A184-731-7000-L180 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION A. B. CONNER, DIRECTOR COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS BULLETIN NO. 432 AUGUST, 1931 DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY MANGANEQE I TEXAS SOILS AND ITS REL y; OPS I~ F - AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE OF TEXAS T. O. WALTON, President STATION STAFFT ADMINISTRATION: A. B. CONNER, M. S., Director R. E. KARPER, M. S., Vice-Director CLARIcE MIxsON, B. A., Secretary M. P. HOLLEMAN, JR., Chief Clerk J. K. FRANcKLOW, Assistant Chief Clerk CHEsTER H1005, Executive Assistant I ———— —i—, Technical Assistant CHEMISTRY: ' G. S. FRAPs, PH. D., Chief,‘ State Chemist S. E. AsBURY, M. S., Chemist J. F. FUDGE, PH. D., Chemist E. C. CARLYLE, B. S., Assistant Chemist WALDO H. WALKER, Assistant Chemist VELMA GRAHAM, Assistant Chemist T. L. OGIER, B. S., Assistant Chemist ATHAN J. STERGFS. B S.. Assistant Chemist MRs. JEANNE F. DEMOTTIER, Asst. Chemist RAY TREIcHLER, M. S., Assistant Chemist RALPH L. SCHWARTZ, B. S., Assistant Chemist C. M. POUNDERs, B. S., Assistant Chemist HORTICULTURE: S. H. YARNELL, Sc. D., Chief I.. R. HAWTHORN, M. S., Horticulturist RANGE ANIMAL HUSBANDRY: J. M. J0NEs, A. M._ Chief B. L. WARwIcK, Ph.D., Breeding Investigations STANLEY P. DAvIs, Wool Grader ENTOMOLOGY: F. L. THOMAs. Ph. D., Chief; State Entomologist H. J. REINHARD, B. S.. Entomologist R. K. FLETcHER, Ph. D., Entomologist W. L. OWEN, JR., M. S., Entomologist J. N. RONEY, M. S., Entomologist J. C. GAINEs. JR., 1VI. S., Entomologist S. E. JONEs, M. S., Entomologist F. F. BIBBY, B. S., Entomologist CEcIL E. HEARD, B. S.. Chief Inspector OTTO MAcKENsEN, B. S., Foulbrood Inspector W. B. \VHITNEY, Foulbrood Inspector AGRONOMY: ' . E. B. REYNOLDS. Ph. D., Chief R. E. KARPER, M. S., Agronomist P. C. lVlANGELSDORF‘, Sc. D., Agronomist I). T. KILLOUGH, M. S., Agronomist H. E. REA, B. S.. Agronomist B. C. LANGLEY, M. S., Agronomist PUBLICATIONS: A. D. JACKSON, Chief VETERINARY SCIENCE: *M. FRANcIs, D. V. M., Chie] H. ScHMIDT, D. V. M., Veterinarian F. P. MATIIEWs, D. V. M., M. S., Veterinarian W. T. HARDY, l). V. M., Veterinarian , Veterinarian PLANT PATHOLOGY AND PHYSIOLOGY: J. J. TAuBENHAus. Ph. D.. Chief W. N. EZEKIEL, Ph. D., Plant Pathologist W. J. BAcH, M. S., Plant Pathologist ——————————, Plant Pathologist FARM AND RANCH ECONOMICS: L. P. GABBARD, M. S.. Chief W. E. PAULsON, Ph. D., ll/Iarketing C. A. BONNEN, M. S., Farm Management **W. R. NIsBET, B. S., Ranch Management **A. C. lVIAGEE, M. S , Farm Management RURAL HOME RESEARCH: ' JEssIE WHITAcRE, Ph. D., Chief MARY ANNA GRIMEs, M. S., Textiles ELIZABETH D..TERRILL, M. A., Nutrition SOIL SURVEY: **\V. T. CARTER, B. S., Chief E. H. TEMPLIN, B. S., Soil Surveyor A. H. BEAN, B. S., Soil Surveyor R. M. MARsHALL, B. S., Soil Surveyor BOTANY: V. L. CORY, M. S., Act. Chief SIMON E. WOLFF. M. S., Botanist SWINE HUSBANDRY: FRED HALE, M. S.. Chief DAIRY HUSBANDRY: O. C. COPELAND, M. S., Dairy Husbanclman POULTRY HUSBANDRY: R. M. SHERWOOD. M. S., Chief AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING: H.-P. SMITH. M. S., Chief ~ l MAIN STATION FARM: G. T. McNEsS. Superintendent APICULTURE (San Antonio): H. B. PARKS. B. S., Chief ‘ A. H. ALEX, B. S., Queen Breeder FEED CONTROL SERVICE: F. D. FULLER, M S.. Chief S. D. PEARcE, Secretary J. H. ROGERS. Feed Inspector K. L. KIRKLAND, B. S.. Feed Insoector SIDNEY D. REYNOLDS. JR . Feed Inspector P. A. MOORE, Feed Inspector E. J. WILsON, B. S., Feed Inspector H. G. WIcKEs, B. S., Feed Inspector SUBSTATIONS No. 1, Beeville, Bee County: R. A. IIALL. B. S., Superintendent N0. 2, Troup, Smith County: _ '. P. R. JOHNSON. M. S., Superintendent No. 3, Angleton, Brazoria County: ' ’ _. R. H. STANsEL, M. S., Superintendent No. 4, Beaumont, Jetferson County: R. H. WYcHE. B. S., Superintendent No. 5, Temple, Bell County: HENRY DUNLAvY, M. S., Superintendent , Plant Pathologist H. E. REA, B. S., Agronomist; Cotton Root‘ Rot Investigations SIMON 1'1. WOLFF. M. S., Botanist; Cotton Root ' I Rot Investigations No. 6, Denton, Denton County: P. B. DUNKLE, B. S., Superintendent No. 7, Spur, Dickens County: R. DIcKsON. S . Superintendent B. C. LANGLEY, M. S., Agronomist No. 8, Lubbock, Lubbock County: I). L. JONEs, Superintendent FRANK GAINEs. Irrigationist and Forest N iirseryman No. 9, Balmorhea, Reeves County: J. J. BAYLEs, B. S., Superintendent No. l0, College Station, Brazos County: . M. SHERWOOD. M In charge L. J. McCALL, Farm Superintendent No. ll, Nacogdoches, Nacogdoches County: H. F. MORRIS. M S.. Superintendent **No. 12. Chillicothe, Henderson County: J. R. QUINBY. B S., Superintendent **J. C. STEPHENS. M. A . Assistant Agronomist No. l4, Sonora, Sutton-Edwards Counties: W. H. DAMERON, B. S.. Superintendent . Veterinarian . T. HARDY, D. V. M , Veterinarian . W **O. G. BABCOCK, B. S., Entomologist . O. L. CARPENTER. Shepherd No. 15, Weslaco, Hidalgo County: W. H. FRIEND. B. S.. Superintendent SHERMAN W. CLARK. B S., Entomologist W. J. BAOH, M. S . Plant Pathologist No. 16, Iowa Park, Wichita County: C. H. McDOWELL, B. S., Superintendent No. 17, - ————-—-——— ~——-————, Superintendent No. 18, -— €—————i , Superintendent No. 19, Winterhaven, Dimmit County: E. MORTENsEN, B. S., Superintendent L. R. HAWTHORN, M. S., Horticulturist No. 20, -——-——-—~—-—— , Superintendent Teachers in the School of Agriculture Carrying Cooperative Projects on the Station: G. W. ADRIANcE, Ph. D., Horticulture S. W. BILSING, Ph. D., Entomology V. P. LEE, Ph. D., Marketing and Finance D. ScOATEs, A. E., Agricultural Engineering A. K. MAcKEY, M. S., Animal Husbandry *Dean Schoo‘_ of Veterinary Nledicine. **In cooperation with U. S. J. S. lVlOGI-‘ORD, M. S.. Agronomy F. R. BRIsON, B. S., Horticulture W. R. HORLACHER, Ph. D., Genetics J. H. KNOX, 1N1. S., Animal Ilusbandrg TAs of August l, i931. Department of Agriculture. ‘l. § Manganese is an essential plant food and a few calcareous soils in the eastern part of the United States have responded to applications 0f manganese sulfate. Twenty-one Texas soils have been tested for their response to manganese sulfate by means of pot experiments. No marked increase in the growth of crops was produced by manganese sulfate. On six of the soils manganese sulfate was apparently toxic. Out of the thirteen soils reported to have produced chlorotic crops in the field, only two produced chlorotic crops in the greenhouse. The coefficient of correlation is low between the amount of manganese removed by corn and the percentage of man- ganese in the soil, being .437 i .04. The addition of fer- tilizer containing nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash, but no manganese to soils tends to increase the percentage of man- ganese in the crop. Crops grown on quartz sand tend to take up increasing amounts of manganese when increasing amounts are applied, corn taking up about l0 per cent of the amount applied, cotton much less. A crop of corn, cotton, or kafir is estimated to require about half a pound of manganese to the acre, and a crop of wheat about one pound. Although some Texas soils are low in manganese, they contain enough for 320 crops of cotton and are better supplied with manganese than with nitrogen, phos- phoric acid, or potash. The manganese content of the soils of the Central Texas Black Prairie is higher than in the soils of East Texas or South Texas. The manganese content of the soils of the Ed- wards Plateau is the lowest of any section studied. Manganese sulfate is not recommended for application to Texas soils, as no soils were found to need it. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. a Previous Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6i Methods of Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Method for Pot Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Determination of Manganese in Crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 Determination of Acid-soluble Manganese in Soil . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 Determination of Total Manganese in Soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11 Description of Soils Used in Pot Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11 Results of Pot Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12 Effect of Manganese on the Weight of the (‘rops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12 Possible Toxicity of Manganese Sulfate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21 Effect of Quantity of Manganese on the Weight and Manganese Content of the (‘rops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 24 Variations in the Percentage of Manganese in Crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Relation of Manganese Taken up by’ Crops to the Manganese Con- tent of the Soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 26 Effect of Fertilizer on the Manganese (‘iontent of Plants . . . . . . . . .. 28 Efiect of Manganese on (‘ropes Grown on Soils Which Produce Chlorotic Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 29 Approximate Amounts of Manganese Required by’ (‘rops . . . . . . . . . . 30 Manganese Content of Other Plant Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 31 Manganese Content of Texas Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3] Relation to Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 32 Relation to Texture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 34 Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 35 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 35 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . 36 BULLETIN NO. 432 i AUGUST, 1931 MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS* By E. C. CARLYLE It has long been recognized that certain elements (carbon, nitro- gen, oxygen, hydrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, sulfur, and iron) are essential to plant growth. Other elements such as manganese, copper, boron, cobalt, nickle, zinc, and iodine, while known to occur in very small quantities in plants, have not been re- garded as essential but have been neglected by investigators until a short time ago. In recent years, however, investigators have found that manganese and perhaps some other of these elements are essen- tial to plant growth. Other workers have found applications of man- ganese salts of practical advantage to crops on calcareous soils in Florida and on certain limed soils in North Carolina and Rhode Island. Large increases in yields of truck crops on these Florida soils have resulted from the application of relatively small amounts of soluble manganese salts. The deficiency of manganese was shown by a yellowish condition of the leaves of the plants grown on the affected areas. Texas contains considerable areas of limestone soils, on some of which chlorosis has been reported to occur. While ferrous sulphate seems to be a good remedy for chlorosis in many of these areas, it seemed desirable to ascertain if the chlorosis might be due to a defi- ciency of manganese. The investigation of possible needs of Texas soils for manganese also seemed desirable on accou-nt of need for more knowledge regarding the possible use of manganese salts for applica- tion to the soils of the state. - Some reports have been received at this Station of a kind of chlo- rosis occurring on calcareous soils in southwestern Texas and in the Rio Grande Valley. Kafir has been reported as turning yellow and failing to make a crop, and peach tree leaves have also been reported to turn yellow and fall off. This investigation has been undertaken partly to determine whether this chlorosis is due to manganese deficiency and whether an applica- tion of manganese sulfate would prevent it. Other soils of a. calcareous nature were studied for the purpose of finding out whether they would respond to applications of man- *A thesis submitted to the faculty of the Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Agriculture. 6 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION ganese sulfate, as manganese as a fertilizer has not been generally - used in Texas. Soils from different sections of Texas were also analyzed for man- 7 ganese for the purpose of ascertaining the manganese content of typi- I cal Texas soil types and comparing them with any soils responding to T manganese to determine Whether there was any probability of other ‘ _ Texas soil types responding to manganese and whether manganese ’ could be recommended as a fertilizer for any Texas soils. PREVIOUS WORK Bertrand (1) in 1897 seems to have first mentioned the possibility that manganese may be an element essential to plant growth. He ob- ' tained an enzyme from the sap of the lac tree which he called laccase, which contained considerable manganese. After several years’ work on the relation of this element to plant growth, he concluded that it was an essential nutrient and that its functions cannot be performed by any other element. Brenchley (3) working with plants in water cultures to which the elements then known to be essential Were added, found that manganese sulfate at a concentration of one to one million or less, stimulated plant growth; with greater concentrations a toxic effect was obtained. She concluded that in low concentrations manganese may prove to be a nutrient essential to plants. McHargue (10) found that wheat grown in quartz sand yielded a larger amount of grain and straw when manganese carbonate was added than when manganese was not added, and that wheat without manganese became chlorotic. lrown in water cultures free from man- ganese, it also became chlorotic and did not grow as large as the wheat grown in cultures containing manganese salts. McHargue (11) in 1922 obtained practically the same results with a greater variety of plants. With lettuce, spinach, garden peas, cu- cumbers, oats, and soy beans grown in quartz, McHargue (12) in 1926 obtained good growth when manganese was supplied but poor growth and a chlorotic condition where manganese was not supplied. From the results of these researches, McHargue concluded that plants have enough manganese in the seed to grow normally for four to six weeks, after which manganese deficiency begins to develop if no manganese has been supplied. Failure earlier to recognize manganese as essential was ascribed to the presence of manganese as an impurity in the re- agents used. He concluded that manganese is an essential element of plant growth and functions in the synthesis of chlorophyll. Miller (14) observed chlorotic conditions with tomatoes in sand cul- tures in the absence of manganese salts. He grew the plants in good greenhouse soil until they were about ten inches high, and then trans- ferred them to pots of quartz sand supplied with Knops nutrient solu- tion containing calcium nitrate, potassium nitrate, potassium phos- phate, and magnesium sulfate. About three weeks after the plants MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 7 were transplanted, they developed chlorosis and stopped growing. The addition of manganese sulfate cured the chlorosis and resulted in nor- mal growth of the plant, but chlorotic spots remained. Only recently have soils under field conditions been found which supply so little manganese that plants suffer from the lack of it. Gilbert, McLean and Hardin ('7) found that manganese deficiency Was the cause of chlorosis in oats, spinach, beans, and wheat, grown on heavily limed soils in Rhode Island. The soils had been limed with limestone high in lime and high in magnesia; so the chlorosis was not caused by a deficiency of magnesium. Applications of iron salts did not cure the chlorotic condition of the plants; so the chlorosis was not caused by iron. Small applications of manganese sulfate cured the chlorosis and enabled the plant to grow in a normal manner. This showed that the heavily limed soils were deficient in available man- ganese. Schreiner and Dawson (15,) in 1927 published a report on certain soils in Florida deficient in manganese. These are highly calcareous glade soils devoted to truck growing. Inorganic fertilizer, applied heavily, failed to produce a crop; the plants were small and developed typical manganese chlorosis. Barnyard manure or peat used in con- nection with the fertilizer produced normal growth. Applications of 25 to 50 parts per million of manganese sulfate with the fertilizer also enabled the crop» to grow normally. In greenhouse experiments, vigorous growth and fruiting of tomatoes took place on the soil treated with manganese. On the soil with no manganese, the tomatoes grew poorly, did not fruit, and developed chlorosis. In Rhode Island, Gilbert and McLean (8) found the application of manganese salts on heavily limed soils beneficial to spinach, lettuce, corn, onions, and mangels. On these soils without manganese, crops were chlorotic and showed typical manganese deficiency. With an ap- plication of small amounts of manganese sulfate normal growth took placed and an increased yield overthe control plots was obtained. An application of as low ‘as eight pounds per acre of manganese sulfate, applied as a spray, was beneficial to lettuce, spinach, and beets. In North Carolina barren spots occurred on the Lower Coastal Plain where corn and. soy beans failed to grow. Willis (21) found that manganese sulfate applied to these areas cured chlorosis in soy beans and corn and produced increased yields. These soils had been so heavily limed as to become unproductive; as in Rhode Island the heavy liming evidently rendered what manganese there was in the soil unavailable to plants. Skinner and Ruprecht (18) studied glade soils in Florida used for growing winter truck crops for the Northern markets. These soils consist of about six inches of muck underlaid by a calcareous material containing 90 to 95 per cent of calcium carbonate. With an applica.- tion of 4000 pounds of 4-8-8 fertilizer per acre tomatoes failed to grow unless peat, stable manure or manganese sulfate was applied, the lat- 8 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION ter at the rate of 50 pounds per acre. The manure and peat evidently furnished the manganese required to produce the crop. A few cars of t manganese sulfate are sufficient t0 do the work of many train loads of ; manure or peat. . Later Work reported in 1930 by Skinner and Ruprecht (19) include tomatoes, potatoes, beans, cabbage, cauliflower, lettuce, carrots, beets, and corn. With tomatoes, 3000 pounds per acre of 4-8-8 fertilizer failed to produce any crop at all, while with 2000 pounds of manure and 150 pounds of manganese sulfate the yield was 492 crates. With 2000 pounds of 5-7-5 fertilizer per acre, plats without manganese yielded 50 bushels of potatoes; with 400 pounds of manganese sulfate added to the fertilizer, 180 bushels were produced. All of the potatoes grown on the plats which received no manganese were unsalable culls, while the potatoes grown on soil treated with manganese were all large. Snap beans fertilized with 1500 pounds per acre of 4-7-5 yielded with- out manganese 4860 pounds per acre; with 50 pounds per acre of manganese sulfate the yield was 18,400 pounds per acre. Cabbage with 600 pounds per acre of 4-8-5 fertilizer and no manganese yielded 28,215 pounds, and with 100 pounds per acre of manganese sulfate 47,025 pounds. Lettuce with 1600 pounds of 5-7-3 fertilizer and no manganese grew heads 'of an average weight of 0.5 pound while with the addition of 50 pounds of manganese sulfate the heads Weighed 3.0 pounds. Beets were a failure with 1800 pounds of 5-8-6 fertilizer alone, but the addition of manganese sulfate in the fertilizer produced large marketable beets. From the work reported manganese deficiency is confined to cal- careous or heavily limed soils and has so far been found to occur nat- urally only in relatively small areas in Florida. On limed soils it has been found so far only in Rhode Island and South Carolina. On this class of soils any manganese present is rendered insoluble by the alka- line condition of the soil, and therefore unavailable to plants. Chlorotic conditions of the plants as reported in Florida, North Carolina, and Bhode Island, are characterized by light green areas ap- pearing on the leaves of the plants; these areas spread rapidly until in a few days the entire plant is affected. The leaves affected seem to be deficient in chlorophyll and the plant becomes stunted in growth and finally dies. Acid soils do not seem to be deficient in manganese. Skinner and Sullivan (16) applied manganese salts in pot experi- ments to a productive Hagerstown loam from the plots of the Penn- sylvania Experiment Station. The soil was slightly acid, and they ob- tained no beneficial results with wheat. I Skinner and Reid reported in 1916 (17) a six-year test with wheat, rye, corn, and soy beans, on an acid silty clay loam soil at the Experi- ment Station farm at Arlington, Virginia._ When no manganese sul- fate was used, one acre yielded 4192 pounds of wheat straw and grain; with manganese the yield was 3258 pounds. Rye without manganese MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 9 yielded 3456 pounds per acre; With manganese, 3424 pounds. Corn Without manganese yielded 43 bushels per acre; With manganese, 32 bushels. CoWpeas With manganese yielded 5152 pounds per acre; Without manganese, 4702 pounds. All yields of crops Were depressed when manganese sulfate Was applied. The plots were then neutralized With lime: Wheat Without manganese yielded 2500 pounds, With man- ganese 3040 pounds for a three-year average; rye Without manganese, 4100 pounds, With manganese, 5173 pounds; corn Without manganese, 43 bushels, with manganese, 45 bushels; cowpeas Without manganese, ' 4587 pounds, With manganese, 5020 pounds. Under some conditions manganese may prove toxic to plants. ElWell (4) found that certain soils Which failed to groW leguminous crops contained a large percentage of soluble manganese salts While the adjacent fertile areas contained no such amounts. He concluded that these soluble salts of manganese contributed to the sterility of the soil. Kelley (22) found the highly manganiferous soils of Hawaii toxic to pineapples. The application of lime only aggravated the trouble. Kelley had the opinion that the addition of lime created conditions favorable for the formation of the higher oxides, WlllCll are the most injurious form of manganese. Lindsay in Massachusetts found that plats Which had become infertile after applications of ammonium sulfate contained 175 parts per million of manganese sulfate; the addition of lime prevented in- jury by the probable formation of calcium sulfate. McHargue (13) found that manganese sulfate added to an acid soil retarded the groWth of radishes and soy beans. When the soil Was made neutral or slightly alkaline With calcium carbonate manganese was beneficial to these crops. METHODS OF PROCEDURE In this Work, pot experiments Were used to determine Whether the soils Would respond to applications of mangansee sulfate and Whether manganese Would prevent chlorosis in plants. In pot experiments, variations in the amount of Water and in the character of the soil can be controlled to a greater extent than in plat experiments. Attacks of birds and insects can be avoided or reduced and the applications of the various additions can be regulated With more exactness than in field Work. Pot experiments Were used by McHargue (12) and Miller (14) in ascertaining Whether or not manganese is an essential element for plant groWth, by McHargue (12) in testing the effect of different concen- trations of manganese on the growth of plants in acid and neutral soils, and by Schreiner and Dawson (15) in testing for deficiency of manganese in the glade soils of Florida. 10 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Method for Pot Experiments Glazed earthenware pots of two gallons capacity were used in this work so as to eliminate any possibility of contamination by manganese that might result from the use of ordinary galvanized iron pots. Pots were used that had the same weight within 20 grams and contained 5000 i 20 grams of soil. Manganese sulfate (M114) in the 1929 series was added in solution at the rate of 125 milligrams per pot,‘ or 50 pounds per acre. In the 1930 series it was added as the solid salt. To each pot to be fertilized (KDNI) one gram of potassium sulfate (K) and one gram of ammonium nitrate (N) were added in solution and ' one gram of dicalcium phosphate (D) as the solid salt. The materials were tested and found to be free from manganese. When second crops were grown the same year on the same soil another application of am- monium nitrate was made but no potassium or phosphoric acid was added. When the same pots of soil were used the second year all ad- ditions were made again. The various additions were well mixed with the soil andwater added to 50 per cent of the water capacity. After the seed were planted the pots were covered until the seed had germi- nated. The pots were kept in a greenhouse and distilled water added three times weekly to bring them to the original weight. If water was needed at other times, it was added without weighing in» amounts thought sufficient. When well grown, the crops were harvested, dried, weighed, and analyzed for manganese. Determination of Manganese in Crop Burn one gram of crop over the full heat of a Fisher burner, moisten the ash with a few drops of water, add 10 cc. of hydrochloric acid, and evaporate to dryness. Moisten the residue with a few drops of hydro- chloric acid, take up with hot water and filter into a porcelain evapo- rating dish, washing with hot water. Add 5 cc. of concentrated sul- furic acid to the filtrate and evaporate to slight fumes. Add 30 cc. of 1:3 nitric acid and proceed as in the bismuthate method. (Meth- ods of the A. O. A. 0., 192-5, page 101, par. '75.) In the beginning of this work, it was noticed that the color of the solution faded rapidly after filtering through asbestos. To avoid this it was found necessary to add potassium permanganate to the water to be used for making up the dilute nitric acid for washing and redistill it, and to clean the vessels used at frequent intervals with chromic acid cleaning solution. Determination of Acid-Soluble Manganese in Soil Digest five grams of soil with 50 cc. of hydrochloric acid, Sp. Gr. 1.115, for eight hours in a boiling water bath. Filter and wash with hot water, evaporate to dryness, and heat to 110° C. to dehydrate silica, take up with 5 cc. of hydrochloric acid and hot water, heating on a water bath if necessary to effect complete solution, filter and make up to 250 cc. To 50 cc. (equivalent to one gram of soil) add 5 cc. MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 11 of concentrated sulfuric acid and evaporate to slight fumes, add 30 cc. 0f 1:3 nitric acid after cooling, and proceed with tl1e bismuthate method as for crops. Determination of Total Manganese in Soil Fuse one gram of soil with four grams of manganese-free potassium bisulfate, using a low flame at first until danger of frothing is past, increasing the heat slowly until the full heat of the Fisher burner is obtained, and continuing this heat for about 25 minutes or until the flux is in a state of quiet fusion. If the fusion has been made in a quartz crucible, cool gradually by slowly lowering the heat. Unless this is done, there is danger of cracking the crucible. When cold, place the crucible and cover in a beaker, cover with 5O cc. of 1:1 sulfuric acid, and digest on a steam bath until the melt is disintegrated. Filter through asbestos that has been washed with sul- furic acid, into a beaker contained in a Witte filter flask and wash well with hot water. Evaporate the solution on a hot plate until it can be transferred to a 100 cc. flask and made up to the mark. To 50 cc. of the solution, add .05 gram of potassium periodate and boil until the color is fully developed, cool, make up to 100 cc., and compare with the standard. The color of the standard is developed in the same way as with the sample by boiling with .05 gram of potassium periodate in 25 cc. of 1:1 sulfuric acid and 25 cc. of water. Description of the Soils Used in Pot Experiments 6731 Clay loam, Willacy county, surface soil. 9297 Amarillo fine sandy loam, Lubbock county, surface soil. 14844 Rice soil, Jefferson county, surface soil. 29423 Upland black land, surface soil, Bell county, dark-brown loam. 29425 Crockett clay loam, Brazos county, surface, 0-7". 29429 Miller clay, Burleson county, surface, 0-7”. ] 29431 Miller fine sandy loam, Brazos county, surface, 0-7". 29434 Wilson clay, Brazos county, surface, 0-7". ' 30964 Subsoil from Val Verde county. Kafir grown in the field turns yellow and dies. y ;- 32077 Surface soil from Kinney county, from a spot in a peach or- . chard where the loaves of the trees turn yellow and fall off. §32078 Subsoil to 32077. f 32187 Surface soil from Cameron county where chlorosis was persist- ent in a citrus grove. $32188 Subsoil to 32187. 2532315 Surface soil from Comal county, in which chlorosis is present i in spots. £32316 Subsoil to 32315. r- -~ w-z-w-s 12 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 28010 Surface soil from Ochiltree county, where sorghum turns yel- and dies. 28011 Subsoil to 28010. 30963 Surface soil, Val Verde county, where kafir turns yellow and dies. 31115 Subsoil from Harris county, from center of an infertile spot. 32561 Surface soil, Reeves county, where chlorosis occurs. 32562 Subsoil to 32561. RESULTS OF POT EXPERIMENTS In. the pot experiments, the treatments for most of the soils were made in triplicate in order to secure a good average of the results of ' each treatment. The detailed results of the experiments are given in Tables 1, 2, and 3, together with the averages and the manganese con- tent of the soil. The dry weight of the crops from the three treatments in most cases agree as closely as could be expected in pot work. Where the weight of one crop grown in one pot varies widely from the other two with the same treatment, the weight of that crop and the percentage of manganese in it have been excluded from the average. The manganese content of the crops in the three crops with the same treatment usually agree fairly well. Chlorosis occurred on only two of the soils. The addition of man- ganese did hot produce any marked increases in yields of any of the crops. ceived nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash alone and also those which received the fertilizer with manganese sulfate, were chlorotic while the crops grown on these soils with no addition of manganese were of a normal green color. These particular soils will be discussed later in the work. EFFECT OF MANGANESE ON THE WEIGHT OF THE CROPS The average weights of the crops from the different treatments are summarized in Table 4. The effect of the manganese on the weight of the crops can be seen by comparing the weights of the crops grown on the portions of soil which received no addition, with the weights of the crops grown on the portions which received manganese sulfate (Mn) and also the crops that received complete fertilizer (NDK) with those receiving complete fertilizer with manganese (NDKMn). The fertilizer used was tested for manganese and none found. None of the nine soils gave any greatly increased crop with the application of manganese; only a few of the soils gave slight increases (Table 4). With wheat, only one soil (No. 29425) of the six tested responded. The manganese-treated portion without fertilizer gave an increase of 1.3 grams. With cotton, three soils out of five gave slight increases. Soil No. 29434 gave an increase of 1.6 grams in the fer- The crops grown on two of the soils (32077 and 32078) which re- i 13 MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS .......-.....-. . . . . . . . owoo. 5o omoo o.w E3 M; 92o N. 2 mwoo. 5m m5? 5w wmoo. W», 02o ma owoo. wB 28. o.w 18¢. ms 2N5 w. 2 ¢ . . . . . . . . . . . ‘ . . . . . :25 @m@:mm:m2 .- . - - . - - - . . . . - . . v . - . . . - who? 5o .28. Nb :5... o.w .88 2.. mwoo. wo wSo. Nb $2.. w.m $8 m1: $8. m.» 55. o.w omoo. mom ~20 f: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 55%? oZ =1. SEQ 5E2 mmwmm 5N0. mam wmoo w? $5 Q3 mowo Q? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ¢mm$>< mmmo. mwm ES o.mw $8 f: wwmo 3mm S9. 92m 52o. ms». $5 Al: wwmo. wow A:2MOZV vfiimwiwi owmo. 5 2m E8. on», o:o f: wmwo. v.3 ES :28: 66m aésgwcg: .:omo:.:Z ommo. mimm owoo 5mm M58. wbH mwwo. mom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . dwm$>< S8. w. 2m wwoo. w . “m e26. 2 . m: wmwo w . wm owmo. m . wm $80. o. 2w owoo. m . 3 owwo. o. .8 . AMDZV wmmo. m. 2m Nmoo. ca"... £5. 92 oowo. wow 53o: Eon oionmwon: imfizz £2. o. I $8 i. $8 mw mwwo. 5N2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Iomw$>< wmmo 5: 8S o.w M35 o.w wwwo. ma: ammo. w.: $8 o.w £5 o.w wowo. w.: RS. m. 2 owmo Ww 3S 1w wowo. w. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :25 owo:mw:m2 ommo 92 28 o.w mos Nb wwwo. i: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iowmb>< mmmo. Q3 2S. mo . . . . . . . . .. Nb wnwo. 5o wmmo. 9N2 .55. o.w m8? m: oowo. 5N2 ommo. Q3 2S f. Q8. o.w wsa. 2.: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3V =2E§w oZ :N.|o :82 >20 SEGEU mmwmm ~56 B: wEmLm E3 .6: 22w Eco 3Q mEEw E3 S: mEQm dZ 5w: bowvm :50 :30 :ofiou :oSoU flown? owunk/ wiziwwm USN mom dmq E :2 E :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 wwGQEMQQQXO QOQ wO 316w: vwmmguQllé 0:33,? 14 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION :00: :.0N 0NNO. 0.00 0.000 0.N: 00N0. 0.0N . . . . . f0m0$>< NN:: 0.0N 00N0. 0N0 N000 v.0: 00N0. 0.0N 0000 N.0N 00N0. 0B0 :00. 0.: 0:N0. 0.0N 2:22:20 03:00:08 N000. 0.0N NNNO. :0 0:00. :.0: 00N0. 0.0N 0:0 00000:: .030 02000000: £00332 0000 0.0N 00:0. >00 >000 0. 0: 3N0. : . “N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60053: N:00. 0 . 0N 0:0 0.00 0:000. 0. :: 00N0. 0 . 0N N:00. 0.00 00:0 N.00 0000. 0.0: 00N0. 0SN AMQZV 0:000. 0.00 0::0. 0S0 >000. N.N: 0:N0. 0.0N 0003:: .060 000.000.0000 600312 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..flwflh®>< 00:0 0.0 0::0. 0.N N0:0 0.N 00:0. 0.0 N30 0.0 0::0. 0.N 00:0 N.0 0:0 0.0 00:0 0.0 0::0. 0.N N:00. 0.0 30:0. 0.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:30 03:00:03: @.@ @.@ ae.nm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Qmmw.mw>< 00:0 0.0 0000. 0.0 00:0 0.N 00:0 0.0 00:0 0.0 N000. 0.N 00:0 N.N 00:0 :.0 00:0 0.0 :000. 0.N . 00:0 0.N 0:0 0.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A00 5.30000 o2 :~.|0 .502 00:00 0:0 .352 :000N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......U@Nknw>< 0000. 0.N0 0:00. NSN N000. 0.0: 0000. 0.0N :000. 0.00 0:00. 0.0N 0:000. 0.0: 0000. N00 2:220:20 03:00:00: 0000. N.00 0:00. 0.0N 0000. 0.0: :000. 0N0 0:0 0000.9: .060 00230.50 £00322 . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..QWG.MO>< 0000. 0.00 :00. 0.0N 0000. 0.N: 0000. 0.00 0000. 0. 00 0:00. 0.00 0N00. 0 . h: :000. 0. :0 AMQ20 0:000. 0.00 N:00. 0.00 0:000. 0.0: 0000. 0.00 0000c: .060 0000:0000: #600022 0:3 .60 050:0 0:3 :3: £52m :23 :00 080:0 0:00 .5: 050:0 .02 000x 000v: Eco :30 GQZOQ 0.5300 0000B 0000.5 $20000 0:0 0cm .00.: :._ ::>: E ::>: :0 ::>: E :3: 0o::$:oU|m0:0Eiu:xo Ho“: 0o 03:00: 0000:0071: 030M. 15 MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS HhHo w? m0H0 08m 0000. 08H ES. 0.0m 1....1.111....lidwauo>< 00H0 0.0m 0mH0 0.0m >000. 00H 3S“ 9mm $8. 53 0000. 0.0m 0000. HXwH 0&0 ha». _ QHZMQZV umocwmnwfi 00H0 5mm HQ0H0. Nam n80. H 0H SS. Hiwm 0cm £80m 32w oionawonn éQmoSHZ . - - . -...-.~ . . . - - --¢--@mfl0fl@>< mmHo v1.8 . 0000. H“. 0m 0000. H 0H 00m0 N00 . 0m H0 w . HNN @000. m. . Hum 0000. m. mH $3 0 . mm . QHOZV 0on0. 0.0m 00H0 5mm Hm00. 0. SH MKS. ha” nwmxa Bum HEQQQmBHQ dumobHZ . . . . ......... . . . . .......QWG.HQ>< mm00. 0Q E00. 0. m 0000. 0. H 0mm0 m . N H000. Him $00. 0.0 H000. mH NOH0 0.0 H000. mim 3.00. m5 0000. 0. H 0mm0 0.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32520 owwamwcw2 H.000. 0Q $.00. 0Q N000. m. H 0mH0 w.» . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . dww$>< 0N00. ma 0000. Him $00. 0H 0:0 N0 $00. 0Q $00. we H000. 0H HRHo SS Z2 m4. wm00. we R00. w . H 2H0. H0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I30 =30?“ oZ filo $2“. 5E5, £20m 0:3 3Q mcbfiw E3 Hun wHHHHPHw Hi3 .80 mEmQw E3 Sm mEwhw . .oZ HHMWJ EwvH Eco EoU cofiou cofioU QNQS? fiwozk/ $20035 Him mom .93 E :H>H E :2 E cH>H E cH>H wwscficonYlwaH-wimHoaxo 8m 0o 5153 UQZGHQQIIQ Minna. 16 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 005. 0.0N 0000. 0.0 v05. 0.NH 0H00. 0.HH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..@m@$>< 0HNO. 0 . 0N 0H00. N.0 00N0. NQH 00N0. 0.> AEEXQZV wwwcmmcwi E5 005. 0.0N 0HNO. 0.> 005. >. HH N000. 00H Him E330 £00m 01200800 évmobEZ . . . - . . - . . . . . - . . . . - . . ' . 0NHO. 0§N 00N0. 0.0 NOH0. N0 0000. 00H . OAQZV .>H5. 0 0H 0000. 0 . 0 0HNO. 0.0 0000. 0 . 0H 0.0.30.0 Eva 2.600.223 50003070 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..®WN.~0>< 0000. 0~> 0NHOM H.N N05. 0.0 00N0. 0.0 H000. 0 > NOH0 H.N 00H0. >6 0>00. 0.N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13020 03:00:02 N50. 0.0 0000. 0.N 00H0. 0.0 005. N0 . . . . . . . . . . . . ..........A00 000E000 oZ :>|0 EwE 000mm 0E0 0:00.204 >0N0 005. 0.0N 00H0. >.0H 0000. N.NN >NHO. H.0H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ivwm$>< 0NHO. 0UHN 0HHO~ 0.HH N>00. 0.0H >HHO. 0.HH . 00335070 03000005 . 0000. 0 >N 005 0 . 0H H000. 0.0N >05. 0. 0H 0cm 0930.0 Eva 00500300 00000502 H000. >.0N 005. 00H H000. N.0N >0H0. 0.0N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600.1451‘. H000. 0..>N 0H5. 00H N000. 0.0N HHHO. N.0N Q0 Z0 0000. 0 0N 0000. 0. 0H 000$. 0.0N 00 H0. 0 . >H E330 .0000 20000300 .0» 9E2 . < . . . . . . . - . . - _ . . . . . ¢ . . . 0000. NWO 0>00. N0 N000. 0 . 0N 0000. 0. HN >000. 0 HH 0000. 0.0 0>00. H.0N 005. 0.NN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15020 vmammswé . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..QMNHQ>< >000. Nmm N000. 0.> N000. 0.0N N000. 00H >50. 0 c N000. N.> N000. 0 . >H 0000. 0 . 0N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A00 E22...“ o7H 355v 00255 mom 335m H0>0 E3 .50 . @5000 ER. .60 £00.00 Ewo .80 0800M Emu .50 wEmLm .070 00300 cofioU Haws? E35,? e08 2S2 E8 0.50 200E000 0cm =00 00A E 002 E c2 E 5>H E c2 wEwEigxv QOQ m0 3050.0 UQZQQOQ|.N wzwh. 17 MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. mic. m4; Rio. ab; $5. m5 l......................@ma$>< IKIII XXIII .25. ma; .38. i: 35. Q3 I £5. >2 Q5. mfifi SS. f: CIZMDZV ommcmmcwi 1cm £23 66m oicnnmosa éomoSEZ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. >30. Wfi $5. Na $6? i: . 952v . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. E8. ma; $6. of f8. m6; .283 Bum Eofimosg cuwobr/H . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I $8. >6 wfio. flfi E8. mvm . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . .. §._.€ ?.fi A&.%.N ......v.-......<...-¢=2@ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ofimo. ob. Clo. oofi vwoo. 5m ........................oww$>< . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. mfimo. m6... $8. $2 Q8. 5m. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. wfimo. oh omflo. mim ohoo. ob. c2335 oZ 6035i .3550 cowhutww 5cm QEI vwwww E3 SQ mEmEm E3 SQ 22w E3 Em wEmCm E3 3a mEfim dZ cofiou cofioU Fawn? i355 0:5 2:2 Eco GnOU mcofimwwm YE mam EQA E E2 E =2 E c2 E E2 UQSGSEOUIwaGQETEQxQ 8n Ho $153 wozwoofllld 22mm. 18 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Table 3.—Detailed results of pot experiments Mn in Lab. Soil and additions Corn corn Kafir p No. grams per cent grams per cent 30964 Chlorosis present N0 addition (0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.2 .0058 .5 Manganese (Mn) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.0 .0112 .7 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash (NDK) . . . . 29.0 .0068 4.5 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash and man- ganese (ND Mn) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12.2 .0092 7.0 32077 Surface soil, chlorosis in peach orchard No addition (0) . . . . . . . . .Kafir (green) . . . . . . 19.7 .0126 30.5 Kafir (green) . . . . . . . 13.7 .0138 28.2 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.5 .0132 29.3 Manganese (Mn) . . . . . . . .Kafir (green) . . . . . . . 15.0 .0172 28.5 Kafir (green) . . . . . . . 18.0 .0182 31.0 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.5 .0177 29.7 Nitrogen, phosphoric Kafir (almost white) 26.2 .0154 25.5 acid, potash (NDK) Kafir (pale green). . 25.4 .0155 29.5 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.8 .0155 27.5 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash, manganese Mn) Kafir (pale green)... 22.5 .0162 10.5 Kafir (pale green). . . 16. 7 .0204 12.2 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19.1 .0183 11.3 32078 Subsoil to 32077 No addition (0) . . . . . . . . .Kafir (green) . . . . .. 2.7 .0203 10.5 Kafir (green) . . . . . . 3.4 .0186 10.5 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.0 .0195 10.5 Manganese (Mn) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.7 .0164 13.2 2 . 7 .0137 12.2 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.2 .0150 12.7 Nitrogen, phosphoric Kafir (almost white) 13.0 .0164 20.5 aci , potash (NDK) Kafir (almost white) 10.5 .0134 17.4 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.3 .0149 18.9 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash, manganese ( DKMn) . . . . . . . . . . .Kafir (almost white) 8.4 0126 17.5 32187 Surface soil, chlorosis in citrus grove Nu addition (0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19.0 0129 16.2 17.7 0132 18.8 16.2 0172 16.7 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17.6 0144 17.2 Manganese (Mn) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13.0 0145 24.3 18.2 0150 17 . 5 20.2 0120 16.0 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17.5 0138 19.2 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash (NDK). . . . 13.5 0127 25.0 24.2 0164 32.2 7 20.2 0168 31.4 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19.3 0156 29.5 MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 19 Table 3.—Detailed results of pot experiments——Continued Mn in Mn in Lab. Soil and additions Corn corn Kafir kafir No. grams per cent grams per cent Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash, manganese 22 .7 .0135 29.5 0126 (NDKMn) 20.0 .0129 25.0 0144 13.5 .0123 36.0 0180 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7 .0129 27.1 0150 32188 Subsoil to 32187 - No addition (Q) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 7 0166 15.2 .0078 5 2 0111 16.0 10075 4 9 0120 13.8 .0114 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.9 0132 15 .0 .0089 Manganese (Mn) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 4 0123 17.7 .0090 4 7 0115 13.0 .0114 4 7 0144 14.2 .0096 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6 0127 14.9 0100 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash (NDK) . . . . 20.7 0124 20.7 .0111 12.7 0126 10.7 0102 15.0 0128 15.8 0132 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16.1 0126 15.7 .0115 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potashfmanganese 15 .0 0108 21 .8 .0126 (NDKMn) 7.2 0117 17.5 .0135 13.2 0103 11.8 .0099 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14.1 0112 17.0 0120 32315 Surface soil, chlorosis present No addition (0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.9 0059 15 7 ..0072 9.5 0058 11 0 .0082 9.7 0065 13 5 .0078 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.5 0061 13 1 .0077 Nlanganese (Mn) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.7 0055 16 1 .0072 11.7 0055 14 1 .0078 12.5 0061 14.3 .0076 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3 0057 14 8 .0075 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash (NDK) . .. 21.5 0069 35 0 .0087 20.0 0063 16 7 .0074 20.5 0084 35 2 .0078 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 20.2 0072 35 1 .0082 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash, manganese 20.0 0087 29 7 .0096 NDKMn) 7.7 0102 17 5 .0102 19.5 0084 24 0 .0090 Average (2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19.7 0094 26 8 .0093 32316 Subsoil to 32315 No addition (0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5.5 0069 10.3 .0072 5.2 0066 11.4 .0072 12 . 5 0060 20. 5 .0054 - Average (2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5.3 0067 10.8 0072 Manganese (Mn) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6.4 0073 9.0 .0060 5.2 0081 8.8 .0054 5.0 .0078 8.5 .0065 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. 5 .0077 8.8 .0059 20 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Table 3.——Detailed results of pot experiments-Continued _ _ _ Mn in Mn in Lab. Soil and additions Corn corn Kafir kafir N0. grams per cent grams per cent Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash (NDK). . . . 15.7 0076 35.0 .0065 » 17.2 0061 32.8 .0060 16. 9 0058 33 .3 .0057 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.6 0065 33.7 .0061 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash, manganese 15.4 0076 33.5 .0063 (NDKMn) 19.9 0065 34. 6 .0061 18.5 0073 39.0 .0078 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.0 0071 35.7 .0067 29423 Surface soils No addition (0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8.5 .0078 6.2 .0098 11.0 .0074 5.8 .0098 11.0 .0096 5.7 0132 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2 .0083 5.9 0107 Manganese (Mn) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 .3 .0069 6. 8 .0096 12.5 .0062 7.1 0120 12.4 .0072 7.0 0106 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.0 0068 6. 9 0112 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash (NDK) . . . . 21.2 0096 37. 5 .0081 26.2 0078 31.5 .0075 30.0 0082 35.0 0090 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29.1 0085 34.7 .0082 Nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potash, manganese 22.5 0075 32 .0 .0096 (NDKMn) 18.5 0113 34.5 .0105 24.4 0072 34.5 .0096 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 .8 0087 33.6 .0099 tilized series with manganese; No. 6731 gave an increase of 1.1 gram for the unfertilized portion and 0.9 gram increase for the fertilizer series treated with manganese. Milo responded in all three soils tested. Soil No. 6731 gave increases of 1.1 gram for the unfertilized pots; soil No. 9297 gave increases of 0.2 and 3.1 grams for the fertil- ized and unfertilized series respectively; soil No. 14844 gave an in- crease of 3.6 grams for the fertilized crops with manganese. With corn, four soils out of nine gave responses to manganese; soil No. 29434 gave an increase of 1.1 gram in the fertilized series With man- ganese; soil No. 29425 gave increases in both series With manganese, an increase of 0.7 gram and 1.1 gram With the unfertilized and fer- tilized series respectively; soil No. 6731 gave an increase of 2.3 grams for the unfertilized series With manganese; soil No. 32316 gave an in- crease of 1.4 grams in the fertilized series with manganese; With kafii‘ four soils out of nine gave increases With manganese, soil No. 29429 gave an increase of 2.7 grams in the fertilized series; soil No. 30964 gave an increase of 2.5 grams in the fertilized series; soil No. 32187 gave an increase of 2.0 grams in the unfertilized series, and soil No. 32316 gave an increase of 2.0 grams in the fertilized series. MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 21 Table 4.-——Effecti of manganese on the average weights of the crops grown (in grams) _ Manganese Nitrogen, and Lab. No Manganese phosphoric nitrogen, No. addition added acid and phosphoric potash acid, potash added added _ Wheat 29434 Wilson clay, 0~7” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.7 6.3 31 .8 30.6 29425 Crockett clay loam, 0-7" . . . . . . . . . 10.9 12.2 36 .2 35.6 29429 Miller clay, 0—7” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.5 10.9 31.9 31.6 29431 Miller fine sandy loam, 0-7” . . . . . . 5.0 4.8 27.1 27.4 6731 Clay loam, surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7.1 6.3 14.9 13.7 9297 Amarillo fine sandy loam, surface. . 2. 1 2. 1 7. 5 6.6 14844 Rice soil, surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.6 5.2 13.8 14.5 _ Cotton 29434 Wilson clay, 0—7" . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1.5 1 5 15.4 17.0 29425 Crockett clay loam, 0—7” . . . . . . . . . 5.1 4 3 15.1 16.5 29429 Miller clay, 0—7” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 3 5 14.8 14.3 29431 Miller fine sandy loam, 0—7" . . . . . . 2.5 3 2 13.4 12.8 6731 Clay loam, surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.7 9 8 23.7 24.6 9297 Amarillo fine sandy loam, surface. . 9.5 7 2 21 .5 25.8 Milo 6731 Clay loam, surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 21.8 26. 22.2 9297 Amarillo fine sandy loam, surface.. 5 0 5.2 9.1 12 2 14844 Rice soil, surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 6 .6 12. 15 2 Corn 29434 Wilson clay, 0—7” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.9 4.9 26.8 27.9 29425 Crockett clay loam, 0—7”. . . . . . . 5 .9 6.5 36.7 37.8 29429 Miller clay, 0—7” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 4.3 29 .3 28.4 29431 Miller fine sandy loam, 0—7” . . . . . . 2.9 2.6 35.7 35.0 6731 Clay loam . . . . . . . . . .._ . . . . . . . . . .. 19.5 21.8 20.4 15.1 32187 Surface, citrus chlorosis . . . . . . . . . . 17.6 17.5 19.3 18.7 32188 Subsoil to 32187 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.9 4.6 16.1 14.1 32315 Surface soil, chlorosis present. . . . . 10.5 11.3 20.2 19.7 2316 Subsoil to 32315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5.3 5.5 16.6 18.0 Kafir 29434 Wilson clay, 0-7" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.9 4.4 26.4 25.8 29425 Crockett clay loam, 0—7" . . . . . . . . . 13.5 11 .6 32.5 32.5 29429 Miller clay, 0—7” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.8 6.7 31.3 34.0 29431 Miller fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . 3.6 4.1 29.6 29.1 30964 Subsoil, surface produces chlorotic kafir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5.5 4.7 4.5 _7.0 32187 Surface soil, citrus chlorosis . . . . . . . 17 .2 19.2 29.5 27.1 32188 Suhsoil to 32187 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15.0 14.9 18.3 17.0 32316 Subsoil, chlorosis on surface . . . . . . . 10.8 8.7 33.7 35.7 29423 Upland black land, surface. . . . . . . 5.9 6.9 33.3 33.6 The increases or decreases in the Weights of the crops caused by the manganese sulfate are Within the experimental error; the Weights of the individual crops receiving the same treatments on the same soil varied nearly as much as the average Weights of the crops receiving manganese varied from those Which did not receive manganese on the same soil.’ POSSIBLE TOXICITY OF MANGANESE SULFATE A few of the soils seemed to show some depression in yield When manganese sulfate Was added. These results are not given in Table 2 but are brought together in Table 5. Corn on Amarillo fine sandy loam, soil N0. 9297, produced 1.3 grams less dry matter When manganese sulfate Was added than When N w gm N00 no.3 0000 mm: 05m. 00.0 :08 0000. m.» . . . .m::0._m::::: oo: o: T . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. ....MEN.:WZZE Q A :1: .m hm. : ammo ommo. m...“ 8 m. ::.m. :20 £3. m. :: ....w::2w:::: 0m. w M . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. ....... @.% ....WEN.~%@@=E@@ N~ 00.: 00.: 3N0. m:mo 0.0 mmm 00.0 :mmo wwmo. m. :: .. . ¢E20==E mm 0 T . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. ....wENhm@=@E Am N 00. :m. :.m:Q. 3:0 me 3 : m0. 00S 0.20. 0.0 .. . QEEmEEE o: 0 E . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. M . . . . . . . .. m m mm mo. “moo. mmoo 0.». 0000:. 0000:. 0000:. . 003:. 0:. . . . 03:09:05 oZ m R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . nmuw.§ . a % E P X E .08 0E 0:00 .6: 0:00 :0: @820 ::o0 an .08 0:00 :0: ::00 :0: mamim :0: 00:: 000:5 L 000/050,: :0::00 h: ::>: .:03o0 50300 000/050: :30 .3 .:.0>0::0: £000 .:.:00 05.50.88 .07: A ::>: 085:6: 00.32,: E ::>: :0 :3: :00>0E0.: ::>: E ::>: :0 :0 05554 00.: W». 000.03: ::>: E905 002?: ::>: 02:25: 5.90:’? T fl 02/050: 30:00:. 0:0 @000 E 0m0:wm:wE 0:: :0 0300.052: :0 353:5 0:: :0 :00.::w:|.w 0:90P C m m S m8: mm: 5m: 040.: Efiwv: m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shomm 0: zownsm wnomm M AL» . N. . hmwflm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~%HQ§»QO ~fl®i§@m ZOW ®OG%.~:@ E w. :m : . am om: m.o: ::00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00:0 00.00030 003E; :00 0:0: 0:001: 0:23.: mmvmm T :\w mm: mmm om E00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.0mm c: momnsw whomm , :5: 0.0m 0.0: ma: E00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 30:0» :05 00300: E000: R000 M m.m: 0.0m 0.0 m..o: E00 IIKIXIJIIJIJ.flT2:0m.:0.m£0:0:.:w0 paw»: 093:0 $500 4 mm: m8: w.m : m E00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . mow 00F: 3&0: on m. m N N w . . . . . . . - . . . . ' . . . . . . . - ¢ . . - ¢ N m 0800052: £0.30: T 0:0. E930: 40:00 :o::::0:0a ..0Z E 0:00 20:03:: 08500502 07: @000 com n0‘: L 00800.25: 508:2 M 50080.2 B 2:00.“: E 2:000 :0 E063 .0:0:::w 08:00.88 :0 3:005: Bfimwomslb 050:. 22 MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 23 it Was not added. The crop from the pot With manganese sulfate and fertilizer Was also smaller than on the pot With no manganese and fertilizer but the difference of one gram is probably Within the ex- perimental error. The yields of Wheat, milo, and cotton grown on this soil Were not depressed by additions of manganese sulfate. The corn groWn on soil No. 14844, a rice soil from Jefferson county, showed significant depressions in yield When manganese Was added, both With the fertilized and the unfertilized pots. This depression amounted to about 50 per cent for the unfertilized pots and about 24 per cent for the fertilized pots. Wheat and milo groWn on this soil Were not affected, and the cotton groWn Was too much damaged by in- sects to alloW any comparisons between the treatments. This soil Was the loWest in manganese of any of the soils tested, containing only .016 per cent of acid-soluble manganese. Soil No. 30964 is a subsoil, the surface soil of Which produced chlo- rotic kafir crops in the field. The yields of corn on this soil Were nia- terially reduced by the application of manganese, both on the fertil- ized and unfertilized pots. Unfortunately there Was only one pot of each treatment for this soil, but the decrease in yield for both the pots treated With manganese, fertilized and unfertilized, is large enough to be significant, especially for the unfertilized pot. Kafir on this soil shoWed neither chlorosis nor reduced yields. Soil No. 32077 is a soil from a peach orchard Where the leaves of the trees turn yelloW and fall off. There is quite a depression in the yield of both corn and kafir on the pots Which received fertilizer and manganese, While the unfertilized pots showed no depression in yield With either crop. The kafir on the fertilized pots With and Without manganese Were almost White, While on the unfertilized pots With and Without manganese the crop Was a normal green. The corn Was a nor- mal green on all the pots. Kafir on this soil did not respond to a complete fertilizer. The application of manganese not only did not prevent chlorosis but also greatly reduced the yield. Soil No. 32078 is the subsoil to No. 32077, and it also produced loWer yields of corn When manganese Was added to the fertilized pots, but the decrease Was not as great as on soil No. 32077. The kafir groWn on the fertilized pots With and Without manganese Was a very pale green, almost White, While those on the unfertilized pots Were normal in color. The decrease in yield With kafir on pot treated With manganese Was not great, probably Within experimental error. It is not clear Why the application of fertilizer to these tWo soils caused chlorosis, nor Why the application of manganese in addition to fertil- izer should cause a reduction in yield on one soil and not on the other. Soil No. 29423, a black-land soil from Bell county, also shoWed a slight reduction in yield when manganese Was applied to the fertil- ized pot. On most of the soils mentioned above, the application of manganese to the pots Which Were fertilized caused a greater reduction in yield 24 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION than Where the fertilizer was not added. It was found during the course of this Work, as will be discussed later, that the addition of fertilizer enabled the crop, in some cases, t0 take up more manganese than When fertilizer was not applied. It Was first thought that the application of fertilizer to these soils enabled the plant to take up enough manganese to be toxic, but on checking back over the analyses it was found that the crops grown on these soils contained no more manganese than the crops that Were not affected. 1t is not clear Why the addition of manganese sulfate to the fertilized pots should cause crops grown on these soils to have chlorosis. EFFECT OF THE QUANTITY OF MANGANESE ON THE WEIGHT AND MANGANESE CONTENT OF THE CROPS One experiment Was carried out With quartz sand to determine the effect of increasing amounts of manganese sulfate on the Weight and manganese content of corn and cotton. Glazed earthenware pots were selected that did not vary more than 20 grams from each other and 5000 grams of quartz sand Were Weighed into each. The following Weights of nutrients in 25 cc. of Water Were applied to each pot, both for corn and the succeeding crop, cotton: Potassium chloride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .75 grams Magnesium sulfate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.00 grams Ammonium nitrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .75 grams Ferrous ammonium sulfate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .13 grams In addition each pot received .86 gram of dicalcium phosphate and 1.72 grams of calcium sulfate, both free from manganese. The fer- rous ammonium sulfate contained manganese and Was purified by re- crystallization before it Was used. The other materials Were tested and found to be free from manganese. The manganese sulfate was applied to duplicate pots as shown in Table 4, equivalent to 10, 25, 50, and 100 milligrams of manganese (Mn), as found by analysis. The detailed results are given in Table 6. Corn responded to manganese, though the variations in the Weights of the crops grown in the duplicate pots showed that some other factor also influenced the growth of the corn in some of the pots. Cotton also responded to the applications of manganese sulfate. The Weight of the crop in pot 1 was probably exchanged for the weight of pot 9. There was no chlorosis in any of the plants, regardless of whether or not manganese had been applied. The percentage of manganese in both the cotton and the corn in- creased with increasing applications of manganese. The amount of manganese removed also increased with an increase in the amount ap- plied. These results are in general agreement with the work at this Station on the available potash (19) and available phosphoric acid MANGANESE IN ,__§T}.S SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 25 (20,) in the soil. With the corn, the amount of manganese was found to be removed in direct proportion to the amount added. The crops removed from the 25- and 5O-milligra1n applications almost 2.5 and 5.0 times as much manganese as from the IO-milligram application. The crops, however, removed only about 10 per cent of the manganese applied, and less than 10 per cent from the 100-milligram application. With cotton also the percentage of manganese in the crop and the amount of manganese removed were larger with larger applications of manganese sulfate, but the increases were not directly proportional to the quantities of manganese sulfate added. With the 50- and 100- milligram applications the cotton contained considerably smaller per- centages of manganese than the corn, although it had the benefit of the residual manganese applied to the corn besides that added as a second application. With the 10- and 25-milligram applications, the cotton removed only about one-tenth of the manganese applied, but with the 50- and 100-milligram applications the cotton removed much less than the corn. VARIATIONS IN THE PERCENTAGE OF MANGANESE IN PLANTS‘ Some plants grown on the different soils showed great variations in their percentage of manganese, as shown in Table 7. This table gives the minimum and maximum percentages of manganese in the crops grown on the soils, with no addition and with complete fertilizer. With the exception of the wheat there is a greater variation in man- ganese in the plants grown on the fertilized pots than those from the unfertilized pots. The maximum percentage of manganese in the wheat grown on the unfertilized soil is exceptionally high (.044 per cent), the next highest being only .014 per cent. If this exceptionally high crop is omitted the variation will also be less on the unfertilized than with the fertilized wheat. The maximum is two to five times the minimum in the plants grown on the unfertilized soils, and three to ten times the minimum in soils grown on the fertilized soils. It will be noticed in Table '7 that a soil which produces a minimum percentage of manganese in one crop does not produce a maximum per- centage in another crop. Soil No. 6731 produced three crops contain- ing minimum percentages of manganese, namely, wheat, and milo, un- fertilized, and milo, fertilized, and it produced no crop with a maxi- mum percentage of manganese. Soil No. 29429 produced four crops with minimum percentages of manganese, namely, cotton and corn, unfertilized, and wheat and cotton, fertilized, and no crops with a maximum of manganese. Soil No. 29431 produced four crops with maximum percentages of manganese,—cotton and corn, fertilized and unfertilized, and kafir fertilized and unfertilized, and no crops with minimum percentages of manganese. 26 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURALUEXPERIMENT STATION Table 7.——Variations in manganese content of plants Nitrogen, phosphoric No addition Soil acid and Soil per cent number potash, number manganese per cent manganese Wheat Minimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0062 6731 .0067 29429 Maximum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0445 29425 .0445 29425 Cotton Minimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0033 29429 .0036 29429 Maximum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0157 29431 .0367 29431 Corn Minimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0018 29429 .0065 32316 Maximum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0195 32078 .0360 9297 Milo Minimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0067 6731 .0061 6731 Maximum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0147 14844 .0204 9297 Kafir Minimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0072 32316 .0057 32316 Maximum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0163 29431 .0588 29431 RELATION OF THE MANGANESE TAKEN UP BY CROPS TO THE MANGANESE CONTENT OF THE SOIL Previous Work at this Station has shown that the percentages of nitrogen, active phosphoric acid (5), and active potash (6), in the soil are related to the quantities of nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash that are removed from the soil in pot experiments. It was a ques- tion if similar relations exist for manganese. The results obtained in the pot experiments with manganese are given in Table 8, which is arranged in an ascending order of the per- centage of acid-soluble manganese in the different soils. The table gives the average percentages of manganese in the crops grown on the pots receiving no addition and those grown on the pots receiving com- plete fertilizer. An inspection of the table shows that there is a small relation be- tween the total manganese in the crop, or the amount removed from the soil, expressed in milligrams, and the percentage of acid-soluble manganese in the soil. The correlation coefficient for corn for the pots receiving no fertilizer is .437 i .04. The correlation coefficients were not calculated for the other crops, on account of their small number. From the results presented in Table 8 one is led to the conclusion that the acid-soluble manganese in the soil is not as good a criterion of the“ availability of manganese, as measured by the amount removed by crops, as is the active phosphoric acid or the active potash. The coefficient of correlation for active phosphoric acid (5) is .57 and for active potash (6), + .794 i .014. In this connection mention may be made of the work of Bertrand (2) on the determination of different forms of manganese in the soil. He MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 27 Table 8.——Relation of manganese taken up by crop to manganese in the soil N0 addition Fertilizer Lab. Weight Per cent Milligrams Per cent Weight Per cent Milligrams No. of crop, manganese manganese manganese of crop, manganese manganese grams in crop in crop in soil grams in crop in crop Corn ~ 14844 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5.0 .0076 .380 .016 17.5 .0106 ‘ 1.855 9297 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 .0134 .563 .024 12.5 .0360 4.450 29434 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 .9 .0054 .265 .032 26.8 .0090 2.412 30964 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2 .0058 .692 .036 29 .0 .0068 1.973 29425 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5.9 .0119 .702 .041 36.7 .0089 3.376 29429 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 .1 .0018 .103 .042 29.3 .0013 .381 29431 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.9 .0084 .243 .043 35.7 .0155 5 .554 32315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.5 .0061 .641 .048 20.2 .0072 1.454 32078 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0 .0195 .585 .055 12.3 .0149 1.833 6731 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19.5 0090 1.755 .055 20.4 .0107 2.183 32077 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15.5 .0132 2.047 .057 25.8 .0155 3 .999 32316 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5.3 .0060 .318 .057 16.6 .0065 1.079 32187 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17.6 .0144 2.534 .065 19.3 .0156 3 .011 32188 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.9 .0120 .588 .067 16.1 .0126 2.029 Wheat 14844 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5.6 .0316 1.769 .016 13.8 .0115 1.587 9297 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.1 .0162 .341 .024 7.5 .0318 2.385 29434 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7.7 .0156 1.201 .032 31.8 .0254 9.697 29425 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.9 .0444 4.840 .041 36.2 .0445 16.109 29429 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.5 .0122 1.281 .042 31.9 .0067 2.137 29431 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5.0 .0142 .710 .043 27.1 .0241 6.530 6731 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 .1 .0062 .440 .055 15.9 .0103 1.638 Cotton 9297 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.5 .0042 .399 .024 21.4 .0122 2.612 29434 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 .0062 .093 .032 15 .4 .0058 .893 29425 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5.2 .0105 .546 .041 15.6 .0096 1.498 29429 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 .0033 .106 .042 14.8 .0036 .533 29431 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.5 .0157 .432 .043 13.4 .0367 4.918 6731 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8.7 .0057 .496 .055 24.6 .0108 2.654 Milo 14844 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .6 0147 1.558 .016 12.6 .0145 1.827 9297 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.0 .0105 .525 .024 9.1 .0204 1.856 6731 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.7 .0067 1.387 .055 26.2 .0061 1.598 Kafir 29423 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.9 .0107 .630 .010 34.7 .0082 1.245 29434 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.9 .0037 .180 .032 26.4 .0171 4.514 30964 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5.5 .0094 .517 .036 4.5 .0109 .471 29425 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13.5 .0186 2.510 .041 32.5 .0250 9.125 29429 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.7 .0074 596 .042 31.3 .0054 1.690 29431 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 .6 .0163 585 .043 25.0 .0588 24.700 32315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13 .1 .0077 1.008 .048 35.1 .0082 2.878 32078 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.5 .0103 1.082 .055 18.9 .0117 2.211 32077 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 29.3 .0128 4.750 .057 27.5 .0174 4.785 32316 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.8 .0072 .772 .057 33 .7 .0057 1.921 32187 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17.2 .0147 2.528 .065 29.5 .0159 4.641 32188 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15.0 .0089 1.335 .067 15.7 .0115 1.806 29311 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trace 15. 6 .0047 .733 29316 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .009 33 .5 .0037 1.239 29315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .013 29.0 .0049 1.421 26817 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .019 30.0 .0077 2 .320 26818 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .023 24.0 .0065 1.580 26815 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .025 33.2 .0050 1.650 29314 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .036 21.0 .0060 1.260 29318 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .038 48.8 .0012 .586 29313 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .040 21.8 .0107 2.333 29314 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .040 16.0 .0046 .736 extracted soils with 1 per cent acetic acid in determining the available manganese. Had it been it might have showed closer relations form. This determination was not carried out in this Work. than the acid-soluble 28 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION In working with the soils of the Netherlands, Wester (20) found no relation between the manganese content of the crop and that of the soil 0n which it was grown in field experiments. EFFECT OF FERTILIZER ON THE MANGANESE CONTENT OF PLANTS The percentage of manganese in plants tends t0 increase when fer- tilizer containing nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash is added to the soil, as shown in Table 9. The crops from only two soils and the average for all the crops grown on the soils are given. The unfertil- ized crop grown on one of the soils contained more manganese than the crop grown on the same soil but fertilized. The crop grown on the other soil which had been fertilized contained more manganese than the crop grown on the portion that had not been fertilized. On an average the crops grown on the fertilized pots contained more man- ganese than those grown on the portion of the same soil that had not been fertilized. This fertilizer did not contain manganese. The crops grown on the soils that received complete fertilizer plus manganese contained larger percentages of manganese than those grown on soils which received manganese only. This difference is slight in some cases and large in others. On an average the addition of fertil- izer caused an increase of 22 to 68 per cent, while the addition of man- ganese effected an increase of only '7 to 24 per cent. The differences in the percentage of manganese for the fertilized crops as compared with those that were not fertilized vary from minus .0055 per cent to plus .0127 for wheat; minus .0030 per cent to plus .0226 per cent for corn; minus .0009 per cent to plus .0210 per cent for cotton; minus .0024 to plus .0425 per cent for kafir. Attention is called to the exceptionally high effect on the kafir crop grown on soil No. 29431. The crop with no addition contained .0163 per cent of manganese while the fertilized crop contained .0588 per cent, an increase of .0425 per cent, or over three times as much. The difference in the crops grown on the soil treated with manganese is still greater. The crop on the soil with manganese contained only .0147 per cent and that grown on the fertilized soil plus manganese contained .1001 per cent—-a difference of .0854 per cent, or nearly seven times as much. This increased amount of manganese in the fertilized crops may be caused in part by an increased root system, which enables the crop to draw more heavily on the manganese in the soil. However, consider- ing the fact that the increase was much greater on some of the soils than on others, it is possible that the fertilizer increases the availability of manganese in some of the soils. This is a question that will have to be solved by further investigation. On some of the soils the application of fertilizer increased the amount of manganese in the crop more than did the application of manganese sulfate. MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 29 Table 9.——Efiect of fertilizer on the percentage of manganese in plants Per cent manganese in crop L31; Fertilizer N0, - Crop N0 Fertilizer Manganese and addition added added manganese added 29429 Wheat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0122 .0067 .0122 .0064 9297 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0162 .0318 .0144 .0364 Average 6 soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0181 .0238 .0194 .0227 Percentage increase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 .5 7.2 25.4 29425 Corn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0119 .0089 .0134 .0094 9297 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0134 .0560 .0304 .0319 Average 15 soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .0095 .0116 .0118 .0126 Percentage increase. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. 22.1- 24.2 32.4 29425 Cotton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0105 .0096V .0129 .0162 6731 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0057 .0091 .0063 .0108 Average 6 soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0076 .0128 .0086 .0158 Percentage increase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68.4 10.4 107.9 6731 Milo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0067 .0061 .0068 .0066 9297 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0105 .0204 .0153 .0194 Average 3 soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .0106 .0133 .0127 .0142 Percentage increase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.5 20.0 33.9 29429 Kafir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0077 .0054 .0080 .0051 29431 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .0163 .0588 .0147 .1001 Average 11 soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .0102 .0170 .0126 .0198 Percentage increase. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66.4 23.5 94.1 EFFECT OF MANGANESE ON CROPS GROWN ON SOILS WHICH PRODUCE CHLOROTIC PLANTS Several soils which have produced chlorotic crops have been tested with various additions t0 find the cause of chlorosis. This Work has not yet been published, but the results with manganese on seven sam- ples are given in Table 10. The application of manganese Was of decided benefit to only one of the soils, No. 32561, on which sorghum was grown. The sorghum on the pot with no addition was almost white, while the sorghum that received manganese was a pale green. The manganese seemed of only slight benefit in preventing chlorosis, but it had a decided effect on the weight of the sorghum, increasing it from 9.6 to 27 grams. On the other hand, manganese was injurious to the crop grown on the subsoil, No. 32562. The crops from the pots with no addition was a pale green, while the crop from the pot with the addition of man- ganese was chlorotic and died. Kafir on soil No. 28010 seemed to have been benefited slightly from the application of manganese but the crops on both the fertilized pots and on those treated with manganese died; so it is not known whether manganese would have benefited the crops had they grown to the end of the experiment. Kafir on the subsoil, No. 28011, seemed to have received a slight benefit from the application of manganese although 30 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Table 10.—Effect of manganese on growth of crop on soils causing chlorosis: crop in grams Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Crop and addition 28010 28011 30963 30964 31115 32561 32562 Corn with nitrogen, phosphoric acid and potash . . . . . . . . .. 27.2 14.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Corn with manganese . . . . . . . 25.0 11.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kafir with nitrogen, phosphoric acid and potash . . . . . . . . . .. 1.7 1.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Kafir with manganese . . . . . . . .. 3.6 5.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . Milo with no addition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 7 0 9 0.8 . . . . . . . . . . Milo with manganese; ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.4 1.1 0.6 . . . . . . . . . . Sorghum with no addition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7 10.2 4.8 9.6 Sorghum with manganese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.8 7.8 6.0 27.0 the plants were not chlorotic. Manganese salts applied to the other soils given in the table had no decided beneficial 0r toxic effects, nor were the crops in any of these pots chlorotic. From the results given in Table 10, it seems that soils which produce chlorotic crops in the field, as these soils were reported to do, may not produce chlorotic crops in pots in the greenhouse, as crops from only tWo of these soils Were chlorotic. It is also evident, in considering soils No. 32561 and No. 32562, that applications of manganese sulfate may be beneficial to the crop on one soil and in- jurious on another soil, and if manganese is to be applied as a cor- rective for chlorosis, it should be at first tried out on a small scale. APPROXIMATE AMOUNTS OF MANGANESE REQUIRED BY CROPS The minimum, maximum, and average amounts of manganese re- quired by Wheat, cotton, corn and kafir have been calculated from the Table 11.—-Appr0ximate amounts of manganese required by crops (pounds) Manganese Crop in pounds per acre Wheat . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . Grain, 30 bushels Straw (dry), 2653 pounds Minimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Maximum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 .86 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.06 Cotton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 300 pounds lint Stalk, seed, hulls, 2100 pounds Minimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .08 Maximum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 Corn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 30 bushels Stalks (dry), 1877 pounds inimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .07 Maximum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41 Kafir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2000 pounds dry forage - Minimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .14 * Maximum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 31 amounts of manganese found in the crops grown in pot experiments and are given in Table 11. The crops require very small amounts of manganese. Cotton, corn, and kafir require less than one-half pound per acre, While Wheat re- quires little more than a pound. MANGANESE CONTENT OF OTHER PLANT PRODUCTS A feW samples of other plants and plant products Were analyzed for manganese and the results are given in Table 12. The grain of corn contained only a trace of manganese. The other grains also contain low percentages of manganese, With the exception of feterita heads, Which are comparatively high. Table 12.—Manganese content of various plant products Per cent Lab. manganese No. in material 30493 Yellow Dent corn (grain) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0007 30483 Yellow Creole corn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trace 30491 Yellow Dent corn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trace 30770 Nicholson Giant Yellow corn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trace 30481 Ferguson Yellow Dent corn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0004 30213 Fcntress Strawberry corn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trace 25979 Hegari heads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0020 26335 Feterita heads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0108 26187 Hegari grains.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0010 29211 String beans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0024 26399 California pink beans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0009 26398 Pinto beans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0013 Cotton leaves (2 samples) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0041 29956 Cowpeas and pods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .0019 30490 Peanut meal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0060 29782 Cotton roots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0016 Guar leaves (3 samples) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .0064 29793 Guar stalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0016 29292 Cottonseed cake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0017 26282 Alfalfa hay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0070 26050 Guar hay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0037 26246 Prairie hay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . .0049 24368 Johnson grass hay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .0058 29751 Kentucky blue grass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0108 26233 Hegari stems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0046 26261 Kafir fodder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0034 29720 Corn silage (dried) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .0062 30212 Orange peel and pulp (dried) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trace The leafy parts of the plants contain the most manganese. Cotton leaves contain .0041 per cent, While the roots contain only .0016 per cent. Guar leaves contain .0064 per cent, While the stalks contain only .0016 per cent. Guar hay, composed of leaves and stalks, contains .0037 per cent. Kentucky blue grass Was the highest in manganese, containing .0108 per cent. MANGANESE CONTENT OF TEXAS SOILS Representative soils from the different sections of Texas Were an- alyzed for acid-soluble manganese. A few determinations of total man- 32 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Table 13.—Percentage of manganese of Texas soils. Relation to location Laboratory Surface soil Subsoil number acid-soluble acid-soluble Soils of East Texas 21222-3 Bell clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .078 .080 24029-30 Bibb clay loam. .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .516 .424 29425 Crockett clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .041 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23948-9 Luverne fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .008 .006 24049-50 Greenville fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .038 .014 17502-3 Lufkin clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122 .015 8314 Lufkin fine sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .003 . . . . . . . . . . . . 29431 Miller fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .042 . . . . . . . . . . . . 29429 Miller clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .041 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23966-7 Milam fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .009 .006 3653 Norfolk fine sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .008 8314 Norfolk fine sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .003 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1224 Norfolk fine sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .040 . . . . . . . . . . . . 12594-5 Norfolk fine sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .041 .005 21224-5 Norfolk sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .006 .004 2331 Norfolk fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .073 . . . . . . . . . . .. 7180 Norfolk fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .012 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1289 Norfolk fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .010 . . . . . . . . . . . . 14942-3 Ruston fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .036 .020 14946-7 Ruston fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .010 .046 16072-3 Huston fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 014 .006 6194-5 Susquehanna clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .010 .022 8389-90 Susquehanna clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .008 .003 8348 Susquehanna clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .046 6196-7 Susquehanna fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .030 .011- 10146-7 Susquehanna fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .008 .003 12586-7 Susquehanna fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .021 .041 14957 Susquehanna fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .008 12598-9 Susquehanna gravelly loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .009 29434 Wilson clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .032 . . . . . . . . . . . . Average. ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .031 .023 Central and West Texas Soils 21594-5 Bastrop clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .050 .034 20995-6 Bell clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .035 .038 18247 Brackett clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .022 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21591-2 Calumet silty clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .050 .034 11669-7 Crawford clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .032 .032 12665-6 Crockett fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .015 .021 12984-5 Crockett fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .011 .007 15948 Denton clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .051 . . . . . . . . . . . . 18248 Denton clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .034 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21568-9 Foard clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .040 .041 21542-3 Foard very fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .066 .072 21564-5 Fowlkes very fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .037 .043 20281 Frio fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .015 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21073 Houston clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .050 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21069-70 Houston black clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .045 .071 12021-22 Houston black clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .097 .080 12029 Houston clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .039 . . . . . . . . . . . . 12568-9 Houston clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .152 .102 21547-8 Miller silty clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .062 .046 21588-9 Miller clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .052 .049 20685-6 Miles fine sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .008 .003 21587-8 Reagan loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .042 .034 16006 San Saba silty clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .088 . . . . . . . . . . . . 20980 Trinity clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .033 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21067-8 Trinity clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .046 .057 21576-7 Vernon clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .040 .051 21549 Vernon clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .059 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21560-1 Vernon very fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .040 .063 21582-3 Wichita very fine sandy loorn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .050 .024 17534 Wilson clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .060 . . . . . . . . . . . . 12014 Wilson clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .079 21071-2 Wilson clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .039 .035 20986 Wilson fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21555-6 Yahola silty clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .050 .049 21572-3 Yahola loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .040 .040 21580-1 Yahola fine sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .051 .051 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .050 .046 MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 33 Table 13.——Percentage 0f manganese of Texas soils. Relation to location-Continued Laboratory Surface soil Subsoil number acid-soluble acid-soluble _ Soils of South Texas 23353 Tiocano silty clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .010 . . . . . . . . . . . . 26815 Catalpa clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .027 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23339-40 Delfina fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .012 Trace 25893-4 Raymondville clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .038 035 25891-2 Raymondville fine sandy clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .030 .030 24019-20 Duval fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .022 .014 6731 Guadalupe clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .048 . . . . . . . . . . . . 26729-30 Guadalupe silty clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .034 .041 26817-18 Guadalupe silty clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .021 .021 21253-4 Harlingen clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .029 .034 20725 Hockley fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .005 21283 Laredo fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .031 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21265-6 Laredo silty clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .043 .032 7195 Lake Charles clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .006 7282-3 Lake Charles clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .007 .014 20928 Lake Charles clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .044 . . . . . . . . . . . . 20726-7 Lake Charles clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .051 .052 21286 Lomalta clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .034 . . . . . . . . . . . . 25879-80 Nueces fine sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .007 .008 23349 Nueces fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .010 . . . . . . . . . . . . 25877-8 Point Isabel clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .025 .027 21288-9 Point Isabel clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .046 .027 25897 Point Isabel fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .019 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21281 Rio Grande clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .046 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21257 Rio Grande very fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .030 . . . . . . . . . . . . 26814 Trinity clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .032 21274-5 Victoria clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .015 .020 17700-1 Victoria fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .020 .017 21277-8 Victoria fine sandy 10am . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .019 .022" 20785 Willacy fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .026 . . . . . . . . . . . . 25883-4 Willacy fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .027 .025 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .027 .023 Soils of Western Plains 10144-5 Amarillo clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .011 .019 29311-2 Amarillo fine sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trace Trace 13737 Amarfllajine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 011 . . . . . . . . . . . . 13760 Amarillo fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .023 . . . . . . . . . . . . 29315-6 Amarillo fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .012 .009 20605-6 Amarillo fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .005 .004 20705 Amarillo loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .018 . . . . . . . . . . . . 20601-2 Arno clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .028 .032 20622 Arno clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .093 20658 Arno clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .018 29318 Randall clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .038 30964 Randall clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .033 . . . . . . . . . . . . 9297 Randall clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .025 . . . . . . . . . . . . 29313-4 Reagan silty clay loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .041 .036 20599 Reeves fine sandy loam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .015 . . . . . . . . . . . . 11615-16 San Saba clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .091 .092 20604 Miles clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .028 . . . . . . . . . . . . Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .024 .034 ganese were also made. There Was little difference between the per— centages of total manganese and acid-soluble manganese, there being only a few soils in which the total manganese is higher than the acid- soluble manganese. For this reason these estimations of total man- ganese are not included in the tables. Manganese Content of Texas Soils Related to Location Table 13 gives the percentages of manganese found in various soil types. The soils are arranged according to location; for this purpose the state was divided into East Texas, The Central and West Texas; SouthTeXas, and The Western Plains. 34 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION From an inspection of the table it is evident that there is a v] range in the percentages of manganese in the different types of s0'; there is also a considerable variation in the manganese content of so“ of the same type. j In most cases there is not much difference in the manganese conten of the surface and the corresponding subsoil. There are, of course, few cases in which there is a decided difference, but, generally if th surface soil is high in manganese, the subsoil Will also be high, an vice-versa. ’ The soils of Central and West Texas contain the highest percentages‘ of manganese, although there are-a few soils in this section that ar; 10W in manganese. I. The soils of East Texas and South Texas contain about the same a, percentages of manganese, while the soils of the Western Plains are? decidedly lower. _, The average manganese content of the surface soils of all these sec»; tions is .033 per cent. Of the soils of East Texas, 40 per cent are‘; above this average; Central Texas has 82 per cent above; South Texas. has 32 per cent above; the Western Plains has only 21 per cent above i; the average. .4 Some of the soils are very low in manganese. For example, one A sample of Susquehanna clay contains only .008 per cent in the surface '. soil and .003 per cent in the subsoil. This Would be equivalent to 160 pounds an acre to the depth of '7 inches in the surface soil and 60 f pounds in the subsoil. The surface soil would contain enough for 320 crops of corn, cotton, or kafir, if the estimate of 0.5 pound of man- ganese to the crop is correct. As the surface soil may contain nitrogen sufficient for only 18 crops, phosphoric acid for 33 crops, and acid- soluble potash sufficient for 50 crops, it is evident that in spite of the low percentage, the amount of manganese is more nearly adequate than is the amount of nitrogen, phosphoric acid, or potash. MANGANESE CONTENT OF TEXAS SOILS RELATED TO TEXTURE The soils are regrouped according to texture into clay, clay loam, sandy, and sandy loam and the minimum, maximum, and average per- centages of acid-soluble manganese are given in Table 14. Tablellllr-Average percentate of acid-soluble manganese in soils as related to texture Clay soils Clay loam Sands Sandy 10am Surface Subsoil Surface Subsoil Surface Subsoil Surface Subsoil Minimum . . . . . . .010 .008 .010 .020 Trace Trace .005 .004 Maximum . . . . . . .152 .102 .516 .484 .057 .199 .094 .741 Average. . . . .045 .046 .064 .068 .021 .040 .024 .025 Number averaged. . . . . 3O 18 21 13 9 8 34 26 MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 35 The clay loams average higher in manganese than the others. There is also one exceptional soil in this group, the Bibbs clay loam, which contains the highest percentage, .516, of any of the soils analyzed. The sands and sandy loams are generally lower, while the clay soils are on the average close to the clay loams. The average percentage of manganese for all of the soils is .038 per cent; 57 per cent of the clay soils are above this average; 70 per cent of the clay loams are above; 22 per cent of the sands and 21 per cent of the sandy loams are above the average. Only one of the sandy loam soils has a manganese content equal to the average of the clay or clay loam soils, and only two of the sandy loam soils are above this average. Only two of the clay soils are lower than the averages of the sands and sandy loams. These two soils are of the same type, Susquehanna clay. The clay loams have four soils‘ lower than the averages for the sands and sandy loams. The clay loams contain a slightly higher percentage of manganese than the clays, and the sandy and sandy loam soils had decidedly lower percentages. These results correspond somewhat with work reported by Wester (23) in a study of the soils of the Netherlands. He found that the loam soils contained a higher percentage of manganese than the other types he analyzed, but he does not specify Whether a sandy loam or clay loam classification was the highest. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The writer wishes to express appreciation to Dr. G. S. Fraps, Chief, Division of Chemistry, for assistance in planning the work and in prep- aration of the manuscript, and for the use of some analyses made in the laboratories of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS (1) Manganese sulfate is not appreciably beneficial to the growth of crops on most of the 21 soils tested. On one soil it produced a de- cided increase in growth. (2) On six soils manganese sulfate decreased the yields. If man- ganese sulfate is tried it should be tested on a small scale at first so as to be certain‘ it will be of benefit and to guard against any possibil- ity of toxic action. (3) Of the thirteen soils which produced chlorotic crops in the field only two produced chlorotic crops when tested in the greenhouse. (4) Corn and cotton take up amounts of manganese almost in pro- portion to the quantities added to quartz sand, but only about 10 per cent of that supplied. (5) A plant grown on one soil may contain two to five times as much manganese as the same kind of plant grown on another soil. (6) The coefficient of correlation between the acid-soluble man- 36 BULLETIN NO. 432, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION ganese in the soil and the amount of manganese taken up by corn was .437 i .04. This is not as close a correlation as that between the active phosphoric acid and the active potash of the soil and that re- moved by crops. (7) The application of a fertilizer containing nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash increases the percentage of manganese in the crop 30 to 70 per cent. . (8) Manganese was of benefit to the growth of sorghum on one of the soils which produced chlorotic crops in the field. (9) On a basis of manganese content, the soils of Texas may be grouped as follows: Black Prairie region highest; East Texas and South Texas intermediate; Edwards Plateau lowest. (10) Clay loam and clay soils were considerably higher in man- ganese than the sandy and sandy loam soils. (11) A crop of corn, cotton, or kafir requires less than one-half pound of manganese per acre, while a crop of wheat requires little more than a pound. (12) The percentage of manganese in a number of grains of plants is given. (13) While some Texas soils contain only small percentages of manganese, the requirements of the plant are so small that the soil is much b-etter supplied with manganese than with nitrogen, phosphoric acid, or potash. (14) Manganese sulfate is not recommended for application on the soils of Texas. There may be some soils on which it is needed, but so far only one has been found with which it is a possibility. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Bertrand, G., 1927. Sur Pintervention du manganese dans les oxidations parraques par la laccase. Compt. Bend. 1241032. 2. Bertrand, G., 1924. Determination of different forms of man- ganese in arable soils. Bull. Soc. Chem. 35:522. 3. Brenchley, W., 1914. Inorganic plant poisons and stimulants, Cambridge, 1914. 4. Elwell, E. E., 1902. Occurrence and importance of manganese salts in the soil. Science N. Series 16:291. 5. Fraps, G. S., 1920. Relation of the phosphoric acid of the soil to pot experiments. Texas Exp. Sta. Bull. 267. 6. Fraps, G. S., 1927. Relation of the potash removed by crops to the active, total, acid-soluble and acid insoluble potash of the soil. Tex. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 355. 7._ Gilbert, B. E., McLean, F. T., and Hardin, L. J., 1926. The re- lation of manganese and iron to lime induced chlorosis. Soil Science, 22:437. 8. Gilbert, E. E., and McLean, F. T., 1928. A deficiency disease. The lack of available manganese in the soil. Soil Science, 26:427. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 20. 21. 22. MANGANESE IN TEXAS SOILS AND ITS RELATION TO CROPS 37 Lindsey, J. B, 1920. Soil studies. 25a. McHargue, J. S., 1919. Mass. Exp. Sta. Rept. 1920: Effect of manganese on the growth of plants. Ind. and Eng. Chem. 11:332. McHargue, J. S., 1922. The role of manganese in plants. Jour. Amer. Chem. Soc. 4411592. BlcHargue, J . S., 1926. Bl-anganese and plant growth. 1nd. zind Eng. Chem. 18:172. McHargue, J . S., 1923. Effect of different concentrations oi’ man- ganese sulfate on the growth of plants in acid and neutral soils, and the necessity of manganese for plant growth. Jour. Agr- ‘les. 23:741. Miller, L. P. Manganese deficiency in sand cultures. Green book; April, 1928. Schreiner, 0., and Dawson, L. P., 1927. Manganese deficiency in soils and fertilizers. Ind. and Eng. Chem. 19:400. Skinner, J . J ., and Sullivan, M. X., 1914. The action of man-- ganese in soils. U. S. Dept. of Agr. Bull. 42. Skinner, J. J., and Reid, F. F., 1916. The action of manganese under acid and neutral soil conditions. U. S. Dept. of Agr. Bull. 44]. Skinner, J. J., and Ruprccht, R. W., 1928. Some results of soil fertility and fertilizer experiments on glade soils of Dade- county, Florida. Comm. Fert. Feb. 1928. Skinner, J. J., and Ruprecht, B. W., 1930. Fertilizer experi- ments with truck crops. Florida Exp. Sta. Bull. 218, pt. 3. Wester, D. H., 1924. Manganese content of some Xetherland soils. Exp. Sta. Rec. 50:514. Willis, L. G, 1928. Manganese as a fertilizer for lower coastal plain soils. North Carolina Bull. 257. Kelley, W. P., 1910. Report Hawaiian Exp. Station, 4:42. Fertilizer