TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION R. D. LEWIS, Director, College Station. Texas data» 746 ‘Zefiaua/zq 195.2 Corn Production in Texas The TEXAS AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL CCJLLEGE SYSTEM GIBB GILCHRIST, Chancellor Azv avwdafia ‘m0 oauskoa mwalca msawrofimw» sfiofiuooawoa AOJC awsaoa was QOHAC wmos owacaamosa AZV aouoafia as 96s 8s wwaaca ms aRoJw. 3 3 .3 .3 .3 3 .3 3 .3 3 .3 3 .3 .3 3 .3 i»: 3 .3 .3 .3 .3 wsasfia wawizuuowkw wwawsi was aasnafl H zsz fiwwaswmaaC £3?» Pas: .s§s..:< 3 =5-..” 3 25d -2 05¢. 23E 3E mao>e15ow3m sass; was Esia 3 =54 .53.» is; .s..:sfi< 3 @7312 3 33. -3 as? wEsE sizes 3:2: w=E=E2 casucsv was .82.? 223a 3 is-..” 3a 25x3 3A 3m 52a owasaU 2m ~22; wfiaiwa fi QsE AwasTPEC was age? 2.23m 3 33...: 3-3 ZmseQQm -5 fish .35 owasaw Em mao>2o .39.; wwawsE was 2.23m £3?» mbsfl 3 5-3-5 3 25d 3W3 .32 mawsea. mwoaO “mo? waoizo éooBw aooawamifl Ea waaaz éfiia 3 A.-3-3 3 2.3. 3A. .22 $5.2m 9.2a magic $09.5 aooauflgfi was wwawsS éfiia 3 =43-..» 3-2 =¢=s-¢¢m.s 3A asE QESa azsssss waoizfiookw wiwsg was Esnai . mH uaa< Ammom >33 3%.; m=8=$2 3 =3-..” 3 25 s -5 .32 @133 awscU :5 awwmwwflwwm, siwawwawwuwmmvw aswiwa< .32. 2.8 mwasw was P5550 é-wfim £3?» Fasi 3 .3-3-=m 3-2 .s=séz.w 3s as; .5255. wsxoh awed a u “E395: $53 3A; a . uawwmwaaaaaawamow mo m5 waflasi- as aw woaoam wmma-assa? wafivuuaaasawsm wssas mom -mwo.aw-wwa.0w aosmmfioh awamusaw m Texas and consist of a large land area with a rolling surface. ' A wide range of soils, varying from dark brown to red in color ; and heavy clay to sand in texture, occurs in this area. The or soils, in general, are highly productive, but the use of fertili- CORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS l3 (rs is sometimes necessary for maximum production. The i= tire area is within the subhumid region and the limited pinfall is somewhat irregular. Cotton, grain sorghum, wheat '1. oats are the principal crops and corn is of minor im- irtance. However, some corn is grown each year in the stern part of the area. High Plains The High Plains in Northwest Texas occupy a vast lateau with a relatively smooth surface. The dark-colored ' ils of the area are primarily clay loams, while the red soils I) mostly sandy in texture. Rainfall of the area is only to 20 inches annually, and a considerable portion of the rop land is under irrigation from shallow wells. The soils ‘re inherently productive and excellent crop yields may be ltained with irrigation. Cotton, wheat and grain sorghum fre the principal crops, and only a limited amount of corn grown. Practically all of the corn acreage is under irriga- n because of the low natural rainfall. CORN CULTURE Cultural practices for corn are similar to those required or other row crops and are known by most farmers and gricultural workers. Seedbed preparation usually consists some type of plowing with a disc or moldboard plow in the 528.11 or winter, followed by harrowing and bedding and some- mes by rebedding. A modification of this method, commonly sed in the Blackland and Grand Prairies, consists of shallow ultivation in the fall with a one-way plow or disc-harrow, _ollowed by bedding and rebedding. Regardless of the method psed in seedbed preparation, corn requires a seedbed that is jeep, well pulverized, in good physical tilth and free of weeds V, planting time. The yield of corn is determined before ind at the time of planting to a much greater extent than iost farmers realize. On sandy soils, the seed are planted on low beds or on e level, while on the heavier clay soils, particularly in the lackland and Grand Prairies, the seed ordinarily are planted "n beds above the ground level. Flat planting on heavy clay jils often results in poor stands as the seed are damaged by g1 drainage within the soil. The practice of “rolling corn” H hasten emergence and obtain better stands is common in reas where heavier soils predominate. Cultivation of corn for weed control is especially impor- l: in Texas where rainfall is often inadequate and the ertility level is low. Under these conditions, the use of ater and nutrients by weeds results in exceptionally low l4 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION yields. The first cultivation is extremely important as it destroys the first crop of weeds and also increases the aeration of the soil around the corn roots. Ordinarily, the second cultivation is the deepest, while the remaining cultivations. should be shallow to avoid damaging the root system. Two to four cultivations of the growing crop are usually required for proper weed control; the last cultivation should be made when the corn is approximately waist-high. The use of machinery for harvesting the corn crop has increased rapidly in the past few years, especially in the more intensively cultivated areas such as the Blackland and Grand Prairies and the Rio Grande Plain. A large part of the crop is harvested in August and early September just as soon as the moisture content reaches 15 or 16 percent. This practice has several advantages over later harvesting. It results in a smaller loss from insects, diseases and weather hazards, enables the harvest to be done during a slack‘ work season, and allows early land preparation for fall-seeded small grain or legume crops. Planting Dates One of the most important factors limiting corn produc- tion in Texas is inadequate moisture during the latter part of the growing season. Texas Bulletin 49, 1898, states the problem: “It must be clearly borne in mind that it is the last thirty days of growth that determines the success of corn in Texas.” Thus, it is important that planting dates and rates enable the crop to be grown with the least injury possible » from the summer drouths. Results reported in Texas Bulletin 397, 1929, show that early-planted corn is practically always more productive than late-planted corn, and that there is a definite relationship between the date of planting and the date of silking. These results also show that corn planted 10 days apart in March ordinarily silks only 5,days apart in June. In other words, the earlier the corn is planted the longer is the period between planting and silking. Although l extra-early plantings may partially escape yield reductions _ from early summer drouths, the disadvantages of this practice are slow emergence, poor stands and possible frost injury after emergence. Since adequate stands are essential for T maximum corn yields, extra-early plantings usually will be inferior in yield to plantings at medium dates. A rule adhered j to by some successful corn growers is to wait until the upper six or eight inches of soil have an average daily temperature r of about 50° F. before planting. This practice ordinarily a, insures more adequate stands, higher nutrient availability i and better growing conditions. As a result, higher yields are 7 CORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 15 March ISI-BO Morch 5- IIII l5 woe-m n u ‘s l ._ Febluury \\ 1o March I Figure 5. Recommended planting dates for the corn-growing areas of Texas. a " usually obtained than by planting exceptionally early in an effort to escape drouth conditions. Dates for corn planting in Texas are subject to both regional and seasonal variations, but in most areas of Texas a planting is begun near the average date of the last frost. Approximate optimum planting dates for the various portions of the State are shown in Figure 5. These recommendations are based largely on results from earlier studies of planting dates as they affect corn yields, which also are reported in Texas Bulletin 397. Weather conditions permit corn to be planted as early as the latter part of January in the Lower - Rio Grande Valley, while it may be delayed until the latter part of April or early May on the High Plains. Some ofithe acreage in the Rio Grande Plain, or southern corn-growing section, is planted in February, but most of the Texas corn crop is planted during March. Plantings earlier than March l6 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 15 in the upper Gulf Coast Prairie are usually injured by excessive moisture and root worms, and the date of planting p . in the Rio Grande Plain is often determined by the-available moisture supply. With these two exceptions, the optimum- ' planting dates are the approximate ranges in the dates of the last frost for the various areas. In general, maximum corn yields will be obtained by planting at those dates when stands and seedling vigor will not be reduced by cold, wet weather, and yet early enough to escape some of the drouth injury caused by the hot, dry weather during the latter part of the growing season. Planting Rates The stand of corn, or number of plants per acre, is controlled largely by the grower, and deserves special attention if the fertility of the soil is to be utilized fully and maximum yields produced. More attention to the relationships between spacing and fertility should increase yields over the entire corn-growing portion of the State. Sandy soils are often low in organic matter and drouthy, and will not support stands as thick as soils having higher amounts of clay and organic matter. Some precaution should be used in recommending thick stands on sandy soils even though the annual rainfall is fairly high. The optimum planting rate is largely an individ- ual problem depending on the fertility of the soil and especially the capacity of the soil to store and hold water. Recent studies at several locations in the State, which have been reported in progress reports of the Texas Agri- cultural Experiment Station, show that the commonly-used spacings of 30 to 36 inches in the row (about 4,000 to 6,000 plants per acre) will not produce maximum corn yields. This is particularly apparent under favorable weather and optimum fertility conditions. Results from a corn fertility-spacing test near Kirbyville in 1950 are given in Progress Report 1307. The soil was a sandy loam and adequate rainfall was received. The best performance was obtained from a spacing of 24 inches in 40-inch rows, or about 6,500 plants per acre. Following heavy fertilization, yields were 65 to 75 bushels per acre with the 24-inch spacing. Results of fertility and spacing studies conducted near College Station in 1949 and 1950 on heavy soils of the Brazos R-iver bottom are given in Progress Report 1339. Yields from spacings of 12, 18 and 24 inches in the row were not significantly different in 1949, but all produced higher yields than the 30-inch spacing. In 1950, as a result of adequate moisture throughout the growing season, the 12-inch spacing "'2 l? CORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 17 gwas slightly superior to the 18 and 24-inch spacings; all three ere definitely better than the 30-inch spacing. Yields of" , to 95 bushels per acre were obtained with heavy nitrogen applications and spacings of 12, 18 or 2.4 inches in 40-inch lows. Plant populations for these spacings were 12,500, isi 300 and 6,250 plants per acre, respectively. » Three-year averages from a fertilizer-spacing test at the elackland Experiment Station near Temple are given in Arogress Report 1388. Yields from the 18 and 24-inch acings were higher than from the 12 or 30-inch spacings. i ields from the 12-inch spacings were greatly reduced in 1948, I very dry year, but were almost as high as the 18 and 24-inch iyacings in the favorable years 1949 and 1950. The roW idth in this test was only 36 inches, and the number of lants per acre was slightly higher than for the 40 and _ -1nch rows, as shown in Table 3. These data emphasize he desirability of stands thick enough to take advantage of iygh fertility and adequate moisture, yet thin enough to void yield reductions in dry years. On these Blackland clay p ils, practically no fertilizer responses were obtained with kacings Wider than 24 inches in 36-inch rows or with less ithan 7,260 plants per acre. TABLE 3. PLANT POPULATION PERt-‘ACRE FROM VARIOUS up; ROW WIDTHS AND SPACINGS IN THE ROW Plants per acre i Difigxeigfiavgen Spacing in the row, inches ' ’ 12 1 15 l 1s | 24 l 30 l 36 36 14,520 11,616 9,680 7,260 5,808 4,840 38 13,755 11,000 9,170 6,678 5,500 4,585 40 13,068 10,405 8,712 6,534 5,202 4,356 42 12,446 9,957 8,297 6,223 4,976 4,148 From these results, plant spacings of about 24 inches in ‘lhe row (6,500 to 7,000 plants per acre) are recommended or the light sandy soils and other soils with only medium o 10W fertility. On highly fertile sandy or sandy loam soils .| the East Texas Timber Country, the spacing may be 'uced to 18 inches, or even less in exceptional cases. On he other hand, 18 inches in the roW (8,500 to 9,500 plants 3;; acre) is recommended for the heavier soils with fairly igh fertility. Bottom and some upland soils may produce aximum yields with even thicker spacings if a high level _f fertility is maintained and Water conservation measures 1 re practiced. Thinner spacings will be necessary in the jestern part of the corn-growing region under dry-land 5 arming conditions where moisture is more of a limiting *1.- actor. l8 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Thicker spacings will also affect such factors as ear‘ ' size, number of ears per plant, weed control and possiblythe‘ a amount of evaporation from the soil. Although the ear size , will be reduced by the use of thicker spacings, it is the number - of ears and not the size alone that determines the yield. Ear ‘ Weights and yields from a spacing-fertility study conducted at . the Blackland station near Temple in 1950 show that maxi- _. mum yields were obtained with an ear weight of one-half ’ pound. Yields decreased with larger ears, indicating that § the stand of corn was not adequate for the moisture and , fertility conditions. Yields were slightly reduced when ear _ sizes were less than one-half pound, indicating that stands . were too thick for the available moisture and fertility. These 1 results were obtained with Texas 28 and are given in Progress Report 1388. If Texas hybrids are planted, ear size may be ‘ used as a reasonable criterion for determining the proper £ spacing for a particular fertility level. All of the Texas hybrids developed to date have a tendency to produce more than one ear per plant if fertility and moisture conditions are favorable and wide spacings are used. Ear and stalk counts made in the spacing-fertility experiment at the Blackland station in 1949 and 1950 show that the per- l centage of plants having more than one ear is reduced by _ thicker spacings. Texas 20 was used in 1949 and Texas 28 in 1950. The following percentages of plants having more , than one ear per plant were obtained: 6 percent from the 18-inch spacing, 13 percent from the 24-inch spacing and 27 L percent from the 30-inch spacing. Plants from the 12-inch 5 spacing averaged slightly less than one ear per plant. Weights of these second ears ranged from about .1 to .3 pound, while e first-ear weights ranged from about .4 to .6 pound. Since a ; higher percentage of the ears from the 18 and 24-inch spacings i were of uniform size, mechanical harvesting probably would ‘ be more efficient for these spacings than for the wider i spacings. The increased number of plants per acre resulting from _ thicker spacings should make weed control easier, since i competition for nutrients would be stronger and the denser 3 shade would not permit vigorous growth of weeds. It should i be easier to control certain species of annual, warm-season i weeds by the use of uniform thick stands. Since soil moisture , evaporation is largely determined by the temperature, the i. increased shading from thicker stands will probably decrease l this loss of soil moisture at a time when it is greatly needed by the corn plants. CORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 19 Fertilizers Fertilizer recommendations vary widely for the different ; f soil areas (Figure 4) of the State, depending on moisture Zyconditions, cropping systems and soil types. Since organic matter plays such an important role in both the moisture and fertility within the soil, fertilizer applications should supple- i ment the soil-building rotations, instead of serving as the §< only fertility practice. Because of the large amount of nu- trients required by the corn plant in a relatively short growing season, it is often necessary to make applications of certain 5 nutrients or combinations of nutrients even though a soil- building system is practiced. Estimates of the amounts of 5 nutrients used by the corn crop are useful in discussing _1 fertility problems and practices. The kinds and amounts of raw materials used by an acre of corn plants producing at the ; rate of 100 bushels per acre are shown in Table 4. The amounts of mineral nutrients actually removed by the har- I vested crop are somewhat less than those shown in this ‘table, but the requirements of the entire growing plant must be supplied if maximum yields of corn are to be obtained. Fer- i, tilizer requirements for a particular area may vary over a period of years. This is especially true if the level of a i“ particular nutrient, such as nitrogen, is kept high for several years. In such instances, the_supply of some other nutrient, such as phosphorus or potassium, may become low and actually " limit production. Deficiency symptoms of the plant and soil tests are important aids in determining the fertilizer needs, Q and both should be given more attention. TABLE 4. KINDS AND AMOUNTS OF RAW MATERIALS USED IN PRODUCING A 100-BUSHEL CROP OF CORN ON AN ACRE Substance 11g“: 3,88 Approximate equivalent Oxygen 6,800 Air is about 20% oxygen Carbon 5,200 Carbon contained in 4 tons of coal Nitrogen 160 500 lbs. of 32% nitrogen fertilizer 3 Phosphorus 40 450 lbs. of 20% superphosphate T Potassium 125 .250 lbs. of 50% muriate of potash . Sulfur 75 75 lbs. of sulfur - Calcium 50 150 lbs. of limestone ~ a. Magnesium 50 250 lbs. of magnesium sulfate Iron 2 10 lbs. of iron sulfate Fertilizer materials should be applied at the proper time and by the best-known methods for the particular area to provide nutrients readily available to the plant during the a growing season. General recommendations regarding fer- j tilizer placement are especially applicable to corn. For best results, the fertilizer should be put in the soil and not spread 20 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION on the surface. Mixed fertilizers should not touch the seed I but should be placed in a band two or three inches on one or both sides of the seed and two or three inches below it. Most , of the soils in East Texas are rather sandy and considerable leaching occurs. If heavy fertilizer applications are made here, the best results are usually obtained by applying only y a part of the fertilizer at planting time and the remainder g as a side-dressing when the corn plants are about two feet y high. On the heavy clay soils of the Blackland, Grand, and . a Gulf Coast Prairies, where leaching is negligible, all of the f fertilizer may be applied before or at planting time. Appli- cation of fertilizers in bands is of particular importance on g the heavy, calcareous clay soils, since this practice reduces the '1 amount of applied phosphorus that is quickly fixed by soil "Y particles. East Texas Timber Country High yields of corn are possible in the East Texas Timber , Country through the use of rather heavy fertilizer applica- 1 tions. Results from Kirbyville in 1950, given in Progress t Report 1307, show that the most profitable yield, about 75 j bushels per acre, was obtained by the application of 120 1 pounds of nitrogen, 60 pounds of phosphoric acid and 30 . pounds of potash per acre. These amounts should be applied 4s by making an application of a complete or starter fertilizer a at planting time, followed by a side-dressing of nitrogen. In ’-.. Brazos County, on Crockett fine sandy loam, fertilizer appli- ‘ cations to corn following corn, as given in Progress Report “ 1339, resulted in profitable yields in 1950. The best treatment ‘j in this test, which yielded 68 bushels per acre, resulted from the application of 90 pounds of nitrogen, 30 pounds of phos- phoric acid and 30 pounds of potash per acre. These results, ' as well as others from the East Texas area, indicate that i applications of from 300 to 600 pounds per acre of a complete or starter fertilizer at planting time, followed by a side- dressing of 60 to 90 pounds of nitrogen, are required to a produce high yields of corn where corn follows some non- ‘ legume crop. The side-dressing with nitrogen ordinarily will ‘ not be necessary where corn follows a good growth of a well- ‘; fertilized legume crop. Nitrogen was the only fertilizer component that gave 1 increased yields of 'corn on bottom-land soils of the Brazos "a River near College Station during 1949-50, as shown in l Progress Report 1339. With limited moisture in 1949, maxi- 1 mum yields of about 44 bushels per acre were obtained with -. 60 pounds of nitrogen when corn followed corn. In 1950, when moisture was not a seriously limiting factor, 120 pounds I CORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 21 of nitrogen produced maximum yields of about 87 bushels per acre, while only 30 pounds of nitrogen were required to produce maximum yields where corn followed alfalfa. Al- though no responses were obtained from applications of either phosphoric acid or potash in these tests, repeated heavy applications of nitrogen alone to corn might eventually result in the depletion of these nutrients. Blackland and Grand Prairies Consistent increases in corn yields as a result of fertilizer applications have not been obtained in the Blackland and Grand Prairies. Favorable responses from applications of nitrogen usually are obtained in years having a favorable rainfall distribution during the latter part of the growing season. The northeast portion of the Blackland Prairie receives a few more inches of rainfall than the remainder of the region and distribution in June and July is also more favorable. Results at the U. S. Cotton Field Station at Greenville show fairly consistent yield increases from appli- cations of 40 to 60 pounds of nitrogen per acre. Recent fertility tests conducted at the Temple and Denton stations, which are summarized in Progress Reports 1388 and 1360, respectively, show that the lack of available phosphoric acid is one of the limiting factors in corn production on Blackland and Grand Prairie soils. Consistent and economic responses were obtained from applications of 40 pounds of phosphoric acid per acre to corn on Austin clay at the Temple station in 1948-50. Even larger increases were obtained by the Denton station from the use of 60 pounds.per acre of phosphoric acid alone or in combinations with nitrogenn These tests were conducted on San Saba clay and Denton stony clay, each following a non-legume. To obtain maximum yields in the Blackland and Grand Prairies, spacings of 18 to 24 inches between plants in the row must be used. With these spacings, applications of both nitrogen and phosphoric acid probably will give economic yield increases in most years. From the data available, the most profitable yields should be obtained from applications of 3O to 60 pounds per acre of both nitrogen and phosphoric acid. Corn following good crops of phosphated legumes probably will fail to give economic responses to fertilizer applications, except in years having a favorable amount and distribution of rainfall. i . Gulf Coast Prairie Fertilizer practices in the Gulf Coast Prairie vary consid- erably for the different soil groups. On the black clay soils, applications of 60 to 80 pounds of nitrogen and 4O pounds of 22 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION phosphoric acid per acre are recommended where corn follows. a non-legume crop. If the corn follows a fertilized legume crop, the nitrogen application may be decreased by 40 to 50; pounds per acre, depending on the growth of the legume crop...’ The sandy loam soils of the area require some potash in‘! addition to phosphoric acid and a heavier application of nitro-i, gen. Applications of 80 to 90 pounds of nitrogen, 30 to 40-?" pounds of phosphoric acid and 20 pounds of potash per acre should produce good yields of corn. Because of the poor? drainage of the Gulf Coast Prairie, part of the fertilizerf applications should be made at the time of planting so that seedling vigor will be increased and better stands will bei obtained. West Cross Timbers The sandy soils of the West Cross Timbers usually are. low in fertility and requirefertilizer applications to produce" maximum yields. Although rainfall is somewhat limited for high corniyields, the recommended fertilizers include applicag , tions of 30 to 40 pounds of nitrogen, 2O to 30 pounds ofi; phosphoric acid and about 15 pounds of potash per acre; If corn follows a fertilized legume crop, the nitrogen appli- cation may be limited to that applied in the complete fertilizer at the time of planting. ' Rio Grande Plain Soils of the Rio Grande Plain range from light sand to, rather dark clay. The amount and distribution of rainfall; are highly variable and fertilizers do not show responses“ in some years. A side-dressing of about 30 pounds per acre? of nitrogen is recommended for the black clay soils of the. area. On the sandy loam soils, an application of about l,’ pounds of nitrogen and 20 pounds of phosphoric acid at? planting time is recommended, followed by a side-dressin; of 30 pounds of nitrogen per acre. In the Lower Rio Grand Valley, very high corn yields are obtained with proper fertiliti practices, thick spacing and irrigation. Fertilizer recomQ mendations for corn grown on irrigated lands include 40 to 8Q pounds of nitrogen and 80 to 120 pounds of phosphoric acidl per acre applied at planting time, followed by a side-dressin”, of about 60 pounds of nitrogen per acre. Following a good i growth of phosphated legumes that have been turned under; the nitrogen application may be reduced by 40 or 50 poundsl per acre. 1 Rolling and High Plains Corn production under dry-land farming conditions on; the Rolling and High Plains 1s hazardous because of the low-= CORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 23 rainfall-received. Applications of 40 to 50 pounds of nitrogen fand 50 to 60 pounds of phosphoric acid per acre are recom- ‘mended for corn on the light sandy soils of the Rolling Plains. YWith irrigated land, primarily on the High Plains, applications 20f 30 to 60 pounds of nitrogen per acre generally are recom- mended. Soil-building Crops The purpose of fertility practices is to supply adequate amounts of available nutrients at the proper time in the ‘growing season to take full advantage of the moisture received ' flduring the crop year. Since the availability of plant nutrients Klepends partly on the available moisture in the soil, improve- , Lments in the water relationships Within the soil are of utmost importance if favorable corn yields are to be obtained con- sistently from year to year. The importance of soil organic "matter should not be overlooked in any discussion of fertility practices for the corn-growing areas of Texas. Some of the unctions of organic matter in the soil are: to increase the érate of penetration and water-holding capacity of the soil iand thus reduce runoff; to release essential plant nutrients such as nitrogen; to make more available the mineral consti- 1_.tuents of the soil; and to make the soil mellow and easier to cultivate. Because organic matter affects most of the im- ,.portant factors determining soil productivity, long-time fer- Itility programs should include cropping systems that provide sources of organic matter. These sources will include crop jresidues, green manure crops, deep-rooted grasses and leg- fumes, and barnyard manure. Fertilized adapted legume and grass crops in our crop- gping systems will solve a large portion of the fertility and soil conservation problems. Fertilizers such» as phosphoric acid and potash enable the legume crops to produce large yields of jgreen material to be used for hay, grazing or green manure ‘crops. Management of the various crops is an individual matter and only a few of the more general cropping systems iwill be mentioned. A Vetch fertilized with bothphosphoric acid and potash at he time of seeding in the fall has proved beneficial as a soil- Yibuilding crop on the sandy soils of the East Texas Timber ~Country and the West Cross Timbers. Results given in Texas Bulletin 731 from College Station, Nacogdoches and Tyler, jfrom 1937 to 1947, show that fertilized vetch produced average yields of green matter per acre of from 10,000 pounds at Nacogdoches to as high as 19,000 pounds at Tyler. These ields were obtained from fall-planted vetch that was turned 24 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION under the following spring. The average yield of 12,000 pounds of green matter produced at College Station contained about 100 pounds of nitrogen. Yields of cotton following the fertilized vetch varied from 39 percent higher than the untreated plot at College Station to 75 and 84 percent at’ i Nacogdoches and Tyler, respectively. The residual effects ‘ of the vetch crops were measured by yields of corn which followed the cotton. At College Station, the residual effect of the vetch resulted in about a 40 percent increase in yield over the untreated plots; at Tyler, the increase was about 95 percent. These results were obtained by using the vetch as a winter green manure crop in a continuous row-crop system which does not provide much protection from soil erosion. Rotations in which the fertilized vetch is grazed or allowed v to make seed, as is the common practice in the West Cross A Timbers and in parts of East Texas, would give more protec- tion from erosion and also would increase the fertility of the soil. Other annual winter green manure crops include Single- tary peas, Dixie Wonder peas and Austrian winter peas. Crotalaria is sometimes used as a summer legume for soil- building purposes. The annual lespedezas are outstanding in their ability to conserve and build up the soil and, at the same time, yield income from hay, grazing or seed. These deep-rooted crops offer excellent possibilities for use in the sandy soils of East Texas. The annual lespedezas may be used in short rotations ~ such as a year or two of row crops, followed by a year or two ~ of annual lespedeza alone or in mixtures for hay or grazing. Exceptionally high yields have been reported from northeast 1 Texas when corn followed 2 to 3 years of lespedeza for hay. a In fact, yields in the neighborhood of 150 bushels per acre , have been obtained in several instances in yield contests ;~ sponsored by the Texas Agricultural Extension Service. a Soil-building crops for the calcareous clay soils of the f Blackland and Grand Prairies center around the sweetclovers. a Either the annual type, such as Hubam and Melilotus indica, i~ or the biennial types, such as Madrid and Evergreen, may be ‘ used, depending on the type of farming system practiced. ~i The deep-rooted biennials are especially desirable in forage- j grain-livestock types of farming as they provide longer periods of grazing. For optimum growth of the sweetclover, about 40 f pounds of phosphoric acid per acre should be applied at i seeding. Time of seeding varies from early fall to early I spring, depending on the rotation and the variety of clover - to be planted. i The sweetclovers offer several possibilities from the f; CORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 25 ,ndpoint of utilization other than as green manure crops. ey can be used for grazing, for hay or for a seed crop, '1 d at the same time improve the chemical and physical A" operties of the soil. They also are well adapted for inter- nting with or overseeding on small grain crops. Some of e most promising possibilities involve the use of small aim-sweetclover mixtures in various cropping systems. ‘our-year averages from a study at Temple on Austin clay, .1 given in Progress Report 868, show that corn following ‘tton produced 34.9 bushels per acre while corn following Vubam sweetclover for hay produced 38.8 bushels per acre. Vnpublished data from the Blackland station show that corn llowing cotton on deep Houston black clay produced 50.5 ishels for the period 1949-51, while corn following a mixture i? oats and sweetclover produced 54.4 bushels. Oat yields ..__m the mixtures were equal to those from oats alone follow- 3: corn. Unpublished results from studies of legumes for ’il improvement at-the Denton station in 1950 and 1951 show at corn following non-legumes produced 33.6 bushels per f" re, while corn following the sweetclovers produced 43.7 shels. In this study, the beneficial effects from the clover ‘ps grown for seed were just as great as when the clover s plowed under for green manure. From the results tained at the Temple and Denton stations, it is apparent it the use of sweetclovers in cropping and grazing systems _ the Blackland and Grand Prairies will result in increased 'rn yields. Shallow-rooted legumes that are often used as winter ien manure crops in the Blackland and Grand Prairies p lude Austrian winter peas, Dixie Wonder peas, Singletary $1 and vetch. These crops are especially well adapted for "e as winter green manure crops in continuous row-crop items, but there are several precautions that should be served if corn is to follow these legumes. If these crops e allowed to make much growth in late winter, seedbed eparation and planting will be delayed. Poor germination g; may result from planting corn soon after the green nure crop has been plowed under. The use of vetch is , fined largely to the sandy loam and clay loam soils of the ilson and Crockett series on the north and eastern edge of i- Blackland Prairie. The planting of vetch for seed pro- ction has increased considerably in the last few years on se soils. 7 The sweetclovers are also the primary soil-building crops i the Gulf Coast Prairie, Rio Grande Plain and the Lower '1 Grande Valley. On the heavy calcareous clay soils of the 26 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Rio Grande Plain, Hubam sweetclover is fall-planted and may _- be used as a Winter green manure crop, as a summer legume ‘ in pure stands or in a mixed planting with small grain crops. 5 Utilization of sweetclover depends on the type of farming or a cropping system, as discussed for the Blackland Prairie and t, Grand Prairies. illelilotus imlica matures sooner than Hubam 1 and is quite tolerant of sandy and acid soils of the areas. Its ability to mature quickly enables it to fit well in rotations; requiring soil-building crops that can be turned under early. f Soil-building crops are not used extensively in either the a Rolling or High Plains because of the low rainfall. Alfalfa, ‘ hairy vetch and the sweetclovers may be recommended for-é ‘these areas, however, when soil-improving legumes are planted. Conservation and Use of Water The supply of available moisture is one of the most acute i problems confronting corn producers in Texas, and additional emphasis should be given to finding solutions to this problem. 5 Most of the corn in Texas is grown during the 5-month period i from March 1 to July 31. The average rainfall received. during this period, as shown in Table 12, varies from about ‘i 18 to 20 inches in the East Texas Timber Country, Gulf Coast Prairie and the northeast portion of the Blackland Prairie, * to about 14 or 15 inches in the Rio Grande Plain and West Cross Timbers. These amounts, plus an additional four or I five inches of water estimated as being normally held in the- top three feet of the soil, give an average total of 18 to 25 inches that may be available to the crop. Since the rainfall is below normal about half the time, the potential supply often ; is less than the amounts shown. The important problem, in 1 both normal and sub-normal years, is to hold the moisture? that is received in the late fall and winter, as well as that} received during the growing season, for use by the corn crop.j Two of the most important factors in water conservationi are the intake capacity and the water-holding power of the soil. Maintaining a deep soil profile by preventing erosion‘ and improving the physical properties of the soil through the i use of deep-rooted legumes and grasses in cropping systems will help increase the net supply of available water. Much higher yields may be obtained in the future if methods are put into practice which will conserve a large. part of the rainfall received. Calculations using the con-g sumptive-use formula, as presented by Blaney and Griddle ini Soil Conservation Service Technical Publications 96, show that about 23 to 24 acre-inches of water are required for high { .32 .3-.. 252 620k .52.. :5: maouU 830m 50...: 82-584. .855... :o$a0=.5n _a:5..$:..< @0308?» M555: 808m m: 0.5a. 0.8:. .88.: M555 83.2: . 035m . 55%.... :o_=:. :0_..:. 6.88 :5§m:0w:c0 080.85 0.4.208.» -835 80¢ M58985 :55 85:98.: :25 .8>c 58.. 8305......» 8058:» 0.5.8:. 1:5 25m :c$a.5:m:0.£ 808m 88:5 wbrnfium 808m M58082: 01.5w . :03:- 3580 5.53m :0$a>§:0 :05... .83: :58..oaa>0 80>? :00...» 85.552 . -0528? Jtabw m5=.3....O 8.5800 .835: .832. .8330?!» 8:3 0:3 05505.5.» 5.8m»: u55a8..-.88>> :8 080.85 80.. 82x5 02295 0.80.85 3.353 M59885 .828 08s :2... .835: $0-5... 05:5 05.3.0.8.» we :28: 2.5m»: =55§ ....3:0O u5ou...8a. .588 @096 u5ms085 030.85 8.5.8.6.... 5:28 .883 525w 88B :3 0:. u: 0w: 785.0580 v.8 :58>.8m:c0 0:. 5 1.550: v5.5 m058a..m =8 0.3 M5803: 5305a 28 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION corn production in Central Texas. These calculations are based 0n temperature, hours of daylight and adequate moisture in the root zone for the 4-month growing season from April 1 through July 31. By the use of conservation measures, the East Texas Timber Country, Gulf Coast Prairie and most ' of the Blackland Prairie should have a sufficient supply of moisture during most of the growing season to meet the re- quirements of the corn crop Without any serious limitation of yields. The efficient use of Water by plants should be closely related to the actual conservation of water, if high yields are to be produced. Factors influencing water use listed by Blaney and Criddle, which cannot be altered or controlled by the corn producer, include humidity, wind movement and latitude. Other factors listed include temperature, growing season, soil fertility and insect and disease pests, all of which may be altered or controlled by the farm operator. The rate of consumptive use of Water by the plant is probably affected more by solar energy than by any other factor. Although temperature cannot be completely controlled by man, early planting permits the corn crop to mature early and escape some of the extremely high temperatures of July and August. Thick spacings provide dense shade, thereby reducing sunlight and heat energy and resulting in a decrease of both evapora- tion and transpiration from the shaded soil and leaves. If the fertility of the soil is improved by applying fertilizers or barnyard manure, or by plowing under legume crops, both yields per acre and consumption of water by plants may be expected to increase. An increase in the fertility of the soil, however, can be expected to decrease the amount of water consumed per unit of crop yield. All factors which contribute to high yields per acre, therefore, are helpful in obtaining greater efficiency from limited supplies of water. Some practices which should help in the conservation and efficient use of soil moisture for crop production are shown in Table 5. The importance of preserving and increasing the organic matter content of the soil should be stressed, since this affects the supply of water and its efficient use by the crop. Practices, such as the use of thick stands and adapted hybrids, early seedbed preparation, and the use of legumes and fertilizers, are controlled by the farmer and should be strongly emphasized. It is apparent that the efficient use of water received as rainfall will result from a combination of all practices that increase the acre yields of corn as well as those that serve only as more direct water conservation measures. jun...“ s...,..'.....¢.*..,...u....;..c.i-..z. i. ‘L. ... .4...“ .. .7 OORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 29 Sizes of Planting Seed l‘ Seed parents of the earlier hybrids, particularly Texas 12 {and Texas 20, produced rather small seed. Although these hybrids performed satisfactorily and the seed was of a good ; quality, most Texas farmers prefer larger seed for planting. ZFThey are accustomed to selecting seed corn with large grain rand harvesting the same type as had been planted. In hybrid eff-seed corn production, the seed represents only half of the . parentage, and the effect of the pollen parent on grain size iicannot be determined until the succeeding crop is harvested. QThus, in certain hybrids, the size of the planting seed is not ;.a good indication of the size of the grain that will be harvested. §Because of farmer preference for large kernels, there has .been a tendency in developing the later Texas hybrids to use T-seed parents which produce medium to large seed and pollen J parents that produce fairly large kernels. In processing the gseed of any hybrid, the seed producer separates the shelled iicorn into various grades or sizes, and usually offers the round 1 grades and sometimes the medium flats at reduced prices. jThe seeds graded as medium flat short and the smaller grades usually are sold as feed corn. Because of farmer discrimination against small-seeded gtypes, tests involving Texas 18 and 20 were conducted at both College Station and Temple in 1948 to compare the emergences f and yields from plantings of the different seed grades. The ; number of seed per pound and the number of acres that could ibe planted per bushel were calculated from seed counts and weights of the various grades. The results are shown in Table 6. The emergence percentages and yields of the differ- ent seed grades are shown in Table 7. QTABLE 6. NUMBER OF SEED PER POUND AND ACRES PLANTED . PER BUSHEL FOR DIFFERENT SEED GRADES j Seed Grade Seed per pound | Acres per bushel‘ Texas 18 l Texas 20 I Texas 18 I Texas 20 Thick large flat 1,110 1,310 7.1 8.4 "y Large flat long 1,160 1,400 7.5 9.0 jMedium round 1,510 1,480 9.7 9.5 {Medium flat long 1,600 1,680 10.3 10.8 {Medium flat short 1,940 2,090 12.5 13.4 ?‘The number of acres that can be planted per bushel of seetfi by planting: the seed 18 inches apart in 40-inch rows. g No significant differences were obtained in the average percentage emergence from plantings of the various seed grades at College Station or Temple. Yields of corn from the Narious seed grades showed no significant differences at College Station, but there were significant differences in the 30 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 03M 3 225:: m.» @333 .3 5-50 5:5 5o» 0550a. 0:“ 14ft 3. ......_.m.._.. .12. .,.ms.,...m..,.._.mk m g Q w»... 59G mvmahzru 9.5 hid 5:035: Eat» i: Qozoaouufl» 0-5: 5N “.3 Q3 . 9pm Q8 35 ouahriw 5N 5.3 3a w? 5m Q8 5.5m 5E 5:262 5.2.. w...» #3 udm Q5 mém m5: 5E 53:62 3a NAN 3N Q3 v.8 4 5m :55; 55:62 5N 3N 5N 3a 5m w? m5: 2:» 055A 5» mdm Q2 w? mam N»; 5E owfi: 43:9 2:55P 5m 3m 33 mdm w; w; ouuho>< Em 5m 3e fifim w; 35 5.25m 5i 53:52 5% 5m 3m aim “.2 5m m5: 5G 5:532 mflm Q5 3E 3m .13 =5 v55: 5:252 Q3 5m $5 mdm N8 5w m5: 5E 55A m5 N3 3E 3a 5m Ndm 5G owfi: 55:. 5.33m ouo=eO _ow.a.~o>< mu mawoa. wfimsxoa. @5325 mu 55a. w: 55cm. @555- 655 .5: 53o 5:05 .5 32> u:35:: .53: 95w 2w oozwupon-H ownbw woom $25326 5mm HZHMHQQ~Q m: 5.5; 9Z4 mmw drawing of the system of crossing involved in producing both i} the single and double crosses. Single-cross seed is produced ‘A on plants A and C as a result of pollination by plants B and D, jrespectively. This seed, when planted, produces the single- f cross plants A x B and C x D, which in turn are i hybridized by allowing plants C x D to pollinate plants A x B. i_ The double-cross seed produced by this cross is then planted i by the farmer for the production of his commercial crop. _ In the field production of either single or double crosses, j~ the actual crossing is done by planting the two stocks alter- A nately in the same field, one as a male, or pollinator, and _ the other as a female or seed producer. Such fields must be well isolated from all other types of corn to prevent any appreciable degree of contamination. In single-cross produc- t tion, since the inbred parents are always rather weak, the usual ratio of planting is two seed rows to one pollinator row. i, Since vigorous single crosses are used in the production of double crosses, however, the ordinary ratio in this case is six or eight seed rows to each two pollinator rows. Before any , pollen is shed by the female plants, tassels are removed. so may be obtained in the single cross, the expense of producing . BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Figure 11. Method of producing single-cross and double-cross hybrids. A, B, C and D are inbreds; AB and CD are the two resulting single-crosses or foundation hybrids; and ABCD is the double-cross hybrid. CORN PRODUCTION IN‘TEXAS 49 that all seed produced will have originated from pollination by only the male plants. This detasseling procedure involves 3a great deal of hand labor and expense, as it usually is nec- essary to go through the field pulling tassels every day for s2 to 3 weeks. A detasseled double-cross production field is ifshown on the cover of this bulletin. _ From this description of the procedures involved in the i-development of corn hybrids, it will be understood why seed "of such hybrids is more expensive than that of open-pollinated qvarieties. In addition, new seed must be purchased each year, J-SlIICG the high-yielding ability is characteristic of hybrid seed "pégnly after the first year of crossing. Yields of second-genera- tion hybrid seed, although reasonably good, revert toward the p lelds of the parental inbreds, and in most instances may be Qexpected to produce about 20 percent less than the first- ‘generation hybrid. On an acre basis, the cost of planting hybrid seed is relatively small. The increased yield more than ipffsets the additional cost of the seed and will justify the ipurchase of new seed each year. TEXAS CORN BREEDING PROGRAM I The Texas corn improvement program was initiated in 1,1927 by P. C. Mangelsdorf with the inbreeding of several f utstanding open-pollinated varieties then grown extensively jn the State. This program was based on the isolation of inbred lines through a process of inbreeding and selection, fjand their subsequent use in the development of synthetic fvarieties. At that time, corn hybrids had not yet been ‘adopted in even the more important corn-growing areas such 73s the Midwest. There was some doubt as to whether their use would be feasible in some of the Southern States where Vgqorn was not of primary importance. ' _ A large number of inbred lines were developed from several open-pollinated varieties, and a few synthetic varieties were produced by combining some of the more promising ‘ bred lines. This method of breeding did not prove success- soul, since the synthetic varieties, in general, were no better than the commercial varieties already in use. p‘ Inbred lines developed in the early improvement program _ id prove to be of considerable value in the production of corn ybrids for Texas. Rapid strides were made from 1930 to 940 in various parts of the country in the development of corn ybrids, and their usage became well established. During , is period, experimental hybrids produced from some of the ‘ exas inbred lines were compared with several of the native pen-pollinated varieties. The best of these hybrids produced BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 50 _§ T T Wm,,M<,<@M;;.@1>w§@wfi;¢;¢§¢@§.i@.¥;fi . m<@@ @@@@ mwww Hfifip w@~» @@=@ Nbfiv Ncww Nubfl v»- mmq mu _~.=@ mfi m >>»H ¢~@ Qfim mbm mww >>- m >@~ .>@@ @¢» hwfifi _@< mm" >>@ Qm H_m mp fiw >>» - =@ wm >>m @~ m >>~ mqwwe »=;>> =5 3. flflbfi qwmfi HQ” mm ¢@¢~ <¢¢~ @@=~ @~ www ¢@¢~ N¢@ -¢ ¢~ mp m_ - m- w=¢ “Hm mww wfiw 5°» ~~ »~=~ Qmw NH wfi. _ mwm wfi =@ Qwq @Hm ~»=~ wflfifl ¢m=~ bmflfl =@@H @¢m ¢@~ _ wqmfi _ mqmfl _ <<@~ _ »¢@~ _ ~¢@~ _ ~¢@~ _ =¢@~ _=~@>- . @323. . .332 dfimmmwm ZMOU @522. MO mHU52 555w 25: 3:35: 5:555 253m 53m 355.3 3335355 5:552 m5x2r 35:33: Ohm: 5555.2 3 3553255 355.: "5955 222m 55.3 £5555: :55m 532mm: $355 .3555 :25» 555 :3w:2 5:555 525: 55: r825 Ew: m::m 3:w:55Q 3E3 2625 :55: £9352 @555: 3:35: 5:555 253m 3:3m 335355 351: 225:; m.:om_o:u3Z S: .5555... 3 5_::3:55m:m $525» :u::m 55w £5555: :55m $355 3555 :35» 555 :3w:2 5:555 2525: 55.5 52:5 555m 3E3 EM: m::m r5525 52:55 £53m 555-5355 .35o:m 3335355 355i m5m:5: .35 525m mm: .5559: 3 2:::5um:m 555.55 :u::m 52.5 $555 57w: :3?» 555 w:2 355.3 $35253 5:53:55: £25: 55.3 “:5: Ew: m::m 3E3 555555 m55:3:5 Mm5>52 553.6553 >555: 253m :55? .:53 $35355 355m: m5w5.r 555G 52m <65 552.2 3 3553255 E55: 55955 :u::m 5:9: :55 mkc5 5:55 :35» 555 355:m 525: 55.3 553w Ew: m::m 55598 3E3 m55:3:5 $952 @555: 53:35:. 52:55 213m 353m 335355 32 35355: 555:. 555$ 52m <2: .5=_.&56_ 3 3:53m3m55 5355.: 55955 :u::m :85 $555 357w: .555 553552535 525: 55.3 “:55 m::m ":>>o5:-:m:3o:9» m55:3:5 r625 5:555 £952 3E3 555555: 355.3 3:35: 5:555 253m 53m E55: $35355 52:52 m5x5E 55::o555:m 23 .5555... 3 5E33:55m:m $555 :7: £555 5555;553:555 53:25:53 5:255: 2525: 52.5 .39» U55: m::m 555555 m55:3:5 25355 :55: £9352 3E3 >553 535555355 3:35: 5:555 253m 1553252555 93555355 5:552 m5xoa. 55::c5o5:m 5-»: :2353m :23:35um5Q 3:335:55 .3»535mw@5555> 5:31: w:::.o5>5Q n: 5555: m.55 55:55 :55 “G555m 525m 55.5.5 .=55m “mic: .555 5:? m55 352m 55525:: :25: :25: “.9255 i25% i25% 5mm3 “G55: P5255 555.5 m2=m “.555 5.555: .5=3m 53m “$5.555 55G m5m:5vG m5m:5M m»: 5:55:52 3 225:55m:m “:5>.55 55:55 :5: 55:55- =55m i5.» “:55 5.5 mic: .555 255i m.55 55:2 :5i2..5::m i25% “:5=.5: 55.5.55 “555 m2=m “:55:w 2:25 255m :25:2m “@5355 255G 555M 595M 5M 5:552 3 5325: “m5: 5:52 3 2.=5:55m:m “:5>.55 55:5 55.5w “mic: 55:55.55: 255i m55 552m “:25: :55 “m.5:5:5:.~ i5: 255i :5::.5:5::m i25% 5mm3 “:55:w m2=m “E555 5:555 £55m 53m 3:55 “.3532: 5:552 555:. i25% mum . 5:552 =55 3.5: .55 3 5:325: “:5>.55 252m 55.5.55 “m555m =25 .2526 55:2 2:5: “:55 .55 mic: wTmG 55:5 .55 55:2 255i m55 “:255:=5.5:: :25: :55: 5:3 :5::.5:5::m i25% .5mm3 .9552 “:55:w m2=m “:55 5:555 255m 53m 335555 55A 555G. i25% mam 5:552 3 2.=5:55m:m “:5>.55 55:55 55.55 “G555m 555.555-55.555 “mic: mG-NG .m55 =55m 35:25:53 55:55:: “:25: :55 “.5555 5:52 m2=m 555.5 55G i25% i25% 553:5 5555 =25 m5.52 “=3 53:55 .5=3m 55:55 $35555 .2.5G 555G. 552E mew 52252 3 2.=3:55m:m “:5>.55 55:5 :55: “mic: m5: 255i 55 55:2 3:5: 95:25:55 5E=.5:: “:25: 5585 .55.» “x2: 5:5: m2=m “E555 553:5 555:5. 2:25 55G i.5=5% i.5=5% £5.52 =53: i5.» $255: 5:555 .5=3m 53m 335555 55.2-5252 555E 5:5:.mm.52 Gm»: 525:2 3 2.=5:55m:m i5.» “.5255 55:55 5.5: 255m .2555 “mic: vG-NG .55 5:2 3:5: “:5=.5: 25255155.: 252m mx=m “x5: 553:5 $5.52 55G i.5.=5% i.5=5% 55.5.5 3:5: .5:.5=m “=3 3 5:555 .5=5_5m 53m 3:55 “$5.555 55G m5x5E 5.555252 4N2 533m :25:5:5m5G 5555.555 .»:5...555::55> 52G 55.5.5535: 5 G _ 55:25:85 mammw: @5555. Z: 55m: mHZGA GHKGZ: 5O ZOGPAGMOmHG d: H.535. qiiiéiii 54 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 19nd“: Nan 335w E mo::ES>: mEEEwE-O Qm3: :35: MEME: 3 3:3m:mo.~ m: :5: .E3mmm us: w:o3m a :33 923m .335? J:3m mooEkin wm mmxom. ..::oo wcow o ma: E5 ~32 mvEwu 3:: Sim: EEwoE m: 55w o:a. momuommw w:m maoomE 3 Ewummmo: Eofivrowofi m: E5 :E:oo:§: :o::m team mommommc: E EESEE S .mE.5m: mmxom. .53: o3 :33 muso .632 63965: o3 :o .moo::vc.:: S 5N maxoh 3 3133: EEEEm mo 3.5m: < mmsw NS 355a E 3.532 5:35.“: :3: 3E3 we mEEwo: E mEoEm “mo: m: 333E mo: :25 3::3m:m.o.~-:::c.:. m_.:::o:3.§: 3o: m: 3.5m: min. 9.3.2 3 o_:E:oom:m m: 3:: mi; 5o :5: mine? 5o 3 3:333: 33.9655 m: S .m_o:.:o: .:o=mEm fir; mpmo .:o=§:m uufmoicm mmoo:wo:a E "w: mmxom. E5: :35 m::w=m 2.3m: 4 m2: $2 2N x w! <3: x 0S: 2m x m2 2N x m»: wm moxoa. cm maxofi mmmw ca: 35:: E moMEoE .m=&€_ 3 o_:flnoom:m 3E: Qm-w m: S momuomflo E5 mfioomE 3 mfimfiuaoogm m: w: om:woo: mzfiis: :3: .5 méoEW E :>mc._m o: “o: 355m 3:: .m:QEw:oo m:::,c.:o 31:: =9; miuohio: 3.5m: m5? .m_o:.~o: 3c=om 33. 3.5m 6M5: :33 dado wE:o:3 m$:w:m 6M5: .533 moo-Eve»: :05? EEEE: EEwoE .5 3.5m: < 3.: <3: x 32 2N x mm»: QM MNNQE .22. =2 26% E mo.:33>: .m:cEw:oo ombomws .:o:o:: wEMwcS 3 o_:$:oom:m m: S .3323: 29:»: :23 =¢m 25m :o mEmomm :3: m._o> mooEzia 3:: ::m:m:mom.-.:::3w 5: m: 3.5m: mEH é.:3x3 E EEwoE 3:: =oEm .533 9S m-oio: o:,-. .oo:o.~o..:::.o.Eo can 39:: EEwoE h? maao :3? Q93 E 8.5.3:: m: :E:3 3133: EEwoE .5 3.5m: < $2 a: x mm: <2: x 32 HNw mmxom. gmmsw w: 355a E moESmS .m=om $5M: ES maobw 3E. 3 woanwwo =95 :25 E3m:mo.:-:3:c.:. m: 3.5m: min. 36G 323W :25 .:o::c:o.::w 3Q=®W mo omcfi :oo.3o: ~93 E o§:.o_:.:o::: 9E YE zoo: o3 “c: 3:: S595 o»: meofio: 2i. .oo:o.~o..:E:o.Eo E owE: 3E3 0:6 3:: 325m o: 3 :53 mfiwo o:a. 35.2w: o:c ms wom: uEo: m??? :o:w::_oa.:o:c an u: E-mo: a ma 25 E .:::mo.:.E fifiioiam m: :o::.$ 3.5m: miuo =< GAS .:o::c.:o.::w 3c=oW $2 x 05: k moxofi :e$E:omoQ mfimmm: wQNHE b0 zoifimomm: To omsofi! meow 36:2: 23951.: S: HSM:. 55 .m.»::. ma: 55:: 5 m::::::>: ..$m m:x:.:. m: M555: 5:: 3 ::::::::m:m m: 5: m: :5: .m::: .5: :5: m5:9.> ::: :5: 3 5355: .»:::::::55 m: :: .m::::::5:: ::::::>:: 5:5: .5: :::5m ::: :5: :55: ::: m::::5:: 5 55.5.»: :::.5:-::: : .»::55::: .:m:2:.:< .::::m :::.5: .»:::u::m :53 m5: ::w::: :::..>:5:m m::::5:: :: .5. m:x:.:. m: 5:555 :5:m ::: 52:: :: :::::.»: 4 m2: <5: x 2:. :5: x mm: 3:: m:x:.:. .52. =5 .25.. 5 555:: @555: 5:: 3 ::::::::m:m m: 3: m5: .5: :5: m5::..> .5: 3 ::::m:m:: .»::> m: :5: u5::>:: :::::m :::::::x: m:: 55.»: m::.:. .::::x:: :5: :5m 55:55 ..:: m:::::: 53.2w: :53 5.5.5:: .»::> :5 m5: ::.:. 3:5: 5: m5: :::n:m-5:::::5 9.3 5:555 .»::.55:::: :: .::::::::-:5:m m: 3: ..»::::::5 55:55 ..:: :55»: < m2: <5: x <5: 2:: x WM: .5. m:x:.:. .m.»::: Nu: 55:: 5 m::::::>: .m::::::.::: :m:5 5:5: w5:::::: ::::m :5: M555: 5:: 3 ::::m:m:: :m:: m: :: . m5: ::: :5: m5::..> .5: 3 55.5.»: m:x:.:. ..>::::.» ::: .,:: ::::m:m:: :m:5 ::: m: mm m:x:.:. .m:::::::::: 5:555 :::::: m5: 9.5 555:: .»:5 5 .55.»: ::::::-::: : 5:555: :u:::::< .55: ::.»:-::::: ..5:::.» :.w::: :5? m5: :55: m::::5:: :: m: m:x:.:. 3 5:555 .5::5:m ..:: 55.»: < :mm: 2m x m5 2N x :5: 5 m:x:.:. .m.»::: Nu: 52:: 5 m::::::>: 5555:: 53m 3 ::::m:m:: m: 3: £555: 5:: 3 ::::fi:::m:m. :w:::::< .:u:5::: 355:5:- .»::: m::..:..::m 5:555: :5: m5: 5: :5: m5::..> ::: 3 ::::m:m:: 5:..>:5:m m: mu m:x:.:. .:_:::: ..>::::.» :5:m : mm:mm:: :5: :u5: :::.::: :5 m5::w ::.:. .m:::::::::: ::::::>:..: 5:5: m5: 9.5 3:55 3 .»:::::::: :5:m ::: m5: 5: 6n m:x:.:. :::: m5: 5M5: .»:::u::m m::::5:: ::::..> .»::::::5 55:55 ..:: 55.»: < mwm: mmm x mum. <5: x Own: .w~ m:x:.:. ‘CORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS ..m.»::: w:: 55:: 5 m::::::>: 5555: 5:: .5 $52.. 3:55:55 : m..>::m :5: m5: .5: :5: m5::..> 5: 3 ::::::::m:m 5:3:5:m m: 3: .::::::::::: ..:: 5.5:: :5.» : m..>::m :5: m::::::.::: ::::::>:.: 5:5: m::: :5:w 9.5 m::::5:: 55.»: m::.:. ...>::::.» ::::. :5: :u::: 5:5: :5 m5::u ::.:. .52: :9»: 5:: ..>::::.» : :53 m5: :::s:m-5:::.:5 m::::5:: ::::..> 55.»: 55: :4 mwm: 4mm: x Ohm: mmw x mum mm m:x:.:. :::m::::: 5:5: 5:52: 55F :3:5:::n: 55m :::fi::::m.:m: :::::.»:.: i I... L. L. 56 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION dmniuw u: mowauow uvaaoau Eofimmooozm acomouaou m wan v .m .N ems? 6Mn=§w c: 21350.9... mvaauflufi w “mama o5 3 owaEaw w: ooumow 3333 23 3 mawuwfi. A.» 2 a 2 mm 2 3 ~w§6>~ E @2535 3mm» m: punizZ 3 w; S; ma m.» NZ =5 .s.==..a=_w a. m? w? 3 Q: .3 wdu tSQ i=3» Mzemsuaoh fifi 3w 3w fin fin m.“ Q3 b»: mafia fifi Q; 3w .3 we Q: w? >2 wnxwb fifl 3w 3w Md fiw 3 W: N3 mesa fié 3w 3w § fin m...“ wAN mm mfise né 2; 3w 9m I. h.» flaw 3 wiws 3 3w Q2 1m fim 3. Qfi X wfiae fié haw 3w 5.. 3. N: 3N 3 mama. fié 3w 3w ma" w.» Q5 . 3a 2 msae fié 3w 3w =5 w.» i: §~ Nfi Q83. fié >5» 3w w» w.» .3. 3N w maxi “as? aim Q5 micom . § . “x. . Q. . .5.- 3 mzz-vsw owniuw wuno owwv-nv»: w 53:: zfizfl PEH 93G . 8.33 wcsowsi 55w 3cm .532 6.5:» 24in. MHEHO mmmeo .532 mcnsamu 22%.?‘ swaaaac 22.5w. aacaw 2 aomsom wamkoau of sass? 2223.5 was 022.0520 aow 2338 i-aw awaoafi 2952. w .>cZ w n54 In cw 3.3 cc.w~ cw aas2 2.53 saw.“ oEasaJw 2023-5 . Es2 mwasm safi I .>¢Z 3. .22 fix S 5.2 2.3m 3 .3222 was Es2 oa2B< ~fi8===o s. 8a 2 Ass 2a 3 m3; 22a 5 2.812» éwssso Qizaa cm dsQ ms asw m? mm 2...: wmss wm maas2 2.5a waE smiwfim was >225; .5233 2 .>oZ 2 as? 2N w m3: cwcm w maaso~ mwasm uafi @=@>;Q£Q@a@ was cmaoacwam? s-zsrasaascm 2 .>sZ 2 QsE 3N 5 3.2 32 mm mks? snsm asm was =85: E22. Z ScZ as .222 fix ww $2 3mm i" @222 >$=sam|>2u aBaoQ sEZQQsU 2 452 2 asE 3N fi 5.3 =2; cw Es2 >20 aom=>> was Es2 mwasw saw.“ “$2250 mwasm N2 :52 2m as; is cm £3 3:. cm as? 25a o_=>aoo.-U 2.. .>cZ 2 n32 3N hm $.22 sass cm us? s35 $2.5m was-asw 2 SoZ S asE 3w Y». 2.5 3mm 3 Es2 >20 =35; “.32 as SsZ 2 .222 3N 5 3.2 B?” w” >20 s85 aowmacfl was .22» aflmaa» 075:0? Nu s52 . 2 as? 5m mm 3.2 Mai cw us? =53 252a S SoZ w cs2 cwu E 3.2 =33 cw us? 202M 523a sfiifim 3 .>cZ s cs2 www um cwg: 23s cw >20 222m 533a “assay...- mm $02 N. vasi fiwm cm wudw 32m aw Es2 mwasm oafl msiuci was_s>o_O 2.2 3.3. N“. Es2 2.5m sat >223fl >>2> wEfis w dofl mm fish as .5 3.2 $12. 5 as? wmisao 8.3 a32ua< m2 wmmfi aamfi 5.3. cu :32 bzsm 2s 52E Eswsfia .22 . . 2i 2 ma-s2 wasw oafi 23cm was awfifi 22mm. 2 SoZ 2 n32 2N E 23w s32. mm maas2 2.5m 2s 2.55 was mosuowucosZ msaoswucosZ 2 .>cZ 2 v52 3N NH a 2.3 s”? Nu Es2 2E3 saE 2E5 22.2mm 3 .>cZ w dsE was c 3&2 2.3 m .920 .352 “.8233 ouo=cO is am cwca 22.5w am cmca . . . aamssm Mari-am saaas . . uamu=§ cmafiwm M552 cwsfl w mmwmsafissafli» oa l.» “Wwaaaafivsa 15w susao>< oWsao>< mam wuaoooa ocsw owsao>< 4 w ac A moaufi mo 2c aoA $93 5cm acfisuo- amok acmsom wafiwoaw ac .396: =sua~s- QHHUDQZOU. Ham? mamas moan? .5. mzoaeaooamsoaafina A {ix =1: suawnqnmunsaszss 1n 62 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION seat of the county in which the test was conducted. The data shown for Kirbyville were obtained from Sabine county, which 1 is the nearest county having such information available. '" Table‘ 13 showsthe higher total and seasonal rainfall; received by the East Texas and Gulf Coast locations, in con- trast with that received by the Blackland and Grand Prairies locations. Rainfall is extremely low in the other areas.‘ Length of growing season is relatively similar for all locations, decreasing gradually from south to north. The seasons are of ample length, however, for the proper maturing of corn. at each location. Y Description of Tests Since the corn performance tests are conducted primarilyi as a basis for hybrid and varietal recommendations, all im-l portant hybrids and varieties offered for sale to Texas farmers? were included. Those showing promise in the initial tests. were continued for further testing, while those with a poori degree of adaptation were discontinued. The better-adapted hybrids ordinarily were tested for several years to determine; their relative performance. Some hybrids and varieties were continued in tests only at locations where they proved to b‘ adapted. A gradual turnover in entries has occurred between} 1941 and 1950, as a result of the introduction of new hybridsé The actual number of entries included in these tests has; varied to some extent. From 1941 through 1946, the numbers were larger, usually ranging from 36 to 64, since a larg number of experimental hybrids were included in addition t“ the commercial entries. Beginning in 1947, all tests wer reduced to 25 entries or less and confined almost entirely I commercial entries, only a few of the most promising experif mental hybrids being included for comparison with curren commercial hybrids. ’ Insofar as possible, performance tests at each locatio; were grown according to recommended practices for that ar = i While it was not always possible to obtain optimum condition particular attention was given to the use of improved croppin systems, proper cultural methods, adequate fertilization an, optimum spacing. The yields obtained in the different pef formance tests, which are considerably higher than the avert age for the areas in which the tests are located, bear amp} testimony that the tests were grown under much more favor able conditions than most of the corn acreage. ‘- Some variation exists in plot size among the performan t tests. Most of the tests were planted in two-row plots, eith 1/ 100 or 1/110 acre in size. In practically all instances, = CORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 63 least 60 plants per plot were obtained, and in no case did the number go below 40. All tests were planted at excessive rates and thinned to one stalk per hill. Spacings of 18 to 24 inches were commonly used, although 30 or 36-inch spacings were used at some of the drier locations. Figure 15 shows typical examples of performance test plots with Texas 30 and Ferguson’s Yellow Dent growing in the 1950 test at College Station. This figure also shows the increased yield obtained when an adapted hybrid is compared with an open- pollinated variety. Simple lattice designs with four replications were used in practically all corn performance tests from 1941 to 1950. A few of the smaller tests were planted in randomized block designs. Six-replicate triple lattice designs were used in a few instances where considerable soil variability existed. All lattice designs were analyzed as such, and yield adjustments were made when significant gains in precision were obtained. Where no gain in precision was obtained, randomized block analyses were used. . Yields of all tests are reported in bushels of shelled corn per acre. Shelling percentages were obtained by shelling , Figure 15. Plots of Texas 30 (left) and Ferguson’s Yellow Dent i (right) in the performance test at College Station. Note the greater i yield of Texas 30. 54 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Figure 16. Field weighing scene 0f an individual corn performance test plot. all the ears from one replicate of each entry. Since it was not always possible to shell a replicate of each individual test, it was necessary in some instances to utilize shelling percent- ages obtained from a comparable test. All yields are based on air-dry field weights, since each entry had ordinarily reached a moisture equilibrium around 13 or 14 percent by the time of harvest. Some bias may have been introduced occa- sionally as a result of variable moisture content among entries, but it was deemed so slight that the additional expenditure of time and effort required in taking individual moisture samples did not appear warranted. An actual field-plot Weighing scene is shown in Figure 16. Discussion of Results Results of performance tests from 1941 to 1950 at 23 _¥ locations over the State are summarized in Tables 14 through 18. All available yield data were utilized in computing these summaries. Data for the entire 10-year period, however, were available for only a few locations. Many tests were initiated after 1941, and unfavorable environmental conditions caused test failures at some locations each year. Detailed annual results for each location are not presented in this bulletin, but such information in mimeographed form is CORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 65 svailable on request to the Texas Agricultural Experiment ; tation, College Station, Texas. Comparable averages were used in comparing the entries ver a period of years, since all entries Were not included for i’he entire period in which tests were conducted. Such aver- ges were computed according to the procedure devised by atterson2, whereby the entries grown for less than the full _riod are adjusted on the basis of the annual average of “hose grown in all years. The number of years tested and the fnk in yield of each entry are included. Results for one ear do not provide a reliable index to their yielding abilities. ecommendations should be based only on the performance of ntries grown for several years. _, Results of the performance tests at the various locations ‘B discussed following by soil areas, to provide a general sis for their consideration. “A t Texas Timber Country _, Only limited testing has been conducted in the southern ‘art of this area, but the results so far indicate that Texas _8, 26 and 24 will produce good yields. Since diseases and sects are important factors in this section, Texas 24 and 30 j ould be given special consideration because of their resist- nce to both types of organisms. On the basis of several ears’ results at the Brazos River.Valley Laboratory, Texas , 26 and 24 are recommended for planting on alluvial soils f the area. Texas 28 and‘ 26 produced the highest yields at yacogdoches in the central part of the area, while Texas 20 i been outstanding in yield in the northeastern section. exas 30 and Keystone 222 also gave good results at Tyler in e single year tested, while Texas 26, 24 and 28 made good Yelds for at least a 3-year period. Texas 26 is recommended .r light, sandy soils of the entire area where drouth condi- 'ons may be severe. Texas 11W has given the best results f any white hybrid in the area. g ulf Coast Prairie y. Commercial hybrids have not proved to be well adapted " the lower part of the Gulf Coast, primarily because of i. eir susceptibility to insects and diseases. Consequently, the uxpan and Yellow Tuxpan varieties are still planted on a nsiderable acreage. Results at Angleton, which is the only location on clay soils in the Gulf Coast Prairie, indicate at the white hybrids, Texas 11W and 9W, are the best japted of the Texas hybrids to the lower Gulf Coast. For f» sandy, better-drained areas, Texas 20, 24, 26 and 28 are pp. cit. 66 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION recommended on the basis of their performance at Prairie View and Cleveland. Texas 24 and Texas 30 should receive 2% special consideration for the entire area because of their superior resistance to insects and diseases. Blackland Prairie ‘ When results are considered from the numerous tests Y conducted in the Blackland area, Texas 28 and 26 are, on the 7 average, the highest yielding hybrids over a period of years. Texas 24 has also given satisfactory results, although it has , generally yielded below the other two hybrids. Texas 30 has i shown promise in limited tests, as did Watson 124 in the single year it was tested. Texas 11W has performed very pj well in the area over a period of years, but it has not yielded ; as Well as the yellow hybrids. Texas 26 is recommended ~ especially for the more drouthy soils of the area. Grand Prairie Tests conducted for the entire 10-year period at Denton, j in the northern part of this region, show that Texas 28, 26 and 24 will produce high yields. Similar results have been . obtained in the southern part at Gatesville for a 3-year period. ‘ Texas 26 in particular, because of its slightly earlier maturity, f; is recommended for lighter soils where drouth conditions are _ more severe. West Cross Timbers At Stephenville, the only location in this area where tests I have been conducted, Texas 28 produced the highest average A yield over a period of years. Texas 11W, Texas 26 and ‘ United U72 also were among the high-yielding hybrids. Rio Grande Plain Tests in the Lower Rio Grande Valley at Weslaco, under irrigation, indicate that Texas 24 is the best-adapted hybrid a for these conditions, and that the Tuxpan open-pollinated; variety will yield about as well as most hybrids. Since insects 1 and diseases are a serious problem in the Lower Valley, Texas » 11W and 30 also are recommended. Texas 24 produced the. highest average yield in tests conducted at Beeville under dry-land conditions. Two other hybrids, Texas 26 and Funki G711, also produced high average yields at Beeville over a- period of years. Rolling Plains Results at Chillicothe, in the eastern part of this area, show very little difference in the performance of several; Texas hybrids. Texas 26, 20, 18 and 28 produced good results; Keystone 222 also yielded well for a shorter period. CORN PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 67 High Plains Performance tests conducted at Lubbock indicate that Texas 28 is the best hybrid for the southern High Plains. More extensive tests are needed, however, to provide a basis for recommendations over the entire area. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Investigations conducted over a period of years on an extensive scale such as reported in this bulletin necessarily involve a large personnel. It is with due appreciation, there- fore, that the authors give recognition to those individuals directly concerned in conducting the tests and assisting with the preparation of material for the manuscript. Acknowledgment is made to P. C. Mangelsdorf, who ini- tiated the hybrid corn testing program, and to C. H. Mc- Dowell, R. G. Reeves, D. H. Bowman and T. E. McAfee who were associated with the corn improvement program during part of the period from 1940 to 1950. Special recognition is due E. J. Redman for his assistance with the testing pro- gram and preparation of the manuscript; to W. C. Higgs for making statistical analyses; and to B. R. Spears for the prep- aration of illustrations. We are indebted to C. A. Bonnen, J. C. Gaines, R. M. Smith and M. D. Whitehead for suggestions concerning partic- ular parts of the manuscript. Acknowledgment is made the following individuals for conducting tests and collecting data at the substations of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and at the U. S._Cotton Field Station: J. E. Roberts, College Station; E. D. Cook, Kirbyville; H. F. Morris and H. C. Hutson, Nacogdoches; P. R. Johnson, Tyler; Mark Buckingham, Mt. Pleasant; R. H. Stansel, W. F. Turner and J. C. Smith, Angleton; O. E. Smith, Prairie View; H. O. Hill and J. R. Johnston, Temple; D. R. Hooton, Greenville; P. B. Dunkle, M. J. Norris, J. H. Gardenhire and D. I. Dudley, Denton; B. C. Langley, Stephenville; W. H. Friend and W. R. Cowley, Weslaco; R. A. Hall and Lucas Reyes, Beeville; J. R. Quinby, Chillicothe; and D. L. Jones and E. L. Thaxton, J r., Lubbock. Recognition is also due the following individuals for their ‘assistance in conducting tests on private farms: W. P. Patton, Lockhart; R. M. Harper, Martindale; O. H. Shulz, Brenham; F. B. Romberg, Holland; J . F. Dulaney, Mart; Minter Wo- lm"*w»r w» ~. A mack, Garland; and R. H. Anderson, Paris. S8 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX r dew.» 3S >13 new bbkwPbM 33a; 9 wb b.bw bbflfiNb-H. >v¢=Q> 6 um u.bw w wu u.wb w 2 5a.. b .:.._.:...3=w Bob-Pr bb u.bw zabbxbrb. wu b6» w bu vdu b bw i; w 2.52m .3300 333E w u.bv mu Q2 w. vu b.bu w wb w.uw bu wuv wb uoabbouuunm vw 3a v vm w.bw w bobmbmubb bbbunP-bb omoomb 2 w.vv bu ".5 u um Q3 w 25D Babb»? 92:32 w» béw b 35b. can-ESE wu b.wu w 222i Punbbmebb bu. “.3 b 25b. nobvbcw wb v.3 wu w...” w mu w.bu b 2 bdw wu wuv wb 15G 381% Pzemnuuoh bu i: b bE-bb ebb-CF akin vu i» m 3 v.bv w biobb Rab-o? cocci v uém b vub .535.» ub v.wv vb uwv v bb i.” v wb Q2. bb Q2 w wbD bvobbzbb S vb wwv w wb v2 w wbD 32:: A 2 wwv v mu uéu u wb is. w ubD 8E5 X 2 v.5 b w Ebb. E mu v.uv b wwv usabmbb-cwb b v.ww b u u.wb u 2w b uuu obbebmmovb m bu u.bv u vb mbw u vwuu mania N bb Qbu u bb ma... kwwwbw i=5 0 ub wwv v wb bfibw u. wbbQ 52E U 2 wdv u u béw b b b...wb mu uzwv b wbbw x55 C u béw w N...“ w wb ".3 b vb b.ww w w.ww w bbbG “bunk U wu v.2 u wu u.vv w uwbO bib-h D 3 w; b ub w...» b ub ma» u bb 25D % bb w.wv wb w.wv u w wum u ub “.2. bb Q3 v wuwb abavbobb P 2 Q3. m u“ Eu a bu 3:. m $2 wivboa N b wum b uu wwv b wuwb Eavbobb R wu f; m v Q2 b wu 3:. m uwwb wiufi. u. 0 uu wév b vu v.mv u 2m .593 C wu v.uv b wu w.vv u www A-dvmflfim wb 3:. . w w...“ b w v.2 v w ".2. w béw b ~$bb munch. vb v.uv wb v.wv b wb wdu w 2 b.bw vb Q3 b 3w manna. w 3m b b u.bw u 3 mauve. w 3:. w “.5 u b w...» m w m.bb v Q5. v wu manna. v new v cum v u wvm u b Q8 m wdw w wu ndbboa. b us» w I m.bm v. w b5» a v u.bb m ".5 w vn nuxob w “.3 u 3m w 2 i; w v u.bb w b.vw w wu maxob. w v.2 bb v.bv w 2 b.bu b 3 v.2 wb v.5 w wb waxoh. b 3:. b b.bm m mb new w w bdb w wan cb ub makvh. w N? bb w? w 2 b.wu m w bamb- 2 3:. ob m munch. ubcaub 33% ubnaub E2? Ea?» ubiaub blob? flhflfih “bfiaub b-bob? ubnabb b-bobfi mun?» muobua.» . 62 67b 67b no nHnnIQQQ-m 4S 8:02.332 tzfibibu ezflm 93:5 In... 1. ..._.._. :1 v.) ....>X4__...X.L f... . b. . _..._...,.. 70 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TABLE 15. GULF COAST PRAIRIE—COMPARABLE AVERAGE i; YIELDS, BUSHELS OF SHELLED CORN PER ACRE, 1941-50 Y Hybrid Anzleton Cleveland‘ Prairie View‘ vagietv YET. \ Yield l Rank Yield Rank Yield 1mm Texas 8 5 30.2 15 61.7 12 Texas 12 5 29.8 16 68.7 7 Texas 18 3 32.9 5 68.8 6 33.1 4 Texas 2o 2 28.8 19 75.6 1 29.5 a f Texas 24 1 31.9 9 68.0 8 33.2 3 A Texas 26 68.9 5 32.7 ‘ a Texas 28 1 31.4 11 73.7 2 26.1 11 Texas 9W 3 36.5 4 58.9 15 26.7 10 Texas 11W 2 40.6 61.3 13 25.9 12 DeKalb 1002 1 31.5 10 DeKalb 1008 1 18.0 31 DeKalb 1022 1 26.8 22 DeKalb 1025 34.8 Dixie 11 1 42.6 1 70.9 4 Dixie 18 1 28.9 18 Funk G711 4 28.4 20 62.0 11 34.8 Funk G716 2 31.1 13 60.4 14 Funk G721 1 32.9 5 Funk G737 1 31.4 11 65.5 9 Funk G788W 1 42.4 2 28.6 Keystone 101W 71.2 3 United U70 54.6 19 United U72 1 26.2 23 58.7 16 United U75 1 22.6 27 United U79 2 32.6 8 26.8 Denco Yellow Dent 1 21.5 29 Ferguson’s Yellow Dent 6 22.3 28 52.4 20 13.6 Golden June 5 25.0 25 Mexican June 4 32.8 7 Reese Drought Resister 5 25.5 24 Surcropper 6 27.6 21 51.8 21 25.8 Texas Golden Prolific 2 20.3 30 55.2 18 Tuxpan 6 31.1 13 65.0 10 24.5 Yellow Surcropper 5 24.6 26 Yellow Tuxpan 6 29.0 17 58.5 17 26.9 ‘Tests grown for only one year. ww w.Nw w cw v.cw v vN w.Nw w cw v.vw N §ESB=Nw #25» wN w.wN N NN w.wN v wN c.ww m wN N.ww w wN mvw c wN v.Nw w. vN v.vv N wN v.vv w .25E2=w vN w.ww w wN v.cv w Simé wsuuewww 300m wN vwN N wN c.wv w tan B==§ < e520 mnwounrwnw vN w.ww v Nw N.wN w oZwuZ 9.3202 vN wwN w wN v.ww w 25m 22E» $22: vN w.mN w ww w.ww w wN v.Nv w wN c.wv w 22w E53» Emu Nw wwN v 2.3. 522w NN v.wN w cN N.cN w wN w.vN v. wN w.vN w ww wwN w cw v.wN w wN w.ww w vN w.wv w as: as?» _ wuwomuuuonw ww w.ww m wuwww >933? OQGQQ N w.wv w w w.wv w w w.ww w w w.vw w w w.Nv w N w.ww w w w.ww w vNw 53x3 w N.ww N vN w.wN w NN w.ww v vN N.cw w w v.cv v cw w.vw w NN c.wv w cw w.wv v wvD 3E5 ww v.ww w wN v.wv w v5 v82: v wvv v wN w.Nw N cN w.ww w vN w.vw w ww v.5 w vw v.Nw w wvD .52: m v.vw w ww 33 w v5 102Gb w w.ww w ww c.cw w w w.wv w w N.ww w cw c.cv w Nw w.ww w vw w.ww w cN w.wv v NvD vBED wN w.vw w wvD @315 v w.ww w ww w.ww w wN w.vw w w c.Nw w . w E2. vN N.wN w wN c.vN w vw wwN w ccww .5555 wN N.wv w wwv Simiew w v.wv w N c.cv w cw w.wv w vw c.vw w w w.Nv w w v.cw N w vNw N cw c.vw N NNN vizivz ww w.vw w v w.vv w wN w.ww w ww N.ww N ww w.Nw N vwNN mam-EM cw v.3 N vN v.wN w wN w.ww N ww w.vN N cN w.wv N vN w.wv w B35 ~55 wN m.wN w vwvU =55 NN mNw w . wNvU 55h cN v.3 w wN w.ww w ww w.ww v w vw w.ww N wN w.wv w vw vcw w S5 v.56 c w.ww w cw vww w vw w.ww w ww c.ww w ww w.ww w wwvU 15E . ww w.ww w <25 xii vw N.ww N w w.ww w Nw w.wv w ww cww w w w.wv w cw w.vw w ww w.ww w ww w.ww w wwvU =55 ww v.Nv w ww v.ww w NcvU =55 wN v.wN w v wN c.Nw w wN w.cw w ww 25a cN v.3 N ww w.vw N vw c.wv N vN w.ww N mw w.ww v vw w.ww v ww c.ww w ww w.cw w wNcw wiuvn ww N.cw N ww w.ww N ww w.wv N N w.ww w wN w.ww w ww w.ww v ww w.wv N ww 1S w NNcw wimva ww v.Nv w wN w.vN w cw w.ww w . c c.Nw w wN c.wv w cNcw =35 ww w.ww w wN c.wN w wN v.ww w Nw w.ww w wccw wiwon mw w.ww w wN w.wN w cN N.cv w ww w.vw w ww v.vw w wN w.vw N wN w.wv w Nccw win»: NN N.mw N www wiwoa wN wNw w www aim»: cw w.vw N ww c.vw v w c.vv v w w.ww w w w.Nv w w cww w w w.ww w v w.ww m >Pww mane? ww w.Nw N ww N.ww v vw w.Nv w mw v.vw w ww w.ww w Nw w.ww w ww w.ww w Nw v.ww w B» n82. w w.wv N v N.cw w cw mawoh .. w w.cv N v w.ww w N N.cw w w w.ww w N mzvv w N v.wv v w w.ww w w w.ww v . wN mauve N w v v w m w w w.wv w w v.3 m v Q5 N w v.3 m wN nBNoH. N w v w v w w v v.wv v v . w.ww v 4 w v.5 w n Nam w vN mGNQ-H N w v w m v w v m v w.ww w w w.ww w w v.wv w 3 QQNOH. N .1 v w w v w w w w 9w» w v wgvm w a Q3 w 3 Odldh. > . v. . . , 9 O. .. . w rnvn, 4w? aw adv . .. 2 95p w aw 3x9... 72 BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TABLE 17. GRAND PRAIRIE AND WEST CROSS TIMBER? COMPARABLE AVERAGE YIELDS, BUSHELS OF SHELLED CO PER ACRE, 1941-50 Hybrid Grand Prairie West Cross Tim o, Gatesville Denton Stephenvillo ; variety No. No. No. '5 — yrs. i Yield i Rank yrs. i Yield i Rank yrs. i Yield i 7 ' Texas 8 3 31.4 12 10 35.4 11 8 26.9 Texas 12 3 31.3 13 10 36.3 9 8 26.7 Texas 18 3 32.6 5 8 36.6 8 7 29.0 Texas 20 3 33.2 4 6 38.2 4 6 29.1 Texas 24 3 35.2 2 5 39.7 3 4 29.6 Texas 26 3 36.9 1 6 40.1 2 3 30.4 Texas 28 2 34.8 3 4 40.3 1 4 32.7 Texas 9W 3 30.6 16 7 34.2 l4 6 27.6 Texas 11W 3 31.5 l0 7 35.0 13 4 30.6 ., DeKalb sss a 25.1 a2 _ i . DeKalb 899 2 27.8 28 DeKalb 1002 1 32.0 8 5 33.7 16 DeKalb 1008 1 31.2 15 2 28.4 DeKalb 1020 1 30.3 17 _ DeKalb 1022 2 31.5 10 6 32.2 20 2 I 26.2 DeKalb 1025 2 29.6 18 3 35.8 10 _ 1 31.3 DeKalb 919W 1 26.2 31 Dixie 11 1 20.0 31 1 27.8 28 Funk G87 1 30.0 23 Funk G702 2 30.0 23 Funk G711 3 32.0 8 9 34.2 14 6 26.5 Funk G715 1 32.4 e 1 31.2 1 1 21.4 Funk G716 1 23.1 29 3 30.8 22 2 27.8 Funk G788W 1 24.4 28 Kansas 2234 1 31.3 13 2 32.4 21 Keystone 222 2 27.8 20 2 37.4 5 United U72 3 27.9 19 5 35.4 11 4 30.4 United U75 5 32.6 19 United U77 1 32.4 6 United U79 3 26.9 22 8 32.8 18 2 28.0 Shannon 1300 1 24.8 27 1 28.5 25 TRF 3 1 33.7 16 Watson 124 K 1 37.4 5 Denco Yellow Dent 1 i 26.7 23 6 24.1 35 2 19.6 Ferguson’s Yellow Dent‘ 3 25.0 25 l0 24.7 34 7 17.8 Golden June 1 18.5 36 7 23.3 Kreid Yellow Dent 1 21.4 30 Mickle’s Yellow Dent 1 24.9 26 3 27.9 27 Reese Drought Resister 6 24.3 33 4 21g Surcropper 3 27.3 21 10 28.0 26 8 22.9 Yellow Surcropper 1 25.8 24 7 27.2 30 4 22.5 73 f w wnww w 0000000005 30:0? ww .20 v 2 0.2 0 3 0.00 0 0253.50 #00030. v 0.00 0. 000000005. ew 3.0 0 00500:. 0w 0.00 w wu 0.00 ew 3 . 0.00 w 00.000.00.005 ea v.ww w 00 w.ww w ww v.ww w 0323M 030000.09 00003 . 00 0.00 w 0.009 30:0? 0.0333 S 0.00 v vu w.ww w. 3 0.00 0 0000;. 00030003 00 0.3 0 00000005. 00030.0 ww =00 w 00 0.00 ew 00 0.00 w 250. 00030¢ wm 0.00 ew 3 .5; w 300G $020? 0.000500% 2 0.00 w 0.0 0.00 w 200G >230 000009 . w 3.0 w 2 0.2 w w 0.00 w ww 0.2. w 3D 103005 3 0.00 w ww e.wu w , B: 335D S ww 0.00 w vw 0.00 w >w 0.3 v NEH 00200.5 m 2 0.00 0 22 .8520 E . w =00 m ~00 0:03.800 T ww 0.00 w w 0.5 w 00 0.3 0 vwuu 000.003 N uw 0.2 w B005 0.5.0 I 2 0.00 a ww 0.0.0 w ew 0.00 w vw 0.8. w 0E0 0100K N w =5. w 0E0 0100b m. ww 0.3 v 0 0.3 w w 0.3 w ew 0.3 a 0S0 0105K T ww 0.00 0 0E0 015k 0W0 5 0.00 N 0 w.ew m wuew £0003 D n 0.00 w ww 3.0 w ww 0.00 v h www w ~02 £0309 O ww =00 0 weew £0309 R w 3.0 w ww 0.00 w 2.: 0000000 P 2 0.00 0 www 0.00000 N aw 0.2 0 www 01.0000 R w 3.0 w ww 0.00 v ww 0.00 w w 0.00 w >50 00000.w. % v vw 0.00 N ww www w =0 0.00 w ww w.ew w 30 0003a. . w 0.00.. u w 0.00 w vw 0.00 w w 0.5 w 00 0000a. v 0.3 w 0 0.00 v w 0.3 w w 0.2. w 3 0000a. N 0.5 u ew 0.00 v w 0.00 v w w.ww u 00 0000B w 0.3 w w 0.00 w w 0.00 w ww 0.3 w 3 0000M. w 0.00 w v www h , w 0.00 0 0 0.2. 0 ww 0000b ew =40 w w 0.00 ew 0 0.00 0 ww w.ww w uw 000008 w 0.3 w 2 0.00 ew w 0.00 0 0w 0.5 w w 0000a. 0100i i 30w? i 0.000.» 01003 i 30w? i 0.000.» 0100M i 30w? i 0.000.» 0100K 30w? _ 0.000.» .02 .02 .02 i .0Z 300.00.’ 0-00.50: 0100000030 0:05am 00000003 .00 20000.0 JU-I . 0000000980053 0000000 00000900 £00 3.5mm a _ i. 0.1. BULLETIN 746, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION MORE DETAILS AVAILABLE Detailed annual yields on performance tests at 23 a locations are available in a separate mimeographed ’ report. Copies 0f these tables may be obtained from ._“ the Publications Office, Texas Agricultural Experiment 1 Station, College Station, Texas. [Blank Page in Original Bulletin] 'spg.1q&q moo sso1o-a1qn0p pun ssoxa-alfiugs fiupnpoxd Jo poqgaw uawuva A8 NMOUE) (or o)! (ax v) smvwa ssoao-a-uenoo ._ t, afi‘ < ____\_‘_- ,,—§; 3 . . , _ pig-i; _ c,%? a -. . _~_\_ \., -s' yin‘ d , w m ?_='\$‘r ‘fir ‘ l 16¢»? ‘_“_ ~,“ a ‘g ‘L d i171 ‘x; wu-m ' T\-1t~__ 5 : .~g_ g- i‘ ‘ ; ‘—-_» 3L3 i’ _>€- ‘it: $E‘\ j ._ 1' x‘ Ir I v “x ‘I I,‘ I , 1 . :5: _ . i‘ . ' 4 _ , ' .1“ ._ v _. - ' .2‘ , -'.- " IE3“.- BVBA CIHIHJ. f a _ ‘Id ssouo-awonss w: ~03 s ssouo-awqh (mo) ' (ovohwaxv) l’ m7?” l‘ N3110d ' oawassvlao BVBA ONOOBS O 0 V 8 {£1479 aoayanui-‘gifiguywa (Iguana .l.NV'ld oauemézwluvwd oaaem ‘L ' iwés~l§¢é~vm$i§",~ne-iw~ ~<=' 11 :-:»>;:=2:s»:.~§5=1-»:=::r-.- **»~=»~§,.=-.\_\_=. ‘~311oa (IQ-IHSSVLHG uvax LSBL-l