R87-637-6m TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIUN A. B. CONNER, DIRECTOR COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS BULLETIN NO. 548 AUGUST, 193T DIVISION OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING (In cooperation with Bureau 0f Agricultural Engineering, U. S. Department of Agriculture; the National Fertilizer Association; and the Joint Committee 0n Fertilizer Application) MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE 0F TEXAS T. O. WALTON, President l; 1 B R IA R Y Agricultural & Mechanical College of Texas ll-lhuun Qlvniinn TQVQQ The placement of fertilizer in relation to the cottonseed at the time 0f planting has a profound influence on the germination of the seed. If the fertilizer is placed too near, germination is delayed and the total number of seedlings obtained will be considerably reduced. Experiments were made at Bryan, Temple, College Station, and Nacog- doches from 1932 to 1935 to determine the eifect on germination and yield when fertilizer is placed under the seed in narrow and Wide bands at difierent depths, when applied at different depths and distances to the side of the seed, when some of the fertilizer is applied in the furrow with the seed, and when fertilizer is applied at different rates per acre and different places in relation to the seed. The results show that of all placements of fertilizer the best germina- tion of cottonseed and the highest yields were obtained when the fertil- izer was placed to the sides and below the seed level. The location of the fertilizer in relation to the seed affected germination more than it did yield. When the fertilizer was placed within one inch of the seed, germination was injured, as it was too close. More plants were obtained where one-fourth of the fertilizer was applied in the surface soil over the seed and the balance 2.5 inches to each side and 2 inches below the seed level, but a higher yield was obtained where one-eighth of the fertilizer was applied with the seed and the balance 3.5 inches to each side and 2 inches below the seed level. lVhen results of applying fertilizer in both wide and narrow bands directly under the seed were compared, the three-inch depth gave the highest number of seedlings for both width bands, but the two-inch depth gave the highest yield for the narrow bands and the one-inch depth for the wide bands. For 250-, 500-, and 750-pound rates the 500-pound rate applied in bands 2.5 inches to each side and 2 inches below the seed level gave the largest number of plants, but the 750-pound rate applied 3.5 inches to each side and 2 inches below the seed level gave the highest yield. No significant difference in yield was obtained where all of the fer- tilizer was placed on one side of the seed or where it was divided and equal amounts placed on each side of the seed. The highest yield of 326 pounds of lint per acre was obtained for the one-side placement, as com- pared with 312 pounds for the placement to each side. When compared with the two unfertilized checks, which yielded 239 and 257 pounds of lint per acre, the results show a significant increase from the use of fertilizer for both the one-side and the each-side place- ments when all four locations are considered. Better response from the use of fertilizer was obtained at College Station and Nacogdoches than at Bryan in the Brazos River Bottoms, and at Temple. Disturbing the soil at any depth under the seed without applying fer- tilizer reduced the final stand of plants as compared with the stand obtained where the soil was undisturbed for a distance of 2.5 and 3.5 inches to each side of the row and no fertilizer applied. CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................ ____ Review of literature .............................................................................. --__ Scope of experiments ______________________________________________________________________________ __ 7 Soil types ........................................................................................ -- 7 ‘h Fertilizers ________________________________________________________________________________________ _- 8 Seed .................................................................................................. _- 8 . Placement machine ............... _______________________________________________________________ _- 9 Seasonal conditions and rainfall ____________________________________________________________ __ 12 Experimental plats .................................................................................. -- 13 Effect of fertilizer placement on germination of cottonseed ________________ __ 16 Under the seed __________________________________________________________________________________ -_ 16 To the sides of the seed ................................................................... -- 22 Placing part of the fertilizer in furrow with the seed ________________ __ 29 At different rates and placements _________________________________________________ __ 35 Efiect of fertilizer placements on yield of cotton ________________________________ __ 41 Under the seed _________________________ _______________________________________________________ __ 42' To the sides of the seed __________________________________________________________________ __ 42' Placing part eff fertilizer withfthe seed _________________________________________ __ 4s At different rates and placements __________________________________________________ __ 48 Summary and conclusions ......... -_; _________________________________________________________ __ 51 Literature cited ______________________________________________________________________________________ __ 52 BULLETIN N O. 5 4 8 1 AUGUST, 1 9 3 7 MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON H. P. Smith, Chief, Division of Agricultural Engineering, H. F. Morris, Superintendent, Substation No. 11, Nacogdoches, and M. H. Byrom, Assistant Agricultural Engineer?“ Texas Agricultural Experiment Station in cooperation with Bureau of Agricultural Engineering, U. S. Department of Agricul- ture; the National Fertilizer Association; and the Joint Committee on Fertilizer Application. Q The poor stands obtained and slow germination of cottonseed have often been attributed to poor seed or some other similar factor, while in fact they may have been due to improper placement when applying the fertilizer. Fertilizer attachments on many cotton planters distribute the fertilizer in such a way that a lar.ge percentage of it is either in direct contact with the cottonseed or close enough to injure them. Consequently, to determine the best placement of fertilizer for ob- taining the most rapid emergence and the highest percentage of ger- mination of cottonseed, numerous tests were conducted with the fer- tilizer applied at various positions in relation to the seed. Data were collected on both the emergence of seedlings and the yield. These tests were conducted for a five-year period, beginning in 1931 and ending in 1935. Tests were planted at both College Station and Temple in 1931, but on account of the poor stands obtained, the data for that year are not included in this report. A _ _ _ A Figure 1. Distributing fertilizer by 111 Texas 1t 15 13119130111111011 DTa-C" hand in lister furrow. Land is relisted - - - to form ridges over fertilizer and so nee to apply most of the fertlhzer fertilizer Will be under the seed. *Credit is due G. A. Cumings of the Bureau of Agricultural Engineering U. S. Department of Agriculture, for designing the experimental machine used and for his suggestions and coordination of the tests in Texas With the tests in other states; to W. H. Redit of the Bureau of Agricultural Engineering and A. L. Sharp, formerly of the Bureau of Agricultural Engineering, for their assistance in planting the tests; to H. R. Smalley of the National Fertilizer Association for his assistance in planning the work and cooperation by fur- nishing the fertilizer used; to George Chance of Bryan and Bob Haney of Nacogdoches for their cooperation in the tests that were conducted on their farms; and to Henry Dunlavy, Superintendent of Substation No. 5 until Janu- ary 1937, for assistance in collecting the data at Temple. (f BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION either before planting or at applied as the time of planting. A small amount may be a side dressing later in the season. When the fertilizer is applied before planting, two methods are used: first, the fertilizer is distributed by Placing fertilizer in ridges Figure 2. Seed with vibrator type distributor. are planted later. hand in the furrow, as shown in Figure 1, and the seed bed formed‘ over the fertilizer; second, the ridge for the seed bed is thrown up either by a middlebreaker or by a turning plow and the fertilizer placed in the ridge by a walking fertilizer distributor, as shown in Figure 2. To apply fertilizer at the time of planting a special fertilizer attachment is mounted on the planter. Figure 3 shows a one-row riding planter equipped with a fer- tilizer attachment. This type of attachment usually distributes the fertilizer either ahead or to the side of the seed-furrow opener and, as a consequence, the fertilizer is mixed in the surface soil over the seed. The first two methods call for much extra ‘time and labor, while the third method places the fertilizer in a position where it may injure and delay germination of the seed. REVIEW OF‘ LITERATURE Among the first investigations by Lee (3) of the North Louisiana Ex- periment Station was a test started in 1888 and continued until 1892 to determine the effects of that better yields were obtained when fertilizer was applied at a depth of from two to three inches under the seed. He also found that fertilizer applied shallow and as a top dressing interfered with the germination of cottonseed. Redding (8) and Lee (3) found that when cottonseed meal was applied in direct contact with the seed, germination was impaired. Musgrave and Coe (5) found that direct contact of fertilizer with the seed or below the seed injured germination more than applications at the side of the seed row and at the same level as the seed. different modes of applying fertilizer. equipped with illustrating point Where fertilizer usually placed seed shovels. He found Figure 3. furrow opener, and One-row riding planter fertilizer attachment; is in relation to sweep, covering MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 7 Cumings (1 and 2) found that fertilizer applied at shallow depths near the seed either below or at short distances to the side caused injury to germination. The Joint Committee on Fertilizer Application (7) published results of a canvass among fertilizer manufacturers showing complaints made by farmers who used equipment that placed the fertilizer near the seed and caused injury to germination. Cumings (1) reported in 1931 that experiments conducted at South Carolina made the greatest yields of cotton with fertilizer placed closest to the seed without encountering injury to germination. McBryde (4) in 1891 and 1892 found that moderate amounts of fer- tilizer were more effective when used in the drill than when broadcast. Experiments conducted by Musgrave and C'oe (6) indicated that the position to the side of the seed appeared to be an ideal location for the most effective results from the use of any fertilizer material. SCOPE OF EXPERIMENTS Machine placement of fertilizers with cotton in Texas was studied at four locations: Bryan in the Brazos River bottoms on Yahola clay, Temple on Houston black clay, College Station on Lufkin fine sandy loam, and Nacogdoches on Norfolk sandy loam. These experiments covered a period of four years, 1932 to 1935, at Bryan, College Station, and Nacog- doches. At Temple the experiments were conducted during the three years from 1932 to 1934. ' Soil Types The surface soil of Yahola clay is a dark chocolate-red or reddish- brown, calcareous silty clay. The subsoil is, on the whole, lighter in texture than the surface material. The surface soil 1's plastic when wet and has a tendency to clod and crust when too rapid drying takes place. After rains on freshly worked soil a thick, hard crust forms, making it difficult for cotton seedlings to emerge. Each year there was sufficient rainfall after the test was planted to form a hard crust on the surface of the soil. The machine placement of fertilizers with cotton was conducted for the first three years on the heavy Yahola clay, but in 1935 the test was on a soil having a higher percentage of sand. Houston black clay is black, very dark gray, or dark brown heavy clay. The subsoil is a yellowish-gray, greenish-yellow, or greenish-brown clay. In some areas both the topsoil and subsoil are highly calcareous. The surface soil is very plastic and tenacious when wet, but upon drying assumes an ashy color and crumbles to a desirable tilth if cultivated when moisture conditions are suitable. Rains cause a crust to form on the surface, but upon drying the crust cracks and crumbles sufliciently to permit the emergence of cotton seedlings. Lufkin fine sandy loam is a grayish-brown or gray, rather compact, fine sandy loam underlain by a highly plastic and impervious clay subsoil. It has a smooth soapy feel and is sticky when wet but very hard and 8 BULLETIN NO. S48, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION tough when dry. The soil has very slow underdrainage, and on smooth flat areas it remains wet for long periods. As a result, the soil warms up slowly in the spring. When dry it is rather diificult to work, and after rains a hard crust forms on the surface, making it difficult for cotton seedlings to emerge. The Norfolk soils are gray on the surface with a yellow subsurface color. The. topsoil layers are friable or loose and merge below either with yellow friable sandy clay or loose very sandy material. The soils and subsoils are readily penetrated by water, and both surface and under- drainage are good. Even on the sandy loam a hard crust forms after rains, making the emergence of seedlings diflicult. Fertilizers The fertilizer used in the machine placement studies with cotton was a 4-12-4 mixture purchased by the National Fertilizer Association on the local market and was typical of that used in farm practice. In 1932 and 1933 double strength fertilizer mixtures were used in the rate studies. Table 1. Number of cottonseed planted in 50 feet of row Location 1932 1933 1934 1935 Bryan 1550 667 857 600 Temple 625 582 500 College Station 682 667 750 789 Nacogdoches 682 612 682 667 Table 2- Planting‘ denth and snacing of cottonseed 1932 _ 1933 1934 193s l Location Planting Seed Planting Seed Planting Seed Planting Seed depth spaqmg depth spaqing depth spacing depth spacing 1n 1n. 1n 1n. 1n 1n. 1n 1n. 1n in. in in. in in. in in. Bryan ~ 1.5-2 .46 2.5 .9 1-1.5 .7 2 1 Temple 2 . 5-3 .96 3-3 . 5 1.03 2 . 5-3 1.2 College Station 1-1.5 .88 1.5—2 .9 1.25—-1.5 .8 1.75 .76 Nacogdoches 1 . 88 . 5-1 .98 . 75-1 .8 1.5 ,9 The amount used was equivalent to 250, 500, and 750 pounds of ordinary strength 4-12-4 fertilizer. At the time of distribution the fertilizer was in good physical condition and drilled well. Seed An efiort was made at each location to plant varieties of cotton that produced well. At Bryan in the Brazos River bottoms Missdel cotton was used for the four years, and at Temple Qualla cotton was used for MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 9 Figure 4. Side view of special combination planter and fertilizer dis- tributor, built under the general specifications of the Bureau of Agricultural Engineering of the U. S. Department of Agriculture for fertilizer placement experiments with cotton in Texas. Note that the driver can give full atten- tion to the team and adds Weight to front of planter, while the man in the rear is free to watch operation of various planter parts and adds weight to rear of machine. the three years. The Startex variety was used each year at College Station. At Nacogdoches Lone Star was used in 1932 and 1933, Acala in 1934, and Startex in 1935. At all locations ordinary gin-run fuzzy seed were used each year except in 1932, when mechanically delinted seed were used at Bryan. Each year at each location the cottonseed were treated with Ceresan at the rate of three ounces per bushel of seed. Table 1 shows the calculated number of seed planted at each location each year. Table 2 shows the depth and spacing at which the seed were planted. PLACEMENT MACHINE In studying the effect of ‘_ the placement of fertilizer it ' is necessary that the relative positions of fertilizer and seed be accurately controlled. The amount of fertilizer and the quantity of seed distrib- uted, width of fertilizer bands, depth and compactness of soil over the seed, general level of the final seed bed, and other seed bed conditions - Figure 5. Rear view of special planter and must be Elnlform throughout fertilizer distributor, showing how top of the experiment. A machine ridge on seed bed is knocked off and how - seed bed is left after all operations have been designed by the Bureau ‘of perforrmfli 10 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Figure 6. Top-delivery hopper showing arrangement for delivering fer- tilizer to as many as four spouts simultaneously. Agricultural Engineering of the U. S. Department of Agriculture was used in the fertilizer placement studies in Texas (Figures 4 and 5). It was designed t0 meet the varied requirements of the tests under different farm practices and soil conditions and to plant and distribute the cottonseed and fertilizer on ridges. It has numerous attachments and adjustments so that the placement of fertilizer in relation to the seed can be accurately controlled. The machine is of the four-wheel type, which permits rigid con- struction and arrangement of attachments for accurate relative placements of fer- tilizer and seed. It was drawn by two mules. A . a; The cotton-dropping de- _ l _ _ _ is of the cell-drop type, ..F;.g;;.e .1“ bSxxfzisssnigitraiszar.%1:"s;;%% having the hgpper mounted A, sweep to knock off top of seed bed; B, shov- _ _ el to open fertilizer furrow”; C, bedding disks; t0 ‘the T631‘ 0f the ferlllllzel‘ D, seed shoe or furrow opener; E, covering hopper and in front of the shovels? F’ press Wheel‘ operator’s seat. Provision is made for changing the rate of seed distri- bution to suit the soil type and conditions. The fertilizer-dispensing mechanism is of the top-delivery rotating- cylinder type, as shown in Figure 6. The hopper is equipped with three delivery openings and tubes. The tubes are flexible and their length such that fertilizer can be directed to any point about theseed. Fertilizer MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 11 can be delivered through one or more tubes simultaneously and in vary- ing proportions. The fertilizer is distributed to the various tubes by blades scraping over the surface of the fertilizer as the hopper containing it rotates. As the hopper rotates, a threaded rod through the center raises the bottom of the hopper and slowly lifts the fertilizer. Conse- quently, an accurate amount of fertilizer is delivered uniformly to each tube, which conveys it to the soil. All the soil-working tools are mounted on a subframe (Figures 7 and 8) which can be raised or lowered without change of inclination or the gen- eral relationship of the various tools. At the front of the subframe is a standard on which a large sweep is mounted to remove the surface soil from the seed bed or ridge. Just to the rear of this sweep are mounted the fertilizer open- ers, which may c o n s i s t either of shovels for placing the fertilizer under the seed or disks for placing it to the side of the seed. On each side and slightly to the rear of the fertilizer opening tools are bedding disks to reshape the seed bed and Figure 8. Subframe of distributor equipped to place bands of fertilizer either to one or fill up the furrows formed both sides and below the seed level: A, sweep by the fertilizer Opening to knock off top of seed bed; Bnpair of single disks to open furrows for fertilizer; C, bed- tQOIS- I11 U19 09111161‘ and ding‘ disks; D, seed shoe or furrow opener; under the rear axle a Curved E, covering shovels; F‘, press Wheel. runner seed furrow opener is placed to open the furrow for the seed. To the rear of the furrow opener are placed shovels and a press wheel for covering and compacting the soil over the seed. As all of these soil-working tools are mounted on a subframe, they are raised and lowered together without changing their relative positions. Any one of the units can. be adjusted independently in order to meet various seed bed conditions. For example, the shovels for placing the fertilizer under the seed (Figure 7) can be adjusted to place it in bands at depths of one, two, three, or four inches. Shields are attached to each side of the shovel to prevent soil from falling back into the furrow and to hold the lower end of the fertilizer tubes. A narrow shovel 1.75 inches in width and a wide shovel 3.5 inches in width are used in placing the fertilizer under the seed. When the fertilizer is mixed with the soil, extra small mixing shovels follow in the furrows behind the fertilizer furrow openers. For placements to the side of the seed (Figure 8) a pair of single disks are used to open the furrows for the fertilizer. The fertilizer tubes are attached a’t the rear of the disks to direct the fertilizer to the bottom of the furrow. These disks are ordinary grain drill furrow-opener disks with the boot attached. The lower end of the flexible fertilizer tube is inserted in the top of the boot, thus permitting the fertilizer to flow directly through the boot to the bottom of the furrow made by the disk. 12 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION The disks are adjustable both laterally and vertically for obtaining various side placements. When fertilizer is placed part with the seed and the balance at other points, three fertilizer distributing tubes are used simultaneously. Two of the tubes place the fertil- izer either under or to the sides of the seed, and the other dispenses fertilizer in the furrow with the cotton- seed. It is understood, of course, that a practical im- proved m a c h i n e for the farmer would not require many of the adjustments and special features of this ma- chine, which was designed for experimental purposes. Attachments for planters are Figure 9. Cotton seedlings breaking through being Placed 011 the market soil crust at Nacogdoches on April 29, 1935: - - - A, row Where fertilizer was applied 1.5 inches Whlch place the fertlhzer to to one side and 2 inches below seed level; the side and below the seed B, fertilizer applied 3.5 inches to one side and 2 inches below seed level. level- SEASONAL CONDITIONS AND RAINFALL The amount of moisture in the soil at the time cottonseed are planted and the rainfall directly following the planting of the seed often have considerable effect on the germination and emergence of cottonseed and seedlings. From a study of Table-3 it can be seen that in most cases light to heavy rains fell within a few days after the tests were planted. This condition occurred each year at Bryan in the Brazos River bottoms, causing a hard crust to form on the surface of the soil which prevented the emergence of seedlings from many seed that germinated. This, of course, caused the percentage of germination to be rather low for the years 1932, 1933, and 1934. In 1935, however, rain was frequent enough to keep the soil sufficiently damp for seedlings to break through readily. In 1935 a rotary hoe was run over the seed he'd just as the seedlings were beginning to emerge freely. As a consequence, a higher percentage of emergence was secured than during the three previous years. On the black clay soils at Temple light rains fell soon after planting, but the soil crust cracked sufficiently to permit most seedlings to emerge. At College Station on the Lufkin fine sandy loam rainfall was sufli- cient each year to cause a hard crust to form on the surface. This crust prevented many seedlings from emerging from seed that had germinated. When the rain fell at the time the young seedlings were in the “crook,” there was a tendency for the soil crust to form around them and cement MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON l3 them in so tightly that they could not break through. In 1933 a spiked- tooth harrow was dragged over the test to break the hard crust and permit the emergence of seedlings. In 1935 frequent and continuous rains kept the soil moist enough for most seedlings to emerge. At Nacogdoches rain fell each year, except in 1934, within one or two days after planting; consequently a thick hard crust formed over the seed that kept many seedlings from emerging. Figure 9 shows seedlings bursting through the hard crust. In 1934 there was ample mois- ture at the time of planting for good germination of cottonseed, but very few seeds germinated where the soil was disturbed under the seed. Where the soil was disturbed to the sides of the seed in placing the fertilizer, the cottonseed germinated and a good stand of plants was obtained in from 7 to 10 days. It was observed that where the soil was disturbed 1.5 inches to the sides of the seed, germination was not as rapid as for the 2.5- and 3.5-inch distances. On the tests with placements under the seed, a stand of plants was not obtained until rain supplied ' moisture. Disturbing the soil under the seed at the time of planting left it loose and, as a result, the soil dried rapidly and to a depth that moisture was not sufiicient to cause germination of the cottonseed. In planting the tests for the side placements the soil was not disturbed under the seed, which were deposited on a firm moist soil that did not dry out. Con- sequently the cottonseed germinated and seedlings emerged without delay. EXPERIMENTAL PLATS The experimental plats at each location comprised about two acres of land that were divided into six blocks of about equal size and shape. All placements of fertilizer were systematically arranged in each block. Each plat, or placement test, consisted of a single row, usually about 125 feet in length. Each placement was repeated in each of the six blocks, or each placement was repeated six times. The row spacing varied according to the farm practice at each location. At College Station and Temple the row spacing was 36 inches. At Bryan in the Brazos River bottoms and at Nacogdoches the spacings ranged from 39 to 41 inches between the rows. Records were taken from i100 feet of row, which was divided into two sections. Therefore in making the germination counts and calculating the yields, 12 sets of notes were secured, and these were added and the averages taken. In the preparation of the seed bed, ridges were prepared according to the general practice of cotton farmers in the greater portion of the state. After the tests were planted the seed were slightly above the general elevation of the soil. This permitted excess water during rains to drain into the depressions between the rows and prevented water from standing in the row and drowning out young seedlings. In 1932 and 1933 three unfertilized checks were planted, but in 1934 and 1935 only two checks were planted, one for the placements under the seed and one for the placements to the sides of the seed. One of the checks had the soil stirred 1.75 inches wide and two inches under the seed, and thus served for a check for the placements under the seed. In another check the soil was left undisturbed for a distance of 3.5 1.......r...v..4................. 0N2" .11. MN!“ IIIIO .15. wn ,. ....,tr... Z Jw§ ~4W4 ?. fi. Hfl -.-.- --.¢--.-=--v¢-.-.-.....-- 0O. ..._.s_. . . . . . m¢~ wm~ . . . . . . . . . . . m. "I" **mN. . .. . . . . . .. .. . ** . . . . . . .. fi mag Na um. . . . . . “Z154 BULLETIN NO. 54s, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION nn °. N °. -X- -X- l? i l\ N 32 £3 .32 j $2 £2 i $2 } £3 S3 £2 £3 $3 £3 $2 .82 $3 monuowwouu Z 14 domfifiw owozoO BQEUF mmim } BQQ QMQ“QH.~ i“ Emacs-Gov 9H0; MHMUH HAMQEQOHM-H uosmiwuou 0H9‘? micmuflnt; E575»? vfiw w: Qua-i GHQ-PP maniac flamwuimiuow AMI-T’? 4H9 mun-aw Uni-w QQUHQ‘ Mflmwifinfi Jim-Sana ZN Umnfluwwfi 15 MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON .33 no 0338c» “on Emvi i500 cowmnrchwu uwuqian 3:8 nowmficbuw wnoummi JGSOU cofimcifium “fir?” .3283 ma? “m3 Emnfilm -- u 1|. » n yuan... . . N7 .. flu. . . . . o“. mo. .€.....HHHH.H. n59 10¢. i“ . . . . . . .. .H...»....e».. 3 . . . . . . . . PM . . . . . . .. moé .fi.w..zm. M .. .. .1... .8... $3M B: a. i. m ..... .. . .. . fir. “mun “Hi. .. . .. . . . . . .. 5N. .. . . . . . . . .. £2 $3 32 $3 m2: $.43 22 S2 $3 22 $2 i m2: i EQQ mosoowwoomz nofigw oMo=oU 0396B _ EBCQ ||||‘|||||\|||||\Y i 16 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION inches to each side of the row. A third check, which .was used only during the first two years, had the soil stirred three inches under the seed as though mixing the fertilizer with the soil. In order to get an indication of delay in the germination of the cotton- seed resulting from the effects of the placements, three germination counts were made. The first count was made soon after the first seedlings began to appear above the ground, and the second count fol- lowed three or four days later, depending upon the number of new plants ap- ditions prevailing. The third, or last count was not made until just before the time for thinning the cotton. The average interval of time elapsing between planting and the first count was 7 days, between planting and the second count 11 days, and between planting and the last count 21 days. Figure 10. Growth of cotton plants 22 days after planting where fertilizer was applied under the seed: A and D, guards, fertilizer applied to sides and below seed level; B, fer- tilizer applied 1 inch under seed; C, fertilizer applied 2 inches under seed. EFFECT OF FERTILIZER PLACEMENT ON GERMINATION OF COTTONSEED In these studies tests were planted with the fertilizer placed under the seed at various depths or at different distances to the sides of the seed and one, two, and three inches below the seed level. Tests were planted with part of the fertilizer placed with the seed and the bal- ance at various locations in relation to the seed. Other tests were planted with the fertilizer applied at 250, 500, and 750 pounds per acre and placed at different points in relation to the seed. Fertilizer was placed under the seed in both nar- row and wide bands, one, two, and three inches under the seed. Figure 11. after planting Where fertilizer was applied Growth of cotton plants 22 days under seed: A, guard, fertilizer applied to sides and below seed level; B, fertilizer ap- plied 3 inches under seed; C, unfertilized check——soil disturbed 2 inches under seed. Effect of Placing the Fertilizer under the Seed It was observed in the clay soils that where the fertilizer was placed at a depth of one or two inches under the seed, the soil flowed back into the furrow and covered the fertilizer with sufficient soil to keep the seed pearing as affected by con- ,- 17 MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 63w MUUCS mwsuE N USN 3:05 WJM wufiww 63w QQUGS @935 N USN OUT’? mQQQGM wobuw 30w... I|\I\!\|\l\\'\| 3w 3 . 3w ww 3 2 S E ww 8 ww .. E 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .5323 333E329 3w ww . .. ww 2w aw ww 3 E 3w ww 2w .. 3w ww . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:....3w~w 235332285 ww 3 . Ew 3E 3 E S E .. E E 2w . ww 3w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3333 $3.5 @235 w ww 3w 33 3w 3 . E E S .._ ww E 3 . . 2w 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:........3www$3== .652 3333:» mlm; ~3=u@ ll \|I|Il\||Il||l1Il 1\.I\ ww Ew 3R ww 2 8 3 3E S R E Ew ww ww 3w w3 3w ow ww 33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z3332? 3852322 S ww ww 3w E E 8 2w ww 3w S E Ew ww ww w3 ww 2 ww N3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :33 $35. 333353. ww 3 ww 3w 2 3w ww E 3w 3w 3w E Ew E N3 3w 3 ww ow ww . . . . . . . . . . . ....3£.w$3==8%=ww ww 3w t. G 2 ww ww E 33 wH ww ow S ow 2 N3 E Z ow 3w .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......333ww%== =33 _ 33s 233:: E4 333m IIIIII llllllllllllllilllll _ ¢>< ww2 3w2 ww2 ww2 .333 ww2 3w2 ww2 ww2 .333 3w2 ww2 S2 .333 ww2 3w2 www: ~32 ummhgm E8360 fiwoTwwcmw 3:352 Emoflwwwcmw 2E Evcsq >20 xomE E5252 5w? mflonm? uGUEUUNTH hQNZCMOI-m |\||||I||I|l wwsoowmoumz cofimwm @3260 wEEwH swim || 30M b6 womb cm E MGUNGICHQQ wwwwzofioO Mo E00 Em Guam 035 A2253 95a n09 3325i Qcn n0 033a via HG 3.33am: n53 hasmiwnvm vuflnuv Gui»? Qoiowao-iv wififlvvm Hi6 Mflmwfi-SEHQM u-Qunflawwao a0 QM-wwiooao-m J3 0113i. 18 BULLETIN NO. a uniform depth of three inches, there was a tendency for large balls or 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION distance above the fertilizer. When a furrow was opened to a chunks of clay to be thrown out, sometimes leaving a hole or pocket in which the Figure 12. Difference in growth of unfertilized and fertilized cotton plants at Nacogdoches on June 23, 1932: A, unfertilized check Where soil was dis- turbed 2 inches under seed; B, fertilizer applied 1 inch under seed. the depressions and hindered the seed and seedlings. soil did not flow back into and fill up before the seed were deposited. This was especially noticeable with the 3.5-inch width shovel, both at Temple and Bryan. This condition evidently prevented the seed from being placed at uniform distances above the fertilizer and perhaps kept them from being covered to uniform depths. At College Station and Nacog- doches on the more sandy soils the fertilizer was placed at more uni- form depths under the seed. It was observed, however, that where the wide shovel was used, the dis- turbed soil sank down and left a depression after heavy rains. This, of course, caused water to stand in germination and emergence of some Percentage of Emergence?“ Where fertilizer was placed in a narrow band 1.75 inches wide and one, two, three-inch depth gave an av- and three inches under the seed, the erage emergence of 60 per cent, the highest for all loca- tions. The unfertilized check gave an average emergence of 63 per cent (Table 4). Fertilizer placed in bands 3.5 inches wide and one, two, and three inches under the seed gave general emergence averages of 53, 55, and 56 per cent, respectively, and the unfertilized check gave 54 per cent for all locations. The one-inch depth at Bryan and the two-inch depth at Temple gave slightly higher percentages than did the three-inch depth. The aver- age for the four locations, depth (Table 4). Figure 13. at Nacogdoches on applied 3 inches under seed; B, unfertilized check——soil disturbed 2 C, fertilizer applied 1.5 and 2 inches below seed level. Showing difference in growth of fertilized and unfertilized cotton plants July 24, 1935: A, fertilizer inches under seed; inches to one side however, was in favor of the three-inch *The percentage of emergence was obtained by dividing the number of seed planted into the total number of seedlings that emerged. MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 19 There were no significant differences in the percentages of emergence for the narrow and wide bands of fertilizer placed under the seed. Rate of‘ Emergence: A study of Table 5 shows that Where the ferti- lizer was placed in either narrow or wide bands and one inch under the seed, germination was delayed and seedlings did not emerge as rapidly as where the fertilizer was placed two and three inches deep (Figures 10 and 11). Figures 12 and 13 show the difference in growth of cotton plants on fertilized and unfertilized rows where the fertilizer was placed under the seed and the soil disturbed under the seed but no fertilizer applied. Figure 14. Showing difference in growth of young cotton seedlings 7 days after planting‘ Where the fertilizer was placed 1, 2, and 3 inches under the seed and on check where no fertilizer was applied: A, 1 inch under the seed; B, 2 inches under the seed; C, 3 inches under seed; D, unfertilized check Where the soil was disturbed 2 inches under the seed. 20 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 6000 0095 00:02 u 90w 0E3 00:02 m.m 90330 =¢w+ 600m 00mm: 0020.2 a 98 093 30x05 m 5H 00.53 mow» Hmw Iimcm omm cHm ....woH ouw wmw Ilmww mom uHw .. umH moo 1.1.3.2 wmm .. . . . . . . fim uwH omm . . . 8 oHw Hwm .. . . wow wwH cwm .. . . .. 2 mwm . . ..9mo00m . .. . No muH w omH .. . . . mH omm umu “mm woH wH m um .. .. 3E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 720.0% HBNHHHFUEHD mww . . .. .... wmm Hmm wmm .. .. . mun umw omw . . .. cow Z0 wmm .. . . . ZN cww . . . . . .32 cwm mmm Nun mcm . .. .. mmH mww cmm cHm coH ~Hm .. . o: oww 1.990000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . >0 ........cmH w HmH .. ...Hm HR mmu Iioou ooH mH .. wu u ......3.Hw .. .. . . . .000m00wc:m0n0nHm muw owm Hcm “Hm m: mmw 0:. . .. www mow omm .. . .coH mum 1.1.32 mum S» S... 3N .. . oHH cmw omm cHw Sm cum . AmH oHm 1.900003 . . . . . . Hm ........2. w uwH :2 33 cwu Zfwwu Hmm w .. .. w w 1.1.33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .000w.s90=m0%£~ Huw .....$.~ Em mHm LLmcH Hmm mcw ....~.mm 2w HHw . :38 mHo 1.1.32 mm ........om Hm 3R ....wm Sm Hwm :33 mom Hwm .. .....cNH Hwo 1.93003 . . . . . . . . . . . u m H omH w mcm mcm mo cHm m . u w 1233.5 .. . . »Hm0.nc0_m.0_.wwww@flmwfiwcm%c . . . m cwm mow omm 3 ocw 5. cwm Hcm HwH Hww S... Nww cHm omm oHw mcm Hmw mwH wmH. . . . . . .32 mom 2m ocm C. mwm mmm mHm 2:. mcH mmw S... mwm cow S» in wmu 3N wcH N2 . . .9503 . 2 8 cHu w oH mHH > mNH wH ccm 0R Ho oom in mu mm 3 w wH . . . . . .33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.20020 H00NSUH0WH~D wow wwm 2m wo www oww $0 cow 3N Hmw oHw mmw uww Hwm in How moH woH mwm . . . . . .32 woH mow o mo i... mmm omm mww cmH omm cwm mwm wmw mmu How wwm moH mwH oco . . .9803 wH ow w u oH muH cH “w mu 2» 8N mw mwm omm wH mu mH cH ~. . . . . . .35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . H0003 0095 30:05 m ocm cHw mwm we mom mom 0G wuw moH H>m Nuw wmw uww com mom in 08 mcu wom . . . . . .32 m: m8 3 3 mom Non wmm 2» mm mom cwm “Hm mmm mwm omm wcm HoH “NH mmo .. .9503 . wm 0 A c oHu 2 w wu 0H HZ 02 8 mHH umu HH oH wH H. m .. . 1.30m . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . .... H0003 0095 @265 w com HHm oHw 2 Nww mcw 80 Hmm HNH omm mwm mcm mwu wmw wmm 1w mmm mcu S... . . . . . .32 wm w m mo u mmu mum mwH Hm S» oHu 0S wHu “Hm omm 02 wHN ow mow . . .9803 w mH H H H ho H mH w Sm mcH m Am mmu w cH wH N c ... . . .350 . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . .0w%Qw.0m».~HHM%HHHH.HQRHHwQH=H0 . . . w N .0>< mmoH wmoH mmoH umoH .0>< mmoH wmoH mmoH umoH .0>< wmoH mmoH umoH .0>< mmoH wmimmoHTmoH m :00 E02 >983 0:852 E02 >953 2E H0392 >20 202a. couwsofl >20 2on0? mmfin 00050005 002x392 30930090002 uoHHmHw 03:00 0350B swim -9200 30h Ho 000m cm E 053080 mmEHH000w _ $.52- 0E3 Una“ 30am s“ HQ Ufifi-n Qnnfi #5 $00M 01MB howli- coin-mu ma?» #055909 QIN 5G iH one-w n09 mwiflofi nuw 50G»? ugmfiowweo we icHvu-iiaow 00$ Ho woofimn .n 0E5! MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 21 It was observed that in many cases the cottonseed sprouted and sent out a short root, which immediately came in contact with the band of fertilizer one inch under the seed, and apparently the salt solution in the fertilizer band was so concentrated that it checked the growth of the root and the emergence of the seedling (A. Figure 14). Where the fertilizer was placed at depths of two or three inches under the seed, a longer length of time was allowed zrrscr or PLACING rcnruuzza UNDER m: for the growth and development SEED of the root system, during which ~;,<>,Q§*T*’$}§=8$v “'"§:n"§‘a%'" "as 500400300 ZOOIOO O 004D 530 period the concentration of the | t |mm,..e..nme.;,we§| I soluble salts was probably reduced somewhat by diffusion and move- ment with the soil moisture, and the plant seemed to have a great- er resistance to the shock of the fertilizer salts and emerged some- what quicker than where the fer- tilizer was placed one inch under the seed (B and C, Figure 14). a menus unoca seen _ um-u-rnuzsn cnscn Q Observations show that where the r0 t f th Figure 15. Averages for the four 0 S O e cotton plant entered locations show that where fertilizer was the band 0f fertilizer tWO and placed in narrow bands t‘, (21, atnhd 3 inchfirs - under the seed, the 3-inc ep gave t e three inches under the seed, the highest number of plants ttltctd the thine}, t‘ f [h ' ' _ depth gave the highest yie . Fer i izer 1p O e root was Often mmred applied in wide bands 1, 2, and s inches _Where the root penetrated and under the seed showed there was a Passed through the hand of fer- falliagnltis itiiiiifi L’; ti? dfitt Stfifififiei? - - - tion was increased. The yield however tlhzer’ It appeared smaller and was in direct reverse order.’ The un-’ slightly discolored at; the band of fertilized checks in each case gave . . . . slightly larger number of plants but a fertlllzer» I11 9143311111118 the Toot lo_wer yield than when fertilizer was ap- system of mature plants on the P1165- placements under the seed it was found that many of the plants did not have long tap roots. This may have been due to injury to the roots at the point where they came in contact with the band of fertilizer when placed directly under the seed. Total Emergence: The data in Tables 5 and 6 show that as the depth of the fertilizer was increased, the total average number of seedlings emerg- ing increased. The differences, however, were not as pronounced for the placements in wide bands under the seed as for the narrow bands (Figure 15). Fertilizer placed in a band 1.75 inches wide and one, two, and three inches under the seed gave an average of 366, 372, and 416 seedlings, respectively, for a four-year period at all locations. An average of 435 seedlings was obtained on the unfertilized check. A band of fertilizer 3.5 inches Wide placed one, two, and three inches deep under the seed during a period of two years gave an average of 388, 392, and 394 seedlings, respectively. The unfertilized check gave 398 seedlings. A comparison of these results may be seen graphically in Figure 15. ' If the results obtained for the narrow band in 1932 and 1933 only are compared with the results for the wide band for the same two years, 22 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION the same general differences exist in the average number of seedlings as are shown for the four-year period for the narrow band. For these years the narrow band gave averages of 318, 324, and 361 seedlings for the one-, two-, and three-inch depths, respectively. The unfertilized check gave an average of 392 seedlings. Effect of Soil Type: The data in Table 4 indicate generally that as the depth the fertilizer was placed below the seed increased, the number of seed germinating and seedlings emerging increased for both the narrow and wide bands. These results, however, fluctuated for the different soil types and climatic conditions that prevailed each year. The unfertilized checks gave more seedlings than any of the fertilizer placements under the seed, indicating that the fertilizer so placed caused early injurious effects even though removed three inches from the seed. The percentages of cottonseed germinating and seedlings emerging are the best indications as to the efiect of the soil, because a different number of seed were planted each year at each location. From Table 4 it is seen that the Yahola clay soil of the Brazos River bottom gave a compar- atively low percentage of emergence. This, however, may have been largely due to the heavy crust that formed over the seed each year. The highest average for emergence was secured for the placements under the seed at Temple on the Houston black clay. There were few differences for the sandy Lufkin and Norfolk soils at College Station and Nacogdoches for narrow bands. Where a wide band of fertilizer was applied under the seed, a higher percentage of emergence was secured on the Norfolk than on the Lufkin soil. Effect of Placing the Fertilizer to the Sides of the Seed Tests were conducted at Bryan, Temple, College Station, and Nacog- doches to determine the effect of placing fertilizer at different depths to the sides and below the seed level. These comprised two tests with the fertilizer placed 1.5 and 3.5 inches to one side and two inches below the seed level. Bands of fertilizer were placed 1.5, 2.5 and 3.5 inches to each side and at depths of one, two, and three inches below the seed level. Unfertilized checks were planted with the soil undisturbed for distances of 2.5 and 3.5 inches to each side (Tables 7, 8, and 9). A graphic com- parison ‘of the number of plants secured for the various placements to the side of the seed is shown in Figure 16. Percentage of Emergence: When the fertilizer furrow opening disks were set to place the fertilizer 1.5 inches to each side of the seed, it was observed that the band of soil between the furrows was slightly disturbed and loosened, especially at the deeper tests, and sufiiciently to prevent the seed from being deposited on a firm compact soil. Where the disks were set for placing the fertilizer 2.5 and 3.5 inches either to one side or to each side of the row, the band of soil between the furrows was wide enough that it was not loosened in opening the furrows for the fertilizer (Figure 17). MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 23 Table 6. Summary of average germination of cottonseed when 4-12-4 fer- tilizer was applied under the seed at the rate of 500 pounds per acre in narrow and wide bands _ Average number of seedlings emerging in 50 ft. of row Fertilizer Placement C ollege N acog- Germination Bryan Temple Station doches General counts average Yahola Houston Lufkin fine Norfolk clay ‘ black clay sandy loam sandy loam Band 1.75 inches wide first . . . . . . . . 8 10S 97 4 54 1 inch under seed . . . . . . second. . . . . 123 219 2S3 58 163 last . . . . . . . . 358 342 403 360 366 2 inches under seed. . . . . first . . . . . . . . 11 128 79 4 56 second. . . . . 289 320 292 172 268 last . . . . . . . . 368 422 392 306 372 3 inches under seed. . . . . first . . . . . . . . 14 207 125 18 91 second. . . . . 291 340 353 194 294 last . . . . . . . . 374 419 446 424 416 Unfertilized check? . . . . first . . . . . . . . 28 278 113 73 123 second. . . . . 318 422 335 26S 335 last . . . . . . . . 419 497 437 386 435 Band 3.5 inches wide 1 inch under seed . . . . . . first . . . . . . . . 3 203 156 2 91 second. . . . . 381 341 278 5S 264 last . . . . . . . . 411 405 313 421 388 2 inches under seed. . . . . first . . . . . . . . 4 280 142 37 116 second. . . . . 326 386 286 322 330 _ last . . . . . . . . 356 470 317 425 392 3 inches under seed... . . first . . . . . . . . 13 233 151 67 116 second. . . . . 312 350 305 280 312 last . . . . . . . . 334 459 338 443 394 Unfertilized checkT .. . . first . . . . . . . . 18 252 136 62 117 second. . . . . 380 341 256 238 304 last . . . . . . . . 412 438 310 431 398 *Soil stirred 1.75 inches wide, 2 inches under seed. TSoil stirred 3.5 inches wide, 2 inches under seed. There was no difference in the percentage of emergence where the fertilizer was placed 1.5 and 3.5 inches to one side and two inches below the seed level. The results in Table 7 show that where the fertilizer was placed in bands 1.5 inches to each side at all locations except Temple, the place- ment two inches below the seed level gave the highest average percentage of emergence. The general averages for the placements one, two, and three inches below the seed level were 60, 66, and 60 per cent, respec- tively (Table 7). Where the fertilizer was placed in bands 2.5 inches to each side and one, two, and three inches below the seed level, the two-inch placement gave the highest average percentage of germination at all locations except Bryan, where the one-inch depth was highest (Table 7). The general averages for the placements one, two, and three inches below the seed level were 83, 85, and 76 per cent, respectively. The check where the soil was undisturbed for 2.5 inches to the sides gave a general average of 81 per cent emergence. . 24 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION .00>00 000w 000 30000 m0 .00>00 000w 0000 30000 000000 u 000 0000 u 000 000w 00000 o0 000000 000w 00000 00 000000 d 000 000w .0000: 0000000000: 000m0 00w 000w QQUGS. 0000000000: ZOwi “m ww . ww 0m mm . . 3 0“ o“ “w 8 wm wm “w ... . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . 0.000000 000000000003 “m um . wm 0w “m . ww o“ w“ 0w o“ N0» 0v 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .00>00 000w 30000 000000 w w. x. R... 0.». m. a. s 0.0.. 8... W 0a 2w S: 0w E Wm 0.0.. fl. fi w“ ....0.0HuHH“000000000000000000000000 m 2 om 00 3 w 0“ ““ ww 8 0. mm 00.2 0000000 00 300:0 ma. 00.50% 0w 0000 000 05 .0“ ““ 000 00 00 wm ww “u . . . . .............0000000 0000000000000 o“ 3 ww 0000 . 0“ 0.0 “m 00 N0 3 m0 0 . .. ........00>00000m 30000 0000000., mw 000 000 ~00 . .00“ 0“ 0“ .... 000 000 . . wm ww wm . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .00>00 000w 30000 0000000 u ww 000 3 “00 . 0“ w“ m0 . . . . . 000 000 . we 000 ow .. . . .. . . . . . .00>00 000w 3000.0 0000000 0 00.8 0.00005 00 3.00:0 Ww 0000M 00 06 11.1.00 00 wm ... I13 m“ w“ 110w w“ N0 1:? 60 ........00>00000w30000w000000w 8 we 0“ ““ 0m 0m 00 0w 06 “w w“ ow 000 ww 0w 3 ww 0N .00 “w .. . . . .. .... . .00>00 000w 30000 0000000 0 0o 00m ........wm om um Iiilow o0 ww Zimw 00 00 ........0m 00» .. . .......00>00000w3000n000000 00.2 0000000 00 3003.0 W0 035m 0“ w“ “w “a 0m . . .. 0m _w“ 8 mw .... ow 000 0“ .... mm 0w .8 0m .... ...00>00 000m 30000 0.0001000 @700 00 =00 000m 0“ o“ 0“ w0 0m I100 T0 N0 “w .... 00 000 Nw .... 0m mw 0m “0 .... .. .00>00 000m 30000 :m 000m @700 00 =3 000m _ _ .0>< mmqiiwimmmi~mq0 .0>< mm@0_)0.8%8%80 .0><»...0@0_23T€0 .v><_tmm.\i0afi_mmi~mo0 _ 0w000>0 0000000 E000 >000w 000000070 E000 >000w 000 0000000 >000 0000000 000000010 >000 00000> 0000000000 00000000000 m0000o0w00070 000000m 0000000 00050.0 0000000 30.0 00 0000 0m 00 M000000E00w 00300300 00 0000 00m I 000m v.00 v0 m000m 000v OH 0.003 n00 000-50000 00m m0 0Z3 000w w: 00010.0: m 0.5 avfiiwnou vuflnnv 0-0-03 w:$0:0:r$w 0 00500300 0Q 0050:3030 s 008d? MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 25 Fertilizer placed in bands 3.5 inches to each side and one, two, and three inches below the seed level gave the highest percentage of emer- gence for the two-inch depth at all locations (Table 7). The general averages for the one-, two-, and three-inch depths were 53, 66, and 57 per cent, respectively (Table 7). The check where the soil was undisturbed for 3.5 inches to the sides and to EFFECT 0F PLACINTGHZEEEQISIZER T0 $|DES QF a of two inches below the NOOFPLANTSIN LINT YIELDIN LBS. seed level showed a, general aver- so ran or ROW PER ACRE 30° Z00 I00 O O IOO Z00 300 44 5 | | | | | age 0f 57 per cent emergence- “""°‘SEI‘3J'ZE>"SECEE _ _ aslnrégvlrcascsiégzLizilrgcl-nzs Rate Enlergenee: ‘FGTtIIIZQT l l I I I placed either 0n one side or on RT TO C each side of the seed did not de- lay germination as much as Where the fertilizer was placed under the seed. Tables 8 and 9 show, however, that fertilizer placed only one inch below the seed level retarded germination more than where the fertilizer was placed two and three inches below the seed level. Where heavy rains oc- curred soon after planting, the effect of the fertilizer on the ger- l mination of cottonseed was not so J INCHES BELOW SEED LEVEL UNFERTILIZED CHECK INCHES BELOW SEED LIVE UN FCRTILIZED CHECK SGVGTG. Figigrg tléithGréetpthlshowgng c€m%)arti- Total Emergence: The data in sono o eoa numero pans .. and the yields obtained at the four loca- Table 8 do not Show any Slgmfi‘ tions where fertilizer was applied to one e n1; d'ff ' _ side and to both sides of the seed. The a 1 erences In iihe final Hum highest number of plants was obtained be!‘ 0f P1311153 Bmerglllg Where the Zihifieetikehfiié?Zfidwzaififhpééeteigviniffié fertilizer Was Placed in bands 1-5 seed level. The highest general average and 3_5 inches to one side and yield was secured where the fertilizer _ was placed 3.5 inches to one side and tWQ Inches be10W the seed level 2 inches below the seed level. (Figure 18) Where the fertilizer was placed in bands 1.5 inches to each side and one, two, and three inches below the seed level, the two-inch depth gave the highest general average number of seedlings emerging. The general averages for the three depths were 430, 446, and 437, respectively (Table 9). Table 8 shows, however, that at both Bryan and Temple the one-inch depth gave the highest average number of seedlings emerging, While at College Station and Nacogdoches the two-inch depth gave the highest number of seedlings emerging. Where the fertilizer was placed in bands 2.5 inches to each side and one, two, and three inches below the seed level, the two-inch depth gave the highest general average number of plants emerging——536, 545, and 488, respectively (Table 9). As in the case of the placement 1.5 inches to each side, the placement 2.5 inches to each side and one inch below the seed level at Bryan and Temple gave the highest average number of plants, but at College Station and Nacogdoches the two-inch depth gave 26 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION AU>0~ H53 On: 32oz mUJUGM N U56 22w SO60 O...» woman: W.|N hOw Hvuvw MOUGS wonbflwmwcd COMO 0% n2. wwo . Iiiwwm moo www Iiiiwww mww . Iiiwww owwowN . .........Jwm_ www oNo aow ........Hww cww How www www ........woN Hww mHN ...........wfi.8m NHw wow oHw ....NwH No HNH ...._....~.wH NwH ....wNH NNH w» . . . . 33E . . . . . . . . . . . . . ihfiuwnubuumzohuocD owo wwm mo“ www moo Hww wmw www .. maN awn ww .. . . . . . . 132 oww woo 2w Nww 2w oow 8w 8w mHN ooN ww . . .. 1.2603 ooN wwN ooN .. . . .. NmH 8H ooN . . .. .... Q2 owH . . . .. ww NoH o .. .. ... . . JWE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I152 8% 320m @622: w w! ooo a: . . . .. m5 HNo wNm wow mow . . . www wNw NwN .. . ., .. .. . . . . I32 2m wwm NNm .. . . .. How Hww How . . oow cow . . wNw HNw wNN ... . .... 1.250% woN NNN cow . . . . . . .. wwH Hw wwH .. .. wwH wwH . .. 5H oNN wo .... .... . . . . 25E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I$>2 8% 32E 320E N 2o NNo m2 ... . oww www oww .... ... Kw Hhw . . . www ooo 8m . . . . . .32 oww wHm amw HHw woN wmw . . wNw wNw . www 5m wow 16:00am . . . . . . . . . .. HwN o: NwN . .. .. w» No mw . .. .... NoH NoH ... owH t; NHH . . . . 23E . Hw>2 H52. 32.3 .35 H fir; muwm 2 usix.“ 2 @225 cNw . . ... oow 2w How .... .. .. woN wHm wow 2w mmw Hhw .... RN moo . . . . 2on2 aww ... . .. wow www Nww .... .... wHN oww wow www oNw oww . . .... wwN wNo .2383 HNH . .. wHN wN wHN .... .... Hw www oww oHw oww ww . .... wo H . . . . . JwE . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z2932 8% aoso 320E w aww own wNm oww How oww wwo Nww mwN oNw 5w 2w www wow wow oww EH oow i... . . . . . .32 wow oww ow S» www oow Hmw 5w ooH 5m oNw Hww omw www Hww How ooH omN oHo . . .2503 om m2 Nw HHH ww wwH Ho owH ww moN wwN wo oww wow mm NNH ww hw w ..... aE ...... . . . . . . ... 2232 8% 32am 8%.: N wmw ........NNw www www ........wwN 2w oww . ........www Nwo 1.1.52 S» .. mww wNw wHw wwH oww www www Hmo .4508. . wo .......ow ww owH ........wo wow How ww w .....;.m.Hw . . . . . .2w>v:v$m32on2uEH 3E. mowm 2 932$ WN 2.5m “Hm Hww _coo HHw .. mww mHo 2w NwN ... wow _oow ... www owN Hww .... . . . . Z32 wow wow NwN oww . . . oww oHw www wwH . . . . oHw HNw . Em Now cow . . . . . .2303 woH wNN woH ooH . .. wN 8 oNH mw . . . . HHN E. . . HwH wNH wm . . . 11.5.5 2232 H63 32.3 :N 62w MZO o“ :o.w vnmm wow wNw woo wHw .. Hww owo wow omN . . . oww wow oww .. mmw oom owN mHw .... .....Jw2 wow wow NoN How . . . . omw HNw mww o2 . “Nw oow www . wNN Nww NwN owN . . . . .2303 omH ZN m: w“ . . . 8 om HwH Nw . HwH mo 2N .. . Q. ww No Hw .... 1.1.33 W52 Hvwvw 32oz :N dEm MZO 0H :m.H wcmm i j ~33. 22 .8 “v.3. 28 :0 3w. .o>< mRHTMQH wwoH NwmH d>< mwoH wwoH @8422 .w>< wmlfii S2 .934 £2 wmimmlfifi EGO 3 saw o o > u a s > u n > u mucsou 2 w V: .3 Z 5x2 98m é Vi A 2o 2 2n 328E 2 2052» moths fiHuEou2m Hwfimfivh wunuowmouwz dofiwow @260 2QEPH. H835 AEBO Qfiflfl Gama. u.“ U901 Gama. u: Q 30H o0 32 om E mHbwuwE w mwczwwwm onus .8: mHZi-Ew gm m0 Hvml 9am“? QB. wool-fun W55? HQNMHmW-MO“ WI Nnuw £083 m-QGMGQWHOQ uo icHw-wfiH-Hnuow 02w i: vooflnfi w ~55. 27 4w>2 wwow N5 B23 Nwsufi u wnm NEN sumw 3 3:05 m.» Now wwvw .535 uonbzmmwa: mow+ MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON EN ........NNN NNN NNN .. .....NNN 2N NNN ....NNN 2N NNN .. ....NNN H.....NNN_ EN ....:..NNN NNN NNN ....N2 NNN NNN ...NNN NNN NNN ....NNN INNSNN .-.--.W@,w . ¢..-.$@ .-..Q@@ .-- -. .-.@ ......Hwh@ . .- -..---..-. #MQUUQU@UNZ@MMU%~HD NNN ..:NNN 2N NNN ... rNNN NS NNN :NNN NNN NNN . NNN 2N ......NNN_ NNN ....:..NNN m3. NNN 1N2 NNN NNN ...NNN NNN 2N ...NNN NNN Idaouww NNN ........NNH NN 8N .. .. ..NN NNN NNN zNNN NNN NN ....NN N ......NEN . . . . ...........NQNNNNNNNNKNNNNNNNEN NNN NNN 2N NNN NNN NNN NNN NNN NNN NNN NNN NNN NNN NNN NNN NNN RN NNN NNN ......NNN_ NNN NNN NNN NNN NNN 8N NNN NNN 5N NNN NNN 8N NNN SN 8N NNN SN QNN NNN ENNNNNN 3N N3 NNN N3 NN m3 NN NNN 5N NNN 2N NN NNN RN NN EN N: NN N ..::§N . .. .........._N>u:NuNNBo_~n NNNNNNN 2N IIwNN 3N NNN ......omN NNN NNN ENS 2N NS .. .NNN NNN JZZNNN" NNN ....NNN NNN NNN ...Nt o3» NNN ....SN NNN NNN .. NNN NNN . 6:83 NN ........_N NN NS .. ....NN NNN NNN ....NNN NNN 2 .:NN N ....:§N .................._N>N_NNNN>>NNNNNNEN Nut. 3 wuiusfie Nwxum A-on-Niwflanvllvaofi nvi mBNi-Qfluéém m9 vwfih 0G9 #6 800m Q-mw v6 33m 05w 6w $0599.» ma? aosmflwawu fiuflnuv floN-Pv m-QQM-hQfiHQO a0 Gonna-limb“ 0N3 i6 wovmumm .w 01E»? 28 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION the highest average number of seedlings emerging. The check where the soil was undisturbed for 2.5 inches to each side gave a general average of 520 seedlings (Table 9). Where fertilizer was placed 3.5 inches to each side and one, two, and three inches below the seed level, the two-inch depth gave a higher general average (447 seedlings) than the one- and three-inch depths (390 and 380 seedlings, respectively), as shown in Table 9. At Bryan the one-inch depth gave a higher aver- age number of seedlings, and at Temple the three-inch depth gave the highest average number of seedlings. At College Station and Nacogdoches the two-inch depth gave the highest average number of emerged seedlings (Table 8). For the check where the soil was undisturbed for 3.5 inches to each side the general average number of seedlings emerging was 430 (Ta- ble 9). Considering all the side place- ments and the various depths of fertilizer application, it may be seen from Tables 7, 8, and 9 that the highest percentage of emer- gence and the largest total number Figure 17. Showing growth of young _ cotton seedlings 7 days after p1ant- of plants were obtained where the ing where fertilizer was applied in bands 3.5 inches to each side and 2 fertilizer was applied in bands 2-5 inehee below the Seed level- inches to each side of the seed and two inches below the seed level. The tests for the placements 2.5 inches to each side were conducted for the two years 1934 and 1935, and the tests 1.5 and 3.5 inches to each side were conducted in 1932 and 1933. An analysis of the data in Table 8, which gives two placements run consecutively for the four years, shows that a higher average number of plants was obtained in 1934 and 1935 than in 1932 and 1933. It cannot be safely said, therefore, that the placement 2.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level would have averaged higher for a four-year period. The data, however, collected in 1934 and 1935 at Bryan, College Station, and Nacogdoches for the 1.5-, 2.5-, and 3.5-inch placements show that the average number of plants was 481, 558, and 505, respectively. Eifect of Soil Type: From Table 7 it is seen that a lower average per- centage of emergence was obtained on the Yahola clay than on the Houston black clay. Better germination was obtained on the sandy Norfolk soil at Nacogdoches than on the Lufkin fine sandy loam at College Station. The poor drainage, slow warming, and plastic qualities of the Lufkin soils appeared to reduce the percentage of germination of cottonseed. The Yahola clay with its heavy soil crust appeared to have MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZLR FOR COTTON 29 a greater retarding effect on the emergence of cotton seedlings than the Houston clay and the sandy Lufkin and Norfolk soils. Effect of Placing Part of Fertilizer in Furrow with Seed Tests were conducted at all locations to determine the effect of germi- nation when part of the fertilizer was placed in the furrow with the cottonseed. Tests were also conducted with the fertilizer placed either in the soil above the seed or mixed in the soil under the seed. The two Table 9. Summary of average germination of cottonseed when 4-12-4 fer- tilizer was applied to one and to both sides of the seed at the rate of 500 pounds ner acre l Seedlings emerging in 50 ft. of row Germi- College Nacog- Fertilizer Placement nation - Bryan Temple Station doches COumS General Houston Lufkin Norfolk average Ylahola black fine sandy sandy clay clay ' loam loam All fertilizer on one side of seed 1.5” to one side, 2" below seed level. . first . . . . . . 79 181 93 157 128 second. . . 275 427 359 364 3S6 last . . . . . . 355 489 451 503 450 3.5" to one side. 2" below seed level. . first . . . . . . 112 211 74 194 148 second. . . 326 41.9 336 363 361 last . . . . . . 372 464 439 517 448 Fertilizer applied to each side of seed 1.5” to each side, 1" below seed level. first . . . . . . 18 401 186 64 167 second. . . 482 438 315 337 393 last . . . . . . 483 530 355 353 430 1.5" to each side, 2" below seed level. first . . . . . . 55 255 148 96 138 second. . . 351 429 366 305 363 last . . . . . . 398 487 450 449 446 1.5” to each side, 3" below seed level. first . . . . . . 35 330 218 121 176 second. . . 440 394 332 349 379 last . . . . . . 471 465 391 420 437 2.5” to each side, 1" below seed level. first - - - - - - 130 162 74 231 149 SCCOIId. . . 348 423 411 486 417 last . . . . . . 458 471 539 678 536 2.5” to each side, 2" below seed level. firSf ~ - - - - - 157 154 1,33 294 1'84 second. . . 325 400 46:1 579 441 last . . . . . . 385 505 575 7.14 545 2.5" to each side. 3" below seed level. first. . . ._ . . 84 159 152 290 171 Second. . . 215 407 442 489 388 last . . . . . . Z99 458 548 649 488 Unfertilized check‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . first . . . . . . H23 137 132 312 176 second. . . 298 353 451 548 412 last . . . . . . 383 455 544 699 520 3.5" to each side, 1" below seed level. first . . . . . . 1 7 394 176 74 165 second. . . 489 425 296 238 362 last . . . . . . 512 463 367 217 390 3.5" to each side. 2" below seed level. first. . . . 85 279 138 167 167 second. . . 397 420 361 349 382 last . . . . . . 444 473 448 423 447 3.5" to each side, 3" below seed level. first . . . . . . 37 3.55 207 138 184 second. . . 410 390 327 335_ 366 labt . . . . . . 423 474 387 236 380 Unfertilized checkf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . first . . . . . . 42 347 193 108 17_~2 second. . . 584 381 321 271 453 last . . . . . . 635 459 373 251 430 ‘Soil undisturbed under seed for 2.5 inlbhes to each side and 2 inches below the seed level. TSoil ulndisturbed under seed for 3.5 inches to each side and 2 inches below the seed level. 30 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION latter tests were conducted for a period of four years. The other tests were carried on for a period of two years, some during the years 1932 and 1933 and others during 1934 and 1935. The tests conducted during each of these years are shown in Tables 10 and 11. The effect of these I placements are shown graphically in Figure 19. Percentage of Emergence: Two tests were conducted where one-six- teenth and one-fourth of the fertilizer were placed in the surface soil over the seed and the balance 2.5 inches to each side and two inches Figure 18. Showing difference in emergence of cotton seedlings: A, fer- tilizer applied 3.5 inches to one side and 2 "inches below seed level. Note large number of seedlings; B, fertilizer applied 1.5 inches to one side and 2 inches below seed level. Only a few seedlings had emerged. below the seed level. These tests were conducted during the years 1934 and 1935. Table 1O shows that there were no significant differences in the percentages of seedlings emerging. Two tests were conducted in 1932 and 1933 where one-sixteenth and one-eighth of the fertilizer was applied with the seed and the balance 3.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level. There were no significant differences in the percentages of germination (Table 10). The general average percentages of emergence for these placements were somewhat lower than where the fertilizer was placed in partial contact with the seed and 2.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level. This may be attributed to the climatic differences during the years 1932 and 1933 as compared with the years 1934 and 1935. It appears that a better germination of seed was secured during the latter two years. Fertilizer placed one-sixteenth with the seed and the balance in bands 1.7 5 inches wide and three inches under the seed gave a slightly lower 31 MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON éiin‘! ||“\|‘|||||‘||||||| Ho E 2w mm u“ i. 8 um +0 g N5 u“ ow z “m Q mm m: Nu Q. . . . . 8% .695 zm 3 :33. m o“ =8 =3» @835 =< mm mm Q ow 2 S“ om 5 wo 8 S. 2. 8 S. S 3 8 on m: S“ .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63m 03% =3 E =< um S . . . . . .. 3 mm 2 . . .. .. .8 8 i. .... 2 o“ w» . . .. . . . . mm i. Ea s25 QEB :24 v53 5 .15 63w 5? w» W52 wwww 3015 3:2: w mwnmm om i. ... . ... o» I. Nm . . .. . 3 N“ x“ .. I i” mm 3 . .. .. 3 iv . . . . . . . mwEm :23 o“ =2 @822 “Ba n33 WA mm Nm 3 >0. 2 . S. i 3w $ 8 2. wv w», uEw mom». oiwm fifimfia wwww nasal» 2w i: 8 #3 .. . S 3 Hm 8 g mm ow 8 mfiwgowmormfiwwn wwow$>o =3 885w 5w» ow i: 8 o: .... .... K “w mm . . . . “w 3 . . . .. .3 2 3 .. . .. 163w =28 8 =3 85:2 63m at? K 3 w. ER; wwvm 820m mwsucm u 238m E3. firs. 33:3 333a :~ d>< 32 $3 Q2 N8“ d>< £2 3,3 32 $2 .o>< 3.3 ~63 S2 d>< £2 $3 R3 S2 d>< F82 335mm 50102 ENO~ 35mm ocu Evisq ha? x222 nfimsom ~83 Sonfiw 4B0 uflv-CUONTM uvnmzfiob mwsuowmoumZ cofifiw omuzoU oHQEuH QQCM 30H we 33 om E wcfimctbhow vwumnofiou Mo “coo 3m anon n09 MEG-ch gm ac Qwfln 0.5 a6 Uvvu 0-: :33 bPQHHn-H 0-: i“ 6059:» m6? Avuflnuvv nvnfimwaew 0-: HQ waflfi iflih? Mplwfiimflnuvw flovmflawwQv m0 Qwwwiouuvnm 5H mléflh. 32 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 2w 3m w...» mww wNw www S6 www Q2 www 8w wNw mmw m3 w...» NNm 8N wwN one . . . . . JwmN . mNN 5w ow Now wfi Q3 2% www 8N wmw mwm mm». oww wmN wNN owN owN 8 8m . . Néooww . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63m $95 8 $ NN Q2 N 2 w w“ a 2N wt mm 8N NoN NN NN oN N. NN . . 135E @265 w No 59% m 0N sow S? N655 NN< NoN woo QNo wNN NNw omw mwo oNm wmN mmw 8w 8w Nam wNw 2w wmm NNm NNN 92 . . . . . awa- oNN wwm Nw NoN wwN 5w oow Now w». omw 3m wow Now Nmn 3» mwN 8» No 2w . . NEouww 3 8N om N wN mNN mm NNN w oNm NwN wwN own wwm Nw ow 3 2 o . . . . . .55 . . . . . . . . . . . . 63w 025m mow E :4. wwm . ZwNN Em woN ........£N mmw N8 wNw 2w wmw .. ZIMNN 96 IIZNQWN wmN ...wwN moN wwN w» wNw wwm won Now Nmw ....wmN mo» 1.9808,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zvwwm .695 0E3 mN oN w NNN m wwN 3N .. won mwN w .. 3 N 1.2.6.2» =24 2&2 E uucwfin dwww 5N3 p» N32 wovm 32mm 3:2: m wwcmm Nmn Hm oNN mww on». 8N wow NNm www mmm wow .. . .. 2m 3b ......NwwN w? . . . . owN s: oNm . . NwN 3w wow . . . wwm wNw New . . . . owN wwo . .9803 wN .. . Nw N wNN . . . . . . . 2 Nmm mNN .. .. NcN 3m wN .. .... NN o . 11.3.6 103m 5% oN =3, ossan.w.aw n33 WA own mNN 5w a.» owN 5w Now 2w Sm omw . .. NNm wwm 1.1.33 N3 .. NwN 3N NNn . . . .. 5N wow GNw . . wNw NNw 3w .. wwN 3m . Nvnouww ww . .. NN. mN NmN .. .. . . .. mN N8 wNw . omN Non NN . ... NN o . . 115E 223w nuaw oNzflm vucfimnfiwuwwnt? BAN NoN. one m2 . w? wwm . . 8w 8w S» 3m oNN . .. 1.1.32 mNm mom mNm .. . oow mwm IoNw wNw IIZZEN Nwm oNN .. 2.950% ....................IdNvNmnowwoN 8N wwN N3 ... . . NNN 8N NNN . . . . .. woN woN .. . . .... oNN NwN m: . . . . . .. . . . JPE =2 Qésdn 63w N25 m8 @0225 5 x 0% woo wQ. . .. .. Nmm m8 8w . ... omw omw .. .. .... New Sm 8N . . . ..... NW2 NNN... 2.». NoN . awn NNw own ........E.m S» ........wwN own NmN ...N.nouww 8 8 8 .. . NN N ww Iiiiwo mu 111:2 Nw om .338 Qwafidwofmw4§_.N.@»Z=>>Xoiw Nv>2 wuow 303a. @235 N munmm “$33 33.25 §~ d>< £2 wRNTAQ S2 .214 32 $2 QSTQ; d>< .32 .83 $3 d>< £2 wQNflMmQTSN it!‘ EmoN 3E3 vNNoNNoZ EwoN 3.5% 2E NNUN s 3 u um o 5w u o 355v . N A N u E a ism N 3 aw? cofima NavEvumNm Nwazmfioh musuouwoumZ nofifiw uwvNNoO vNQEoF swim ..NE.NQU 30H No NvuN on E wEwNuEw mmnzwwow QHQB fir; 395-5 B; E NENNEN: B?» Nwéfiwv uosNNNwuou v5 nah mwiflon can u: ovum 0-5 w: doom 0-5 u: wax-N H053 dvwmiowwao a9 ioNwuflN-fluow 0-3 :0 wvofinfl .Hn 077w? MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 33 general average percentage of emergence than the placements discussed above (Table 1 0). Placing all of the fertilizer in the soil above the seed did not give quite as high a general average percentage of emergence as did the place- ment Where all of the fertilizer was mixed with the soil three inches under the seed (Table 10). Tests conducted in 1931 and 1932 but not reported showed that placing the fertilizer in di- rect contact with the seed consid- erably reduced the percentage of germination and emergence, and the results obtained indicated that this placement was very in- jurious to the germination of cot- tonseed. It appears that a small amount of fertilizer can be placed in direct contact with the seed without materially affecting ger- mination, but a large quantity will seriously injure the germina- EFFECT OF PLACING FERTILIZER IN PARTIAL CONTACT WITH THE SEED LINT YIELD IN LBS. PER ACRE I 0O 3 >0 NO. OF PLANT IN 5O FEET OF ROW ZOO I00 .'{."@‘X'*"F1=“F~"‘% Wm‘ a méfis uu 52:3: ALL m sumac: son. Aaov: sun uinxzo wrm son. unoza seen I Figure 19. Comparison of total emer- gence and yields at the four locations Where fertilizer was placed part with the seed and the balance at different places in relation to the seed. tion of cottonseed and result in poor stands. Rate of Emergence: From Table 11 it appears that placing one-fourth of the fertilizer in the surface soil over the seed gave a more rapid emergence than placing one-sixteenth to one-eighth of the fertilizer with Effect seed on growth of cotton plants: Figure 20. 1.5 inches to each side and 2 "inches below seed level; surface soil, balance 2.5 inches to each side and 2 inches of placing part of‘ the fertilizer in the soil with the A, 1/8 to 1/16 fertilizer with seed, balance B, 1/4 of fertilizer in below seed level. 34 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION the seed and the balance to the sides and below the level of the seed (Figure 20). Mixing the fertilizer under the seed to a depth of three inches delayed germination and emergence more than applying it in the surface soil above the seed. Total Germination: The data shown in Table 11 indicate that placing one-fourth of the fertilizer in the surface soil over the seed and the balance 2.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level did not retard germination as much as placing one-sixteenth to one-eighth of the fertilizer with the seed and the balance 2.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level, The differences in final stand obtained were not significant. A comparison of the results obtained where one-sixteenth of the ferti- lizer was applied with the seed and the balance 3.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level, with the placement where one-eighth Table 12. Summary of average germination of cottonseed when part of the fertilizer (4-12-4) was applied in the furrow with the seed at the rate of 500 pounds per acre Seedlings emerging in 50 ft. of row Germi- Fertilizer Placement nation College Nacog- General counts Bryan Temple Station doches average f; to 9i with seed, balance in bands first . . . . . . 70 68 22 63 56 2.5" to each side and 2" below seed second. . . 248 370 349 317 321 level. last . . . . . . 362 4S6 552 699 517 $4 in surface soil over seed. balance in first . . . . . . 110 164 112 290 169 bands 2.5" to each side and 2" below second. . . 276 426 422 515 410 seed level. last . . . . . . 357 493 521 702 518 f; with seed, balance in bands 3.5" to first . . . . . . 11 325 131 44 128 each side and 2" below seed level. second. . . 435 422 312 269 360 last . . . . . . 456 502 367 340 416 ‘/§ with seed, balance in banlds 3.5” to first . . . . . . 14 275 174 24 122 each side and 2" below seed level. second. . . 462 404 310 238 354 last . . . . . . 498 521 350 352 430 11; with seed, balance in bands 1.75" first. . . . . 8 276 127 13 106 wide and 3" under the seed. second. . . 431 348 244 254 319 last . . . . . . 454 301 294 348 349 All in surface soil above seed. first . . . . . . 41 282 12S 67 129 second. . . 326 386 447 220 345 last . . . . . . 427 423 436 262 387 Mixed with soil to a depth of 3" below first . . . . . . 12 178 93 60 86 seed level. second. . . 274 345 346 275 310 last . . . . . . 366 406 444 497 428 of the fertilizer was applied with the seed and the balance 3.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level, does not show any signifi- cant differences in the earliness of germination or final stand obtained (Table 11). The general averages for the final stands for all locations for the three placements where part of the fertilizer was applied with the seed and the balance in narrow bands under the seed, all the fertilizer in the soil above MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 35 the seed, and all of the fertilizer mixed with the soil under the seed to a depth of three inches were 349, 387, and 428 plants, respectively (Table 12). Efiect of Soil Type: The data in Table 10 show two tests conducted during 1934 and 1935, three tests conducted in 1932 and 1933, and two tests conducted during all four years. By taking any set of these tests it can be found that lower percentages of emergence were obtained on the Yahola clay than on the Houston black clay soils. Of the four soil types, the Houston black clay gave the highest percentage of germination for all place- ments with two exceptions where fertilizer was placed in partial contact and either above or below the seed. As a general rule, the sandy Norfolk soil gave a higher percentage of emer- gence of cotton seedlings than did the Lufkin soil. Effect of Applying Fertilizer at Different Rates and Figure 21. Comparing effect of rates of Placements fertilizer application on growth of cotton , plants at Nacogdoches on July 24, 1935: A, T0 determlne the effeet plants Where 750 pounds of fertilizer Was ap- - - plied in a band 1.75 inches wide, 3 inches of applylng different rates of under seed; B, plants Where fertilizer was ap- fertilizer at diffgrenl; plage- gliedhin bbands 2.3 lincliiesc to fea<€l1l_ sléle hang inc es e ow see eve; ,un er 11ze c ec menlls, tests Were Conducted Where soil was undisturbed 2.5 inches to each with three different rates of side- fertilizer applied at five different places in relation to the seed. The rates and placements are shown in Tables 13, 14, and 15. Figures 21 and 22 show the difference in growth of cotton plants where no fertilizer was applied and where 250 and 750 pounds of fertilizer were applied. Percentage of Emergence: When fertilizer was applied at 250, 500, and 750 pounds per acre in bands 1.75 inches wide and three inches under the seed, the heavy rate gave a slightly lower percentage of emergence for all locations (Table 13). When these three rates of fertilizer were applied in bands 1.5, 2.5, and 3.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level, no signifi- cant differences in the general average percentages of emergence were obtained. Of the three rates and three placements the highest general average percentage was secured for the 500-pound rate with the fertilizer placed in bands 2.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level. When fertilizer applied at the three rates was mixed with the soil under the seed, the 500-pound rate gave a slightly higher percentage of l... ‘l B R 1A R Y Agricultural & Mechanical College of Texas 36 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION mm oA . . . 3 ow ww . . 3 3A wA . . .. wA NA wA ... m3 aw . . . 63w 303E: zw 3o 3333303. w 3 330w 3333? 3653.33 wm ~w . . ww. . em . . . ow NA ww . . .. 3o oA om . . ow om I . . . . . .3363 8% 30302 ..~ 63.3w 30$ 3 zww 35mm eA ww no wA .. .. INA ow we Zieo ea 110m Nw w3 ......30>w33.0ww3o3wn:~nazwsowonzzmdwcmm wA Nw wo oe oA ww em . . . . ow ow . . Nw ew 2 . . . . . . .3963 8% 30393 :~ 63.3w 5on0 3 :m.3 328m em om wA wm Aw we em Aw we 8 em me 8 3w wA ow wA m3 e3 ww . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .363 33E: zw .033 :mA.3 3.5mm 0.6a 323 @3525 owA 3 3e oA ww wm oe wA oe Aw we on . ee eA ew wA 8 ow mw w3 33 3w . . . 360w 303E: ..w 3o 3.333303. m 3 36w 3333B 3.8293 ee we 0A ow Aw. ww S ow oe ww 3A mw 8 ww ow wm Aw ~w Aw wm . . . . .30>w3 360w 30323 :~.. 63w 330.3 3 ..w.w 35am mw e03 83 ~33 . . .... wA oA oA . . . . .... 303 303 .... .... wm ww wu .... .... .. 1.3263 30.3w 3223 =~ 63.3w 332$ 3 =3 35mm wA wA 2 AA . AA 3w we . . . . .. wa wo .. . . . wm ww 3N ... . . . . . . .3363 8% B223 =~ 63w .328 3 ..w.3 35mm S Ae Nw ww ww we Am 3w we 3m oe wA 8 me ww ww ~w o3 8 3m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 636w .6333: zw 6E3 :mA.3 3.9mm 0.8m 8w 35:03 com wm ~A .. . .. . . we 3w 3w . . . . . Aw we wA . 3w we ew . . . . . 8 ww . . . . .363 .6335 :w 3o 33303. w 3 sow 33333 33x22 em ww . . . . 8 ww wm . . . . . . ww 0e ww . . Aw ow ww . . . . . . . Aw em . . . . Z3363 350w 3030a. =~ 63.3w 330$ 3 zmzw 328m eA wA 2 wm ZIIINA ow we Iliiwo wm Ililwm ww ow ......3w>w33ewww3o3wn:mdumwsunwofbducwm cw ww eA 8 ....eA 3w oA ....wo3 wo3 ....Am 8 3 .. 3v>u33woww3o3wnzud3zw33uwvo3:m.3 325m we NA ~w A0 ww we wm cw we 8 we wA ew ow we a. ow e3 Nu cm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303w Ea: zw .03.33:mA.3 358m . 0.8m 3on3 wwnsoa 0mm d>< wwiwwiwwfl ~83 ....>< £2 www3_wri~ww3 .o>< c803 325w 0333.30.73 c803 32.8w 2E 230C333 .320 0322a. 3332633 >2“. m3o33m> .360 333vEvum3n3 303333.813 i wonuowwouwz 33o33m3w wwozoU 03350.3. 38am 33 3o $3 om E wcSmcmEwww cwowcofiou 3o 3333 3on3 33305005333 3235 n0wau 3303033330 3w 3.033 E33» ma»? h0s333wa0u wuflnuv H0333 w-Gwfl-iirfivw 3000330300 u: 0wawi00n0nm fin 0333:? MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 37 emergence than the 250- and 750-pound rates (Table 13). For.all three rates the highest average percentage 0f germination was obtained where the fertilizer was placed in bands 2.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level. The lowest average percentage germination for all three rates was for the placement where the fertilizer was mixed with the soil under the seed. Rate of Emergence: Tables 14 and 15 show that of the various place- mentsof fertilizer applied at the rates of 250 and 750 pounds per acre, the placement in bands 3.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level gave the most rapid emergence. At the 500- pound rate, fertilizer placed in bands 2.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level gave the most rapid emergence. At each of the three rates, fertilizer applied either in bands 1.75 inches wide and three inches under the seed or mixed with the soil under the seed to a depth of three inches delayed germination _ __ Figure 22. Comparing growth of fertilized and emergence much belew and unfertilized cotton plants at Nacogdoches ' - - J 1 24, 1935: A, fert'lized check Where that Obtalned for the Slde (8)311 152s undisturbedugg inlches to each side and 2 inches below seed level; B, fertilizer applied at the rate of 250 pounds per acre of h . . . 1.5 inches to each side and 2 inches below t e side applications seed 1eVe1_ the placement 1.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level gave the lowest rate of germination and emergence. applications. Total Germination: The data in Table 15 show that for the three rates and the various placements the narrow band 1.75 inches wide at three ‘inches under the seed retarded germination more than any of the place- ments at all rates. The final stand obtained for the narrow band three inches under the seed was lower than for the side placements at all rates. The data show that where the fertilizer was applied 1.5, 2.5, and 3.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level, the highest number of seedlings emerged for each of the three rates where the fertilizer was placed in bands 2.5 inches to each side, except -for the placement 1.5 inches to each side at the 250-pound rate, which averaged five plants more. The 500-pound rate and the placement of fertilizer 2.5 inches to each side and [W0 1222a; Ja/aW/iiaxaad/Ve/a/{z/z d‘? lxgeiay/zra/age EJ171161’ of plants for tlze three rates and placements. as BULLETIN NO. 54s, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION wow www wow wow mww www mwo www o3 mww wmw wmw oww 3a www m3 o2 wm mwo . .32 wwm mww ow www s2 www cww www m2 3w 3w www www 8s cwm owm Q; ow wmo osouow mw uo ms ow w wo w wm wm wwm m3 ww mcm N3 C Hm 2 m mm . . . . . 3E 8% sows: zw mo soaow o oo =8 so? @254 wmw cww 2o wmm wmw oww wwo www wwm oww mcw cow oww www cow mww mmm mwm wca . . . . .52 www cww oww com mcw cow mcw www o2 oww mww 5w sow omw mcw www Sm n: wcw . osouow . s2 o3 wwm ow ow wws. ww B2 wm cww 3m mw oow 3w wo Es m3 om om . . . . . 3E so>os ooow Boson zm oEm sumo co :w.w vim w: ooo Sm .... .... wmw smo wmw wcw wcw .... www wmw mwm . .. .. .. . . . .32 wmw www mmw 3w 8w 3w ccw ocw .. . wmw 3w wmm . . .:€o8w wom mmm cow . . . . . . . . m2 so i: . . is is . ... . Rs cmm wo . . . . . . . . . 12E sass coon 22B zm 63w sumo oo :w.m wEwm mmw cww wmw .... .... mow wwo mww cmw cmw . ... www cww m2 ... . 13.32 wom cww ow .... ... www 6w mww sww 5w . ... wom 6w 8s . .. . . osouow . 3s m2 mw . . . . . .. is E o2 wo wo . .. . . 3 m2 ww . .. . . . . . . . 5E s96. ooom B2B :m oEw sumo oo =3 9am oww www wmw Sm www 3w mwo cow m2 mcw mww www mmw Sm 5w 8w m8 o2 wom . . . . . .52 mmm m2 o cmm 2w oww oww www o2 mww oww www wsw Cw wwm wwm m8 m: m3 . . osouow . cw ow w ww mm 2: 3 ow 2 mom S; ww wm 2w ow wm ms w m2 . . . . zowso . . . . . . . . . doom sows: zw o3? =24 9am . _ 98o SQ moaxoa ccw cmw 5w cww oww . wwm oww oww Kw mmw cww NB mmw . . . . :52 s2 wmw o2 wwm . N2 8w www wow w: Em .. wo wco .:€Q§ wm .... . m3 s w? . .... om wwm wcm .... oom s2 w“ .... . .. m mm . . . . zomao ooom sows: zw so sosoo m. 8 mow is? @852 mwm .... .... mcm mow wow . .... owm 2w wcw ... mcw mcw cww .. .. 1.3m wow . . . . .32 wwm wcm oom wom . o2 cww ocw oow oww ocw .. Es cww Iiosouow cw .... ww ww w: .. .... wm 8w mow . .. 2w wmw om .. ... m: m2 . . . . . 3E E2 coow >52 zm 63w sumo oo :w.w 2am wow .8 cww cww cwo cmw .... .... www www .. mww 3w wwm . . . . . . . 32 cww 6m mow mww wow cww .... .... mcw mcw .... S» 2w cwm . . . . . .. Iosouom owm wwm owm . . . . o2 w: S; ... . . . . . B; m3 . . . . is 2N cm . . . . . . . sflo seas ooow 306s zm 62w sumo oo :w.m saws wow wcw wwo mww mwo wmw . . . . . . . . 2m 0;. . . . . wow Sm was . . . . . 15E www mww wow 5w mmw oww .... .... mmw mmw .... mwm Sm m2 .... . . .283 m2 8 cwm .... .... is o2 o: .... .... o8 o8 .... wo 1S mm ... . . . . 13E so>os 8% Eosoo. :m 63m suoo os =3 osso wmw www woo mom oww cww wwo Kw s2 wow cww cww wow mmw www mmw o2 m3 wmm . . . . . Jmfi wwm mww wo ocw mwm mww sow oww ww oww wow www www mow 2w 3m s2 o... ccw . . osouow sw Hm ww ww 3 m2 3 cw 2 www o2 mw wws Sm wm mw w w mom . . . . 23E . . . . . . . . . doom sows: :w 6E3 =24 98m i oéo sow mwxaoo cwm .o>< £2 wmqswmas S2 .o>< £3 i2 22 S2 .o>< wwiwwos $2 .o>< £3 $3 wwifii mossou Enos >vsmw ozoosoZ Emos Eusww oss sVGsA 52o sumso. soswsom mo? ososm> soios osossoomsm sousfisom wosuowmouwZ l sosomow owozoU oEEoH swim sssoU utmost-vain Us: >>os mo oooo cw E wsswsosso mwsswoow _ mowfln wfioavwifl as $03.55» ma? sosmiwnou wnflnuw flop-F UQUHOEO mwfliuoom u: noésl-Z .wH 0175.. 39 MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON Nmm . 15mm 3m NNm . .. m2 m? N$ ....mmm mmm NNm . m2 .. :_Nm NN mQN .. 1Q: N? 8m ....m...m 8N mmm .. m... . . .. mm a m8 1.2 2m m3 -53 m3 mN . ...wmummmw===mmfiowmoimompmmawvmmfi EN mmN N3. 2m zmmN Nam 2m ....@Nm 3m Nam . NmN ......mNN 8N Nom E45 Q8. mNm :..Nmm 8m mom . Nm . mN mm m2 . QN 3m Nmm mmm Em Nm .. 1B2 wvumaowfi =N 2% n28 8 =m.m 98m mmm mmm mom .. ...mmm Nmm 2m .. 1.3m 2:. .. ..mNm 3m mm“ .. . . . . 1:2 m2. 2m Now 1.8a. mmm mmm ....Nmm Nmm . ....mmN Nmm N3 .. ...w=oumw 8N emN mm: 110$ mm N2 . {m3 m3 .. E46 mm“ S. . . . . . 23E wfimlvwvmaofiwflfa.vwmm_momwom=m.Nw5wm 3m mNm NNm 1.5mm Qmm 2m 115m Ni. . ....Nmm Em m8 . .223“; mam mmm mNN zimmm 2a. mmm . 118m NNm . ....mmN NNm mi . .656»; NNN 8N m2 . 3.2: E mm“ . :53 Q; . . .:.mm S NN . . . . .86 wfiwmmmmwaofiwmfaufimmomwofmq96m mam 3m mom NNN Nmm m3. 3a 8m m2 mmm mmm mmm 3N N3 mmm m3 $4 i: EN . . . . :22 NNN NNm Nm mmN ZN mNm Nmm Nam mm 8m mNN mmm Q8 Nmm NmN NmN m: Nm omm ...€o8w om mm N; mm m Na NH NN m NNN o2 mm S NNN NN om a N mm . . . . zaé ..........w8m sw===miza=miuamm 98w N2» £555 em.“ ¢>< mmQ mmfi mmS NmQ .95. mmi mmfi mmi NmQ ¢>< mmfi mmS NmQ ¢>< mmQ $3 mmi Nm2 munnoo :82 35mm £2.62 5x2 Nmwnwm vac cfiwsq 52o xofin aomwsom >20 fiocfiw nofiwn mcufiwumflm Nwuzmmmoh - o MUSOOUMOONZ EOSGQW QMUZOQ OTHEUP cwsfim wan O n33 mo $3 0m 5 MEMBEM. mwnzwowm flviiwwflcD-I. nwivivufiim win mow-mu wiuuwfimw w: fiofifliw ma?» nusmiwhou vnflnuv i053 m-vwnviv mWim-mfwfim MG Hufiinn-Z QM 01:»? 40 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Where 250, 500, and 750 pounds of fertilizer per acre were mixed with the soil under the seed, a slightly larger number of plants was obtained at the 250-pound rate at all locations. The lowest number secured was for the 750-pound rate. When all rates and placements are considered as a whole, the data indicate that slightly more plants were secured for the 500-pound rate than for the 250- or 750-pound EFFECT°FA§ZEQQ§§§1EkEZ§§EQTSD'FFERENT rates. The 750-pound rate gave NSg.?ES_IF_I\OI~:_TSOIvI~J |_|NLgAEk%Afé LBS the fewest number of plants for ‘°°‘°°’°° =°° '°° ° ° '°°=°°*°°‘°°*°° the three rates and the various I I zsovouuosvcn ma: . _ “"°‘;jf,;,';$;";;’;°=='"- placements of fertilizer (Table “Sfiitlfiiiilfsiéfilifii 1 5 ) - BAIOS ZSINCHES TO EACHSIDE 2 INCHES BELOW $EED LEVEL MIXED WITSPEESSIIL UNDER 500 POUNDS PER ACflE BANDIJSINCHES WIDE 3 IN. UNDER SEED These results are graphically shown in Figure 23. Effect of Soil Type: By con- sidering the effect of soil type on the germination of cottonseed Without comparing effects of rates of application and placement of fertilizers, it can be seen in Ta- ble 13 that the Yahola clay gave the lowest percentage of emer- gence for the four soil types. The percentage of emergence for 1933 and 1934 is exceedingly low,- whereas in 1935 it is much above the expected normal average ger- Figure 29h The largest total number mination of cottonseed. As stated of plants obtained at the four locations elsewhere in this discussion’ Suf- when fertilizer was applied at rates of _ , 250, 500, and 750 pounds per acre was ficlent rams fell each Year S0011 Zfiifaié’? $332 $32 ififiligeiniéiéati? after Planting to cause a heavy low the seed level. The highest yield crust t9 fQrm on the surface 0f was obtained where 750 pounds was ap- . . plied in bands 3.5 inches to each side the YahQIa S011» and thls mate‘ and 2 inches below the seed level. riany reduced the emergence of seedlings. From observation it was found that numerous seedlings were sealed up under the soil crust that could not force their way out. The high emergence obtained in 1935 resulted from the use of a rotary hoe to break up the heavy crust. BANDS lb INCHES T0 EACN SIDE 2 INCHES BELOW SEED LEVEL BANDS ZSINCHES TO EAOISI Z INONES ZUW SEED LEVEL QSINONES TO EAEN SI 2 IKPES BELON SEED LEVEL MIXED WITN SOL UNDER SEED "ISO PGQNDS PER ACg BAPDIJSINCFKS WIDE SIN. UNDER SEED BANDS L5 INCKESTO Efillllll NOE BELOW SEED LEVEL BANDS ZSINDHL!» TDEACM SN 2 INCHES BELOW SEED LEVEL LSINOESTOEIOI SIDE 2 INGHE; BELOW SEED LEVEL The crumbling characteristics of the Houston black clay prevented the formation of a soil crust of a sufiicient hardness to hinder emergence of cotton seedlings. This factor is reflected in the high percentage of emergence obtained. This percentage was generally the highest of the four soil types, being even higher than the percentages obtained on the sandy Norfolk soil. The Norfolk sandy loam gave higher percentages ofemergence than were obtained on the Lufkin fine sandy loam. This reflects the effect of MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 41 poor drainage and the plastic and crust-forming characteristics of the Lufkin soils. EFFECT OF FERTILIZER PLACEMENTS ON YIELD OF COTTON The data collected in the studies of machine placement of fertilizer for cotton do not always show that the highest yield was obtained on the Table 15. Summary of average germination of cottonseed when 4-12-4 fer- tilizer was applied at different rates and placements Seedlings emerging in 50 feet of row Germi- Fertilizer Placement nation counts Bryan Temple College N acog- General Station doches average 250 pounds per acre Band 1.75” wide, 3" under seed . . . . . . first . . . . . . 78 189 108 41 104 second. . . 317 394 337 245 323 last . . . . . . 384 4140 430 478 433 Band 1.5" to each side, 2" below seed first . . . . . . 94 168 148 188 150 level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Second... 282 422 481 458 411 last . . . . . . 356.8 519 582 568 509 Baird 2.5” to each side, 2" below seed first . . . . . . 154 145 12y6 246 168 level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . second. . . 331 402 4,57 550 410 last. . . ._ _. . 382 488 550 595 504 Band 3.5” to each side, 2" below seed first . . . . . . 76 397 173 40 172 level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . secolnd. . . 500 406 294 235 3S9 last . . . . .. 540 S05 363 282 422 Mixed with soil to a depth of 3" under first . . . . . . 14 208 134 73 107 seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . second. . . 351 335 284 271 310 last . . . . . . 480 446 346 470 4.36 500 pounds per acre Band 1.75" wide, 3" under seed . . . . . . first . . . . . . 46 144 100 30 80 , second. . . 283 359 339 222 301 last . . . . .. 401 442 419 446 427 Band 1.5" to each side, 2" below seed first . . . . . . 91 63 124 124 100 level . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . second. . . 264 381 444 268 339 last . . . . . . 354 470 562 527 478 Band 2.5” to each side, 2" below seed first . . . . . . 157 154 132 294 184 leve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . second. . . 324 400 461 578 441 last . . . . . . 385 505 574 714 544 Band 3.5" to each side, 2" below seed first . . . . . . 95 291 138 131 164 level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . second. . . 402 437 360 443 410 last . . . . . . 490 502 456 423 468 Mxed w th soil toa depth of 3" under first. .. . . . 11 127 94 42 68 seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . second. . . 280 329 344 254 302 last . . . . . . 344 425 445 463 419 750 pounds per acre Band 1.75” wide, 3" under seed . . . . . . first . . . . . . 29 110 97 30 66 second . . . 267 295 328 222 278 last . . . . . . 363 386 415 393 389 Band 1.5"'to each side, 2" below seed first . . . . . . 63 149 104 229 I 136 second . . . 236 397 436 393 366 last . . . . . . 339 447 539 548 468 Band 2.5” to each side, 2" below seed first . . . . . . 90 145 126 208 142 second . 255 437 446 404 386 st . . . . . . 323 480 555 566 481 Band 3.5” to each side, 2" below seed first . . . . . . 42 367 183 67 165 level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . second. . . 508 424 307 287 382 I last . . . . .. 592 513 379 274 440 Mixed with soil to a depth of 3” under first . . . . . . 24 I 148 166 43 95 Se . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . second 384 , 300 295 196 294 st . . . . . . 372 442 329 45 2 399 42 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION test where the highest percentage of germination and emergence of seed- lings was obtained. This may be attributed to some extent to moisture and climatic conditions, which probably may have influenced the avail- ability of the fertilizer to the plants. Efiect of Placing Fertilizer under the Seed The two-inch depth gave the highest yield where the fertilizer was placed in narrow bands 1.75 inches wide and one, two, and three inches under the seed (Table 16). At College Station and Nacogdoches, however, the average yield for the four years was highest for the three-inch depth. The unfertilized check at Bryan gave a higher yield than did the ferti- lized test for the one- and three-inch placements under the seed. At Temple the average yield for the check was higher for the three-inch depth and slightly lower than for the one- and two-inch placements under the seed. At College Station and Nacogdoches the average yields for the one-, two-, and three-inch depths increased as the depth increased, but the differences were not significant. There was, however, a significantly lower yield for the check (Figure 15). Tests were conducted for only two years with the fertilizer placed in wide bands 3.5 inches wide and one, two, and three inches under the seed (Table 16). At Bryan and Temple the highest yields were obtained for the one-inch depth, but at College Station and Nacogdoches the two- inch depth gave the highest yields. The two-inch depth under the seed gave the highest general average yield for all locations. At Bryan, College Station, and Nacogdoches the unfertilized checks were significantly lower than the fertilized tests, but at Temple the check yielded higher than the placements two and three inches under the seed but lower than the one- inch placement. The general averages for the placements under the seed for all locations were lower than any of the tests for the side bands. The general average yields decreased in the same order as the fertilizer was placed deeper in the soil (Figure 15). By comparing the yields for the narrow and wide bands, it may be seen in Tables 16 and 17 that in each test the wide band gave the highest general average for all locations. When the general averages, however, for 1932 and 1933 are compared, the dataindicate that the three-inch depth for the narrow band gave higher yields than the three-inch depth for the wide band. There were no significant differences in the checks for the wide and narrow bands for the two years. Effect of Placing Fertilizer to the Sides of the Seed The results shown in Tables 18 and 19 for the bands 1.5 and 3.5 inches to one side and two inches below the seed level do not show any significant differences in yield for the two placements. These results are 313 pounds 43 MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON .0000 00oz: 00:05 w .053 00 .0000 00oz: 00:05 w 0E3 00s 505 m.» 005500 =80 05 m: 5000500 =09“ 0R ww . . .. 2 wo Q0 . . . wow 02 30 80 mow oow . . . . 0% . . . . . . . . . . . .. F0050 wmé=te=o mww wmw . . . oow mmw 8m . .. $0 mmw $0 0R oww mwm . . ... . $0 . . . . . . . . . 1.0000 0055 00:05 0 0S mow I . wow omw $0 . . .. §m 3m oow o3‘, 2N $0 . . . . .. 03 .... . . . . . . Z0000 00oz: 00:05 w wwm N2 .. . oww 3N mww . .... 3w 0R $0 wow 0S 03 . . . . .. mom . . 122.5000 0055 n05 5 00.30. 0000:.“ 2. 33% 0E Q: wo SN 3 wo $~ 0B. RH omw mow 3w 20 wow 30 8m oow $0 wow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1020 ofififificD mow omw omw 02 mow mmw wfi‘. m? 02 m? mww EN mow 0E o3. E0 m2 w? mww . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .0000 $95 00:05 0 wow wmw oNm +2 n: 3N oow $0 .2: Cm $0 mom 000 NZ $0 $0 02 mwm 5w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . .0000 0055 00:05 w tw mow SN 02 “m5 mww wom 80 I; oow $0 wow $0 3w oow 000 o8 20 wmw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0000 00050 s05 0 00.30 300$ m: 53M .0>< £2 $3 MMQTMQ .0>< 002702 000L002 .0>< 82 $5 .0>< WRL$QHTMQLN0QH E02 >550 5.02 >000» 0cm >20 x003 >20 .0>< 020.5002 5080a 0000003 05058» .200 00050005 005mfi0m 00500000002 cofifim 03:00 0350B 005m 000m ~00 0c: Mo 053cm 000a n00 £00000 00m m0 000a 0-5 v0 000m 005 n00.5- 003000 00.5 n0sm=wn0u vuflnnv =0 05$ 00:00 m0 ~50?» 00 0250mm 5H 0:10P 44 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION of lint per acre for the placement 1.5 inches to the side and 326 pounds for the placement 3.5 inches to the side of the seed (Figure 16). When the fertilizer was placed in bands 1.5 inches to each side and one, two, and three inches below the level of the seed, the highest general average was secured for the one-inch depth (Table 19). This, however, was only two pounds more than the general average for the three-inch depth, the yields being 312 pounds for the former and 310 pounds of lint per acre for the latter. Results from the two-inch depth were consider- ably lower and gave a general average of only 282 pounds of lint per acre (Figure 16). Table 17. Summary of average acre yields of cotton when 4-12-4 fertilizer was applied under the seed at the rate of 500 pounds per acre in narrow and wide bands '3’ Average number pounds of lint per acre Fertilizer Placement Bryan Temple College Nacog- General Station doches average Band 1.75 inches wide P‘ ’-‘" 1 inch under seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 302 302 20S 277 2 inches under seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 305 306 233 292 3 inches under seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 270 312 239 283 Unfertilized check‘ . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . 314 291 267 109 245 Band 3.5 inches wide 1 inch under seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408 354 285 242 322 2 inches under seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 364 299 342 265 318 3 inches under seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335 249 303 2S2 285 Unfertilized checkT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296 314 245 82 234 | ‘Soil stirred 1.75 inches wide, 2 inches under seed. TSoil stirred 3.5 inches wide, 2 inches under seed. Fertilizer placed in bands 2.5 inches to each side and one, two, and three inches below the seed level did not show any significant differences in yield at any of the locations except Bryan, the general averages being 280, 287, and 269 pounds of lint per acre for the one-, two-, and three-inch depths, respectively. The unfertilized check at Bryan and College Station did not give significantly lower yields than the fertilized tests (Table 18). There was, however, a significantly lower yield at Nacogdoches. The average for all locations was 239 pounds of lint per acre (Figure 16). Bands of fertilizer placed 3.5 inches to each side and one, two, and three inches below the level of the seed gave general average yields that increased as the depth of the fertilizer increased, being 293, 304, and 311 pounds, respectively (Table 19). At Bryan the unfertilized check where the soil was undisturbed for 3.5 inches to each side gave higher yields than did any of the side place- ments (Table 18). At this location 389 pounds of lint per acre were secured on the unfertilized check, while the next highest yield, 367 pounds, was secured where the fertilizer was placed in bands 3.5 inches to each side and three inches below the level of the seed. At Temple the 45 MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 2962 ~63 v5 3on5 $205 N was 22¢ sumo 3 muzu: .8“ wow» .325 wwnhzflwc: mowh. .132 26$ o5 30in mono": N 2.5 02w 22$ 3 mono: m m mzN .82 vuwm 3E5 uwnhzmmua: mo? NmN 2w IIZIS. g 3N 11.1.25. owfi 3w SN Q». ow». Zilimvm NmN ............IuwnuuufimfificD Cm mwN ........ovw oNN oNm ZIIINQ». EN 3N 3N owN New ........+o¢ owN ......_u>2vwww.so_wnwwnoamm 3m vwN 3N woN N3 3N N3 3Q NNN 22.. omN 8N mNN m3 2H. E» 8N 3w 8N ..........................._Q>2wwow B2B wwnuEN NaN mmN ZIQNN ovN 3N 21$»... 3N owN 3N NwN 3m Z154. woN ............................_o>w_wwwm3o_wnnunmfi 25. $3 2 323$ W». 238M 3N Q02 mw i; 13.1.3». new N: ....awN we». aoN . .................................._2uwsuwwuzmfiuwnb ooN 3N NwN mNN IZZINN». N3. 2N iIIUvmN Em 2o . 2u>2wwvm32wnmwaucmm NwN mmN NoN wwN Iiwom wow ooN ....Nom 3w». oNN . ...................2w>v_uwww>>2vnmonosmN owN wNN ooN S2 IINQ w? 5N 225m mww 3N ....................._w>w_ww~w>22@nnu:22 “E... $3 2 n32». WN 3:35 2m 3N 113m omN 8N 12$». wmN 2N NNm mNN 0mm 1.63 8N . ....:m>2wmafiaawpwogoim NwN m2 CN m3 Em 3N NON Q2. 2N mNm 3N 2m 0N». 8m ZN S» o2 o3 NmN ........_w>w:.wom 32B mQBEN N2‘. KN 221mm 3N 3m IZNmm EN moN oNw wwN oNm Zimow 3N _v>2wvwm>>o2vnnocw~ 2E. <3» 2 §NQ=N wé 35.5 0N». NNN mmN mmN NN». NNN M5. ma" 3» mm». mm». B». 2m NoN ma. rah;Ewwa¢_2f.~wwaskoofmawfiam m8 NwN wwN NmN ZN 1:8» N? 8N 3m ....Nom N8 123m o»... 8N 2% .............._2a_woaaomfa ~Ew9s¢fm4 28m v8» L? “v.3. 28 :0 2v. d>< $.62 2W3 3.3 NNQ d>< £2 3.3 NNQ NNQ o>< ~63 Nmfi .o>< £2 3.3 ~63 N23 5x2 >ucmw 5x2 3E3 vac >20 202m >20 .v>< £2.82 c222 couwsofl 2onm> .50 EwE32m “uusmfiuh wvauowmoumZ cofifiw umosow MHQEUP auim 0.6m 8a “c: No mwnsom omen huh nNZ-Hafl an u: OHHH oflw u.» H001 02w n9 02m 02w ow Q0255» ma? nonuiwnou vuflnuv Gui»? flbwwcc u: ~20?» H: wvoimn in 325E 46 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION unfertilized check where the soil was undisturbed for 3.5 inches to each side gave 314 pounds of lint per acre, while next highest yield for the fertilized tests was with the fertilizer placed 1.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level, or 318 pounds, which was four pounds higher than for the unfertilized check. At College Station and Nacog- doches the unfertilized check with the soil undisturbed for 3.5 inches to each side gave lower yields than did any of the fertilized tests. The general average for this unfertilized check was 257 pounds of lint per acre (Table 18). Table 19. Summary of average yield of cotton when 4-12-4 fertilizer was applied to one and to both sides of the seed at the rate of 500 pounds per acre Pounds of lint per acre Fertilizer Placement I College Nacog- General Bryan Temple Station doches average All fertilizer on one side of seed 1.5” to one side of seed, 2" below seed level . . . . . . 343 302 320 287 313 3.5” to one side of seed, 2" below seed level . . . . . . 351 353 327 272 326 ____._. ___.___ Fertilizer applied to each side of seed 1.5" to each side and l" below seed level . . . . . . . . 370 293 313 271 312 1.5” to each side and 2" below seed level . . . . . . . . 317 318 294 198 282 1.5” to each side and 3" below seed level . . . . . . . . 359 298 298 286 310 2.5” to each side and 1" below seed level . . . . . . . . 301 . . . . 312 226 280 2.5" to each side and 2" below seed level . . . . . . . . 302 . . . . 305 2S5 287 2.5” to each side and 3" below seed level . . . . . . . . 234 . . . . 327 246 269 Unfertilized check‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 . . . . 319 109 239 3.5” to each side and 1" below seed level . . . . . . . . 331 286 299 25S 293 3.5” to each side and 2" below seed level. . . . . . 333 295 332 254 304 3.5" to each side and 3" below seed level . . . . . . . . 367 266 326 28S 311 Unfertilized checkT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389 314 244 81 257 ‘Soil undisturbed under seed for 2.5” to each side and 2" below the seed level. ‘lSoil undisturbed under seed for 3.5” to each side and 2" below the seed level. Placing the fertilizer to one side of the seed gave higher general average yields than did any of the placements where the fertilizer was divided and placed to each side of the seed at various depths (Table 19). From Tables 18 and 19 it can be seen that generally higher yields were obtained where fertilizer was placed 1.5 and 3.5 inches to each side than for the placement 2.5 inches to each side. In considering these results it must be kept in mind that the placements 2.5 inches to eacl side were used only in 1934 and 1935, while the 1.5- and 3.5-inch place ments were used in 1932 and 1933. In the latter placements the two-incl depth was used during each of the four years. For this placement a both Bryan and Nacogdoches higher average yields were obtained for thi period from 1932 to 1933 than for the period from 1934 to 1935. A College Station the reverse was true. As no yields are available for th~ placement 2.5 inches to each side for the years of 1932 and 1933 during the period the higher yields were obtained at Bryan and Nacogdoches the yields for these placements cannot be compared with the placement 1.5 and 3.5 inches to each side. This also explains why the general averag 47 MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON wow wow wow wos owo wow ooo owo ssw mmo wmw wow oow wow wow wwo wws omo omw . . . . . . . . doom sods: 2o so 58o w oo ssom i? wane =< wow sow oww wws sow oww oow oow wos mww oow owo mwo wso oso wwo osw oow www ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zdoom o>oso ssom 5 =< oww wow . . . .. mow wow sow . . . . . . .. sow oww mow wow wow oso ... .. soo omw suoom so? ~22 :mw.s duos 5 oucosws doom i? w“ doom sods: mosuss o mdnom owo mow .. .. .... owo www mwo . . . . .. .. moo oow wso owo wso owo . . .. .... wow wow ........ . . . odsm sumo oo zoo oussosos doom 5? w\~ woo oow .. .. .... ooo oww wwo . . .. .... osw oow wwo owo soo woo .. .. .. .. com mow . . . . . . . . . . . odsm sumo os :m.o ousosos doom so?» w. wow www www wow .... .... wso oow oww .... .... .... .... .... mow ooo wos .... .... odsm sumo ou :m.w ousmsos doom so>o ssom ooflém E o» oow oww wow sos . .. wow woo sww . . . . . . . wow moo wws . . . .. ... . . . odsm sumo os :m.w ousosos doom sows w\~ 8 on. so>os doom Bosos mosuss w mdowm soosaoo sofisofi §~ .o>< moos woos ooos woos .o>< moos woos ooos woos .o>< ooos woos .o>< moos wwimoos woos Enos ossucom Enos >23 oow >2“. vsumss .33 .o>< vssooooZ osossows cosmooss osossfiw doO onoEoumsfis sonsssssows . mosuosuwoums/s ssossmsw owossoO osssEoH swims osum son “ass o0 mdsssons H“ $99G us: bwosva. win 0.12s: HQQHQMQQ ssswafii is Ma 0.5.» moi miss-om can ossfiifl an? nousssioo wYNsTQ GOG»? £9300 HQ Eos.» HQ sooosfi 5N 015»? 48 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION yields are lower for the placement 2.5 inches to the sides than for the placements 1.5 and 3.5 inches to the sides. Effect of Placing Part of Fertilizer in Furrow with Seed The highest general average yields obtained when part of the fertilizer was placed in the furrow with the seed were for the placements where one- sixteenth and one-eighth of the fertilizer was placed with the seed and the balance 3.5 inches to each side, or 332 and 329 pounds of lint per acre, respectively (Tables 20 and 21). ‘The general average yields for all of the other placements ranged below 300 pounds of lint per acre (Table 21). The lowest general average yield obtained was for the placement where one-sixteenth to one-eighth of the fertilizer was placed with the seed and the balance 2.5 inches to each side and two inches below the Table 21. Summary of average acre yield of cotton when 4-12-4 fertilizer was applied at the rate of 500 pounds per acre in partial contact with the seed and mixed in soil above and below the seed Average pounds of lint per acre Fertlilizer Placement College Nacog- General Bryan Temple Station doches average f; to ‘/§ with seed, balance in bands 2.5” to each side and 2" below seed level. . 284 . . . . 294 229 269 M in surface soil over seed, balance in bands 2.5” to each side and 2" below seed level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 . . . . 314 272 294 11¢ with seed, balance in bands 3.5" to side and 2" below seed level . . . . . . . . . . 382 327 327 290 332 '/fi with seed, balance in bands 3.5" to each side and 2" below seed level. . . . . 379 318 325 295 329 f; with seed, balance in band 1.75” wide and 3" under seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316 265 261 264 276 All in surface soil above seed . . . . . . . . . . . 319 320 299 231 292 Mixed with soil to depth of 3" under seed 284 ‘ 294 303 267 287 level of the seed, or 269 pounds of lint per acre. In comparing these averages, however, it must be kept in mind that the highest averag< yields were for the years 1932 and 1933, and that the lowest were for th< two-year period of 1934 and 1935. Climatic and moisture conditions therefore, may have influenced the average yields. The four-year averag yield for the placements where all of the fertilizer was in the soil abov the seed or all mixed with the soil under the seed gave 292 pounds o lint per acre for the former and 287 pounds for the latter (Figure 19] Eifect of Applying Fertilizer at Different Rates and Placements In comparing the yields obtained where fertilizer was applied at th rates of 250, 500, and 750 pounds per acre at various placements i relation to the seed, it is found from a study of Tables 22 and 23 tha as a whole, a higher general average yield was obtained for the 750-pour: rate (Figure 23). In general, the yields increased as the rates of fertilize application increased. When the various placements were considered, tl 49 MACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON NNN 3N ....._.N¢ amN NNN 5J8 NNN 13.. NNN. 2N 2N ....NN¢ mwN ..........uvuNNNw::zmuofawuwowzownt?@822 NNN NNN ZINE. NNN 3N :25“ NNN NNN NNN 8N NS IINNm NNN .........._N>NI.NNNN>QNQQ=NufimfitNuofwNNémm 2N NNN NNN 8N :..NNN NNN NNN ..:NNN SN NNN .............._N>NNNNNNN>Q_NN=NJBNNQNQQN=WNNENNN NNN NNN NNN NNN ....:..¢NN NNN. NNN ............NNN NNN N2 ...................m>2_swmao_wn=N.NENNQNNQN=N.NEam owN mNN Nwm a; m3 woN owN wwm o3 mom mmN oNN NmN 3N 8N Nmm N: N8. 2N .. . .. 1.63m s95 tm 6E3 :24 2am PEN. NNN NwNNxoQ emu waN 3N wwN Nwfi 3N NMN 8N own 3N Nmn mmN NNN. mwm 00m wwN wwm ii 0mm hoN . . . . wNm 8N moN woN mNm omN mmm 3% NNN on». 8N 0D“. 3w oNm mmm 8N mmN N8 KN . . . . NwN mmN NmN wvN ........mon wow uoN .. . NwN moN NNN ma“ ........mcm Gov 8N Ho». mo“ NoN NmN ooN mm“ 0mm wwN 8N m? N9 Nwm 3N wcm NQN ma. mom “mm mmH owv omN . . . . wuww Nova: zm No Ntnww m o» =8 at? @652 4942 w»? 30:5 zN 6w? 58 3 :m.m 9am 495M Ham 303m :N JEN NON... 3 :m.N 98m 40>»: wwom 3on5 zN 63w :23 3 zm; uamm ......... . . . 63w N25: 2N. 6E3 2m»; 98m “N3 Nwfi Nwaaefi be». aaN 3N ....oNN N2 8N ....NNN 3N 2N NNN NNN NNN :15. 8N ..........N.N~N§E==NN¢fiN~wNQQQQNNRNQNNE 8N NNN ZIwmN 3N woN ..:$N cmN NNN NNN 2N 8N .242. NNN ..........32NauwasofifNuENNUNNNfIWNNEWm woN vwN EN meN ....NNN N3 NAN ....:N NNN oNN .-.-.~Q>Q~@Umvwanv@QQIN.Qwv@m£ONUOu=m.NUNHWm 8N EN _NN NNN ..:NNN oNv NNN NNN NNN EN ....._o>2.vwvNBo_on=Ndwmwsuwvfizm;98m NNN mNN 2N m2 NNN QQN 8N wmv 8N wmN mwN 2m mmm woN 8N wwm mm“ N9. EN 1:45am MQwZHDNNm.0@T$§WhZm 25m SEN. NNNN NwxxoQ Qmw .o>< NNS $2 mmofi Nmofi .u>< mmofi wmofi mmoH Nmofi d>< mmofl NmaH .o>< mmafi wmmfi mmmfi Nmafl 2.6,... :82 3:8» 5&2 3E3 vac >30 MQEQ 5N3 .o>< £2.82 55:4 c3262 NHQENV .50 musuowwoumZ comfifiw “E230 035mm. imam unuEvufim Nounfiuuh 0.8m Nun Nu: No mvnsom nwfloioou-fi via nevus vacuum“; w: e215: n95 aosimwaou vuflnuv G055 .3300 u: 20-h i: Uoufi .NN 035m. 5O BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION highest yields were obtained where the fertilizer was placed 3.5 inches to each side and two inches below the level of the seed. It is significant to note that this placement gave the highest general average yield for all rates of fertilizer application. The increase in yield for either the 500- over the 250-pound rate or the 750- over the 250-pound rate was not sufficient to consider the higher rates profitable at any of the locations except Nacogdoches. Considering all three rates and the five placements for each as a unit, it will be seen that the average increase of the 500-pound over the 250- pound rate was only three pounds of lint per acre, but the average increase of the 750-pound over the 250-pound rate was 33 pounds of lint per acre. The placement 3.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level gave the largest gain (68 pounds of lint per acre) when the ferti- lizer rate was increased from 250 to 750 pounds per acre. Doubling the fertilizer rate from 250 to 500 pounds per acre raised the acre yield 19 pounds, but when 750 pounds of fertilizer were applied, there was a. gain of 49 pounds of lint per acre over that obtained for the 500-pound rate. At Bryan on the Yahola clay the only significant increase in yield was obtained where fertilizer was applied at 750 pounds per acre and placed 3.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level. The Houston black clay did not give any significant increase at any rate or placement. Table 23. Summary of average acre yield of cotton when 4-12-4 fertilizer was applied at diiferent rates and placements \ Average pounds of lint per acre Fertilizer Placement College Nacog- General Bryan Temple Station doches average 250 pounds per acre l Band 1.75” wide, 3" under seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 296 310 296 215 279 Band 1.5” to each side, 2" below seed level . . . . . . 294 . . . . 323 254 290 Band 2.5" to each side, 2" below seed level . . . . . . 311 . . . . 338 234 294 Band 3.5" to each side, 2" below seed level . . . . . . 366 332 298 224 305 Mixed with soil to depth of 3" under seed . . . . . . . \ 370 316 290 221 299 I 500 pounds per acre Band 1.75" wide, 3" under seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308 308 303 251 292 Band 1.5” to each side, 2" below seed level . . . . . . 278 . . . . 305 263 282 Band 2.5” to each side, 2" below seed level . . . . . . 302 . . . . 305 255 287 Band 3.5" to each side, 2" below seed level . . . . . . 333 370 33S 260 324 Mixed with soil to depth of 3" under seed . . . . . . . 288 327 301 261 294 750 pounds per acre Band 1.75” wide, 3" under seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290 270 286 275 280 Band 1.5” to each side, 2" below seed level . . . . . . 282 ' . . . . 320 334 312 Band 2.5” to each side, 2" below seed level . . . . . . 267 . . . . 353 324 315 Band 3.5” to each side, 2" below seed level . . . . . . 417 330 360 385 373 Mixed with soil to depth of 3" under seed . . . . . . . 354 341 354 341 l 348 BIACHINE PLACEMENT OF FERTILIZER FOR COTTON 51 On the Lufkin fine sandy loam significant increases were obtained at the 750-pound rate for two placements of fertilizer. These were 3.5 inches to each side, two inches below the seed level, and mixed in the soil under the seed. At Nacogdoches significant increases were obtained for most of the placements by increasing the fertilizer rates from 250 t0 500 pounds per acre. Larger gains in yield were obtained when the fertilizer rate was raised from 500 to 750 pounds per acre than by doubling the 250-pound rate. In either case profitable increases were obtained for each of the five placements. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Machine placement of fertilizers with cotton in Texas was studied at four locations—Bryan in the Brazos River Bottoms on Yahola clay soil, Temple on Houston black clay, College Station on Lufkin fine sandy loam, and Nacogdoches on Norfolk sandy loam. These experiments covered a period of three years at Temple, and four years at Bryan, College Station, and Nacogdoches. A 4-12-4 fertilizer was applied at the rate of 500 pounds per acre in six placements under the seed with an unfertilized check; eleven place- ments to the side of the seed, including two placements to one side of the seed, with the addition of two unfertilized checks; five placements in the furrow with the seed; one placement in the soil above the seed; and one placement mixed with the soil three inches under the seed. Fertilizer was also applied at the rates of 250, 500, and 750 pounds per acre at five placements. " The results show that the earliest germination, the highest average percentage of seedlings emerging, the best final stand of plants, and the most rapid growth were obtained when the fertilizer was applied 2.5 inches to the sides and two inches below the seed level. Fertilizer placed within one inch of the seed, materially delayed germi- nation and emergence of seedlings, thus reducing the final stand of plants. Placing the fertilizer in a band 3.5 inches wide, one inch under the seed, gave the highest yields on the clay soils of Bryan and Temple, but the wide band two inches under the seed at College Station and Nacog- doches gave the highest yields of all placements of fertilizer under the seed. The highest average yield for the narrow bands was 292 pounds of lint per acre and was obtained where the fertilizer was placed two inches under the seed. The same placement for the wide bands gave the highest yields at College Station and Nacogdoches, while the one inch depth gave the highest yields at Bryan and Temple. The check for the narrow band yielded an average of 245 pounds of lint per acre, while the check for the wide bands yielded an average of 234 pounds of lint per acre. 52 BULLETIN NO. 548, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Disturbing the soil under the seed at any depth reduced the final stand of plants as compared with stands where the soil was not disturbed. Fertilizer applied at the rate of 500 pounds per acre, 2.5 inches t0 each side and two inches below the seed level, gave higher average per- centages of emergence of seedlings and better final stands than did the 250- and 750-pound rates and fertilizer applied in other places in relation to the seed. Fertilizer placed 3.5 inches to one side and two inches below the seed level gave an average yield of 326 pounds of lint per acre, which was slightly higher than that obtained for any of the placements where the fer- tilizer was applied to each side of the seed. Fertilizer placed 1.5 inches to each side and one inch below the seed level, yielded 312 pounds of lint per acre, which was only one pound more per acre than was obtained for the placement 3.5 inches to each side and three inches below the seed level. The unfertilized checks yielded 239 and 257 pounds of lint per acre. The highest general average yields obtained when fertilizer was placed in the furrow with the seed were for the placements of one-six- teenth and one-eighth of the fertilizer with the seed and the balance 3.5 inches to each side, or 332 and 329 pounds of lint per acre, respectively. When the fertilizer was applied at the rates of 250, 500, and 750 pounds per acre, the average yields were increased as the rate of ferti- lizer application increased. For all rates of fertilizer application the place- ment 3.5 inches to each side and two inches below the seed level gave the highest yield. Considering all the placements enumerated and discussed, it appears that the best results were secured when the fertilizer was placed 2.5 inches to the sides and two or three inches below the seed level. LITERATURE CITED 1. Cumings, G. A., Mehring, A. L., and Sacks, W. H. Field and Laboratory Studies of Fertilizer Distributors for Cotton. Agricultural Engineering, Vol. 11, No. 4, pages 149 to 160. 1930. 2. Cumings, G. A., Mehring, A. L., Serviss, G. H., and Sacks, W. H. Progress Report on Mechanical Application of Fertilizers to Cotton in South Carolina. U. S. D. A. Circular No. 192. 1931. 3. Lee, J. G._Cotton. Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin No. 27, Series 1, page 469, 1889; Bulletin No. 8, Series 2, page 185, 1890; Bulletin No. 16, Series 2., page 446, 1891; Bulletin No. 21, Series 2, page 630, 1892; Bulletin No. 29, Series 2, page 1025, 1893. 4. McBryde, J. M. Modes of Applying Fertilizers on Cotton. South Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, First Annual Report, pages 269 to 273, 1888; Second Annual Report, pages 316 to 320, 1889. 5. Musgrave, G. W. and Coe, D. G. Influence of Fertilizer Treatments on Stand or Germination of Cotton. Journal of American Society of Agrono- my. Vol. 19, No. 2, pages 171 to 180. 1927. 6 Musgrave, G. W., and Coe, D. G. Influence of Fertilizer Treatments on Maturity and Yield of Cotton. Journal of American Society of Agronomy, Vol. 19, No. 10, pages 910 to 923. 1927. 7. Proceedings of the Joint Committee on Fertilizer Application. 1925-1928. Bedding, R. J. Cotton Culture. Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin No. 39. page 125. 1897.