Soil Investigations in South Central Oregon

STATION
ual Pro gress Report, Fiscal Lear Ending June 30, 1952
ot Title:
Soil Investigations in South Central Oregon.
Sub-Project Titles: 1. Soil Fertility studies
2. Reclamation and Amendment Studies.
partments and cooperating A .ncle
.aab*.1 Experitiental Area
Lxtension Service, lar _th and Lake Counties.
Personnel
A. R. Halvorson, Proj t Leader
A. J.. Gross, Superintendent
lt Jendrzejew ski,
J. 0. Vertreen a.
Rstension Service.
Nature and Fxtent of Work Done This leer:
1.
Further InTomation was Obtained this past year
regarding the fertility status of the soils of
the KlaJath Basin. Thin wa obtained from results
from actual field trials, greenhouse trials, and
by studying the soils in the laboratory. The field
experiments were locatdd In a number of different
areas so as to get a. general Survey picture of as
muck of the basin as possible. Soils fro the
experimental plots were tented so that correlations
could be worked out between soil tests and actual
field trials.
.
2.
Reclamation and af,(:.ndment studies were quite limited
the past year. E02 rm work was done in the greenhouse
studying the results of various treatments in pots.
More treatments than would be possible to handle in
the field can be handled qdite easily in the green
house. Also, compared with field trials, resuls
can be obtained much sooner. The most promising of
the treatments will now be tried in the field. A
plot site was located last fall and staked out for
these trials.
.
4
Results. of the Project:
Major Accoplis:laritl : or Progress o f
Inception
its
,,
1.
Soil. Fertility Studies.
A picture of the general fertilit status o the
soils of the Klamat asin Is beginning to take
form. L:i general, the nitrogen reserves of the
Mineral Soils are low suppleal nitrogen
needs to be added for non-Legume croos.. The
phosphate reserves are consMerably better, but
Suppletal phosphate shDuAsi be added, particularly wher high producing crops such as lei;umes
and potatees are grown year after year.. The native supply of potash. in the 7kalneral soils is
quite high and generally no significant response.
from Ootasn fertilizatiOn. has been obtained.
There are no resqlts to 'date that would indicate
that the mineral soils need any suppleacntal
minor tle7le1ts.
.
-
The muck soils of the basin are very variable
from place to place as regards their fertiliser
needs. These fertilizer needs vary from requiring
ajor el
only one of t
nts to all three, and,
in some cases, also the _ inor elements - particularly copper or manganese, or both.nch more work
Is needed to define and delineate these areas. The
most apparent difference in muck areas now appears
to be that those in the Fort Klamath area are acid
and those of Lower Klamath are alkaline.
-
2. Reclamation and Amendment Studies.
Information has been obtained on the limits of
alkali which various crops can tolerate under our
conditions. Preliminary s1/2dies of the soil of
the station :Las pro vided d.ata which show that further improvement of the alkali condition has to
await better drainage. Greenhouse trials have
shown that with the proper use of gypsum in leaching, followed by fertilization with nitrogen and
phosphate, good growth of grass can be obtained
on soil which had previously been so alkali that
no growth was possible.
-
Major Results of the Year:
1. Soil Fertility.
Field experiments were expanded to include more
soil areas and a larger number of treatments. This
meant that a broader picture of the needs and problems could be obtained.
Bag responses t niroaea fertilization were
obtained In Lo out of three rain experiments
on theaaineral aoll. In Loth eases the yield
was about daabled where 60 pound of nitrogen
was appliaal. In the third case, some Increase
was obtaaaad but only about a 20' lnereaaea The
first t.: ; trials were on land that had not been
IA elover ar potatoes the previous year, but two
or more yadrs arevious. The third trial was on
a field. w"a107, had been ln potatala the previous
year. Apparently laaere wa0 sole unused nitrogen
fertilizer from the potato crop waicli carried over
for the rain. in all three trials the response
was aboua ths saaae tram either amonlaa. aUlfate,
ammonium nitrate or caleiala nitrate. r 'aaaareen"
did not seea to be quite: as effective. L. one of
the three trials there wao a decidedadvaatage in
fertilizer la bands below U.00: seed
Plaeln , a the
•
over sarface appliaatien Ia feet, in this one
ease, tha surface application wa8 of no benefit at
all. Laproper and insufficient irriaation can account for this. There was no response to phosphate
or potash in any of the three triala. All grain
trials were on land aaich aad grawn potatoes in
past rotations but on. only the one plot was the
grain the first crop after potatoes - the potatoes
having been fertilized, for the aost part, with a
nitrogen phosphate fertilizer (16-20-0), and, to
some extent, with a complete fertilizer (10-16-9
or 10-10-5).
-
,
-
Potatoes in the one experimental plot needed
large amounts of nitrogen for highest yields.
150 poands per acre each of nitrogen, P205 and
K20 gave a yield of 248 sacks of No. 1 potatoes
per acre, whereas no nitrogen but the same amount
of phosphate and potash gave a yield of 180 sacks
of No. 1 potatoes. This was on a field which had
also beea in potatoes the previous aaar. Only
very little, if any, response occurra from the
use of phosphate or potash. In the trial, 16-20-0
gave the largest yield. Where ammonium nitrate
-
was used as a source of nitrogen and mixed with
phosphate and potash, the second largest yield
was obtained.
There were five experimental plot locations on the
muck soil - two grain trials on Lower Klamath Lake
propBr, one by Keno, one on Upper Klamath Lake near
the mouth of the Williamson River, and one pasture
trial in the Fort Klamath area. These trials showed
that the muck soil is quite variable from place to
place. Improvement of the muck soils will Involve
more than the usual type of management and fertilizer practice - particularly those of Lower Klamath. These soils, in addition to needing nitrogen
or Phosate ; or both. - (:),Ains on the location
also nce6. one or E0i." of tc ylmor eleilts, and
so hav an excess of one - boron. To late, responses have been obtained froia copper with. barley on
Lowr N'ttith. Jxperi :lental Area. • Th past year,
on the sa area, responses to mananese were ab,tained. MAh alfalfa. A Combination . A capper and
manganes - witiA phosphate. - resulted in a very rer.
narkab:Isi ;; rowtil of alfalfa. Trials b Tulana Farms,
in Other locatIons on Lower 2.aa: .7t1).., have shown very
marked responses to'nanganeso wen eats are grown.
.
-
,-
,
.
-
-
Trials with c,hosahate o :1. Iznr Klanath PXperlimmtal
Area again verified the n ,i)d. tor phosphate fertilization on .t'clat area Sinfz.1 superphosphate proved
significantly better than treble superphosphate for
carrectin the phosphat deficlency. No reason can
be iven ill: ban;1 kor •hs'..s since previous trials
Showed no response to a:afar or ,,::., Also l analysls of drainao waters of tie area show considerable suliat present.
-
.
,
.
.
Fertilizer trials with barley on Upper Klamath near
the llliaason River, 'Go date have not given any
definite responses to any of the Miner elements', nor
have pastures in the 'Fort Klamath area. In the
Williamson River area last year large increases in
yields were obtained from nitro en with little or
no response to phosphate or potash.
The past year plota were located in an area more
highly organic. There appeared to be a slight
response to nitrogen and possibly some to phosphate.
In the Fort Klamath area, on native pastures, there
were responses to all thre : . of t. rajor eleMenta nitrogen ; phosphate arid potash - particularly from
nitrogen and phosphate. Grass growth was quite Outstandin where nitrogen wa applied. Where phoSphate Vq4 aoplied, increased., 'clover growth was very
evident. Vihere both nitroen and phosphate were
applied both clover and grass did well.
, ,
Soil samples, which were taken from each experimental
plot area, were tested for available phosphate and
potash in the laboratory. Soluble and exchangeable
potash were the potash forms tested for, as these
are generally assumed to be the available. forms.
Three different phosphate tests were used. One was
the :Bingham test which is used quite =II successfully in California and which they renort is a useful test on acid or calcareous •soil. Another was
the Truog test which is quite strongly recommended
for nen-calcareous soils by the U.S.Department of
Agriculture. The third method is that used In
Illinois by bray - also for non-calcareous soli.
In addition to the Bingham test, the last two tests
were used on all the past year's soil samples even
-
thou'A some were calcareous, because some informatioa ls provided by these tests.
On the mineral soils, no ainificant crop responses
from. phosphilte fertilizers. The• soil
were of
test val -Je obtained from test in these soils could
then 'be e.ssul.Jed to be "hifh for the -)a .- .4ztioular
failed. to re spona to th
oshate fertiaroo
lizer. Ain, in the case of the mineral soil, any
One )f t7.7Le tbre tests need will probably give good
correlatIon b Aween • oil tests and fertilizer needs.
,
snIfisart resTJore was obaIred ;Cron potash
oia
fertiliZgtian.
soil test values
can he aE,Slie fi t0
"Ms' froLi tbm soil tQst
stand i)oint. All test valus were about the same
excet tzle tastny Fan::. - where there ay have been
bnCfit from potas fertilization on potatoes.
,
-
Phosphate tests on the muck soils 77,ave considerably
irore tro ,.::..ble from the etrmdpoint of . both actual
cheloal _1.eterzy .ination ou from
correlation
with fertilizer needs - •-except for the acid muck
soils in t C Fort
There a definite
response was obtained. rm
osphate and•the soil
test values:were ulte for ;) (3. the remainder of
the muck area no deflnite ghc. sphate test pattern
has taken form. Undoubtedly, with further trials
and tests, a pattern of some sort will take form,
.
.
-
,
Only in the Fort Yllmath area., on the slightly acid
leaChea ruck soil, was there a. potash response.
Soileamplss from this area were the only soil
samples that tested low for potash.
The experimental work the past year on correlating
soil tests with actual fertilizer needs indicates
that, for the rr, ineral soil, suitable standards for
a soil testing program can be worked out in the
near future. This applies to phosphate and potash.
No correlation work has been done with a soil test
for nitrogen because there is no satisfactory rapid
teat for available nitrogen,
Work with the muck soil in the greenhouse, field
and laboratory has shown these soils to be quite
variable. Consequently, more work has to be done
before a definite pattern, either for the whole
area or by sections, can take fora. A suitable.
potash test standard appears more promising.at
the present than one for phosphate for the muck
area. however, one problem complicating correlation of crop responzes with phos ,. :flate or potash
fertilization on t.r, nck soils, is the deficiency
of minor elements in certain locations. Where these
are lacking the plants cannot fully and properly
respond to phosphate or potash.
In addition to
Qospbato and potash tests,
soil bfl,
.c.ntert and approxLate organic
::ac; been. deterlAned 'In the laboratory.
.Knowldge of these soil constituents is tmportant ir
tbe Tiatiagemet and behavior of the soli.
.: . t1.1dies in th.r: ::_:ircnhouse are 11-Ited nretty
mush to findin "i.sads and Indications. Iho past
year alfalfa. was planted In yzmck soil fro Lower
t
v.•'..x.perlrental tract and fertMzedwith
.j
varic)E rAnor elen:ent,F. A :.lefinitk- re,sponse was
:-.3.ahc;a7tlese
obtaineJ_
f.oer. This
was thr, trie(1 In the field and &I. .11ar responses
were obtained there. Thls is an exa.:410 Of the
use of the'greenhousein obtaining leads and indicatins. Further InforatIon wa gained on the
use of to
It was found that
copper could be applic a as a Foil apPlication,Or it could ho applied al.ost a effectively as
a spray, T e same Was true with. .J . ananese on
alfalfa, l.1; was snach.st:J.pler to find tnis out in
the gr1:11: :ouse than in the
,
-
,
. -
-
-
2. Reclamation and Amemiler,t Studies:
This past yefAr lcoo tLn 7: and effort Were spent on
this project. ::xj)rierital work on this problem
needs very clo
c7)ntrol. Good control would be
practical only herc;. at the station. Since we need
drainage before proF.ress can be made with reclamation, worh ha 4-aited drainage development.
,
,
Some work Was done in the labor a tory and greenhouse.
Soil so severely affected with alkali that no crops
would grow at all under fir.ld conitions - not even.
"salt 7rass"-was taken to th ;- reenhoue for various
treat(Jgents. Wherr_-: no treatent was given to the
soil, Leon's. alkali grass geralifiated and managed
to exist
.4ade very little jrov:th. Soil that
had been t: roughly leached wit ,yypsu.m to make the
soil porous and to remove the sodium, allowed a fair
growth ofLeaontS alkali grass, Alta Fescue and
Strawberry clover. The plants, however, were not
healthy and vigorous. Where nitrogen and phosphate
was applied to the leached soil the plants grew
very well and appeared normal in every respect.
Rither nitroen or phosi*ate alone gave only about
half the result of the combination. Fertilizing
the unle ached soil was of no benefit. These results
will be used as a guide for field trials for the
coming year.
,
-
Not as -much work on alkali tolerance of plants .
hf s hoer. ..;.one as on salt. tolerance. Since our
nar.r.all" sollE arc th true alkali soils rather
more infom_ation was wanted
than saline
on the al1.altolerance of the various crops.
Soil frole c1ifrt locations on the Station was
0 0 . 8,5, 9.0 and 9.5. In
selected for pH of
this case, only 1,)h •aS ated as a 'theaeure of the
(odi;a determinations
actual alkali
were yiarae later on). .i!lac h tes, soils as •
placc. in a box•abobt 5Ix IncAes.by 15. by 24.
There were two replic.ations of each soil. In
each planted .A,Tfalfa, Granri;er
hLover, _roegrnss, ah• two Strains
Lotus,
of Alta Cl'e_scue - one a stan3arC1 it am anc:.1 one
obtainc,d from Alta '.,.'escue seea gLowr1 oa ver ) alkaline area. Dn the stption, It was thought
Eorial tolerance to
pOssitly
alkali :In theorstrAn. anc' outstanding fact
- none of the al.)v'A crops •;,rew on soil
showed
with a c7 .7,Y.f 7).5. Alta Vescne and ,.:', rome germinated but soon c.1.sd.. Ot the 77.ining tiJree soils
growth ras prOressiv17 poorer as the 71.) went up.
re alkali tolerant
rai
Alta rescue WAS co.
than an other crop. Alsike Clovo dropped off
quite fast after pH 8.0. ihere was no apparent•
difference between the two ,strains of Alta Fescue.
There. WAS no striking differe in tolerance evident between alfalfa and lotns. ii;arly . in the
growth of the plants there appeared to be more
tolerance in t:ye alfalfa to tme alkali, but later
on this differ ,,;nce . waS no loner evident. Theearli difference :nay have been due to the fact
that lotus is slow In getting established,
,
Outlook;
1. Soil Fertility St;uAles.
With 7 tter ectioll . ei . lt available for putting in
exprilitaI plots, : , ore field work can be carried
out. ':;hile most of the Increase should go to the
biggest problem area - the thuck soil -the overall
field work progras should be larger this year than
amount of laboratory work done
before. Also should be greater as more facilities and help are
available.
2. Rec3amstion and Axneleent Studies.
Yore work will be unertaken this year on this pro-.
4 ect now that draina.P - e facilities are better on the
station. More prop:xest should "be possible on this
project with the irnprovea draina.ae as previous work
has shown the bigu.Et 7:: ,..a-ficap to reclamation on
the station has been poor drainage.
Practical Application of Results or Public Benefits:
With a soil testing service being set up at
Corvallis, the infornation obtained here from
field trials and. laboratory tests should help
considerably in makinF more accurate fertilizer
recommendations for the local farmers.
-
Indications fror grain trials are that nitrogen
fertilizer can very profitably be used on oats
or barley to increase yields. There are also
very good indications that pasture production
in the Fort Klamath area can be increased a
great deal - in the case of the trial it was
doubled.
Program for the Coming Year:
1. Soil Fertility.
Some increase in the overall programm will be
possible thie year It is planned that much
of this increase will go on the muck soil where the major problems exist. Work on these
soils will have to include a study of:
1. The use of the major elements.
2. The minor elements.
3. The extent to which excess boron is
contributing to the unproductivity.
4. The extent to which salt or alkali
is contributing to the unproductivity.
The
benefit to be derived from summer
5.
irrigation.
6. Other practices that might be suggested as more information becomes available.
Most of the work undertaken this year will be field
trials to get more information on the major and
minor elements - mostly on the minor elements. Various rates and combinations will be tried and, where
possible, spray applications will be compared with
soil applications. Soil samples will be taken for
greenhouse and laboratory studies - which will throw
more light on the alkali and boron problem.
Several trials will be located In various areas so
as to get a broader picture of the entire muck
area. In the Fort Klamath area most of the trials
will be with the major nutrient elements on native
pastures.
To supplement the information from any field and
laboratory testing that we might do here, additional information will be obtained on the minor
ii
elements from spectrographic, analysis made on
plant steeples from the various fertilizer plots.
Arrangements have been eaade with the Physics
Department at Oregon State College to make these
determinations on the various plant samples and possibly soil samples.
On the xrineral soil, trials with grain and potatoes are planned. Grain trials will be largely
to determine further the rate of nitrogen needed,
although soee trials will be conducted to study
the effect of nitrogen, phosphate and potash
singly and in combination. These trials will
again be scattered over the basin so the results
will have as wide an application as possible, At
least two to three potato trials will be planned.
These trials will give more emphasis to the study
of nitrogen rates this year than last. Previous
results indicate that nitrogen is the most immediate limiting element for potato production.
The potato trials can be handled easier this year
as we now have the belt type fertilizer distributor mounted on the culeivator in the place of the
regular side dressing equipment. This means that
we will not have to hael a potato planter around
and it eliminates the job of planting. The farmer
will leave an unfertilized area and the experimental plots put in as a side dressed application which will be done immediately after the farmer
has planted.
Some work will be done in cooperation with farmers
who are putting out trials of their own. For example, were a farmer is putting out a fertilized
strip of clover (fertilized With phosphate) and
leaves an unfertilized strip along side, soil
samples can be taken from the two sites and tested
for phosphate. Where the two strips can be harvested separately and separate yield determinations
made, additional information can be obtained for
correlation of tests with crop response.
Soil testing will be carried out to a greater extent than this past year, and possibly some chemical
analysis of plant material can be made - such as
protien and phosphate determinations on pasture
samples.
The greenhouse will again be used for pot trials to
obtain leads and indications.
2. Reclamation and. Amendment Studies.
A location on the station has been selected for
another soil amendment trial. With better drainage now available, it should be possible to get
12
some results fro• the use of amendments in experimental trials. Heretofore, drainage has limited
any progress. The proposed trial will be accompar?ied by a good leaching program. Before plantin the plots, part of each plot will be fertilized to compare reclamation with amendments alone
as compared with a reclamation treatment plus
fertilizer.
Also, Krilium will be trl.c oa alkali areas to
determine its effect in aiding reclamation. This
will be done mainly throuh field plots and where
we have as good control as possible over the plots
preferably on the station.
So .e krillum H ..lot s are planned for some of the
spots on th.. muck E,01,1. of Lower Eaimath.
if tle permits
few plDts :rxy also be put out in
cfl Valle on the
black clay soil along
it A.ver.Jf field. trIale aro not put out in
CX17.e, la'boratory an greenhouse
Vallr
work.will be aone.
:
13
The next Seven page are tables of sieemarized crop yield
eummaries of phosphete aed potash tests, and peie conductivity
and less' oh ignitien deterednations made in 1951. The followe
Lag will be an explaaatIon area a more detailed interpretation
of these. tables.
Table I, age
Under the olure of nitregea, those values that
have supereeeipte refers to the following carriers
of nitroeene
1. Geloiam nitrate
2. Ae:eoniam sulfate
eemonle].. ,it rate
4. euereee
eee two nitrogen values are folIn those case; lowed by the eeee superscript, the one with the
line underneath refers to a surface application of
the eitroeen whereas the ot'ner is a band application aoproxLeetely 3 inches eelow the seed. No
surface applieation was made of Nugreen.
The first three farms are elineral soil - the ateetny
farm in the vicinity .of Malin, i.=Oele fare near 'rrill
and Blackman farm near Xlamath ails. The second three
farms are muck soil Oopco on jpper Klielath near the
mouth of the leilliaeeea River, Bureau Lease Land on
Lower Klamath, and Kerns on Lower 111.eath near Keno.
Kerr farm is in Lake County on dry land, mineral soil,
only about four years out of sagebrush.
.
The yield of barley on the Staetny farm was low, even
with high rates of fertilizer, because of inadequate
moisture. Also, the grain was planted a little late.
Following planting there was a spell of dry, hot weather which likely had an unfavorable effect on the
crop. The crop previous to this was gain. Two years
previous the crop was potatoes.
.
-
On the uale kern, the previous crop was potatoes
which had been fertilized. The grain was planted quite
early and planting was followed by quite favorable weather. Moisture was not lacking for this crop.
-
On the Blackman farm, the grain tAal had been preceded
by two previous drain crops, none ef which had been
fertilized. PrecedinE these grain crops was a potato
crop which had been fertilized. iere also, conditions
were quite favorable after plantine. However, a great
deal of wild oats came in, in spots, in this area and
this undoubtedly had some influence in producing the
erratic results obtained.
Both phosphate and nitrogen rates were used in the
three trials on the muck as responses had been obtained previously from both. Also, the minor elements
were included as responses had been obtained from their
use in several locations. Following are the fertilizer
carriers ueed:
lfate
- . zicron : :.
:,7 superphoshato
.50% sulfate of potash
.
,iopper 8111 .La1;p. (':::;'.,:i A _ 15#:
. • ::.i.ana Ti:::se aitate 65 50#
.
..1.roil ;:•:.-.,1'2;...i ate 5.0i /A.
BitroLen.
Photaate
Potash.
Copper
ManLannse
Iron •
-
,
.
-
.
.
.
-
;..-
od on the Coco plot
The yield of barley was qut
and it wasn't AnfP:Lenced 11,ue .i by any 'fertilizer treatment. On the oir two plots the yields Were rather
low and wrentt influenced .0.1 ach by anyfertilizer
possibl:f the Kern plot which seemed
treat fit,
to .respond s.-.Ty.what to nitrogen. In the•CaSe Of the
latr two :10s Jere are apparently Other factors
lILIItI.I o. :oduction tnan t:,])se WJI.ch were atte:apted
t'fle .asal fertilizer applicatione.
to be redIed.
had sog,n in5auoe In causing the
Ono fact : a
plots and that 15 possilow yields In tILse
-,.
-
.
,
sorin rains follOwed
bly a lack
plantLug and. this Ian(1
winter Irrigation pluc depc.‘Adent upon moisture from
rains during ,the growing
The :err plots were on dry lana
Ine County and
hnve as on the
only half as cilach
oontaih as many
irrigated lama. hi Th plot does
ncc it was ::.J.ore Dr less an
treatents :as the oters
exploratory type of plot.
,
,
gives t Eiliaarized yields from an
Table 2, pagej
alfalfa plot on Lower Yitv:.ath , :ikperiental Area, pasture yields from atrial rl.lar 7.ort Z,,larith, and yields
from potato plots near Malin.
,
.
-
Alfalfa was planted in small plots on Lower Klamath
to cheek in the field acid° of the responses obtained
in the greenhouse. Lar: ;:e responses In the greenhouse
were obtained from phosphate, copper and manganese.
n,2e was from phosphate, but copper
The largest
and manganese 3.a771 alone with phosphate gave still
:
,,-
greater res i)onLe. Tncre phosphate, cope and manganese wereall applied, best results were obtained.
response was obtained from
In the field a very I.
phosphate. Additional increases fro. copper and manganese were not as large in the field as they were in
the :•.Inenhause. Viewing the plots in the field, one
would have guessed that those plots receiving little
copper or :i.ananese with. hos ;:hate would have yielded
more. Thn plot with all three looked considerably
bettor and had a darker : ,reea color and blossoming
started. earlier and proressed consierablyfarther
than any of the other plots. here again l super
phosphate was used as the source of phosphorous.
-
• .
.
.:.
While barley has not responded to manganese treatments - either as a sI:1 ;. a; or soil application alfalfa did respond. Whether the 1 ananese status
-
.
,
5.. such that it i$ sliftic.:.1...,Dht for barley and not
for ali ....1to lt.no '.,. :,••knp .iv;Ta. PosSibly not ena7.14,...,h• !..:aanrnese J.; tas usd. as the soil applicatio.r. bov:ever )
v.'LL-.. .fl 6 1- .1,-.4ane;:ls was sra'; aplie.d a
z.1'.7s.:ount v.:s.s used Lo there sh., ..yulL baVe .=.;cen soTe.re .
sponse, li there Lad been a deficienc .y. :n.is work
will be err:!;.. farer in the next seas:Jill..
-
,
-
.
-, -
,
,
-
,
7
-
arted out data 7;:o.s obtain
Two pasture trials wsre ed from on.1;.J. one as livetc,lo .,ot into the other
plot. This trial va2, of an. exploratory nature just
to get So.(.=. .,e oreliinary information for further eX...
tonsilFe tr.tals. liltrogen used here was amronr1 9
nitrate 03e :[1 : USed 'With phonate or potash. .:±here.
ulfate was ued. Copper waS
used alone,. u71zonit incidad 1•,_ :,:re .ocaus• other aroas on te :Hick had been
found low Incopper. ;.':fnbclquelit analysis of torae
from thcr _7ort ILI..4...,:l.FAth. area nas snwn tbat the cols12,.er
content ll. te iorae Is :, 1E,hor tf:.an :Jat ir•ri.• Lover
Klamath SO vory 17L'ke1 ;:i no copce ]:- rs 0 ,:ne would be
evident.
-
-
-
-
-
.
.
.
, .
,
-
-
-
.
.
-
Only one potato plot was carried hrouib to completion. In this trial various; rates of nitrogen )
phosDhato and potash were tried holdin.:: two of the
elcents constant while vary1n6 the ot...ler. The
Stastny field ,..lad been in potatoes the.previOuS ear.
The res 1...onse in the trial was ;Jainly to nitrosen....
l'hosphate Eavo little ot no rcspoAse, Very likely'be- •
cause of the previos cio of fertilir on potatoes •
in previoua rotations. H2bePhOs;;:hat .:J.7 „ .7ply• was evidently quite high. The natiVo•suppl ;Jf loOtash is
high since no sinificant response as obtained, and
no residual potash would be present since little or
no potash fertilizer has been used In the past. Just
for coys;pariSon ) 16-20-0 (a=onium phosphate) was used
at a rats. to supply 100 pbun .5.s'of nitrbcen' and cornpared. witll a Sillar quarity of nitrogen and phosphate ,:::adF, fro a,T.Ioniu. sulfate a'::I 3.. single superphos
phate. Inc fist .asterisk - follo'vis t" Ic..1 treatuent •
is the aLiaioniu„ phos ,?hate and the send treatent with
the asterisk is the mixture ..of Ray?onilLi sulfate and.
single superphosphate.
-
.
.
, -
.
,-
-
-
-
,
,
,
The last treatent witYti the three asterisks Indicates
that the rlitIgn t.7( :6 'Is LcLff ,onl nitrate instead of
ammonlaza sulfat as vis the case with the other treatments.
.
,
,
-
The reainder of the tables are self-explaining.
SU
Lbs. per acre
Plant Nutrients
P205
.1,22
0
60
0
0
60
60
0
30
60
90
60 1
60 1
60 2
77
60 3
60'1
0
60
60
60
60
60
60
0
90
0
90
0
90
90
90
90
0
0
Q
0
0
0
0
30
GO
90
90
90
90
0
0
0
50
0
50
50
50
50
50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
AT
OF YIELDS
8U/A FROM 1951 GRAIN PLOTS
Bannchen
parley
lina:h en
y
Barley
Markt on
Oats
Blackman
15.2
42.3
17.1
13.2
38.2
42.7
17.8
36.2
36.5
51.1
37.4
13.5
28.0
14.6
42.3
15.6
31.0
79.6
100.0
83.4
34.0
75.3
36.8
39.5
78.0
49.0
41.3
43.2
69.0
52.6
81.0
50
50
50670u
50ALn
50&Ve
502zOlaMn&Fe
rI .4
98.4
30.9
99.0
97.0
.
63.4
70,5
65.5
76.0
6'2,4
61.0
64,7
77.8
Ilannchen
Barley
Copco
Overat nd
Oats
Bureau
Over
Oats
Kern
63.1
79.0
60.2
67.5
75.1
62.4
65.5
72.0
69.8
67.5
34.9
47.8
39.6
40.5
43.2
40.4
35.9
45.2
41.3
38.8
25.1
42.0
23.9
23.9
33.1
23.0
19.8
42.2
37.2
27.9
65.7
69.5
65.2
69.2
69.7
63.6
42,2
44,2
45,8
41.8
37.4
40.9
42.0
37.0
40.0
29.2
31,8
41.7
41.0
58.2
62.8
51.2
*On dry 1and in Lake C cy Int;y• - only half the indicated plant nutrients used.
,
nd.
Ltannchen
Barley
Ktirrit25.3
37.0
22.6
16.7
29.4
33.6
15.9
33.4
Klar th Alfalfa (Dry Weight)
one /A
110
110
110
110
110
.68
1.70
1.68
1.62
1.71
1.89
ek
20
50
20
50
.07
ri Kern stun
Lb f2Oci
50
50
50
50
50
50
90
t lents
K20
ausrManl...Namism*
Tons
Cu
2.47
2,80
3.37
3.69
3.71
3.90
3.84
4.24
4.35
4.47
50
90
50
50
90
90
50
90
50
500
25
Stastny Potato Plots
bs
A
50
100
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
100
100
150
NI
, 0 50
150
150
150
150
0
50
100
150
150
150
125
125
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
0
50
100
0*
0*
150***
Sacks No.1
137
180
194
208
248
240
240
257
224
259
237
288
244
234
No.1
3.1
63.5
67.2
66.8
71.8
71.4
70.5
72.5
70.5
74.8
71.5
77.2
75.8
74.1
Total
Sacks
216
283
287
310
346
335
339
354
317
345
330
373
321
382
3P.E.FL
1 1LD
-
Treatment 21-21A
Ck
200
200
400
400
600
600
800
800
51.4
51.2
42.4
57.2
37.2
59.5
46.7
47.2
34.7
SP
TSP
SP
TSP
SP
TSP
SP
TSP
a*
Ck
200
400
600
BOO
600
600
600
& 20 Cu
& 20 Cu.
& 20 Cu
& 20 Cu
& 10 Cu
& 30 Cu
& 40 Cu
I*
Ck
Cu
Fe P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
& Cu
& Cu ()
& Cu (
& Mn (6)
& Zn (S)
& Cu & Mh
& Cu & Zn
& Cu Sc. Pe
& Fe (S)
='‘, _)7 ,.3 rphosphate
SP
TSP - 4:4 2re 1a SwTrphosphate
-
.
-
The numbers before tile 'letters
indicate aotual'pounds per acre
of sinjlaa super:OhotPhate o
j:; i..:ocrs before TSP indicate treble
vaperphosphate equivalent to that
:any po'ands of single super.
.
6*
.
a*
*
law
01.
VI•re
num:oers refer to lbs /a of
supt)rphosphate.•
Oueans oopper sulfate. Numbers
before Cu indicate the pounds of
copper sulfate per Acre.
57.4
56.1
53.3
58.0
62.9
63,0
56.2
70.0
ff.
- 1951
*
*PM
Du - copper sulfate
Fe - Iron sulfate
P - 500 lbs of 184 sum phosphate
in
',aanganese sulfate
Zn - Line sulfate
(6)- where it follows Cu,Mn,Zn or
Fe, indicates a spray ical
application. The number inside
the bracket In .fAcates the numbar of spray applications.
36.6
41.8
36.6
48.6
42.4
45.5
43.6
45.0
32.6
46.8
41.8
45.3
45.3
,
*
.01*
las
41.
119a
7.1a
SW
aell
0.
41,1a
11••
*IL
*I.
In all cases, except where indicated, the fertilizers are band
applied below the seed. Unless spra,cd on, the minor elements
were mixed with the phosphate.
OM
*1
CT)
SOIL pE..* AND C10;.CDJOTIVWX** OV
1951 Plot Sites
R0).
Depth
0-6
Blackman
6-12
12-16
0-6
tastny
6-12
12-18
0-6
Quale
6-12
0-6
6-12
. i,utty
0-6
J. 2,t. rn
6,-12
12-18
0-6
6-12
New-.'.0tand 12-18
0-6
Copco
6-12
laath
12-18
0-6
B. 'i.,:ern
6-12
Ft „:62I_Jvith
0-8
8-16
16-22
'Zxi.11t
la
7. 10
20
8.1
12
7.8
4
7.0
4
7.5
8
7,5
8
6.5
4
6.5.
10
6.2
4
6.3
44
8.1
8.2
50
22
8.1
180
7.6
1Q0
7.6
3(X)
7.6
60
:3..2
CO
.::',.4
6.2
6.3
8.0
7.9
7.7
7.
7.9
7.9
6.7
7.0
7.5
6.4
6,2
6.3
6.6
8,2
:..,.3
d.4
6.9
af..6
5,6
6.2
8.1
8.0
8.1
16
10
4
4
4
4
4
4
38
34:
280
240
300
60
60
h
_LI....
7.3
8.0
7.6
7.0
7,2
7.4
6.4
6.3
6.5
6.2
8.3
8.4
8.2
7.1
7.3
7.9
8,2
8.5
8.4
8.1
7.8
7.7
4
16
14
4
4
10
4
4
4
4
41
48
55
340
320
220
70
50
44
7.8
8.1
7.6
6.4
7.1
7.3
6.4
6.0
KX 105
4
16
12
4
4
4
4
4
8.5
8.4
8.3
7.5
7.6
7,2
50
56
65
3(X)
340
300
8.0
7.5
7.7
*pH on. r:oll Paste
**Oondctivity on 11 soil water extract on xAneral soil except on Bureau Lease
soil 1 o Boil to .3 of water.
Land oi1, Copeo soil and Wanpler 0-6
(Vast) 6-12
0-6
(west) 6-12
Vicho1son0-6
(south)6/12
0-6
(idd1e)6-12
0-6
(.)6-12
5.5
5.7
5.6
5.6
6.1
6,1
6.1
5.8
5.8
6.3
fT SOIL U.O.OSPJIATE AND POTASH cUSTS •
.
Uingham
PPM PO4
ppe,777
xtraot in soil
rra
Blackman
St astny
quale
R.H.Kerr
J. Kern
Bureau
Copeo
E. Kern
L:Klamath
Wampler
Nicholson
Stastn
spuds
0-6
6-12
12-18
0-6
6-12
12-18
0-6
6-12
0-6
612
0-6
6-12
-18
0-6
6-12
12-18
0-6
6-12
12-18
0,4;
6-12
0-8
8-16
16-24
0-6
6-12
0-6
6-12
0-6
6-12
12-18
.98
.60
.24
1.26
.97
.84
1.36
1.11
.93
.27
1.01
.59
.27
.43
.24
.14
3,6742.96
2.34
1.07
• 1.72
1.28,
.27
.32
T
.14
3.29
1.99
.85
4.28
5.28
2.84
4.53
3.72
3,18
.98
3.32
1.93
.91
1.61
.80
.41
19.10
10.9
9.4
T
41.
3.53
5.71
3.34
.91
1.12
T
T
43.4
31.1
28.4
57.4
51.3
44.8
53.5
52.3
22.2
9.6
52,3
45.5
26.7
155.8
113.4
61.4
65.3
9.7
13.5
9.7
28.2
26.4
11.5
6.4
3.6
14.2
18.2
19.4
81
65
65
108
90
85
102
92
38
22
94
85
52
156
120
62
18
12
19
54
84
Soluble and
Fxchangeable K
in PPM in soil
468
409
345
325
341
453
405
308
680
647
415
195
97
442
330
308
436
123
200
90
T
20
14
17
22
79
90
87
102
91
76
Bingham - Phosphate tests for grain land. California Agriculture Vo1.4,No.12 p.7 Dec 1950
Rethods of Soil Analysis for Soil ' 2 ertility Investigations. USDA Clr.No.757
Truog
Bray - Determination of Total, organi & available forms of phosphorous In soil.
(Acid s)luble phosphate)Soll Science Vol.59 No. 1, p.43, Jan.1945
Potash test - Testing Aissouri Soils by F.R.Graham.Cir.345,College of Agr.UnAm.of Mo.
.Sta.ar 1950
sulay
(phosphate in PPM of in soil)
1950,r..,RINTAL PLUTS
lqharn*
,r_ YD4
n txtract
Truo:c*
St e bilenson*
0-6
6-12
12-18
65
50
28
155
110
50
10.8
8.1
3,1
3=2
2,5
.95
69
48
16
Finehum 0-6
6-12
12-16
29
41
19
100
95
44
1.7
1,9
1.2
.52
.58
.37
39
40
14
Lyon
0-6
6-12
12-18
61
50
45
123
136
110
3.9
3.4
1.6
1.2
1.0
.49
14
17
8
quale
0-6
6-12
12-18
27
38
33
102
109
81
1.9
1.3
.5
.58
.40
.15
7
7
5
*Ref
o the method of testing used.
Cope°
Truog
s given in Aethods of Soil Analysis for Fertility
Investigations. U.S.D.A. Cirvular No, 757
Bray - As given in Soil Science, Vol.59,No.1,p.43 (Acid
Soluble Phos.) Jan.1945
Bingham
As given in Oalifornia Agriculture (Phosphate Tests
for Grain Land) Vol.4,No.12,p.7. Dee.1950
Stephenson - Method used by R.B.Stephenson, Soils Dept.,
Oregon State Colle g e for class work testing.
Loss on Ignition and Loss on Heating Air Dry Soils at 100 Deg.C.
cJ
?arm
c3ls:6757E1
1951 Plotamples (All based on per cent loss)
th
Re . 1
D
0 1cm.
0
3.8
2.8
.0
2.9
.10 4.0
2.51
.69 3.2
2,44
.96 3.4
2.72
1.08 3.8
2.'30
1.00 4.4
2.50
44,2
1.70
1.73 6.6
4,26
1.94 6.2
7.00
3.00 10.00
3,50
1.70 5.2
2.43
1.37 3,8
6.00 24.6
6,17
17.62
21.6
7.(0 29 2
71.7.? 2
23.3
,
6-12
12-18
3tastny
0-6
(3-12
12-18
'4uale
0-6
6-12
C.err
0-6
6-12
(Lake0ounty)
3' „Kern
0-6
6-12
12-18
0-6
Bureau
TJeaseLand
6-12
12-18
0-6
opoo
(Upper.l..wmth) 6-12
12-18
3.27 14.0
0-6
Kern
6-12 2.37 10,0
t *Klamath
-8 12.64 59.4
8-16 9.84
16-22 9.20 41.0
0-6
1.50 3.6
3tastny
6-12 1.83 4.0
(arrad,s)
32-18 1.60 4.0
'.fl.
,
10.73
7.63
46,76
29.96
31.80
2.17
2.4
ii2 O
Re • 2
I .
Dr L
-
1.
1.06
1.38
1.10
.58
1.17
1,60
1.20
1.80
2.10
3.00
1.30
1,80
5.93
5.36
5.17
6,01
6,39
21.0
21.2
28,0
19.2
2.74
2.62
2.9
3.22
2.83
2.8
3.0
5.4
4.7
7,4
2.7
2.0
14.87
15.64
16.03
21.99
12.81
2.44
2.00
13.46
9.16
7.46
1,40
1.64
1.26
13.6
8.3
61.8
32.3
27.8
3.8
3,2
3.2
11.16
6.3
48,34
23,14
20.34
2.4
1.56
1,94
3.8
4.0
4.0
3.8
4.0
4.4
4.2
7.2
6.3
10.4
4.0
3.8
20.8
3
0
.26
.37
Rep. 3
n
.89
1.08
1.30
1.61
1.80
2.00
2,84
2.38
1.60
6.26
6.60
5.06
7.18
7.81
6,07
4.0
3.2
3.4
4.0
3.8
4.0
4.4
6.4
5.8
11.2
8.6
3.4
22.0
23.6
22.0
28.4
25.4
20.4
14.10 61.0
9.93 38.0
9.10 40.4
1.49 4.0
1.01 4.0
1.51 4.0
.4
Dr Loss
2.74
1.83
2.51
2.92
2.5
2.39
4.60
3.8
8.36
6.22
1.80
15.74
17.0
16.94
21.22
17.59
14.33
1.4
1.46
1.00
1.00
1.17
4.0
4.0
4,0
3.4
5.0
1.36 4.6
2.70
1,90 /75?
1.64 //,67
5.29 22.0
5.46 21.8
5.59 19.2
46.90 12.80 59.1
28.07 10.43 48,4
31.3
9.71 44.2
2.51
2.99
2.49
2.6
2.54
3.0
2,4
2.23
3.24
g.56
-
16.71
16.34
13.61
46.3
37.97
34,49
23
,TTQ
7..1
T 0
1951
Muck Soil Lower Klamath - Barley
Surface soil taken just west of 1950 ferti zer trials.
Two replications.
Treatm r .s
f.,-.
3.
P
Grams
Phos.
Ou
P , '311 Y(Z n sray)
4. POu.-(ZnIFe spray)
3. T5:cou 9.7nFe
6. P .,Cut., (Fe sp ray)
7. P
B. P ),, Ln
9, P Fe
10. P ,:, ( ,,n spray)
11. P ,,,, (Fe sray
12. 'D , ,,.7 çLn 6. Fe spray)
13. P & -Ln .'s Cu spray
14. P (',c(Cu spray )
35. P & ,-;a , Cyp
)
5
5
5
5
5
5
.5
.5
0010 .0 41100
Spray
spray spray
.5
.5
spray
00.0000.
.5
5
G00 N. 0.1
5
5
CO0
leowas*
5
01•7 al* 400
spray
spray
.1
5
00,
spray
.5
spray
spray spray
spray spray
.00.010
spray
spray
15
inch pots used.
In all cases the phosphate and the minor elements were mixed
with the soil. All minor elements used are the sulfate
(Tennessee Corp. I.E.
Pots planted to Hsnnchen Barley Jan. 11, 1951.
Purpose: To further verify - the beneficial effect of the minor
elements on tbis soil ana to further study their application
by spray and soil methods - especially . copper as v.. toll ann.,
cation and. On as s spray. Phosphate was 18% super-phosphate.
Jan,2? - First spraying of minor elements one-tenth of a
gram of each element - Fe,Zn,Cu, weighed out and dissolved
in. about 50 cc r)f. E120; about 8 cc out in the atonizet and
about 2 cc 'sprayed an the plants In each pot. In each case
just a trace of citric acid, was at in each stock bottle containing the minor elements. Where there was to 'cc 'a mixture
of the minor el ,vm.nts sprayed on the above indiviaual solutions were TIY;(1 and the resulting mixture sprayed - at
proportionately larger doses.
'1.
Jan. .29 - iiew solutions of iron, and any of the mixtures of
-Ade fresh fcr each spraying. (ferrous sulIron, have 6o
Just a trace of detergent used as a wetting agent
late used
Fab .
Feb. 8
No minor 'IL s sprA7 d on ]Voray - , Feb.
(Conference in Corvalli, 'ca sprayed Feb.? and Feb.8.
(p.1)
March 9 - Lights started - on at dusk - on for 4 hours.
March 12 - Up to now t pots not receiving copper showed
symptoms just like those described as copper deficiency in
oats and wheat - rollin of terminal leaves and then drying
and death. of the end of this leaf and the next younger ones ,
However - on March 12 the rolling of terminal leaves was
noticed on some of the pots receiving copper. Could the use
of lights have affected this?
March 16 - heavier rate of M.F. applied - 1/2 gm. /50 cc 2 cc of this /pot.
March19 - Spray application of minor elements at a heavy
rate - from here on once a week .sprayed.
.
a rch_26 - Last spray of Minor F.,ent
- Harvested.
Yield i c27rams
-,
er
DO
eld
Rep. 2
Rep.
Treatment
12.6
9.7
Ck
1.
5.0
15.2
2. P
17.0
3, -) 1 Cu 17.4
Zn 1 re
.
19.2
19.8
P
8c(Fe
spray)
4.
27.2
14.0
5. P Fk. (Zn spray)
24.8
19.0
6. P
27.0
20.0
spray)
7.
23.7
24.5
(All
d
spray)
8. P
25.0
25.0
Pe
9. P
28.6
29.0
P
&
(Cu
spray)
10.
32.2
'.2
P
Sr
Cu
11.
28.0
32.0
P
&
Cu
0,
(Zn
Fe
spray
12.
33.1
Gypsum
-.›.(Zn
re
spray)
31.0
P
'A
Cu
13.
33,7
30.6
a
(Zn
spray)
14. P
2
35.0
Cu Yz ('0 spray)
P
15.0.5
-
Average
11.2
10.1
17.2
19.5
20.6
21.9
24.0
24.1
25.0
28.8
29.2
30.0
32.0
32.2
32.3
NOTES F3 ItiVTIIRF_ TJS:124, All plots receiving copper. looked good and
had good heads - except where zinc was applied as a soil application with copper. Then the plants were only slightly better than
plots with no copper.
Iron may havr had a sliht beneflcIal effect as n. spray
none noticeable as a soil application.
Zinc as a spray may have been •li,z.htly brneficial-h.7t doubtful.
Copper as a spray very effective but not as effective as soil
application. This may hgve been due to the fact that the arrount
of copper applied was too smalls
Early in the growth of the barley there WRE a .definite roll
curl
of the terminal leaf of thrr barley on the pots not receivor
ln.g the copper. Shortly after the lights were sf•:tsd this showed u
and. z;rowth
up sane on the pots with cooper, however, not as was not restricted.
(p.2)
Tql1ALS - 195 1
Ruck soil Lower Alazuath - Alfalfa
Surface soil used - taken just west (center) of 1950
fertilizer trial plots.
6 inch pots used.
Two replications.
Treatments
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Ck
P
P & Cu
P Zn
P & Cu
P & Cu
Mn
P
P
Cu
P & Cu
P & Cu
&
&
&
&
1.7
1.7
1,7
1.7
Zn
1.7
(Zn S raT'
1.7
Mn
1.7
(Zlin Spray)
1,7
Zn
spray) 1.7
Ma 40 gam
.1
.1
NM ON
.1
.1
.1
■*.110
*no 41*
*MOW.*
Ibra
AIM, WO. MO
-.1
.1
S or ay
Spray
.1
.1
Spr ay
Spray
.1
In all cases the fertilizers were mixed with the soil
Pots planted Jan. 17 to Ranger alfalfa.
Purpose: To study the effect of various fertilizers on the
growth of alfalfa - a possible future crop on the soil of
Lower Klamath area. The minor elements used were all as the
sulfate. Tennessee Corp. M E
1st spray application Feb. 1 - same rate as used on grain
1 on /50 cc and about 1-2 cc of spray used.
No ME spray Feb. 5 but sprayed Feb. 8
Apparent response already to Mn - quite pronounced on ck.
March 16 - stronger solution of
used - 1/2 gm In 50 cc and
spray applied only once this week and from here on.
March 19 - Sprayed once this week and g once a week Iron, now on.
'Mrch 26 - Last spray of ME.
NIUS FOR REIPRCf:: There was early response to Ln - possibly
more so than to any other minor ele(nent. Phosphate showed up
early too. Check pots remained at about 2 Inch height for a considerable 15,ngth of time. Then shortly after lights came on
there was considerable lengthning of stems. Also, at about time
lights came on, or somewhat after, the P Mn was no longer the
best. There was an apparent yellowing of the leaves. The P
Mn apr ared about the best - a full dark green color.
Cu
Blossoming also began first on this, followed by any that had
cop T r.
co'
Yield In grans per pot (air dry wt) of alfalfa
Grand
4tnClttin)-Jct.10
3rdCnttinu,-A 7.1
2nd6uttinT-Ja
lstCuttiny
Ave.
ReP.1
Rep.2
Ave.
Averar
r,ep.1
t
ep.2
-71ve . La2,1 T ep . 4,
Tratreat
3.5
.83 .845
.86
2.05
2.
1.9
4.
4.8
4.6
4.65
4.4
4
•• •
(317
6.2
4.5
4.6
4.4
4.25
4.9
3.6
7.1, 5
7.3
2.4
7.5
7.9
7.1
2, P
5.9
3.8
4.1
4.4
4.15
4.0
4.3
6.4
6.1
7.7
8.35
7.6
9.1
,
3. P
7.8
4.55
4.3
4.8
5.15
5.7
4.6
7.65
7.6
7.7
10.35
19.7
10.0
4. P
9.3
5.05
4.4
5.7
6.2
6.6
5.8
11.1 11.75
12..4
14.1
13.2
15.0
5, P & Cu
7.9
5.25
5.7
4.8
5.3
5.7
5.9
8.9
8.2
-.85 7.a
7.7
10.0
6. P&Cu': -Y ,7.,,
9.7
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.5
5.4
5.6
11.35
12.A
16.15 10.3
13.0
16.7
r ,-7. P & Ca H
).6
5.6
5.5
...)....)
5.85
5.3
6.4
12.5 71.6
15.45 19.5
115.3
lb .6
8. P & Cu :,. Ln. 0.3
5.5
5.7
5.3
5.65
6.8
5.5
72.0 11.5
11.0
14.7
L' .3
Cu(AZplawid4.1
9. P
10.P & Cu & Zn
9.1
5.8
5.9
5.7
5.8
5.2
6.4
9.4 13.55
13.35 15.7
11.9
14.8
(Mnray. )*
11.P 9 Cu &
9.0
5.05
5.1
5.0
6.55
6.3
6.3
11.0 11.2
11.4
13.0
11,3
Spray)* 14.7
(ZrIc.
.
.
,
Arranren2 ent 2_.).y rank
1. Check
Ln
2. P
3, P
4, P . C4 Mn
5. P Cu & Fe
6. P Cu & (Zn&Mn Spray)
7. P & Cu & Zn (Mn Spray)
3. P & Cu
9. P&Cu&(ZnSpraJ . )
10. P S.: Cu & Zn
11. P & Cu. & Mn
Grand Aver
L4 .5
5.9
6.2
7.8
7.9
9.0
9.3
9.3
9.3
9.6
9.7
*No spray treatment of minor elements after 1st cutting.
1951
TRIALS
e'
•
Will Olackman soil Alsike Clover
Previous crop - oats
Treatmen
1. Ck
2. P
3. K
4. PK
5. N
6. NPK
ME
7. P
8. P&13
Mo
9. P
10. PK & Mt
CaCo3
11. P
CaCo3
12. P
Ca0o3
13, P
1.7
.,5"
•5
Mo
.5
1.7 .5
A. 1.7
1. r/
1 I-7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
.5
.03
.
1.7
1.7
1.7
trace
trace
*The minor elements used were: copper, manganese, zinc, iron as
the sulfate, each at about 40 lbft except zinc at 20; Boron as
Borax about 30-40 lb/a, and sodium mol;bdate at at race sprayed on the soil at the tine, of mixIng (about 1 lb/a).
Tennessee Corp. M.E. used except Mo as reagent grade.
Nltrosen used was ammonium sulfate; phosphate 18% super-phosphate;
and Potash 60% muriate of potash.
Purpose: To try to find out if any of the fertilizers are limiting
the production of alslke.
6-inch pots used.
Two replications.
In all cases the fertilizers were mixed with the soil. The
molybdenum was applied as a spray to the soil before mixing.
Pots planted to alsike Jan. 16, 1951.
DRY WITIGET OP ALS .,:-Y (in grams per pot) FROM. GRYF.NHOUTh TreatmfTt
1st cutt1nF-41.
r- - 2
il
P
X
PK
NP1(
PK at ME
P at 8
P A ' ' ' :T
P x .4:7
P e=': L '',, Mo
P & iv;o.
P & L
Ck
7.5
11.6
0.2
10.9
10.7
5.5
8.7
7.5
3.6
7.1
10.0
7.7
5.2
8.1
12.5
9.5
10.5
12.3
6.7
10.8
8.6
10.0
10.0
8.8
6.5
7.6
7.8
12.0
7.8
10.7
11.5
6.1
9.7
8.0
6.8
6.5
9.4
8.1
6.4
ep
6.0
15.0
6.0
18.0
16.0
13.0
14.0
16.0
12.0
16.0
14.0
14.0
4.0
Cat
IPL iTi VILL BLACKA.NtS SOIL
Ig-Rme26
1ep.2 Ave.
7.0
12.0
7.0
17.0
16.0
17.0
14.0
13.0
7.0
8.0
11.0
11.0
6.0
7.5
13.5
6.5
17.5
16.0
15.0
14.0
14.5
9.5
12.0
12.5
12.5
5.0
Grand Average
4.4
6.7
3.8
4.8
5.5
4.0
7.7
6.3
6.3
4.7
3.5
4.9
4.8
3.5
5.4
4.0
4.8
0.0
2.6
4.1
7.1
2.0
4.5
5.5
4.6
3.4
3.8
6.0
3.9
4.8
6.0
3.6
5.9
6.7
4.2
4.6
4.5
4.8
4.1
6.4
10.5
6.1
11.0
6.4
8.4
9.9
9.7
6.8
8.4
8.8
8.5
5.2
(T)
-HQSPHATE TESTS ON SOIL951 '1,0' SITES •
fl
Stastny
(grain)
cu ale
Kerr
J. Kern
Bureau
LeaseLand
Cope°
Upper.
Klamath
B.Kern
Pt ,]math
L.K..A.
Wampler
N1clon
Depth'BinOam T
0-6
1.01
47
6-12
.64
28
12-18
24
.18
0-6
1.09
62
6-12
1.06
55
12-18
.61
40
0-6
1.10
53
6-12
.80
50
1.01
22
0-6
.12
6-12
9
0-6
1.16
57
6-12
.58
42
12-18
.43
30
.64
0-6
120
6-12
.49
109
.30
12-18
52
0-6
3.67-1.66
6-12
3.12
19
12-18
0-6
.09
11
6-12
T
29
1.19
24
0-8
8-16
1.93
10
T
16-22
1.22
.36
0-6
7
.46
15
6-12
T
18
0-6
22
6-12
.14
*Extraction and testing method
T - means trace.
Bray
77
60
56
106
85
75
99
88
40
18
102
90
54
169
194
85
25
3
62
91
20
8
9
25
83
109
107
0
Re
np-h Troop, Bray Bingham 1E22E
.04
43
86
.61
41
76
.40
31
.30
62
25
62
T
28
62
.18
29
69
57 102
1.35
1.50
61 124
.80
52
95
1.01
51
90
.86
45
33
1.29
51
94
1.50
54
99
54 104-' •
1.50
1.59
55 102
1.32
57
94
.95
24
36
.83
22
37
10
22
.30
.39
10
25
.70
49
1,04
91
54
91
.30
40
83
.58
51
80
.18
29
58
.24
26
52
.40
168 145
162
148
.34
.15
16
.18
29
127 100
.18
.09
7
12
T
8
3.67/
3.07/
13
67
63
15
T
2.10
11
3.67110
21
14
2.34
19
9
45
28
.09
76
.95
24
.98
10
30
28
14
10
1.56
1.83
18
10
10
1.19
19
1.28
7
20
.18
T
18
74
.18
13
24
T
92
12
59
T
T
24 102
12
62
•
f".■
Be . 4
ng,.; , T ruo g Bray
1.30
43
83
1.07
40
76
74
.61
33
1.10
49
99
1.01
48
90
.61
44
87
1.35
53 104
.73
48
85
1.13
.89
.21
.55
.15
51
49
22
173
202
186
92
87
47
164
156
141
1.16
156
1.44
28
12
10
20
19
18
-
13 0
poTAsE TESTS** ON SOIL FROM 1951 FIELD PLOTS
(Soluble & Exchangeable K in PPM of Soil)
Rep.1
Rep.2
p.3
Rep.4
Blackman
0-6
6-12
12-18
460
390
380
450
390
280
460
430
340
501
430
460
Stastny
0-6
6-12
12-18
300
504
360
310
240
400
350
290
680
260
330
370
quale
0-6
6-12
440
340
370
350
390
320
420
220
Kerr
LakeCounty
0-6
6-12
640
570
760
760
640
610
J. Kern
0-6
6-12
12-18
410
180
60
440
130
150
390
250
110
430
220
70
Bureau
LeaseLand
0-6
6-12
12-18
420
390
280
460
270
240
460
340
260
430
320
450
Copco
0-6
6-12
12-18
390
180
420
80
500
110
200
E.Kern
Ft .Klamath
70
T*
110
T*
*T - Trace
**Method used is that in "Testing Missouri Soi "
F. R. Graham, University of Missouri, College o
Agri., Agr.Fxpt.Sta.Cir.345 March 1950
BAJALvi - • 1.51
.
Yield in srargs per plot e11y_t foot rowe (16 sq. ft.
ications
Averw-e
473
537
505
654
623
622
633
0-90-0
386
629
431
482
4.
0-0-50
690
462
461
540
5.
60-90-0
626
605
572
601
6.
60-0-50
565
450
481
499
7.
0-90-50
454
505
613
524
6.
30-40-50
551
674
502
576
9.
60-90-5C
621
437
618
559
10.
40-90-50
564
562
474
540
11.
60-30-50
55 8
387
632
527
12.
60-60-50
501
605
563
556
13.
60-90-30 & Ca
506
340
421
522
14.
60-90-50
580
492
591
554
15.
60-90-50 / le
545
661
469
558
16.
60-90-50 c4
618
465
445
509
1.
Ck
2.
GO-0-0
3.
Fe
Statistically no significant difference for treatment.
32
Yield in grams per plot.
2 eight foot rDws (16 sci.ft)
2
P1-0108t 4 oYls
3
4
Average
86
43
199
208
133.8
60-0-0
188
lai
273
288
225
3.
0-90-0
47
86
196
182
127.8
4.
0-0-50
136
35
121
219
127.8
1.
Ok
2,
.
60-90-0
96
364
168
78
176.5
6.
60-0-50
102
115
173
101
122.8
7,
0-90-50
77
89
125
134
106.3
S.
30-90-50
158
272
100
373
225.8
9.
60-90-50
131
75
352
171
182.3
10.
90-90-50
92
210
185
107
143.5
11.
60-30-50
117
202
396
186
225.3
12.
60-60-50
122
78
270
321
197.8
13.
60-90-50 & Cu
165
181
88
422
214
14.
60-90-50 &
136
52
160
275
155.8
15.
60-90-50 & -1;e
160
204
188
127
169.8
16.
60-90-50
111
206
237
339
223.3
& 1, e
Statistically, no sig. c - t difference for treatments. 5% 1 vel)
(41:TALC -
1
2
3
4
679
500
750
627
639
Aver
2.
60-0-0
912
634
896
756
799.5
3.
0-90-0
610
539
769
747
666.3
4.
0-0-50
776
517
756
745
698.5
5.
60-90-0
586
714
577
632
627.3
6.
60-0-50
816
615
708
730
787.3
7.
0-30 50
648
618
659
656
645.8
3.
30-90-50
804
757
776
831
792.0
9.
60-90-50
932
911
653
359
776.3
10.
90-90-50
650
558
837
ill
666.3
11.
Ck
654
544
6 31
657
622.0
12.
**Da (WO,
701
607
359
366
508.3
13.
CA
POP
430
700
691
750
642.8
14. PH4)2 SO4
509
582
558
467
524.0
15. NEL4)2 SO 4
782
667
642
339
607.3
16. N114 NO3
606
423
469
683
546.5
17. NH4
. . NO3
18. Nugreen
400
617
545
391
433.3
504
715
530
323
513.0
*Yields are in grams.
1,ght
s
**All these nitrogen fertilizers (treatm.eits 12-184- were
applied at the rate of 60 lbs /acre of V. Those fertilizers
which are underlined are Furfa ce applications; the others
band place:went below the seed.
***Iii3D 167.6 grams (5:,6 level)
-_ 1951
e7).?Ications
3
4
Average
.
Ck
103
304
151
171
132.3
.
60-0-0
451
500
192
463
401.5
.
0-90-0
154
148
327
157
196.5
4.
0-0-50
285
127
271
159
210.5
5.
60-90-0
403
468
447
349
416.3
.
60-0-50
263
303
211
271
262.0
7.
0-90-50
245
200
193
246
221.0
8.
o-90-5o
165
422
233
103
230.8
.
60-90-50
444
411
355
262
368.8
10. 90-90-50
273
108
249
492
280.5
11. *CA (NO3)2
650
257
530
293
432.5
12. IZA CA (NO3)2
474
347
486
459
442.0
13. Mi4)2 SO4
562
550
499
190
452.7
14. A-4)2E4
291
233
261
89
218.5
15. NH4 NO3
234
503
202
304
310.8
16. NH4 NO3
437
459
298
150
336.0
17. Nugreen
361
187
535
343.8
Yields are in grams per plot (2 eight foot rows)
-**All these nitroen fertilizers (treatments 11-17) were
applied at the rateof 60 lbs /acre 31 N. Those fertilizers
which. are underlined are surface applications; the others
band placement below the seed.
**LSD 166.8 grams (5%
35
1951
do lic at ions
cs2
3
4
if wo.17.4fterm
1. Ck
2.
60-0-0
3. 0-90-50
4.
0-0-50
1W era
123
130
132
101
121.5
305
444
348
258
338.8
107
167
137
137
137.0
111
185
170
116
145.5
5.
-90-0
150
396
332
346
306.0
6.
CO-0-50
505
461
363
237
341.5
7.
0-90-50
102
170
166
128
141.5
3.
30-90-50
267
324
291
277
289.8
9.
60-90-50
272
329
333
235
292.3
10.
sa
90-90-50
394
421
360
462
409.3
11. **CA (NO3)2
272
357
314
257
300.0
12. CA (NO3)2
104
117
128
85
108.5
JH4)2 SO4
243
356
204
121
231.0
14. N H4)2 604
135
159
97
78
117.3
15. NH4 NO3
339
343
341
272
323.8
16. NH 4 Eu7,
134
161
71
136
125.5
17. Jiugr‹-;en
166
347
266
213
248.0
=6 = = =
-
*Yields are in -7 xams per plot. 2 eight foot roes.
,
**All these nitrogen fertilizers (treatments 11-171. were
applied at the. rate of 60 lbs /acre of N. Those fertilizers
which are underlined are surface applications; the others
band placement below the seed.
',',**LS1) (5A 63.5 grams.
'41T KLA ATI 1
PASIUB
-
::;ep 1 ations
,117,rw,e
2.07
2.28
247
• o
.
3,0.5
4.25
4.05
3, P
3.36
3.38
3.37
4.
2.05
3.56
2.603
5. NP
2.97
5.50
4.35
6. NE
3.59
4.00
7. 2K
2.47
5.20
3.235
a. NPX
2.76
4.66
3.71
G p
5,39
5.55
4.47
10. NK 8Cu
2.52
5.0R
3.80
1. Ok
9. NPX
Yields in ]J;s. dry matter per plot sample
•
x 121
stically no signiticant difference for treatments.
37
Minor Bleuts on Bar'
ROD
1951
ications
1.
Ck
214
279
311
368
293
2.
Cu (E)i1 application)
419
353
269
30C
337
227
240
352
277
291.5
394
437
352
402
3',.',8.75
390
319
316
331
339
410
374
473
197
363.5
3e2
333
392
289
349
349
404
265
423
360.25
0 .
'e
application)
•
(Cu soil app,)
pray)
6.
P
(1 Cu
7.
f
(ECu s rays)
8.
P
(: r
9.
P 3
( Zn spray)
348
257
230
208
260.75
10.
P
(1Te spray)
476
287
310
370
362.75
11.
P
Cu & (An spray)
430
333
342
386
12.
P
Cu
;)c (Zn spray)
310
322
330
378
335
13.
P
c Cu
(Pc Spray)
364
390
353
345
363
spray)
Statistically no significant difference for treatment.
-
Re
1.
Ck
1951
i-ations
3
A
---
AveraF;e
Q
173
2118
153
166.75
287
234
246
257
256
3,
0-00-0
223
187
219
218
211.75
4.
0-0-50
2 17
193
240
219
217.25
5,
60-90-0
134
225
246
258
22.25
6.
60-0-50
270
239
270
84
215.75
7.
0-90
198
138
195
135
191.5
3,
30-90,50
244
275
229
218
241.5
9.
60-90-50
258
163
262
221
10. 90-90-50
134
267
230
201
203
11. 60-30-50
167
213
270
245
225.75
12. 60-60-50
299
143
297
196
233.75
15. 60-90-50 & Cu_
267
227
233
255
245.5
14. 60-90-50 & Mn
225
233
220
214
224.25
15. 60-90-50 &Fe
153
154
288
206
200.25
16. 60-9050 & Cu & Pe
258
219
150
240
218.75
held ln T r": :s per
.
St at
-
t. 2 eight foot rows
y no B:Ignificant difference for treatment.
Y
(ATTIc
•ON)
[ttO[O seoq34od
'!O
ad
'44 'bs 002
U
spieT7:
TeAeT %9
•su 1,03
0
041
con*
91 'tT
0'961
tg
t3
1?61
Tt
91
t61
Ot
02
LOT
k'h9T
39
61
WE
31
91
013
82
ti
391
0-013-.171M '21
0"$6T
hg
81
t6T
h2
6
033
09
9
001
0-03-9T '31
h091
49
2.3
161
09
91
gt-E
L2
91
991
001-091-0gI 'TT
VCIAT
91'
93
903
09
YE
1/AT
99
TT
991
0°174T
92
93
891
09
t3
gtT
tt
4
61'1
0-091-091
2"2,LI
61?
03
810
19
hT
91?T
L2
93
691
O41-001-091
2'991
19
00
091
kg
6
99T
'at
21
091 - 09 - 09T " L
L't91
19
03
281
Ot
21
ha
6t
31
041 - 0 - 091 *9
2 I TLT
tg
61
106
09
13
921
Ot
a
:99:11
O TE - OTE'"OgI "9
L"3tI
99
03
391
34
01
991
39
L
26
091 - 621 - 00I "fl
0'221
t9
21
h2T
61?
2
1?3I
39
01
991
2°t3T
3L
6
921
39
TIT
981
09
9
.,,z_,
08
OqI-OgI-0 '3
926
09
6
031
t9
9
99
04
4
96
a1o.q0 'T
T;x
tFETUQ
3' 0 N
T'oN
uoTTcvTTaeM
G1[n9
3C1
*
KETIOVI2
I
ay.
'QN
09-041-091
0
0 .1
.
6
.
041-081-04 '2
0.
Replications
Averae
1.
Okeck
163
210
235
202.66
2.
30-0-0
244
308
337
296.33
3.
0-45-0
158
133
203
101.33
4
0-0-25
(232) 121
147
166.66
0.
30-45-0
141
263
297
235.33
6.
30-0-25
245
311
250
268.66
7.
0-
96
141
145
127.33
8.
30-45-25
(232) 297
9.
30-45-25 &
251
..
LSD 52)
-25
-,...--
'0.-0o
c nn
,
4:73i6.00
364
vel 75.9 grams
Yields in Rrars. per plot. 2 eight foot rows (16
325.33
•
LOWFR
- 1951
Single Super Phosphate 3: Treble Superphosphate trials. Yields in grans per
plot. 2 eight foot rows (16 q.ft.)
k versEs
1.
,,'neck
-
364
454
425
390
410.8
2.
200 SP
397
472
406
665
410.0
3.
200 TSP
343
288
426
301
340.0
400 SF
497
422
407
501
456.8
330
360
274
226
297.5
412
463
512
517
476.0
600 2L4T
400
227
339
531
374.2
4a CI
481
351
375
303
377.5
fA0 TSP
213
253
246
400
278.0
.
5.
400 2 1'
1-
-
6. 600 S„
7.
.
LSD 5'h ivel 107.0 grams
-
-
42
1,OR
Olt
PJ1OE'L0Iat 0 Copper Trials
,iat ions
vel:age.
ge■le*.n.ra
414
43S
455
503
460
2.
200
490
672
251
381
443.5
3.
400 , 20
484
357
444
418
425.75
4.
660 ,( 20
424
522
496
413
463.75
5.
800 u; 20
498
430
55•
3
6.
600 6, 10
431
513
516
507
, 4.25
7.
600 0. 60
464
362
368
605
449.75
6.
6')0 0. 40
690
560
552
442
561
Yields In grpros per plot. 2-eight foot rows (16 *iio significant
ffece for treatments.
503.5
t.)
43
ALP ATP A
. •
T.:0 1::
•
••••
Lb s . dry nistt er Der p10 A
writ) le
Ave r alYe
•55
Check
2 . P
.
P 6,;
; P
P .?••:f1
*LSD 5i0
Y 5qn
e
.45 1b r..3
.44
.B5
1.61
1.55 1.66
2.0
1.71
16
1.30 1.63
2,08
1.07
1:82
1.61 1.59
1.45'
1.62
1.44
2.0
1.26
2.TE
1.71
2.06
1,91 2.09
1,44
1. 09