Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T07:36:59.754Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Influence on Crop and Soil of Manures applied to Permanent Meadow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Charles Crowther  and
Arthur G. Ruston
Charles Crowther
Affiliation:
(Department of Agriculture, The University, Leeds.)
Arthur G. Ruston
Affiliation:
(Department of Agriculture, The University, Leeds.)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The experiments reviewed in the preceding pages have been carried out on a light loam soil very poor in lime, in a district of medium rainfall (20–25 inches).

The chief conclusions drawn from the results are as follows:

1. Although the heaviest crops have been obtained with an annual application of dung, they are little heavier, and more costly to obtain, than the crops obtained with a biennial application of dung, especially if in the alternate year a light dressing of “artificials” including nitrate of soda be given.

2. A complete mixture of “artificials,” including nitrate of soda, has given good average crops, but not equal to those given by a biennial application of dung.

3. For the soil and other conditions of Garforth nitrate of soda is distinctly better for the hay crop than sulphate of ammonia. This is doubtless largely associated with the poverty of the soil in calcium carbonate.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , September 1915 , pp. 197 - 218
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1915

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 197 note 1 Experimental Farm of the University of Leeds and the Yorkshire Council for Agricultural Education.

page 201 note 1 Cf. Stapledon, , This Journal, VI. 499.Google Scholar

page 201 note 2 Results embodied in thesis submitted at Final B.Sc. Examination, 1907.

page 201 note 3 Results embodied in thesis submitted at Final B.Sc. Examination, 1910. See also “Guide to Experiments at Manor Farm, Garforth,” 1914, pp. 6, 7.

page 202 note 1 Cf. Armstrong, , This Journal, 1907, II. 299.Google Scholar

page 205 note 1 eg. Hall, and Russell, , This Journal, 1912, IV. 339.Google Scholar

page 207 note 1 This Journal, 1912, IV. 305.Google Scholar

page 208 note 1 Scientific Feeding of Farm Animals, pp. 82–93.

page 208 note 2 loc. cit. p. 311.

page 209 note 1 Cf. Ingle, , This Journal, 1910, III. 22.Google Scholar

page 210 note 1 The chemical composition of the soils was more exhaustively studied but it is not proposed to deal with the results here.

page 212 note 1 Russell, , This Journal, 1910, III. 233.Google Scholar