Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T11:46:49.439Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study in soil cultivation. The effects of varying soil consolidation on growth and development of rain-grown cotton

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

O. V. S. Heath
O. V. S. Heath
Affiliation:
Empire Cotton Growing Corporation, Cotton Experiment Station, Barberton, South Africa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. Experiments were carried out in four seasons at Barberton, South Africa, occupying approximately 2¼ acres of ground. Three soil treatments were used, viz. Normal (N), Compressed (C) and Grubbed (loosened) (G).

2. Measures of consolidation of the soil were made with a specially designed apparatus, and large differences established (pp. 516–520).

3. Estimations of water content and nitrate content were carried out. No great differences were found (pp. 520–524).

4. Fortnightly samples of the plants were taken, from which numerical data were collected designed to estimate morphological development (primary data, pp. 526–529).

5. Derived data on net assimilation rate, relative leaf-growth rate and efficiency index were calculated (pp. 529–533).

6. Growth in total dry weight was found to conform approximately with an exponential law up to the time of flowering. Up to this stage also net assimilation rate was found to remain constant.

7. Growth differences between treatments were related to variation in net assimilation rate only (p. 531).

8. The results were analysed statistically. Significant results alone are emphasized.

9. In all respects growth and development on the consolidated soil was more rapid than that on the grubbed soil, normal being generally intermediate.

10. The results are discussed with reference to the question of nitrogen supply, water supply and aeration of the soil.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 27 , Issue 4 , October 1937 , pp. 511 - 540
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1937

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

REFERENCES

(1)Balls, W. L.Philos. Trans. (1916), B, 206, 103 and 403.Google Scholar
(2)Balls, W. L.Philos. Trans. (1918), B, 208, 157.Google Scholar
(3)Briggs, G. E.Proc. roy. Soc. (1922), B, 94, 20.Google Scholar
(4)Crowther, F.Ann. Bot., Lond. (1934), 48, 877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(5)Culpin, C.J. agric. Sci. (1936), 26, 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(6)Culpin, C.J. agric. Sci. (1936), 26, 45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Davies, C.J. S.-E. agric. Coll. Wye (1931), 28, 284.Google Scholar
(8)E.C.G.C. Reports received from Exp. Sta. 1932–1933 to 1935–6 (1934–7). London.Google Scholar
(9)Eden, T. & Maskell, E. J.J. agric. Sci. (1928), 18, 163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(10)Fisher, R. A.Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 5th ed. (1934). Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
(11)Fisher, R. A.The Design of Experiments (1935). Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
(12)Gregory, F. G.Ann. Bot., Lond. (1926), 40, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13)Gregory, F. G.Meeting of Res. Workers, Gezira Res. Farm, Sudan Govt. (1928), p. 27.Google Scholar
(14)Gregory, F. G. & Richards, F. J.Ann. Bot., Lond. (1929), 43, 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(15)Gupta, P.J. Ecol. (1933), 21, 452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(16)Heath, O. V. S. E.C.G.C. Second Conf. on Cotton Growing Problems, Report and Summary of Proc. (1934), p. 96. London.Google Scholar
(17)Heath, O. V. S.Emp. J. exp. Agric. (1934), 2, 205.Google Scholar
(18)Howard, Sir A.Crop Production in India (1924). Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
(19)James, W. O.Ann. Bot., Lond. (1930), 44, 173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(20)Keen, B. A.J. agric. Sci. (1930), 20, 364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(21)Maskell, E. J.Ann. Bot., Lond. (1927), 41, 328.Google Scholar
(22)Müller, D.Planta (1934), 16, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(23)Richards, F. J.Ann. Bot., Lond. (1932), 46, 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(24)Veihmeyer, F. J. & Hendrickson, A. H.Soil Sci. (1931), 32, 181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(25)Yates, F. & Zacopany, I.J. agric. Sci. (1935), 25, 545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar