f
n -
'; ! ill.
31
xXX No. 8V ; j , " , : SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1915.
a Year, 5c. a Copy
JUt TAET DUTLCU
A FERTILIZER ANALYSIS THAT
MISLEADS ' v.:
A
c vft few even of tar best fe
efS have appreciaieu tneamquni ui ttpjjiicu; per. atjc,, suiucwncre Deiweea:,
, miorot wftirln mu9t! IS nounds atLd25.'noiinds nf nltfhoreti.
t mim0 fnrmine material5 which, mu9t - IS pounds ahd 25pounds of nitrogen,
humus iuii b . . ntvt .,, w;n.. hsM'A in hi -rfrrcw o
irge and profitable: croff cost of from" $2.5(1. to $5. per' acre .!';!.;
nrodllCtion. It IS inis axmuav ,wu v . . v.jc wuuw. adic uua iu muct uu:
olete absence of anything like- a jrue" some ' crop on land that r had. not re-
5Hea of tne amuum . iv"&, vwfcv .v wj; ,v wnpsM ouu
soils require that js
for eternally and everywhere' ihsist- and: apply toT-this';. pfaiTof "coTfoiTSOO"
;o nn a more liberal treatment-, df to- OO' pounds -of add phosphate per
Our SOilS. . .IVjl ; :;.;-ij. tc: iu iuc. utm. ucivic..yiaiuiuy, ifi .
: - -'-., tnere; is, any tendency tor tne cotton.
What About a 104-4 Fertilizer? ; otl thisT land to suffer from. rust, we-
, . , .; Vn a a would add 100 pound of kainit pe'
GEORGIA reader asks if, a, 104 .
A fertilizer, using 1,000 pounds : pe? " , Thk advice is crivMi. with tfm- iW
acre, will be good to. --use .on, poWmK ihti . auction1 Wowdi' to:.
and corn. - .-(''""''- the'"'iis' : of commercial' fertilizers.
On the same sort of. soil. we. think T. r . 4rA . Kv.koW ua in.:
a fertilizer for corn, shouldc conlaim
rather more nitrogen or a, larger. Rro-MmpxeM::kld, from cbmmer-
portion oi nurugwii
ton. Unless the land isvvery thurver mflchr by tha. neaa. and' stable,
think 4 per cent, of nitrogeni rather. 'maure;
large in proportion to the other plant ; - - - . . -j - "" -
foods in this fertilizer and tl tolanxt! . ArmtrW Ertill7Pr Prnhlimr
is thin 1,000 pounds is: very heavy fcr- : AnOtlier HertlllZCr maim
tilization, possibly too heavy7 to: be ; A MISSISSIPPI reader says he-has-the
most profitable, on such.a,thid the following: fertilizer,, but thinks
soil. .' V 100 pounds of kainit should' be. added
Gn a fairly good soil l,Q0Q'oound& : to 200 pounds- of the fertilizer,, and
of fertilizer containing, 10 pejicentpfwhen Jhusjnjxedihe- proposes1 to use
phosphoric acid and 4-pert cent of. pot 400 pounds, to. 450; ppuncfa per- acre i
ash may prove profitable., biit wer .TXratof nnlnMa nhncnli ArlJ nriT 8 ror cant .
doubt if for cotton it will pay- best tO'" Citrate soluble, phosphoric, acid-.-. 1 per cent.
h- . . aiUUBCU , , ..i.. ..ra t ....... . . . ..... JUVw UUi UtMll,
1S 1 Potash '. . r,5(T per. cent
the amount of nitroeren in 1.000- . .
pounds of a fertilizer containing' 4 e.aiso: asKS. it weger any. gooa
per cent of this plant food; ' - " fr??w th? Cltra soiublejptosprronc -
For corn, we think the plant, food's? - i," V , . r
in a iu-4-4 fertilizer better Draper- V "TJ V . - : ; ,, ' j
tioned, but if the. season i n?t iaeal.to-be ?e.d r.ows sufficient stalk and
as regards moisture supply we;' doubt ' Vlul 1J vvyA.
if it wlll be most orofitahle. tn use PrPWe.m . v . - -
in. tne hrst place,, ail. experiments, at ,
the experiment stations- of. Mississippr
indicate! tbat" a .fertilizer for Gotton
needsjno, potash, at .all,- unless it is.;
uied on land, where, the. cotton suffers
from.fust.; We therefore,: think. tha.t.
B cents a bushel, the increase ft S ffie Ptash;
v eH win .v. X. mr....,.-,-.- the. fettjlizer wxll. be wasted. and. the.
v ..... ur, uu. u. fcTyZ UUSUOSi IU'
Confuting Fertilizer. Fbrmurat Are
Sometimes Macle So Intentionally
: Misleading:' S tatements Should' BV
PVoWbited hy LaV ?
A' READER r sends ; tne:: following;
guaranteed analysis of a fertilizer
and: aks for' information regard
ing it: . : . ;;,.,;vr-
r PER CENT POTATO GUANO
Guaranteed' Analysis
Nitrogen. . . . ... ... .. . . ... 5.78 per cent:
Ammonia . . . . . ................ 7.00 per cent.
Soluble phosphoric: acid- , wr-.-3.00 per cent
Reverted, phosphoric add . ; .. .. 3.00 per cent.
Available phosphoric acid ..... 6.00 per cent
Insoluble phosphoric acid . ... t,00 percent
Equal o bone: phosphate ot
' lime ... . . ... . .17.00 per cent
Potash, (actual) ... . ... ... . . .. ff.00 per cent
Equal to sulphate of potash . 9.25. per cent;
lv "The analysis states ::.
B.7B per "cent of nitroyen;
- 7.00 per cent of ammonid.
most profitable- to use
1,000 pounds of such a, fertilizec on
corn. The cost of the pounds: of.
phosphoric acid at PAr cents, 40
pounds of nitrogen at 20j ceiita, and. 40
pounds of potash: at 5 CEntsWlast.
year's prices), amounts- to $14.50. ;,At
pay for the fertilizer alone:. , On fairly ' ditln-o k?t pimply, increase.
6wu iana ana a. favorable" season; ."- "77 . r. T
such an increase in- yield might ,be: land "f; ru&?
obtained Knt x cjottonos. likely -to suer from. rust.:
justify such expensive fertilization of the, ambunt. of init suggested", added.
wrn-on average soilan ordinary yearj
We would advise-the useof not morer 1&- mQre .pota3.h than, is, probably nee-
"tan w or 500 pounds of such of a .""CA. . . .s.'
"uxture. if, however increase " in oiiom uqus uuuut sauiucm
yield, regardless of cosis the object, o. stalk, without Utilizer the
'Jt w Probable that 1,000 pounds of the' nitr?gfnrapp!leid will also.probably be
blazer will produce, a. larger yield. Ta-ted' ff t vvill. serve, ta increase'
Where Nirrno-en la rTtf4- pfiosphoxio. acid alone- improbably all
e strogen Is. Not Needed for he rtnizer needed: except when
" tOttOir -t- ; the cotton rusts-and' their, as stated,.
A LOUISIANA reader, writes, ar fol-- about 100 pounds of kainit per acre
Mows: "I haver a four-acre plat should: probably-be used: On. lands
nat I am going; tQ piant - stapiethat ' usually make" sufficient growth
follmx 'jv' vear the land grew oats,
0Wed by peas,, peas were removed in'th fertlllzei:"before'Plantin& but if :
ber u e turne under in: Noyem- 'wheirVthe cotton about to begin :
man aPplied five tonsof stableIoon t is not making a
dnure per acre.1rokiUifL;&
r'lP a,nd disked and harrowed ,T ing.t of . f row. 50 to 100 p.
pounds of ni-
j. ' X.come to the place and there tjate of'sodi per acre may be given..
fc " I do -not . The cil
rHratp-snliihlp. nhosnhoric acid
uui... x uu not f . ' " . ' r x-. ------ -7
to .put on J0ia 1 ructe
cml fn.;:i.'w una4 ot this
. -i mizer
cdmrrrer- '-sbfiiblfe arid; is always included in tfie
nd;inli "available phosphoric, acid" fn a fer-
mercial f eve 900 'fioandi of cornet Hlzer; -The guarantee: on: this fertile
What a ertlllze too much, to aoolv iizer might, as. well have been:
Land ,t-f ":nicr , .. : - Available pboaphoxic: acid. ... .lfl.OO percent
, wtllch "looks richl" crrpw " a Nitrogen , r.65 percent.
roP of peas last summe tf ? Potash ...,...;...au... i.50 p
the l?8 0f staWe manureapPl?ed ta:
anv e certainly should notneed: pounds! of ..this" mixed fertilizer,
"or? aPPd in commercialV have: the:
tili2er on h h Commercial f tr'K followirrg: arralsis r y J
ComolptP f a.M- U assumed 1 to be V" Available phosphoric acid 6.67 per cent
6 lertllizer,: and therpfnrp. ; Nltrownr 1.10 . per cent
inereiorej it Potashr...,.. .......... 5.17- percent
"Am F getting 12.76 per cent of plant,
food' or 5.76' per cent as; I: understand
it? : From what source!, is the am
monia and is it soluble!or ihsrpluble?
"2. The analysis gives r
Potash (actual),. 5 per cent
Equal1 to BUlphate of potash, 9.25" per
. cent. . - . ' . ...
"Am I getting, 14.25 per cent of plant
f ojodl or 5 per cent,, as; L understand it ?
What is meant by 'equal to sulphate of
potaslu9.2S per cent I'"-' - ;
Tliis ia rath-er? arr extreme case-of a
"guarantee""' stated in snclL a. manner
as to mislead the average farmer. If
there'isaTrygoodpurQsentt-stating
a guarantee of this-fertilizer it is to
give the, 'farmer 'ot buyer .information
regarding its composition: or the plant
foods it' contains; This: guarantee
gives; ai part: of . the information, re
quired,, but adds: other useless: state
ments which; while adding nothing to .
the information conveyed to the man
familiar with such matters, mislead
and confuse those less familiar, such
aar, the average users- of commercial
fertilizers;- ' ' , ' -r -
All that: this: guarantee tells 'abecut
th- nitrogen it contains, isr included inj;
"nitrogen 5.76 per cent."
The addition of "ammonia 7 per
cent" tells, nothing that is not told; in
the statement of the ' nitrogen. In
fact, there is really no "ammonia" in
the- fertilizer: The nitrogen in? this ;
fertilizer, (576j per. cent) if combined
with hydrogen tos torm ammoniac
would formr af certain amount of am
monia.. In other words 5;76 pounds ol
nitrogen if combined with hydrogen to;1
form ammonia (which, is: not the: case:
in, the: fertilizer) would form about
seven, pounds; of. ammonia.
In short, the addition of "ammonia
T per cent" furnishes, absolutely no .
information of value not furnished by
"nitrogen 5.76 per cent " and since it.
serves no purpose except to con fuse
and mislead, the uneducated (unedu
cated, in this particular line), it should
be prohibited by law
There is nothing, in this guarantee
to indicate the source or availability
of the nitrogen; in- the fertilizer., Some
of our readers have indicated that
they think the nitrogen in a fertilizer
should be soluble in. water. This is t
not necess ary nor would it be desir
able m all cases. It is- sufficient if it:
becomes soluble in the soil water rap
idly enough to feed the plants as they
need ; it during : the period of their ,
growth; The nitrogen in materials'
like nitrate of soda is freely soluble
in water,: while that in many other:
valuable, materials, like cottonseed
meal; blood, tankage, etc,, becomes so
by decay in the soil. , That is it be
comes, available more slowly in these ;
materials, but if it becomes available
as the plants: need it this' is- sufficient,
and , with crops having a long growing,
season it may actually be an advant
age' especially on' light, soils during :
very wet seasons.. In this fertilizer
our. reader will only get 5.76 per cent
of nitrogen and not 12:76 per cent.
2. Tire, guarantee ; regarding thr .
potash, may cause somewhat similar,
confusion. . . . ? '
In reality . there is: no "actual'! '
potash- :(pptassium oxide): in tha
fertilizer, while there may be sulphate
of "potassium;. The more accurate
method would be to. state the peii
cent, of, "potassium" in the fertilizer,,
but the custom, of stating the potas
sium. in terms of "potash" is soi gen
eral. that, there is less, objection to- ifc
than in the case of "ammonia'' usedr
. ait ameans - of the- nitrogenr-Potashr
actually contains only a little over 83
per cent of potassium (the balance:
being oxygen which, is not a so-calledi
plant; food); but ai stated the term?
"potash" is used by practically all in.
stating-the amount of thi& plant food
in fertilizer guarantees;
In view of this well establishedi
practice other statements regarding
the amount: of potassium in the fer
tilizer should be prohibited- by law,
because they serve no; purpose? except
to confuse and; mislead. But: if the
source! of the: potassium', that is, ,
whether in the form of kainit, so-calU"
ed muriate: of potash,, or sulphate: ot
potash; were stated itr would be ofi
value in some cases ' ";,
But in this particular guarantee thi
addition of "equal; to sulphate of pot
ash, 9$25 per centf' tells nothing not
told by '"potash (actual) 5 per cent"
andsimipiy serves to; confuse;. It doe9
.notsenunfianthatythe-potasium; im
this! fertilizer is in the formi of sul
phate- If: it means anything, it means
that, the potassium in 9.25 pounds; of
potass ium. sulphate is equal -1 o the1
amount of potassium: in five pounds of
potash It is: probably, us edi because
it is likely to misleiad the buyer- intoi
! believing that he is getting mare
plant food thaig he would in a fertile
izer in which; the guarantee simply in
cated 5;! per cent, of potash;, and for
this, reason should be prohibited in as.
fertilizer guarantee; r Que ' reader is:
only getting 5! per cent' of potash, not:
-14.25 per cent!;!!-:! I- !;
'- The same; is true of the statement,'
"equal'' to bone phosphate of lime V7
per cent."! This merely means'- that'
the phosphorus in this fertilizer, i
combined with the materials- to form .
"bone phosphate of lime," would fornn
17 pounds" of this" material' for every?
-seven- pound's of phosphoric acid im
the fertilizer. ' ! '
This guarantee would have tol
every bit as much of value- to thei
farmer and have been' les misleading''
if it had been stated' as? follows r
Nitrogen . . ... ... . . . . . .:.. . , ...... 5.76 per cenft.
Available phosphoric acid ..... 6.00 percent.
Potash . . .. ......... 5".00 per cents
In stating the phosphoric" acidalt
the facts necessary from, any stand-
point-would havVbeen contained . in
the following, and could not have
been misleading; Phosphoric: a
per cent, of which 6 per cent ia avails
able and 1 per ! cent insoluble. ! Or if
further 'z information is - desired; t-:
might have been added that, of the- 6
per cent regarded as. "available," 3 per .
cent is? "soluble" and: 3 per cent "re
verted" 1 "
But when, stated as in this- guaran
tee the-farmer sometimes thinks; he. isj--getting;
more thanr 7 per cent of phos
phoric acid, ; 6 per cent of which is
available,, and this, isr the reason for
using the; confusing, method and also
the reason why it should be prohibit-'
ed by law.,
EncTovecT find; check for fl to renev our
subscription for. a. year., ; We think. The Pro
gresslve Farmer the best farm paper to be
had. We calf It the- farmer's friend, and
this friend has been a- weekly visitor to our'
home for more than 20 years, and we want
It to continue; as Ions as we live. We would
be delighted to. know that every, fanner la
the j?outh got a copy of this most valuable
and Interesting paper every weeltStorjr
Bros.- .. ..
... i
t :
.1 :