The Charlotte Democrat., 1890-03-21
AGRICULrURAL. A L.
FertiliZing Corn.

t. ia vet an unsettled question whether
corn requires the application ot miro ogen'
ous fertilizer. The results OF carefully
conducted experiments at seVerai e4pe!f
ment stations seem to indicate that rtnls
nlan. has the power to gather it's requisite
supply of nitrogen from the SOIL, or lron
the atmosphere, or both. lhat IL mus'
have nitrogen is proven oy the lacI sna'
the matured plant, IN all Its ParIS' anu ,,'9 es
pecially the grain, contains nitrogen. lne
indications of these experiments Woulo
seem to be 10 the very teeth OF the expe,
rience of all farmers, that cotton SEED ana
cotton seed mesl-whose principal element
oil plant food is nitrogen-rarely iail 10
produce a good yield when applied 10
corn. If corn were a new plant just lRtro
duced into cultivation, we would conclude
by reasoning from analogy, that 1t would
respond to nitrogenous fertilizers, because
it belongs to the same botanical order, or
family OF plants that includes wheat, oats,
rye, barley, the various grasses, etc, to all
of which we have long been accustomed
to apply highly heterogeneous manure with
supposed profitable results. If these ex-
periments are conclusive, or are to become
80, then we will have to admit that NIL
hons have heretofore been wasted IN
manuring corn with stable manure, cotton
seed and cotton seed meal, Peruvian
guano, etc, because the chief value of all
Of those is due to the fact that they con-
tain more or less nitrogen. We are not
inclined to reverse our opinion on this
point, all at once, but will leave the ques-
ton open, and judgment suspended, until
more light is afforded from the most exact
experiments. In passing, however, we
will say that in our own experience we
have uniformly got better results from the
use of rotten cotton seed, even when rotted
without any precaution against loss of nj
trogen, than from green cotton seed, when
applied TO corn, which would appear to
favor the view that corn does not require
q heterogeneous fertilizer.
II but a small amount of fertilizer is to
be applied to corn, say less than ten
bushels, of cotton seed, or its equivalent,
it is probably best to make but one appli-
cation, aud that at the time of planting,
taking care TO somewhat scatter the
manure around the seed, instead OF drop
ping it in a lump in one spot. But II
liberal manuring is contemplated, we
advise two or more applications. This
advice is not based Ga the theory that the
plant will take up the manure before 1t is
needed, and that the supply will be ex'
hausted before caring time. On the con
trary it is quite probable that the plant
cannot and will not appropriate all the
applied plant food until needed Even ii
the idea were correct that the plant will
exhauet the manure during the early
stages of its growth, it Is also true that
the roots, stem and blades are a safer re-
pository than the soil itself. Whatever
of plant food is taken into the plant sys
tenn will inevitable 60 into the grain
when the latter requires it, 1t will not be
exhaled into the air and lost. Plants ex-
hale very little, if any, nitrogen, and not a
particle of the mineral elements 1t is
true, however, that large stalk requires
more to form its tissues and will therefore
withhold larger proportion of the plant
food taken up from the soil, than a smaller
stalk; and it is certainly true that a
liberal, all ut once, dose of manure, at
planting or shortly after, tends 10 produce
large stalk. There is something, also, in
the idea that repeated applications gives
successive stimulations to the plant and
induces successive reactions on the inert
plant food in the SOIL Actual experiment,
however, is the crucial test and expert
ence seems to confirm the view we have
uggested.-Southern CaSItioator.