The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1892-08-27

ne alue OF Whole Seed as Compared
WIN Dark Cotton Seed Meal.
from the Monthly Bulletin for August.
The following letter addressed to
well known citizen of Chjpley,
Florida, will probably be of interest
to many of our readers.
A. g. Chandlee, ESQ: -.
DEAR SIR-Replying to the ques-
tlon you ask as to the manurial value
OF dark cotton seed meal al $l.OO
per hundred, as compared with whole
short staple cotton seed at thirtv-
seven and half cents per hundred
pounds, permit me to say: The ques-
tlon is somewhat complex and diff
cult to answer positively. Neverthe.
less | think / can give you some
facts which may assist you in form
ing a conclusion, especially as you
say that the question is Of great
practical Importance to the farmers,
in your portion Of the state.
First let us look at the matter from
the standpoint of the chemist
omitting for the moment all questions
OF freight, expense of hauling, COM
posting, applying ETC., and supposing
that IN each case there is no waste
of fertilizer Or fertilizer value.
Now one hundred pounds of short
staple cotton seed, fairly dry and
tree from lint costing thirty-seven and
half cents, contains on an average
three pounds Of ammonia, worth lat
the valuation have this year adopted
for ammonia in vegetable substan-
ces) exactly thirty-six cents. There
is also about one pound of phosphoric
acid worth six cents and one and
quarter pounds of potash worth
seven cents, total torty-nine cents.
The manural value therefore exceeds
the cost by eleven and half cents
Or one ton, cost $3.50, and it's
manurial value is $50; gain $3.50.
Dark cotton seed meal costing
Sl.0O per hundred contains on an
average in each hundred pounds
six and a half pounds of ammonia,
worth seventy-eight cents; two and a
quarter pounds of phosphoric acid
worth thirteen and half cents, and
one and one-quarter pounds of pot
ash worth seven cents; total ninety
eight and a half cents. In other
words, the manurial value is less than
the cost value by one and half cents,
or ton costing $4,000 has a
manurial value Of $19.70, and there
is seeming loss Of thirty cents. So
that if nothing else were to be taken
into the account save the manurial
value actually existing in these two
fertilizers, i. might he said that the
man who buys whole cotton seed
makes $3.50 cents on each ton Of
whole cotton seed used.
This however, il very far from
telling the whole story. Dark cotton
seed meal is in condition for
immediate application as fertilizer.
Whole cotton seed is not. The latter
contains considerable proportion Of
oil, which has no manurial value and
is probably rather detrimental than
otherwise. Then, too, the whole
cotton seed must either be composted
or allowed to partially rot to destroy
the vitality Of the seed and fit it for
plant food. Both these operations
as ordinarily conducted are exceed
ingly wastetul in that most valuable
element, ammonia.
The question thus assumes some
thing Of this form: If a farmer can
buy cotton seed delivered at $3.50
per ton and he has all the facilities
for making a good compost heap,
under cover, with the proper proper
tions of superphosphate or bone
meal and sulphate of potash (if he is
cultivating tobacco or fruit) or
kanite, if be is growing cotton; not
emitting liberal supply of gypsum
to save ammonia, and he is also
possessed of the requisite knowledge,
skill and experience in the manage
ment of such a compost heap, it may
be wise investment for him to buy
and use the whole seed. He must
remember, however, that there is
only margin Of $3.50 to cover all
this labor skill and riRk of loss. 1t is