The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-02-01

combined with chiorfn 10 form common
salt. II Is very inturios-s. even In very
small quantities.
Phosphorus acide occurs in all fertile
eoIis. although usually In march small
Tar amounts than the otk1er important
ingredients. Il never occurs free, but
IN combination with either iron, alum
ina or LINE. phosphate OF lime being
rrsost common because ali crops take
1t from the soil, and because OF the
small amount present In most oe them.
decidedly beneficial effects are usually
produced by adding il as a fertilizer.
The Question OF profit resulting from
its application can only be determined
by trial.
Sulphuric acid Is found as one OF the
constituents OF most soils, although
present in minute quantities. It Is usu-
ally in the form Of calcium sulphate
or gypsum.
Chsorin is found only sy,arinxiy In
soils, and Is usually in the form OF
common salt
Agriculture, as science. is OF COM
paretiveiy recent date As recently as
1888 1t was still an unsolved problem
whether or not mineral matter was nee
essary to the life OK the plant Since that
time the ideas concerning the relation be-
tween the plant and the soil in which II
grows have been varied and conflicting.
always governed and modified by the
theories Of the time. Real scientific agri-
culture only dates back about thirty
three years, when Liebig first discovered
the true philosophy OF plant nutrition.
His discovery was not made until he had
learned that theories. however plausible,
are often disproved by practical tests.
Liebig's examination OF plants from many
portions of the world was very productive
OF results. He found that all plants con-
tanned the same ash constituents. al
though varying in proportion for different
plants From this he argued that ell
plants take from the soil certain mineral
substances, and that unless these forms
Of plant food were returned 10 the soil.
fertility would be seriously impaired by
continuous cropping. Upon this theory
the manufacture OF ARTIFICIAL fertilizers
was founded. Because OF mistaken CON-
ceptlons of the nature of plant food, fer
tiiizers were at first prepared in the most
fnsoluhle form possible: and hence. when
applied 10 the soil, did not yield the ex-
pected beneficial results. 1t was not until
Others discovered that plant food must be
soluble In order to be assimilated that
artificial fertilizers became of value.
When ii first became known that the
ashes OF plants. and soils, were alike in
their composition, 1t was at once as
sumed that there was a direct relation
between them, and that chemical analysis
would reveal that relation. It was sup
posed that If a given soil refused to pro-
duce q profitable crop. an examination of
Its ash, and OF the soil, would show what
the latter lacked that was required by
the former. But when put In practice 1t
was soon found that analyses showed no
deficiency In the elements Of plant nutri-
ton, and yet the plant would not grow.
For this reason. 1t was then. as well as
now, dangerous matter for the chemist
to state Dramatically that given soil
must be productive because he has found
1t TO contain all that plants require; be-
cause a practical test may prove his
statements TO be false. This is oHe rea-
son. and perhaps the chief one. why many
have been In the past. and some are to-
day, sceptica1 concerning the ability of
chemical science to render any practical
assistance to agriculture
When 1t was also discovered that the
differences between a new, fertile. un-
cultivated soil. and one that has been
worn out by iong-continued culture, are
so slight that even the delicate balance
OF the chemist can barely appreciate
them. doubts began to arise in the minds
of chemists themselves as TO the useful
ness OF chemical soil analyses. In their
opinions on this point chemists disagree
very widely.
fact that. while it reveals what the soil
contains, and IN what proportions the
different constituents are present, 1t does
not show how much of the plant food
present Is In a form suitable for assirni-
lation by the plant. Other things being
equal the productiveness of any soil
should be proportional to the amounts of
available plant food which 1t contains.
When 1t becomes possible to show by an
analysis how much of the plant food is
capable OF being absorbed by the roots.
then soil analysis will have reached a
point where it's practical utility cannot
be questioned.
A very large portion of the future farm
ing land of our state Is as yet unculti-
ated, virgin soil. A chemical soil analy-
sis will always show whether or not
there Is deficiency OF any OF the eie-
ments OF plant food. II is pretty gener-
ally agreed that an investigation OF yir-
gin soils Is a fruitful field OF work. We
know that plants differ In their requires
ments upon the mineral food OF the soil.
Hence 1t IS possible for the chemist to
determine In his laboratory what the
farmer can only determine by the costly
experiment of crop failures. While the
analysis can not demonstrate with GER
tainty that the soil OF any given locality
Is untitled for the successful production
OF any given crop. yet IT may indicate a
reasonable probability of success or fail
ure Many important points concerning
the needs OF soils that have long been
under cultivation might be revealed by
analyses, although IL must be admitted
that the results are less satisfactory than
In the case Of virgin soils.
The chemical constitution Of soils. as
Important as Il IS. Is not the only de-
ternnin,n< factor OF fertility. Equally.
or perhaps even more important, are sts
physical characteristics. The available
ity cr plant food Is probably largely con-
ditionesi by the size Of the grains. Hence
the determination Of the Dimensions Of
the soil particles is important. II is now
also generally accepted az true. that the
water holding power OF soil. It's rermea-
hsiity 10 air and water. and all az its re-
iations TO moisture, have maeh 10 do With
fertility or harrenness.