The people's journal. (Pickens, S.C.) 1891-1903, 1900-01-04
PkOLIFICACY VERSUS PRODUC-
TIVENESS.
Corrcspondence Cotton Plant.


meaning fruitful, it by 10 means fol.
lows that they are to be regarded as
synonymous, meaning one aud the
same thing, or that they are inter.
changcablc, the ono with the other.
In the case of vegetation in general,
a plant may be exceedingly prolific,
without being what may be justly
termed productive while on the other
hand, plant may be enormously pro-
ductive without being exceptionally
prolific.
This difference is plainly cNcmpli-
fled in tho case Of popcorn and the So
called scvcn-car corn, which may be
regarded as being exceedingly prolific,
hut not necessarily prOductive; or at
least not so much so us other and lar
ger varieties while such varieties as
WclbOrn's Conscience, Kentucky
Mammoth, Chester County Mammoth
and many other equally large varieties,
are enormously productive, yet could
hardly be termed prolific.
The same is equally true Of the Gus
ter coltons, which are us rule, cX-
cccdingly prolific, but not necessarily
productive, while the big boil varieties
arc usually enormously productive but
likewise without being exceptionally
prolific.
l'rolilicacy seems then to deal more
especially with the number of fruits
while productivcucss Las more direct
reference to their size, while neither
tenn has any reference whatever SIS to
the quality of the product. 1t is vcly
important, in fact highly csscntlll, il
not absolutely Indispensable for the
soil tlil,r, in whatever special branch
OF agriculture he may be engaged, to
keep in mind the difference in the ac-
lual meaning OF the above named tcl ms.
Proiiicacy does not always mean
produclivcncss, neither does product
lvcncss necessarily imply or include
proliliracy.
Some of our farming brethren may
! possibly think that this il Il distinction
without Il difference, and that wc are
unnecessarily precise in our definition
. but If they were engaged, as we are,
IN wing to obtain maximum yiclls
per acre of each and every crop planted
as well as in obtaining extra fine spcci-
mems of each, in fact makin., not only
'hc land, but also each individual plant
. do lis very level best, thereby inu out
the capabilities Of, not only each spc-
clcs of vegetation, but also of The land
itself and each individual acre uf It
, they would then find out the impora
tive necessity of bearing above dis
! unction constantly in mind.
We hear rf Sccdlcss ruisins, sccdlcss
. melons, peaches. oranges, etc, etc. in
: some instances these arc productive
bat in no sense could they possibly b,
termed .prolitic, while the so-callct
| lintlcss cotton is, on the other hand
exceedingly prolific, but is far from be
| ing productive, in the usual sense o
l productivcncss, i. e. in lint.
, The very best Of goo0 seed is css2ntia
IN order to the production Of larg,
yields per acre. s. &.
Almost without exception, extreme
' early varieties are also cxtrcmel'
u small ant insignificant varieties Carl
ness and not prnductivcncss being tn,
main and leading object of the pr0du
Ger in his choice of varieties medium
- early varieties arc invariably more pro
ductivc than are either extremely earl,
or extremely late varieties. =; AS an ex
perimcntal farmer, experimenting
solely for our own satisfaction, and il
. order 10 gain positive, practical valua
, be information at first hand, and will
all mere idle theory eliminated; to en.
, , aplc us to sift the ,chaff from the Dur,
golden grain ; Oh questions pertaining
to fertilizers, to varieties, to soils, anl
to culture, with the probable effects
possible effects and positive effects OF
! each, when intcligently and juGicious
ly cmployed.; we have found it decid
| ~ advantageous to study closely thu
i, peculiar characteristics of each an,
u every agent employed, or that could b,
> employed.
o IN THE PRODUCTION OF. MAXIMUM
G YIELDS.
= FcrtillZing for prolilicacy and fcrtil
Zlng FOR prOduCtlvcness. Is it posslbl,
to so fcrtlllZc as to increase prolilicac,
at the expense Of productivcncss, O
:. 10 incrasce productivcness at the cX
pcnsc Of prolificacy?
t TO limited extent, yes. If we hat
not l'cleved it posslqle, we woul,
- never have called the readers attention
" to it by propounding the query. What
ever other functions may be attributed
to pho 'phoric acid, it undoubtedly in
crcascs prolilicacy but this very pro
Efficacy is sometimes an actual draw
back, Il disadvantage, for the reas OF
that the quality Of the fruit is 80 de
. cidcdly inferior that productivencss i
actually decreased thereby.
Potash and nitrogen on the othc
hand, exert but little influence towar
increasing prolificacy, but seem to ex
crt their entire influence in incrcasin
the size and improving the quality @
the fruit and this, even at the cx
pcnse Of its prolihcacy, and this i
! is more especially true of potash.
a multiplication of the number Q
fruits at the expense of size and qua
lty would possibly be advantageous i
the case Of lintless cotton and possibl
Of some few other agricultural pre-
ducts but with the generality Of far.