The gazette-times. [volume] (Heppner, Or.) 1912-1925, 1922-07-27
DRY TREATMENT IS
THE BEST FOR YIELD
&C. c. Calkins, County AGENT

W. y. SdlhiilsY SOuuly AkSHl,t
Although a final check has not been
made on all the dry treatment for smut
tests so much interest has been mani
Tested in the results that we have been
requested to make known the results
thus far.
On nine experiments which have been
carefully checked we have found that
there were ASH per cent or practically
half more wheat where treated with
copper carbonate than where treated
with the old hluestone and formalde-
hyde treatment. In one instance where
the wheat was seeded late there was
practically three times the stand and
in one other instance better than twice
the stand, from the dry treatment.
Take it as a whole it would have paid
all these farmers to have treated all
their grain with the dry treatment last
year owing to the fact that there would
have been a half more wheat and Incl
IDENTIFY approximately a half greater
yield. However, it will be noticed that
on the average the dry treatment was
not as effective for the control of smut
there being more than 40 per cent of
smut on the average in the copper car
Donate treated wheat as against 1.S per
cent smut where the old standard meth
DDS of dipping were used.
This dry treatment was tried on Blue
stem, Forty-fold, Turkey-red, and Hy-
brid 12s.
We have a number of other tests to
check up on, Following this we will get
the returns from the other wheat grow
ing counties of Eastern Oregon and will
then be in better position to make re-
concentrations.
This dry treatment has shown US con-
cuSively that great amount of injury
is done by seed treatment. That many
of the poor stands can be attributed
directly to that cause. This was shown
by the fact that in some instances two
and three times the stand Of wheat was
secured where copper carbonate treat
ment was used. 1t has also made us
very anxious to have the experiment sta
tions perfect for us smut immune
wheat which can be planted without
treatment
1t reveals the fact that we may be able
to use it safely for some varieties OF
wheat such as Turkey-red and with some
notifications we will very possibly be
able to use it for other varieties.
In order to make more careful
check on the effectiveness for the diff.
ferent chemicals for smut control where
Bluestem wheat was heavily smutted We
tried some of them along side Of for.
maldehyde and bluestone on small platS
on Adam Blahm's place below Heppner
The results will be found below
Copper carbonate, u per cent smut;
formaldehyde, no smut; Seed-O-San
l-l0 of one per cent smut; bluestone, nc
smut; eorona-copper, 2h per cent smut;
no treatment, rs per cent,
The Bluestem seed used above was al
heavily smutted, the smut balls beinl
broken over the seed and we'll rubbed
into it, The seed was then treated ac
cording to directions for the methods il
question, Compared with the no treat,
ment it will be noticed that the copper
carbonate, Seed d-0-San treatments wer'
quite effective, while the corona-coppel
gave only 21s per cent.
More extensive demonstrations on in
jury due to seed treatment and she eff
fectiveness of the different methods fol
controlling smut will be arranged with
different farmers in all of the whea
producing communities for this fall, The
names of the cooperators and the fina
results of all the tests will be published
in the local papers,