FARM AND DAIRY

Taranaki Daily News, 9 June 1932, Page 16

FARM AND DAIRY

INJURY BY FROST. INFLUENCE OIF (POTASH, Several cases are quoted from the current literature in which potash fertilisers increased the resistance-of. crops to injury by frost. , A. Arland, Leipzig, has observed that the younger leaves show a greater resistance to frost injury than the older, and he emphasises tile similarity between the type of injury produced by frost and that .caused by drought. As a result of his investigations he assumes that the lower 1 resistance to frost observed in plants receiving insufficient potash is due to an increased loss of water by transpiration. 1 He maintains that the increase’ in resistance produced by potash manuring cannot be caused by an increase in the salt content, and a consequent lowering of the freezing point of the. cell -sap, as the effect of potash in this respect is very slight. Potash manuring tends to reduce the loss of water to the plant by transpiration, and thus to prevent the drying up of the plant tissues, and it is to this fact that,he ascribes the greater resistance of plants manured with potash’to injury by frost.

WOOL GROWERS’ PROBLEM.

EXPERIENCE “The statistics issued by the National Council of Woolselling Brokers appear to indicate that the period .of abnormally high prices pf the war and the postwar period definitely terminated with the. .1928-29 season, when the average price throughout • the Commopwealth was 16.44 d per lb., and in the iSydney market 164 d per lb.” This statement was made. by the general secretary of the Graziers’ .Association (Mr. J. Allen) in l his annual report submitted to the annual meeting of the members. It waft pointed out that the average price in the Commonwealth for - the 1929-30 season was 10.29 d, while in.the following year the Commonwealth average 1 was 8.3i6d, 'with the Sydney average‘in each case fractionally higher. For the first six months of the current, season the Commonwealth average has been BJd, and Sydney 8.2 d. After quoting th? statement of Chief Justice Dethridge in his ; variation judgment in July, 1930, that' taking' Australia as a whole he felt safe in assuming that “the average cost of, production, of .wool .is .lid a . lb., without bringing into account ■ any' interest ■ on capital or borrowed money or any profit or return to - owners for their services,” the annual report continues: “This statement represents the general experience of ‘wool-growers, ahd, although the utmost economies have been effected by graziers .in all controllable expenses within the boundaries' of their properties, it may definitely be asserted that very few have'been able to show any profit whatsoever during the past two years, or have, in fact,' beenable to make ends "(meet.

“Wool values appear ‘definitely to have receded to a pre-war level, and would even now be very considerably lower hut for the high rate' of exchange, and this cannot safely be relied upon for thb maintenance of future values. Some reductions in the important items of wages and interest have been made,, but no alleviation lias yet .been obtain: 6d in respect of taxation, transport charges, or agents’ charges.” . Referring to Wool Cort? ference which was held in Melbourne last June, 1 tfie report states: ‘ f li-is-' believed that while no sensational results were achieved, - a great 'deal of good was done,- especially by Hihging together.- the representatives /of the Commonwealth, New Zealand, ; and South. Africa, so that they may in the future more closely work together in the common interests of the wool- . growers of the (British Empire. The recommendations of the* conference have since 'been unanimously approved .by the South African Wool Council, with the exception of the resolution which affirmed that the 'best method Of selling wool is by means of public auction. In this respect the South African Council expressed the view that in some circumstances the sale of wool by privatecontract was advantageous.”

EQUALISING PASTURE GROWTH

ACTION OF SUPERPHOSPHATE.

(By K.P.) ■ " With an even growth of, grasi. available throughout the twelve months of the year, it would be an easy, matter to stock up to the full capacity of a farm. Wastage of growth would cease, /there would be no need to purchase expensive hay and ensilage making machinery, and winter feeding of stock would, be a simple business. Unfortunately this ideal state' is not likely to be realised, but, at least, we have evidence to prove that something can be. done in the way of equalising pasture growth. Writing in the November issue of the Journal of Agriculture, Mr. Hudson, crop experimentalist, shows that under normal conditions of growth, over a period covering three successiyb years, no le.ss than 85 per cent, of the total yearly, growth of grass is produced from February to the end of August. Where regular topdressing with superphosphate had been carried out, it has had the effect of increasing total production by 50 per cent., but of even more importance perhaps, is the discovery that the use of super tends to

equalise growth throughout th© year. Autumn and, summe-r (December) applications of super caused the pastures to yield 75 per cent, of their total growth during the September-January period aqd 25 per cent. —an increase" of IO per cent.—during the February.August period. ' Commenting on this phase of topdressing, Mr. Hudson makes the. following statement: , . “The manures, especially Super, gave their greatest percentage increases during low production periods. Thft effect of this is brought out in table 4 where it is .shown that a. greater percentage' of th© production for the year occurs during the low period in the case of the manured plots than where no manure was. used. The summer And autumn applications of super ate definitely superior in this respect to other supbt treatments and to all slag treathients. Even during those times of poorer growth which fell in the high-production I periods the relative effect of the manures was greater than when conditions were conducive to good growth. Herein lies a. very valuable aspect of phosphate ‘ manuring.”

ARTICHOKES FOR PIGS. “AN INVALUABLE FOOD.’’ “My note suggesting that artichokes should make a good crop for pigs has brought a letter from an Australian pig breeder, Mr. G. A. Gutheridge.” says a writer in a English paper. ‘I have had great success,’ writes Mr. Gutheridge,

“with artichokes, and consider them ■an invaluable fopd for .pigs. They are quite easy, to establish, and I sow mine behind the. plough, ©very third (furrow, ploughtwo lands, and .planting -one land while ploughing the other. I apply scwt. of manure per acre-—mostly high-grade superphosphate,and.: sime complete fertiliser, and. employed , three men to do the; planting—-one to plough, one to plant-the tubers and, the other to sow the manure, which was. spread, over the articliokes as they were ! planted; The crop was.hilled and treated the same’as potatoes, and gave a fine, yield. “ ‘I- consider the artichokes great feed, for sows, and for that matter all pigs— I just turn them, in on the crop and feed rape, kale, and other green stuff in conjunction.; -If the green crops are not available I place a self-feeder in tlie arti-choke-paddock and fed the following mixture: — • « ‘l4olb. middlings, 1121 b.-barley nieal, 1001 b. linseed meal, 1121 b. rice pollard, -to which I add 10 per cent, meat meal and 2 . per. cent. bone meal. “ ‘.This makes a fine fattening mixture for-pigs, and one that I can recommend for feeding in self-feeders. You may not be able to . get rice/meal, and I would suggest crushed maize as a substitute. All pig farmers, I think, should grpw artichokes; they have so jnany advantages in being easy to) establish ana practically permanent on light land and oreat yielders on heavy land, where I think the crops should be replanted every year and managed the same ’as potatoes.’ ” • .