Collections: 
0-9 | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

10 > Image 10 of Kentucky farm and home science, vol. 4 No. 2 spring 1958

Part of Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station

:1 high average alkaloid co11te11t. Those from the 1955 Tibl 2-- Tliff \{)id Eznifiigcrgit 1*;:33; crop had a lTlllCh lower alkaloid content than those Tcrglggug tjlgfe gfslgsidrlm W from the 1954 and 1957 crops bllt a higher average . alkaloid content than did the 1956 samples. Eip;,,,2tfd yield Y C Grade B R T (V`, A Table 1.- The average total alkaloid (nicotine) content of hh V ***r b=~ %1>*=; Obeined from me me as = whsle than 1500 ....,..... 1.04 5.16 .;.0; 2.70 ..1- "d. lm"' "a " h" "a f h" *95457 lS a1g 1500-2000 .................. 2.0:; 3.14 :;.66 :;.76 :;.10 av': g"d"S Above 2000 ................ 2.00 :;.22 4.00 :;.04 -i. Xgrlmd Area tipsgpnlesz Flyings and trashX; lngsC; bright 1eafB; red leafH; 5 & _ 1954 bacco which went to the pool from this area i11 1955, i~ 1955 ........................ 2.25 6.4:; :;.00 3.86 :;.25 and agam iu 1956 when this was Om of dw 1WSt ah .4 T Area 1 ................ 2.68 4.20 4.74 4.6:3 4.05 kaloid areas in the state. The data (Table 3) indicate 0% that thequantity of tpbacco which went to the poolh $5 1056 ........................ 2.01 3.07 :;.60 :;.25 from thla me Ia 1905 was a1>1>r<;>a*1y two flaw? eq- Area 2 ................ 1.98 :3.47 4.58 4.61 4.22 the amount which could be expected on the basis of mst Of Sm" 202 3114 :160 **61 :114 the quantity of tobacco produced in this area or 011 *"v -. .+22 170 432 3'87 the basis of the total state production which went to Q_ ii,,Shrliilh hly1"s ""ll ""1"x 1"SC 1"1h l""fB "1 1""f`R the pool. This would indicate that the companies ( The results obtained can be roughly correlated with (hd hht hhy SO aaavay hl hhs. ahhh hhdfhht the high- 7 tl1e rainfall patterns i11 the four years. The 1954 and hhhlmd Chhthht hwy have hhhcthd thhhl hh}/mg Phh- 1 4 1957 crops were largely dry weather" crops, while the uhh _ railtfall tlistrilmtioii lll 1955 and 1956 Was lllllCll 11101*9 Table 3.-A comparison ol` tobacco production and pool VT i(](.a]_ take from high-al-kaloid area 1 (Table 1) witl1 that of the c ln 1955, 1956, and 1957, area patterns (high- lll(l inc as u whole lh 1955 and l956` ifi A low-alkaloid areas) were obvious in the state. Thus T i955 LQEG- W . lll 1955, tllI`* WAS ll hlgl`1-all1l<11U0$ (Such as 111056 l)i`V*i1iUg in 1956) me Ye- M the high alkaloid level. q11ired for the p1'O(lUCtl()ll of a crop witl1 a11 alkaloid 6 ~ 1 C()l'lt&llt equal to the traditional range of 3.00-3.25 per- L Yield-Nicotine Relationship Cent aa The llllllI(llC( on nicotine content of increasing Although weather conditions have a marked effect 47 yields is shown by data obtained in 1956 (Table 2)_ o11 alkaloid content, tl1e increased emphasis on yields ht l"iU`lllll`$ Slllllllltllllg samples were asked to estimate through tl1e use of large quantities of nitrogen ferti- ` their yields. and then the average alkaloid content of lizer is believed to be the chief reason for the tendency in Sulllplvs froni farms witl1 yields of less than 1,5()()_ for a higher average alkaloid COlltllt of burley crops. ` _, 1.590-2.000. Lllltl above 2,001 pounds per iicre was The trend toward higher yields results i11 a marked T talt11latcd. The data indicate zi marked increase in improvement in the physical characteristics of the * ( atllsaloid content with increasing yield_ especially in tobacco witl1 ll decrease in the q11a11tity of `inon- H 1 saunplcs froni the top of the plant (the leaf and tip smoker" grades. Tl1e increased yields and improve- grades). ment in physical qualities have undoubtedly increased " s llighallid content and the tlecreuse in usefuliiess ( attcinpt was made to determine the quantity of to- (@0,,;;,,ugd 0,,, page 15) ` HAM lil K1:N*111c1<1 lT.~\li\l .4Nn lloxtn SCIENCESPRINC 1958 `O~ l