xt71c53f0108 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt71c53f0108/data/mets.xml   Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. 1902 journals kaes_bulletins_098 English Lexington, Ky. : The Station, 1885- Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin n.98. text Bulletin n.98. 1902 2014 true xt71c53f0108 section xt71c53f0108 KENTUGKY A
  _ !
. Ob THE ¤_`
St21teC0llege et Kentucky. ?  
1. Kentucky Forage Plants—The Clovers and their Allies.  
2. Notes on True Grasses in the Plots in 1900-1901.  
3. Analyses of Forage Plants from the Plots.  
 ’_   x
Laxmsron, xemucxv, _
February 25, I902,

 ; ‘·’ ·l T
Til Eb
X; _ l
  3 {lgmcultural Expammznt Statmn.
 i ‘ THOS. TODD, Shelbyville, Ky.
 V. V J. B. KENNEDY, Paris, Ky.
    J. B. MARCUM, Jackson, Ky. `
L , D. F. FRAZEE, Lexington, Ky. l ~
. J. K. PATTERSON, President of the College.
. M. A. SCOVELL, Director, Secretary.
,·i M. A. scovELL, Director and Chemist.
  A. M. P T iz, _
I, E E } Chemists.
l   H. GARMAN, Entomologist and Botanist.
J   . C. W. MATHE\VS, Horticulturist.
l   J. N. HARPER, Agriculturist.
i   . H. H Remus,
E   27 O BZCATFEFY }~ Ass’t Chemists.
, , Q . . ,
‘ {E { R. M. ALLEN, Clerk, Food Division. '
¤ V ·
&_   J. D. TURNER, Secretary to the Director. ‘
,   J. O. LABACH, Chemist, Food Division,
,   GEO. ROBERTS, Ass’t Chemist.
‘ I T. L. RICHMOND, _ _ _·
kt · } Asst’s to Entomologist and Botanist.
I .
,' * S. D. AVERITT, Ass’t Chemist.
l     D. \V. MAY, Animal Husbandman.
  Address of the Station—LEXINGTON, KY.
V The Bulletins of the Station will be mailed free to any citizen of Ken·
{ ‘ ‘ tricky who sends his name and address to the Station for that purpose. ,
Correspondents will please notify the Director of changes in their post- -
. i office address, or of any failure to receive the bulletins. —
LEx1NGToN, KY. `

 ? E
i i 
, i
BULLET/N `/\/O. 98. .
l. Kentucky Forage Pl¤nts—The Clovers \_‘
i i dnd their Allies. ?
BY H. GARMAN, EN*ro11oLot;1s’r· AND Boranrstr.  
Bulletin 87, published by this Station in igoo, relates to the  
true grasses. Another group of forage plants, including  
clovers, next to the grasses in importance, and not second to
them in some respects, is known under the family name
Leguminoste. These plants have a special importance because
of their properties as green fertilizers and as nitrogen gath- I
erers. This bulletin relates to such members of the family as
are cultivated in Kentucky, to others that have been grown in '
plots on the Experiment Farm at Lexington, and to those found i
_ growing wild in the State. The number of these latter will
doubtless be increased somewhat as we become better ac-
I quainted with our native Hora. The list presented is consid- ` . ,
· ered only as a foundation for a more thoroughgoing account mt`
of our species, which we have in preparation.
i The same plan of arranging the species is adopted as in  Q
Bulletin 87, the technical names being presented in alphabetical  
 · order, while an index including only common names is ap-  
pended. Q
,_ S0 much space is occupied in agricultural journals with dis- A  
, Cussions on the effect of clovers and their allies on soils, that  
t· — it may seem like thrashing over very old straw to give the
matter attention here. Farmers, it may be said, understand
very well that these plants improve their land, and are ready
_` to make use of them without caring very much how the im-
provement is brought about. It may be questioned if this ‘
attitude is one that is likely to contribute to an improved

5, Q 4 Bu//elin N0. 98.
·;  il agriculture. The explanations brought out by a study of
  i plant physiology and of bacteriology may not be all they
 i should be, but are the best we have, and will at least serve as
J A a foundation for further investigation and thinking. Future
[  work may lead to their complete overthrow or to their being .
 _ more firmly established. Earnest students of these subjects
  are not likely to raise any serious objection to either result. -
i  Yet in view of the care with which experiments have ·
·  A been made, showing that clovers and allied plants appropriate
 · the free nitrogen of the air and thus put it within the reach
' of other plants, such as wheat and corn, that cannot draw
—  upon this source of nitrogen, it 1nay be considered very
  improbable that future investigations will greatly alter our
  conceptions of the part played by these plants in restoring to
    soils this important element.
  p Good reasons can be given for the belief that these plants
ii do not take free nitrogenfrom the air by means of their
    leaves, and evidence has been recorded showing that they do
  not gain free nitrogen in any way unless certain knots or
T   tubercles appear on their _roots; that minute bacteria in the i
  tubercles and not the plant itself, are the agents by which ‘
    nitrogen of the air is nxed in the plant. A very brief review
  Q of investigations that have led to the accepted views on these
    points will help to a clearer understanding of the purpose of
  · some observations and experiments on soy beans reported  _
ij   in what follows.
. ?   Leguminous Plants as Nitrogen Gatherers.
1 » The peculiar renovating properties of the clovers have been ,
A » i known in practical agriculture for 111any years. A French '
I chemist appears to have been first in the field with the pur-
! _ pose of finding an explanation. In 1837 Boussingault began _
numerous experiments with plants grown in sterilized soil, ·
i the plants themselves enclosed and sometimes surrounded with ·
` air that had been "washed." At one time, we are told, he
held the opinion that nitrogen of the air was fixed in the soil \
by certain microscopic plants, but later abandoned this view,
and finally as the result of many years’ investigation con-

 I 1
léyztzzcky Forage PZ:z¢zz‘s—- Tée C/overs and {heir /Il/z`es. 5 A j
cluded that the higher plants cannot assimilate the free nitro-
gen of the air.
Messrs. Lawes and Gilbert, who became of recent years the
leading British authorities on the subject, began work on the `
problem about the time Boussingault gave it up, in 1857.
They also grew plants in sterilized soil under glass covers, rk
_ and like him reached the conclusion that plants do not appro-  
\ priate the free nitrogen of the air.  
But this conclusion did not satisfy workers. Facts were ;_ l
being observed that could not be explained, assuming that '  
plants do not get nitrogen from some other source than the  
soil, and the dissatisfaction led at length to renewed experi- if
ment. The American chemist, W. O. Atwater, was one of i
the first, possibly the first, to publish the conclusion based  
upon experimental evidence that after all some plants do take  “.i
up the free nitrogen from the atmosphere. In the American
Chemical Journal, Vol. 6. pages 365-388 (1884-5), he gives
his data in detail, but makes no serious effort to explain just .
how the nitrogen is taken up.*
The best known work tending to demonstrate that free V-
nitrogen is appropriated by leguminous plants was furnished _
by the Germans, Hellriegel and Willfarth. The former of
these in 1883 grew various plants in washed quartz sand, add-
ing nutrient solutions but no nitrogen, Then to a part of
· them he gave various known quantities of combined nitrogen. gtk;
He found that ordinary grasses grew in proportion to the
quantity of combined nitrogen supplied them, but that the  
Leguminosae did not in all cases agree. Certain plants grow-   _
ing better than any of the others were found to have small  
 · nodules, or tubercles, on the roots. In conjunction with his   I
colleague, he began to make use of soil extracts, simply { (
shaking up rich garden soil in a vessel with water, then re- l  
‘ moving the soil and applying the water to certain plants `Z
j under experiment. It was found that this treatment led to a
good growth of the plants, with a development of nodules on
the roots, and as a result of many such experiments they an-
*Atwater appears to have published his results before the American ·
Association for the Advancement of Science in 1881.

 _   I
L I"? `il —
  6 B1¢IIez‘i2z N0. 98.
  g* nounced in 1886 that Leguminosm thrive in soils with no ni-
  rd trogen in them, if only the tubercles are developed, but that
 _ ‘ without tubercles the growth is poor and no free nitrogen is
  · taken from the air.
.  Lawes and Gilbert took up the study again in 1888, and
  Q during this year and several following, obtained results com-
yf . pletely confirming those obtained by the German writers
i_  mentioned. In summing up the results of their later work ,
 ¢_ they write (journal of the Royal Society of Agriculture of
 a England, gd Series, Vol. 2, 1891, p. 689), "Reviewing the
_ whole of the results which have been brought forward, there
  can be no doubt that the fact of fixation of free nitrogen in
{ I the growth of Leguminosm under the influence of suitable
  microbe infection of the soil, and of the resulting nodule-for-
Q F mation on the roots, may be considered as fully established."
  The importance of the conclusion reached by these men is
  not yet fully appreciated by farmers. Nitrogen in some form
{ L is essential to the proper growth of plants. It is one of the
  most costly fertilizing materials when supplied artificially.
»   i; Yet here is a supply ready to every farmer’s hand. He can-
`   not draw on it with wheat or corn or oats; but clover, soy ~
r—   beans, a11d alfalfa, capture it and place it at his disposal. In
L   the light of this explanation, we may read with a better under-
¥ z standing the words of Monsieur Georges Ville (Artincial Ma-
  _ nures, 1882, p. gy), "It cannot be too often repeated that it is ‘
5}, one of the secrets of profitable farming, to draw from the air
_   'Y as much nitrogen as possible by the alternation of crops."
Q 2
` ` T ` The Tubercles.
‘ * f . The root nodules, or tubercles, of clovers and cowpeas are ·
if familiar to most farmers. They vary much in shape and
'_ average size with the plant on which they grow. On the
1 hairy vetch (Wrzlz 2v`//asa) they are variously lobed, young  `
galls frequently consisting of three or four rather slender pro- _
cesses loosely attached to a rootlet, and older galls having
r numerous lobes, making the general surface very uneven.
The diameter of some of those observed in our plots was 5-16 "
inch. The tubercles formed on the roots of soy beans are

 § {
2 l
. l
. T l
Ke¢ztz¢cky Forage Plum'.:-— The Clover: and Meir A/[ies. 7 ·  
very different, looking like minute potatoes. They are fre-
quently quite spherical, the surface rather smooth, sometimes
with a few obscure impressed lines, occasionally with the sur-
face decidedly impressed in places, producing coarse folds. .
When cut open early in the season the cut surfaces are of a
peculiar reddish brown or brick-red color. Late in the fall
the cut surfaces are greenish, and as the plants dry out, the  
tubercles blacken and shrivel, becoming at length coated with {
i K a whitish mould-like fungus. They are juicy and rather soft _ i
at first, often with 311 appearance of a small central cavity. ·  
The diameter varies from about ·1-16 to 5-16 inch. Large Q ni
numbers are produced on a single plant, some on the central  
root, others far out on the lateral fibrous branches. On clover,
the galls are oval in shape and only about 1-16 inch long. J
Tubercles similar to those occurring on the roots of legu-  
minous plants are found on the roots of some plants of other
families, and are probably in some cases due to similar organ-
isms. Some others are the result of the invasion of the roots _
by microscopic plants recognized as fungi proper. Still others
are due to attacks by microscopic worms, one of the best
known of which is ffelemdem mriiro/a, of cucumbers, lettuce °
and other plants. 4
The Bacteria Causing the Tubercles.
· The organisms living in the nodules were recognized as ,_ ,
bacteria as early as 1866. Later, and quite recently, the exact kw
nature of the organisms was in dispute, some naturalists cou-
sidering them fungi, under the genus name Rhizobia, others  [
regarding them as true, though in some features of structure  
 . and development, exceptional bacteria. At present the  
latter view is quite generally held by bacteriologists. The  
name Bacillus mr/z`cz`c0/cz was applied to them in 1888 and is _ {V6;
‘ now in common use. Each genus of Legumiuosze appears to iff
V harbor an organism in some ways different from those living
on others, but yet so 1nucl1 alike that they cannot in all cases
be distinguished. Most of tl1e111 are coming' to be regarded
`~ as varieties of one species, and in conformity with this view it
is held that bacteria producing nodules on clover, for example, `

L [vi` `  .
i { 8 _ Bu//etz`1z N0. 98.
i will in time also produce them on other closely related plants
J?   · that may be planted in soil previously occupied by clover.
 J ` How the Bacteria Get Into the Roots.
A li The life history of the organisms has recently been studied
 f f with some care. They have been found to invade the roots
 ‘  by way of the root hairs, making for themselves a slender
§   passage down the centers of the hairs until the root proper is
i  reached in which they occupy larger passages bearing at first A
some resemblance to the growing threads of a fungus. It was
L the thread-like appearance of these larger passages that led
r f · early investigators to consider them an essential part of the
. t organism, the bacteria being looked upon as reproductive
  · bodies.
  The Effect of the Absence of Nodule Bacteria from
  . .. . SO"- .
g   Since it is by the aid of the bacteria that clovers and other
tg leguminous plants can live and thrive in soils containing no
  combined nitrogen, it has been suspected that in some cases
I ;   when clovers fail to do well it is because the nodule-producing
‘ ;   bacteria are absent, and that by introducing them the plants ‘
  will be enabled to grow. This matter has now been pretty
Q   thoroughly investigated in European countries, and to some
.   extent also in this country. It has been found that land is
  _ often greatly improved for clover simply by sowing it with I
M soil taken from good clover land, and thus introducing the
7** nodule-producing bacteria. The method is somewhat incon-
Q   ; venient in practice and has other defects, such as introducing
. V fungus or other pests with the Bari//as mdzkzkala.
` The Bacteria May be Sown by Means of Cultures.
K Any way the use of pure cultures was bound to be consid- _ _
I ered, and has for some years been tried. Beyerinck, who
first described the organisms as true bacteria, appears to have
made such cultures previous to 1888. In this country Prof.
Atkinson, of Cornell University, made cultures about 1889
from tubercles on the roots of vetches. Dr. Nobbe, of Thar-

 l _l
i l
A l
ffenfucky Forage Plants-- The Cloziers and their A/hes. 9 l
and, Saxony, about 1896, began the preparation of cultures »
of the organisms of leguminous crops on a commercial scale,
and they were at one time obtainable in this country, and
were to some slight extent employed here in an experimental ·
way. Recent inquiry with reference to obtaining cultures for
experiment at this Station, however, disclosed the fact that
they could no longer be secured through the representatives  
of the German manufacturer, and it was only through the {
kindness of Dr. L. Hiltner, of Berlin, that fresh cultures _ A
were Enally obtained. These were tested last summer on the ·  
Experiment Farm, in the case of soy beans with a success that   A
was quite surprising, considering all the difiiculties in the way *“
of sending the living bacteria such a long distance. Further A
reference to these cultures will be found under the heads of E
‘ red clover, alfalfa, and soy beans.  
The Dissemination of the Bacteria by Natural _
The nodule bacteria of our most commonly cultivated
leguminous plants, such as garden peas, beans and clover, p
seem to be quite generally distributed in the soils of the v_
State. This is what would be expected from the fact that
these plants have for a long period been cultivated here. In
the case of plants which are not generally grown, soy beans ‘
. for example, tubercles can not be expected to appear on the qt`;
roots the first year of planting on ground new to the plant, `
unless bacteria are introduced. This has been the experience
in our forage plant plots at Lexington, at any rate. The sec-  Ii,
_ ond year of planting on the same ground the tubercles are  
_ always abundant, though nothing is done to encourage them.  
The bacteria are perhaps carried about to some extent in the ’ (
air. Atwater and W'oods report* that they found tubercles  
~ · On some plants grown in sterilized soil` and kept moist with  
sterilized water, and suppose the organisms to have been con-
veyed in the air from a neighboring garden. It has been
observed in our plots, however, that the special bacteria of
new forage plants remain very closely restricted to soil in
*Bul1etin 5, Storrs School of Agriculture Experiment Station, 1889.

 ; _‘ ` "tl W
Q 1 10 Bzzllctivz ./V0. 98.
J; ·‘ which such plants are grown, not even crossing a three-foot
VY  t path to plants of the same sort. For a whole season two
Y  ` plots from the same lot of seed have stood thus side by side,
i the one with roots loaded with tubercles, the other with none.
 ; iv One would expect that particles of earth carried on tools used
 Y T in working the plots and on the shoes of workmen would in-
  evitably inoculate the new plots, but no evidence of this has
Y  been witnessed. It may be that the destructive effect of sun- t _
light and drought on the bacteria in the surface layer of soil
A accounts for these facts, in which case we can hardly suppose
. the bacteria would, in their growing state at any rate, survive
  _ dissemination in the atmosphere. It has seemed to me from
S, - observations of this sort that the bacteria must be scattered
{ chiefly, if not entirely, during cool, moist weather, in fall and
Q spring, by the washing of soils, otherwise they would surely
    appear before the end of a summer in new plots standing be-
  side old ones. But this does not explain the sudden appear-
    ance of the special bacteria adapted to soy beans in an isolated
E   plot of ground, while land all about remains free from them.
* —   It must be assumed in such cases that the organisms of some
V j,   commonly grown plant become adapted to the soy bean, that
    by virtue of some change either in the soy bean or in the bac-
  teria, the association of tl1e two becomes possible after tl1e
- 3 first season.
  Other Nitrogen-Fixing Plants.
· § It has been shown by Dr. Hiltner that some other plants
` ` f (alders among them) besides tl1e Leguminostu tix nitrogen of
· the air with the aid of tl1e bacteria residing in tubercles on
·· their roots. Certain of the lower green plants (Algae and i
. mosses) which grow on the surfaces of moist soils have been
I thought to appropriate free nitrogen without aid from bacteria; . _
but results obtained in experiments with these plants have
i been criticised because the growths under experiment were not
freed from bacteria, these latter being assumed by critics to
have secured the nitrogen while getting the carbon from the
Algae, the association of the two being thus similar in charac-

 1 l
Q J 
3   .
` `l
V l
I(e2ztz¢e}zy Forage P/a7z!s— The C/mers and their AZ/zes. 1]. V  
ter to that of tubercle bacteria and clovers. At any rate the ‘
tendency for some time past has been to consider the evidence
of fixation by Algae and mosses as not completely satisfactory.
Nitrifying Bacteria.
The bacteria producing tubercles on the roots of clovers and
cowpeas are very different from those described by the natur-  
I alist Wiiiogradsky, and which he obtained in ISQI from soil, {
` and succeeded in growing in pure cultures on a medium con- _ V
taining soluble silicates. These nitrobacteria are of three ·   `·`` ·.
sorts, one of which (Nitrosomonas) attacks organic matter at jg
a certain stage of decay, producing nitrites, after which, act-  
ing on the nitrites, a second form (Nitrobacter) produces the '
nitrates which are assimilated by growing crops. It thus ap- ii.
pears that the plants employed for crops are completely de-  =*i`r
pendent on lowly soil—inhabiting bacteria; upon the nodule-
forming species for the free nitrogen obtained from the air;
and upon the nitrobacteria of 'Winogradsky for rendering _
nitrogenous material already in the soil available as plant
food. I
A Bacterial Cultures for Wheat and Corn. ·
Of late a preparation known as "alinit" has been distributed
to stations in this country by a European manufacturer*,
which is claimed to encourage the growth of wheat and allied ;__ ,
plants by its action on nitrogenous materials in the soil, its "ki
effect being like that produced by the Nitrosomonas and
Nitrobacter of \\’inogradsky. Samples received at this Station  ’
last SI11l}II1€I‘ were put up in small vials of brown glass, each  
’ vial containing enough for an acre of ground. The brown  
powdery contents include with other material compact masses Q
of an organism that may easily be the Nitrosomonas. The W    
_ ._ enterprise appears to be an effort to utilize \\’inogradsky’s V"?
discoveries. The preparation has not been tested by us in a
practical way. A French worker, Malpeaux, has recently an-
nounced that he has obtained results from pot experiments
indicating that alinit has a beneficial effect in soil very rich in
*Friedr. Bayer & Co., Elberfeld, Germany.

 ; _'T` “l T
  1 12 Bu//etiyz N0. 98.
    organic matter, but that it has no such effect on cultivated
*  land*. I have calledattention to it here merely to point out
 ;  i that it is not like tubercle bacteria, calculated to increase the
 i 7 nitrogenous matter in the soil, but only to render available to
 V growing crops certain fertilizing materials already present.
 ‘ C Useful Literature Relating to Nitr0gen·Fixing and
  Z ‘ Nitrifying Bacteria. 7
i ii Following are the titles of a few of the most commonly ac- A
I 1 cessible articles on the action of bacteria in providing and pre-
· paring food for the higher plants. For the farmer, numbers
· 1 2, 3, 8 and 9 give information of special value. The agricul-
7 tural student will find numbers 1, 4, 5 and 6 highly inter-
F A esting.
  1. W. O. Atwater, The Acquisition of Atmospheric Nitro-
g   gen by Plants: American Chemical journal, Vol. 6, pp. 365-
  388 (1884-5).
l  2. ]. B. Lawes, and ]. H. Gilbert, The Sources of the Nitro-
j   gen of our Leguminous Crops: journal of tl1e Royal Agricul-
I ,   tural Society, Vol. 2, 3d Series, p. 657 (1891).
.     3. R. ¥Varington, Lectures delivered before the Association
  of Agricultural Colleges and Experiment Stations: Bulletin 8,
i   Ofhce of Experiment Stations, U. S. Dep. Agr. (1892).
iq   4. Albert Schneider, Observations on some American Rhi-
Q, zobia: Bulletin Torrey Botanical Club, Vol. 19, p. 205 (1892).
  V 5. Albert Schneider, A New Factor in Economic Agricul-
  ture; Bulletin 29, University of Illinois Agricultural Experi-
·   ment Station, p. 301 (1893).
` 1 6. G. F. Atkinson, Contribution to the Biology of the
’ Organism Causing Leguminous Tubercles: Botanical Gazette, ·
_ ' Vol. 18, pp. 157, 226, 257 (1893).
· 7. R. \Varington, Contribution to Recent Investigations
I I upon Nitritication: Agricultural Science, Vol. 7, p. 34 (1893). ` ‘
1 8. J. Augustus Voelcker, "Nitragin" or the Use of "Pure
Cultivation" Bacteria for Leguminous Crops: journal Royal
Agricultural Society, Vol. 7, 3rd Series, p. 253 (1896).
9. P. P. Deherain, Origin and Formation of Organic Matter
_;journal Royal hlicroscomocietyr, 190], p. 577 (abstract).

 ` l
I (
{ i 
1 i ‘
l il
Ifenlueky Forage Plants- The Clavers and their Allies. 13 ( l
in Plants: Experiment Station Record, Vol. 9, p. 903 (1898). A
10. E. F. Smith, Notice of a paper by O. Zinsser on the
root—tubercles of Leguminosm; American Naturalist, Vol. 32,
p. 365 (1898).
II. H. von Schrenck, Notice of a paper by L. Hiltner on
root-tubercles of alders and Eleagnaceae: American Natural-  
ist, Vol. 33, p. 450 (1899). ,`
` The Characters of the Clovers and Allied Plants. _ `
Wliile these Plants are often used for hay and pasturage in '   -.
the same manner as grasses, they are very different in their bo-  
tanical characters from true grasses. Plants belonging here if
generally have leaves composed of divisions known as leaflets, { A
irregular, perfect flowers, often very showy and attractive  
to insects, the seeds generally enclosed in a single—celled pod  ‘ii
or legume.’i* .
Many valuable plants besides those used for forage belong `
to the group: Indigo comes from one; gum-arabic from a ·
second; rosewood from another; and the dye, logwood, from
still another. It includes also some species, such as the Dar- 5
ling pea of Australia, that are accused of poisoning stock. -
List of Kentucky Leguminosae, with Notes.
Aman if/l/·7l0€7Z.S`Z-5 (ILLINOIS l\[I)IOS;\).—A1l erect herb with
finely divided leaves and clustered pods. Credited to Kentucky itk;
by several authors. Observed in cultivation at Lexington.
Said to be eaten by stock turned out on bottom lands.  
f.f77l07?/l£Z_/l'1¢lIl2`05£l (F,xLs1; INl)I(}O).—·A shrub often seen  
about lawns. Probably of no great value as forage. Perhaps  
· native also, since it was credited to Kentucky by Short and   i
Peter.   3,
Arzlhyllis vzllzzerarfa (Kmxny V1~:Tc1—1).——European. Thrives —  
` ' on dry and rather poor soils, where it furnishes good pasture i`
for sheep. It has the general habit of the clovers, being in-
clined to grow in tufts, the upper stem leaves with slender
divisions, the yellow flower-clusters about the size of red clover
*'l`l1e word legume is souietinies applied to plan/5 of the family; thus, .
cl over, alfalfa and cowpcas are by this usage, legumes. V

 i  ,7* `ll F .
.i gl
% - 14 Bu/Zeiivz N0. 98. i
rg ¤‘ heads, but broader in proportion to the length. It has been S
V  ¢ grown twice in plots on the Experiment Farm, and presented
i  a very pretty appearance the second season in both cases, but
= did not last. It was planted April 25, in one case, and May rg,
I V in another. The first season the leaves were rather short, and _
i  l no blossoms were developed. The second season in both
  cases it bloomed freely, being in one planting at its best ]une
I,   13, and in the other, May 23, the difference being the result of Q
_ different weather conditions. But one yearly cutting can be
{ secured from it on our soil. From our experience with it, I
i ` would commend the plant as worthy of trial in a small way by
Q  farmers living in hilly sections where there is some sand in
{ t the soil.
  Apios apias (GRoUND·NUT).—A perennial vine, observed
(   along the Kentucky River.
  Apias _1brz'zezz¢za.—A species collected in the State by Miss
; g Sadie F. Price, of Bowling Green.
i   .A.S`[?'¢7(Q`(l[7l5 ram/z'zzz`a¢z1¢s (CA1aoL1NA MILK VETcH).——A
?   native plant credited to Kentucky by Drs. Short and Peter.
i   .6’a]5!z`5z'a zz/ba (WHITE 'WILD IND1Go).—Kentucky (Short
j   and Peter).
    b’rzj>!z`sz`a lezzmufba (LAi IND1Go).—Kentucky (Britton and
  ' Brown).
  Cassfa rhmzzm·n“s!a (PARTRIDGE PEA).—An annual, with
·   1 numerous very small leaflets and bright yellow flowers. Com-
` ’   mon locally in \Vestern Kentucky.
i Z ' Cassfa mzzzy/mzdfm (XVILD SrcNNA).—~-Coarser and taller ,
. ` than the preceding species, and perennial. Frequent. Occurs
·_ through the State.
I if Cassia ¢zz`¢¢/z`/ans (S1$Ns1’i*1\‘E Pr:A).—Eastern Kentucky. A
. specimen in the Station collection was collected by Prof. A. R.
Crandall; another from jackson County was collected by Mr.
· G. M. Sullivan.
(`amia fam (Low SExNA).——Kentucky (Short and Peter).
Cervis carzar/evzszk (Rm)-nUr>).~—This well known tree is

/t'e2zlz¢c/ay Forage Plmzls-— T/lc Clover: and {heir A//ics. 15 A Q
` very common in Kentucky, being especially abundant along "
the Kentucky River.
Cladmstis [mea (YEL1.ow-woon).—The yellow-wood is
becoming scarce in Kentucky, though young trees from ro to `
I5 feet in height, and 1% to 2 inches in diameter of trunk
can still be found in some numbers on the cliffs of Kentucky Kr
River in jessamine County. The tree is well worthy of culti-  
j vation. Flowers white, like those of black locust, but the i_
cluster more straggling, and often I5 inches long. Leaf- ,  
lets of young growth often 5 to 6 inches in length. i    
C!2`z‘0rz`a marzkzmz (BUTTERFLY PEA).-—A specimen in the  
collection was collected at Cumberland Falls by Prof. C. VV. _i
Cmmz spicaia (GO.-\'l"S RUE).——Collected at Cumberland  
Falls by Prof. Mathews. i
Cnzarzz vir_gz`2zz'mza (CAT·GU'1`, GOAT’SRUE).—-Frequent on
hill tops throughout much of Kentucky. The seeds some-
times badly infested with a small snout-beetle. Aden Springs; ‘ .
King’s Mountain; Cloverport.
CyZz`sz¢s .vmprzn`z¢s (ScoTcH Baoomr, HAG\\’EED).—ThiS has i
i been grown in the Vivarium of this Division, but does not `
seem calculated to be of value for forage. It is a coarse,
straggling plant, with scant foliage and woody stems, such
that they could only be browsed while young. It has been __ A
recommended as a soil renovator for rather arid regions. F6
Fa/mm wmam (HOO PEANUT).—A perennial vine credited
to the State by Kearney.  " 
R1/mm pz`!c/len' (Hoo PEANUT).—A perennial vine. Clay’s  
, Ferry, August 22, 1892.  
Galax//a wZubz'//s (Doxvmz MIL1; PEA.).—Kentucky (Miss   .
Sadie F. Price, also Britton and Brown). . _  
- G/crZz'/srhzkz aquatim (\VA’l`ER LocUsT).—Collected by me  
only along the Mississippi River in \Vestern Kentucky.
G/é’ll’Z·f5[hl-tl !rz'zzmnz%0s (HONEY LOcUsT).—A very common
tree throughout Kentucky.
" Gymuar/mz’us ll]I·0l`£Il.S` (KENTUCKY COFFICE-'l`REE, COFFEE _
BEAN).-—Ol1€ of the most characteristic trees of Blue—grass

; _‘f’  
5  E
  , 16 Bu/Ze/in N0. 98.
  {‘ Kentucky in woodland pastures, where the large pods become
F  i— conspicuous during the fall and early winter months.
if  Gbtcivzc bz`s_;52`a’a (Sov BEAN, SOJA BEAN).——This forage
¥ plant caught the attention of Kentucky farmers recently, and
  ` has risen rapidly in favor; promising in the end to displace the
 i f cowpea. Its upright growth gives it the advantage of cow-
  peas in cutting and curing. It makes good hay and silage,
X   is a convenient soiling crop, and the seeds make good feed for ·
 _, most stock. They make a very acceptable dish for the table
-  also, either picked green or when thoroughly ripe. The plant
 . is a soil renovator, and endures severe drought well. In short,
-·  it has more good qualities than any other forage plant that
y l has recently engaged the attention of our farmers.
i The soy bean is an annual, with a strong central root,
Z  broad leaves, somewhat like those of ordinary beans, small
  purplish flowers, and short, downy, few-seeded pods, clustered
  in large numbers along the main branches; the seeds small,
  roundish generally, though in some varieties flattened like
I   navy beans, resembling in a general way the seeds of the
.   common garden pea, but with a long scar a11d the surface A
i   never indented. In color the seeds vary from white through
i   shades of yellow and green to black.
    The plants may be dwarf and early-maturing, or medium,
~ 5 3 to 3}/Q feet high, or late and tall, reaching a height of 3% ·
  i to 4 feet or more, and maturing their seeds so late that at this
,? g. . latitude they are likely to be caught by frosts. A moderately
‘     early yellow, or green pea is best adapted to the State.
,   Soy beans should never be sown until the soil is thoroughly
‘ i i warm. Plots planted on the Experiment Farm with the idea `
- D of giving them an early start have not done as well as those
1 planted two weeks or a month later. They are hot weather
1 . plants. Immediately after planting corn is generally a good
. time to put the seeds in the ground. If planted for seed, ,
I sow with a grain drill, stopping up the holes so as to make
K rows about 32 inches apart. When grown for hay, or soiling,
they may be drilled like wheat, using about 5 pecks of