The bat guanos of Porto Rico and their fertilizing value

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
The bat guanos of Porto Rico and their fertilizing value
Series Title:
Bulletin / Porto Rico Agricultural Experiment Station ;
Physical Description:
66 p. : ; 24 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Gile, P. L ( Philip Lindsey ), 1883-1972
Carrero, J. O ( José Oriol ), 1890-
Publisher:
Porto Rico Agricultural Experiment Station
Place of Publication:
Mayagüez, P.R
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Guano   ( lcsh )
Organic wastes as fertilizer -- Puerto Rico   ( lcsh )
Genre:
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
Statement of Responsibility:
by P.L. Gile and J.O. Carrero.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 029614920
oclc - 21269906
System ID:
AA00014647:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text


































































x:. x44
Ait


















I I.:. O.JIR


4f















i.





"VC






4w

Lip





i 4.









PORTO RICO AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION,
D. W. MAY, Agronomist in Charge,
Mayaguez, P. tR.
BULLETIN No. 25.

Under the supervision of the STATES RELATIONS SERVICE,
Office of Experiment Stations, U. S. Department of Agriculture.


THE BAT GUANOS OF PORTO RICO
AND

THEIR FERTILIZING VALUE.



BY

P. L. GILE, Chemist,
and
J. 0. CARRERO, Assistant Chemist.

v


Published July 8, 1918


WASHINGTON:
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE.
1918.





Y


GU1TVAA1 F4MUKENT


PORTO RICO A021 STAMI I
JUnder the supervision of A. C. TRuic, Directort.9 Ms States Relations Service, United St",
otAgriculture.]
1 141*
Eo W.. ALLEN,. ChW-qf Office of _Expmment $tations_.,
WALTER 111. EVANS Chief of Division ofInsular Stationsv OffiM of Bxpffimeta
STATION STAFF.
D.V. X&Tj APMO"' t itt C- h*ge,.,
P. L. Gnx, Chemist.
W. V. TowER,1 Entomologist.
E. THGUASPlant Pathologist.
31. 0. HENRYM EN1, )8.PM'Wi9t in.,Y" j&*4WM*W-
W. A. MAciE:, Agriadtural TMhnolog0t.
T. B. McCLE LLA-N D, Horticultitrist.
J. 0. CARn-Huo, Assistant Chemist.
W. P. Sxyjul R. Assistant-in Plant BrWing.
C. ALEmAR, Jr., Clerk,


LETTER OUTRANSMITTAL6


PoRTo. Rico AGnicuum"L ExpEwmENT STATzoz;,
NeWaguez, P. R-,, Pebruary 18, 19171,
SiR: In the present diligent:pearch. for all p9saible sources of fertilizing mated
natural deposits, especially of phosphates, axe of special interest' One of the no,
resources of Porto Rico is the guam deposited by bate M' the many eaves of iho
stone sections. These guanoB have been used as fertilizers for years, but with
clear conception of their value or the manner in which they can be employed b
This manuscript gives the results of extended studies on the' composiitionun'&
tilizing value of these deposits and should prove of considerable value as & pidi
Porto Rican planters. I recommend that it be published as Bulletin No, 25 of,
station.
Respectfully, D. W. MAY,

Aoonomi-qt in
Dr. A. C. Tnur-1
-Director States Relations Sm*e,
U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. V.

Recommended for publication,
A. C. Mam Director.

Publication authorized.
D. F. HousToN,
SecretM of Ap*ul
I Appointed Mar. 1,. 1918, to succeed R. H. Vii Zwaluwenbun, stranded -to United StAaskteo
meat of Agriculture, Bureau 91 But9mology. ... .... ..
(2)





- -I





THE BAT GUANOS OF PORTO RICO AND THEIR FER-
TILIZING VALUE.


CONTENTS.
., Page. Page.
on--................................ 3 Valuation of guanos......................... 53
lisfiljion of guano deposits ................ 4 General remarks on bat guanos .............. 55
,C .buai analyses of samples ................ 9 Summary ...................---............-- .... 61
Vegetative tests with bat guanos ............ 19 Appendix ................................... 64


INTRODUCTION.

Deposits of bat guano have been reported from the southern
United States, most islands of the West Indies/, Brazil, Uruguay,2
the Philippines, Marianas,3 the Federated Malay States,4 India,5
Transvaal,6 Egypt, Italy, Sardinia, southern France, the shores of
, the Mediterranean, and Austria-Hungary.7 They evidently occur
wherever conditions are adapted to the existence of bats in large
numbers and suitable congregating places are afforded.8
As the composition of guanos depends more on the leaching, etc.,
to which they have been exposed than on the composition of the
original substance, many of these deposits are similar to certain
phosphatic guanos formed by sea birds. The individual deposits
originating from sea birds, however, are much the larger, for although
both birds and bats congregate in immense numbers, the birds con-
sume much more food.
Scattered through various publications many analyses of bat
guanos can be found, although apparently no thorough study of the
SCousins, H. H., Local deposits of bat guano, Bul. Dept. Agr. IJamaica], 1 (1903), No. 6-7, pp. 144-146.
Ageiks, C. N., The origin, composition, and fertilizer value of the bat guanos of Cuba and the Isle of Pines,
Modern Cuba, 3 (1915), No. 2, pp. 48-59. Miller, C. F., On the composition and value of bat guano, Jour.
Induas. and Engin. Chem., 6 (1914), No. 8, pp. 664,665.
Schroeder, J., Composition of bat guano from Uruguay. Rev. Assoc. Rural Uruguay, 44 (1915), No.9,
pp. 529-531.
3 Kanamori, S., On bat guano from Marianne Islands. Bul. Col. Agr., Tokyo Imp. Univ., 7 (1907), No.
3, pp. 461-464.
Dunstan, W. R., Report on four samples of bat guano from the Federated Malay States. Agr. Bul.
Straits and Fed. Malay States, 4 (1905), No. 10, pp. 394-399.
sThompstone, E., Bates' guano in Burma. Agr. Jour. India, 4 (1909), No. 4, pp. 379-381.
single, H., The Wonderfontein caves. Transvaal Agr. Jour., 3 (1905), No. 10, pp. 217-221.
SFritsch, J., The Manufacture of Chemical Manures, translated by D. Grant, London, 1911, p. 287.
Rimpier, A., Die kauflichen Dfungestoffe, revised and enlarged by R. Woy, Berlin, 1911,5 ed., p. 127.
I Campbell, C. A. R., The eradication of mosquitoes by the cultivation of bats. Internat. Inst. Agr.
[Rome], Mo. Bul. Agr. Intel. and Plant Diseases, 4 (1913), No. 8, pp. 1175-1181, pls. 2. In this article, the
author gives interesting data on the amount of excrement voided per bat and results from an experimental
bat roost which, he claims, show that it is commercially profitable to build roosts for the manure yielded.








































DESCRIPTION OF GUANO DEPOSITS


EXTENT OF DEPOSITS


* ........';..-H.i...
.. ..:.. ; "..
h SE
S.. .. sU,
I J .
P1 ih{L1


The hundred or more deposits examined in Porto Rico n.. M
found in limestone caves (see Appendix). The size of the :jAd
vidual deposits varied according to the number of bats, the $i*W:I
the cave, and the protective conditions afforded. Most dqpoui
were small, the largest being that of "El Oscuro" at Morovis, -4i
servatively estimated as consisting of about 3,000 tons. This
well with the reports of similar deposits in other countries, "whid
.. *. o^ r i ,, ... / .: .
apparently are very rarely of great size.' The deposit near CrQ o
of 4,000 tons is spoken of as the largest European deposit.. Ageto
however, estimates a deposit in Cuba as consisting of some 40;01
tons of high-grade material. This is the largest deposit yet report
SAnalyses of one or more samples are given in the articles cited on page S. F". Haire, JINew tej
Rpt., 1904, pp. 36-40, gives analyses of some 150 samples of bat guanos. Analyses of a few pa
to be found in Texas Sta. Buls. 35 (1895), 51 (189), and 85 (1906) and In the furWu iullatt nlbs
other State agricultural experiment stations. '' ''.
Ageton, C.N. Loc.cit. ':'I





S5

A In most Porto Rican caves the guano forms a layer about 3 feet
deep over the floor of the cave, although some caverns contain 6
to 10 or more feet of guano, especially where there are pocketlike
depressions in the floor of the cave. Most of this material is ready
for use as it exists. In some cases, however, it contains 10 to 30
or 40 per cent of stony concretions that should be screened out
before it is transported any distance. The fresh bat manure requires
no screening.
KhNDS OF MATERIAL AND MANNER OF FORMATION.
Although there are no sharp distinctions between the different
kinds of bat guano, they may be roughly divided into three classes-
bat manure, decomposed guano, and phosphatic guano. It should
be borne in mind that this is not a rigid classification, as there are
Small conceivable grades of guanos. The classification is probably
most useful in considering the formation of the guanos, which will
be taken up under the description of the three classes of material.
Bat manure.-Bat manure is, of course, the fresh material voided
S by the bat. Its nature depends chiefly on whether excreted by
Sfrugivorous or insectivorous bats. The solid material in the manure
of frugivorous bats consists largely of fruit and berry seeds. Sam-
ples Nos. 376 (Table III) and 828 (Table IV) represent this material.
Nearly all Porto Rican deposits come from insectivorous bats,
the solid matter in the manure consisting chiefly of undigested
parts of insects, as wings, legs, and other chitinous parts. The
fresh bat manure is easily distinguished from the older guano by
its peculiar physical nature. It consists of small excremental lumps,
is dark brown in color, and when dry glistens somewhat, owing to
the insects' wings. It has a peculiarly low volume weight, only
about one-fourth to one-fifth that of other kinds of guano when dry.
Chemically the fresh manure contains a large amount of chitin,
the chief constituent of insects' skeletons, as well as a great variety
of other chemical substances voided by the bat, among which are
urea and potassium phosphate. The composition is fairly constant,
as shown by the analyses of samples Nos. 472, 503 (Table III), 751,
780, 854, 876, 879, 880, 881, 885, and 977 (Table IV):
I
TABLE I.-Results of analyses of 11 samples of bat manure.

Total Citrate-
Nitrogen. phosphoric soluble
acid. phosphoric
acid.

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
Maximum .......................................................... 13.04 9.74 7.22
Minimum ................................................ 9.21 2.96 2.61
Averag ............................................................ 10.93 7.29 5.54







per cent, potash, 3.5 perventsulohur tdov* sttk4
loaitm I lima;
and, volatile matter. I
Me nitrogen oU the fresh mda
compounds. (Proeins,.
etC,)' and as ammoniA And1mi fttw, 1A tbe,4Wrw
gen present as ammonia and nitzite averaged 39 per cent
nitrogen, althou& it variej tetween 4.9 and 73.2 per Omt.
absolutely fresh matuib (1OUD'
wid ammoniij but und6r eektabi dondifivns t eytaxe 14n",41rA*
Y .... .1
quickly. In absolutelp ft4h b&VIBSUMTO., Arealod iAu"Ublo
enous compounds carr niostlbf ther!nitrogen.,J, nr-.'; f
A certain amount. of'thiaA,6sh maUrial
habited by -batsy the quantity" being, Ae by, tho,, av*mm
bats and the conditions1for couservuil6n., the joW*,
most eaves -the surface inch or 3 inche iof the, d ", AJalrea
whileiin certain dry eaves where Slowtbo FOO,
more fe0t o, f undeco sed 901",6 :ih some'! 11
cavts, the fresh material occiinm"Ainly in, pilesmbiaro the UM

49, the fresh bat manure AS ejt6ed to W"er., fttfoing tbok
soluble constituents are leacheddo*m.,iiito.;.thetook,,(gonorftllY-ii*;,
stme) forming% the'floo"r of the cave. Tbe, mluble phosphates *WsQf'
phates react with the hmeiJorMiAg.th&Ws soluble calcium p,
and sulphate, W,1ile the.potagh sAd. nitralm disappeai--,in the dpinsftj
Water.: As the manure I deeompo'ms uAder. bacteAdiADAlon'? th&o
an'i6 mat-ter is,,oxidized with the formlatioa of
monia, and nitric, i sulphurib,, and pliosphcifie i )The, aai)o*t
diom'd: and some. ammonia pass ofFint6the airi while thelp
sulphuric and nitric acids leached into.. the i:mderbring str"
react with the lime. When bactefial decomposiww and loaablat
are not:complete the rbsultingproduct is-decollPoged iguvino;,
they are complete, theresulting produztm&phqaphaticguajlo4
Dommposed. guano.--rThe dw. omposed-,&aab ii,geneiak bm" ia'
color and pulverulent, with amuoh higher w1ume',weight then
manure but.lower than ordinary soil. It often contains 1UMjW Of
gypsum, organic matter, or fragments of carbonate'of lime.
composition is intermediate between that of the fresh manure
the P&osphatic gu&uo. It contains considerable organic matter
gypsum. As this is not a well defined material, no m .. I
imuni figures can be,,. given for the percentages of nitrogen
I An black =Agm materW Mgh In aWmc xnatter is not fresh bst In some Caves th%
1, 2, 3, or 6 inches of materW with some undecomposed Insects' wings contains only 3, or 4 pewr
nitrogen. This shows fairly rapid decomposition of ths material in moist eaves.






Sphosphoric acid, but as a rule it contains 1 to 2 per cent of nitrogen,
10 to 20 per cent total phosphoric acid, and 3 to 10 per cent of citrate-
soluble phosphoric acid. Small amounts of nitrates and water-
soluble potash are often present. Samples Nos. 458, 497, 733, and
734 are representative of this class of guano.
Phosphaoic guano.-Phosphatic guanos represent what may be
called the end product of the various reactions and conditions which
produce the decomposed guanos. Practically all organic matter has
been oxidized, leaching has carried away all the potash, gypsum, and
nitrates, and the monocalcium and dicalcium phosphates have been
converted into tricalcium, ferric, or. aluminum phosphates. The
phosphatic guano, though somewhat similar in appearance 'to the
decomposed guano, has a greater volume weight and is generally
Smore gritty in texture and lighter in color. Sometimes .the color
' is red, owing to the presence of much iron, but it is more generally
light brown or gray. Phosphatic guano contains practically no
nitrogen and consists of the insoluble phosphates of lime, iron, or
i alumina, mixed with siliceous impurities. The total phosphoric acid
i content is high unless the amount of siliceous impurities is high.
Bn Samples Nos. 500, 501, 504, and 509 are of this type. This material
l is physically and chemically similar to old, leached bird guano.

CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE COMPOSITION OF THE DEPOSITS.
The great variation in the guano in the same and different caves
Scan not be well understood without considering the various condi-
tions affecting the material. The composition of a guano is deter-
-mined by its age, the amount of water entering the cave, the intrusion
of soil from without, and the composition of the limestone or rock
forming the floor of the cave.
The age of the deposit is of slight importance in determining the
nature of the material except as it affects the completeness of other
modifying influences.
The amount of water entering the cave doubtless affects the
material more than any other condition. A cave where no water
enters and where the atmosphere is yet sufficiently humid to promote
bacterial decomposition is likely to contain a guano high in nitrates,
potash, phosphoric acid, and soluble salts or a product richer than
the fresh manure, owing to the decomposition of the bulky organic
matter. Absolutely dry conditions, such as obtain at the Peruvian
guano deposits, where moisture is insufficient for much bacterial
decomposition, will most probably produce a guano of practically
the same composition as the original material.
Neither of these extremes exist in Porto Rico, as surface or
percolating water enters all the caves at times. Where material has
I Sample No. 881 approaches this material.










S surface is fairly uniform at different depths, while in other cases it
varies considerably. The same is true of the lateral variation.
In some caves the material in different caverns or compartments
is fairly uniform, while in others it is not. Generally the material
is likely to be more uniform at different depths than in different
parts of a cave. Analyses illustrating these points are afforded by
samples Nos. 497 to 500, 772, 774, 775, 777 to 779, 788 to 791, 792 to
794, 843 to 845, 848 to 850, and 856 to 859, as may be seen by re-
ferring to a description of the samples in Table IV.

CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF SAMPLES.
METHODS OF ANALYSIS.
In preparing the samples for analysis and for vegetation tests, all
S were passed through a 1-millimeter sieve, except the fresh bat manure.
This could be done by pulverizing without grinding. Occasional pieces
of limestone or stony concretions not readily pulverized were dis-
carded. In this way, a fair sample of the utilizable material was ob-
Stained, as the large lumps of nonpulverulent material have little
S fertilizing value and should be screened out before transporting the
guano from the cave.
The usual analytical methods of the Association of Official Agricul-
tural Chemists were used when possible. Samples containing much
organic matter were ignited with magnesium nitrate before deter-
mining the total phosphoric acid. Lime was determined by the
Glaser method as modified by Jones.'
The total nitrogen in most samples was determined by the Kjeldahl
method modified for nitrates, as nearly all samples contained more
or less nitrate. The nitrogen present as ammonium salts was deter-
mined in a water solution of the guano by direct distillation with
sodium hydroxid. Nitrates were then determined in the same solu-
tion by distillation with the further addition of zinc and iron. The
results for ammonia thus obtained may sometimes be slightly in
excess of the true values, as the sodium hydroxid may have
attacked organic nitrogenous compounds, but they are accurate
enough for practical purposes.
All percentages are calculated on a moisture-free basis. It should
be borne in mind that the ordinary air-dried guanos contain 3 to 15
per cent of moisture, and that the percentages calculated on an
air-dry basis would therefore be somewhat lower. In the ordinary
cave, the guano, before air-drying, contains a very high percentage
of moisture, as may be seen from Table II, which gives the moisture
content of different guanos from two caves of about average dryness.
I Wiley, H. W. Principles and Practice of Agricultural Analysis. Easton, Pa., 1908, vol. 2, 2. ed.,
p. 236.
55016-18-2























Before the systematic survey of the caves was commenced, a,.rzuin :
bar, of samples were subjected to a complete analysis to .gji9 ;.
..S .t .. .. :w:k "', ,.,i
idea of their general composition and to find whether' .th,,
of citrate-soluble phosphoric acid 1 varied with the qua.tit,g i
other constituents, as iron and alumina, lime, ..or sulpba :(! ..i .i
:. ii .... :.:. :
analyses are given in Table III. i:,i.
SThe method of calculating the monetary value of the PR ei||1,^j|
Tables III and IV is described in a subsequent part of 4 nis nii: ..

1 Citrate-soluble phosphoric acid in this bulletin refers to all phosphoric aid seluble:itW 'i^
monium citrate, i. e., water-soluble phosphoric acid plus that insolube In water butoI..eubg:,..s
citrate. : *.,...iii....
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. .:: .* J ,:)..

*:II: jv;






irk
H X .:i : i
** : *f ::*:-:,i :* N
..~~ :. .. ./':
., ^ .. ... l b ; .' .
: : : ;. [i**^ ."<; l( :.:j
...." i. '!:,
.. ... .. ...
'** ... f i r' :.'!

I ,', r ,.
*. l: : :: :i i-:^ i
.: : .. .*^ \ ;ii
.* : i ,^ l: '',

*i : -**, t^' i" 'i ,

*, ; .il
t (flp il

: ; i *., r



: ; ;. [.*; i .,!;,i
: ~~" *: 1 ''- o ,':! !
,


1 "1



".? a






TABLE III.-Complete analyses of repreentative bat guanos.


Name or location of cave.


263
321
374
375
376
415
447
458
460
6 472
497
498
499
500
501
502

503

504
505
606

507
508
509
733
734


Description.


Aguadilla....................
Cabo Rojo..................
Arecibo.....................
Las Marias.................
.....do.......................
Cabo RoJo................
Vega Baa...................
San Germano .................
Cabo Rojo, Hacienda Mar-
garita.
Lares. ..............
"Ancones," Barrio Ancones,
San German.
.....do.......................
.....do.......................
.....do .......................
. .....do........ ...............
.....do.......................

"Francisco Quiflones," San
GermAn.
.....do.......................
.....do.......................
.....do.......o................
.....do.......................
.....do.......................
..... do .....................
Cayey .......................
.....do .......................


Total
nitro-
gen
(N).


Total
plhos-
phoria
acid
(P2O0).


Water-
soluble
phos-
phoric
acid.


Citrate-
soluble
hos-
Ehoric
acid.


Water-
soluble
r potash
(K,0).


Lime
(CaO).


(MgO).


Iron
(FeO,).


Alum-
ins
(AlO,).


Sul-
phur
(BOf).


,I I I I- 1 1 I 1 1


Mixed lot, with some carbon-
ate of lime.


Mostly seeds...............




Fresh bat manure..........
Surface foot.................
Second foot.................
Third foot...................
Fourth foot.................
Sixth foot...................
Black peaty material from
pocketlike depression cov-
ered with other guano.
Fresh bat manure near cave
mouth.
Ninth foot near center of cave.
First foot near center of cave.
Gray-black, dusty material,
first foot Just outside cave
mouth.
Fourth foot near cave mouth.
Seventh foot near cave mouth
First foot near center of cave,
distant from 505.
...............................


Per ct.
0.40
1. 63
.52
.66
3.23
.66
1.06
1.32
.97
10.25
1.46
1.43
.27
.28
.33
5.35

11.73
.18
.56
.59

.80
.64
.38
76
.84


Per cft.
7.77
14.47
12.68
18.55
4.35
20.73
26. 18
13.85
13.56

6.95
7.75
10.50
28.08
31.20
26.51
13.06

7.42
21.45
24.43
10.18

19.04
29.31
22.91
19.10
18.30


Per ct.
0.28
.53
.82
1.10
.46
.41
.33
51
0
2.82
.90
.78
.24
30
.40
39

2.40
Trace.
Trace.
Trace.

0.19
Trace.
Trace.
1.55
1.04


Per cft.
2.92
3.24
2.98
3.89
2.42
1.13
10.45
5.29
6.85
6.43
1.37
.80
1.37
4.97
1.22
2.08

5.04
0
0
3.28

3.94
3.81
0
10.72
8.11


Per c.
0.64

.96
.18
.25
.23
.42
.77
.32
3.85
.25
.06
.10
.47
.13
.31

1.57
.34
.13
.29

.28
.22
.23
Trace.
Trace.


Per ct.
30.49
5.82
22.45
13.72
1.74
15.18
34.36
5.24
19.86
2.36
25.51
19.45
7.49
6.75
3.78
13.12

4.56
.74
2.48
22.77

8.18
2.15
2.02
27.62
21.19


Per c.
Trace.
Trace.
0.20
1.15
.27
.17
10
.05
.20

1.40
0
0
0
0
0
0

1.03
Trace.
Trace.
1.89

.57
Trace.
0
Trace.
Trace.


Per ct.
3.04
6.03
4.27
5.33
10.58
5.17
4.90
4.33
5.34
.38
3.35
4.60
6.27
&5.03
7.56
5.97

.78
11.33
15. 00
4.61

8.46
13.25
15.20
2.42
4.28


Per ct.
0.33
6.88
4.44
5.47
2.37
8.61
1.11
2.89
3.65
0
.23
4.46
15.77
19.52
12.90
2.00

.49
7.77
& 8.44
2.62

S8.44
13.08
6.15
1.21
3.37


Vola.
tile
matter.


Per c.
18.97
7.37
19.54
17.54
10 95
2.80
3.06
17. 10
5.98
3.00
23.95
19.31
7.81
2.24
2.32
1.46

3.80

0
6.97

5.56
0
0
16.16
10.42


Insolo
uble
matter,
sand,
etc.


Per ct.
27.64
28.98
22.02
28.32
56.67
26.29
19.04
38. 69
32.30
83.65
32.85
31.86
21.13
27.27
17.42
46.38

82.63
14.40
15.35
24.50

24.30
19.51
15.92
28.94
27.72


value
per dry
ton.8


Per ct.
8.94
28.55
16.68
12. 97
16.44
17.83
6.54
14.53
20.01
.16
4.01
5.62
10,84
5.87
25.37
16.97

1.39
42.70
31.62
24.00

23.68
18.28
38. 14
7.48
16.11


a Based on prewar values of fertilizer constituents. See page 54 for method of determining values.
b No. 472 contains 0.78 per cent of nitrogen as ammonia and 0.31 as nitrate.
o No. 503 contains 1.57 per cent of nitrogen as ammonia and 1.23 as nitrate.


Lab-
ora-
tory
No.


- I


33.69
7.17
5.55
5.58
8.54
6.53
9.35
8.95
4.16
23.90
4.73
5.65
7.66
11.01
5.30
12.19

26.75
.7?
2.23
2.28

7.40
2.09
1.68
13.74
8.82








"w.' thir n6 oile,odns
It eg-mm be titIft"t
tion with any one Uher()onSv1tu'eU*t alt P&.
Of citrat"obUo -Own', one ny,_W
pJa did ua is"", 0'
v6ith the amount of,.nitroge]OL, P -su1PhAtm,hwe,*")A4*
All cons0tuoi4ts varied greatt r". $P
y in tbe. d1fre in Mples
ww. h was
nesia W A&rlnly-J* aA
negligible M* all except the two samples of -fmh bit xnanun.
No. 263..6.-dntaJAed 15.*68..'per',70ARZ .0f, Rar ca limsy thi*q
Only sample with an -appreciable amount of vArbonatao
.... ...... .... .
PARTIAL: ANALYSES oil'.. Or

ne Samples taken in the course of the thi

.. ... .. .......... ........ ...
deposits werej: as a rule, analyzed uftlyfor tOW, nitrogm.4$M.,
varlaus orm:3!:of phosiphoric acia. When
nation it seemed worth while, a- mifical mtrW
detethiined. Desiofiptions :of: .'the diff6kent 1mmp a n
suii",Of the paxtial pAalysos are: g1ven1l74..T4-bjqJy.

TABLE W.-Analyses.of guanos, with their apponmate val.

Walti
lAb- Total Nitro- 'Nitro- SON-
ora-. Name or location of nitiv- gell as gen." .. pho*- ble
11)escrlptio..:
cavoi n][-
tor 1W g% 0 -
Nvy. rN). monla. trate.
'acid.

P.Ct. P.ic. P.Ct. P. cK P.ii*
741 -Barrio Monte, Grande, Fresh bat Wp4re.,.. 10.81 Z 04, L W. CL 51 45
San:GerniAii."
La Tuna BArrio La 011
Tuna, Cabo Rojo:
772 Section A .......... Surfwo to 2 2.01 .09 .45 43 M96--1a- 7.
713' Do ........ ..... do ---- : ...... ... 4.28 .26 .59 1207 2.10 5.74 13
7, 74, Do ......... 2 to 14 in6 ........... .88 t 20 .76 2.08
Do,,.,.... _.- .. ..
775 14 to 26 in ............ 1.12 ........ ...... & 94 79 1. G1 3",
776. SectiowA.
'* ------- 3. to 14 Inl'.i .......... .72 2h 82 .29 43
777, Surfam to 1 in ....... C 63 .44 .42 33 .76 2, 11 11
779 Po ............ 'to 12 In ............... M 1%:88 Truce.
........... 423 1.. IL 88 Tn". '3.16
780 Skirfice to 3 In.. 9065 .42 3. 81- &.21 139 '4.18
793 Do. AO 12 in. .1-02 ..... 17.08 .25 83' 7.97
_4sides).
12 to 86: in.:(4d '.1: 25 ... 2&- 1% SWT
... ...... .12, IL 06
&
7P Section 11tixture of 772,774, 89 ..... .. .89 2.19
sod 77&
786 Do ,Zto 38 5.91 .02 .35: k4 .17 L04 7.
797 Cabo lqnt 3 ft. of ................ 17.38 Tnm.,. &48 31
"Los Chorms Barrio
788 First8in ............ '.83 144 .16 2. 25 131
789 Do........ ....... 9econd 8 in. .. ...... Al 1& 09 .24 1. 95 2.
790 Do ............. Third 12 in .......... .36 19.43 .23 1.65 1.
791 Do.... Fourth -.22, 1& 99 .29 1.
792 SectiouA.---., First. 9 in ............. -1.37 2C 24 24 &53 &
793 Do ............. 24.87 :26
....... .. ...
794 Do ........... Third14 in ........... 72 2& 29 .17. 4.56 &
795 Section 4 tp 18 In .............. .96 2L.52 .2D A.75 &
796 Section V ........... 3 to 40 : f1m ina- J&
,lin ....... 21*,87 0 0
t6ria
tvmn
grated stone.

I Nitric and ammoniacal uitrogen were ;kot.: 4iderawilmd lu,:,. wqmphi 1%, 1-50I:Por pont 0
nitrogen except in special =MV







13


TABLE IV.-Analyses of guanos, with their approximate values--Continued.


Name or location of
cave.


797



798
799

s..
802
802
Sn
.1, -
SOS


Description.


Mixture of surface 3
in. near 788 to 791.


Surface to 3 ft......
Surface to 6 f t ......
0

Surface to 2 ft......
.....do.. ...........
..... do .............
...... ................


"LosChorros,"'ete.-Con.
Section C .........

'4Guaniqullla No. I"
Barrio Guanquilla,
Cabo Rojo:
:Section A.........
Section C..........
"Guaniquilla No. II"
Barrio Guaniquilla,
Cabo Rojo:
Section A........
Section B..........
Section C.........
Hacienda Juanita, be-
tween Mayaguez and
Las Marias.
Do...............
"Boquilla," Barrio
Tierras Nuevas, Cam-
po Alegre:
Section A ..........
Do...........
Section B..........
Section C..........
Do...........
Section D.........
"Alta Gracia," Barrio
El Coto, Manati.
Do...............
"La Laguna," Barrio
El Coto, near Campo
Alegre:
Section A..........
Do...........
Section B.........
"Los Santos Barrio
SEl Coto, Manati.
"Oentral Carmen2"
Barrio Rio Abajo,
Vega Baja.
"Miranda." Barrio Rio
SArriba, Vega Baja.
Aguas Buenas.........
: Do................
"La Oscura," Barrio
Rosario,San GermAn:
Section A.........
Section C ..........
"El Murcidlago," Bar-
rio Rosario, San Ger-
Sman:
Section A..........
Section B..........
S Do...........
Do...........
Section C.........
"El Colorado," Barrio
Rosario, San Ger-
mtm:
man:
Section A..........
Section B.........
Section C.........
Section D .........
"'El Convento," Barrio
El Cedro, Pefuelas:
Section A..........
Section B..........
Do...........
Do...........
Do...........
Do............
*


Total
nitro-
gen
(N).



P.ct.
2.27



.21
.88


.44
.68
.03
.06


Nitro-
gen as
am-
monia.



P.ct.
0.06


Nitro-
gen as
sni-
trate.



P.ct.
0.25


07 ...... _


1.38
.25
1.32
4.28
.21
3.28
2.08

.59


.47
.12
.52
.14

.34

4.07

1.03
1.58


Surface to 6 in......
6 to 30 in..........
Surface to 3 ft......
Surface to 6 ft.......
6 in. to 6[ ft.........
Surface to 3 ft.......
Surface to 3 in.......
3 to 15 in...........


Surface to 12 in......
12 to 36 in ...........
Surface to 6 ft .......
Surface to 24 in......
Surface to 3 ft.......

.....do.............

Surface material....
First 2J ft. from dry
part of cave.

Surface to 3 ft......
Surface to 2 ft......


Surface to 3 ft......
......do.............
Surface to 2 in.......
2tSurface to in....in ......

Surface to 12 in......

Surface to 9 fint ......
Surface to 24 in......
Surface to 3 in ft.......
Surface to 24 in....

Surface to 3Sin....
.....do..............
3 in. to 51 ft........
3 in. to 3J ft .........
3in. to Jft.........
Mixture of 843, 844,
and 845.


.02

.04
.03


.54

.24
.47


1.74


.21 ........ ......
.18 ....... .......


.05


.04


.05
.07
.01
.03
.02
.04


'."83'


".95


3.40
2.20
1.30
1.06
1.03
1.18


Total
phos-
phoric
acid.
(P205).


P. ct.
11.16



17.25
31.92


19.13
18.67
2.21
3.65


Water-
solu-
ble
phos-
phoric
acid.


P.ct.
0.51



Trace.
.71


Trace.
Trace.


5.10 .......


16.07
38.57
12.72
13.48
32.35
18.53
.50

.50


13.36
9.97
20.24
22.82
36.77

8.25
5.08
11.02


15.86
3.63


& 82
4.75
6.49
6.76
2.97


4.72
4.70
1.46
3.01

16.66
14.83
24.59
26.52
20.88
21.52


.43
.34
. 25
.66
.79


Trace.
Trace.
Trace.
.56

1.06

2.34

Trace.
.64


Trace.
Trace.


.27
.14
.37
.08
.07


.29


Ci-
trate-
solu-
ble
phos-
phoric
acid.


P.ct.
4.21



3.02
8.41


3.85
6.03
.05


5.43
5.81
3.88
5.63
5.68
5.60


2.39
2.27
4.69
2.61

8.62


6.56
2.58
4.81


.51
.66


4.07
2.06
2.53
5.50
2.29


1.15
1.03
1.12


4.44
3.08
-'ll
3.00
4.02
2.48


Ap-
prox-
imate
value
per
dry
ton.


83.51



1.11
12.41


4.73
7.39


4.69
2.81
6.52
5.96
3.66
6.90
3.22
1.18


3.33
2.51
4.68
2.89

10.24

17.86

4.64
7.97


.74
.92


&73
2.88
10.80
6.22
3.35


1.31
1.17
5.10


1&.66
15.03
8.57
7.57
8.68
9.10


La1>
tory
No.


.83
.41
4.15
.36
.53


.08
.07
1.01
.06

4.42
3.62
1.53
1.30
1.51
1.93


813
14

M4
815
816
817

815

819

820
421,


824
825



827
1282
829
830


831
832
.8n8
'834

"841
842
843
;S46
.8545
r MG4


.i...... .. .....
-m ..... I ---- ---








TAM& XV

M.,
Wst -
Lab- TOW XWp_ Nitiv- TOW Xau- blow
Aftro- Xq,Op fflpm as
War NO* or beatiod. of bid
ex". OR- 1111, PE pbw
1TV mg" bate. ph"le phwjo
Q&

"JU, Omventp,#t eto.-
COOK PAL Afiltl: i P a, P.jcL P.d.
847 Section C ........... Surfm to a 419 AOIU.' CA7. 7.77 Q 79 4.0
848 Do ............ 3 In. to 4j it. ........ 1.81 .1% 1.38 UAS
849 Do ................. do .............. .87 ....... 2MR L 14:
850 Do.... ........ 3in.tefijft ......... .94 .............. 22.50 Aot
851 MiXtuft TU SOP 849, L42 AV, 0.14' 2L 62
and 850.
"Ma JCh& 0
0to !U= A
862 S"on A ......... Surface to 3 R ....... .6.06 .47 2.93 9.39 LAS &3t 2L,
,,W Surftce'to.181n..... 2.76 Od AS
'T ft' 1.32
NA di Surfm* to 6 in.... 9.21 .38 2. W &74 LOS, & 80
Pascual 11 Barrio El
Ced[ro,' Mue1w,
M5 Section A.. Suilace 31
1.55 ......... 17.79,
Surface to 7 t:::::: tow
to &81:
Do ............ Surts" to 511 ....... 1.95 .04 1.53 21.37. 4,= W14
Do ............ Surfam to-ij R ...... 3.46 .06 328 Sk 58,:" E491
859 Do ............ Surface to 4 R ....... 1.74 .04 1:29 :2L 12 Ist
8w Do ............ Ifixtun of MO 857,, 2.35 .03 2.20 I'D.W a m
W, and 859.
9491 J=Y,?` in reinge
of north of
Gumnica: Centrale:
874 SWUorLA....o.e.. 'Surface to 3 in. 9.91 3.10, &16 7.76 19
877, Section B ......... Surfawto 2 ft. .52 0 -k a w 17-M J64 lisS
Odgmts ]14ta hifls
south of Alta kJ
SUM=
878 SwUm A .... -- Surface to 3 7.58 1.34 4.19 MIA C12
Om IS
829 Section B ......... Surtwe to 6 ft ....... 12.16 & 58 4.33 Ak 74 4(L-
Section 0 .......... Surboe tb 3 ft ....... 10.90 2.74 3. 2D 8.16 ....... Cfis W 76
.. 0 .... 4. 0. )WO,
881 ...... Ifixture of 878 SnP A 04: 3,0D 8.94, &26 47.10,
890.
El Ifforno P1
In raw
of hills north of Gu*
SUrf&"toj2in.L.-. .17 AM
so Section B .............. do........ .17 :.4;:.;::, 0 7
884 1A at foot Surhm to 4 2.47 &38
of south, of
Gum" CAmtrale,
wtion A.
NW I'Ventana 11 Haden& Surtaft to 3 jW40, 'L14, 112 2.00 ...... _&6I
1A Ventan% Guaya.
CAja dis XuartoB, No.
1, Imorflif" of

886 -Nation I .......... Surfm* to 6 ft ....... ....... ...
987 section 11. ..,p ..... Surk" to:4 ft 1.32 ....... ... U 29, 4, IS 7
8" Section in ....... surtme to 6 ft ...... .83 ....... ........ 31.12 ....... *I ST U.
80 Mixture of $86, 887, 1.01 .43: 1.06 31.62 .... 10.79
and 888.
no 11C de Muatm No. Surbice: to 3 ft. _21 U.5a
U." northeast I Of
Sol "Lik 3(41m" Barrio Surfmto4ft ....... .21 &Z 1.68 IL
Um* ;WUo; A.
910 Bayanidn. 2.38 ....... aft 1.11,11,
PSI BfirrW Ob.
bashu;6, Rom*
gn &KUM A.. .L ...... OW'M to 2 ft L.14 .4n, 10 is. n ...... IN
gn Section, D. Ow L
I", to 3 It *0 4a.00-A m,44000- 19.10
91a ........ -34 ....9 .. ....... a 75
914 8wffonH......::: Surbele to 6 ft ....... 08 1.... ....... MW *ww:b0*-b so I
916 Section Surh=U 5 It ....... .33 L 17., do

Viso
916 Section 3* 09 IL M.
017 1.12
Section B 4 QI91






15


TABLE IV.-Analyses of guanos, with their approximate values-Continued.


Name or location of
cave.


918

919

990


921
922

923
924
925
926
927
928
929

- 930


931
932


933
934
935
936



937
938
939
940

941



942
943
944
945
946
947



952
953
954
955
956
957

958
959
950
961


Description.


"San Miguel," Barrio
Cabachuelas, Moro-
vis:
Section A..........

Do...........

Section B.........
"La Chiquilla," Barrio
Cabachuelas, Mor-
vis:
Section A.......
Do..........
"Oscura," Barrio Ca-
bachuelas, Morovis:
Section A........
Do..........
Section B .......
Section C.........
Do..........
Sections A, B, C...
"Capa Prieta," Barrio
Cabachuelas, Moro-
vis. .
Do...............
"Pablo Clas," Barrio
Cabachuelas, Moro-
vis:
Section A.........
Section B.........
"Toronija," Barrio de
Cabachuelas de Tor-
recilla, Morovis:
Section A.........
Section B.........
Sections B and C.
Section C .........
"Cerro Hueco," Bar-
rio de Cabachuelas
de Torrecilla, Mo-
rovis:
Section A.........
Section B.........
Section C.........
"De los Puercos," Bar-
rio Cabachuelas, Mo-
rovis.
"Alta," Barrio Caba-
chuelas, Monovis.
"Archilla," Barrio
Cabachuelas, Moro-
vis:
Section A.........
Do............
Section C-.........
Do............
Section D..........
"Escalera," Barrio Ca-
bachuelas, Morovis.
"Convento," Barrio
Hato Viejo Poniente,
Ciales:
Section A.........
Do...........
Do............
Section B..........
Section C (hole C-1)
Section C (holes
0-3 to C-6).
Section C (hole C-4)
Do...........
Section C (hole 0-7)
Section C (hole 0-8)


Total
nitro-
gen
(N).


Nitro-
gen as
am-
monia.


Nitro-
gen as
ni-
trate.


Total
phos-
phoric
acid.
(PMOO).


1 1 1 3 1


P.ct.
0.90

.11

.19


.73
.51
.15
.16
.25
2.75
.31

.11


P.ct. I. P.cft.
. ........J....


0.05


Surface to 8 ft. in
southeast corner.
Floor, 5J ft. below
918.
Floor, surface to 1 ft.


Surface to 2 ft......
Surface to 3 It......

3 in. to 32 ft........
3 in. to 4J ft........
3 in. to 6 ft ........
3in.to 5 ft........
3in. to 4- ft........
Surface to 3 in ....
Surface to 6 in......

6 in. to 2ft .........


Surface to 7 ft......
..... do...........


Surface to 2 ft .....--
3 in. to 21 ft........
Upper 3 in.........
3 in. to3| ft.........



Surface to 2 ft......
Surface to 18 in.....
Surface to 2 ft .....--
Surface to 18 in.....

Surface to 2 ft......



Surface to 3 ft.. ....
.....do.b ............
Surface to 18 in.b....
..... do.a ............
Surface to 3 ft.c....
Surface to 8 ft......



Surface to 1 ft.......
1 to 2 ft............-
Surface to I ft.......
.....do...............

Surface to 3 ft.......
Surface to 2 ft.....
2 to 4 It.............
Surface to 1 ft.......
.....do...............


8.92
.48
3.32
1.13



.78
1.59
3.08
.21

3.01



.59
.68
.72
1.28
.60
.27



2.34
.71
.23
.18
.06
.52

1.06
.23
.55
.99


.01
"....6.
.10





.02
.13


.31


.04


0 19 -1
......I


P.ct.
4.41

1.19

4.69


1.82
2.26

33.64
37.44
30.21
8.87
36.90
12. (19
9.92

6.12


27.57
28.66


.07
1.59
.79




1.14
.34


.36


.12


5.78
22.84
6.81
21.87



14.11
12.55
24.48
5.59

5.29



23.88
23.39
22.62
21.11
2.32
39.65



7.49
34.02
26.91
29.53
41.58
31.85

4.05
34.13
5.56
14.97


a Border of guano still in place.
b Guano turned over to extract intermediate black layer.
a Dirt through which passageway has been cut for pack horses to pass in and out of cave.


Water-
solu-
ble
phos-
phoric
acid.


P.ct.


Lab-
Ora-
tory
No.


.80 .......
.89 .......


Ci-
trate-
solu-
ble
phos-
phoric
acid.


P.ct.
1.52

.21
2.90



"i.'oo.
1.00

6.64
10.77
2.70
1.25
8.11
3.76
2.10

1.00


9.08
6.99


1.62
1.26
4.17
6.80



5.24
3.74
6.45
.80

3.40



2.42
2.58
2.56
9.71
.64
5.96



2.87
1.40
2.94
1.50
0
14.92

2.77
21.64
2.95
13.18


Ap-
prox-
imate
value
per
dry
ton.




$3.32

.43

3.28



1.""i'40


3.14
11.79
3.00
1.57
8.61
5.16
2.72

1.22


10.15
7.23


10.78
2.22
13.53
11.47



6.80
9.09
9.19
1.22

8.42



3.60
3.70
4.00
13.33
1.84
4.51



5.68
2.81
3.40
.95
.12
11.87

4.89
11.72
4.15
9.32


.13 ....... ......
.20 ..... .......


....... ......








TAMH IV.-Andres of gwnos ?iiA aejrqppr^w1*,w



Total bmie:
Labt-'. Total Nitro- Nitro- SO11k
ora- Nsmelor Itkeatka of nitro-, gpg
Doiw4ptiox n]L- or)
tory ara-
acid.
PSINI.O.

La Gonzalez," Barrio
Hato Viejo Poniente,
Ciales., Pitt. P d. P d P. a. P. Ct. P.&I
962 Section A .......... Surface to 18 13ri ...... 0.42 145,
963 Section B .......... Surface to 2 ft .... ..25, 6.61 3.00 4.
ara Barrio'Sulni- 41
dero Aguas Buenas:
964.- Yaweststction. Surface to61n.__-.'w !.971 72 ... 2.,20,
965 Southeast section ..do ....... ....... .87 43141 vs 6 '1. 14,
"Oseura,". Barrio Su-
midero, Aguas Bue-
nas: ....
966 Section C .......... Surface to 1 ft ...... 2.35: 0.05 V. 14 11,90 4.62
967 Section B .......... ..... do ...... ...... 3.65 .05 .03 fig a. W, 7.0
968 Sala IV ............ Surface to 3 in ....... 2.21 .04 .08 6.29 05 6.
969 SaU Grande ....... ..... do .............. 2.37 03 OJ S. 28 $i5 :4617
97o Bi Aito,,. ...... ...... do ............... 26 '.05 .12, & 79 4.04 "T
"Vel Rio 11 Baffloft-
midero' Aguas Bue-
has:
Chwnbr 'yond' Surface to 1 2.01
971 be I IV 5. 44
"Charco Hondo.
1972 Do ............ I ft. to 18 in ......... .07 ....... ....... .49
973 Biafora No. 1 11 Bar- Surface to 4 ft ....... 10-02 ...... 2.15 2,55
rio ii5r ?, Are.
cibo.
974 Do ................. 4 to, 10 ft .......... .14
Do..... ........... Mixture from pile at .... ..... 26.43 '1179
dwelling house.
976 `BfakaNoll Bar- Surface to,1 ft_ .17 ....... 2.29. 1.42 LIG
rio Mraflore' Are-
cibo.
Bernardo Mi6ndez-,
Barrio Bayaney
arroacal o go-
es), o:
01 8 tion A .......... Surface to 3 ft ....... 12.03 2.15 2.20 7.82: 1.22 W64
.78 1.30 60 15%9
978 Do ............ 3 to9ft ............. 3.09 2L-84 33.59
fivilella"J, Barri%.Ye-
guadffla Hatillo:
979 Sedtion A ........... Surface to 6.in __- .63 ------- -- 7.33 ....... 1.86 3,11
A.,
980 Do ........... W 6 in. to 44 ft .......... .20: ....... X 14 3.82
981 Section, B ....... :... 6 in. to 1-ft .......... 27 ................ 2kL 44 52
Oflo Oscuro "Barrio
Sandw, V,6uy:
982 Sections A and C.'. Surface to 1 ft ....... 9.44 .06 .40 10.22 7.; 43 14.19
983 Sectiou A ......... I ft. to 18 in ......... m ....... ........ ig.37 .... 10,18 IL A4
984 Do ............. 18 in. to 5 ft .......... .58 -------
985 Section C I to 3 ft ............. .48 ....... ..... 7 14.79 10,68
999 "Juan Encarnacion Surface to 3 ft ....... .5,3 Tram ... 4.06
Cort4sj! 11 Barrio Cor-L
roles, Aguadfila.
1000 Pro -ty of Ludovino Surface to 2 ft ....... .24 10. W_
Suarez, Barrio Are-
nales, Aguadilla.
1001 California 11 Barrio Surface to 4 ft ....... .34 ...... ....... 32.61 9. 21 Wk S 9
Centro, Voca.
1002 Do ................ Surface to 3 ft ....... ......... 4.48 '&07
1003 Nos. 1, 11.0 and III, Surface to 2 ft ....... .62 ....... ........ '1.47 Z 71
pro y of Mercedes
&nn, Barrio Cor-
ale Aguadilla.
1004 8,11 al" Barrio (W. 'surfs" to 3 ft ....... 31 ....... .... ... 2.77 ... :1.69 ,*121,
nilta Bajo.- Agaa-
d Ua
iOO5 DO... 2 ft. to 3 ft... .42 ....... ....... 1, 19
PLop" erty
Hwem. Barrio Od.?.
mital Baj Agua-
1001 vo. I .......... L.-'.. Surface to I ft ....... W ....... ...... 1.21 ........ Trwe
100 No. 6 ........... da, ............. .40' Trim
I 1M8 'Propi 48
erty of Pablo Gon ..... do ..............
Wes, Barrio Cama-
seyes, Aguadilla.
f1







17


TABLE IV.-Analyses of guanos, with their approximate values-Continued.


Name or location of
cave.


1009

1010

1011

1012


1013

1014

1015


1016
1017
1018


1030
1031

1032

1033

1034




1035
1036
1037

1038

1039
1040

1041
1042

1043

1044
1045



1046
1047

1048
1049
1050


Description.


Property of TomAs
Torres Barrio Cor-
rales, Aguadilla.
Property of Pedro Rol-
dan, Barrio Camas-
eyes, Aguadilla.
"Cuchilla," Barrio
Cuckilla, Moca.
Property of Rafael
Domenech, Barrio
Caimital Bajo, Agua-
dilla.
Property of Rafael
Suarez, Barrio Cen-
tro, Moca.
Property of Gabriel
Pifteiro, Barrio Coto,
Isabela.
"Sin Fin," Barrio Are-
nales Bajos, Isabela.
"El Jobo," Barrio Are-
nales Bajos, Isabela:
Section A..........
Section B..........
Do............
"Murcidlago," Barrio
Galateo Alto, Isa-
bela:
Section A (subsec-
tion 1).
Section B (subsec-
tion 2).
Section B (subsec-
tion 3).
Section C (subsec-
tion 5).
Section D (subsec-
tion 5).
Property of Juan
Eusebio Acevedo,
Barrio Galateo Alto,
Isabela:
Section A..........
Do............
"Juan Bautista
Perez," Barrio
Planas, Isabela.
Do.................
"Chito Perez Barrio
Plans, Isabela:
Section III.........
Sections III and
IV.
Section II.........
Sections III and
IV.
"Pajita," Barrio Cal-
leine%, Lares.
Do................
"Sol," Barrio Calle-
jones, Lares; main
(north) mouth.
"Los Crazes," Barrio
Callejones, Lares:
Sections II and III.
Far end of Section I

Section IT ........
Far end of Section I
Property of Jos4 Maria
Girao (or Jurant),
Barrio Lares, Lares;
end of main com-
partment below rock.
55016-18---3


Total
nitro-
e~n
(N).


Nitro-
gen as
am-
monia.


Nitro-
gen as
ni-
trate.


1 1 1 1


P.ct. P. ct.
0.68 .......


39 ..


1.80


0.03


P.cl.


0.04


. W I.. .... .. .......


63 ........


.....do............

.....do............

Surface to 2 ft......

Surface to I ft......


.... do .............

.... do....... .....

....do............


.-.-- do............
.... do....... .....
.... do....... .....


Surface to 2 ft. intact.

Surface to 3 ft.......

Surface to 6 in..--...

Surface to 2 ft.......

Surface to 3 ft. intact.




41 to 74ft...........
Surface to 4 ft......
Surface to 2 Ift.......

Surface to 3 ft.......

12 to 15 ft ...........
Surface to 3 ft......

d.. d .o...... .
Surface to 10 ft.....

Surface to 3 ft......

3 to 6ft .............
Surface to 1 ft.intact.



Yellow earth........
White nodules in-
closed in guano.
Surface guano.......
Surface to 3 f t .......
3-ft. layer...........


Total
phos-
phoric
acid.
(P2O).


P.ct.
2.62


Water-
solu-
ble
phos-
phoric
acid.


P. ct.


3.84 .......


21.07


6.39 .......


26.93 ..


Ci-
trate-
solu-
ble
phos-
phoric
acid.

P.ct.
1.54

2.86

6.77


2.76


3.17 ..............

5.03 ..............


23.42
36.71
31.85


3.69

19.85

21.94

31.00

5.62




25.35
18.88
36.44

24.64

19.35
28.60
30.22
28.90
17.97


4.68 .......
6.14 .......


6.23 .......
35.67 .......


.48
. 17
. 74


.09

.14

2.15

.15

.57




.38
.62
.22

.49

1.13
1.53
.29
.27

.08

.44
.76



.14
.08
.31
.38
.09


2.62
18.52
2.97


.24

2.81

2.28

1.44

1.50




4.23
9.33
1.94

3.34

5.06
5.52
2.99
1.25

1.93

.94
1.09



4.43
28.66

4.72
15.76
1.47


Lab-
ora-
tory
No.


23.25
21.70
2.81


Ap-
prox-
imate
value
per
dry
ton.


$2.90

3.64

4.33

1.00


1.00

3.65

6.29


3.58
18.86
2.12


.42

3.09

4.55

1.74

2.67




4.99
10.67
2.388

4.32

7.32
8.58

3.57
1.79

2.09

1.82
2.61



4.71
28.82

5.34
16.52
1.65


I


an



















"Jesus Tortes," Barrio
Lares Lares: .
Section A..........
Section B-........
"Cerro de Jose Cruz,"
Barrio Lares, Lares;
mouth of cave.
"Clara" and" Oscura,"
B a r r i o Guayabal,
Juana Diaz; sections
SI, III and V.
"Callo, Barrio Vil-
lalba Arriba, Juana'
Diaz.
"Naranjo," Barrio Na-
ranjo, Juana Diaz:
Section A...........
Section B..........
"Los Santos," Barrino
Vega Redonda, (Com-
enrio:
Section A..........
Section B ..........
"La Moret" or
"Iglesia," B a r rio
Vega Redonda, Com-
erio:
Section A..........
Section B..........
SectionC ..........
"Gruaragul," Barrio
Veg Redonda, Corn-
erio.
"Flori," Barrio Pue-
blo Viejo, Pueblo
Viejo.


Loose guano........
Surface to it .......

Surface to 2 ft.......


P.t.
1.51
1.13
.75.


.33


Surface to I it ....... 5.69


Surface to 6 in.......
Surface to 3 ft.......


1.96
1.70


Surface to 3 ft....... .62
.....do............ 2.14


1051
1052
105

1072


1073



1074
1075


1077
1078



1079
1080
1081
1082

1104


2.00
2.34
1.69
.97

1.22


P.cd.
0.15


.06



.04



.04



.03
.02,


P. d.
0.66


.73



.11




.34.



.75
.26


P.ct.
24.22
20.87A
.1.52


4.98


P. d.


5&12 1.......
Tre..... I


10.36
15.26



7.26
14.68
16.98
4.63

19.94


Determinations were also made of the water-soluble potash in
samples which, on account of their character or location, were likely
to contain appreciable amounts. The results are given in Table ,

TABLE V.-Water-eoluble potash in certain guanos.


Laboratory
number.


Water-
soluble
rt0)
:O').


Laboratory
number.


Water-
soluble
Fotfah
3,40).


Laboratory
number.


Water-
soluble
F tash
(KZO).


Laboratory
number.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
773 ....... 0.78 833........ Trace. 855 ........ 1.59 881........ 4.15'
777....... .23 1........ 1.56 858........ 18 885........ .78
780A ..... 1.4 842........ 2.82 860........ 1.2 935 .97
786 ....... .43 848........ 1.36 8706........ 1.83 ........ 8.29
799....... .75 851........ .84 878........ 2.71 977........ 3.22
819A..... 1.83 852A...... 3.90 879........ 3.48 98........ .9 6
828....... 1.48 854........ .84 880........ 4.18 982........ Tram.


The potash in the other samples, with, possibly a few exception,
can be taken as negligible. Table III showed about the quati
of potash that could be expected in the ordinary guano. 1


....do..............
....do..............
.... do...............
Surface to 2 It.......


* :, :1,~







fMW-

a a
, .: : *:":":::.::i1


'^ 6 :" 'i


'* v .w.. .. ':::
"* :. ..

IS 3, *'. !
ILl.
4412 '

1246 /:E


'SI








X 1


Ils



3.80


9.90


Water.
soluble
potas).
?0I).


t *.
: ;! .
o ^ ',
* *< *


i......,





19


It is hardly necessary to point out that some of the samples in
Tables III, IV, and V represent valuable material and others prac-
tically worthless deposits. The maximum percentages of the fertil-
izing constituents found in the 247 samples analyzed were as follows:
Total nitrogen 13.04 per cent, nitrogen present as ammonia 3.60 per
cent, nitrogen present as nitrate 4.60 per cent, total phosphoric acid
41.58 per cent, water-soluble phosphoric acid 2.82 per cent, citrate-
soluble phosphoric acid 28.66 per cent, water-soluble potash 4.18 per
cent. The minimum figures found for the different constituents were
practically zero. It will be noted that in many guanos most of the
nitrogen is present as ammonia or nitrate. As was to be expected,
the samples of best material came as a rule from caves in the drier
parts of the island.
Samples Nos. 886 to 890 from the small island of Caja de Muertos
were. doubtless formed by birds rather than bats. Many of the an-
alyses reported in Tables II and IV are similar to those of leached
bird guanos from Mona Island, as may be seen from the analyses in
Table VI.
TABLE VI.-Analyses of guano deposits from Mona Island.

Total Citrate- Total Citrate-
Labors- phos- soluble Total Calcium Labora- phoric soluble Total Calcium
tory phoric phos- nitrogen sulphate tory acid phos- nitr sulphate
number. acid phoric (N). (CaSO4). number. (pO) phonic rogen (CaSO4).
(P20b), acid. acid.

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
573-------....... 28.71 13.85 0.25 34.37 593 ....... 18.00 3.37 0 51.48
574 ....... 26.36 4.76 .15 7.46 594 ....... 17.39 3.58 0.06 55.93
575 .....--.. 14.38 2.26 .08 .43 595 ....... 37.52 23.10 0 21.59
576 ....... 4.68 1.60 .04 5.20 596 ....... 6.30 2.39 0 64.29
77....... 32.25 12.96 .11 22.29 597 ....... 1.87 .11 .06 Trace.
578 ....... 45.41 5.96 .17 .82 598 ....... .85 0 .36 Trace.
579 ....... 29.14 2.63 .08 1.29 641 ....... 25.85 5.57 .......... 25.11
580 ....... 35.52 4.97 .30 23.67 642 ....... 37.25 7.52 .-..---------.... 6.13
581 ....... 41.14 1.88 .10 5.15 643 ....... 37.17 2.45 .......- ... 2.24
582 ....... 26.20 4.08 .76 34.16 644 ....... 30.54 6.28 ..-........ 2.19
583........ 38.64 4.56 .97 Trace. 646 ....... 17.10 3.29 .......... 14.36
584 ....... 27.06 24.42 .04 41.45 647....... 9.50 1.30 .......... 4.96
585 ....... 12.177 4.79 .42 6.98 648 ....... 28.19 3.46 .......... 9.28
586-------....... 3.21 1.71 .32 6.57 649 ....... 21.39 1.78 .......... 4.50
587 ....... 33.33 1.73 .12 17.36 653 ....... 22.30 1.90 .......... Trace.
588 ....... 3.06 0 .10 Trace. 654-------....... 31.70 .80 .......... Trace.
589....... ------- 2.37 0.46 .08 Trace. 659 ------.. 26.17 2.72 ....................
590 ....... 2.10 .74 .21 3.79 664 ....... 21.62 2.10 .......... 4.18
591 ....... 27.86 1.06 0 28.17 673 ....... 32.75 6.08 .......... 14.47
592 ....... 42.23 21.08 0 3.80 750 ....... 27.68 2.92 ....................

The samples from Mona Island represent materials from different
caves, but by no means represent all the deposits on the island.

VEGETATION TESTS WITH BAT GUANOS.
GENERAL METHOD OF CONDUCTING TESTS.

Many vegetation experiments in pots were conducted to compare
the fertilizing efficiency of the nitrogen or phosphoric acid in bat
guanos with the efficiency of the nitrogen or phosphoric acid in stand-
ard commercial fertilizers. The results from some 2,300 pots are

















of the crops grown in the acid-phosphate series'a crrve' was pltfl 3J
showing the amount of phosphoric acid from acid phosphate re i*$6iW!7
to produce any increased yield in that particular test. F'Yrba isf
curve the amount of phosphoric acid from acid phosphate YMd"'w:
found which would have been required to produce the'same i':' :3:I
that produced by any one of the guanos. The ratio of theidi 11" :-
quantities of phosphoric acid (froni the'guano and acid phosplb#4".
which produced the same increased yield gave the efficiency of 7i e
phosphoric acid in the guano relative to that of acid phosphate' ............
The efficiency of the citrate-soluble phosphoric acid in add p |b4' 7
phate in all the following tests was taken as 100 and the other f;.. il
ciencies expressed relative to this. Thus, if 2 grams of -phosphoric 'i|
acid from a guano gave the same yield as 1 gram of phosphoric add "?
from acid phosphate, the efficiency of the guano phosphoric acid wria.1.:
taken as 50. -
Glazed earthenware pots were used as containers. They were .| ii
on trucks in a wire inclosure (five meshes to the inch) during itig i
weather, but run into a glass house during rains and violent winds. n .
The water content of the soil was kept constant by daily weighingsj;
transpired or evaporated water being replaced by rain water caghtl
on the glass roof of the plant house. When the plants had attain h
considerable size the weights of the pots plus soil were corrected for.. .
the added weight of the plants. Plants grown under these oondi-:I
tions were equal in size to field plants where the maximum fertilizer '
was used.
Both green and oven-dry weights of the crops from each pot were..
determined, although in most cases it made little difference whether
efficiencies were calculated from green or dry weights. For the sake .
of conciseness, only oven-dry weights are reported, except in two .
tests (Tables VIII and XX). Determinations of nitrogen or phos- i.
phoric acid in the crop were not so essential with the plan employed ..:.
as with the usual method, as has been pointed out.* .! i|
1 Gile, P. L., and Carrero, J. 0. A plan for testing efficiencies of fertilizers. Jour. Amer. Spoc. Agrn,,:;
8 (1916), No. 4, pp. 247-255, fig. 1. .. .
SGile, P. L., and Carrero, J. 0. Loc. cit. j







Corn (Zea mays), millet (Setaria italica), and rice (Oryza sativa)
were the crops used. Millet and rice were grown to maturity, and
transplanted corn seedlings were grown 30 to 40 days.
The fertilizing materials were mixed with the first 3 or 4 inches of
soil in each pot before planting. When a second application of the
basic fertilizer was used, it was applied to the surface in dilute
solution.
EXPERIMENTS ON EFFICIENCY OF PHOSPHORIC ACID IN BAT GUANOS.
Plan of experiments and materials used.-In testing the efficiencies
of the different guanos as phosphatic fertilizers it was necessary to
. conduct the work in considerable detail on account of the many
factors affecting the availabilities of phosphatic fertilizers. The
relative efficiencies of different phosphates are known to vary some-
S what with the kind of soil and crop, and to be differently affected by
liming. There is also supposed to be a difference between the
efficiencies of phosphates applied immediately to the crop and those
applied sometime before. the crop is planted. Certain representative
: samples of guano were tested with respect to these variable con-
ditions of soil, crops, liming, and effect of remaining in the soil.
Most of the samples, however, were tested only for their immediate
availability or efficiency in one soil, the river sand.
In the following tests two soils deficient in phosphoric acid were
used, a river sand1 and the Porto Rican red clay.2 The red clay,
fully described elsewhere, is acid and consists almost entirely of silt
and clay particles.. The river sand is neutral in reaction and con-
tains considerable coarse and medium sand and a small amount of
clay particles. It is doubtless derived from clay soil as the river
which deposits it drains a red clay area.
The guanos were all compared with acid phosphate as a standard,
but bone meal, basic slag, finely ground rock phosphate or floats, and
a leached bird guano from Mona Island were also used in many tests
to afford a better idea of the position of bat guanos among phos-
phatic fertilizers in general. Analyses of these materials are given
in Table VII.


I Porto Rico Sta. Bul. 11 (1911), p. 22.


2 Porto Rico Sta. Bul. 14 (1914).

















































































































* II I'


I. ~
U




- w w w~


TABLE VIII.-Immediate availability of phosphoric acid in guanos.

CORN GROWN SEPT. 9 TO OCT. 10, 1914.


Source of phosphoric acid (P205).


No phosphate....................
Acid phosphate....................
D o. ..........................
D o...........................
D o. .........................
Do ........... ................
3uano No. 263.....................
Guano No. 375....................
Guano No. 497....................
Guano No. 500....................
Guano No..502....................
Guano No. 504.....................
Guano No. 506....................
Guano No. 509....................


Phos-
phoric
acid
applied
per pot.


Grams.
....... .
0.30
.60
.90
1.35
2.03
2.40
2.40
2.10
2.40
1.50
3.60
3.60
3.60


Basic fertilizer applied per
pot.


Sodium nitrate, 8.4 gin.;
ammonium sulphate 6
gm.; potassium sulphate,
8 gin.; in three applica-
tions.


Dr
soil
per
pot.


Pounds.





S41


Num-
ber of
plants
per
pot.


Green yield of individual pots.


Average
green
yield and
probable
error.


I I -_ _-_ _-_ _


Grams.
234
344
534
642
656
639
538
460
334
569
314
280
341
328


Grams. I Grams. I Grams


Grams.


Grams.


Grams.


Grams.
226L18
358 4
492 11
568-18
68117
67612
53711
460 5
34811
55712
282 9
252 9
316 8
300 9


Efficiency
of phos-
phoric acid
as com-
pared with
that of acid
phos-
phate=-100.


29
............



22
13
36
9
2
13


6
5






TABLEVIII.-Immediate availability of phOphoric acid in guanos-Continued.
CORN GROWN OCT. 30 To DEC. 5, 1914.


Phos. Num- Average of phos-
D phonic aeld
phoric s".'jT ber of 0`7en as com-
Source of phosphoric acid (P20j.). acid Basic fertilizer applied per pot. plants Oven-dry yield of individual pots. yield
applied per per pro pared with
per pot. pot. pot. error. that of acid
phos-

Grams. Pounds. Grams. Grams. Grams. Grams. Gram. Grams. Grams. Grams.
No phosphate ..................... .......... 10.2 8.3 9.0 9.9 10.4 ........ ..... .. 0. 6:L 0. 3 .......
Acid phosphate ..................... 0.30 15.9 23.1 13.6 17.4 19.6 ; ....... ..... ::. 17.91.1 ...........
Do ............................ .60 30.8 31.2 26.7 19.6 ...... .. ........ ........ 27.11.8
Do ............................ .90 36.9 48.0 36.7 40.5 .......... 46.5*1.8: .......
Do, ....................... 1.35 ft 4 60.9 66.1 54.0 ............ 6144tEL8 .........
...................... 2.03 76.5 82.6 77.4 K6 ................. ......... Sol, 1. 3
Guano No. 408 ..................... 1.80 Sodium nitrate, 8.4 gni- 2& 7 25.4. 22.2 24.3 ........ .. I ...... .......... 29
Giumo No. 499 ..................... 1.80 19.7 22.3 29.0 24.3 22.1-4- .6 .24
ammonium sulphate ------ ---------------- 19,
Gimno'No. Sol ..................... .3-60 46 4 38.7 29,8 3118 21.4 ........ ................ 30.414
1.2() gm.; potassium ;iIpLte'
GuaUo -XM SM ..................... 30.4 J-9. 2& 6 39.6 -------- -------- --------- 31 1::L 2 .65
Guano No. 505 ..................... 3.60 8 gm.; in two applications. I I -
12.7 0 A 8 15-6 ......... ................ 13-3:L .8
Guano No. 607 ..................... 1.80 26.9 A 4 19.4 M. 5 ..... ........ ...... 25,8+-L-5 31
(luatlo:No* 5M ..................... 3.60 12.2 11.4 10.9 1L5 ........ ........ ...... 11. 5,:k .2 2
DO --- ---------- 14.40 17.0 14.1 io. 6 UA ... ....... ........ 14. G:L 9
Guano No. .................. .80 35.1 38.0 26.1. 36.0 ........ ........ .... M 8=1t 1-8 94
Guano No. -73a .................... 1.20 40,7' 33.7 33.9. 38.4 ........ 3k + 1. 1
Guano No.750 .................... 1.20 13.7 11.8 14.1 ........ ........ .

CORN GROWN NOV. 23 TO DEC. 312 1914. .. ........ ... .... ..

No phosphate ..................... .......... 9.1 6.8 9.0 8.4 8--2 9.2 8.5 510.
Acid phosphate .................... 0.30 10.1 15.9 '22.2 14.7 14.1 ........ ........ .. 1. 0
Do ............................. .60 22.2 31.0 27.1 M7, -22.2 ....... ........ 27.2ck 1. 5
Do ... .90 44
Do .... ----------- I I : I .11 38.7 43-51 64.6 44.9 48.3 ........ ......... S;L i+ 2
----------- .1.35 45.8 60.1 49.1 66.4 70.6 ........ 58.4 ;. 2
Do ......... 4 .................. 2.03 66.9 82.9 88.9 99.7 86.1 ................ 84.013.6
Guano No. 734 .................... 1.20 21 1 22.4 23.9 24.0 ........ ........ ......... 22. 19
Do ............................ 1.80 24:4 32.1 3.5.0 29.4 ....... !.' ...... 2;L 1. 5 86
Do ............................ 2.70 51. 8 41 L8, 51.0 52,0 ........ ................ 9;j 1. -49
Do C 05 Sodium nitrate 8 4. 71.2 87.1 7s.5 ........ ................ 75. 7:L 3. 0
....................... M9
Guano Yo. 509 ..................... 3.60 ammanill-M sulp4te 6 10.4 ........ ........
Do ...................... 7.20 46 4 8
gra,,"; patasstum, sulinhate'. 8 1 19.2 .8
Do ............................ 1140 gM* thred ij
114C







Do............................
Guano No. 321.....................
Guano No. 374.....................
Guano No. 415.....................
Guano No. 447.....................
Guano No. 458.....................
Guano No. 460.....................
Guano No. 376.....................
Guano No. 750.....................


28.80
2.40
2.40
3.60
1.80
1.80
1.80
1.20
2.40


31.7
26.5
31.0
42.3
19.8
'34.5
17.7
25.2
13.4


29.3
24.2
27.0
32.8
23.5
32.0
13.2
25.8
13.4


29.1
33.4
34.7
56.6
27.5
40.4
15.9
23.0
15.4


25.5
38.1
35.8
39.5
19.5
31.2
15.3
22.0
19.7


28.9 .9
30.62.1
32.11.3
42.83.4
22.61.3
34.51.4
15.5 .6
24.0 .6
15.51.0


CORN GROWN FEB. 16 TO MAR. 29,1915.

No phosphate..................... .......... 10.2 7.9 11.9 7.6 10.0 ........ ....-... 9.50.5........
Acid phosphate.................... 0.30 18.6 19.6 19.0 16.1 22.8 ................ 19.2 .7.........
Do............................ .60 32.2 39.4 38.0 32.9 35.1 ........ ........ 35.5 .9 ...........
Do............................ .90 Sodium nitrate 8.4 gmi; am- 56.4 50A4 54.6 44.2 53.8 ........ ........ 51.91.5 ............
Do............................ 1.35 .o1im chlorid 5.3 gm.; 73.0 74.6 82.6 69.2 73.5 ................ 74.61.5 ............
Do............................ 2.03 monassiumi hlo hate. 8 4 4 89.6 96.9 105.9 90.9 99.0 ................ 96.52.0 ............
Guano No. 498..................... 3.00 ptSsin stw auplp atens. 42.0 41.2 58.7 35.6 50.4 ................ 45.62.7 26
Guano No. 499-..................... 3.00 g in TWO applications 38.4 48.3 42.9 52.0 43.8- ------- --- 45.11.6 26
Guano No. 506-.-.................. 8.00 35.6 22.3 26.4 21.9 .-.. ..... 26.52.1 5
Basic slag......................... 1.30 51.0 57.6 62.5 59.5 51.7-....-........ 56.51.5 76
Bonemeal........................ 1.40 31.1 42.3 30.7 37.7 36 ........ ........ 35.61.5 43


MILLET GROWN MAR. 12 TO APR. 21,1915.

No phosphate..................... .......... 1.9 1.5 2.0 2.1 1.7 ........ ........ 1.80.1 ...........
Acid phosphate.................... 07 3.7 3.6 2.7 2.6 3.9 ....-... .. .. 3.3 .2.........
Do............................ .14 4.7 4.1 4.2 3.4 5.6 ........ ........ 4.4 .3 ..........
Do............................ .21 6.0 6.5 8.3 4.6 9.4 ........ ........ 7.0 .6 ..........
Do............................ .32 12.2 9.3 9.2 8.4 13.1 ........ ........ 10.4 .6 .........
Do ........................... .47 12.3 9.8 13.5 12.7 12.1 ................. 12.1 .4 .........
Do............................1 26.6 13.5 20.3 22.4 21.5 ........ ........ 20.91.4 ..........
Basicslag.......................... 50 Sodium nitrate, 2.8 gm.; am- 9.3 9.8 9.1 9.9 13.1 ...... ........ 10.2 .5 62
Bone meal......................... .54 monium chlorid, 1.8 gm.; ,o 8 2.1 3.7 3.4 5.6 4.9 .. ...... 3.9 .4 20
Guano No. 263..................... .95 potassium sulphate, 2.7 gm.; 18 8 9.0 7.5 7.5 13.2 8.0 ...... ....... .
Guano No. 497..................... 1.40 in two applications. 7. 9.5 9.7 7.7 8.9 3 19
Guano No. 498..................... 95 8.1 6.2 6.4 7.2 8.6 ........ ....... 7.3 .3 23
Guano No. 499A................... 1.07 8.6 5.5 8.5 8.2 7.6 .. .. ..-..-.-... 7.7 .4 22
Guano No.500A................... .94 8.2 7.1 9.1 11.1 5.5 --------------8.2 .6 26
Guano No. 501..................... 1.50 7.7 8.0 7.2 11.3 7.5 ....-.-.-.. ... .. 8.3 .5 17
Guano No. 502..................... 2.50 5.8 7.1 7.8 8.7 7.0 .. I 7.3 .3 9
Guano No. 503..................... .50 10.8 10.6 7.9 6.5 7.1 ........ ....... 8.6 .6 53
Guano No. 750..................... 2.50 4.6 5.2 4.4 4.5 5.5 ........ ........ 4t.8 .1 6






TABLEVIII.-Immediate availability of pho8phoric acid in guanos-Continued.
CORN GROWN APR. 12 TO MAY 1711915.


Phos- Num- Aven of Phos<
D phorle add
phoric- t berof ove*"'d'T- as coni-
Source of &wphoric add (PsOs). acid Basic fertilizer applied per po Oven-dry yield of individual pots. da n
applied pot. per %'b ab 8: Mtej With
f acid
per pot. pot. error. phos-


Grams.. Pounds. Grams. Grams. Grams. Grams. Grant. Grams. Gram8. Gram8.
No phosphate .................... ........... 10.3 7.2 6.7 13.0 7.2 ......... .... -.1 8-9+0-8. ........
Acid phosphate .................... 0.30 15.1 13.8 17.8 16.0 19.4 ........ ........ .. 16. 46 .7 ........
....... .60 49.5 29.2 30.6 25.8 32.0 ........ ......... 33.4:L2.8 ...........
Do. ...... .90 51.2 39.0 50.5 45.3 52.1 ......... ......... 47.6-+1.6 ...........
Do ............................ 1.35 64.9 59.6 -63.8 64.3 58.1 ........ ........ 62-1 .9 .........
Do- ....... -* ... 2.03 75.3 84.8 86.1 78.7 78A ........ .....
Guano No: .............. 2.67 51.3 65.6 47.4 46.4 45.4 ........ ........ 51.22.5 98
Guano No. 501 ..................... 4.00' 25.4 29.7 25.1 34--5 45,,O ........ ........ 31192.5 15
Guano No. 780.4 ................... 1.00 Sodium nitrate, 8.4 gm.; am- 42' 3 37.7 46.3 37.8 40.8 ... ..... 41. 0-+1. 1 :76
Guano No. 784...M .................. 1.60 monium chlorld 5 3 gm.; 23.9 40.9 26.7 ws 34.7 ........ ......... 31.32.0 35
Guano No. 785 ...................... 1.60 potassium SUII)&te,'8 gM.; 47 4 31.8 28.9i 37.1 36.8 38.1 ........ a ....... 5:kl. 1 39
Guano No. 796 ....................... 6.00 in two applications. 8.4 10.0 IL2 10.7 12.8 ........ ......... ro. 61 5 -11
Guano No. 7197 ...................... 2.00, 17.0: 19,0 17.5 27.2 17.6 ........ ...... 4 '19.7+1.a 1$
Guano No. 708 ..................... 4.80 IS-3 10.3 1662 13.9 12.9 ....... ........ 33. 3+ .6 41
Guano No. 810... 4.80 15.9 26.1 16.9 20.2 20.0 ..; ..... ........ 10.6+1.1
Guano No. 811...' .' .: ............. .2.40 20.7 18.7 10.7 23.5 ........ ........ 3+1-8,
Guano No. 819 ..................... 1.00 32.2 3260. 36, 5 40.7 so., 36 1+1_2 06
Floats !PLO&*& .................. 6.00 18.8 22.6 19,9 25.3 33i, 8 2.4. 1 &2-7 7
..... 18.00 38.0 -35.7 32.3 28.4 39.4 ......... .
Do.. ............... .1
No. 708 ....... .......... 2.40 41.9 4& 5 37.4 57.2 43ii 0 ....... ........ 44.6*2.3, as
... .. .....












































17.6
13.7
17.9
11.9
12.5


15.2
14.4
12.7
19.3
11.7
16.3
13.5
11.7







TABLE VIII.-_ Immediate availability of phosphoric acid in guanos-Continued.
MILLET GROWN OCT. 15 TO NOV. 22, 1915.

Efficiency
of hos-
Phos- D Num-' Average pho 9011 acid
phoric SY ber of as 001n-
Source of phosphoric add (Ps0s). acid Basic fertilizer applied per pot.', Plants Oven-dry yield of individual pots. ;Veloda
per Prot ed with
applied pot. per Ct of sold
per pot. pot. error. phos-
phste-100.

Grams. POU708. Grams. Grams. Grams. Gram8. Grams. Grame. Grams. Grams.
No. hoaph 6.6 4.4 6.5 6.1 7.4 &0 6.7 6.2*0.2 .......
Pho01aPj:te ................... 10.0 10.8 10-7 10 8 10.5 10.0 11.1 10. 6:L I .............
Do ............................. .30 15.6 16.1 15.7 15.5 17.2 16.8 18.1 16-A .2 ............ .
Do ....................... W .... .45 21.0 19.4 20.9 21.1 20.9 21.0 19.8 20.6- .2 ........
Do ............................ .675 Sodium nitrate, 2.8 24.8 21.5 23.4 23.4 25.5 24.5 23.8 23. 8 -j: .3 ............
Guano No. 848 ......... ............ 2.50 monium Sulpbate!%-;,;T-; 16, 14 13.4, 15.1 15.1 15,9 16.2 -.12-5 14.2 14.6* 10
potasium sulphate, 2.7 gm.; 15 15.8 19.5 17.1 16.6 13.6 16.0 -3z
Guano No. 852 ..................... .50 .2 16.
Guano No. 853 ..................... 2.50 in two applications. 25.0 24.4 25.5 24.7 23.1 25.1 27.1 -25.0+- -3 211 .....
Guano No. 912 ..................... 3.00 7* 9 6.6 7.8 7.4 6.6 7.-9 7.0 7.3+ A
No. 916 ..................... 3.00 7* 3 7.1 6.3 7.2 7.3 8.1 7.5 7-3+ 1 1.
ailano No. 931 ..................... 1.35 Ka 19-10 19.4 20.0 19.2 20.2 20.7 19.6:k .2: 31,
(hmo, No. 982, ..................... 1.50 14.8 17.0 15.8 15.8 16.0 14.7 18.5 15,8+ 2 .10,

MILLET GROWN DEC. 8, 1915, To JAN. 22, 1916.

Nophogpbto ..................... .......... 7.7 7.8 7. 1 8.1 9.1 8.5 ........ 8 2*0.z ............
Acid ph&Pbste ................ 0 is 11.6 11.0 10. 2 -11.1 10.7 13.0 ........ 11: 3:E ;+9 -:..... *. ,
ADO. ........ so 14.0 14.5 14 0 15.1 16.1 16.0 ..; ...... .15. O;k I
Do ---------- ......... ....... .45 .18.1 18.6 16.0 17.3 18.0 18t2 ........ 17.7 .3 .............
Do ........................ !, ... .675 21* 1 21.4 20.5 22.5 22.6 22.2 ......... 21.7:b .2 ....
Guano No. 851 ................... 1 40 Sodium nitrate 21 9 14.4 10.5 12.2 IS. 2' 13.4 ....... 13,1*
Guano No. 881 .................... :do 14:,2 20-5 15.6 15.6 15.3 18.2 ... K-6- 65
Guano No. OM ......... 2.50 17.5 13 11.2 .9-8 10.2 10.1 7,2 7.1 ........ 9. 3 .04 2
Gu&W No. 959 ............... ..... .70 potassium aWphate, 2 gin.; 13.9 13.7 1 '
............ in one application. 1J., 6 13- 4 13.4, 13.1 ...... i,.: 8-4 1 33
GuanoNo. 961 ..................... .50 13A 12.4 a 12. 8 14.0 12.9 ........ M 8 .3 40
Ouaxxo'No. 975 ..................... 2.40 9.0 ILZ 10.7 9'4 ........ 9.6 ...... Iff. 0+. X 4
Guano No. 977 ....... ............. .50 1$ -22.0 '18.0 W1 1843 -.20.7 ...... 19. 1tt 7 108
guano No, 978 ..................... .9 194 u. 9 is 19-kfi 16.5 17.3 1& 2+ A
Wano, No. 080.6 9.40 10.9. .,m -10.6 11. 4' 10.1 ...
Guano No. M ....... .65 12.0 12.6 13.4 12" 9 12.2 ......... ... 12. 6* .2






MILLET GROWN MAR. 20 TO MAY 2.1916.


No phosphate....................
Aoid phosphate..................
Do .........................
Do........................
Do ............................
Guano No. 939....................
Guano No. 943....................
Guano No. 945....................
Guano No. 947...................
Guano No. 965...................
Guano No. 970...................
Guano No. 971...................
Guano No. 1011..................
Guano No. 1013 ...................
Guano No. 1018..................


0.15
.30
.45
.675
1.60
3.00
.90
2.50
.60
.90
.90
1.20
3.00
3.00


Sodium nitrate, 2.8 gm.; am-
monium chlorid, 1.8 gin.;
potassium sulphate, 2.7 gm.;
in two applications.


14.5


6.7
11.6
18.1
22.9
26.0
17.1
13.1
21.6
17.0
12.1
15.4
16.2
10.8
9.2
9.0


6.4
10.9
15.8
24.6
28.0
19.4
17.1
24.3
13.7
9.9
14.2
17.9
11.5
7.7
9.9


8.6
9.7
17.6
19.2
28.3
16.7
16.7
22.6
14.9
10.3
13.8
18.1
11.3
7.8
9.1


6.5
13.4
19.1
22.3
27.5
16.1
18.1
22.1
17.1
10.9
14.0
16.8
11.1
8.8
8.0


6.1
11.9
18.0
20.4
26.9
17.4
17.4
19.5
13.6
8.9
15.0
16.8
11.9
8.4
8.7


8.0
12.6
17.2
22.3
29.1
20.9
20.4
22.2
15.8
10.4
15.5
17.0
9.8
9.4
9.6


6.8


7.00.2
11.7 .4
17.6 .3
22.0* 5
27.6 4
17.9 .5
17.1 .7
22.1 .4
15.4+ .4
10.4 .3
14.7 .2
17.1- .2
11.1 .2
8.64 .2
9.1-- .2


............
............


20
10
51
10
18
25
32
11
2
2






rM enicienciesof. the- Phosphates asf ound', Pby vrogotatiow
expressed relative to that of iwid phospha.e taken as 100.
the percentage.of total phosphoric acid a guano he
its,: efficien value and divided by 1007 ihe,JMtnA will, be:, Oarrl`q
centage of phosphoric acid in the. guano whi is av,
acid, phosphate. For example,. No. 321y kcont,44'ug. M47 per ow,
total phosphoric acid with an efficienq of'2 contains 3.911 per,
of phosphoric acid which is as available as, that: in' acid Phosphato,
14.47 per cent X 27
=3.91 per cent.
100 4
It will be noted that certain guanos were tested.several tbAes.
Some of these duplications were made to ga'i an idea 6f 'the "Curwy
of the work, others are due to the same guano's be" used in several-
tests of the effect of different conditions on efflelencileR.,
The efficiency of the phosphoric, acid iin the differe':nt'saioies teow
varied between 0- and 108. In respect to availabilityin a sandyooil;
some of the guanos are, therefore, as good as th6Iest fertilizers eairx"
ing, phosphoric acid, while others are practically wbrthless,- TnaNAt.
half the samples tested, the phosphoric acid had an io fficioncy, of 20 qr
more, which compares well withbone meal under. the. sa'me:.COUdAi04,
While A large part of the guanos must be considored:t phosphA*,`
fertilizers of low availability, nearly all were more effective thou
finely ground phosphate rock or floats.
Six samples of fresh or only slightly decomposed hat- manure were
tested, Nos. 472, 503, 751; 780y 881, and 977, The phosp6rie aeW
was of high efficiency in, all, ranging from 59 to 108, the a-yerage-beii*
84. In respectto efficiency (not quantity): of its phosphoric aeidvthe
fresh bat manure, therefore, ranks with the best phosphatic fevtil-
izers.
Efficiency of tU phosphoric acid as affedd 4 the, er9p.-AA J..' er-
ent crops are supposed to vary a their ability to utilize the slightly
soluble phosphates, the relative efficiency of different,: phbsphates.de-
pends. somewhat on the crop used as a test. In so me cases diflerent
efficiencies of phosphates f or different crops aredue to distinct second-
ary effects of the phosphates, as acidity or I basicity., 2--:This 10, every
is really a question of the interaction between son and pho S*phate
rather than between crop and phosphate.
When a quick-growmig crop requires considerable phosphoric acid,
one phosphate may be more effective than.au0ther because. it is more
I Determinatiops of efficiency of the same material repeated in different tests agre a very dloWy for tho
most part. In some cases lack of agreement was partially due to experimental errors. DiffereAces due tt6,
experimental errors, however, were probably small In most cases, as duplicate determinations m4de in thd-
same test agreed very closely. The larger varlaVlons, such as oodufted with bons Meg, -were doubtless ddO
to real differences in the efficiencies of the materials in the diffe=t lots of $o1l. WhilbthOSPAOtmofsoll,
was used In all the tests reported In Table VMM, different lots were sectired -1&, dlfterente'ipriments,, x6d
these lots of course varied somewhat In OharSeter.
2 The good effect of basic slag on clover has oiten been noted.




U31

tt soluble, that is, it supplies soluble phosphoric acid at. a faster rate.
Ff Without attempting a detailed discussion of a subject which still
S needs investigation, it may be pointed out that, whether or not
ji different crops have different powers of "feeding" on insoluble
II phosphates, it is well established that one phosphate may be much

More effective than another for a certain crop.
"'it'
I: Table IX has been compiled from the figures in Tables VIII and X
I to XV.
yU TABLE IX.-ffect of crop on the availability of phosphoric acid in guanos.


SEfficiency Efficiency
p of phos- of phos-
Source of phosphoric pho acid Source of phosphohoric acid
S acid (P0). Crop. compared acid(fp Crop. compared
with that of acid (Pe05). with that of
I: acid phos- acid phos-
phate= 100. phate= 100.
Guano No. 263..... Millet ........... 29 Guano No. 733.... Millet ........... 60
(Corn ------------ 29 iCorn ............ 68
ME.. Millet ........... 19 Gun N 7 Millet........... 6
Guano No. 497 ...... 13 Guano No. 5- Corn ............ .
ON:.. ............
C Millet. 2------ 3 .Millet ........... 77
GuanoNo. 498 ..... Guano No. 780--Milt7
Corn .......i 7Corn .......76
Mile ------j7Millet .....38
J Guano No. 501 ...... Corn ......... 17 Guano No. 785 ... Corn ............ 39
SMillet ----------- 9 M let........... 20
S Guano No. 502....... --Millet Guano No. 7978 ilet .......2
Corn- -- ............ 9. GCorn- ............ 18
Siua No.Mllet- --....... a9 5 Guano No. 810. Millet- ........... I
Guano No. 502-----Corn ............ 97...u iCorn ............ 18
Guano No. 504 Mllet...... Guano No. 811.. JMillet 1..
S GuCorn ............ a Corn ............ 14
Guan Millet 12 Guano No. 81. .... Iorn ...........
SuanoNo.50 Corn ............ 5Miilet ............
GumnoNo.507-----Millet 25 Floats o.. M n----------- -6
GunoNo 56 ... Corn ------------ a 30 G aoN .89 .. Corn ------------ a66
GMillet... 2 JMillet -------------.65
Guano No. 508 ................ a .. ......... .. orn .
Corn1 ----------------------------------------------- 7
{Millet Boema..... 4 (Millet ----------- a 29
Guano No. 509 ...... Corn ------------ a 3 Bone meal ......... Corn ----- 43
Sa Average from several determinations.

In the above table comparisons are given of the efficiencies of bone
meal, slag, floats, and 19 different guanos for corn and millet. In
50 per cent of the cases the difference between the efficiencies for
corn and millet was 3 or less, the average for the efficiencies of the
22 samples being 27 for millet and 29 for corn. It is therefore
apparent that the guanos are equally effective for corn and millet.
The effectiveness of guanos for rice was also tried, but as the
Growth of rioe was increased only 20 per cent by abundant phos-
phoric acid, few efficiencies could be calculated. Guanos Nos. 502,
505, 506, and 508 showed no availability for rice in this test. In
this same lot of soil, the growth of corn was increased 300 per cent
by phosphatic fertilization and the same guanos which had no
availability for rice had a very low availability or none for corn.
This test demonstrates how much less rice responds to phosphatic
fertilization than corn and shows no greater ability in rice to utilize
insoluble phosphates than in corn or millet.



































Source of phosphoric acid
(P2OO.)


No phosphate..... .......
Acid phosphate..-----------
Do.-.....................
Do..-........-..--...
Do................
Basic slag..--...-.-----..
Bone meal...................
.Floats........................
Guano No. 917...........
=uanO No. 9M.............- .
Guano No. 936m.........
Guano No. 957...........
Guano No. 96f6A-............
Guano No. 977...............
Guano No. 981...............
Guano No. 982...............


Phos-
phoric
acid
applied
per
pot.


Oven-dry yield of individual pbt*.


An1,0

y24s3
erro.


I -II -' C


0.40
.80
1.28
L92
1.60
3.00
8.00
2.00
3.50
&350
250
3100
1.30
6.00
1.60


Grams.
.n.6
26.9
34.3
53.8
57.2
4a 5
38.5
26.7
1U.1
28.8
47.5
41.1
31.0
43.5
19.5
30.9


Grams.
132.5
26.9
42.7
4a9s
5as5
48.1
37.3
21.3
12.0
30.4
47.7
41.6
31.0
44.2
.17.8
29.4


RED CLAY (41 LBS. DRY SOIL PER POT,


No .hshate................
Ad phosphate...............

Do......................
Baidag....................
Bone meal........ .......
Basi ...: ...... .....
S Gano No..917..............
Guam No.. .; -- ....._...--.
Guano No. 936..: ...........
GuaoNo. 967...........
Guano No. 966A..............
Guano No. 977...............
Guano No. 981..............
GOano No. 98 ...............


.40
.80
1.28
1.92
1.60
3.00
Lo00
2.00
3.50
3.50
2.50
3.00
1.30
6.00
L.OG


12.2
42..7
53.5
67.8
71.9
60.9
57.5
54.8
9.3
85,7
66.3
46.9
42.5
65.2
55.8
54.5


16.2
42.0-
47.8
-55.9
7M.6
66.5
65.5
15.7
53as
62.2
47.8
43.5
6310
58.9
6S3


Grams.
8.2
25.1
35.6
4a 3
57.9
47.8
36.0
18.2
14.0
28.0
4a 0
39.6
33.0
40.2
17.2
30.1


Grew.
1.1
27.0
39.5
47.0
60.5
42.7
,34.8
18.2
18.6
30.0
52.7
43.2
35.5
46.3
19:.8
30.7


Gream
13.3


..- -I. t
.1** ..


*.5 .3-**"


.*26.6*.3
7+1.2fS
a& I*:
4837L3



*6.3* .4
21.11 .5

3.4* .7
43.6+ .8
I1.6.4
30.3+ .2


*-M-






-mA
;.I* j,.:*,...:y.


S.


: '- 3.
.^.U,
~. &J'- '


------ r --,-u 4flt-;. ,
WATER CONTENT 25 PER.iTlIk*CI


15.4 18 17.7 15.4*8.4 -
43.5 &TML4 .,l :
45.7 55.1 ........ 5 akiT6
U4 59.6 ty 41J4f 4;
65.9 77.8 72.3*1.6,-----*
6L 2, (G ..,.5.Mej |2f ^; n .*
71.9 60. 6 --.6. ll ;
TaS .-38.0 .... ...te f> 'f l W -ll
14.9 22.1 ..... 1. T
53.7 51.0 ...-.... aS~lt .r 'b| r.., ::
65.5 77.4 ........ 67.91%,2
50.4 44d2. 3: ., 44.6&42 1. j* W
u8.9 A&s 45. o-o 2.a
51.38 5645 ... ... 2 .H,
64.8 59.5 81.2
04i 57.: ..f.s 5L1:ii .0 ij*: ^
__ I ..


A summary of all data which show the efficiekncs of the dsMrewi
materials as affected by the kind of Mol is :inn inTable XI. k

fires given in this tabk are amrages of th6 efficiducnsis e'tf
different materials as given in Tables VIII, X, and XIII- 'aLi:lri




.. ....




33


STABLE XI.-Effect of soil on immediate availability of phosphoric acid in guanos.
I
Efficiency ofphosphoric, Difference
acid in- between
Differencee efficiency
------------Difference ^
I between in clay
Source of phosphoric acid (P20s). efficiency and sand
Red clay Sandy in clay and expressed
Red clay S in sand. as per-
soil. soi. centageof
i efficiency
in sand.

P(r cent.
Guano No. 797A---.......-----..-----------....---------------- 50' 5 +45 + 900
G uano N o. 851...--------. --- ----....-...-......--- -----..------------ 48 "16 + 32 + 200
GuanoNo.917....-----......-.-----...---.....-----..-------------- 0 3 3 100
GuanoNo.928 --...-----.......----------......-------------------.... 26 14 +12 -+- 86
Guano No.936...-------.....---------...........-------------------- 47 36 +11 + 31
GuanoNo.957 ...----------.........-----------..--------------- 31 a34 3 9
GuanoNo.966A..........-----------------------------------..... 26 20 + 6 + 30
Guano No. 966B.... ----------------------------------- 29 8 +21 + 263
Guano No. 975........................................ ------------------------------------50+ 4 +46 +1,150
SGuano No. 977 ..-..--..-------..-----....--------------------- 89 V94 5 5
Guano No. 981---------...........-.......-----...----------....---------- 20 3 +-17 + 567
Guano No. 982 ------------------------------------................................... 65 33 +32 + 97
Slag ....................-------------------------------------------......... 75 "a 68 + 7 + 10
Bone meal..----.. -------.. -------.-----..--------------..... 1 53 "31 +22 + 71
Floats ......................-- ............-...--- --.......----- ....---. 23 a 4 +19 + 450

a Average from several determinations.

Guanos Nos. 917, 957, 966A, and 977 were no more or only slightly
more, effective in clay than in sand, while all other guanos were far
more effective in clay. In some cases guanos of such low availability
in the sand as to be practically worthless were highly efficient fertili-
zers in the clay. Relative to acid phosphate, basic slag had about
the same efficiency in clay as in sand, while bone meal and floats were
much more efficient in the clay.
It should be considered in judging these results that the efficiencies
were measured against acid phosphate, that is, they were relative,
not absolute. The increased efficiency of some of the phosphates in
the clay soil may therefore be due to a depression in the effective-
ness of the acid phosphate, or an increase in the effectiveness of
the other phosphate, or a combination of the two changes. Which
of these changes occurred does not affect the choice of what phosphate
to use on a certain soil although it is important for a knowledge of
the reactions of the soil.
Efficiency of the phosphoric acid as affected by remaining in the
soil.-Certain phosphates are supposed to become more available
through various reactions in the soil. Thus finely-ground rock phos-
phate is supposed to be more effective after it has remained in the soil
for a period than it is when applied immediately to the crop.1 As
nearly all guanos contain most, or a large part, of their phosphoric
acid in a form which is not immediately available, it was important

I Numerous investigators, including P. Wagner, have not been able to establish this, while others have.
Possibly the nature of the soil is the determining factor, although some affirmative conclusions have
been based on inadequate data.
55016-18---5


















No. 213 (45 pounds dry soil per pot with a water content. oftSI
N.F.." .. i : 24:

cent), 30 plants per pot lieing grown from October 12 to N.
23, 1915, with a basic fertilizer consisting of 8.4 grams sodium init
6 grams ammonium sulphate, and 8 grams potassium sulphas-te.P-ii:
pot given in two applications. i,
For the test in Table XIII, millet was grown in red clay, 38p hi
dry soil per pot with a moisture content of 33 jer cent. The pLen i
28 to the pot, were grown'from May 10-to June 26, 1916, wit ta-
application immediately before planting of a basic fertilizer dA
sisting of 6.3 grams sodium nitrate, 4.5 grams ammonium sulpb|e, i
and 6 grams potassium sulphate per pot. .- I..
.i .' ""EE. .-7 | >. -E :.. :.
*~~~~~~~ ,..* ay
-. *- :* .


41 ./:
*/ ,^ : :::
..-.* ':. i-' ,

S .: ... *:
:- ,. .:.. .:..,1 :. .. ^




Ii
.. ..
"' -. "? *.^



J:' :-. : !i|







'ii



S .:E *







TABLE XII.-Effect.of remaining in the soil on the availability of phosphoric acid in guanot.


Source of pbosphorio
acid (P2O5).


No phosphate........
Acid phosphate......
Do...............
Do. .. ..........
Do...............
Bone meal...........
Guano No. 797A.....
Guano No. 811A.....
Floats................
Guano No. 842A......
Guano No. 860.......
Guano No. 889.......
Guano No. 923.......


Phos-
phoric
acid ap-
plied per
pot.


Grams.
0.40
.80
1.40
2.10
2.10
2.98
4.12
8.00
1.62
3.20
3.20
3.20


Phosphates applied to soil 6 weeks before planting.


___________________________________________________ __________ -- I


Oven-dry yield of individual pots.


I 7


Grams.
33.0
48.1
62.5
76.6
83.9
- 59.5
62.4
53.5
43.1
45.9
71.4
54.5
43.2


Grams.
33.7
49.1
56.8
70. 4
77.8
60.9
66.6
56.3
46.2
53.1
66.3
50.8
40.5


Grams.
31.4
48.8
65.0
78.1
87. 1
65.3
62.1
55.7
44.5
55.9
73.3
50.4
43.2


Grams.
37.3
43.5
56.9
76.7
82.1
62.5
59.5
52.2
43.5
57.4
70.4
53.3
40.4


Grams.
27.1
46.3
60.3
70. 7
77.9
60.5
61.5
55.9
46.3
56.1
62.9
51.7
37.8


Average
oven-dry
yield and
probable
error.


Grams.
32.5 1.1
47.1 .6
60.31 1
74.51 1
81.81. 2
61.7 .7
62.4 .8
54.7 .5
44.7 .5
53. 7 1. 4
68.91.3
52.1 .5
41.0 .7


Efficiency
of phos-
phoric acid
as com-
pared with
that of acid
phosphate
applied at
the same
time.


Efficiency
of phos-
phoric acid
as com-
pared with
that of acid
phosphate
applied im-
mediately
before
planting.


Phosphates applied to soil immediately before planting.


Oven-dry yield of individual pots.


__________________I I-____________-___________


40
30
15
4
37
36
17
7


21
15
8
2
19
20
11
6


Grams.
36.0
59.3
74.9
87.7
82.8
69.6
72.3
65.1
49.5
64.1
67. 7
62.0
50.1


Grams.
33.7
62.5
75.7
87.7
83.8
63.9
75.4
63.1
46.7
59.2
69.3
58.9
48.2


Grams. Grams.


33.9
59.9
73.4
81.9
87.1
59.9
68.3
58.0
55.4
59.5
73.7
53.8
45.5


32.2
57.4
75.4
83.3
85.6
61.6
69.4
54.0
48.8
52.7
68.5
53.7
45.7


Grams.
35.9
61.9
78.2
81.4
92.9
63.0
74.0
56.1
47.9
52.5
61.1
56.2
43.9


Average
oven-dry
yield and
probable
error.


Grams.
34.30.5
60.2 .6
75.5 .5
84.4 .9
86.4+1.2
63.61.1
71.9 .9
59.31.4
49.71.0
57.61.5
68.11.4
56.91.1
46.7 .7


Efficiency
of phos-
phoric acid
as com-
pared with
that of acid
phosphate
applied at
the same
time.


24
9
3
22
19
11
6







TABEXII.-fec oflm nteaalbltyo hshrcai ngansapid6weso mmdaeybfr lnig
i-==,, N O .......
Phosphatesi~i applied.... tosi eesbfr patn.Phshtsaple osoli mdatl eoe lnig
Efiiec
Efficiencyiiiii of pos fficenc
=Piiios-i ofi phos-= iiiiiiiii acidofiiis
Source of ii phosphoic phrcAeaeiiicai a o-Aeag h cai
acid~ (P20i6).iiiiiiiiiiil acidiiiiii ovndyaio-iae ihoe-dy 1 scm
aplid Ovndriiedofidiiuaipt.iildadiaedwthiatofaidOiiiyiildoiidviuaiot.yiliadiie wih
per pot.iiiiriiiiiiiithiiiiiiiiciiiphiiiiiiiiiiioiiiiii tiaiiiof acid
iiiiiiierror.iiphosphateiiiappliediiierror.iiiphosphatei
aple at' imm- ppie a
the sae daeytesm
tie beoe ie
plnig

Grm.Gas rm.Grm.Gas rm. Gam.Gas rm.Gas.Gas rm. Gas




No hoshat. 1.4 2.8 10. 118 1.4 2.0 0.4 ......... ......... 0.1 10. 120 1.3 2.3 11.110 3 ........






Acdp osh t ... "0 44 335 2.0 2. 1. 10 1. ...... ....... 3. 3. 38 84 364 3---. ......





37

TAiL XIV.-Efect of remaining in the soil on the availability of the phosphoric acid
h o of guanos.
i**

Efficiency of phosphoric acid in
S, guanos compared with that of
acid phosphate= 100. Gain or
Gain ( +)or
S----------loss (-) in
efficiency
Source of-phosphoric acid Kndof sil Guanos ed b y
(PhOs). Kind of soil. Both Both applied caused niby
applied applied six weeks siamg
six weeks just before,acid six weeks
befnre btfnrA nhnnhatn in soil.


SGuano No. 797A..................
Do: .........................
Do..........................
Guano No. 811A.................
Guano No. 842A..................
Guano No. 851. ..................
Do..........................
Guano No. 860................... I
Guano No. 889....................
Guano No. 923....................
Guano TNo. 966B.................
Do............... .....
Guano No. 975 ...---.......-.......
Do............................
Guano No. 977...................
Do..........................
Bone meal.........................
Do...........................
Do ..........................
floats.........................
Do..........................
Do ...........................


Sand.............
Clay.--.......--..
Clay, limed.......
Sand.............
.....do ............
Clay.............
Clay, limed......
Sand.............
.....do............
.....do...........
Clay..............
Clay, limed.......
Clay .............
Clay, limed...-....
Clay.............
Clay, limed .......
Sand.............
Clay.............
Clay, limed.......
Sand ..............
Clay ...............
Clay, limed..


planting.


I I


30
57
39
15
37
50+
25
36
17
7
27
27
50+
13
111
88
40
100+
38
4
40+
3


planting.


24
50
30
9
22
48
15
19
11
6
29
23
50+
5
69
23
57
22
3
29
1


just before
planting.

15
37
27
8
19
50+
17
20
II
6
25
18
50+
9
80
58
21,
84
25
2
40+
3


- 9
-13
-3
-1
-3
+ 2+
+2
+ 1
0
0
-4
-5
0
+ 4
-11
--2
+27
1+ 3
--1
+11+
+2


The third column in Table XIV gives the efficiencies


of the guanos


relative to acid phosphate when all materials were added to the soil
six weeks before planting, and the fourth column gives the efficiencies
when materials were added immediately before planting. It will be
noted that relative to acid phosphate nearly all guanos were more
effective when applied six weeks before planting than they were when
applied immediately before planting. This does not show that the
.absolute availability of the guanos and other phosphates was in-
creased by remaining in the soil, as the greater efficiency relative to
acid phosphate may be merely due to a depression in the availability
of acid phosphate produced by remaining in the soil. The fifth
column elucidates this.
In the fifth column, efficiencies of guanos, bone meal, and floats,
added to the soil six weeks before planting, are compared with those
of acid phosphate applied immediately to the crop. The values in
the fifth column should be greater than those in the fourth, if the
availability of the other phosphates has really been increased (rather
than that of acid phosphate depressed) by remaining in the soil. As
a matter of fact, most of the materials lost in efficiency by remaining
in the soil, although they lost less than acid phosphate. In the sixth
column is shown the amount the materials actually gained or lost in
efficiency by remaining in the soil.






The: romult Mi Table XTV show that when gwwos ip*"
m the, soil, the availability of the-hbsphoric aci(I is sli&tly
in others slightly increased, and in raost guanos very little
Me availability of bone meal and floats was quite markedly
by roonaim*g in the Iay and very little deprosed in the sand.,
1h the red clay the favorable 'or unf vorable effect of
Wthe. soil Was more. aarked tha4 M' fle san4.
IA the ied clay tended: to diminish the increase or deemaso
availability produced by reimaining in.. the soil.
Efficiency of the pho8phoric acid as afeded by liming.-It has booa,
shown -by Priani nikov I and Wheeler 2 that the efficiencles of bnA4jt
phosphates are notably affected by--libain& while -othes -a"'.-put
slightly affected. Obviopsly the degree. to which. avAilahM6w Vf
affected depends somewhat on the nature of .the soil and the
of time the phosphates remain in the soil before they are.. aPATta
by the crop.
To gainsome idea of how bat guanos. ve affected by finfiM
efficiencies of bone meal, floats, slag, and 11 guanos-were cotap-4,1i-l'
wi th thoset of acid phosphate in limed and unlimed red eJ ay and 0 OL
sand. Detailed results of the tests are given in Tables XIII and
a summary of the results in Table XVT..
For the test in Table XV, millet plants were grown 30 to the pot
inrivpr sand No, 213 (41 pounds drk'. soil -per pot with a. watercon,." f
tent of 18 per cent) 77he crop was prq4uced 'from -Aupst 17 to
.0 ... 6
*th a b fertilizer oonwtmg 0 8A Pr
September 29, 19161 wi asic f
sodium nit-rate, 6 grams axamonium sulphLe, an grams
sulphate per polgiven in two Pplic'ations.
1 20 .v, D. #ber den Einflussvoia Ralk auf die "kmag NOW vwebio"w
Phospliatau loondw. Ver& Stat., 75 (1911) No. 4-6, pp.. =-3701. Ind'u' s
2Wbw1erH.J. After-effects ofeertdn pbospates onlimed and unUmed 1n wr Und
Chem, 2 (1910)i No. 4J, pp. 133-IS&

















'I It






39


TABLE XV.-Effect of lime on availability of phosphoric acid in guanos.
N LIME.
NO LIME.


Source of phosphoric
acid (P205).


No phosphate.........
Acid phosphate.........
Do....-.......-..---
Do.........-..-.--.-
Do..................
Bone meal.............
Moats...................
Baic slag...............
Guano No. 811A.........
Guano No. 842-.........
Guano No. 851..........
Guano No. 860..........
Guano No. 889 .........
Guano No. 923.........
Guano No. 957 .........
Guano No. 966B.........
Guano No. 977........


Phos-
phoric
acid
applied
per
pot.


Gm.

0.40
.80
1.40
2.10
3.00
8.00
1.00
6.00
3.00
4.50
3.00
5.00
7.00
2.00
3.00
1.00


Oven-dry yield of individual pots.



a


Average
oven-dry
yield and
probable
error.


Efficiency
of phos-
phoric
acid
as com-
pared
with
that
of acid
phos
tein
e same
soil.


E7 I I I


am.
38.3
58.2
70.0
80.6
90.0
73.9
50.1
59.6
54.7
63.2
6&82
76.6
66.1
52.6
59.6
50.5
72.3


Gm.
42.1
52.2
69.9
70.5
87.0
66.7
53.3
60.4
64.3
68.4
70.1
72.4
68. 0
46.9
69.1
49.0
75.2


Gm.
42.1
55.8
64.3
88.1
89.9
74.7
48.9
63.8
62.8
65.4
71.2
65.0
62.5
50.8
60.6
50.1
64.9


am.
41.9
54.7
71.6
75.5
85.6
68.6
54. 9
56.5
60.2
61.9
61.9
64.1
60.6
51.4
62.3
49.6
74.3


Gm.
37.3
59.5
73.3
66.2
90.1
65.7
62.7
65.0
42.8
58.9
71.1
61.3
59.7
49.4
54.9
50.8
66.1


am.
41.5
52.5
66.3
73.4
88.3
7a 3
73.3
59.1
66.5
62.9
64.0
66.8
72.3
69.8
..:. I


am.
40.40.6
55.5 .8
69.2 .9
75.72.1
88.5 .5
70.51.1
54.81.4
62.01.0
58. 02. 3
63.6 .9
68.2-1.0
68.&6-1.6
64.51.1
50.2 .7
61.31.5
50. 0 .2
70.61.3


AIR-SLAKED LIME, 10 GRAMS PER POT.


No phosphate..........
Acid phosphate.........
Do.................
Do.................
Do.................
Bone meal..............
Floats ...................
Basic slag...............
Guano No. 811A........
Guano No. 842.........
Guano No. 851.........
Guano No. 860.........
Guano No. 889..........
Guano No. 923.........
Guano No. 957..........
Guano No. 966B.........
Guano No. 977..........


Efficiency
of phos-
phates
and
guanos
in limed
soil com-
pared
with that
of acid
phos-
phate in
unlimed
soil.


31.......... .........


5. ........
59. ........
... ...... .........
... 21...... .......


17 ... .... ...
3126 .........
13........
4 .........
29 ...........
821 .........
26 .........
13 ......... .
4 ..... .....
29 ..........
8 ..........
93 ..........
*


0.40
.80
1.40
2.10
3.00
8.00
1.00
6.00
3.00
4.50
3.00
5.00
7.00
2.00
3.00
1.00


36.3
49.5
55.8
74.6
77.2
38.0
39.1
50.8
61.2
45.1
53.5
36.9
41.6
50.1
57.4
43.9
54.8


34.7
53.2
62.9
73.2
79.4
43.8
38.8
47.7
57.4
33.4
55.7
43.3
46.6
50.1
62.7
49.1
57.3


39.3
51.2
48.3
69.2
81.2
40.6
33.4
50.9
60.2
36.2
49.6
40.2
39.4
47.3
64.7
54.1
51.1


42.9
46.9
59.7
70.0
73.9
45.5
37.8
48.6
65.9
42.3
48.6
40.6
42.0
47.7
59.4
51.0
54.0


22.3
46.9
62.5
81.7
76.8
55.4
36.8
56.8
61.7
43.6
57.7
42.7
47.8
51.6
63.7
53.4
57.2


43.8
49.7
62.3
84.1
80.9
46.3
45.7
57.7
59.3
44.3
57.2
46.2
47.6
45.8
66.7
37.5
54.6


36.62.1
49.6 .7
58.61.6
75.51.7
78.&2 .8
44.91.6
38.&61.1
52.11.1
61.0 .8
40.81.3
53.71.1
41.7 .9
44.21.0
48.8 .6
62. 4 .9
48.21.7
54.8 .6


........

0
31
9
0
8
0
2
3
30
7
38


9
1
51
15
4
13
5
5
6
47
12
63



















































were depressed less by liming than the efficiency of acid phosphate.
while the efficiencies of bone meal, floats, and .all other guanos weri
depressed to a much greater extent than that of acid phosphate.
The efficiencies of slag and acid phosphate were affected aboiut..
equally. '
~

.... ** '!





41


r In regard to absolute gain or loss in availability (comparison of
values in third and fifth columns), it can be seen that guanos Nos.
811A, 923, 957, and 966B were practically unaffected by liming;
while all other guanos, together with bone meal, floats, and slag,
suffered moderate to extreme losses in availability.
Liming decreased the efficiency of the phosphates more in the red
clay than in the sand. This was due to the fact that certain materials
have an enhanced availability in the acid clay (see Table XI). The
degree to which liming affects the efficiency of phosphates thus de-
pends largely on the nature of the soil as well as on the character of
the phosphate.
The influence of lime on the efficiencies of phosphates applied to
the soil six weeks before planting was pointed out on page 38.
Effect of quantity of guano used on efficiency of the phosphoric
aid.-In the preceding tests some of the guanos had a very low
availability, only 2 to 10 per cent of that of acid phosphate. It
was expected that the availability of such materials would be inde-
pendent of the quantity used in the experiment; nevertheless this
point was tested, as it is of considerable practical importance. If
the availability of the materials is independent of the quantity
used, then a maximum effect can be secured if a sufficient quantity
is used.
Table VIII affords detailed results of tests of several different
quantities of the same guano, summarized results being given in
Table XVII.
Ke
TABLE XVII.-Effect of quantity of guano used on immediate availability of phosphoric
acid in guanos.

SEfficiency Efficiency
of phos- of phos-
Phosphoric phonic Src p acid Phosphoric phoric acid
S eof hosphorc acid ad applied compa Suc Of ) acid applied compared
|iO6). per pot. with that of 2 per pot. with that of
acid phos- acid phos-
phate==100. phate=100.

Grams. Grams.
S 3.6 2 1.2 39
Guano No. 508 .73........... 14.4 1 GanoNo.734............ 1.8 36
f 3.6 2 -oN 7 .. 2.7 39
7.29 3 1 4.05 45
Guano No. 509 ............ 14.4 3 Floats .................... 6.00 7
28.8 2 ...................18.0 4

Where availabilities varied with the quantity of guano applied,
the differences were within the limits of experimental error. The
results as a whole show that the availability of the guanos is main-
tained when large amounts are used and, therefore, if applied in
Sufficient quantity, they will produce the same increased yield as
I, commercial phosphates.





42,

OnV qf the p7wsphorie acidew'd
tU ,'Pov.--An. iiiteinpt wa.4 made to,,det&,iA-h6 *h;oth4 ho t
w e qys y cient ph' atit,
osph fertffizbm, at t all a" bf thid
*tho It might he thought that tl4e wbie nft*AHjib161
would. be more efficknt'dining the later Aages of plant'growth;
ihe' root system is moTe d 6 -tha during earW g,6wth,,'f' Li
The officioncies 4 bone meal'and se*en gnanos, were, Woe& t At"
to acid phosphate'with millet grown 31,41.: iLnd,: 5 1 d, 0 ih toi
grown 39 and 55 days. River sand 13 wi. waler otito&V4,
No 2 Mth c,
18 per' cent w'as U sedy 46 poun& dry, soil P& potfor tN*:.eoi*j 4V
the'millet crops. The corn was grown from February 2 to Man* 201
1915,Ahonulletfrom'July4toAn t2411.915. --ki.-31.dAys4,he`hA`'
of millt were just appewihg, MAI days:iA6eds.Vftre f6kniiiig hqt, v
not fully, ripe' and at 51 diiys the ds the plant
see were ripe, an&
mencing io dry. Te 'corn commenced to, show: prono-unwd joiln
39 days (after transplanthig'Seedlings to: pot's) ajid ixt 55 dapf
werebut on many plant. In order- that plants grown, 55.,1 aywo&
not be restricted in growth by fhe- 'size of the poC more than-thoo'
grown 39 days, four seedlings to a, pot, were plant6d in- thef,,304
series and 2 seedlingsto a pot in the 55--Aay.senog, *hil.B,29, miWt
plantsvere grown per pot for all three tests. Regults.W the Usis
are given in Table XVIII.
TAIRLE XV11 I.-Bfect of p.c*d of qrowth of crop qn the immediate availabily j1,
p StA07* 16t6& iA
ho', guanos.
CORN GROWN 39 DAYS.

rhos-
phoric Average
Source of phos- acid Basic fertilizer Oven-dry yield of individual 0yen-,dry as MM"
oncld
ph yeld n
(P'O p1d ble
'a applied per pot. pro ): P""
error. th ol
PAr.

Gm. Gm Gin. Oit. Gm. Gm. am.
No phosphate ..... ........ 11.2 6.3 6,9 8.9 5.9
Acid osphate. 0.30 Sodium nitrate, IM 16.9 13.4 18.7 9.5 15.41.1 ............
DI! ........... .60 8.4'gm.; am- 28.8 32.5 37.2 33A 21.7 30-8j--1-8
Do. .......... .90 monium chlorid., 56.2 34.1 49.3 M; 8 46.6 47.2-12.,5
Do ............ 1.35 5.3 gUL; potas- 169.2, 68.9 61.1 WS 61.2 64.10 L 4 .......
Do. 2.03 sium phates, 86.1 86.6 8C 3 87.4 89.6 86-8+ 6 ..............
Guano 2.40 8 gm., "T two 42A 37.1 44.4 M- 0 30-8 37.61.1
Guano No. 1.40 applications. 63.1 61.1 S& 1 64.1 0. 1:kz
Guano No. 504.. 10-00 9-9: 6.71 9 8.2 8.3db .4
Guano No. 507..' ... 3.0011 t 50.2 47.01 41: 50.2. 45.1 46-011.1 30'
1101









%*







43


TABLE XVIII.-Effect of period of growth of crop on the immediate availability of the
phosphoric acid in guianos-Continued.

CORN GROWN 55 DAYS.


Source of phos-
phoric acid
(P,0).


No phosphate.....
Acid phosphate....

Do............
Do...........
Do............

Do...........

Guano No.500.....
Guano No. 5 ....

Guano No. 504.....
Guano No. 507.....


Phos-
phoric
acid
ap-
plied
per
pot.


Gm.

0.30
.60

.90

1.35
2.03

2.40
1.40
10.00

3.00


Basic fertilizer
applied per pot.


Sodium nitrate,
8.4 gmn.; am-
monium chlorid,
5.3 gm.; potas-
sium sulphate,
8 gmn.; in two
applications.


Oven-dry yield of individual
pots.


Gm.
25.4
34.4
57.1
43.5
100.1
84.7
104.2
87.7
118.6
121.3
144.0
151.6
68.0
68.9
94.0
107.6
25.0
30.7
107.7
94.2


am.
33.4
18.6
37.4
47.7
79.7
83.0
117.9
86.4
146.6
127.6
147.4
142.6
82.4
108.0
82.8
122.6
35.2
23.1
86.5
107.9


Gm.
20.8
29.7
31.8
60.2
87.6
69.5
100.3
99.0
144.0
107.7
167.1
145.0
100.4
95.7
125.9
105.0
31.5
21.8
105.6
102.2


Gm.
20.2
26.0
57.0
46.6
84.8
68.2
108.4
112.0
103.5
130.7
140.6
160.4
100.0
85.6
122.5
110.4
38.5
14.4
89.4
91.0


am.
24.6
19.8
49. G
29.3
96. 0
65.4
102.3
92.2
119.3
126.4
171.9
167.6
114.1
69.2
117.0
100.5
27.8
18.5
95.9
78.4


Average
oven-dry
yield and
probable
error.


Efficiency
of phos-
phoric acid
Sas com-
pared with
that of
acid phos-
phate =100.


Gm. i
25.31.2 ...........
46.02.0 ..........
81.92.6 ............
101.02.2 ...........

124.62.9 ............
153.82.5 ............
89.23.6 30
108.82.9 74
26.71.6 0
96.92.1 28


MILLET GROWN 13 DAYS.


No phosphate............. 7.8 10.6 10.0 10.3 9.0 9.50.3............
Acid phosphate.- 0.30 19.6 20.0 16.6 19.7 18.2 18.8 .4 ............
Do ............ .60 Sodium nitrate, 24.5 26.7 26.3 27.6 23.5 25.7 .5...........
Do ....--........ .90 8.4gm.;ammon- 31.2 27.3 30.5 28.8 26.9 28.9 6 ............
Do-........... 1.35 ium sulphate, 30.4 33.3 32.8 32.8 29.5 31.8 5............
Do ............ 2.03 6 gin.; potas- 33.6 36.0 33.3 32.8 27.1 32.61.0...........
Guano No. 499A... 3.20 slum sulphate, 20.1 23.8 24.6 26.4 22.4 23.5- 16
Guano No. 503A... 1.40 8 gmn.; in two 27.2 29.2 29.8 31.6 28.7 29.3 .5 70
Guano No. 505A... 8.00 applications. 18.4 17.5 15.6 18.0 15.0 16.9 .5 3
Bone meal......... 3.00 30.0 29.0 28.4 25 3 29.8 28.5 .6 29
Guano No. 818 .... 3.20 28.4 30.3 28.1 29.6 24.4 28.2 .7 26


MILLET GROWN 41 DAYS.


No phosphate .............. 22.3 19.7 21.0 18.4 22.2 20.70.5 ............
Acid phosphate... 30 32.9 33.1 35.7 34.9 34.3 34.2 .4...........
Do............. .60 Sodium nitrate, 41.1 43.0 44.0 38.9 45.8 42.6 .8............
Do ............. .90 8.4 gin.; ammo- 47.6 51.9 50.3 56.0 47.0 50.61.1............
Do ............. 1.35 nium sulphate,6 57.1 61.1 54.0 51.1 60.7 56.81.3............
Do ............. 2.03 gin.; potassium 58.1 62.7 58.4 61.3 52.4 58.61.1 ............
GuanoNo. 499A... 3.20 sulphate.8 gm.; 37.0 40.0 41.7 47.4 32.3 37.71.1 13
GuanoNo. 503A... 1.40 in two applica- 43.0 49.4 41.9 53.4 46.7 46.91.4 54
GuanoNo. 505A... 8.00 tions. 29.3 31.4 28.8 34.4 ...... 31.0 .8 3
Bonemeal......... 3.00 52.7 53.1 45.2 53.9 48.6 50.71.1 31
GuanoNo. 818..... 3.20 49.7 46.8 48.9 43.7 48.4 47.5- .7 25


MILLET GROWN 51 DAYS.


No phosphate .............. 44.2 34.9 44.6 40.2 42.0 41.21.1 ............
Acid phosphate .... .30 60.7 49.4 55.9 54.1 46.1 53.21.7 ............
Do............. .60 Sodium nitrate, 63.6 63.0 57.5 62.7 63.1 62.0 .8 ............
Do ............. .90 8.4 gin.; amino- 63.2 63.2 68.9 68.1 61.3 64.91.0............
Do ............. 1.35 niumsulphate,6 73.3 65.9 69.3 77.0 79.1 72.91.6............
Do ............. 2.03 gin.; potassium 88.0 78.8 90.2 92.5 79.7 85.81.9 ............
GuanoNo. 499A... 3.20 sulphate, 8gin.; 58.0 54.8 58.0 57.6 60.0 57.7- .5 14
Guano No. 503A... 1.40 in two applica- 65.6 65.2 66.9 66.0 69.4 66.6 .5 71
Guano No. 505A... 8.00 tions. 48.2 44.7 48.7 51.9 50.8 48.9 .9 3
Bonemeal......... 3.00 69.1 69.0 73.7 77.5 75.0 72.91.1 45
Guano No. 818..... 3.20 67.1 65.2 60.4 72.0 69.7 66.91.3 32





44
It be: noted
oes the 4oreell"
dLincies deter=m;ed -a' tu, vaAbug "Stages of growth was remark
close. The sl*-ht differenom: that vcemrted wem within the limit-'s
expefiraental error in all cases except tho of bone meal.
greater efficiency of bone meal at the 51-day'than at: the 31-daystW
of'the millet crop is probably not due tb the. fwt. that b one'ra* ia'.,
more, avaiNble to mille t duringr thd la ages of growth, u,,,
rather to the fact that the availability of bon- e meal Jis not decreas4d
by its remahining in the soil while that of acid phosphate is, decreasM
(see'p. 54).' The difference m. efficiency of bone meal ot M e
periods in the growth.of millet is) therefore, due, to:. the wtion of ths
soil rather than to 6at of the.orop,
So -far as assimilation by the crop is concerned, the guanos seenvto-
be as efficient during the' early 'growth of the plant as. during the
later growth. Some duriiag tho lattpr gpo-Wth :of loing t' -a
crops, may show an Mcreased availability relative to wid p
due'to a smaller loss.of availability M': the guanos on rem in,", J
soil.
Citrate 8olubility ag a measure qf the awa$*Wle phovhofix a64 1'0 -&a
guanos.-Chemical anAlyses and vegetation- -tests conducted with 921
different samples of guano afford data for judging the reliability Of
the citrate method for detl available phosphoric acid in bat
guanos and leached bird guanos. in Table XEK is shown theppr.
centage of total phosphorip, acid in the guano available by the ditrufa
method and aJso the immediate efficiency of the total -Vhosphoric
acid relative tothat of acid phosphate as determined by a vege6i'len
test in a sandy soil. As the phosphoric acid of the acid phosph&W
2
was all available, the figures for efficiencieg in the vegetation too*
also sh Ow the percentage of the total phosphorip acid in the
which was available.
In Table XILX, the figures for efficiencies by vegetation tests am in
many cases averages of the values obtained in several different U*A
with the same guano. They all represent tests, however, of theimme-
diate efficiency of the phosphoric acid in. sandy sQ with corzi
millet. The results in Table XIX were compiled from: portiona of
Tables IV, V111y X, XII., ahd XVIII.
I It should be bome in mind that efficiencies are expressed relative to that of acid phosphate..
3 Acid phosphate was used in the tests on the basis of-the content of available phosphoric acid, not tuawd
phosphoric add.





45


TABLE XIX.-- rate solubility compared with vegetation tests as a measure of the availa-
bility of the phosphoric acid in guanos.


Source of phosphoric acid
(P205).


Guano No. 263...........
Guano No. 263A........
Guano No. 321............
Guano No. 374--....---....
Guano No. 375--..........
Guano No. 376...........
Guano No. 415...........
Guano No. 447............
Guano No. 458 ..--.....
Guano No. 460............
Guano No. 472...........
Guano No. 472A...--.....
Guano No. 497............
Guano No. 498........
GuaIno No. 499............
Guano No. 499A..........
Guano No. 500........
Guano-No. 500A ..........
Guano No. 501............
Guano No. 502............
Guano No. 503............
Guano No. 5A03 ..........
Guano No. 504..........
Guano No. 505..--......
Guano No. 505A..........
Guano No. 506...........
Guano No. 507........----
Guano No. 508............
Guano No. 509............
Guano No. 733............
Guano No. 734...........
Guano No. 750 ...........
Guano No. 751...........
Guano No. 780...........
Guano No. 784....--..---
Guano No. 785..........
Guano No. 790.........
Guano No. 793-.........
Guano No. 796--....--..-..
Guano No. 797............
Guano No. 797A........
Guano No. 798............
Guano No. 799............
Guano No. 806............
Guano No. 807............
Guano No. 810...........
Guano No. 811............
Guano No. 811A..........


Citrate-
soluble
portion
of total
phosphoric
acid in
guanos.


Percent.
38
48
22
23
21
56
5
40
38
43
93
93
18
8
5
9
16
9
5
16
81
68
..........^.

30
27
13
"" 56'
44
11
84
80
46
52
13
28
.......... ..
39
50
18
27
34
15
16
30
30


I
Efficiency ;
of phos-
phoric acid i
compared
with that
of acid
phosphate
= 100 by
vegetation
tests.


29
38
27
28
22
42
24
26
40
14
94
101
16
26
25
16
32
26
17
9
70
65
4...........
3
8
29
2
3
64
39
9
104
77
35
39
4
35
1
19
24
4
31
12
6
10
15
i 9


Source of phosphoric acid
(P206).


Guano No. 816...........
Guano No. 818........
Guano No. 819 ...--...---
Ouano No. 824.......-
Guano No. 841 .........
Guano No. 842-----......---
Guano No. 846........
Guano No. 851 --.....-------
Guano No. 852...........
Guano No. 853............
Guano No. 860...........
Guano No. 881 ............
Guano No. 889....---..--..
Guano No. 912...........
Guano No. 916 .......-...-
Guano No. 917............
Guano No. 923---..--.......
Guano No. 928 -......--...
Guano No. 931 ..........
Guano No. 932 -....--.....
Guano No. 936.........
Guano No. 939......--.-
Guano No. 943............
Guano No. 945.....----...
Guano No. 947..........
Guano No. 955------------
Guano No. 957 .......--.....
Guano No. 959...........
Guano No. 961 ............---
Guano No. 965-----.........---
Guano No. 966A..........
Guano No. 966B..........
Guano No. 970 ............
Guano No. 971 ...........
Guano No. 975 ............
Guano No. 977 ............
Guano No. 978...........
Guano No. 980............
Guano No. 981 ...........
Guano No. 982...........
Guano No. 985..........
Guano No. 1011 ..........
Guano No. 1013..........
Guano No. 1018..........
Floats..................
Slag a ....................
Bone meal..............


Citrate-
soluble
portion
of total
phosphoric
acid in
guanos.


Per cent.
23
23
80
3
27
21
11
28
89
13
15
80
34
10
10
28
20
31
33
24
31
26
12
46
15
5
47
63
88
74
38
46
68
11
92
82
13
12
73
72
32
10
9
2
78


Efficiency
of phos-
phoric acid
compared
with that
of acid
phosphate
= 100 by
vegetation
tests.


18
26
66
2
14
18
10
16
60
27+
23
65
12
1
I
3
5
14
31
19
36
20
10
51
10
2
34
33
49
18
20
8
25
32
4
94
87
5
3
33
31
11
2
2
4
68
31


a Solubility in 2 per cent citric acid.

By the citrate test the 92 samples had an average of 33 per cent of
the total phosphoric acid available, and by the vegetation test, 26 per
cent.' Sixty-four of the 92 samples showed excellent to fair agreement
between the chemical and vegetation tests of availability. Of the 28
samples showing poor agreement, 6 gave higher results by the vegeta-
tion than by the chemical test, and 22 lower results by the vegetation

test. Fresh, or only slightly decomposed, bat manures showed a
very fair agreement between the two methods for availabilities.

I Where one sample was tested several times, the mean value was used in calculating the general average.


-1






ia e-7ident thatf6rbioA guanos V.
test of the availability of the phosph4ic. ac4,` but mith mx4y,
the citrale method gives fax too high nsults. In some C81040 a,
error would be made in relying on -the citrate method. This
surpnsinglm view of the very v"Woomp(mWon Of tha
Brzonsulting the complete analYE" of guanosin Table III it
Lpp&rent that the inaccuracy of the- 4trate: raothod for certain
can not be correlated with the content of any coustituents,'as i''
alumin, lime, volatile matter, silica, or sulphates.
In judging these results 'it should be considered that the tin
bility or efficiency of a phosphate is not an.tinalteraMe proport16'
is affected by many conditions'- already mentioned. On the',
hand, solubility of a phosphate 'in neutral am citrato:
fixed property if the method I's rigidly foll6wed. C6nseqmm4
citrate solubility can not be a true. measure t)f the efficieney 741W
phosphate under all conditions. In a comparison of th6ci"io'
vegetation methods for availability,.it*istherefot-eessentiid t' UW
thei conditions of the.'vegetationtests. Under certain
conditions the -availability of the phosphate shoidid: be the AWAo,'
the solubility in ammonium citrate if the chemical. method is"APO*
cable to the material.
It is reasonable to hold thatthe citrate method, if it is
to given material, -should show-Ahe amount of phosphoric,
immediately available to a crop under conditions where phospWi,'O,
efficiency is not particularly enhanced. or depressed. It is behowd
that in the tests of im diste availability in riversiand therevvo
no special conditions enhancing or depressing the efficienoy of-the,
phosphates and that the tests therefore fairly show the applicabfty
of the citrate Method to guanos. The fact that in thee testA citrst&
E; olubility was a fairly to exceedingly accurate measure Of &'_V4abftY
ith 72 per cent of the samples, but a very inaccurate measure'v'vitith
28 per cent of the samples, confirmsthis idea. The agroemenk4f
some samples and the nonagreement of others show. that the citmte
method is not applicable to all kinds of guanos.
Had the vegetation tests all been conducted in the acid day 8,
doubtless nearly all guanos would have shown a- greater vegetation,,
than chemical availability. Such -a soil, how.ever, would got be I a
4% the citrate
fair medium for det amlicabilitv of the method,
Summary of raults effioi.ency of tu p4osphoric acQ in gumios.-
Veg6tation tests showed that the immediate efficie.ney of the pb&-i
phoric acid in bat and bird guanos variied-between 0 and 108,'o-
pared with 100 for ihe efficiend of L phosphoric acid in: said phos-
phate. Samples of fresh bat Manurehad an average ef&iony of 94,
showing that they are alniost as'available, as acid phosph:ate. '' -Adut
half the samples examined had an efficiency of 20 or better, practimMy





47 /


that of bone meal under the same conditions. Nearly all guanos had a
higher immediate efficiency than ground rock phosphate, although
in a few instances this was lower.
The guanos were equally efficient for corn and millet, and there
was no evidence of their being any more efficient for rice.
Four guanos gave the same efficiency (relative to acid phosphate)
in a clay soil as in a sand, while eight samples were from 30 to 1,100
Super cent more effective in the clay than in the sand. Bone meal and
floats also showed increased efficiency in the clay.
Remaining in the soil six weeks before planting the crop slightly
increased the efficiency of some guanos, slightly depressed that of
others, and markedly depressed the efficiency of acid phosphate.
Bone meal and floats lost very slightly in efficiency by remaining in
the sand but increased markedly by remaining in the clay. Liming
tended to counteract the effect of the soil on availability.
Liming the soil had a practically negative effect on the efficiencies
of four guanos, but markedly depressed the availability of acid
phosphate. Relative to acid phosphate these four guanos therefore
showed increased efficiencies in the limed soil. Seven other guanos
suffered a marked to an extreme loss of availability in the limed soil.
Bone meal and floats also lost more in availability than acid phos-
phate in the limed soil, while slag and acid phosphate were affected
about equally. Liming the red clay depressed availabilities more
than liming the sandy soil.
It was found that the quantity of guano used did not affect the
availability of its phosphoric acid. Consequently even guanos of low
efficiency will produce maximum yields if they are used in sufficient
quantities.
The guanos seemed to be equally efficient at all stages of crop
growth so far as assimilation by the plant was concerned. However,
most guanos would show a greater availability relative to acid phos-
phate with a long-time crop than with a quick crop, as most guanos
were little affected by remaining in the soil while the availability of
acid phosphate was decreased. This is an important consideration
under Porto Rican conditions, as cane, citrus fruits, and pineapples
are long-time crops.
It was shown that solubility of the phosphoric acid in neutral
ammonium citrate was a fair measure of the available phosphoric
acid in about 70 per cent of the guanos tested, but an inaccurate
method for some samples.
EXPERIMENTS ON EFFICIENCY OF THE NITROGEN IN GUANOS.
Plan of experiments and materials wed.-In testing the efficiency of
nitrogen in guanos the same plan was used as in the work on phos-
phoric acid. Work on nitrogen was on a less extensive scale than



















GO tills, a value oi i was assu uieu ior miDe einciencies 01 ilOOU uniaw-ei
to sodium nitrate in the last two tests. The value of 71, ,was 41
as being probable from the values actually detehnined :in tb1 itUM*
tests. The values for the guanos used in these" two. tests .ardx W ..8l|
quently subject to doubt within narrow limits.. -: ,K iq:* j* i
Corn and millet were the crops grown. The river msai.d tI.:
in two tests, the red clay in one test, and a mixture aof nifo@ r
red clay subsoil and one part sea sand -(containing '19914- pJi..e l*
carbonate of lime) in three tests. To promote nitrification, Id
FI .. : : .. ..........
lime was incorporated in all soils except the subsoil mix-ture. .
"" wi ': "'* | 'I "::: "''"""
In the three largest tests efficiencies were calcuate4 from, th qA:
tity of nitrogen in the crop rather than from the i'ert .weigh& t/
the crop. Efficiencies calculated from the analyses of the" crorlit w&#i
in most cases practically the same as efficiencies calculated froa ::|ie
green weights. It was thought necessary to analyze the-plant `;J'. ..:
those receiving blood and home other materials were later 'min4:,df 4 .C
oping and much greener than dther plants. No such- irregila"t ]li ":':: i
occurred in the phosphate experiments. :
Immediate efficiency of the nitrogen in guanos.-The tests, desc~ied |
above and reported in detail in Table XX were conducted U dmtuer-L... i'
mine the efficiency of the nitrogen in guanos when applied imm eiatey ii
before planting a short-time crop. In this table the effciencies ef
the nitrogen in guanos are expressed relative to the efficienty' rof
nitrogen in sodium nitrate taken as 100. As all the nitrogt &, i
sodium nitrate is available (although not recoverable in the':tap, ||
the figures for relative efficiency also express the "percentage.ofit:.J .
total nitrogen available under the conditions of the e '-xperini.t.
By comparing the figures for efficiency wth the figures sbowi.g I
percentage of the total nitrogen present as ammonia and itrate, it.
can be seen to what extent the orgatnio nitrogen is available.' ..
SFor this calculatioxi it is considered safe to assume that ammon ealaol nitrogen his the same avabfta .
as nitric nitrogen. : : :"
".i







TABLE "XX..-Immediate availability of nitrogen in guanos.

CORN GROWN SEPT. 29 TO NOV. 17, 1916.


Source of nitrogen
(N).


No nitrogen........
Sodium nitrate...
Do............
Do............
Do............
Dried blood........
Guano No. 852A....
Guano No. 855A ....
Guano No. 881A ....
Guano No. 1011.....
Guano No. 1079.....


Nitro-
gen
ap-
plied
per
pot.


OGm.

0.'3C
.60
1.00
1.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00


Basic fertilizer ap-
plied per pot.


Dry soil.


Kind.


Water
con-
tent.


Amount
per
pot.


Num-
ber of
plants
per
pot.


I I I I I


Basic slag, 45 gm.,
and potassium
sulphate 18
gm.,rmixed with
soil; acid phos-
phate, 22.5 gin.,
in two top dress-
ings.


Mixture 9
parts clay
soil and 1
part sea
sand.


Per ct.


Lbs.




60


Gm.
46.0
82.0
93.0
142.0
116.0
110.0
117.0
70.0
99.0
54.0
95.0


Oven-dry yield of individual pots.


Gm.
55.0
93.0
108.0
114.0
132.0 C
107.0 C
104.0 C
69.0
96.0
52.0
91.0


Gm.
48.0
84.0
81.0
100.0
90.0
77.0
104.0
73.0
103.0
50.0
87.0


Ow.
55.0
63.0
88.0
62.0
140.0
94.0
95.0
73.0
82.0
53.0
102.0


Gm.
50.0
75.0
92.0
128.0
130.0
96.0
106.0
74.0
97.0
59.0
87.0


CORN GROWN OCT. 5 TO NOV. 21, 1916.


Nonitrogen ........ ........ I f 23.0 28.0 21.0 25.0 23.0 24.0 24.00.7 0.173.......... ................
Sodium nitrate..... 0.25 48.0 54.0 41.0 46.0 34.0 51.0 46.02.0 .354......... ........ ........
Do............. 50 62.0 56.0 53.0 58.0 54.0 64.0 58.01.2 .510 .......... ........ ........
Do............. .85 s 58.0 66.0 70.0 60.0 64.0. 71.0 65.01.4 .728 .......... ........ ........
Do............. 1.35 Basic slag, 36 &m., 73.0 62.0 72.0 79.0 73.0 73.0 72.01.5 1.094 .......... ........
Dried blood......... 75 and potassium Mixture 9 61.0 65.0 60.0 58.0 57.0 ....... 60.0 .9 .504 65........ 14.33
Guano No. 777...... .751 sulphate,3 gm., parts clay 32.0 30.0 40.0 40.0 35.0....... 35.01.4 .242 13 13 6.63
Guano No. 780A.... 75 mixed with soil; soil and 1 30 30 4 56.0 60.0 59.0 55.0 34.0 ...... 53.03.2 .408 44 44 9.65
GuanoNo. 809 ...... 75 acid phosphate, part sea 39.0 33.0 31.0 36.0 50.0...... 38.02.2 .274 19 13' 4.28
Guano No. 819A.... .75 15 gm., in two sand. 61.0 59.0 61.0 62.0 56.0...... 60.0 .7 .444 53 45, 4.86
Guano No. 828 ...... 75 top dressings. 42.0 40.0 34.0 40.0 42.0...... 40.01.0 .300 23 21' 4.15
GuanoNo. 854 ...... 75 45.0 46.0 43.0 47.0 48.0...... 46.0 .6 .313 26 27 9.21
Guano No. 885 ...... 75, 39.0 46.0 49.0 47.0 48.0 ...... 46.0-1.2 .345 .32 311 10.60
Guano No. 911...... 75' 28.0 28.0 50.0 27.0 24.0...... 31.03.1 .229 11 2, 6.15
Guano No. 935 ...... 75 58.0 61.0 24.0 57.0 60.0....... 52.04.7 .400 44 51 3.32


Gm.


Average
oven-dry
yield and
probable
error.


Gm.
51.01.2
79.03.3
92.03.0
109.09.1
122.0 05. 9
97.03.9
105.02.4
72.0 .7
95.02.4
54.01.0
92.0+2.0


Effi-
ciency of
nitrogen
as
compared
with
that of
sodium
nitrate
=100.



..... .....
... .......

54
55
18
45
3
34


Nitro-
gen in
crop.


Gm.
0.352
593
.819
1.112
1.525
.786
788
S497
.703
.378
.626


Nitro-
gen
pres-
ent as
am-
monia
and
nitrate.



Per ct.




67
15
63
4
39


Total
nitro-
gen in
guano.


Per ct.




14.33
5.06
10.54
13.04
1.80
2.00


........ .. .... ................ ... .. ........ .
..: n:: .' ... .::::. .: ::: ::' :: .... ...... .... :: ::: :::: "
.. .. .. ... .. .. .. .... ... ....... .... .. %- ::::::- : N ....
..... .. .... .... .. .... ... ..... .
.. ..... .... w
... .. ... .. .........


:: i.- ''












































































CD
24Q
*i 3 3 3 3 3 3


51 W jI 3 3 3 3
814 I. 06000o3 e
C| il a 1 i zm w m t-
,* ..
:.3:


v: zzzzzzzzz


Z c A P0 0 0 0


1 I I
I !
--- '. : ; :'; ,"






* .I i
*', : : :* I.14






jI1jLEij,


106.
HSt
*s!4
4I:



i






CORN GROWN FEB. 18 TO APR. 6, 1916.


No nitrogen........
Dried blood........
Do............
Do ..............
Do............
Sodium nitrate.....
Guano No. 472A ....
Guano No. 952......
Guano No. 811B....
Guano No. 928......
Guano No. 977......


0.40
.80
1.20
1.80
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00


Slaked lime, 20
gm.; potassium
sulphate, 18 gm.;
acid phosphate,
44.8 gin.


River s a n d
No. 213.


CORN GROWN DEC. 1, 1915, TO JAN. 10, 1916.


Nonitrogen ............... 78.3 75.4 76.6 72.2 81.4 ...... 76.81.0........ ........ ......
Dried blood........ 0.50 S d 2 96.4 11.L6 98.6 103.6 97.2 ...... 105.52.3 a l7......... 14.33
Do ........... 1.00 Slaked lime, 20 107.9 118.4 138.4 105.8 105.4...... 115.24.2......i a71 ........ 14.33
Do............ 1.50 gsnm potasium. River sand 18 6 102.4 122.9 121.3 116.4 129.9...... 118.63.1 a71....... .14.33
Do ............. 2.25 sulphaten ac14dgm No. 213. j 129.0 118.2 125.8 127.5 106.9...... 121.52.8 ....... a71 ........ 14.33
Guano No. 884...... 1.25 hate 0 fin 100.3 94.2 101.8 99.9 109.3...... 101.11.6........! 28 21 2.47
Guano No. 889A .... 1.25 phate, 30 gm. 87.8 79.6 81.4 79.6 82.7...... 82.22.0........ 6 8 1.01
GuanoNo. 933...... 1.25 70.1 86.9 83.4 83.1 82.5...... 81.21.9 ........ 5 1 8.92

a Average values obtained from other tests.


146.0
173.0
182.0
203.0
197.0
179.0
152. 0
156.0
150.0
166.0
,164.0


140.0
170.0
189.0
188.0
195.0
194.0
152.0
156.0
149.0
145.0
171.0


135.0
168.0
186.0
198.0
216.0
202.0
160.0
159.0
152.0
161.0
175.0


147.0
165.0
184.0
184.0
206.0
201.0
171.0
152.0
160.0
155.0
176.0


145.0
166.0
177.0
191.0
203.0
209.0
150.0
151.0
147.0
155.0
163.0


143.0 1.0
168.01.0
184.01.0
193.02.0
203.02.0
197.03.0
157.02.0
155.01.0
152.0 1.0
156.02.0
170. 02.0


.......69
69
69
69
100
15
12
9
14
31


11
7
9
9
36


. ..... ... .. .. .. .. ... ...


14.3ii
14.33
14.33
14.33
10.25
2.34
3.28
2.75
12.03






TABLE XXIII-Immediate availability of nitrogen in guanos--Continued.
CORN GROWN DEC. 1, 1915, TO XAN. 10, 1916.

Dry soil. Efft-
clency of Nitro-
Nitro- Num- Avprage nitrogen Ren
gen ber of green Nitro- as pres- TOW
Source of nitrogen ap- Basic fertilizer ap-, plants Green yield of Individual pots. yield and genin compared ent as nitro-
(N). plied plied per pot. Water A=unt with am- gen in
per Kind. con- per per probable- crop. thatof monta guano.
pot. tent. pot. pot. error. so(Uum and
nitrate nitrate.
-100.

Gm. Per d. Lba. Gm. Gm. Gm. Gm. Gm. Gm. Gn. Gm. Per CC. -Per d.
No nitrogen ................ 498.0 417.0 449.0 422.0 462.0 418.0 4". O:L 9. 0 ........ .......
Dried blood........ 0.35 Slaked lime, 20 527.0 550.0 567.0 573.0 706.0 556.0 580.018.0 ........ W H,
Do ............. .70 gin.; rtassium 594.0 538.0 632.0 594.0 M.0 543.0 580. 0--j- 11. 0 ........ a 71 ........ M 33-
Do ............. 1.05 sulp ate 92 Redclay ...... 35 40 4 391.0 592.0 6". 0 597.0 545.0 694.0 574.0+Z.0 ........ &71 ......... 14-33
01552.0
Guano No. 884 ...... .190 gm.; acid pho; 593.0 577.0 590.0 5M 0 593.0 .0 -10.0 ........ b 25 .21 147
I I '1 568.0+
Guano No. 8%A .... .90 phate, 20 gm. 480.0 493.0 439.0 471.0 416. 508 .0 468. 0j: 9.0 b 5. 9:: f. 01
Guano No. M ...... .90 474. 0 438.0 418.0 423.0 408. 415 429. O:L 7. 0 0 1 892

Average of values obtained from other tests.
b EgWkiwies are doubtful, as possible OM per ceft nitrogen from dried blood is somewhat in, excess of crop requirements.















JW. T.., "Ila ,JI'll Ji





53


i. ,It will be seen that the 39 samples tested gave quite uniform
results, since in practically every case the availability of the nitro.
igen was about equal to the percentage of the total nitrogen present
as ammonia plus nitrate. The average percentage of total nitrogen
present in the guanos as ammonia and nitrate was 19.6 per cent,
while the average availability of the total nitrogen was 20.4 per cent.
Evidently in nearly all samples only a very small portion, if any, of
Sthe organic nitrogen was available during the 40 to 50 days of the
tests. This low availability of the organic nitrogen can not be
attributed to the fact that the soils used were poor mediums for the
Decomposition of organic nitrogen, since dried blood gave an average
Availability of 71, a very fair value for the duration of the tests.
Even the samples of more or less fresh bat manure, Nos. 472, 503,
780, 854, 881, 885, and 977, showed practically none of the organic
nitrogen available during the tests.
The fact that only the ammonia and nitrate nitrogen and none
of the organic nitrogen was available in 40 to 50 days does not mean
that the organic nitrogen in the guanos will not become available
later. It is evident, however, that the organic nitrogen is very
slowly available. The fact that insect remains, which form the
more slpwly decomposing part of the organic nitrogen of bat guanos,
are known to decompose in the soil shows that the organic nitrogen
is eventually available. Also the fact that, in caves where fresh bat
manure is being formed, the surface inch of material often contains
only 2 or 3 per cent nitrogen, shows that the decomposition of the
nitrogenous compounds is fairly rapid under certain conditions.
Experiments were made to determine how much nitrogen in bat
guanos was available in 100 and 140 days, as compared with the
amount available in 40 to 50 days. Unfortunately, in these tests
increases in the crop through nitrogen fertilization were not large
enough to yield reliable results. It is significant, however, that in
nearly every case the guanos which had remained in the soil the
longer time gave slightly greater yields. If possible, this work will
be repeated later.
In using bat guanos as fertilizers, it should be considered that
part of the nitrogen (that present as ammonia and nitrate) is imme-
diately available and that the remainder probably does not begin
to become available for four months or more. Many guanos, how-
ever, contain 50 to 90 per oent of their nitrogen in the immediately
available form.
; VALUATION OF GUANOS.
S In Tables III and IV, a money value per dry ton was given for each
Sguano. This value was estimated as follows: The available phos-
Sphorio acid was taken as worth 5 cents per pound. Where vegeta-





































ni*QA DJ-MVw ivw i0I5 a.- AW V a v naasJ Mfi 3u JLLO VCtU&L L C jI cLuAj a.L LLLWtFL I.fAO pi r
phoric acid in Porto Rico will be better established when t64il V
areas are known which respond to insoluble phosphates. T iA'k
where finely ground rook phosphate is used as a fertilikert f';Y
soluble phosphoric acid in guan6s should have an equivalqM
: ^ ^ ~ ', S t:: f-f *" Jf: ~ s*'
as the availability will average about the same. On a6,ecount 6of V.
low value and efficiency of ground rock phosphate anl becvuYse of
freight charges, there has been no market for this mIteri in PT&i
Rico up to the present time, and this analogy does not estpabbjt
: i + :. :: .':U ;:(i:,i.:i
value here. I j
Bearing in mind that te ioble phosjhoric acid would have anh
efficiency only on certain soils, about 1 cent a pound might Ped. 4I..ed..
for the monetary value of .insublo pAbhosphoric aoid in guano iOj
taining an appreciable amount. Certain guanos like oS, 79w ,.8Q .





55

925, 1018, and 1037, with 21.37 to 38.57 per cent phosphoric acid,
might have a value for making acid phosphate if they were sufficiently
low in iron and alumina and if they existed in sufficient quantity to
render their marketing practicable.
The values assigned the fertilizing elements were based on usual
prices prevailing in the eastern part of the United States. They should
be slightly augmented for Porto Rico, since freight charges raise the
price of fertilizers in Porto Rico. Transportation to certain interior
districts of Porto Rico enhances the cost of standard fertilizers still
further in those districts. On the other hand, it should be borne in
mind that the valuations given in Tables III and IV are for a dry'ton
of material. The material as procured from the cave will contain
considerable moisture, and the value must be reduced according to
the amount ol moisture.
In deciding the monetary value of guanos relative to standard fer-
tilizers, it should also be borne in mind that the standard commercial
fertilizers arc uniform products of known efficiency, while the value
of individual guanos is not so well established. The guanos described
here which have been subjected to vegetation tests as well as to
chemical analyses can also be considered as of known efficiency, but
those which have been merely analyzed are of less certain] y estab-
lished value. For instance, it was shown that the citrate method for
availability was fairly accurate with 72 per cent of the samples tested
but very inaccurate with 28 per cent of the samples, the tendency
being for the citrate method to give too high results. The chances are
thus about three to one that a chemical analysis will show fairly closely
the availability of the phosphoric acid. Because of this element of
doubt a guano high in phosphoric acid not thoroughly tested may be
worth somewhat less than the valuation given in Tables III and IV.
All therfactors mentioned make it difficult to establish an absolute
value for the guanos, but it is believed that those given in the tables
are lair. It will be noted that values of the different guanos varied
between practically nothing and $47.60 per dry ton, the average for
the 247 samples tested being $7.14.
GENERAL REMARKS ON BAT GUANOS.
The analyses and tests reported show the great variation in different
bat guanos, in respect to their content of the fertilizing elements and
the availability of these elements. The reasons for the variations are
given in the first part of this report. Bat guanos, excepting fresh bat
manure, can not therefore be regarded as a specific fertilizer in the
same sense as modern commercial fertilizers, or even the old Peruvian
guano.
The fresh bat manure, however, is a fairly definite material in ap-
pearance, composition, and availability of its phosphoric acid. It is































addition of. other materials' before being used for. certain dc .i'ps +".4j[
F ... ........ .. "... .
certain'soils. .: ,' [Iff .ii '!d
Most bat guanos, but not all, are to be classed with; the:low.r* ',. &^
frtilizers;-: either because of a low-percentage ofF the: ferti hi|
eleiments, or because of a low ,availability of the nitrogenv, orI hu. -: =
phonic acid. This does iot mean that they are capable of- tiliation i
only' under certain conditions, although they ..,can,'-be. 'tuea |!|o
advantageously under some conditions than under otherad 'Aa.1
granos contain a variety of other -substances besides idrteui,: +
phosphoric acid, or potash, some persons have an ideartha& : i
ought to have a peculiar fertilize value because of theit very
complexity. 't 'is not tr"e'for th6 most pat, hIbugh a few of'1
the bat, guanps, in. common with thel old Peruvian gAhos,, arepa :r : :|
tinularly effective for certain conditions because of havi.gftir
nitrogen present in different, degree. 4ot availabiity. os.. ,.
contain more or less gypsum : Litt.e importance should be attVij..t:d 'i
to this, since gypsum has p,.. .of fertilizing value 'only, ,.. c .i.. ..-
tional cases, aside from its us n sp pi imprega ed with .alk "i|
SThe favorable action of gypsum on a few soils has been attributed to the furnishing of libm dt h .... .:,
te llberatiqn of potash froIt uIlkwtes. an4 the proZeuliyp sfo*4 by the oalcium Ijc in wnt#hus |
M~tW BG "!t f ". ^.""iijii,
between salts. 'I :*.'*
I t ,If
..:..."..,,.: a,,..
",ii :;M





57


S Whether it will pay to use a given bat guano to supplement other
fertilizing materials depends, of course, on the relative cost of the
materials at the place where they are to be used. The valuation of
the gp anos given in Tables III and IV shows their worth relative to
standrd fertilizers. It is thus possible to calculate the relative
cheapness of guanos and other fertilizers at different places by com-
paring values and costs.
Guanos are what may be termed neutral fertilizers. There is no
danger of an accumulative acid or alkaline effect from their con-
tinued or excessive use. However, low-grade guanos containing
much carbonate of lime should not be applied in large quantities to
pineapples on very sandy soils.
Before transporting guanos from the caves the material should,
in many cases, be screened to remove stones and large concretions
not easily pulverized, as these have little fertilizing value. If the
material is to be stored in bags, the bag should be treated with a
dilute solution of copper sulphate to prevent decay, as guano not
thoroughlydry will rot through a bag in a few days. This is com-
monly and erroneously attributed to a caustic action of the guano.
From the estimated quantities of guanos given in the appendix and
the valuations assigned in this report, it is evident that bat guano will
never form an appreciable part of the fertilizer consumed on the
island. Most of the deposits are too valuable, however, to be neg-
lected, and even after these deposits have been extracted, fresh
material will be formed having an annual value of several thousand
dollars. The fresh material should be removed from the cave fre-
quently, as it is fairly uniform in composition and in nearly all caves
(on account of leaching) is worth more when fresh than when partially
decomposed.
THE USE OF BAT GUANOS.
For the intelligent use of any fertilizing material it is obviously
necessary to know its composition and the availability of its fertilizing
components. This information concerning most Porto Rican bat
guanos is given in the first part of the report. It is also necessary to
know the fertilizer requirement of the particular crop on the particular
soil, that is, the best fertilizing formula for the conditions. This
information is not given here, but the following remarks on the use of
the bat guanos apply to any fertilizer formula.
USE OF DATA IN COMPOUNDING A FORMULA.
The following examples will show how the data contained in this
report should be used in making a fertilizer mixture of required
formula: Suppose a formula of 3 per cent nitrogen, 12 per cent phos-
phoric acid, and 12 per cent potash is required and that guano No.






793 is W, be'moW k 4h.w*'m OQMWUA
*xtive I woul&,contsk.: 34: voum
phwiic Wdd, ajid 120.. Pound% of, t -TaMe IVV,"*Iuws, tbA*
NoV,: 793 'eontamis 24.87 per Cout of, hdsphozic,, mid s and
shows that the ..... ..... ... dir-te efficiencytof t. he oqhne sci4i
'24.687 uer:i- cent x3-5
Guano N6@' 793 ilus'4kams_ or9.7 per
ediately av4ilable acid.,. or.,SJI povmb in 100'*
Of. mAten*aL To f urm'4.120" Vrll& ..phmpbp v,
120 x 100, 11371 n, 8. of A8
pou A' gu rod.
793' N 6U'
8.7
No. 793 also contains 0.99 per cent. of uitro t
I 371x
13.6 ,pomd
afford f ni It
WU
oldylgafe to. allow. for an avaitOiEty. of 50 per cent of -tUetat 1,
t4Mfore.e, this gimno- probably furnisbps oB::.Iy',6.,RPoUU4O.,. Ot 8i
nitrogen, To furnislithe restof the nitrogen (30 pounds-,,Q*
I I .. 8 poun
2.3.2 pounds), about 160 pomds of- nitrgto, of? sodswould boAsedoit,
This guano will contaiii praoticallyao-w4to-solubte, potash: thusglmmt
240 pounds of. a high-grade potash s4t, will, b6.necessw7', to,'Pt Y
the 120. pound :of potash required bythe 'formula, Thp,
nowtontains,4371 pounds a 0 No. 7.93, 16GApou4d!a, of nitrx"Q
of.spda, and 240,.pounds of high-grade.;potash SIt tow of 1, 7 1
pound.%., The, whole., nuxture of .1,77 pounds is eqwI.yqJe.UtjG, 400,'
pounds of the 3: 12: 12 fertilizer. JAI
Suppose guano No. 881 were. to be used in this, formU14
No.793. Tal?16IVsllowsthatNo,881cmtsius.13.04per'ceutoftoW,
nitrogenVbut 3.6+4.6=8.2I.per-qen m is.: Pres,00 Os
annnonia and- nitrate. Table XX shovit that the remam'der of tb e
total nitrogen has practically no bi=: ediate avail-ability'. Thus only a
13'04 8.20. -
quarter Gf the remamimig nitrogen. or --- 1 per: .donty tart
4
be: counted on Gu ano No. 8811 64imatea to haIv'O`on`:4-41' er
dnt (8.20+1.21) of effective m ro which is conservaim. r
fuish *the 30 pounds of 'Mitrogon',re(11u:'ired b the f6riiufa,,' ab6d
3" d N; 881 needed.: fnihe' 326 s of, guano
POM a. ol guano 0. Is
NO." 88t,'v6I&,'c6ni&Ins' 4.15perbent of potash (06:Ta V)'p th
.b. I I remain er i b out
19 13.3 P6 of oi"h. For the .4 of f6: P''otash, a'
pounds of a high-grad otiAs'a liv"! n`-'A'be nee e. .:' As a No. 8 f
contains 8.94- Xmt:t Md. which Table XIX shows
Per QWPhoaphorie
has an efficiency of 65, it contains 5.81,per cent of 'immediate ayaA&
able ph s horid ae an urnis es i8J8
0 p 0 pou'nids ga o thus urimus j
pounds otavailab]e ph h or the reA of 'tile. p1hosphonq
osp one acid.'
acid, 10:1 6uhds acid hosphate: 6f.a phosphatic guano,: as No.' 1,01





59

I could be used. As no vegetation test was made with guano No. 1017,
Sthe citrate-soluble portion, 18.52 per cent, is taken as the available
Sphosphoric acid. Of this guano 546 pounds is required. The mix-
ture thus contains 320 pounds of guano No. 881, 215 pounds of a high-
r grade potash salt, and 546 pounds of guano No. 1017, a total of 1,081
Pounds. The 1,081 pounds of mixture is equivalent to 1,000 pounds
Sof the 3:12:12 formula.
It will be noted that, in using the guanos to make a formula, the
availability of the nitrogen and phosphoric acid in the guanos was
considered, as well as the total amount of these elements present.
It should be borne in mind that in the analyses given in the first part
of this report percentages are all calculated on the dry material. The
material as it exists in the cave contains 10 to 60 per cent of moisture,
and the air-dried material contains 3 to 15 per cent moisture. For
moist material, the percentages must therefore be reduced and the
quantities of guano utilized increased.
MATERIALS FOR MIXING WITH GUANOS.
Most guanos can be mixed with any of the commercial fertilizers
without loss of availability in the mixture. A few guanos con-
taining carbonate of lime, should not be mixed with sulphate of
ammonia or acid phosphate. A test for carbonate should be made
by observing whether the guano effervesces with acid before mixing
a guano with such materials. If it is desirable to use a guano con-
taining carbonate with sulphate of ammonia, the sulphate of ammo-
nia should be applied to the soil first and later the guano incorporated
with the soil. On the other hand, a few guanos contain considerable
ammonium salts, and these should not be mixed with basic slag, as
the free lime of the slag will liberate the ammonia.
As certain guano deposits have a peculiar place utility in being
located in districts where transportation charges make commercial
fertilizers particularly expensive, it is important to use them with
other waste fertilizing materials, if possible. A combination of
tobacco stems and bat guanos would be equivalent to a complete
mixed fertilizer, the tobacco stems furnishing potash and some nitro-
gen, the guano phosphoric acid and some nitrogen. Where more
potash in proportion to the other elements is desired than can be
obtained by mixing guano and tobacco stems, wood or bagasse ashes
can also be applied, although the ashes should not be mixed with
some guanos.
Guanos can also be used to supplement stable manure, as stable
manure is relatively deficient in phosphoric acid. A phosphatic
guano can be advantageously added to the compost heap as it is




































any crop. There are some specic features about the gfaltsjib t
ever, which make them especially good for long-time cropil 4
In the previous pages it was shown that the phosphoric Wd Mtit:
guanos lost less in availability by remaining in the sol tan'A: i
acid phosphate. Consequently when tsed in 'Mixtdred (yr iit i
trees, pineapples, sugar cane, yanms, coconuts, and other rops d4 A
long growing season, many guanes will show a greater esinflewpiay
tire to acid phosphate than they wil .for quick cropoa like l.tt-ia
radishes; etc. This does not, mean that guanos are -not effeeti E
quick crops. If used on the banis of the inimmediate ffcienoiest.t#
"LU :ff n:,.,tjVF"
cated in the previous pages, they will bef eqpiaflyr asdeotiv'eh4M'h
.. ,, .,. .0 :,O i.:.......
standard fertilizers. .. .i...... ...
All the guanos contain a. considerable portion of ethsrxitnpxHinMi
an insoluble and relatively unavailable form. To this p4lrt&t- b:r?...
Mixing insoluble phosphates with stable manure has been advocated as tending to inches th"iva
ability of the phosphoric acid, but there is some question as to whether any decided increase in ava*hhWlFf.l||
results from this treatment.






Nitrogen, a value only one-fourth that of the ammoniacal and nitrate
Snitrogen, was given. It is nevertheless probable that practically all
T- this insoluble nitrogen will become available in time. It should
II therefore be regarded as of considerable value for a long-time crop
I or at least for the permanent enrichment of the soil.
il."
." SOILS ON WHICH GUANOS SHOULD BE USED.
S Work is at present under way to determine the relative efficiencies
Sof the standard phosphatic fertilizers on the different soils of Porto
SRico. When this work is completed, quantitative data should be
Available concerning what phosphates are best for the different soils.
From the general knowledge available on the subject and from the
availability tests reported here, it appears that bat guanos should be
Particularly valuable phosphatic fertilizers for acid soils and for non-
, calcareous clay soils. On neutral sandy soils they should show an
! efficiency equal to that assigned them in this report, but not an
Enhanced efficiency. On strongly calcareous soils many guanos, in
common with bone meal and rock phosphate, will have their effi-
? ciency lowered much more than that of acid phosphate. A few
.I guanos, however, appear particularly good for calcareous soils, their
Efficiency being less affected by liming than any of the other phos-
If phates. Thus far no analytical method has been found which will
t tell whether or not the efficiency of a guano will be affected by
f* liming.
I SUMMARY.

S Deposits of bat guano are especially common in the Tropics and in
subtropical regions, and their fertilizing value has never been investi-
Sgated thoroughly. Generally they are of small size, consisting of a
few to several thousand tons, and they usually occur in limestone
caves.
The material may be roughly divided into fresh bat manure, decom-
i posed guano, and leached or phosphatic guano, although this classi-
r fiction is not sharp. Only the fresh bat manure is of fairly constant
k composition, averaging 10.93 per cent nitrogen, 7.29 per cent total
I phosphoric acid, 5.54 per cent citrate-soluble phosphoric acid, and
I 2.3 per cent water-soluble potash. The leached phosphatic guano is
Similar physically and chemically to leached guanos of bird origin.
S Attention was called to the manner in which the different kinds of
Sguano were formed and the conditions determining the composition
Sof the material and its variation in the cave.
Twenty-five samples were subjected to a complete mineral analysis.
Y No one constituent showed any regular variation with any other con-
stituent in any sample. The portion of the total phosphoric acid




N,' 7 Z 7-1


whiahwww avad", Qw1Qed;W ooOiwpoU4,JP #womij*4"'

-TWID., hundred. "d t wtWtr,4WAO "MPIM
tihzwcowtituan*s 00,Y)AW
samplesbeing as followial-K. ToWmib*ppl PMipprs mat,:
ammonia, 3.60 'per cent;-nitrogen as nitrate, 4.60 per cent;
phophoric xcia,: 41.68, per'
per cent; citraite-Eolub1e, p'hosphOjia uid; 2K.66 "OVAW
soluble potash, 4,18. po 'Ceo. nftlm petewt" fOH1RJj;jAf
ent, s sample weria practkaRy zero .,for mck Qonoijh to
A number: of samples wom; tested by,,!vpgO***,*xpe
pots for the immediate eMcianqy ofthar Vi6,:&waid, in wnoatc*
sandy- soil. Calfing the
acid in, acid phosphate 100, the: efficieney. of tho phosphOrio-'#44
different. bat guanos varied between, Q, *Adi 109-- About 11 0 v)
samples tested had an -. avaflability. of..: 2G or:--,Mqte- w1fich Oouqmoodf-
well with, bone meal under the. same conditiims,..-sud'in nwotA*')
phosphoric acid was more.available, th&u in fiug cL
yt grciun4k, -V
phosphate.
The phos -horie acid of the guanos waaeq1Aal1Y.,&v&Ao6Wo for1.OWW**
and millet.
.Most guanos in'. commonvith, b 'waal ond, r uwr
one floa* were faL Oq
effective add red clay, than1u 4: awdy. scdL:, 6om
however, were no more effective in the clay than in the sand.
The efficiencies of nearly all -gnanw -relafive to acid plwvhate weile
mulch greater when applied six weelm before planting than when
applied immedi7ately. TbJA 'increased effieieijq, relsti*e t6uinid phiA-
phate. was due to a depr&mion- 'in t6 availabilit:- of th 6 iid phibW
phate, as the guanos showedpraefiaUy no absblute giiii fil" A'
by remaining, in either the clay, or the sand*
Four of eleven guanos tested were unaffected in efficieny by linfi**
the- soil. ne re g guan os, with bt)ne: meal, fioatz,'slag, ltid
acid phosphate, suffered a, moderate to extreme lbs iii A*tflib
fromm Inimming.
As: the efficiencies of the guanos: appeared, UnAffect6d by, tho qb"-
tity used, they shoxdd produce m, yield*if api*4ifi'aufficient i
quantity-
Thephosphoric acid mi: guancis Was.as e&6ent.`Aiiring the C
rowth of corn and millet as during the-laur suig".
In 70 per 'cent of th6 9 2 Samples telsited'th"- was f air, to' exAigt
k 6d
agrement between efficiencies of" phosphoric acid as: &Wfirifin
solubility in: ammonium citrate And bylloge a -ion experimenM.
most, of the samples where agreoment, wAAIor the citratesphlibili
w&4 far higher than the vegetitti"..6ffibith6y.





63


Only 91 of the 247 samples analyzed contained 1 per cent or more
f total nitrogen. In 22 of the 91 samples 50 per cent or more of the
total nitrogen was present as ammonia and nitrate. Vegetation
experiments with 35 samples were quite uniform in showing that the
nitrogen present in any form other than ammonia or nitrate had
practically no immediate availability.
A conservative value assigned the different guanos, on the basis of
prices of fertilizing elements prevailing before the summer of 1914,
varies between 0 and $47.60 per dry ton, the average value of the
247 samples being $7.14.
General conclusions are drawn concerning bat guanos as fertilizers,
utilization of Porto Rican deposits, materials with which guanos
should be compounded, mode of application, and crops and soils on
which they should be used.






































murcielaguina," or bat droppings, and all others are called "abO no
mineral, or mineral fertilizer. A more accurate classification
adopted by Mr. Fallon is: (1) Dry, unmodified bat guano, or zsV,
guano, (2) modified bat guano, which has lost some of its solu ....
contents through leaching, and (3) leached bird guano, or old guano,. '
which is still further described as clean or more or less mixed withj'.hi
f ..' ::.
sand etc.
Samples Were taken from all the caves for analysis and weighed
in a box of known capacity, and from the weight per cubic foot the.
amount of the different kinds of guano was estimated in tons,
Analytical data on the various samples of guano are given in the main'":
-portion of this bulletin. While many of the caves were found to:
contain little, if any, guano, the tonnage in others was large. In :,
most instances the marketing of the guanos will be expensive on.
account of the primitive methods of extracting them and the distance
(64) AI
1 *ll
ll|'! i
*.'-Iiill
/ ..":*-* ,:.:::iH "







65

of the caves from good roads, but the wider use of this material would

not only be beneficial in crop production but would furnish soil ele-
ments usually supplied from expensive imported fertilizers.
The following lists give the name or owner of each cave visited, its

location, and the amount of guano of all kinds it is estimated to con-
tain. The estimates are believed to be conservative and their
aggregates do not by any means include all the possible supplies of
the island.

Approximate tonnage of guano in Porto Rican caves.


Name of cave or owner and location.


La Tuna, La Tuna, Cabo Rojo..........
Los Chorros, Cotui, San German ........
Guaniquilla No. 1, Guaniquilla, Cabo
R ojo......... .......... ..............
Guaniquilla No. 2, Guaniquilla, Cabo
Rojo....---..............---.-------.-
Boquilla, Tierras Nuevas, Campo Alegre.
Alta Gracia, El Coto, Manati............
La Laguna, El Coto, Manati............
Los Santos, El Coto, Manati.............
Central Carmen, Rio Abajo, Vega Baja..
Miranda, Rio Arriba Vega Baja.........
Hacienda Juanita, between Mayaguez
and Las Marias ........................
La Oscura, Rosario, San Germin........
El Murcielago Rosario San GermAn....
El Colorado, Rosario, San German......
El Convento, El Cedro, Pefuelas.....------
Mapancha, El Coto Pefluelas...........
Pascual, E1 Cedro, Peiuelas.............
El Jaguey, north of Guanica Centrale....
El Homo, north of Guanica Centrale....
Santa Rita, south of railroad station.....
La Ballena, foot of hillssouth of Guanica
Central ...............................
Cajoa de Muertos No. 1, northeast of l ight-
house..................
Cajade Muertos No. 2, northeast of light-
house ................................
La Majina, Limon.......................
Lucero Cabachuelas, Morovis ...........
Achotillo, Cabachuelas, Morovis.........
San Miguel, Cabachuelas, Morovis.......
La Chiquilla, Cabachuelas, Morovis.....
Oscura, Cabachuelas, Morovis -....---...
Capa Prieta, Cabachuelas Morovis......
Pablo Clas, Cabachuelas, Morovis.......


Amount
of
guano.

Tons.
333
433
48
449
441
10
128
17
35
221
60
48
110
110
924
483
439
16
12
127
217
91
25
11
676
414
224
90
3,144
67
575


Name of cave or owner and location.



Toronja, Cabachuelas de Torrecilla,
M orovis-..............................
Cerro Hueco, Cabachuelas de Torrecilla.
Morovis -..--.......-......-----..............
De los Puercos, Cabachuelas, Morovis...
Alta, Cabachuelas, Morovis..............
Archilla, Cabachuelas, Morovis..........
Escalera, Cabachuelas, Morovis .........
Convento llato Viejo Poniente, Ciales..
Oscura S'umideroA guas Buenas.......
Clara, Sumidero, Aguas Buenas.........
Del Rio, Sumidero, Aguas Buenas.....
Biafara No. 1, Miraflores, Arecibo.......
Bernardo Mdndez, Bayaney, Hatillo....
Vilella, Yeguadilla, Hatillo..............
Ollo Oscuro, Santiago, Camuy...........
Ludovino Suarez, Arenales, Aguadilla...
California, Centro, Moca.................
Rafael Suarez, Centro, Moca.............
Cuchilla, Cuchilla, Moca.................
El Jobo, Arenales Bajos, Isabela_........
Murcielago Galateo Alto, Isabela........
Juan Eusebio Acevedo, Galateo Alto,
Isabela...........................
Juan Bautista Perez, plans, Isabela ....
Chito Perez, Planas, Isabela............
Pajita, Callejones, Lares.................
Los Cruzes, Callejones, Lares............
Jose Maria Girao, Lares, Lares...........
Jesus Torres Lares. Lares .................
Callo, Villalba Arriba, Juana Diaz .......
Naranjo, Naranjo, Juana Diaz..........
Los Santos Vega Redonda, Comerio....
La Mora, Vega Redonda, Comerio.......
Guaraguao, Vega Redonda, Comerio....
Total...... .....-............. ....


Amount
of
guano.

Tons.
170
139
51
35
611
112
659
390
60
50
201
405
121
976
33
100
50
100
172
67
447
133
214
50
40
30
100
20
110
212
285
30
16,141








































XraDio iLfl1r, uanumuu JU D SO, Ajguwa- MA uzgAIuxn, rlugA .auOaua, *p-.
dilla. mero. )t I.s i'
Sergio Llore, Caimital Bajo, Agua- Cachimbo, Vega Redonda, 0.o-' ,
dilla. merio. .,..
Felipe Llore, Caimital Bajo, Agua- Iglesita, Vega Redonda, Comerifoi II
dilla. Honda, Vega Redonda, Comer e. .i.
Pablo Gonzales, Camaseyes, Agua- Rafael Domenech, Caimital Bajo,
dilla. Aguadilla. i

Information and detailed data regarding all the abovo-named '
caves are in the possession of the experiment station at Mayag&k.
0 -.* E





** ~ t '*::
........



*,,1
*~ 2.'* :i '

v ::il
.. L.:*

:E<1:E


















PH ..





























Ak







































ii~iiiiiii # i













&AI
|Q


mm

imy 14 "'-;



ml .... ....... ..... .... .
dt
,!0
i|1 .......... ......... .
nl QH M k

|A
t,[ Qn
1'






VLS




_4


ii




UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


3 1262 06929 1313




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E7KZ29BMS_HUQ70B INGEST_TIME 2014-07-22T22:02:29Z PACKAGE AA00014647_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES