Data come from the Illinois Experiment Station.
The data values are from Smith (1910) and the field map is from Harris (1920).
Each plot was 1/10 acre, but the dimensions are not given. Note that
1/10 acre is also the area of a square 1 chain (66 feet) on a side.
The following text is abridged from Smith (1910).
How much variability may we reasonably expect in land that is
apparently uniform? Some data among the records of the soil plots at
the Illinois Experiment station furnish interesting material for study
in this connection.
A field that had lain sixteen years in pasture was broken up in 1895
and laid out into plots to be subsequently used for soil
experiments. The land is slightly rolling but otherwise quite uniform
in appearance. There are in the series to be considered in this
connection 120 one-tenth acre plots. These plots were all planted to
corn for three consecutive years without any soil treatment, so that
the records offer a rather exceptional opportunity for a study of this
kind.
A study of this data reveals some very striking variations. It will be
noticed in the first place that there is a tremendous difference in
production in the different years. The first year, 1895, was an
extremely unfavorable one for corn and the yields are exceptionally
low. The weather records show that the season was not only unusually
dry, but also cool in the early part. The following year we have an
exceptionally favorable corn season, and the yields run unusually
high. The third year was also a good one, and the yields are perhaps
somewhat above the normal for this locality.
It will be observed that certain plots appear to be very
abnormal. Thus plots 117, 118, 119, and 120 give an abnormally high
yield in the first season and an abnormally low one in the two
following years. This is to be accounted for in the topography of the
land. These plots lie in a low spot which was favorable in the dry
year of 1895, but unfavorable in 1896 and 1897. For this reason these
four plots were rejected from further consideration in this study, as
were also plots 616, 617, 618, 619, and 620. This leaves 111 plots
whose variations are apparently unaccounted for and which furnish the
data from which the following results are taken.
It is noticeable that the variability as measured by the standard
deviation becomes less in each succeeding year. This suggests the
question as to whether continued cropping might not tend to induce
uniformity. The records of a few of these plots which were continued
in corn for three years longer, however, do not support such a
conclusion.
It seems reasonable to expect greater variability in seasons very
unfavorable for production, such as that of 1895, because so much may
depend upon certain critical factors of production coming into play
and this suggestion may be the explanation of the high standard
deviation in this first year. Results extending over a longer series
of years would be extremely interesting in this connection.
If we consider the total range of variation in any single year, we
find differences as follows: Plots lying adjoining have shown the
following maximum variations: 18 bushels in 1895; 11 bushels in 1896;
8 bushels in 1897.
The above results give us a conception of the unaccountable plot
variations which we have to deal with in field tests. The possibility
remains that a still closer study might detect some abnormal factors
at play to account for these variations in certain cases, but the
study certainly suggests the importance of conservatism in arriving at
conclusions based upon plot tests.
The particular value that the writer has derived from this study is
the strengthening of his conviction that the only dependence to be
placed upon variety tests and other field experiments is from records
involving the average of liberal numbers and extending over long
periods of time.