Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:50:43.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The chemical effect of the addition of a “spreader” to the mixed lime sulphur-lead arsenate spray

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

W. Goodwin  and
H. Martin
W. Goodwin
Affiliation:
(Research Department, South-Eastern Agricultural College, Wye, Kent.)
H. Martin
Affiliation:
(Research Department, South-Eastern Agricultural College, Wye, Kent.)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The addition of casein to the mixed lime sulphur-lead arsenate spray causes:

(a) an increase in the amount of soluble arsenic formed on the decomposition of the spray,

(b) no change in the reactions of the polysulphide sulphur.

2. The addition of lime to the spray:

(a) decreases the formation of soluble arsenical compounds,

(b) reduces the fungicidal value of the spray owing to its reaction with the sulphur liberated from the calcium sulphide.

3. The addition of lime-casein to the mixed spray is influenced by the composition of the lime-casein.

If much free lime is present:

(a) the formation of soluble arsenic is dependent on external conditions which in certain cases tend to decrease the amount of soluble arsenic formed,

(b) the fungicidal value of the spray is reduced as in 2 (b).

If slight excess of lime is present, or if the sample has badly carbonated:

(a) the amount of soluble arsenic is increased,

(b) there is little effect on the reaction of the polysulphide sulphur.

4. The addition of gelatine to the spray:

(a) increases the formation of soluble arsenic,

(b) has no effect on the reaction of the calcium sulphide.

5. The rate of decomposition of the mixed spray is retarded by the addition of casein, lime, lime-casein and gelatine.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , October 1925 , pp. 476 - 490
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1925

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

(1)Goodwin, W. and Martin, H. (1925). Journ. Agr. Sci. 15, 307.Google Scholar
(2)Vermorel, V. (1914). Prog. Agr. et Vit. 35, 180.Google Scholar
(3)Woodman, R. M. (1925). Journ. Pomology and Hort. Sci. 4, 78.Google Scholar
(4)Gooch, F. A. and Browning, P. E. (1908). United Sta. Dept. Agr. Bur. Chem. Bull. 107, 239.Google Scholar
(5)Thatcher, R. W. and Streeter, L. R. (1924). New York Expt. Sta. Bull. 521, 12.Google Scholar
(6)Jones, C. P. (1923). Journ. Agr. Res. 25, 323.Google Scholar
(7)Robinson, R. H. (1919). Journ. Econ. Ent. 12, 429.Google Scholar
(8)Bradley, C. E. and Tartar, H. V. (1910). Journ. Ind. and Eng. Chem. 2, 7, 328.Google Scholar
(9)Divers, E. and Shimidzu, T. (1884). Journ. Chem. Soc. Trans. 45, 288.Google Scholar