Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2011 with funding from

LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation

http://www.archive.org/details/publicationsofpeOOpenn

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

THE PUBLIGATIONS

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree
Blight Commission

1911-1913

IIAKRISBURG, TA.:

IV.M, STANLEY RAY. STATE PRINTER
1915

CONTENTS

1. The Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Proceedings, Harrisburg,

February 20th and 21st, 1912. Pp. 254.

2. The Chestnut Blight Disease. Means of Indentification, Remedies Sug-

gested, and Need of Co-Operation to Control and Eradicate the Blight.
Bulletin No. 1. October, 1912. Pp. 10.

3. Treatment of Ornamental Chestnut Trees Affected with the Blight Disease.

Bulletin No. 2. October, 1912. Pp. 8.

4. Field Studies on the Dissemination and Orowth of the Chestnut Blight

Fungus, by Paul J. Anderson and D. C. Babcock. Bulletin No. 3. De
cember, 1912. Pp. 46.

5. Progress Report of the Commission, July 1 to December 31, 1912. Pp. 62.

6. The Chestnut Blight Fungus and a Related Saprophyte, by Paal J. Ander-

son and H. W. Anderson. Bulletin No. 4. December, 1912. Pp. 26.

7. The Symptoms of Chestnut Tree Blight and a Brief Description of the

Blight Fungus, by F. D. Heald. Bulletin No. 5. May, 1913. Pp. 15.

8. The Chestnut Tree. Methods and Specifications for the Utilization ol

Blighted Chestnut, by .J. P. Wentling. Bulletin No. 6. August, 1913.
Pp. 16.

9 The Morphology and Life History of the Chestnut Blight Fungus, by Paul
J. Anderson. Bulletin No. 7. December, 1913. Pp. 44.

10. Final Report of the Commission, January 1 to December 15. 1913. (Un-

numbered). Pp. 122.

11. Bibliography of the Chestnut Tree Blight Fungus, by R. Kent Beattie.

(Separate). Pp. 32*.

cn

(4)

THE CONFERENCE

Called by the Governor of Pennsylvania to Consider

Ways and Means for Preventing the Spread

of the Chestnut Tree Bark Disease

THE CAPITOL

Chamber of the House of Representatives

HARRISBURG - PENNSYLVANIA
FEBRUARY 20 and 21. 1912

Stenographic Report of Proceedings
of the Conference

Tleporled by GUILBERT & LEWIS

519 Land Tale Building

Philadelphia, Pa.

HARRISBURG:
O. E. AUQHINBAUGH, PRINTER TO THE STATE OJP PENNSYLVANIA

1912.

!ii!ii>ianfi»>li!fi»l!{i

1

s

g

fe^

g

^

fy\>

!fi

s

!fi

>fi!{i!fi>f;!Ji!li!l»;!f;>E

FOREWORD.

The folloAviiig report of the proceedings of the Uarrisbiirg
Chestnut Blight Conference is distributed Avith the compliments
and best wishes of the State of Pennsylvania. The numerous
papers and the discussions thereon contain ma,ny new and
valuable ideas. It is believed that the ultimate worth of the
Conference Avill lie in the fact that it brought home to the east-
ern United States the truth concerning a most serious tree dis-
ease, and started discussions and a new trend of thought which
must evolve real benefit for the whole people. If the Conference
can produce a better understanding and higher appreciation
respecting the value of trees, and of one tree in particular, its
calling will have been of great public benefit.

The officers chosen by the meeting take this last opportunity
of expressing to the Governor, the Chestnut Tree Blight Com-
mission and the Delegates from the States, their sense of high
appreciation for the honor conferred upon them in being invited
to preside over the deliberations of the Conference. They also
have hopes that information may be found in the folloAving pages
AS'hich will incite greater interest in the earnest work now being-
undertaken in Pennsylvania and other States to prevent the fur-
ther spread of this serious and destructive Chestnut Bark Dis-
ease.

New York, Chairman.

^S<iS A)iL^^<^^^^

rennsylvania ,

-^rOufV^^W.

Secretaries.

Maryland,

(•1)

^

(4)

OFFICIAL CALL FOR CONFERENCE.

The Official Invitation for the Chestnut Tree Bark

Disease Conference, issued by the Governor

of Pennsylvania.

mmm/'yMtWy^i

Sf>? f(rfi'?/^3 ¥:/^/^.

(5)

i.

1

(6)

1.

cent.

„ 1 ■„ ciir,wino- Infected Zones and Tercentage.

■"" per cent. 3. . . ,
Northumberland , Union ,

per

Lehigh, Berks, Lancaster and

Y^ counties, 50 per cent 3^^^>-.,^^f ^S^%Sr^^f>ero"^S.pbS:
?u'4ia, Montour, Nord^mnberl^^^^^ ^^-.^^^ ,,,,,ti,,, ^^ .?^Vd' o'n

York counties, oO per cenr. V"- '; '^'VV;:' „ ?5nvder, Juniata, Perry, Uaii
Sia, Montour, ^^^^^^^^^dS ' Sklin a^^^^^^ Adams counties, 15 per
Schuylkill Lebanon, Cumbeilam^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ quarantine line indica,

the'^S,'fheTSSed't°i^efa^ estimated at 1 to 5 per cent.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

THE PENNSYLVANIA
CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT COMMISSION.

The call issued by the Governor, iu which he urged the iin-
portauce aud necessity for prompt and concerted action in com-
bating the Chestnut Bark Disease, included the following
statement : ,

"In 1911, the Pennsylvania State Legislature passed a bill au-
thorizing the Governor to appoint a Commission of five citizens
for the j)urpose of thoroughly investigating the Chestnut Tree
Bark Disease which is rapidly destroying the chestnut trees of
the CommouAvealth. The Act placed an appropriation of |275,-
000 at the disposal of the Commission for the investigation and
scientific study of the problem, and more specifically to ascer-
tain the exact extent of the blight, and to devise ways and means
through which it might, if possible, be stamped out.

The Commission Avas appointed in June, 1911, and, after or-
ganization, began its work immediately by sending a large force
of experts into the field. The reports of these experts together
with the results of the Avork of the pathological staff, will, among
other matters, be presented for discussion to a Convention called
by the Governor to assemble at Harrisburg, February 20th,
1912.

In order that the other States not yet touched by the blight,
but certainly in its line of advance, may realize the seriousness
of the situation, the Governor, who is much interested, has called
this Convention for a consideration of ways and means, in the
hope that the States may be aroused to action and be ready to
meet the invasion at their borders. Pennsylvania's problem is
now or soon Avill become the problem of Maine, Vermont, New
Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New
York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Caro-
lina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee,
Kentucky, West Virginia, Ohio, Indiana and Michigan. Active
co-operation of the States is essential. The attendance of a
large number of Delegates is respectfully urged."

(7)

^NS**.*

(S)

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

PROGRAMME

of

THE CONFERENCE

Called by the Governor of Pennsylvania
to Consider Ways and Means

for

PREVENTING THE SPREAD

of the

CHESTNUT TREE BARK DISEASE

February 20 and 21, 1912

THE CAPITOL

Chamber of the House of Representatives

HARRISBURG - PENNSYLVANIA

An office for registration and information will be opened in one of the

ante-rooms of the House of Representatives, and it is earnestly

requested that all delegates and guests will

promptly register.

(9)

(10)

PROGRAMME

OPENING SESSION
Tuesday, February 20, 2 o'clock P. M.

ORGANIZATION OF THE CONFERENCE.

1. Call to Order and Address of Welcome to Delegates and Visit-

ing Friends^ hg the Honorable John K. Tener, Governor of
Pemisglvania.

Election of Permanent Chairman for the Conference.

Election of Two ^Secretaries.

Designation of Official Reporters.

Appointment of a Committee on Resolutions.

2. Responses to the (xovernor^s Address hg Delegates on Behalf

of the States Represented.

3. '^Historical Review and the Pathological Aspects of the Chest-

nut Bark Disease.'-

A discourse and illustrated lecture by Dr. Haven Metcalf,

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. (Dr.

Metcalf s paper will summarize the record of work to date,

and present the leading pathological features of this tree

disease.)

Many of the lantern views will be shown for the first time,
having been especially made for this occasion.

4. "Can the Chestnut Bark Disease he Controlled f'^

By Prof. F. C. SteAvart, N. Y. Agricultural Experiment
Station, Geneva, N. Y.

(11)

12

5. ^'Eow Further Research May Increase the Efficiency of the
Control of the Chestnut Bark Disease.'^

By Prof. W. Howard Rankin, Cornell University, Itliaca,
N. Y.

6. ''Recent Notes on the Chestnut Bark Disease/^

By Prof. H. R. Fulton, Division of Patliology, Pennsylva-
nia State College.

7. ''The Possibility of a Medicinal Remedy for Chestnut Blight"

By Dr. Caroline Rumbokl, in charge of the Pennsylvania
Chestnnt Tree Blight Commission's Laboratory.

8. "T^reatme^it of Individual Trees,''

By Prof. J. Franklin Collins, U. S. Department of Agri-
culture, Washington, D. C.

9. General Discussion.

EVENING SESSION
Tuesday, February 20, 8 o'clock, P. M.

1. ''Chestnut Culture."

An illustrated lecture by Prof. Nelson F. Davis, of Buck-
nell University, Lewisburg, Penna. In this lecture Prof.
Davis will exhibit the value of the chestnut trees as a source
of food (nuts), and outline the progress made in the new
American industry, chestnut cultivation.
The insect enemies of the chestnut, and the methods of con-
trolling them will be shown.

Many of the views have been especially prepared for the
occasion, and will be shown for the first time.

2. General Discussion.

MORNING SESSION
Wednesday, February 21, 9 o'clock, A. M.

ERADICATION AND CONTKOL OF THE CHESTNUT
BAIIK DISEASE.

1. ^^Tlie Pennsylvania Programme."

By Samuel B. Detwiler, Executive Ollicer of the Pennsyl-
vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

2. Reports by State Foresters^ or other officials of States repre-

sented, on the present extent of the bark disease and esti-
mate of the present and possible future loss.

o. ^'('Jicstnut BUylit and the Future of our Forests."

By Dr. II. P. Baker, Department of Forestry, State College.
Penna.

4. "Cliestnut Bliylit and Constructive Conservation."

By Dr. J. Russell Smith, Professor of Industry, University
of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.

5. Open Discussion of the Prohlenis Presented.

AFTERNOON SESSION
Wednesday, February 21, 2 o'clock, P. M.

1. Presentation of the Report of the Committee on Resolutions.

2. General Discussion.
Adjournment.

(13)

14

111 addition to tlie above staled papers on the advance pro-
gramme, others were read or formally presented as follows:

1. A paper on the "Botanical History of Diaporthe iiarasiticu

and Allied or Identical Fungi," by Prof. W. G. Farlow,
of Harvard University ; read by Prof. G. P. Clinton.

2. A paper on the "Kelation of Insects to the Chestnnt Bark

Disease,'' by Dr. A. D. Hoplvins, of the Bureau of En-
tomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, and
read by him.

3. A paper entitled "Chestnut Blight and its Possible

Remedy," by Mr. W. M. Benson, of the Oak Extract
Company, Newport, Perry Co., Pa.

4. A paper entitled "The Field Work of the Chestnut Tree

Blight Commission," by Thomas E. Francis, Field Su-
pervisor of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Com-
mission.

5. A paper entitled "A Report on Scout Work on the North

Branch of Bald Eagle Mountain, between Sylvan Dell
and Williamsport, Lycoming county. Pa.," by Hugh E.
Wells, Field Supervisor of the Penna. Chestnut Tree
Blight Commission.

Conference for Preventing the Spread of the
Chestnut Tree Bark Disease.

OPENING SESSION
Tuesday, February 20, 1912, 2 o'clock, P. M.

CALL TO OEDEE AND ADDKESS OF WELCOME TO DEL-
EGATES AND VISITING FRIENDS, BY THE HON.
JOHN K. TENER, GOVERNOR OF
PENNSYLVANIA.

GOVERNOR TENER: Gentlemen, the meeting Avill please
be in order.

Let me say at the ontset, speaking for this Commonwealth and
less for myself personally, that Ave are gratified indeed at the
splendid representation here to-day, bearing testimony to the
great Interest manifested in the work at hand.

I know that many of you have come from afar, many of you at
great inconvenience and certainly at expense to yourselves or to
the State or Association that you represent, in order that you
might meet with us here, in the Capital City of Pennsylvania,
to discuss and to consider seriously the objects and the pur-
poses of this meeting.

It is not my purpose to enter into an extended discourse upon
the subject of the chestnut tree blight or bark disease, but
rather to extend just a word of welcome to you, on behalf of
our Commonwealth and our city, and also to suggest what might
be proper for your consideration at this time; to go over briefly
the extent of this disease in the area it now covers; what it
means to us if it spreads farther, and what it has meant to us;
the value of our chestnut trees, and a suggestion of what I hope

(15)

16

you may be able to arrive at before you leave us. We know that
in conventions, we cannot exercise any governmental function;
yet we want this to be something more than a "resolve to re-
solve" meeting, and we hope that something really tangible will
result from it. I have noted just a few things which, as I
stated before, I would like to have you consider in your delibera-
tions :

This Conference has been called for the purpose of obtaining
all possible information concerning the best methods of fighting
the destructive fungous disease known, as the chestnut tree bark
disease or the chestnut tree blight, which was first detected in
the neighborhood of New York City about eight years ago, and
has since spread to the Northeast as far as Eastern Massachu-
setts, and to the Southwest as far as Central Pennsylvania,
Maryland and Northern Virginia.

This tree disease is virulent in character. To date, no specific
remedy to be applied to individual trees is known.

It seems almost unthinkable that a disease of this character
should have invaded so large an area and that no means of pre-
venting its spread is yet at hand. Unless this disease be stopped
by concerted action among the States, it is certain that within
a few years very few living wild chestnut trees will be found in
America. It is, therefore, entirely in accord with the American
spirit that we make every effort to destroy or check the advance
of this blight.

The value of the standing chestnut stock to-day in America is
enormous. In Pennsylvania alone, the wild chestnut tree is
found native throughout the State, and in its southern counties
is the principal remaining forest tree. The value of this tree in
the State of Virginia is reliably conceded by competent au-
thority to be not less than thirty-five millions of dollars. I be-
lieve that here in Pennsylvania, by a very conservative estimate,
placing a valuation of fifty cents upon each tree in our wood-
lands, which you will admit is a very low estimate, the value of
the wild chestnut trees is at least forty millions of dollars.

The best chestnut in the world is still standing in the moun-
tains of North Carolina, West Virginia, Eastern Kentucky and
Tennessee. The chestnut stock of the future must necessarily
be drawn from these states. To date, the blight has not reached

17

that region, but is steadily tending in that direction. This tree
is also of great valne in Ohio and the remaining Atlantic Sea-
board States, and by reason of the all too prevalent forest de-
strnctiou going on, the tree can ill be spared ; much less its value
wasted, as it largely will be, should the remaining chestnut
stock ^be attacked.

The destruction of the wild chestnut trees in New Jersey, in
Southeastern New York, Western Connecticut and Massachu-
setts and Southeastern Pennsylvania is marked to be complete.

The industries depending upon the wild chestnut tree for
their support are of large proportions and great value. Every
part of the tree is valuable for making tannic acid, used in the
tanning industry. Telegraph and telephone companies depend
mostly upon this tree for their stock of poles. The railroad com-
panies are largely dependent upon it for their best railroad ties.
The nuts are no inconsiderable part of this valuable product.
Many thousands of men are employed in the industries depend-
ing upon the saving of the wild chestnut tree, and many other
thousands of real estate owners will find their land' values seri-
ously affected should the tree ultimately be destroyed.

Two great facts to be borne in mind are, first, that the plague
is with us and it must be reckoned with; and second that har-
monious action and complete co-operation among all the inter-
ests involved, as well as the governments of the various states,
can and will be the only means of checking this disease, if it can
be checked. We are not so much concerned with its origin as
we, are with its presence and effects. While its botanical his-
tory and pathology are of importance, the real thing is prepared-
ness to repel the invader, using every means known to science and
practical experience.

It is, therefore, to be hoped that this aspect of the problem
will be thoroughly taken hold of and discussed from every point
of vieAv, that concerted action will be immediately inaugurated,
and no effort left unemployed that might produce desirable re-
sults. The time to act is now, and not after the scientific world
has more fully worked out the history and pathology of the dis-
ease. Present day practical measures may well be aided by
scientific inquiry, but the one by no means must wait upon the

18

other. It was because of Pennsylvania's realization of the im-
portance of this Avork that the Legislature, at its last session
enacted a bill creating a commission and defining the duties of
that commission, as well as appropriated an adequate amount to
carry on the work. Without reviewing that bill in its full text,
it might be said that the proposed Commission was given the
direction to seek out and destroy this disease. As Admiral
Dewey, you remember, at about the outset of our war witli Spain
was directed by President McKinley and the Cabinet to seek out
the Spanish fleet and destroy it, so it might be said that the
only direction given this Commission was to find this dread
chestnut bark disease, and destroy it.

That Commission has been organized, and this State is in-
deed fortunate in being able to command the services of such
splendid men, such capable men as Messrs. Sargent, Peirce,
Craig, Bodine and Ely, who have gone about their work with the
determination to do all that is possible to bring about the de-
sired results.

Were the cause of this disease known, and did we know how
to combat it and how to destroy it, a meeting of this kind would
be unnecessary; but we do know something of its ravages, how
it attacks the trees, and now we are here to consider how we
shall blot it out; how we shall arrive at tlie source of it, if pos-
sible, and then blot out the disease completely.

I am prepared now to consider a motion looking to a proper
organization of this convention for the carrying out of its work,
and for the proper recording of your deliberations to-day.

MR. HAROLD PETRCE: I would nominate, as permanent
chairman of the Conference, Dr. R. A. Pearson, former Commis-
sioner of Agriculture of the State of New York, and as secretar-
ies, Messrs. F. W. P>esley, of Maryland, and Samuel B. Det-
wiler, of Pennsylvania.

THE GOVERNOR : You have heard the motion. The ques-
tion is upon the election of Mr. R. A. Pearson, former Commis-
sioner of Agriculture of the State of New York, as chairman of
this Conference, and Messrs. F. W. Besley, of Maryland and S. B.
Detwiler, of Pennsylvania, to serve as secretaries of this Con-
ference.

The motion was put and unanimously carried.

19

THE GOVERNOR: Mr. Peai'soii is iiiianimously elected
cliairman, and Messrs. liesley and Detwiler are unanimously
elected secretaries. I Avould suggest, gentlemen, for tlie com-
plete organization for tlie transaction of your business, that
some one be selected or designated to report the proceedings of
this convention.

MR. I. C. WILLIAMS : I suggest the name of Mr. Victor G.
Marquissee, who is here prepared to report the proceedings of
this convention.

THE GOVERNOR : Without objection, the gentleman named
in the motion will report the proceedings of this Convention.
I now take very great pleasure in presenting to you, and calling
to the Chair, the Chairman whom you have elected, Mr. Pear-
son, of New York . (Applause).

Mr. Pearson took the chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: Governor Tener, Ladies and Gentlemen:
I apj)reciate that it is a great honor to be asked to preside over
3^our deliberations. I accept the honor, and thank you for it,
with appreciation also that it carries with it great responsibili-
ties, for this is an important Conference. It is important be-
cause of the great commercial interests involved, and it is also im-
portant because of the intricate scientific questions that are
involved. That its importance is well recognized could not be
better shown than by the fact that tlie Governor of this great
Commonwealth has called this Conference together, that it
meets in these splendid quarters, and that this State has taken
the lead in providing for practical, efficient work to be done in
checking the ravages of the chestnut blight, through the efforts
of a special Commission, the competency of the members of which
is recognized not only in your State, but in many other States
as well, where the work which they have begun has come to be
known.

Four months ago we held in the Capital city of New York,
a Conference of much smaller proportions than this, but called
together to consider the same questions; and at that time we
were told that it was the purpose of Governor Tener to call this
larger Conference, and we have been looking forward to this time
as an epoch-making event.

20

It lias been snggested that we should do nothing to counteract
the ravages of the chestnut tree disease, because we are not fully
informed as to how to proceed. That is un-American. It is not
the sj)irit of the Keystone State, nor the Empire State, nor the
New England States, nor the many other great States that are
represented here, to sit down and do nothing, when catastrophies
are upon us. It has been suggested that we should wait patiently
until the scientists have succeeded in working out these ques-
tions in all their minutiae; that thus we may be able to accom-
plish our results more quickly. But that is not the way that
great questions are solved. If we had waited until the appli-
cation of steam should be thoroughly understood, we would be
still waiting for our great trains and steamboats, which are the
marvel of the age. (Applause).

We know some things about this curse, and we are here to
exchange ideas; to tell, on the one hand, Avhat we have learned
through our scientific studies, and, on the other hand, what we
have learned through our practical work; and thus we believe
that at the close of this Conference, we will all go away from
here, wiser and better prepared to carry forward the great work
in which we are interested.

Now we are here for business. The Governor has given us the
keynote for the meeting. I should not take your time further in
making remarks, but let me say to 3^ou that, so far as in me lies,
these meetings will be expedited; they will begin on time; the
programme will go forward without unnecessary delays; and I
only ask that the Chair may have the sympathy and the cordial
co-operation of the many delegates who are attending the meet-
iugs, to the end that when we close, we may all feel that it was
well that we came together. Unless other arrangements are
made, the Chair will understand the usual rules of procedure
will govern our deliberations, and he will follow those rules to
the best of his ability, being always willing to be corrected or
to be overruled by those who are participating in the Conference.

Tlie Chair will now recoguize Mr. Samuel T. Bodine, of the
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

ME. BODINE : In order that the deliberations of this Con-
ference may be properly summed up, Mr. Chairman, I move
that a Committee on Eesolutions be appointed by the Chairman

21

of this Conference, of which he shall be a member ex-officio, which
Committee shall be representative of the various States inter-
ested in the wild chestnut, and represented at this Conference.
The motion was seconded.

MK. S. M. ENTERLINE, of Pottsville, Pa: I would further
add, Mr. Chairman, that these proceedings should be reported
and printed, if that be possible, and forwarded to the delegates,
as far as the supply of reports may reach.

THE CHAIRMAN : That question may come up properly a
little later. The motion now before you is on tlie api)()inlnient
of a Committee on Kesolutions.

The motion Avas put and unanimously carried.

THE CHAIRMAN : The Chair will be pleased to receive, if
the opportunity offers, sitggestions from members as to their de-
sires in this or any other matter.

The programme now calls for brief responses to the Governor's
address, and it has been suggested that the best manner of pro-
cedure will be to call the roll of States which are represented
here, asking one person from each State to make a response;
and, in order that we may get through the list promptly, unless
directed otherwise, the Chair will have to ask each State to limit
its response to three minutes. It may be that some of the first
names on the list are not prepared to respond at once. In that
case we will pass them over and return to the names a little later.

Alabama. (No response).

Connecticut.

DR. GEORGE P. CLINTON, New Haven, Conn., Expt. Sta-
tion : Mr. Chairman : I hold a commission from the Governor of
Connecticut to represent that State, with two other delegates, at
this Convention. In Connecticut we have studied this disease
somewhat longer than you have here in Pennsylvania, and we
have it in a very serious manner. I am not officially on the pro-
gramme, but I have prepared some of my ideas and views on this
subject which I wish, at the proper time, to present to this Con-
vention. I have also a paper by Professor Farlow, from Harvard
University, who has studied the history of this fungus, that I
wish at the proper time to present to the Convention for their

22

consideration. I take it that we want in this Convention, to
know everything that is known concerning the chestnut blight
and from that to deduce our conclusions. In that respect I am
prepared to present all that I know and my views on the subject,
in order that the truth, if such is known at present, may come
out.

THE CHAIEMAN: The District of Columbia. This in-
cludes the Federal Department of Agriculture. Is Professor
Collins in the room?

PEOFESSOR J. FEANKLIN COLLINkS, Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D. C. : I am not prepared to make
any remarks for the District of Columbia. I come from another
direction. I have no remarks to make particularly.

THE CHAIEMAN: We will give you an opportunity later,
Professor Collins.

The Dominion of Canada. (No response).
Delaware.

Dr. WESLEY WEBB: Mr. Chairman, Delaware sends a
delegate up here to learn the situation. Delaware itself is pretty
thoroughly infested with this disease. Every chestnut growth
and every forest has diseased trees in it. The only way to destroy
the disease in Delaware, in my opinion, is to destroy every chest-
nut tree and clean it up. I doubt if any measures short of that
would be successful; but still, something may be learned here
that will modify that opinion.

THE CHAIEMAN: Georgia. (No response).
Illinois. (No response).
Indiana. (No response).
Maryland.

ME. J. B. S. NOETON : Mr. Chairman, I had supposed that
Professor Patterson would speak for our State, as he is inter-
ested from the forestry standpoint, and I am interested in the
Experiment Station from the nursery standpoint. We will have
a problem to meet in our State in controlling this disease, and
I am sure we are very actively interested in this work, because
we are in the same condition as a few other States. We have a
large part of our area already infested, and a considerable part

23

of it that is free, so it makes it a more active and important qnes-
tion to us tlian to sections wliere the territory is entirely covered
with the disease.

THE CHAIRMAN : Massachusetts.

PROFESSOE F. AV. RANE, State Forester: Mr. Chairman,
I was sent out here by Governor Foss. I had an opportunity
to have a conference with the Governor shortly before coming.
We had hoped to bring along some of our large timber owners,
but, at the last moment, it was impossible to make arrangements.
The Governor said it would be impossible for him to be here, but
urged me to extend his compliments to you by all means. In
Massachusetts we are just beginning to realize that the chestnut
bark disease is a very serious menace to us. During the past
year we have had a man from the Department of Agriculture
with us for three months, and I have had all my assistants in the
State Forestry Department Out in the field hunting it down. We
find' that it is scattered pretty much over the State. Our simple
remedies we send out by men that are with us, and we are always
ready to assist anybody in any part of the State with any sug-
gestions possible in regard to it; but I do not care to talk about
that at the present time. I am here to learn everything possible,
and am glad to be here, I assure you.

THE CHAIRMAN : New Jersey.

DR. MELVILLE T. COOK : Mr. Chairman, in the State of
New Jersey I find, although I have been there but a short time,
that those who have looked into the situation most carefully are
inclined to believe that, so far as the State is concerned, the situ-
ation is practically hopeless. Almost every chestnut growth in
the State is infected at the present time. We expect, of course,
to do some work in combating the chestnut blight, because we
will not give up until the chestnut timber is entirely destroyed.
While the majority of those who have been making a study of the
conditions over the State look upon the situation as hopeless, yet
we can say that there has some good come out of evil, because at
the present time the people are wike-awake to the importance of
the careful study of plant diseases. At the present time there
is no difficulty, whatever, in getting the people to listen to any

24

advice that looks toward the protection of the natural interests
of the State. So the State of New Jersey greets the Convention
here to-day with honest hopes that something may be accom-
plished which will advance the pnblic interest and welfare.

THE CHAIEMAN : New York.

GEOEGE G. ATWOOD: Mr. Chairman, the State of Ncav
York appreciated very highly the honor extended by the invita-
tion of the Governor to be here to-day, so as many as possible of
the delegation accepted with pleasure. We are here to-day to
learn something in order to perfect a plan that has been brew-
ing in New York State. New York State has a large chestnut
area to save. We have a small section of the State where the
chestnuts are practically gone. Arrangements are being per-
fected for carrying on the Avork under the advice of the botanists
of our stations, and we hoj^e soon to have a forest plant patholo-
gist, working either with the Department of Agriculture or with
the Conservation Commission. The Governor of the State is very
much interested in this proposition. We are waiting for some
definite plan, which will be taken hold of as quickly as it can
be devised, and as thoroughly as the necessities of the case re?
quire.

THE CHAIRMAN: North Carolina. (No response).
Ohio.

DR. xYUGUSTINE D. SELBY : Mr. Chairman, Ohio is very
much interested in this Conference, because Ohio lies in the
western part of the Appalachian chestnut belt, and, as State
Pathologist, the problems of the chestnut bark disease would be-
come our laboratory and field problems. As yet we are not aware
that the disease exists in Ohio, although it may be so ; but we are
perfectly aware that our success is indissolubly bound up with
the success of Pennsylvania and the states to the east of it. If
Pennsylvania, either by reason of a natural change in conditions
by which the parasite of this chestnut bark disease becomes less
virulent, or by the trees becoming more resistant, is not able to
save a portion of its chestnut growth, then Ohio will not be. If,
on the other hand, Pennsylvania and West Virginia, as well as
New York, are able to save their trees from the wrecking of this
disease, then Ohio Avill realize the advantages of such a Confer-

25

ence and such work. I assure you tliat whatever efforts are made
by this Conference, or wliatever conclusions are reached by this
Conference and whatever efforts are made by other States, these
will be suj)j)lemented with vigor in our own area. Personally, of
course, we are without experience in the disease. For ourselves,
we feel that we have in the chestnut bark disease one of those
occasional and epoch-making parasites which has arisen from the
unknown and wrought incredible damages; that it will continue
its aggressiveness through a long period may or may not prove
to be true. If it i)rove to be true, then our difficulties are very,
very great. If tlie (((iidiHoiis |ir(»ve more favorable, our forests
may be preserved.

THE CHAIRMAN: Eliode Island.

JESSE B. MOWPvY, State Forester: Mr. Chairman, in be-
half of the State of Rhode Island and the other delegates repre-
senting that State, I desire to acknowledge the very cordial wel-
come extended to us by the Governor of Pennsylvania. Last sum-
mer a systematic insi)ection of the State of Rhode Island was
made, under direction of Professor Collins, and this disease was
found to exist in the chestnut-growing portions of the State. We
are very glad to be here, to learn what we can about it, and to
profit by the pioneer work which the State of Pennsylvania is
doing in behalf not only of its own Commonwealth, but in the
interest of all the other States which grow the wild chestnut
tree.

THE CHAIRMAN: Tennessee. (No response).

Vermont. (No response).

Virginia.

MR. GEORGE P,. KEEZELL : Mr. Chairman, on behalf of
the General Assembly of Virginia, I desire to return thanks to
the Executive of this great Commonwealth for the invitation to
be present on this occasion, and to take part in these delibera-
tions. So far as Virginia is concerned, we are at this time per-
haps fortunate in tlie fact that, if we have this dread disease with
us, we have so far had very little complaint of it. We are not here
to give any experience of our own which may be helpful to others,
but to learn from others what mav be of benefit to the whole

26

Commonwealth of Virginia. As was suggested by the Governor
in his remarks, a great deal of the wealth of the Commonwealth
of Virginia is in our chestnut timber interests. Within the last
decade her chestnut timber has been the source of a great deal of
income to Virginia, and of a great deal of wealth. Its more re-
cent use, for tannic acid, has brought into great value the waste
places of the State, and timber heretofore regarded as not very
valuable has become one of the most valuable assets of the Com-
monwealth. Naturally, we are very much interested in anything
that goes toward the preservation of this valuable timber, and at
this time we are especially grateful for the invitation to be here,
because our General Assembly is now in session, and bills have
already been introduced looking toward appropriations to com-
bat this disease ; and we are particularly anxious to get all the in-
formation we can here, in order that we may go back and give our
legislators the necessary facts. T have no doubt provisions will
be made by the Commonwealth to fight the ravages of this dis-
ease.

THE CHAIEMAN : West Virginia.

DR. N. J. GIDDINGS: Mr. Chairman and Ladies and
Gentlemen: I can assure you that the peoj)le who are most in-
terested in West Virginia appreciate the opportunity which this
Commonwealth has offered for meeting here and considering
matters in regard to the chestnut bark disease. The chestnut in
West Virginia is a very important tree. Just recently I learned
of shipments from one station amounting to one hundred and
fifty-five thousand pounds of chestnuts, — the wild nuts, — during
last fall, and there may be other shipments that run as high,
or higher.

The annual cut of chestnut in West Virginia for the last two
years has been about one hundred and eighteen million feet, and
has neither increased or decreased; but the disease is present in
the State. To what extent, we do not know. We are in hopes
to have at least one or two men in the field this spring to learn
more in regard to the conditions in the State, and we hope to be
in a position, after getting the details which we may from this
Conference, to go back and undertake the work in a much better
manner than we otherwise could.

27

THE CHAIRMAN : For the Dominion of Canada, the Chair
will call on Dr. H. T. Gussow, of Ottawa, the Dominion iJotanist.

DK. GUSSOW: Mr. Chairman: On behalf of the Depart-
ment of Agriculture of the Dominion of Canada, I am here to
thank you for your very great courtesy in asking us to jjartici-
pate in this very important meeting. I may say that, as far as
we are concerned in Canada, we have not this dreaded disease at
the present time, and we have been very anxious to avoid the im-
poi'tation of it across the border, by passing stringent legislative
measures prohibiting the importation of chestnuts of any kind,
nursery stock or even chestnut wood, or anything else connected
with chestnuts. I find that tliis will probably be the only means
to restrict the disease to the States in which it is found at the
present moment, and I can only extend to you, neighbors of the
United States, my best wishes to succeed in combating, or at
least, restricting this very serious disease.

THE CHAIRMAN : Are there other States represented who
have been passed over? Are there any States we have not heard
from?

MR. J. W. FISHER, of Tennessee: Mr. Chairman, we are
very greatly interested in this subject, because we have such a
marvelous growth of chestnut in Tennessee. It is receiving very
considerable attention at the present time from the axemen, for
lumber and tannic acid. It has a vital connection with our water
sources, because it covers the area so completely that if it were
destroyed, it would vitally affect vast water powers and irriga-
tion. We are therefore, extremely interested that you, in your
deliberations, should find some means of checking this disease,
that we may have our forests preserved to us. I shall take a great
deal of pleasure in reporting whatever I can to our Governor,
Hon. Benjamin Hooper, whom I have known for years and who
comes from our town, so I think I am in an attitude to bring the
attention of the State to this matter, and I sliall be extremely
glad to do so.

THE CHAIRMAN: Are there still other States represented,
who have not been heard from? A number of delegates are ex-
pected in later in the day. You will all agree with the Chair

28

when he suggests that it is very much like having the play of
Hamlet with Hamlet left out, wheu we fail to hear from the great
State of Pemisylvania ; but, as usual, this State asserts her
modesty, and has insisted on being excused for the present. The
Chair will assure 3^ou that later we will hear from the State of
Pennsylvania, and from more than one person.

Unless it is otherwise decided by motion and vote, the
Chair will request tJiat all resolutions be handed in at the desk,
without taking the time of the Conference to read them, to be
referred directly to tlie Committee on Kesolutions. This, how-
ever, may be overruled if tlie delegates desire to take the matter
into tlieir own hands.

I am informed that provision has been made for registration
at one of the ante-rooms outside of the entrance to this chamber,
and each one is earnestly requested to register his name, home ad-
dress, official iDosition, and his temporary Harrisburg address.

The program now calls for an address upon the "Historical
Review and the Pathological Aspects of the Chestnut Bark Dis-
ease," by Dr. Haven Metcalf, of the United States Department
of Agriculture. It is with the greatest regret that we have
learned of the serious illness of Dr. Metcalf, which makes it im-
possible for him to be i)resent at this time. Fortunately, however,
we have with us Professor J. Franklin Collins, the Assistant
Pathologist in the Federal Department of Agriculture, and Pro-
fessor Collins has kindly consented to address us at this time.

ADDRESS OF PROFESSOR J. FRANKLIN COLLINS, OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, WASH-
INGTON, D. C.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen : It is with very great
regret, for many reasons, as you can imagine, that I have to take
Dr. Metcalfs place here. I came here rather unprepared to
take his place. The accident to Dr. Metcalf occurred on Satur-
day night, and I had the chance to see him only a little while on

Xo. o-l. Distrilnitioii of the chestnut bark disease. Horizontal lines indicate
approximate distribution of uninfected chestnut: dots indicate isolated infected
spots ; the heavier lines in various directions indicate varying degrees of infection
culminating in an area about New York City in which all chestnut trees are dead.

Xo. 1. Branch of a chestnut tree showing a disease lesion on smooth bark.

No. 2. Portion <if a branch of chestnut tree, exhibiting a lesion started around
dead stub, the pustules being especially prominent.

No. 4. Surface section of chestnut bark, with pustules in the crevices.
Lower illustration shows pustule greatly enlarged, fiom which three spore
tlireads have been produced.

29

Siiuday. I have come liere without many of liis ideas. JJowever,
he has some slides Avhich are to be shown, and perhaps 1 can
tell you something about those, and so add to their interest.

Before the slides are shown, I want, very briefly, to give a short
sketch of the history of this disease. It will be very brief, and
of a general nature only. The history of the disease has already
been published in quite a number of cases, so I will touch only
upon the main points.

Our attention was first called to this disease, I believe, in the
fall of 1904 by Dr. Merkel, of tlie Bronx Zoological Park, in New
York city. He noticed that chestnut trees were dying in greater
numbers than seemed to be w^arranted by any previous knowledge
of the dying of chestnuts. He looked the matter carefully over,
as I understand it, and decided that there was a definite disease
there, and later turned the material over to Dr. Murrill, of the
New York Botanical Gardens. Dr. Murrill studied this disease
and later published his findings upon it, naming the fungus which
caused the trouble, Diuporthe parasitica^ a new species of the
genus. At that time, I believe. Dr. Murrill stated that it was a
very serious disease, and sent out a warning to that effect. If
1 am misquoting him, I hope he will correct me, for he is in this
room to-day. It was not until 1907, three jeara after the dis-
covery of this disease, that a laboratory was established in Wash-
ington for the study of tree diseases. Since that time — almost
immediately and since theii — certain investigations, both in the
laboratory and in the field, have been carried on in Washington.
I do not propose to say anything about these studies at the pres-
ent time. Mj point here is to give you a general idea of tlie
disease, wliat it looks like, how it affects a tree, and tilings of
that sort, — a general discussion of the topic. This review will
be, will necessarily have to be, primarily an explanation of the
views which will be thrown on the screen. I may elaborate at
points, but, as I say, I am not primed as Dr. Metcalf would have
been had he been able to be here. I think perhaps we may as well
proceed to the views at once.

Slide No. 1. Tliis, to begin with, sliows a diseased spot, as
we will find it on the smooth bark of a brancli of a chestnut tree,
a branch which is perhaps anywhere from three to six inches
in diameter. The disease is a fungous disease, and starts its

30

gTowlli from a very miscroscopic, one-celled body, which we know
as a spore. By some means the spore reaches a place in the
bark of tlie chestnnt, where conditions are favorable for its
growth. Its growth is not essentially different from that of the
spores of other fungi. It consists mainly, or principally, of a
threadlike growth coming from the spore. This threadlike growth
branches, and finally we have a great mass of threadlike fila-
ments. In the case of the chestnut disease, the spore may gain
entrance at some point, say here, or some little break here, pos-
sibly (indicating on slide), and perhaps occasionally without any
break at all in the bark. The growth in the bark continues to in-
crease in size, that is, the general area of the growth, and sooner
or later, the same as in practically^ all plants, we have a fruiting
stage of this fungus. This view shows some of these fruiting
stages, as we ordinarily see them on the chestnut. Some of the
stages, which are not quite so common, will be shown a little
later ; but I want to call your attention to the fact that, from this
point to the point away over there (indicating) we have an area
of disease. As a rule the bark in the smooth-barked limbs is
somewhat sunken, where the limbs are two or more inches in di-
ameter. Where they are below that diameter, the diseased area
may be an enlargement rather than a depression in the bark.
These little yellowish spots which j^ou see all over here, many of
them, are smaller than the head of a pin. They are of various
colors, but usually some tint of yellowish brown or orange, or
sometimes they weather to a darker color. Those pustules are
what we know as the fruiting pustules of this fungus. These
pustules, during the growing season, in the summer as a rule,
produce a certain type of spore, and later in the season, or at a
later stage in the age of the disease, at least another type of
spore. For convenience we will speak of the first type as the
summer spores and those of the later stage as the winter spores.
No. 2. This shows a similar branch with a lesion, which has
started evidently from around this old dead stub, and this has
spread until we get the diseased area from this point, from here
probably, (indicating) up to the top of the picture. Now dur-
ing the summer, or rather after a rainy spell which is followed
by a dry spell, perhaps two days or one day or three days after
the rain has ceased, we shall find that these pustules, or fruiting

■'¥;<

1.^.-

31

spots, have im.slKid out, ti liLLle mass, a Uu'cadlikc mass, in much
the same Avay as you would press out the paste from a collapsible
tube by pinching the tube. As a result we get, perhaps, from
one of these pustules, anywhere from one to fifteen or twenty
structures of that sort, (indicating) which are, of course, here
greatly magnified. This represents the pustule at the base, this
yellow area; and this is one of the threadlike masses which has
been forced out by the swelling of the mucilaginous matter in
the pustule.

No. 3. Each one of those masses shown at the right hand side
of the view is composed of many hundreds of thousands of spores,
no larger than bacteria. One of these spores may, so far as we
know, under favorable conditions, reproduce this fungus and con-
sequently reproduce the disease, if it starts growth in the proper
place.

No. 4. This shows simply a somewhat larger view of one of
those pustules, from which three of those spore threads have
been produced. At the upper part of this picture we have a sur-
face view of the chestnut bark in which we find the pustules
gathered in the crevices. This is rather characteristic on chest-
nut bark that is of a sufficient age to be cracked. Only on smooth
chestnut bark, as a rule, do we find these pustules all over the
bark. In the cracked bark we find them primarily, if not entirely,
in the crevices.

No. 5. There we have a section of a small branch that shows
some of these pustules, and above some of these threads as they
appear on the bark of the chestnut. I have nothing special to
say about that view, except that, so far as the color is concerned,
we are apt to get it just that color, but quite as often somewhat
darker, with a little orange or reddish tint to the pustule.

No. 6. Now if we take one of those areas of disease on smooth
bark and cut into it, if we shave the top of the bark off with a
sharp knife, — suppose we take just such a case as we have at the
left here (in fact this is made from the same branch) and shave
it so as to show what is beneath,— we get a discolored area, a
rather characteristic area, which is not shown as well in this
view as it will be in another; but remember that this view at the
right represents such a branch as that at the left, with the sur-
face of the bark removed with the knife.

32

No. 7. Here is a view wliicli represents a branch, from which
the surface of the bark has been shaved in the same manner as
in the last view, bnt here we have the characteristic fanlike mott-
ling, which we often get in the bark beneath the surface. Some
times the effect which you see here is produced immediately be-
neath the surface of the bark, at other times down in the middle
of the bark, and at other times you have to get in pretty well to-
wards the wood in order to find this characteristic marking, de-
pending largely upon whether there is a perfect epidermis, or
perfect skin, over the bark, or whether there is a corky layer;
but it is not entirely gauged by those characters. This line (in-
dicating) representing the line of discoloration; the infection
started at this point and radiated in all directions from the com-
mon starting point. Of course, if we shaved off the other side
of that branch, we should have expected to find about the same
condition of affairs there; but liere we have shown only the half
circle of the more or less circular area of tlie disease.

No. 8. Here are two branches of a chestnut tree, an orchard
tree as I recall it. These branches are about four or five inches
in diameter. This represents a very common appearance on
chestnut in the smooth-bark stage. Of course, this has begun to
crack more or less from age. That is not an exceptional case by
any means, as all who have seen the disease will readily realize.

No. 9. This represents another case of a diseased portion, in
which tlie disease started about at this point (indicating). One
of these cracks probably represents the positiou of the starting
point of the disease, and it has radiated in all directions, tending
to form the circular mass which is shown here, running down
there and across the bottom and of course off of the view entirely
at the right. That is a grafted tree, hj the way, and the enlarged
portion at the middle of the tree represents the graft line.

No. 10. This is merely a section of a little older piece of bark,
where we get the pustules of a darker color, that is, more of the
brownish tinge, as we often do in weathered bark. This, as I
said a moment ago, is found in material which lias withstood the
weather for some time.

No. 11. This is another vieAV which shows merely some of
the older pustules. This is intended more to represent the winter
stage of the fungus. I do not think, however, that you will be

No. 6. Sections of smooth-barked chestnut twigs showing- disease lesions. Sur-
face of bark removed from right-hand specimen, showing discolored and diseased
areas.

: ^mtrntgammmmmga^^^-' . ^ ■ ' *^j^|ifl|

W\ji^m

J^l

Cii'^: H

m^fM

-^^^^HjHjJI^K? >** :. ^9h

No. 7.

Characteristic fan-like mottling revealed by

branch.

shaving the bark of a diseased

No. 8. A large area of disease pustules on a smooth-barked orchard tree.

graph by Prof. Collins.

-Photo-

No. 9. Bark removed from over a canker, showing the cracks at the centre and
the fan-shaped spread of the yellowish fungous mycelium; also, at the lower edge,
the circular margin of the disease. — Photograph by Prof. Collins.

33

able to make oii't the individual litllu spots wliidi i^o (o make
up one of these commou masses. TJie winter stage of this dis-
ease produces- its spores down in the bark; tliat is, down beneath
the surface of the bark, and so also does the summer spore stage,
except that in the summer spore stage they are extruded in the
form of these threads, wliile the winter spores are not extruded in
the same Avay, although they are extruded later.

No. 12. Tliis view represents a diseased spot on an orcliard
tree. The diseased spot is less than three 3'ears old, but more
than two years old, according to the records which were kept.
This shows, at the upper part of the picture, how the bark soon
loosens and later falls from the tree and the branches, until
linally we have simply the bare trunk or a bare branch left.
Sometimes this bark breaks away in less than two j^ears, to much
the extent that is shown there.

No, 13. Here is a small twig of a chestnut. A little while ago
I mentioned the fact that, in tiie smaller twigs, we sometimes
had an enlargemeiit when the disease was present, rather than a
depression. Here at the left we get the normal size of the twig,
and then, running out this way towards the apex of the branch,
we see where the disease started, and we have this considerable
swelling. This is quite characteristic, under certain conditions,
of twigs which are less tlian a half inch in diameter. It some-
times occurs in larger branches, but as a rule we get it quite com-
monlj^ in this type of branch.

No". 14. In the older trees, where the bark has become deeply
furrowed, I said that we found the diseased pustules almost en-
tirely in the cracks or crevices of the bark. This represents the
surface, — greatly magnified, of course, and beyond what you
might imagine,^ — and some of the furrows. We get the yellowish-
orange pustules in the crevices there, and in various places,
whereas the other parts, the raised places, show no pustules at
all.

No. 15. So mucli for the disease as it appears on the branches.
Now when the disease appears on a branch, or on the trunk of a
tree, it starts from the common point and radiates in all direc-
tions, forming the more or less circular area of disease. Of
course, on the trunk of a tree it goes up the trunk from the com-

3

34

moil point, down the trunk, and around the trunk. When
these portions of the disease which go around the trunlv meet on
the other side, we have a brancli or a trunk wliich we speak of as
girdled. Now a girdled branch, or a girdled twig, or a girdled
trunk, means the early death of all parts of the tree beyond the
girdled area. If it is a twig, it means the death of the twig be-
yond the girdled area. If it is the trunk, it means the death of
the Avhole tree at once, or soon after the girdling is completed;
not immediately, as a rule. Now I want to call your attention to
some of the obvious effects of this girdling upon the foliage of
the tree. When you are looking for this disease during the sea-
son of foliage, it can be detected oftentimes at a great distance.
I have myself detected diseased trees more than a mile away, or
trees supposed to be diseased, by the characteristics which I WLUit
to call your attention to now. To be sure, you must bear in mind
that the coloration of the leaves to Avhich I am going to call your
attention can at times be brought about by other things than tliis
disease; but we have in the coloration of the leaves, as we gener-
ally say, the "danger signal" which suggests where to look for the
disease; for, if the disease has been going on very long, for a few
months, or weeks even, in certain places, we shall get some of
these discolored leaves as the result of the girdling of some one
or more of the twigs or branches. I have shown here a somewhat
normal chestnut leaf. It is a little broader than the normal leaf;
til is is intended to represent not, perhaps, a perfectly'- typical
chestnut leaf, because we have on the margin a little paler green
than in tlie portion in the centre. The pale green in the margin
of every leaf at times, is one of the first symptoms of discolora-
tion. It becomes a little pale. First of all, i^erhaps, the leaf
wilts a little, if you notice it carefully, and if this paleness of the
leaves is extended over the leaves of a whole branch, the effect as
a whole is quite noticeable.

No. 16. Here is a greenhouse plant which has been inoculated
with the disease. At the left we find some of the normal chest-
nut leaves; at the right a branch which had been inoculated and
has been girdled way down here. (Indicating). Now I do not
know about that particular specimen, but, if we were looking for
the disease on such a specimen as that, we should never look up
here for it, that is, not primarily. What is causing the trouble

^^^B^^Vj. ^^F M ^^B* i& ^

f «'*' .^^''^^

^#"-|*|l»!^3

« flp . HM> '^r^M^^^^^^^^^^l^^k

■^B *^ j^^BS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^K^^^^^^^^^ m

No. 10. Bark shewing- pustules of a dark color or of a brownish tint, due to longer
exposure to weather. — Photo<nai)h hi/ Prof. Collins.

No. 12. Diseased chestnut tree slowiu'^- shredded bark after two or three years in-
fection.— Photograph hn Prof. Collins.

No. 13. Small twig of chestnut with enlargement due to disease. At the left side
the normal size of the twig is shown.

No. 1'). 'Soi'mal chestnut kaf. A pale green in the margin is one of the first
symptoms of discoloration and disease.

35

with that stem is down licrc soiiiewhen;, down behnv all these
dead leaves. That applies to looking for the disease on the tree,
or on the sprouts or suckers Avliich may come np from the l)ase
of a tree.

No. 17. In very young nursery stock, or the young sprouts
A\'hich come up from a tree, or tlie vigorous growth on a tree, on
ihe twigs at least, we often get this type of the <lisease at its vei*y
beginning. This is often more brilliantly colored than sliown in
this view. It is very conspicuous indeed, particularly on nursery
stock. Although the view does not show any fruiting pustules
at all, by cutting into that area we get the characteristic mottled
mycelium or vegetative stage of the fungus beneath the bark.

No. 18. Now we have a branch which show^s the Avithered and
yellowish leaves. This yellow color follows along after the pale
green color. It is not a pure yellow, as a rule, although some-
times it has been quite strikingly of a pure yellow color. You
will notice that the leaves wither after awhile; that is, they
cruniple up after a time and that crumpling is shown, to a certain
extent, in this view; and also the yelloAV color.

No. 19. A little later we have the deeper color. This shows
the browner coloration around the margin of the leaves. At the
left we have two leaves which sliow merely the beginning of the
discoloration. At the right the leaf is somewhat crumpled, bent,
and discolored.

No. 20. This is a stage much the same as that of the little
l>rancli which was shown Ihi'ee views back, this showing a larger
view of the same thing.

No. 21. Finally the leaf assumes a somewhat l)roAvnish tint,
which is shown here. The leaves in this condition are often more
crumpled and curled up than shown here. These two leaves have
been flattened out somewhat so as to show the color.

No. 22. Now to take some of the woodland views, to show
how the disease looks in the landscape. Here is a large tree
which, owing to lack of special instruction as to the coloring of
it, lacks one or two features which it ought to have. For instance,
this branch up here, and that whole branch (indicating), ought
to have shown the yellow lu'own color. The coloring, however,
was not noticed in time to give instructions in regard to it. This
view, however, is shown primarily to represent the type of tree

wliicli is so valuable in the lai-ge estates in the various States.
This particular tree had a eircninference, above the settee which
is there, of more than nineteen feet. The view was taken three
years ago. That tree now has only two or three of the green
branches left and the whole top of the tree is cut off. I am sorry
I do not have the other views to go Avith this, but through some
slip someAvhere they were not forwarded to be shown.

No. 23. NoAV we have a view in which the disease has a start
np in this corner, and the discoloration of the leaves, or the
masses of leaves, is here shown. Now a discoloration of this sort,
particularly when it comes to a little later stage and has a more
brilliant color, is quite conspicuous in the landscape. This view
does not do credit by any means to the point which is intended to
be brought out here.

No. 24. Here is a vieAV taken on Long Island, which shows
the effect on the tree ; a tree which has been nearlj^ killed by the
disease, showing the practically defoliated type of tree. Here
is another type, (indicating), which has become badly diseased,
and we have a bunch of sprouts appearing at this point, also here,
and also basal sprouts coming up. These sprouts are rather char-
acteristic; perhaps I should not say characteristic, but they are
commonlj^ found connected with this disease, and are supposed
to be more or less characteristic of the disease, but the sprouts
can be produced by other means than as a result of the disease.

No. 25. Another tree, also on Long Island, in which all but
two of the lower limbs on the left hand side have been killed by
girdling from the disease, and now we have remaining only those
two, or perhaps three, lower left hand limbs.

No. 26. This is a tree showing the sprout growth which I
alluded to in one of the last pictures, to even better advantage.
Notice the sprouts which come up around the base, and the
sprouts which come from the trunk at various places up in the
crown.

No. 27. There you have another ty]»e (tf the same thing, a more
pronounced example, in which the sprouts are confined almost
entirely to the trunk of the tree and everything is dead or dying,
except perhaps one or two branches.

No. 28. This view is shown in order to call to your attention
this particular tree (indicating), which shows four good lesions

No. 10. A green-house chestnut tree in pot. three months after artitieial imieuhition
with summer spores. PliotorjrupJi hi/ Brciar.

'^-

No. 17. Early effect of the disease upon young chestnut sprouts and nursery stock.

No. 18. Characteristic withered and yellowish leaves on chestnut twig infected

with the disease.

37

of the disease, diseased spots, on the truiilv of tlie tree. That is
the way the tree looks when this disease attacks the trunk. That
tree is practically dead. The lower part, represented by the
loAver half of tliat picture, shows some life.

No. 29. In the course of two or three years we find that the
bark begins to peel from tlie trunks of the trees. At the left we
have a tree which has only recently been killed, that is, within
a year or so perhaps, and the next one to it is one which is a little
older, and the bark has begun to peel otf. The one which is so
prominent is probably the first in the group which was attacked
and killed, and the bark has practically disappeared from the
Iree, so far as this view shows.

No. 30. Now to consider the more general appearance of the
woodland, here is a view taken in Forest Park, Brooklyn, along
the Boulevard. This is one of the main boulevards through the
Park, and any of you Avill have no difficulty in picking out the
chestnuts. They are the most conspicuous objects. Not one of
the green trees you see there is a chestnut.

No. 31. Here is another view taken, I think, at Port Jeffer-
son on Long Island. It may have been a New^ Jersey view; I
am a little uncertain as to just where it was taken. That shows
the young growth coming up and becoming diseased, and shows
the effect along the hedgerow that we get from this disease.

No. 32. This is one of the most southern stations which we
know for the disease. This vieAV was taken in South-western Vir-
ginia, in Bedford, county. The more prominent trees there have
lost the bark entirely. Those trees, I understand, have been cut
out and no longer exist.

No. 33. If you want to see what the chestnut disease can do
in a very nearly pure stand of chestnuts, there is a view which
will show it. That was take]i in Forest Park on Long Island.
Any of you who have been in Forest Park will probably recognize
that view.

No. 34. The next view, I think, is another view of a little
different portion of the same Park. These trees at the right are
not chestnuts at all. This one up here, I believe, is a chestnut
and there are some oaks there at the left.

No. 35. I want to call your attention to the distribution of the
chestnut, and, to do so, T wnnt (o call your atlention to this map.

38

This map represents the eastern portion of the United States
and the horizontal lines represent the approximate general dis-
tribution of the chestnut tree. It may not be exact. I think most
any of you who live at or near the border line represented here
would have some suggestions to offer, but the map has been coni-
I)iled from as reliable general sources as we could obtain. Thus
we have the chestnut from northern Mississippi, through
northern Alabama and Georgia, northwestern South Carolina,
western North Carolina, u]) through this region and up into the
northwestern edge of Androscoggin county in Maine. In NeAV
Hampshire and Vermont there are only a fcAV cliestnuts present,
as compared with tlie region farther soutli. Down through here
(pointing to the southern Alleghanies), we have our great chest-
nut stand, j)articularly on the western slope of the mountains.
In the State of Connecticut a bulletin which was published with-
.in a few years stated that x^robably more than fifty per cent, of
the forest trees in Connecticut were chestnuts. That was on
very good authority, and I do not hesitate to quote it. In Ehode
Island the chestnut is of a little less importance, but probably
pretty nearly half of the trees in Rhode Island are chestnuts.
The proportion furtlier south I am not so well informed about,
but we have the bulk of the heavy chestnut timber south of tlie
Potomac River. The black area on the map represents the places
where practically all the chestnuts are now dead, and the various
forms of lines which are shown on the map represent varying de-
grees of infection, until we come down to the line right here. ( In-
dicating). Tliese vertical lines represent the approximate limits
of what you might call somewhat general infection. The blaclv
spots which are shown there represent the outlying spots of infec-
tion, so far as we knew them in December. Here is the line
througli Pennsylvania. The eastern part of Pennsylvania is
I)retty well infected with the disease, and the work now being
done in this region, (indicating), will be told about a little
later by someone who is better informed than I am.

In closing this address, I want to read just a few words and,
if we can have the lights now, I will finish in about two or three
minutes.

Having seen what this disease is and what it is doing, we now
come to tlie (|uesti<>ii wliich, I take it, we are gatliered here to

•asuosip ai[i
Xq .t-.in[[Mi.o JO 53a,T;ia rao.ij iU]} q^'iuAVd.iq Sui.uoqs -jnnj.St:!!.! r-qj jo saABaq •];- -ox;

aq; jo 9S-b;s psDn-BApB ob ;b ^in:)saqo eq; jo s9ab9[ pa.TOiODSip puB papn^ -Qo 'OM

•asBesip ^q:^ ^fq pasnBO
S3AB9I JO ,§u!|.iao puc snoi;B.io[oos;p s'ui4iqiqxa ;mqsaqo aqi jo saABa^ -qj^ -qs^

39

answer as best we can : AVliat are we going to do about it? That
is the question. Three conditions lie open before us, as we see it :

First: Do nothing; lie down and let the disease spread as far
as it will, and destroy as much property as it can. It must be
acknowledged that there is ami)le precedent for this course, us
well as ample scientific support. Beyond question, this is the
easiest thing to do.

Second: Conduct scientific investigations of the disease, but
make no attempt to control the disease until these investigations
yield conclusive results. Sucli a course would unquestionaltly
yi(dd results which wouhl be valuable in future epidemics of dis-
ease, but it would not save the chestnut trees at this time. The
President of the Cariu^gie Institution, in a recent address, enun-
ciated the principle tliat the results of scientific research must
be stated in decades, not in years. We must investigate the dis-
ease as thoroughly as possible, but investigation alone, without
application, will not save the trees.

Third : Investigate as thoroughly as possible, devote as much
money as possible to research on the fundamental problems re-
lating to the disease, but, at the same time, put into force im-
mediatel}^ whatever measures against the disease appear to be
most j)romising, recognizing clearly that there is not time first to
prove absolute efficiency. I am informed that, as an immediate
result of the recent burning of the Equitable Building in New
York city, a special commission was appointed to devise better
methods of fighting fires in the congested business section of New
York. The appointment of the commission was necessary and
will unquestionably yield excellent future results; but I notice
that the Ncav York Fire Department, went ahead and did its best
to put out the Equitable Building fire, without waiting for the re-
ports of any commissions. It appears to me that we are in mucli
tlie same situation. The fire is burning too fast for us to wait for
the reports of experiments which will take from two to ten years
time to carry out. We must go ahead, using the best methods
that we have, and leave the results to the future. (Applause).

THE CHAIRMAN: I am sure everyone will agree that this
talk has been both instructive and interesting, and we are par-
ticularly indebted to Professor Collins for stepping in at the
eleventli hour, as he has done, and favoring us so generously.

40

, PEOFESSOR SELBY: Mr. Chairman, would it not be
proper for ns to send, on behalf of this Convention, at this time,
an expression of our sjmpatliy with Dr. Metcalf in his serious
accident? I move you that such an expression be sent by the
Convention.

Seconded by Mr. I. C. Williams.

THE CHAIEMAN: Such a motion naturally would go at
once to the Eesolutions Committee, but the Chair is glad to malie
an exception in this case. Professor Selby moves that this Con-
ference send a message of sympathy to Dr. Metcalf, with hopes
for his speedy recovery.

The motion was put and unanimonsl,y carried.

THE CHAIRMAN : The Chair will appoint Professor Selby
a Committee of One to prepare and forward the message.

The next on the program is a paper entitled "Can the Chestnut
Barlv Disease be Controlled?" by Professor F. C. Stewart, of the
New York Agricultural Experiment Station.

CAN THE CHESTNUT BAEK DISEASE BE CON-

TEOLLED?

By PROF. F. C. STEWART, Neio York Agricultural Experiment Station.

Mr. Chairman and Ladies and Gentlemen: My views are so
much at variance with Avhat I conceive to be the sentiment of
this Conference tliat I hesitated somewhat to present them. I
feel like one throwing water on a fire which liis friends are dili-
gently striving to kindle. But a sense of my duty to the public
and, also, myself, ijupels me to proceed.

I assume that you are all familiar witli the method of control
which has been recommended, namel}-, the one wliich has been
outlined by Dr. Metcalf and Prof. Collins in Farmers' Bulletin
No. 467, so I shall not take time to explain it. If you are not
familiar with it, you will become familiar with it before the
close of this meetini>-.

No. 23. Very early stage; infection of twigs in top of trees, at upper right-
hand side. Lancaster county, Penna. — i^lwtogiaph by Prof. Collins.

No. 24.

Type of diseased chestnut tree on Long Island, New York,
characteristic sprouts. — Photonraph hy Prof. Collins.

showins

No. 25. Tree nearly dead from the disease. Only the two lower left-hand
branches remain alive. Scene near Cold Spring, New York. — Photograph hij Prof.
Collins.

No. 26. Chestnut trees on Long Island. New York, showing the effect of the
girdling of the tree by the chestnut bark disease. — Photograph ly Prof. Collins.

^M

' 'i J

„ .

-^:^' '\

'\\

'%£

I /•

v/

•

^^

1

-i3[

'

Mi

J

^^*

W'

,

^^m

P'*

^C wY^'

' '' .**"

>^^m

1 -""

^^\-

^i

'^^m

^^'''

1

.^M

^^^^

1

iu

'^

r

f

^uJ

. * ' ' '■'"'. .■>' ■'-■.'"

im'-^

E^^n

^wiW^fe^

'■*>• ■■'

■" ■■■'■...''■ -^^

:>, , -';r^^^P^Hp

- '

-.-, .-»,• -' are,. •■«.•;

No. 27.

A chestnut tree on Long Island, New York, with sprouts at various
points on the trunk. — Photograph ly Prof. Collins.

No. 28. The chestnut tree iu the ceutre of the picture shows four well-developed
lesions. — I'liotogruijh hy Prof. Collins.

No. 29. Typical group of dead chestnut trees. Note dead suckers on the trunks.
From left to right: — the first trunk shows the disease less than one year old.
(nothnig evident in this photograph); the second, an infection of from two to three
years old; the third four or more years old; and the fourth about three years old.
Scene near Brooklyn, New York. — Photograph hy Prof. Collins.

Xo. 30. Dead chestnut trees along a boulevard near Richmond Hill, New York.
Note healthy condition of trees of other species. — Fhotograplb hy Prof. Collins.

No. 31. Dead and dying sprout growth. Note healthy condition of trees of other
species. Scene at I'ort Jefferson, New York. Photograph bij Prof. Vollins.

No. 32. The most southern point of infection — a group of diseased chestnut trees
at Fontella, Bedford county, Virginia. — Photograph by Prof. Collins.

^0. 33. Complete destruction of chestnut trees in a nearly pure stand. Many
ot the tTunks have lost their bark. View in Forest Park, near Brooklyn. New
-Photograph hij Prof. ('olliu.<i.

York.

No. 34. Complete destruction of chestnut trees in a nearly pure stand. Many
of the trunks have lost their bark. Scene in Forest Park, near Brooklyn, New
York. — Photograph hy Prof. Collins.

41

It is my opinion that we are rnsliing into tliis enormously ex-
pensive campaign against the cliestnut bark disease without con-
sidering as carefully as we should the chances of success. The
first question to consider is, can the disease be controlled by Met-
calf's and Collins' method/ of destrojing advance infections and
establishing an "ininmne zone?" Tliis is a technical question of
fundamental importance. It is a ({uestion to be answered by ex-
XDert mycologists and plant pathologists. I have observed tliat
the leading advocates of the method avoid, as far as possible, dis-
cussion of its probable effectiveness. In Farmers' Bulletin 4G7,
the question is disposed of by inserting into the letter of trans-
mittal the following sentence : ''The experimental data upon
which the recommendations contained in this publication are
based will be published in full in a forthcoming bulletin of the
Bureau of Plant Industry." The authors then go on to say (page
10) that "so far as tested" the method is practicable; and on
page 11, after giving an account of what they consider a success-
ful attempt to control the disease in the vicinity of Washington,
D. C, conclude with the following statement: "It is therefore
believed that this method of attack will prove equally practicable
in other localities and if carried out on a large scale will result
ultimately in the control of the bark disease." Up to the present
time the promised bulletin has not api:)eared and we are still in
the dark as to the nature of the "experimental data." I had
hoped that it might be presented at this meeting. In justice to
the public it should have been published before Bulletin 4G7.
There is great need of some real evidence that the disease can
be controlled. Apparently, the sole foundation for the optimis-
tic statements made by Metcalf and Collins in Bulletin 4G7 is
the result of the field test^ which they made at Washington and
I hold that no definite conclusions can be drawn from that test.
The chief criticism to be made of it is tliat there is no means of
knowing what would have happened if the diseased trees had
not been removed. There was no check, and experimenters are
agreed that experiments without checks have little value. This
is one of the first principles of experimentation. Weather con-
ditions may have been unfavorable for the spread of the disease.

42

Most fungoiis diseases have periods of quiescence alternating
with periods of activity, depending largely upon varying weather
conditions.

Also, there is reason to believe that the region covered by the
test is not now as free from the disease as Metcalf and Collins
think it is. Last summer there w^ere found two centres of in-
fection previously overlooked.^ One of these consisting of a
gTouj) of six diseased trees, was within a few miles of Washing-
ton. In company with Dr. Metcalf and others I had an oppor-
tunity to examine these trees on December 30, 1911. One of
them, a tree over three feet in diameter, was in an advanced stage
of the disease. Large limbs were dead and the lower portion of
the trunk was thickly covered with spore masses of the fungus.
How long these trees had been affected it was impossible to de-
termine, but it is safe to say that some of them had been diseased
for at least a year and x)robably longer. That is to say, they be-
came infected in 1910 or earlier and must have been discharging
millions of spores at the very moment Dr. Metcalf was writing
his statement that the country within a radius of 35 miles of
Washington was apparently free from the disease."^ It is quite
probable that other overlooked cases of the disease exist in the
vicinity of Washington at the present time.

Further, We visited two places where diseased trees had been
removed and the disease "eliminated" in 1909. In one case, one
tree had been cut ; in the other case two trees. The bark had not
been removed from the stumps. On one stump we found a few
spore masses of the fungus; also on the base of a nearl)y tree.
On the other two stumps no fungus w-as found. The first-men-
tioned stump had not si)routed, but the other two were sur-
rounded by healthy sprouts. At both points there were a few'
chestnut trees in the immediate vicinity, but, so far as could
be determined, none of them w^ere diseased. It should be stated,
however, that it is very difficult to locate diseased trees in win-
ter. It is inevitable that the bark around the base of a diseased
tree and also the surrounding soil, fallen leaves and other litter
will become covered with spores carried down by rain. Hence,
when the diseased trees were removed thousands of spores were
left behind. How long such spores live and retain their power
of infection is not known. Now does it seem probable tliat the

48

failure of the disease to spread to nearby trees was due to the
removal of the diseased trees? Is it not more likely that its
spread was prevented by the conditions being unfavorable for in-
fection?

Returning now to the main question: No such method of
controlling a fungous disease has ever been attempted. Our
knowledge of fungous diseases in general indicates that it is im-
practicable. It will be extremely diflicult to locate all of the
diseased trees and absolutely impossible to remove all of the
fungus after the diseased trees are found. The fungus spores,
Avhich are produced (juickly and in enormous numbers may be
widely disseminated in several different ways, some of wliich
cannot be prevented. Tlie work will l)e exceedingly expensive
and must be continued indefinitely. Taking all tliese things
into consideration, the chances of success are much too small to
warrant the expense.

It is true that some fungous diseases, notably the x^luni black
knot, are more or less successfully controlled by the prompt re-
moval of diseased plants or parts of plants; but it should be
noted that the diseases successfully controlled in this why have
two characteristics which make this method of control possible:
(1) The diseased plants may be readily detected in the early
stages of tlie disease; (2) the causal fungus requires a long time
to ripen its spores. Plum black knot may be readily detected
from one to several months before the ripening of the spores of
the causal fungus. Hence, the knots may be removed before
they liave had a chance to spread the infection. Not so with the
chestnut disease. It possesses neither of these characteristics.
It is difficult to detect in the early stages, and multitudes of
spores may be produced within a month after infection.

Undoubtedly, the spores are carried long distances by birds,
especially woodpeckers, which visit the diseased trees, seeking
borers, in the tunnels of which most of the infections occur.^ It
naturally follows that the "Immune zone" must be many miles
wide, — Dr. Metcalf suggests ten or twenty miles wide. In this
connection, please note that while the main line of infection is
now somewhere north of the Potomac river, advance infections
already occur in southern Virginia and West Virginia, 150 miles
or more southwest of Washington. In fact, IMclcnlf and Oollins

44

say f "Observations made by the junior writer indicate that the
disease may have been present in an orchard in Bedford county,
Va., as early as 1903." The advance infections are widely scat-
tered.

Back of the "immune zone" extensive areas must be inspected
frequently and thoroughly. Should tlie "immune zone" be lo-
cated at or north of the Potomac, the entire States of Virginia
and A¥est Virginia must be covered by such inspection. There
is no knowing when or where the disease may break out, and
wlien conditions for its spread are favorable, a single diseased
tree overlooked may start an uncontrollable epidemic wliicli will
necessitate establishing a new "immune zone" fartlier soutli and
starting all over.

It is quite generally admitted that it will be difficult to locate
all of the diseased trees, but there is some difference of opinion as
to the importance of this fact. It may be argued that by the de-
struction of 90 or 95 per cent, of the diseased trees the spread of
the disease will l)e reduced to that extent. This is very improb-
able. If this disease behaves like fungous diseases in general,
its spread depends more upon weather conditions and the sus-
ceptibility of the host than upon the number of spores produced.
Wlien the conditions for its spread are favorable five per cent, of
the spores may be sufficient to nullify any attempt to control the
disease. All experience with such methods of treatment goes
to show that the work must be done thoroughly, else it is not
effective.

The history of the chestnut bark disease is unparalleled in the
annals of plant pathology. Here we have an unknown fungus,
none of the relatives of which are parasites, suddenly becoming
widespread and taking higli rank as a destructive parasite. This
indicates that it may be expected to beliave in an erratic manner
and be unusually difficult to control; also, that something
unusual has happened either to the host or to the fungus, or per-
haps to l>oth, making tin's epidemic possible. Just what this
may be I am unable to say. There is no reason for believing
that tlie fungus is eitlier a recent creation or a recent introduc-
tion from abroad. The only rational theory yet advanced re-
garding tlie origin of the epidemic is Dr. Clinton's winter-andc
drought-injury theory/ Ixit even this seems insufficient in some
respects.

15

IL Jias hwii asked "W'Jial llieii \v<»iil<l you have us do? Slaud
idle wliiJe tho disease destroys our cliesluut forests " My
answer is tliis: It may be well to restrict the Irausportatiou of
diseased nni»sery stock, but tliis is all tliat it is worth while to
attempt at present in the line of combating the disease. Jt is hci-
ier to attempt nothiiif/ tJuiii to inistc a lanjc amount of puldic
money on a method of control whu-li there is ererij reason, to t)e-
licve cannot succeed. I believe in being hone^st with the public
and admitting fra]ds:ly that we know of no way to control this
disease. I favor moderate-sized appropriations for investigation
of the disease, bnt none at all to be nsed in attempts to control it
by any method or methods at present known.

What will be the futnre conrse of the disease can only be con-
jectnred, bnt it can be safely predicted that nothing which man
can now do will materially alter its conrse. However, the sitna-
tion is by no means hopeless. That the disease has already reach-
ed its zenith and will now gradnally snbside is qnite possible.
There liave been other epidemics, and other kinds of trees and
plants Iiave been threatened with destrnction throngh disease,
but sncli a thing has never actually happened. So far as known,
no plant has ever been exterminated by disease. It is unlikely
that the chestnut will be exterminated.

THE CHAIRMAN: It occurs to the Chair tliat the situati(m
would suggest discussion at this time, but it would pro])ably be
Ijefter to continue with our programme as it was ably laid out b^^
those who have provided for this Conference, and have the dis-
cussion after we have heard the papers. We will, therefore, call
for the next paper, entitled "How Further Research may Increase
the Efficiency of the Control of the Chestnut Bark Disease," by
Professor W. Howard Rankin, Cornell University, Ithaca, New
York.

1. Metcalf, H. and Collins, J. F. The control of the chestnut bark disease. U. S. D. A.
Farmers' Bui. 467, 28 O. 1911.

2. Loc. cit. p. 11.

3. Reported by Dr. Metcalf at a conference ou the chestuuti bark disease held in Albany,
N. Y., October 19, 1911.

4. U. >S. D. A. Fanners' Bui. 467:11.

5. U. S. D. A. Farmers' Bui. 467:10.

6. Metcalf and Collins. The present status of the chestnut bark disease. U. S. D. A. Bur.
Plant Indus. Bui. 141, Part V, p. 46. 30 S. 1909.

7. Clinton, G. P, Report of the Botanist, 1908. Conn. Exp. Sta. Rpt. of 1907-1908: 879-890.
July. 1900.

46

HOW FURTHEK RESEARCH MAY INCREASE THE EFFI-
CIENCY OF THE CONTROL OF THE CHEST-
NUT BARK DISEASE.

BY TKOFESSOR W. IIOWAKD IJANKIN, Vorncll Uidvcr&Hy, lihutu, N. Y.

Mr. Cluiiriiiaii, Ladies and Geutlemeii : Up to this time investi-
gations concerning the chestnut tree canker disease and the
causal fungus have not brought fortli facts as rapidly as we
could wish. It was the opinion of the conference lielcl at Albany,
N. Y. last October tliat we did not have facts enough about the
disease and that scientific research was the one thing needed. To
emphasize this point we may consider some important phases of
the disease which are yet little understood, but the knowledge of
which is fundamental to devising efficient control methods. Con-
cerning the means of spread of the fungus from one tree to
another we have nothing except secondary evidence. Most writ-
ers have tlieorized on the different methods by which the conidia
or summer spores might be carried from one tree to another and
a new infection started. Reasoning by analogy with what is
knoAvn of the behavior of many fungi, such agencies as borers,
birds, ants and the T^'ind, etc., have been suggested but in no wise
lu'oved to be responsible. It seems that the ascospore stage has
not been considered by an}' Avriter in the dissemination of the
fungus, yet this stage follows the conidia very quickl}^ and is the
more abundant fruiting stage which is formed in the red or brown
pustules on the surface of the cankers. Under moist conditions
the ascospores are shot forcibly out in the air where they can be
caught up by the wind and carried for a considerable distance.
The speaker found the ascospores being shot from mature pus-
tules during every rainy period last summer. These spores ger-
minate readily in rain water producing a new mycelium of con-
siderable length in fifteen hours. The question at once arises,
why could not these ascospores once sliot into the air be carried
long distances and owing to their abundance cause a large ma-
jority of the infection? The time of year at which new infec-

47

tioiiH took place last .summer in the Hudson lliver Valley was
evidently about the time when the ascospore stage was just be-
coming abundant. It is an important matter then to determine
the spore stage and tlie agency responsible for the spread of the
fungus before we can hope to advise an efficient and effective con-
trol. For example, such precautionarj^ measures as the peeling
of logs before allowing them to be moved could be limited to the
time of year when this Vsus necessary and thus obviate a great
cost.

Likewise the problem as to how the present epidemical char-
acters exhibited by the disease have come about is as far from
solution as it was six years ago. The speaker has recently col-
lected and examined a fungus indistinguishable from the chest-
nut canker disease fungus on dead chestnut bark in several
places in Virginia. No case of this fungus attacking living
trees was found in the short preliminary examination made near
Ljaichburg, although several specimens were collected on dead
bark of stumps from which trees were cut about two years ago.
Also a fungus found in Pennsylvania on white, red and black
oak has great similarity to the canker disease fungus. The pos-
sibility of having several strains of the same fungus identical as
to microscopic characters, some saprophytic and others causing
a virulent disease, is at once puzzling. One of two things has
evidently happened, either the host plant has, under existing
conditions, been altered in its physiological process enough to
change its, susceptibility to this heretofore saprojihytic fungus,
or the fungus has developed a parasitic habit iudependent of
any change in the host. Possibly, of course, both factors may
have combined to bring about this disease-condition. Prelim-
inary investigations carried on by the speaker seem to point to
the fact that the susceptibility of the chestnut tree to this fungus
depends upon drought conditions; that is a low water content in
the tree. This requires confirmation however by further detailed
experiment. Weather conditions causing winter injury as sug-
gested hj Dr. Clinton may quite possibly be of importance also
in this connection, and accurate data concerning past weather
conditions and experiments to determine the effect of low temper-
ature on the chestnut tree in connection with the production of
susceptibility is highly important.

48

If the results of Dr. JMiiueli on the cause of suscei^tibility and

iiiimuiiitA^ of forest trees to disease should prove true in the case

i of til is disease also, we may hope to be able to control the bark

disease in shade, lawn, and park trees, by keeping up the water

content of the tree.

Whether nursery stock serves to introduce the disease into
new localities is an important problem to be determined b}' ob-
servation ami experiment. The present method of inspection
and cutting out would be inefficient if the fungus lives commonly
as a saproplnte at the base of the tree on dead bark and can at-
tain a parasitic habit with some slight change in weather condi-
tions. If, on the other hand, it exists only as a w^ound parasite,
then inspections would be possible and the cutting out method
effective. However, with such problems as these undecided, no
one can i^ronounce definite judgment upon the efficiency of the
cutting out method. Once however, these facts are established,
modifications may be made in the present method by which its
effectiveness may be insured at possibly a lower cost than can
now be expected.

The present method which the Pennsylvania Commission has
adopted of eradicating only spots where the fungus is distinctly
parasitic, can accomplish a great good in a sanitary way, and
once sufficient facts are forthcoming, tiie method may be altered
to suit our knowledge and thus its efficiency assured.

THE CHAIKI\[AN : The next paper, entitled ^'Recent Notes on
the Chestnut Bark Disease,'' will be delivered by Professor H. R.
Fulton, Division of Pathology, Pennsylvania State College.

RECENT NOTES ON THE CHESTNUT BARK DISEASE.

BY PROFESSOR II. R. FULTON, Peimsijlvaniu >S'/a/c College, State

College, Pa.

The steady and devastating spread of the chestnut bark dis-
ease brings us face to face with a grave situation, and raises
many questions of great importance. Most of these will centre
about the three great questions : Is it possible to cheql? effectively

Orchard chestnut tree girdled at base, showing characteristic growth of sprouts.
Scene near Westburj', New York.— Photograph hy Pciieij Spaulding.

Large forest tree girdled at base, showing- characteristic growtli of sprouts; near
Richmond Hill, New York. — Pliotor/raph by Prof. Collins.

Large trees with some branches sirdled. Note condition of the foliage
Westbury, New Yorlv. — Photograph by Prof. Collins.

Scene at

Large trees witli s

' ^\-it'i some branclies girdled. Note condition of foliage. Scene at
\Nestbnry, New Yovk.—Photoc/raph by Prof. Collins:^

Orchard chestnuts.

(grafted varieties), nearly dead. Note
Photograph hy Prof. Collins.

sprouts on the trunks.

Orchard chestnut with limb girdled by twig-girdling' borer. Easily mistaken at
a short distance^ for chestnut bark disease. — Photograph iy Prof. Collins.

Examples of tree surgery, showing healing process after cutting out cankers, in
treatment of orchard trees. This treatment uudoubtedly prolongs the life of the
trees. — thoiogrupli liij i'rof. CoUiiis.

Example of tree surgery, showing healing process after cutting out cankers in
treatment of orchard trees. Will prolong life of tree. — Photograph by Prof.
Collins.

i"«iJ!A5"'jhLii^* c&r.r-'itv*'* «

Chestnut tree sliowiug early stage of disease; note small girdled twig on upper part
of the tree in the centre of the picture.

Large chestnut tree partly dead. Note sprouts with leaves near the top, the
dwarfed leaves on the middle right-hand limb, and the healthy lower branches with
normal leaves. Scene at Rawlinsville, Penna. — Photograph hy Prof. Collins.

Early stage of infection in an orchard tree ; note girdled twigs with withered
leaves at top. Scene in Lancaster county, Penua. — Photograph hy Prof. Collins.

Complete destruction of the chestnut trees in mixed stand. Note healthy con-
dition of trees of other species. Views along Long Island Railroad, near Richmond
Hill, New York. — Pliotograph hij Prof. Collins.

Complete destruction of chestnut trees in mixed stands. Note healthy condition
of trees of other species. A'iews alon.o- Long Island Railroad, near Richmond Hill,
New York. — Plioto^/rapli hij Frof. Collins.

Small orchard chestnut nearly dead. — Photograph hij Prof. Collins.

A dying tree ou Long Island, New York.

Examples of tree surgery, showing healing process after cutting out cankers, in
treatment of orchard trees. This treatment undoubtedly prolongs the life of the
trees. — I'liotograph hij Prof. CoUins.

49

tlie spread of tliis diseusi'? Ls it worth while doing so? What
are the best methods to use VVliile no one, perliaps, will ven-
ture to prophesy the ontconie, all doul)tless agree that the great
interests at stake jnstily an aggressive tight; and all alike are
anxious to see the warfare waged in the most effective way.
Other contests against fnngons foes have been Avon in spite of
apparently insuperable obstacles, and we now look back from
the vantage ground of knowledge gained through the contests,
and wonder that the tasks should have seemed hard. Each year
witnesses the conquest of more than one important pest, just as
each year is apt to bring into the limelight some hitherto unob-
trusive pest. Mention might be made of scores of animal and
plant pests that, in the wide interchanges incident to modern
civilization, have been brought into contact with new host species,
or with new environmental conditions, and have forthwith en-
tered upon a period of riotous devastation. At the present time,
federal and state resources are being drawn upon, and concerted
state action is being had, in the fights against the gypsy and
brown-tail moths in New England, and against the cotton boll
weevil in the southwestern portion of the cotton belt. I cannot
refrain from recalling to mind the eradication of the cattle tick
in certain districts within its range, and the stamping out of yel-
low fever in territory undt p United State jurisdiction, as notable
examples of success that hah in recent times come from complete
knowledge of the situations, combined with efficient administra-
tion. x\s a citizen of Pennsylvania, I take pride in pointing to
the successful suppression of the fcot and mouth disease of cattle,
during 1908, by the State Livestock Sanitary Board in co-opera-
tion with the Federal Bureau of Animal Industry. These were
campaigns of quarantine and sanitation.

These examples of very diverse nature do not prove anything in
regard to the chestnut bark disease; but they do serve to em-
phasize the fact that persistent effort in the right direction may
win in the face of great odds.

To the specialist in plant diseases, a most interesting question
is, why is it that this disease has made such headway in this coun-
try in so short a time. Is it that there are factors involved, aside
from administrative difficulties, that are not found in the many

4

50

fungous diseases that atfect our crops, — less spectacular in their
working, but none the less damaging in their effects? Or is it
that well recognized factors are here found in a unique combina-
tion that adds to the seriousness of the situation? Is this dis-
ease inherently more serious than pear blight or cotton wilt or
wheat stem rust? Answers to such questions involve considera-
tion of the habits and value of the host plant, as well as definite
knowledge on all important points in the life history of the causa-
tive organism, Diaporthe parasitica.

For chestnut bark disease infection to occur, three general con-
ditions must be met just as for any other fungous disease.
Broadly stated, these are (1) the presence of infective material,
(2) a host plant in a condition of susceptibility, (3) general en-
vironmental conditions that are favorable. All rational control
measures for the disease must be based on the peculiarities of this
fungus with reference to these three things.

The infective material for Diaporthe parasitica seems to be
pre-eminently the spores, which are of two types, the pycnospores,
sometimes called conidia or summer spores, and the ascospores,
or winter spores. AVe wish to know definitely the conditions that
influence the formation of each type, the longevity of each under
favorable and under unfavorable conditions, their modes of shed-
ding and of transfer, the conditions favorable and unfavorable to
their germination, their abilities to establish the fungus upon
various materials, and the relative importance of the two types
in spreading the disease. General environmental conditions may
have their effect upon longevity of spores, upon germination of
spores, upon rapidity of growth of the fungus, and upon spore
production by the fungus. Susceptibility in the host has refer-
ence to qualities of genera or species or varieties or strains or
individuals, that render them liable to attack by the fungus,
which qualities may be inherent or possibly induced by environ-
mental conditions. Here must be included the exposure through
various wounds of susceptible portions of the host; and the pro-
tective effects of measures that maj^ lessen the susceptibility of
the host. Other points in the general life history of the organism
may be of interest and importance, aside from any direct rela-
tion to the setting up of infection.

51

Ilealizing' the iiuportaiiec to the public welfan; of juore com-
plete knowledge along these lines, the Pennsylvania Agricultural
Experiment Station, through its lal)oratory of plant pathology,
has undertaken certain investigations upon the life history of
Diaporthe jKirasitica, in hearty co-operation with the Avork of the
Pennsjdvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. While a com-
plete report cannot be made, in tlie nature of the case, for a long
time, we beg to submit a brief preliminary report on the lal)ora-
tory work now being carried on by Mr. E. A. AValdron, of the
Experiment Station staff ; to which is added at the request of the
Executive Oflficer of the Pennsylvania Commission, a summary
of field studies made by Mr. E. C. Walton, one of the field agents
of the Commission. Credit for the findings reported here is due
to the careful work of these two men.

AIR CURRENTS AS CARRIERS OF THE CONIDIA.

The tests were made with the blast from an electric f^in, with
a velocity of perhaps twenty miles an hour. The material used
was bark of chestnut with tendrils of conidia projecting from
the mouths of the fruit-bodies. The tests were made with these
tendrils dr}^, with them moist, and Avitli the spraj^ from an atomi-
zer playing over them, the last to imitate conditions prevailing
during storms. The attempt was made to catch the spores on the
surface of sterilized potato agar exposed about six inches away,
in the blast; and to determine the carrying power of the air cur-
rent from the subsequent growth of Diaporthe parasitica in this
material. Also, wet cotton was similarly held in the blast; it
was then squeezed out in sterile water ; this was centrif uged, and
microscopic examination made of the sediment, as well as cul-
tures from it. There was unmistakable evidence, from each
line of testing, that the conidia may be detached by strong air
currents, and carried short distances. The detachment Avas
greater when the spray played over the material. The test will
have to be carried further before quantitative results can be
given. It seems likely that the detachment was largely of small
bits of the tendrils made up of large numbers of spores, and that
these are too heavy to be carried great distances; and suggests
that under natural conditions infection may be spread short
distances by wind.

52

LONGEVITY OF CONIDIA AND ASCOSPORES.

Tli(3 length of time that conidia retain their power to germinate
will doubtless vary with the conditions under which the spores
are kept. Spores from bark collected in late summer and kept
dry at ordinary room temperature, germinated readily for four
months, but three weeks later could not be induced to germinate.
Material exposed out of doors and that kept moist and at about
75 degrees F. in a greenhouse, did not give germination of conidia
after four months earlier tests not having been made.

GERMINATION OF CONIDIA AND ASCOSPORES IN DIFFERENT MEDIA.

Both kinds of spores germinate in a decoction of chestnut bark,
in rice broth, etc. Ascospores germinate in spring water, the
conidia do not.

EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE ON GERMINATION.

Conidia germinate best at a temperature of 60 degrees F., and
distinctly less rapidly at temperatures 10 degrees above or below
this point.

Ascospores germinate best at a temperature of about 70 degrees
F., but a good percentage of germination occurs at 85 degrees F,
and 45 degrees F. Even at 38 degrees F. the germination of as-
cospores was 25 per cent, in the first 24 hours, and reached 70
per cent, in three days. Ascospores germinate readily after at
least moderate freezing. These facts indicate that the ascos-
pores may play a more important part in causing infection under
certain conditions, than has been commonly attributed to them.

The effect of extremely high and low temperatures on spores
has not yet been completely investigated in our laboratory.

EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE ON Ex\RLY GROWTPI.

In general the most rapid early growth is at the optimum tem-
perature for germination. In a nutrient solution of boiled chest-
nut bark, the ascospores will send out a length of mycelium 10
to 15 times the spore length in the first 24 hours at 70 degrees F.,
which becomes an indefinitely large mass of mycelium in two
days. At 38 degrees F., the growth is about one spore length the
first day, and 15 times this in five days.

53
GROA'STII ON OTPIER MATERIALS THAN CHESTNUT.

Ill the laboratory the fungus j>rows Avell on a variety of artifi-
cial media, perhaps most readily on potato agar that has been
made slightly acid. Material was submitted to us of white oak
and black oak bark, collected by Mr. J. li. Guyer, agent of the
Pennsylvania Commission, which bark had been killed by lire pre-
vious to its observation, and Slli»^^(• pustules of what seemed to
be Diaporthe parasitica. Careful microscopic examination show-
ed that the morphological features corresponded closely to those
of D'mp)ortUe parasitica, as did also the growth of the fungous in
artificial culture. Red oak twigs killed by steaming in the j)rocess
of sterilization, were readily infected by DiaportJie parasitica ob-
tained from a typical chestnut lesion. While it is desirable to
carry on further cross inoculation experiments, it seems rea-
sonable to suppose, in the light of present evidence, that Diapor-
the parasitica may, under unusual circumstances, establish itself
saprophytically on portions of trees outside the genus Castanea,
if these portions are already dead. We have found no evidence
that the fungus jjroduces in any sense a disease of such trees as
tlie oak.

RELATION TO LIGHTNING INJURY.

In August, 1908, Mr. George Wirt, of the Pennsylvania For-
estry Department, directed the attention of the speaker to a
chestnut tree in an advanced stage of infection, that had been
struck by lightning earlier in the season, when its leaves were
half grown. Where the wood had been splintered along the
lightning track, there were numerous pycnidia standing apart
one from the other, as is characteristic of Diaporthe parasitica
when fruiting- on wood rather than on bark. Many of these fruit-
bodies were deep in the cracks made by the lightning, and evi-
dently had been formed after the stroke. Specimens taken from
the wood and from the bark near by, wlien tested, gave good
germination of spores. Probably the bark infection, which
seemed to date far l)ack, existed at the time of the stroke, and the
fungus spread from this to the shattered wood, the lightning
presumably not having killed the fungus in the vicinity.

54

DEVELOPMENT IN SAPWOOD AND HEARTWOOD.

Where a section of a large infected brancli was kept in a moist
atmosphere constantly, an abundant development of pycnidial
fruit bodies was noted in about two months from both sapw^ood
and heartwood at the more moist cut surface. The similar de-
velopment in wood shattered by lightning has been mentioned
above. In two cases, the fungus was found on young, unligni-
fied shoots; in both cases, the parts had been distinctly injured
by insects.

SUMMARY OF FIELD STUDIES AT ORBISONIA, PA.

During the fall and early winter of 1911-12, Mr. R. C. Walton
made a detailed study of an advance spot of infection at Orbi-
sonia, Huntingdon county, in Central Pennsylvania. The tract
covered some forty-six acres on the north and northwest slope of
a mountain. It had been cut over originally forty-five years
ago, and at intervals since, the last cutting being in 1908. Most
of the chestnut growth was coppice of four years standing.
Rather severe fire injury had occurred in 1902, and the land had
been pastured recently. Soil conditions and density of stand
varied considerably over the tract. The infection was found in
detached spots over about thirteen acres. There was one spot
that seemed to be the original centre of infection, dating back
two years ; but elsewhere in the area there were lesions aj)parently
as old. Altogether three thousand and fifty-nine chestnut trees,
sprouts, and stumps were examined and two hundred and eighty,
or 9.1 per cent, were found to be infected. Of these, practically
all were four year coppice growth. The oldest lesions wpre
seemingly two years old, and ten of these were found. The
youngest were for the current season, and of the total, about half
seemed to be less than one year old; and estimates of the age of
all the lesions indicated a very uniform rate of spread during
the two years. It may be added from a recent investigation tliat
153 trees in southeastern Pennsylvania, near Haverford exj^osed
to natural infection, carefully examined and marked as unin-
fected in January 1911, showed 25 trees infected in a recent ex-
amination. This would indicate something, perliaps, of the
rapidity of the spread ol the disease, where observations were
made upon that point.

• 5f) .

Out of 18 sprouts sbowing two lesions, 13 bad tlie younger
lesion above and 5 tbe older, wbicb migbt indicate tbe probable
work of insects in carrying infection.

Sprouts were originally infected at tbe base in more tban four-
fiftbs of tbe cases. Forty i3er cent, of tbe oldest lesions on
sprouts sbowed twigs as a centre of infection; eigbteen per ceiit.
sbowed cracks, fourteen per cent, wounds; tbirteen per cent,
beetle boles, eleven per cent, crotcbes, and four per cent, were in-
determinate.

More infections were found in medium dense growtb tban in
dense growtb, and very few in ratber open growtb. Of all in-
fections recorded, 47.3 per cent, were witbin twenty feet of old
Jogging roads, 7.4 per cent, from 20 to 50 feet away, and 45.3
per cent, at greater distance. Many more infections were found
wbere soil conditions were moderately moist tban wliere tbey
were dry. Of 150 original sprout infections, 62, or 41 per cent,
bad a nortb to nortbeast exposure; 20 or 13 per cent, a soutb to
soutbwest exposure; and tbe remainder were about e(iually
divided between tbe otlier two quadrants of tbe compass. Tliis
migbt suggest moisture again as an important factor.

Tbere were 28 cases of pycnidia observed developing on wood.
Only eigbt trees larger tban seven incbes in diameter sbowed in-
fection. One of tbese bad a lesion apparentl}^ two years old ; and
balf bad tbe oldest lesion less tban one year old. All of tbe tree
infection was in tbe bark of tbe trunk, none in tbe tops. Half
bad development of watersprouts in connection witb tbe lesions.
Lesions in the bark of stumps sbowed fissures at tlieir centres
in almost all cases, and in tbe oldest ones tbe pustules were
usually dark and in tlie ascus stage.

In connection with lesions on sprouts, trees, and stumps, tbere
were abundant evidences of animal association, principally
beetle and otber lai'ge insect larvae, tunnels and boles ; but also
woodpecker boles and claw marks, and ant nests and trails.
Most of tbe ant nests were in old dried stump stubs. Fully nine-
tentbs of all old lesions sbowed beetle larvae in or near tliem.
Tbese were mainly a species of Leptura. Of tbe youngest lesions,
about two-flftbs sbowed larvae in or near tbera; and in all cases

56

there were about twice as many larvae iu as near the lesions. It
would seem that these usually folloAV rather than precede the in-
fection.

Woodpecker work was noted in about one-tenth of the oldest
lesions, and not at all in the youngest lesions, — much less fre-
quently than beetle work. Ants were seldom found actually in
the lesions.

It is expected that careful observations of this same tract next
year and later, will add much to the value of the present very
complete records, which it has been possible to summarize only
briefly in this account.

A good deal is known about this parasite; very.much remains
to be learned. As far as our present knowledge goes, the prompt
stamping out of advance spots of infection, and the general cut-
ting off of hopelessly infected tracts, seem to be the only practi-
cable means of control. No one perhaps realizes more keenly
than the speaker the difficulties of finding infection and thor-
oughly removing it in sparsely- settled tracts of large extent and
of little value for timber. I have had occasion this last summer
to be on the outskirts of the line of spread of this disease through
the State, and I have seen numbers of these advance spots. It
seems that if we can find these spots and remove the timber, we
Avill be doing much to check the advance of this disease. In this
State the fight is on, and it is the part of all good citizens to co-
operate in the work that is being done. (Applause).

THE CHAIRMAN : Dr. Caroline Rumbold, who is in charge
of important research work at the laboratory of the University
of Penns3dvania, will present a paper in relation to medicinal
remedies for the chestnut tree bark disease.

OY

THE POSSIBILITY OF A MEDICINAL REMEDY FOIi
CHESTNUT ULIGHT.

BY Dll. CAKULINE EUMBOLD, IN CIIAIIGE OF THE TENxXSYENAMA
CHESTNUT THEE Bl.KJlIT COMMISSION'S LABOKATOIIY.

Mr. Cliairmaii, Ladies and Centlenieii : Altliougli in the pro-
gramme, the title of my remarks lias been given as the possibility
of a medicinal remedy for chestnut blight, I much prefer to con-
line myself to a question of medicinal treatment as I believe it
would limit me too much were I to try to discuss a remedy, a
cure-all, one might say, when we have only started to work out
the problems in the case. My main task is to attempt to lind the
relation betAveen the chestnut tree and the fungus which causes
its death; consequently my work is with individual trees.

The question of medicinal treatment should be considered
broadly from tAvo sides. Firstly, the side of securing better
health conditions for the chestnut trees, in order that they may
have the ability better to resist the disease. This we will call
preventive treatment. Secondly, the aspect of curative treat-
ment.

Under tlie first heading come the details of water, food, light,
in other words, matters of environment. As for water, there is
the question as to whether or not droughts of recent years are
partially responsible for the spread of the disease in the chestnut
tree. I am now conducting experiments in which chestnut trees
are being exposed to infection under varying conditions from dry-
ness to excessive moisture, both of atmosphere and soil. These
experiments may also throw some light on the report that the
blight spreads rapidly where trees are in a crowded coppice,
while trees growing on the ridge of a hill are uninfected.

In the matter of food, various fertilizers are being subjected to
tests on growing trees.

I am al)0ut to start a series of experiments in which young
trees are to be grown in solutions of different chemicals, with
the object of hastening the growtli of the bark, or of increasing

58

the amount of chlorophyll in the leaves, in order to find out
whether or not such variations as this might increase the immu-
nity of a healthy tree. Under the head of preventive treatment
is also to be considered the care of wounds, etc. This subject
will be fully considered in this conference by other speakers.
My own w^ork in this direction is confined to the testing of
"washes" submitted to the Pennsylvania Commission for trial.

If the question of preventive treatment is still so far from be-
ing satisfactorily answered, that of a curative treatment is in
a more inchoate condition. At most, I can describe the meth-
ods adopted in the Pennsylvania Commission laboratory, and in
which I shall attempt gradually to start experiments along the
following lines : — Experiments to test the relative vitality of the
mycelium of the fungus, its ascospores and the conidiospores
found in summer and those formed on wood during the winter;
injection into trees of chemicals toxic to the fungus causing the
blight; tests as to the immunity of different varieties of trees.
I have started some experiments along two of these lines, but
none is completed. According to my experiments so far, the
ascospores or winter spores seem to have the greater vitality;
then follow the summer or conidiospores. The mycelium and
those conidiospores grown on wood seem to be equally suscep-
tible to poisons. The injection experiments which are to be
made are those where chemicals are injected into roots and
where hypodermic injections are made on the trunks of the
trees. Tliese are of necessity dependent on the experiments
leading to the discovery of chemicals toxic to the fungus and
not deadly to the tree.

Experiments as to relative immunity of chestnuts are now
being conducted on two or three varieties of trees. Japanese
and American trees have been inoculated with the blight. For
the purpose of such experimentation, the Commission has been
given the privileges of the Botanical Laboratory of the Uni-
versity of Pennsylvania, where a special room has been set
aside for my work. A greenhouse has been recently completed,
in which a number of small chestnut trees are now growing.

THE CHAIRMAN: The next paper is entitled "Treatment
of Individual Trees," by Professor J. Franklin Collins, United
States Department of Agriculture.

r.9

TEEATMENT OF ORCHARD AND ORNAMENTAL TREES.

BY TROFESSOR J. FRANKLIN COLLINS, U. S. DEP'T OF AGRICULTURE,

WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen : For the pnrpose of call-,
ing your attention to one or two points that I want to emphasize
as a preliminary to my main topic, I will quote the oi^ening para-
graphs of a story published in the fall of 1910 in a well known
popular magazine. The particular incident may or may not
have been true, it doesn't matter, still, all who have had much
to do with the chestnut bark disease will recognize the incident
as a fairly typical one, with perhaps a sliglitly different setting.

The programme of experimentation tlius outlined seems for-
midable, but this work must be thorongh if an}^ results of value
are to be obtained. It can be said that nearly all of these experi-
ments point to the possibility of curing infected chestnut trees.
Perhaps by the end of another year the Pennsylvania Commis-
sion laboratory will be able to report, if less of a forward looking
programme, at least more of actual and valuable results. (Ap-
plause).

"A tall, lean man, with a grizzled beard and tlie air of wisdom
that goes with such adornment, strode across the lawn of an old
fashioned Connecticut country seat, and gallantly lifting his
dingy Panama hat to the mistress of the manse, said in impres-
sive tones:

'Madam, I have just been looking at your chestnut trees. They
are all covered with scale, and are dying. I can save them, if
you wish to have it done.'

'Can you?' said the credulous woman, looking up to the dead
top of a noble tree. 'I have noticed that there Avas something
tlie matter with them. TIovv much will it cost?'

'Let's see,' mused the tree-doctor. 'Eleven trees, two dollars
apiece. Well, I'll make it twenty dollars for tlie lot. They're
worth more than that to you, ain't they?'

CO

'I should say they were,' said the owner of the estate. 'My
husband said before he died that he wouldn't take five hundred
dollars for that big chestnut out in front there. I will willingly
pay twenty dollars to have them saved.' 'All right. Let me get
my outfit.'

He went to his buggy, brought back a paper bag of j)owder and
a whitewash brush, and borrowed a pail, some water and a step-
ladder. In an hour he had swabbed the trees from as high as he
could reach from the ladder down to the ground, pocketed the
pleased widow's twenty dollars, got into the buggy, said 'Gid-
dap' to his horse, and was down at the next door yard, swabbing
more trees and pocketing more dollars."

It is true that many unscrupulous persons have been making-
money in a manner similar to the one mentioned in this story.
It is true also that the ravages of the disease, and especially the
legislative ap]3ropriation to combat it in Pennsylvania, have sud-
denl}^ brought to light numerous unsuspected infallible cures for
all the ills (including the chestnut bark disease) to which trees
are or ever will become heir, if we should judge only from the
statements of the advertisers and inventors.

Apropos of this, the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission of
Pennsylvania might relate some of their experiences along this
line that would make more interesting reading than the above,
though the incidents were less profitable financially to the fakirs.

The main point that I want to emphasize, hoAvever, is that the
value of ornanmental trees cannot, like forest trees, be gauged by
the mere timber value of the wood, nor, like the orchard tree,
merely by the value of the annual crop of nuts. The chestnut
tree undoubtedlj^ attains its liighest value as an ornamental tree.
You will all recall, I am sure, certain estates where one or more
chestnut trees are the main aesthetic or decorative features. Per-
haps the tree may have been a veteran, famous in the country-
side, long before the present owner purchased the land and built
liis domicile. Oftentimes the value of the ornamental tree is
largely enlianced by its location with reference to the house, and
even more largely, at times, by historic or ancestral traditions
with which it may have been, long since, associated. The value
placed by the owner of the estate upon such tree may occasion-
ally be almost without limit.

61

The very racL iliai the (I'ee is of imicli gi-ealer value to JLs
owner, than any tree in tlie l'or(?st coirld be, means that more
labor and more care, can and will be expended upon it, if it needs
it, than would be considered possible, from almost any economic
point of view, on either the orchard or the woodland tree. Con-
sequently some methods of combating the disease may be profit-
ably applied to ornamental trees tliat would not for a moment l)e
considered in connection with a tree in the forest.

At the very beginning of the experime'ntal work undertaken
by the United States Department of Agriculture, this fact was
recognized, and has since been kept in mind. Considerable of
the experimental work has had for its main object the solving of
the problem as to whether or not it will be possible to eradicate
or control the disease on individual trees.

Notwithstanding the fact that much of this work has been
done in chestnut orchards, there are probably few orchard trees
that ^^•ould be w^orth the expense involved in an attempt to sav(;
them; however, on account of their smaller size and greater ac-
cessibility, they would be more profitable for individual treat-
ment than the forest tree. Consequently these orchard trees be-
come, in most cases, nothing more or less than experimental
martyrs for the possible future benefit of their more aestheti-
cally valuable ornamental kin.

It is yet much too early to make a very definite statement, cer-
tainly not a final report, upon the possibilities of being able to
control fully the Chestnut Bark Disease on ornamental trees
without recourse to the radical methods at present advocated
for controlling it in a woodland. Nevertheless, certain facts
have been repeatedly demonstrated in the course of the experi-
mental work which apparently point in a very encouraging man-
ner to the probable ultimate accomplishment of tliis highly de-
siralde end though perhaps not on a very encouraging economic
basis, as such a basis is usually figured.

I want to call your attention to some of these facts, as well as
to the bearing that they maj^ have upon control work of tliis
general character. But in order to make clear certain points T
must first refer very briefly to the general line of treatment
which is being folloAved in the experimental work mentioned.

62

This lias been fully described in Farmer's Bulletin No. 467, of
the United States Department of Agriculture, and need not be
considered in its entirety here.

For this work the most essential implements are a gouge, a
mallet or hammer, a pot of tar or paint, and a brush to aj)ply the
latter; also a whetstone for keeping the gouge sharp. AVhen a
diseased spot in the bark is located, it is carefully cut out with
the gouge and mallet, care being taken to cut the bark perhaps
one-half inch beyond the discolored area which is usually so
prominent a characteristic of diseased bark. It is extremely im-
portant that the gouge be kept scrupulously sh<irp. If it is dull,
the pressure required in forcing it through the bark will invari-
ably result in some injur}^ to the delicate cambium cells at the
edge of the cut. This means that the new growth will start
back under the bark some distance, an eighth, a quarter, a
half inch, or even more, and not close to the edge of the cut,
where it should start under the most favorable conditions.

During the growing season the new growth begins to lift the
old bark within a week or ten days. If this growth does not be-
gin close to the edge of the cut, ^ye shall find in the course of
three weeks, under the uplifted edge of the bark, the finest kind
of a shelter for all kinds of small grubs, beetles, etc. ; all of which
are well known danger factors in connection with the spread
of the disease.

xit most seasons of the year, it is highly important that the
edge of the cut along tlie cambium line be covered with paint or
tar as promptly as possible. This is an important, and often
essential, point in coaxing the new growth to start closer to
the edge of the cut than i! ev;'^ would under perfectly normal
conditions. By using a sharp gouge and promptly covering the
cut edges, we have many times had the satisfaction of seeing
the new growth start within a thirty-second of an inch of the
edge of the cut, and be readily visible to the unaided eye in less
than a week. Anything better than this can scarcely be expected.
Of course, all portions of the cuts must be finally, carefully and
completely f>ainted with tar, paint, or other suitable waterproof
coating, and it is, theoretically at least, a good plan to paint the
cut surface with copper sulphate or Bordeaux before waterproof
coating is applied.

63

111 disciKSsinj^' (Ik; |»()ssil)iliti(!s pro and con of coiitrollinj*' llio
disease on individual trees after it lias become established, there
are many factors that should be clearly understood and carefully
considered. It should be determined just what bearing each
will have on the main problem, just how each unfavorable one
can be overcome or at least neutralized, just how each favorable
one can be made even more helpful in the fight; all these, and
more, if we are to enter the combat fully equipped. From
numerous points of view it is extremely unfortunate that the
disease has 'sjiread with such rapidit}^ from its first known
centre, that nearly every person who has been detailed by the
States or the Federal Government to work on the disease has,
of necessity, been obliged to devote most of his energies to lo-
cating or destroying infected trees, and relatively little or none
to the research or investigation phase of the problem.

Everybody who has had much to do with the disease will
agree with me, I am sure, when I say that in our efforts to con-
trol it we have been enormously handicapped by lack of just
such knowledge as comes only from systematic and painstaking
research. If we had this knowledge at the present time we
would undoubtedly see with clearness many things which are
now shrouded in the mistiness of uncertainty or in the darkness
of complete ignorance. Who, I wonder would venture to foretell
the effects upon the whole question of control if we had sj^read
before us a complete, or fairly complete, positive knowledge of
the many important points connected with the disease, about
which we now know so little; e. g., to mention a feAv of these, its
origin, methods of dissemination, detailed effects upon the host,
i]nmediate cause of the death or the lost vitality of the spores,
resistance of spores and mycelium to toxic agents, climatic in-
fluence upon host and disease, the extent to which it is possible
artificially to introduce various fluids into the circulatory sys-
tem of a tree without killing it, the extent to which insects are
responsible for the spread of the spores, the precise knowlege of
the relation of birds, rodents, wind, etc., to dissemination of the
spores.

In attempting to control the disease on individual trees, there
are certain facts, as I have already stated, which have been re-

64

peatedly deiuoiistrated in the coui'se of experimental work, that
are worthy of consideration at this time. I want to mention
and very briefly discnss six of these :

(1). Lateral or obliqne condnction.

There seems to be a rather widespread (bnt erroneons) idea
that the crude and elaborated sap of a tree can pass up and
down the trunk or branch only in a longitudiual direction, that
is, lengthwise of the fibres or "grain" of wood or bark, or at most
with but slight deviation from this route. The fact that it is
transferred almost entirely in a longitudinal divection in a
healthy uninjured tree may be true enough under normal con-
ditions, but it is far from true in trees that have been injured
in certain ways, and, as all students of plant physiology know,
not strictly true under perfectly normal conditions.

It is a fact of common knowledge that a tree will ordinarily
cover or grow over, an area of bare wood where the bark has
been removed. It is couunon knowledge to all observant persons
that these scars heal over maiuh^ from the sides. In all proba-
bility this is largely because they adjoin the uninjured vessels
through which sap is being conducted in the normal longitudinal
direction, but doubtless in part also to other causes to which I
shall allude directly. If a partially or entirely healed over scar
should be dissected, it will be found that in the layers of wood
formed immediately after the iujury the fibres are curved out-
ward around the injur}^, and continue in a nearly longitudinal
direction both above and below tlie scar. When the scar is par-
tially covered, the newly formed fibres are straighter, and finally
after the scar is entirely covered, the youngest fibres will be
found to have assumed their normal longitudinal direction, or
very nearly so.

If it were not for this possil)ility of oblique conduction, a tree
that had a large lesion extending half way around the trunk
on tlie north side, for instance, and an equally large one on the
south side, either above or below the other, would, to all intents
and purposes, be girdled.

In the chestnut tree, the angle from the perpendicular to
which these fibres can be made to curve, as a result of experimen-
tal cuttings, may seem surprisingly great. In one instance the

G5

Avriter very nearly succeeded in an attempt to force this new
growth to produce til)res at right angles to the normal direction:
i. e., they were made to bend more than 80 degrees.

The fact that new fibres can, if necessary, be formed at such
a great angle from the normal is of very great advantage to the
chestnut in the process of healing over scars made, for example,
by cutting out diseased spots in the bark. As food is conveyed
through a plant in very dilute Avatery solutions, it is necessary
that a great amount of sap be circulated or conveyed to a point
where any considerable amount of food is demanded. If the
tubes which i)rimarily convey sap should be severed, as when a
diseased spot has been cut out of the bark, the free transfer of
sap is at most seasons of the year immediately reduced to a mini-
mum in the severed or ''dead ends" of these sap conducting tubes,
which from the point of view of circulation, now hold about
the same relation to the uninjured tubes that the stagnant arm
of a river does to the main river.

So far as the actual food is concerned, it is obvious that the
amount of sap necessary to supply the requisite food cannot
reach the ui^per and lower edges of a scar by means of the dead
ends of the conducting tubes as readily and rajjidly as at the
edges where there is a continuous stream of sap passing along
the uninjured tubes.

Oftentimes just below a broad scar which reaches to the wood,
and less often above it, a triangular piece of bark will die. This
is due directly or indirect!}^ to the inability or great difficulty
that the sap has in reaching these places. In order to preclude
the possibility of the bark dying back either above or below a
scar, and thus furnishing favorable shelters for insects, the top
and bottom of the scar should be pointed instead of allowed to
remain abrupt or rounded. Under ordinary conditions it takes
no longer for a scar six inches long and an inch wide to heal
over completely than it does for one an inch long and an inch
wide, simply because the healing over depends almost entirely
"upon the growth at the sides of the scar. As I have already in-
timated, all cuts should be made with instruments that are kept
very sharp.

(2). Mycelium in the wood.

66

The mycelium of the fiiiigus almost always produces a very
characteristic mottled fau-like appearance iii the bark, and ap-
pears to penetrate through the tissues of the bark but a short
distance, if at all, beyond this discolored area. The mycelium
also penetrates the sapwood very freely, when the disease reachi3s
as deep as the wood, as it generally does sooner or later; but,
unlike its effect in the bark, no pronounced discoloration is pro-
duced in the wood, and it is impossible to determine with the
unaided eye the approximate limits of the mycelium, as in the
case of the bark.

In all efforts to control the disease without destroying the
tree, it is of course necessary to gouge out this disease infected
sapwood. The depth to which it is necessary to remove it can-
not at present be definitely stated, as insufficient time has
elaiDsed to demonstrate this point experimentally. Many cut-
tings, some with the sapwood partially removed from beneath
a lesion, and others with all of it removed, are now being watched
for results. However, in a diseased spot from three to four
inches in diameter apparently at least three annual layers of
wood in the centre of the diseased spot must be removed.

Of course where sapwood is cut, enormous numbers of minute
tubes, which conduct the crude sap from the roots through the
trunk and branches to the leaves, are severed, and, should the
cutting happen to have been done during warm, dry weather,
it often happens that one or more branches directly above the
cut-out area will show much wilted leaves within an hour or
two. This is a direct and inevitable result of the suppression,
from any cause whatsoever, of a considerable portion of the sup-
ply of water for the leaves.

Considerable careful judgment may at times have to be used
when making cuts of this nature, and occasionally it may be
wise to remove one or more healthy limbs, or perhaps to strip the
foliage partially from a branch situated just above a place where
much sapwood has been removed. This will at least tend to pre-
vent wilting, which if excessive, may result in the subsequent
death of the branch.

(3). Preservation of exposed wood from decay.

If exposed surfaces of wood are left with no protective cover-
ing they soon become weathered, dried, checked, and easily in-
fected with fungi, causing decay of the wood. In the chestnut,

67

moreover, ilu^re is llio addilioiial (huigi.'r <»]" iiif(;«:Li<)ii fn»i)i llio
spores of JJuipoiihc iKira.siilca. lii onler to rcdiicc; llio cliaiices
of infection from wood rotting and other fungi, it has been the
prevailing cnstoni for many years in this conntry as well as
abroad, to paint all exposed surfaces of wood Avith tar or lead
paint. Jndging from onr own experience perhaps these are as
good general preparations for this purpose as any tliat we care
to recommend at this time, though they are not ideal and they
do not prevent the checking of the wood. Morever, they must
be renewed from time to time in order to accomplish permanent
good. Creosote is excellent for a preliminary coating, but it
sinks into the wood readily and apparently has waterproof quali-
ties of only temporary value. It should always be followed
(within a few days, for example) with some thick or heavy coat-
ing, such as tar or paint.

For preventing the drying back of the cambium layer at the
edge of a cut, we have so far found nothing better than orange
shellac. This does not long remain a waterproof covering nnder
ordinary conditions, and should, as in the case of creosote, be
covered with a heavy coating of paint or tar, say within two or
three weeks after it is applied. ]Many other preparations for
covering exposed wood have been tried, but those mentioned ap-
pear to have been the most satisfactory from the point of view
of our experiments on ornamental and orchard chestnut trees.

(4). Sanitation.

In cutting out diseased spots in the trunk or branches of
chestnut trees, the chips should be carefully gathered in papers,
or better, paper bags, and destroyed by burning. They should
not be left scattered about on the ground. In other words, sani-
tation is one of the essentials for success in this kind of work,
just- as it is in the case of diseases of human beings. In all of
onr experiments with the disease on one particular plot the
chips were left where they fell. No attempt was made to de-
stroy them. Later many of these chips were examined and ap-
parently good, though dormant, frniting pnstules were present in
the majority of cases. To take one particular case : In March,
1911, some diseased spots, with good frniting pustules, were cut
from a chestnut tree and the chips left on the ground in a sunny
exposed place on a dry hill-top. These remained on the ground

68

tbroiigliont tlic spring, tliroiigli tlie hot dry weather of early
July, and the drought of July and August. In early September,
two days after the almost unbroken week of rain during the lat-
ter part of August, these chips were again examined, and on a
few of them which were composed entirely of bark, two or three
inches long and half as wide, many spore threads were found.
These, remember, from chips that had been lying on the ground
for more than five months through the hot summer drought. Pos-
sibly this may be regarded as an extreme case, but in any event
it clearly emphasized the necessity of extreme care in destroying
all diseased bark, chips, etc., in all attempts to control the dis-
ease. Again, extreme cases of the sort mentioned are often the
very ones that must be guarded against. In certain instances a
gasoline torch has proved an efficient adjunct for the burning out
of the diseased spot and thus destroying the fungus, whether or
not followed by the gouge and mallet.

(5). Insects.

Soon after beginning work on the disease in 1908, our atten-
tion was irresistibly^ drawn to the evident intimate relation that
insects bore to the spread of the disease. It is singularly inter-
esting to note that practically every person who has been work-
ing on the disease in the field for any length of time has, sooner
or later, been strongly impressed with this very apparent inter-
relationship between insects and the chestnut bark disease. Per-
sonall}', we have made many observations upon the topic, but a-?
this work properly belongs to another Bureau of the U. S. Dept.
of Agriculture, we have limited our work to observations. Here
is a phase of the Avorlv tliat could easil}^ influence the plans of
control to a large extent if we knew absolutely the relation of
insects to the disease. It is gratifying to know that the Commis-
sion has an expert entomologist already at work on this particu-
lar part of the general problem.

(C). Immunity.

From what is now knoAvn regarding the spread and virulence
of the Chestnut Bark Disease, there seems little immediate
promise of individual trees or variations of the American Sweet
Chestnut (Castanea dGntata) developing immunity. As this
species is the only forest tree of the genus in the country, it

G9

would ajjpear that the question of immunity can have practically
no direct or immediate bearing upon tlie saving of our forest
chestnut trees.

At the present time there is every prospect tliat we can rea-
sonably expect to procure immune pure bred varieties or species
of chestnuts from northern Asia and Japan. Indeed, we already
know that some of tlie Japanese and Korean chestnuts are al-
most, if not quite, immune to the disease. I think it is safe to
say, where Japanese varieties liave been killed by this disease,
that in more than ninety per cent, of the cases which have come
under our personal observation, the trees have been grafted with
Japanese scions on American or European stocks, and the Jap-
anese trees have been killed by girdling below the graft. We
have repeatedly observed such cases where the stock has been
absolutely covered with disease up to the graft line, with not a
sign of it anywhere on the Japanese portion. Naturally, this fact
in itself is strong proof of the immune nature of these particular
Japanese varieties. As these highly resistant, or perhaps im-
mune, trees are with us small, and the nuts, though often huge,
are of inferior quality, their value will be almost entirely as or-
namental trees, and probably never, in our time at least, of any
value in replacing the American chestnut. If the better flavored
native and Paragon nuts should disappear from the market, we
would doubtless soon turn to the inferior Japanese nut as a sub-
stitute.

In recent years much has been accomplished along the line of
breeding hybrids or strains of plants which are not only often
fine in quality, but also highly resistant to disease. The results
that have been attained in this direction within a comparatively
fcAV years are truly gratifying, but the future will witness
greater results. There is no reason to doubt that we may even-
tually see an immune hybrid cliestnut that will rival the Ameri-
can s^eet chestnut in flavor of the nut, and the Paragon in
size.

THi: CHAIKMAN: You will recall that, while we were
listening to the addresses in response to the remarks of Gover-
nor Tener, the gentleman from Connecticut stated that he had

70

some results which he desired to present to us at sometime dur-
ing the Conference. It has been suggested to me that, as it is
a little late, it would be best to put over all general discussion
until this evening, when we are to have only one set paper and
at this time to call upon the gentleman from Connecticut, Pro-
fessor Clinton, who has his results in the form of two short
papers. If that meets with your approval, then, we will ask
Professor Clinton to speak at this time. He is not "a long, lean
man with a grizzled beard," but he has some other points that
will commend themselves to us. (AjDplause).

PEOFESSOR GEORGE P. CLINTON (Botanist, Connecti-
cut Agricultural Station) : Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentle-
men: The first paper that I will present is written by Profes-
sor Parlow, of Harvard University. For the benefit of those
who do not know Professor Farlow, I will say that he is the
oldest mycologist in this country, has had the greatest experience
in studying fnngi and has some of the best herbaria dealing with
fungi, especially those bound in book form, known as Exsiccati,
in the world. He took up the study of the nomenclature of the
chestnut blight disease, at my request, about two years ago. He
has not supplied a title to the paper which I will now present.

PAPER BY PROFESSOR W. G. FARLOW, HARVARD UNIVERSITY,

MASSACHUSETTS.

The cause of the disease of chestnut trees prevalent in our
Eastern States is ascribed to the growth of the fungus named
D'iaimrtlie imrasitica by Murrill in 1906. If as is generally be-
lieved, this fungus is the cause of the disease, in searching for
the best method of combating it we not only should obtain all the
information possible in regard to the microscopic structure and
pathogenic action of the fungus, but we should see whether we
may not get some practical suggestions from what has been
written in regard to the distribution and pathological action of
fungi which are most nearly related to our chestnut fungus.

The first question we may ask is : Is Diaportlie parasitica, as
at first supposed, really a species new to science? If so, is it
a native species which has hitherto escaped the notice of our my-
cologists, or has it been introduced from some other country?
In disease due to fungi tlie presumption is always in favor of the

71

theory tliat they have been introduced when they produce sudden
and virulent epidemics, as in the case of the potato rot. The
presumption, I say, is in favor of this theory, but a presumption
it should be borne in mind is not a certainty. If Dicvporthe para-
sitica is not a species new to science, what is it, and where did
it come from? The microscopic structure of the chestnut tree
fungus as we now know it, is well known, and its habit and its
reproductive organs have been described and figured in many
publications accessible to everyone. What, however, is not so
generally known is what has been written in times past on fungi
found on chestnut trees in different countries, and a review of
what is known to mycologists in this connection may be instruc-
tive although, it must be admitted, the subject is not very easy
to follow. On account of dried specimens in the older herbaria
and a summary of tlie often obscure and conflctiug descriptions
to be found in old treatises, even if desperately dull, will enable
us to form certaiii practical conclusions.

When I first received fresh specimens of the fruiting fungus
of the chestnut tree I ^^'as struck by their great resemblance to
what is generally known in American herbaria as EiuJotliia
gi/rosa. Unfortunately most of the specimens of that species in
herbaria are sterile and from tlie habit alone one cannot be sure
of the species of a fungus of this group. The fresh fungus also
recalled a specimen I had seen in an Italian collection, and ou
looking it up and comparing it miscroscopically with the fresh
material, I found the two to be identical. The gross structure
and the characters of the spores and asci were the same in both.
The Italian specimen to whicli I refer is No. 986, First Series of
the Erhario Crittogamico Italiana, issued in 1863. The label
states that the fungus grew on chestnut trunks at Locarno on
Lake Maggiore, where it was collected by Daldini in 1862. The
name there given is EndotUia radicaUs, but the question of the
name need not be considered at present. As other botanists
have examined the specimen just mentioned and agree as to
the identity of the Endothia 7'adicalis and the Diaportlie parasi-
tica, some having already expressed their opinion in print, we
may state definitely that our American chestnut tree fungus does
not appear to be new but to have been known on cliestnuts in
Italy fifty years ago.

72

It may be well to glance at what lias been written on the sub-
ject in Italy. The earliest reference known to me is that of Eu-
dolphi in Linnaea, 1829, where the Endothia is said to grow on
Quercus Ilex, Q. imhens and Castanea vesca. Later accounts
were given by Cesati and De Notaris in 1863 in their Schema and
the Sphaeriacei Italica, where there is a good description and a
rather crude figure apparently drawn from somewhat immature
specimens, for the spores are represented as one celled, although
in the description they are said to be sometimes obscurely two-
parted. The fungus is said to be common on dried branches and
denuded roots of oaks and chestnuts in Northern Italy and to
occur also on elms.

Italian sj)ecimens were distributed in Kabenhorst's Herbarium
Mycologicum, Thuemenis, Mycotheca Universalis and Saccardo
M^^cotheca Yeneta ; but in the coj)ies which I have examined the
specimens had spermogonia but no asci. The most recent notice
of the fungus in Italy is that of Traverso in Flora Italica Cryp-
togama, in 1906, who uses the name Endothia gyrosa. It is said
to grow on Aesculus, Alnus, Carx^inus, Castanea, Corylus, Fagus,
Juglans, and Quercus, and to occur not only in Europe and
North America but even in Ceylon and New Zealand.

We have early notices of the fungus in France. In 1830 Fries
stated in Linnaea that he had received it from that country and
Tulasne in his Carpologia, Vol. II, 1863, gave a long notice of
the fungus, which he says grows on Carpinus, with critical notes
on the synonymy of the species. In 1870 Fuckel recorded its
appearance as rare on Alnus at Oestrich in Nassau, and Winter,
in 1886, in Kabenhorst's Crytogamen Flora, stated that the En-
dothia grew on different deciduous trees in Germany. The
records of the fungus in France and Germany are less satisfac-
tory than its record in Italy, and the specimens distributed from
the former countries in exsiccati are few and poor.

From this rather long account of the history of the chestnut
fungus in Europe, we ma^^ draw the following conclusions : Our
chestnut tree fungus is widely spread in Europe and is common
in Northern Italy, where it was first noticed as long ago as 1829.
It is of interest to notice that writers are very generally agreed
that it grows on bark, dried branches, and dead roots, rather
than on living branches, and the liosts on which it is said to grow

73

are not merely chestnuts and oaks bnt a considerable number of
deciduous trees. Yet, although the fungus has been so well
known in Ital}', where it is in some places certainly common,
there is no record whatever of any serious disease of the chestnut
due to it. The chestnut, which is a tree of great economical im-
portance in Italy, is subject to a good many diseases which have
been carefully studied by the Italian pathologists but, so far as
I know, not one has suggested that any is due to the Endothia.
AVere it a fact that the Endothia, whatever specific name we
please to call it, is a species endemic in Italy but not found in
North America until the appearance of the present epidemic, we
could understand why the fungus might cause a serious disease
in this country although it causes no trouble in Italy, for, if in-
fected plants were imported from Europe, the fungus, as in other
well known cases, might be transferred to our native chestnuts
which unlike the chestnuts of Italy have not become immune.

Italian botanists did not and do not regard their chestnut En-
dothia as merely an endemic species but consider it to be the
same as ^phiierid radicalls described by Fries in 1828 from
North American specimens collected by Schweinitz. We learn
from Schweinitz, in his North American Fungi, that the species
was very rare on roots of Fagus in North Carolina. The syn-
onymy is too complicated to be folloAved here but some reasons
why it is so complicated should be stated. Prior to the publica-
tion of iS'. radicalls, Schweinitz had in 1822 described a f^pliaeria
gyrosa from North Carolina said to groAV on Fagus and Juglans.
Later Fries made this species the type of a new genus, Endothia.
The earlier Italian writers regarded /S'. gyrosa and S. radicalis
as two distinct species, apparently basing their opinion on the
fact that Fries placed the two in different sections of the old
genus Bpliacria rather than on an examination of American
specimens of the two species. Traverso and some later writers,
however, consider that the so-called two species are really only
two different stages of a single species. It appears to me that
their opinion is quite possibly correct, but the question can be
settled definitely only by an examination of original Schweinit-
zian specimens. Thanks to the kindness of Dr. Stewartson
Brown I have been allowed to examine the specimens in the
Schweinitzian Herbarium in the Academy of Natural Sciences

74

in Philadelphia, and I have also examined Schweinitzian speci-
mens in the Curtis Herbarium at Harvard. Unfortunately I
have not as yet succeeded in finding a Schweiuitzian specimen of
/S'. 7'adicalis which shows ascospores; possibly none of the so-
called 8. radicalis has ascospores, but I am not yet certain that
that is the fact. Specimens supposed to be S. gyrosa are com-
mon in American' herbaria and have frequently been distributed
in different sets of exsiccati. Unfortunately of the considerable
number of specimens I have examined, the greater part were
sterile although judging by the habit alone, they might very well
be aS'. gyrosa. I have, however, seen no specimens in the older
American herbaria where the fungus supposed to be S. gyrosa
was certainly growing on chestnut. In general the hosts were
not speciflcially stated but a large per cent, were evidently on
oak. There is a fungus common on oak in the Southern states
which has the external habit of Endothia, and appears fre-
quently in herbaria as Endothia gyrosa. An examination of a
number of fertile specimens on oak from different localities, hav-
ing all the appearance of being E. gyrosa, has shown that the as-
cospores are unlike those of the Endothia of Northern Italy or
like those of what is called Dlaportlie parasitica. Stated in
words the differences may seem to be slight but in practice one
can without difficulty distinguish the two. The spores of the
form on oak have hardly half the diameter of those of the chest-
nut and the spores are nearly linear. Naturally no definite ac-
count of the spores was given by Schweinitz and therefore ex-
cept by an examination of authentic specimens we are not able
to say whether the form on oak should be considered the true S.
gyrosa of Schweinitz or not. As I have said, I have not yet been
able to complete my examination of original material, not as yet
having found mature 8. radicalis.

Although further examination is necessary before expressing
a final opinion, certain facts seem to be settled. Our form on
chestnut called Diaporthe parasitica, described in 1906, and tliat
on chestnut in Italy collected by Daldini in 1862 are identical as
far as can be determined by a study of the dried, herbarium
specimens which we have been able to examine. As far as I have
been able to examine the older herbaria, I have found no speci-
men of Endothia on chestnut in North America. There is, how-

75

ever, an Eudothia on oak not nncomnionly fonnd in fruit in tlie
Southern States which has spores wliicli seem to me to be speci-
fically different from those found on tlie cliestnut. The question,
however, is still open as to whether the form on chestnuts may
not also be found on oaks on further examination. If so, how-
ever, it must be less common, if I may judge by tlie considerable
number of specimens I have examined, than the form with nar-
row, linear spores.

DE. JOHN MICKLEBOROUGH, of Brooklyn: Mr. Chair-
man : I would suggest that Professor Clinton be given the first
opportunity to present his own paper tlie first thing this evening.
We have had a very long session, and I tliink the time has come
for adjournment.

THE CHAIRMAN: That f^eems an excellent /suggestion.
What is the pleasure of the Conference? Is there objection to
it? If not, then. Professor Clinton, if it is agreeable to you, we
will ask you to present the other paper the first thing this even-
ing.

The Chair will remind you, gentlemen, that you are invited
to register and he would state, also, that the Committee on Reso-
lutions will be announced to-night. We will then now stand in
recess until sharp at eight o'clock, when we will again meet in
this chamber.

EVENING SESSION.

Tuesday, February 20, 1912, eight o'clock P. M.
THE CHAIRMAN: Gentlemen, the meeting will please be
in order. We will first hear the short paper that we had expected
to hear at the close of the afternoon session, by Professor Clin-
ton. (Applause).

SOME FACTS AND THEORIES CONCERNING CHEST-
NUT BLIGHT.

BY PROFESSOR GEORGE P. CLINTON, BOTANIST, AGRICIILTTTRAL EX-
PERIMENT STATION, CONNECTICUT.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen : —

At a recent meeting of the American Pliytopathological So-

76

ciety held in Washington, D. C, clnring a discussion of the chest-
nut blight problem, the writer made the following predictions :

(1). That chestnut blight was not imported into the United
States from Japan; not saying that it does not occur in the lat-
ter country.

(2). That it is a native American species.

(3). That it is a previously described species.

(4). Tbat there is evident relationship between its rise and
spread in this country and weather conditions.

(5). That it is impossible to eradicate it by the cutting out
method.

(6). That there will in time be a decliue iu its prominence
due to natural conditions.

(7). Unpublished — by which was meant that the fungus oc-
curs in Europe.

I propose here to discuss some of these predictions, thus giv-
ing my reasons for presenting them. There have been advocated
two almost diametrically opposed views concerning the chestnut
blight in this country.

The first of these, if I understand it correctly, assumes that
the cliestnnt blight is a recently introduced disease, apparently
from Japan, and that its spread and destructiveness here have
not been at all influenced by weather conditions ; that if left un-
controlled, it will continue to spread and devastate our forests
until they are practically ruined.

The second view, advanced by the writer, assumes that the
chestnut blight is a native American fungus, apparently also
indigenous to Eurojoe, and that weather and other unfavorable
conditions, which have weakened the vitality of the chestnut
trees in the northeastern United States, have had much to do
with its sudden, destructive, and wide-spread appearance, and
that it will not necessarily wipe out all of our chestnuts, as it
is likely to decline gradually with the disappearance of the fac-
tors that have favored its rise into prominence.

Between these two extremes there are those who take one or
the other view in modified form, or agree in part with both. It
is highly important that the truth of the matter be ascertained,
since upon the nature of the fungus and the manner of its appear-

77

aiiee in tliiy country depend in large; Jiicasure tlie practicability
or impracticability of the only method now advocated for its
control, immely, the cutting- out and destruction of the diseased
trees.

Before proceeding to ii discussion of the reasons why I hold
the view I do, let us consider for a moment the apparent reasons
for the other view. Ho far as I can make them out, they are as
follows :

(1). The trouble ai)peared suddenly and seriously, and as it
is unusual for a fungus thus to spring up in a country where
it has never been known before, it is presumably an imported
one.

(2). But such a serious disease of chestnuts has never been
known before in any other country. However, insects and weeds
and fungi also, that have been comparatively inconspicuous in
their native countries, when introduced into a new country,
sometimes develop into serious pests because of their new and
unusually favorable surroundings.

(3). The Japanese species of chestnut has apparently shown
considerable immunitj' to the chestnut disease, more so than any
other. It may therefore be supposed that the fungus is an in-
conspicuous native of Japan, and was brought into this country
on seedlings from there. It spread to our native chestnuts, and
finding these much less resistant to its attacks, has suddenly
spread through the regions in which it is now known to occur.

(I). The preceding statements being true, there is no reason
why it should not go on spreading, and annihilating the chest-
nuts of the eastern and southern United States.

(5). Preliminary cutting out experiments in a region with-
in thirtj^-flve miles of Washington, D. C, are claimed to have
prevented the spread of the disease in that region, and based on
this, the much more extensive work in Pennsylvania is now being
carried on, and similar work is advocated. in other States to
preveiit its further spread through the south and west.

Now, if the preceding points are true, Pennsylvania has pos-
sibly taken a wise step in trying to control the disease. That it
can ever be eradicated, the writer does not believe for one in-
stant, and he has serious doubts about the control being effective
or financially profitable, since it means a continuous fight, much

78

like the gypsy moth work in Massachusetts, to prevent re-infec-
tion. If the above points, however, are not true, it seems to me,
at least, that the efforts for control planned for this Stiite will be
time, money and trees throAvn away.

The author of the first view has not, to my knowledge, claimed
that the chestnut blight was imported from Europe, or that the
European chestnuts in this country are especially immune to
the disease. If he should ever advocate that it is a European im-
portation, I do not see how he can account for the fact tliat it
has caused no very noticeable trouble on that continent, and yet,
when introduced here, kills off the European chestnuts as readily
as the native ones; unless he admits that weather or other con-
ditions have been unfavorable for these chestnuts, and have thus
favored the development of the fungus.

Proceeding now to my own tlieory, let me take it up point by
point.

First, that the chestnut blight is a native of this country. In
1900 I sent to Professor Earlow, of Harvard University, the first
specimen of DiaportJie parcmtica that he had examined, and
asked his opinion as to whether or not it Avas the same as a cer-
tain species that Schweinitz had years before described on chest-
nuts from this country. He replied that it was not, but that it
agreed more perfectly Avitli the genus Endothia than with Dia-
porthe, and that it Avas closely related to, but apparently dis-
tinct from, Endothia f/ijrosa. Endothia r/i/rosa Avas originally
described from Carolina and Pennsylvania by SchAveinitz as
t^phacria radicalis and Hphaeria gyrosa, and reported by him on
Eagus and Juglans. It has since been reported in the United
States on Liquidambar and Quercus species, chiefly on the lat-
ter.

With the clue furnished by Professor Earlow, I found and so
stated in my 1908 report, that a specimen of Endothia gyrosa
on chestnut collected by Scarrado in Italy had been issued in de
Thuemen's Myc. Univ. No. 769, and that so far as its gross ap-
pearance and pycnidial stage (the onl}^ stage present in my speci-
men) were concerned, I could not distinguish it from Diaporthe
parasitica Murr. As the ascospore stage was not present, I did
not venture to claim that they were the same species.

79

The writer Jias HJiire iiiado ii cai'd'ul Jiiiiil (or /'Jntlol/iia (jijrosa
iiiid lias specimens of i(, on two sjK'cies of oak collected in Con-
necticut and tlic District of Oolnndna. Cultures have been made
of these, and from DUiportlic jKirasillca on chestnut obtained
from the same localities. Our studies of these cultures and
specimens from various localities are not yet complete, but they
have gone far enougli to say definitely that DiaporUie pdramticd
belongs in the same genus Avitli the Endotliki gyrona on oak, and
at least is very closely related to it, though at ijresent my opinion
is that they are distinct species. Professor Farlow has also
made further studies, and I have presented his paper on the
subject.

We have not been able so far to find in literature a reference to
Endothia gyrosa on chestnut in this country before the outbreak
of Dia'portlie parasitica in 1904, Neither have we found speci-
mens in an herbarium that were collected before that date. We
have not, however, quite exhausted all opportunities for investi-
gation along this line. If it is ever proved that our Endothia
gyrosa on the oak is exactly the same as Diaporthc parasitica on
the chestnut, of course it is at once apparent that Dlaporthe para-
sitica is a native and not an imported fungus.

A second observation that leads me to believe that Ifaiporilic
parasititca is a native species is the fact that frequently in Con-
necticut I have found it as a languishing parasite on the roots
and base of trees, where it was doing no very apparent harm,
and this is somewhat the way Endothia gyrosa occurs on oak
here and elsewhere, and is also the way that the so-called En-
dothia gyrosa on chestnut acts in Europe, where it causes no
particular trouble. This makes me believe that these
particular occurrences of Diaporthe parasitica in Connecticut
represent the fungus in its native condition as an inconspicuous
parasite, rather than as an introduced pest that is bound to kill
those particular trees. Likewise, I believe that at least part of
the so-called spread of the disease in this country is merely an
unusual development of the fungus which has existed there for
years in an inconspicuous way.

A third indication that the chestnut blight is a native species
is a comparison of the situation of Endothia gyrosa in Europe
and in this country. In Europe Endothia gyrosa has been re-

80

ported on cliestiiiit, oak and various otlier hosts in different
places, but apparently the natural home of the fungus is South-
ern Europe, as it has been reported most frequently from Italy
and France. In Germany, AVinter reported that it produced its
pycnidial, but not its perfect stage, though both are found in
Italy. Now, if Endotliia gyrosa has a variety of hosts, including
chestnut, in Europe, and prefers a southern habitat, what of its
preferences in this country? From an examination of literature
and of specimens in the New York Botanical Gardens, it is ap-
parent that Endothia gyrosa has been reported much more fre-
quently south of Pennsylvania than north of it. For two years,
I and others have been looking for it in Connecticut, and only
this winter was it found by our forester. This specimen, like
those reported by Winter from Germany, has only its pycnidial
stage, though this is the time of year to find the asco-stage. En-
dothia gyrosa has been found on as many hosts in this country
as in Europe, and likewise chiefly from the south. Why may we
not then expect to find it there on the chestnut? We certainly
have had trouble enough with the chestnuts in the South in for-
mer years to believe that it might occur there.*

The second point expressed in my view is that the chestnut
blight fungus is also a native of Europe. Briefly stated, my rea-
sons for this belief are: (1) The specimens in deThueman's
exsiccati on chestnut in Italy already referred to; (2) the state-
ment of Professor Farlow that he has seen identical herbarium
specimens of it from Europe; and (3) a recent letter from Pro-
fessor Saccardo of Italy, who states that he and Professor Hoh-
nel simultaneously recognized that Diaporthe parasitica Murr.
is the same thing as Endotli'm gyrosa, both in its ascospore and
conidial stages. A critical study of more specimens on all hosts
from each country may, however, settle differently some points
at present not clear to me.

*After tlip H.in-isbnrg CDiiforoiice the writer went South especially to see if Endotliia ffyrosa or
Diaporthe paraniHca oc^urrerl there on chestnut, as sugj^ested in this paper, though never having
been so reportert. Stops were made at Roanoke and Blacksburg, Va., Bristol. Va., and in Ten-
nessee and at Asheville and Tryon, North Carolina, and Lynchburg, Va., and at each place there
was found the suspected fungus on both chestnut and oak, and more frequently on the former. This
fungus occurred as"a languishing parasite or as a saprophyte, usually at the base or on the roots of
the trees, and was never found forming isobiled cankers on the olherwise sound sprouts, as is
Diaporthe parnMtica in tho North. Appaii'utly this fungus is the same on both the oak and
chestnut, and the same thing as the so-calh'i! KiiilnUiiu (/i/rosa on the same hosts in Europe. What
its exact relationship is to Diaportha parasiliia h;is not yet been fully determined. In gross ap-
pearance its fruiting pustules are scarcely different, except possibly slightly less luxuriant,
as a rule. Its pycnidial spores or Cytospora .stage is apparently identical with that of D, para-
sitica, but the asco-spores are evidently as n whole less luxuriant; that is, they are somewhat
smaller, ,ind especially slightly narrower. Whether these differences are those of a strain, variety,
or distinct species, is yet to be determined by cultures, inoculations, and further study.

81

The tliird jjoiiit in my tlieory is that weather and other un-
favorable conditions have weakened the vitality of the chestnut
in the eastern United States, and that the fungus has developed
into prominence because of this. The reasons I have for advocat-
ing this theory are as follows :

(1). The chestnut blight came into prominence suddenly in
1904, just after the severe winter of 19034. From my own ob-
servation at that time and since, I know that this winter was un-
usually severe on fruit, and to a less extent on shade and forest
trees in Connecticut. I am corroborated in my views by the ob-
servations of Professor Stone, botanist of the Massachusetts Ex-
periment Station, wlio has made a specialty of the diseases and
injuries of shade and forest trees. Various experiment stations
and other publications show that the fruit trees in New York,
Michigan and Ohio suffered from this, and possibly from subse-
quent cold winters.

(2). Since 1907, speaking particularly for Connecticut, we
have had five summers with unusual periods of drought, culmi-
nating with that of last season, which lasted from June until
about the first of August. I know that these droughts have been
hard on forest and shade trees from their weakened condition
and from the unusual number that have died. Except in the
case of chestnuts, the death of these trees has been laid directly
to the drought, by many observers. I have given somewhat more
detailed accounts of these weather conditions in my previous re-
ports, and will not dwell further on them here. We have found
that chestnut trees on the south and southwest exposures, (and
on that side of the trees) where they have suffered most from
drought and winter injury, have sometimes developed severe out-
breaks of the blight, while the trees on the more protected north-
ern exposures in the same vicinity did not.

(3). We have found cases of chestnut blight developing more
severely in woods suffering from fire injury than in surrounding
woods not so injured. It has been our almost universal experi-
ence that blight develops first and most severely in the easily in-
jured chestnut sprouts from one to ten years old, whose new
roots have not yet become thoroughly established, and last on the

82

sturdy old seedling trees. How many times we can renew our
chestnut Avoods by sprout growth is a question, but that such
trees in time are weakened foresters generally acknowledge. Most
of our Connecticut chestnut timber has already been cut over at
least two or three times.

(4). The unusual spread of the disease in very dry years is
contrary to the general experience of fungous troubles, which
are favored by moist years; and yet here is a case where the
severer the drought, the worse the fungus became. If I am
Avrong about its relation to weather conditions, what a
deluge of trouble we may expect with the return of a few moist
years !

As to my statement that chestnut blight cannot be eradicated
in this country by the cutting out ajid burning method perhaps
no one now thoroughly conversant with the trouble will d<.'ny,
though there are those that evidently believe it can be controlled
in this way. Man never 3^et has eradicated a fungus so widely
distributed as this, unaided by nature, and is never likely to un-
less he eliminates the host. Professors Stewart and Murrill have
given reasons why they believe it is impractical even to try to
control the disease. I agree in the main with their contentions.
The method that is advocated in the present case aims at the com-
l)lete destruction of the infected trees and in some regions, if I
am informed correctly, of the healthy as well. This is a decidedly
unusual procedure in the control of plant diseases, since usually
we aim to save not only the healthy plants but the infected ones
as ^^'ell. I know of no similar practice, outside of nursery in-
spections, except that api)lied in a few regions for the control
of peach yellows. There the infected trees only are destroyed,
but the yellows would kill those any way in a short time. There
is, however, no National effort to control peach yellows even in
this way and at least one State, Connecticut, that started under
authority of law to inspect orchards and to destroy all infected
trees, repealed that law after a few vonrs' trial.

Now as to my last contention : that the disease of itself will
gradually decline with the return of a series of years favorable
to the chestnut trees. If unfavorable weather conditions for the
trees have been the chief cause of the rise of the fungus as an
aggressive parasite, favorable weather corrditions for the chest-

83

iiiit will of coiii'sc briug about the decline of tlie fungus, unless it
has already attained an unusual and lasting virulence from its
present aggressiveness.

That chestnuts have in the past in our southern States suffered
from disease or injury of some kind yet unaccounted for, no one
who has looked up the literature of the subject can deny. I have
gatliered together statements of this sort from various sources,
but will not take the time to present them here. From the fact
that no trained mycologist has studied these outbreaks in the
past, and from the further fact that the observers often speak
of them by such terms as "blight," "root rot" and so forth, and
did not find insects responsible, I, for one, am open to proof as
to their relation to Dkiporthe imsasitica, despite the statement of
two or three observers wiio have recently examined trees in the
South, that there is no such relationship. Anyway, the chest-
nuts have suffered severely in these States at different times dur-
ing the past seventy-five years, and have been apparently
crowded out of the lower lands, but they still seem to be quite
vigorous and abundant in the higher regions of those States,
since the chief object of the campaign in fighting DiaportJw para-
sitica seems to be to keep it north of the Potomac River in order
to preserve the valuable timber said to exist south of it.

THE CHAIRMAN : We are now to be favored by hearing an
illustrated lecture on Chestnut Culture, the speaker being Pro-
fessor Nelson F. Davis, of Bucknell University, Lewisburg, Pa.

CHESTNUT CULTURE.

AN ILLUSTRATED LECTURE BY PROFESSOR NELSON F. DAVIS, OF
BUCKNELL UNIVERSITY, LEWISBURG, PA.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: I wish to take you
to-night on a little trip to Irish Valley, situated near Shamokin,
Pa. I will take you on this trip by a series of lantern slides.
I wish to show you tp-uight what has been done in spite of ene-

84

mies, by Mr. C. K. Sober, who lias been working with the Para-
gon chestnut since 1896 and 1897. In 1896 Mr. Sober began to
graft the Sober Paragon chestnut, as it is now called, on native
chestnut sprouts. He had on his farm in Irish Valley about four
hundred acres of waste mountain land. This mountain land he
wished to reclaim. It was not suitable for ordinary farm crops.
His method was to remove ever^^thing and, by means of cleanli-
ness, which he obtained by using the grubbing hoe, the saw, the
axe, and the pruning knife, and then burning everything, to keep
his growth clean. In this way he hoped to keep out the enemies,
such as the weevil, and another worse than the weevil, the burr
worm. There are two species of the burr worm, one of which is
new to scientists. It belong to the genus Holcocera, and has been
named, in honor of Mr. Sober, Holcocera Soherii. The other
larva, the adult of which is not known, is equally injurious. By
means of removing the nuts as soon as they emerge, removing
the burrs from the grove and burning the shucks as soon as the
nuts are taken out, Mr. Sober on fifty acres has practically re-
moved the weevil and burr worm, so that last year the nuts
gathered from fifty acres contained scarcely a peck of wormy
chestnuts. He has done this by means of cleanliness in every way,
and by removing the larvae and not allowing them to mature. In
other parts of the grove it has not been possible to do this in
every respect, and there the weevil is an enemy. It has been his
custom, during the last ten years, to remove every dead limb that
has appeared in the four hundred acres and if there was chestnut
blight, it has .been cut off and burned. An actual count of the
chestnut trees now in the grove showed forty-four thousand and
thirty-five trees that are bearing, and in addition to those there
are others that are not yet matured.

By means of these slides I will take you in harvest time over
the grove as it now is, and then, by means of other slides which
I have taken during the last ten years, show you the various steps
that have been taken in developing this grove. If we may have
the lantern, we will begin our trip.

The first slide is a portrait of Mr. C. K. Sober. (Applause).

The next slide represents a portion of a fifty-acre tract, as it
appeared when he took possession of it. It was covered with
waste wood of various sorts. Very little of this was of any use.

A typical cliistei- of burrs of the Paragon chestnut.

85

Some could be used, of course, for pulp wood; l>ut notice, among
the old stumps, there are a few sprouts coming up. Tiiese are
sx)routs of the native chestnut, and it was upon these sprouts
that Mr. Sober conceived the idea of grafting. Of course, it had
been done elsewhere, but not upon his four hundred acres. That
was the beginning of his Paragon chestnut.

As we approach the grove at the iH'esent time, you will see the
mountain side in Irish Valley from this view. This shows on
the hillside from a distance a portion of the four hundred acres,
which is now grafted, and from one end of the picture to the
other represents a distance of over a mile.

In the next view, as we approach the farm, coming near to the
buildings, you can see the nature of the surrounding country,
the hillside. Back in the centre of the picture, at the top, is
ninety acres now grafted to the Paragon chestnut.

In the next view we see the farm buildings and, starting from
the buildings, we will now visit the grove as it appeared last
October.

Driving up the road you notice along the roadside everywhere
seedlings grafted to the Paragon. They have been ti'ansplanted,
and all along the road wherever you drive, you will see these
trees.

As we approach the grove, you can see its condition in this
view. This is a portion of the four hundred acres. There are
shown in the view about three hundred acres. Above you see the
the mountain side, as this grove would now have been had he not
cleared it.

A nearer approach to the grove shows the grafted trees, and
above them the native chestnut principally. This land was ori-
ginally covered with, I suppose, white pine. That was removed
and later hard woods came in its place, oak, chestnut, and other
hard woods. Now it meant considerable work removing and
clearing and grafting these trees, and I wish to show you the
various stages as we pass along.

As we enter the grove, it is harvest time, as shown in this view.
They are gatli,ering the nuts, which have been placed in bags at
this particular portion, so that we are just entering the grove.

86

In the uext view, the hirgest tree at the right is about nine
years old. Keallj the A^ork from 189G until 1900 consisted in
experimenting. AMien the methods were perfected, the real work
began, in 1900.

Another portion of the grove shows a tree on which the nuts
are maturing. This tree is about eight years old.

A branch from that tree shows the nuts almost ripe, just ready
to open. If we examine under the trees, many of the burrs are
fallen to the ground. You can see the burrs and the nuts in the
burrs. It is harvest time and the harvesters are gathering the
nuts and placing them in piles, whence they can be hauled to
the threshing machine, which will be shown later.

The next view shows a normal burr, containing three nuts.

I will now show the different stages through which fifty acres
of this four hundred have passed. I do not have the photographs
taken in 1896 and 97-. The photographs I have were taken be-
ginning with 1903 uj) to the present time. This view shows the
work of removing the brush piles, which were left on the ground.
These had to be burned, the logs removed and all the sprouts pro-
tected. Every native sprout was protected in every way from
fire and from injury, and in the front of this view you see a num-
ber of sprouts that have been left. These are ready to be grafted.
When the logs are hauled out, these have to be i)rotected ; Avhen
fires are made, to burn the brush and rubbish, these need to be
protected. A sawmill was set up, and w^hat wood was valuable
used either for railroad ties, or mine props, or pulpwood, for
whatever it could be used, so that it partly paid for clearing.

When the sprouts are ready to graft, they are about six feet
high. Four sprouts are here shown. The two on this side were
cut off about the point where the hand is, and these two were
selected because, coming from the stump, they came from lower
down and a little farther out and apparently had better roots.
So two were selected and two were left. The two were grafted
on this side and two left, in case of injury to the other two; so
that, if anytliing happened, the otliers could l)e grafted the next
season.

Old trees were cut down in different parts of the farm. This
shows a giant tree that was cut in order that this little sprout at

87

the side luiglit be grafted. This anus about two years after the
tree was cut.

This shows another tree from which four sprouts were grafted.
This was grafted in May, and in June tlie sprouts were started.
Of course, all buds below the graft were removed in order to pre-
vent the strength passing iiiu, ine buds.

This view shows the same grafts as they were maturing dur-
ing the first summer. Three have started; the fourth was a little
slow in starting.

Here they are shown after one season's growth. The roots
from the old stump contained lots of nourishment and pushed the
growth rapidly, so that during one season the growth that you-
see took place. This was taken in October.

Another view showing one season's growth, after the leaves
had been removed. This shows four sprouts grafted. They are
growing together.

This is a typical sprout after the first year's growth. Notice
it makes a fan-shaped tree. At this point, sometime during the
early sj)ring this limb would be cut off here (indicating), this
one and the one at that x3oint, thereby insuring the next year a
low crown. The growth is so rapid that frequently the wind
would break them off if they were not cut back, so that it is much
better to cut them back.

The next view shows a grafting outfit. These are the sprouts
cut from the Paragon trees, called the "scions," to be grafted on
the native sprouts. This shows the tape, which is waxed, and
some of the grafting wax. This is the machine for winding the
waxed tape, previous to the beginning of the grafting.

The wedge graft was used first. This view shows the method
of insertion of the wedge graft. It is then waxed and wound
with the waxed tape. The wedge graft was used by professional
grafters who were employed in 1897, 1898 and 1899, but only
about two per cent, survived. The season is very short during
which this could be used, because the bark separates from the
stock so early that the union would not take place.

This view shows one of the trees, showing a successful union
of the wedge graft. This is one of the oldest trees now to be
seen in the grove.

• - 88

This view shows a wedge graft, one of the original ones, that
did grow. This photograph, I think, was taken in 1903, but
only about two per cent, of the grafts in 1897, 98, and 99 lived,
so that there are only a few of these surviving. The wedge graft
method was consequently abandoned.

Then budding was tried. This method you are familiar with.
This is the bud to be inserted. It is then inserted, wrapped with
wax and covered with the cloth. This method, however, was not
successful when used in the grove. A few of tliem lived. The
next view shows such a case; tAVO on either side are buds that did
live, and in the centre is a whip graft. Here is one that was suc-
cessful. After a time the tree heals up perfectly at the union.

This view shows the manner of inserting the knife in the whip
graft. It should be inserted at a considerable depth. This one
is shown with the top cut off ready for grafting. This is the
sprout, on which the graft is to be set.

This shows another view of the whip graft, the method that
has been successful. This came in 1900, when Mr. Sober person-
ally took charge of the grafting. He instructed green men
rather than professional grafters and had them use his method,
being particular to make the scion fit perfectly to the stock.
It is then inserted and driven down so that the tongue holds it
at that point; it is cut back a little later, waxed there (indicat-
ing) and the bud is allowed to develop.

This view shows the completion of it. The stock may be even
a little larger than the scion. It is better to have them the same
diameter. It is then waxed and wrapped with tape and a little
piece of wax put on the top of the scion to keep the moisture in.
This is the most successful method with chestnuts.

This shows one after the graft has started. This is waxed
muslin, which is old muslin that will tear readily as the tree
grows, and will remove itself, so that it does not girdle the tree.

This is after one year's growth, the union practically complete
all the Avay around.

The next view shows a tlirougli section, showing tlie complete
union. Here is tlie tongue which held them together; and here
is another section through. Occasionally they decay at that
point. This shows a perfect union of the whip graft.

89

It is very necessary to keep the buds removed from below the
graft. The four grafts shown in this view started, all of them,
but the buds below took all the strength from them. The bark
has been removed from the three on this side; from the other it
has not. The sap, of course, flows along the line of least re-
sistance and takes all the strength and the graft dies.

The next is a photograph to show the Paragon grafted on oak.
The tree is still living. The oak now is smaller in diameter than
the chestnut, the chestnut growing faster. This was not very
successful; still, it is succecssful to the extent that it lives and
bears nuts.

A defective union. At that point (indicating) enemies can
enter, — fungi and beetles. Tlie wind also will frequently break
off a tree at the j)oint of union, if the union is not jjerfect. A
sprout was allowed to mature on this and later was grafted.
The growth is very rapid, and the chestnut not being a strong
wood, man^^ were lost in this way where the union Avas defective.

This is a portion of the fifty acres as it appeared six years ago.

Here Ave have a vicAV of it a little later. All the roots of the
other trees begin to sprout and it is necessary to clean out every-
thing. If the underbrush is alloAved to grow^, it will, sooner or
later, choke out the trees and Avill alloAv enemies to develop; you
cannot keej) it too clean. Fires will run through it; so Mr.
Sober early found that it was necessary to keep the growth
clean. Many parts of it are now clean enough to mow with a
lawn moAver. In many places the grass is beginning to groAV.
I Avish you would notice how clean the grove is in places. This
is the condition soon after the grafting. Tlien it Avas necessary
to employ from twenty-five to fifty men to clean out and, in
order to save the young* grafted trees, screens Avere made. At
one time I saAV as many as twenty-five of these screens. They
were covered with asbestos to protect them from the fire, and
the young sprouts that have been grafted are back of the screens.
These men are grubbing out and cleaning, trying to get the
ground clean enough to raise grass.

This vieAV shoAVS one of the screens a little nearer and some
of the men, Avho rested a moment Avliile I took the photograph.

90

Here tliey are again. Even after the trees are of this size, it
is necessary to finish tlie cleaning. Tliey are cleaning out every-
thing; any suspicions sign, any dead tree, is cut out.

Another view showing them carrying the material to the
screens for burning, — grubbing out sprouts, so that later it was
possible to run a specially constructed mowing machine through
it, and much of the undergrowth could be cut off in that way.
It is possible to run a mowing machine through nearly all of the
four hundred acres, except where there are too many stones.

Originally the idea occurred to Mr. Sober to graft the tops of
a few of the trees, and we had full sized trees in which eight or
ten grafts were set on the top. This view shows one where the
top was grafted ; this one is another, with the top grafted. That,
however, did not prove successful, because you would have only
a few limbs in the top, and in a little while the others would
catch up with them.

Here is another view of a tree grafted at the top, and this a
younger tree, two years old, beginning to bear nearly as many
nuts as the grafts at the top of the other tree. You can see,
therefore, why that metliod was abandoned. The Paragon be-
gins to bear very earl,y, the second year after grafting; occa-
sionally tlie first year a burr or two will mature.

Now the grove is beginning to look cleaner. These trees are
two or three years old. This was taken in the summer time, in
June, before the trees had blossomed. This is a young tree two
years from the time the graft was set, really the third summer
for it; a tyj)ical tree. It is now making independent roots for
itself and in a little while it will be free from the old stump.
Many of the old stumps are still standing. Some of them have
rotted away.

Another portion of the grove, just a little later, showing trees
one, two, and three years old, and the tops of a- few trees that
were grafted in the top.

Tliis view shows two trees by tlie roadside, one two years old;
the other in the third season of its growth. Notice the shape.
They were cut Ioav, so as to secure this low crown, which makes
it convenient in harvesting the nuts". It keeps the trees low.
It is like it is with a peach tree; the shape is much the same as
that of a peach tree.

Group of Paragon chestnut trees, two, four and six years old.

91

This is a view of an ideal tree, tliree years old, with a Ioav
crown, two feet from the ground.

In this view, the hnekleberries are beginning to groAV nnder-
neatlh; all through the grove the huckleberries have filled prac-
tically everything. The ground has been burned oyer, to burn
up the leaves and the burrs, Avhich contain the enemies, and the
huckleberries and chestnut sprouts are coming u]) ; but it is nec-
essary to keep these down.

. This view shows how that same ground was cleared, and
how it aj)peared in the winter time. Everything that could
be removed was grubbed off and buriii'd, tlie screens Avhich you
saw before being used.

This is a young tree, three years old, in the third summer.
From that tree three hundred burrs were removed. Two hun-
dred were left to mature. This was too many, and many of
them dropped off. The leaves were picked from that same tree,
and this view shows it with over a hundred burrs in which the
nuts are practically ripe.

This is the grove as it appeared in 1904. This is a portion
not of the fifty acres, but a xDortion in the flat which was grafted
about 1900, some of it in 1899. Notice now that the grass is be-
ginning to grow below the trees. The stumps are there, but the
tree is becoming independent. It is now possible to have the
mowing done by means of cattle and sheep in the grove.

This is another view showing trees out hy the edges, as the
sprouts come up. They were grafted until there is a stand all
over the four hundred acres, and now it is necessary to use the
axe to trim out, because they are too thick.

Another portion, showing a four-year old tree, with nuts.

This view shows the trees a little older. This was taken in
1910 and shows the character of the mountain side. It is cov-
ered with stones; impossible to mow around it; it has to be
grubbed, — but an ideal place. The stones help to keep the mois-
ture in the ground and the trees do exceptionally well.

This is another tree, a photograph taken in 1911. It was in
Octol)er and the nuts were ripening on the tree.

The next view shows part of an old hedgerow that had grown
up with ever\^thing. Stones from the field on either side of
this had been thrown along a gully that existed there at one

92

time. In that row, in which there are altogether abont twenty-
nine trees, three years ago there matured nine and a half bush-
els of nuts, just on that old hedgeroAV, that could not be used for
anything else, and full of stones. Some of the trees in that row
last fall had almost half a bushel of nuts ou single trees. The
trees on the four hundred acres last year were xjractically all
bearing ; some of them less than a pint to the tree ; others almost
half a bushel to the tree.

This view was taken in 1903, or 1904. Notice the size of the
trees, especially. About five hundred sheep were put into the
grove and they are doing the mowing and fattening themselves,
where the machine is no longer needed.

This view shows the same trees in 1911. The fence by the side
shows the growth from 1901 to 1911. They are rapid growers,
because they have a good root system.

This is a view of the ridge, a portion of the ridge that has a
southern front. There are ninety acres grafted, and all bearing.
The red spider appeared on this southern side, the sunny slope,
and interfered with the growth.

Here is a near view on the three hundred acre lot. It shows
the condition which might have existed up to the top of the ridge.
That is Mr. Sober's line. A fence is built, — you can just see
the posts, — and that fence is a mile long, running from one end
to the other, and below it is what jou see and above is waste
mountain land, containing chestnut and rock oak. Through
that, of course, fires run every now and then and it is necessary
to establish fire lanes at the upper end, so that below the fence
is a fire lane which will prevent a fire from getting into the
grove.

This photograph shows what was there in 1896 and 1897 — that
same grove that you saw up at the edge. This has been possi-
ble with Mr. Sober, and it is possible anywhere where the chest-
nut grows. You can make the change from this to what you
saw before.

This is tlie identical spot that you were looking at in the pic-
ture preceding. Tiie preceding picture was taken five years
ago, and here it is to-day. These trees liave been grafted two
years and three years, and they are bearing. On this fifty acres
ever since they have been bearing, every nut, practically, has

93

been removed, so that last ,year on tliis fifty acres there was
scarcely a weevil, and scarcely a bnrr worm, in tlie nuts that ma-
tured there.

Another portion, showing young trees bending over, breaking
down, almost, on that same fifty acres. It was taken in 1911,
about the first of October. The trees are heavily laden, the nuts
perfect.

Another view showing the slieep doing the mowing. The cat-
tle help with the work. Pigs help, but I do not have a photo-
graph showing them. A lot of them were put in after the crops
Avere gathered. The men harvested the nuts and afterwards
the pigs were turned in and found enough to fatten tiiemselves.
I think that on the waste mountain land in this State, you could
fatten on chestnuts all the pigs that Ave raise, if we' used it for
nothing else.

In harvesting, the nuts gathered in 1911 Avere hauled to a
threshing machine. It was necessary to have a machine made,
the problem of threshing the nuts, getting tliem out of the burrs,
becoming so great. This shows a photograph of the men hauling
the burrs before they are quite ripe, and placing them in piles.
They ripen, the burrs open, and the nuts can then be picked out.

This shows another pile of tlie burrs. Notice that they are
opening. This was taken a little later and the nuts Avere matur-
ing.

Harvesting before we had the machine. The men had to pick
them out. The nuts AA^ere taken out and placed in sacks, all
by hand. This shoAvs a pile of burrs. Every burr had to be
opened with gloves, and it was very tedious. The problem was
too great, so that a threshing machine was invented by Mr. C. K.
Sober especially for the purpose this last year, and this view
shows the machine in operation. The nuts were hauled in piles
in the burrs. They were then put through this machine, which
is run b}^ a little gasoline engine; the nuts ran out into a basket,
Avere put into sacks, and later they were loaded and carted to the
house to be assorted.

This is the assorting room. They are then packed in boxes.
Here are crates filled with nuts. Last year a carload AA^as sent
to Seattle, Washington. After the season was over, orders were
taken for two carloads to be delivered at Seattle next fall, and

94

the same man may take the entire crop next 3^ear. What that
will be I cannot say. This year it was between three and four
thousand bushels, including good and bad nuts.

In this view typical burrs are shown. Notice how thin the
husks are on many of them.

Another burr. It does not look as if it could cover the nuts.
In fact, it could not now, because the burr has shrunken away
as it dried out, leaving the nuts. Four, five and often seven
nuts are found in a burr.

This view shows seven in a burr. Notice that they are
crowded in, which gives them irregular shapes.

In this view the nuts in the lower row are covering silver half
dollars. The seven below measured over ten inches. Eight of
them measured thirteen inches.

In this view the nut in the lower right hand corner is covering
a silver dollar; the other four covering silver half dollars.
Above, are typical burrs.

Here are thirty-two selected nuts, measuring one quart.
Another group of the burrs as they were taken from one tree, a
little seedling three years old.

Forest fires were started in the mountains above by hunters,
carelessly or otherwise. They rnn down into the grove, so that
it is necessary to watch cautiously. Perhaps, however, the burn-
ing of the parit above helped to destroy some of the weevils and
some of the burr worms ; but of course the danger is that it will
get into the grove, and it did burn over nearly ten acres at one
time. This view shows a fire lane; the building of a fire lane,
between a grove and the woods above. It shows what the grove
would have been had it not been cultivated and put to this use.
That is the land immediately above it, full of chestnut timber.

This shows another point, showing on one side where the fire
jnst went tlirough. It did not get into the grove. The trees are
dead, not from the blight in that case, but from the fire. It
shows on the other side chestnut grafted to Paragon, and the
four hundred acres is practically surrounded on three sides by
that same kind of timber.

There are other enemies. Meadow mice girdle the young
sprouts at times. The sprout shown in this view was girdled

95

by a meadow mouse. Uy keeping tliem clean, liowever, en t ting
the grass away and burning it over, tlie meadoAV mice are kept
down witli tlie otlier enemies.

Tlie seventeen year locnst is another enemj^ There is a brood
of them every three of fonr years, it seems. In 1903, 1906 and
1910 thousands of them, — millions, I suppose, — came out. This
is one view, which I took looking up, pointing the camera into
the tree. These are the empty skins of the chrysalides as they
came out of the ground into the tree, the cicadas having crawled
out.

This view shows a little Avild indigo plant, on which there
were two hundred and fifty cicadas. The injury comes Avhen
they deposit their eggs.

The next view shows two branches recently stung by the
cicada. The eggs are deposited, making holes through which
fungi may enter. The wind blows then and breaks them off
at places, and the branches fall to the ground; but the cicada
has left holes and it is necessary to trim off the brandies and
prune. This view shows a little tree that has been pruned. The
dead branches are below and of course there is not much left.
This interferes with the bearing of that tree. A tree trimmed in
1910, in 1911 had. no bearing wood on it; a loss of the nuts, loss
of a year's crop, because of the cicada. However, if the limbs
are not broken, they begin to heal.

You can see in this view where the ovipositor punctured the
wood. This was stung in 190G and the photograph was taken in
1910. The,y are slow in healing up, and form wounds through
which the spores of the fungi may enter.

This view shows still further the process of healing. Some
of them heal up entirely and apparently suffer nothing from
the injury.

Tbis tree was stripped by the striped oak worm. There are
other enemies. Mr. Sober and I have been fighting enemies for
ten j'Cars. Nearly every one discouraged Mr. Sober. He stood
alone; but he is fighting them, and will continue to fight them.
In spite of the blight and in spite of everything, he expects to
see chestnut trees as long as he lives, and if we could come back
in two hundred years, I think we would find chestnut trees there.

One of the enemies that is most serious is the burr worm. At

9G

the time tlie cliestnut blossoms, a little moth lays an egg on the
young fruit. The egg hatches and a little worm burrows its
way into the burr. It seems to prefer living on the burr rather
than the nut. This view shows what I have called the "little"
burr worm. Here it is. It lives normally in the burr. Occa-
sionally it eats into the nut, but it does not like the nut, but
leaves an ugly liole and the nut afterwards frequently moulds.

This shows the adult moth, the Holcocera Soherii. It is very
similar to the Holcocera glandulata, but, according to Kear-
foot, of Montclair, New Jersey, it should be called a distinct
species, and it has been named in honor of Mr. Sober. This is
one of the worst enemies. There are two shown in this view, a
"little" and a "large" one. This is the larger one. (Indicat-
ing). I have tried a number of times to get the adult of that, but
I have failed thus far. It is easy to get them in the larval stage,
- — you get lots of larvae, — and they will make the cocoons.
Normally tlie cocoon is made in the burr and fortunately when
the burr is removed the cocoon is removed; but I have not been
able to get them to mature. I do not know the adult of this
one.

This view shows the hole it makes into the nut. It is cut
away to show it. It has not gone in very far and this has re-
moved all the injury done. The other one is the injured one,
showing the spot, in the edge of the screen. This one is injured
here. (Indicating). If the nuts are eaten immediately or used,
they are scarcelj^ injured; but if they are allowed to stand for a
time spores of various moulds get into them and the nuts soon rot
entirely. In this case this nut shown has cracked open, and
is full of black spores. I am not able to identify all the moulds ;
some of them resemble very much the ordinary bread mould.

Insect traps were made by Mr. Sober in 1910 and placed
throughout the grove, and thousands of moths, many of them
belonging to the same genus, the Holcocera^ were caught in these
traps. Lanterns were suspended from the trees beneath which
were these tin arrangements, and below was a pan of water on
which was placed a little oil. That arrangement caught thou-
sands of moths. That is one method of controlling the enemy.

The grove is full of birds. There are many blue birds, and
nest boxes have been put up. I do not know whether it is a good

97

plan to eiic<mrai!,e tlie birds or not. Tiu; woodpeekeis are there,
feeding on insects and the beetle larvae nnder the bark. It may
be a good chance to spread the chestnnt blight, Ijnt tliey help to
control the motlis. Tliey feed on Imndreds of them. You see
them hunting everywliere. The insect-having birds are there.
You find the vireos, the red-eyed vireo especially; you find the
American redstart; you find Avarblers. They are there looking
for the moths and weevils. Chickens were placed in the grove.
They search for grubs and everything they can find and, of
course, in doing that they destroy many of the chestnut weevils
and the grubs of other worms.

This view shows the chestnut weevil, the Belaninus, on the
burr. These can be controlled by removing the burrs imme-
diately, before they have time to come out on the nut.

This view shows them at work. Several females were placed
on this burr, which I have cut in two.

This view shows the long, beaklike proboscis. There is
another one, and another in the corner. There was another
one here, but it crawled around too much to be photographed.
How the eggs are deposited, I cannot say, but in some way, I
think through that long beak. They have two slim feelers,
with which they can take the eggs from the ovipositor to the end
of the beak. This view shows a big one. The weevil, as you can
see in the next photograph, never withdrew its beak. There it
is, in the picture. This was removed and in its place larvae
developed. I have taken out of one nut as many as fifty-five
grubs of the Bclanius.

This view shows them maturing. In this one there were as
many as thirty larvae.

This view^ shows them in different stages ; they are practically
mature. When they are mature, they come out through the
little hole in the nut and burrow in the ground. They remain
there until June or July, when they transform into pupae. The
next view shows six of them taken in July. In about two Aveeks
they mature. The next view shoAvs six adults, three male and
three female. I think in some way the eggs are taken by means
of these appendages which will reach the end of the bill and

98

reach the ovipositor. I have never been able to see them do it,
bnt in some wa}^ I think the eggs must be inserted by this
method.

The demand for the Paragon nut has come from all over the
United States, and it was necessary to start a nursery. Mr.
Sober, with the cleanliness he practices, will keep this going in
spite of the blight. He put away last fall three hundred
busliels of nuts, burying them, and now a little later they will
begin to sprout. When they are sprouted, in beds of sand,
they are taken out and planted. The method is before the nuts
are planted, to pinch the large tap roots off at this point, so
that a fibrous root is started. Otherwise this (indicating) is
what you get, and it is hard to transplant that tree and have it
live. To pinch off that root, or to put it in horizontal position,
will develop fibrous roots, Tliis one was not pinched off, but
was planted with the tap root in a horizontal position, and you
see the result. This nut (another view) was planted and al-
lowed to develop for itself; and you see the difference between
the two.

The nuts are planted in rows, aiul here you see them after
the first summer's growth in tlie nursery.

Flere they are, two years old, ready to be grafted. Some of
the seedlings bear the second year and third year, but they are
not true Paragon. Some of them may be better. Last year
fifty seedlings, two and three years old, had nuts on them.

Tliis view shows men engaged in grafting these seedlings with
the Paragon. This gives an idea of the size of one nursery.

This view shows one season's growth after grafting on the
seedling. You see it is nearly five feet high, — one season of
growth, grafted on a seedling two years old. It is then trimmed,
back, of course.

There is one grafted one year, bearing a nut at that point and
two nuts at that point, and still others here. They are grafted.

Large trees can be transplanted, but not successfully. It is
very hard to get a tree that is five or six years old to stand trans-
planting. It does not pay to transplant the larger trees. Oc-
casionally they will live, but the others soon grow and catch up
with them.

Seedlings from Paragon nuts — to be grafted with Sober I'araguu (.-hestnut

Paragon chestnut trees, 9 years after graftiui; on native sprouts.

90

Now we will go to the burn and get our horse and go back to
the station at Taxinos. Good night. (Applause).

DR. MICKLEliOROUGII: AVill vou permit a question?

THE CHAIRMAN: We will.

DR. MICKLEIJOROUGH : I would like to ask the Professor
if the blight has appeared in the Irish Vallej^? '

THE CHAIRMAN : If you do not mind withholding that ques-
tion for just a minute, I want to make an announcement, and
then we are going to throw the doors open to discussion. At
the afternoon session you directed the Chairman to appoint a
Committee on Resolutions, this committee to include the Chair-
man of the Conference. The Chairman requested that persons
attending the Conference should offer suggestions as to who
should be included on this committee. He did not receive as
many suggestions as he would like to have had, but he did receive
a good many, and every person who was suggested has bceli
appointed. '

The committee as made up, is as follows:

Ex-officio, Raymond A. Pearson, Chairman of the Conference.

jMaine, Charles E. Lewis.

New Hampshire, Philip W. Ayres.

Massachusetts, E. W. Rane.

Rhode Island, Jesse P. Mo wry.

Connecticut, George P. Clinton.

New York, G. G. Atwood,

H. P. Marshall,

George L. Barrus.

New Jersey, Melville T. Cook.

Pennsylvania, I. C. Williams,

Harold Peirce,

AV. T. Creasy,

Henry S. Drinker.

Delaware, Wesley Webb.

Maryland, J. B. S. Norton,

William McCulloh Brown.
Virginia, George A. Kerr,

George B. Keezell.

100

West Virginia, N. J. Giddiiigs.

Ohio, A. D. Selby.

H. H. Becbtel.

North Carolina, 11. R. Fulton.

Tennessee, J. W. Fisher.

Canada, Dr. H. T. Gnssow.

In a very rough wa}^, it has been endeavored to have tlie num-
ber of members from the States indicate something as to the
number of persons Avho accej^ted invitations to attend this Con-
ference. The Chair Avill suggest that the members of the com-
mittee meet in the seats at the right of the Chair immediately
after adjournment this evening, for the purpose of organizing.
Now, according to the program, we are to have a general discus-
sion. The presiding officer almost feels that he should offer
you an apology, because he is not personally acquainted with all
the persons who may wish to speak. He appreciates that there
are some illustrious i)ersons in the audience and that he ought
to know them; but, as he does not know everyone, he Avill ask
again that each person, on rising, whether known to the Chair or
not, will first announce his name and the name of his State
clearly.

The papers that we have heard are all before you for discus-
sion. It is your meeting. The Chairman is 3'our servant, and
if you desire to have the course of procedure changed in any
way at an}^ time, it is your duty so to state. We will now hear
the first question,

DE. MICKLEBOROUGH, of Brooklyn : My question was, Mr.
Chairman, whether the Diaporthe parasitica had appeared in
the Irish Valley.

PROFESSOR DAVIS : Yes; it has appeared there, but in that
grove for the last ten years every sign of anything suspicious
has been cut out, and the nursery inspector who went through
the grounds found forty-four thousand and thirty-five trees that
are free from it. If there were some signs that were suspicious,
these trees were cut. If it is there now, it is practically under
control, and it is very, very hard to find it. We are not certain
always that it is there. There is one disease that follows up a

1(11

fire that so closely resembles it that it is hard to tell it. It is |

sometimes doubtful. I have not, however, found any ascospores
there this fall. The nursery stock shows nothing at all. The
idea is to keep it clean, cut out everything, so we do not wait to
see whether it is there or not.

DE. J. RUt^SELL SMITH, of Pennsylvania: Mr. Chairnian:
before the cutters-out and anti-cutters-out begin taking up the
questions of the afternoon, I want to speak about one point in
connection with the recent lecture. Mr. Davis stated, in pass-
ing, that the waste land of this State would feed as many pigs
as the whole State i)roduces. AVe have lots of pigs, yet that
assertion as to the possibilities of tlie waste laud is understated.

Man, in looking at the botanical realm, began at the wrong
end. When the human race looked at the hundred thousand
species of plants, it picked out little measley grasses, with a
grain or two of seed, from which it developed rye, corn and wheat,
while here were the giants of nature, bearing hickory nuts, wal-
nuts, xDersimmons, peaches, apples, and pears; yet very few of
them have been improved, for the reason that, for the annual
cropi^er, his grains permit of easy improvement and the big
trees, with their slow generations, were very difficult to improve.
Yet they are the potential heavy harvest yielders. Wherever we
find land put over to tree crops, it yields several fold the annual
croj). Chestnut-growing in Europe, as in Italy for example, is
an established industry. Offtcial re^Dorts show an annual pro-
duction of chestnuts in Italy of thirteen bushels to the acre, and
I know, by examination of the orchards, that they are not in any
way in a high class condition or very carefully attended to in
many localities. We average at least that, with the American
standard of weight per acre, in the United States. I have not
a doubt that if some of tliose big Japanese chestnuts were bred,
selected, and hybridized, we could get varieties of chestnuts
which would yield fifteen or twenty bushels per acre on the aver-
age, of first-class pig feed. Furthermore, it permits the use of
land which is now^ entirely unusable for anything except forest,
which is a very low grade producer of annual cash value. For
example, to-day on the train between here and Philadelphia I
saw a block of ground which covers twenty-two thousand acres.

102

and is itself covered with stones. It is langlied at by the Lan-
caster county people, and it is rocky; but chestnut trees are
sticking their roots between the rocks which cover the surface
and reaching down into the good, strong clay beneath, and that
twenty thousand acres of good, strong clay is more potentially
productive than the tops of the Apennines, which are to-day
yielding thirteen bushels to the acre.

So in the chestnut we have something more to consider in po-
tentiality than mere timber. The time is coming when we
will put one hundred dollars in the breeding of tree crops and
get ten thonsand dollars for the people of the next decade. (Ap-
plause).

DE. MEEKEL, of New York City: Mr. Chairman: I would
like to ask Mr. Davis a point that does not appear quite clear to
me. Was the blight kept out of the orchard, or out of the entire
valley and out of the surrounding country?

PEOFESSOE DAVIS : It is in the valley, but just beginning,
apparently, to appear. I have hunted through there and hunted
days at a time without finding any evidence. Yet I have found
evidences of what apparently is the genuine Diaportlie, as I saw
it on Long Island ; and I will say that I think I saw the blight on
Long Island in 1897, or 1898. It was at the time when the Long
Island road was building a log cabin near Cold Spring Harbor.
Mr. Jarvis was the carpenter building the cabin, out of chestnut
logs, and, wiien he pulled the bark off, under that was found what
we recognize now as the chestnut blight. Mr. Jarvis and I dis-
cussed it, and did not know what it was. It was in patches; on
some of the logs which were ten to fifteen inches in diameter, the
patches were as large as my hat, and I do not doubt in some
cases that the trees were girdled entirely and the trees were
dying. That was at Cold Spring Harbor, and I also saw some of
the same thing between Cold Spring Harbor and Huntingdon,
and especially back of Huntingdon, through the hills around
there. So I think it was in 1898 well established in those locali-
ties. Of course, I cannot prove that is what it was, but I have
seen so much of it near Cold Spring Harbor that I think it is
the same thing.

103

DK. MERKEL: Then, apparently, the cleaii-cuttiiig in this
case, unfortunately, is not a proof that the fungus can be kept
out, because it has not been present long enough; is that the
idea?

TROFESSOR DAVIS : Yes.

DR. A. K. FISHER, of tlie Bureau of Biological Survey,
Washington: Mr. Chairman: I would like to ask Dr. Stewart
what evidence he has to sliow that birds are important factors
in spreading the disease? Dr. Metcalf made that statement
in the Farmers' Bulletin, that birds Avere one of tlie important
factors in spreading the blight, but, in private conversation
with the doctor, he stated that he had no positive evidence; but
that birds traveled here, hence, thence, and he tliought it most
probable. Now the very birds which are accused of carrying
blight are the woodj^eckers, which are more or less stationary in
their life history; especially the downy woodpecker. There is
no v ay of telling just how far a bird will go from the nest in
which it was born, but there is pretty good reason to believe that
the downy woodpecker never goes over four or five miles from its
home. In fact, a woodland of a few hundred acres will hold a
l)air or more of birds, wliich probably live there throughout their
lives. I know of one or two pairs near Washington that we are
reasonably sure to see at any time of the year. It seems to me
that wind and weather, which carry other forms of diseases, are
very mucli more liable to carry tlie germs of this disease. When
wind will carry heavy articles a thousand miles and, it is said,
carry volcanic dust half way around the globe, it seems to me
that we do not have to look to birds or mammals, or even in-
sects, as the means of spreading the disease, when other known
factors are present.

THE CHAIRMAN: Dr. Fisher asks Dr. Stewart what evi-
dence he has that birds are responsible for carrying the chestnut
tree blight.

DR. STEWART: The evidence is largely inferential. This
should be considered : Many of the infections, — in fact. Dr. Met-
calf states a majority of the infections, — occur in the tunnels
made by borers. The borers are in those tunnels. Woodpeck-

104

ers go after the borers. Spores are produced in enormous num-
bers right around those tunnels. It is inevitable that the wood-
peckers will get the spores on their bills and on their feet and on
other parts of their bodies. Those birds, when they go away,
will carry those spores with them and leave them where they
alight the next time. If they happen to fall in a wound of some
kiud and the conditions are favorable, the infection is going to
occur. That is the kind of evidence. It is inferential. As for
actually kiiowiug that infections have resulted in that way, we
have no evidence. Of course, it is exceedingly difficult, if not
impossible, to get it. As to the migration of the woodpeckers,
I have it on the authority of a comxDetent ornithologist that some
kinds of them do travel long distances.

DE. FISHEK : There are certain forms of woodpeckers which
go south in winter, but those are not the birds which are highly
specialized which secure their food from the trees. They are
birds which seek their food like the flicker, Avhich feeds largely
on nuts, and the redheaded woodpecker, which feeds quite ex-
tensively on grasshoppers and other insects, as well as fruits;
but our woodpeckers, our native, resident woodpeckers, are
rarely migrators. As to the injury to the trees, the nut gath-
erers, it seems to me, produce very many more wounds than the
woodpeckers i)roduce. Tliey either jar the smaller trees with
stones that break the bark and form places for the insertion of
the germs, or they use climbers which injure the bark, and enter
the wood very much further than the woodpecker's bill does.

ME. DETWILEE : I have the report of a field agent who has
been investigating the relation of birds to the carrying of dis-
ease. This investigation has been in progress only about a
month, and the data is of an elementary character. However,
there are two paragraphs ^^'hich have a bearing on this subject.
First, the field agent says :

"I can truthfully state that every blighted tree I have seen
since I have begam this study, has had its bark punctured by
woodpeckers, in most cases with scores of holes."

The other pertinent olisorvation is:

105

"We were surprised by the ltir<^e iiiuiiber of gi-iibs we were able
to iiud ill infected trees. TJiey seemed, too, to be generally dis-
tributed tlirougliout the bark of the tree."

The inference being that the grubs attract the woodpeckers to
the blighted portions of the tree particularly.

PKOFESSOll DAVIS : I\lr. Sober wishes me to extend an in-
vitation to any of you, or all of you, to visit his place, when he
will shoAV you tliis grove in person. I forgot to mention it in
the lecture, but he invites you to meet him at the Paxinos station
at any time.

THE CHAIRMAN: How early are the chestnuts ripe?

PROFESSOK DAVIS : The chestnuts are ripe in the latter
part of October.

DK. A. H. GKAA'ES, of New Haven: Mr. Chairman: There is
one thing that has been overlooked here, and that is that the
spores are very stick}^ in these exudations from the pustules.
They all stick together, and tlie wind would carry these spores
with great difficulty; so that the theory of the spores sticking to
the feet of birds seems very plausible, for that principal reason.
The spores miglit possibly be washed down the tree by the rain
and mingle witli the dust at the base of the tree; but, as is said
somewhere by some authority, tliese chestnut trees do not usually
grow in the dusty places. The spores tliat are washed down the
tree would be covered up by leaves and there would be very lit-
tle likelihood tlmt the wind would carry them. I think, Mr.
Chairman, the sticky nature of the spores should be considered
in this connection, with the dissemination of the spores by birds
and insects.

DPv. W. J. GIDDINGS, of West Virginia: Mr. Chairman: I
Avant to say something more in regard to the means of control
of this disease; and I have one suggestion that has occurred to
me during the afternoon and evening sessions : That is the pos-
silulity, in states Avhere they do not feel it would be wise to
make the inspection a thoi'ough inspection, to send out men to
do plot work, — I believe that is the proper term, — such as is done
in forestry. They can pick out a certain small section where
there are chestnuts, and determine tlie number of chestnut trees

106

there, and tlie amount of infection. Not only that, but they can
find out if there is old infection there. In that way we can find
out whether there has been infection in America for a number
of years, as lias been suggested by some, and possibly get those
states interested, if the infection appears to be spreading. In
some places that I have seen lately there was evidence of the dis-
ease working on trees that were partly dead, but we should find
out more about that while the work is going on.

DR. J. W. HAKSHBERGER, University of Penna. : Mr.
Chairman: Professor Stewart, in his communication this af^
ternoon, discouraged the work which is being done by the Penn-
sylvania Chestnut Blight Commission in the removal of trees
along the outposts of the disease. I would like to present my
view of the problem, because I think it is largely a question of
the attitude of the State of Pennsylvania toward these larger
questions of conservation which have agitated the country for
the past few 3^ears.

Pennsylvania is the Kej^stone State. She is so situated Avith
regard to the other states of the Atlantic Seaboard that she oc-
cupies a central position, halfway between the North and the
South. It would be to the lasting shame of Pennsylvania if she
would let the opportunity pass of taking some means of attempt-
ing to check the disease. The states to the south and west of
us, Ohio and West Virginia, Virginia and Tennessee and North
Carolina, which are very largely concerned in this movement,
would point to Pennsylvania as having let the opportunity slip
of doing something to check the ravages of this disease. Two
hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars seems a large sum
of money to appropriate for the prevention of the destruction
of property ; that is, it seems a large sum to use in the combating
of a single disease. Yet Pennsylvania is a wealthy State, and,
if we take the many millions of dollars which are at stake, the
amount of money which the State has appropriated is merely
a drop in the bucket, and it seems to me that the money is well
spent, because we are standing, as a buffer State, between the on-
spread of this disease from the locality where it started, and the
States beyond. In the future, when we look back on the history
of the conservation movement in the United States, this move-

107

iiiciil ill reniisylvaiiia will be licid up as an example of a patrio-
tic movement of the entire people in an attempt to prevent the
destrnction of onr native forests, which are going all too fast.
So this movement, it seems to nie from my standpoint, is one
of the most commendable things which has been done by any
State in recent years and, even if no direct resnlt is reached, we
can point with pride to the attempt which has been made to
check the disease.

At one point there occnrred to me a little story that was told
in connection with the remarks of Professor Clinton this after-
noon, when the paper of Professor Farlow was read. Professor
Farlow snggested that the chestnut blight came from Italy. A
friend of mine, a botanist in New York city, said that he had
often noticed that aronnd the settlements of Italians in the
neighborhood of New York and Brooklyn and Jersey City, these
smaller settlements that the Italians made outside the city, that
the trees always died or were killed, and he thought there was
some relation between the death of the trees and the settlement
of the Italians nearby. So he suggested rather a curious name
for this malady which attacked the trees — he said it was a form
of "Dagoeatis." So perhaps, if Professor Farlow^'s views are
correct, the trees which were killed on Long Island suffered from
a form of "Dagoeatis." That, you may observe, has no scientific
relativity in the discussion of this subject.

MK. CHESTER E. CHILD, President Lumber Manufactur-
ers' Association of Connecticut: Mr. Chairman: I noticed on the
map presented this afternoon that it appears that chestnut trees
are practically dead in three-quarters of Connecticut. I noticed
coming down on the train, between New Haven and New York,
that there are a great many dead chestnut trees, and yet there
remain a great nmny that are alive. I know that along the
Connecticut River, where the blight is supposed to be working
quite freely, that in a tract of timber which was sold on account
of the blight being in it, it was stated that at least ten per cent,
of the chestnut trees were affected. I know two men about sixty
years of age who state that they are positive that they saw this
blight twenty years ago, or something that looked the same as
is shown in the blight to-day, — that they saw the same thing
twenty years ago. I would like to ask, unless the information

108

is reserved to be given ns toniorroAV morning, whether there is
any data to show what the expense is to cut out, remove and take
np the infected chestnut trees where the blight is known to be
working.

ME. I. C. WILLIAMS : In answer to the gentleman's ques-
tion, I would like to sa}^ that the Chestnut Blight Commis-
sion has no data at hand which will answer him directly. The
work of the Commission has not been specificially directed to
cutting out diseased trees, but has been in the direction of urg-
ing persons to do that. It has not been possible to follow that
work sufficiently closely to make an approximation of just what
that cost would be. The effort that is being made in Pennsyl-
vania will be more minutely described to-morrow morning, and
I do not feel that it would be fair to trespass seriously upon
that paper this evening; but what evidence there is, and Avhat
knowledge we have on that subject, will be laid before jou in
the morning in the first paper.

Some of the speakers this afternoon seemed to be utterly ap-
palled at the fact that Pennsylvania has thrown two hundred
and seventy-five thousand dollars into a rathole. Now it may
be of interest to this meeting at this time to realize that the
whole work thus far accomplished by this Commission has been
at an expense of twenty thousand one hundred and forty-three
dollars. That leaves a considerable margin of the two hundred
and seventy-five thousand dollars upon wliich we are privileged
to go until the first of June, 1913. (Applause).

This Commission is Imilt u])<)ii business principles. It is not
being dashed about wildly, like a potato in a tub, not know-
ing what it is doing or where it is going. It is trying to find
its way. It may be tliat it will get lost in the blighted chestnut
Avoods, but we are going to make an honest endeavor to get out
of the woods. Every known method, and a lot of methods that
are not known and about which we heard a good deal this after-
noon, will be tried. If tliere is any virtue in them, they will
be followed to a finality. If there is no virtue in them, Ave Avant
the world to knoAV it, — the sooner the better. The mere fact that
somebody believes that something cannot be done is going to
have mighty little weight in the Avork of this Commission. (Ap-
plause). We do not care a rap what someone's belief is. If he

109

has any facts to hring to lis and lay before tis, we are willing
to accept tlieni. AVe want facts; we want knowledge. We have
heard a great deal abont scientific inquiry. I understand that
science is the pursuit of knowledge, and that its business is to
get facts. Science simply describes. It has nothing to do with
explanations. Therefore, if science will describe to us the things
that we are trying to learn, we will be greatly indebted to science,
and Ave b}^ no means are in a position, nor do we wish it to be so
understood that we attempt to turn our backs upon scientific
inquiry. The truth is that this Commission wants all the facts
it can get. It wants the help of every scientist in the land who
is interested enough to pursue a line of work and make deduc-
tions therefrom that are useful in a work of this kind. We want
to go hand in hand with everyl)ody who can lend an iota of
strength to this work; but we do not care to join hands with
those who see simply gloom and failure, and are unwilling to
make any decent effort to determine Avhether or not a thing can
or cannot be done. The experiments that are being made by
the Commission are for the purpose of finding out. We heard a
great deal about the ineffectualness of the cutting-out method
of combating this disease, or checking its spread. I do not know
upon what foundation or upon what premises these conclusions
are drawn. We have attempted to follow the progress of this
inquiry and the knowledge on the subject as closely as possible,
and yet gentlemen tell us that it is absolutely ineffectual. Now
I would like them to tell us why it is ineffectual, and how much
cutting out they have done, and what real knowledge they have
derived from that kind of At'ork. If it is going to turn upon
someone's opinion, then I would like this meeting to believe that
probably one man's opinion is as good as another's. If it is not,
let us find out why. I would like to ask Mr. Stewart, in respect
to one sentence in his paper this afternoon, which you will re-
member was one continued negation, I would like to ask him to
tell us why in that paper he broke away from the negative atti-
tude and, in the very closing moments, took a positive stand in
that he recommended the restriction of the movement of nursery
stock. Nov/ if there is no use in cutting out a diseased tree, if
there is no real effectual value in doing -dixj work of any kind, if
we are simply to sit down and let things go and take their course,

110

if we are going to throw up our liands iu impoteut helplessness
and say "It is the will of Allah," why would he restrict the move-
ment of nursery stock? If there is any real reason for tliat, let us
have it. I do not remember that the Professor stated his reason.
That is one of the questions his paper raised in my mind. I
do not wish to take more of your time, because these ought to
be only short discussions. If Professor Stewart would be good
enough to tell us why he thinks we ought to restrict the move-
ment of nursery stock and let everything else go wide open, I for
one would like to know it, and I believe there are some others
who would be iiiterested in hearing it. (Applause).

DR. STEWART : I will answer that question in this way :
That this diseased nursery stock may transmit the disease long
distances. In that way the disease may take long jumps, clear
across the continent.

MR. WILLIAMS : I understand from the Professor's paper
that birds likewise take long jumps. What will he do with that
side of the case?

DR. STEWART : We can do nothing there.

MR. A. THALHEIMER, of Reading, Pa.: Gentlemen, I
rise to protect the woodpecker. (Applause). I own probably
in small woodland patches, two hundred acres of chestnut. Since
this blight question first came up, I have gone through nearly
all my trees and I have not found a single tree that was diseased,
with the exception of some near the city. I have about one hun-
dred and twenty acres near the city, and of course, the boys, —
maybe some of you have done that, — want to get the chestnuts.
They bump the trees and some of them are bruised in that way.
But my section is full of woodpeckers. They are not immi-
grants; they are stationary and they have not destroyed or in-
fected any trees. I think it takes a long time to get at the bot-
tom of it, and find what really is the cause. I desire to inform
you of a sul)ject in which I took a deep interest, — one which
leads to this matter. During the war, in traveling through Vir-
ginia or through Maryland, you all know how scrub oaks are
scattered over all that country. A scrub oak is a very small tree
and does not bear any fruit at all. I often wondered where they

Ill

came from, not having been planted tliere. In going from here
to Washington, or going anywhere, if I knew of ^ny farmer who
lived in that neighborhood, I wonld ask him what he knew abont
it, and none of them conld tell me. I was anxious to know and
see if I could not get that information. I wrote to the Forestry
Department at Washington, and could get no definite informa-
tion there. One time in moving from one house to a new house
and in rearranging my library, I got hold of a book. The library
had belonged to a friend of mine, a lawyer, and I got some of his
books in remembrance. I looked through tliose books and I found
a book of birds, and among them I found a picture of a bird
called a "tree planter." It gave a description how that bird
traveled from Maine to Florida, traveled from the north to the
south and migrated again north, and they had a committee, —
I do not know whether it was a Committee of Thirteen or not, —
but they had a committee which would carry the nuts and plant
them for food on both ways. Then, down South, they shoot
these tree planters and utilize them for food, and I suppose there
are not enough coming back to x>ick up all the fruit which is
planted, and that this is the way it grows up into scrub oaks.
(Applause).

PKOFESSOR W. D. CLARK, Pa., State College : Ladies and
Gentlemen: I came here to-da}^ to this Conference because,
being a forester by training and by profession, I am vitally in-
terested in any movement which seeks in a practical way, to con-
trol or to eradicate the chestnut blight disease. I fully appre-
ciate the value and importance of the chestnut tree, both as a
timber producer, to enhance the aesthetic value of the landscape,
as a shade tree and as a nut producer, and I heartily favor the
pursuit of scientific studies and experiments in order to deter-
mine whether or not there is a practical way, within the means of
human agencies, either to eradicate or control this disease. I
am, however, very solicitous lest, on account of the obviousness
of this disease, the directness with which it works, the quickness
of its results, and the generally common knowledge of the dis-
ease, we will become blind to two other diseases of trees which,
on account of their remoteness, their complex character and
their slow, insidious way of working, we are apt to forget. I

112

refer to the disease known as an unjust and unscientifl« manner
of taxing timber lands, and to the disease known as forest fires.
Here are two diseases which threaten to destroy not only chest-
nut trees, but all of our forest trees. These diseases threaten
not only to destroy our standing trees but to prevent, or make
useless, the j^lanting and growth of any forest trees. These
diseases are not well-known diseases which are beyond our con-
trol. They are entirely witliin the control of human agents, and
I would be grateful if I could impress upon the mind of every
member in attendance upon this Convention that if we could
only control the forest fires and bring about a just, scientific,
and uniform system of taxing forest land, and then go ahead and
plant trees, trees immune from this dreaded disease, pine trees,
oak trees, hickory trees, poplar trees, valuable timber trees, we
would have so many tini])er trees flourishing in the State of
Pennsylvania that it really would not matter a very great deal if
we had no more chestnut trees. We could possibly get along
without them. (AiDplause).

ME. F. B. JEWETT, of Susquehanna county, Pa. : Mr. Chair-
man and Gentlemen : I came to the City of Harrisburg to-day
not i^articularly to attend this Convention; but, when I arrived
here and the programme was thrust before me, every other item of
my business stopped, and I have attended your meetings and
have been very much interested.

The first dollar that I ever remember of having in my life was
derived from the chestnut tree, half a century ago, when, as a
little boy, I picked up the chestnuts. I have been very much in-
terested in every f)hase of the discussion, because, like the gentle-
man over here, I have several acres that have chestnut trees on
them. In this evening's lecture there was thrown on the canvas
a view of the harvest of that chestnut orchard in Irish Valley,
near Shamokin, and in the picture I noticed the green burrs
were harvested. The question that I wish to ask, if Professor
Davis is present, is, hoAv they could get those green burrs off
from the trees without injuring tlieni? All those that have
knowledge from experience know that it is almost impossible to
get a green burr from its native branch until the frost comes
and kills the connection between the burr and the branch. I

113

remember distinctly a few years ago, perhaps fifteen, I made
my first shipment of chestnuts to New York. I sent them to a
commission mercliant and I was surprised, altliough I knew that
it was early, to receive back in two days' time returns of twenty-
four dollars per bushel for that sliijunent of chestnuts, with this
advice: ''Ship chestnuts as fast as possible. Your shipment
was the first that came into the City of New York this fall."
I tried to get another shipment, but I could not get those burrs
open, and the last shipment I made to New York that same fall
brouglit me only |2.50 per bushel. I agree with the gentlemen
that have read these very interesting papers, so very interesting
to us, indeed; but so far as the spread of this disease is con-
cerned, I am on the side of the woodpecker, because the wood-
pecker has been my friend from my boyhood up, and I have
learned to love the music of his beak. But let me tell you, gentle-
men, a few years ago I was out in Kansas, and on that wild
prairie, a heavily loaded team had passed over in the spring. It
was September when I Avas there, and across that unbroken
prairie were two distinct tracks and sometimes, when the for-
ward wheel had not run exactly straight, there were four tracks ;
and in every one of those tracks was a thrifty growth of sun-
flowers. Can you tell me how those sunflowers came there? If
you will tell me that, I will tell you what spreads the fungus on
your trees. It is nature. Y^ou know we all of us love up-to-date
stories; we do not care about the old "chestnuts" so much. But
in this case the chestnut is very important and, in closing, I
want to speak a word of commendation for Mr. Williams and for
the men who so wisely voted the appropriation of two hundred
and sevent3'-five thousand dollars to this work. I appreciate it.
Ever since I have been a boy, it has been grumble, grumble,
grumble about appropriations and graft, and so on. New Y'ork
State can sympathize Avith us somewliat in the matter of Capi-
tol graft. Y^ou remember you got througli witli it in Albany. We
got through Avith it Avithout as many years of experience as you
(lid, but I remember very Avell, after tlie old Capitol burned here,
that five hundred and fifty thousand dollars was appropriated.
Why, that was a big sum ; but you know how that "chestnut"
grew, and we got out of it with thirteen millions. I am very

8

114

thankful that the "chestnut" of the old appropriation is improv-
ing; that we have the two hnndred and seventy-five thousand
dollars appropriated, and that Ave are getting out of it with
about twenty thousand dollars as far as it goes now. So I think
that the State of Pennsylvania has done finely in taking the
initiative in this work. I pay tax on timber, and I want to pay
tax on timber-land. It is fair and square that we should pay it,
and let the gentleman that complains of it remember that none
of that tax goes into the State Treasury.

THE CHAIRMAN : We wish to hear Professor Clark's reply
to the question, but there are a number of others who are pre-
pared to make remarks. The Chair would ask if you have any
instructions Avhich you would give to govern our discussion
from now on. Do you wish to limit the length of the remarks?
I will entertain a motion, if it is your desire.

MR. E. A. WEIMER, of Lebanon, Pa.: Mr. Chairman: I
would suggest that we limit our remarks to the chestnut blight.
I would also suggest that the speakers be very careful not to
bring out facts without careful consideration. The man on my
left here talked about the spores being sticky. He did not con-
sider that the spores were sticky only during a certain portion
of their lives. Another man on my right talked about the wood-
pecker, but he did not consider the fact that the woodpecker does
not pull out the grub with his feet, and that is about the only
place he could get the spores on. We want to be very careful
when we are going to get at any facts, not to hunt up facts to
base our arguments on, but to base our arguments on facts. I
suggest in the future that we deal only with questions dealing
with chestnut blight, and accept Mr. Sober's invitation to visit his
orchard when the chestnuts are ripe.

DR. MICKLEBOROUGH, of New York State: Mr. Chair-
man, just a word with reference to the spread of the disease by
the spores : During the summer the conidial spores, those thread
spores which have been explained to us to-day, are produced
in myriads upon the diseased tree. The water, the rain will
readily dissolve those little sticky, pasty threads and, when they
are dissolved, it takes about eight or nine thousand, put end to

115

end, to measure an incli, Tliey are exceedingly small micro-
scopic objects and tliej are readily carried l)y the wind, and n(jt
very much by the woodpecker. That is nw judgement of the case.
The wind will curvy those very readily, and sometimes to a
considerable distance. I think we can account for the spread of
the disease, the carrying of the spores, by the wind. Railroads
are sinners to a certain extent in this matter. The trains, as they
sweep through the country, will create a great deal of draft,
and you will notice along certain main lines that the disease has
spread with a great deal of certainty and rapidity. Now" these
spores, when they are lodged upon a chestnut tree, are washed
down b}'' the rain, by the water, by the dews, and you are very
apt to find the disease attacking the tree in the fork of the limb.
You will find it there perhaps more frequently than any other
place, and there is a good place for the entrance of the spore.

Now, to digress from that for one moment, I think. Sir, that
Pennsylvania has done a magnanimous and great thing, and I was
very glad to hear from Deputy Commissioner Williams. We were
told by the Governor that the value of the chestnut stand in
this State, I think, was forty millions dollars. The Legislature
of the State of Pennsylvania did not appropriate one per cent,
of that which is endangered by this chestnut blight. In fact, the
Governor told us the estimate Avas based upon fifty cents per
tree. Indeed, if the statistics were carefully made, Pennsylvania
has not appropriated more than about one-half of one per cent,
to protect the value of a great chestnut growth. (Applause).

DR. GIDDINGS, of West Virginia : Mr. Chairman : I w^ould
like to raise some questions in connection with Dr. Clinton's
statement. I infer two things from it : One is tliat the control of
the gypsy moth in Massachusetts was not a valuable expendi-
ture of money; another was that, by leaving off the control of
the peach yellows in Connecticut, it was to the advantage of
that State. I would like to ask if those inferences are correct
and if Professor Clinton has data to show that the dropping of
the peach yellows inspection has been to the advantage of Con-
necticut.

THE CHAIRMAN: Professor Clinton, can you answer those
questions in a word or two?

116

PROFESSOR CLINTON: I do not know that I made the
statement that gypsy moth work in Massachansetts was not
effective. I said it meant a long fight and a continuous fight.
This chestnut blight, from the re-infection, would make the fight
a continuous one. You could not do it uj) and leave it there.
You would have to keep at it forever, provided the material con-
tinued. Regarding the peach yellows law, my statement w^as
that they dropped that. The reason it was dropped was because
it made so much trouble with the farmers, by going into their
orchards. You would find that same difficulty with the farmers
in Pennsylvania that you would in Connecticut.

DR. jMERKEL, of N. Y. : Mr. Chairman : I have been on
my feet C(jntinu(jusly ever since Mr. Williams spoke, and was
about to give it u]). Some of the points I wanted to bring out
have already been brought out. However, I want to thank Mr.
Williams. I want to thank the great State of Pennsylvania for
I)assing that law. Pennsylvania has shown all the other States
in the Union what it is t > pass an unselfish law. If we could
only have a Federal laAv that Avould be as broad as the law of
Pennsylvania ought to be and could easily be made, by simply in-
serting the words after "the chestnut tree blight,"' ''and any other
fungous or insect pest," we would have no trouble with ovir fun-
gous or insect pests after a certain length of time. Sometime ago
I wrote that only when we considered a tree that is dangerously
infected with an insect or fungous pest as dangerous as a person
infected with smallpox or as a rabid dog, will we get rid in our
forests of insect and fungous pests. I was very glad to hear that
Mr. Williams and the members of the Commission have not be-
come discouraged by the large amount of cold water that has been
thrown on their ]3lans. I am sure that the two hundred and
seventy-five thousand dollars that the State of Pennsylvania has
appropriated will never be missed, even if no beneficial results
are obtained; but that the everlasting shame that the State of
Pennsylvania would suffer if she made no attempt to save her
chestnut trees, should be enougli not to discourage any and all
citizens from unselfish effort for their fellow men.

GEORGE G. ATWOOD, of New York: Mr. Chairman:
There is a little desk in Albany that has been open for about a

117

3^eai', and in tluit desk is about everything that has been said,
or thougiit, or dreamed of, relative to the chestnut bark disease.
We have had the advice of our friend Stewart, who thinks as
Dr. Clinton does, along the same lines. What they have stated
here to-daj^ we must accept as the honest statement of men who
know enough to make such statements. They know what they
are talking about, because they have investigated this disease and
they have investigated similar diseases, so tliat we must take
what they say with a great deal of confidence. They have been
talking to the point whether chestnut bark disease could be con-
trolled or eradicated. If I were to ask either one of those gentle-
men what thej would do with a chestnut tree in their own yard
that was infected with this disease, they would prol)ably say^
"Cut it out." That gives us the keynote of what I think should
be done wherever there is a possibility that single trees, or small
infections, can be removed. That seems to be the simple thing,
and the proper, sensible thing to do. It may have to be done by
the force of statute, but a great deal can be done by advising
owners of chestnut trees that become slightly infected, asking,
urging, forcing tliein in every way you can, to cut that timber
while it is still alive and save it. If that were done in the State
of Pennsylvania, tlieir entire two hundred and seventy-five thou-
sand dollars would be well expended. We are up against a
proposition in New York. We have probably two-thirds of our
chestnut timber still intact, and we want to save it if we can.
Now why should we not go out in tlie borders and carry on a
missionary work, or something stronger, and see if we cannot
cut a dividing line? Let scientific men go on with their investi-
gations. We need all the advice that their broad knowledge can
bring to us; but the other thing is a practical thing, a thing that
is at our doors, and a few hundred thousand dollars spent now
may result in a saving of that valuable property l^^ing all to the
west and south of us. (Applause).

DR. J. RUSSELL SMITH, of Pennsylvania: Mr. Cluiirman :
Professor Clinton advanced a very interesting point; that it
was tlie dry weather that made these trees amenable to blight.
The evidence was that people in Connecticut thought the dry
weather liad killed other trees that died, if I remember the

118

gentleman correctly. It seems to me that that matter of the
drought would be much better tested by showing that, in locali-
ties of low, moist, abundantly watered soils, the trees had not
had blight. There must be many such localities of chestnut in
Connecticut where even the recent droughts of past years have
not subjected many trees to a dearth of water.

THE CHAIKMAN: Can you answer that In a word, Pro-
fessor Clinton?

PROFESSOR CLINTON: I was giving the various things
that weaken trees. Drought is one of them. We have had severe
droughts in Connecticut, and I hold that the situations that
have been the most moist have been the regions that have suffered
most from tlie drought, because when a tree is trained to live in
a moist place, during a drought it will suffer more than a tree
on higher land which has been used to dry soil.

MR. CRANMER, of Pennsylvania: Mr. Chairman: AVhile
still well on the sunnj^ side of life's meridian, I distinctly re-
member, as a barefoot boy on a little farm on the eastern sea-
board of New Jersey, the advent of what was known then as
the Colorado beetle, commonl,y called the potato bug. As a little
boy about this high (indicating) I was put in between the rows
to catch those fellows and get them off the vines. Naturally
they ^appeared on the vines of other farmers in that section, and
many of the old fellows shook their heads in despair. They
said "We will never raise any more potatoes. The potato crops
are done in America." My father did not feel that way, althougii
I would have been pretty well satisfied if he. had. He made me
hunt potato bugs, and then we later began to use the London
purple and the Paris green, and so forth. We are still raising
potatoes in New Jersey and other places throughout the United
States, with success. We still have specimens of the Colorado
beetle in the United States, but we expect to go on raising pota-
toes, and doing our best. So it seems to me, gentlemen, in rela-
tion to this chestnut bark blight, this chestnut tree disease, we
are not to liold up our hands in despair and listen to too much
of the expert advice and opinion that falls from the lips of our
university men. I come from a university myself, and I dare
say that. We have heard much to-day. There have been numer-

119

oiis expressions of opinions and of guesswork. We have yet
to liear from any person who tells us what he has done in a
practical way for the cutting out and eradication of this dis-
ease in an}"^ extended form and over any very large tracts of land.
I am unfortunate in the fact that my chief, who is custodian of
all the property at Lehigh University, is not able to be here to-
night. Dr. Henry S. Drinker, whose name appears in the roster
of officials of the American Forestry Association, and who is
president of Lehigh LTniversity. He is custodian of a large tract
of land, adorned on its campus with many primeval chestnut
monarchs from eighteen inches to three feet in diameter, giants
of the old forest tract. In the rear of this campus we have
some two hundred acres covered with a coppice growth of chest-
nut and various hardAvoods of Pennsylvania. We were exceed-
ingl}^ fortunate, some years ago, in having heard from the lips
of Mr. 0. W. Levitt, an eminent landscape engineer of New York
City, the warning that our chestnut trees were likely to be visited
Avitli an insidious enemy, which would destroy them all. It was
not, hoAvever, until the summer of 1908 that I as custodian of
those grounds, saw any unusual discoloration on either the
bark or foliage of a chestnut tree, except that Avhich seemed to
be natural in the decay of any specimen of deciduous trees. Dur-
ing that summer I saw, on a small chestnut, this unusual dis-
coloration and the appearance of small red or broAvn pustules.
This tree Avas immediately cut doAvn and portions sent, after all
otlier portions were burned, to Mr. I. C. Williams, Deputy State
Commissioner of Forestry of Pennsylvania, Avho placed it in
incubation and pronounced it the chestnut bark blight, or dis-
ease. I am not familiar Avith the scientific name. I was then
cautioned by the president to be careful, observant, and vigilant,
and to watch for any recurrence of this thing. To hasten from
that time on, through the summer of 1910, Avhen it appeared,
and in 1911, we have done exactly as AA'as recommended to us
by Mr. Williams and by Dr. Kothrock, who visited us during
this period of time and walked through our coppice grove of
chestnut. I am not able to sa}^, after extended experience along
this line, that all trees Avhich are treated by severe pruning,
which have been touched by tliis blight, may be saved. We do
know, hoAvever, that we have tided trees over one year and two

120

years, that were striken with tlie blight, by removing all such
portions as were affected by it, treating them with a composi-
tion of coal tar, diluted slightly with spirits of turpentine, so
that it might be easily applied with a brush, using it both as
a fungicide and insecticide; using it on bark, wood, and broken
places. Thus far we feel that our work has been successful
along this line. Last year it is true we cut out forty trees, all
of them less than ten inches in diameter. We have as yet lost
but three trees in all this large tract of land that were more
than this size. We have, as I said before, saved many trees by
severe pruning and trimming, cutting out all diseased places and
treating them with this solution of coal tar, ordinary coal gas
tar ; so that we feel it is worth while to do something along this
line. We do not feel like the dear old lady who stood up on
the banks of the Hudson Eiver when Mr. Fulton was about to
experiment with his steamboat, and said, as it was puffing and
blowing, "It will never move, it will never move," and when the
ropes were cast off and the boat moved out into the stream,
she said "It will never stop, it will never stop." We hope this
will be a successful work, prosecuted for the highest end by
this worthy and able Commission of the State of Pennsylvania,
and we, as representatives of Lehigh University, Dr. Drinker,
Professor Hall, of the Department of Biology, and myself as
custodian of the grounds, stand ready to help you with anything
we can do for you. We stand ready to listen to what you say to
us, stand ready to take your advice as a Commission, and go
with you hand in hand along this line. (Applause).

DE. H. S. REED, of Virginia: Mr. Chairman: Regarding
one of Dr. Smith's questions, we have a few observations upon
the chestnuts in Virginia. Reference has been made this after-
noon to the blight in Virginia. It has been found there in some
instances, — probably there is more there than Ave think, —
but we have observed this that wherever it has been found, that
it was at an altitude of less than 800 feet. Most of the chestnut
timber that is liealthy, and the greatest majority of it, is at an
altitude of more than a thousand feet, and on none of that which
is more than a thousand feet above the sea level has any trace
of the blight been found; but it is found occurring at altitudes
less than 800 feet and in regions where the rainfall is great.

121

THE CHAIEMAN : On account of the particularly interest-
ing address that we heard from Professor Davis to-night, the
Chair thought that there would be some questions directed to
him, but it seems that the discussion has gone along on somewhat
different lines. There is one question however, which Professor
Davis has not answered, with reference to gathering the crop
while it is still green, if I remember the question. Will Pro-
fessor Davis kindl}^ answer that question?

PKOFESSOR DAVIS: In September, when the burrs are
green, you can shake them from the trees as you can apples,
and the entire crop has been harvested without frost. When
they are shaken off, they are alloAved to dry a little wliile. AViien
you shake them off in September they color up brown and the
frost, I think, has nothing to do with it.

THE CHAIEMAN: This note has been sent to the Chair:
"Will you please ask Dr. Spalding, of the United States Bureau
of Plant Industry, what has been done in the vicinity of Wash-
ington, D. C, to prevent the spread of the chestnut bark dis-
ease?" Of course, it wUi be impossible now to go into that sub-
ject at length, but if Dr. Spaulding will tell us, in a minute or
two, something of Avhat has been accomplished, and in a word,
the main features of the method, I feel sure it will be ap^jre-
ciated.

DE. SPAULDING : I am not very familiar with the work that
has been done in the vicinity, because I have been working on
other problems most of the time during the last few years. I
simply know, in a rough way, that the method of cutting out
had been practiced wherever diseased trees have been found and,
as far as I know, that has been fairly successful. There are cases
w^here spores have been found on tlie stump of an old tree. In
many cases, I am sure from Dr. jMetcalf's statement, no special
precautions were taken to remove the diseased chips, or even to
remove the bark from the stump, so that certain cases might very
well be expected to have the fungus at this time.

THE CHAIEMAN : It seems now, the time being half past
ten, that we had best do one t>f two things: either take a recess
until to-morrow morning at sharp nine o'clock, or decide to spend

122

the rest of the night here and finish this subject The Chair
learns that Mr. H. P. JMarshall is not here and therefore cannot
serve on the Committee on Eesolutions for New York. He will
ask Mr. Merkel to take his place. This Committee will meet at
the right of the Chair immediately after adjournment, only for
a minute or two.

ME. TITALHEIMEE, of Eeadiug, Pa.: Mr. Chairman: I
was listening to the gentleman from New York. I think he has
the proper theory, that is, that the spores are spread by the
wind blowing them from place to place, and just according to
how the wind blows at a certain time. Take the Orlansa tree.
It is called Orlansa in Latin, Lance wood in English and Para-
dise tree in German. It is a tree like a sumac. There is prob-
ably one out of fifty that has a seed on it, like grapes, and at
certain times of the winds they are blown for thousands of feet#
Some may land between the mortar, or between the bricks, of
a building, and a tree will grow there. If you go up Third street
from the ferry after you land there, you will see here and there
and everywhere in the front yards a nice little tree growing
there, if tliey have let it grow. You have all seen that, especially
in Washington. That seed is just like a leaf, and it is as sharp
as a knife, and the seed is encased in that leaf and that gets into
any crevice. I have had some taken out of my wall that grew
there, and they would grow to a good size. I have seen them
grow out of a brick pavement, where there was not any sweep-
ing or any work done around.

THE CHAIEMAN: As President Drinker cannot serve on
the Committee on Eesolutions, Mr. Green is asked to serve in
his place.

We Avill now take a recess until nine o'clock to-morrow morn-
ing to meet again in this room.

(Adjourned until Wednesday, February 21, 1912, at 9 o'clock
A. M.)

123

MORNING SESSION.

Wednesday, Tebruary 21, 1912, 9 o'clock A. M.

THE CHAIRMAN : The iiieetiiig will please be in order.
We have a busy session before us and in a few moments oppor-
tunity will be given for the presentation of such business as
ought to come up, and then we will proceed with our programme.
It has been suggested to the Cliairman, and he very heartily ap-
proves of the suggestion, that we should start our morning ses-
sion with a good taste in our mouths, which would be provided
by hearing a few remarks from our old friend. Dr. J. T. Roth-
rock, who is recognized as the father of Pennsylvania forestry
conservation, and, if there is no objection, the Chair will change
from the established order to call upon Dr. Rothrock for a few
remarks at this time. (Applause).

DR. JOSEPH T. ROTHROCK: Yiv. Chairman and Gentle-
men : This question of chestnut blight, although of course it is
a portion of the forestr}^ work of the State, is somewhat foreign
to the line in which I have been most actively interested. I
would say, though, that it was my good fortune in 1880 to spend
nine months in the laboratory of Professor DeBarry at Strass-
burg, Germany. DeP>arry at that time was recognized as the
leading fungologist of the world. I departed from the faith that
was in me then, not because of lack of interest in the field, but
because my eyesight gave out, and I drifted then into forestry.
So that you will see that I am not wholly without a knowledge
of the rudiments of this work that you are engaged in.

Now when a contagious disease breaks out among men or
among domestic animals, the first thing that is done is to limit,
as far as possible, the spread of the infection, or of the contagion.
Meanwhile, the laboratories of the land are doing all they can
to find out the causes and what is to be done to end the trouble.
The two lines of work are progressing side by side. When the
Peronospora invaded the vine-growing districts of France and
Germany, the laboratories of the Old World were busily en-

124

gaged in finding ont how the fungns that produced the trouble
in the wine-growing districts found its access into the vines. I
had the pleasure of having Professor DeBarry point out to me
himself the first spore that I ever saw, sending its germ threads
down into the tissue of the i^lant. I do not know who discovered
the Bordeaux mixture, but I do knov; that that was very in-
fluential in limiting the spread of the disease and restoring the
wine industry to its normal and natural condition. I do not be-
lieve, however, that it was discovered by our scientific friends;
bnt they did discover the life history of tlie disease, which was
a most important, permanent contribution to. the vine-growing,
v>'ine-producing indnstry of the Old ^Voi-ld. Now it seems to
me that we are in a somewiiat similar condition here. We have
with us a pest, which is destroying our forests. It seems to
me that the proj)er thing to do is to destroy every spore-produc-
ing specimen that y^e knov/ is actively engaged in disseminating
and widening the area of the disease. That v/ould seem to be
one commonsense remedy to adopt. It is along the line of what
we know in the treatment of contagious and infectious diseases.
In the meanwhile, let our laboratory men go on with renewed
energy and keep uj) the work. I think that ever^^ State in this
Union ought to have a laboratory of well equpiped scientific
men, men who folloAV their work not for their salary but for
the love of the work. Those are the men that give you the perma-
nent results. I would like to see every State in this Union
have a laboratory well equipped and well provided with all that
is necessary to produce effective work. Mark Twain on one
occasion made the remark that they had a queer way of dealing
Avith criminals out West. He said '^'They hang them first and
try them afterv\'ards." Now it seems to me that we have the
known criminal with us here. Let us hang him first and then
let our laboratory friends try him in the meanwhile. (Applause
and laughter).

MR. HAEOLD PEIRCE, of Pennsylvania: Mr. Chairman:
I move that at 11.30 A. M., the Conference take a recess until
two o'clock, and at that time, 11.30 A. M., the Committee on
Resolutions meet in the House Caucus room. I would also
move that no resolntions be received after 10.30, and that up

]25

to iliat Lime, all rcsoliitioiiH Miat are desired to l)e l)roiiglit to
the Committee on Eesoliitioiis be sent to the desk, to be presented
to the Kesohitions' Committee.

Seconded by Dr. Rnssell Smith, of Pennsylvania.

THE CITAIKMAN : The motion is that we adjonrn this meet-
ing at 11.30, to reconvene at 2 o'clock, and that at 11.30, the
Eesolntions' Committee meet in the Honse Cancns room, which
is below this room, on the main floor, and that no resolutions be
received after 10.30 this morning, and that all resolutions should
be presented at the desk during the next sixty minutes. You
have heard the motion, which has been seconded. Are there
any remarks? If there are no remarks, we will call for a vote.

The motion was put and unanimously carried.

MR. PEIECE: I have a letter that has been sent me, that
I think it would be well to have read.

THE CIIAIIIMAN : Let the Secretary read the letter.
Secretary Besley read the following letter, written upon letter
head of the Harrisburg Board of Trade:

'^Dear Mr. Peirce:

It occurs to me to suggest that it might be well to have Mr.
Pearson call the attention of the chestnut tree bark disease con-
ference to several things relating to the stay of the delegates
in Harrisburg.

1. The Capitol Building, itself easily one of the ten great
buildings of the world, with its appropriate and memorable art
decorations, is an exhibit worth looking at. There are courteous
guides at hand to explain to visitors its features.

2. The State Museum, housed in the Library building, just
south of the Capitol building, is almost unique in character.
It presents an epitome of the life and manufactures of Pennsyl-
vania.

3. The City of Harrisburg is a civic exhibit well worth the
attention of any visitor to the conference. It has in ten years
made more progress, in proportion, than any other city in the
United States, toward true civic improvement. Its two-mile-im-
proved water front, open to the public; its 55 miles of paved
streets f its great park system, including 719 acres, which last

12G

year cared for more than a million and a quarter visitors; its
notably efJQcient and pleasing water filtration plant, open to
visitors, on Island Park; its dignified city entrance, at Market
Street and the river, — all make it Avorth a look from those in at-
tendance upon the conference.

I have instructed the secretary of our Board of Trade, Mr.
James A. Bell, to present this to you and to proffer his assistance
in connection with any information about the city.

Congratulating you on the alreadj^ apparent success of your
splendid work, and on the monumental and unique character of
this conference, I am

Yours truly,

J. HORACE McFARLAND,

President."

TlIP] CHxVlPtMAN: Tlie Chair would suggest that if Presi-
dent McFarland will kindly do so, it would be most agreeable
if he would ])e in the ante-room at the close of this session, to
meet delegates who desire to secure further information or sug-
gestions from him. Certainly his letter is much appreciated.
Is there further business to be attended to at this time? One
of the first rules of physics is that two objects cannot occupy
the same space at the same time. The Chairman is reminded of
this rule when he looks at the programme and reflects upon sev-
eral requests tliat have come to him for other matters than those
mentioned on the progTamme to be x)resented in the short session
of tliis morning. The fact is, we have now just two hours, and a
programme which easily could occupy double that time. If mem-
bers wish to give instructions for the guidance of the proceed-
ings this morning, it might facilitate matters.

MR, SHEPPARD: Mr. Chairman: I move you that the
Chairman be empowered to confine all discussions to three points
upon this morning's programme, and that all talks on these sub-
jects be limited to three minutes.

Seconded by Mr. Merkel, of New York.

THE CHAIRMAN: The motion is the discussion on this
morning's session shall be confined to the three points on the

127

morning programme. It wond save a little time if Mr. Sheppard
would tell ns just how lie defines those points, there being four
papers.

MR. SnEPPARD : First, the Pcnns3dvania programme, the
third, the chestnut bliglit and the future of the forests, and tlie
fourth, the chestnut blight and constructive conservation. The
second item (reports of the State Foresters), is one that would
be so general that it seems to me we could hardly get very far
Avith it.

THE CHAIRMAN: It is moved, then, that we confine dis-
cussion to those three subjects, remarks to be limited to three
minutes, which, of course, would govern except by excei)tion
being made by unanimous consent.

PROFESSOR CLINTON, of Connecticut: AVhat is this?
A Pennsylvania Conference, or a Conference of the United
States?

THE CHAIRMAN: Are there other remarks?

PROFESSOR HOPKINS, of Washington: It might be well,
Mr. Chairman, to state some additional subjects that are to be
presented this morning, to be taken into consideration along this
line. We would like to discuss the insects before we are through.

THE CHAIRMAN: There have been numerous suggestions
that we should give some attention to insects.

MR. PEIRCE: I think it Avould be well for that resolution
to carry this morning, not in order to cut off discussion, but
because the programme this morning was formed for constructive
work and for utilization; and I think it would be well if we would
carry out that line this morning. An opportunity will be given
this afternoon, I should think, for all other subjects to be pre-
sented. If we confine ourselves to the one thing that is specially
mentioned in those three subjects, I think we can get more effec-
tive work that if we try to have a diverse discussion this morn-
ing.

THE CHAIRMAN: If you observe the subjects on the pro-
gramme I think you will find that they would not confine discus-
sion to Pennsylvania questions. Are there further remarks?

128

MR. CASSELL, of Peuiisylvaiiia: Do you tliiiik it miglit b(»
T» ell, iTiider the circumstances, to make No. 2 on your programme
No. 4? Then, if we have time for it, it could come up and some
of our frieuds, who have come prepared to report under that,
would have their opportunity.

THE CHAIRMAN : Do you offer tliat as an amendment?

MR. CAS SELL: Yes, sir.

THE CHAIRMAN : An amendment is offered, that question
No. 2 follow No. 4. Is the amendment seconded?
The amendment was seconded by Mr. Peirce.

THE CHAIRMAN : Do you wish to take any further action,
or suggest any further action? If not, we will put the amend-
ment first.

Tlie amendment A^'as ]out and carried.

THE CHAIRMAN: Now you have the original motion as
amended, that- discussion be strictly confined to the three sub-
jects. Is there any desire to open up the insect question this
morning? If so, we should hear another amendment.

PROFESSOR CLINTON: I understand that Mr. Hopkins
has something to say, and I, for one, should like to hear wliat
he lias to say. I move that, at sometime at least, we hear from
him. I do not care whether it is this morning or this after-
noon.

THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair would be glad to entertain
an amendment.

PROFESSOR RANE, of Massachusetts : It seems to me that
we are losing a good deal of time on these amendments. I should
]ik(? to hear tlie papers, and then also hear Professor Hopkins
ou the insect question.

. MR. PEIRCE : I would move that Professor Hopkins pre-
sent his paper at two o'clock this afternoon.
The motion was seconded.

THE OHAIKMAN: The Chair has one motion before the
House, to confiue the discussion to three subjects and remarks to
three minutes in each case.

(The motion was put and carried).

THE CHAIRMAN : Mr. Peirce malces a motion that Profes-
sor Hopkins be requested to speak on the insect question at
two o'clock this afternoon.

Tlie motion was seconded by Mr. I, C. Williams, was put and
duly carried.

THE CHAIRMAN : Having executed the criminal, we will
proceed with th-e trial, and ask Mr. Hopkins if that will be agree-
able to him.

PROFESSOR HOPKINS : I had planned to leave for Wash-
ington directly after dinner, at least at three o'clock, and I
am afraid that will interfere Arith my plans ; but, if it is the wish
of the meeting, I will submit.

THE CHAIRMAN: It would be very kind of Professor Hop-
kins to remain over. It seems almost the unanimous wish. We
will proceed with the morning programme, the first paper being
''The Pennsylvania Programme," by the first secretary of this
Conference and the executive officer of the Chestnut Blight Com-
mission, Mr. S. B, Detwiler. (Applause).

THE PENNSYLVANIA PROGRAMME.

By S. B. DETWILER, EXECUTIVE OFFICER. PENNSYLVANIA CHEST-
NUT TREE BLIGHT COMMISSION.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen : Although a deter-
mined effort to control and eradicate the chestnut bark disease
was made by a number of public spirited citizens, residing in
the vicinity of Philadelphia, it soon become evident that they
were unable through individual efforts, to save their valuable
chestnut trees from destruction. As a result, Pennsylvania
took up the fight against this destructive tree disease in earnest,
realizing the necessity for prompt and vigorous action on the
part of the Commonwealth. A Commission was appointed in
9

ICO

June, 11)11, for the piirijo.sc of thoroughly iuvestigatiug the
chestnut blight, to devise and api)ly ways and means through
Avhich it might, if possible, be stamped out.

In 1909, according to the report of the State Auditor (Jeneral,
there were 7,633,180 acres of forest land in Pennsylvania, of
wliich it is estimated tliat 21 per cent., or approximately one-
tifth, is chestnut timber. Allowing two poles, four ties, and
two cords of wood per acre, and allowing |2.00 per pole, 33 cents
per tie, |1.00 per cord for wood, the total value of the chestnut
timlter i]i Pennsylvania would be $55,000,000, in round iHunbers.
If we allow 115,000,000 as the total value of the nut crop, and
orchard, park, and shade trees, the total value becomes |T0,000,-
000. This does not consider the value of chestnut forests as
protection for water-sheds. By dividing the counties in the
eastern half of the State into zones, as shown on the map, on
the same basis as the above estiinate is made, the value of the
chestnut trees already killed or affected by blight in Pennsyl-
vania is estimated at |10,000,000. Of this amount |7,000,000
is the value of poles, ties, and other Avood products, and |3,000=-
000 is estimated as tlic value of orchard, park, and shade trees,
the loss to nurserymen, and to real estate owners. It is believed
that 13,000,000 is a low estimate for the value of these trees, since
the loss to real estate owners and to owners of shade and orchard
trees has been particularly severe in the southeastern corner of
the State where the chestnut tree is of great importance in this
respect.

No reliable estimate of the annual income from the sale of
chestnut products in Pennsjdvania can be given. The statistics
of the Forest Service, for the year 1909, show that for the United
States, the value of the annual cut in that year was approxi-
mately 120,000,000. Of this amount, about one-half was the
value of lumber, lath, and shingles, tlie other half representing
the value of poles, ties, and extract wood.

The Pennsylvania Cliestnut Tree Blight Commission began
its investigations in August, 1911. The general plan adopted
by the Commission is that recommended by Dr. Metcalf in his
recent bulletin on the control of the chestnut bark disease. In
brief, this consists in first determining the exact range of the

131

disease, especially (lie advance! points of lln' in feci ion. Tlie dis-
eased trees of these spot iul'ectioiis are destroyed as so<ni as
possilde after being located. Ultimately, it is planned to es-
tablish a zone free from the disease which will be constaidly
patrolled for new infections. The portion of tlu; Htate west of
this zone will be thoronghly scouted over at least once each year
and new spot infections eradicated as soon as found.

East of the immune zone no immediate attempt A\ill be made
to eradicate the disease, partly because most of the energy will
be re(iuired to fight the disease in the imnuine zone and Avest-
ward, and also because of the poor market for chestnut pro-
ducts, especially cordwood, of which a large amount will be pro-
duced. It is planned, however, to place competent men in the
region of general infection for the purpose of encouraging tim-
ber owners to cut their diseased trees before they deteriorate, and
to assist them in finding a market for this material. In com-
munities east of the general advance line where the per cent, of
blight is not high and the owners desire to co-operate in cutting-
out the diseased trees, the Commission plans to give all possible
encouragement .and assistance.

At the risk of being tedious, I will give a resume of the pro-
visions of the Act whi("h governs the work of the Pennsylvania
Commission.

Section 1. A commission consisting of five persons, to serve
for three years, is created.

They are given power to use all practical means to destroy
the chestnut tree blight.

The Department of Forestry is directed to work in collabora-
tion.

Section 2. The Commission and its agents or employes are
given power to enter upon any property to determine whether
trees are attacked by blight. They are directed to co-operate
with owners for the removal of the trees and eradication of the
disease. The commission will furnish every owner with infor-
mation respecting the location of his blighted trees.

Section 3. If an owner refuses to co-operate with tlie Com
mission in applying remedies or doing any act directed to be
done to prevent further spread, the Commission may give liini

132

twenty days' notice that it will proceed if be does not. At the
end of the period of notice the Commission may cause trees to
be destroyed and the cost of doing such work is collectible from
the owner; and if the cost be not paid within sixty days, the
Commission is directed to proceed by action at law.

An owner may appeal from the decision of a member of the
Commission or any of its agents or employes, within ten days
after receiving his notice. The Commission will then direct a
re-examination and accord a hearing to the person making the
appeal. Proceedings in the meanwhile will stay.

Section 4. The Commission is given power to establish a
quarantine or destroy trees not affected by blight, if so doing will
result in preventing spread of the disease. Good trees so de-
stroyed are to be paid for at current stumpage prices. In case
an owner be dissatisfied with an amount allowed him for the
destruction of good trees, he may appeal to a court for such
remedy as he thinks he inay be entitled to.

Section 5. Violations of tliis Act or any of tlio regulations
adopted by the Commission, or resistance to an officer of the
Commission, are declared to be a misdemeanor, and upon con-
viction, the defendant may be fined |100 or imprisoned one
month; and the provisions of the Act are extended to corpora-
tions as to individuals.

Section 6. The Commission shall receive no pay but actual
expenses only. The employes of the Commission are to receive
such compensation as the Commission may determine.

The superintendent of Buildings and Grounds shall furnish
them with suitable offices.

Twenty-five thousand dollars is appropriated for scientific re-
search and office expenses, and |2.50,000 additional for general
field work.

Section 7. Eepeals all inconsistent legislation.

A quarantine on the shipment of chestnut nursery stock was
declared by the Commission soon after its organization. Regu-
lations were made requiring that all nursery stock prior to ship-
ment be inspected by an agent of the Commission and dipped for
several minutes in an approved fungicide, preferably Bordeaux
mixture, in the presence of an inspector. Nurserymen are pro-

103

liibited from shipping, and transportation companies from carry-
ing chestnut stock not bearing the Commission's tag. Chestnut
nursery stoclv shipped into the State from without is to be held
at the border of the State for inspection. The nurserymeii and
transportation companies of the State deserve credit for will-
ingly co-oj)erating with the Commission to make tliis regulation
effective.

A field force of over thirty men has been organized and the
extent of the blight in the State has been determined approxi-
mately. The infected region in Pennsylvania occupies the east-
ern two-fifths of the State. The western-most line of general
advance may be shown by drawing a line from Susquehanna to
VVilliamsport, and southward through Hu'ntingdon to the south-
ern boundary of the State, although there are scattered spot in-
fections west of this to near the Ohio State line, in the south-
western corner of the State. The field work done by the Com-
mission last summer and fall was largely scouting to locate the
extent of the disease. From January 15 to February 15, 1912,
1,352 infected trees on 87 tracts have been disposed of according
to the regulations of the Commission, and fully as many more
are in the process of removal. This is part of the work, in ad-
dition to general scouting and the holding of meetings for the
purpose of educational work on the part of the field agents.
During the summer months, when the work is carried on to the
best advantage, it is planned to increase the field force so that
the State may be thoroughly scouted and all diseased trees cut
out west of the advance line.

On the advance line and to the westward, the owner of the
trees marked for removal is required to bur]i the bark from
visibly diseased or cankerous portions of the trees. He is also
required to destroy the bark of the stumps of infected trees, either
by peeling the bark to the ground line and burning it, or
by burning the brush over the stump until the bark is consumed.
Experiments are being tried to determine if it is not j)ractical
to cover the stump with kerosene, crude petroleum, tar, or some
similar material, to make the destruction of the bark thorough
and less expensive. A trial shows that one man at this season of

134

the year can peel six stumps 10 to 15 inches in diameter in an
hour. That is a conservative figure.

It is the policy of the Commission to use every possible means
of securing the co-operation of owners in cutting infected tim-
ber, before resorting to their power under the law. The power
that the law gives the Commission is sufficient to insure respect
for its powers, but we realize that the law alone is not sufficient
to make the plan of controlling this disease effective unless it
is backed by strong public sentiment in its favor. This is being
accomplished by educating the public to recognize the symptoms
of the disease and to realize its serious character through lec-
tures, held meetings, circulars, newspaper articles, and other
work of an educational nature, such as interesting school chil-
dren and boy scouts in the movement. So far, no serious oppo-
sition has been met with in the w^ork of eradication ; on the con-
trary, we have had exceptional co-operation from all classes
of timber owners.

The Commission maintains a laboratory for determining
doubtful infections, and for conducting experiments in the con-
trol of the disease through the use of sprays, fertilizers, and medi-
cations. The Commission is giving an impartial trial to the many
remedies submitted, to determine their effectiveness. These ex-
periments are being pushed forward as rapidly as may be done,
but no remedy will be endorsed by the Commission until its
efflcienc}'^ has been demonstrated beyond all doubt. Most of those
submitting remedies for the blight have in mind the size of our
appropriation rather than the practicability and efficiency of
their remedies to the public.

The Commission keenly realizes its responsibility to the pub-
lic for the proper expenditure of the funds placed at its disposal.
Yesterday's j)roceedings of the conference emphasized the great
need for comprehensive scientific investigation into all phases
of the blight problem. It is only by finding out all the facts
relative to the disease that we can hope to eradicate it, and it
is evident that many scientific facts of practical importance are
still unknown. For instance, it has not yet been definitely deter-
mined Avhat agents are of primary importance in distributing the
spores, or fo what extent tlie disease may l)e spread liy the

inn

transportation of barked and uubarked products of diseased
trees, two points which have a direct bearing on cost and
efficienc}' of control.

The woodpecker and other birds liave been blamed for spread-
ing the blight, when in my opinion it is more apt to be the fault
of insects. Further investigations may prove this to be as much
a problem for the entomologist as for the pathologist. A\'e feel
a sentimental interest in the birds. Nevertheless, this does not
free us from also investigating them to find out scientifically
their exact relation to the spread of this disease. In other words,
we must investigate everything, Avhether we believe one thing
or another. At the present time three field agents have been de-
tailed to make special studies of field conditions for the purpose
of securing further facts relative to several of these problems.
Mau}^ lines of co-operative investigation and experiment are in
progress and others are planned. Detailed knoA\ledge of the
agents causing infection and the time of year when infection
occurs, which will be obtained as the work progresses, will un-
doubtedl}^ assist in making control more elfective aiid in cheapen-
ing the cost of the work of eradication, by pointing out the
simj)lest methods required to give satisfactory results. In tlie
meantime, however, it is our belief that sanitation is practical
and should give good results in checking the spread of this dis-
ease as it has done in the case of other diseases. Quarantine
measures proved successful in checking outbreaks of yellow
fever after the mosquito was convicted. It is more than prob-
able that by destroying the diseased bark of infected trees in the
eastern half of the State, we shall also destroy the agency
which spreads the disease.

In my opinion, the big problem which confronts us and whicli
more than any other will determine the success or failure of
our undertaking is the question of profitable utilization. A
satisfactory market for the various classes of chestnut wood
Avhich must be disposed of as a result of the cutting-out method
of control, appears to me to be vital to the ultimate success of
the plan. The active co-operation of cliestnut owners cannot
be willingly secured if they must do the cutting at a loss. AYe
have found iliat owners who were reluchuit to cut have been

136

willing to do so after they found a market for the product which
enabled them to follow our regulations without expense, or per-
haps at a profit. The Commission, by acting as a clearing house
to bring buyer and seller together, will be able to assist ma-
terially in solving this problem. There are over thirty com-
mercial uses for chestnut wood, and it seems likely that all the
chestnut wood which will be produced can be utilized, provided
it can be delivered to factories and other consumers at a price
which will allow it to compete with other woods. The solution
of this problem seems to lie in lower frieght rates on chestnut
products. All classes of chestnut products will probably become
more or less of a glut on the market, unless rates can be secured
which will enable such material to find a market over a much
wider territory than at the present. The greatest present diffi-
culty however lies in the disposal of chestnut cordwood.

Pennsylvania's programme may be summed up as doing all that
can be done along the lines indicated to save the chestnut trees.
If successful, we shall be most hapx^y ; if we fail, after an honest
fight, we shall have the satisfaction of knowing that it has been
money wisely spent. Even though we accomplish no more than
to secure the best utilization of the blight killed material, the
expenditure of money and effort is justified; and in addition, Ave
have the educational value along forestry, conservation, and
pathological lines; an object lesson to the State and Nation, of
which we must not lose sight.

Pennsylvania hopes for two great results from this conference ;
first, the united effort of the states here represented in attempting
the control of the chestnut blight, and second, assistance from
users of chestnut products in devising ways and means of profit-
ably disposing of the products of diseased trees. The other thing
needful to ultimate success, that is, the complete scientific facts
of the disease, will be obtained in the course of time through sys-
tematic investigation, through the collection of facts, not through
hypotheses. ( Applause ) .

THE CHAIRMAN: The next paper is entitled "Chestnut
Blight and the Practice of Forestry in Pennsylvania," by Dr.
H. P. Baker, Department of Forestry, State College, Penna.

137

THE CHESTNUT BLIGHT AND THE PRACTICE OF FOR-
ESTRY IN PENNSYLVANIA.

BY DR. H. P. BAKER, PENNSYLVANIA STATE COLLEGE.

Mr, Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: I am glad indeed of
this opportnnity of presenting a very informal paper, and I
wish yon would consider it as an introduction to discussion only.
I feel like apologizing a little for presenting so short a paper.
In fact, I received a telegram in regard to it just as I was leaving
State College and have not been back to the College since, so
that what I have gotten together has been on the run and I am
afraid will not be facts entirely.

The Chestnut Bark Disease (Diaporthe parasitica), which was
first observed in this country in 1904 in the vicinity of New
York, has now spread through the hardwood forests of ten to
twelve of the eastern States. Up to this time the loss from de-
struction of chestnut trees of all ages has probably been more
than fifty million of dollars. (From Mr, Charles Marlatt, of the
Bureau of Entomology, United States Department of Agriculture
in National Geographic Magazine). The chestnut, because of its
sprouting capacity, rapidity and vigor of growth, and the natural
durability of its wood, is one of the most valuable hardwoods
of our eastern forests. It is especially valuable for farmers'
wood lots, because of the simplicity of management necessary to
produce repeated yields of posts, poles and ties, and that w^'thin
a shorter time than possible with any other common hard wood,
or wood of equal value. The length of rotation for pro-
duction of posts and poles may be made so short, with proper
care and protection of the wood lot, that the ordinary cry of too
long an investment for profit will not apply to the growing of
chestnut under simple coppice. By simple coppice we mean the
cutting of the forest and its reproduction by sprouts from the
stumps. This method has been praticed by our wood lot owners
for a good many years. They have not called it simple coppice,
but it has been that just the same, and they have been practicing
it very successfully indeed.

138

I eaiiuot believe, in view of the great valne of cliestiuit wood
and tlie rapidity and vigor of its growtli, that we can get along
without it in onr Pennsylvania forests, or in our eastern forests.
I am oj)timistic naturally, and I do not believe that we will ever
carry on forest management in this country without using chest-
nut.

AVitli the possibility of the complete commercial destruction
of this valuable tree, it is indeed time that the foresters of the
country consider what the effect of the removal of this tree will
have upon the future of the forests and whether or not the intro-
duction of some special method of management may not make it
more difficult for the disease to spread or make it easier for the
tree to resist the disease by keeping it in the most healthful and
vigorous growing condition. Tliese are not easy questions to
answer, because we have no precedent to follow, either in the
practice here or abroad. We have never had such a serious
enemy of the forest Avorking in a well settled region of the coun-
try, and at a time when both the national and state governments
are so well disposed to appropriate sufficient funds for combating
the pest. In the State of Pennsylvania we are now carrying on
work against this disease which was undreamed of when we
were suffering earlier from special insect devastations in our
forests.

A very brief statement of the devastations of two similar pests
may lielp us to appreciate somewhat our problems in connection
with the blight. In 1882 the Larch Saw-fly worm appeared in
the native larch or tamarack in Maine, and during the next five
years did tremendous damage throughout northern New England
and New York. By destroying the needles of the trees it caused
their slow death and not until the territory had ])een pretty tlior-
oughly covered by the insect and until certain natural enemies
arose did this insect finally disappear. Nothing, of course, was
done to combat tlie insect or iirevent its spread. While it was
not possible to estimate the damages resulting from the work
of this insect, it must have exceeded several millions of dollars.
There was no serious re-occurrence of this pest until last year,
when it appeared in the tamarack swamps of the Northern Lake
States. It is reported that Michigan is studying this pest Avith

13U

the lioi^e of being able to do some effective work against it. I
mention this pest because it practically wiped out the tamarack
in northern New England as a commercial tree, though after the
pest had passed there were single trees and also considerable
areas left that were not touched at all. We heard little of it,
because there was lots of timber everywhere else, and people
were not interested. It was not brought home to them as the
work of this chestnut disease is here in Pennsylvania. Yet the
tree was not wiped out entirely, and I cannot believe that, even
though this blight disease may spread ever so widely through
the Appalachians, that the chestnut will become extinct.

Tlie second and better known devastation of forests by an in-
sect was that of the Nun or Spruce Moth which appeared over
considerable areas of the spruce forests in southern Germany in
1891 and 92. Bavaria alone spent over three hundred and
seventy-five thousand dollars in combating this insect and finally
by the use of bands or rings of viscous tar on the trees prevented
the upward movement of the larvae from the ground and thus
the pest was destroyed. Great areas of forests were clear cut
and the market was glutted with spruce poles and logs of certain
sizes. Dr. Endres, tlie great forest statistician of Munich, re-
ports that even though there was an apparent over-supply of
timber from these clear cuttings, yet the market did not suffer
and a good average price was received for all material. The
methods followed in Europe for combating either insect or fun-
gous pests are hardly applicable here because of their denser
population, cheaper labor and smaller and more accessible for-
est areas.

Much was accomplished in Bavaria and the states of south-
Avestern Germany by the clear cutting of the forests in broad
strips. In replanting these strips some attempt was made to
replace the spruce by species not susceptible to injury by the
moth. This, however, was not followed out to any large extent,
because the spruce is the most profitable tree for southern Ger-
many. I believe tliat no system we may use in wiping out this
chestnut disease, if we are able to do it, will preclude the use of
chestnut in our future forest management. The forester is going
to grow the tree from which he can make the most money, if the

140

agencies of nature will let him do it. Of course, tlie agencies of
nature are against us now in this chestnut disease fight. Strips
of forest in German}^ often a half mile wide Avere left while the
cleared areas ranged from a dozen rods up to a quarter mile in
width, depending both uj)on the age of the forest and topography.
The Government having the right of condemnation entered pri-
vate holdings at an}^ time and forced owners to cut infested areas.
It is fortunate that the act appropriating money for the control
of the chestnut blight gives this same right. We must, however,
IH'oceed with great care in condemning trees and timber so as not
to arouse the opposition of the people to the work of blight eradi-
cation and the introduction of methods of management which
will perpetuate best the remaining chestnut and other hard
woods.

The two pests described above are unlike, of course, a fungous
disease such as the blight. Insects are always more easily con-
trolled than fungous diseases. I mention this last one to bring-
out especially the fact that Germany used a definite system of
forest management to overcome a great devastation of the forest
and that successfully.

Along the northern and western extension of the blight there
should be as clean a cutting of the worst infested areas as the
market will justify. The creation of a belt or zone in which
there is no chestnut is, probably, not practicable in combating
this disease, which is carried both by birds and insects. In lo-
calities where there are good markets for ties, mine props, acid
Avood, and like small products, there will be no question as to
the practicability of clean-cutting over considerable areas.
Where a proper market exists the possibilities of future returns
under the system of coppice will be most excellent in our hard
wood forests. The United States Forest Service, in a recent
statement as to the possibilities of this sprout land, estimates
returns as folloAAS :

"Good quality of oak and chestnut sprout land in the Appala-
chians can be purchased often for less than five dollars an acre.
Careful study shows that in fifty j^ears these lands will yield
seven hundred cross ties to the acre. Assuming that two cents
an acre each year will pay the costs of efficient fire protection
and that a cent and a quarter per acre will pay the annual taxes,

141

the cross ties would have to be worth, at the end of the fifty-year
period required to produce them, eight and one-half cents on the
stump to return five per cent, compound interest on the entire
investment in land, protection and taxes. Any advance in the
price of tie stumpage within the fifty-year period would mean
that much profit over the percentage given."

I have referred to those returns from sprout land simply to
show what can be done in the way of practicing simple coppice
effectively over our hard wood forests. We can, I believe, stimu-
late a market for certain forest products. I know that many
say we cannot help the present market conditions, but I am op-
liiiiistic in this as great manufacturing concerns are stimulating
tlni market for certain special products. Why should we not be
able b.y showing fully the uses of chestnut stimulate its use to a
greater extent than at present, at least? AVe must emphasize
continually the utilization phases of the problem, it seems to me,
in seeking methods which will accomplish the greatest good for
owners of chestnut timber.

Simple coppice, which many of our Pennsylvania wood lot
owners have been carrying on, in a way, for years, is without
doubt the best method both for the perpetuation of the wood
lots and for keeping them in such condition as to insure the
chestnut being as hardy as possible against the work of the
blight. That is, I believe we can accomplish a great deal by
putting our chestnut forests into a more healthful condition. A
tree in a healthy, rapid-growing condition, is going to be able to
resist the blight and other diseases much more effectively than
if it is in the condition in which too many of our wood lots and
chestnut trees are at the present time. Wood lots have been run
over repeatedly by fires, the humus is gone and the soil has been
depleted. The trees are just hanging on, we might say, and no
wonder they are susceptible to any disease that may come along.
AVe can accomplish a great deal by methods of control that will
put our chestnut forests into a better growing condition. Unfor-
tunately, a considerable proportion of our wood lots, in which
there is chestnut, have been cut very carelessly and little or no
protection given the developing sprouts from either fire or graz-
ing. There has been more or less complaint as to this method
because of the gradual dying out of the mother stump. A great

142

deal of our cutting is doue carelessly. Too high a stump is left,
so that, when the sprout comes out, it is liable to be broken off by
wind ; whereas, if the stump had been cut low, even though it re-
quired a little more bending of the back, the sprout would be
able to establish a root S3\stem of its own, and there is then al-
most no limit whatever to the life of the mother stump. If a
high stump is left and the sprout comes up six, eight, or ten
inches from the ground or further, we cannot expect anything
else than the gradual dying out of the mother stump; hence a
great deal can be done in properly cutting the chestnut which
we want to rei^roduce by sprouts. Another cause for unsatis-
factory results from reproduction by sprouts, and perhaps a jus^
tifiable one, in view of present markets, is the leaving of old mis-
formed trees and forest weeds. These low-growing, half-trees
are usually very tolerant and shade the sprouting stump in a
way that prevents vigorous growth. A certain amount of shade
is desirable, but, as a rule, in our wood lots the owner, or the
contracting cutter, does not i3ay much attention to these weeds
and leaves them. They take advantage of the space and so shade
the ground or the sprouting stumps that the sprouts are not vig-
orous. One or two cleanings to remove these undesirable trees
would make the competition for space and light much less severe
and no doubt would result in better formed chestnut and oak,
and the chestnut, because healthier, would be better able to re-
sist both insects and fungi. These cleanings can be made as re-
peated cuttings on an exceedingly short rotation, even though
the p^'oduct will be of value for posts and mine props only. Ii,
instead of this weeding out, so to speak, of blight-infested trees,
here and there, we might induce the owners to use a definite sys-
tem of cutting, I believe we would be accomplishing more per-
manent results. If instead of this destruction of scattered in-
fested trees, which may be and probably is effective in the south-
eastern jiart of the State, on small tracts, if, in the place of this
weeding out process, I say, we could induce the owners to use
some such system as clear-cutting and planting with non-sus-
ceptible trees, or cutting so as to keep the forest reproducing
rapidly by sprouts, I believe we would accomplish very much
more for forestry in Pennsylvania. If we could in some way
bring about such market conditions as to justify clear-cutting

143

and repeated clear-cuttings until tlie blight has disappeared,
might we not only get rid of the blight, but in the process bring
about the introduction of definite forestry practice?

I am not condemning entirely the method of eliminating blight
infested trees. That method may be used more successfully over
small areas of woodland such as occur iu the southeastern part
of tlie State. When one thiidvs of the tremendous areas of wood-
land which the State owns and is owned privately for instance,
through Centre county and on up into Clinton county, the propo-
sition of going in and cutting out infested trees is a hard one to
consider. If over such lands we can bring about the introduc-
tion of some method of cutting on as short a rotation as possible,
and as often as the returns will justify it, it is easy to see that
we will keep the forest growing rajjidly and healthfully and that
we will do more toward keeping the blight out and j)erpetuating
the chestnut than going here and there through that great area
and cutting out infested trees. While this Commission, which is
doing such a splendid work, and work which will always redound
to the credit of Pennsjdvania, is eliminating infested trees here
and there through the State, might it not be able also to intro-
duce a system of management among our woodland and forest
owners which will continue beyond the life of tlie Commission?
At the present time, by the j)ractice of eliminating diseased trees
you are getting rid of those infested trees only. In saying this
I am not discountenancing or underestimating the tremendous
educational value of the work which the Commission is doing,
but if you carry on this method of eliminating individual trees
only, what have you done for the owner after you get through
with it? You may have stopped temporaril}^ the blight, but if
at the same time you can introduce a system of management thnt
is going to put the whole wood lot into better growing condition,
I say you are going to accomplish more in the way of permanent
results and more in a forestry way in this country. (Applause).

THE CHAIRMAN : The next paper is entitled ''The Chestnut
Blight and Constructive Conservation," by Dr. J, Russell Smith,
of the University of Pennsylvania.

144

THE CHESTNUT BLIGHT AND CONSTRUCTIVE CON-
SERVATION.

By DR. RUSSELL SMITH, OF THE WHARTON SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY

OF PENNSYLVANIA.

"A liorse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse !" In these words
Shakespeare makes the defeated King Richard III express the
valne of a certain piece of property, as he paced the field of de-
feat, seeking flight, — not what the horse wonkl actnally cost in
the horse market; not what lie wonld bring in the liorse market,
was the basis of valnation, but wliat was going to happen to
Richard III if he had to go without him.

On that basis I question if the estimates of the value of the
chestnut species have been placed anywhere near high enougli.
The United States, with a big timber cut, is within from one to
three decades of an era of timber scarcity which will put us in
the position of having to go raise timber, rather than go find tim-
ber. In the timber-raising epoch the chestnut comes to the
front. Taken altogether it is for the next sixty years of this
nation a tree without a peer, for no other tree can touch it for all-
around efficiency.

1. It grows rapidly. No other good tree of the forest can
equal it in the speed with which it makes wood. By the time
the white oak acorn makes a baseball bat the chestnut stump has
made a railroad tie. Cut it down and it throws its shoots up
six feet the first year and keeps them going. This astoundingly
fast start, in connection with its record fast growth, makes it a
forest marvel.

2. The wood of no other tree is so generally- useful. It is dur-
able in the ground as posts, a quality which makes it a standard
telegraph and telephone pole, and a good railroad tie or mine
prop. It is durable above gronnd, giving it many virtues as lum-
ber. It is also a beautiful, prized, and much used wood for in-
terior finish. Lastly, it is full of tannin, so that any chip, top,
slab or scrap can be digested for this valuable manufacture.

145

The BliijUt Threatens a National Loss. Who Loses?

If anybody thinks lie is not a loser because he has uot a chest-
nut forest all his own, he has another think coming.

(a) Do you wear shoes? If so, the chestnut interests you,
because we are just beginning to make tannin for leather from
the wood of the chestnut.

(b) Do you read? Tlie pul^) that remains after the tannin
is gone makes paper; also a new industry just starting.

(c) Do you rent a house? Chestnut wood is one of the most
satisfactory woods for finishing the plain man's house.

(d) Do you use the telephone or telegraph? Chestnut makes
OIK! of the l)est telegraph and telephone poles.

(e) Do you go a-trolleying? The chestnut is tlie tie-produc-
ing tree of the future, if we do not let the blight kill the species.

(f) Do you own a farm or a town lot? Chestnut is one of the
great fence post trees of America.

Lastly in its list of virtues we sliould not forget its value, and
especially" its possibility as a producer of food for man, and sheep,
goats, hogs, and possibly other livestock. Already the chestnut
orchards of Europe make rough mountain sides worth one hun-
dred and fifty dollars per acre. Compare that to American farm
lands. Tlie chestnut forests of Italy are reported to make more
bushels of nuts year after year than the continuously cropped
lands of Dakota and Minnesota yield in wheat. Fully one-
fourth of the State of Pennsylvania, which is worthless for wheat
or corn, is better fitted for chestnut culture than any other use
now in sight. If we make them yield no better than the Italians
do, that would give us ninety million bushels of nuts, an amount
50 per cent, greater than our wheat and corn crops combined.
It would make this one of the greatest sheep and pig fattening
states of the country.

The stake in maintaining the chestnut species from destruc-
tion is large. The estimate of three hundred million dollars is
probably under, rather than over, the proper figure. In the ab-
sence of definite knowledge of tlie cure, how much are we justified
in spending in uncertain efforts? The problem is one of insur-
ance. Forty billion dollars' Avorth of property in the

10

146

United States was insured last year against fire, at an average
rate of 1.14 per cent, or fonr hundred and .fifty-six million dollars
for fire insurance in one year.

Now ninety-nine and one-third per cent, of that property was
insured against a fire that did not come. American property
owners are paying over one per cent, of the value of their prop-
erty to be insured against a chance of less than one in one hun-
dred and thirty-three. Now it is pretty generally agreed here
that the blight has a better than a one one hundred and thirty-
third chance of winning out if we sit still. Therefore, business
analogy tells us that we can at least afford to pay an average in-
surance rate on the risk. Don't forget that this fire has already
broken out. If we raise an average insurance rate, for a fight-
iug fund, we have about three million four hundred thousand
dollars per year coming to us. Thus far the whole American
nation has not spent over one per cent, even of that sum, and the
blight has already destroyed nearly or quite one thousand times
as much as we have spent to stoj) it.

If there is any such thing as constructive conservation, this
chestnut blight is blowing the whistle for us to come aud con-
struct, and get about it quickly.

What Can We Dof

1. All agree that we can stop the movement of nursery stock.

2. All agree that we can go home and start careful and thor-
ough surveys of actual conditions in our various States.

3. Every State can start scientific investigation to get more
knowledge of the trouble.

4. Every State can try the cutting-out method of control, at
least on small outbreaks, if not on a larger scale.

Therefore every State that has any blight needs an approjDria-
tion of ten thousand dollars to fifty thousand dollars for the
season of 1912, depending on the size of the State. The Federal
Government also needs a substantial appropriation. Altogether
this will make but a fraction of the common sense fund that
would be produced by a one per cent, insurance rate on the pro-
perty involved.

There is no evidence to bring out in proof of tlie final efficiency
of cutting as a cure. On the other hand, actual observation has

147

shown that when a forest fire jnmijs yonr fire line, yoii jump on
it Avhile it is little and stamp it out rather than let it run while
you devise a theoretically sound method of attack.

We are indebted to the two gentlemen wlio have had the coui--
age to come here and tell us that we didn't know. We don't
know. But at least let us exert ourselves to the extent of aver-
age insurance cost. We don't know, but neither do the courage-
ous Messrs. Stewart and Clinton. Their objections savor largely
on the temperamental. For example. Professor Clinton tells
lis that he thinks drought and other climatic cavises may he re-
sponsible. This is very reasonable, but it is astonishing that
the gentleman did not bring something that was at least near-
evidence. If drought is the promoting factor, there have been
abundant ox^portunities to compare trees that were in different
relations with respect to water. Connecticut, Avith its many
infestations of blight has given great opportunity to find chest-
nut trees languishing for water on rocky, sandy, shalj^, and other-
Avise very dry knolls. These could be compared with trees grow-
ing near water tables, in moist coves, below mill races, and in
other moist locations. Sucii comparisons would be in the nature
of proof for what is otherwise an entirely unproved theoretical
suggestion. jNIr. Stewart opposed the cutting-out plan, men-
tioning as evidence the fact that Metcalf and Collins had cut
out an infestation and two years later the stumps showed a fun-
gus and six trees nearby had the blight. Would it not be better
to note that, after informal and experimental cutting out, only
six trees had blight? Mr. Stewart also mentions as a cause for
despair the fact that an outbreak at Fontella, Ya., had been go-
ing since 1903. A Virginia report states that this outbreak has
in that time spread to about an acre of woodland.

A Lesson From the 8aii Jose 8cale.

This miserable little bug with an umbrella on his back had
us scared nearly to death ten years ago because he killed our
fruit trees so mercilessly. Now any farmer can turn him into
soax3 and keep his orchard clean, and the scientists are now tell-
ing us to go at the chestnut blight; only there is this difference

148

— a man can go after the scale. It takes the State, and mnch
better, all of the States, to stoiD the chestnut blight, for he
travels faster than the scale.

A National Scientific Campaign, or a National Standup Fight.
An Example from Africa.

We have national corporations, national j)arties, national co-
operation to make a meal even, and now we have got to make a
national organization to light a tree enemy just as we would to
fight a man enem}^ The j)roblem is big, but we know how if
we will.

We liave a splendid example in the South African cattle
plague. It swept for hundreds of miles, taking all cattle before
it as frost, does the flies. Tiien the South African Governments
drew a quarantine line around it and fought it to a standstill
riglit there. The United States should try the same with the
chestnut blight.

An Example from the Peach Yellows.

The peach yellows is a disease of which we know just two
things. The first is that it is a sure kill for trees, the second
that it can be controlled by rigid quarantine. Before we knew
the second fact, the disease had actually broken up communities,
as in the Michigan peach belt, and reduced land values from
one hundred dollars an acre to thirty dollars per acre. With
quarantine in operation, and the disease still unknown, these
same localities have more peach trees than ever and are again
prosperous.

A Lesson, from the Foot and Mouth Disease of Cattle in Penn-
sylvania.

The foot and mouth disease in this State, — which cost us the
life of one of the most efficient men Ave have ever had, namely
•the brother of our Chairman, Dr. Leonard Pearson, — the foot
and mouth disease, which is, practically, sure and quick death,
and so contagious that a stal)leman can carry it miles in his
clothes, broke out recently in Pennsylvania in many places. Yet
this State jumped on it, and by a sharp, stiff, stand-up fight, it

140

A\'as absolutely stamped out in a few weeks l»y (lie i-igoroiis es-
tablisliiiient of a dead line. I tliiidv this chestnut disease calls
for constrnetive conservation of jnst that kind. (Applause).

THE CHAIEMAN: Last call for resolutions: All resolutions
should he presented without delay at the desk.

We are now to hear reports by State Foresters. What is your
pleasure in reference to the time to l)e assigned to this part of
the programme? Do you desire to place any limit on reports?
We desire, of course, to have them unlimited but, in your judg-
ment is it necessary to place any time limit on these reports?

PROFESSOE HARSHF>ERGER, of Pennsylvania : I believe
we have a time limit of half past eleven, and it is now within an
hour of that time, so I believe we are obliged to have these re-
ports within the next hour.

THE CHxilRMAN : In your opinion, would it be well, then, to
limit the reports to say eight minutes, except b}^ unanimous con-
sent for more time?

PROFESSOR HARSHBERGER: I would inmgine so; eight
minutes with tAvo minutes leeway, making it ten minutes in all.
I make that motion: tliat the papers be limited to eight minutes,
with t^so minntes alloAvance.

The motion was seconded and carried.

THE CHAIRMAN: The motion prevails. It can, of course,
be excepted to under unanimous consent. Is the State Forester
or a representative prepared to report for IMaine? (No re-
sponse). New Hampshire? (No response). Massachusetts?

PROFESSOR RANE; Is the idea of this report to give some-
thing along the line of work being done in the State

THE CHAIRiMAN: The Chair will read the subject as stated
on the programme : "Reports of State Foresters or other officials
on the present extent of the bark disease; an estimate of the
present and possible future losses." In answering Professor
Rane's question, it would seem desirable to the Chair to discuss
this subject from the standpoint of his own State, if that answers
your question.

150

PROFESISOli EANE: Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the
Convention : In so far as Massachusetts is concerned, we have
this cliestnnt bark disease and we have also gone at it in what
seems to ns a practical way. I simply wish to give you an idea
of how we ate tackling the problem. In the first place, the dis-
ease was found scattered here and there. I made arrangements
with Dr. Metcalf, because I considered he was the man of the
hour to give us instructions and ideas, to go forward and carry
out this work. Dr. Metcalf came on to Boston and we went over
the whole proposition, and finally arranged to have a man come
on last spring and go over the whole State. He spent the
months of June, July, and August, visiting on a motorcycle all
the forest sections of the State, to study the problem, and we
found that the disease was far more prevalent than even Dr.
Metcalf realized. Now when the report came out from Dr. Met-
calf's assistant, the first idea he conveyed to us was that the
State of Massachusetts should call upon its Legislature for a
large sum of mone,y. Most of you know undoubtedly that we
have been tackling the gypsy and browntail moth problems, and
that these depredations, which have been pretty much confined
to Massachusetts, and more recently New Hampshire and
Maine have incurred much expense. Now we have been tackling
problems more or less of this sort and, as State Forester, I cer-
tainly did not wish to make the mistake of plunging into this
chestnut disease problem before I was sufficiently familiar with
it. We have a pretty thorough organization in Massachusetts
from the forestry management standpoint, and of the papers and
discussions tliat liave come up here, the one that pleased me per-
haps most was the talk that was given by Professor Baker of the
State College. Gentlemen, it seems to me that in spite of the
question of our needs for plant mycologists and specialists, that
the necessary thing is to get further at the root of the trouble, and
that is to introduce a better organization in this present develop-
ment of o~ur forest states and nation, a more definite forestry
management from a fundamental standj)oint. The whole prob-
lem, it strikes me, of insect and fungus depredations, is one of
looking a„t it and studying it from the broader viewpoint, namely
that of the system of forestry management. We have had the
gypsy and bro^Mitail moth work in Massachusetts, more or less

151

similar in a general way, to tiiis cliestnut disease. We arc spend-
ing in Masacliusetts practically a million dollars every year on
these insects. Furthermore, if Massachusetts had not taken hold
of this problem as it did, undoubtedly these moths would have
been into Pennsylvania by this time. But we have taken hold of
it and we have methods and we understand more about this prob-
lem than we possibly could without this large appropriation.
The business-like way in which the State took hold of it has
commended itself. The State of Massachusetts is greatly in-
terested as we have been discussing the pro and con as to means
and ideas with regard to this blight disease. It is the same
thing, going through the same thing only of another kind that
the gypsy moth tight in Massachusetts has been. Even some of
the best entomologists of the country seemed to think originally
that the attempt to destroy the moths was money thrown away,
but the people living in the infested country have appreciated
the importance of it and we realize to-day that the money has
been well spent. We have spent practically seven millions of
dollars on these insects. On this chestnut blight disease, there-
fore, we do not care to go to a big expenditure in Massachusetts.
What I have done thus far with this chestnut disease is to en-
deavor to S3^stematize the work and carry it out along the same
line that we are carrying out our gypsy and browntail moth de-
predation work and our general forestry work. Forest fires have
been mentioned. The economic importance of putting a stop to
forest fires came along after the moths came. One thing has
evolved into another. At the present time I veritably believe
that in certain sections of Massachusetts the gypsy moth has
been a blessing to those sections. Why? Because formerly
there was no system of forestry management and little forest
education developed. We have gone in, cleaned up stumps,
dead wood and debris, selected better species of various trees,
that are now protected, and in twenty to twenty-five years I
veritably believe the product will pay for all the expenses we
have been to up to the present time.

Now this question of the blight disease again : As I have looked
upon it, — my observations may not be very keen, — but as I have
looked upon it in my own mind, we find it where the conditions
are unbalanced. That is here appears to be the worst condition

152

we liave. I was out with a man owning seven tlionsand acres in
the western part of the State last Friday. The disease was the
worst where thinnings had been made and a few trees allowed to
stand because they were not large enough to cut into ties.
These forests were unbalanced and the air and sun allowed to
get in. The blight was on the southern side ; the cankers showed
up largely there. But in the stands where we had normal con-
ditions, we found ouly a diseased tree once in awhile. There is
an unbalancing condition again where forest fires have raged
through the State year after year and the trees are abnormal
and only half alive anyway. There you find the disease seems
to travel more rapidly than it does where the trees are under
normal conditions and have a forest floor where there is plenty
of moisture and the conditions are more favorable. I have gone
over it with some of our best practical men, lumber men, and
they seem to think that it is a problem that is going to solve
itself. They are good, practical men; they have been in the
business a great many years, and are reluctant to believe that we
Avill lose all our chestnuts. The way that we are endeavoring
to solve this problem in Massachusetts is this: I have a forest
Avarden in each town, who is appointed by the officials of the
town, subject to the approval of the State Forester. I am en-
deavoring to educate these men so that they will know this
disease. We have notified all of our papers throughout the State
that it is up to the people that own chestnut trees that they
become familiar with the disease; otherwise they are likely to
lose their chestnut stand. We are sending out literature. We
have just sent out a recent bulletin. Tlie idea of the bulletin
was to show photographs so that a man could take the bulletin
and go out and determine whether the disease is present or not.
We send men from the office, at the expense of the State, to
assist anybody in cutting out, at the same time giving them
ideas as to better forestry management; and with that the idea
of education, endeavoring to make the work self-sustaining, so
that the people will attend to it themselves and without neces-
sitating State expense. I believe the first law is preservation,
self-preservation, and I believe we ought to educate, ought to
put out more practical publications that people will read. If
boiled right down to the essence of the work, farmers will look

153

after their own trees, and I think forestry management will
ultimately solve the problem as much as anything. There are
lots of ideas that 1 would like to suggest; for instance, the com-
parative conditions as between insects and fungous diseases. We
have had a great time in handling the gyps}^ moth ; but in their
case we can see the egg clusters, while, when you come down
to a fungous disease, it is quite another proposition and a propo-
sition also that it seems to me we cannot begin to fathom so
quickly as one can in the handling of the insect. (Applause).

THE CHAIEMAN: Does anyone wisli to ask one short (pies-
tion of Professor Rane?

PEOFESSOR CLINTON: I understand when they began
the work in Massachusetts, they were going to locate the disease
and cut it all out, and that Professor Rane had the authority
to send, men into private woodlands of the farmers of the State
and destroy those trees, if he saw fit. He has not done that.
Why?

PROFESSOR RANE: As for the question of cutting out
the chestnut tree, that was our plan when Dr. Metcalf sent
liis man in, and we went all over it. I selected one of our best
woodchoppers and he was to follow along and wherever the ex-
pert found a tree, — Ave expected to find one in about every other
county in Massachusetts, — he was going to cut it out. This
fellow started out with an axe, and when we came to some old
trees that were about ten feet in circumference, and there was
some question as to whether the disease was there or not, but
they thought they had better cut it out anyway, this man did not
feel as if he was equal to the occasion. It was practically im-
possible to do anything along those lines and the trouble was
that, even among the experts, there was quite a discussion as to
whether the disease was prevalent or not. It is an impossible
problem to cut out under our conditions. The forestry manage-
ment end of handling the wood lot, and taking it out where you
can, I think is the practical solution.

THE CHAIRMAN: Connecticut.

PROFESSOR CLINTON : We have no appropriation in Con-
necticut to fight this trouble or to stop it. We have merely

154

carried on our investigations with tlis usual appropriations of
our State. We are asking for no special fund.

I have a paper which I desire to i3resent, and I want to state
that it is signed not only by myself as botanist, but also by Mr.
Spring, State Forester:

CHESTNUT BLIGHT SITUATION IN CONNECTICUT.

First Reports.

The first specimens of chestnut blight from Connecticut were
sent to the Exxjeriment Station in November, 1907, by F. V.
Stevens of Stamford, who had found the disease doing consider-
able damage in his region during that summer. He also stated
that he thought he had seen the disease in one or two other towns
in the state. Since that report, others have stated to us that
they had seen the disease earlier, but had not known its nature
at the time. For exam^Dle, Mr. G. H. Hollister, who is here to-
day, states that in the summer of 1905 he found a tree on the
Edgewood Park Estate at Greenwich that he now believes to
have had the blight. Our forester reports that a farmer in the
town of Easton also noticed the disease as early as 1905. These
three towns are all in Fairfield county, next to New York State.
Ill the winter of 1909, Mr. Newton J. Peck brought a specimen to
the Station from Woodbridge, New Haven County, and stated
that he had noticed the disease in his forest for four or five years.
So far, then, we have no information of the presence of the dis-
ease in Connecticut before 1905.

Subsequent Reports.

In the report of the Connecticut Experiment Station for 1908,
we noted the disease in twenty-two of the twenty-three towns
of Fairfield County, in eight towns of New Haven County, and
we had an unverified report of its occurrence in New London
County, in the eastern part of the State, making thirty-one towns
in all.

In the Station report for 1909-10, we listed the disease from
all the twenty-three towns of Fairfield County, twenty-one towns
of New Haven County, fourteen of Litchfield, seven of Hart-
ford, two of Middlesex, three of Tolland, one of Windham and
one of New London County. Thus we found the disease present

155

in all of the counties of the State, and in seventy-two of tlie
towns. Of these onl}^ seven towns were east of the Connecticut
River, but this region had not been carefully examined. At the
Albany conference, held October 19, 1911, we reported the dis-
ease present in one hundred and twenty towns of the State.
To-day (February, 1912) we have records of its presence in 164
of the 168 towns of the State (all but Ashford, Eastford, Put-
nam and Haddam), and we have every reason to believe that a
careful search would reveal its presence in these four towns.

Present Situation.

The present situation in Connecticut, then, is that we have
the disease in more or less abundance in practically every town.
We are surrounded on three sides by states that have the disease
more or less abundant in their diiferent counties. On the south,
we are separated by Long Island Sound from Long Island, which
also has the disease.

In Fairfield County as early as 1907, the disease was doing
considerable harm, and by 1909 it was very serious, while to-day,
from fifty to seventy-five per cent, of all tlie chestnuts are affected
or dead. New Haven County began to show evidence of trouble
in 3908, and at present the disease is present in most of the
forests and serious in many of them. Litchfield County did not
begin to show the trouble until 1909 and 1910, but last year it
was doing considerable damage there. Flartford and Middle-
sex counties also last year began to sliow its presence in their
forests, in some places very prominently. These counties are
all west of the Connecticut River. East of the river the trouble
is not nearly so general or abundant, but in some places in 1911
it was causing considerable damage.

The year 1911 more than any other seemed to be favorable
for the spread and injurious effects of the fungus. This we at-
tribute to the unusual drought of that year, lasting from early
spring until the last of July. This is the fifth and most severe of.
a series of drought years that we have had since 1907.

Control Work.

Our work in tlie field, besides locating the disease, has been
aloiis: the foUowino' lines:

156

(1) Studying the progress of the disease on marived trees.

(2). Setting out seedling chestnuts, including a feAV culti-
vated varieties, in infested forests, to see how the disease will
affect them.

(3). Attempting control in a badly diseased private forest by
the cutting out method. This did not prove of value, and after
two seasons we have discontinued the work. Opening up the
forest there seemed harmful to the chestnuts left, especially on
south and west exposures.

(4). Attempting control hj the cutting out method in a state
forest where the disease- was not conspicuous. This work has
just been started in our forest at Portland. Previous to 1911,
onl}^ a few diseased trees had been seen in this forest. Our pre-
liminar}^ survey this winter, hoAvever, has shown it now present
more abundantly than we expected. On account of tlie time it
took to locate the diseased trees and the labor and cost of cutting
them out, we cannot advocate this as a practical method for
-general use in the State, even if it proves successful, which we
doubt, since the disease is generally present in the neighbor-
hood.

Recommendations.

In Connecticut we are not asking the legislature for any
special appropriation to fight thi.s disease, and do not expect to.
We are taking no concerted action to control it and we do not
think this feasible. We are only occasionally advising cutting
out, when the disease first appears, as a possible, though not a
proved method of control. Where a wood lot as a whole is mer-
chantable, and the disease is present, we advocate that, if market
conditions are favorable, it be cut and disposed of in the ordi-
nary way. Where the trees are not as a whole of marketable
size, and the disease is present, we advocate.' the removal of the
dying trees, and their disposal as poles, ties or cord wood, as
their size may permit. We have no uniform recommendations
for treatment of sprout growth too small for market i)urposes.
We are trying to prevent a glut of the market by discouraging
wholesale cutting of the forests, and as yet we have noticed no
general glut and drop of prices except for cordwood in certain
towns, and for 7x9 ties, for which the demand on the part of

ir)7

the rciiJi'oads lias evidciidy j^oiie down. On Uk^ whole, liowciver.
there lias been more timber cut than usual. \Ve have no small
factories for the utilization of waste products, such as bark and
wood for tannin. The brass factories and the brick kilns use up
most of the chestnut cordAvood in their vicinities, thus preventing
much of a glut. Lime kilns also utilize considerable of the cord-
wood. A relatively small amount is made into charcoal.

THE CHAIIIM2VN: Are there any <iuestions for Professor
Clinton?

MR. OHESTEIl E. CHILD: I would like to ask Professor
Clinton vrhat was the result of the cutting out of the infected
trees on any tracts or estates he knows about; where the affected
trees were removed, what was the result on the trees that re
mained?

PROFESSOll CLINTON: That A\as on the estate of one of
the wealthiest men in Connecticut, so he had mone^^ enough to
cut them out if he wanted to. It was on the southern exposure of
a hill and we found that, where cut out, the trees left seemed
to suffer more from drought, etc., and be more injured by blight.
AVe also found that by cutting out the trees and not removing
the bark from the stumps, about thirty per cent, of those stumps
showed the disease present on the bark that was left. Up to
last summer the forests in the same region, on the northern ex-
posure, had'- not suffered much from blight. This gentleman
said that he Avould go on if we wanted to continue the experi-
ment, but he thought, as far as he was concerned, in the future
he would prefer to cut the trees as they died. That was not
a thorough, careful experiment like they are going to conduct
here in Pennsylvania, by cutting every diseased tree down an<l
burning the bark and all that, but it was about the way a prac-
tical man would do it,

THE CHAIRMAN: There is time for one more question, if
anyone desires to ask one.

]MR. THALHEIMER : Have you found out whether the con-
ditions differ between low and high ground and the exposure, on

158

the soiiUh'I'ii, iiorflKvni, or easleru and wrsturi] sidi'ts; that is,
whether you foiiiul any infected trees on the eastern side of the
mountain?

PE0FES80R CLINTON : It sIioays most frequently on tlie
eastern and southern side and around to the western and south-
ern side of exposed trees. That is, the more northern slopes are
generall}' less affected, in our experience. Examine the chestnut
trees in Fairmount Park in Philadelphia, and see if the blight
does not come out more on the western and southern side. Look
at your trees and see if you do not see injuries on that exposure,
that is, before the trouble becomes general.

THE CHAIRMAN : New York State.

MR. G. L. BARRUtS, of the Conservation Commission: Mr.
Chairman : First of all, I want to say that the commissioners
and Superintendent Pettis hoped to be here for this Conference,
but were unavoidably kept away, and I regret to say that we
have ]iot any detinite statistics to give as to the value of the
chestnut or the amount that has been destroyed. I think this
question has brought up the need of such stiitistics; if it has
not done anything more, it has brought up that need. We have
been conlining our efforts in New York, been confining this forest
policy to sixteen counties, which include the Adirondacks and
Catskills. About six million acres of forest land are included
in that area. Outside of that, there is another six million acres
of farm wood-lot land ,which has had little thought in the i^ast
as regards forest management. This question of chestnut bark
disease has brought our attention to this other six million acres
of land. If it has not done anything more, it has done that, and
we are now concerned in finding some Avay of branching out, tak-
ing care of and giving management to this portion of the forest
land of the State.

As to the distribution of the chestnut, I might say tliat we
sent about four thousand circular letters throughout the State,
asking if the chestnut was found in the towns where these differ-
ent persons resided, and asking if the chestnut bark disease was
present. The public showed their active interest in the subject
in the way they replied. We got over a thousand answers to
those letters, froin all p^rt^ of the State, and in that way we are

159

enabled to give a rongli map of Uie slate, showing Avliere the
ehcstimt is found and, to a eertaiii degree, wJiere the chestnut
disease is found.

We find that tlie chestnut belt of New Yoiiv State covers forty-
six per cent, of the total area of the State (approximately 2'A,-
000 square miles), and on that area I think it is conservative to
say tliere are thirty million dollars worth of chestnut timber.
The diseased area, or I miglit say the chestnut belt, .includes the
Hudson Valley and the southern part of the western half of the
State. The Adirondack region has no chestnut, and the same
may be said of the Catskill region. The diseased area is confined
primarily to the Hudson Valley, an.d includes one-quarter to one-
third of the chestnut belt. West of the Catskills, the chestnut
bark disease has been found in one case in Tioga Connty, on
the Pennsylvania line; one case in Broome County, near the
Pennsylvania line, and in two or three cases, in Delaware
County; a matter of from one to twenty trees in a batch. That
is the best information we have at the present time.

The loss due to the chestnut bark disease cannot l>e estimated,
inasmuch as we have not had the time and the money to put
men in the field in that portion of the district. We have con-
fined our attention to the outlying districts where the disease
was spreading, and I dare say there is at least ten million dol-
lars worth of timber that is already destroyed, or will be de-
stroyed before it can be ntilized. The problem of utilization is
a big one in New York State and, in order to do something in
this way, several conferences have been held in connection with
the Eastern Foresters' Association, and it was found that little
could be done to develop new markets for the chestnut. The
leather market and the tannic acid market seem to be flooded,
and in such a condition that it would not encourage any new
industries in the tannic acid business in New York State, the
tannic acid plants preferring the southern chestnut in most
cases rather than the New York chestnut. I do not think that
the chestnut is so much of a glut on the market at the present
time that it is necessary that New York State people should cut
out their trees and sell at a sacrifice. The poles have been taken

IGO

out gradually, aud tliat market is not flooded at the present
time. There is also a good market for cord wood iu most portions
of the State.

I just want to saj- one other thing in regard to Professor
Clinton's attitude to^^■ard this question : It seems to me that it
is an encouraging fact, if the points he has brought out are
found to be true; I think it is a most encouraging statement;
I think that if favorable weather conditions are going to help
to bring the chestnut back to increased vitality, so that it may
be able to resist this disease, I think it should encourage us to
eliminate as much of the infectious material as we can at the
present time, and thus aid nature in anything she can do to
restore the chestnut to vitality. In New York State we have
had several articles in the newspapers, bringing this subject be-
fore the people. We have gone about the work of finding out where
our chestnut stands are, and have had the wood-lot sections, as
I say, outside of the previouslj- reported preserved area, brought
to our attention. It occurs to me, who should get the credit for
bringing out tliese points? Who should get the credit for this
Conference here to-day? Who should get the credit for calling-
several conferences relative to the utilization of the chestnut,
and were those conferences worth while? It seems to me that it
should be given to the men who were willing to stake their scien-
tific reputations on something that could be tried, rather than ta
give it to the men who Avere afraid to stake their scientific repu-
tations, and who say, "It cannot be done." (Applause).

THE CHAIRMAN : Is there any inquiry regarding the New
York situation and methods?

ME. J. W. FISHEE, of Tennessee: I would like to know
what per cent, of old timber, as against young timber, is infected
by this disease; whether or not the young timber is the i)rinci-
pal timber that is infected.

ME. BAEEUS : In those sections of New York State where
the chestnut disease is present, most of the marketable timber
has been cut out, fire has gone through the remainder, and, as
the result, there is a great majority of the chestnut whicli is
sprout growth of small dimensions. I should estimate that

161

one-fifth of the chestnut is of merchantable size and perhaps,
in the district where the disease is, more than four-fifths is under
merchantable size.

ME. FISHEE : Does it not appear that the several years of
scant rainfall which the whole eastern country has endured, to-
gether with frequent fires in this young timber, is not this pos-
sibly one of the greatest sources of the disease?

ME. BAEEUS: I believe that is a question touching on the
technical and scientific side, and perhaps Professor Clinton

THE CHAIEMAN : As we are confined to State reports now,
we will ask Mr, Fisher kindly to let that question go until we get
into general discussion. The next is the State of New Jersey.

DE. MELVILLE T. COOK : Mr. Chairman. I regret that
the State Forester of New Jersey is not present. I have been in
the State only a short time, and so cannot speak first hand.
However, as most of you know, the State of New Jersey, being
close to that point where the disease is supposed to have origi-
nated in this country, has suifered probably more than any other
State, in proportion to its area and the amount of standing chest-
nut. The disease has swept through the State (excepting the
southern part) , and has proved extremely destructive. We have
no special appropriation for the study of the disease or for fight-
ing it, and I believe that you will all agree with me that such
a campaign as is being carried on in the State of Pennsylvania
would be absolutely impossible in the State of New Jersey at the
present time. We are, however, continuing our scientific investi-
gation, so far as possible, and wherever we receive inquiries from
farmers who are timber owners, reporting the disease present
on their properties, we advise them to turn their chestnut into
cash as quickly as possible, and to clean up as thoroughly as pos-
sible. We also advise persons contemplating planting chestnut
not to do so. We also advise the nurserymen to discontinue
handling chestnut stock at the present time. So far as possible,
we are stimulating the market by advising builders to use the
chestnut for interior trimmings.

I cannot say anything more in regard to our campaign in
New Jersey. However, I wish to give just one or two observa-

11

162

tions which I have made upon this disease : So far I have been
unable to confirm the observations of Dr. Clinton in regard to
the weather conditions. His observations may be absolutely cor-
rect, so far as the State of Connecticut is concerned, but in the
territory which I have examined it has been impossible to con-
firm them. I have on two occasions, found the disease in dense
timber on the sprouts, down under the heavy, large growth, when
it was impossible to find it in the tops of the trees or at any point
near the one on the ground line. I do not know how much
that observation will be worth to you, but undoubtedly the sur-
rounding trees in the vicinity Avere not so infected as to make it
noticeable in walking through the timber and making careful
observations. The only points where we could find the disease
at all were close to the ground, and the sprouts there were badly
infected.

THE CHAIRMAN: We will now hear from the State of
Pennsylvania. We will call on Deputy Forestry Commissioner
I. C. Williams.

MR. WILLIAMS: In speaking for Pennsylvania, I think
probably the subject has been well covered and that I should
say little. I want to say something, however, about the appear-
ance of the blight in the forest reserves. The Pennsylvania forest
reserves to-day are included within twenty-six different coun-
ties and aggregate nine hundred and seventy-two thousand acres.
The line of reserves on the west approximately follows the dark
line on the map, extending somewhat west of it on the north.
Beginning with Potter county, which is at the middle of the
northern line, and dropping a line southwestwardly to Avestern
Clearfield and then southwardly to eastern Westmoreland, you
will include east of such a line all the forest reserve counties.
The chestnut blight has appeared in the forest reserves equally
as it has appeared on private tracts. In the westernmost re-
serves, the foresters and other officers are busily at work seek-
ing it out and destroying every infected tree they find. The
Pennsylvania Department of Forestry proposes to take no
chances in leaving an infected tree stand, out toward the west.
That tree comes down. If we can sell it, well and good; if not,
it is converted into ashes to fertilize the ground, That is a method
that I think we shall continue to pursue.

163

I would like to say a word further with respect to the cutting-
out method. We have heard considerable in this series of meet-
ings about the importance of our doing things. Whenever I
hear a man talking about "impossibilities/' then something be-
gins to boil. I do not believe in "impossibilities" that are simply
guessed at. It was no impossibility for the Pennsylvania lumber-
men to sweep over this State from the Delaware to Ohio and
take down every merchantable tree within the State; and that
has been so completely done that Pennsylvania has figuratively
been combed of her merchantable forest trees. If it is not im-
possible to do a thing when there is a money reward behind it,
why is it impossible to do it when there is simply some altruistic
thing behind it? This method of dealing in impossibilities is
mighty misleading business, and I want you to know that we
believe it is so. The cutting-out of this diseased stuff in the
forest reserves, then, is going to continue. We propose to find
a market for it if we can; but if we cannot, it is going to be
destroyed. To that extent the Department will contribute its
small share to do what it can, to stop the westward advance of
this scourge. i ^ '

Let us not talk about impossibilities until we know we are up
blank against the stone wall. You have well gathered from the
uncertainty which has pervaded these meetings with respect to
methods and means, that it ought not to lie in the mouth of any-
body to come here and talk about impossibilities, especially with
regard to things that are not half way investigated. Let us in-
vestigate and work : not investigate first and work afterwards.
Let us get busy all along the line and, when we have utterly tried
out every method and are absolutely and abjectly defeated, then
it is time to talk about impossibilities. (Applause). >

THE CHAIRMAN : Is there any inquiry?

PROFESSOE SMITH: I should like to repeat the question
of Mr. J. W. Fisher, because I believe Mr. Williams is in posi-
tion to throw some light on it. We have had a great deal of
trouble with fat lands near Philadelphia, on the lands of rich
men, where forest fires are unknown. What has been the testi-
mony there witli regard to this climatic matter?

164

ME. WILLIxlMS : I happened to be in charge of that Main
Line investigation, and probabl}^ Ivnow something about it. We
found there all conditions of forest growth. We found that ma-
ture forest giants, running up in diameter anywhere from five
to seven feet, and we found the tiny sprout coming out of the
stump. We found the infection attacking trees of all sizes. It
seemed not to prefer any particular age or size of tree. I have
in mind to-day a splendid old tree belonging to a gentleman
living near Philadelphia, that was worked on by a tree doctor.
He punched it full of lioles with his climbing spurs, and in a
few months afterwards that tree was infected from top to bottom
in those punctures. That was a tree, the owner told me for which
he would not take a thousand dollars if it were possible to save
it. In working on a tract to the north of Philadelphia, near
Jenkintown, we found large timber prevailing in the area. There
were some three hundred and forty trees in the tract. The trees
probably averaged over a foot in diameter. We found that in
the top of the largest trees there was occasionally a single dead
branch, and that alwa^^s, of course, excited attention; but the
minute investigation that was made of the tree was at the ground
line, about the trunk; and almost invariably, in those big trees,
when y^^e found any suggestion of infection in the top, we found
pustules nearly at the ground line, and it made no difference
what the size of the tree was. We likeAvise found sprouts no
thicker than a straw badly infected, and from that size up to
the giant forest tree. Frequently we found pustules at the base
of large trees, but were unable to find anything in the crown
of the tree. With the strongest spyglasses which we carried
with us, we could pick out nothing; but getting down on our
knees and going around the base with a hand magnifier, almost
invariably, where the disease was in the neighborhood, we would
find a pustule or two on the base of the tree, and of course that
classed it as infected. I take it that this disease shows no prefer-
ence in trees, and, while it is probably true that it will attack
somewhat more readily the young, sappy sprout growth and kill
it much more quickly, it is equally certain to do its Avork with
the older trees.

THE CHAIEMAN: Does that answer the question, Mr.
Fisher?

165
ME. FISHER : Yes, sir.

DR. J. M. BAOKENSTOE, of Pennsylvania : Mr. Chairman :
I would like to ask the sjjeaker with reference to the treatment
that was given to these thousand dollar trees.

MR. WILLIAMS : AVe came in contact with a good many
interesting propositions down there, and we were visited by tree
doctors from the day we arrived until the day we left. When we
went in they implored us, and when we went out they cursed
us. One of the methods of treatment was that they would
prune oti" every infected piece of bark or branch, and cover the
wound with some dressing. But in the process of doing this
work, they used telephone linemen's climbers. This they thought
was the proper thing, so they did it. AVe discouraged that and
finally broke it up. V\'e did not think that method of treatment
was good. Then we wer«^ met with the idea of throwing some
chemical on the ground, in order tliat when the rains would dis-
solve this material, it would enter the soil and be taken up by
the roots. Generally, we were met with a i3roposition to buy
some of the material and try it ourselves. It was most infre-
quent that we found these things were being tried by the people
who recommended them. Then there was the idea of introduc-
ing into the sap of the tree some medication. There was an-
other idea, with respect to watering the tree. The plan advo-
cated by gentlemen engaged in the business was, that they would
take a large chestnut tree, say three feet in diameter, and after
some examination conclude, just empirically, that it was suffer-
ing because of lack of water. That may have been entirely true ;
but the method of treatment was to run down a series of two-foot
lengths of ty>'0-inch gas pipes, or one-inch pipes, as the case
might be, at a short distance from the trunk of the tree, and then
turn a hose into the pipes aixl moisten tlie ground. I believe if
those pipes had been put down at the proper place, good results
might have followed. Water might have been introduced into
the feeding roots of the tree. But it is of little value to intro-
duce water under the tree near the trunk, where there is little
absorption from the ground. There were other methods of treat-
ment advocated. I do not remember them all now, but they
have been tried out there pretty generously. Men who are

166

owners of trees of that character, wishing to preserve them if
possible, have paid large sums of money to allow treatment to
be applied, but I do not know of any instance yet where it may
be said that any particular treatment has been a complete suc-
cess. Occasionally, and very frequently of late, we have been
reading about methods of treatment in the newspapers, Avhere
men say they have just the thing. For instance, we had a letter
the other day from a gentleman in northern Ohio. He said
he had a preparation that would kill the chestnut blight and he
wanted us to buy it right off. Now, there is no chestnut blight
in Ohio, and I take it that this man had never seen a blighted
tree and does not know what the chestnut blight is; yet there he
has the remedy all prepared. Much of this remedial business
is just of that character. I believe also there is an opportunity
to try out a lot of remedies and get some results, but there are
no results of value to be had from jumping at conclusions and
saying ''This thing will do the work," or that thing, until we
know it actually has done it. Therefore, the Commission is
giving all reasonable latitude to these gentlemen w^ho have any-
thing of the kind to offer, and every opportunity to try out their
methods, in the hope that something will be found that will do
some good. That is part of the Pennsylvania proposition, to let
nothing be untried, even if it does not produce results.

THE CHAIRMAN : If that does not fully answer Mr. Back-
enstoe's question, we will ask him to bring it up later. The
question was with reference to the treatment of thousand dollar
trees.

MR. WILLIAMS : iill trees down there are thousand dollar
trees.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delaware.

PROFESSOR C. A. McCUE : The chestnut grows naturally
in the two northern counties of Delaware. It is found in the
southern county only here and there, and mostly in plantations.
The disease is common over the entire State. While I do not
say that it would be impossible to quarantine against this dis-
ease in the State of Delaware, I do say that, considering the
Avay we have the disease now, it would not be a good proposition
in the State. I am not in favor of the State of Delaware ap-

167

propriating any public money for methods of eradication of this
particular disease. I think the disease is scattered too generally
throughout the State. We have no need of a quarantine line
on the east, because we have the Delaware Kiver and the ocean,
nor on the west because our friends over in Maryland already
have the disease. The Chesapeake Bay does not seem to have
stopped it on the west. I think our solution of the problem,
if we have any, lies in the question of management, and I am
rather loath to believe that even the chestnut is entirely doomed
in the State of Delaware, even where the infection is as general
as it is, as I believe, — I am optimistic in the matter, — that with
proper management, brought about with proper educational pro-
paganda, we will be growing chestnuts in some manner, a great
many years hence. We have many chestnut plantations in our
State. We are not advising our growers to plant chestnuts for
nut culture, neither are Ave advising the planting of chestnut
trees in our forests. But we believe that, by cutting out dis-
eased trees, especially the larger trees, as soon as their useful-
ness passes, and putting them upon the market,— that is, when
the annual increment falls down below the amount of damage
done annually by the disease, — ^that in this way, the disease may
be gradually eliminated, to such an extent, that in certain locali-
ties, finally all the diseased chestnut trees will have been taken
out, I believe, that there will still be left a number of chestnut
trees that have never taken the disease. By proper management
and by encouraging people to take out trees as they become dis-
eased, I believe that in years hence, we will still find a great
many chestnut trees growing in our Delaware forests.

There is another point regarding infection, which I have
not heard spoken of here, that has come under my observation.
I have noticed that where hunters are allowed in young coppice
growth that a great many of the young sprouts are injured by
the shot, and that in areas infected by the chestnut disease that
every shot hole offers a point of entrance for the disease. Hunters
should not be allowed in young cliestnut coppice.

Having, as we do in Delaware, a number of chestnut orchards,
it throws a rather interesting light upon the question of drought
as a predisposing cause of the chestnut disease. Those orchards
are under cultivation the same as our apple orchards. They

168

are not suffering from drought, neither are they suffering from
a scanty food supply. They are in good, thrifty condition. We
find that practically every chestnut orchard in the State is in-
fected with the chestnut disease. In Delaware, at least, I am
not inclined to believe thnt drought plays any part whatever in
the chestnut disease problem.

THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any question?

PROFESSOR NORTON : I would like to ask if the blight is
equally bad on the Japanese chestnuts?

PROFESSOR McCUE: It would be rather hard to answer
that question definitely, because I do not know whether we have
any simon-pure Jaj)anese chestnuts in Delaware or not. We
have a lot of varieties called Japanese, but the probabilities are
they are natural hybrids with tiie American; yet we have found
infection in tlie so-called Japiiuese chestnuts the same as in the
American.

MR. WILLIAMS: What is Delaware doing to prevent the
shipment of infected stock beyond the borders of the State?

PROFESSOR McCUE: With the permission of the Chair,
I will refer that question to the secretary of the State Board of
Agriculture, Professor Webb, who has charge of the nursery
inspection work of the State.

THE CHAIRMAN : Professor Webb, will you please inform
us what Delaware is doing to i^revent the shipment of infected
nursery stock beyond the borders of the State.

PROFESSOR WEBB : I believe at the present time we have
no nurseries growing chestnut trees, but, if diseased chestnut
were found in them, the trees would be destroyed.

THE CHAIRMAN : Maryland, As one of the secretaries of
the Conference, we have present Maryland's State Forester, Mr.
F. W. Besley.

MR. BESLEY : As far as the chestnut bark disease is con-
cerned, I think all eyes are on Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania has
established, as it were, a great experiment station for the treat-
ment of the chestnut bark disease, and we are all looking with

169

a great deal of interest to the results which may be accomplished
through this work. I came up liere for the purpose of listening.
I want to hear what has been done. I hoped that we might have
some definite cases where the chestnut bark disease had been
eradicated from specific spots. It should be remembered at
this time that, Pennsylvania has only taken it up recently. There
has been less tlian a year's operation of the new law and of
course, we cannot expect very extensive results, but it seems to
me, and it has already been pointed out by a number of speakers,
that there is the necessity at this time of treating individual
trees and of keeping an accurate record of them, so that we will
know exactly what we may expect in the way of eradicating the
disease. Professor Clinton has spoken of certain diseased trees
that were cut out, and he mentioned the fact that the bark was
left on the stumps. We know absolutely tjhat where the bark is
left on the stump of a diseased tree, in which the spores very na-
turally work down the tree we are pretty apt to find them around
the base; so, of course, we cannot consider that a very effective
way of treating the tree, or a fair test of the cutting-out process.
What we want to find out is where somebody has treated a tree,
cut the tree out, then destroyed the bark, and kept a record of
that for some years, two or three years, possibly, to see if there
is any recurrence of the infection. I was talking with Dr. Met-
calf sometime ago along that line and he says that, in the vicinity
of Washington, they have for the past two or three years carried
on a rather extensive campaign for the detection and eradication
of the disease, and I think I am correct in the statement that he
has located certain spots, cut the disease out, and there has not
been a recurrence of the disease. I should much prefer to have
that statement come from Dr. Metcalf, or somebody from the
Bureau of Plant Industry; but, if that is the case, this Confer-
ence ought to know about it, because it seems to me there is a
ray of hope there that we may be able to combat this disease.
There is, of course, as shown by this Conference, a general in-
terest in this bark disease, and I cannot help but believe that a
Conference of this sort is going to lead to very productive re-
sults. The interest in Maryland is a very important one. We
realize that it is necessary for us to do something noic, if we are
going to do anything at all. We find that the disease has spread

170

over the eastern and northeastern sections of the State. Per-
haps one-fonrth of the State has been generally invaded. Prob-
ably abont five per cent, of the chestnut trees in the area is lost
up to the present time, and I may say this is based on an investi-
gation of last summer to determine the extent of the damage
caused by the chestnut bark disease in Maryland. I might say
also that this investigation wdB prompted, at least, by the very
excellent example that we have in Pennsylvania, because we felt
that Ave might use it as data, not only for the State of I\Iaryland
in trying to control the chestnut bark disease, if it is possible to
do so, but for other States in co-operation with the State of Penn-
sylvania. We found that the amount of damage up to the present
time was about thirty thousand dollars, that is, the stumpage
value of the chestnut trees, and in the area of infection that the
stumpage value of the chestnut was something like six hundred
thousand dollars. The disease appears' to be spreading very
rapidly. The total stumpage value of all the chestnut in Mary-
land is something like two million dollars. So, if there is some
way by which we can control the chestnut bark disease, it is
going to mean a great deal to the forest interests of the State.
What we propose to do, — and we have already started the ma-
chinery going, but the results of this Conference are going to
determine very largely the manner in which we are going to
press that, — we thought it might be possible, by establishing
a sort of dead line just outside the area of infection to prevent
the spread of the disease. Now I do not know whether that is
practicable or not, but it seemed to be the only solution offered
at the time, and in carrying out that idea Ave have introduced a
bill, Avhicli is practically a copy of the Penns3ivania laAv, into
the Legislature of Maryland, noAv in session, carrying a small ap-
propriation for the purpose of putting this Avork into operation.
NoAV we have had several people speak about the management
of the chestnut as being perhaps the solution of the difficulty.
It seems to me that AA'here a man has the chestnut bark disease
in his woods, it would be simply commonsense business policy to
cut out those diseased trees and utilize them wherever possible,
and I think we can depend on the individual land owner to do
that. Now whether it Avill be possible for us to go much further
than that in recommending the prompt cutting out and utiliza-

171

tion, where possible, of the diseased chestnut trees, I am not pre-
pared to say. I doubt whether it will be possible to go any far-
ther than that, but it seems to me, outside of this area of general
infection, if we can establish a sort of quarantine zone beyond
which we can protect the rest of the chestnut trees in the State,
that the work Avill be well worth while, and that is the line along
which we are proceeding at the present time. Now as to the
question of management, I think that simply by cutting out dis-
eased trees and by a coppice management of the chestnut, I
do not see how that is going to eliminate the disease, because we
know definitely that the stumps are more apt to be diseased, and
this infects the sprouts as soon as they come up. I have seen
that time and time again over the State of Maryland, that those
sprouts become immediatel}^ diseased, and the whole tree dies
very quickly. What has been done has furnished the basis of
the proposed work, and I hope that we will be able to evolve from
this Conference some definite programme, which other States can
adopt with some hope of ultimately controlling the chestnut
bark disease. I realize that it is a very big proposition, and we
are not going to do it all at once ; but I think by concerted action
and a definite policy, we will certainly be able to limit the de-
struction by this disease, which has already done such an im-
mense amount of damage in the northern States. (Applause).

THE CHAIRMAN : Are there any questions?

MR. BRAUNBERG, of Pennsylvania: Are those approxi-
mate figures you gave of the damage already occurring in the
State of Maryland to the chestnut trees? You made an approxi-
mate estimate of the damage to the chestnut trees, also an ap-
proximate estimate of the value of the chestnut trees. May I
have those figures?

MR. BESLEY: The present damage was estimated at fifty
thousand dollars, based on a stumpage basis, and the total stump-
age value of the chestnut in Maryland is about two million dol-
lars.

THE CHAIRMAN : Mr. Detwiler will comment on one point
raised by Mr. Besley.

172

ME. DETWILER : Mr. Besley asked for some definite facts
concerning the efficiency of the cutting-ont method. I have
some facts, which are not conclusive, but may be of interest.
Mr. Peirce, Secretary of the Commission, cut several hundred
trees on his property, near Ardmore, last year. The stumps were
barked to the ground and the sprouts came up abundantly.
Two weeks ago I sent one of our fields agents to investigate thor-
oughly, and he reported being unable to find a single sprout dis-
eased, and those sprouts are now a year old. It may be that
after two years they will be diseased, but at the present time
they are still sound.

THE CHAIRMAN: Virginia.

DR. H. S. REED : Mr. Chairman : The Experiment Station
has studied the chestnut blight in a small way, since we have
had, up to the present time, very little complaint of diseased
chestnut in the State. We have heard, though, from several
here at this meeting, that there are a few centres of infection in
the State. We know the disease is present just across the Poto-
mac from Washington, and we know it is present in Bedford
county, at Fontella. AVe have reports, however, which have not
been fully verified, of the disease in Albemarle county and also
in Henrico county, near Richmond. I went over the last named
territory with Dr. INIetcalf last fall, but we were unable to find
the disease in the field. We have, however, in the State, a dis-
ease wiiich has existed for about twenty years and has caused a
very considerable destruction of chestnut timber, south and
east of Lynchburg. I visited this region about ten days ago
and found there a fungous disease, of which we have not yet been
able to determine the exact nature. Some of the gentlemen whf)
are here have found the DiaportliG fungus near Lynchburg. If
the DiaportJie fniigus has been there for the last twenty years,
it is evident that it is acting somewhat differently from what
it is act'ng in the North. We have this question under observa-
tion. The diseased areas are at present confined to the Piedmont
district; none has been reported from higher elevations in the
Blue Ridge or Allegheny mountains in the State. There is a
bill before the Legislature now in session, asking for a small ap-
propriation to be used against this disease, which will not per-

173

mit of any extensive eradication, bnt we liope to use it in getting
a good survey of the damage which has already been done and to
get a basis for future recommendations.

THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any inquries regarding the
situation and methods in Virginia? The next State is West Vir-
ginia,

PROF. GIDDINGS : I will make my remarks brief, because
we have done but little in West Virginia in regard to it. So
far as we actually know, there were three infections in West
Virginia. Those were scattered through the State; one in the
central part, one in the northern part, and one fairly well south
in the State. One of them came from nursery stock. The tree
was purchased from a nursery, set out by a lumber man, and he
discovered that there was something wrong. That tree has been
destroyed. One of the other diseased areas, in the northern
part of the State, we believe has been destroyed through lumber-
ing operations which have been going on there, as I understand
the infected trees could not be found last fall. We undoubtedly
have more of the disease, especially along the northern border
and near the Pennsylvania line, as there is considerable infection
in the southwestern portion of that State. We hope to get some
work done during the coming season. I know that a number
of interested parties will make a very strong effort to have at
least a small amount of careful work done in West Virginia to
determine the prevalence of the disease in certain sections of the
State. We cannot hope to do much, but our Legislature will
meet a year from now and if conditions warrant, there will, I
am sure, be no trouble in securing funds to continue the work.
The possible losses in West Virginia are considerable. I have
secured several estimates as to the chestnut stand in the State.
One firm which is reported as doing the largest lumbering busi-
ness in the State, dealing in timber land and well acquainted
with the subject, places the present stumpage at ten billion feet.
As proof and in support of their statement, they gave me reliable
data in regard to the chestnut stand in some regions of the
State. A stumpage value of |2.50 per thousand, which they
quoted, would make twenty-five million dollars for the chestnut

174

in West Virgiuia, and certainly some effort will be made to deter-
mine the extent of infection and the best methods of handling
the disease in the State.

MK. BESLEY, (acting temporarily as Chairman) : Are
there any questions to be asked Professor Giddings? The next
is Ohio; is there anyone to represent the State of Ohio? (No re-
sponse).

North Carolina. Is there anyone to speak for North Carolina?
(No response).

We will next hear from Tennessee.

MR. J. W. FISHER: Mr. Chairman: As far as I know,
there is no infection in Tennessee. We are extremely interested
in the matter, because we have such a vast area of chestnut forest,
and a very large amount of it is the original forest. W^e have
very far-siglited Congressmen down our way, who have been for-
tifj'ing, or are about to fortif}^ us against such infection, by hav-
ing a bill passed through Congress appropriating one million dol-
lars, to establish forest reserves in western North Carolina and
eastern Tennessee, known as the Appalachian Region. Just last
week the Government purchased eighty-five thousand acres near
me, in eastern Tennessee, for a forest reserve, and will continue
to i)urchase large areas, so that we will have the backing of the
Federal Government in the fighting of this disease in the future.
I shall, however, call tbe personal attention of the Governor to
this matter, so that we may take it up ourselves, as a State,
and I trust that, when the matter comes to our attenion per-
sonally, we shall have some means that will help to battle with
the disease, if it should occur. I am very much interested in
listening to these discussions, and I think I shall go home very
greatly profited. As I am a tanner and an extract man, I am
personally and financially interested in the prevention of any
loss of chestnut timber. I might say to you, for your information,
that a large number of the trees in our country are very old.
The Federal Government inspectors who have been in those
forests have placed the age of those trees from two hundred to
four hundred years, and some of them range as high as eight
feet in diameter, — immense trees. The area is so large and the
chestnut timber growing so thickly that it affects us, or would

175

affect us, vitally in a number of directions. The water supplj
or Avater sources will be vitally affected if this disease should
get the better of us and cover very much of our vast territory.
I assure you that none of you are more vitally interested in this
matter than the people of Tennessee, for the great reason that
we have so much chestnut.

THE CHAIKMAN: Is there any inquiry from Tennessee?
The next is Canada, Dr. Gussow.

DE. H. T. GUSSOW: I do not think I need to take up the
time of the meeting this morning. I have already expressed my
observation that the disease is not present in Canada, and that
we have very few chestnuts. I have come here to profit by your
information, which I am grateful to say, 1 have been able to do.

THE CHAIRMAN, (Mr. Pearson) : The Chair committed a
slight error in suggesting that President McFarland would be
available to make suggestions regarding seeing the city. He
should have mentioned jMr. Bell, who was mentioned by Presi-
dent McFarland, and who will be available after this meeting.

I have been requested to make the following announcement :
Please inform this meeting that a good photographer will be at
the main entrance immediately after adjournment to take a group
photograjjh, — at the main entrance where the statuary is. The
size of this will be 11 x 14 and the price one dollar per copy
for those who desire to get copies. It is urged that each one go
at once to the main entrance, so as to be in this photograph,
whether you choose to buy it or not.

Deputy Commissioner AVilliams will present a communication
from the President of the United States.

ME. WILLIAMS: The following letter accompanied by cer-
tain documents, has just been received by Governor Tener, and
I am requested to present it to this meeting:

"White House, Washington, February 19, 1912.
My dear Governor :

I herewith enclose a communication from the Secretary of
the Department of Agriculture, in which he gives all the infor-

17G

matioii wliicli is available in Lis Department upon the question
of the chestnut bark disease which is to be considered in a pub-
lic meeting in your capital to-morrow.

I hope that this communication may contain certain informa-
tion of value to your people in fighting this very destructive
enemy of one of our most beautiful trees, and you have my very
earnest sympathy in your efforts to accomplish the desired end.

Sincerely yours,
(Signed) W. H. TAFT."

(Applause).

MR. WILLIAMS: This is accompanied by a letter of Secre-
tary Wilson, transmitting the information requested by the
President, a copy of Bulletin No. 467, and a statement of the
present status of the chestnut bark disease, signed by William
A. Taylor, acting chief of Bureau.

It was moved and secondetl that the communication be re-
ferred to the Committee on Resolutions.
The motion Was put and carried.

The letter of Secretary Wilson, referred to above in the letter
from President Taf t, is as follows : .

'^Department of Agriculture,

Office of the Secretary,
Washington, February 19, 1912.
Dear Mr. President :

Our experts in the Bureau of Plant Industry have given the
chestnut bark disease situation much attention for some time
past, and are convinced of the urgency of the present situation.
They have prepared the inclosed memorandum which indicates
the present status of the chestnut bark disease and the import-
ance of prompt action, if its further spread is to be prevented and
serious loss to the people of the entire Appalachian region is
to be averted.

Sincerely yours,

(Signed) JAMES WILSON,

Secretary.
To the President."

The communication referred to in Secretary Wilson's letter
to the President, indicating the present status of the chestnut
bark disease, is as follows:

177

United States Departuient of Agriculture,

Bureau of Plant Industry,
Office of Chief of Bureau.

Wasllingto^, D. C, February 19, 1912.

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY.

Regarding present status of chestnut hark disease.

This disease, which was first recognized as serious in the
vicinity of New York City in 1904, appears to have been present
on Long Island as early as 1893. Its origin is unknown, but
there is some evidence to indicate that it was imported from
the orient with the Japanese chestnut. In southwestern Con-
necticut, southeastern New York and northeastern New Jersey
a majority of the chestnut trees are already dead from the bark
disease. Outside of this area in western Connecticut, eastern New
York, western New Jersey, southeastern Pennsylvania, northern
Delaware, and northeastern Mar^^land the chestnut trees are
practically all infected. Outside of this area from the northern
border of Massachusetts and from Saratoga county. New York,
southwestward to the western border of Pennsylvania and the
southern border of Virginia, scattering areas of infection are
known to occur and may be expected at any point. So far as is
known the disease is limited to the true chestnuts and chinqua-
pins. It is not certainly knowni to occur on oaks, beeches, horse
chestnuts, or other forest trees.

The bark disease appears ultimately to exterminate the chest-
nut trees in any locality Avhich it infests. The financial loss
from this disease in and about New York ('ity was estimated
three years ago at between five and ten million dollars. A conser-
vative estimate made in 1911 by the experts in the Bureau of
Plant Industry indicates a loss in the states infected, up to that
time, of twenty-five million dollars. The heaviest damage thus
far has been to chestnut trees in localities where this species
is grown chiefly for ornamental purposes, rather than for lum-
ber. It has now reached a point in its spread where the entire
chestnut timber belt of the United States, comprising portions

12

178

of the States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachu-
setts, Khode Island, Connecticut, New York, New, Jersey, Penn-
sylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Ohio,
Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Georgia, Alabama and Mississixjpi are likely to become involved.
As the disease is spread from tree to tree by spores of the fun-
gus which causes it, the spread is usually rapid after a single
tree in a locality is infected.

There is evidence that the spores are spread through short dis-
tances by rain; through longer distances it appears possible that
it is spread also by birds, insects and rodents, such as squirrels.
The disease is carried bodily for considerable distances in tan
bark and in unbarked timber derived from diseased trees. It
is also frequently transported on diseased nursery stock.

No method of immunizing individual trees is yet known and
no method of treating or curing them wiien once attacked is
certain in its results. This being the case, so far as the chestnut
forests are concerned, the only practicable method of dealing
with the situation is that of prompt location of isolated centers
of infection in advance of the main line of the disease, coupled
with the prompt cutting out and destruction of such scattered
diseased trees. This method has been tested sufficiently to in-
dicate that it is practicable to control the disease where the
situation is effectively attacked before a general infection has
resulted. In addition to this it may be found necessary to es-
tablish an immune zone by destroying all chestnut trees, diseased
or healthly, in a belt ten to twenty miles wide, or possibly less,
in advance of the main area of infection, with a view to barring
its progress. A regional quarantine of chestnut products likely
to move from the area of complete infection to protected terri-
tory may be found necessary. This is now a subject of con-
sideration in the investigations that are under way.

The disease having already done much damage in eastern Penn-
sylvania and northeastern Maryland, but not having appeared
to a destructive extent in the states farther south, it is peculiarly
important at this time that effort be made to stay the progress of
the disease before it reaches the heavily timbered chestnut are^s
of Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia, and the mountain regions
farther south. The fact that the State of Pennsylvania has ap-

179

propriated |275,000 for the eradication or control of the disease
within its borders is an indication of the importance witli which
the matter is regarded there. (Congressional action with a view
to making possible effective co-operative ett'ort to control the
disease by Federal authorities in co-operation with the authori-
ties of the several states interested, before it is spread to a point
beyond control, appears to be of the utmost importance.

Very truly yours,

(Signed) WM. A. TAYLOR,

Acting Chief of Bureau.

NOTE, — ^The accompanying document sent with the Presi-
dent's letter, "Farmers' Bulletin, No. 467," is not reprinted here-
in, but may be obtained without charge upon request, from the
United States Department of Agriculture, AVashington, D, C.
This Document is entitled "The Control of the Chestnut Bark
Disease," by Haven Metcalf and J. Franklin Collins, Issued
under date of October 28, 1911.

THE CHAIRMAN : The programme now calls for coming to-
gether at two o'clock, and the first paper will be by Dr. Hop-
kins, on the insect question. No one can regret more than the
Chairman that the general discussion has been crowded out this
morning. Would it seem wise to begin our meeting this after-
noon at a quarter before two, in order that we may have a. little
more time?

MR. WILLIAMS: I make that motion.
The motion was seconded and duly carried.

THE CHAIRMAN: I am asked to announce that the pro-
fessional foresters, — all professional foresters, are invited to meet
in this room at 1.30 P. M., fifteen minutes before our meeting-
time, for some general purpose.

MR. WILLIAMS : I wish to announce that the Committee on
Resolutions will meet in the House Caucus room, immediately
beneath this chamber, after adjournment, this morning.

The Chairman announced that the Convention stood in re-
cess until 1.45 P. M.

180

AFTEKNOOK SESSION.

Wednesday, February 21, 1912, 1.45 P. M.

THE CHAIKMAN: The meeting will please be in order.
We are to have first this afternoon, a paper by Dr. A. D. Hopkins,
who is in charge of forest insect investigations. Bureau of Ento-
mology, U. S. Department of Agriculture.

DE. HOPKINS: Mr. Chairman: I regret exceedingly that
the insects are interfering in this trouble, and making more of
it. Heaven knows tliey are maldng enough trouble of their own
all over the country. They are killing the merchantable sized
pine in the Kocky Mountains and on the Pacific Coast at a
greater rate than that by fire alone. They are killing the pine
in the South. They are killing the hickory, they are killing th}
oak and the hemlock, and now they are interfering in this dis-
ease. They are also killing chestnut on their own account.

Mr. Chairman, I have two papers here, both about the same
thing. One is an abstract which will take about ten minutes;
the other is the whole paper, wliich will take about half an hour.
I presume you would like to have tlie abstract, which will take
less time.

THE CHAIRMAN : I presume it would be better to give us
the abstract, and then, if there is more time available, let it
be spent in general discussion. Will tliat meet with your ap-
proval ?

DR. HOPKINS : Yes ; that is what I intended to do.

Dr. Hopkins read the following paper :

While the history of the discovery of the chestnut blight dis-
ease and its spread from a local to an interstate problem is well
known and much interest is manifested in the subject, the history
of extensive dying of chestnut from various other causes is not
so well known.

When we review the history of extensive dying of chestnut
during the past half century in Mississippi, Tennessee, Georgia,
South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia, it is surprising

^o-fecT.or- ■''.■*t: 2 5*.

CULT

Map showing range of the chestnut tree, and comparative percentage of the
chestnut bark disease.

181

that there are any living trees left. In fact, there are not many
left in some sections of these States where the tree was abundant
and healthy fifty years ago.

It appears that there are a number of agencies of destruction
other than this new chestnut blight disease, and that these agen-
cies have been in operation in the area affected by the disease as
well as in areas where this disease is not known to occur. There-
fore, they must be taken into consideration and investigated
before the problem of protecting the chestnut can be solved.

There appear to be other diseases and we know that there are
insects which have been directly or indirectly the cause of the
death of a large percentage of the chestnut over extensive areas.

One species of insect, the tAvo-lined chestnut borer, is perhaps
the most destructive insect enemy. It has been investigated
and methods of controlling it determined and demonstrated,
and there is no lack of published information on the subject.

There is also a combination of insects and the chestnut blight
disease. Investigations by forest pathologists have revealed the
fact that the spores of the chestnut blight find their way into the
living bark through some wound and that the majority of such
wounds appear to be caused by bark-boring insects.

Becent investigations by forest entomologists tend to verify
this general statement, and that a large number of species of
insects are involved.

Inasmuch as the insects make a primary attack and the dis-
ease is largely dependent upon insects to continue its destructive
work, it is also plain that we have an insect problem of perhaps
equal importance to that of the blight itself.

It is also plaiji that this interrelation of insects and disease
presents a new and complicated problem which will require a
great deal of exact scientific research by the forest entomologists
and the forest pathologists before we shall be warranted in ar-
riving at definite conclusions, or in giving specific advice on
methods of control and prevention.

Considerable work has already been done on the general sub-
ject of chestnut insects by the West Virginia Agricultural Ex-
periment Station and the Bureau of Entomology of the U. S.
Department of Agriculture since 1893. The published and un-
published records of these studies show that three hundred and

182

fifty-four species of insects were found to inhabit the chestnut.
We find that other observers have recorded one hundred and
sixty-four species. IJy eliminating all duplications, the total
is four hundred and seventy-two. So you see that the chestnut
is pretty well inhabited by insects. This is only a beginning.
There are many more insects to be found on the tree and a great
deal to be learned about thein as a basis for practical conclu-
sions and action. A more specific and comprehensive study of
chestnut insects is now being carried on under a special project
of the Branch of Forest Insects of the Bureau of Entomology.
This investigation will Ite extended into all parts of the country
where tlie cliestnut is, or lias been, an important forest tree, and
especially iii those States and sections wliere the people represent-
ing the private, municipal, and State ownership manifest a
special interest in this pliase of tlie problem. We are assured of
the co-operation of the Commission and other State officials in
the work carried on in Pennsylvania and we hope to have the
co-operation of other States in any work done within their boun-
daries.

Possibilities of Control.

You will note that I am not discussing the control of the dis-
ease, because I do not pretend to know anything about that, but
that, as the insects are related to the trouble and the primary
cause of the wounds, we must consider control of the insects as
a primary measure.

In the consideration of the possibilities of controling depre-
dations by the insects, it nmy be stated that under certain con-
ditions of public interest, witli facilities for utilization of the
affected product, and Avitli a knowledge of the fundamental facts
and principles relating to the deprecbitors and their control, it
is entirely jjossible and as a business proposition it will pay.

On the other hand, it has been forcibl}^ demonstrated in >i
number of cases that have come under our observation that any
direct attempt to condiat an insect depredator without a knoAAl-
edge of essential facts and principles will result in failure and
a waste of energy and money. It has been shown that a few hun-
dred dollars expended in practical application after the essen-
tial facts have been determined Avill accomplish more than many
thousands of dollars expended without such knowledge. In

183

other words, practical api>licatioii iimst follow and not precede
scientific investigation and expert advice, just as legislation for
the control of forest insects to yield good results must follow
and not precede education on the principles and methods of con-
trol.

The steps toward the successful protection of forest trees from
their insect enemies are:

1. Investigations to determine the essential facts about the
principal insects which are capable of killing the trees.

2. Concentration of the investigations on the most imj)ort-
ant species to determine their seasonal history and habits, and
the most economical and effectual methods of preventing serious
depredations by them.

3. Dissemination of authoritative information on the essen-
tial facts and principles of control and prevention, by means
of circulars, press notices, lectures, special field instructions, and
field demonstrations.

4. Practical application of this information by the owners
of affected and threatened timber, under a strict adherence to
the recommendations.

I might pause at this point, to make it clear, that we are con-
ducting now and have conducted a number of practical demon-
strations to prove that our recommendations Avill work, and we
have proved it in a nund>er of cases. In one case last summer,
involving the cutting of over twenty thousand trees, over a very
large area in Oregon we demonstrated the practicability of con-
trolling one of the worst insect enemies of western forests. In
one locality in Montana over ten thousand trees were cut by
private owners, small owners. They cut the timber and worked
it into fuel and burned it during the winter and sto]>i>ed insect
depredations which had been going on for twenty or thirty years
and killing an enormous amount of tind>er. The timber stopped
dying the next year. I had a letter informing me, just before I
came here, that over one hundred Indians were cutting and bark-
ing timber according to our recommendations in an Indian reser-
vation in eastern Montana. This is a demonstration project, and
the Indians are so much interested that they have authorized the
expenditure of ten thousand dollars, and they are cutting the
timber and barking it themselves. This, we believe, is almost

184

certain to be a success, and we will be prouder of it than any-
thing else we have done, because it shows that, if the Indians can
do it, anybody else can do it.

Continuing my paper, in conclusion, I want to say that in
our general investigations and practical demonstrations, we have
recognized that the State and Federal governments can render
the greatest service through investigations and the dissemination
of information and that it is the owner who should make the
practical application. Therefore, this chestnut problem is the
people's problem and especially that of the people who are owners
of valuable natural or cultivated growth. It seems to me that the
()nly way the successful protection of the chestnut resources of
the country can be brought about will be through individual and
co-operative action by the owners. They are the ones to be di-
rectly benefited, financially and otherwise. I am sure that, as a
rule, they are anxious to do everything they can afford to do,
if someone will show them how and demonstrate to them that, as
a business proposition, it will pay. They will then not only try
to protect their owu timber but they will realize that there is
a common interest involved and Avill be impelled to help their
neighbors, their county, and their State.

I have some photographs here Avhich I took in 1903 in North
Carolina, showing the extensive dying of chestnut there. The
chestnut, practically dead as far as you could see in every direc-
tion, the white, barkless trunks appearing as ghost trees in the
forest. I have also a list of the insects found on chestnut, which
of course you do not want me to read.

THE CHAIKMAN : Dr. Hopkins lias some photographs here
illustrating some of tlie insect pests, and I am sure he will be
glad to show them to those who' are interested, after this session
is over. The paper of Dr. Hopkins is open for discussion. I
know he will be glad to answer questions that may arise pertain-
ing to the relation of the insects to the chestnut bark disease, or
any other questions that may come up in relation thereto.

DR. MURRILL, of New York : I would like to ask Dr. Hop-
kins how far these beetles which attack the chestnut have been
known to go from tree to tree in a forest?

185

DK. HOPKINS: That is not known. We have no way of
determining how far they will go. But they have wings and can
fly. There is no reason why tliey should not go long distances.

DE. REED, of Virginia: I would like to ask Jiow many of
these insects are borers in the chestnut that would inflict any
wound in the bark which would be large enough to allow infec-
tion by a fungus?

DR. HOPKINS : There are a number of insects which may
cause wounds which will give entrance to the spores. When the
insects hatch from the eggs, they are almost microscopic ; there-
fore, the burrows made going into the bark will hardly give en-
trance to the spores unless there is a flow of sap from these small
wounds, which sometimes happens. My observation in Virginia
and the section south of Washington indicates that there is a
disease, possibly a bacterial one, which does get into these minute
wounds, on account of a small amount of the sap oozing out,
and in that way it works into the cambium. This is only a pos-
sibility which has been suggested time and time again to me by
my observations ; perhaps it acounts for the fact that great num-
bers of dead trees in the South, do not show any traces of insects.
The trees die and the bark falls off and yet they show no evi-
dence of insects. Of course, the majority of dead trees do show
such evidence. We have had a man down in North Carolina in
1903-1904 studying the insects, and trying to determine the cause
of the extensive death of the timber in that state, and there was
no doubt that a great many of the trees were killed by insects,
but that insects were not the cause of all of the trouble.

DR. REED : Is there any part of the tree which is invariably
attacked by these insects, or does it occur generally on the
tree?

DR. HOPKINS : The principal point of attack, the most vital
part of a tree, is the middle trunk. We have found, in the study
of insects which kill trees, that they attack the middle portion
of the trunk. They girdle the tree at that point. The two-
lined chestnut borer does this especially. Other insects attack
all parts of the tree including the leaves, and some of them are
associated with the chestnut blight, as has been determined by
Mr. Craighead, who has been carrying on work under my instruc-
tion here in Pennsylvania.

186

ME. BAEKUS, of NeAV York: I would like to ask: Is there
auy case where the larva of the insect is found under the bark,
and the mycelium of the fungus is found radiating from the
burrow of that insect? I would like to know whether that is
known to Dr. Hopkins, and whether that means anything rela-
tive to the spread of the disease? Would it be possible that the
spores of the fungus were deposited at the same time the insect
was deposited there in the egg, and a mycelium growth had gone
on parallel with the development of the larva?

DE. HOPKINS : That is a problem yet to be solved. It is
a problem in which we will have to co-operate with the forest
pathologists. We are studying that feature of the problem. We
find insects undoubtedly associated with the disease. We find
them going into the perfectly healthy bark of some trees and we
find the disease following them. We find also that insects go
into the healthy bark or other trees, and the disease does not
follow^; so that it is one of the complex problems to be worked
out. I think it is absolutely necessary to work out a few of these
problems before we can do much towards control. I think it will
save money. We certainh' ought to know something about what
we are doing.

ME. BAEEUS : A number of articles have been sent in for
identification, reported as the work of insects which had not
worked in healthy trees, and I wondered whether it was meant
by that whether those insects would work on a tree after it had
lost a certain degree of vitality, even before the tree had died.

DE. HOPKINS : It depends on the species. There are very
few people who can recognize the different species of insects in
the larval stage. We have specialists Avorking on this now. The
identification of species from the larval stage is something the
general entomoligist cannot do. Any assumption, from the larval
form alone, that certain insects will do so and so, is mere guess-
work. Some species of insects will bore in the living bark. Others
can not possibly exist in the living 43ark but must bore in the
dying, dead or decaying bark. There are many species, as this
list shows, over four hundred and seventy-two species, and out
of those there are only a very few which attack perfectly healthy

1S7

trees. So that the others live in various ways. If a lot of in-
sects is foiiiid ill a diseased tree, we must know wliieli of these are
the insects that attack the living hark and wliich come in after
the bark begins to die, or aftei- it is dead, and whether or not any
of them can carry spores after they transformed into the adult
stage and come out. I doubt whether the relation of insects is
as important a factor as has' been suggested, because as a rule
when insects develop to the adult or winged stage, and emerge
from the bark, they fly away very quickly, as if to escape some
enemy. Tliey do not as a rule crawl about over the bark before
they fly.

MR. W. HOWARD RANKIN, of Ithaca, New York : Can you
tell us wdiether in your estimation, the Leptura species of borer
precede infections of the blight, or follow it?

DR. HOPKINS : That is a problem Ave are working on, but
we are not ready to form an oi)inion on it. It will require a sum-
mer's work before we can state definitely just what relation they
have to the disease and the dying of trees.

MR. RANKIN : I would also like to ask the Doctor if he is
acquainted with some chestnut trouble in Otsego county. New
York? There is a lot of chestnut dying in that locality from
what I took to be insect trouble.

THE CHAIRMAN: Mr Rankin calls attention to apparent
losses caused by insects in Otsego county, New York

DR. HOPKINS : The matter has not yet come to my atten-
tion.

THE CHAIRMAN : Are there further questions?

PROFESSOR CLINTON : I would like to ask Dr. Hopkins if,
during the past few years, the insect troubles of trees in general
have been on the increase or decrease, over the previous ten or
fifteen years?

DR. HOPKINS : I have been studying the subject in rela-
tion to dying timber for the past tw^enty years, or since I started
to study forest insects, and the question of climate has been one
to which we have given considerable attention; because every
time trees start to die someone comes up and says they are dying

188

from drought, or if it is a wet season tliey claim tliey are dying
from wet weather. We have demonstrated conclusively, I think,
that insect troubles do not depend on drought. In fact, the
most destructive insects work better under moist conditions.
So far as the relative abundance now and formerly is concerned,
it is the habit of all destructive insects to be very destructive for
a series of years and then practically disappear. This is, under
natural conditions they go in waves. There is no particular
period, but whenever the conditions, whatever they may be, are
favorable for their rajDid increase, and their enemies are not
present in numbers, they start another invasion and sometimes
kill off nearly all their host trees. The most striking example
of the complete extermination of an insect throughout a vast
area was in 1893. In 1891 and 1892 the pine throughout West
Virginia and Virginia was dying at an enormous rate. We
found that it was being killed by the southern pine beetle, which
was threatening the total destruction of all the timber in those
two States, and did kill from seventy-five to eighty per cent, of
the best merchantable timber. In the winter of 1893, in January,
it was twenty-five degrees below zero in many sections in this
area. The next spring when we went into the woods to continue
our investigations, we found all of the broods of this beetle dead,
and as we continued the investigation we found them dead all
over the area. Since that time to the present, there has not been
a single specimen of that beetle found in the area mentioned.
This is an example of climatic influence. If we could have some-
thing of that character come along and clean out the chestnut
blight, it would settle all this trouble; but we can not depend
on such things to happen. This killing of the southern pine
beetle by cold was due to the fact that it is a southern insect
which had worked its wa}^ northward during mild seasons, so
that when the extreme cold came it was exterminated. This
cold did not kill any of the local insects that were working in
the bark with it. The same insect is now threatening the de-
struction of the timber throughout the southern States. Our
work in the south during the past summer has led to the exten-
sive cutting of infested trees by the owners in carrying out our
recommendations, and T think the beetle will be controlled.

189

THE CHAIRMAN: You will all be pleased to know that
Governor Tener very willingly accepted an invitation to come in
and say a few Avords this afternoon before our final adjourn-
ment.

This morning, after considerable labor, we formulated some
rules to govern a discussion that never occurred. It occurs to
the Chairman that it might be well to open up the subjects of
the morning" session, in connection Avith the one subject pre-
sented this afternoon, under the rule adopted this morning and
continue along that line until the Committee on Eesolutions is
ready to report. If no objection to that proposal is made, it will
be understood that it is the wish of the Conference so to pro-
ceed, having the paper presented by Dr. Hopkins and the papers
presented before us this morning for discussion on a three-
minute rule.

DR. MICKLEBOROUGH, of Brooklyn : Mr. Chairman and
Gentlemen : I have given some four years of study, more or less,
to this fungous disease causing the death of the chestnut trees.
A great many of you have seen the pamphlet Avhich I wrote for
the State of Pennsylvania. I am indebted for my first knowl-
edge of this subject to the gentlemen just in front of me, Dr.
Murrill, of New York. My attention in 1907 was called to it in
Forest Park in Brooklyn. Let me say a word or two to those
who are using the microscope. I think perhaps one or two errors
may have been stated here, and I Avant to call attention to the
spores that are developed by this fungus, the Diaporthe para-
sitica.

This fungus produces four kinds of spores. The two most
abundant and generally found are the sac spores in the winter
stage and those other spores in thread masses called conidial
spores, and which are present in the summer stage. Besides these
there will be found in some specimens, numerous small spores
(or cells) which are developed in a flask or perithecium called
a spermagonium. These very minute spores (or cells) of the
spermagonium are called si^ermatia. Besides being very small
they possess great motility. There is a fourth kind also de-
\eloped in a flask or perithecium AA^hich is called a pycnidium.

190

The pycnidial spores (or sporules) are from two and a half to
three times the length of the conidial spores. The sporules are
borne on pedicels and are not contained in sacs as are the winter
spores. A pycnidinm may properly be called a stylosporous
perithecium. These four kinds of spores, vary in size and are
of a different origin. The condial spores are the only kind not
produced in perithecia or flask-shaped bodies. The conidial
spores are borne on filiform, simple hyphae. The sac spores
are called sporidia, the thread mass are conidia, the minute
spores (or cells) are the spermatia, and the pycnidial product are
the sporules.

THE CHAIRMAN: Doctor, I tliink I will have to ask for
unanimous consent, because we have now gone to the limit of our
rule.

DR. MICKLEBOROUGH: I would ask consent tliat I may
be able to present a statement that I think is of some importance
in the work which I have been doing just latel}^

THE CHAIRMAN: Can you give us an idea of the time?

DR. MICJKLEBOROUCH : I will take just a few minutes.

THE CHAIRMAN: Dr. Mickleborough asks unanimous con-
sent that he proceed for a few minutes to complete this state-
ment. It seems to be necessary to ask that, because we are work-
ing under a rule. Is there objection? If not, the consent is
given.

DR. MICKLEBOROUGH: I will take up the other feature.
I have had under consideration all forms of sprays and Cutting
and things of that kind, and have examined the cuttings in many
parts of New York State and also in Pennsylvania. I want to
make this statement, not to produce any sensation or create any
false impression : Within the last five months I have had as-
sociated Avith me in this work an experienced bacteriologist, and
last Friday I called upon my associate and I asked him to give
me the language that I might use as to what we had accomplished
up to this time in trying to find an entirely different remedy for
the chestnut tree blight. I will read you the words that he ap-
proved of last Friday ; that was February 17, 1912 :

191

"The work has advanced sufficiently to state that temporary
immunity is assured to a certain degree." That means over
certain areas and over smaller things with which we have had
to deal in the bacteriological laboratory. "And spore develop-
ment in affected areas has been arrested."

Now we have started out largely with the idea that dog will
eat dog and that we will have to meet this from the bacteriolo-
gical standpoint. I do not know ; and I do not promise success.
We are going ahead with this work and many experiments will
have to be preformed this spring. I am not sure that we are
going to be successful, anl I am not going to tell you whether it
is going to be a toxin or an anti-toxin, as we might call it, or a
serum which can be used.

MK. STEVENS: This is a very interesting paper and we
enjoyed it; but we have taken up so far in our Conference the
negative side of the question and, with the limited time left, I
think we have all we can do to consider Avays and means of pro-
cedure. I think it should be the sense of the meeting that we
should give the remaining two hours of time to positive work,
in the procedure of the work of this Conference.

DR. MICKLEBOKOUGH : I have no desire to prolong this
discussion at all against the wish and the unanimous consent of
the Conference, and 1 am not Avishing to create a false impres-
sion. What we may be able to produce I do not know. I do
know this, that it is something that ought to be encouraged,
just as much as when the sleeping sickness in Africa killed a
million of the tribes of Africa. The white man did not say, "Let
them die'' but rose up, as a man, the rebel in nature, and said
"I will not die, but I will destroy that which is destroying me."'
and I am taking that position now. We are trying to see if there
is not something that can be done to destroy the chestnut tree
blight. I yield to the gentleman ; if there is any objection, I do
not wish to continue.

THE CHAIEMAN: The matter before us comprises the
papers of this morning, with their various bearings, and the
paper of the afternoon. There are four distinct subjects.

DR. SMITH: There has been a manifest desire that all pos-
sible information be given here of the experiments of Dr. Metcalfe

192

whose publication lias raised the hope that the dead line is to be
effective. Possibly Dr. Crowell can tell ns something about it,
or some other member of the Department.

THE CHAIKMAN: That would be eminently proper under
the rule guiding us at the presene time. We would be glad to
here from Dr. Crowell for three minutes, and extend the time,
if the Conference desires; either Dr. Crowell of Professor Col-
lins will speak.

PKOFESSOR COLLINS: Mr. Besley made the remark, I
do not remember whether it was this morning or not, that he
would like to have some positive statements. I am prompted to
say a few words about the matter. I should have said them
before, only the discussion seemed to be so close on to the time
limit that I thought perhaps a little more favorable opportunity
might occur later.

In reply, if we can regard it a reply to the question of Mr,
Besley and Professor Smith, I would like to say a few words in
regard to the cutting-out experiment around Washington. You
must remember that in the Farmer's Bulletin which has been
published, the statement is made that those experiments were
conducted chiefly hj the senior writer, which is Dr. Metcalf.
We are all sorry that he cannot be here to tell you more about
this. Unfortunately I have visited only a few of these places
personally. Here is a statement, however, which I would like
to read in connection with that :

In Farmer's Bulletin 467, p. 11, we made the following state-
ments regarding certain experiments which had been performed
at that time to test different methods of controlling the disease
by cutting out advance infections :

"The country within approximately thirty-five miles of Wash-
ington, D. C. was chosen in the fall of 1908 as preliminary ter-
ritory in which to test this method of control. This section has
since been gone over fairly thoroughly once a year. As will be
seen by Fig. 1, fourteen points of infection were located and the
infected trees destroyed. Most of this work was done by the
senior writer. The largest infection was a group of nursery
trees that had been imported from New Jersey; the smallest, a
single lesion on a small branch of a large forest tree. In one

193

case eleven forest trees in a group were infected, the original
infection having been two trees, dating apparently from as early
as 1907. Up to the present time (June, 1911) the disease has not
reappeared at any point where eliminated and the country with-
in a radius of approximately thirty-live miles from Washington
is apparently free from the bark disaese, although new infections
must be looked for as long as the disease remains elsewhere
unchecked. It is therefore believed that this method of attack
will prove equally practicable in other localities, and if carried
out on a large scale will result ultimately in the control of the
bark disease."

Since June, two new points of infection, dating probably from
1910, and a third suspicious point have been discovered within
this area. This was expected, as above. If the results of legis-
lation this winter show that an effort will be made to control the
disease in Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia,
these points of infection and any others that may be found will
be destroyed in the spring. Otherwise the experiment will be
abandoned, except for keeping a record of previous cuttings.

Since Christmas six of the fourteen points above referred to
have been visited. In one case where only diseased limbs were
removed and the balance of the tree left standing, the tree has
become infected. This was expected; we have always recom-
mended complete destruction of diseased trees. At tw^o points
the diseased trees were cut, but the stumps left unbarked. This
we believe to be bad practice, but in spite of this the stumps are
still with one exception unaffected. In the other three cases
the trees were entirely destroyed, and the disease has not reap-
peared in the vicinity. The regular inspection of all fourteen
points will be made again in May and June, after the leaves are
out, as has been our previous practice.

Only indicative conclusions can be drawn from the above ex-
periment until at least six more years have passed. It should be
borne in mind that this is an experiment, not a demonstration.
The experiment should in any case have been duplicated in var-
ious parts of the country. It is not too late to do this now ; even
in States where it is too late to attempt general control, local

13

19i

cutting-out experiments can be made, and the end will give re-
sults of great value, on account of the difference in local condit-
ions.

DR. MUERILL, of New York: Mr. Chairman: I wish to
speak just for a moment in reply to the preceding paper, and
I wish to speak very briefly and plainly, as to why the chestnut
canker cannot be controlled by cutting-out method proposed:

1. It is impossible to locate all advance infections, these not
being apparent even under close inspections.

2. It is practically impossible to cut and burn all infected trees
after their discovery.

3. Even if these trees are cut, it is impossible to discover and
eradicate the numerous infections originating from millions of
spores produced on these trees and distributed by birds, insects,
squirrels, wind, and rain.

4. Even if it were possible to cut and burn all affected trees,
for ten or twenty years afterAvards numbers of sprouts would
grow up from the roots of these trees and continue to die from
the disease and to spread the infection.

5. Supposing that it might be possible to eradicate all ad-
vance infections, what method is proposed that is at all feasible
for combating tlie disease in its main line of advance? All of
the foresters connected with the United States Government and
the entire Army of the United States would be utterly powerless
to oppose its progress.

6. Although the chestnut canker has been known and experi-
mented with since 1905, there is not a single instance where an
individual tree or a grove of trees affected by the disease has
been saved. If it is impossible to combat the canker under the
most favorable circumstances, how would it be possible to suc-
ceed with an extensive forest? The published account of the
extermination of the chestnut canker in the vicinity of Wash-
ington, D. C, upon which experiment the requests for state
appropriations are said to be founded, cannot be relied upon.
The trees most conspicuously affected there have been cut and
burned, so that the presence of the disease is not readily appar-
ent, but with each season additional trees will be affected and

195

the attempt to t-tay the disease will be abondoned, especially
when the main line of advance, which is now in northern Mary-
land, reaches the Potomac Kiver. (Applause).

MR. CASSELL, of Philadelphia: I wish to say to Dr. Murrill
that I will be glad any time to show him trees that have been
treated for two years and are alive to-day and apparently quite
healthy. (Applause).

PEOFESSOR STEWART: Mr. (^lairman: I wisli to speak
of two points mentioned by Professor Collins in connection with
the AVashington experiment. I think tliat he has left the im-
pression that those points of infection discovered after June,
1911, could be regarded as noAV infections. Now, one of them,
which we examined. Professor Collins says must have occurred
in 1910, and I quite agree with him that it occurred as early
as that; and perhaps earlier. That certainly cannot be regarded
as a new infection. Anotlier point: Professor Collins states that
in those two cases where the trees were cut and the stumps left
unbarked, that tlie disease has not reappeared. Perhaps he did
not put it quite that way; I believe he said, "they are not now^ In-
fected." Now on the 30th of December last, when we examined
them (Dr. Metcalf, Prof. Collins and others being present), we
found the fungus on the bark of one of those stumps, and also at
the base of an adjoining tree, as stated in iny paper.

MR. I. C. AVILLIAMS : Mr Cliairman : I wish to direct the
attention of this Conference to the character of some of the
scientific investigation that is going on with respect to chestnut
blight disease. I think we have a right to know what some
scientists are doing, what they are saying and what they are at-
tempting to do. It is for that purpose, therefore, that I have
brought before 3^ou a copy of the report of the New York State
Museum, and I wish to read you a short paragraph therefrom.
On page 7 of that report it is written as follows :

"While there (referring to a locality which was visited)
my attention was called to a diseased chestnut tree. It
was a young tree, Avitli sickly looking foliage and a few dead
branches. It was suffering from the chestnut bark disease,
caused by a parasitic bark fungus. Both branches and trunk
were affected by the fungus, the latter dead a few feet above the

196

ground. It was my first opportunity to see a tree affected by
this disease, about wliich much that appears to me to be over-
drawn and needlessly alarming has recently been published in
magazines and newspapers."

This is dated Albany, May 15, 1911. You will bear in mind
that the writer admits having seen but one diseased tree from
which he draws that conclusion; and (to Dr. Murrill), if my
friend will just bear with me a moment, he will get an oppor-
tunity when I am through.

THE CUAIEMAN: The three-minute limit having expired,
we will understand, unless there is objection, that Mr. Williams
has unanimous consent to continue.

MR. WILLIAMS : I hold before this meeting that it is a case
of ridiculous and a1)surd foolishness for a man to come out in
a public print of that character and, as a reputable scientific man,
wishing to be taken seriously, say that because he has seen one
diseased tree he regards this thing as needlessly alarming, and all
trumped up and in the air. If that is the kind of scientific aid
we are getting, then much of our scientific work is useless.
Much of it is just as useless as tlie conclusions that were drawn
here yesterday from some of the papers read. They are simply
guesses in the future, strokes in the dark ; they amount to noth-
ing. One man can guess at something as well as another. If
the practical men of America are to pin their faith to guesswork
resulting from the cursory examination of one tree, then I say
it is pretty nearly time to call off the scientists and let us look
to somebody else.

PROFESSOR CLINTON: The politicians.

MR. WILLIAMS : Yes, sir, they will help. You will find that
when a politician sees something good, he goes for it and
generally gets it. He, at least, has courage enough to try.

In regard to the article just read before you, I happened to have
a copy of that in my hand. I suppose the gentleman who read
it is somewhat mystified as to how I got it; but if he desires to
know, the information may be had. It may be interesting to
this meeting to know that it was one of his pre-Convention efforts
in some way to cook up a sentiment, or an apparent sentiment,

197

against what possibly niiglit be done at this meeting, and was
accompanied by such a letter as 1 rather expected would never be
written.

The first statement is : "It is impossible to locate all advance
infections, these not being apparent even under close inspection."

I deny the assertion. Advance infections can readily be found
if the man looking for them knows his business. In time every
tree will develop to such a stage in its infection that it may
readily be detected. There is no hidden m^^stery about this
disease. All you have to do is to know it and find it. It takes
probably repeated searching, but when you go out for a thing
you search until you get it. You do not look for it in a des-
ultory way and then say "It is impossible to find all advance
infections."

"It is practically impossible to cut and burn all infected trees
after their discovery."

Who for a minute will believe that i( is impossible to burn a
tree if you cut it down?

"Even if these trees are cut, it is impossible to discover and
eradicate the numerous infections originating from millions of
spores produced on these trees and distributed by birds, insects,
squirrels, wind and rain."

If we cannot eradicate, we nmy check. We may do something
that will be beneficial, and if it is impossible to do as stated in
paragraph 3, then let us do the next best thing. Let us not
quit because some one thinks that it probably is impossible, but
let us go ahead and do the best we can. I question the pro-
priety of anyone engaged in work of this kind and in relation to
this disease being ready to give up after the first effort.

"Even if it were impossible to cut and burn all affected trees,
for ten to twenty years afterwards numbers of sprouts would
grow up from the roots of these trees and continue to die from
the disease and to spread the infection."

I would like to know whether that observation is based upon
facts, or whether it is a mere guess, an assumption. An incident
was cited to you this morning where a number of infected trees
were cut out of a grove near Philadelphia. The bark was care-
fully taken from the stumps, burned, every infected portion of
tree that could be found was destroyed, and the sprouts from

198

those stumps have come up in a fine, thrifty manner. To dale
they show no infection. That is not complete evidence, of course,
but it is an indication. It is an indication that these stumps
will sprout again and they may possibly be kept free from infec-
tion. How much easier it is to go back to the stumps and cut
the small sprouts than to search for tlie disease on tall forest
trees. "Supposing that it might be possible to eradicate all ad-
vance infections, what method is proposed that is at all feas-
ible for combating the disease in its main line of advance? All
of the foresters connected with the United States Government
and the entire Army of the United States would be utterly power-
less to oppose its progress."

I would like to ask how that was arrived at. By what xjrocess
of calculation has that statement been derived? I would like to
ask what method they propose. Do they have a method? Is
there any method that is worth anytliing at all? Now if there
is, let us use it. If there is not, let us look for one. We are in-
terested in looking for one. We claim no metliod tlmt is of great
virtue, but we do claim tliat we are intei'ested in looking for a
method, and tliat is tlie thing we want to do.

"When an af)propriation is asked for, it is customary to point
to some good reason for hope of success provided the ajDpropria-
tion is obtained." In other words, you must solve your prob-
lem before you get the money to solve it. If that is the way the
States of the United States are doing business, then I think
they had better reform their methods of business quickly. If
that is the way the scientific men of the United States do their
work, I think it is well for them to get wise.

Now Mr. Chairman, I do not want to be misconstrued. I
want to be fair to these gentlemen, and I am fair. But I doubt
Avhether it is just the thing for them, in this present uncertain
state of our knowledge, to stand as they do, utterly oblivious to
any decent attempt to do anything, to relegate that all to the
shades and simply conclude, as a matter of a 'priori inference,
tliat this thing cannot be done, and therefore drop the whole
business.

I would like to raise another question. I would like to ask
the gentlemen from around the neighborhood of New York city

199

\vhether, if they had been really active and alert and on the firing
line when this thing was discovered in 1904, might they not have
accomplished some real thing which wonld have redonnded to the
benefit of the otlier States, as Massachnsetts has done in her
gypsy moth fight? (Applanse). If instead of sitting down
and nnrsing their hands in idleness and allowing this sconrge
to go on, simply because they could not originate sufficient in-
terest in their States, they had gone out and done what they
could, this thing would probably not have come upon us. The
assumption is quite as valid as many we have heard from the
other side.

Now Mr. Chairman, in work of this kind I think it just and
right that those who are interested in it should all pull together.
If w^e do not agree upon methods, if we are not agreed as to our
conclusions, why not each work out these conclusions for him-
self? Why not each interested person. State, or organization,
endeavor to do what he or it can? We would regard it as
our everlasting shame and disgrace if we had sat dow^n and per-
mitted this disease to sweep on without raising a hand against
it. We have the finest kind of illustrations of success in work
of this kind. Did the United States Goverment cease to pursue
its investigations and its practical work in the eradication of
yelloAV fever simply because it took a hundred years to get to
some tangible result? Finally they have solved the yellow fever
problem. They have done it with the aid of the scientist, and
we welcome his effort, but we want it to be on scientific grounds.
New Jersey has been plagued with mosquitoes since time imme-
morial, I presume ; but have the citizens of New Jersey ever failed
to screen their windows against mosquitoes because the scientists
of the State have not succeeded in working out a method of
eradication that is effective? There is a lot of homely illus-
tration of effort where we are engaged in doing what we can in
an endeavor to find out something that will be really useful,
tangible, and effective.

Tliat is the keynote of our work liere. I would like this Con-
vention to carry away with it the idea that we are in this work
just for what ever result we can accomplish, and we do not care
in what direction tlie inquiry goes. That makes no difference
whatever. What do we care whether this fungus went on a

ii-i

foreign trip some years ago and then came back in disguise and
is now setting up business at the old stand? The thing is with
us, is before us, and we want to deal with the concrete present.
The other is interesting historically, but let that be as it may.
The thing to do is to deal Avith the problems that are with us;
and when we have dealt with them to the best of our knowledge
and then failed, we have used our whole effort and I think we
have discharged our duty to the public. (Applause).

PEOFESSOE SUEFACE: Mr. Chairman: I should like to
direct our thoughts to a subject which I think has, in part, es-
caped our attention in discussing the excellent paper of Dr.
Hopkins. He has brought our attention to the fact that there
a^?e four hundred and seventy-two species of insects known to
attack the chesnut tree, and a great number of these are borers.
He has brought our attention to the fact that those borers make
two holes in the tree, one as the young larva forces its way in and
one as it comes out as a mature beetle. It has been shown that
the fungus germ or spore enters where the bark is injured or punc-
tured. Thus we see that each insect boring in the tree makes two
places of injury where the spore germs can enter, and thus it
makes a possibility of damage at two places, although as a rule
they are not far apart. Now let us remember that the natural
and chief enemies by all means of these borers are the wood-
peckers, and the natural enemies of these four hundred and
seventy-two species of insects are the birds of the forest. It
has been said that the Avoodpeckers carry the disease germs;
but let us not infer for a minute that the woodpecker should
be exterminated for so doing, for, were all the woodpeckers
utterly destroyed, there would practically be just as much dis-
semination of these disease germs as if the woodpeckers were
all present. These germs are carried readily by the wind. In
the same way the robin, for example, has been accused of spread-
ing the San Jose scale. If all the robins were destroyed the San
Jose scale would be carried just as much as if the robins were
present. The fact that in passing from one injured place to
another there may be some germs on the bill of the woodpecker
does not argue against that beneficial bird of our forest. I
wish to go on record as saying that one of the most efficient

201

methods of fighting this blight is to preserve the birds and par-
ticularly the woodpeckers, which destroy these borers. I have
before me sections of branches that have been bored by insects
and woodpeckers having been taken out, showing their beneficial
work. It appears to me, then, that the impression should be
corrected as to the possibility of preventing the spread of the
germs by destroying woodpeckers. Preserve the woodpeckers
and other insectivorous birds and prevent the spread of the in-
fection. (Applause)

DR. MURRILL : Mr. Chairman : 1 have been accused of
using ^'pre-Convention methods." I had no intention whatever
of that purpose. I am not a politician at all. When I got back
from the Pacific Coast I found there had been a Convention or a
Conference, in Albany, and I found that New York State, my
own State, had made certain recommendations for an appropria-
tion. I deemed that unwise, that is, to ask for a large appropria-
tion, so I immediately took steps to write to the Governor and
to write to some of the representatives and I took the matter up,
entirely as a citizen of New York State. It was my duty to the
State. Later I heard something about an appropriation in the
Legislature of Virginia, my native State, and at once took the
matter up Avith the Governor of that State. It is a copy of this
letter which the speaker before (Mr. Williams) had for discus-
sion.

As to sitting down and doing nothing, for twenty years I have
been working on diseases of trees. For the last seven years
I have known this fungus. Immediately when I found it, when
the affected trees were shoAvn me by Mr. Merkel, I began the
most industrious investigation of it, and I venture to say that
many of those present have been guided to a knowledge of it
througli ray extensive correspondence on the subject.

Now for a programme, I have that also. I do not believe in
butting our heads against a wall and wasting the public money
uselessly. I believe in carrying on investigations a little fur-
ther and, if possible, in finding some rational method, so that
we can use our funds to much better advantage. I should say,
keep in touch with the disease in every stage; survey and locate
it, but do not locate it with reference to eradication, because I
deem that impossible. Devote this year, at least, to scientific in-

202

vestigatioii. The papers of all the delegates liave referred to
being on the eve of some great discovery. Now let us give them
another year and let the Commission devote its best energies
to scientific investigation along certain lines which I have here
marked out, which may be used if you Avish them. I will not read
them.

(The speaker handed a paper to the Chairman, which ap-
pears later on the record of proceedings).

Let them be forest tests, and also orchard and laboratory
tests. Those forest tests may embody your immune zone, your
eradication of diseased trees in a section. Let that be a scien-
tific, thoroughly scientific test, under this Commission, and,
after the season is over, let us have a report and decide what
further must be done with this magnificent appropriation which
the State of Pennsylvania has so generously made. (Applause).

PROFESSOK RANE : I simply rise just to make this point:
It seems to me that a discussion is what brings things out. Now
I am sure everybody that is attending this Convention at this
time feels that the State of Pennsylvania is taking a splendid
stand in this work. I am also of the opinion that some have al-
lowed the little financial end to step in, thinking perhaps that
the State of Pennsylvania is throwing away some money. After
all, this is insignificant. I feel that the responsibility upon a
Commission that has money to expend in this work is likely to
bring those men out, and put them in a position that we will
all look forward to, and we cannot secure this unless that re-
sponsibility is placed in such a way. I think that is the beauty
of the gypsy moth work in Massachusetts. We have had a great
deal of money. When it was placed under my Department, I
wondered how in the world to spend that amount of money and
really derive the most benefit from it. That was the problem that
worried us most, and I doubt not that is the same jjroblem that
is worrying this Commission most. I am sure we are not here in
any way to criticize, and I hope at least we do not fall into that
attitude of mind. I am inclined to think that some have the
wrong impression. We are heart and hand with this Commis-
sion in Pennsylvania, and I believe that with money and with
responsibility, they are likely to bring things about. We have
brought results about in the moth work in my state in improv-

203

ing spraying machinery alone that I believe will be sufficient
importance in the future to the whole broad United States tx)
pay for the expenditure. Also, no one could estimate the value
to the world of the use of arsenate of lead for spraying purposes,
for which the gypsy moth work in Massachusetts is responsible.

Again, another point that I wish to emphasize. We are es-
tablishing positions, State Foresters and other State positions
along different lines. I think that we want to get into the habit
of having a well directed forest policy, so that the current may
flow along well defined channels. The great trouble I think,
as I look upon these forest pathologists and entomologists is
that there are constantly new outbreaks in new places, and a
few good specialists on each problem are better than each state
working it out independently.

I should like a system, and it seems to me that the State
foresters, if there is such a position in our various States, ought
to be closely knit together and that this work should go along
that channel and be Avell directed, not only, as I brought out,
for these individual things but for the problem as a whole, so that
in the long run we will get definite results.

Mil. STEVENS, of the Lehigli Valley Railroad: Mr. Chair-
man, it is now three o'clock on the last afternoon of this session.
I came here for two purposes : One, to get additional information
regarding this fungous pest, and another, to get some idea of how
we can best co-operate in combatting it. Now a large share of
this meeting has been given up to one side, the analytical side
of the question, and it seems to me we should give some attention
to the constructive side. We are agreed in some things, and one
is, that a better system of forestry, carried out through the East,
will tend to control or help control this fungous disease. I think
there is no dissenting voice on that at all. This has been the
the history of a good many pests which we have met. I have in
mind particularly such a one as the orange pockweed.

"The Devil's Paint Brush." We may not have known how to
eradicate it, but the introduction of that weed has brought about
a better rotation of the crops, which makes orange pock-weed a
negligible quantity. So it seems to me here, if we could appoint
a committee or in some way formulate a plan for a more rational

204

control of our forests, we would be doing something upon which
we could agree and work together, and thus not only control this
fungous disease, but do wonders to the forests of this section.

THE CHAIRMAN : Mr. Stevens will probably be pleased to
learn that the Committee on Eesolutions will have something
of a constructive order to suggest.

MR. STEVENS : Then may we proceed as quickly as pos-
sible, so that we may discuss that?

THE CHAIRMAN: That is the next order on the pro-
gramme, and before calling for a report by the Committee on
Resolutions, if you will permit a word from the Chair, I will
beg your indulgence. A few moments ago, doubtless in a spirit
of fun, the word "politician" was introduced into our discus-
sion. Now I wish to say that I have made careful observations
— as one may of the work in one State from another State —
of the work that is being done in the State of Pennsylvania
along this line. Thus far I have failed to see the first sign of
what might be regarded as political methods, and I claim to be
somewhat expert in detecting the presence of such methods.
(Applause). I have inquired of two gentlemen of Pennsylvania
who are well posted, one of them being a member of the Chest-
nut Tree Blight Commission, as to the political faith of these
five men, and I have been unable to find out yet what their
political faith is. (Applause).

The members of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission of
Pennsylvania are serving without compensation. They are
men of large business interests and also altruistic interests.
They are glad to give their time to the subject because they
Itelieve they can lielp the State to solve a great problem, and,
so far as I liave lu'cn able to size up the situation in Pennsyl-
vania, from the i)Mpers and the discussions which have been
offered here, I should say that the Pennsylvania plan, in a word,
is to seek the truth and when the best course is found, then to
follow that course. Wliat else can we consider to be the policy
in this State? Remember that the Legislature of Pennsylvania
has appropriated Uvo hundred and seventy-five thousand dol-
lars, and we heard yesterday that only twenty thousand dollars

205

lias been expeiKled. Thai ukuicj is being nsed, it appears t<)
me, to determine wbieli of various metbods is tbe best, and the
very fact that such a large balance of the money is still held in re-
serve is the strongest proof that the authorities of this State
are waiting until they are fully satislicd as to which is the best
course to pursue. It seems to me, gentlemen, that when we
say there is danger of wasting public money uselessly in con-
nection with the work which has been reported here, we are
attacking a phantom and, as I tbink there is some little danger
of the wrong impression getting out from this meeting, I desire
to make these remarks to assist in clearing up the situation.
Good work is being done in this State and in other States.
Here the problem is perhaps greater than in any other State,
and here the State has made magnificent provision for both
studying the problem and carrying out effective measures.
(Applause).

DE. MURRILL : I just want to concur heartily in every-
thing the Chairman has said, and entirely disclaim any refer-
ence to the Commission in any way or any shape that the Penn-
sylvania State Legislature has so generously provided for. I
just wanted, when called a politician, by using pre-Convention
methods, to disillusionize you of that statement.

PROFESSOR CLINTON: I used that word "politician."
Why did I use that word "politician?" Not because he is a
Democrat or a Republican or anything of that sort — I do not
care what his politics are — but for this reason : The convention
at Albany and the convention here, to my mind, is called largely
for a moral backing for this Chestnut Blight Commission in
Pennsylvania. They want that backing and they are going to
get it, and I am not going to object to it. You can pass any
resolution you want, and I will not object to it. I came down
here to present facts as I know them and to give them to you,
and the moment Mr. Williams is speaking, he is trying to throw
slurs at science, and especially at science outside of Pennsyl-
vania. He attacked Professor Peck, and Professor Peck at
Albany was the one man that^ — not the one man, but he was a
man — that said he was in favor of their work in fighting the
chestnut blight. He quotes him to disparage him, and he is the

20(5

man that is backing up their work. Piofessor Peck is a good
scientist in his way. There are a lot of good scientists that are
doing good work outside of this State, as well as in it.

THE CH AIEMAN : We will now proceed to hear the report
of the Committee on Resolutions.

MR. AVILLIAMS : I would like to preface the report by say-
ing that I have no intention of disparaging any man.

What I said was not with that intention in mind, but to call
attention to what I claim are inadequate methods, methods not
well thought out. I have no quarrel with any man whatever.
I admire a good, lusty antagonist, and I respect his opinion. I
am also most profoundly grateful that we have had an explana-
tion from our good friend, Dr. Murrill, as to just what his
jjrogramme is. We have wondered a long time what it might
be and we are in the dark no longer, now that he has made the
explanation ; and we are glad for it.

In presenting the resolutions which have been drafted by your
Committee, appointed for that purpose, and as the Chairman
of the Committee, it becomes my duty at their direction to report
as follows:

WHEREAS, This Conference recognizes the great importance
of the chestnut tree as one of our most valuable timber assets,
having an estimated value of not less than |400, 000,000 ; and

WHEREAS, A most virulent fungous disease has made its
appearance in wide sections of the chestnut timber region, and
already many millions of dollars of damage have been sustained,
and the total extinction of the chestnut tree is threatened by
the rapid spread of this disease; and

WHEREAS,. We recognize the importance of prompt action ;
therefore, be it

Resolved, That the thanks of this Conference are tendered to
Governor Tener for calling it, and for the courtesies lie has
shown.

That we appreciate the interest of the President of the
United States, as evidenced by his communication to Governor
Tener, showing, as it does, that the head of the National Gov-
ernment is not unmindful of the great danger presented by the
Chestnut Blight problem.

l>07

That the Commission appointed by the Governor of Penn-
sylvania be commended for the earnestness and diligence they
have shown in the conduct of their work.

That we nrge the National Government, the States, and the
Dominion of Canada to follow the example of Pennsylvania,
which is analogous to that of Massachusetts in starting the fight
against the gypsy moth, and appropriate an amount sufficient
to enable their proper authorities to cope with the disease
where practicable.

That we favor the bill now before Congress appropriating
|80,000 for the use of the United States Department of Agricul-
ture in Chestnut Bark Disease work, and urge all States to use
every means possible to aid in having this bill become a law at
the earliest moment.

That we believe trained and experienced men should be em-
ployed in the field and la])oratory to study the disease in all its
phases.

That we believe definite boundaries should be established
where advisable, in each State, beyond which limits an earnest
endeavor should be made to stamp out the disease.

That we believe an efficient and strong quarantine should be
maintained; and that it should be the earnest effort of every
State, the Federal Government, and the Dominion of Canada
to prevent the spread of the disease within and beyond their
borders. In accord with this thought we strongly commend
the efforts being made to pass the Simmons bill now before
Congress.

That we believe strong efforts should be made in all States
to stimulate the utilization of chestnut products, and in order
to do so, we recommend that the Interstate Commerce Commis-
sion permit railroads and other transportation companies to
name low freight rates so that chestnut products not liable to
spread the disease may be properly distributed.

That we recommend the National Government, each State,
and the Dominion of Canada to publish practical, concise, and
well illustrated bulletins for educating owners of chestnut
trees.

208

That we believe further meetings on the line of this Confer-
ence advisable and we hope the Pennsylvania Commission will
arrange for similar meetings.

That we thank the State of Pennsylvania for its intention to
publish immediately the proceedings of this Conference.

That copies of these resolutions be forwarded to the Presi-
dent of the United States, to the Governor of every State, to the
Governor General of the Dominion of Canada, and the members
of the Federal and State Legislatures, with the request that
they do all in their power to aid in checking the ravages of
this dread disease.

I respectfully move the adoption of the resolutions.

Seconded by Dr. J. Eussell Smith.

THE CHAIEMAN : Are there any remarks?

DE. MUEEILL: Possibly I have taken too much of your
time, but I have a message to these delegates of the other States,
and I feel sure that they are willing to listen to me for two
minutes. The question is, what will you say to your States
when you return? What programme will you recommend in
your States? First: Survey to keep in touch with the progress
of the disease, so that you may be able to acquaint timber
owners just w^hen to cut and utilize their timber to the greatest
advantage. The State should have this knowledge. "Then
also pay heed to science and further investigation.

THE CHAIEMAN : What you are giving is undoubtedly of
great value, but it occurs to the Chair that it is not directly in
line with these resolutions, and the Chair would ask if you
would not be willing to bring it up after we have acted on the
resolutions, unless you have something in mind further than
has been developed. Is there any discussion of these resolu-
tions?

The motion to adopt the resolutions was put.

THE CHAIEMAN: The resolutions seem to have passed.
They have passed.

DE. J. W. HAESHBEEGEE, of Philadelphia : Mr. Chair-
man : Just one suggestion that I want to make that has oc-
curred to me during the proceedings, that I think is in line with

209

suggestions looking toward some practical outcome of these
meetings. We, as wise men, should provide for any contingency
that may arise in future years. If the chestnut tree is doomed,
then the fungus which attacks the chestnut tree is doomed with
it. My suggestion is this : That the Chestnut Blight Commis-
sion send to some out-of-the-way part of the world, where the
chestnut tree will grow, nuts which have been thoroughly steri-
lized, with a suggestion that these nuts be grown under the
care of some forester; you might say in southern Germany, or
eastern Germany, wherever they think proper, in case that the
American chestnut tree is exterminated by the chestnut blight
in America; so that we can draw upon that supply to re-forest
our hillsides and our slopes with our native cliestnut tree. Just
as the man in the western states provides his shelter against
the cyclones, so we should provide a means of re-stocking our
forests with the chestnut tree, by sending these chestnuts to
some out of the way part of the world, which is immune, or
where the chestnut blight disease will practically be cut off from
reaching the chestnut trees. That is merely a suggestion, in
line with future operations connected with this blight disease.

THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair should have extended an
opportunity to Professor Murrill at once, after passing the reso-
lutions, for his statement.

DE. MUERILL : Just a minute, and I will feel that my duty
will have been done: The State's programme, then, would be,
first, to survey, to locate, and keep in touch with the progress
of the disease, not a rigid inspection, but such an inspection as
the State Forester and State Pathologist could take charge of,
possibly with a slight appropriation. Second, await results of
scientific investigation for one year at least. We are having a
magnificent experiment here, one we are glad to have made
along scientific lines, and under the leadership of a Commission
above reproach in every way. Now, can we not wait a year
and continue our experiments and then act upon the evidence
that we get from this year's work?

Just a word to timber owners: Forest management is not
a cure for the chestnut blight. The chestnut blight is a good
feeder. The better the chestnut tree, the better it grows on it.
14

210

It is a mistake to nay that forest management will eradicate
blight. It will eradicate most other diseases, insects, and so
forth, bnt it does not affect the blight.

Utilization is the real issne; the practical nse of the lumber,
and that is in the hands of those who own chestnut timber. The
X>resent is 3^ours. You have the chestnut timber as it is ; tomor-
row, next generation, you may have it not. Be business like and
stand for your own rights. The opinion of one man may be
worth a thousand times the opinion of another. You see that
in every walk of life. Take the opinion of hardheaded, scien-
tific men, who know al)out this trouble, just as you would the
opinions of hardheaded business men. I thank 3^ou for your at
tention. (Applause).

THE CHAIEiMAISl : If there is no objection, a statement
prepared by Dr. Murrill upon "Questions for Scientific Inves-
tigation,'" handed in to the desk a few minutes ago, will be
including in the proceedings, together with his personal views.

The paper submitted is a follows:

QUESTIONS FOR SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION.

1. The viability of the spores, both summer and winter forms.

2. The vitality of the mycelium in the bark and wood.

3. The vitality of sprouts and their bearings on the ques-
tion,

4. The food of the fungus; the decomposition of tannin by
ferments.

5. Distribution. A large subject, involving experiments and
observations over wide areas and dealing with winds, rain,
insects, birds and their migration, squirrels, the transportation
of wood, railway ties; rate and direction of distribution; nur-
sery stock; trees in foreign countries; effects of coppicing.

6. Origin. Nothing is known at present. Is it native or for-
eign? Wliy was it unknown until recently, and tlien why so
violent?

7. Will it attack other trees besides species of chestnut?
Much depends on tliis. Trees nearest the chestnut should be
used for experiment.

211

8. Wbat is tlie future of the dlscnise? Will it run its course
and disappear? Will it become less virulent? ^^'ill resistant
varieties appear? Can such varieties be made bj selection, hy-
bridization, etc.? Can chestnuts be grown with safety beyond
the Mississippi river? How long' after death of all our trees,
may chestnuts be again planted Avith safety?

9. Can we expect natural enemies to arise? If it were an
insect disease, this might be looked for with more hope.

10. Can a method of control be discovered by further scien-
tific research? Most remedies suggested by unscientific persons
are known at once to be valueless and need not be tried. One
thing is certain, the more one knows about a disease, the more
liable one is. to discover a remedy. If none is possible, the
sooner this fact is known, the better for all concerned.

THE CHAIKMAN : It has been suggested to the Chair from
two directions that, as we have in this audience a numl)er of
men of large commercial interests, the opportunity should be
extended to them to make remarks. The Chair is pleased to
accept that suggestion. Mr. Thalheimer.

ME. THALHEIMER, of Reading : Mr. Chairman : In Penn-
sylvania, in those counties that I know, most of the farmers
have five, ten, and some of them fifteen acres of timber land that
has come aAvay back from their forefathers, and I think it would
be proper for this Connnission to get the names of those farmers,
or their representatives, and keep them posted on how to take
care of their timber and caution them of the danger they are in
of losing it, and let them assist you in looking after it. Attract
their attention, and you will get many good points for this Com-
mission to act on which you would not get otherwise.

If you will allow me one minute, I will tell you something
which I observed myself. It may be interesting to some of
you. I stopped off at a corner of a lane to wait for a car and
while I was waiting, I looked on the ground and there saw gypsy
moths. I never saw them as large in my life. They were yel-
low and Idue with big horns, worse than the Massachusetts kind.
They were about two inches long and about a quarter of an inch
thick. They walkefl along the track, and I looked at them and
followed them. My car came along, and I went down town and

212

coming back, while waiting for another car, I wanted to take
a seat. There was a walnut tree at the corner of the lane,
and I wanted to take a seat on a bench nnder the tree. When
I came to take that seat, it was literally covered with those
gypsy moths, coming off of that tree. What I want to say to
yon is this: I watched and noted that there was a little fly,
which is like a comparison of a guinea hen to an ordinary
chicken — they were just that shape— and one or two would fol-
low a moth and they would get on top of the moth and just
sting it and jump off again. I kept on investigating, and it took
me two hours to watch them. As soon as they would touch the
gypsy moth at a certain place back of the neck, they would kill
it every time. That was an accidental investigation. I spoke
to several professors about it, and asked them to look it up, and
see whether they could not propagate that fly.

MR. STEVENS : Where was that?

MR. THALHEIMER : In Reading, Pa.

MR. STEVENS: May I ask Dr. Murrill a question? He
made a statement that good forest management would not help
to control chestnut blight disease. I would like to ask his au-
thority for the statement.

DR. MURRILL : My own experience about New York State,
over a wide area, for several years.

MR. STEVENS: In forests?

DR. MURRILL : In forests, over dense, almost full grown
chestnut forests. The disease occurs without reference to ill
or well trees, and I have noticed it on vigorous trees as well as
on trees diseased from other causes.

PROFESSOR RANE : In construing that term "forestry
management," it seems to me it might go further than just ap-
plying it to chestnut trees. As a matter of fact, our forest
management as regards the moth situation is to eliminate those
trees and bring in others that would take their place. Forestry
management means, therefore, the elimination of the chestnut
with the idea of bringing in other species; so we can bring that
thing out in a practical way, from a different standpoint than
just thinning the chestnut.

213

DE. MUKRILL : I heartily commend that.

MR. CRAMER, of Lehigh University: In reply to the gen-
tleman at my right, Dr. Murrill said his observation was based
on many years' experience of his own in and about the forests,
.1 would like to submit the question to this gentleman as what
those experiments were, — actual work, or scientific experiments,
actual work in removing these infected trees, or examining
them?

DR. MURRILL: Both. We tried various experiments.
When the disease first appeared, we tried the cutting off and
cutting out, but not the cutting of the stumps. Some of the
stumps were burned, and we found that the sprouts sprung up
from several inches below the ground and that the disease went
into the roots some distance. It also went beneath the bark
into the wood and re-appeared, so that it was impossible to cut
it out. We have had a number of observations and experiments
about New York to show that forest management, so far as
clean culture goes, has no effect whatever on the eradication or
on the control of chestnut blight.

MR. ZIEGLER : I am concerned with the management of
about twenty thousand acres of forest, which is largely chest-
nut coppice. I want to tell you about a condition existing
there, and to ask Dr. Murrill's opinion as to what should be
done. We have chestnut blight in those twenty thousand acres
in about ten spots, the largest of which is about ten acres, ex-
isting there for two years. The first year's attack killed merely
a few trees here and there. The second year's attack shows
the death of trees in a radiating direction from the central
focus, you might call it. I would like to know what action
should be taken; whether he would recommend cutting out
these few acres at once and thereby trying to reduce the number
of spores produced, to the degree of say one one-hundredth, at
a very small cost, or whether he would leave those trees go a
year longer and await some other measure?

DR. MURRILL: I have received hundreds of letters of that
same nature, and now I must answer all of them in this way:
To save, utilize, and market your timber is the first considera-

214.

tion, when the disease lias entered a forest of that extent. There-
fore, cut your timber that is likely to go to waste first. Cut it
first, if favorable, and later, as the disease encroaches, cut other
timber and use it and market it, so that you may not glut the
market. ^

ME. ZIEGLEK : May I suggest that that is practically along
the line that is being followed by the Penna. Blight Commis-
sion, so far as I have been able to learn of it, and that is the line
^^^e hope to follow, following their advice.

DR. MICKLEBOROUCH: Dr. Murrill, have you been cut-
ting the chestnut groA\tli up at the Bronx Garden?

DR. MURRILL: AVe are now cutting down the last trees.
It has cost us five thousand dollars to cut down fourteen hun-
dred trees in fifty acres of the Bronx Park.

DR. MICKLEBOROUGH : I would like to ask Dr. Murrill
another question, and that is, in the early stages of the disease
on western Long Island, where it is in the most malignant form,
if it was not his suggestion to the Park Commissioners in the
autumn of 1907 or 1908, on account of the prevalence of the dis-
ease in Prospect Park Avhere there were twelve or fifteen hun-
dred chestnut trees, and if you did not also recommend to do
the cutting there?

DR. MURRILL : That has been my recommendation, Mr.
Chairman, until we found it was hojieless, and the area of the
disease was so great as to make it practically impossible to cut
these trees. We have not been able to get money enough appro-
priated by the Parks and public in New York City to cut out
the dead wood caused by this disease.

Mr. E. A. WELMER, of J.ebanon, Pa.: .Mr. (Miairman and
Gentlemen: I would like to addi-ess a few unscientific remarks
to the owners of wood lots or forests, and if my scientific friends
^\'ish to listen, they may.

I have been interested in forestry for twenty-four years and
have made a study of the chestnut blight during the past four
years. I tliink that I have the honor, with the Hon. Mr. Elliott,
who is here, and Dr. Drinker, in discovering the first entry of

215

the blight into Pennsylvania. I have here in a jar a sample of
that very first specimen, three and one-half years old. It has
been sealed ever since, I am told, and it shows living or active
spores. I show yon this to demonstrate the care that is nec-
essary to take in getting rid of the refnse of the trees and their
bark when we go to cut them down.

To land owners I wish to say that I have myself a tract of
chestnut timber in Lebanon county. The trees there are forty-
one years old and they will range all the way from forty to
ninety feet in height, and from ten to twenty inches in diameter.
This tract of land shows every condition, you may say, of alti-
tudes, of moisture, and of soil conditions. It has a nortli, soutli,
east, and west exposure, because it is in the shape of a horse-
shoe. It has an altitude of eleven hundred feet at the highest
part and at the lowest of seven hundred feet above sea level. It
also has a stream running through it which gives you a swampy
portion. Up at the top it is very gravelly; on one side it is
clay, and on the other side you will find some of the best of
wheat land. In every one of these sections I have found focal
centers of blight, making this tract a perfect field for study.

Here I want to call your attention to one thing that has just
come to my mind : Do not depend on discovering blight from
surface indications only. The inspectors and myself have gone
through my tract several times, and we thought we had discov-
ered several trees only with the blight in its advanced stages,
and a small number of other trees showing only traces.

Two weeks ago, however, the Forestry DejDartment asked me
to cut two carloads of blighted wood to demonstrate to the ex-
tract manufacturers that the blight had no effect on the produc-
tion of tannic acid.- So we went out to my tract, and Mr. Wirt
and Mr. Fox of tlie Forestry Department, helped to locate trees.
After going through the tract and locating only two focal
centers of about twenty-five trees, we commenced to wonder
where the two carloads, tAventy-seven cords, were to come from.

I then suggested to Mr. Fox, wdio remained on the job, that
we start cutting down the trees around the focal centers, and,
if we found trees not infected, we Avould throw them aside. We
started cutting and chopped down an acre of trees that showed
few signs as viewed from the ground, but when cut down, we saw

216

that their tops were badly infected; every one in fact. This
shows that when you find a focal center, it would be advisable
to keep on cutting all around the focal center until you have
taken every infected tree, and not to depend on surface indica-
tions.

You may look at the stump with a microscope and you may
not find any spores; for I will tell you that I have hunted for
surface indications of the blight for the past few years in my
tract, and never found indications of the bark splitting or spore
dust at the roots or base of the stump, until last year, yet the
tops of the trees, in cert-ain sections, are all dead; they started
dying several years ago.

I want to say one thing more. The farmers can help the
Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Commission by starting to do
some of the work of inspection themselves, and if in doubt, may
call on the Commission for advice and information. The Com-
mission is willing to send men out to help you to locate the
blight and tell you what to do. I will also try to help you, or,
if you will send your foresters to my tract near Mt. Gretna, I
Yidll try to help them.

I have discovered a new way of finding the blight which T
wish to present to this body for what it is worth. I want to tell
you how 3^ou can see the blight even ninety feet in the air on
what we call top-infected trees. You place your back directly
towards the sun, half close your eyes and then look up along
tlie top part of the tree, and if there is any blight in the cracks
of the bark in a direct line with the rays of the sun, you will
find the yellow spores liighly illuminated. Under any other
condition you would not see these spores, as they would be
hidden by the shadows cast by the bark. Now, say in two hours,
after the sun lias illuminated another portion of the tree, you
liad better go through that tract again. In other words, start
out going through the tract by one route so planned that during
different times of the day you will have passed the same tree
several times, and each time place the sun directly back of you,
and you will be surprised with the results. I think Mr. Fox, (if
he is here), will verify what I have said. Both of us spent
three days in inspecting an area of trees, and did not find an
infected tree. But, one morning, on that coldest day we had for

217

years, two weeks ago, I got up at six o'clock, and found over
seventy-five trees by this sun method in a phice that we had gone
over three times before, and we were truly surprised.

I notice that some of the experts are laughing, but I will
wager that I will take anyone to my tract, and they will pass
by the trees referred to as uninfested. I will then cut these
trees down and show them the blight.

These trees are just as dangerous as the trees infected with
the blight from top to bottom. If you think you do not have
the blight among yonr trees, sacrifice a few trees that look
suspicious, and the chances are that you will see it on the top
branches. If it is possible to get up on some high point over-
looking your forest, and you notice brown or yellow patches
of tree tops, go and cut the trees down in those spots whether
you see the blight or not. Take no chances, because it is a
disease that you can take no chances with.

I want to tell yon another thing. We may not be able to
control the blight by cutting down the trees, but it is worth
while taking the chances, and all these men who have property,
I think have money enough to take the chances. I would advise
cutting down the trees quickly in the forests. Do it tomorrow,
because winter time is the best time. The spores are in their
winter quarters and are less likely to be blown around. Cut
them down, bark them and, if possible, try to burn up all the
leaves and brush in the infected areas. If necessary, sacrifice
that area. Put all the branches and bark over the stumps and
spray them with coal oil or better, cheap crude oil. Buy one of
those cheap sprayers, costing about six dollars, and atomize
the oil. You will find that a few gallons will cover a number
of stumps and enable you to burn the stump down to the ground.
It will kill all the spores and borers. On the first application
of the heat, the bark peels away from the stump, and that
presents the spores and borers to the flame where they are
destroyed at once. Burning the stumps is better than peeling
them, because when you peel off the bark, you lose some of the
bark or shake the spores out on the ground.

This bottled specimen which I have shows that the spores
will live three and one half years. This should show you the
necessity of killing all the spores possible.

' 218

Here is one benefit of the Chestnut Blight Commission's work.
They propose to cut down the infected trees. It may not stop
the blight, but one thing it will do. If they burn the stumps,
it will produce tlie best possible new condition for the manag-
ing of that forest. Even if the blight does come back on the
sprouts, you can work on the sprouts and cut them off the second
time, if necessary. You can also spray the young growth with
iime-sulphur solution for the fungus, and apply some other
solution to be discovered for the borers. It will also teach us
the true value of chestnut wood.

I think our chances of controlling the disease are good. I do
not say or believe that we are going to kill it entirely, because,
to my knowledge, no spore diseases have ever been completelv
eradicated. We still have the black-knot with us, as well as
the peach-yellows, but they are now both so well controlled
that we have almost forgotten them.

We may be able to check tlie bliglit to such an extent that
nature will be able to supply a means to throw off the disease
in due time, especially if we aid her by killing the borers and
limiting the supply of spores. So, again I say, I believe the
Chestnut Blight Commission is on the right track, and my
forest preserve is open to any man interested in this work.

My address is E. A. Weimer, Lebanon, Pa., and I will say
to any man who comes to Lebanon, I will show him all I can;
every condition of forestry that has developed on my tracts
from over twenty-four years of practice. (Applause).

PROFESSOR COLLINS : The statement was made that this
specimen in the bottle had been sealed for three and a half
,years, and the spores are still alive, as I understood it. I think
Mr. Weimer forgot to tell how he knew they are alive.

MR. WEIMER: You can see in the lower part here (exhibit-
ing bottle), that the spores have become very active. They
retain their red color, whereas, up here where they are dead
or dormant, they turned black, and have fallen off. I think
that is the best indication that I can offer. These indications
were thought good enough for my purpose.

PROFESSOR COLLINS : I think the observations would be

219

ji little more conclusive if tlie gentleman would try cultures to
see if they would grow.

MR. WEIMEK: 1 agree with the Professor, and will say
that this specimen is now the property of the Forestry Depart-
ment, and I will kindly ask them to have a culture test made.

DR. MICKLEBOROUGH: May I make a brief statement
^\ith reference to the life of spores? I have a little vial with
me in Avhich I have the ascospores that I collected at Glad-
stone, New Jersey, on Memorial Day, 1908. I have examined
those spores from time to time, and find they are still alive.
How do we know they are alive? We can take, as I have done,
a five per cent, solution of pure glycerine, and the spores will
sprout in it. These ascospores will sprout and I have examined
the sprou tings under the microscope, — the mycelium threads.
I was performing a miscroscopic test to harden spores for the
microscope, to make a permanent mount, and I accidentally
found that, instead of hardening the spores, my five per cent,
solution of pure glycerine only was food for them and they
proceeded to sprout.

Let me remind you that those little pieces of bark that I have
in the vial with me in my coat pocket have been kept dry, free
from moisture. If they had been out in the forest, or subjected
to the climatic conditions which fungi require, heat and moisture
l)Oth, I am very sure those spores would have been developed
and disseminated long ago. They would have lasted perhaps
but a few months; but you take them and keep them perfectly
dry, and I believe that you can prolong the life of the ascospores,
and probably the conidia, for several years.

THE CHAIRMAN: Would it be well, gentlemen, to agree
upon a time for final adjournment, so that we may know what
we are working toward? I wish also to arrange for the Gov-
ernor to come in. Would it be well now to set a time for ad-
journment?

A DELEGATE : I move you that we adjourn at 4.15 p. m.

MR. PEIRGE : I move that the time be amended to 4 :30 p. m.

MR. BODINE: I think it was announced. at the beginning
of the session that we were to be favored by a farewell visit

220

of the Governor. Should we not consult his convenience before
fixing^ an hour for adjournment?

THE CHAIEMAN : He has stated that it would be agree-
able to him to come in at any time.

The substituted motion is that the hour of adjournment be
fixed at 4 :30.

The motion was seconded and carried.

THE CHAIEMAN: What is your pleasure with reference
to appointing a committee to wait on the Governor?

PEOFESSOE EANE: I so move you.
Seconded.

THE CHAIEMAN: It is moved that a committee be ap-
pointed to escort the Governor into the room before adjourn-
ment.

The motion was put and carried.

THE CHAIEMAN : The Chair will appoint as that commit-
tee, Commissioner Bodine, of the Chestnut Tree Blight Com-
mission, Dr. Merkel, of New York, and State Forester Eane of
Massachusetts, and will request them to escort the Governor
into the meeting ten or fifteen minutes before the adjournment,
as they find it to be convenient.

DE. HAESHBEEGEE, of Philadelphia : A very simple test
could be made of the vitality of those spores which Mr. Weimer
has, by growing them on an ordinary culture medium, and I
would make the suggestion that Mr. Weimer send his specimens
to the proper person connected with this Commission, and have
the test made to ascertain whether those spores he has in the
bottle still retain their vitality or not.

THE CHAIEMAN: The suggestion is made by Dr. Harsh-
berger that Mr. Weimer be requested to send the spores to an
expert connected with the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission
for examination as to their vitality, and, if agreeable, the Chair
would suggest that the result of that examination be included
in the proceedings of this meeting.

ME. WEIMEE : This sample is in charge of the Forestry
Department, so that Mr. Williams or Mr. Wirt will attend
to that. It is their privilege. I will take it up with them.

221

THE CHAIRMAN : We will dismiss tlie matter, thei], with
the understanding that Mr. Weimer will take it up with tlie
Forestry Department, and if there is no objection, authority
is given to include the report of that investigation in the report
of this meeting.

PROFESSOR GRAVES : I would like to ask Mr. Detwiler
a question about this dead line. Is that going to be delimited
by cutting out all the chestnut, healthy and diseased, or is it
just simply an arbitrary line? I want to know this for in-
formation.

MR. DETWILER: The dead-line which we plan to estab-
lish will be maintained by cutting out the diseased trees as
located by constant control; and we have not yet considered
cutting out all of the chestnut trees, unless the owners are
willing to do it. If, upon an explanation of the situation, the
owners are willing to do this, we have advised that it be done.

PROFESSOR GRAVES: If this sort of work is going to
be taken up by the State, it seems to me it would be a good
plan to delimit all areas which contain no chestnuts. I have
the honor, Mr. Chairman, to be the gentleman who went through
the State of Massachusetts on a motorcycle, as Professor Rane
said this morning, and I found a great many areas there which
had no chestnuts at all, and some such areas I am sure occur
in Pennsylvania; so if you are going to take up this method,
it seems to me such areas ought to be marked out and then
start west of those.

PROFESSOR NORTON: I desire to make a suggestion.
There may be a great deal of chestnut that must be cut and
utilized which might possibly over-stock the market. Why could
not the chestnut that is beyond the needs of the market have
the tannin extracted from it and stored for future sales, either
by corporations, individuals, or possibly by the State? I would
like to mention another question of a scientific nature that has
been suggested and which I think has not been brought out
sufficiently. Of course, those who are familiar with fungous
diseases understand this, but I believe that a good many people
who are not familiar with the nature of fungi would not appre-

ciate it, and that is the question of the difference in the oppor-
tunity for its infection where you have destroyed, say fifty per
cent, of the infected material, or where you have destroyed
ninety per cent, of it or ninety-nine per cent. Professor Stewart
spoke of that, but I wish that someone who is familiar with
statistics on that could bring it out a little better; whether
there would be much difference in the opportunity for infection
where you have destroyed fifty per cent., ninetj^ per cent, or
ninety-nine per cent, of the infected material? Of course, we
understand that where ninety-nine per cent of it has been de-
stroyed, there still would possibly be hundreds of millions of
spores in a small area.

PKOFESSOE KANE : I have some resolutions which I would
like to present at this time :

"Kesolved, That the delegates and others in attendance at
this Conference desire to express their high sense of iippi'ecia-
tion of the many courtesies tendered them by the ofiicers of
the Pennsylvania State Chestnut Blight Commission and the
Department of Forestry.''

It was moved and seconded that the resolution be adopted.

The motion was f>ut and unanimously carried.

PKOFESSOR EANE: I have another resolution:

"Eesolved, That the thanks of this convention be, and are
liereby tendered Hon, K. A. Pearson for his able and courteous
way of handling the duties of permanent Chairman," (Ap
plause).

MK. BESLEY (in the Chair) : Mr. Pearson is too modest to
put that resolution, so I take pleasure in putting it before this
liouse, and if there is no discussion, — I believe it is seconded, —
I suggest an immediate vote on that question.

The motion was put to adopt the resolution and unanimously
carried. (Applause),

ME. PExVESON: Mr. Temporary Chairman, Ladies and
Gentlemen : I sincerely thank you for this compliment. I
thanked you at the opening of the conference for the honor of
being your presiding officer, and I wish to assure you it has

been a great privilege to me. I feel that we have really accom-
plished something here which is worth while, and I trust that
the good that has been done will be recognized more and more
as time passes.

There are two gentlemen in the room who, I am sure, every-
one wishes to hear from before we adjourn. Several times dur-
ing our conference mention has been made of the first discovery
of the chestnut tree blight, and the name of the gentleman who
discovered it has been mentioned several times. I think we
ought to ask him formally to come before us, and make a few
remarks. I refer to Mr. Merkel, of New York.

MR. MERKEL: I do not know what Mr. Pearson wants me
to say; whether he is wishing for blarney or not. I can only
say that I came in order to hear the opinions of everybody
expressed. I am glad that the resolutions that were adopted
were adopted, in spite of the fact that there were some people
who did not agree with them. I believe that the work of this
Congress to-daj^ is epoch-making. I believe we have advanced a
vast step. We have gone further yesterday and to-day by miles
than we were the day before. I hope that we can save the chest-
nut tree. My fondness for trees in general is the only reason
that brought me here ; but that I should be pushed into the lime-
light thus, — a modest violet like I am, — was not my intention.

THE CHAIRMAN: Frequently during our discussion we
have heard about the need of constructive work. The one man
of the entire State, and I dare say the entire world, who has
made possible the greatest constructive work against the Chest-
nut Tree Blight Disease is now in the room, and I must call
upon the father of the measure which is responsible for the
effective work in Pennsylvania for a few words. Senator Sproul.
(Applause).

SENATOR SPROUL: Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen: A
member of the Senate is generally safe in the House, and I did
not know that anyone in any official capacity knew I had come
over here.

THE CHAIRMAN : We all know vou.

. 224

SENATOE SPEOUL : I am very glad, indeed, to have had an
opportunity of looking in on this meeting. When the bill was
introduced and considered, it was regarded as largely an ex-
periment, and it was thought that probably the State was taking
rather large chances in making available so large a sum of money
for carrying on a work which nobody at that time seemed to
know very much about. I think that, from what I have heard
of the results of this meeting, if no other good were accom-
plished by the expenditure of the money by Pennsylvania, the
initiative taken in investigating this very serious question and
in trying to devise ways and means to control the disease, — if
no other good out of this meeting has been accomplished, I think
that the expenditure was perfectly justifiable. I am glad indeed
to hear the expressions from the discoverer of the chestnut
blight and others as to the usefulness of this Convention, and
I trust that the good work will go on, not only here but every-
v/here where this disease is threatening so much harm. (Ap-
plause),

THE ( 'IIAIEM AN : A request has been made that Deputy
Couiiiiissioner Williams say a word before we adjourn, and at
the same time advise j^ou how extra reports of this Conference
may be secured, if persons wish to have them.

ME. WILLIAMS: I had no intention of speaking again.
All I can ssij is tliat we hope, and the Commission hopes, to
have this report transcribed and published at an early date.
When it is printed ever}- person who has registered here, as
visitor or delegate, wlio has come at the behest of his Governor
or some institution which he represents, will be sent gratis,
through the mails, a copy of this report. Every other person
interested in having a copy of the report can make application
to the headquarters of the Chestnut Blight Commission in Phila-
delphia, 1112 Morris Building in that city, and, so far as may
be possible, I think tlieir requests will be complied with. Just
how soon it ^ill be possible to have this record in print we
do not know, but no time will be wasted in the interim.

I do not think I have anything further to say except to add
this word : That the Pennsylvania Department of Forestry is
interested with all other foresters and all other practical men

225

and all other scientific investigators, in doing wliat we can to
produce the greatest good. What we are aiming at in P(;nnsyl-
vania is to get results, and I take it that when this problem
is understood by our friends and neighbors, they will equally
be anxious to get results. These will be obtained through var-
ious pathways and by different means, but it is the favorable
result that we are interested in. That is the great goal of all
this effort. We would be very pleased to have any of the dele-
gates and friends who are here call at the Department of For-
estry. Many of you have been there; probably many have not.
You will find it in the north wing of this building, and we usually
liave open house from seven o'clock in the morning until ten
o'clock at night. Sometimes the doors are open all night, so
we are ready to receive our friends at any hour of the day or
night. I thank you for this final opportunity to say a word
to you, and trust that your visit in Pennsylvania will not have
been without some permanent result. (Applause).

MR. THALHEIMER : I would like to ask the delegates that
are here whether any of them has had any communication with
the Italian Government, to find out their success in raising
the chestnut. *

THE CHAIRMAN: We are going to refer the speaker to
the Secretary of the Conference for that information, and he
can give it immediately after adjournment. The Secretary is
thoroughly informed on the subject.

Although I have been very positively instructed not to do
so, I must at this time call for a word, at least, from the Secre-
tary of the Pennsylvania Blight Commission, Mr. Harold Pierce.
(Applause).

MR. PEIRCE : Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen : As Secretary
of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, in behalf of the Com-
mission, I want to thank both you, Mr. Chairman and the mem-
bers of the Conference, for the close and business-like attention
that has been given to the various discussions that have taken
place, and while at times there has been great diversity of
opinion, yet from that very diversity we trust much practical
good may result.

15

226

At the request of Governor Tener, the Commission prepared
the programme, but in arranging for the speakers it tried to
jjrovide for full and frank discussions by both the supporters
and opponents of what is known as "the cutting out process,"
so that every one would have a fair chance of being heard.

If at any time any one has information of value to impart,
the Commission will be only too glad to hear from such persons,
and we assure you that anything which may seem likely to be
able either to curb or cure the disease, will be gladly given a
trial by the Commission.

The Commission considers it has been wise to make what has
been called a dead line, believing the ravages of the disease
can thereby be much better controlled than to allow the disease
to continue to spread as it did for several years, without any
attempt to keep it within bounds.

At the same time, the Commission intends to do all it can
to carry on investigations both in the field and in the laboratory,
hoping that in the near future some cure may be ascertained.
We, however, believe that if we are to succeed, we must have
the earnest co-operation of all the states, for it seems self-
evident to us that Pennsylvania cannot win without such co-
operation. We therefore earnestly trust every member of this
Conference will go from here to his home imbued with the feel-
ing that he will do all in his power to bring about such co-
operation. Without that, I fear it will only be a short time
before all the chestnut trees along the Atlantic seaboard will
be in a dying state.

As far as possible, the resolutions which this Conference
has passed, will be carried out by the Pennsylvania Commis-
sion, and in closing, I want again to thank you both for the
close and businesslike character of this Conference and to urge
earnestly that if anyone here learns of anything which may be
of value, either in controlling or curing this disease, that he
Avill at once inform us of it.

Messrs. Bodine, Merkel, and Rane then escorted the Governor
to the floor of the Convention.

THE CHAIEMAN : Governor Tener, I desire to report to you
that during these two days we have been discussing the various
phases of the chestnut tree blight. Many valuable points have

been brought out. The main conclusions of the Conference have
been embodied in a set of resolutions, duly adopted this after-
noon. It has been arranged, through the courtesy of your own
State, to publish the proceedings of this Conference, in order
that what has been said and done here may become widely known
for the benefit of the fight against this terrible tree disease.

And now, Sir, our deliberations have about ended, and it is
a privilege, and I deem it an honor, for me to turn back to you
the duty as presiding officer of this meeting, as I received that
duty from you only yesterday. (Applause).

GOVERNOR TENER: Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentle-
men: While it has not been possible for me to attend the
meetings of your Convention since its opening and to listen to
the various papers that have been read or to take part in the
deliberations of the meeting, yet from time to time information
has come to me, and I have learned that your meeting has in
every way been an interesting one and that you all will go
home feeling that you have probably learned something from
this meeting and from each other.

I hope that the purpose of the convention was sufficient to
justify calling you here. Many of you have come at some incon-
venience, I am quite sure. Pennsylvania will be very glad, —
and I am particularly pleased to say it, — at her own expense,
little or great as it may be, to print the proceedings of this con-
ference and to give the report the very widest circulation. I am
glad that you have seen fit to come here and to take the interest
you have.

I have learned also that at times there was some spirited
argument between you, and very often we know that out of a
great conflict comes the greatest peace and the best understand-
ing, and I hope that that is the case in this instance.

And now, as you go to your respective homes, I hope you
Avill carry with you a very pleasant thought of this convention
and that, in the days to come, your associations here, your de-
liberations, and all that you have done, will prove a most pleas-
ant recollection to you all. We are glad indeed to have had
you in our Capital City with us on this occasion. Now that
you are going, I wish you Godspeed, happiness, and prosperity in
all your undertakings of life. (Applause).

228

If there is no further business for the Convention, I will
entertain a motion to adjourn.

DE. MUERILL : I move you, Sir, that we adjourn.
Seconded by Professor Eane.
The motion was put and carried.

GOVEENOE TENEE: I now declare this Convention ad
journed sine die.

ADDENDA.

Newport, Perry County, Pa.,

February 21, 1912.

To the Officers of the Chestnut Blight Convention:

^to'

I desire to submit a statement in connection with this blighted
wood question which is not the professional opinion of any
representative of the Chemical or Forestry Department of the
State, or any scientist; but is presented merely as the thought
of a layman who has had considerable experience in the chest-
nut wood extract business, and who has conceived the idea that
it might possibly, in a way, have some bearing upon matters
under consideration by the convention. It is submitted merely
as an individual hypothesis, which may be entirely wrong.

W. M. BENSON.

229

CHESTNUT BLIGHT AND ITS POSSIBLE REMEDY.

By W. M. BENSON, NEWPORT, PA.

In discussing the causes of the chestnut blight perhaps the
past experience of the extract manufacturers who make extract
for tanning leather, may be of assistance in pointing out the
proper remedy.

The chestnut wood received at the extract factories was at
first supposed to be all alike in tanning strength, but costly
experience proved that wood from good, strong lime, shale or
limestone lands is far richer in tannin than wood from soils
that are rocky, sterile, and which contain little lime. This
difference is so marked that even the workmen in the leach
house at extract plants can tell when wood from a lime shale
or limestone region is being leached, simply by the unusual in-
crease in the strength of the liquors obtained from such wood.
Chemical analyses proved the same thing beyond all question,
that in order for chestnut timber to attain its full tannin
strength, it must grow on limestone or lime shale soil. This
is not a secret of the extract trade, but a trade fact that extract
manufacturers want the public to know, as it explains why
the extract manufacturer will take wood from one region, but
will refuse wood from some other locality, where analyses of
the wood, and practical results in the leach house show a wide
difference in the yield of extract per cord of wood. It pays
better to pay freight for long distances to obtain wood from a
lime shale or limestone region, than to buy wood that is closer
to the factory, but which has less tannin.

An analysis of the ashes from the extract factory which was
made at State College in the Spring of 1911 shows that there
is over 40 per cent, of lime in the ashes. The analysis was made
with a view of selling the ashes for the potash they were sup-
posed to contain, but the result was surprising inasmuch as
the analysis showed about one-third of one per cent, of potash,

230

while as before stated it showed over 40 per cent, of lime. Is
it not a remarkable thing to realize that a chestnut tree wants
120 times as much lime for its composition as it does of potash?

Another fact from the manufacturer's costly experieace with
the lime in extract liquors is the expense it costs him to keep
the oxalate of lime which is leached from the wood from coat-
ing up the copper tubes in the evaporating apparatus, or vacuum
pans as they are called. Oxalic acid has a powerful affinity for
lime, and it is used as a test in the chemical laboratories to
detect the presence of lime in a solution. In the boiling down
process the lime combines with the oxalic acid in the tan liquors,
and it is precipitated as oxalate of lime, and coats the 4,500
tubes of the evaporating apparatus Avith a coating which has
to be removed by hammering it loose. Acids that will eat the
lime ofl: the copper tubes will also eat the copper of the pans,
so mechanical and other means must be used to keep the tubes
free. It is no small job to do this; and while the constant
presence of lime in chestnut tan liquors is one of the drawbacks
to evaporating liquors economically, the fact of the j^resence
of lime in the liquors is regarded as a good sign of plent}' of
tannin in the wood.

Now the writer has little or no scientific knowledge of the
chestnut blight, further than having seen it and being able to
recognize it in the woods, but would suggest for your further
thought and consideration, the supposition that it is due to a
lack of lime in the soils in which such blighted wood is grow-
ing, and that a blighted tree is simply a tree that is in the pro-
cess of being starved to death for lack of lime. If this is true
then blighted wood will be found on soils that are known to
lack in lime, and on the contrary the soils where the chestnut
tree attains its greatest size and age will be found on analysis
to be composed of a considerable proportion of lime.

The map shown in this convention which outlined the area
in which the chestnut blight is at its worst, shows the worst
affected area to be in the vicinity of New York City, Long
Island, portions of Connecticut, New Jersey, and Delaware.
No doubt nearly all who attend this convention know of the
palisades of the Hudson, and how little lime such a weather
resisting rock is likely to have. The sea sands of New Jersey,

231

Long Island, and the clays soils of the Connecticut Valley,
which are made up of the granite erosion of the White Moun-
tains, all yield but little lime. Granite soils yield potash, but
our analysis shows that our chestnut tree needs 120 times as
much lime as potash. It was brought out at the convention
that the f)lace where the chestnut trees attained the greatest
age was in Eastern Tennessee, where they grew to the immense
size of six feet or more through. If you will take a geological
map of Tennesee, and look at the rock formation in the region
of Knoxville, you will be impressed with the large area of lime-
stone and lime shale outcrops in that region. Please note that
it was also stated in the Convention that there is no blight as
far as is now known in the whole State of Tennessee. If trees
can be shown there that are 500 years old and free from blight,
growing on a lime shale or limestone soil, it will go far to suj)-
port our supposition that the blight is not so much a dread
disease that threatens to sweep away our native chestnut trees,
as it is an evidence that blighted trees are merely trees that are
starved for want of lime in the soil on which tlie tree is growing.
It will not take over six weeks or two months to collect sam-
ples of soils from every state represented at the convention,
and analyze them. If the soil where the blighted trees are
growing show on analysis a low lime content, as against a
high lime content where the trees grow large, then we will know
almost beyond the shadow of a doubt that the blight is most
likely to be caused by lack of lime, but in order to fully prove
the supposition, I would 7'ecommend that solutions of lime water
he soaked into the ground thoroughly around trees known to he
ajfected unth the Might, and soak the ground, around the trees
as far as the hranches ahove extend out. Soak the ground thor-
oughly for a distance of two or three feet down, so that every
root hig and little will get a little lime in solution in which shape
it is readily taken up hy the roots. Then spray the trees above
ivith the Bordeaux mixture as well. The reason why I recom-
mend lime water solution soaked into the ground, instead of
scattering lime around under the trees is this : It is known
that the sap in blighted trees is sour; this sourness is not the
natural sourness of tannic acid, but an abnormal sourness;
therefore every little fibre and rootlet must be fed lime to cor-

dis

232

rect the sourness of the sap, and cause a normal, healthy sap
to flow or start this spring before the leaves come out. Lime
scattered on the ground under the trees would do the same thing
in time, but it would take months for occassional rains to soak
ihe lime down to the roots.

What we are particularly interested in at this time is to get
positive evidence into the hands of the convention officers as
soon as possible ; hence I recommend the lime water test in order
to get quicker and more positive results, rather than the plan
of scattering lime under the trees which is less costly than
the lime water plan. Water takes up only one seven-hundredth
part of its weight of lime; 80 pounds of linie, costing about 10
to 12 cents 'VNliolesale, will therefore make 56,000 pounds of
lime water, or 28 tons. The lime would cost less than the labor
of getting the water, but for the purpose of getting positive evi-
dence soon it is here recommended.

If the tree grows a longer set of sprouts this coming summer
than it did last summer, or if the leaves are a more healthy
color, then the Avhole case will have been fully proved that we
have a specific for the blight disease, and it will no longer have
any terrors for us. We Avill be able to preserve the trees we
now have, as well as cultivate them to advantage wherever we
like, if we choose to go to the expense of applying the lime arti-
ficially.

From the extract makers point of view, I would like to see
the general law proved by experiment that all trees having a
high percentage of tannin in their bark or wood, or both, require
lime for their vigorous growtli. For instance, the bark of the
pear tree is known to contain a fair percentage of tannin. If
the tree blights, is it due to a lack of lime in the soil? or is it
from some other cause? Will the bark of the pear tree show
a high percentage of lime on analysis? If this should prove to
be the case then the Horticultural Department of the State will
be in possession of a valuable fact, and the extract maker will
know to a certainty just what localities are the best in which
to locate an extract factory, by studying a geological map show-
ing the limestone and lime shale outcrops, and locating all sorts
of tannin producing trees that he may wish to utilize in the
future. We already know that the bark of the rock oak which

233

contains 37 per cent, of lime in ,the ashes of the bark, and there
seems to be a general law in nature that tannin bearing trees
must have lime in greater quantities than other trees.

The first few analyses of the soils where blighted chestnut
is growing will put the Forestry Departments of the states
represented at the convention in position to know in a few
weeks whether this supposition of a lack of lime in the soils in
blighted tree areas is borne out by facts. If it is found to be
so, then the costly and irritating job of forcing reluctant owners
of blighted chestnut trees into cutting them down at their own
expense will have been avoided, and a policy of preservation
adopted in its place. The latter policy will be much easier to
put in force, as it Avill have the hearty co-operation of the public,
in the generous efforts of the states to assist owners of blighted
trees to save them. If the Forestry Departments can be put
in possession of a proper remedy for the blight by this single
convention, it Avill emphasize the value of such conventions,
and demonstate the wisdom of the legislators of this State,
who so far-sightedly made the convention possible by their
appropriation.

FIELD AVORK OF THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT COM-
MISSION.

By THOMAS E. FRANCIS, FIELD SUPERVISOR.

During the six months the Held force has been at work, the
field agents have been trained and organized, and the general
line of western advance determined. Owners of infected wood-
lots, and the public generally have been warned of the existence
of the disease.

The general plan which has been followed is to place one
man in charge of the work in a county, under the direction of
the field supervisor. The man in charge of the county usually
has an assistant, and the two work out from the same head-
quarters but cover different territory. When one community
has been carefully scouted for the blight, the men move to an
adjoining district, and in this way cover' the county. In the
meanwhile, timber owners are interviewed and the subject is

234

called to the attention of the public by means of field meetings,
lectures, talks before Farmers' Institutes, Grange meetings, and
the like.

The work from early September until December consisted
almost entirely of scouting for the disease. Later in the season,
the field agents marked trees for removal and devoted much
lime to meetings with timber owners in the field, and general
educational work. The most important result of our field work,
is the interest and spirit of active co-operation we have aroused
among the owners of wood-lots in areas where the chestnut
tree bark disease has been found. The spirit has been aroused
by the activity and honest efforts of our field men. Their in-
spections have been thoroughly and carefully made, and their
talks at local institutes, grange, and special meetings called
for the purpose of discussing the chestnut tree bark disease,
have been instructive and interesting. These meetings have
been well advertised locally and well attended. In Fulton,
Franklin, Huntingdon, Bedford, Mifflin, Blair, Centre, and
Snyder counties I have personally attended and addressed meet-
ings called by the local field men, at which the attendance ranged
from forty to two hundred and fifty woodland owners and inter-
ested persons. At these meetings a lively interest was shown,
and at every meeting promises of active co-operation and help
in locating and eradicating the disease, if found, have been
given. Not a single instance of antagonism to our work and
methods has come under my observation, and following every
meeting, requests have come to us for the in.spection of individual
tracts, showing that the Avoodlaud owners not only approve our
methods, but are anxious for an opportunity to do their part
in assisting with our work. In fact, many cases of blight have
been found and reported by owners as a result of instruction
received at these meetings.

Judges, school teachers, ministers, farmers, business men,
imd prominent men interested in the welfare of the State have
addressed our meetings and expressed their approval of our
work. As direct evidence of willing co-operation, fifty-seven
woodland owners in the previously named counties have removed
and properly burned eight hundred and thirty-six infected trees
{aid stumps from December 1, 1911 to February 15, 1912. In

i

235

every case, an explanation of the object of our work has. secured
voluntary action on the part of the owners. This is the best
evidence that the people of the State are interested, and will
accord us the strong co-operation which is essential to carry out
successfully the proposed plan of controlling the disease.

A EEPORT ON SCOUT WORK ON THE NORTH BENCH
OF BALD EAGLE MOUNTAIN, BETWEEN SYLVAN
DELL AND WILLIAMS PORT, LYCOMING COUNTY,
PA.

By H. E. WELLS, FIELD SUPERVISOR.

In order to determine as nearly as possible the number of
eases of infection existing in Sylvan Dell Park and the bench
land along the north slope of the Bald Eagle Mountain, a care-
ful inspection was begun at Sylvan Dell. The park land was
chosen on account of the assured co-operation of Mr. F. B.
Thrall, ])resident of the club, and the members of the Associa-
tion.

The work of felling infected trees and burning the bark and
brush vijas carefully done, and because of the nearness of the
park to the road, many interested persons had an opportunity
to see the blight and practical methods of control.

Seventy-five acres of park land were inspected. Twenty-five
acres had been previously gone over in a very thorough manner
during the last two years, and all dead, dying, or defective trees,
together with brush, undergrowth, and all forest weeds, were
removed. The result is an open, clean looking, thrifty stand;
and, most significant of all, hut one infected tree could he found.
This tree was a large one, fifteen inches in diameter, growing
close to the road through the park, and but slightly infected.
The remaining fifty acres lie in the eastern part of the park
and from a forestal point of view, are in a run-down condition.

No care or management has been given the fifty-acre portion
of the park, and the blight, as well as many other fungous
diseases, have had full opportunity to thrive unchecked. It
was an admirable place in which to study the blight, for it was
present in every stage of development. Sprouts, saplings, young

236

thrifty trees, as well as old, over-mature standards were found
infected. The forest floor is mostly rocks, there being little or
no soil cover at all. The chestnut runs about 40 per cent, of
the stand, with 25 per cent, rock oak, and the remainder a mix-
ture of red, black, and white oak.

The majority of the infections apparently started in the tops.
Some trees had to be climbed to identify the infection. In most
cases the characteristic appearance of persistent leaves on
girdled branches or on infected sprouts below, large lesions or
blisters which have girdled the trunk, were sufficient to remove
doubt as to whether the tree had blight.

It may be said here that in scout work the closest observation
must be given to all suspicious trees, or trees with danger sig-
nals. The most conspicuous danger signals in summer or winter
are the persistent dead leaves. In summer, these leaves are
light yellow in color, in contrast with the health}^ green leaves.
As they are killed slowly by a gradual stoppage of sap, they
remain rather flattened instead of curling and wrinkling as do
leaves killed by frost in the fall. Their color is about the same
in summer as that of persistent leaves in winter killed by frost
and causes other than the blight. This yellowish shade tinged
with a greenish hue like that of hay in the mow, often lasts long
into the winter. Generally, though, the persistent leaves in
Avinter nre of a distinctly red rusty brown color, curled, twisted,
frayed, and blown to shreds on the edges. On an infected or
girdled branch, the leaves are persistent. In a healthy limb,
when sap action stops in the fall, little corky layers are formed
at the base of the leaf stem, and the leaf splits off at this point.
In a diseased limb, the sap is held up and the leaf is not cut off
by the corky layers.

With the leaves, small undeveloped and unopened burs are
often seen. In some instances trees are found with almost every
bur remaining, closed and nearly full size. The burs are dark
in color and blend with the color of the leaves. If the burs are
few in number and scattered, especially if open, the chances of
blight being present are small.

Another characteristic danger signal is the growth of suckers
or sprouts in a ring on girdle below a blister or lesion, extend-
ing around the tree. The upward flow of the sap being stopped.

237

the tendeucy is to jjiit out tliese laterals. These sprouts are
almost always infected and quickly girdled, so in late fall or
winter, a tree with suspicious persistent leaves and burs in the
top and leaves on lateral shoots, is very apt to be infected.

As was said, apparently most infection started at the tops
of the trees as evidenced by the appearance of the leaves, etc.
Yet many large trees were found to be infected upon a careful
tree to tree examination, at the base, and the only visible out-
ward sign of the blight was the reddish yellow pustules, forming
in the deep fissures of the bark, where the new inner bark is
breaking through. Upon cutting into this region, the diseased,
discolored inner bark next the wood was found filled with the
mycelium of the fungus.

On old trees it takes more time for the disease to appear on
the outer surface of the bark in the form of pustules, and often
a well defined blister of mycelium is found on the inside of the
bark showing no sign of its presence on the outside. For this
reason the complete peeling and burning of the bark on the
trunk of a tree that is going to be used is essential.

In the inspection work that was carried on, specimens show-
ing the blight in various stages and under different conditions
were found, and among them, one in particular is worth men-
tioning. A large blister nearly a foot in diamter was discovered
and a great many of the pustules were rubbed off or destroyed.
All over the surface of the lesion were numerous holes made
apparently by wood-peckers, probably in search of the insect
larvae that are commonly found under dead bark. Is it. not
possible for these birds to get spores on their feet and bills,
carry them to other trees which may not be infected, and upon
searching in that bark for more insects, thus deposit spores
of the blight?

The infections found in the park numbered thirty, twenty-nine
of which are in the part that has been allowed to go without
management of any kind. In the first inspection made of the
park last fall only three or four trees were found to be infected.
Accordingly, on finding so much infection here it was decided
to make a careful strip survey of the bench land lying between
the State reserve on the north side of Bald Eagle Mountain,
and the Susquehanna river. The tracts are mostly farmers'

238

woodlots, ranging in size from a few acres np to several linn-
dred acres. The soil is poor there and rocky, and gets poorer
in quality closer to the mountain. The stands are in about the
same condition as the eastern portion of the j)ark, except where
some cutting has been done, and here the brush and growth of
forest weeds is very dense. The chestnut runs from 20 per cent.
to 40 per cent, of the stand, and chestnut oak is present together
with red, black, and white oaks.

In direct contrast with the condition found in this i)ortion
of Sylvan Dell Park is the condition observed on the Fish and
Game Preserve owned by the Jay Cooke Estate. This property
is several hundred acres in extent but only about one hundred
acres have been inspected. This portion of the tract is located
four miles northeast from Waterville in Cummings townshiji,
in the west-central part of Lycoming county. The timber is
fully 90 per cent, chestnut and is a clean, thrifty young pole
stand averaging six to ten inches in diamter, with 250 trees to
the acre. On less than five acres fully thirty trees were found
to be infected with blight. The characteristic persistent leaves
of last summer were present in every case, but pustules were
visible only at a height of ten to twelve feet. As was stated,
the trees are unusually healthy and thrifty in appearance and
no signs of insect work were found. This center is, at the pres-
ent time, the most northwesterly infection known.

The map accompanying this report gives the relative size of
the tracts, and shows approximately the centers of infection by
a cross in a circle. The numerals indicate the number of trees
in the center.

The most typical center or spot infection was found on the
southwest corner of the Hamm tract (see map). There is tim-
ber all around this point, except on the west and northwest.
On the west it is cut over, and a young second growth of saplings
is present, while on the northwest is a cleared field. The real
center of this spot was a large tree about sixteen inches in diam-
eter, infected from top to bottom. The bark was fairly plastered
with pustules and all of the young saplings (of which there
were three or four growing from the base), were badly infected.
It seems reasonable to suppose that this infection has been
present for two or three years.

239

Infections of every kind were found al, varying distances from
this badly infected tree. Fifty feet away, two saplings, six
inches in diameter, were found, upon climbing, to be infected,
and the only sign of the blight at a distance was a cluster of dead
leaves on a terminal shoot. On climbing, a blister about four
inches in diameter was found, but pustules had not been formed,
the infection having been caused probably late last summer.
This lesion was about ten feet from the very tip of the leader.
It was found to be girdled and pustules were present at the
beginning of last year's growth.

A short distance away a little to the southeast, a small tree,
six inches in diameter, was found infected only at the base.
Another tree one hundred feet west in the cut-over area was
badly infected. This tree was dead, having been girdled with
an axe, and the ring of bark removed; but the blight was fully
developed and the bark was covered with pustules above the
portion of the tree girdled by the axe.

The largest center was found on the Keefer tract (see map).
Here twenty-three trees, all saplings, were found on a circular
spot fifty yards in diamter. Only one other tree was found
outside this center, and that at the extreme southern end of the
tract.

Another center less than a quarter of a mile east from the
first center described, was found on the line between Hamm
and Stuempfle, and the most badly infected tree was one 10 to
12 inches in diameter, to which the wires of the fence were
nailed. The tree was dead, and the tunnels of borers and the
larvae in them were found. This tree showed very well tlie
appearance of the blight on old bark, and from it several good
sections were obtained. Around this tree the young sprouts
and two saplings, four inches in diameter, were badly infected.

The strip was worked, in the manner indicated, and when a
center was found, every tree within a varying radius depending
on the size of the center was carefully examined until no more
trees could be found that were infected. Often at the outer
limits of one center the edge of another center would be en-
countered, and this new spot w^ould be studied in the same way.
Here and there, scattering cases of infection were found, not

240

in a center, though i^erhaps the source of the infection was one.
These are shown on the map as small circles without a cross.

In the same way a careful inspection of the Fisher and Savidge
tract has been carried on. Messrs. Fisher and Savidge of Wil-
liamsport and Sunbury respectively, have planned to cut off
and graft with Paragon scions, the natural stock on 550 acres
of land located one mile west of Essick Heights. This land
is admirably adapted to the optimum growth of chestnut, and
in fact, in some portions of the tract, which comprises in all
640 acres, nothing else grows. The stand is dense young sap-
ling sprouts 12 to 15 years of age, though here and there patches
of old mature timber are found. The purity and density of the
stand, however, without a doubt accounts for the number of
infections i^resent, which exceeds greatly any condition here-
tofore found in Lycoming county.

The first spot or center was found not over 100 yards west
from the house of G. H. Newman (on map), and it is definitely
known that summer before last wild doves roosted here and
that they flew in here whenever disturbed. Adjoining was a
field of buckwheat where they were in the habit of feeding. The
infection or center was entirely on a tract of less than one-fourth
acre in size and the trees were nearly all thoroughly infected,
mostly in the tops. Several trees showed persistent leaves in
the tops, but otherwise there were no signs of the blight. Upon
climbing these trees the first stages of the blight were found
in a slight splitting of the bark together with a few pustules
just beginning to become visible. It seems likely, therefore,
to suppose that this infection was carried here by these birds,
or at least that it was spread locally by them to other centers
near at hand. In all nearly 400 trees were found to be infected,
and these were found grouped in six or eight centers. Very
effective co-operation is being given the Commission by the
owners of these tracts in this region. However, there is a solid
strip of chestnut timber four to five miles wide and eight to ten
miles long, stretching from the Ogdonia down the Loyalsock
Creek. It will be impracticable to attempt to scout this region
this winter, but with the opening up of spring, by placing a

241

crew of four or five uieu in here imder the direction of a man
familiar with the territory, the whole region will be carefully
fcicouted.

All known infections will be destroyed and the men working
in this territory cutting tannery wood, are thoroughly familiar
with the appearance, spread, and danger of the disease, so that
we can look for local assistance, and that in the end is the aim
of our work.

In conclusion, taking everything into consideration, good
results have been obtained by winter work. Persistent leaves
are visible to a trained eye for long distances through the woods.
However, deep snow or a covering of sleet interferes with the
finding of pustules at the base of the tree. Their dying branches
begin to show most prominently during late summer, hence
August and early September is the ideal time for scouting work.

The strip along the river actually inspected contains 452
acres, and this was covered in about a month of actual inspection,
for considerable time was used up in superintending the removal
of infected trees.

A fair estimate is 4 acres per day per man for a close inspec-
tion, working the tract in "50 feet strips. In a very close tree
to tree winter inspection, two men can cover four to five acres
or two to two and a half acres per day per man.

LONGEVITY OF LIFE OF SPOEES.

The following report is submitted in response to the request
of Mr. E. A. Weimer, that an attempt be made to germinate
spores from an infected piece of chestnut, collected in Monroe
county in July, 1908, and continuously kept in a moist cell at
the Department of Forestry since that date. Forty-four months
after the time of collecting, the status of the fungus is found
to be as below:

16

242

''Pliiladelpliia, April 19, 1912.

Mr. I. C. Williams,

Deputy Commissioner of Forestry,
Harrisburg, Pa.

Dear Mr. Williams: In reply to your letter of April 18, I
can give you the following report:

The fungus on your specimen made a small growth as I at
first reported to you. After however, it had started to produce
a small number of picnidia it ceased to grow, I then began
again, and found that I could cause the spores to germinate.
They in turn made but a small growth, and afterward were
unable to produce any fruiting picnidia. A small part of the
bark which I removed from your specimen was put in a damp
chamber. I was unable to get any growth at all from this. This
shows that the specimen has almost lost life. This loss of
vitality may be due to the Penicillium,. a fungus which has
covered the surface of this specimen. I will return the speci-
men in the bottle to you at once.

Very truly yours,
(Signed) CAROLINE RUMBOLD."

REGISTERED DELEGATES AND GUESTS.

The following names and addresses appear on the official
register of delegates and guests in attendance at the Conference.
It is a matter of regret that a large number of those in attendance
failed to register, although indicating their active interest by
their presence at one or more sessions.

Daniel Adams, 301 Crozier Bldg., Philadelphia, Pa., (Lumbermen's Ex.)

Prof. Geo. G. Atwood, Albany, N. Y.

Dr. J. M. Backenstoe, Emaus, Pa.

Prof. H. P. Baker, Forester, State College, Pa.

Parker Thayer Barnes, Harrisburg, Pa.

Prof. Geo. L.-Barrus, Albany, N. Y.

24.3

H. H. Bechtel, Cincinnati, Ohio. '

George Bell, Marysville, Pa.

F. W. Besley, John Hopkins Univ., Baltimore, Aid.

John Birkinbine, Philadelphia, Pa.

W. F. Blair, Waynesburg, Pa.

Rep. Bloodgood Nurseries, Flushing, N. Y.

Samuel T. Bodine, Villa Nova, Pa.

John Y. Boyd, 222 Market St., Harrisburg, Pa.

H. F. Bright, Ashland, Pa.

H. R. Bristol, Plattsburg, N. Y.

Wm. McC. Brown, Oakland, Md.

Henry G. Bryant, 2013 Walnut St., Phila.,

Geo. H. Campbell, B. & O. R. R., Baltimore, Md.

Chester E. Child, Pres. Lumber Mfrs. Assn., Putman, Conn

Prof. W. D. Clark, State College, Pa.

Dr. Geo. P. Clinton, Conn. Agr. Exp't. Station, New Haven, roim

S. C. demons, 431 Dearborn St., Chicago, 111.

B. F. Cocklin, Mechanicsburg, R. F. D., No. 2, Cumb. Co., Pa.

Prof. J. Franklin Collins, Washington, D. C.

W. G. Conklin, Troxelville, Pa.

Hon. Robert S. Conklin, Commissioner of Forestry, Harrisburg. Ta

Dr. M. T. Cook, New Brunswick, N. J.

W. C. Coombe, Millerstown, Pa. ^

Geo. F. Craig, Rosemont, Pa.

J. C. Cramner, Lehigh University, South Bethlehem, Pa.

Hon. J. W. Crawford, North Bend, Pa.

H. W. Crawford, Conestoga Traction Co., Lancaster, Pa.

W. A. Crawford, Cooperstown, Pa.

Hon. Wm. T. Creasy, Master State Grange, Catawissa, Pa.

Hon. N. B. Critchfield, Secy, or Agriculture, Harrisburg, Pa.

S. L. Cummings, Devv'art, Northumberland Co., Pa.

Prof. Nelson Fithian Davis, Bucknell University, Lewisburg, Pa.

Jos. W. Derrick, care of Harison Townsend, 10th and Chestnut, Phila.

S. B. Detwiler, Executive Officer, C. B. Comm'n., Bala, Pa.

Mrs. S. B. Detwiler, Bala, Pa.

Dr. Samuel G. Dixon, State Health Comm'r., 1900 Race St., Phila.

Dr. Henry S. Drinker, Pres. Lehigh University, South Bethlehem, Pa.

Hon. John J. Dunn, Board of Agriculture, Providence, R. I.

S. B. Elliott, Reynoldsville, Pa.

Elwanger & Bro., Pottstown, Pa.

Dr. J. B. Emerson, 40 E. 41st St., New York City.

S. B. Enterline, Pottsville, Pa.

Samuel L. Eslinger, Lemoyne, Cumb. Co., Pa.

J. K. Esser, Field Agt. Chestnut Tree Blight Comm., Mauch Chunk, Pa.

Thomas Evans, Lebanon, Pa.

Hon. A. B. Farquhar, Pres. Penna. Conservation Asso., York, Pa.

P. S. Fenstermacher, Supt. Trexler Farms, Allentown, Pa.

F. R. Fertig, State Horticultural Inspector, Lebanon, Pa.

Rep. F. & F. Nurseries, Springfield, N. J.

F. W. Finger, Philadelhpia, Pa.

W. Righter Fisher, Bryn Mawr, Pa.

Dr. Wm. R. Fisher, Swiftwater, Pa.

J. W. Fisher, Newport, Tenn.

244

Dr. A. K. Fisher, Bureau of Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.

Amos Fleisher, Newport, Pa.

P. Hartman Fox, Austin, Pa.

James G. Fox, Hummelstown, Pa.

W. W. Frazier, 250 S. 18th St., Philadelphia, Pa.

Thomas E. Francis, Field Agt. C. T. B. Comm'n., Huntingdon, Pa.

Prof. H. R. Fulton, State College, Pa.

Blair Funk, Pequea Creek, Pa.

W. H. Gardner, Basic City, Va.

Samuel R. Gault, Harrisburg, Pa.

Dr. N. J. Giddings, Morgantown, W. Va.

J. M. Goodloe, Bigstone Gap, Va.

C. E. Gosline, Paterson, N. J.

Prof. Arthur H. Graves, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.

E. M. Green, Mt. Union Tanning and Extract Co., Mt. Union, Pa.

W. E. Grove, York Springs, Pa.

Melvin Guptill, Maiden, Mass.

Dr. H. T. Gussow, Ottawa, Canada.

Miss Mary M. Haines, Cheltenham, Pa.

Robert B. Haines Co., Cheltenham, Pa.

Robert W. Hall, Lehigh University, South Bethlehem, Pa.

James L. Hamill, Columbus, Ohio.

J. Linn Harris, Bellefonte, Pa.

Dr. J. W. Harshberger, 4839 Walton Ave., Philadelphia. Pa.

D. S. Hartline, Bloomsburg, Pa.

W. Elmer Houpt, Shippensburg, Pa.

Henry Hawk, 903 16th Avenue, Altoona, Pa.

L. E. Hess, Berwick, Pa.

John K. Hibbs, Field Agt. C. T. B. Comm'n., Philadelphia.

Dr. Samuel S. Hill, Supt. Chronic Insane Asylum, Wernersville, Pa.

G. H. Hollister, Hartford, Conn.

J. E. Holme, care of England, Walton Co., 3rd and Vine, Phila.

E. A. Hoopes, Moylan, Pa.

Dr. A. D. Hopkins, Bureau of Entomology, Washington, D. C.
John Hosfeld, Shippensburg, Pa.
Hon. Josiah Howard, Emporium, Pa.
Geo. G. Hutchinson, Warrior's Mark, Pa.

F. B. Jewett, Brooklyn, Pa.

Henry C. Johnson & Co., Luzerne, Pa.

Joseph Johnston, 3940, Lancaster Ave., Phila.

Miss Florence M. Jones, Philadelphia, Pa.

Miss Martha Jones, Conshohocken, Pa.

Hon. George B. Keezell, Keezeltown, Va.

George W. Kehr, Pa. State Branch Nat. Con. Asso., Harrisburg.

George A. Kerr, care of John H. Heald & Co., Lynchburg, Va.

W. S. W. Kirby, Philadelphia, Pa.

Theodore Klein, Ariel, Pa.

William Kline, West Hanover, Pa.

H. C. Klinger, Liverpool, Pa.

Q. U. S. Krody, Lancaster, Pa.

J. Landis, Bunker Hill, W. Va.

W. J. Lawson, Andora Nurseries, Chestnut Hill, Pa.

Chas. E. Lewis, Orono, Maine.

245

Edw. Lienhard, Mauch Chunk, Pa.

K. Lockwood, State Chemist, New York City.

Hon. Amos F. Lunn, State Senate, No. Smithfield, R. I.

Lindley R. Lynch, Providence, R. I.

Garfield McAllister, Harrisburg, Pa.

Prof. Chas. A. McCue, Dover, Del.

John McNabb, Howard Estate, Lower Merion, Pa.

James E. McNeal, Lancaster, Pa.

Miss M. A. Maffet, 264 S. Franklin St., Wilkes-Barre, Pa.

E. Mather, Harrisburg, Pa.

E. S. Mays, Rochester, N. Y.

Herman W. Merkel, Zoological Park, New York City.

W. E. Merriman, Narrows, Va.

Dr. John Mickleborough, 489 Putman Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y.

J. J. H. Miller, Waynesville, Pa.

C. S. Minehart, Orrstown, Pa.

Sidney R. Miner, Penna. Conservation Asso., Wilkes-Barre, Pa.

C. G. Minick, Ridgway, Pa.

F. F. Moore, Amhert, Mass.

James N. Moore, Legislative Ref. Bureau, Harrisburg, Pa.

H. A. Moore, Mgr. Oak Extract Co., Newport, Pa.

Hon. Jesse B. Mowry, Chepachet, R. I.

Harry J. Mueller, Hartleton, Pa.

Prof. W. A. Murrill, Bronx Botanical Garden, New York City.

C. L. Nessly, Florin, Pa.

S. E. Nevin, Landenburg, Pa.

J. B. S. Norton, State Pathologist, College Park, Md.

Hon. W. C. Norton, Waymart, Pa.

J. S. Omwake, Shippensburg, Pa.

A. N. Palmer, Field Agt. Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

S. E. Pannebaker, East Waterford, Pa.

Hon. Raymond A. Pearson, Albany, N. Y*

Harold Peirce, Secy. P. C. T. B. C, Haverford, Pa.

E. T. Pierce, York, Pa.

Peters, Bryne & Co., Ardmore, Pa.

John M. Phillips, Board of Game Commissioners, Harrisburg, Pa.

Prof. F. W. Rane, State Forester, Boston, Mass.

Prof. W. Howard Rankin, Ithaca, N. Y.

Prof. Donald Reddick, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y.

Dr. H. S. Reed, Blacksburg, Va.

W. A. H. Reeder, Reading, Pa.

J. G. Reist, Mount Joy, Pa.

C. Reublinger, Harrisburg, Pa.
P. B. Rice, Lewistown, Pa.
John Rick, Reading, Pa.

P. S. Ridsdale, Secy. American Forestry Asso., Washington, D. C.

L. M. Rockey, York Haven, Pa.

Keller E. Rockey, Philadelphia, Pa.

H. Justice Rood, Millersville, Pa.

J. W. Root, A. W. Root & Bro., Manheim, No. 1, Pa.

Dr. J. T. Rothrock, West Chester, Pa.

Hon. H. B. Rowland, Sanatoga Inn, Pottstown, Pa.

Dr. Caroline Rumbold, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

D. C. Rupp, Shiremanstown, Pa.

246

David Russell, Shlppensburg, Pa.

A. F. Satterthwaite, Harrisburg, Pa.

Oliver D. Schock, Hamburg, Pa.

F. D. Search, care Frank D. Search & Co., Shickshinny, No. 1, Pa.

Dr. Augustine D. Selby, Ohio Agr. Expt. Station, Wooster, Ohio.

J. W. Seltzer, Coburn, Pa.

C. E. Seville, McConnellsburg, Pa.

S. T. Seybert, Berwick, Pa.

W. E. Shafer, Mifflinburg, Pa.

C. Shenk, Lebanon, Pa.

W. C. Shepard, Asst. Forester, P. R. R., Philadelphia, Pa.

John L. Shibeck, Cresco, Pa.

S. L. Smedley, Bala, Pa.

Edgar H. Smith, Elimsport, Pa.

C. M. Smith, Scranton, Pa.

Dr. J. Russell Smith, Penna. Conservation Asso., Swarthmore, Pa.
Heber L. Smith, Reading, Pa.

D. A. Smith, Shlppensburg, Pa.
Michael Smyser, York, Pa.

Hon. Henry C. Suavely, Cleona, Pa. ~~

Dr. F. Herbert Snow, Harrisburg, Pa.
C. K. Sober, Lewisburg, Pa.
Dr. Perley Spaulding, Washington, D. C.
Lewis E. Staley, Mont Alto, Pa.
Geo. E. Stein, East Prospect, Pa.

F. R. Stevens, Agriculturist, L. V. R. R., Geneva, N. Y.
Prof. Fred. C. Stewart, N. Y. Agr. Expt. Station, Geneva, N. Y.
Geo. D. Stroh, Pittston, Pa.
0. T. Swan, Forest Service, Washington, D. C.
Luke H. Swank, Swank Bldg., Johnstown, Pa.
F. H. Swayze, Western Electric Co., 11th & York, Phila.
William Teas, Marion, Va.
A. Thalheimer, Reading, Pa.
Rep. Thomson Chemical Co., Baltimore, Md.
A. L. Towson, Smithsburg, Md.
Albert H. Tuttle, University of Virginia.
R. C. Walton, Field Agt. P. C. T. B. C, Philadelphia, Pa.
Allen G. Walton, Hummelstown, Pa.
Allen K. Walton, Waltonville, Pa.
R. A. Waldron, State College, Pa.

Mrs. Wm. C. Warren, 432 W. Stafford St., Philadelphia, Pa.
Prof. Wesley Webb, Secretary State Board of Agriculture, Dover, Del.
W. H. Weber, Pres. The Munson-Whitaker Co., .381 Fourth Ave., New York
City.

E. A. Weimer, Lebanon, Pa.

R. A. Wheeler, Kennett Square, No. 4, Pa.

Hon. N. P. Wheeler, Wheeler & Dusenbury, Endeavor, Pa.

Hon. I. C. Williams, Dep. Com. of Forestry, Harrisburg, Pa.

Mrs. I. C. Williams, Royersford, Pa.

J. R. Williams, Rector, Pa.

Jos. R. Wilson, Field Agt. P. C. T. B. C, Philadelphia, Pa.

J. K. Wingert, Chambersburg, Pa.

H. B. Wolf, Field Agt. P. C. T. B. C, Philadelphia, Pa.

INDEX.

A.

Tapf.

Act creating Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, 131

Address of welcome by Governor Tener, 15

Address by Chairman R. A. Pearson , 19

Air currents as carriers of conidia, 51

Appropriation to investigate blight, 45

Appropriation by Penna. Legislature 106

Appropriation , how used , 205

Ascospores, vitality of, 219

Atwood , George G. , remarks by , 24

Atwood , George G. , effect of drought , IIG

Attractions of Harrisburg, 123

B.

Backenstoe, Dr. J. M. , remarks by, 165

Bacterial investigation, result of, 191

Baker, Dr. H. P., The blight and practice of forestry, 137

Barrus, G. L. , Report as to prevalence of blight in New York State, 158

Beetles on chestnut trees , 184

Benson, W. M., A possible remedy for chestnut blight, 229

Besley, Prof. F. W. , Report upon the blight in Maryland, 169

Birds and chestnut tree insects , 200

Birds as distributors of blight spores 103

Birds in the chestnut groves , 97

Blight, medical treatment of the, 57

Blight in New Jersey in 1898 102

Blight, plan to combat, 140

Blight, possibility of control 181

Blight , infections in Lycoming county , 239

Bodine , Samuel T. , remarks by , 20

Braunberg, Mr., Value of Penna. chestnut and damage sustained, 171

Bureau of Plant Industry, Report on blight 177

Burning stumps, necessity for, 213

Burr worm , ravages of the , 95

C.

Cassell , Mr. , Remarks by I95

Cause of chestnut blight , 70

Chestnut bark disease — can it be controlled? 40

Chestnut bark disease — its remarkable spread 44

(247)

248

Page.

Chestnut bark disease infections , 50

Chestnut bark disease — recent notes on, 48

Chestnut blight in Connecticut, 81

Chestnut blight and forestry, 137

Chestnut blight and constructive consei-vation, 144

Chestnut blight a National loss, 145

Chestnut blight, history of, 29

Chestnut blight, method for locating infections, 216

Chestnut blight and possible remedy, 229

Chestnut blight , work of the , 34

Chestnut burr worm , the , 84

Chestnut culture , 83

Chestnuts as stock-food , 101

Chestnut timber — growth and value, 144

Chestnut timber in Penna. , 16

Chestnut trees, destruction of, 17

Chestnut tree diseases of the past 83

Chestnut trees, general distribution of, 38

Chestnut trees , how to perpetuate 209

Child , Chester E. , Remarks by , 107

Cicada in chestnut orchards, 95

Clark, Prof. W. D., Remarks by, Ill

Clinton, Prof. George P. , Remarks by , 21

Clinton, Prof. George P., Chestnut blight facts and theories, 75

Clinton, Prof. George P., Report upon blight in Connecticut, 154

Collins, Prof. J. Franklin, Illustrated lecture, 28

Collins, Prof. J. Franklin, Treatment of orchard and ornamental trees, .. 59

Collins, Prof. J. Franklin, Cutting out blight process, 192

Combating plant and animal pests, 49

Commission, Penna., Chestnut Tree Blight, 7

Commission's policy, 134

Committee on Resolutions , 99

Committee on Resolutions, Report of, 206

Committee to escort Governor, 220

Conference, necessity for holding 7

Connecticut, blight in, 107

Control of the blight, 63

Cook , Dr. Melville T. , Remarks by 23

Cook, Dr. Melville T., The blight in New Jersey, 161

Cranmer, J. C, Remarks by, US

Cutting out diseased parts, experience with, 67

Cutting out experiments at Washington, D. G. , 77

D.

Danger signals of the blight , 236

Davis, Prof. Nelson F. , Address by, 83

Dead-line, establishing, 221

Defining Diaporthe parasitica , 71

Delegates and guests , list of, 242

Detwiler, S. B., birds and the chestnut blight, 104

Detwiler, S. B., "The Pennsylvania Programme," 129

Devastation by insect pests , 138

249

Page.

Development in sapwood and hardwood , 54

"Devil's paint brush ," how eradicated, 203

Diaporthe parasitica in Pennsylvania groves, 100

Diaporthe parasitica in the South , 80

Diaporthe parasitica, infective material of, 50

Diseased trees , locating, 44

Drought favorable to blight, 81

E.

Early history of Disporthe parasitica , 72

Eliminating blight infected trees, 143

Endothia gyrosa , 79

Enterline , S. M. Remarks by , 21

Epidemics , sudden 71

Eradication of blight by cutting out, 82

Experimenting with cutting out process, 103

F.

Faking tree doctors and empirists, 59

Farlow , Prof. W. G. , paper by , 70

Field studies at Orbisonia , Pa. , 54

Field work of the Commission , 233

Fighting enemies of the chestnut , 95

Fisher, J. W. , Remarks by 27

Fisher, Dr. A. K. , Habits of the woodpeckers, 103

Fisher, J. W. , Reports no blight in Tennessee, 174

Food and mouth disease , how suppressed , 148

Forest acreage in Pennsylvania 130

Forest and laboratory tests, 202

Forestry management, meaning of 212

Foreword , 3

Francis, Thomas E., Report upon field work, 233

Fulton, Prof. H. R., Address by, 48

Fungous diseases, treatment of, 43

G.

Germination of conidia and ascospores, 52

Giddings, N. J., Means of control, 105

Giddings , N. .7. , Remarks by , 26

Giddings, N. .7., The blight si i nation in West Virsiinia 173

Grafting chestnut, how successful 87

Grafting native chestnut sprouts, 84

Graves , Dr. A. 17. , Remarks by 105

Groves chestnut , to be kept clean , 90

Growing chestnut trees , 98

Growth of blight on other material than chestnut, 53

Gussow, Dr. H. T., Remarks by, 27

250

H.

Page.

Harrisburg Board of Trade , Letter from the , 125

Harshberger , Dr. J. W. , Remarks by 106

Harvesting cultivated chestnuts, 93

Historical and Pathological Aspects of the blight, 28

History of the chestnut blight, 29

Hopkins, Dr. A. D. , Insect injuries, 180

Hopkins, Dr. A. D., The chestnut bark disease, 180

I.

Immune pure-bred varieties of chestnut, 69

Immunity of chestnut trees, 68

Immunizing chestnut not possible, 178

Implements for treating infected trees 62

Infectious character of blight , 116

Infections , how to find , 197

Insects affecting chestnut trees, 200

Insects and the chestnut blight, 181

Insects destroyed by cold , 188

Insects, relation to spread of the blight, 68

Insect traps in chestnut groves, 96

Investigations in Pennsylvania , when commenced 130

Investigations of chestnut bark disease, 39

Italian authorities upon blight quoted, 73

J.

Jewett , F. B. , Remarks by 112

K.

Keezell , Hon. Geo. B. , Remarks by, 25

L.

Laboratory experiments , 134

Lesson from the San Jos6 Scale, 147

Lightning injury seat for inoculation , 53

Lime in chestnut wood ashes, 229

Lime water as a remedy for the blight, 231

Longevity of conidia and ascospores , 52

Loss incurred in Penna. by chestnut blight, ; 130

M.

Machine for removing chestnuts from burrs, 93

Main Line investigations of blight, 164

McParland, Horace, Letter from,^ 125

Meetings to discuss blight, 234

Medicinal remedies for chestnut blight, 57

Merkel, Dr. Herman W. , Pennsylvania's unselfish law, 116

Metcalf , Dr. Haven , Address by, 28

251

Page.

Method of controlling blight, 40

Mick lebo rough, Dr. John, Kemarks by, 114

Mowry , Jesse B. , Remarks by , 25

Murrill, Prof. W. A., Treatment of chestnut blight, 194

Murrill, Prof. W. A., Questions for scientific investigation, 210

McCne, Prof. C. A., The chestnut blight in Delaware, 166

N.

National scientific campaign against blight, 148

Necessity for co-operation of States , 7

Newspaper publicity valuable and urged, 152

New York , blight in , 117

Norton, J. B. S., Remarks by, 22

Nursery stock spreading blight, 48

Nut planting for trees , 98

Officers of Harrisburg Conference , IS

Official call for Conference 5

Official i)rogramme of Conference, 9-14

Orchard and ornamental chestnut trees, 59

Origin of the blight, 177

P.

Paragon chestnut culture , 83

Peach Yellows, lesson from the, 148

Pearson, Hon. R. A., Introductory address by, 19

Pearson, Hon. R. A. , Resolution of thanks to, 222

Peirce, Harold, The need of co-operative work, 225

Peirce , Ha rold , Remarks by , 18

Pennsylvania Forestry Department: Co-operation of, 215

Pennsylvania's programme , 129

Plans for controlling the blight, 146

Predictions regarding the blight, 76

President Taft's letter, 175

Preventive treatment, 58

Profitable utilization of chestnut, 135

Programme of Conference , 9

Protecting native chestnut sprouts , 85

Q.

Question as to control of the blight, 211

Questions for scientific investigation , 210

R.

Rane , Prof. F. W. , Need of co-operation , 203

Rane, Prof. F. W., Remarks by, 23

Rane, Prof. F. W., Urging co-operative work 202

Rane, Prof. F. W., Report of blight conditions in Massachusotis, 150

Rankin , Prof. W. Howard , Address by , 46

Reclaiming mountain land , 84

Reed , Dr. H. S. , Chestnut in Virginia , 120

Reed, Dr. H. S., The blight situation in Virginia, 172

252

Page.

Register of delegates and guests 242

Relation of birds to spread of blight , 103

Rumbold, Dr. Caroline, "Possibility of Medicinal Remedy for Chestnut

Blight," 57

Rumbold, Dr. Caroline, Report upon test of old spores, 241

Research work to control blight , 46

Resolutions adopted by the Conference, 206

Resolutions , Committee on 99

Rothrock, Dr. Joseph T. , How to combat the chestnut blight, 123

S.

Sap , flow in chestnut trees , 65

Scout work in Lycoming county, , . . . . 235

Selby, Dr. Augustine D. , Remarks by, 24

Seventeen year locusts in chestnut grove, effects of, 95

Sheep in cultivated chestnut orchards , 93

Sheppard, Mr., Remarks by, 126

Smith, Dr. J. Russell , Effect of drought on trees, 118

Smith, Dr. J. Russell, Chestnut blight and constructive conservation, .... 144

Smith , Dr. J. Russell, Value of chestnuts for stock food, 101

Spaulding, Dr. Perley, Remarks by, 121

Spores, how carried by birds and rain , 105

Spores , how spread , 46

Spores , spread by air currents , 51

Spores, varying kinds of, 190

Spores , vitality of , 217

Spring, Mr., Report upon blight in Connecticut, 154

Sproul, Hon. William C, Remarks by, 224

Spruce moth or Nun , ravages of, 139

State and Federal control and investigations , 184

Stevens, F. R., Remarks by, 203

Stewart, Prof. F. C. , Controlling the chestnut bark disease, 40

Surface, Prof. H. A., Bird and insect life, 200

Symptoms of the blight, 235

T.

Taft, President, Letter from, 175

Tannic acid, 221

Taylor, William A., Report to Secretary Wilson upon the blight, 179

Tener , Gov. , Opening address by , 15

Tener, Gov., Closing addi'ess by, 227

Temperature , effect of early growth , 52

Temperature , effect on germination , 52

Thalheimer, A. , Remarks by , 110

Thalheimer, A. , Obsei'vations upon insect life, 211

Thanks to Hon. R. A. Pearson , Chairman , 222

Theories regarding the chestnut blight , 78

Treatment of diseased trees .' 42

Treatment of individual trees, 59

Tree doctors, harm done by, 165

Tree surgery in treatment of blight, 62

Trees , how grown from nuts , 98

Trees injured by insects , 185

253

V.

Page.

Value of chestnut in Pennsylvania 129

Value of chestnut timber , 16

Value of individual trees, 60

Vitality of old spores of the blight, 241

W.

Walton , R. C. , report upon field studies 54

Weather conditions affecting blight, 57

Webb, Dr. Wesley, Remarks by, 22

Weimer, E. A., Experiences in combating the blight, 215

Weimer, E. A. , Remarks by, 114

Wells, H. E. , Report of special scouting operations in Lycoming county, .. 235

Wild chestnut in Pennsylvania, 16

Williams, Hon. I. C, Blight in forest preserves, 162

Williams, Hon. I. C. , Pennsylvania's effort to check blight 108

Williams , Hon. I. C , Naming official reporter, ; 19

Williams, Hon. I. C. , Best methods to combat blight, 196

Wilson, Hon. James, Letter relating to blight, 175

Wind spreading chestnut blight, 115

Woodpeckers and insects, relation to blight, 135

Z.

Ziegler, Mr., Remarks by 213

*■

^!fnii!li!li>li>f»i!RS

Si!li!fi!fi!fi!li>fi>fi!fi!

(254)

BULLETIN NO. 1.

OCTOBER, 1912.

THE

Cf)es;tnut Mi^t J^i^m^t.

MEANS OF

IDENTIFICATION, REMEDIES
SUGGESTED AND NEED OF
CO-OPERATION to CONTROL
and ERADICATE the BLIGHT.

ISSUED BY

THE COMMISSION FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND CONTROL OF
THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT DISEASE IN PENNSYLVANIA.

1 i 1 2 Morris Building,
Philadelphia.

HARRISBURG:

0. E. AUGHINBAUGH, PRINTER TO THE STATE OP PENNSYLVANIA

1912.

NOTE.

The Commission for the Investigation and Control of the Chestnut
Tree Blight Disease in Pennsylvania was authorized by an Act of
Assembly approved by Governor Tener, June 14, 1911.

This Commission, in collaboration with the Pennsylvania Depart-
ment of Forestry, is to ascertain, determine upon and adopt the most
efficient and practicable means for the prevention, control and eradi-
cation of a disease of the chestnut tree, commonly known as the
chestnut tree blight. It is authorized to conduct scientific investiga-
tions into the nature and cause of such disease, and the means of
preventing its introduction, continuance and further spread. The
Commission has power to establish, regulate, maintain and enforce
quarantine against the introduction and spread of such disease, and
from time to time, to adopt and prescribe such regulations and
methods of procedure as it may deem necessary and proper.

The Commission will cooperate with the owners of chestnut trees
To accomplish all of the purposes of the Act in every possible manner.

THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT DISEASE.

THE DANGER

In 1904, Dr. H. W. Merkel first called attention to the disease
now known as the chestnut blight, which was then killing the chest-
nut trees in the Bronx Zoological Park in New York City.

At least two reliable observers have reported that th?y found
diseased chestnut trees on portions of Long Island, as early as 18*.)'->,
which had every appearance of sufifering from the blight. There are
aocounts of a general dying-out of chestnut trees in portions of the
South as early as 1824, and again in 1860, 1862, and 1878. It is
not knoAvn whether these troubles were due to a fungus, to the attacks
of some of the well-known insect enemies of the chestnut, or to other
causes.

During the summer of 1911, the authorities of the United States
Department of Agriculture and the officials of various States in-
vestigated the present extent of the ravages of the Chestnut Bark
Disease. It has radiated from New York as a center, and is noAv
known to occur from New Hampshire and eastern New York to
western Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. It is feared
that the disease Avill sweep through and destroy the great chestnut
forests of the South. The blight has virtually exterminated the
nativ3 chestnut trees on western Long Island, and in southwestern
Connecticut and northern New Jersey. An increasingly greater pro-
portion of uninfected trees is found as the distance from New Y'ork
City becomes greater. However, I eyt nd the region of general infec-
tion there are centers of disease, sometimes of considerable extent,
Avhere all, or almost all, of the chestnut trees are s^en to be hope-
lessly affected.

In Southeastern Pennsylvania, the disease has affected a very high
percentage of the chestnut trees, large and small, and there is but
little hope of saving many of these trees in this region from future
destruction by the disease. The accompanying map of Pennsylvania
shows the badly infected territory and where the infection is scatter-
ing, as far as is known.

BOUNDARY LINE

The western boundary of the blight in Pennsylvania may be shown
approximately by a line drawn across the state from Susquehanna, in
Susquehanna County, southwest to Waterville, in Lycoming County,
thence to Orbisonia, in Huntingdon County, and southward along the
Tuscarora Mountains, in Fulton County. East of this, the blight

(1)

may be expected to be more or less abundant in any locality. There
are a few isolated infections beyond this line in the western half of
the State.

THE LOSS

If we take into consideration only the commercial value of the
timber products and nuts, it is safe to say that the blight has already
caused a loss of |7,000,000 in this State. If we consider the value
of the chestnut as a lawn and park tree and the value which such
trees give to real estate, the financial loss is certainly not less than
13,000,000 more than that mentioned above. Yet this estimated
loss of ten millions of dollars in Pennsylvania is small when com-
pared with that which may occur throughout the entire counti^y.
Dr. Haven Metcalf, U. S. Department of Agriculture, estimates the
present total loss caused by the disease as not less than twenty-five
million dollars, ($25,000,000). The rapid progress of the blight
through Pennsylvania and Maryland threatens the complete commer-
cial extermination of the chestnut, unless the disease is conquered
in a very short time. Pew persons in eastern Pennsylvania realize
how rapid has been the progress of the blight, but to be convinced
•f this fact, it is only necessary for one to become familiar with this
disease and to closely examine the woods.

THE CAUSE

Many cases of supposed chestnut blight when investigated prove
to be dead or unhealthy trees that have suffered from insect attack,
lightning, or other common injuries. The real chestnut blight, more
properly known as the chestnut bark disease, or the chestnut canker
disease, is caused by a fungus, and is not, as some erroneously believe,
the work of an insect. It affects, in varying degrees, all kinds of
chestnuts, but pure strains of the Japanese chestnut have the power
of resisting the disease to a remarkable extent. The chinquapin is
killed by it, but, so far as is now known, living oaks and other trees
are not attacked by this fungus, although it has been found on dead
oaks and also on dead sumach.

THE BLIGHT

This fungus is a parasitic plant which rejsembles in many ways the
moulds that form on decaying food. It gTows however, in the inte-
rior of the bark and not on its surface, and feeds on living tissues
instead of wholly on dead material, as do the moulds mentioned. It
may be described as consisting of great numbers of tiny threads,
which branch and grow in every direction through the bark. These
threads, collectively known as the mycelium, are so small that a single
one can be plainly seen only through a microscope; but they are so

uumerous in the diseased bark that as mycelium, they may be seen
with the naked eye, clustered together in the form of small, buff-
colored, fan-like bodies when the bark is pared down. These fungal
threads feed in the living tissues of the bark and eventually grow into
the sapwood. Wherever they grow they cause the speedy death of the
living cells of the trees. After a time the fungus completely girdles
the tree, trunk or branch on which it is feeding. This causes the death
of that part above the girdled portion, much as if girdled with an axe.

When the fungus has grown for a time in the chestnut bark,
it develops on the surface of the latter a series of tiny, irregularly
dome-shaped protrusions, (called pustules), each rarely larger than
the head of a pin. These are the fruiting bodies which produce mil-
lions of sticky spores corresponding to seeds, and so tiny that they
can be seen only by means of a powerful microscope. On smooth,
young bark these pustules usually first appear as little reddish blis-
ters beneath the surface of the bark. The tops of these blisters
soon burst and the pustules appear as slightly raised spots covering
the surrounding dark colored bark. On somewhat older bark the
infected portions often, (though not always), become sunken as a
result of the de^struction of the underlying tissue. On small branches,
especially young shoots, the infected portion is often abnormally
thickened and cracked, and of a brilliant reddish or orange color.

Two forms of spores are produced, as in many other fungi. During
find immediately following damp weather the mature pustules be-
come somewhat enlarged, and thrust out slender twisted threads or
"spore horns," one-sixteenth to three-eighths of an inch in length,
and occasionally much longer. These are composed of the very
minute summer spores held together by mucilaginous matter. At
first, these threads are soft and jelly-like but they soon become hard,
and, when dry, brittle. The number of spores in one of these ''spore^
horns" is so great that a single one, a quarter of an inch long, has
been estimated to contain over five million individual spores.

The winter sjjores, (or ascospores), are more frequently produced
during the fall and winter and are larger and less numerous than
the summer spores. They are forced from the enclosing sacs in the
mature pustules in damp weather and may be very important factors
in spreading the disease.

DISSEMINATION

The blight usually appears first upon a tree here and there some
miles ahead of the general infection. Where these instances of in-
fection in regions ahead of the line of general advance are found, it
may be that the sticky spores of the fungus have been carried
on the feet of birds, particularly woodpeckers and other insectivorous
birds. When these spores are deposited on healthy trees they are

easily washed down over the surface of the bark by rains, perhaps
to lodge in a Avormhole or other wound in the bark, where they can
develop into minute plants. From these isolated trees as centerr;,
the spores of these new plants can readily be distributed to surround-
ing trees by squirrels, birds, insects, etc.

It is not yet definitely determined what agency is most concerned
in distributing the spores, but it appears probable that insects are
closely connected with the progress of the disease. The sticky spores
are easily carried upon the legs and bodies of beetles and moths. So
far as is known at lyresent, in order to cause an infection, the spores
must enter a wound or an abrasion in tlia bark, hence the boring in-
sects are especially harmful on account of the holes they make through
which the spores may enter. These holes are moist, and some of the
spores which wash down the trunk are likely to enter these damp
chambers and germinate. Ants, which are found crawling all over
trees, are known to have eaten the spores from the surface of the
fruiting bodies, and may thus have become effective agents for spread-
ing the disease from tree to tree in an infected locality. Several
other species of insects which affect chestnut trees appear abnormally
abundant, and their relation to the spread of the disease is now
being studied. Birds, as a factor in spreading the disease over longer
distances, have already been mentioned, but they are possibly also
effective in spreading the disease locally from tree to tree, by carry-
ing the sticky spores on their feet from infected branches to those
that are healthy. Woodpeckers, nuthatches, and other birds which
bore into the bark for insects have been observed visiting the blight
cankers. The wind blows many of the spores about, either mixed
with dust or as fragments of broken "spore horns." The winter
spores are forced out of the pustules into the air and the wind also
is a factor in their distribution. When the summer spores are in the
''horn" stage, or when fragments of a horn are carried to other trees,
the gelatinous mass is readily dissolved by the first rain, aud the
spores washed down to lower positions on the tree where new infec-
tions are started.

Infection appeai-s to take place only through a wound in the
bark. The fungus feeds on the inner and middle bark and usuallj^
quickly girdles the trunk or branch on which it grows. A canker
three inches in diameter lias been observed to develop in five weeks.
Small trees may die in a single season, and large ones are killed in
from two to four seasons after the blight attacks them. In the mean-
time, half, or perhaps nearly all, the nearby chestnut trees may be
expected to show the disease at some state of development.

Diseased logs, cord wood, bark, etc., hauled along public highways
or on railroads, may carry the spores to new localities. Shipment
and planting of diseased chestnut nursery stock is another wav in

en

53 p

S'3

^ o

A large area of disease pustules on a smooth-barked orchard tree. — Photograph

by Prof. Collins.

Untreated orchard tree showing blight infection in upper branches.

V. liicli the disease may be widely scattered. 2sursery stock shipped in
Peuusylvania, must in accordance with law, be jjieviously examined
jnid tagged by a duly apjiointed agent of the Chestnut Tree lUight
Conmiission.

The disease may be located and recognized by some, or occasionally
all, of the following characteristics:

1. Dead brdiicJic^, usiiaUtj iciih tciUiertd leaves clinging to them.
In the spring, prior to death, the leaves on the infected branches
remain small and sickl}- looking, and gradually take on a yellowish
tinge. When these leaves finally die, they have a peculiar wilted
appearance. The burrs also remain small and undeveloped. < hi the
branches attacked after the leaves have fully developed, the leaves as-
sume their yellowish or reddish-brown fall colors. On trees killed
by blight during the growing season, prior to t?eptember, both leaves
and burrs usually remain clinging t(j the branches during the follow-
ing winter, and at this time of the year are of great value in helping
to locate infected trees. The wilted and dying, or dead leaves, are
frequently the first intimation that the disease is present, and every
owntr of chestnut timber should carefully investigate the cause of
dead branches in otherwise healthy trees, since these are the "danger
signals" of this disease. Branches may occasionally be killed by
worms of several kinds Avhicli burrow beneath the bark and girdle the
tree or branch, or they may be killed by some physical injury.

'1. i'aiikevH on diseased hranches or on the hunk of sniooth barked
irre.'i. These cankers are areas of dead, discolored and sunken bark,
often more or less broken by cracks or checks into the inner bark.
Old, thick bark does not change in outward appearance until a year
or more after it is diseased, when it begins to peel from the tree in
shreds. Prior to shredding, thick bark which is diseased gives forth
a peculiar hollow sound when struck. This is because of a space be-
rwoen the wood and bark caused by the decay of the inner bark. All
hollow sounding bark is not necessarily diseased, however.

o. H)nall wart-like eruptions^ (pustules), which appear on cankers^
These pustules are of a bright sulphur, saffron, or orange-yellow which
darken with age and at maturity are a dark brown. On old or fur-
rowed bark the pustules form entirely in the crevices of the bark,
and if numerous, appear as orange or yellow lines. Sometimes, es-
pecially in damp weather in summer, the yellow threads whieh exude
from the pustules can be seen.

4. The mijceliuni of the fungus ichich occurs in sniall^ irregular
fanshaped areas of a yellowish or huff color within the hark. As fur-
ther proof that a tree is diseased, shave off the surface of the sus-
picious looking bark, or cut slant-wise into it. If the cut shows the
mottled color and characteristic whitish irregular fans of the fungous^
mycelium, the disease is ])resent.

G

5. Suckers or water sp-routs, lohich develop at the base cf the
cankers, or at the hose of thq diseased tree. They are frequently
Tery numerous, and grow vigorously for one or two seasons^ after
Avliich tliey are usually killed by the fungus.

However, to be absolutely certain, anyone suspecting the disease
should mail generous samples of the dead bark, (taking care to
include the area showing the pustules), to the Chestnut Blight Lab-
oratory, Zoology Building, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelpliia,
Pa. for examination. To prevent spread of infection, each specimen
should be wrapped in a separate paper or enclosed in a paper bag,
or a tight box, and securely wrapped for shipment. With each speci-
men there should be information as to where, when, and by whom
it was found, (including the post-office address of the sender.) In
regions where the disease is just appearing, much assistance can
be given to the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission by reporting it im-
mediately and by sending specimens of suspected cases as directed

above.

TREATMENT OF INDIVIDUAL TREES

Experience has shown that it is difficult to save individual trees
after they have been atacked by blight. By special treatment of
individual trees, it is possible to greatly prolong their lives, or per-
haps save them, if the disease has not advanced too far when treat-
ment begins. The expense is greatly increased and the chances of
success are much more remote with large or old trees and particularly
borer infected trees. The details of the treatment of orchard and
shade trees is given in another circular, which may be had upon
application to the Commission.

THE REAL REMEDY

The only efficient means of combating the disease, so far as known,
is to cut down diseased tre-es and burn the infected portions, since
the spores and most of the fungal threads are in the bark; if the
diseased trees are cut down, barked, and all of the bark carefully
burned, and a strict watch kept for new cases of infection as they
occur, the disease will very probably be held in check. Great care
should be taken to burn all of the diseased bark from the infected
trees in order to destroy any infection that may be present.

In case the infection is on branches of trees of small size, it is
better to cut out the diseased portion and burn it entirely than to
waste time in saving the wood by peeling the bark. It is a good
plan to burn the refuse over the stump of the infected tree to pre-
vent possible future infection from this source. Stumps which have
not been burned should be completely peeled of their bark, and this
should be burned on nearby brush heaps. Even where perfectly
healthy chestnut trees are cut, it is recommended that these stumps

be peeled, since it has been found that many cases of infection in
sprouts originate from the bark of such old stumps. By destroying
the bark on stumps, and by promptly burning such portions of trees
as are not utilized, the insects which commonly breed in such material
are prevented from becoming abundant, and thus perhaps causing
a more rapid spread of the blight. The trees should be barked im-
mediately after they aie felled and the bark and brush burned, with-
out being moved further from the stump of the felled tree than is
absolutely necessary, since this moving always causes a scattering
of spores, thus spreading the disease more widely. It is recom-
mended that the brush and debris on the ground be cut and piled,
prior to felling the diseased tree, in order to facilitate the complete
cleaning up of the diseased bark and branches after felling. That
such work may be successful, however, it is necessary that every
owner of chestnut timber follow this plan of cutting the infected
trees and burning the bark as soon as they are found. A single
infected woodlot will re-infect surrounding woodlots, no matter how
carefully they are treated.

The Commission has established a quarantine line to prevent the
further westward spread of the disease. Spot infections are found
some miles in advance of the main line of infection. In a prompt
removal of these spot infections as they appear lies the hope of pro-
tecting the timber in these localities and to the west. It is quite
important that the people learn to know the characteristics of the
disease, so that new infections may be discovered and removed be-
fore the disease has spread generally.

UTILIZING CHESTNUT TIMBER
The blight problem in the southeastern part of the State, (see map),
or where the percentage of infection is very large, is mainly one of
utilization of the diseased treevS. The advice given to owners is es-
sentially this: — Learn to recognize the blight and keep thoroughly
posted on the subject. Examine your chestnut timber thoroughly
and frequently. If you have timber that is infected, arrange to mar-
ket it at once, because a tree infected with the blight will die and the
lumber rapidly deteriorates after the tree is killed. Trees fit for tele-
phone and telegraph poles are not usually accepted for this purpose if
they have been atfected with blight for more than one season. Cut all
trees that are at all infected. It would be wise to burn the bark that
is infected with the disease, and also the bark from the stump, to
prevent its spread to your own and your neighbors' healthy timber.
Be very careful to extinguish your fires. Try to get your woods in
a better condition for future growth. Try at least to keep your
timber free from this disease, and interest your neighbors in doing

the same. Write to the Department of Forestry at Harrisburg, Pa.,
for valuable information regarding the planting and management of
vour forest lands.

It is believed hy many that extremely dry or cold and unfavorable
weather conditions have favored the growth of the fungus, and that it
Avill decline again naturally. It is also possible that some medicinal
remedy for the blight will be found for saving valuable individual
trees. No evidence, however, has yet appeared that the disease is
being checked through natural agencies, nor has any better or cheaper
method of control been proposed than the simple one of cutting out
and burning all the infected material, and in this way destroying the
sources of infection. Practical demonstrations of the cutting-out
method have given encouraging results, and strengthen the belief that
the bark disease may at least be controlled, if not eradicated by it, pro-
vided the owners of diseased trees in the region of scattered infection
co-operate in applying this measure promptly, and continue to do so
as the new infections appear. The co-operation of all owners is
the end to be desired. If each owner took care of his own trees, the
fight would be alreadj' won. Do your part and explain the disease
and consequences to your neighbors and friends. The Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission stands ready to give you any help
that it can.

DISPOSAL OP PRODUCTS

Logs from infected trees may be converted into lumber, ties, cord
wood, etc., after the bark has been removed from the diseased por-
tions. TelejAone poles, posts, etc., from diseased trees are not likely
to be a source of danger in spreading the fungus, provided the bark
has been removed. Much valuable material on the utilization of
chestnut has been compiled by the Commission for the benefit of
timber owners. If interested, write for full particulars.

THE LAW

Pennsylvania is the first State to attempt systematically to check
the progress of the blight. On June 14, 1911, Governor Tener signed
an Act which was passed by unanimous vote of both houses of the
Pennsylvania Legislature. The act provided for the creation of a
commission of five members, and gives them complete authority to
attack and destroy this disease by whatever method they may adopt.
It provides an appropriation of |25,000 for scientific investigations,
and 1250,000 for field work. This law provides that the Commission
shall ascertain and adopt the most efficient and practical means for
the prevention, control and eradication of the chestnut blight. It
has the power to enforce quarantine against the disease. If the

9

owners of chestnut trees, ^aJicu nutitied to remove the diseased speci-
mens, refuse to co-ojierate with the Commission, it is fully empowered
to do this work at tho expense of the owner. (See notej.

The Commission began its war on (he blight in the lattei- jiart of
July, 1911, by placing in the field a force of scouts to locate the
diseased trees. During the present summer of 1912, the Commission
has in its employ about two hundred field agents and scouts to locate
infected trees, and see that they are removed under the propei* condi-
tions.

A quarantine on chestnut stock was declared which prohibits
the shipment of nursery stock not bearing the Commission's tag of
inspection. This certificate means that the stock has been inspected
in the nursery rows, and again after it has been dug. Diseased trees
are destroyed, and those which are apparently healthy are immersed
for several minutes in Bordeaux mixture or lime-sulphur wash, and
are then tagged by an inspector. Only a comparatively small amount
of chestnut stock was shipped by the nurseries during the past fall.

(le)

PENNSYLVANIA CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT COMMISSION.
1112 Morris Building, Philadelphia.

BULLETIN NO. 2. OCTOBER , 1912.

TREATMENT OF ORNAMENTAL

CHESTNUT TREES

AFFECTED WITH

THE BLIGHT DISEASE

HARRISBURG:

C. B. AUGHINBAUGH, PRINTER TO THE STATE OF PENNSYI^yANIA

1«12.

>ii!{!>fni»aHi!ii!fnii

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

MEMBERS OP COMMISSION.

Winthrop Sargent, Chairman, Bryn Mawr.

Harold Peirce, Secretary Haverford.

Samuel T. Bodine, Villa Nova.

George F. Craig, Rosemont.

Theodore N. Ely, Bryn Mawr.

EXECUTIVE STAFF.
Mark Alfred Carleton, General Manager.
Samuel B. Detwiler, General Superintendent.
Oliver D. Schock, Assistant to General Superintendent.
Thomas E. Francis, Field Maiiager, Western District.
Joseph R. Wilson, Field Manager, Eastern District.
David T. McCampbell, Chief Clerk.

Irvln C. Williams, (Pennsylvania State Forestry Department Collaborator).

SCIENTIFIC AND OPERATIVE STAFF.
Frederick D. Heald, Pathologist.
J. P. Wentling, Forester in charge of Utilization.
Paul J. Anderson, Field Pathologist.

Caroline Rumbold, Physiologist in charge of Tree Medication.
Roy G. Pierce, Tree Surgeon.
Keller E. Rockey, Forester in charge of Demonstration Work.

NOTE.

The Commission for the Investigation and Control of the Chestnut
Tree Blight Disease in Pennsylvania was authorized by an Act of
Assembly approved by Governor Tener, June 14, 1911.

This Commission, in collaboration with the Pennsj'^lvania Depart-
ment of Forestry, is to ascertain, determine upon and adopt the most
efficient and practicable means for the prevention, control and eradi-
cation of a disease of the chestnut tree, commonly known as the
chestnut tree blight. If is authorized to conduct scientific investiga-
tions into the nature and cause of such disease, and the means of
preventing its introduction, continuance and further spread. The
Commission has power to establish, regulate, maintain and enforce
quarantine against the introduction and spread of such disease, and
from time to time, to adopt and prescribe such regulations and
methods of procedure as it may deem necessary and proper.

The Commission will cooperate with the owners of chestnut trees
to accomplish all of the purposes of the Act in every possible manner.

TREATMENT OF ORNAMENTAL CHESTNUT TREES AFFECTED WITH THE

BUGHT DISEASE.

This bulletin is intended as a guide for the treatment of individual
cliestnut trees affected with blight, which on account of their value
as orchard trees or for decorative purposes warrant the expenditure
<if considerable time and money for their preservation,

DESCRIPTION OF THE DISEASE
The blight disease is caused by a fungus which grows in the bark
and also in the outer layers of sapwood. Pustules (fruiting bodies)
are soon produced and grow through to the surface of the bark. On
old, rough-barked trees these pustule-s are borne in the crevices of the
bark. The pustules, of a pinhead form, are orange-yellow or saffron
in color, and get darker with age, at maturity being a rusty brown.
The spores are of two kinds and are- produced at nearly all seasons
of the year. They are disseminated through the agency of wind,
insects, birds, etc. The spores must reach the inner or middle bark
to cause an infection. Ordinarily they germinate very quickly, per-
haps in a few hours, or at most in a few days. The mycelium then
grows through the bark in all directions, developing a series of more
or less concentric rings, so that the lesion, or area of infection, lias
a somewhat circular or oval shape. The rate of gi'owth of the mycel-
ium depends upon weather and other conditions. It grows at all
seasons of the year, except in the coldest weather, when it is dor-
mant. In summer, especially in June and July, it is most rapid, as
a temperature of about 70 degrees and upwards seems best suited for
its development, but growth is less rapid if the weather is dry. In
July and August the trees bearing dead branches are especially
noticeable.

FAKE REMEDIES

A great number of so called "cures" for the blight have been ad-
vanced. In many cases the method of treatment shows that the
sponsor is either ignorant or unscrupulous, and in other cases the
work is done in such a haphazard fashion that it is entirely worth-
less.

A spray cannot penetrate beneath the bark where the disease is
working, and consequently is absolutely worthless as a remedy. It
may be possible, however, to find a toxic solution which can be in-
troduced in some way into the circulation of the tree which will
kill the fungus without killing the tree. The Pennsylvania Chestnut
Tree Blight Commission is carrying on a series of experiments with
this end in view, and it is hoped that some such remedy will be
found. It has been claimed that a proper application of ferti-
lizers will cure the disease. While it may be that a healthy, rapidly

(1^

growing tree is more resistant, observations seem to prove that soil
fertilization alone is not a cure. The principal remedies and treat-
ments advocated are being given a thorough test by this Commis-
sion, and should any of them be found successful, the public will be
so informed. At the present time, however, we can recommend noth-
ing but the treatment herein outlined, which will have to be carried
out thoroughly if any considerable degree of success is to be attained.
The work can be done by the owner himself in some cases, especially
if the trees are small or easily climbed. A good working knowledge
of the characteristics of the disease is essential, but the owner can
be sure when he does the work himself that the proper precautions
are taken. The owner should also make numerous examinations
after the first treatment is concluded, and should be in a position
to remove the incipeiit infections, when this can be done cheaply
and before the trees are much harmed.

TREATMENT
The treatment consists principally in cutting away the infected
portions of the tree. The mycelium quickly discolors the bark and a
sharp line between the apparently health}^ and infected bark is usually
seen. However, the mycelium penetrates into the api^arently healthy
bark, and if possible, the cut should be made one inch or more beyond
the discolored area. The mycelium also works to some extent into the
sapwood below the discolored area, and three or more an-
nual layers of wood should be removed as well. The smaller
infected branches should be cut off one foot or more below the
canker, when possible. If these branches are cut oft" at
the base, flush with the tree, the wound will heal over more
quickly, and there is less danger of the trees becoming reinfected.
If the infection lies near the base of a branch, care should be
taken to see if any of the mycelium has grown into the trunk. A

gouge, chisel and mallet are the
proper tools for use in such work.
The gouge should be ke.pt very
sharp, so that the tissues at the
edge of the cut are not unneces-
sarily bruised, and the healing
over of the wound thus delayed.
W\th good work the new growth
will start directly under the cut
and will often be visible in less
than a week, in the actively grow-
ing season. The new growth takes
place at the sides of the wound.
Three handy tools in tree surgery. Often above and below a broad

wound a triangular piece of bark will die. For this reason it
is advisable that the top and bottom of the scar be pointed rather
than abrupt or broadly rounded. A large percentage of the bark
of a vigorous, young tree can be removed if necessary, without
killing the tree. Portions can be cut away from all sides, and
the flow of sap will alter its course so as to follow the living
bark. It has been shown that this flow of sap under extraordinary
conditions will deviate from a longitudinal course fully 90 degrees.

The wounds should be painted with an antiseptic covering after
all traces of the mycelium are removed. This is to prevent the de-
velopment of insect or fungous diseases, as well as the infection
by spores of the blight which may haA^e lodged upon the wound,
and also to act as a waterproof covering for the wound. Very thick
coal tar diluted with creosote to make it readily applicable is the
best combined antiseptic and cover that can be recommended and
should be used wherever possible. Other substances which can
be used as antiseptics only are:

Corrosive sublimate (bichoride of mercury), in the proportion of
one part of the corrosive sublimate to one thousand parts of water.
Tablets of this poison are sold at all drug stores with directions as
to how much water to add to make the 1-1000 solution.

Formalin, 5% solution in water. This is also a poison and must be
used with care.

Either of the above antiseptics will kill any of the fungus with
which they come in contact. The cutting tools need not be dipped
in any solution to kill any spores which may adhere to them, pro-
vided the antiseptic is immediately and carefully applied to ^11
cut surfaces.

Waterproof coverings to follow as soon as antiseptic is dry:

1. Coal tar.

2. Lead paint.

3. Shellac, (of temporary value only unless renewed

often ) .

Or this Solution:

4. 1 gallon pine tar.
2 qts. rosin.

1 qt. linseed oil. Mix thoroughly.

Extreme care should be taken to collect and burn every particle
of the wood and bark which was cut from the infected parts of the
Iree. This is important. The fungus will live in this bark for a
hmg time after being cut. It has been found that pieces of bark
cut from trees send out living spores after lying on the ground in
all kinds of weather for five months, and that fence rails and un-

barked logs used for building purposes have still shown the disease in
^n active condition after a year or more. All underbrush, etc., should
%e cleared from around the tree and the entire tree and the ground
•directly under it sprayed with a lime-sulphur wash or other disin-
fectant.

After the treatment has been completed, there is danger from two
•sources: — 1. Some of the mycelium may have been overlooked and
left in the bark or wood. The edges of the wound should be closely
watched for sometime after the first treatment, and if re-infected,
..should be promptly and more thoroughly cut away again. Unless
this is done it will be unwise or useless to spejnd money for the first
treatment. 2. The tree must be guarded against new infection,
iFor this reason if the tree is located in a region where the disease
is very prevalent, or if the tree is in an unhealthy condition and
presents many wounds which serve as entrances for spores, the
chances for success are smaller. All wounds should be covered dur-
ing the first treatment and every precaution taken to prevent un-
necessary wounds. The use of climbing irons on trees results in the
most dangerous type of wounds, and their use by any so-called
■''tree doctors" should be sufficient reason for branding the men as
incompetent, ignorant or wilfully careless.

Spraying the trees at intervals for the purpose of preventing
re-infection will kill spores on the exterior and may be successful.
Lime-sulphur or Bordeaux mixture may be used, and the work should
be done at intervals of about two (2) weeks during the spring and
summer, and, if possible, through the entire year.* Painting or
spraying the trunk and larger limbs with whitewash is also of some
apparent benefit, so far as tried. It is also advisable to apply a
■coating of tree varnish or tree tangle-foot to the base of the trees
after spraying, to keep crawling insects off of the trees.

CASES WHERE THERE IS SMALL CHANCE OF SUCCESSFUL TREAT-
MENT
No such treatment can be recommended for forest trees on ac-
count of the difficulty and expense attached to it. Even in the
treatment of orchard and lawn trees there is less likelihood of suc-
cess than usual in such instances as the following:

1. When the tree is very old or very large. Trees in time lose
rtheir power of recuperation, and the wounds made in the course of
;the work will not heal over readily. Experience has shown that trees
.over forty feet high are seldom treated with any beneficial results.

.2. Where the disease has progressed over a large portion of the
trmtfk of the tree so that much of the bark will have to
be removed. If the trunk or a large branch is nearly girdled, the

•Complete and detailed directions for making Bordeaux Mixture and Lime-Sulphur so'uticns
will be found in Farmers' Bulletin No. 243, which can be obtained free upon application to the
'Secretary of Agriculture, Washington, D. O.

^\

treatment is apt to seriously weaken the tree. Before the work begins,
a careful inspection of the diseased areas should be made. Begin
at the base and thoroughly examine all portions to the tips of the
branches, for signs of blight unless the base is badly diseased, when
it will be useless to attempt to save the tree.

3. When the tree is in an unhealthy condition, due to borers or
wood rotting fungi. Trees having borer holes and bark wounds
present entrances for more spores of the blight and do not respond
to the treatment.

4. In localities where the blight is very prevalent and where
little is being done to fight it. There is little hope of saving a tree
when there are many trees in the vicinity producing millions of
spores.

FERTILIZERS

It is believed that a healthy, rapidly growing tree is less liable
to infection and will certainly recover better under treatment. It
is advisable to apply a fertilizer to the soil about the tree. The soil
should be treated a few feet further than is covered by the spread
of the crown of the tree. The fertilizer to be applied should contain
all the chemical elements in which the soil is deficient — nitrogen,
phosphorus, and potash are the most likely to be absent from or
deficient in the soil. A mixture of these three is advisable. The
following formula, which contains these three elements in readily
soluble form, is suggested:

Per 100 square feet:

4 oz. muriate potash

13 oz. nitrate soda

14 oz. acid phosphate

(Potash-content 50%)
(Nitrogen-content 15% i
(Phosphorus-content 14% )

Per Acre

100 lbs. muriate potash (50%)

330 " nitrate of soda (15%)

350 " acid phosphate (14%)
It has also been suggested that an alkaline condition of the soil
may have some favorable influence in checking the blight. As a
remedy, lump (fresh burned) lime should be used, in quantities of
about 9 lbs. per 100 square feet, or two (2) tons per acre. If used
with the above fertilizer, it should be applied either two weeks be-
fore or after — not at the same time.

SUSCEPTIBILITY AND IMMUNITY

AH wild and cultivated varieties of American iand European

chestnuts seem to be susceptible to the blight, but not all to the

same degree. So far as can be ascertained, pure strains of Chinese,

Japanese and Korean chestnuts seem to be almost, if not quite,

6

immune to the blight. This applies, however, only to trees grown
from imported nuts or nursery stock. These trees hybridize very;
readily with the native trees, and trees grown from seed produced in
this country appear to lose their power of immunity.

RECOGNIZING THE DISEASE

Owners of valuable chestnut trees in Pennsylvania should learn
at oiice to recognize all the symptoms of the blight, so that it may be
speedily detected as soon as it appears.

Briefly stated, the disease may be located and recognized by some
or all of the following characteristics:

1. Dead branches, usually with withered leaves clinging to them.
In the spring, prior to death, the leaves on the infected branches
remain small and sickly looking, and gradually take on a yellowish
tinge. When these leaves finally die, they have a peculiar wilted
appearance. The burrs also remain small and undeveloped. On
branches attacked after the leaves have fully developed, the leaves
assume their yellowish or reddish-brown fall colors. On trees killed
by blight during the growing season prior to September, both leaves
and burrs usually remain clinging to the branches through the fol-
lowing winter and are of great value in helping to locate infected
trees. All dead branches should be closely examined for further in-
dications of the disease, particularly at the base of the dead parts.

2. Cankers on diseased branches or the trunk, where the bark
is not thick and rough. These cankers are areas of dead, discolored,
sunken bark, often more or less broken by cracks or checks into the
inner bark. Old, thick bark does not change in outward appearance
until a year or so after it is diseased, when it begins to peel from the
tree in shreds. Prior to shredding, thick bark which is affected
gives forth a peculiar hollow sound when struck with a hammer,
due to a space between the wood and bark caused by the decay of
the inner bark.

3. Small reddish blisters appear on cankers on smooth bark.
Later the tops of these blisters burst, forming small, wartlike erup-
tions or pustules of a sulphur-yellow, orange, or brown color. In
the deep cracks of old bark, the pustules form reddish or orange-
colored lines. . These pustules are the fruiting bodies which produce
the spores. During damp weather bright yellow, twisted threads of
the microscopic spores are sent out from the pustules. These threads
are jelly-like at first but on drying become firm and brittle. They vary
from one-sixteenth to half an inch in length, and are dissolved by the
rain, which distributes the spores down the surface of the bark.

The mycelimm or vegetative portion of the fungus shows in small,
irregular, fan-shaped areas of yellowish or buff color, when the sur-
face of diseased bark is shaved off or cut slantwise. This is the
portion which produces the spore-bearing pustules, and also the part
that saps the life of the bark.

5. Death of tops of entire trees. These dead trees are often con-
spicuous because of the reddish-brown patches of bark, due to the pre-
sence of the pustules. In case the tree has been dead for a year or
more, the bark begins to peel off naturally in strips or shreds.

6. Suckers or water sprouts, which develop at the base of th«
cankers or at the base of the diseased tree. They are frequently
very numerous for one or two seasons, after which they are usually
killed by the fungus.

If in doubt as to the existence of blight in your locality, communi-
cate with the Chestnut Tree Blight Commision, 1112 Morris Building,
Philadelphia, supplying all information of importance concerning
the matter.

'^-PENNSYLVANIA CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT COMMISSION.
1112 Morris Building, Philadelphia.
BULLETIN No. 3. - DECEMBER,

iFielb ^tutriesi

ON THE

J^isiSemination anb a^rotutf)

J» / OF THE

Cfjesitnut Mi^i)t iFungusi

BY

PAUL J. ANDERSON AND D. C. BABCOCK

HARRISBURG:

O. E. AUGHINBAUGH, PRINTER TO THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

1913.

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

MEMBERS OF COMMISSION.

Winthrop Sargent, Chairman Bryn Mawr.

Harold Peirce, Secretary, Haverford.

Samuel T. Bodine, Villa Nova.

George P. Craig, Rosemont.

Theodore N. Ely, Bryn Mawr.

EXECUTIVE STAFF.
Mark Alfred Carleton, General Manager.
Samuel B. Detwiler, General Superintendent.
Oliver D. Schock, Assistant to General Superintendent.
Thomas E. Francis, Field Manager, Western District.
Joseph R. Wilson, Field Manager, Eastern District.
David T. McCampbell, Chief Clerk.

Irvin C. Williams, (Pennsylvania State Forestry Department), Collaborator.

SCIENTIFIC AND OPERATIVE STAFF.
Frederick D. Heald, Pathologist.
A. G. Ruggles, Entomologist.
J. P. Wentling, Forester in charge of Utilization.
Paul J. Anderson, Field Pathologist.
F. P. Gulliver, Geographer.

Caroline Rumbold, Physiologist In charge of Tree Medication.
Joseph Shrawder, Chemist.
Roy G. Pierce, Tree Surgeon.
Keller E. Rockey, Forester in charge of Demonstration Work.

CD

(2)

NOTE.

The Commission for the Investigation and Control of the Chest-
nut Tree Blight Disease in Pennsylvania was authorized by an Act
of Assembly approved by Governor Tener, June 14, 1911.

This Commission, in collaboration with the Pennsylvania Depart-
ment of Forestry, is to ascertain, determine upon and adopt the
most efficient and practicable means for the prevention, control and
eradication of a disease of the chestnut tree, commonly known as the
chestnut tree blight. It is authorized to conduct scientific investiga-
tions into the nature and cause of such disease, and the means of
preventing its introduction, continuance and further spread. The
Commission has power to establish, regulate, maintain and enforce
quarantine against the introduction and spread of such disease, and
from time to time, to adopt and prescribe such regulations and
methods of procedure as it ma}'- deem necessary and proper.

The Commission will cooperate with the owners of chestnut trees
to accomplish all the purposes of the Act in every possible
manner.

(3)

#

(4)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page.

Official roster of Commission, 1

Note, 3

Dissemination of the fungus, 7

Introduction, 7

Review of the literature, 7

How the fungus enters the host, 7

How the fungus is carried from one tree to another, 8

Channels of entrance to the host, 10

Necessity of a wound, 10

The value of observation of natural infections, 10

Inoculations of various kinds of wounds, 11

Man as the disseminator, 13

The shipment of nursery stock, 13

The spread of the disease by tools, 14

'Shipment of logs and wood, 14

Birds as carriers of the fungus 17

How the rain spreads the disease, 18

The relation of insects to the disease, 20

The relation of wind to the spread of the chestnut blight, 23

Occurrence of the ascospores stage, 24

Ejection of the ascospores, 24

The relation of rain periods to the ejection of spores, .... 25
Time required after the bark is soaked for the perithecia

to begin shooting spores, 25

The duration of shooting if the bark remains wet, 26

Effect of dessication on the resumption of shooting, 26

Distance to which spores will be ejected, 26

Rate of ejection of spores, 27

Length of time after ejection required for germination of

ascospores, 28

Spore content of the air, 28

Inoculations by wind borne spores, 30

Summary, 33

Longevity of the spores:

Ascospores after ejection, 33

Ascospores in perithesia, 34

Conidia, 34

Inoculation and growth experiments, 34

Rate of growth of the cankers per month, 35

Time of appearance of the fruiting stages, 36

Comparative growth of the fungus on youug and old bark, 37

Growth of the fungus on leaves and burs, 37

Growth on the roots of the chestnut, 37

Growth on the green shoots of the current year, 38

Comparison of susceptibility of trees in the open and in dense

woods, 39

The effect of altitude and water content of the soil on the growth

of the fungus, 40

Endothia parasitica on other hosts, 41

Natural occurrence, 41

Growth on sterilized twigs of various species, 42

Inoculations on chestnut with strains from other hosts, 42

Inoculations with Diaporthe on hosts other than chestnut, .... 43

Summary, 44

Literature cited 45

Explanation of Plates, 46

(5)

^^

$;

(6)

INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT.

The work reported in this Bulletin was carried out under the
direction of the Field Pathologist in two field laboratories of the
Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission during the grow-
ing season of 1912. One of these laboratories was located at Charter
Oak, Huntingdon County; the other was at Mt. Gretna, Lebanon,
County,

The writers wish to acknowledge valuable assistance from the fol-
lowing: E. T. Kirk, J. F. Burrows, M. R. Clare, C. F. Korstian,
L. S. Pearson, A. B. Bechtel, W. E. Keefer, R. D. Spencer, C. A.
Gates.

DISSEMINATION OF THE FUNGUS

INTRODUCTION.

Not only must the chestnut blight fungus be destroyed where it is
already found, but it must be prevented from spreading to healthy
trees. The loss of the trees already infected would be a small matter
if we had a way to prevent it from spreading to those that are now free.
But this way will be found only after it has been determined how
the fungus passes from one tree to another, and how it gains
entrance to a healthy one. This is the fundamental problem and no
small part of the summer's work has been directed towards its
solution. The work is far from complete but a report is submitted
at this time for the benefit of others, who may be working along
this line.

Before entering into a discussion of experiments, a resume will
be given of what others have said and done on the problem of dis-
semination.

A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.

How the fungus enters the host. — Murrill (1) in 1906 is of the
opinion that the fungus could only enter through wounds but sug-
gests the possibility of lenticels also being channels of entrance. He
thinks that wounds may be made by any one of a number of agents :
mice, voles, rabbits, man, insects, etc. Later in the same year (2)
he believes that the fungus may enter through dead twigs, since he
finds these at the center of many cankers. Metcalf, (3) in 1908 says

(7)

8

that the spores enter throiig'h wounds, insect punctures, dead twigs
or dead wood. Later in the same year Hodson (4) repeats the state-
ments of Murrill and Metcalf. The next year Metcalf and Collins (5)
state that the spores enter through wounds and possibly in other
ways. In 1910, however, they (7) assert that the fungus can enter
without any visible break in the bark. Still they are of the opinion
that wounds are the usual channel and state that among these, the
tunnels of the bark borers are the most common. They suggest also
that winter injury may produce lesions that will give entrance to
the fungus. The idea of the borers being- responsible was evidently
strengthened by further observation for in 1911 (9) after repeating
their former statement, they write, "In many parts of the country
where the disease is prevalent there is very direct evidence that
bark borers, and particularly the two-lined chestnut borer (Agrilus
bilineatus) are directly associated in this way with 90 per cent, or
more of all cases of this disease." None of these writers cited give
any experimental data to prove their assertions.

How the fungus is carried from one tree to another. — Whether the
agent that makes the wound is the same as the one that carries the
spores, is a question on which observers do not agree. The tendency
in the last few years has been toward the belief that they are the
same, and that when the specific agent that makes the wound is
found it Avill also be found to carry the spores.

Murrill (1) in 1906 says that the summer spores are disseminated
by wind, insects, birds, squirrels, etc., and also that mice, voles and
rabbits make wounds and carry the spores in their fur. In a second
article ^2), he suggests the agency of rain in carrying the spores to
other parts of the tree. Hodson (4) in 1908 sa5^s, "Wind is probably
the principal agency, but the spores are no doubt carried by animals,
birds, insects and by the shipment of infected material. The disease
spreads locally through the gradual distribution of the spores from
tree to tree and at a distance, chiefly through the shipment of in-
fected material, such as a nursery stock, bark, nuts and other
products. There is a possibility that long distance infection is also
effected by means of migratory birds." It should be noticed that
he was speaking only of the summer spores. He does not claim to
have done any work on this subject himself, but has compiled his
circular mostly from what Metcalf and Murrill wrote. Rane (8) in
1911 says that the spores are carried long distances by the wind but
it is impossible to tell whether he was speaking of the conidia or
winter spores. Exactly the opposite opinion is expressed by Metcalf
and Collins regarding the spores (9) : "There is no evidence that

they are transmitted by wind, except where they may be washed
down into the dust and so blown about with the dust." The follow-
ing year Metcalf stated as follows :" Both kinds of spores appear to
be sticky and there is little evidence that they are transmitted to any
distance by wind except when washed down into the dust and so
blown about with it." (10). To account for the spread they suggest
rain and add : "There is strong evidence that the spores are spread
extensively by birds, especially woodpeckers, and there is also ex-
cellent evidence that they are spread by insects and by various
rodents, such as squirrels." (9). They also mention the agency of
man by shipping timber and nursery stock. The general opinion of
investigators up until the present about the wind, is well expressed
by Collins* who in his address at Ithaca, N. Y. in December 1911,
makes the following statement: 'T am quite convinced that these
spores are not blown broadcast, simply because they are of a sticky
nature." He adds that there is no reason why birds should not carry
them.

As far as any published research is concerned, the situation was well
summed up by Rankin (11) at the Harrisburg Conference in Feb-
ruary, 1912: "Concerning the means of the spread of fungus
from one tree to another, we have nothing except secondary evi-
dence. Most writers have theorized on the different methods by
which the conidia or summer spores might be carried from one tree
to another and new infection started. Reasoning by analogy with
what is known of the behavior of many fungi, such agencies as
borers, birds, ants and the wind, etc., have been suggested but in no
wise proved to be responsible. It seems that the ascospore stage
has not been considered by any writer in the dissemination of the
fungus, yet this stage follows the conidia very quickly and is the
more abundant fruiting stage." Then he adds : "Under moist
conditions, the ascospores are shot forcibly out in the air, where they
can be caught up by the wind and carried for a considerable distance.
The speaker found the ascospores being shot from the mature pus-
tules during every rainy period last summer. The question at once
arises, why could not these ascospores once shot into the air, be
carried long distances and owing to their abundance cause a large
majority of the infection?" So far as the literature shows, Mr.
Rankin stands alone in his views of the importance of the ascosporic
stage and the agency of the wind.

Fulton (11) reports some work carried out by Mr, R. A.
Waldron, which has an important bearing on dissemination. At-

*Conins, J. F. , The Chestnut Bark Disease. Reprint from Proceedings of the Second Annual
Meeting of the Northern Nut Growers' Association, Ithaca. N. Y. , December, 1911.

10

tempts were made by a strong blast from an electric fan to blow the
conidia into the air. The results were such as to lead Mr. Waldron
to believe that at best the conidia could be blown only a short dis-
tance even in a strong- wind. His opinion, expressed to the writer,
is that the wind has very little to do with the dissemination of the
conidia.

CHANNELS OF ENTRANCE TO THE HOST.

Much confusion has arisen in the past by not making a distinction
between the agent that carries the spores, and the one that produces
the wound by which the spores may enter. Some writers have pro-
ceeded on the assumption that one and the same agent is responsible
for both, i. e., that this agent carries the spores to a healthy tree and
there makes the wounds where it deposits the spores in a favorable
place for growth. That such is not the case, can positively be
demonstrated in many cases and the evidence is strongly against it
in the majority of cases.

Necessity of a wound. — Murrill (1) failed to get an infection ex-
cept where a wound was first made. Metcalf and Collins (7) how-
ever, state that the parasite may enter without a visible abrasion in
the bark. In our experimental plots all attempts to get an infection
by placing the spores on sound bark have failed. The following ex-
periment, however, may be not without significance in this respect.
Diseased .bark taken from a young canker was placed closely around
small branches, where no abrasions could be detected and then the
whole wrapped with cotton. The cotton served first to exclude in-
sects and other agents ; second, to keep the bark moist. Seven
branches were treated in this way on June 29th and on September
5th, — a little less than ten weeks, cankers were formed on three of
them. There was no sign of an infection, however, one month after
the experiment was started. On account of the unusually favorable
conditions for infection that are offered and the tardy appearance of
the cankers, not much practical importance has been attached to
these results. All other experiments indicate that the cases where
the fungus enters through sound bark are so rare as to be entirely
negligible.

The value of observation of natural infections. — The questions
that have been asked hundreds of times are: Can't you tell by look-
ing at young cankers, how they were started? What is the use of
making inoculations when you have the wounds right there at the
center to show you where the canker started? The problem is ap-
parently very simple. If you find a canker with a larval gallery at
the center, then the fungus must have entered through that wound;

11

if a sapsucker hole is there, then it is plain that the infecting spore
was deposited in that hole, etc., etc. It is safe to say that ninety-nine
per cent, of the statements that have been made concerning the in-
fecting agent are based on data collected in this way. Some extensive
lists of the kinds of wounds in the canker have been carefully com-
piled and put forward as indicating that certain specific agents are
responsible for a certain percentage or the infections. The fallacies of
such data are so obvious that they hardly need comment. It is
almost impossible to tell, except in the very youngest cankers,
whether the wound preceded the canker or the canker preceded the
wound. Very few old cankers are free from larvae and it is not
uncommon to find them in cankers less than an inch in diameter in
our experiment plots and yet the wounds were produced by a knife
and not by the larvae. Woodpeckers and other birds pick at the
cankers to get the larvae. The holes that they make, often lead the
uninitiated to believe that the canker started in them. Many have
stated that the natural cracks in the bark are a favorite means of
entrance because they found these at the center of the canker. Yet
it has been noticed all summer, that it does not matter by what
method the inoculation is made, — a crack will almost invariably be
formed at the center on account of the drying out of the bark and
soon it is almost impossible to tell by what method the inoculation
was made. In our observations on natural cankers, dead twigs
have more often been observed at the center than any particular
wound. But did the canker start from the dead twig or did the twig
die as a result of the canker forming around it? Very lyoung
cankers are not often noticed and when they are, they usually con-
tain no spores, so that it is impossible to state whether or not they
were produced by Endothia unless cultures are made or they are
put in a moist chamber for further development. Many cankers
have been ascribed to this fungus, but when sent in to our labora-
tories for examination proved to be only the natural dying of the
bark around insect galleries.

Observations on the natural cankers are not altogether without
value, but it is certain that data collected from these observations
alone are not reliable in determining the cause of infection.

Inoculations of various kinds of wounds. — The only way then to
find out what agents are responsible for giving entrance to the fun-
gus is to find the wounds produced by these agents (in uninfested
territory), inoculate them artificially and see if cankers are devel-
oped from them, at the same time keeping plenty of wounds not in-
oculated as checks. In some cases where wounds cannot be found

12

where wanted, it is necessary to make artificial wounds as near like
the natural ones as possible. The following kinds of wounds have
been inoculated and the results given in Table 1.

1. Slits in the bark, longitudinal, diagonal, etc., to imitate axe
wounds, knife wounds, etc.

2. Gouges to imitate climbers.

3. Artificial borer holes.

4. Natural insect holes.

5. Peeling down the bark.

6. Scraping off only the outer cork layer.

7. Cut stubs,

8. Broken down branches.

9. Natural cracks.

10. Gimlet holes to imitate sapsucker holes.

11. Holes made by a hypodermic needle.

It will be noticed in this table that a fair percentage of infection
was secured in all but three kinds of wounds. One of these was
natural cracks. Indications from later experiments, not yet re-
ported, lead us to believe that this kind of a wound also can become
infected. It is worthy of remark that out of all the natural insect
holes that have been inoculated with both kinds of spores and with
cultures, not one has produced a canker up to date.

The results of all the inoculation experiments of the summer, cer-
tainly warrant the following conclusion: Any kind of a wound in
the bark deeper than the outer green cortex may furnish an entrance
for the fungus. In other words, it is not necessary to have a wound
of any specific character or made by any specific agent.

Before leaving this subject, mention should be made of another
mode of entrance, which although as yet not sufficiently investi-
gated, may prove to be of some importance. It was commonly
noticed in thick young coppice in eastern Pennsylvania that many of
the young sprouts of this year's growth were dying from the tip
downward. The disease seemed to start in the leaves, the midrib
especially being blackened by the invasion of a fungus. All stages
could be found from leaves with dead tips to the entirely deadened
twig. In a very large number of cases the blight fungus was grow-
ing around the base of the twig, where the blackening had run down
to the larger branch, in such a manner as to lead one to believe that
it had entered by means of the twig. Isolations both from the leaves
and from the twigs showed the presence of a fungus which we have
repeatedly demonstrated to be the cause of "die back" on the twigs
in western Pennsylvania. This fungus was isolated too late in the

13

season to carr}^ on inoculation experiments this year. That its at-
tack may have some relation to the entrance of the blight fungus is
at least possible.

TABLE 1

Showing the comparative value of different kinds of wounds for

infection.

Character of wound.

Inoculation naaterial used.

Longitudinal slit —

Longitudinal slit,

Diagonal slit,

Diagonal slit,

V-shaped cuts,

V-shaped cuts,

V-shaped cuts

Artificial borer holes,

Natural insect holes,

Natural insect holes,

Natural insect holes,

Peeling down bark,

Stab with knife

Stab with knife -

Stab wjth knife

Scraping off outer cork layer.

Cut stubs,

Broken branches,

Natural cracks,

Ginalet holes,

Hypodermic needle,

Diseased bark,

Mycelium from culture, -
Mycelium from culture, .

Dry spore horns,

Conidia in water,

Ascospores in water, ...
Ascospores shot in dry, .
Mycehum from culture, -
Mycelium from culture, .

Conidia in water.

Ascospores in water, ...
Mycelium from culture,
Ascospores in water, ...

Conidia in water,

Dry spore horns,

Mycelium from culture,
Mycelium from culture, .
Mycelium from culture, .
Mycelium from culture, .

Ascospores in water,

Ascospores in water, ...

ses

93.&

454

89.2

25

96.0

16

93.7

W

98.8

88

94.3

238

82.5

68

54.4

18

0.0

23

0.0

22

0.0

25

88.0

347

36.9

81

86.8

96

79.1

25

0.0

22

81.8

45

71.9

25

0.0

135

52.6

54

75.9

Having thus disposed of the agents which furnish a means of
entrance to the new host, let us next consider some of the agents,
which have been suspected of carrying the disease from tree to tree.

MAN AS THE DISSEMINATOR.

The shipment of nursery stock. — This has proved to be an efficient
means of carrying the fungus by long jumps to regions free from
blight (Cf. (5) p. 49; (4) pp. 5 & 7.) This phase no longer calls for
experimental proof, but four interesting cases which have come to
light in western Pennsylvania are worthy of mention because they
were all far beyond the main line of advance of the disease. The
first of these was near Connellsville, Fayette County, a county in
which blight has never been found on the native trees. Twelve

14

Paragon trees had been purchased from a Philadelphia nursery in
the Spring of 1911. These were grafted trees about two or three
years old. When the disease was discovered about a year afterward,
six of the trees were dead or in a dying condition from cankers on
both the stocks and the scions. Fortunately no native trees were
close to these and the fungus had no chance to spread further. A
second case at Warren was similiar. Out of twelve trees, eleven were
dead at the top and on the majority of the trees Endothia was
plainly the cause of death. A very similar condition was found in
Elk county. Here however, it had gone further and one native tree
close by was badly infested. These trees were brought from
Rochester, New York. The fourth case is between Somerset and
Berlin in Somerset County, and here it has been left long enough to
demonstrate the awful destructiveness of the disease. About four
years ago some Paragon grafts were brought from Lancaster
County, a badly infested county, and top grafted on native trees.
There are now thousands of diseased trees within a radius of two
miles from the grafted trees. Since the disease has gone so far and
since there were no records of it up to the present year, it is only
fair to state that it cannot be definitely proved now that this infection
started from the Paragon grafts. The fact that the scions were from
an infested orchard indicate that these were the source of infection.

The spread of the disease by tools. — To determine whether the
disease can be spread by tools in cutting into a diseased tree and then
into a healthy one, the following experiment was tried :

On July 25th, 13 cuts were made in trees with an axe, each time
after chopping into a diseased log several times. Within six weeks
cankers began to appear around the cuts and on October 1st, when
the trees were cut down and burned, 12 of the 13 cuts had decided
cankers about them. There is then little doubt that the disease can
be carried in this way.

Shipment of logs and wood. — Can the disease be spread by ship-
ping logs and wood into uninfested territory? This resolves itself
mainly into the question of whether the fungus lives and grows and
produces spores on the dead bark and logs, under the conditions in
which they are usually kept. How long will it live there? Will it
pass from one log to another or from one piece of bark to another?
Supposing that the spores were already formed, how long would
they continue to live on dead logs or on bark? How long would the
perithecia retain their power to shoot spores into the air? To
answer these questions, the following experiments have been started
and the results up to date are given below:

15

Experiment: To determine how long mycelium will remain alive
in logs, peeled and not peeled. On July 1st, 104 logs were cut and
left on the ground where they fell; 18 of these were peeled and the
remainder left with the bark on them. Three months afterward
the mycelium was found still alive in 22 per cent, of the peeled
logs and 66 per cent, of those not peeled.

Experiment: To determine whether bark after being taken from
the log and thrown on the ground can become infected. Pieces of
bark were inoculated and thrown on the ground in various situations
to see if the fungus would develop on them. Table II gives re-
sults.

TABLE 11.

Showing results of inoculation in removed bark.

Date.

Method of making inoculations.

Where kept.

■

0
C«

.£1
3
0

_a
"o

1

[3
S

a ■

w

bo

<•

B

June I,

June I,

June I

July 23

July 23

Mycelium from culture in slit...

Conidia put in slit in bark,

Ascoipores put in slit in bark,

Mycelium from culture in slit,

Ascospores in water, ....

Dry ground where sun was

shining.
Dry ground where sun was

shining.
Dry ground where sun was

shining.
Shady place but rather dry

ground.
Shady place but rather dry

ground.
Shady place but rather dry

ground.
Low wet ground in shade,...

Low wet ground in shade....

Low wet ground in shade....

14

12
IS

6
3
3
12

7
21

p

(X

0

1 00
100

July 23,

Aug. 21,

Piece of diseased bark tied on,

Piece of diseased bark tied on,

Washed with water containing asco-
spores.
Mycelium from culture in slit,

100,
100

Aug. 21,

Aug. 21,

8s

From this table it appears that the condition under which the
bark is kept will determine whether or not it can become infested.
If piled in a moist and shaded place, it is certain that the fungus will
spread through it, if any spores are present, to infect it. Also if
diseased and healthy bark are piled together, the fungus will run"
from the diseased bark to the bark that is uninfested. It has often'
been noticed during the past summer that where diseased trees were
cut and the chips left in a pile about the base of the tree, that the'
fungus will grow luxuriantly in the bottom of the pile. Not only

1^

will it grow on the dead chips, but also on leaves and dead chestnut
burs, as proved by the following experiments :

Experiment: To determine whether Endothia will grow on
dead leaves. Dead chestnut leaves were sterilized in a moist
chamber on July 23rd and then a few drops of water containing
ascospores washed down over them. On August 24th numerous
pycnidia were formed on the leaves.

Experiment : To determine whether Endothia will grow on dead
chestnut burs. On June 14th, three dead chestnut burs were steri-
lized and placed under a bell jar. Afterwards a few drops of water
containing ascospores were washed down over them. On July 24th
pycnidia had been developed on all of them.

Experiment: To determine whether the fungus can grow on
seasoned chestnut wood. On September 13th, nine small pieces of a
rail that had been seasoned for several years, were put in tests tubes
with moist cotton, sterilized and inoculated at one end. On October
6th, scattered pycnidia had formed at various points on the surface
of all of them. That it can also grow on twigs of other species will
be brought out later.

The fact that this fungus, besides being a virulent parasite, is also
an excellent saprophyte seems never to have received sufficient at-
tention. It will grow more rapidly through dead tissue than through
living tissue, and will live there for a long time and continue to pro-
duce its spores. Some interesting examples of this have been
noticed. In an infested tract previously mentioned, in Somerset
County, in June of this year, diseasecf trees were burned so near
healthy ones, that the latter were scorched on one side and the bark
cracked open. A reinspection of the injured trees four months later
showed that the fungus had gained entrance through the cracks
and had spread entirely over the burned sides of the trees, growing
in some cases a distance of six inches from the point of infection.
Comparisons with the rate of growth as determined by inoculation
experiments show that this is a great deal faster than it grows
through healthy tissue. At St. Marys, Pennsylvania, trees with scat-
tered cankers were cut in the spring of this year and permitted to
lie without further attention. In October a reinspection showed the
fruiting pustules of the fungus spread more than a foot from the
edge of the canker during the summer. Trees in the same condition
were felled during the spring at Anderson, Pennsylvania. The
trunks were utilized but the tops and branches were left on the
ground. Six months later, hardly a branch or stump or top could be
found which was not fairly covered by the fungus. In the sapro-

17

phytic condition no canker is formed and the bark looks no dif-
ferent from ordinary dead bark except for the reddish pustules.
Another peculiarity of the fungus under these conditions is that the
mycelium does not advance in fan-shaped mats, but by single strands
so that it is mot readily visible to the unpracticed eye.

Spores that are already formed live for months (see below under
"Longevity of the Spores") and that the perithecia will still retain
their power of ejecting the ascospores into the air is proved by
the following:

Experiment: To see how long after being dried the perithecia
can eject the spores. Bark with perithecial stromata was kept in the
laboratory for 14 weeks. Five pieces of this were then tested and
ascospores were shot out on slides from two of them.

Then there is no reason why the disease can not start in a new
locality to which the logs are shipped, if in that locality they are
placed near where chestnut trees are growing. If the logs are peeled,
however, the chances of spreading are much reduced since the logs
will dry out more and in any case only pycnidia will be pro-
duced. The shipment of unpeeled wood is evidently a more prolific
way of spreading the disease since the perithecia are developed on
the bark.

The only recommendations about the shipment of chestnut pro-
ducts that can be made at this time are in regard to the moisture
conditions under which they are shipped or stored. It has been
demonstrated that water is necessary first for the ejection of the
ascospores ; and second for the germination of either form of spores.
Shipment should be made in closed cars and the wood, if it cannot
be stored inside, should at least be piled up off the ground in such a
way as to admit all the air and sunlight possible.

BIRDS AS CARRIERS OF THE FUNGUS.

The fact that birds pick at the cankers in search of larvae has been
previously mentioned. Then they would get the spores or bits of
mycelium on the feet, bills and feathers and carry them away to
other trees and deposit them there seems a plausible theory. During
the early spring, on the experimental plats at Mt. Gretna, Mr. Clare
observed several species of woodpeckers and the blue jays picking at
these cankers, and in some cases large areas were picked away. At
that time, however, none of these were shot and tested for the pre-
sence of spores. A set of experiments was planned to determine
whether any of the birds carried the spores, but on account of un-
fortunate delays, could not be carried out until the middle of the

18

summer. By that time the birds were very scarce around the trees.
It seems that during the summer they live mostly on berries and
other fruits and do not pick at the trees. Nevertheless some of them
were shot in the plots and tested. The method and results are given
below :

Birds found on the infested trees were shot during the
summer and their feet, bills, and tail feathers washed separately in
sterile water. This water was then centrifuged to bring down the
spores that might have been washed from the birds. Part of the
sediment was then examined under the microscope and the other part
plated out in dilution plates. When colonies of fungi appeared,
they were isolated to determine whether they were Endothia. An-
other method used, was to make direct imprints on sterile chestnut
bark agar plates with the feet and bills of the birds. Three blue jays,
eight downy woodpeckers, three creepers, four flickers and two
hairy woodpeckers were treated as above, but all results were nega-
tive. To determine whether this method was at fault, the feet and
bills of birds were brought in contact with both conidiospores and
ascospores and then treated as above. Colonies of Endothia de-
veloped in abundance.

Birds may be instrumental in spreading the disease but up to the
present we have no experimental data to prove it. These experi-
ments will be resumed during the winter and spring with a better
chance of obtaining conclusive results.

That such a wound in the bark as that produced by a sapsucker
could become infected by ascospores is indicated by the follow-
ing:

Experiment: One hundred and thirty-five wounds of about the
same diameter and depth as the holes made by sapsuckers were made
with a gimlet. These were inoculated by putting the ascospores in
water and dropping the water from a pipette into the holes. All of
these had cankers formed about them six weeks later. No cankers
appeared on the forty-five uninoculated gimlet holes used as checks,

HOW THE RAIN SPREADS THE DISEASE.

The rain dissolves the mucilaginous matrix of the spore horns
and the conidia are carried down the trunk, where they probably
find lodgment in wounds and produce cankers. This is the usual
explanation of the fact, that most trees with cankers on the upper
trunk or large limibs, later become diseased at the base and on the
exposed roots. As an actual fact, there are no experimental data
which prove that the rain is responsible for these basal cankers. In-
sects might just as well carry the spores there, and several other
agents might be suggested but the rain theory is the most plausible

19

Some very interesting data were collected along this line at
Charter Oak on the naturally infested tract. The diseased trees
were blazed April 1st of this year, the blaze being cut in healthy
bark in most cases. On August 14th eighty-four of the blazes were
examined and sixty-six of them had developed new cankers at the
base of the blaze, while only eight had cankers at the top. Now a
remarkable thing about the Charter Oak infection is that all
through the summer no ascospores could be found, but there has
been an abundance of conidial tendrils since the middle of May.
Taking these facts into consideration, therefore it seems probable
that the cankers in the blazes were started by the conidia washed
down from above.

To determine that the spore horns are washed off by the rain, it is
only necessary to watch the water running down the trunk during
a rain. That they would wash into wounds below is certain, if
there were wounds there at the time of the rain. Then to duplicate
these conditions, it is only necessary to make a suspension of conidia
in water and spray trees so that the conidia run down into wounds,
or to put the water with the spores directly in the wound. This was
done successfully in various sorts of wounds as reported in Table
III.

A still more convincing experiment was carried out at Mt. Gretna
as follows:

Experiment: Isolated trees were selected which had cankers on
the trunks producing conidial tendrils, but having no ascospores
in them. Wounds were made at various distances below the
cankers. Water was sprayed with an atomizer on the cankers and
allowed to run down the trunks into the wounds. Of the twenty-
three wounds treated in this way, sixteen developed cankers later.

TABLE III.
Showing the value of conidia in water for producing infection.

Date.

0

Method of inoculation.

c
.0

jt

"3

1
"0

u

0

.a

e

3
z

"3

CO
V

3

i
i

June S,

June 17,

6

15
12
36

Sprayed with atomizer in V-shaped cuts,

Dropped into «tab in the bark,

Dropped into itab in the bark,

57
S3
96
40

89.4

54-7

June II,

SS-oo

July 7,

Dropped into V-shaped cut,

92.5

20

A much more important part played by the rain in the spread of
the disease is in soaking up the bark and the perithecial stromata,
thus bringing about the proper conditions for the ejection of the
ascospores. This will be treated under "Wind Dissemination,"

Sometimes it has been observed that the ascospores, instead of
shooting, merely ooze out, and in this case, the rain would wash
them down and produce basal infection, just as with the conidia.
To determine the power of ascospores to produce infection when
carried down by the drops of rain water, a set of experiments was
carried out very similar to those with conidia. The rain might
also splash the spores for short distances or carry them to trees that
are directly under cankers on the higher trees. The results are given
in Table IV. On the whole there is need of further experiment in
regard to the relation of the rain to the disease.

TABLE IV.
Showing the value of ascospores in water for producing infection.

Date.

Method of inoculations.

June 10,,
June II,
June 17,
July 17,.

Dropped into stabs in bark,...
Dropped into stabs in bark,...
Dropped into stabs in bark,...
Dropped into V-Shaped cuts,

184
144
59

29.3
34-7
40.7
88.9

THE RELATION OF INSECTS TO THE DISEASE.

From the time that the disease was discovered, insects have come
in for a large share of the blame for its spread. The main reason
for this theory seems to be that they are found so abundantly on
and in the bark of chestnut trees and that their galleries are common
in the cankered areas. But one will look in vain through the literature
for any convincing experimental data to prove that they are
responsible. Since this was considered a problem for the entomo-
logist, and since there were several entomologists working on it
in Pennsylvania, very little work bearing on the relation of insects
was done in our laboratories.

The insect most often found in this state, working in the bark is
the little larva of the "bast miner." When it emerges it leaves a

21

neat little hole less than 0.5 mm. in diameter. Since these appeared
to be excellent places for the fungus to gain an entrance, inocula-
tions were made in them, with mycelium, ascospores and conidia
and introducing them in various ways and at different times during
the summer. No infection was ever secured.

There seems to be a general idea abroad that insects are in the
habit of boring into diseased bark and then goinj^ to another place,
and boring another hole there, thus carrying the disease from one
tree to the next. Competent entomologists assure us, however, that
it is doubtful if any insects with such habits live on the chestnut.
Larvae do not leave their galleries until they come out as adults,
and then they come out leaving the old pupal case behind them, or
else they come out and go into the ground to pupate, in which case
also they would not carry the spores to other trees. There is also
an idqa current that when the adults deposit their eggs they sting
or puncture the bark and lay the eggs on the inside. Now as an ac-
tual fact we are informed that such is not the case but that the eggs,
as a rule, are deposited on the outside of the bark, and when the
larvae hatch, then enter the bark through microscopically small
holes and at so slow a rate, that it is doubtful if very much fresh
bark is left exposed at any one time. The cicada is an exception
to this rule, since it does deposit its eggs on the inside and make
a large wound in doing so, but has never been demonstrated that a
cicada will oviposit in a diseased area, so that it would be hard to
see how the spores could get on the ovipositor in the first place. Nor
are the cicadas sufficiently numerous in this part of the State to
account for the infection. The writers have had occasion to ex-
amine several thousand cankers during the summer, but have
never seen one that was suspected of having started from a cicada
wound. However, cases have been reported by field men in which
as high as thirty per cent, of the lesions were found in or about
cicada wounds.

Ants have been accused and some observers state that they have
actually seen them eat the spore horns and pustules and also carr^r
them about with them. Even at that, this is only secondary evi-
dence that they produce new infections with these spores.

Experiment: On May 8th, eighteen ants were dug out of a
canker and each transferred to a sterile plate of potato agar and
permitted to run over the plate for several days. No colonies of
Endothia developed on the plates. This experiment was duplicated
later by R. D. Spencer in the laboratories at Charter Oak, but with
negative results. Mr. Spencer is of the opinion, however, that
this method is at fault.

22

; Experiment: On August 7th, five vials of insects were sent to
Charter Oak from eastern Pennsylvania by P. H. Hertzog, to be
tested to see if they had spores of the fungus on them. These were
tested by putting them, one at a time, in tubes or melted agar, kept
just warm enough so that it would not solidify. The tube was
then shaken and the agar poured into sterile Petri dishes. Ants from
three of the vials proved to have the spores on them. The spores
had been artificially placed on the ants in one of the vials, however.
The ants in the other two had been taken from the bark of the
diseased chestnut trees after a rain. This indicates that the ants can
carry the spores.

Experiment: To find out how long spores will remain on ants.
On August 28th, fifteen large ants were caught and immersed in
water, which was milky with conidia. Then these were allowed
to run in a bottle of earth and at regular intervals two were taken
out and tested for the presence of spores. The last test was five
hours and sixteen minutes afterward and spores were still on the
insects. The technique used was the same as in the preceding
experiment. This shows that ants may retain the spores long
enough to carry them some distance.

Experiment: To determine whether ants eat the stromata of the
fungus. On August 28th, fifteen ants were placed in a bottle, con-
taining moist bark with perithecial stromata. Air was admitted
through cheesecloth at the top. They were kept in there until all
but two of them starved to death. Examination showed that they
had not eaten the pustules. No similar experiment with spore horns
has been tried.

Many observers have noted the fact that the stromata at times
are found to be all eaten out of the bark. This has been attributed
to various agents, such as birds, squirrels, ants, etc. This has been
especially noticed during the past summer and trees have been
found covered with cankers, but with not a pustule remaining. It
was thought that the agent that removed the stromata might be
responsible for spreading the disease, by carrying the spores to
healthy trees. Mr. Spencer worked on this problem and found that
although several insects occasionally work at the pustules, by far the
greater part of them in this locality, were eaten out by Leptostylus
maculata, — one of the Cerambycid beetles. These insects were re-
peatedly put in cages, with pieces of the bark containing stromata,
and it was a matter of only a few days when not a pustule re-
mained on the bark.

The question next to be answered was, whether the disease was
further disseminated by the ravages of this insect or whether the
beetle was beneficial since it ate such a large number of spores.

23

Are the spores digested and thus destroyed in the stomach of the
insect or do they pass out in the excreta to germinate on the other
hosts? Two sets of experiments were run to determine this point.

Experiment: The beetles were fed on the stromata for five days
then taken out and sterilized with phenol on the outside. Then the
viscera were removed with sterile needles, put in melted potato agar
and plated out by the usual poured plate method. Numerous
colonies of bacteria developed but no fungi at all. The bacterial
colonies are explained by the fact that bacteria thrive in the intes-
tines of insects, as well as higher animals. This experiment was
checked by the following:

Experiment: After being fed for a day on the ascosporic stro-
mata five of these insects were removed and caused to excrete the
fecal material by a light pressure with the forceps on the abdomen.
This fecal material was caught in sterile potato agar tubes and
plated out with the same negative results as in the preceding ex-
periment. These experiments indicate that this insect may be really
beneficial.

Mr. Spencer and the writers are of the opinion that the insects
are not important agents in the spread of the blight, except in so far
as they produce wounds by which the spores may enter.

THE RELATION OF THE WIND TO THE SPREAD OF THE
CHESTNUT BLIGHT.

Murrill in his first publication on the blight (1) in June, 1906,
states that the summer spores are disseminated by the wind. Out-
side of mentioning the fact that the winter spores are matured in
late autumn, this stage of the fungus is entirely ignored. From
that time until 1911 almost every writer on the chestnut blight who
mentions dissemination at all, follows Murrill in stating that the
conidia are blown by the wind and in ignoring the ascospore stage.
The disease does spread in a way that would lead most observers to
suspect that the spores are carried by the wind ; therefore their con-
clusions are not remarkable. It is much easier to imagine the wind
blowing the spores off these exposed tendrils of the summer spores,
than out of the perithecia, which are deeply imbedded in the
stromata. Besides, the ascospores were thought to be developed in
the winter, while the disease spreads most in the summer. But when
it was discovered that the conidia are very sticky when wet, and
are cemented together in a mass as hard as horn when dry, the
wind dissemination idea had to be discarded. The general opinion
concerning conidia as expressed by Metcalf and Collins (9) in Oc-
tober, 1911, was as follows: "As both kinds of spores are sticky,
there is no evidence that they are transmitted by wind except where

24

they may be washed down into the dust and so blown about with
the dust."

The results of a series of experiments during the last summer,
have led us to believe that the ascospore stage is the important
stage in the dissemination of the fungus and that the wind is largely
responsible for its spread. The observations and data upon which
these conclusions are based are given below.

Occurrence of the ascospore stage. — The ascospores are commonly
called winter spores but this name is misleading. There has never
been a time during the past summer when ascospores could not
be found maturing in any number of localities in Pennsylvania. On
the other hand there were "spot infections" in the western part of
the State, where nothing but the summer stage could be found, al-
though the infection apparently was of several years standing. A
comparison of a large number of these "spot infections" showed that
in general, where the fungus was all in the summer spore stage,
young cankers were scarce and were mostly confined to the young
growth about the older infested trees, while in the localities where
the winter stage was common, they were more numerous and much
more widely spread in the surrounding woodland. These were the
first observations that led us to believe that the ascospores are of
primary importance in spreading the disease from one tree to an-
other.

Ejection of the ascospores. — These spores are enclosed in a tough
leathery flask, the perithecium, which in turn is deeply imbedded in
the stroma. In order to get to another tree and to reproduce the
disease there, they must be removed from this flask and get out
into the air. The question at once arises: How do they get out?
In the summer of 1911, W. H. Rankin (11) discovered that the
spores are forcibly ejected from the ostioles of the perithecia. That
such is the case can very easily be demonstrated. After a heavy
rain or after making the bark very wet by spraying water on it,
fasten a glass side on the bark over mature perithecia, so that the
surface of the slide is only a few fillimeters from the ostioles. In a
short time white blotches will appear on the slide over certain of the
ostioles which are active. Examination under a microscope will
show these to be little heaps of ascospores sticking to the slide.
The course of the spores after leaving the ostioles can be watched
under the low power of the microscope or better under a binocular
dissecting microscope. The writer has also often observed them
with only a hand lens. A still better method of watching them in
quantity and one which has been used successfully in our labora-
tories is the "light-beam" method, which is described by Buller in

25

his "Researches on Fungi." By this method they can be watched
with the naked eye, shooting out into the air by thousands.

The relation of the rain periods to the ejection of spores. — ^The
spores are ejected only during periods of rain since the bark must be
well soaked. To see how often they would shoot during the month
of August under natural conditions, slides were suspended over 30
groups of pustules on a clump of trees. All of them ejected spores,
at least once during the month, and four of them at five different
dates; others, less often. The fact was noticed that even after a
heavy rain, the spores would oftervbe ejected only from the stromata
on one side of the tree, the other side not being sufficiently drenched
to start the perithecia.

Time required for perithecia to begin shooting spores after the
bark is soaked. — This, of course will vary with the moisture content
of the bark before the soaking begins. To make conditions uniform,
specimens of bark which had been dried for three weeks in the
laboratory were used in a number of experiments. They were
drenched, then put in the bottom of Petri dishes, into which had
been poured a little water to keep the bark continually moist. In all,
35 pieces of bark were used. Of these 22 had shot spores within
two hours; 5 began shooting in 45 minutes. The average time for
the 22 was 1 hour and 28 minutes. In another set of experi-
ments, fresh bark was brought in from the woods and tested. The
variation was greater due to the different conditions under
which the bark was used. Several specimens ejected the spores in
less than three minutes after they were brought into the laboratory.

The duration of the shooting period following a rain. — The fol-
lowing experiment gives data both for answering this question and
also additional data on the one just discussed: Sixty pieces of as-
cospore bark were soaked for 15 minutes and then slides suspended
over them to detect the spores that were shot. Ninety per cent, of
them ejected spores: The first one started in 22 minutes, the last
one in 1 hour and 55 minutes, the average being 1 hour and 3
minutes. Records were taken of the time they continued to shoot.
The shortest time was 1 hour and 20 minutes ; the longest, five hours
and two minutes; the average, 3 hours and 7 minutes.

In another experiment a canker was drenched with water in
the woods and after it started to shoot, it continued for 2 hours and
35 minutes.

In a third experiment, a well infested small log was brought into
the laboratory and sprayed with an atomizer. It began shooting in
44 minutes and was still shooting in places after 3 hours and 30
minutes. In this experiment it was noticed that, whenever the sur-

26

face of the bark and pustules became dry, the spores ceased shooting.
We may say then in general that as long after a rain on the surface
of the bark remains wet, the spores will continue to shoot. This
leads us to the next question.

Duration of shooting, if the bark remains wet. — On August 18th,
five pieces of bark about 1 cm. square, were started to shooting in a
moist chamber in the usual way. Records were taken three times a
day of whether they were still shooting. One of them became
covered with Pencillium and stopped shooting after six days. Of
the others, one continued shooting 17 days, one 14 days, another 22
days and the last one, 25 days. Each of these, however, occasionally
missed a day or part of a day. Later experiments gave similar
results although no longer record than 25 days was ever obtained.
Since it is not likely that a period of continuous rainy weather
would be longer than 25 days, we may say in general, that the spores
will continue to shoot as long as the bark is wet.

Effect of dessication on resumption of shooting. — On July 23rd,
two pieces of bark were started to shooting spores in the regular
way. After it was determined that they were shooting well, they
were removed and thoroughly dried for a day, then tested again for
shooting, after which they were dried for two days and tested, etc.,
being dessicated alternately for one and two days. For 27 days
this experiment was continued, and on wetting each time, they con-
tinued shooting. The experiment was discontinued on the 19th of
August because of contaminations.

In a similar experiment, allowing the bark to dry, however, one
day between each test, spores were ejected on every test for 14 days.
In a third experiment they were dried a week between each test.
This experiment was in progress four weeks and at each test spores
were ejected.

Distance to which spores will be ejected. — W. H. Rankin re-
ports that they will be ejected with sufficient force to throw them
5 mm. straight upward. Numerous tests have been made in our
laboratories. In general they will easily shoot from 4 to 7 mm. and
often much higher. The highest record secured as yet is 22 mm. A
more important question is: How far will they shoot horizontally?
One is surprised in watching the course of the spores, by the
"light beam" method to find that the majority follow a rather
regular "sporabola," as Buller has named it; some of them seem to
be lighter and float off further afield than the others. The follow-
ing experiment will give some idea of their power to shoot horizon-
tally when all air currents are excluded as far as possible. A piece
of shooting bark about 5 mm. square was supported 1 inch above

27

the edge of a sterile plate of agar, so that the ostioles pointed out
horizontally over the plate. All this was done under a bell jar.
After allowing the perithecia to shoot five minutes, the plate was cov-
ered and stored to see how the colonies of the fungus would show
up. At the end of three days 508 colonies of Endothia appeared.
From the region below the bark, diverging lines of closely crowded
colonies appeared for 30 mm. Beyond this the colonies were irregu-
larly scattered over the plate. The farthest one was 89 mm. from the
point where the bark was placed.

These experiments show that without doubt, the spores are shot
far enough into the air so that the wind will have abundant oppor-
tunity to catch them up and carry them to other trees.

Rate of ejection of spores. — The following experiment was carried
out to determine the rate of shooting from a single ostiole. A piece
of shooting bark was mounted on the stage of a microscope and
a single ostiole found, from which spores were shot on to the slide.
The spores on the slide were counted and the following data se-
cured :

Slide Number.

Time of Exposure.

30 seconds,
30 seconds,
30 seconds.

Perithecium A.

212
109
103

Perithecium B.

127
118
63

This gives us the further data :

The greatest number of spores per second, 7.1

The smallest number of spores per second, 2.1

Average number of spores per second, 4.06

Using the average as the basis of our calculations, this would
give us 14,000 spores per hour or at the rate of 345,600 per day for
one ostiole. By watching the ostioles under the microscope each
discharge can be noted by the breaking of the film of water over the
ostiole. It has been determined that with each discharge 8 spores
are ejected. Taking the average in the table above, this would give
us one discharge for every two seconds.

Another experiment which will give an idea of the rate of dis-
charge was as follows: A canker on a small trunk was drenched
with water and as soon as it began discharging spores a 10 cm. plate
of sterile agar was exposed horizontally under it for five minutes.
Nine thousand seven hundred and thirty-three colonies developed
on the plate. The actual number of spores, of course, would be
much greater than this.

Length of time required for germination of aseospores. — In favor-
able weather, aseospores will begin to germinate usually within five
hours after ejection. The shortest record obtained in a long series
of tests was 1 hour and 25 minutes. At most a spore would have to
be kept moist only a few hours to become established in a new
tree.

As to the mechanics of the process of ejection, very little is known
and nothing has been done as yet in our laboratories. That it is con-
nected with the life of the organism and not a mere physical pro-
cess, is indicated by the fact that when the spores are killed by a
treatment of four minutes with formaldehyde gas, they are no longer
ejected from the perithecia.

Spore content of the air. — To determine whether the spores of the
blight fungus were really floating about in the air two methods were
used. Both of these methods were first used in badly infested tracts
during dry weather, i. e. while the trunks of the trees were dry. Over
one hundred plates were exposed and 5CX) liters of air were tested
with the aspirator but since not a spore of Endothia was detected,
it was decided that if there were any in the air in dry weather, they
could not be detected by the methods used. Since it had previously
been determined that the spores are ejected only after rains, all
other tests were made while the trunks of the trees were wet. Since,
however, it was inconvenient to have to wait for rains, the trunks
were usually drenched with water by hand.

The aspirator method was the first one tried. A 15 liter flask was
filled with water and a sterile sugar tube put in the opening at the
top. The water was then permitted to run out slowly through a
faucet at the bottom. The water in the bottle being replaced by air,
which passes through the sterile sugar in the tube, any spores
that were in the air, would be retained by the sugar. The sugar was
then plated out and the number of spores per liter of air calculated
from the number of colonies that developed on the plates and the
number of liters of air drawn through the tube. The result of a
number of tests made in this way are given in Table V. In general,
this method was not found so satisfactory as the next one described,
but was more accurate in giving more exact figures as to the num-
ber of spores per unit quantity of air.

29

TABLE V.

Showing the number of Spores contained in the air as determined
by the aspirator method.

u

w

i,

J4

a

T3

j5

0

3

g

j=

0

Q

^

a

Number of liters of air.

•a

0

al

3

J3

s

u'a

e

C

^s

2

fi a

S

Q

z

30

ao

30,

I ft, and II in.f

12

8, :.:::: ; :.::::.::::::::::::

4 ft.

2 ft.

6 in.,

IS,

10

15.

33

IS,

S in.,

IS,

2 in.,

40

IS,

6 in.,

22 ft.

14 in,,

6 in

1 ft

2 ft

I ft

Sft

Sft

15,

SO

IS,

250

IS

no

IS,

I ft.

75

IS,

2 ft.

8S

IS

I ft. ... .

60

IS,

sft.

180

IS

3 in.,

210

Summary: Two hundred and sixty-three liters of air taken from
distances varying from two inches to two feet out from and from
six inches to twenty-two feet below the canker gave a total of 1135
spores, an average of 4.3 spores per liter.

The second method was as follows: Badly infested trunks of
small trees were brought into an open place near the laboratory and
induced to shoot spores by drenching with water. Sterile plates of
chestnut bark agar were exposed for varying lengths of time, mostly
so that the wind blew from the cankers to the plates and at various
distances. The number of colonies of Endothia was counted,
usually after three days. If there was any doubt about the identity
of a colony, it was transferred to agar slants until identified by
further growth. By this more convenient method, we were able to
catch spores at a distance of more than 50 feet to the windward
from the logs, but never more than a few inches against the wind.
No effort was made to catch them at greater distances than 51 feet,
but since they could easily be detected at that distance in a moderate
wind and on a level with the canker, it would not be hard to im-
agine them carried for miles if they were on mountains, as we have
often found them, and with a strong wind blowing. The results of
a series of exposures is given in Table VI.

30

TABLE VI.

Showing the results of exposure of sterile agar plates near infested
trees. Plates exposed so that the wind blew from the infested trees
toward the plates.

Number of plates.

Distance from log.

c

rt

_o
c

5

•a"

0

0.

H
u

B

•a
a

-a

V

U

1

<

i6

I inch
I inch
I inch
2-6 inch
6-24 inch
2-36 inch
3-9 ft.
9-30 ft.
30-SI ft.

3-S min.

3-S min.

3-2S min.

2-30 min.

3-30 min.
IS-60 min.
10-80 min.
20-60 min.
60-90 min.

4

3932

15

2-4 inches
6-36 inches

466

13

7
7
21

4I

77
44

78

23, . .

890

40,

23

16

6-36 inches

SI

51, .

5

8s,

5

46; ;;::;:::;.::::::::;;:;:::::::::::;:.:::::;::::::::::.

5

Exposed to side and Back of the Trees.

Back of log.

To side of log.

13,

12-90 inches.

IO-2S min.
S-60 min.

3
7

14,

1-26 in.

A similar series of exposures with only 12 plates, however, at
distances of only a few inches was tried with logs on which were
numerous conidial tendrils but the results were entirely negative.

Inoculations by wind-borne spores. — Having demonstrated then
that the spores are carried in great abundance by the wind, the next
thing to be demonstrated was that these spores, falling into a wound
in that condition, could produce infection. In order to duplicate
more nearly natural conditions the following plan was followed in
making the inoculations: Various kinds of wounds were made in
the bark of healthy trees. Then ascospore bark taken from cankers
and which had been determined to be shooting spores was suspended
so that the spores were ejected toward the wound in the healthy
tree. There was no way for the spores to get from the diseased bark
to the healthy tree, except to pass through the air. After exposing
it for a time, as given in the table, the wound was covered with

31

cotton to prevent spores entering- from any other source. The
wounds were always made with a sterilized instrument and the bark
was previously sterilized by washing with mercuric chloride or for-
malin. That this method was entirely successful is demonstrated by
the results given in Table VII.

TABLE VII.
Showing results of inoculating with naturally ejected ascospores.

Kind of wound.

5

V-cut -.

V-cut

V-cut,

V-eut

V-cut.

Broken branches, ..
Tangential slice, -.-
Bruises from stone,

V-eut

Longitudinal slit, .
Jagged knife cut, _.

V-cut

V-cut,

i ineb,
1 incb,
J inch,
1 inch,
I inch,'
i inch,
k inch,
I inch,
J inch,
i inch,
J inch,
i inch,
1 inch.

15 min.

86

li hrs.

S13

15 min.

22 1

1 hr.

391

1 hr.

152

45 min.

138

1 hr.

28 1

2 hrs.

49 '

1 min.

59

1 hr.

12

S^min

ez

1 hr.

65

2 hrs.

19

63

236

12

370

135

25

27

49

47

2

56

59

19

In another series of inoculations the ascospore bark was placed at
a greater distance from the wound and a draft created toward the
tree by a hand bellows. These inoculations were also successful as
indicated by Table VIII.

TABLE VIII.
Showing results of bellows inoculations.

i

s

o

a

*;

■a

a

•a

a

2

Kind of woimd.

o

o

O

CO

S'§

u

h

A

S o

pQ

.o

■2g

g

a

a

Q

Hi

»

!z!

V-cut

3-12 in.
1-4 ft,
l-2i ft.

10 min.
10 min.
15 min.

19
38

, 128

15

V-cut - - -.

le

V-cut, . —

66

Another method of inoculating with dry ascospores was to crush
the ascospore stromata in a mortar and then blow the fine dust into

?>2

the air and let it settle down into wounds which had been made in
healthy trees. The results of this series are given in Table IX.

TABLE IX.

Showing results of inoculations made by blowing crushed ascos-
pore stromata into the air.

Character of Wound.

Jagged hole,

.Shot hole,

Breaking off dead limbs, .-.
Hitting tree with blunt axe,
Jagged knife cut,

230
19
120
100
200

47
14
7
72
64

Check wounds were made in all the three preceding series but
no cankers developed about them.

Another experiment to demonstrate the agencv of the wind in
carrying the spores was carried out as follows: Clumps of cop-
pice growth chestnut were selected in each one of which was one
or more trees with ascospore-bearing cankers. Wounds were made
on the trees surrounding the cankered one, these wounds facing
the cankers of the diseased tree. Sterile implements were used in
making the wounds and the bark was previously sterilized for 2h
minutes with mercuric chloride. These wounds were then covered
with fine meshed v.'ire (50 meshes to the inch) which was tacked
down with a layer of cotton at the edge to insure it against the en-
trace of insects. A piece of cotton was tied very tightly just above
the wired area to insure against any spores being washed down
from above. The intention of this experiment was to exclude every
possible agency for transport of spores except the wind. The cank-
ered trees were drenched with water once a day for ten days. The
wounds were at a distance of from one to five feet from the cankers.
Of the 559 wounds made and protected in this way, 114 had de-
veloped cankers when the screens were removed at the end of three
months. The wounds which Avere facing the central canker showed
the greatest per cent, of infection. This is undoubtedly the most
convincing of all the inoculation experiments with wind-borne ascos-
pores.

33

Summary. The following demonstrated facts then lead us to be-
lieve that the wind is an important factor in the spread of the
disease.

1. Mature ascospores can be found at any time of the year.

2. After ever}^ rain these are thrown out into tlie air in countless
millions.

3. They are readily carried about by the wind.

4. Dry ascospores thus carried produced a high per cent, of in-
fection in almost any kind of a wound.

5. Wounds are very common on chestnut trees.

LONGEVITY OF THE SPORES.

In studj-in^" the methods of dissemination of the fungus it is
important to Know how long the spores will retain their power to
germinate and produce new infections. During the summer the
writers began three sets of experiments to answer the three follow-
ing questions : How long will ascospores retain their vitality after
being ejected from the perithecia? How long, if they remain dry in
the perithecia? How long will the conidia retain their vitality?
None of these have been completely answered yet but the results up
to date are given below.

1. Ascopores after ejection. — Clean slides were suspended over
active ostioles and when clumps of ascospores had been deposited on
them, they were stored in boxes in the laboratory to be tested at in-
tervals for germination. The tests were made by covering the clump
of spores with a drop of water and keeping the slide in a moist cham-
ber over night. On the opposite end of each slide was placed a drop
of water containing fresh ascospores to serve as a check. The per-
centages of germination were counted on the following day. As far
as possible all slides for eacli series w^ere secured from the same pus-
tules. The first tests were made as soon as the spores were ejected
and the percentages thus obtained may be considered as additional
checks on the later tests. The results of two series are here given,
the first being at Charter Oak and the second at Mt. Gretna :

Charter Oak.

At time of ejection (July U), j test 90% check 90%

Alter four weeks, -- test 15% cheek ^%

After six weeks - ■ test 10% check 95%

After eig-ht weeks, test 10% check 87%

After thirteen weeks, test .03% check 89%

Mt. Gretna.

At time of ejection (August 2nd), — test 95% check 95%

After two weeks, - test 95% check 95%

After four weeks, test 50% check 97%

After seven weeks, test 25% check 82%

After seventeen weeks, ._ ^ test 14% check 81%

34

2. Ascospores in the perithecia. — Bark containing mature ascos-
pores was stored in open boxes in the laboratory. The results of
three series, in which the same technique as in the preceding series
was employed, are as follows :

Ascospores from bark collected at Charter Oak, June 25tb, ger-
minated to the extent of 40 per cent, after fifteen weeks (October
8th). Checks gave 95 per cent, germination.

Ascospores from bark collected at Mt, Gretna on June 28tl!. ger-
minated to the extent of 65 per cent, after twenty-three weeks
(December 6th). Checks gave 83 per cent, germination.

Ascospores from bark collected at Charter Oak May 10th ger-
minated to the extent of 64 per cent, after 29 weeks (December 3rd).
Checks gave 69 per cent, germination.

3. Conidia. — To test the longevity of conidia kept dry an ex-
periment was carried out as follows : Spore horns were collected
from trees in the woods on June 27th and stored in the laboratory irt
vials with cheese cloth tied over the tops. On July 25th they gave a
fair per cent, of germination in rain water acidified with sulphuric
acid. Since, however, this method was not reliable and since they
could not be germinated in ordinary water, the next test, four weeks
later, was by making streaks on agar slants. Six streaks
gave successful cultures. On September 13th (11 weeks)
they were tested by placing bits of the spore horns on sterile twigs in
test tubes. Five inoculations made in this way gave just as good
cultures as the checks made with fresh conidia. Similar results were
obtained by this method at the end of 15 weeks and again at the
end of 19 weeks. There is no doubt then that conidia can produce
infection after being kept dry in the spore horn stage for 19 weeks.

All of these experiments are still in progress and much longer
records are anticipated.

INOCULATION AND GROWTH EXPERIMENTS

Many important questions in regard to the life history of Endothia
parasitica have never been answered. Too many statements
have been based on mere casual observations on natural cankers. We
have very little actual data on the rate of growth for various months
of the year, how soon after inoculation the pycnidia appear, when
the perithecia develop, what parts of the host can be infected, etc.
Several thousand inoculations have been made at different times and
under different conditions to settle some of these points.

35

RATE OF GROWTH OF THE CANKERS PER MONTH.

After inoculation the canker usually begins to show in two weeks
if the inoculation is made with canker tissue or with mycelium from
a culture. If, however, it is made with ascospores or conidia it shows
very little, until from three to five weeks. Often no growth seems
to take place for several months, then it suddenly begins to grow.
Such cases are the exception, however, and not the rule. After the
inoculation had been made from two weeks to a month, depending
on the method, a white line was painted around the edge. At the
end of each succeeding month, the canker was again outlined. Thus
at the end of the year we will have a complete monthly record of
the increase in the size of the cankers. The growth up and down the
tree is more rapid than that around the tree so that, no matter how
■the inoculation is made, the canker soon becomes oval in shape. The
rate of growth up and down the tree also varies greatly, — much
more than that around the trunk. It seems to depend a great deal
on the nature of the wound and the condition of the tree. This fac-
tor, however, is not so important. What we wish to know is : How
fast does it grow around the tree? It is the girdling that kills and
not the longitudinal growth. Up to the present we have the records
for six months. These are given in Table X.

TABLE X.

Showing the monthly rate of growth of cankers in sun\mer of 1912.
Using transverse diameter of the cankers.

Moctb.

June,

July

Augnst, ..
September,
October, _
November.

OS a
<^ o

> B

31

1.887

200

2.7TO

186

2.834

140

1.840

63

1.92

IS

These are averages for a large number of cankers. Individual
cases showed growth sometimes more than twice as great, but in
general, the variation was slight. It will be noticed that the greatest
growth was during the months of July and August, which were very

36

warm months with an abundance of rainfall, while September and
June were much cooler. There is an impression abroad that a
canker will girdle a large tree in one year. A table is given show-
ing the length of time it would take for a canker, growing all the
time at the rate they did in August of this year, to girdle a tree of a
given diameter (Table XI). However, it is very doubtful if the
cankers will grow at this rate during the winter, so that it is likely
that it would take much longer than this.

TABLE XI.

Showing the time it Avould take a canker to girdle a tree at the rate
they grew in August, 1912

Diameter of tree.

Time required to girdle tree.

1 inch, -.

2 inches,

3 inches,

4 inches,

5 inches,
12 inches,

2 months and 12 days.

5 months and 19 days.

8 months and 12 days.

11 months and 9 days.

2? months and 15 days.

34 months and 0 days.

TIME OF APPEARANCE OF THE FRUITING STAGES.
There has been much dispute as to whether the winter or
ascospore stage was developed on cankers during the first year,
also as to the time it takes for the two stages to appear. Records
have been and are being kept on over two thousand cankers to de-
termine these points. The records of average plots which have com-
pleted the cycle, are given in Table XII.

TABLE XII.
Showing the stages of development of the fungus during the sum-
mer of 1912. From artificial inoculations.

a

a

'o

o

ft

-M

jq

as

ulat

O

a

o

ft

o

Method.

O

a

o

a

o

Fh

<

93

cs

^

a>
ft

<

10,--
12,—

!»

S7,—

May 29,

June 9,

Jvme 9,

June 11,

June 26,

June 27

July 12,

Diseased tissue in slit.

Diseased tissue in slit,

Aseospores in stab,

Conidia in stab,

Diseased tissue in slit,

Diseased tissue in slit, _.
Diseased tissue in slit,

31
76
184
99
35
47
20

July 11,

July 5,

July 23,-..

(No data)

July 25,_-.

(No data)

Sept. 6,-

Oct.

3

Sept.

3

Oct.

1

Oct.

2

Sept.

5

Oct.

3

Get.

4

Z7

In general it may be said that under natural conditions in the
summer time the spore horns will be developed in from three to six
weeks, and that the winter or ascospore stage will develop in ten
weeks or more. The fact that the perithecial stage on all these plots
appeared in September and October should not be interpreted as
indicating that the approach of winter had any influence in bring-
ing about this stage. There has been no time during the summer
when developing perithecia could not be found in some localities. In
cultures on agar the conidia are produced more quickly. On potato
agar, they are almost always developed in less than two weeks
from conidial streaks. They have been developed in six days from
ascospores caught on chestnut-agar plates after being naturally
ejected from the perithecia.

COMPARATIVE GROWTH OF THE FUNGUS ON YOUNG AND OLD BARK.

In order to determine whether the fungus grows as rapidly on
the heavy barked-trunks, as on the thinner-barked younger trees
and branches, twenty inoculations were made in old trees with heavy
rough bark. At the same time, 78 inoculations were made close
by in thin-barked trees. Since the bark on the old trees did not show
any depressions where the cankers were, they could not be outlined,
and the monthly growth of the two plots compared. Therefore at
the end of twelve weeks the bark was peeled from the cankers on
the old trees and the cankers measured on the cambium. It was
noticed, however, that the fungus spread somewhat more rapidly in
the bark of the heavy barked trees than in the cambium, so the fig-
ures are a little less than the real dimensions of the cankers. The
average for the twenty cankers was 13.22 x5.58 cm. The average
for the 78 cankers on the thin barked trees Avas 14.3x9.7 cm. Ac-
cording to these figures the growth is a little more rapid on the thin
barked trees.

GROWTH OF THE FUNGUS ON LEAVES AND BURS.

Up to the present, it has never been found growing on either
of these, and all attempts to inoculate green leaves and green
burs have been unsuccessful. Dead burs and dead leaves, however,
in moist chambers have been sucessfuly inoculated as given under
the heading, "Man as the Disseminator." Seasoned dead wood was
also inoculated and the fungus successfully grown on it.

GROWTH ON THE ROOTS OF THE CHESTNUTS.

That it will grow on exposed roots just the same as on the bases
of the trees is a matter of common observation. Inoculations made
on exposed roots were just as successful as those on the trunks. To

38

determine whether it would also grow on subterranean roots 18 in-
oculations were made on June 27th, and the roots again covered with
earth. The parasite appeared to grow in all cases, but did not pro-
duce typical cankers. The invaded areas became soggy and the
growth was apparently very slow. Isolations from the soggy areas
however, gave pure cultiires of Endothia.

GROWTH ON THE GREEN SHOOTS OF THE CURRENT YEAR.

Murrill (1) does not believe that the shoots of the first year be-
come infected. So far as the literature show^s, no one has ever found
blight on them, or successfully inoculated them. The following ex-
periments give the results obtained at Charted Oak on this point.

Experiment : Inoculation of sterilized first year twigs. Fifteen
fresh pieces of first year twigs were sterilized in test tubes by wash-
ing in a 0.5 solution of mercuric chloride and inoculated as follows:

Five with conidia. Four were successful.

Four with diseased bark. Three were successful.

Six with agar culture. All were successful.

The growth on all of these was characteristic for Endothia and
differed very little from cultures on older twigs under the same con-
ditions. This proved that failures to produce infection of first year
twigs were not due to any injurious substance in the twigs them-
selves.

Experiment : Inoculations of first year sprouts in the woods. The
methods of inoculation and the results are given in Table XIII. The
cankers produced were typical in every way. Some of the sprouts
had already died from the cankers when the plot was destroyed.
This proves beyond question that cankers can be produced on first
year twigs, but offers no explanatior of why they are so rarely found
there in nature.

TABLE XIII.

Showing results of inoculation in first year shoots.

§

53
a

1
o

a

3

a
S

Method of inoculation.

•H

?

«

o

1

es
1

p

s

^

fM

July 27,

48

Ascospores in slit protected with cotton,

25

4.0

July 27,

48

Aseospores in slit not protected with cotton,

24

S7.6

July 27,

48

Diseased tissue in slit protected with cotton,

13

100.0

July 27

48

Diseased tissue in slit not protected with cotton.

6

83.3

39

CX)MPARISON OF SUSCEPTIBILITY OF TREES IN THE OPEN AND IN

DENSE WOODS.

One would naturally expect that trees in dense woods would be
more easily attacked on account of better moisture conditions. Plots
were therefore selected in dense coppice and check plots in open
places, where the trees were trimmed high and were far apart and
no underbrush around them. Here they would have plenty of op-
portunity for air currents and abundance of sunlight. These were
inoculated on the same day. The results are given in Table XIV.
This summer has been very moist and the results might be different
on an average year, but certainly the results here do not argue for
much advantage of either location over the other. One fact how-
ever was observed in this series of inoculations which is worthy of
notice. Where the inoculation wound is made in a tree in the open,
a callus begins to form at once and for several weeks one is tempted
to believe that the tree has succeeded in excluding the invader.
There is evidently a continued struggle between the host and the
parasite and if we were dealing with a less virulent parasite, the
struggle would undoubtedly result in favor of the former. But the
fungus gradually works in under the callus and soon becomes too
strong to be resisted. On the other hand it is very rarely that a
callus is formed where the tree is in dense woods.

TABLE XIV.

Showing the difference in susceptibility of trees in the open and
trees in dense woods.

Open Woods.

CD

a

o

a

i

§

Method of inoculation.

a

o

o

S3

a

3

1

Q

fk

tH

■S

June 28,
Aug. 5,
Aug. 5,
Aug, 15,
Aug. 15,

Mycelium from culture in slit,
Conidia in water in V-cuts, .
Ascospores in water in V-cuts,
Ascospores In water in V-cuts,
Diseased tissue in slits

35

88.6

56

76.8

72

55.0

36

44.4

42

100.0

46

Dense Coppice.

a

o

*

p

a

1

o

V

a

S

Method of inoculation.

O

is
n

2

C3

o

a

9

a>

Q

f^

2;

ft

June 37
June 27
Aug. 5
Aug. 5

29 Mycelium from culture in slit,

29 Diseased tissue in slit, -

51 Conidia in water in V-cuts, _

51 Ascospores in water in V-cuts,

75.0

lOO.O

50.00

90.0

THE EFFECT OF ALTITUDE AND WATER CONTENT OF THE SOIL ON
THE GROWTH OF THE FUNGUS.

Some observers have noticed that the blighted trees are ahvays
on low land ; others have observed that they are always on the side
of the slope; others that they are always up high on dry ground.
The theory that tlie water content of the tree determines its sus-
ceptibility, has also been advocated. The laboratory and experi-
mental plots at Charter Oak are admirably located to test out these
theories. Along Shavers Creek, below the laboratory, there are
marshy places where the roots of the chestnut trees have not been out
of the water all summer. The woods is dense and conditions could
not be invented where the water content of the trees would be
higher. Back of the laboratory, Lead Ridge, a dry rock ridge of
Tussey- Mountains, rises about 1200 feet above Shavers Creek and
is covered with chestnut trees. They grow under very dry condi-
tions at the summit and there are all intermediate conditions on the
slopes. Plots were inoculated under all these conditions. The
methods and results are given in Table XV.

The results of the experiment indicate that the altitude and soil
drainage have very little to do with the susceptibility of the host or
rate of growth of the fungus.

41

TABLE XV.

Showing the effect of moisture and altitude on the growth of the

fungus.

Date of inoculation.

a
o

B

1-1

o

s

Location .

Percentage infection.

Growth per montb.

3

42

3
<

S
«

1

02

29*

291
16*

let

19*

June 27,

June 27,

June 7,

June 18

June 18,

June 21,

40

40
54
80
44

m

Summit of dry ridge 1200 ft.,
Summit of dry ridge 1200 ft.,

Half way up' the ridge,

Half way up the ridge,

Half way up the ridge —

Marsh near creek,

100.0
82.5
9e.3
86.3
95.5
93.7

1.66
1.55
2.66
2.55
2.21
2.21

2.58
2.28
3.10
2.69

2.66
3.10

2.14
1.82

2.78

2.7S

, 2.90

2.46

*Inoculations made by placing canker tissue in longitudinal slit.

tlnoculations made by placing mycelium from culture (No. 31 Charter Oak) in longitudinal
slit.
Ilnoculations made by placing mycelium from culture (No. 32 Mt. Gretna) in longitudinal slit.

ENDOTHIA PARASITICA ON OTHER HOSTS.
NATURAL OCCURRENCE.

This fungus is known to cause a serious disease only on chest-
nut. During last summer, however, a fungus which was in all
outward appearance tb.e same, has been collected and sent to us or
has been found by the writers on the following hosts :

Quercas velwtina (Black Oak).

Quercus alha (White Oak).

Queicus prinu^ (Chestnut Oak).

Rhus typJtina (Staghorn Sumac).

Acer riihruiih (Red Maple).

Garya ovata (Shag-bark Hickory).

The fungus was isolated from all of these except Quercus
prinus They were cultured on various media and as far as their
culture characters are concerned, they cannot be distinguished
from the regular Endothia parasitica, on chestnut.

In most of the cases where it was on other hosts it was growing
as a saprophyte, seeming to prefer fire-scorched or ligiitning-killed
trees. In two cases, however, on the white oak, it had all the ap-
pearance of a parasite, plainly pushing out into the living tissue.
So many of these specimens were sent in and there was such
general interest in them, that it was decided to run a set of experi-

42

ments to determine whether the fungus was the same on all these
hosts, whether it was the same as that on the chestnut, whether they
would infect chestnut and whether the regular Endothia would in-
fect the hosts from which each was isolated. These experiments and
the results are given below.

GROWTH ON STERILIZED TWIGS OF VARIOUS SPECIES.

Experiment : To determine whether the chestnut blight fungus
would grow on sterilized twigs of other species than chestnut.
Twigs of the following species were used :

Castanea dentata (Chestnut).
Quercus alba (White Oak),
Quercus prinus (Chestnut Oak).
Quercus macrocarpa (Burr Oak).
Quercus velutina (Black Oak).
Quercus rubra (Red Oak).
Quercus coccinea (Scarlet Oak).
Rhus typhina (Staghorn Sumac).
Nyssa sylvatica (Sour Gum).
Acer rubrum (Red Maple).
Liriodendron tulipifera (Yellow Poplar).
Juglans nigra (Black Walnut).
Carya ovata (Shagbark Hickory).

Pieces of these twigs, about three inches long, were put in test
tubes with wet cotton in the bottom, plugged and steam sterilized.
Six tubes of each species were used, two inoculated with conidia, two
with ascospores, and two with mycelium from culture. The fungus
grew on all of them and also produced pycnidia regardless of how
they were inoculated. The growth on all the oaks, on sour gum
and on sumac was just as rapid and as vigorous as on the chestnut
twigs. On the others, however, the growth was much slower and not
so luxuriant. This experiment was duplicated in two laboratories
with the same results. Twigs of other species were not tried, but in
all probability it would grow on other twigs besides those mentioned.

INOCULATIONS ON CHESTNUT WITH STRAINS FROM OTHER HOSTS.
Experiment: To determine whether the strains isolated from
other hosts would produce typical cankers on chestnut. The isola-
tions were made in each case from the original host, either from
spore horns or from the diseased tissue, which was transferred to
potato agar. Pieces of this agar were then introduced into slits in
the bark as in our regular inoculations. The strain from hickory
has not been used since it was isolated too late in the season. The
results of the inoculations are given in table XVI.

The cankers produced were in every way typical, and grew with a
vigor and rapidity equal to that of the strains isolated from the
chestnut. There is therefore, no doubt that these strains are the

rpcriilar rbp^tnnt blip"ht funP"US.

43

TABLE XVI.

Showing results of inoculations on chestnut with strains of the

fungus from other hosts.

CO

a

o

-J

s

3

a

9

s

a

I

Host from which isolated.

o

bo

3

43

a

5

S

s

a

s

m

^ \

fi

July 20. — ..-.

6

Black Oak,

2S !

95.6

July 20

July 20

9

White Oak,

27

85.2

36

Sumac (Staghom), __

20

96.0

Aug. U

38

Red Maple

18

75.0

INOCULATIONS WITH ENDOTHIA ON HOSTS OTHER THAN CHESTNUT.

Experiment : To determine whether Endothia parasitica can be
inoculated into other hosts and made to produce typical cankers
there. The mehods and results of these inoculations are given in
Table XVII.

TABLE XVII

Showing the results of inoculation with Endothia parasitica on hosts

other than chestnut.

w

a

o

es

10

a

3

Host inoculated.

Method.

o

£

1

p

1

(4

1

C3

June 10,.
June 27,.
June 28,.
June 13,.
June 13,-

July 12,

July 12,

July 19,

July 19,

July 19,

July 19,

July 19,

July 19,

July 19,

July 19,

July 19,

July 19,

July 19,

July 19,

July 20,

July 20,

July 80.

11

ae

31

14
A14

31
35

37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
40
41
42

Obestnat oak

Red maple,

Black oak, .
White oak, .
Sumac, -

Sumac.

Yellow poplar
Chestnut oak,
Chestnut oak.

Hickory,

Hickory,

Hickory,

Hickory,

Scarlet oak, .
Scarlet oak, .
Scarlet oak, .
Black oak, ..
Black oak, ..
Black oak, ..
White oak, ..
Black oak, ...
Soaae,

Diseased tissue in slit,

Diseased tissue in slit,

Mycelium from culture in slit,
Ascospores in stab protected,
Ascospores in stab. Unpro-
tected.

Diseased tissue in slit,

Diseased tissue In slit

Ascospores in V-cut,

Conidia in V-cut,

Conidia in V-cut,

Ascospores in V-cut

Mycelium from culture in slit,

Diseased tissue in slit,

Ascospores in V-cut,

Conidia in V-cut,

Diseased tissue in slit

Diseased tissue In slit,

Conidia in V-cuts,

Ascospores in V-cuts

Mycelium from culture,

Mycelium from culture,

Mycelium from culture, ...^.

34

391

41

?0

61

58

78.4

32

71.9

23
38
30
22
27
16
12
18
12

6
12
12
12
10

9
M

lOO

lOO
100

100

44

The figures representing- the percentages of successful inoculation
in this table do not accurately represent the results of the experi-
ments. In no case were typical cankers produced as on the chestnut.
The inoculation was judged to be successful, when the spore horns
of the fungus were produced on the bark of the inoculated tree..
This in all cases did not mean that it was growing there as a parasite.
A wound is always necessary in making an inoculation, and there is
abundant opportunity for the fungus to grow as a saprophyte on the
injured tissue about the wound. This condition was especially
noticed in the case of the hickory, black oak and scarlet oak. The
growth on the white oak and chestnut oak was nearest like that on
the chestnut. The fan-shaped areas of mycelium were found plainly
advancing into the healthy tissue and there was an abundance of
spore horns. The outline of the cankers continued to advance slowly
for from eight to ten weeks. After that the fungus was apparently
holding its own, but ceased to advance. As yet no oak tree has
been found killed by the fungus. The growth on the sumac is
entirely different from that on chestnut or on oak. No fan-shaped
areas were found, but an abundance of spore horns, and also super-
ficial pycnidia were produced on the edges of the inoculation wounds.
The rate of growth varied with the condition of the host. Where
the host was apparently in poor condition the growth was very
rapid. Two trees of this kind were killed during the summer.

The ability of this organism to live as a saprophyte on other
hosts is well illustrated on the infested woodlot previously men-
tioned at Anderson, Pennsylvania. This mixed stand of chestnut
and chestnut oak was cut in the early spring of 1912. When the
writers inspected the tract the following October, the characteristic
reddish, flattened pycnidia were found on the top of almost every
stump, irrespective of Avhether it was chestnut or oak. Many of
the dead tops of the trees also had an abundance of the pustules of
the blight fungus on them.

SUMMARY.

The results of these experiments indicate that the fungus is a
\v cak parasite on white oak, chestnut oak and sumac. It has not
shown any parasitic tendencies on any of the other species tried.
Its attacks on the other trees is of practical importance, only in
that they may be the means of keeping the fungus over in a locality
Avhere the diseased chestnut has all been destroyed.

45

LITERATURE CITED.

(1) '06 Murrill, W. A. A serious chestnut disease. Jour. N. Y.
Bot. Garden 7:143-153 June 1906.

(2) '06 Murrill, W. A. Further remarks on a serious chestnut
disease. Jour. N. Y. Bot. Garden 7:203-211 Sept. 1906.

(3) '08 Metcalf, Haven. Diseases of ornamental trees. U. S.
Dept. of Agri. Year-book 1907 :489-490.

(4) '08 Hodson, E. R. Extent and importatice of the chestnut
bark disease. U. S. D. A. Forest Service Cir. (unnumbered) 1908.

(5) '09 Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The present
status of the chestnut bark disease. U. S. D. A. Bu. Plant Ind. Bui.
141, pt. V 1909:45-54.

(6) '09 Alickelborough, John. A report on the chestnut tree blight.
The fungus Diaporthe parasitica (Murrill). Commonv^ealth of
Pennsylvania, Dept. of Forestry. May 1909.

(7) '10 Metcalf, Haven, and Collins, J. Franklin, The chestnut
bark disease. Sci. N. S. 31 :748. May 1910.

(8) '10 Rane, F. W. The chestnut bark disease, (unnumbered)
State Forester's Ofifice, Boston, Mass. 1911.

(9) '11 Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The control cf
the chestnut bark disease. Farmers'Bulletin 467 of the U. S. Dept.
Agri. Oct. 1911.

(10) '12 Metcalf, Haven. The chestnut bark disease. Jour, of
Ec. Ent. 5 :222-226. April 1912.

(11) '12 Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference, Rept. pub-
lished by the State. February 1912.

(46)

Fans or mats of mycelium of the chestnut blight
fungus in the cambium and inner bark.

Colonies of the blight fungus on agar plate resulting from naturally ejected
ascospores. Bark with active perithecia placed one inch above the
plate over the dark line at bottom of plate. Each black point indicates
one colony.

Stiomata shoTing the necks of the perithecia.

i

Hypertrophy type of canKer.

Cankers showing stromata.

Painted outlines showing monthly growth
ot a canker, one-half natural size.

Inoculation with ascospores in stab in the bark.

Inoculation with naturally ejected ascospores at
close range.

Inoculation with diseased bark.

^^i

Inoculation at the base of broken twigs.

Artificial wind inoculation with bellows.

Testing the carrying power of the wind. Sterile plates exposed on tripod at
the right. Active perithecia on the upright logs at the left. Wind blow-
ing from the logs toward the plates.

J

Logging experiment at Mt. Gretna, Lebanon Co., Pa.

Commontoealtt of PcnnSptoania.

REPORT

OF THE

2^ltgf)t Commisisfton.

July 1 to December 31, 1912.

1112 MORRIS BUILDING, 1421 CHESTNUT STREET,
PHILADELPHIA.

HARRISBURG:
C. E. AUGHINBAUGH, PRINTER TO THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

1913,

CONTENTS,

Page.

Foreword ". 3

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, Roster of 5

Letter of Transmittal from the Commission to the Governor, 7

General Manager's Report, 11

General Superintendent's Report, 19

Field Work in the Western District, 21

Field Work in the Eastern District, '. 30

Tabular Statement of Field Work, 35

Pathological Investigations, 40

Field Investigations in Pathology, 42

Physiologist's Report, 45

Investigations of Insects Associated with the Blight, 48

Chemist's Report, 49

Tree Surgeon's Report, 51

Geographer's Report, 52

Forester's Report upon Utilization, 54

Demonstration Work, 59

Silvicultural Effect of the Chestnut Blight 61

Regulations Governing Trees Infected with Chestnut Blight, 63

Financial Statement, 67

(1)

m.

(2)

FOREWORD.

It is onlj within recent years that the possibility of a serious tim-
ber famine has confronted the American people, and as a result many
of the friends of forestry and forest conservation are thoroughly
awake to the absolute necessity of action in the various channels
that will tend towards remedying the threatened crisis.

A comparison of the present market quotations of lumber with
those in force only a few years ago will form its own commentary.
Those who are .well informed upon the gradual, but certain advancing
values of commercial lumber declare that it would cost fully thirty-
three and one third per cent, more to-day to buy certain grades of
hemlock and other common varieties of lumber than the same class
of material would have cost less than five years ago. The price of
the high-grade, seasoned hard-wood lumber and building material
has been increased at a much higher percentage, and in some in-
stances, its use is almost prohibitory, because of its actual scarcity,
high cost and prevailing economic conditions.

These are among the many potent and excellent reasons why Penn-
sylvania's exceedingly valuable chestnut timber should be saved from
total extermination by the chestnut tree bark disease, which has
caused such great loss in some of the eastern counties of the Com-
monwealth. The accompanying report presents the situation in de-
tail, and the reader cannot fail to become interested in this economic
problem which means so much to all the people of the Commonwealth
who are interested in the protection and preservation of its natural
resources.

(3)

m

(4)

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

MEMBERS OF COMMISSION.

Winihrop Sargent, Chairman, Brya Mawr.

Harold Peirce, Secretary Haverfoi'd.

Samuel T. Bodine ." Villa Nova.

George F. Craig, Rosemont.

Theodore N. Ely, .Brya Mawr.

EXECUTIVE STAFF.

Mark Alfred Carleton, General Manager.

Samuel B. Detwiler, General Superintendent.

Oliver D. Schock, Assistant to General Superintendent.

Thomas E. Francis, Field Manager, Western District.

Joseph R. Wilson, Field Manager, Eastern District.

David T. McCampbell, Chief Clerk.

Irvin C. Williams, (Pennsylvania State Forestry Department) Collaborator.

SCIENTIFIC AND OPERATIVE STAFF.

Frederick D. Heald, Pathologist.

A. G. Ruggles, Entomologist.

J. P. Wentling, Forester in charge of Utilization.

Paul J. Anderson , Field Pathologist.

F. P. Gulliver, Geographer.

Caroline Rumbold, Physiologist in charge of Tree Medication.

Joseph Shrawder, Chemist.

Roy G. Pierce, Tree Surgeon.

Keller E. Rockey, Forester in charge of Demonstration Work.

(5)

(6)

THE COMMISSION FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND CONTROL
OF THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT DISEASE JN PENNSYL-
VANIA.

1112 MORRIS BUILDING, BROAD AND CHESTNUT STREETS.

Philadelphia, January 8th, 1913.
Hon. John K. Tener, Governor, Harrisburg, Penna.

Sir: We have the honor to transmit to you herewith our report
of the operations of this Commission for the latter half of the year
1912. The contents of the report may be very briefly summarized as
follows :

Orgamzation. There is first, a statement by the General Manager
as to the organization of the different lines of work and a discussion
of certain special features. Our forces are now thoroughly organized
with a good staff of specialists in charge of each line of work, similar
to that of the State Experiment Stations. As our work is of an un-
usual nature, it has taken considerable time and attention to effect
this thorough organization.

Field Operatiotis. Next follows a statement by the General Super-
intendent of the essential features of the field operations, with sug-
gestions as to future work. There have been many difficulties, par-
ticularly the past season, apparently on account of the unusual rain-
fall, but in spite of these we have made good progress, much beyond
what was to be expected. In about two-thirds of all cleaned locali-
ties re-inspected, there has been no re-occurrence of the blight. The
western portion of the State, to the extent of about one-half its
arpa, has been cleaned to date.

Pathological Work. The foundation of all our operations is the
knowledge of the disease itself. Fortunately this has been increased
very materially by our own investigations, the results of which are
given following the report of the field operations. We have deter-
mined that the form of the fungus in the southwestern part of the
State is harmless, and therefore in that region no forced cuttings are
required. Facts have been learned showing that the disease may be
disseminated by the carrying of ascospores in the air, which has given
us many helpful suggestions in the field work. The facts as to the
longevity of spores have been obtained and as to the amount of cold
they will endure before germination.

hisect Investigations. Next follows a brief statement of the work
so far done iu the study of insects. This was begun very recently
and there is little to report. Suffice it to say, however, that there is

»

s

no postive evidence obtained that insects carry the disease, though it
is still suspected. Much time has been given to the study of ants
with no j)Ositive results as yet. It has been determined, however, by in-
vestigations in co-operation with the United States Entomological
Bureau, that certain species of insects eat the spores, and to a slight
extent at least, take part in diminishing the disease.

Chemical Investigatiotis. In the chemical work, also, much is yet
to be done, but a few interesting things have been determined includ-
ing one important fact: that the blighted portions of trees possess a
larger percentage of tannin extract than healthy portions of the
same trees. Extract from blighted portions also appears to give a
better color to the leather, particularly sole leather.

Tree Medication. Considerable time has been given to this work
but so far only with the result that it is found to be rather easy to
inject various solutions throughout the chestnut tree. We have not
been able as yet, however, to inject such trees with a sufficiently
strong solution to kill the fungus and not injure the tree. Many in-
teresting incidental facts have been learned, however, of use to
us and to others in future studies.

Treatment of Individmil Trees. Splendid results have followed
our work in the examination and advice as to the treatment of indi-
vidual trees on lawns and in public parks, and also orchard trees.
This work has been much appreciated by the people. In connection
with this work it has been learned that the spraying of Bordeaux
Mixture appears to prevent the entrance of the disease into healthy
trees.

Geographic Work. A brief statement of the geographic work fol-
lows, which has been going on but a short time. This work is of
much aid to the field operations, and is suggestive in probable expla-
nations of certain unusual occurrences of the disease in particular
locations.

Utilization of Diseased Trees. The important part of our work in
the Eastern District is the exploitation of markets for the great
amount of diseased chestnut timber existing there. Cutting of dis-
eased timber has already begun on many tracts in this region through
our influence. Plans are under way for the disposal of such timber in
Valley Forge and Fairmount Parks, and arrangements have been
made for a rapid consumption within the next two or three months
of cordwood, chiefly for tannin extract. Much investigation has also
been started in this line of work.

Demonstration. A statement is next given of the lecture work
at Farmers' and Teachers' Institutes, and of exhibits made at County
Agricultural Fairs. Our work is being explained free at one hundred
of the Farmers' Institutes in localities which are the most important
in this respect.

There is finally appended a statement by the Deputy Commissioner
of Forestry on the silvicultural effect of our sauilation work, giving
its advantages in actual forestry management.

Chestnut becomes weakened through repeated sprouting after lum-
bering operations, but the practice of cutting low and peeling and
burning the stumps, forces sprouting far down near the surface of
the ground, with the etfect of a production of much more healthy and
vigorous new trees, which are not likely to be injured by decay from
within, as in cases where the sprouts occur up on the stump and
are supported by a decayed and weakened base.

Ino remedy has yet been obtained for the blight disease through
the work of any institution. However, with the etforts being made
in that direction by our scientific force, there is hope at least that
such a result may yet be obtained.

In closing, we beg to call to your attention the fact already stated,
of being just now in condition, with a well equipped organization,
and a good stafi; of scientific men for doing rapid and thorough
work, and that it would be unfortunate if we could not, while so well
equipped, go on and finish the work that has been given us to do,
particularly, as hereafter our work is bound to be doubly more ef-
fective. It is important to note, also, the helpful etfect of our op-
erations on the bordering states of Ohio and portions of J!^ew York,
West Virginia and Maryland, where the chestnut may be largely, if
not entirelj^ saved from the disease through our own operations, just
as Massachusetts has helped other states in connection with her work
with the gypsy moth.

To efficiently continue the work it is of great importance that the
next appropriation be made more liberal than the present one. It
should be not less than |500,000. The increase would be economical
in the end, for it will enable thorough work to be done, and not
to do thorough work is, of course, uneconomical.

Trusting that the entire report may be found interesting, and that
it shows therein results which amply justify the continuation of the
work, we beg to remain,

• Very truly yours,

WINTHEOP SARGENT,

Chairman.

(10)

11

REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER FOR THE LATTER
HALF OF THE YEAR, 1912.

The period of my connection with the Commission dates from
June 7, 1912. A brief statement has already been given by the
General Superintendent, in his report of last July, giving the cir-
cumstances which lead to my appointment, and which made it de-
sirable to have a broader organization of the Commission
force in order to do the work that seemed to be required in various
lines. As that report practically covered the work done up to July
1, 1912, this report may be considered to refer to operations from that
date.

ORGANIZATION.

As the chief duty of one in my position is understood to be the
general direction of different lines of operations and the establish-
ment of such new lines as seem to be required, naturally much time
was needed to be given to organization.

FIELD OPERATIONS.

The chief purpose of the Act of Assembly establishing the Com-
mission, is the extermination of the chestnut tree blight disease by the
removal or destruction of all diseased material, and, therefore, the
field operations are of prime importance. This work being
under the direction of the General Superintendent, was already well
organized and in thorough operation, and needed little or no atten-
tion on my part.

From the beginning, a more or less definite division has been
maintained between the slightly infected western portion of the
State and the badly infected eastern portion, these divisions being
called the Western and Eastern Districts, respectively. In the two
districts quite different restrictions are maintained with respect to
the method of procedilre in handling diseased trees. The line of
demarcation between these districts, as at present understood, is
the eastern boundary lines of Fulton, Huntingdon, Mifflin, Center,
Clinton, Lycoming, Sullivan and Bradford Counties. It will be re-
membered by the Commission members that until recently, no definite
regulations of quarantine governing the handling of diseased chest-
nut wood in these districts have been adopted, as we have been
learning ourselves constantly the best method of operation, and in-
dividual cases have been handled in accordance with local conditions

12

and the stage of our knowledge of dissemination of the disease at
the time. Recently, as we have given more attention to the subject
of utilization, it has become practically necessary for the information
of parties wishing to make commercial use of diseased chestnut prod-
ucts, to be able to refer them to some definite system of regulations
imposed. Therefore, a complete statement of quarantine regulations
governing the felling and transportation of diseased chestnut pro-
ducts has been submitted to you for your approval, and is attached
herewith to this report.

PATHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS.

As the chestnut tree blight disease is caused by a fungus parasite,
at present known technically by the name of DiaportTie parasitica,
Murr., and as little or nothing was known of the nature of this
parasite at the time the Commission began its work, the first and
most essential scientific study was an investigation of the disease
itself, and the fungus which caused it. For some time field patho-
logical investigations have been conducted in the region of the ad-
vance line of the disease, chiefly as an aid to the scouting work. It
seemed very necessary, however, to make some thorough studies in
a general way of the fungus itself, its relation to its host — the chest-
nut tree — the manner of dissemination, etc., with headquarters for
such iuvestigations near the main office in Philadelphia. Accord-
ingly a pathologist of national reputation and much experience was
selected to take charge of these lines of investigation, and to be pri-
marily responsible also for the conduct of nursery stock inspection
and for the instruction of new scouts. He is also expected to advise
with others in direct charge of related lines of investigation.

The entire pathological staff, as now made up, including two path-
ologists and six assistant pathologists, is one of the best in the
United States and will compare well with any similar body of scien-
tific men at the State Experiment Stations or in the Federal Service.

INVESTIGATIONS OF . INSECTS.

Numerous agents have been suggested as taking part in the dis-
semination of the blight disease, and naturally insects have been
thought of at once. It seemed very necessary, therefore, to make
investigations of the habits of insects found associated with the dis-
ease, and such a line of work has, therefore, been established. One
entomologist and an assistant in charge are conducting these inves-
tigations. Previously, considerable work had been done also by an
assistant of the U. S. Bureau of Entomology, in co-operation with the
Commission, and during the past summer two entomologists were
employed for a brief period of three months each, for special summer
investigations.

13

CHEMICAL STUDIES.
For a time afi assistant chemist was employed to aid the physiolo-
gist conducting investigations in tree medication. Later, it seemed
very desirable to investigate the effect of the disease upon the pro-
duction of tannin, and also its effect upon the quality of the extract
in the manufacture of leather and other ways. This assistant was,
therefore, instructed to conduct such investigations. The results
obtained already have been very interesting and of economic import-
ance, as shown in his accompanying report.

TREE MEDICATION.

For some time an effort has been made to determine if certain
liquid solutions or gases could be injected into the chestnut tree,
with the result of preventing or killing the blight fungus, with-
out injuring the tree. The physiologist in charge of this work,
located at Philadelphia, at first was burdened with other duties of
identifying specimens received and making cultures of the fungus.
Since the reorganization of the scientific work, she has been relieved
of these extra duties and instructed to give her entire time to the
tree medication work.

TREATMENT OF INDIVIDUAL TREES.

Numerous requests have been received from time to time for the
examination of individual trees, which because of their location on
lawns or in public parks, and from long associations are usually
prized, much above the value of ordinary trees, with a desire for
advice whether such trees could be saved by some special treatment,
if only for a short time. It was at first impossible to properly handle
these requests with the help at hand, and, therefore, a well trained
forester from the U. S. Forest Service was appointed to take im-
mediate charge of this kind of work. He has been given one assistant
and such other special help as could be furnished at different times.

To date, not one of the numerous requests for examination of even
a single tree at any distance, within the State, from Philadelphia,
has been neglected. No doubt in this way the Commission has been
able to save, for a time at least, many trees that might have other-
wise been considered hopeless and destroyed ; on the other hand, the
minds of many people have been relieved by definite advice to destroy
trees that could not have been saved.

GEOGRAPHIC WORK.
In the scouting work it is required that the field men report facts
as to the percentage and location of chestnut trees and the principal
other trees in the localities where they are working, as well as
the percentage and location of the blight disease, and also 0"
casjonally, other information of value to forestry.

14

To show accurately what has been accomplished by the Commission,
and to record our operations, it is necessary to bring, these facts to-
gether in a harmonious whole on maps drawn to uniform scale. A
former member of the U. S. Geological Survey, a, man of considerable
training in Geography, has been employed to do this work. At the
same time he is expected to furnish all the information he can on
the relations of rainfall, altitude, temperature, etc., throughout the
State to the occurrence of the blight disease. This work has been
under way but a short time and already we have obtained interesting
results, particularly as to the probable relation of rainfall to the
spread of this disease.

UTILIZATION.

As the only practical means of accomplishing anything over a large
area of the eastern part of the State is simply the disposal of diseased
wood as rapidly as possible, it is of prime importance to encourage
in every way the uses of different chestnut products..

The exploitation of such operations was put in charge of the As-
sociate Forester of the Minnesota School of Forestry, who was secured
for this work temporarily on leave of absence from that Institution.
His connection with the Commissioin dates only from about Septem-
ber 1st. Naturally, as with other lines of operations, much time had
to be spent in getting in shape for active operations, providing cards
and files for obtaiuing information, getting out circulars, and getting
together a force of men capable of giving the proper assistance ; how-
ever, much headway has already been made. Numerous cuttings of
various tracts have been under way for some time, due to our efforts,
many buyers have been put into communication with sellers, and
deals have thus been made.

A plan is being completed for disposal of wood in Fairmount and
Valley Forge Parks; extract factories have been induced to take
much more diseased chestnut wood and other things done, making
the progress in this line to date very satisfactory.

DEMONSTRATION AND LECTURES.

We have constantly endeavored, as far as possible with the limited
help we have, to inform the people in advance of the destructive nature
of the disease with which we are dealing. At the same time as fast as
we have obtained any infonnation of value or made any scientific dis-
coveries, these have also been made known, so that the people may
see we are trying in every way to be of aid to them in combating the
disease.

The work in this line has been in the form of demonstrations at
county fairs where actual exhibits have been made, lectures at Teach-
ers' Institutes, talks to timber owners at Farmers' Institutes and

1 r>

special lectures and exhibits, at different times, before different so-
cieties at educational institutions and at expositions. The special
features of this work at present are the exhibits being prepared to
be installed at the State Museum at Ilarrisburg and the Commer-
cial Museum in Philadelphia.

CO-OPERATION.

The Commission has been fortunate from the beginning in obtaining
the hearty co-operation of various institutions, public and private,
which has not only been of much aid to us, but has shown the interest
taken by the people in this most peculiar and destructive of forest
tree epidemics.

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

The most extensive co-operation has been with the Bureau of Plant
Industry of the U. S. Department of Agriculture. Actual financial
help has been given by that institution to the extent of about one
thousand dollars per month, or at the rate of tAvelve thousand dollars
per year. This help has been partly in the shape of furnishing micro-
scopes and other apparatus, and the payment of expenses of em-
ployees outside of Pensylvania, but chiefly in the actual transfer of
salaries of nearly all the jjathological force from our own funds to
that of '^Investigations in Forest Pathology" in that Bureau. We have
in turn been of much help to the Federal Service in stirring up inter-
est in forest tree diseases throughout the country, in obtaining ap-
propriations for the Federal work and in general information given,
as to the nature of the disease and manner of dissemination.

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA.

Too much cannot be said of the generous attitude of the University
of Pennsylvania. Two large and well-equipped laboratories with gas,
water and other facilities have been furnished by this University in
its new Zoology Building, free of rent, we taking part only in the
payment of actual expenses of lighting and janitor service. The
Botanical Department has also furnished space for the tree medica-
tion work and also considerable apparatus, including microscopes.

STATE FORESTRY DEPARTMENT.
From the beginning there has been the closest co-operation with the
State Forestry Department in all of our work, the Deputy Commis-
sioner himself, being a collaborator on this Commission. Constant
practical suggestions and help in many other ways have been given
by that Department, as well as the help of their foresters on the forest
reserves.
2

10
OTHER INSTITUTIONS.

Pennsylvania State College has taken part in the scientific investiga-
tions as far as its force of men and equipment would permit. At
present one of our assistant field pathologists is located at that in-
stitution.

A field pathological laboratory is also maintained in connection
with the Franklin and Marshall College at Lancaster, which institu-
tion has provided rooms for laboratory work.

Dr. W. G. Farlow of Harvard University, is also aiding in the
scientific investigations through the work of one of his assistants who
is making culture studies of the blight fungus.

The Foreign Seed and Plant Introduction office of the U. S. Bureau
of Plant Industry has also given material help by furnishing us with
nuts of a Chinese chestnut, which is claimed to be immune to the
blight disease, to be used in grafting and cross-breeding experiments.

We have all along maintained cordial and helpful relations with
State institutions in several of the adjoining States.

SPREAD OF THE DISEASE.

As between the two years, 1912 and 1911 it appears that in certain
portions of the State the chestnut blight disease has spread much
more rapidly in 1912. This condition has been particularly true,
apparently, in the Western District, the disease having reoccurred
with considerable virulence in places where it was already once
eradicated. The reoccurrence of the disease in cleaned areas was
expected, but that it should happen to the extent it has the past
season in certain localities seems due to the unusual rain fall in
those places in the summer of 1912, as shown on precipitation maps,
accompanying the report of the Geographer.

PROGRESS OF THE FIELD WORK.

The condition above stated of the considerable reoccurrence of the
disease in localities already cleaned has interfered materially with
the progress of the field work; nevertheless, much has been accom-
plished. The amount of actual sanitation completed is much more
than I ever expected could be performed, and the difficulties with
which we have had to contend makes such progress all the more
gratifying.

With the exception of a single infected area in Somerset County,
the inspection work and removal of diseased trees has been accom-
plished over about one-half of the State, details of which are given,
however, in the accompanying report of the General Superintendent.

17

NURSERY INSPECTION.

A number of cases of new infections in the western part of the
State, caused by the introduction of diseased nursery stock, have
made it imperative that strict inspection be made of all nursery stock
intended for shipment. It was soon found that such inspection
needed to be more and more rigid. Finally, we have required indi-
vidual tree inspection, and that every tree in shipping must be given
an individual certificate of inspection. This does away absolutely
with the possibility of including in bundles any that might
otherwise go uninspected, and furnishes a system of inspection far
ahead of that actually practiced by any of the States. It is also
required of the railroads that no chestnut trees be allowed to
come into the State without proper certificates of inspection.

As it is not possible for the Commission to station a man perma-
nently at all chestnut nurseries, the possibility has been noted that
occasional shipments of uninspected nursery stock might be made
without the knowledge of the Commission. To prevent such an occur-
rence it is now required of all nurseries that their stock shall be in-
spected at intervals, whether shipments are to be made or not.

The total number of trees inspected during the fall season was
3569, of which 70 were rejected, and the remainder 3499 considered
to be sound trees. The details as to the number of trees inspected,
the names of the nurseries themselves, dates of inspection, etc., are
given in the pathologist's report.

RESISTANCE AND IMMUNITY.

Among the different lines of investigation that should be made
in connection with the blight disease there is left the study of resist-
ance or immunity to the disease on the part of individual trees, for
which there is, so far, no provision. It is worthy of note that to date
no such study has been made by other institutions. I have thought
recently of giving some personal attention to this subject myself, so
far as can be done, in addition to administrative work. The seed-
lings we will obtain from the nuts introduced from China will form
a good basis for such an investigation in the way of introducing
foreign stock. Observations should be made, however, on the natural
resistance of individual native trees and hereafter, it is expected that
more attention will be given to that matter. Bj the use of buds or
grafts from such resistant trees or from foreign stocks, or by later
cross-breeding, a variety of chestnut for orchard purposes may be
developed which would be at least resistant, if not immune, to the
blight disease.

18

THE OUTLOOK.

After giving the organization and scope of the work of the Com-
mission, as above outlined, and knowing the principal results of our
operations, as summarized in the reports here following naturally
one may ask the question, what is the outlook?

As I have seen the progress of the work from all standpoints,
and undertook my duties unacquainted with the State, and can,
therefore, view the results impartially, and having had a previous
experience of over twenty years in combating plant diseases, my
own view of the outlook as here follows may be of interest.

First. The complete sanitation of the State as to this disease over
practically the western half of it is in itself, in my own mind, worth
much more than the entire appropriation already made; this in re-
gard to the State itself. In addition we may have been the means of
saving the chestnut trees in Ohio and adjoining portions of New York,
West Virginia and Maryland as well.

Second. The scientific results obtained already are not exceeded
in interest and value by those of any other institution in the same
length of time. The determination of a distinct form of the fungus
known as the '^Connellsville fungus" and the discovery of the carry-
ing of ascospores by the wind is of the greatest practical importance
in further operations against the disease.

Learning more as we are every day of the proper methods of re-
moval of diseased trees, based upon scientific and practical knowl-
edge, our work is bound to be still more effective in the future. Not
the least of the important results of our work, as stated by our
Collaborator, the Deputj^ Commissioner of Forestry, in another place,
is the good effect it will have on forestry management in the State.

We hr.ve organized such a splendid force of scientists and for-
esters that our work will go on in the future ^dth double the rapidity
and thoroughness of the past. Given a sufficient appropriation for
the next two years, which should be much more than heretofore appro-
priated, I am still confident, as stated in the recent summary of re-
sults for the Governor, that at the end of two more years, we shall
have the chestnut blight disease practically under control.

Abstracts of the reports of different lines of operations of the Com-
mission follow herewith, together with the last monthly financial
statement. The complete reports of the difi'erent men in charge are
available, if desirable to obtain further details, not here abstracted.
Respectfully submitted,

MARK ALFRED CARLETON,

General Manager.

10

KEPORT OF THE CJENEKAL SUPERINTENDENT.

(Figs. 1-21.)

THE CHESTNUT TREE BARK DISEASE.

The main facts known to the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission
when it was created in June 1911, were that a destructive disease
caused by a parasitic fungus had affected a majority of the chestnut
trees in the southeastern corner of the State and that this disease
was rapidly SAveeping westward across the State. The Commission
was created to find out the facts relating to the fungus and to a})]>ly
the best available measures in an attemfjl to eradicate v.r check it.
iVt the time the Commission was organized no extensive systematic
study of the disease had been made by any investigators except those
in the U. S. Department of Agriculture. Accordingly, Dr. Haven
Metcalf who conducted these investigations was called in consultation
and the Commission determined to adopt the plan of control recom-
mended by him. The first necessity in any fight is to knoAV the loca-
tion and strength of the enemy. Therefore, the first action advised by
Dr. Metcalf was to make a general scout of the State, to determine
the extent to which the disease had spread. The blight does not
spread in a solid line, but first appears on a single tree or small
group of trees miles ahead of the main body of the infection, from
which it spreads to the trees immediately adjoining. This fungus is
a plant which produces immense numbers of spores by which it
perpetuates itself. It is assumed that the destruction of all in-
fectious material in any spot will prevent the further spread of the
disease in that spot unless reinfected from an outside source, much
as by destroying the roots and seeds of the Canada thistle we can
prevent the spread of this pest. Therefore, the plan of control, in
brief, is to locate all the spots of advance infection in the
western part of the State and carefully destroy the diseased bark and
other infectious material by burning. By reinspecting these spots
for recurrence of the disease and by scouting for any new spots
which may appear, it is expected that the disease will be kept from ad-
vancing further into the State. Sanitation (destruction of diseased
bark) appears to be the most practical plan of control that can be
applied by the Commission until scientific research has time to dem-
onstrate a better method.

20
FIELD OPERATIONS IN 1911.

The field operations of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission be-
gan in August 1911, when a party of six scouts was placed in the
field in York county. Subsequently, the force was increased until, in
November, thirty-five scouts were engaged in a hasty survey of the
central part of the State. The field work in 1911 was done at a dis-
advantage, due to the lack of" trained men and the very slight knowl-
edge concerning the geographic extent of the disease in the State.
It was not until after the leaves began to turn color that an effec-
tive organization could be developed. The unusually favorable fall
and winter weather in 1911 and 1912 has made it possible to do more
work than could otherwise have been done.

It was thought before the field work began in 1911, that the blight
had not extended west of the Susquehanna river except in southeastern
York county. It was a great surprise to find that in the eastern
and central portions of Cumberland, Perry, Juniata, Snyder and
Union Countiies the blight was already well established. Spot in-
fections were found widely distributed throughout this territory,
although the region was apparently not yet hopelessly infected. Until
January 1st, 1912, field work was confined entirely to scouting the
central section of the State, to determine the location of the advance
line of the blight, that is, the point beyond which the areas of blight
infection were small, few and widely scattered. This was found to
extend along the Tuscarora mountains in Fulton county through
eastern Huntingdon, Centre and Clinton counties, central Lycoming
county and thence northeast to the northeast corner of Susquehanna
county, as indicated by the dotted line on the accompanying map.

Soon after the work began in 1911, about 6,000 circular letters ask-
ing for information relative to the condition of the chestnut trees
were sent out. Many hundred replies were received, and late in the
fall inspections were made at points in the western portion of the
State where the chestnut trees were reported as being unhealthy. Only
one case of blight was found out of over one hundred inspections dis-
tributed throughout all the counties w^est of the advance line. It was
impossible in this preliminary scouting to cover every county in the
western half of the State, but the results of the inspection, together
with the information obtained in other ways, made it practically cer-
tain that the advance line as located was approximately correct.
West of this line it was expected that only a relatively small number
of isolated spot infections would be found when a detailed survey
was made. A careful scouting of every county in the western half of
the State in the spring, summer and fall of 1912 shows that the conclu-
sions reached last year were correct, except that a considerable area
of blight exists in Somerset county.

2i

SCOPE OF WORK EAST AND WEST OF THE ADVANCE LINE.

Soon after the work of the Commission was begun it became evi-
dent that it was the duty of the Commission to carry on field work
east as well as west of the advance line. The field work west of the
advance line has for its object primarily the total eradication of the
blight, and the checking of further westward spread. East of the ad-
vance line, where the bulk of the chestuut trees is located, it is the
duty of the Commission to acquaint owners of timber with the facts
relating to the blight. Every owner of chestnut timber should know of
the existence of this disease on his property either in time to save the
uninfected trees, or at least in time to cut out the diseased trees be-
fore they deteriorate in commercial value.

For the purpose of our work the State has been divided into two
districts. The western district comprises Fulton, Huntingdon, Mifflin,
Centre, Clinton, Lycoming, Sullivan and Bradford counties and all the
counties lying west of them. The counties lying east of the above
named counties comprise the eastern district. In each district a dis-
trict superintendent has been appointed to direct the field work.
Field headquarters, centrally located, have been established at Leba-
non in the east and Tyrone in the west. The western district was
subdivided into seven divisions of five to seven counties each, and five
divisions were made in the eastern district. Each division has been
in charge of a Supervisor. A field agent was detailed to conduct the
work in a county and as manj^ scouts as necessar}^ were assigned
him as assistants.

FIELD WOEK IN THE WESTERN DISTRICT IN 1912.

DETAILED SCOUTING.
In January, 1912, the plan of the field work was changed. Field
agents of the Commission were stationed in the central part of the
State close to the advance line. Each Field Agent proceeded to make
tree to tree examinations in the vicinity of previously located spot
infections. In this way a systematic and thorough examination was
made, tract by tract. The infected trees were blazed and the owner
informed of their existence, with a request to cut them and destroy the
diseased bark. Much effort was expended during the winter in
holding field demonstration meetings and in other educational work
to familiarize the timber owners with the blight, in each community
where the disease had been found. In this way all of the first dis-
covered infections along the advance line were removed without farced
cutting being done by the Commission, but much effort and time had
to be devoted to explaining to owners the benefit they would derive

22

by following the plan outlined by the Commission. This delayed the
progress of the inspection so that in the spring only a small portion
of each county on the advance line had been thoroughly cleaned up.

In the latter part of March and through April, May and June the
field force was steadily increased and the work organized so that every
county in the western district had from two to five men making a
thorough examination to locate spot infections. The discovery of the
extensive infection in Somerset county together with the existence of
the socalled "Gonuellsville Fungus" (see next heading) made it ex-
tremely important to know accurately the condition of the chestnut
in the counties in the extreme western part of the State. Accordingly,
effort was concentrated on these counties throughout the summer, and
in September scouting was completed and no blight found in the fol-
lowing counties : Erie, Crawford, Mercer, Lawrence, Beaver, Washing-
ton, Greene, Westmoreland, Allegheny, Indiana, Armstrong, Butler,
Jefferson, Venango, Cameron, Forest and McKean.

Scouting was also completed in Fayette, Clarion, Elk, Warren and
Potter counties early in the Fall and very slight infections found in
each. In Fayette county a single spot infection was found, consisting
of eleven trees purchased from a nursery the preceding year. In War-
ren county four spots of infection were found near Warren. In one
case a dozen nursery trees planted in 1911 were found affected with the
blight, and the other three cases were native trees on which the blight
was just beginning. In Potter and Clarion counties a single native
tree was found infected in each county. In Elk county three spots of
infection were found. The largest spot consisted of about three hun-
dred native trees ; the second spot consisted of three native trees, and
the third spot of about thirty trees, purchased from a nursery and
planted in 1911. In the latter instance the blight had already spread
to a native tree adjoining the infected nursery stock.

When scouting was completed in the westernmost counties and
all known infections were removed, the field men were placed in
counties further east. Cambriar and Sullivan counties have since
been completed, work in Clearfield and Centre is nearing completion
and the field force has been concentrated to complete the work in
Somerset, Bedford, Blair, Clinton and Tioga counties as quickly as
possible. A small force of men is at work in Bedford, Fulton, Hunt-
ingdon, Lycoming and Bradford counties. The latter counties will
be completed as soon as the more w&stern counties are finished.

THE CONNELLSVILLE FUNGUS.

In December 1911, Mr. John K. Hibbs, a Field Agent of the Com-
mission found a fungus at several points in Washington and Fayette
counties which was apparently the chestnut blight fungus, Diaporthe
parasitica. Specimens of this fungus were submitted to various

23

pathologists who proiioimced it Diaporthe. Accordingly,
owners of the trees on which this fungus was found
were notified and the trees cut voluntarily. However, the
absence of the characteristic fans of mycelium and the decided sap-
rophytic nature of the fungus showed that there was a distinction be-
tween this and the virulent blight fungus. It was at first thought
that this difference was due to the elfect of smoke, which has done
much damage to the trees in the localities Avhere this fungus is
found. Detailed scouting early iu the spring of 1911 showed that this
fungus is distributed through western Fayette, southern Washington
and Greene counties.

When a Field Pathologist was employed by the Commission in
May, 1912, the first problem he undertook was to determine the
identity and virulence of the "Connellsville fungus" (so-called from
its abundance in the vicinity of Connellsville. ) Through numerous
tests by inoculations and extensive investigations in other directions,
the Connellsville fungus was proved hj the Field Pathologist to be
a harmless saprophyte which belongs in the same genus as Diaporthe
parasitica, but is a distinct species. The ditfereuce in appearance
between the two fungi is very minute, being principally in the size
of the spores. While this comj)licates the situation to a certain
extent, it is now possible to tell with which species of fungus we are
dealing. It is a great relief to know that the southwestern corner
of the State is free from the i^arasitic species.

METHODS OF SCOUTING IN 1912.

An instruction camp was established where the scouts were
given the necessary training. If they could not qualify after a Aveek's
training, they were not emi)loyed. After they were given a chance
to demonstrate their ability in practical w^ork in the field, men who
proved most efficient were promoted to be Field Agents and given
charge of the crews. In each county, the Field Agent in charge made
a preliminary trip through the county to get acquainted with the ter-
ritory and to note the general conditions. A plan was then formu-
lated for a more detailed survey. After this plan had been approved
by the supervisor the county crew began a careful examination of
all chestnut timber areas. In heavily timbered districts the entire
crew (field agent and scouts) worked together in scouting. The
plan usually followed was to inspect the timber in strips. The men
were placed from 50 to 200 feet apart, one man to each parallel strip.
In the agricultural districts where the timbered areas w^ere small and
scattered only one or two men worked together. When the ex-
amination of each tract was completed, a data card, giving all the
necessary information relative to the tract, was sent to Field Head-

24

quarters. Each card was numbered and a corresponding number was
placed on the county map in the approximate spot where the tract
was located.

In the three extreme western divisions it soon became apparent
that there was little or no blight, and in order to complete the work
in a reasonable time, a more general system of scouting was adopted.
No attempt was made to examine every tree in the general scouting,
but all the chestnut areas were traversed and a close watch kept
for dead or dying branches, unhealthy tops and other signs of the
disease. Numerous inquiries were made as to the existence of un-
healthy chestnut trees, nursery stock and chestnut orchards, and
when a suspicious case was reported, a detailed examination was
made.

It had been the opinion of those engaged in chestnut blight opera
tions outside of the State that the months of August and September
were the best time of the year for scouting. In these months the dis-
ease kills many tops and branches of trees, causing the so-called "dan-
ger, signals." These branches with the dead leaves clinging to them are
easily seen on trees in the open, but in the dense Avoods the green
foliage makes it difficult to find the smaller dead branches and small
cankers. In both 1911 and 1912 it was demonstrated that fall and
early winter, after the leaves had fallen, is the ideal time for locating
spot infections. The dead leaves on the branches girdled during the
summer and early fall remain on the diseased parts throughout the
winter and spring. After the foliage is off the trees, a scout can see
for long distances through the bare tops in dense woods, and locate
even very slight infections. Where the disease has not yet com-
pletely girdled a section of the tree, the cankers are more easily
seen in winter because of the greater amount of light admitted
through the tops of the trees.

In locating infections everything depends upon the man. The work
of scouting requires a man with trained powers of observation, who
can withstand the arduous physical exertion required in tramping
for eight or ten hours through dense woods in a rough country. He
must be constantly on the alert to detect the blight in the tops,
trunks or bases of trees, and in case of doubt, he must climb the trees
to investigate. In addition to this, he must be able to deal tactfully
with all classes of timber owners and be ever ready to perform the
numerous duties required of him in carrying on an educational cam-
paign in the community in which he is stationed. When he meets
opposition he must be able to withstand criticism and see that the
requirements of the law are carried out.

Young men are best adapted for the work of scouting since they
have the necessary vigor and enthusiasm and are Avilling to work
for low wages. Older men of the type who have done the best work

25

in scouting are difficult to obtain for work of this character,
since men of this sort usually are settled and do not care to leave
home. Many men with college training have been employed because
such men quickly acquire the necessary knowledge of botany and
forestry, if they do not already have it, and look on the experience
gained as partial compensation for their services.

METHODS OF ERADICATING A SPOT INFECTION.

The plan now being followed when a spot infection is found is to
blaze the infected trees at breast height and also at the base. The
official stamp of the Commission is then ijut on the blaze with a
marking hammer, and the infected trees are numbered consecutively.
On the other side of the tree is tacked a yellow tag, on which is
printed brief instructions governing the disposal of the tree. When
possible, the OAvuer is immediately interviewed. If he can be induced
to do so, the trees are cut while the Held agent is on the premises
and can locate the trees for him in person. Otherwise the agent
leaves infection sheets with the owner, in which are given the loca-
tions of the diseased trees. The owner or person responsible for the
care of the tract is again interviewed by the field agent, Avho explains
the nature of the blight, the necessity for removal of the diseased trees
and the proper procedure to follow. The infection sheet, together with
a letter of intsructions is then handed the owner. If, at the end
of twenty days the owner has not removed the diseased trees, the
work of removal is begun by the field agent in charge, with the help
of choppers hired for the purpose. In all our work great stress has
been laid on the prompt removal of infections, but until September,
moral pressure only was brought to bear upon the owners to secure
their co-operation. In September, and later, a more aggressive policy
was adopted and in the few cases where owners refused to co-operate
with the Commission, the work was done by the Commission and bills
for the same presented to the delinquent owners.

The procedure followed in destroying infection is as follows: The
trees are felled so as to leave as low a stump as possible. If felled
with an axe, the bark is first removed from the part of the trunk
through which the cut is to be made to an inch below the surface of
• the soil. If felled by sawing, peeling may be done after the tree has
been cut down. In either case the stump and all exposed roots
must be cleared of every particle of bark and all bark removed must
be carefully collected and burned. After the tree is felled, all
portions above the stump which show mycelium or pustules of the
blight are peeled of bark or the entire piece cut out and burned.

The brush from tops, and portions of the felled chestnut trees
which are not peeled and Avhich it is not intended to utilize miffet also
be burned. After the stump is peeled, if fire can be made over it with-

26

out injuring the surrounding trees, the brush and refuse are piled
over the stump and burned when there is no danger of forest fires.
The fallen leaves around the stump over an area as far as the diseased
portions of the trees extended after the tree was felled, are raked
into the fire aud burned. The fire must entirely consume or deeply
char all of the material, no small ends of branches and small twigs
being allowed to remain. If it is imj)ossible to make the fire over the
stump without injuring the surrounding trees, the sides and top of
the stump must be coated with creosote to prevent any possibility of
reinfection. Portions of infected trees which show no evidence of
the blight are not permitted to lie in the woods over twenty days after
felling, but they may be handled and shipped in the same manner as
logs or wood of other species of trees, provided they are shijjped
promptly in closed cars. If the wood from the diseased trees is not re-
moved from the woods within twenty days from the time the trees
are felled it must be peeled and the bark burned, or else wood and
bark burned. Wood from diseased trees used where exposed to the
weather must be peeled. Fire wood, if kept under dry cover, need
not be peeled.

The points to be emphasized in eradicating spot infections are:
1. Take all possible care to prevent injuries to surround-
ing chestnut treea and sprouts in felling the infected tree. If it is
necessary to clear away brush to facilitate cleaning up after felling,
any small chestnut sprouts should be cut flush with the ground.
Experience has shown that such stubs often become infected if near
a diseased tree.

2. Cut all stumps as low as possible, to lessen exj^euse of peeling
and to save merchantable timber in the log.

3. Destroy all diseased portions of the tree showing pustules,
by burning on the spot, immediately, either the bark or entire sections
of the tree which show cankerous areas.

4. Either utilize all unbarked portions of infected trees within
a brief time after they are cut, or, if it is desired to permit this
material to remain in the vicinity of healthy chestnut trees, peel
the bark from all portions of the trees which it is desired to retain.

5. In every case, peel the bark clean from the stumps to an inch
or two below the surface of the soil. Experience has shown that the
stumps of infected trees and portions of the green tops which are per-
mitted to lie for several months on the ground, are almost certain to
become infected if the bark is permitted to remain on them, even
though no cankers exist on the stump at the time the tree is cut.
Some of the largest spots of infection have developed from unpeeled
stumps. The spores germinate on the sappy surface of the stump
and the mycelium grows downward through the cambium, and in the
course of a year or two reaches the sprouts which come up around

27

the base of the stump. Little infection in the sprouts is found where
the stumps have been carefully peeled. Furthermore, the sprouts
have more vigor and are better rooted when they come from i)eeled
stumps, since in this case they must start from beneath tlie soil and
can soon form their own roots.

RESULTS OF CUTTING OUT SPOT INFECTION.

Sufficient time has not elapsed since the Commission began
work to determine the efficiency of sanitation in checking the disease.
Early in 1912 the work of eradicating spot infections alojng the ad-
vance line and to the westward was begun. The general methods out-
lined in the i^receding paragraph were used. Many facts relating
to the proper procedure in destroying infection have only become
known as a result of this first work, hence in some cases the cleaning
up was not done as carefully as we now know to be necessary.

Forty-two tracts on which the original infection was cut out dur-
ing the early part of 1912 were reinspected during November and
December of this year. The number of diseased trees in these spots
prior to cutting ranged from a single tree to ninety-three, the total
number of diseased trees on the forty-two spots being 556. On re-
inspection, twenty-eight out of the forty-two spots showed no recur-
rence of the blight ; in three cases a single new infection was found,
and in six cases there were two recently infected trees. The highest
number of new infectious numbered thirteen trees. In the forty-
two spots averaging 13.25 original infected trees each, 156 reinfec-
tions occurred or 3.7 infections per spot. In two-thirds of the forty-
two spots no blight reappeared, and the new infections which de-
veloped in the remainder equalled only two-sevenths of the number of
trees originally diseased. These spots were located in the region of
very slight infection in Elk, Clearfield, Centre and Fulton Counties.

One of the most interesting spot infections studied was one which
covered about ten acres located near Orbisonia in central Hunting-
don county. In the fall of 1911, 271 infections, mostly on 4 year
old stump sprouts, were discovered. During March, 1912, the in-
fections on this tract were cut out and burned. A re-examination
was made in October, 1912, and eighty-two new infections were
found. These infections were mostly on small branches and about
one-eighth of them must have existed last year when the tract was
scouted, but were so small that they were missed. The remainder
apparently developed blight this year, undoubtedly from poor w^ork
in burning the Infections. At least, it is interesting to note that
all but thirteen of the 82 new infections were Avithin a hitudred feet
radius of last year's infections which were not very carefully
burned.

28

OCCURRENCE OF SPOT INFECTIONS.

Spot infections of the blight appear in all ls.inds of locations.
Some are in small woodlots, others far within the boundaries of
large reserves ; while in some cases they are near roads and rail-
roads ; in other cases they are far from the routes of travel.
Some are in the valleys, others on the highest elevations, some are
in moist soil, others in very dry soil. A number of large in-
fections along the advance line are located in gaps in the mountains
where the wind sweeps through, and in upland benches, draws,
ravines and other depressions, where it is likely that there are con-
stant air currents. The examinations of spot infections show that
in practically every case the disease starts on a single tree, which
may be located miles from any other infection. The disease is
then communicated to the trees immediately surrounding the original
infected tree, forming an irregular spot which is usually more or
less elliptical in form. After the spot assumes considerable propor-
tions, scattered diseased trees appear at some distance from the
central infection, in -the midst of healthy chestnut.

The rate of spread of the blight from the original center of infec-
tion appears to vary greatly, according to the condition of the
chestnut trees in the vicinity of the infection. Where the chestnut
trees are sound, vigorous and healthy, the spread is apparently less
rapid than where the trees are injured by storms, insects, fire,
drought or other agencies.

An example of the slow spread from a centre of infection was
found in Elk county near St. Marys. The accompanying diagram
shows the center of this spot infection to be 160 feet from a public
road in a dense stand of chestnut sprouts about 15 years old. The
original infection probably occurred sometime in 1908. A short
time afterwards (Spring of 1909) two other trees from the same
stump as the original infection and three trees on a stump 77 feet
to the east were infected. In 1910; 24 trees, in 1911, 100 trees, and
in 1912, 166 trees were infected, making the total number in the
spot 296 trees. The spread of the infection to the east was greater
than in any other direction. The most distant infection in this
spot was 12.50 feet from the original center. In contrast to this,
a spot infection in Somerset county may be cited. Here the original
infection occurred in 1908. The disease was apparently carried from
a chestnut orchard in eastern Pennsylvania on diseased scions of
chestnut which were grafted on native sprouts in Somerset county.
In all about 100 trees were so grafted and it is on these trees that
the oldest, cankers have been found. With this orchard as a center
the disease has spread over an area about four miles wide and six
miles long. A thorough scouting in 1912 revealed 6700 infected trees

29

and this number is being constantly increased by additional in-
fections found as new tracts are scouted. The rapid spread of the
blight in this region is probably due to the fact that these trees were
severely injured by storms in 1911 and 1912.

The most interesting fact secured through the field work in
1912 is the advance which the disease has made in the mountainous
region in the central part of the State. The heavy line on the map
shoAvs the line of general advance as it exists at the present time.
In the strip between this year's advance line and the dotted line
denoting the advance line as determined in 1911, the blight has
appeared in a great number of spots where its presence could not
be detected last year or early in the summer of 1912. In a great
many instances, large spot infections became apparent during Sep-
tember and October of the present year where previously only a few
infected trees had been found or none at all. Just east of last year's
advance line, in the Pennypacker and Rothrock forest reserves, crews
of men were engaged in locating and removing infected trees through-
out the summer and fall, but in spite of this the number of infected
trees which constantly appeared was so large that it has been
impossible to clear the blight from these reserves up to the present
time. In the heart of the Roth rock reserve an area of blight, several
hundred acres in extent, appeared in mid-summer where no in-
fections had previously been discernible. It is characteristic of
the infections in this region this year that they are mainly on twigs
and small branches in the tops of the trees. It is thought that the
extremely wet weather in the spring, summer and fall of 1912 had
some relation to the rapid spread of the blight in this section.

INCREASING THE EFFICIENCY OF THE CUTTING-OUT METHOD OF

CONTROL.

The magnitude of the task before the Commission must be con-
sidered. The report of the Secretary of Internal Affairs for 1911
gives the acreage of timber land in Pennsylvania on which taxes
are paid as 7,428,228 acres. To this must be added nearly a million
acres of forest reserves and more than a million acres of woodlots and
timber tracts located in townships for which no figures appear in
this report. A very conservative estimate places the average per-
centage of chestnut in the forests of the State as slightly in excess
of 20 per cent or about one-fifth of the stand.

The western district contains at least 6,500,000 acres of wood-
land. This entire area must be scouted since there are few localities
where the chestnut is absent, and until the land has been actually
gone over it is not certain that no blight exists. Even though the
percent of chestnut is small, the blight, if present, may spread to
adjoining areas with a higher percentage of chestnut. The number

30

of acres inspected per man per day in the western district has
averaged 50 acres. At this rate, paying inspectors at the rate of
20 cents per hour, it would cost 4 cents per acre or a total of
1260,000 to thoroughly scout the forest areas in the western district.
In the eastern district there are at least 3,000,000 acres of wood-
land. Allowing the sum of 2 cents per acre for the instruction of
timber owners and the work in utilization in this district, the cost
to the State would be |60,000. The total cost of the work in both
divisions thus amounts to |320,000.

FIELD WOEK IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT IN 1912.

,The eastern district was subdivided into five divisions, each
division being placed in charge of a supervisor. Previous to July,
1912, only a few men were employed in this division. Since July,
hoAvever, there has been one or more field agents employed almost
continuously in each county in the district.

It is the policy in this district to carry on three lines of work,
namely, field demonstrations, educational work and utilization in-
vestigations. In field demonstration, a field agent goes to a
property owner, takes him into the woods and shows him the
symptoms and ravages of the blight. An inspection is not made
unless the owner or tenant is present. In this way some action
usually follows inspection, since the owner or tenant learns the
nature of the disease and realizes the importance of endeavoring to
check its progress. The knowledge of the blight possessed by the
majority of timber owners is the single fact that a "blight" is
destroying the chestnut trees around. New York and Philadelphia.
They have the vague impression that it is due to an insect. These
owners are usually surprised to learn that the blight has already
made its appearance in their timber. The ordinary observer seldom
notices the blight until the disease is so firmly established as to be
beyond hope of control. A very large number fail to notice the
diseased condition of their trees even after the blight has killed
many trees and partially destroyed their commercial value.

The eastern district has not been as thoroughly scouted as the
western district, since the complete organization of the work in the
west took precedence over the work in the east. However, considerable
data have been collected in each county which are embodied in the
accompanying map showing the geographic extent of the disease.
The disease is most prevalent in the tier of counties along the

Fis>s. 2, 7, 9,
Figs. 39, 41, 42,
other illustrations
photographer, niidei
tlu'y are credited.

NOTE.

13, 1<S, and 70 are from photograi)]is madi' l).v K. T. Kirk.

48 and 49 are from photographs made by Wm. Jiovie. All

were photograijlied by Mr. Wm. Cnrrle, the (.'ommissiou

the supervision of the respective di'])artmeuts to which

Fig. 1.

Young chestnut tree with top killed bv Blight. Note droooiug. shriveled leaves
and dense growth of sprouts below the canker. Valley Forge, Pennsylvania.

Fig. 2.

Cankers ou sprouts killed by Blight, uear Oxford, Chester County, IVnnsyl-

vania.

Fi^-. 4.
Native chestnut shade trees attacked by blight. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Fis-. T).
Grafted chestnut trees in orchard attacked by blight. Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

Fig. 7.
Blighted chestnut tree showing how "The Danger Signals" appear in winter.

Chestnut shade troe

Fig. 8.

with lii'aneh kiHed l).v Blight.
I'hiladelphia , Pennsylvania.

Note withered leaves.

Fig. 0.
Sprouts killed by blight on tract near Oxford, in Chester County, Pennsylvania.

Fig. 10.
Chestnut shade tree killed by blight. Philadelphia, Pa.

Fig. 11.
Chestnut trees in orchard, killed by chestnut blight. Bucks county, Pennsylvania.

Fig. 12.

Diseased chestnut trees girdled at the top, showing how the persistent leaves clins
to the dead branches after the foliage from the healthy part has fallen.

1

Fig. 13.

Virgin forest of chestnut and white pine in Warren County, Pennsylvania. Two
chestnut trees two feet in diameter; wliite pine in back groiuid, 4(1 inches in
diameter.

Fig. 14.

Center of infection in spot infection of 296 trees located in Benzinger township, Elk
County, Pennsylvania. The blight probably started on this tree in 190S.

General view of dead trees killed by the blisjlit near Oxford, Chester County, Penn-
sylvania.

Fig. IC,
Chestnut trees broken by sleet storm, Somerset County. Pennsylvania.

Fig. 17.
Spot infection in Bedford Coufety, consisting of sixteen large chestnut trees.

Fig. IS.

Cliestuut sapling broken by sleet storm. The blight had entered this tree where
it was broken. Somerset County, Pennsylvania.

2 ~

Chart of spot infection of 290 trees illustrating tiie rate of spread of the Blight fom a (
is considerably ahead of the general line of advance infection. These -"aCi aiseasej
iDOt, it is expected that the Blight can be kept from gaining headway in Mk Lountj.

<-SS Z\l '^t.'t'^e^'i^^'^'^^^'^'-^'^

1

w. ur. h^

(3) (S>

31

D-

■ c-
ts
)r

IV
IV

!0

le
e-
a-
a.
It
le
•n

t-
c-

^■s
in
le

IS

le
t.
re
n-
le

ig
le

r3

a

ly

to

ly

ed
Le
,ed

..■^ A-p-i, 'jy^^y"-^^

aP>-

' ? \

u ^.

j^j^W'^"' /^' -^'^^'^Yx^

•kr^/-

_ f- iJ< ili ('A', _, -5., „

.jp~'h^ ' > JiXl^:::^^. \ ; v

\\. ^-«fe;^f=£' -s_ ' I 5^ ^ /-jsi/ ^)<(^r-k

.Strip survey of sjutLern York County, showing decrease of ijurcentage of Bliglit, west of a center of iui'ectiou. A spot infection appareutly existed in the vicinity of Delta (shown by triangle on map) as early as ItlOL'. Figures beside dots

indicate percentage of infection.

31

southern border of tlie State from lUicks to York, and it ap-
pears to radiate from this section as a center. Even where
the percentage of disease is very low the evidence of the charac-
teristic spot infections is present. At the center of these old spots
the trees are all diseased and often a majority of them are dead or
nearly g'o. Proceeding in any direction from such a center, a lower
percentage of the trees are found to be affected, and on the outer
edges of the spots areas are found Avhich show no disease. Where
the blight is very prevalent, the spots are so numerous and have so
completely mingled that it appears to be a solid infection.

The progress of the disease near Philadelphia is shown by some
figures recently collected. In October and November 1910, the De-
partment of Forestry inspected the trees in the suburbs of Phila-
delphia in co-operation with the Main Line Citizens Association.
Out of 1637 chestnut trees on ten tracts in this locality inspected at
that time, thirty-one percent were found infected, and twenty-nine
percent were reported as doubtful. In December 1912, a reinspection
of these tracts was made and seventy-nine percent of the trees were
found diseased. In the Northern and Western counties of the east-
ern division the blight occurs in small scattered spots. The ac-
cpmpanying map of Monroe township, Juniata County, which shows
the spot infections found by a thorough scouting of this township in
1912, illustrates the progress of the blight across the State. The
work on the Pennj^packer forest reserve in western Perry county
illustrates the steady increase of the blight. In 1911, 656 infections
were destroyed on this reserve on an area of 1,620 acres. On the
(Completion of this work this area was apparently free from blight,
fn 1912 new infections appeared. Portions of this same area were
rescouted two and even three times, with the result that 2«447 in-
fections were found and 1,897 infections cut out. This is at the
rate of 1.2 infected trees per acre. In connection with the preceding
discussion of the cost of sanitation, it is interesting to note that the
cost of scouting and removing the blight from this area was 73
cents per acre. The cost of scouting was 30 cents per infected tree;
the cost of removal of each infection averaged 22 cents, making a
total cost of 52 cents per infection. This work was thoroughly
supervised and the cost is as low as it is possible for such work to
be done and done thoroughly.

UTILIZATION AND METHODS OF CUTTING.

The blight is so prevalent in the eastern district that apparently

the only course of procedure practical is the utilization of all diseased

chestnut trees as rapidly as possible. In this district, therefore, the

Commission up to the present titne has iiot forced cutting of diseased

3

32

trees, except that all diseased trees must be removed within a
distance of one-half mile from the nearest boundary of all chestnut
orchards or nurseries, the owners of which are themselves applying
adequate protective measures. In all other portions of the district
cutting is optional with the owners, but it is urged on the owners of
chestnut timber in this region to cut all diseased trees, and where
the amount of blight is SO per cent, or more, both diseased and sound
trees, for the purpose of getting the full value from the merchantable
products of these trees and also to reduce the chances of further
infection and lessen the distribution of the disease from east to west.

Owners of valuable, ornamental, shade or orchard trees are recom-
mended to use the surgical method outlined in Bulletin No. 2 of
this Commission. Trees so treated should be inspected for re-
occurrence of the blight every six weeks from April 1st to November
1st, and the trees or diseased parts promptly treated as found neces-
sary. Immediately following the cutting of diseased trees, all stumps
should be peeled clean of bark to the ground line and all brush from
tops, bark fragments and other refuse burned, so that sound sprouts
will be developed. Stumps should be cut low and the burning done
directly over the stumps wherever practicable. All felled chestnut
trees whether diseased or not should be immediately removed from
the woods and utilized, so that they may not become a breeding place
for the blight fungus. Shipment of blighted wood must be made
in closed cars.

From the beginning of the work m the East the importance of
utilizing the diseased timber has been emphasized. Throughout the
summer the field agents Avere instructed to urge utilization at
all times and to. give the owners general information as to
the various ways in which the diseased wood could be used. An
effort has been made to keep only those men who are best qualified
for work of this character on the force. The most difficult material
to utilize is small stuff, which can only be used for cord wood. The men
are instructed to keep in close touch with the office of utilization in
order that the most helpful suggestions may be given to owners.

EFFICIENCY OF THE CUTTING-OUT METHOD EAST OF THE ADVANCE

LINE.

In order to get information concerning the effectiveness of two
different methods of cutting out diseased chestnut, a stump to stump
count of 100 stumps each was made in November 1912, on two differ-
ent tracts located at Haverford. In one of the woodlots the infected
trees were cut in the fall of 1910, and the stumps peeled, and all
brush destroyed by burning, but the burning was not done over the

stumps. On this tract a luindied stumps liad 1:154 vigorous sprouts,
on 254 of Avhich the blight was presenl. lii oilier words 82 per cent
of these sprouts were free from disease and of the infected sjironts,
99, or 39 per cent were infected at the base mostly from diseased bark
left on the stump.

The second tract, used for comparison with this, is located about
one-half mile distant from the tirst tract and was cut about the same
time. The brush was burned and all the merchantable wood used,
but the stumps were not peeled. As near as could be determined, the
two woodlots received identical treatment except that the stumj)s
were peeled in one case while they were left with the bark on in
the other. On this tract the 100 stumps had 140(5 vigorous sprouts,
1115, or 79.3 per cent of which were infected, 22.2 of the infections
were basal.

The above mentioned results indicate that by careful work, the
majority of these sprouts which come from diseased stumps may be
kept free if the stumps are peeled and charred. Creosote has been
used to coat stumps, after peeling, instead of charring them, with
good results.

In March, 1912, 120 stumps of diseased chestnut trees in Lebanon
county were carefully peeled and charred. When re-examined in
November 1912, the sprouts on only 12 of these stumps were infected,
and of these 12, 9 had been improperly peeled and burned.

DECREASE IN RATE OF SPREAD OF THE BLIGHT.
A number of reports have been received from foresters and timber
owners in Pike and Monroe counties that the blight in these counties
is apparently losing its virulence and not spreading. Some observers
were of the opinion that infected trees weie recovering from the
disease, in some cases. To test this matter Mr. K. E. liockey, of the
Commission, laid off several sample plots near Shawnee, Pa., last
June. The condition of the trees on these plots were carefully noted.
A. re-examination was made recently and it was found that the cankers
enlarged during the summer at slightly less than the rate noted by
the field pathologists in other parts of the State. The spores are
produced in a normal manner and have normal vitality. The disease
was also found to be spreading from infected trees to healthy ones
and to other parts of the same tree but apparently the infection of
healthy sprouts and trees is not proceeding as rapidly as in other
portions of the State, where accurate observations have been made.

FOREST FIRES.
The employees of the Commission have been appointed Deputy Fire
Wardens (itnsalaried) by the Department of Forestry. During
November, field agents of the Commission took charge in extinguishing

34

eight large I'uiest fires. Over 7,000 acres of timber land was burned
OYt:' in these fires. Only one forest fire is known to have occurred as
a result of burning infections. The tire started while burning brush
in an enforced cutting. About five acres of woodland were burned
over before the fire was extinguished.

Eespectfullv submitted,

SAMUEL B. DETWILEE,

General Suijerin ten dent.

35

•snonDadsni jo -ox;

•poaanq

a9AO mo S4DI3ji JO 'OfJ

•uorpajni jo % oSB.iaAY

•^nmsaqo jo % osk.tsav

•uoijoadsni laqmrj

10 8SB3JDC aiBUIIXOldcIV

•pni!ji3qniri
JO flSuajDE ajBtnixojddv

05iH U3i>«c

00 CO 00 =3 CO ^* OS
A-- O <^i CO O CO c^

1— ( CO Cli O^ 00 03 <JS

( (M CO l-H C-J CO

OOO r-ICO <

ro uo t^ c-i <

00 O t> tQ C

-S O a 3 g 3

I O Oo «

1 ^o

3«P

36

■iiiiiH J )il-:iu ;o 'ii^

•pDU.UUj
SJ.IUft p.^lOOJUl piii:
.[SAO ;nj s4ou,ii j.) "(j^.

•noijDajut JO % oSu.iOAV'

•jnn^saqD jo % eSBiOAy

JO 93B8.I0C 3}Bin!X0.tdiIV

■pnB[.T3qaiii
JO aStjajoc ajBinixo-icidK

CO CO r-l ^

® t~ J~ 1-1 'C (M t-H

'g' rH (M CO CM CC -:f

T— C2 O GO O 00 "^
'.-: r^i O '_- i^ .W CO

00 .' - 00 « O ^ X^
,'- C:: IT -t^ iM O C/J

O) ::: l^^ 00 * -r r-<
■= -f C-. 00 CO 00 iri
uo ::^ >c CM (M ou o

I !

c3 o'O a>

s^ i^H o

•[EAoniei JO ssaaojd
m saaj^ p8:)D9jnr jo '0!<i

•pgAoin
-8Jt saa^ psiMjnt jo -om

•pnnoj

•siOBj:} pa:}33jn! jo -onj

•jnn^saqD jo % QSejaAy

JO 3SB3J3B e^BiaixoiddY

•DnB[j,:iqran
JO 3313 3 JOB ajBUiixojday

o-j

Oi 1

O 1

CJ ooo

O C-l Oi

M O 33r
t- v;^ O c
to O e- C

-d O :o rt
i_3 O "-3 o
c: :::^ o CO

feT S CO r-T

ooco

Igs

© ■n iH * rH
S r^ & S lS

I ?:

^-lwOf!^

50 -a
O 2

b- An o

•^ •?! CO

I CO- I

2 fi

0) o

G^ n ^ —
1^ W Q O O

•5 J5 e
HOB

3S

•leAOinaj jo ssaDoid
□1 S33J1 pDiDajni JO "OSL

•psAora
-31 SBDiq. pajMju! jo •o>i;

•pnnoj
sddi]. pajDdjn! JO 'ox

•sjDKJi pajoajat jo -oj^;;

•jimjsoiio JO % eSBioAY

•uoijDarlsui .isqiuij
JO aSua.ioB ajuuiixo.icidv

■pcEiJoqinij
JO a3B3.iDB ajBmiio.iddv

5>i b- t-

o O o o i^ c -

^ i-l T-H rH rH C<l r

C^ ^ t^ CO uO
O CO CC J- o

COM eOC35 Oir-it-

l> CO CO -* -v g^ CO

-."vi -^ ■<*< ^ O CO CM

i^'>f J:- CO O c; c>r

■Q ?> ^ C5 I'- O

O « t> CO 00

eO CO CO S5 CI i-H t-
■ > -* rt» C "

1 -^i^ ;

J.^ cc CO -* rt» C3; GO

=-t » h^ t-T ^

k: a, 35 ;
i-)MpqO-

39

.Supervisor.

•|i: viiiii.'i.i JO ssaoojfl

1' ,,),M1 Ii,)].),HlII JO -osi

II 00

II ^_

II lO

•paAoia
-.11 sad.i; pai-injui jo -OfQ;

to

«= II rH
'^ II g

II 00-

II'-'

II

II •

■pimoj
saa.i) pap,ijn! JO -o^

«o

la Ho

'-' lis

lu-
ll«

II
II

s'ljcu pa;,)3}iu JO -osi

M

CO II 00

II?

11
II
II
II

■jnuisfltio JO % aSBjaxiy

^S*^

•ticnoadsat jaqiiiij
JO aScajDi? ajiiinixojddv

IC »Q QO
i-H rH

^ III

^ II M

S IIS

lu-
ll

■pnB[J3qni.n
;o isoaaan 8;B[n:!xoiddv

III

o lO oT

05 JO rt

CO H Tfi

2 " §

Siu^
lu-
ll

District and County.

o

a
a

c
t-

o

o

£

S

O

-a
a

03

t-t

O

40

PATHOLOGICAL INYESTTGATIONS.
(Figs. 22-38.)

The pathological investigations in charge of Dr. F. D. Heald are
conducted in Philadelphia in the Zoological Building of the Universii}'
of Pennsylvania. Dr. Heald was not appointed until August 16th,
and has, therefore, onlj^ been able to make a fairly good beginning
in the work. In addition to the pathological work, Dr. Heald is re-
sponsible for the training of scouts and for the inspection of nursery
stock.

INSTRUCTION OF SCOUTS.

The training of scouts was begun in the Commission laboratories on
September 23rd and since that time a total of twenty-six have been
enrolled. It has required from Ave days to two weeks for each
scout to complete the course outlined. This length of time has varied
in accordance with the previous preparation and experience of the
men employed. The proper training of scouts is considered to be as
essential as research work, and it has been necessary to devote a con-
siderabe amount of energy to this work.

IDENTIFICATION OF SPECIMENS.
As soon as the laboratory had been equipped, specimens received by
the Commission Office for identification were turned over to this labo-
ratorj' for examination. The accurate determination of the specimens
has re juired a considerable amount of time, involving both cultures
and microscopic examinations. In addition to the specimens of Dia-
portJic parasitica which predominate, various other fungi growing
upon the chestnut, have been submitted. Some of these have been
mistaken for DiaportJie by those not familiar with the nature of the

fungus.

GERMINATION OF THE SPORES OF DIAPORTHE.

In order to get the characteristic type of growth of young DiaportJie
colonies in Petri dish cultures, a preliminary study has been made of
germination in agar hanging-block cultures of both ascospores and
conidiospores. This particular feature is fundamental in analytic
work on dissemination. The ascospore cultures were made from
ascospores shot upon sterile slides. A drop of sterile bouillon was
placed over a spore print on a slide and dilutions made from this to
a second drop of bouillion on a sterile slide and the planting made
directly from the spore dilution.

It was found that germination of conidiospores is much slower than
the germination of ascospores. This probably explains the fact that
a smaller percentage of successful infections is secured in artificial in-
oculations with conidiospores than with ascospores. At the end of
twenty-four hours the germ tube of conidiospores is only sliglitlj- in
excess of or sometimes double the length of the swollen spore. During

41

the first part of the g'evnii nation period the spore swells until it is oval
or oblong in form and its diameter is slightly in excess of that of
the germ tube that is to be produced. (See iigures 30-37).

Din FEREiNTIATION OF ASCOSl'OllE AND CONIDIOSPOKE (JOLONIES ON

PETIil DISH CULTURES.

The tests made in hanging drop cul lures in regard to (lie rapidity
of germination of the Lwo types of spores suggested the possibility of
differentiating ascospore colonies and conidiospore colonies by their
rate of growth. The results of comparative cultures of ascospores
and conidiospores on 3 jjer cent, glucose agar, plus 10, by the common
poured plate method show that the ascospore colonies become visible
and conspicuous when the conidiospore colonies are still minute.

THE RELATION OF INSECTS TO THE CHESTNUT BLIGHT DISEASE.

The part which insects play in the dissemination of the blight is
one of the topics that is being investigated in co-operation with the
Entomologist.

An examination has been made by means of cultures of small insect
galls occuring on one year shoots of the chestnut to determine whether
an infection had already taken place. The insects causing these galls
are not available at this time of the year but they are designated in
this report as Diptera species.

The number of tests made is not sufficient upon which to base any
accurate conclusions and the work will be continued and a large num-
ber of similar galls from various portions of the State will be tested.

Some cultures have been made also to determine whether certain
insects frequenting blight lesions Avere carrying spores, with negative
results.

NURSERY STOCK AND DISSEMINATION.

In connection with the work of inspection of chestnut tree nursery
stock, a list is kept of trees shipped by the nurseries of this State with
their destination. The places to which nursery stock is shipped in
this State will later be visited by an agent of the Commission to deter-
mine to what extent any of these become centres of infection. The
list of trees sent to adjacent states will be furnished to the United
States Department of Agriculture.

The inspection of nursery stock has suggested the possibility that
chestnut blight might be carried by other nursery stock than the
chestnut. Since the spores of Diaporthe are known to be carried by
the wind, they might settle upon the surface of any nursery stock
growing in the vicinity of diseased chestnut trees.

In order to determine the effect of the ordinary nursery fumigation
upon the spores of the blight fungus, an experiment was conducted at
one of the principal nurseries of the State in which twelve twigs

42

of chestnut were immersed in wafer containing ascospores and
then allowed to dry. Six of these were placed in a sterile capsule
as a check and six placed in a fumigator and subjected to the usual
fumigation. Twelve similar twigs were immersed in water containing
conidiospores and subjected to the same treatment. The result
of this experiment was that the the usual fumigation had no effect
whatever upon the spores of the blight fungus.

In addition to the above, various experiments have been conducted
and are now under way to determine the effect of cold upon the growth
of the blight fungus in cultures and also the comparative effects of
light aud darkness upon cultures of the same fungus. This work is
much facilitated by having available a series of constant temperature
rooms making it possible to test temperatures from below freezing up
to the maximum temperature at which growth is possible.

Eesults of other experiments recently made show : —

First, that conidiospores do not germinate in extracts of soil. This
is important in indicating the possibility of their persistence when
washed to the ground.

Second, the expulsion of ascopores from the perithecia is dependent
upon temperature as well as moisture. In all tests made to date no
expulsion has occurred when the bark bearing the perithecia has been
kept at a temperature less than 52 degrees Fahr.

PUBLICATION.

A bulletin is being written describing more in detail the charac-
ters of the organism causing the blight than has been heretofore
given. It will be accompanied by numerous illustrations and will be
ready for publication within a few weeks.

FIELD INVESTIGATIONS IN PATHOLOGY.

Field investigations of the chestnut blight fungus have been con-
ducted for a considerable time under the immediate direction of Mr.
P. J. Anderson. A considerable series of experiments have been con-
ducted in much detail. Among many things that have been learned
there are two that are important and have much practical bearing in
our efforts to eradicate the blight fungus.

THE CONNELLSVILLE FORM OF FUNGUS.

First — As stated in the report of the General Superintendent, much
difficulty was encountered in the scouting work because of the condi-
tion early apparent that the fungnis as found in the vicinity of Con-

43

nellsville in the southwestern part of the State was harmless to the
trees which it infested. This condition led to thorough investiga-
tion of the nature of this form of fungus compared with the usual type
that is found generally over the State, and it was learned that it dif-
fers considerably from the usual form in several respects. The size and
form of the spores are ditfereut. The behavior in culture media is
quite different, and artificial inoculations with the Connellsville form
on young, healthy trees do not produce the usual cankers. A rather
complete description of this form of fungus has been published in Vol-
ume 2, Number 5 of 'Phytopathology."

A more recent and detailed technical description of the Connells-
ville fungus, under the new name of "Endothia Virginia," has been
published by Mr. Anderson and his brother Mr. H. W. Anderson, in
Volume 2, Number 6 of "Phytopathology," pages 261-262.

A manuscript describing the Connellsville fungus and including in-
formation additional to that given in the paper in "Phytopatho-
logy," has been submitted by Mr. Anderson, and is intended for pub-
lication as one of the bulletins of this Commission.

DISSEMINATION OF THE FUNGUS.

Second : — -Numerous experiments have been performed to determine
whether or not the chestnut blight f ungTis is disseminated by means of
the wind. It was soon found that the ascopores of the perithecial or
second stage of the fungus are much more easily and rapidly dispersed
than was thought at first. In nature after a rain, or when the pustules
are artificially moistened, these ascospores are shot out into the air
to a distance of as much as one inch at regular intervals and with
considerable rapidity. Agar plates placed at different distances from
moistened pustules have caught these spores before falling to the
ground up to a distance of fifty feet from the starting point.

Other experiments have shown that the blight may be caused by
catching these spores in artificial wounds made in trees at similar
distances from the shooting pustles. It seems natural to infer from
these experiments and others conducted, the details of which cannot
be here given, that the fungus is easily and rapidly disseminated lo-
cally, at least, by means of ascospores carried by the air.

A paper giving the details of various experiments performed leading
to the conclusion above stated has been submitted to be published as
another bulletin of this Commission.

GROWTH OF THE FUNGUS IN THE WINTER.

It has been found that the growth and appearance of the blight
canker is quite different in late Fall and Winter, than during the Sum-

■11

rier. The fungus does not advance into the healthy tissue in fan-
shaped mats of mycelium. The edge of the canker is more regular and
is circumscribed by a black line between the healthy and dead tissue^
which liue was not there during the Summer. The average growth
in diameter of fifty-three cankers, for October was 1.92 cm. For
twenty-two days of November and all of December cankers showed
no increase in diameter, indicating that the weather had become too
cold. No inoculations made during October, November and December
show^ any signs of infection. Whether the spores will remain and
begin growth when the Aveather becomes warm again, is yet to be
determined.

FURTIIH]R RESULTS ON DISSEMINATION.

Clumps of coppice growth of chestnut were selected, in each one of
which was one or more trees with cankers bearing ascospores. Wounds
were made by sterile implements on surrounding trees facing the can-
kers of the diseased trees and the bark was previously sterilized. These
w^ounds were then protected from insects by wire screens and a strip
of cotton placed upon them to insure against spores being washed from
above. The cankered trees were drenched with water once a day for
ten days. Of the 559 wounds made and protected in this way, 114 de-
veloped cankers at the end of three months.

In another set of bellows experiments not previously report^, sixty-
three sterile wounds were made in the trunks of trees and shooting
bark was supported at a distance of one and a half to two and a half
feet from each wound. A draft of air was created toward the wounded
tree by hand-bellows for fifteen minutes and then the wound protected
with cotton. Twenty-four out of the sixty-three wounds developed
ankers.

LONGEVITY TESTS.

Results of tests m the longevity of spores are as follows : — -

First — Ascospores after being ejected from the perithecia and kept
dry on slides in the laborator\% retained their vitality twenty-four (24)
weeks ; limit not yet reached.

Second Ascospores kept dry in the bark without being dis-
charged from the perithecia retained their vitality thirty -four (34)
Aveeks ; limit not yet reached.

Third^ — Conidia kept dry as spore horns in the laboratory, retained
their vitality twenty -eight (28) weeks; limit not yet reached.

Fourth — Both ascospores and conidia collected at regular intervals
frdui the woods during the winter up to the present time (Feb. 1st)
have retained their vitality. Even the conidia from the exposed pyc-
nidia on wood have given a high percentage of germination at every
period of the winter.

45

CULTURAI. AND TAXONOMIC STUDIES.

The ii-iie blight fungus lias been much confused with several other
very closely related species of this genus. Cultures of all these forms
from various localities in America and Euro])e were made and studied
on a large number of media. As a result of these studies it is now
definitely proved that we have three distinct species in Eastern Ignited
States: — First. The true blight fungus. Second. The Connellsville
fungus. Third. The long s]M)red s.,aThern fungus. Only the first tw(»
of these are found in Pennsylvania and only the first one of the three
causes any injury to the trees.

KEPOKT OF THE PHYSIOLOGIST

(Figs. 39-49.)

The investigations in tree medication have been in charge of Dr.
Caroline Eumbold, and have three objects in view:

1. To ascertain if the growth of the chestnut blight fungus can be
checked by the introduction of chemicals into growing chestnut trees.

2. To determine whether the fungus can be entirely killed by such
a process.

3. Also to determine whether the tree can be rendered immune
to the disease by such a process.

The condition is also to be understood that the tree must remain
uninjured in each case by the treatment.

Some of the results obtained to date are as follows: —

EFFECT OF ALKALIES ON THE GROWTH OF THE CHESTNUT BLIGHT

FUNGUS.

Certain alkaline compounds, lithium carbonate, sodium carbonate
and sodium hydroxide, were employed in percentages varying from
one-half to one-sixteenth per cent, and added to bean juice agar (2 per
cent.) and to boiled chestnut juice. On cultivating the fungus in these
media, it was found that lithium carbonate was the most toxic, one
eighth per cent, being sufficient to kill the fungus.

EFFECT OF ALKALINE SOLUTIONS ON GROWING PLANTS.

Eooted slips of Coleus and Impatiens were placed in alkaline solu-
tions, and it was found that a one-fourth per cent, one-third per cent,
and one-half per cent, of what was supposed to be a saturated solution
of lithium carbonate readily entered the plants through the roots. If
taken from the solution as soon as a slight curling of the leaves indi-
cated the presence of the lithium in the tips of the plant, they survived

46

this treatment. Allowed to remain, the plants continued lo absoib
the alkali, and died, the tips of the roots and of the leaves turning
brown first. Next, chestnut seedlings two and three years old, which
had been transjjlanted into pots, were injected with lithium carbouute
solution through a root cut under water. The solution spread from the
root throughout the seedling, as was shown by the effect of the solu-
tion in the leaves and tAvigs whenever tested. Some of the trees ab-
sorbed the one fourth per cent, solution readily, and others even the
one third per cent. Controlled trees injected simply with distilled
water, did not absorb the water as rei.dily as the other trees absorbed
the alkaline solution. On inoculating the trees injected with lithium
carbonate and the controlled trees with the chestnut bligixt fungus, the
alkali appeared to have no effect, as both series of trees were infected.

FIELD EXPERIMENTS AT EMILIE, PA.

In experiments conducted at Emilie, Pa., in April, lithium carbon-
ate in different percentages was injected into orchard trees
through the roots. The trees which had an average age of six years
were already infected with the chestnut blight, most of the cankers
being at the base of the tree. In August, while some of the injections
had seriously retarded the growth of the trees, none of the latter
were killed by them, though they did die from the blight disease.
However, in no case were the injections of any benefit to the tree.

METHODS OF TRUNK INJECTION.

For large trees it is manifestly impracticable to practice injection
through the roots. Two different methods, therefore, of trunk injec-
tions were devised, in one of which a tin can and grafting wax were
used, and in the other, a glass jar, rubber tubing and a clamp. Details
of the use of these methods are given in the full report of the physio-
logist in charge of tree medication. The latter method is well illus-
trated, however, by accompanying figures 39, 41, 42.

EXPERIMENTS AT COLEMANVILLE, PA.

During the late summer, field experiments were conducted in a
large chestnut orchard at Colemanville. Solutions of the following-
compounds were used ; copper sulphate, copper chloride, zinc chloride,
lithium carbonate, barium chloride, sodium carbonate and sodium
hydroxide. A number of other compounds were also used in different
concentrations, including certain color solutions, such as eosin, methyl
green and congo red, in solutions of one one-tenth per cent.
These solutions were injected by the two methods of trunk injection
above mentioned. So far, no difference in the rate of intake in different
concentrations of the solutions has been noticed. No tests were made
of the effect of temperature, wind and humidity in these experiments.

Fig. 22.
Aiooeboid infection on two year old sprout.

Fig. 23.

Amoeboid infection on two year old sprout. The bark bns been removed from tie
shoot and spread out flat.

Fig. 24.
Amoeboid infection on two year old sprout.

Fig. 25.
Type of sprout infection common in some tracts.

Fig. 26.

Infection stiown in Fig. 2.5, with tliin layer of brown bark removed sliowing
white advancing mycelium in the layer of green bark.

the

Fig. 27.
Isolatif)n culture from infection shown in Fig. 25.

Fig. lis.

Blight canker on branch showing characteristic swelling and cracking of bark on

young wood.

I'O.

The figure at the left shows the fruiting pustules bursting through the bark. The
figure at the right shows a young infection with an enlargement, which is often
characteristic in vigorous branches.

Fig. 30.

Rough bark showing broad bauds of perithecial pustules iu tlie crevices. Spores
shot from this specimen were used in making the ascospore cultures described in
this report.

Fig-. 31.
Peritliecial pustules from rough bark.

Fig. 32.

Culture of Diaportlie parasitica obtained from pyciiospores, produced by pycnidia
on two year old wood pile, Bronxville, N. Y.

'O-

Bark from the end of a piece of cord wood. Obtained from railroad siding, Ft.
Robinson, Pa. The inner or fibrous bark is completely cohered with pycuiuia.

5 b

P d

O

o

O CD

a ^.

Fig'. 35.
Potato agar culture grown in light showing the pronounced zonation.

6

a>

0

9

<3

^

c^

Fij:. 30.

Germination of Conidiospores in 3 per cent. gliK-ose agar. 22°C. 1 after 12 hours;
2 after 16 hours ; 3 after 22 hours ; 4 after 3G hours ; 5 after 36 hours ; 6 after
36 hours.

These illus*;rate tlie lim^ar and y types of gei-mination.

Fig. 37.

Germination of Ascospores in 3 per cent, glucose agar. 22°C. 1 to 4 a series
showing growth of a single spore: 1 at 11.45 A. M. ; 2 at 2.45 P. M. ; 3 at
4.45 P. M. ; 4 at 7.45 P. M. ; 5 after 24 hours ; 6 after 24 hours ; 7 after 24 hours.

la 4, each cell has produced two hyphae. In 5, one cell has produced two hyphae,
while a strong lateral has grown out from the main axis just beyond the spore.
In 6 one cell has produced a lateral but no terminal hyphae.

In 7, one cell of the ascospore failed to produce a germ tube.

o

5;
0
<

"

o

' ^

uq

f^.

p

T

„j

T!

^

— ,

a-

<i>

t_i

^^

-1

-3

o

CO 'tj

o
p 5

cro "^

^§

a 2.
B a-

S 2

CD ^

a"

O fB
I — ' i-s

^ 5

3

CO

Fig. 3!_).
]\Ietliod of attaching tube for injecting a solution into a tree.

tX

Fig. 40.

Tree No. 27. Flot B. Martic Forge 1912.
1 per cent, formaldehyde. Tree injected August 14 consumed 1445 cc. solution.

Photographed August 27.

Fig. -il.

Cross section of a tree at tlie point of injection. Sliows the injection ijole and glass
tube entering it — held in place by the I'libber cork ana the clamp.

Fig. 42.
The bent lever forcing a cork against a tree.

TREE 31

CorxQO Re

Fig. 43.
Tree No. 31. Plot A, 1912 Martic Forge.

Injected October 7 with .01 per cent. Congo Red. Tree consumed 2 gills, stain.
Tree cut down October 13.

Note — In the photograph of tree sections the stained areas are either marked or
outlined by black lines. The photographs show the natural size of the sections.

Fig. 44.

Tree No. 60. Plot A. 1912 Maitic Forge.

Injected October 7 with .01 per cent Congo Red. Consumed 2 1-2 gills of stain;
Tree cut down October 13.

Fig. 4.1.

Tree JNo. (J2. i'lul A. lLtl2 MaiLic i''or.i;e.

lujictcd AiiL'usi -U with .(II per cent green. About 2 gills of stain consumed,
fre' cut down September 10.

TREE G5

Fig-. 4(j.

Tree No. 63. Plot A. 1912 Martic Forge.

Injected August 20 with .01 per cent Methyl green. Consumed about 1 quart of
stain. Tree cut down September 10.

Fife'. 47.

Tree No. 04. Plot A. ]912 Martie Forge.

Injected August 20 with .01 Methyl green. Tree CDnsumed about 2 quarts.
Tree out down August 21. See 1.

->

4^"^

Fig. 4S.
Tree No. CA. Plot A. 1912 Martic Forge.
Injection AnsuPt '.'(I with .<l!)l Methyl gr-cn. Ccnsamed about one quart of
stain in 4-") minrtes. Altogether about 2 1-2 pints consumed. Tree cut down
August 2] .

Fig. 49.
A tool and storage box having on top of it the implements used in making three

injections.

47

As evening approntned, the intake decreased. The experiments have
not been continued long enough for accurate conclusions as to the path
of the solutions in the tree. It was possible, however, to mark out the
path of the solution on the bark of the tree, those twigs and branches
whose tibres entered this path, having their leaves killed. In certain
cases all of the leaves were eventually killed, making it look as
though the solution had diffused throughout the tree, but soon the
leaves on those parts of the tree not included in the path of the
solution, fell off. Callus had formed and the leaves fell as in the
fall of the year. More direct evidence concerning the path of the
solution in the tree during the months of August, September and
October was obtained from color solutions of eosin, methyl green
and Congo red, (Figs. 43-47).

The effect of lithium carbonate solution was visible in the leaves in
about three days after the injection, when the injection was made in
August. The effect on the trees of injections in the spring was more
general than in the case of those treated in August. Solutions of
heavy metals, although killing in concentrations, did not at once
affect the cambium layer when passing up and down the vessels. Cop-
per chloride solution, twelve hours after injection into the tree, killed
the leaves on the branch. The cambium was still alive. This layer
died later, however, and still later the green cortex.

The effect of the different solutions on the leaves was so marked
that one could tell from the manner of the blotching, what kind of
solutions had been used (Fig. 7, 8 and 9). The leaves on those
branches which did not receive the killing solutions, finally dropped
off, and new leaves were produced, as though it were spring, while on
those branches which were injected, the dead leaves continued to
hang, making them conspicuous on the trees. This phenomenon
was general when the solution of heavy metals and formal-
dehyde was used. The first effect noticeable is the changing of the
color of the leaves on injected branches, together witb a decided
smell of fermentation. The dying leaves do not become crisp until
some time after they have turned brown.

Injections of compounds of ammonia produced very different effects
from those of the heavy metals ; in these cases the autumn leaf fall of
the tree was normal as to time and appearance. Further experiments
with these compounds will be made.

CONCLUSION.

So far, no general method for either killing or checking the growth
of the chestnut blight fungus has been found. A successful method
for injecting fluids into the tree has, however, been devised, which,
with modifications can be used for injecting gases also. The present
indications are that the heavy metals will not be of value in tree
medication.
4

48

INVESTIGATIONS OF INSECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
CHESTNUT BLIGHT.

These investigatioiis are in charge of Professor A. G. Buggies, for-
merly associated Entomologist of the Minnesota Agricultural Experi-
ment Station, and at present on leave of absence for work with this
Commission.

As in the case of other investigations, Professor Buggies has only
been engaged for a short time, and therefore his work is only fairly
begun. The investigations in this line may be divided into four main
divisions as follo^rs : — •

1st. The reh'tiion of insects to the blight as possible carriers of the
disease.

2nd. The study of insect wounds that may form a good lodging
place for fungus spores.

3rd. The study of insects that feed upon the spores of the blight
fungus.

4th. The study of insects infecting chestnut trees that have already
been killed by the blight.

In addition to the above, it may be also of importance to investigate
the insects that attack living chestnut trees.

The first of these divisions is beiug given considerable attention as
certain insects may really be agents for carrying the disease.

The results of the work of Professor N. F. Davis, special entomolo-
gist during the summer, may be summed up as follows:

Many cases of infection were seen that were not thought to be due
to the wind. No summer spores or winter spores were found, yet the
disease kept spreading. Ants were thought responsible because they
were found carrying mycelial threads of the fungus. 75 to 90 per
cent, of the cases of infection w^ere attributed to ants, particularly in
drj weather. At present one cannot accept all or any of the conclu-
sions reached by other former workers in this line. There are links
to the chain of evidence yet to be supplied. Several experiments are
outlined for this work that cannot be started until spring, however it
is expected to have some facts about ants before the Avinter is over by
means of greenhouse investigations.

The second line of investigation has not been much studied. Many
insects make wounds but we do not yet know always what species
make these wounds. Some Avounds now thought to be insignificant
may have a special bearing as the starting points of infection. These
are to be studied. The relation of insects to hypertrophied cankers
should be investigated. Also further inquiry as to insects that eat
chestnut blight spores is very important;

49

The fourth line or uuvrestigatioii is being made from the standpoint
of utilization of the wood. Before a tree is dead with the disease, in-
sects begin to attack it. AfterAvard many insects help in its destruc-
tion. Recent observations show that blight cankers are a means of
entrance for wood-boring insects. In a peeled telephone pole, for in-
stance, old cankers were filled with entrance holes of some of these in-
sects. (Fig. 50.)

Our investigation should show how long a tree dying with blight
may remain standing and still be useful for telephone poles or lumber.

CORRESPONDENCE AND IDENTIFICATION OF INSECTS.

In addition to the above lines of investigation under way or soon
to be started, some time is required in identifying insects of the
chestnut, sent in by correspondents, and studying insect injuries of
the chestnut tree, also, in correspondence on the spraying of chestnut
orchards for combating insects.

SPRAYING INVESTIGATIONS.

Red spider, plant lice, scales and leaf-eating insects have their
probable insecticides recommended. It is economical to combine when
possible both an insecticide and fungicide in the s»iri3 spray. It is
desired to determine the toxic properties of certain •cimmon fungicides
that readily mix with insecticides to the proporti u best adapted to
kill the chestnut blight fungus, and the amount of iraying necessary.
Some fungicides have also an insecticidal value.

REPORT OF THE CHEMIST.

The chemical work of the Commission is in charge of Mr. Joseph
Shrawder, and has been under way since about July 1, 1912. The
chief object of the chemical investigations is to obtain facts con-
cerning the tannin content of the chestnut tree in health and when
diseased by the chestnut blight, and also in relation to the soil in
which the tree grows. Other incidental questions spring up as the
work goes on. Certain rather interesting results have been obtained
during the course of the investigations.

COMPARATIVE TANNIN CONTENTS IN BLIGHTED AND HEALTHY

TREES.

The tests as to tannin content have been made so far entirely with
the bark. In twenty tests, all but one showed a higher percentage
of tannin in the infected bark than in the healthy bark of the same

50

tree. The lower percentage in an exceptional case may be expjc....cd
by certain abnormal conditions in that case. No satisfactory ex-
planation has been offered for this tannin increase in the infected
portions of the tree. As no one has as yet explained the exact function
of tannin in the plant world, this variation is for that reason of still
greater interest.

COLOR OF THE EXTRACT.

The tannin extract from the normal bark gives a bright, claret
colored solution, while that from infected portions is always of a dark
brown color, (see illustrations, Fig. 51). Eemoving the tannin from
the normal bark extract leaves a solution of a straw yellow color,
while the removal of the tannin from the infected bark extract
changes the color but slightly.

EFFECT OF COLOR IN LEATHER MANUFACTURE.

The effect of the difference in color of the tannin extract from
infected and normal portions of the tree in leather manufacture was
tested by the actual tanning of sheepskin, in which the tannin from the
normal bark gave a very light color to the leather, that from the
infected bark gave a medium dark color, while extract from chestnut
oak gave a still darker color, (see illustrations). It appears that in
the manufacture of certain leathers, particularly sole leather, this
medium color as given by the tannin from infected bark, is the one
that is preferred. It is, therefore, a matter of much interest.

Details of experiments upon which the above statements are based,
and discussions of other minor experiments are given in the accom-
panying complete report from the chemist.

PLANS OF FUTURE WORK.

In future investigations, it is expected to determine with greater
accuracy the chemical effect upon the sugar, starch, nitrogen com-
pounds and cellulose of chestnut bark produced by the chestnut blight
fungus. It is also expected to make more complete ash analyses. A
second line of studies will be the effect of the fungus upon the wood
from the chemical standpoint. A third investigation will be the at-
tempt to extract tannin from chestnut wood with solvents other than
water. This will be an advantage in utilization. If it is possible to
extract tannin by a chemical process, chestnut wood may be utilized
to greater advantage without storing it in the woods or shipping it.

Sheep skin tannin in extract from sound
chestnut bark.

Sheep skin tannin extract from infected
chestnut bark.

Sheep skin tanned In extract from chestnut
oak bark.

51

EEPOKT OF THE TKEE SURGEON.

(Figs. 52-55.)

The work of examination of indivitliial trees on lawns aiid in
private parks as well as orchard trees witli the idea of attempt iiig lo
save such trees by possible surgical or other treatment is in cliar^e
of Mr. Roy G. Pierce, Tree Surgeon.

Requests for examination of individual trees are very frequent.
Within the past four moullis 208 such examinations have been made by
the tree surgeon and one assistant. Most of these examinations were
made in the vicinity of Philadelphia and in Montgomery, Bucks, Dela-
ware and Chester counties,

FAIRMOUNT PARK.

An examination of the chestnut trees in Fairmount Park is in
progress. Over 2,000 diseased trees have already been located in tlie
East and West Park, not including Wissaliickon Drive.

PRIVATE TREE SURGEONS AND FORESTERS.

As the Commission does not stand the expense of treatment of
these individual trees, it is found practically necessary to investigate
the reliabilit}^ and skill of these private tree surgeons and foresters
who give their time to tree treatment work. A list of such men has
been obtained nearly all of whom have been seen by agents of the
Commission and the right methods of operation explained to tliem.
Their work is also investigated, and when not up to the standard they
are so informed.

CHESTNUT ORCHARDS.

A list of 205 owners of cultivated chestnut trees has been com-
l)iled. Bulletin No. 2, '"Treatment of Ornamental Chestnut Trees
Affected with the Blight Disease," has been sent to these owners. All
of the large chestnut orchards have been visited by employees of this
Commission. Other owners of such orchards will be seen personally
as soon as possible.

EFFECT OF SPRAYING.

Trials of spraying have been made by certain chestnut tree owners
to see if the entrance of the chestnut blight may be prevented in
this way. While resulis, ^u far are not entirely conclusive the indica-
tion is that Bordeaux Mixture will prevent the entrance of the chest-
nut blight fungus, but will not, of course, kill it after the tree is once
infected.

52

KEPORT OF THE GEOGRAPHER.

The investigations of rainfall, temj)erature, altitude and geuei-aJ
topography of the State in relation to the disti-ibution of the chest-
nut tree blight disease is in direct charge of Di*. F. P. Gulliver,
Geographer. The work has been uuder Avay only a short time. In
addition to the field investigations it is the duty of the Geographer
also to bring together on a uniform scale map the facts given by field
agents as to the location, distribution and percentage of the blight,
percentage of chestnut trees, and other related facts in forestry.

RAINFALL.

Maps have been constructed to show the spring, summer and
autumn rainfall over the State for various years. These show marked
ditfereuces in succeeding years. The relation of greater or less rain-
fall and more or less humidity to blight distribution are being
studied.

POSSIBLE RELATION OF SUMMER RAINFALL TO THE SPREAD OF
THE BLIGHT DISEASE IN 1911 AND 1912.

It appears that in the summer of 1912 there was a much greater
increase in the extent of the blight disease in certain portions of
the western part of the State than in 1911. A careful study of
these conditions show the possibility that the cause was the much
greater rainfall in those areas in 1912 than in the corresponding
months of 1911. Maps are herewith attached, which show differences
of rainfall in the two seasons, (Figs. 56-59.)

MAPS ILLUSTRATING FIELD INSPECTION.

A scouting map has been drawn to show the progress of the field
work to date, also a map of the western district showing the
number of infected trees found in areas which have been scouted in
detail.

BASIS OF MAPPING WORK.

All maps are made to correspond with the excellent quadrangle
sheets gotten out by the United States Geological Survey. In areas
for which sheets are not available the best other sources of infor-
mation possible are used.

53

PHTSIOGEAPHIO FEATU UES.

A careful study is being made of the relation df luomilaius and
valleys, and the direction of the wind to ihe spread ol" I he blight
disease, but there has not been sufficient time to obtain any results.

PUBLIC HIGHWAYS.

As the blight disease is so often found along jjublic highways,
observations are being made to determine if automobiles, railway
trains or telephone and telegraph linemen may be responsible to any
considerable extent in carrying the disease from one infected locality
into another. .

54

EEPOET OF FOEESTEE IN CflAEGE OF UTILIZATION.

(Figs. 62-70.)

The exploitation of diseased chestnut wood in various forms tor
market is iu charge of Professor J. P. Wentling, Forester, ^^ ho is
assisted by three other men. The work has been under way about
four months, although good, thorough work witlj a central office and
a capable force of assistants was not possible until after November
first

EXPLOITATION OF BLIGHTED CHESTNUT WOOD ONLY.

At first it was thought advisable to encourage utilization work
through the State in unblighted as well as blighted chestnut and to
stimulate trade in local chestnut. Later, however, it became evident
that the badly blighted timber, mostly iu the eastern part of the State,
warranted the entire attention of the meu engaged in this work. For
the present at least, it seems therefore best to carry on most of
the work east of the Susquehanna Eiver. At present it is thought
best to do as much of the active work as possible, in the southeastern
part of the State Avhere the conditions seem to demand immediate
attention.

METHODS ON PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LANDS.

As the different lines of work progressed, it became evident that
two methods of work should be followed: One on private lands and
the other on public lands. In the former case the field men are
directed to be helpful in every way possible, so long as they do not
involve the Commission in any operation or transaction. Where
necessary, assistance is given in examining and cruising timber,
estimates are given on cost of cutting and marketing, and in furnish-
ing information on markets and market prices of various products,
and in any circumstance that might arise in connection with an
individual operation.

On public lauds a few instances arose in which it seems necessary
that the Commission take entire charge of cleaning out blighted wood
and marketing the same. In cases of this kind it is expected that
the governing body controlling a piece of public land do what it
can financially, allowing the Commission to complete the work at
its own expense. If the governing body has no money available for
this work, the Commission may take entire charge, bearing initial
expenses, and what loss there may be between the cost and returns,
and in case any profit results, it should be turned over for use on the
particular piece of public property under consideration.

55

TIMBER OWNERS.

Field agents in utilization are required to meet timber owners
directly and by the field work to find where the valuable chestnut
stands are, what their condition is, what they will produce, and what
the market is. In this way at least the good stands of chestnut will
be brought to our attention.

MARKETS.
Considerable information has already been obtained as to markets
for lumber, poles, ties, shingles, staves, etc. However, the average
chestnut stand in the eastern part of the State is in many cases a
straight cordwood proposition. It is therefore important to find
all possible markets for this low grade material. Lumber users can
be reached very well by correspondence. The lumber market is good.
The situation as regards poles is similar. The small dealer who uses
fence posts, a few ties, cordwood, shingles, staves, etc. is hard to reach
by correspondence. Because of this the policy is pursued of hunting
out cordwood dealers and getting information by personal inter-
views. A number of very good local markets for chestnut cordwood
of almost any quantity have been found in this way.

MINING TIMBER.

In the northeastern and north central parts of the State large
amounts of chestnut are now used and more may be used, in and
about the coal mines. The addresses of all mining companies, both
bituminous and anthracite, have been obtained and a letter sent to
each asking for specifications of and prices paid for chestnut material.

RAILROAD TIES AND FENCING MATERIAL.

Chestnut railroad ties are not in very great demand by the steam
roads on main lines, but electric lines do use large quantities of them.
As a general rule it is pretty safe to manufacture standard ties and
deliver them at a railroad before a definite market has been obtained.

Fencing material — posts and rails — is in local demand in certain
localities, and markets for this kind of material have been obtained
only through personal interviews, and very largely through fuel deal-
ers who handle coal as their product

COUNTIES EXPLOITED.

The markets have been very carefully investigated in Montgomery,
Bucks, York and Adams counties, and considerable work done in
Philadelphia Chester, Delaware, Lancaster, Berks and Lycoming
counties, and to some extent in the remaining counties east of the
Susquehanna River. In this investigation the county is taken as a

56

unit and the facts are tabulated and tiled according to counties and
industries. The study is made from town to town and information
obtained by personal interviews chiefly along the main lines of
traffic.

CO-OPERATION WITH THE FOREST SERVICE AND STATE DEPART-
MENT OF FORESTRY.

The Commission has received from the Forest Service a list of all
users of chestnut lumber in the State and will by correspondence and
personal interviews, reach these users and get from them the grades
of chestnut lumber they use and prices they pay for each grade.

It is possible now to further co-operate with this Service in obtain-
ing similar data on poles, shingles, ties, cordwood and lumber in this
State which has not been covered by the utilization study made
already by the Forest Service during the past year, as well as on tim-
berlands, markets, etc.

The State Department of Forestry in conjunction with the United
States Forest Service has collected a large amount of information on
the wood-using industries of the State which data the State Depart-
ment has promised to furnish to this Commission for use with the
provision, of course, that such data shall not be published by the
Commission.

MILL STUDIES.

Timber owners frequently ask what they shall make of their timber
in order to realize the most ijrofit. There is no definite information
as to this matter except what little can be obtained from lumbermen.
To be able to advise inquirers in this line mill studies have been
undertaken. One operation with staves has been completed. Average
trees from six to twenty inches in diameter (D. B. H.) have been run
through a stave mill and an accurate account kept of the staves pro-
duced. For the information to be of general value, a number of
similar studies should be made in different regions where timber
grows under different conditions. The next study proposed is that
of shingles.

LABOR.

To obtain good wood cutters is one of the problems in the utilization
of chestnut in large quantities. Labor that is fit for wood work is
scarce in the eastern counties and for the most part employed. After
finding the markets comes the problem of finding suitable labor.

It is this item of labor, together with markets and the cost of
transportation to the railroad that presents the chief difficulty in the
way of the utilization of diseased chestnut wood.

57

DETEllIOllATlOX INVESTIGATIONS.

A few cases have come to our atteiitiou where telephone i^oles have
been rejected because of a conditiou which is charged up to the blight
disease. Investigation of poles of this kind in almost every case
showed a poor condition of the wood due to the fact that the trees
from which the poles were made were dead on the stumij a year or
more before they were cut. It seems unfair to charge this to the
blight. Insects and fungi are agencies of deterioration and both of
these attack diseased and weakened trees, but the extent and rate of
the deterioration of the wood due to their injuries are not definitely
known. For future work certain experiments are outlined to arrive
at some conclusion as to this question of deterioration.

SPECIAL TARIFF CLASSIFICATION.
From present indications if negotiations that are now on foot
terminate favorably, the special tariff classification for blighted cord-
wood will be used to a considerable extent by the first of the year
1913, and as more and better markets for cordwood are discovered
and timber owners are induced to cut and ship the blighted chestnut,
this tariff ought in six months from now to be in general use.

LUMBER ASSOCIATIONS.

An effort is being made to interest lumber associations in an
increased use of chestnut. An exhibition of specimens of lumber made
from blighted timber will be made at the January meeting of the
Pennsylvania Lumbermen's Association in this city. Officers of this
association have promised their hearty co-operation.

PUBLICATIONS.
Manuscripts now in preparation for x>ublication include a "•Hand-
book of Chestnut Utilization" for the use of agents of this Commis-
sion; "Chestnut Utilization" a more popular publication for the
Ijeople, and ''Deterioration of Chestnut Poles due to Blight."

VALLEY FORGE PARK.

A plan is being prepared for presentation to the Valley Forge Park
Commission. It seems best under the circumstances that practically
all of the chestnut timber should be removed from this park except
such trees as may be saved by tree surgery work, and which are located
along driveways and near the entrenchments. This work can best
be done during the Avinter. A well-known lumberman at Eeedsville
has agreed, when the proper arrangements are made, to furnish prac-
tical woodsmen to carry on the work under the supervision of the
Commission.

58

When this work is done it is suggested that the area cleaned be
re-planted with coniferous trees that may be obtaii.. .rom the
State Forestry Department.

PRIVATE OWNERS AND OPERATORS.

Various inquiries are received wishing advice in the disposal of
blighted timber in and about Philadelphia. Where timber of this kind
is shown by inspection to be worthy of consideration of a millman,
every effort is made to have a responsible millman see the property and
then negotiate with the owner. Eecently a transaction of this kind
was engineered through the Commission office and it is believed that
the millman concerned will install a mill and remove the timber
during the winter.

CORDWOOD.

After locating cordwood markets, calling for about 2000 cords of
wood a year, a business man of Philadelphia was interested in supply-
ing the wood. At the same time an experienced woodsman was located
at West Chester who agreed to furnish two carloads of cordwood per
week for the coming year. It is believed that an agreement will be
made between these parties to supply this wood. If so, the woods-
man will be informed as far as possible as to locations where chest-
nut cordwood is available.

Arrangements have been made with the Oak Extract Company of
Newport, to accept any quantity of cordwood from York and adjoin-
ing counties. During the winter a campaign of advertising among
the farmers and other timber owners, urging them to cut their
blighted chestnut and deliver it at the railroad to be shipped to New-
port, will be conducted.

CLEAR CUTTING OF CHESTNUT.

Cases arise where the percentage of chestnut is so low that by
taking the blighted trees only, there is not enough to- attract a mill-
man. We are advising in many cases where there is any considerable
amount of blight that all the chestnut be cut and utilized at one
operation rather than cut over such areas three or four times through
the possible reoccurrence of the blight.

SOME FUTURE WORK.

Information will be obtained as to the cost of all operations of
cutting and utilizing chestnut timber from stump to market based on
a thousand feet board measure, for :

1. Pure stands

2. Chestnut in a 70 per cent, mixture

3. Chestnut in a 50 per cent, mixture

4. Chestnut in a 30 per cent, mixture

5. Chestnut in a 15 per cent, mixture

6. Individual trees scattered throughout cleared areas.

T»9

An effort will be ninde to interest ontside concerns in the conversion
of spent chestnut chips from extract factories into wood pulp. Work
of this kind has already begun.

With the help of the chemist it is expected to investigate the tannin
of chestnut wood as well as of the bark. The effect of different soils
on the tannin content will be considered.

Mechanical tests of blighted timber will be continued in a variety
of conditions to determine definitely what is the effect of blight
cankers of various stages of development on the strength of the
wood.

Within the next six weeks letters will be sent to all lumbermen of
the State, all contractors who use rough lumber, mining companies,
and cordwood users, encouraging them to call for chestnut wood in
the forms in which they require it as much as possible in order to
stimulate the trade in chestnut.

EErORT OF DEMONSTRATION WORK.

The demonstration work of the Commission, including the prepara-
tion and handling of exhibits at county fairs and at special expositions
and association meetings, lectures at Teachers' Institutes and talks
to farmers, is in charge of Mr. Keller E. Rockey, Forester.

FAIR EXHIBITS.

During the summer an exhibit of specimens of the chestnut tree
blight and other specimens showing the work of the Commission and
the uses of chestnut wood was made at thirty-three agricultural fairs
in the State. Three men assisted Mr. Rockey in this work. At six
other points a similar exhibit was prepared and exhibited by local
field men. In nearly every case field men were on hand and rendered
good assistance. The place given the Commission for exhibits was
always without charge and as a rule was in a good location in one of
the Exhibition buildings.

The exhibit consisted, first, of chestnut bark specimens affected
with the blight, the aim being to show the disease In all phases.
Photographs of trees and forests illustrating the effect of the blight
were also shown, as well as illustrations of surgical treatment, chest-
nut orcharding, etc. Specimens of wood in various finishes and
tannin extracts were shown to give some idea of the uses of chestnut.

60*

Notices of our publications Avere distributed and placards and a map
of the blight distribution Avere displayed. The total cost of our
exhibits was almost nothing in comparison with those made by other
State Departments, but the Blight Connnission exhibits compared very
favorably in value and public interest shown. At several fairs, on
request, the representative in charge gave a lecture upon chestnut
blight. With each exhibit was placed a registration book for those
who desired copies of our publications, or who desired inspection
of their chestnut trees. In all about 2,000 visitors were registered,
nearly all of whom were timber owners. At Conneaut Lake, alone,
225 requests for inspection were received. Such requests have been
or will be complied with. The 2,000 visitors who registered are, of
course, a small percentage of the actual visitors at the exhibits. All
kinds of people were registered, teachers from normal schools and high
schools, county superintendents, and other county officers, members
of the Legislature, newspaper men, students from the normal schools,
boy scouts, park commissioners, and employees, tree doctors as well
as OAvners of lawn trees, chestnut orchards and large tracts. Many
visitors were from New York, New Jersey, Maryland and other
States. Many brought specimens for identification.

A surprising fact learned at these fairs was the ignorance of people
concerning the blight. The belief is common tliat it is caused by
insects ; on the other hand many people knew a great deal about it.

Representatives of several other fairs not on our .lists were anxious
to have us exhibit ; in a few cases this could be done, but several such
requests had to be refused.

FRUIT AND NUT GROWERS' ASSOCIATIONS.

Exhibits and lectures have been giA^en before the Adams County
Fruit GroAvers' iVssociation at Bendersville, the Northern Nut GroAV-
ers' Association at Lancaster, the Perry County Fruit GroAvers' As-
sociation, and the Wyoming County Horticultural Society. An
exhibit was also made at the State Grange meeting at Clearfield in
December.

FARMERS' INSTITUTES.

Arrangements were made with Hon. A. L. Martin, Director of
Farmers' Institutes, to give us a place upon the program at 103
Farmers' Institutes, which were selected as being located where they
Avould be of the most value for our purpose. The subject matter of
each lecture is outlined and approved before the Institute begins.

EXHIBITS.

Arrangements have been made to install a permanent exhibition
in the Philadelphia Commercial Museum, which will be as complete

fil

ns possible. Adociuafe (•al)iiu't s])}K*e nud Avlialovci- |)i-iiiiiii^ is ih'ccs-
saiy will ho fiirnislied by flic Miisonin. T>\(*iity small })hotograj)lis
are now being onlarg;^! by I lie Mnseiuii, for this j)ur])ose.

It was arranged to place a similar exhibit in the State Capitol
Museum at Harrisburg. Other exhibits not so elaborate might be
])la('ed in other ])]aces Avhere conditions are favorable.

TEACHERS' INSTITUTES.

Exhibits and lectures were given before twenty-six of the Teachers'
Institutes. In making these exhibits the material is carried in a box
made of chestnut wood and includes three cases of blighted specimens
under glass, pictures, maps, and literature. At these institutes the
co-operation of the teachers is requested in the following ways:

First. To have a complete set of publications on the subject in the
libraries. Second. To collect and display a good set of specimens.
Third. To give the pupils an explanation of the cause and nature of
the blight disease. Fourth. To make field trips occasionally for
showing the disease in its natural condition.

NORMAL SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES.

As yet little has been done to bring the subject of the chestnut
blight before the normal schools and colleges on account of the lack
of help in such work ; however, it is expected that during the winter
we can have the subject included in the Science courses of study, and
have an occasional illustrated lecture and exhibit }xt these in-
stitutions.

In the full report appended, a complete list of fair exhibits and all
farmers' and teachers' institutes is given.

THE SILVICULTUEAL EFFECT OF THE CHESTNUT BLIGHT.

By Hon. I. C. Williams, Collaborator, State Forestry Department.

The following statement as to the silvicultural effect of the chest-
nut blight on future forestry management within the State is fur-
nished by Mr. I. C. Williams, Collaborator of the Commission, and
Deputy Commissioner of Forestry: —

The present stand of chestnut trees in Pennsylvania is in most
instances a third crop, and sometimes we find even a fourth crop or
third regeneration. The frequent cutting of chestnut in Pennsylvania
has weakened the stump and root systems of the trees cut. Each
regeneration of sprouts jirobably arises with less vitality than the

62

preceding one. If our trees continue to be cut and regenerated in
accordance with the old system, it is probable, we shall exhaust this
species of tree in time even without assistance from the chestnut
blight.

The wild, sweet chestnut is the best forest tree remaining in
quantity in Pennsylvania. It is best because of quantity and is
the tree to which the lumbermen of the State will probably have to
turn while waiting for other and still better trees to be developed.
Of all our forest trees the chestnut undoubtedly has the best sprout
regeneration. This is another fact which makes the tree of unusual
value at this time.

In cutting chestnut the custom has been to leave high stumps. The
succeeding circle of sprouts will generally be found rather high on the
stump. As the sprout growth increases in size the stump of the
parent tree within slowly rots away. This decay causes the young
sprouts to have an insecure foothold and a minimum of root system,
and they are almost certain to be decayed upon the inner side. Tree
rot once started is almost sure to continue. Because these conditions
are general, our present sprout growth is necessarily of a weakened
and less valuable character. Young trees thus situated are easily
thrown by the wind, are an open prey to insect enemies, and are by
no means of the good character they might be under different and
better conditions.

The presence of the chestnut blight and the necessity for its
destruction has brought to the attention of the people a new method
of treating this tree. The cutting out method of dealing with the
blight requires that the trees be cut low, that the bark be removed
from the stump to the surface of the ground, and that the blighted
wood, bark, and other refuse of the tree be burned upon the stump.
After such treatment little or no portion of the stump remains above
the surface of the ground. Any sprout regeneration will come from
the upper side of the main living roots. As a matter of experience, it
is found that such firing of the stump does not kill the main roots
and that they produce a better sprout regeneration than formerly was
had from the high stump. Such new sprout will shortly make for
itself a complete new root system and will be independent of the
parent stump, the decay of which will affect it slightly or not at all.
The utilization of our present blighted chestnut stock, if carefully
made and the refuse disposed of as stated, will assist in producing
not only a regenerated stand of chestnut but one that will be better
in all respects than any preceding stand except possibly the original
seedling primeval forest. A knowledge of these facts brought to the
peo]de of Pennsylvania who are owners of chestnut woods will be
and ought to be of great value. If this new method of handling their
woodlots is carefully adhered to they will not only retain their chest-
nut groves but have them of better character than ever before.

r

">

Fig. 50.
Photograph of a canker on a chestnut telephone pole, showing how wood-boring
insects prefer such places for their entrance burrows.

Sound material.

With Tannin
tannin, removed.

Fig. r,1
Extract from wood and bark.

Hlight material.

W'itli Tannin

tiiuniii. removed.

Fig. 52.

Two cankers on cultivated grafted cliestnut tree, after surgical treatment: coated
with coal tar to prevent reinfection. Kennett Square, Pa.

Fig. 54.

Spraying Bordeaux Mixture 4-5-50 on large chestnut trees at estate of Pierre DuPont.
Sprayed every two weeks from April to middle of November, 1912. Kennett
Square, Pa.

Fig. 55.

Sprayin?- Bcrdfaux Mixture 4-5-50, formula, on large chestnut trees at estate of
Pierre DnPont. Spraying done every two weeks fi'om April to middle of Novem-
ber, 1912. Kennett Square, Pa.

r

■/.^

H ■

o .

r-

-3

:?>

;>

m

r

N.

-d

3

1^ :

Q-
>

c

p .

^

>

1

^ ^

^^

<)

2

I

^•-

;^

^■#1

CD

y 7. \ f.T: #>* ., . ;, . ,. f z , »• ^ ;.

iJ#i%W ^ '^' ■■■' ' '

,^1 P ;

Fig. 62.
Chestnut us?d for interior finish.

Fig. U3.

General view of combination portable saw and shingle mill. A type of mill which
will effect closer utilization of blighted chestnut than the saw mill alone.

i

Fig. 64.
Staves made from blighted chestnut, bundled, ready for shipping.

"s " -.

Fig. Go.

Shingles ready for shipping. Produced by portable shingle mill from blighted

chestnut.

Fig. 06.
Chestnut on the farm. Mortised posts made from blighted chestnut.

P"ig. <)7.

Portable Saw Mill — The t.vi)e of mill that must be depended uixm to furnish lumber
from blighted chestnut of saw log size.

Fig. 68.

General view of portable stave mill operating in blighted chestnut. This kind
of mill can utilize chestnut unfit for saw logs or shingles.

Fig. GO.
Chestnut on the farm. Rails for use in mortised posts made from blighted chestnut.

^ H-

63

A further result of the exi)erience had in cuttin*^ out blighted
chestnut wood is that when (he work is pro])erly done and refuse
completely burned^ on 1o]» of jlie stump, which sliould ))e deeply
charred, the resulting- si)rou(s sliow lidle or no attack of llie blight
"at the base. Such attack, if any, is usually found in the tips of the
branches, indicating rather strongly that the infection came not from
the old stump or the soil but that the spores were carried from nearby
infected stock.

This kind of treatment, if faithfully adhered to, can be nothing
other than good. With complete utilization of the present infected
stand we may look for a regenerated chestnut forest of the best
character. Watchfulness, of course, will be necessary probably for a
term of years, or until some method shall be found by which this
disease may be destroyed other than by cutting the trees. To reunsyl-
vania and to the chestnut forests of this State the determined effort to
destroy the chestnut blight at this time will be of great value and this
result alone will justify the exi)enditure of all the money and all the
labor even if no other result will be obtained.

A further result, however, is almost certain to follow in that the
people of our State will have had their attention very pointedly
called to the need for better forest treatment, not only of trees in
groups but of trees as individuals; and the awakened consciousness
of our people to the value of present tree growth and the dangers
which threaten almost every species of tree will be of the greatest
possible service in enabling them to see the need of a more construc-
tive system of tree management. The ultimate result of such knowl-
edge can be nothing other than the general restoration of tree growth
to those lands within the State Avliich are of little or no value for any
other purpose than producing trees.

REGULATIONS OOVEKNING TREATMENT OF TREES FOUND
INFECTED AVITli CHESTNUT BLIGHT.

ADOPTED BY THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT COMMISSION, JAN-
UARY 7, 1913.

W1I]*]REAS, since it is found necessary to make certain regulations
in order to provide for the prevention, control and eradication of the
chestnut tree blight, it is

RESOLVED by this Commissiou that the following regulations, be
adopted, and as occasion may rise, such other and further regulations,
and the altering or amending of the same as may seem to it neces-
sary.

5

64

REGULATION No. 1. For the purpose of quarantine, a division
shall be made betAveen the slightly infected Western portion of the
State, and the badly infected Eastern portion. The line of demar-
cation at present shall be as follows: — the eastern boundary lines of
Fulton, Huntingdon, Mifflin, Centre, Clinton, Lycoming, Sullivan and
Bradford counties. These portions shall be known respectively as
the Western and Eastern Districts.

REGULATION No. 2. In the Eastern District the blight is so
prevalent that apparently the only course of procedure practical is
the ultilization of all diseased chestnut trees as rapidly as possible.
All diseased trees must be removed within a distance of one-half mile
from the nearest boundary of all chestnut orchards or nurseries the
owners of which are themselves applying adequate protective meas-
ures. In all other portions of the Eastern District, owners are urged
to cut all diseased trees, and where the amount of blight is SO per-
cent or more, both diseased and sound trees, for the purpose of getting
the full value from the merchantable products of these trees and also
to reduce the chances of further infection and lessen the dissemina-
tion of the disease from east to west.

Owners of valuable ornamental, orchard or shade trees, are recom-
mended to use the surgical methods outlined in bulletin No. 2 of this
Commission. Trees so treated should be inspected for reoccurrence
of the blight, every six weeks from April 1st to November 1st by the
owner or his agent, and the trees or diseased parts promptly treated as
found necessary.

Immediately following the cutting of diseased trees, all stumps
should be peeled clean of bark to the ground line and all brush from
tops, bark fragments, and other refuse burned so that sound sprouts
will be developed. It is recommended that the trees be cut low and
the burning done directly over the stumps.

All felled chestnut trees whether diseased or not, should be im-
mediately removed from the woods and utilized, so that they may
not become a breeding place for the blight fungus. Shipments of
unpeeled blighted wood must be made in closed cars.

REGULATION No. 3. In the Western District and where cutting
is enforced in the Eastern District, the following procedure shall be
strictly adhered to. After the agent of the Commission has inspected
the chestnut trees on any property and has found diseased trees, the
same shall be blazed at breast height, stamped with the official mark
of the Commission, numbered consecutively and tagged as follows: —

No

THIS trp:e is infected with the chestnut blight.

This tree must be felled, the diseased bark removed and the stump
peeled to the ground, within twenty days after notice to oAvner or

G5

agent. All bark and unnsed ])orlion,s ol" ILo tree shall be burned on llie
stump. Wlieie such burning Avill injure adjoining trees it should l)e
done at a safe distance, in wliich case tlie slump must be painled wilh
creosote, in place of burning. I'ortions (»(' this tree to be utilized must
be removed wilhin twenty days after felling. I'oles, posts, rails, and
other products exposed to weatlier shall be peeled of bark. Take siie-
cial care to prevent forest fires.

Pennsylvania Chestnut Ti-ee Jilight (Commission,

Bj

Field Agent.

Following this a sheet showing the a])])roxinmte location of each
diseased tree shall be delivered to the owner of the trees, his agent,
or em])loyee, or other i)erson responsible for (he care f>f the j»roperty,
logelher witli written or verbal explanation of the necessity for the
removal of the diseased tree and the method of procedure. A dupli-
cate copy of the infection sheet, marked with the date of notitication
and the name of the person interviewed shall be mailed to the field
headquarters. The process of removal of infected trees shall be as
follows: — First. Where the ground beneath an infected tree is covered
with a dense growth of brush, this giowtli may be cleared so that the
diseased chips and branches may be easily picked up, provided that
any small chestnut or chincjuapin trees or sprouts shall be cut flush
with the surface of the ground and the tops burned.

All the trees should be felled so as to leave as low a stump as
possible. If felled Avith an axe the bark shall lirst be removed from
the part of the trunk through which the cut is to be made to an inch
below the surface of the soil. If felled by sawing, such peeliug may
be done after the tree has been cut down. In either case the stump
and all ex})osed roots must be cleared of every particle of bark, and
all bark removed must be carefully collected and burned.

After the tree is felled, all portions above the stump which show
mycelium or pustules of the blight shall be peeled of bark or the entire
piece cut out and burned. The brush from tops, the bark, and portions
of the felled chestnut trees which are not peeled and which it is not
intended to utilize shall also be burned.

After the stump is peeled, if lire can be made over it without in-
juring the surrounding trees, and without danger of forest fires, the
l)rush and refuse collected shall be piled over the stump and burned.
The fallen leaves around the stump over an area as far as the diseased
portions of the felled tree extended, shall be carefully raked into the
fire and burned. The fire must entirely consume or deeply char all
of the material ; no small ends of branches and small twigs shall be
allowed to remain. If it is impossible to make the fire over the stump
without injuring the surrounding trees, the sides and top of the
stunijt shall lie coated with creosote.

6G

Portions of infected trees which show no evidence of the blight shall
not be permitted to lie in the woods over twenty days, but may be
handled and shipped with the bark on provided it is shipped promptly
in closed cars. If the wood from the diseased trees is not removed
from the woods within twenty days from the time the trees are felled
it mnst be peeled and the bark burned, or else Avood and bark burned.
Wood from diseased trees to be used where exposed to the weather
must be peeled. Fire wood if kept under dry cover need not be peeled.

If the owner or other person responsible for the destruction of the
diseased trees starts immediately to treat them as directed, the agent
of the Commission shall see that this work is done in strict accordance
with the regulations governing this procedure and shall give all
possible assistance. If at the end of twenty days the infected trees
have not been treated according to the regulations of the Commission,
or if the work has been improperly done, or the owner, his agent, or
employee refuses to do this work according to the regulations of the
Commission then, on the twenty-tirst day after the notice to remove
these trees was first given, the agent of the Commission shall employ
laborers and begin the work of removing such infected trees according
to the method above described. Inunediately after such work is per-
formed he shall furnish to the field headquarters a detailed statement
of the expenses so incurred by the Commission. The amount of these
expenses must be paid by the owner within sixty days from date of
presentation of a bill for the same.

67

CHESTNUT TREE BLTOHT COMMISSTON.
Financial Statement .showing account December 17th, 1912.

Received from State Treasury.

August S3, 1911. ,.
November 22, 1911,

April 4, 1912,

June 11, 1912,

June 18, 1912

August 16, 1912, --
October 3, 1912, ...
November 14, 1912,
December 17, 1912, .

$2,000 CO
3,000 00
3,000 00
3,000 00

5,000 00

Interest from Comml. Trust Oo., Dec. 31, 1911,
Interest from Comml. Trust Co., July 1, 1912, .

$16,000 00
1.5 21
18 44-

Expenditures as per detailed statement below,.

$16,033 65
11,222 62

Bal. available in Pliila. Dec. 3, 1912, plus warrant de-
posited Dec. 17, 1912,

Contingent fund (S. B. D.), _ — $7(X> 00

Contingent fund (M. A. C.),- 800 00

Commonwealth Trust Co., 37,133 12

Balance in State Treasury,

5,633 12

$4,811 03

9,000 00

Balance of appropriation,

Vouchers ready for submission.

$13,811 03
1,307 38

Net resources

Balance in State Treasury,

$12,503 a^
9,000 OO

Balance on hand in Philadelphia, Dec. 17, 1912,.

$3,.t03 65

$8,000 00
20,000 00
20,000 00

30,000 00
30,000 00
30,000 00
20,000 00
30,000 00

$188,000 OO
85 18
165 94

$188,251 12
154,429 03

$3;3',822 09

62,000 00

$95,823' 09
9,788 04

$86,084 05
62,000 OO

$24,034 a5

$10,000 00
23,000 00
23,000 00
3,000 00
30,000 00
30,000 00
30,000 00
25,000 CO
30,000 00

$204,000 00
lOO ^
184 38

$■204,284 77
165,051 65

$38,683 12

$109, a33 13
11,095 42

$98,. 5.37 70
71 ,0m 00

$27,.5S7 70

DETAILS OF EXPENDITURES.

V

©

o

"§

s

a

03

'a

M

S

CO .

Si

al

a

oS

o

!-,•*-<

o

Ph

f^

H

Scientific research,
OflBee furniture, ..
Field equipment, ..
Traveling expenses.

Office salaries

Office expenses,

Field expenses,

Field salaries,

$4,131 67

1,660 10

125 57

60 20

4,390 58

809 10

44 00

1 50

$11,222 62

$3,763 08
13,104 74

6 30
53,897 53
83,657 38

$154,429 03

$4,1.31 57
1,660 10
3,888 65

13,164 94

4,390 58

815 40

53,941 53

83,658 88

$165,651 65

Respectfully .submitted to Winthrop Sargent, Chairman.
D. T. McCAMPBELL, Chief Clerk.

(68)

PENNSYLVANIA CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT COMMISSION.

1112 Morris Building, Philadelphia.

BULLETIN No. 4. ^ OCTOBER. 1913.

{Manuscript Suhmitted December, 1912.)

Th.

Chestnut Blight Fungus

AND A

Related Saprophyte

BY

PAUL J. ANDERSON and H. W. ANDERSON.

HARRISBURG:
O. E. AUGHINBAUQH, PRINTER TO THE STATE OP PENNSYLVANIA

1913.

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

MEMBERS OP COMMISSION.

Winthrop Sargent, Chairman, Bryn Mawr.

Harold Peiree, Seo efary, Haverford.

Samxiel T. Bodine, Villa Nova.

George F. Oraig Rosemont.

Theodore N. Ely, Bryn Mawr.

EXECUTIVE STAFF.
Mark Alfred Carleton, General IManager.
Samuel B. Detwiler, General Superintendent.
Oliver D. Schork, Assistant to General Superintendent.
Thomas E. Francis, Field Manager, Western District.
Joseph R. Wilson, Field Manager, Eastern District.
David T. McCamphell, Chief Clerk.

Irvin C. Williams, (Pennsylvania State Forestry Department), Collaborator.

SCIENTIFIC AND OPERATIVE STAFF.
Frederick U. Heald, Pathologist.
A. G. Ruggles, Entomologmt.
J. P. W«ntling, Forester iu charge of Utilization.
Paul J. Anderson, Field Pathologist.
F. P. Gulliver, Geographer.

Caroline Rumbold, Physiologist in charge of Tree Medication.
Joseph Shrawder. Chemist.
Roy G. Pierce, Tree Surgeon,
Keller E. Rockey, Forester in charge of Demonstration Work.

(2)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pago.

Introduction , 5

Observations on tlie natural haliitat of the fungus, 6

Microspocic examination and comparison witti the Eastern fungus, . . 7

Isolations, 10

Inoculations , 11

Cultural comparisons, lo

Distribution of the Connellsville fungus, 15

Taxouomic relations, IG

Literature cited , 19

(3)

(4)

THE CHESTNUT BLIGHT FUNGUS AND A
RELATED SAPROPHYTE

By P. J. and H. W. ANDERSON

INTRODUCTION.

When the Penns^^A^ania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission under-
took to determine the extent of the blight disease in Western Penn-
sylvania, they were confronted with a puzzling condition of what was
apparently the blight in a few of the extreme south western counties.
In these localities a fungus was found quite commonly on the
chestuut trees, which superficially, could not be distinguished from
the true blight fungus, but it was apparently causing no serious
injury to the trees. Aside from the fact that this fungus was usually
found only on stumps and dead parts of the trees, one other pecu-
liarity was noticed. One of the most characteristic features of the
true blight is the presence of fan-shaped areas of fungous mycelium
in the bark on the scalloped advancing edge of the canker. These
areas are entirely absent in the bark of the trees infested by the
"Western or Connellsville Fungus" — by which name we shall des-
ignate the fungus occurring in these southwestern counties. Mr.
J. K. Hibbs, supervisor of this southwestern district, being in doubt
as to the identity of the fungus, submitted specimens to all the lead-
ing pathologists who have concerned themselves with this disease.
They uniformly agreed that this fungus was the true blight organ-
ism, Diaporthe pcuafiitica, as we shall call it in this paper. Micro-
scopic examinations were made, but if any differences were noticed,
they were ascribed to local conditions, immaturity of the specimens
or various other causes. Many theories were advanced to explain
its peculiar behavior in this district. Some believed that it was due
to the large amount of coal smoke in the atmosphere of that region.
Others thought the trees there were more healthy and therefore more
resistant. Still others considered it a saprophytic strain of
Diaporthe parasitica, while some advanced the theory that this was
the saprophytic progenitor of the deadly eastern parasite. No light

6

was thrown on the relation of these fungi at the Harrisburg con-
ference in Febrnary of last veai*, althongh the existence of a so-called
saphrophytic strain was mentioned by several speakers.* The un-
certainty about the relation of these forms has given rise to much
confusion as to the extent of the blight.

With this puzzling condition of affairs confronting the Commis-
f-'ion, it was tiiought best to make a careful study of tiie varstern
problem and for (his purpose a field laboratory was located at Con-
ncllsville, where the so-called western fungus was quite cora^von.
The results of the investigation carried out at this laboratory are set
forth m the following pages.

OBSERVATIONS ON" THE NATURAL HABIT AND HABITAT OF THE

FUNGUS.

In external macroscopic appearance this fungus resembles
Diaporthe jjarasitica in all its stages and there seems to be no way
in which it can be distinguished from this fungus in the field, ex-
cept by the absence of the areas of fan shaped mj^celiuni. On young
bark the Avestern fungus develops small, scattered orange pustules
under the epidermis. Areas of orange colored mycelium are often
found throughout the thin bark. The pycnidia are formed in the
pustules beneath the epidermis and the spore horns develoi* singly,
jnishing out from the top of the conelike pustules. The pustules
on older bark are much larger, often reaching three or four milli-
meters in diameter. These occur as a rule in the crevices of the
bark but are not confined to this region, being especially well devel-
oped on the bark of the callus at the edge of a rotted area or at the
base of the stump on tlie exposed roots. The pustules vary greatly
in color from a light yellow to almost black, a deep orange being
the most common color observed. In the coke-oven region, old
pustules are usually black externally on account of the smoke. The
stroma is a liglit yellow color and pulverulent in the young condition,
darkening and hardening A^ith age. A number of pycnidia
may be formed in each of these stromata. Perithecia may be found at
any season of the year and are developed in the same manner as
in Diaporfhe parasitica. On the inner surface of the bark which
has separated from the wood and on the wood protected by the
bark, single pear-shaped pycnidia are found, in general appearance
similar to the eastern fungus. Pmall reddish, flattened, single
pycnidia are also developed on the top of stumps or on the end of
logs several inches in from the edge of the bark. They are also
formed on the cut edge of thick bark, especially when this is some-
what shaded.

"Report of the Chestnut Tree Blight Oonference, Feb. 1912, pages 47 and

Special attention was given to tlie habitat of this fungus since
the question of its parasitism would be largely based upon these
observations. It was usually found growing on stumps from which
the trees had been lemoved one or tw<o years, or upon fallen logs
of about the same age. It was seldom found on trees or stumps
which had been dead for a longer period. Many careful examina-
tions of the coi)pice at the base of an infected stumi» were made
since this was a connmin ])oint of infection by Didpoithe patastica,
but always with negative results. Die-back conditions and cankers
produced by other fungi and insects are common on the coppice
in this section of the State. The western fungus was often isolated
from such areas, but was never found to be the primary cause of
the diseased conditions. It was also found on thick bark of old
trees where no injury could be found, but in no instance had it
penetrated into the cambium. Very often when it was found on
the apparently healthy trees, cutting into the bark would show that
the borers had been at work and had killed the tissue below the
area infected with the fungus. There has been no case during all
the investigations where the western fungus was found causing the
death of a tree. Aside from the chestnut it has been found on several
species of oaks, among these the chestnut oak being its most common
host.

MICROSCOPIC EXAMINATIONS AND COMPARISON WITH THE EASTERN

FUNGUS.

A microscopic examination of the western fungus revealed a num-
ber of striking characters by which it could readily be distinguished
from Diaporthe parasitica. On account of the small size of the
conidia, no effort was made to find in these a basis for differentiating
the two species. A large number of comidial measurements indi-
cated that the difference between the two species is very slight
in this respect.

The examination of the perithecia, asci and ascospores revealed
a number of differences, the most marked of which were the size
and shape of the ascospores. There was also a ver}^ pronounced dif-
ference in the length of the asci. In the following table is given the
measurements of the asci and ascospores of Diaporthe parasiticA
and the western fungus taken from a number of sources'. The mea-
surements here recorded are only a portion of those actually made
but indicate the range of the material used.

8

The Connellsville specimens were collected from various localities
about this city and no two of them were obtained from the same
tract. The measurements of the Virginia and Tennessee specimens
were included under the Connellsville fungus since it has been shown
from our cultural and microscopic examinations that there is no dif-
ference between the fungi collected from these various localities.
All measurements were made with a 1-12 oil immersion objective.

TABLE I.

Showing the relative size of the ascospores of the Connellsville
fungus and Diaporihe parasitica.

Connellsville Fungus.

Locality.

Diameter.

Length.

r

a

a

t-i

0

r-

;3

to

'-'

G

4-1

.—

i

s

^

ri

13

>

;^

■^

Connellsville No 50,

Connellsville Ko. 51, on oak

Connellsville No. 52, -

Connellsville No. 55,

Connellsville No, 56, .-.

Greene Co., Pa.,

Lynchburg, Va.,

Erwin, Tenn.,

Fauquier Co., Va., —

Albermarle Co., Va.,

Morg-antown, W. Va.,

55

2.93

55

61

3.2

61

57

2.91

.57

63

2.93

63 i

30

3.1

30 !

39

3.0

39 i

50

3.1

90

40

S.l

40

81

3.1

81

50

3.0

50

50

2.4

50

6.78

6.9

6.0

6.5

7.22

6.8

6.9

6.9

6.86

6.88

6.98

Diaporthe parasitica.

Mt. Gretna, Pa —

Highland, N.Y.,»

Somerset, Pa.,

Connellsville, Pa. M. Gray orchard, imported,

4.54

.50

8.52

4.40

75

8.8

4.4

60

8.2

4.6

25

8.4

'Measured by W. H. Rankin.

TABLE II.

Showing the relative length of the asci of tlie Connellsville Fungus
and Diaporthe parasitica.

Connellsville Fungus.

Locality.

Connellsville No. 50,

Connellsville No. 51, on Oak,_

Connellsville No. 52, -

Connellsville No. 56, ---

Connellsville, No. 56,

Greene Co., Pa.,

Lynchburg, Va., —

Erwin, Tenn.,

Fauquier Co., Va.,

Albermarle Co., Va., .-.

Morgantown, W. Va.,

50

33.21

30

35.73

51

32.1

43

32.0

56

38.05

30

ai.7

40

36.7

40

32.4

60

34.29

51

32.52

50

34.72

Diaporthe Parasitica.

Mt. Gretna, Pa.,

Somerset, Pa. No. 77,

Highland, N. Y.,*

Connellsville, Pa. M. Gray orchard, imported,

52.0
53.6

*Measured by W. H^. Rankin.

In general, it will be seen that the ascospores of the Connellsville
fungus average 7x3 mikrons, while those of Diaporthe parasitica aver-
age 8.5x4.5 mikrons. The maximum and minimum sizes are as
follows: Connellsville fungus, 8.8-5.7 mikrons; Diaporthe parasitica,
9.94-7.1 mikrons. The average length of all asci measured gave 34
mikrons for the western fungus and 51.3 mikrons; for Diaporthe
parasitica. The maximum and minimum sizes are as follows: Con-
nellsville fungus, 45.5-28.4 mikions; Diaporthe parasitica 58.2-42
mikrons. The contrast in the size here given is striking but even
more striking is the difference in the shape of the ascospores.

10

As shown by the measurements the Diaporthe ascospores are much
wider in proportion to their length than those of the Connellsville
fungus. The relation is about 1:1.9 in the former, and 1:2.7 in the
latter. Furthermore, the septa in Diaporthe are very e^^[dent and a
distinct sinus may be seen on the mature spores, while an indistinct
septum and a very slight, if any, sinus is the rule in the Connells-
ville fungus. These characteristics are so evident that a glance
at the spores imder the microscope by one familiar with the two
fungi, is sufficient to distinguish them, provided the ascospores are
mature.

Aside from the difference in length, the asci of the two fungi are
similar, excej^t that the wall is usually more evident in the western
fungus. The perithecia of the western fungus are much smaller
than those of Diaporthe parasitica. A number of measurements
made from specimens collected at Connellsville and from various
points in ^"irgiuia, gave an average measurement of 346 mikrons in
contrast to 490 mikrons, obtained from perithecia of Diaporthe
parasitica from Mt. Gretna. It was also noticed that the walls of the
perithecia of the western fungus were much darker in color than those
of the blight fungus.

Since the blight is not found in the southwestern portion of the
State where the western fungus is found, there might arise the ob-
jection that the measurements obtained above are not comparable,
in that local conditions might influence the size of the spores.
On a farm a few miles northeast of Connellsville were found some
chestnut trees badly infected by the real blight. These were nursery
trees which had been planted two years previous, and had not
shown signs of the disease until last summer when the winter
stage was found. Asci and ascospore measurements from these are
given in the tables and show no variation from Diaporthe parasitica
measurements although taken from the center of the locality where
the western fungus flourishes.

ISOLATIONS.

The most successful method of isolating Diaporthe parasitica
which has been used in the field laboratories of the Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission is this: The outer bark is peeled
with a sterile scalpel from over the advancing edge of a young
canker and a small piece of tissue just on the line between the healthy
and diseased inner bark is transferred to a potato agar slant. One
hundred per cent, of pure cultures by this method is the rule in
these laboratories. Such a method, however, could not be used to

11

isolate the Avestcrn fnngiis since it was rarely found advancing? on
the healthy tissue and even where it was found in close proximity, a
transfer usually gave "Several bacterial and fungal contaminations
besides the desired organism. In many instances, liowever, success-
ful isolations were made in tliis way, since llie fungus is a rank
grower and the edge of the colony is apt to be pure. Usually, how-
ever, other methods had to be used. The most successful of these was
the couidial streak. If the specimen showed the fungus to be in the
jsycnidial stage — summer stage — it was placed in a moist chamber
for a few days, and invariably spore horns were pushed out from the
stromata. These horns were detached with a wet sterile needle
and the free end of the horns streaked on agar slants. 'Where only
the perithecial stage was present, however, the culture had to be '
made from the ascospores. Two methods of making isolations from
Ihe ascospores were used. In the first, the stroma with the en-
closed perithecia was removed and the l)otto]n cut olf with a sharjj
sterile scalpel, thus exposing the contents of the perithecia. Then a
very minute drop of water was touched to the gelatinous mass of
spores and the Avater containing the spores drawn into a fine capil-
lary tube from which it was blown into a sterile pe.tri dish. Agar was
added and the developing colonies isolated. 'A more successful
method, however, was by inducing the perithecia to shoot the ascos-
pores upward on to a sterile agar plate inverted a few millimeters
above the ostioles. This method Avas found to be the most convenient
of all. With these four methods it Avas found possible to isolate the
fungus from any kind of a specimen sen^t in, j)rovided the
spores and mycelium Avere not entirely dead. Isolations were made
from specimens collected in over fifty different localities. Most of
these Avere in soutliAvestern Pennsjivania, but a few of them — as
elsewhere mentioned — Avere from Mrginia, West Mrginia and Ten-
nessee. All of them were identical, lioweA^er, and need not be dis-
cussed separately, i. e., they all shoAved the same cultural char-
acters. Nor did It seem to make any difference AAdiether the isola-
tion was made from mycelium, ascospores or conidla; they all grew
alike. Isolations Avere made from dead stumps, logs, die-backs,
on coppice and apparent cankers on living trees, but all proved to
be the same. Neither did the isolations from the oak stumps and
logs give different results.

INOCULATIONS.

The final test of the pathogenicity of a fungus is its ability to
produce the disease in its typical form when introduced into the
host under normal conditions. The importance of making a large

12

number of inoculations controlled by proper checks was realized
early in the work. The methods of making these inoculations were
those which had proved most successful in. the inoculations with
Diaporthe parasitica at other laboratories.

When mycelium, either from the tissue or from culture was used,
a slit was made under the bark and a piece of the tissue or a portion
of the agar with the mycelium growing on it, Avas introduced into
this slit. These are called slit inoculations. When couidia or ascos-
pores are used, these are shaken uj) in a quantity of water and intro-
duced thus, or the dry spore horns may be used. The point of a heavy
knife is thrust obliquely into the bark with the broad side of the
blade facing the tree, without removing the point, the knife is pulled
^ downward and away from the tree. Several drops of the spore-
containing liquid are then dropped from a pipette into the exposed
wound back of the knife blade. The tree quickly sucks up these
drops, so that this has proved a very effective method of introducing
spores into the living tissue. Between 80 and 100 per cent, success-
ful inoculations have been secured with the true blight fungus by
these methods. The following series of inoculations were made at
Connellsville.

1. Mycelium of western fungus from tissue.

2. Mycelium of D. parasitica from tissue.

3. Mycelium of D. parasitica from culture.

4. Mycelium of western fungus from culture.
4. Conidia of western fungus.

6. Conidia of D. parasitica.

7. Ascospores of western fungus.

8. Ascospores of D. parasitica.

Nearly a thousand inoculations with the western fungus were
made at Connellsville together with a few with Diaporthe parasitica
as checks. On account of the danger of introducing the disease a
very limited number of inoculations were made with the eastern fun-
gus, and these were carefully guarded and cut out after they had ad-
vanced to the stage where there was no longer any doubt of their
power to produce the typical disease. Our inoculations with Dia-
porthe parasitica gave 100 per cent, infection with mycelium from
culture and from the tissue and also from ascospore inoculations.
The conidial inoculations had given over SO per cent, infection when
they were cut out. In all cases a definite canker with the typical

13

scalloped edge and the invading fan shaped mycelial areas developed
within a month after the inoculations were made. In a few older
cankers left for two months, the infected area extended nearly an
inch beyond the edge of the inoculation wound.

The western fungus developed in the dead tissue above the inocula-
tion wound, and within a month had developed pustules upon -^ihich
spore horns were frequenMy found, l)ut the growth of the fungus
was limited to the area in Avliich the tissue was killed by the inocu-
lation. If it spread beyond this area, it was in the dead bark above
the living cambium. There was always a definite even line between
the dead and living tissue and no fan-shaped areas of mycelium were
present. In all inoculation wounds a healthy callus had formed
and in those made three months previous, this growth had almost
cloved over the wounds. In some cases bacteria and insects delayed
the formation of a callus in some parts of the inoculation, but
when these were removed the callus quiclvly developed.

Inoculations made with ascospores of the western fungus on
chestnut oak developed as on the chestnut, forming spore horns on
the dead area above the wound. Eeisolations were made from these
spore horns, proving the fungus to be the same as that used in the
inoculations.

These inoculation tests were confirmed by the results obtained
at the Charter Oak laboratory where they were duplicated. The checks
were more plentiful there since several hundred trees had been
inoculated Avith Diaporthe parasitica. In a few cases we have found
the western fungus spreading beyond the edge of the wound, i. e.
apparently parasitic, but its development was so slow that it could
be called at best, a weak jjarasite.

From these inoculation tests and from observations in the field,
there is no longer any doubt but that the western fungus is a sapro-
phyte and that it cannot develop into an active destructive parasite
like Diaporthe parasitica. While we have not found it occurring in
the same region, where the eastern fungus is common, yet the inocu-
lations made at Charter Oak, show that it will not develop parasitic
tendencies in a region w^here Diaporthe parasitica flourishes.
Furthermore, by inoculations and by observations of natural infec-
tions, it has been proved that the true blight fungus develops nor-
mally about Connellsville.

CULTURAL COMPARISONS.

Shortly after isolating the western fungus, it was noticed that its
development in culture was markedly different from Diaporthe para-
sitica. Further study of these differences resulted in securing cer-

14

tain kinds of media upon which the two fungi showed very marked
contrasting characters. Both of these fungi j^roduce conidial spore
horns in much the same manner. If those spore horns are streaked
on a potato agar slant, Diaporthe parasitica will produce an orange
stieak within four days at room temperature. This orange streak
broadens, keeping pace with the growth of the fungus until the en-
tire surface of the slant is covered with a deep orange growth. On
the other hand no orange color is noticeable on the streak from llie
conidia of the Connellsville fungus even after a period of ten days.
A lighter orange sometimes develops on these slants after a week or
so but is never so marked as in Diaporthe and often fails to develop
at all. Conidial streaks on other media, especially chestnut bark
agar and corn meal aga]-, show a recognizable difference bet^veen the
two fungi but this difference is not so marked as that of the color
on potato agar.

On potato agar cultures from mycelial ti-ansfers a fan-shaped or
irregular wavey growth is noticeable at the edge of the advancing
mycelium in the case of Diaporthe, while the Connellsvillle fungus
has an even unbroken edge. Furthermore, there is a marked con-
trast in the amount of aerial m3T'elinm developed — Diaporthe de-
veloping scarcely any, while the Connellsville fungTis has a fluffy ap-
pearance, due to a white mycelial gi-owth above the surface of the
agar. Also the conll-ast in color between the growths on potato agar
is evident; especially in cultures about three weeks old. Diaporthe
develops an oranjge brown color while the Connellsville 'fungus
has at first a sulphur color which deepens as the culture becomes
older.

Next to the conidial streaks on potato agar, we have found the
growth on sterile twigs in test tubes to be the most accurate dis-
tinguishing character. The Connellsville fungus within ten days
develops a fluffy orange mj^celial growth which almost completely
fills the tube. This mycelial growth is at first white, but turns to
the orange color within a few days after its development. On the
other hand, Diaporthe does not develop this heavy aerial mycelium
but only a short white, web-like growth over the surface of the twig
with heavier bunches of mycelium, which later become orange col-
ored, where the pycnidia are to develop.

On the cut end of the twigs, Diaporthe develops a thick felt-like
orange mycelial growth but this never extends out on the bark and
is much denser than the growth of the Connellsville fungus. We
have made these cultures on black oak, chestnut oak, white oak,
chestnut, maple and sumach, but find very little difference in the

35

nature of the growth. We have used tliese tests on fungi from over
fifty ditferent sources and ha^ e never failed to get these characteristic
reaclions. These tests are ahvays chiM-ked when possible by asco-
spore measurements and often l>y inoculalion on live li-ees. No doubt
many other cultural ditferences could be discovered by further tests,
but these given have proved to be so reliable that no further effort
was made to find media which Avould show additional dift'erences.

In culture tht\ fungi collected at various points in ^'irginia,
West Virginia and Eastern Tennessee, show no variation from the
Connellsville type of the fungus. This conforms with the results
from the spore measurements. These fungi are evidently the same.

DISTRIBUTION OF THE CONNELLSVILLE FUNGUS.

Up to date this fungus has been found in Pennsylvania only in the
four southwestern counties — Greene, Washington, Fayette and
Westmoreland. Many specimens were examined from other parts
of tlie State, which were thought to be the same, but in all cases
they were found to be Diaporthe parasitica. The fungus probably
occurs in other parts of the State but has so far not been
reported. Since it was found as far down as the West Virginia line,
visits were made over into this State and the same conditions were
found there. Early in the investiganon, it had been suspected that
this Connellsville fungus was the same as that which had been report-
ed from several points in Virginia. A visit to that State revealed the
same condition of the chestnut timber as about Connellsville. As re-
ported on a previous page the microscopic and cultural characters
were found to correspond, so that there is no doubt as to the identity
of the two fungi. Specimens Avere also sent, b}^ Mr. J. K. Esser,
from various parts of Eastern Tennessee, and these Avere found to
be the same as the ConnellsAdlle fungus. As indicated by the col-
lections then, we may say that this fungus is distributed throughout
Southwestern Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia and Eastern
Tennessee. It is not at all improbable that further search will show
that it occurs in scA'eral other States.

There is another fungus found in the extreme south — Florida,
Alabama, South Carolina and Mississippi — which is A'ery similar in
external appearance both to the Connellsville fungus and to Dia-
porthe parasitica. This is the fungus found in Ellis and Everhart's N.
A. Fungi (No. 1950), Avhere it is labelled Endothia gyrosa. It is also
found in a number of other North American collections under this
name. The ascospores of this fungus measure 8.2x1.90 u, being
much longer in proportion to their Avidth than the Connellsville fun-

16

gus. They are cylindrical in shape and are very well represented in
Ellis and Everhart's North American Pyrenomycetes. Besides the.
exsicicati we have also received specimens of this fungns from
several points in North and Sonth Carolinia..

TAXONOMIC RELATIONS

What is the Connellsville fungus? There is no question but
that it is very closely related to Diaporthe parasitica and should be
placed in the same genus. Following Saccardo's system -of classifica-
tion it undoubtedly falls in the genus Endothia and fits well his
description of Endothia gyrosa, in so far as the spore measurements
and microscopic characters are concerned. It is certain, however,
that it is not the same as the long-spored southern form.

The synonomy of Endothia gyrosa given by Saccardo is misleading
since it is certain that Schweinitz and Fries had in mind two very
different species when they wrote of Sphaeria gyrosa and S. radicalis.
Furthermore, if the genus Endothia was founded by Fries on
Sphaeria gyrosa, as Farlow (1.) believes it was, then the generic name
Endothia is not correct when applied to this fungus — provided we go
back to Fries (2) for the defiuition of the genus. Schweinitz (3) in
1822 described S. gyrosa as No. 24 of his Syu. Fung. Car., but so
far as we have been able to find, there is no specimen in the
Schweinitz collections corresponding to the number of this descrip-
tion. It is probable that the specimens of this collection were in-
cluded in his North American Fungi and in this collection there is
a specimen of this species (No. 1431) which fits very accurately his
description of S. gyrosa. in Syn. Fung. Car. In fact, in looking at this
specimen under a powerful lens one is struck with the extreme ac-
curacy of his description and one cannot doubt that he had this or
a similar specimen under his lens. This fungus is entirely different
from Diaporthe parasitica or the Connellsville fungus and one would
not think of placing it in the same genus or even in a related genus.
The most noticeable character macroscopically is that the entire
surface of the stroma is covered with very regular hemispheres
(sphaerulae of Schweinitz.) The perithecia are enclosed in each of
these separate sphaerulae and their walls do not differ in color
from the surrounding stroma. No neck is evident and the ostiole is
inconspicuous or wanting. The conspicuous black walls and long
necks of the perithecia of Diaporthe are entirely lacking. The peri-
thecia are entirely within the knobs or spheres of the stroma, i. e.,
they do not extend down into the stroma. The ascospores are often
slightly curved and the septa very indistinct. The average size of

17

the ascospores was 15.82x4.37 u. The asci have very distinct walls
and are not shaped at all like the asci of Diaporthe. They average
54 u. in length.

Schweinitz's Sphaeria radicalis (N. A. Fungi No. 12G9), is an en-
tirely different fungus from the above and although the perfect stage
is not present, it resembles very closely the imperfect stage of
the Connellsville fungus, or Diaporthe parasitica or the long-spored
southern form. Any one who has worked with the above species will
be convinced that Schweinitz (4) was writing of the perfect stage of
one of these forms when he saySj, ''Ostioles cylindrical, very black
within, orange red externally^ everywhere elevated on the surface,
easily falling off — ivJience tJie exposed surface shoivs Mack points, on
accomit of the Mack shining ducts hy which the ostioles are con-
nected ivith the perithecia." But which of the three he had in mind
would be hard to say unless the perfect stage is examined. Fries (2)
places S. gyrosa in the tribe Confluentes and S. radicalis under the
tribe Versatiles, thus widely separating the two, since the characters
of these tribes are quite distinct. His descriptions of the two
species follow closely those of Schweinitz. His distinction between
the two is best brought out in his Elenchus (5) where, in describing
S. radicalis, he says, "A wonderful little fungus^certainly com-
parable only with S. gyrosa but very different from this in the posi-
tion of the pcrithecia and the ostioles. Ostioles numerous, conical
elongated, fragile, spinelike. Perithecia minute, black globose, sunken,
also continuous through the spine-like ostiole by a little black duct."
Under S. gyrosa he says, "There is no distinct ostiole," and does not
mention the beaks so noticeable in S. radicalis. This agrees well with
the specimen of Schweinitz, where no ostioles are to be seen and the
small knobs on the surface of the stroma contain simply the peri-
thecia with no distinct necks.

It is, therefore evident that Fries had clearly in mind the distinc-
tion between these two species when he created the genus Endothia
in ]S46. In the meager and incomplete description he does not men-
tion S. radicalis but he does mention S. gyrosa and it is to be
presumed that he intended this species to be the type of the genus
Although he promised later to describe ithe bharacters of this
genus more fully, we find no further mention of it in his later publi-
cations. If we admit that he used S. gyrosa as the type for erecting
this genus and if we wish to include under it only species resembling
it, ihen it is evident that the present Endothia is an entirely different
genus from what Fries intended. As further evidence that he did
not intended to place S. radicalis in this genus we may turn again to .

18

Ills descriptions where he speaks of the perithecia being light colored
(pallidus) and yet he distinctly mentions the dark walls of the peri-
thecia in his description of S. ,radicalis.

In 1863, however, De Notaris (6) withont any explanation, pnt the
two in the same genns, and in the same year we find them combined
by Tnlasne (7) under the genns Melogramma. Since that time all
authorities Avithout further investigation have considered that
Schweinitz gave these two names to one and the same species.

If the generic name Endothia is to be retained for those species re-
sembling S. radicalis of Schweinitz and Fries and the more recently
described Diaporthe parasitica, then we believe that the Connells-
ville fungus Avould fall in the genus Endothia. If, however, we wish
to retain under this name such species as that on which Fries erected
the genus, the Connellsville fungus would certainly not fall in this
genus, and a new one will have to be erected to include Diaporthe
parasitica, the Connellsville fungus and the longspored southern
form of Ellis and E verba rt. According to our present system of
classification, the form on which Fries erected the genus Endothit^
would easily fall in a previously established genus and this name is
now left without any significance whatever. Besides we are not cer-
tain that Fries meant to give a generic description in this short note
since he states that he expects to describe the genus more fully later.

The simplest way out! of this taxonomic tangle then, it seems,
Miould be to retain the name Endothia for the forms such as Saccardo
includes under it. Then we would have in our territory (1) the long-
spored Southern Endothia, (2) the true blight fungus — E. parasitica
— and (3) the Connelsville fungus, for which we proposed the name
E. Yirginiana and for which we have published a description.*

*Phytopathology 2:261-262, Dec. 1912.

19

LITEEATURE CITED.

1. 1912 Farlow, W. G. The Fungus of the Chestnut-Tree Blight.
Sci. N. S. 35: 717-722. May 10, 1912.

2. 1846 Fries, E. Suninui vegetabiliuni Scaudinaviae p. 385, 1846

3. 1822 Schweinitz, L. I). Synopsis Fuugorum Carolineae, p. 5,

1822.

4. 1831 Schweinitz, L. 1). Synopsis Fungnruni in America Boreali
media degentium j). 197, 1831.

5. 1828 Fries, E. Elenchus Fungorum 2:73. 1828.

6. 1863 I)e Notaris, G. Sj^eriacei Italici. Cent. I. Fasc. I, p. 9,
1863.

7. 1863 Tulasne. Selecta Fung. Carpologia. Tome 11:87. 1863.

(20)

21

Fig. 1. Faus or mats of mycelium of chestnut blight fuugus in the
cambium and inuer bark. Photo by E. T. Kirk.

22

Fig. 2. A. Singlel ascospore, of the Connellsyille fungus. B.
Single ascospore of the chestnut blight fungus. C. Ascus of the
Connellsville fungus. D. Ascus of the chestnut blight fungus.

23

1'

i

i

c

1 O E G Q ii

j

ip

? ?'■

L.

i

" !^' ?"

=■

'

fl ,-^'-^

: ")

<^ ■:

---,_ W J. (

:/

Si

z

-^H ,i

!

-

'■"'---

u

'■. ■

;f "t ^'

\
\

)»

, jA

1 '
I.

'" J

'T ^^

:;2 ... '.-

■X

■\^

'p

i

z'

■■^^^:

r :•• y , ' i

^^

/ -/ -

» 1, ,. «

\ ' "^

\ =

r"

\ ^

!

' 0

^

La^.

/

^ >r ^ Pj----.

' ^'

6 -

-r'

f^ ^ /

■■??., ;

c^

/' "'■^'

.t

<^

''/-t " /

f"

^■^ /

t" '~.

<.

■-

v/

"

"■■-■-

<

c-~-i-.*-i^- '5

24

Fig. 4. Inocailations of 1 1-4 inches tree with Cunnellsville fun-
gus, after five months (right) ; inoculation of 1' 1-2 inches tree with
blight fungus, after three months (left). Both outlined with paint to
show extent of growth. Photo by E. T. Kirk.

9?^

Fig. 5. Bark cut away from inoculation with the Connellsville
fungus, showing the even outline. Photo by E. T. Kirk.

26

Fig. 6. Two inoculations with the Connellsville fungus showing
callus formed around each. Trees 1 inch and 1 1-2-inches in diameter.
Photo by E. T. Kirk.

PENNSYLVANIA CHESTNUT TREE
BLIGHT COMMISSION

1112 Morris Building, Philadelphia
Bulletin No. 5 MAY 15, 1913

The
Symptoms of Chestnut Tree BHght

and

A Brief Description of the

BHght Fungus

by
F. D. Heald, Pathologist

1913

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight
Commission

MEMBERS OF COMMISSION

Winthrop Sargent, Chairman - - - - Bryn Mawr

Harold Peirce, Secretary ----- Haverford

Samuel T. Bodine ----- Villa Nova

George F. Craig - - - - - - Rosemont

Theodore N. Ely - - - - - Bryn Mawr

EXECUTIVE STAFF
Mark Alfred Carleton, General Manager
Samuel B. Detwiler, General Superintendent
Oliver D. Schock, Assistant to General Superintendent
Thomas E. Francis, Field Manager, Western District
Joseph R. Wilson, Field Manager, Eastern District
David T. McCampbell, Chief Clerk

Irvin C. Williams, (Pennsylvania State Forestry Department), Collaborator

SCIENTIFIC AND OPERATIVE STAFF

Frederick D. Heald, Pathologist

A. G. Ruggles, Entomologist

J, P. Wentling, Forester in charge of Utilization

Paul J. Anderson, Field Pathologist

F. P. Gulliver, Geographer

Caroline Rumbold, Physiologist in charge of Tree Medication

Joseph Shrawder, Chemist

Roy G. Pierce, Tree Surgeon

Keller E. Rockey, Forester in charge of Demonstration Work

Introduction

INQUIRIES are constantly being received by this Com-
mission for more detailed information about the chestnut
tree blight fungus. On the other hand, certain erroneous
ideas exist in regard to the nature of this fungus. This
circular is written with the hope that it will supply some
desired facts and assist in correcting false notions. Investi-
gations on the dissemination and life-history of the blight
fungus are in progress at the present time and new facts
are constantly being determined. Our knowledge being far
from complete, it is only advisable to present the facts which
appear to be fairly well established.

Symptoms and Effects

Young infections of chestnut blight on smooth-barked
vigorous shoots (two to six or more years old) can be
easily recognized by the presence of yellowish or yellowish
brown patches, slightly raised, and standing out in marked
contrast to the olive-green healthy bark. The area invaded
by the fungus may be fairly regular (Figs. 4, 23) or very
irregular in outline, the latter showing what has been desig-
nated as the amoeboid type (Figs. 1, 2, 3). In young in-
fections of this type there are no fruiting pustules, but these
make their appearance later. If the external brown layer
of cork cells is removed from the advancing edge of the
invaded area, the whitish or buff-colored mycelium, or vege-
tative body, of the blight fungus is exposed (Fig. 24).
Infections of this type may spread until the shoot is com-
pletely encircled (Fig. 4), and fruiting pustules will be
formed later.

Young infections on slow-growing twigs or on the
smooth bark of older branches or trunks are not as evident,
but they generally show as somewhat discolored, dead areas,
sometimes slightly depressed, and occasionally with a raised
margin. The area invaded may be nearly circular, giving a
so-called "target" infection, but it is more frequently elon-
gated in the direction of the long axis of the shoot or branch.
The invaded area gradually enlarges until the shoot or

branch is completely encircled. A small shoot may be com-
pletely encircled before the appearance of fruiting pustules,
but on larger limbs or on the main trunk the fruiting pus-
tules begin to make their appearance long before complete
girdling has taken place. These fruiting bodies show as
small yellow, orange or reddish brown pustules (1/16 inch
or slightly more in diameter) which break through the
bark some distance back from the advancing edge of the
lesion.

The interior tissue (inner bark invaded by the fungus)
is changed to a yellowish brown color, which is in marked
contrast to the bright fresh color of the normal healthy
tissue, and a careful examination by cutting away the bark
will show the buff-colored fans of the fungus which may
have penetrated as deep as the cambium layer (Fig. 12).

During damp weather following rains, or in moist situ-
ations, long, irregularly twisted threads varying in color
from buff to bright yellow may be extruded from some of
the pustules (Fig. 13). These are masses of conidia or
summer spores, and have been designated as "spore-horns"
or tendrils. The spore-horns when first formed are soft
and sticky, but when dry they become hard and brittle and
are frequently darker in color.

Young infections on old trunks or large limbs with
thick fissured bark cause little change in the appearance of
the bark itself and the fungus may have gained considerable
headway before there is any external evidence of its pres-
ence. Sometimes the first indication of an infection on large
limbs or trunks is the appearance of abnormal longitudinal
splits or fissures. The orange or yellow fruiting pustules
appear in the deep crevices or cracks, and spore-horns may
be developed from these under favorable conditions of
moisture and temperature. In case of doubt as to whether a
given discoloration is caused by the blight fungus the fol-
lowing test may be used : Place the twig or piece of bark
in a closed vessel so it is supplied with plenty of moisture
and will be retained in a moist atmosphere. In all cases
if the fungus is present and is alive, bright yellow or orange,

4

cottony tufts will make their appearance upon the surface,
and in many cases spore-horns will also be developed.

An infection with the blight fungus is sometimes the
cause of a pronounced enlargement, or hypertrophy. This
enlargement may involve the entire invaded portion (Figs.
6, Y) or it may be more pronounced at the upper end of the
lesion (Fig. 5). Enlarged lesions are apparently the most
frequent on vigorous shoots. Longitudinal splits or fis-
sures in the bark are very characteristic of hypertrophied
lesions (Fig. 7). In many instances the lesion may show a
marked sunken area (Fig. 8) due to the killing of the
invaded bark, while the surrounding tissues have continued
to grow at the normal rate. This dead tissue may be more
or less cracked or fissured and a typical canker developed
(Fig. 8). In the old lesions which have completely girdled
a limb or branch the bark becomes cracked and fissured and
begins to peel away (Fig. 9). The branch shown in the cut
referred to had been killed by this lesion and had been dead
for a year. On old rough-barked trunks or branches the
bark over old lesions will give a hollow sound when tapped,
due to the fact that the inner bark has been destroyed by
the fungus. The bark may be readily peeled away and the
inner fibrous portion is more or less shredded.

Aside from the discovery of the actual lesions there are
various other symptoms which indicate the presence of
blight. Dead leaves hanging in characteristic drooping
clusters are an indication of blight-killed twigs or branches.
If the twigs or branches were not killed until late spring or
summer, that is, prior to the first of September, the leaves
reach normal size, and these clusters of dead leaves will
generally remain clinging to the tree during the winter
period after the normal leaves have fallen. This affords one
means of detecting blight-killed branches in the winter. In
blight-affected branches there is an indirect effect upon the
size and persistence of the burs. If the girdling is completed
early in the growth of the burs, they are likely to remain
small and undersized, but with later completion of girdling
they may attain full size. These burs of blight-killed

branches commonly remain hanging upon the tree during
the winter, constituting another evident symptom for the
detection of bhght during the leafless period.

In case the girdling of a branch is not completed until
late fall, the normal shedding of the leaves occurs. In
the spring, however, the leaves from these branches remain
undersized and assume a yellowish or pale color, and soon
wither and die (Fig. 11). If girdling is completed later in
the spring or not until midsummer, the leaves of the
affected branches develop to full size, but later turn yellowish
or assume a characteristic reddish brown color. Later when
the leaves die they assume more of a brownish tinge, and
some fall from the tree while many remain hanging for a
considerable time.

The development of sprouts or "suckers" is another
evident symptom of blight which can be noted at any period
in the year. As soon as a branch or the main trunk has
been girdled by blight, there is a marked tendency to the
production of vigorous, rapid-growing shoots from a point
just below the girdled area. These sprouts may be few in
number or they may be so numerous as to make a conspicu-
ous clump (Fig. 11), and they may occur on the branches,
the main trunk, or at the base of the tree. These sprouts
may be killed in turn by the blight, but they sometimes
persist for several years. When they persist their age
serves to tell the time at which the girdling was completed.
The general effect of blight is to kill the part of twigs or
branches beyond the lesion. The occurrence of trunk lesions
is most serious, since with the completion of girdling the
entire tree must succumb. In trees which have suffered from
top infections for several years, the occurrence of the
blight-killed branches sometimes gives rise to an effect
called "stag-head." The wood of blight-killed trees is
injured but little as a direct result of the disease, but if left
standing it soon begins to deteriorate as a result of the
work of insects and various species of wood-destroying
fungi.

6

The Blight Fungus

The chestnut bhght is due to a definite species of fun-
gus which grows as a parasite in the bark and to some
extent in the wood of the infected tree. This fungus was
first described as Diaporthe parasitica Murrill, but has since
been referred to Endothia parasitica (Murr.) And. It is
possible to grow this fungus in artificial cultures (Fig. 25)
and it has been repeatedly demonstrated by inoculations into
healthy trees to be the cause of the disease.

1. The vegetative body or mycelium. The blight fun-
gus grows within the bark and to some extent in the wood of
the affected parts, where it produces strands or mats of
closely appressed filaments, known as the mycelium or vege-
tative body of the fungus. In young infections on smooth-
barked shoots this mycelium is located just below the brown,
outer, or corky bark, and is cottony white at the advancing
edge but assumes a buff tinge in the central or older portions
of the infection (Fig. 24). As the infections become older,
the mycelium penetrates deeper and spreads out at various
depths in the bark, where it produces characteristic fan-like
aggregates. The fans of buff or yellowish mycelium are
especially well developed in the layers of inner bark, and
finally in the cambium or growing layer between bark and
wood, which is thus destroyed by the growth of the fungus
(Fig. 12). After the mycelium has reached the cambium
and spread out in that region, it enters the wood and grows
throughout the outer layers of sapwood. It is^known to
penetrate at least as far as five annual rings of wood.

2. The pycnidial stage. After the mycelium of the
blight fungus has been growing for a time in the bark it
begins the formation of fruiting pustules for the production
of spores. The first kinds that are produced are known as
pycnidial pustules or stromata, and they appear as minute
raised papillae scarcely larger than a pin-head, and showing
a yellowish or orange color when they break through the
bark. Each pycnidial pustule shows a smooth or slightly
uneven outer surface and is a dense aggregate of fungous
tissue, generally containing one (rarely more) large, lobu-

lated cavity (Fig. 14) lined with innumerable vertical fila-
ments by which large numbers of minute rod-shaped bodies,
the pycnospores, are produced. With the accumulation of
these in a pycnidium, the external wall is ruptured and the
accumulated mass of spores imbedded in mucilaginous
material oozes out in the form of a thread-like or flattened
irregular coil, the so-called "spore-horn" or tendril (Fig.
13). A single spore-horn of average size has been found by
actual analysis to contain as many as 115,000,000 pycno-
spores (Fig. 21).

The pycnospores have frequently been designated as
summer spores, but the development of pycnidia depends
largely upon the age of the lesion rather than on the time or
season of the year. Pycnospores are produced in abundance
at all times in the year when temperature and moisture con-
ditions are favorable, and are washed down in large numbers
from diseased branches even during the warm winter rains,
when the spore-horns are rarely observed.

The production of pycnospores is not confined to pus-
tules which break through the bark of diseased areas.
Smaller orange or reddish superficial pycnidia may be pro-
duced in large numbers on the cut end of the inner bark or
the outer layers of sapwood (Fig. 18) of fallen logs,
stumps, or wood previously affected with blight, or on the
inner surface of inner bark where it has split away from
the wood. Peeled posts and poles previously affected with
blight will frequently show many of these minute pycnidia
on the diseased spots, but these pycnidia are generally rather
scattered. Pycnidia producing large numbers of viable
spores have been obtained from a wood-pile two years old.
Chips or fragments of diseased bark or wood that fall in
damp locations will produce pycnidia, so that material of this
sort is always a possible source of infection.

3. The perithecial stage. Following the production of
pycnidia and pycnospores, a second type of fruiting pustules
containing the perithecia makes its appearance. Super-
ficially these perithecial pustules can be readily differenti-
ated from the pycnidial pustules, since each one shows upon

8

its surface either a number of minute raised papillae or a
number of minute black dots, the ostioles or openings of the
perithecia or flask-like bodies buried deep in the stroma
(Figs. 16, lY).

Each perithecial pustule is a dense aggregate of fung-
ous tissue containing 1 to 60 distinct flask-like cavities, the
perithecia, each of which communicates with the exterior by
means of a long black neck which opens at the top of a
surface papilla (Fig. 15). The wall of each perithecium is
lined with small club-shaped cells or spore-sacs, which are
produced in enormous numbers (Figs. 15, 20) and give
rise to the second type of spores or ascopores. There is
one perithecium for each superficial papilla.

The perithecial pustules show some differences in color
and external appearance depending upon their age and the
conditions under which they have developed. The papillae
and the stroma may both be yellowish or orange, or the
papilljE may be yellowish brown to brick-red on a lighter
ground, or in old pustules the stroma may be nearly black,
with slightly lighter papillae. In most cases when the peri-
thecia are mature the ostioles or mouths of the necks will
show as dark spots at the ends of the surface papillae. There
is considerable variation in the length of the surface papillae,
the difference being due to varying amounts of moisture,
those which develop with an abundance of moisture show-
ing especially long necks, while with scarcity of moisture
the papillae remain short.

The spore-sacs formed in the perithecia contain the
ascospores. Each sac produces eight two-celled spores
arranged generally in two irregular rows (Fig. 20). These
spores have a volume about fifty times as great as that of
the pycnospores (Fig. 21). They are not extruded ordi-
narily in masses from the perithecia, but under favorable
conditions of moisture and temperature the spore-sacs rise
to the ostiole and explode, forcing the spores into the air.
If a glass slide is suspended 1/8 inch or slightly more above
the surface of some mature perithecial pustules moistened
in water and kept at a temperature not under 65° F., large

numbers of ascospores will be expelled and will adhere to
the slide. Such a spore print of ascospores is shown in
Fig. 22. A similar expulsion of ascospores takes place in
nature whenever conditions are favorable.

The ascospores have been designated as "winter
spores." Their time of maturing, however, appears to
depend more upon the age of the lesion than upon the
season of the year. Maturing perithecia may be found at
any season of the year, although they are perhaps more
abundant in the fall and winter than at other seasons. Suc-
cessive crops of perithecial pustules may be found on a single
lesion which has persisted for a number of years. The
blight fungus may spread throughout the bark of a blight-
killed tree and continue to produce fruiting pustules, or peri-
thecial pustules may be produced in abundance in the crev-
ices of the bark of fallen logs (Fig. 17).

The Spread of the Disease

The cause of infections. New infections, whether in
sound trees or in those already diseased, are caused by the
establishment of the vegetative body or mycelium of the
fungus in the tissues. This mycelium originates from either
pycnospores or ascospores. Successive stages in the germ-
ination of both kinds of spores are shown in Fig. 26. If this
germination takes place in some wound which penetrates the
outer brown bark, the fungus readily establishes itself and
begins to grow through the tissues of the bark in much the
same way that it is growing in the culture medium shown
in Fig. 25. An infection can be caused then by either a
single ascospore or a single conidiospore if they are carried
and lodged in a favorable location. A large percentage of
the new infections appear to be definitely related to some
mechanical injury, but there are some evidences that natural
cracks and fissures may also be the avenue of entrance.

Natural agencies in disseminatioji. The pycnospores
or the ascospores must be carried from one part of a tree to
other parts, or from tree to tree, if new infections are to
result. Present investigations point to the fact that asco-

10

spores which are forcibly expelled into the air during the
moist and warm periods of the year play a very important
part in the spread of the disease, since they can be carried
by the air currents. It can also be definitely stated that
conidiospores are washed down during every rain, even
the cold rains of winter, in countless numbers from every
lesion that has reached the spore-producing stage.

It seems probable, then, that conidiospores play a very
important part in the spread of the disease throughout a tree
after it once becomes infected. Rain and wind are undoubt-
edly the most important natural agents in the dissemination
of spores.

The part which birds, insects and other animals play
in the scattering of spores is at the present time somewhat
problematical. The few tests reported up to date have given
only negative results. (See Bulletin No. 3 of the Pennsyl-
vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.) From investiga-
tions now in progress it may be definitely stated that a single
downy woodpecker has been found to be carrying as many
as 657,000 pycnospores.

Artificial agencies. It has been definitely shown in
numerous cases that the shipment of infected chestnut
nursery stock has been responsible for the introduction of
blight into a new region. After it is once introduced, natural
agencies may be responsible for the scattering of the spores.

The shipment of chestnut products of various kinds,
such as logs, wood, posts, poles etc., made from blight-
affected trees may also be responsible for spreading the
disease, since the mycelium may retain its vitality in blighted
bark or wood for long periods and produce new crops of
pycnidia very soon after moisture is supplied, or spores may
be scattered from pustules formed previous to shipment of
the products. (See also Bulletin No. 3.)

11

Explanation of Plates

All photographs are by Wm. Currie, except Fig. 12, which was made
by E. T. Kirk.

PLATE I

Fig. 1. Amoeboid infection on two-year-old shoot. Bark
has been removed and spread out flat.

Fig. 2. AmcEboid infection on three-year-old shoot.

PLATE II

Fig. 3. Characteristic amoeboid infection on two-year-old
shoot.

Fig. 4. Basal infection on two-year-old shoot. The fungus
has completely encircled the shoot.

PLATE III
Fig. 5. Characteristic hypertrophy of two-year-old shoot.
Fig. 6. Characteristic hypertrophy of two-year-old shoot.

PLATE IV
Fig. 7. Characteristic hypertrophy of vigorous shoot.

PLATE V

Fig. 8. Lesion that nearly surrounds the branch. Sunken
on one side, and a slight enlargement on the other.

PLATE VI

Fig. 9. Old lesion in which the bark has become somewhat
shredded and the wood exposed. The branch had been
dead for a year.

PLATE VII

Fig. 10. Characteristic position of drooping leaves on
blight-killed shoots. Shows also a small bur.

13

Fig. 11. Water sprouts produced at the base of a tree
recently girdled by the blight fungus. Tree also shows
few small leaves, giving the characteristic appearance of
a blight-killed tree.

PLATE VIII

Fig. 12. Fan-shaped mycelium from bark of a rough-
barked tree. (After Anderson.)

PLATE IX

Fig. 13. Pycnidial pustules with spore-horns developed in
a damp chamber in the laboratory.

PLATE X

Fig. 14. Vertical section of a pycnidial pustule. The fila-
ments lining the lobulated cavity produce the spores
that ooze out as "spore-horns."

Fig. 15. Vertical section of a perithecial pustule. Several

of the perithecia are cut so as to show the full length |

of the necks. "

PLATE XI

Fig. 16. Perithecial pustules enlarged (x3).

Fig. 17. Perithecial pustules in the crevices of rough bark.
From a fallen log.

PLATE XII

Fig. 18. Pycnidia on the end of a fallen log. Three zones
are shown, one for each of the three outer rings of
wood.

Fig. 19. Vertical section of pycnidia shown in Fig. 18.

PLATE XIII

Fig. 20. Spore-sacs or asci, each containing eight spores.

Fig. 21. Diagram showing relative size of pycnospores
(left) and ascopores (right). Maximum and mini-
mum sizes of each are shown.

14

PLATE XIV

Fig. 22. Photograph of an ascospore print on an object
slide. Made by inverting a slide over perithecial pus-
tules that have been soaked with water and kept for a
time at a temperature favorable to the expulsion of
ascospores.

PLATE XV

Fig. 23. A young lesion of the chestnut blight fungus on
a vigorous two-year-old sprout.

Fig. 24. The same lesion as above with the brown outer
bark removed to show the white or buff-colored
mycelium.

Fig. 25. Isolation culture made from the above lesion
before the removal of the bark. A minute portion of
the mycelium was planted at three different spots in
the culture plate.

. PLATE XVI

Fig. 26. Photograph showing successive stages in the germ-
ination of both kinds of spores, (a) ascospores series
from 8 to 22 hours, at hourly intervals; (b) conidio-
spores series from 8 to 22 hours, taken every two hours.

15

Plate I

Fig. 1

Fier. 2

Plate II

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Plate III

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Plate IV

Fig. 7

Plate V

Fie. 8

Plate VI

Fig. 9

Plate VII

bA

£

&D

£

Plate VIII

Fig. 12

Plate IX

Fig. 13

Plate X

Fig. 14

c' U^

Fig. 15

Plate XI

Fief. 16

Fig. 17

Plate XII

Fig. 18

■..".•.■.-Sv.vv.

Fig. 19

Plate XIII

Fig. 20

r\

yj

r^

\J

Fig. 21

Plate XIV

:,:.:^

■;. *

• .if

: •:.-.■..■■ -^

^

'^^J

mJjm^ji^BHbi, ■'* - '.'"lb. ji|g^^H|[^HB

AJA---.^"

jtf£^^^^v . ^2lEi£.... i'.MdKC~'~^fl^BIH^^^^HHK '

g;^; ;

-

^MiK^^^i^

p;:1.-

^^p^>;:^^E^

,.■.•.;:#

' '^''^^ll'' ''"'"^^^^^By" """'

, "." -"■• j^Mp'' -■^^^^^-- • "

'-

■■"^■ppi'f;--::---^p:.'.

Fig. 22

Plate XV

Fig. 23

Fig. 24

Fig. 25

Plate XVI

o iku.

Fig. 26a

Fig. 26b

The Commission for the Investigation and Control of the
Chestnut Tree Blight Disease in Pennsylvania

1112 MORRIS BUILDING
PHILADELPHIA

THE CHESTNUT TREE

METHODS AND SPECIFICATIONS

FOR THE

UTILIZATION OF BLIGHTED CHESTNUT

BULLETIN No. 6
August 15, 1913

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight
Commission.

MEMBERS OF COMMISSION.

WiNTHROP Sargent, Chairman Bryn Mawr

Harold Peibcb, Secretary.. Haverford

Samuel T. Bodine Villa Nova

George F. Craig.. Rosemont

Theodore N. Ely. „ Bryn Mawr

EXECUTIVE STAFF.

Mark Alfred Carleton, General Manager.
Samuel B. Detwiler, General Superintendent.
Oliver D. Schock, Assistant to General Superintendent.
Thomas E. Francis, Field Manager, Western District.
Joseph R. Wilson, Field Manager, Eastern District.
David T. McCampbbll, Chief Clerk.

Irvin C. Williams, (Pennsylvania State Forestry Department), Collaborator.

SCIENTIFIC AND OPERATIVE STAFF.

Frederick D. Heald, Pathologist.

A. G. RuGGLES, Entomologist.

J. P. Wentung, Forester in charge of Utilization.

Paul J. Anderson, Field Pathologist.

F. P. Gulliver, Geographer.

Caroline Rumbold, Physiologist in charge of Tree Medication.

Joseph Shrawder, Chemist.

Rot G. Pierce, Tree Surgeon.

Keller E. Rocket, Forester in charge of Demonstration Work.

THE CHESTNUT TREE.

The genus Castanea, or chestnut, contains four distinct species,
two of which are found in the United States, and two in Europe and
Japan. Of the two species found in the United States, one is a shrub
or small tree, the chinquapin, and the other is our native American
sweet chestnut {Castanea dentata). Some botanists recognize a third
species in the United States, this being Castanea almfolia, which is
found only in the Southern states and which is only a small shrub.

Reproduction.

Chestnut reproduces from seed and by stump sprouts. Sprouts
grow more rapidly than seedlings and produce what is known as second-
growth chestnut. Chestnut is the American species best adapted for
regeneration by sprouts, known as coppice. Stumps of any diameter
may put forth sprouts. Coppice chestnut from twenty to forty years
old will yield telephone poles, posts, railroad ties, extract wood, etc.

Some Uses of Chestnut.

The following are some of the important uses of chestnut:
Telephone and telegraph poles; railroad, trolley and mine ties;
extract wood, fuel wood, charcoal wood, kindling; paper pulp, in mixture
with other woods; construction timbers; sills, especially when placed
in the ground; fence posts, stakes, rails and paling; staves and heading
for barrels and kegs; mine material, props, lagging timbers, brattice
boards; boxes and crates; shingles; lath; furniture, as chairs, built-in
sideboards, tables, beds, church pews, organs, pianos, billiard tables
and fixtures; cabinet making; interior finish — doors, door and window
frames, wainscoting, beams, picture molding, panels, base boards,
ceiling, etc.; flooring; vine and hop poles; carriages and parts of auto-
mobile bodies; tubes for water pipes; caskets and rough boxes; agri-
cultural implements; veneer cores; veneer; gymnasium goods; toys;
musical instruments ; car sills and frames ; show cases, bank and barber-

(1)

shop fixtures and sewing machines; ribs of ships; brush backs; trunks;
tie plugs, etc.

The fruit is an article of food, both in its raw state and when
manufactured into meal and flour. Its leaves are used in the manu-
facture of medicine.

CHESTNUT POLES.

Kinds.

Telegraph, telephone, trolley.

Telephone Poles.

Telephone poles are usually classified according to the size of the
poles, and to the number of wires which they are intended to carry.
There are two general classes of poles : firsts and seconds. Some electric
companies, however, make as many as four classes. Poles are usually
required to be perfectly sound, squared at both ends, reasonably straight,
well proportioned from butt to top, peeled, and to have the knots
trimmed to the surface of the pole.

Pole dimensions consist of length, top circumference and circum-
ference taken six feet from the butt. Poles are variously classified,
according to the requirements of the consumer.

First-Class Poles

Second-Class Poles

Length

Top Circumference

Circumference

Length

Top Circum-

Circumference

of Pole

6 Feet from Butt

of Pole

ference

6 Feet from Butt

25 feet

24 to 25 inches

33 to 36 inches

20 feet

22 inches

30 inches

30 "

24 to 25 "

36 to 40

ti

25 «

22 «

31 to 33

u

35 "

24 to 25 "

40 to 43

u

30 "

22 "

32 to 36

u

40 «

24 to 25 "

43 to 45

u

35 «

22 "

34 to 40

u

45 "

24 to 25 «

47 to 48

u

40 «

22 "

38 to 43

u

50 "

24 to 25 "

50 to 51

u

45 «

22 "

43 to 47

u

55 "

22 to 25 "

53 to 54

u

50 "

22 «

47 to 50

a

60 "

22 to 25 "

56 to 57

u

55 "

22 «

53

u

65 "

22 to 25 "

59 to 60

u

60 "

22 ■«

56

u

70 "

22 "

63

u

65 «

22 "

59

u

75 "

22 «

66

a

70 "

22 «

62

u

Some electric companies make two more classes, with specifi-
cations as follows :

Third-Class Poles

Foukth-Class Poles

Length

Top

Circumference

Length

Top

Circumference

of Pole

Circumference

6Feet from Butt

of Pole

Circumference

GFeetfromButt

25 feet

20 inches

30 inches

25 feet

20 inches

27 inches

30 "

20 «

33 "

30 "

20 "

31 "

35 "

20 "

36 "

35 «

20 "

35 «

40 "

20 "

40 "

40 "

20 "

39 "

45 "

20 "

43 "

45 "

20 "

43 "

50 «

20 "

46 "

50 «

20 "

46 "

55 «

20 "

49 "

The following table gives the length of poles that may be obtained
from average trees of different diameters. This is based on a table in
Bulletin 53, U. S. Forest Service, "Chestnut in Southern Maryland."
The tenths of inches in the original table have usually been placed in
the nearest inch or half -inch class, and were in a few cases disregarded
so that the figures given would compare with the average pole speci-
fications :

Size of Pole from Tree.

Diameter Breast-high
(D. B. H.)

Length of Pole

Diameter at Top

Diameter
6 Feet from Butt

11 inches

25 feet

8 inches

10^ inches

12 "

30 "

8 "

111 "

13 «

35 "

8 "

121 «

14 "

35 "

81 «

m "

15 "

40 "

02

141 "

16 "

40 "

81 "

151 "

17 «

45 "

8| "

161 "

18 "

45 "

8i "

171 «

19 "

50 «

81 "

18 "

20 "

50 «

8i "

19| "

CHESTNUT TIES.

Chestnut is cut into railroad, trolley and mine ties. These may be
round, sawed or hewn. Round ties are used by mining companies.

Railroad ties usually are 8| feet in length, trolley ties 7 to 8 feet, and
mine ties from 5 to 6 feet. Each company has its own specifications,
prices, and methods of piling, which vary to some extent.

Durability.

Chestnut ties are not usually treated with a preservative, but
when treated with 10 pounds of creosote per cubic foot the life of the
tie is doubled.*

Quality of Timber.

Ties must be cut from sound timber, which is free from imper-
fections which might affect their strength. It does not pay to cut ties
from timber under 11 inches in diameter because of the large amount
of waste in trees of small diameters.

RAILROAD TIES.
The usual specifications for railroad ties are :

No. 1.

Pole

Squared

Sawed

Hewed

Sawed

Hewed

7 X 7" X 8^'

7 X 7" X 8|'

7 X 8" X 8i'

7 X 8" X 8^'

No. 2.

Pole

Squared

Sawed

Hewed

Sawed

Hewed

6 X 7" X 8^'

6 X 7" X 81'

7 X 7" X 8|'

7 X 7" X 81'

No. 3.

Pole

Squared

Sawed

Hewed

Sawed

Hewed

5 X 6" X 8^'

5 X 6" X 8^'

6 X 6" X 8^'

6 X 6" X 8|'

* Bulletin 118, Forest Service.

Tie Volume Table, giving Average Number op Pole Ties (8.5

feet long by 7 by 9 inches) in Trees of Different

Heights and Diameters.

D. B. H. Inches

Height in Feet

50

70

80

90

Number op Ties per Tree

100

10

11

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

2.8
2.8
2.9
2.9

0.7
1.1
1.7
2.3
2.9
3.4
3.5

0.9

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.5

1.7

2.0

2.3

2.5

2.7

3.1

3.5

3.4

3.9

4.3

4.1

4.7

5.1

4.3

5.0

5.6

4.6

5.4

6.0

4.8

5.7

6.3

4.9

5.8

6.5

5.1

5.9

6.6

1.2
1.8
2.7
3.7
4.5
5.4
6.0
6.4
6.7
6.9
7.1

From Bulletia 10-B, Tenaessse Geological Siuvey.

TROLLEY TIES.

The usual sizes of troUey ties are 6 x 8" x 8', 6 x 7" x 8', and 6 x 6" x 8'
The following table gives the number of ties which can be cut from

trees of various diameters and heights and the excess of top wood in

cubic feet :

Tm Volume Table, giving Average Number of Ties (8 feet long

by 6 by 8 inches) from Trees of Different

Heights and Diameters.

Height in Feet

50

60

70

80

90

DiAUETEB BbEABT-HIGH

Volume

Ties

Top-
wood*

Ties

Top-
wood

Ties

Top-
wood

Ties

Top-
wood

Ties

Top-
wood

Inches

10

11

12
13
14
15
16
17

No.

1
1

2
3
3
5
6

Cu.Ft.
9.0

8.2
7.5
6.9
6.2
6.1
6.0

No.

1
1

2

3

3

5

6

6

7

7

8

9

11

12

12

15

Cu.Ft.

10.3
9.6
9.0
8.3
7.8
7.6
7.2
6.7
5.9
5.6
5.1
5.1
4.5
4.4
4.7
4.9

No.
1

2

3

3

5

5

7

8

8

8

10

10

10

12

13

15

Cu.Ft.
11.1

10.7

10.4

9.7

9.4

9.3

9.1

9.0

9.2

9.2

9.9

10.3

10.9

11.8

13.2

14.8

No.
1

2
3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

11

14

14

15

18

Cu.Ft.
10.5

10.4
10.3
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.2
10.7
11.5
12.1
13.5
14.7
16.8
18.8
21.6
24.4

No.

3

4

4

5

8

9

9

10

11

12

13

14

17

17

19

21

Cu.Ft.

9.5
9.8
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.7
11.2
12 7

18

13 5

19

15 3

20

17 3

21

19 4

22

21 8

23

25 2

24

29 1

25

34 0

* Topwood down to a diameter of 2 inches.
From U. S. Forest Service, Bulletin 96.

MINE TIES.

Chestnut mine ties may be either flat or round, although chestnut
is not favored for the latter. Round ties are notched, the notches
being 4 inches wide. These bring about 9 cents delivered.

Both the dimensions and prices for flat ties vary considerably.
One thousand ties weigh about 20 tons, and 100 will make a good load
for two horses. From 1,000 to 2,000, depending upon size, may be
placed in a box car.

The usual sizes are:

6 X 6" X 6'

5 X 5" X 6'

6 X 6" X 5Y
5 X 6" X 5|'

0X0 X 0'2

4 X 6" X 5Y
4 X 5" X 5V

4 X 4" X 5Y
3 X 5" X 5i'

3 X 4" X 5|'

5 X 5" X 5'

4 X 5" X 5'
3 X 4'' X 5'

CHESTNUT FOR CORDWOOD.

Chestnut cordwood is used chiefly in the manufacture of tannin
extract and charcoal; also to some extent for fuel.

Tannin Extract.

There are at present between fifteen and twenty establishments
in the United States manufacturing tannin extract from chestnut wood.
A number of these are located in Pennsylvania.

Chestnut wood contains a higher percentage of tannin than does
the bark, differing in this respect from oak and hemlock, the bark of
which contains more tannin than the wood. For this reason chestnut
wood is used extensively in the manufacture of tannin extract. Some
of the extract plants in Pennsylvania use chestnut wood almost ex-
clusively.

8

Old chestnut wood is richer in tannin than wood from young chestnut
trees. Analyses show that there is a higher percentage of tannin in the
butt of a tree than in its top; also a higher percentage in dead than in
living wood. Chestnut extract wood in the Southern states is largely old
or of first growth, and is more profitable in the manufactiue of tannin
extract than is our Northern or second-growth chestnut, such as is
found largely in this State. For this reason the largest and the most
profitable extract plants are located in the Southern states.

Chestnut blight does not seem to decrease the per cent, of tannin
in the wood. Extract plants accept blighted chestnut as readily as
unblighted, or sound wood. The light-colored extract derived from our
Northern chestnut is preferred by some tanners ta the dark-colored
extract made from Southern chestnut.

Specifications of Extract Wood.

Extract wood is purchased either by the standard cord (4x4x8'
or 128 cubic feet) or the long cord (5 x 4 x 8' or 160 cubic feet). A
cord of 128 cubic feet contains approximately 90 cubic feet of solid
wood and 38 cubic feet of air space. A cord of 160 cubic feet contains
approximately 128 cubic feet of solid wood. Split wood from large
trees is preferred, but extract plants will accept chestnut sticks that
are not less than 4 inches in diameter at the small end. A cord of
128 cubic feet usually sells for from $2.50 to $3.00 on board cars at
shipping point, and from $3.00 to $3.50 a cord of 160 cubic feet. Wood
with the bark on is as readily accepted as wood that has been peeled.

Chestnut Wood for Charcoai^.

Chestnut cordwood is used to some extent in the manufacture
of charcoal. It may be used pure, or in mixture with other woods.
There are two general methods of manufacturing charcoal — the kiln
process and the retort process.

Charcoal is used in a number of industries, among which are glass
plants and iron furnaces. Considerable quantities are used by railroads
for cooking in dining cars, and it is also used to some extent in res-
taurants.

Chestnut Wood for Fuel.

This wood is not very desirable for use in open fireplaces, because
of its tendency to throw out sparks. Its heating value is less than oak
or hickory, and where these woods are available, chestnut is used

very little. It produces an excellent kindling wood, and is used to
some extent for this purpose, in mixture with other woods. In certain
parts of the State large quantities of chestnut are used in burning
limestone. Because of its rather mild heat, it is used for tempering
glass, and is particularly desirable for annealing brass, being for this
purpose better than any of our other woods. Some iron furnaces use
small quantities each year for kindling fires.

SPEciAiy Tariff on Blighted Chestnut Cordwood.

The Pennsylvania Railroad has issued a special tariff on blighted
chestnut cordwood which will aid timber owners in marketing this
cordwood at a profit. The minimum rate in this tariff is 35 cents,
and the maximum $1.00 per ton. This rate can be applied only upon
shipments of cordwood entirely within the state.

11

PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY

NORTHERN CENTRAL RAILWAY COMPANY

PHILADELPHIA, BALTIMORE & WASHINGTON RAILROAD COMPANY

WEST JERSEY «. SEASHORE RAILROAD COMPANY

LOCAL FREIGHT TARIFF

-OH-

BLIGHTED CHESTNUT CORD WOOD

CARLOADS

—TO AND FROM—

ALL STATIONS ON PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD

EXCEPT BRADFORD, EAST BRADFORD AND MARTIN'S CREEK, PA.

IN STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

Governed, except as otherwise provided herein, by the Official Classification, I. 0. C— O. 0. No. 38
(F. S. Holbrook, Agent), supplements thereto and reissues thereof; and by Exceptions to said Classification,
G. O.— I. 0. 0. No. 3774, supplements thereto and reissues thereof.

TABLE OF RATES.

The following rates will be applied to and from stations on the Pennsylvania Railroad, as provided on
this page, for movement wholly within the State of Pennsylvania, and lists of stations and mileages will be
ascertained by reference to G. C— 1. 0. 0. No. 3800 (G. O. No. 402), supplements thereto and reissues thereof.

MILES

RATES

1 to 70 inclusive _

71 to 80 " _

81 to 90 '

35 cents per 2000 pounds.
40 « " " "
45 « « « «

91 to 100 '

50 " " "

101 to 110 " _

Ill to 120 "

55 " " " *

60 " " " " •

121 to 130 " „

131 to 140 * _

141 to 150 «

65 « " ' "
70 ' " " "
75 " " " «

151 to 160 '

80 • " " "

161 to 170 "

85 " « " "

171 to 180 • _

181 to 190 " _

191 to 272 « _....

90 " " «
95 " " " "
100 «

This tariff has not been filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission, as it is intended to be applied
only on traffic entirely within the State of Pennsylvania, and the rates contained herein must not be used
to or from any junction points with connecting lines.

ISSUEDJUNEI9,1912, BY

GEO. D. OGDEN,

General Freight Agent,
Philadelphia, Pa.

EFFECTIVE JUNE19, 1912

[oveb]

12
RULES GOVERNING THE TARIFF.

CERTIFICATE OF INSPECTION.

With the forwarding of the first shipment the shipper will file with
the agent a certificate, such as provided for below, which certificate
may be used for subsequent shipments by the same shipper up to and
including the number of cords of wood covered by such certificate,
record of which will be indicated on the certificate as each shipment
offers, showing waybill reference, car number or numbers, number of
cords and destination of each shipment.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA.

The Commission for the Investigation and Control of the
Chestnut Tree Blight Disease in Pennsylvania.

Certificate of Inspection,

This is to certify that I have examined cords of chestnut

wood on the property owned by at

and have found the same to be infected with Chestnut Blight, caused
by the fungus Diaporthe parasitica, and entitled to be shipped as
blighted chestnut wood.

Dated 191 at Pa.

Inspector,

For the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

Shipped cords of the above-mentioned wood in car

Shipped cords of the above-mentioned wood in car

(Signed)

Station Agent.

13

CHESTNUT FOR FENCING.

Chestnut is the post-and-rail timber of Pennsylvania. Chestnut
posts are either round, hewn on one side, rough-spUt, spHt and hewn,
or they may be sawed. Rails may be used round, but are usually split.
Posts intended for wire or board fences are used solid, while posts for
rail fences are usually mortised, each post containing from two to five
holes, to receive the ends of rails.

Cost of Manufacture.

The cost of making fence posts depends on the size of chestnut
timber, and the labor. Rails are 11 feet long, usually split and pointed
at both ends, when used in mortised posts.
Facts about Posts; the Result of Investigation.

Chestnut posts in actual use, when compared with good quality
of white-oak posts, used under the same conditions, show a higher
per cent, of durability than the best white oak.

A large post usually lasts longer than a small one of the same wood.

Decay proceeds with equal rapidity whether the post is set with
the large end down, in the position the tree grew, or reversed, with the
small end down. Therefore, the larger or sounder end should receive
preference.

In stiff clay soil the posts rot principally just beneath the top of the
ground, and in the porous sandy or gravelly soil they usually rot from
the top of the soil all the way down; the effect is the same in both cases.

In soil that is full of water all the time, posts will last longer. It
is the alternating between wet and dry that causes decay.

It seems that seasoning has little effect on the durability.

Table Showing Number of Hewed and Round Posts Obtainable
From Forest-Grown Chestnut Timber.

Diameter

Number of 7-

Number

OF Posts

Total Number

Breast-high

FooT Cuts

Split

Round

OF Posts

7

1

1

2

3

1

1

2
2

1

8

1

9

2

10

2

4

11

5

4

3

7

12

5

8

2

10

13

6

11

2

13

14

7

15

2

17

15

8

20

2

22

16

9

24

2

26

17

10

28

2

30

18

10

33

1

34

19

11

37

1

38

20

11

42

1

43

21

11

46

1

47

Note. — Data compiled from actual measurements of 150 trees.

14

CHESTNUT FOR SLACK COOPERAGE.

STAVES.

Chestnut is manufactured into slack cooperage stock for the
manufacture of barrels and kegs, to hold such commodities as nails,
lime, cement, fruit, etc. For staves it is particularly desirable. It is
sometimes cut into hoops. Timber which is four inches in diameter
and up may be used, and that from six to ten inches is preferable.
Large, loose knots only are objectionable.

Stave timber is either cut in the woods into small logs or bolts,
which have approximately the same length as the staves to be cut from
them, or it may be brought in as long logs and sawed into these lengths
at the mill. Nail-keg staves are 18 inches long and 3 to 5 inches wide,
while barrel staves are 28 inches long and about the same width. Bolts
for keg staves are 19 inches and up in length, and those for barrels
about 30 inches. Keg staves are packed in bundles of 100 for ship-
ment, and barrel staves in bundles of 50.

The cost of a stave mill of 12,000 daily capacity of ten hours is
from $1,500 to $1,750. To operate such a mill requires seven or eight
men, only three of which need to be skilled. A power plant which
will develop 25 horsepower is required.

A cord of 160 cubic feet will produce 2,000 keg staves.

Timber which will produce 1,000 board feet will make 5,000 keg
staves, and approximately 2,500 barrel staves. One cord of bolts,
with the bark, will make 1,000, or, without the bark, 1,200 barrel staves.

Heading.

An ordinary slack cooperage barrel has a head diameter of 17 inches.
Chestnut which is of sufficient size is very suitable for this purpose.

Hoops.

Some chestnut was used for hoops in 1907, but none was reported
as being used for this purpose in 1909. This may be attributed to the
fact that wire hoops have to a large extent replaced wooden hoops in
slack cooperage.

15

CHESTNUT FOR SHINGLES.

Chestnut shingles may be split or sawed. Owing to the scarcity
of good quality straight-grained chestnut, and to the development of
shingle-sawing machinery, split shingles have fallen into disuse. Sawn
chestnut shingles are usually 4 inches wide, ^ inch thick at small end,
^ inch thick at the butt end, 16, 18 or 24 inches in length They are
usually sold in bundles containing 250 shingles. Four bundles, or one
thousand shingles, will lay about one "square." A square is 10 feet
on each side, or 100 square feet. Shingles are laid about one-third to
the weather.

Durability.

No. 1 chestnut shingles on a roof of J pitch or more should last
about twenty years. Chestnut shingles are inclined to leak after a
short time, around the nails, due to the corroding action of the tannin
in the wood upon the iron in the nail. No. 1 chestnut shingles are next
in durability to No. 1 white pine or to cedar shingles.

Quality op Timber.

Chestnut for shingles is sawn into bolts or blocks the exact length
of the shingles to be made. For this reason shingles may be cut from
chestnut which is too crooked or too short for lumber or poles, so long
as the wood is reasonably clear of defects.

16

TO FIND THE VOLUME OF STANDING TREES.

A "rule of thumb" for estimating tall, sound trees by the Doyle
rule is as follows: Volume in board feet equals f of the square of the
diameter, breast high ; for example, a tree 20 inches in diameter, breast
high, contains 600 feet board measure.

A more accurate rule is as follows : From the diameter of the log
in inches (at the top inside bark), substract 4 for the slabs; then
multiply the remainder by half itself and the product by the length
of the log, in feet, and divide the result by 8.

Volume in Board Feet oe Chestnut by the Doyi.e-Scribner
Rule, Southern Appalachlan Region.

Height of Tree in Feet

D. B. H. Inches

50

60

70

80

90

100

Volume in Boabd Feet

12

30

35

40

50

55

65

13

35

45

55

60

75

85

14

45

55

65

75

90

100

15

55

65

75

90

105

120

16

65

80

90

105

125

145

17

80

95

110

125

145

170

18

95

110

125

145

165

195

19

110

125

145

165

190

225

20

125

145

165

185

215

255

21

145

165

190

210

240

290

22

165

185

210

235

270

325

23

185

205

235

260

305

360

24

205

230

260

290

340

400

25

225

255

285

320

380

440

26

250

280

315

335

420

485

27

275

305

345

395

460

530

28

300

335

380

435

505

580

29

320

360

410

480

555

630

30

345

390

445

520

600

685

31

370

420

480

565

650

745

32

390

450

520

605

700

810

33

555

640

755

875

34

680

805

940

35

715

860

1010

36

750

910

1080

U. S. Forest Service, Bulletin 36.

The Commission for the Investigation and Control of the
Chestnut Tree Blight Disease in Pennsylvania

112 MORRIS BUILDING
PHILADELPHIA

The Morphology and Life History

OF THE

Chestnut Blight Fungus

By PAUL J. ANDERSON, Field Pathologist

BULLETIN No. 7

DECEMBER, 1913

HARRISBURG, PA.:

WM. STANLEY RAY_, STATE PRINTER

1914

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight
Commission

MEMBERS OF COMMISSION.

WINTHROP SARGENT, Chairman, Bryn Mawr.

HAROLD PEIRCE, Secretary, Haverford.

SAMUEL T. BODINE, Villa Nova.

GEORGE P. CRAIG, ; Rosemont.

THEODORE N. ELY Bryn Mawr.

EXECUTIVE STAFF.
MARK ALFRED CaRLETON, General Manager.
SAMUEL B. DETWILER, General Superintendent.
OLIVER D. SCHOCK, Assistant to General Superintendent.
THOMAS E. FRANCIS, Field Manager, Western District.
JOSEPH R. WILSON, Field Manager, Eastern District.
DAVID T. McCAMPBELL, Chief Clerk.

IRVIN C. WILLIAMS, (Pennsylvania State Forestry Department), Collaborator.

SCIENTIFIC AND OPERATIVE STAFF.
FREDERICK D. HEALD, Pathologist.
A. G. RUGGLES, Entomologist.

J. P. WENTLIN6, Forester in charge of Utilization.
PAUL J. ANDERSON, Field Pathologist.
F. P. GULLIVER, Geographer.

CAROLINE RUMBOLD, Physiologist in charge of Tree Medication.
JOSEPH SHRAWDER, Chemist.
ROY G. PIERCE, Tree Surgeon.
KELLER E. ROCKET, Forester in charge of Demonstration Work.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 5

SPORES 6

Pycnosores 6

Morphology 6

Germination 7

Vitality 7

Ascospores 10

Morphology 10

Germination 11

Vitality 12

MYCELIUM 13

In culture 13

The yellow pigment 14

The fans ". 14

Rate of growth 15

Vitality 16

PYCNIDIA 17

Development on artificial media 17

Factors influencing production 17

Development of pycnidia on yovmg canker 20

Spore-horns 21

Pycnidia in older stromata 22

Superficial pycnidia 23

STROMATA 24

PERITHECIA 25

Primordia 25

Degeration of the ascogonium and growth of the enveloping hyphae... 28

Beginning of the differentiation 29

Pathological conditions 30

The cavity and paraphyses 30

The asci 31

Development of the neck 32

The mature perithecia 33

The ejection of the spores 34

SUMMARY 35

BIBLIOGRAPHY 37

EXPLANATION OF PLATES 43

(3)

(4)

The Morphology and Life History of the
Chestnut Blight Fungus

By PAUL J. ANDERSON, Field Pathologist

Penn'a. Chestnut Tree Blight Commission

INTRODUCTION.

Considering that it has been only seven years since the first article
on chestnut blight was published, the amount of literature on the
subject is becoming exiensive. Eighty-five of the ])iiucipal contiibu-
tions are given in the bibliography at the close of this bulletin, but
none of these give us more than the briefest facts concerning the de-
velopment and morphology of the producing organism, Endotliia
parasitica (Murr) And. To be sure, various authors have given such
superficial facts as the size, shape, and color of the spores, asci and
perithecia, the general times of years at which they occur, the macro-
scopic appearance of the stromata, spore horns and "fans;" the be-
havior of the organism in culture has been pretty well covered by
Murrill (2, 3, 4), Pantanelli (34,89) and Clinton (83); inoculation
experiments are recorded by Murrill (2, 3), Clinton (83), Rankin
(101) and the writer (81). Interesting facts and observations have
been added by many others but we know of no one who has made
a detailed study of the life history and morphology. The necessity
of this study is readily apparent; until such study is made we are
dealing with an unknown enemy, our control measures are guess
work and their success a matter of chance. The writer has not ex-
hausted the subject by any- means in the work which is recorded in
the following pages. He presents the facts discovered with the hope
that they may be of assistance to others who are working on this
phase. The matter is presented under the heads of Spores, Mycelium,
Pycnidia, Stromata and Perithecia, not because these all represent
distinct stages and because they do not overlap, but because he finds it
more convenient to group the facts about these heads.

The writer is under great obligations to Professors Whetzel and
Reddick of Cornell University, Messrs. Detwiler, Carleton and Heald,
officers of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Commission, Messrs.
Babcock, Kirk, Gates and Keefer, who have assisted him especially in
the laboratory and to a host of others who have sent specimens and
given valuable aid and suggestions.

(5)

SPORES.

Like most other Ascomycetes, this fungus produces two kinds of
spores: (1) pycnospores, otherwise known as conidia, conidiospores,
asexual spores or summer spores and (2) ascospores, which are also
called the winter spores or perfect or sexual spores. These will
be treated below in the order named.

PYCNOSPORES.

On active young cankers during the spring, summer and autumn,
slender, curling, yellow tendrils are especially abundant shortly after
rain periods. If one of these "spore-horns" is put in water, it swells
up and then apparentl}^ dissolves, but if a drop of this water is placed
under the microscope, it will be found to contain millions of minute,
hyaline bodies — the pycnospores.

Morphology. Murrill (4) who first described the species, gives
their size as 1 x 2-3 microns, Clinton (92:367) as .75 x 2.5-4 microns,
Pantanelli (89) as 1.7 x 3.8 microns. The writer made two hun-
dred measurements of pycnospores from spore horns and got an
average of 1.28 x 3.56 microns. An equal number of measurements
was made of pycnospores produced in pure culture on oat
agar and also of pycnospores from superficial pycnidia on wood,
but the difference in size was found to be negligible. Their
shape is shown in figure 52, being oblong of cylindrical with
rounded ends, or slightly oval. As a rule they are straight,
although occasionally slightly curved. Dr. Mickleborough's
curved figures (19) are evidently exaggerated; they remind us more
of the spores of a species of Naemospora which grows on the chestnut
and the spore horns of which cannot always be distinguished macros-
copically from those of Endothia parasitica. Although the tendrils
of the latter species are bright yellow, the spores themselves, as seen
under the microscope, are quite hyaline. This color is due to a pig-
ment which is evenly diffused in the spore, or more likely the spore
wall, and can be noticed only when there is a mass of them together.
The pigment is the same as is found in the hyphae and will be dis-
cussed under the head of mycelium.

The wall of the resting spore is extremely thin and is not readily
differentiated by staining. No markings, germ pores or layers can
be detected. The spore is densely filled with protoplasm which is
homogeneous; only occasionally are oil globules or vacuoles seen in
the resting spore. By staining it can be determined that each spore
contains a single small nucleus, which is elongated in the direction
of the long axis of the spore. It usually lies close to the wall, about
equi-distant from the ends, but may be almost in the end. It is shown

at the center of figure 14. With carbol fuchsin, and various other
stains, a single body in each end of the spore stains very deeply.
The significance of these polar bodies is uncertain. They cannot be
located after germination and it is conceivable that they are used
up in the enormous growth of the spore during that process. The
outside of the spore is covered with a mucilaginous, sticky coat which
is hard when dry and holds the spores together in the characteristic
brittle ''horns," but, on wetting with water, it first swells and then
apparently dissolves and the spores float away free from each other.
The mucilage of the spore horns is however, insoluble in alcohol.

Germination. Unlike the ascospores, the pycnospores do not ger-
minate in cultures in water. Tap water, rain water, spring water
and distilled water have been tried without success except that a
slight and uncertain germination was secured in rain water. A small
percentage of the spores germinated in water made slightly acid with
sulphuric acid. A large number of media have been tried but mostly
with disappointing results. Entiiely successful germination was se-
cured, however, in a decoction made by boiling chestnut bark in
water, filtering and then sterilizing the filtrate in the autoclave.
With this solution, a percentage of over eighty has been uniformly
secured, and it has therefore been used almost exclusively in tests
for longevity, vitality, etc. ' This suggests that there is some soluble
substance in the bark of the chestnut tree that is necessary for their
germination. In order to see if this substance is peculiar to the
chestnut, sterilized twigs of the chestnut, red oak, white oak, black
oak, sour gum, sumach, hickory, walnut, red maple and yellow poplar
were sterilized in test tubes, and then washed with a suspension of
pycnospores. From the fact that they germinated and produced the
characteristic mycelium on all of these species, it is certain that the
substance needed for germination is not peculiar to the chestnut tree,
and that a spore would germinate just as readily if it fell into a
wound of a sour gum or any of the other trees as it would on a chest-
nut. It is also significant that they will germinate perfectly in potato
agar and most any of the ordinary nutrient agars. To determine
whether they would germinate in the humus about the base of the trees
if washed down into it by the rain, twelve petri dishes of sterilized
humus were inoculated by spraying pycnospores over them. Not only
did they germinate, but the mycelium grew and produced typical
pycnidia on this medium. Tannin also is apparently not essential
to germination because they germinate readily in media which are
free from this substance.

Two methods of artificial germination have been used. In the
first, a slide is supported on two glass rods in a petri dish as a moist
chamber, and a drop of the bark decoction containing a suspension
of the spores placed on the center of the slide. In the second method

8

a film of pycnospores in water is spread on a sterile cover glass and
permitted to air dry. It is then covered with a drop of potato agar
or some other nutrient agar and inverted over a Van Tieghem cell.
This second method was used when it was desired to study the pro-
cess of germination because it offered the advantages of keeping the
spores stationary, and at the same time they could be put under the
immersion lens.

The time required for germination varies widely with the tempera-
ture. Fulton (48:52) says: "Conidia germinate best at a temperature
of 60 degrees F. and distinctly less rapidly at temperatures 10 de-
grees below or above that point." The writer, on the other hand,
secured the most rapid germination at 89 degrees F.^ the shortest
time secured for the appearance of germ tubes being twelve hours.
At temperatures ranging from 60 to 75 degrees F., germination oc-
curs in from 18 to 36 hours. At lower temperatures it often re-
quires four or five days. No effort was made to find the exact maxi-
mum and minimum temperatures. Some experiments by D. C. Bab-
cock in our laboratories indicate also that light hinders germination.
From the data given, it appears that the very warm periods of the
summer are most favorable for infection by pycnospores. That
winter conditions are not favorable is indicated by the following
experiment: At the beginning of every month during the last year,
twenty-five or more inoculations in healthy chestnut trees have been
made with conidia. At the present time, (June 15, 1913), none of
those made after September or before April show any signs of pro-
ducing cankers. Cankers are appearing about the inoculations made
in April. Apparently then, infection will not necessarily result even
if conidia do gain access to wounds during the winter.

The process of germination is preceded by an enormous swelling
of the spores. This swelling begins in fifteen to twenty hours after
they are placed in neat bouillon agar, and is then very rapid until
the germ tube is pushed out. As previously stated, a mature spore
measures about 1.28 x 3.56 microns. At the end of 18 hours,
50 spores which were just on the point of pushing out germ
tubes, gave an average of 6.86 x 10.53 microns. The largest
one observed was 9.05 x 14.48 microns. The volume of the
spore just before germination is thus more than eighty-five
times that of the resting spore. This increase in size is shown
in figure 38, at the center of which are a number of resting
spores. The various shapes assumed by the germinating spores will
also be observed here. They may become cylindrical, oblong, ellipti-
cal, isodiametric, ovate, pyriform, reniform or dumb-bell shaped, in
which latter case they resemble ascospores. The contents become
coarsely granular, and often large vacuoles are seen, due to the rapid
swelling. The first indication of a germ tube is a small protrusion or

pimple at one end which rai)idly increases in length. So far as ob-
served, the tubes are ahvays at the ends of the spores. A few hours
after the beginning of the first tube, another one starts at the other
end of the spore. Only very rarely do both start at once. The rate
of growth, size of the tubes and order of the laying down of the septa
are brought out by the series of camera lucida drawings of single
spores at short intervals reproduced in figures 89 and 40. This is an
average growth in potato agar in Van Tieghem cells at 21-26 degrees
C. The pycnospores generally produce two germ tubes. Very
rarely a third one comes out laterally. From three to six hours after
germination starts, the first septum appears in the tube and other
septa are laid down often enough after that to make the cells of the
mycelium 4-10 times as long as broad. As the germ tube lengthens,
the cells composing it increase in diameter but the septa, being solid
plates, do not increase in size correspondingly; hence the constric-
tions at the septa which become more marked as the mycelium be-
comes older (Fig. 8). Sometimes a septum divides the spore dur-
ing this process. After a time it is difficult to locate the old spore
since the first cells of the germ tube become exactly like it, and it is
now merely one of the cells of the hypha. The branching of the germ
tube is shown in the figure just referred to.

The swelling of the spores is due not merely to a mechanical imbibi-
tion of water; it is really a process of growth. To be sure, dead
spores will swell, but only to about half the size acquired by living
spores. Pycnospores, stained just before the germ tube is pushed
out, show that the increase in size is accompanied by active nuclear
division. Even at this time, two to six nuclei, rather larger than the
original nucleus^ may be made out. Also the polar bodies have dis-
appeared and the protoplasm is not dense. The nuclei push out into
the germ tube almost as soon as it starts. The wall in the meantime
has increased in thickness until it almost equals the diameter of the
resting spore and is quite distinct in stained sections. A germinating
spore is shown in optical section in figure 13.

Vitalitij. All experiments up to the present indicate a remark-
able vitality of the summer spores. Reasoning from analogy to what
is known or believed of the imperfect spores of most fungi, one would
not expect them to survive winter conditions. But the case is quite
the contrary. During every month of the past winter pycnospores
were taken from the woods, (a) from spore horns, (b) from pycnidia
imbedded in the stromata and (c) from superficial pycnidia on bare
wood and tested for germination in bark decoction. The percentage
of spoies which germinated ranged between 54 and 71 per cent.,
being only slightly lower than that of fresh conidia in culture, and
showing only slight variation for the months. Apparently, then,
weather conditions such as we have had in Pennsylvania during the

10

past winter, have very little if any effect on their vitality. Heald and
Gardner (93) also found that freezing does not affect the vitality
of the pycnospores. Tests made at various times during the summer
of 1912 show also that the hot and dry weather of summer does not
affect their vitality. Three series of tests were conducted to deter-
mine their longevity. In the first series, spore horns were detached
from the bark and stored in open vials in the laboratory. At the
end of each month, sterile twigs have been inoculated with the spore
horns. Every test has been successful, including the last, which was
at the end of one year. In the second series the spore horns were
left attached to the bark, which was kept dry in the laboratory,
and germination tests made in decoction as given above. The last
test — at the end of 11 months and 15 days — gave a germination of
65 per cent. In the third series, pycnidia in the bark were stored.
This series has been running only eight months; the last test gave a
germination of 40 per cent. All these series are being continued
and there is little doubt that they will retain their vitality much
longer than a year since very little decrease in the percentage has
been noticed. On the other hand, if the conidia are separated by dis-
solving the spore horn in water and then dried, they do not retain
their vitality very long. The writer has not seen them germinate
when kept in this condition longer than one month, but more experi-
ments are necessary.

Inoculation experiments with conidia are described in detail by
the writer and Babcock in Bulletin 8 of the Pennsylvania Chestnut
Tree Blight Commission. In general it has been proved that almost
any kind of a wound in the bark may be infected with pycnospores,
whether they are introduced dry or suspended in water.

ASCOSPORES.

On older cankers, as shown in figure 46, the mature stromata
are beset with projecting papillae. The black speck at the apex of
each papilla is the opening of a little flask in which the winter spores
are produced.

Morphology. The shape of the spores is shown in figure 37, being
oblong to oval with rounded or more or less blunt pointed ends, 2-
celled and constricted at the septum when mature. Clinton (92:368)
in Connecticut, evidently does not consider the constriction as con-
stant. His photomicrographs however — as they have been reproduced
in his plate XXVIII — show beautifully constricted spores. They are
quite hyaline both as seen under the microscope and when seen in
mass. Murrill (4) gives their size as 9-10 x 4-5 microns, Pantanelli
(89-73) the same as Murrill, Clinton (92:368), says they vary from
6-10 X 2.75-5 microns and average (92:427) 7.45 3.2 microns, based
on the measurement of one hundred spores. His measurements

11

are the smallest of any we have seen. The average of one hundred
and forty measurements made by H. W. Anderson and reported
in Bulletin 4 of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Commission,
was 8.53 X 4.49 microns. These were from points in Pennsylvania.
In the same bulletin seventy-five measurements of ascospores made
by Rankin in New York are reported and give an average of 8.8
X 4.4 microns. One hundred measurements of spores from points
in Pennsylvania and Maryland more recently made by the writer
gave 8.68 x 4.51 microns as the average.

The walls are thicker than those of the pycnospores and are also
more resistant to chemicals. With strong sulphuric acid they may be
made to swell until their thickness often equals the diameter of the
contents but they do not dissolve. This treatment shows no strati-
fication of the walls and no germ pores or markings of any kind.
The septum is also swollen greatly by this reagent; in fact, in none
of its reactions does it seem to differ from the wall, and it is evidently
of the same composition. It is a true septum and not merely a di-
viding line between the protoplasts. This fact was particularly no-
ticed because Saccardo in his description of the genus Endothia in-
timates that it is a false septum, and also because it differs in this
respect from the long-spored southern Endothia, as reported by H.
W. Anderson before the American Phytopathological Society in Janu-
ary, 1913.

The spore is densely filled with homogeneous protoplasm. Only
occasionally have anything like oil globules or vacuoles been seen.
The writer has not found the large globules (or vacuoles), repre-
sented in Murrill's figures (4), to be common. Chemical tests have
shown no glycogen or other storage products except proteids. As
shown in figure 37, each cell of the spore contains two or four nuclei ;
occasionally there is one or three, and in some cases the number is not
the same in both ends of the spore; more than four in one cell have
not been found. The nuclei are best brought out by staining with
iron-alum haematoxylin. The ascospores, like the pycnospores are
sticky and adhere with great tenacity to any object with which they
come in contact. The nature of the sticky covering has not been
exactly determined, but it is conceivable that it is due to the matrix
of epiplasm in which the spores lie while in the ascus.

Germination. They readily germinate in tap water, spring water,
rain water or any of the ordinary media used for this purpose. A
higher percentage was secured in chestnut bark decoction, however,
than in pure water but as a rule more than ninety percent germinate
even in water. They germinate as soon as mature without a period
of rest. Spores were produced in September from inoculations made
the previous June, and as soon as mature, were tested and gave a good

12

percentage of germination. The same methods for artificial germina-
tion were used as were described in treating of the pycnospores.

The time required is much shorter than for pycnospores. At
room temperatures they push out a tube in from six to twelve hours.
The shortest time secured was one hour and twenty-five minutes after
ejection from the perithecium. As for the effect of temperature on
germination, Fulton (48:52) says: '^Ascospores germinate best at a
temperature of about 70 degrees F., but a good percentage of germina-
tion occurs at 85 degrees and 45 degrees F. Even at 38 degrees F.
the germination of ascospores was 25 per cent in 24 hours a]id
reached 70 per cent in three days."

Like the pycnospores they swell before germination, but not to
such an extent. The resting ascospore measures approximately 4.5
X 8.5 microns. Fifty spores measured after ten hours in nutrient agar
averaged 7.27 x 13.84 microns — representing an increase of about
four times the volume of the resting spore. The largest one was 17.2
X 9.05 microns. During the swelling the shape remains practically
the same except that the sinus becomes deeper. The first germ tube
usually appears at the end, but this is not always the case — some-
times it is lateral. The second tube to appear is in the other cell;
this is generally followed by a second one from each of the cells,
making a total of four germ tubes, which is the rule for the asco-
spores of this species. Their order of appearance, size, manner of
septation and branching is best explained by reference to the suc-
cessive camera lucida drawings of single spores in figures 41 and 42.
The germ tubes from the ascospores grow much more vigorously than
those from the pycnospores. By sowing ascospores on chestnut bark
agar, in summer weather, mature pycnidia have been produced in five
days. The early and rapid development of the mycelium from
the ascospores is probably due to the larger amount of food material
available in the spores.

During germination the contents of the spore becomes granular
and vacuoles often appear. The nuclear behavior is the same as
that of the conidia described above.

Vitality. So far as has been determined, weather conditions have
no effect whatever, on the vitality of the ascospores. During every
month for the last year they have been collected from the woods and
tested, but the differences in the percentage of germination for the
months have been entirely negligible. Their longevity is indicated
by the following two series of experiments : In the first series, ascos-
pores ejected from the perithecia were caught on glass slides and then
stored and tested every two weeks for germination by covering them
with a drop of water. They continued to germinate for five months
and six days. After that they would not germinate. In the second
series, bark containing mature perithecia was stored in the labora-

13

tory and tested every month. The last test — at the end of api)i'Oxi-
mately twelve months — gave a germination of above 90 per cent.
There is no doubt that this experiment will give a much longer
record, since they germinate almost as well now as they did a year
ago. These experiments also show that the spores will live much
longer when they remain in the perithecium than if they are ejected
and free from each other. These tests of course, indicate only the
time they would retain their vitality if they were kept dry. If, on
the other hand they were in a moist place, they would germinate
at once and unless they gained entrance to their proper host or
possibly, some suitable substratum for a saprophytic existence, they
would die without causing any damage.

The results of a large number of inoculation experiments are given
by the writer and Babcock in Bulletin 3 of the Pennsylvania Chestnut
Tree Blight Commission. In general, the same thing may be said
of them as was said of the pycnospores ; any kind of a wound in the
bark deeper than the cork layer may be readily infected either by dry
ascospores or with ascospores in suspension in water. In fact, there
seems to be very little difference in the ability of the ascospores and
pycnospores to produce the disease on the trees.

MYCELIUM.

This is the absorbing system of the fungus. It consists of millions
of fine branching threads — the hyphae— which grow into the living
tissues of the bark and sap wood, killing and digesting them in its
progress round the tree. It is thus the immediate agent in producing
the canker and ultimately killing the tree.

In culture. The beginning of the mycelium is the germ tube; the
mature mycelium with its millions of hyphae is produced simply by
the continued elongation and branching of the germ tube. In all es-
sential points it is alike, whether produced from an ascospore or a
pycnospore. A few hours after the germ tube starts it begins to di-
vide into cells by laying down septa. (See figures 38-42.) Shortly
afterwards, branches are pushed out from these cells and these in turn
become septate and give off branches until a thick tangle of filaments
is produced. These processes, so readily followed in the simple germ
tube, are in all essentials the same in the later growth of the mycelium.
Branching is nearly always preceded by septa tion ; it is always mon-
opodial and it is very rarely that more than one branch is produced
from a single cell. The sinus at the septum, seen in the younger
mycelium, is less distinct in older hyphae. The manner of branching
is shown in figure 8. The individual hyphal cell is best studied in
agar culture although it shows some slight differences from the cell
in the bark, as will be explained later. The diameter of the hypha in
agar culture varies from 2 to 12 microns, and the length of the cells

14

from 20 to 50 microns. The apical cells have very dense protoplasm,
but, further back in the hyphae, large vacuoles appear, as shown in
figure 8. The protoplasm is not homogeneous but shows larg gran-
ules and certain refractive bodies. The wall is very thin and easily
collapses when dried. Each cell contains several small nuclei as
shown in the figure.

The yellow pigment. The mycelium grows luxuriantly on -a large
number of artificial media. Cultural studies have been reported in
detail by Murrill (2) and Clinton (83). Results secured by the writer
largely duplicate theirs, and will not be recorded here. For ordinary
purposes the writer has used potato agar. On this medium, at the
end of from four to six days the mycelium begins to turn yellow, due
to the production of a pigment in the cells. The same pigment gives
the characteristic color to the spore horns and the stromata on the
bark. It is apparently evenly difl'used in the cells or cell walls. The
writer has noticed that old agar cultures of the fungus often become
purple or wine colored. Other experimenters have told him they have
had the same experience and were at a loss to explain it. The con-
nection between the purple color and the yellow pigment as worked
out by H. W. Anderson, is this : The pigment is yellow and insoluble
when in an acid or neutral medium, but in an alkali medium is readily
soluble and takes on a purple color. This can readily be demon-
strated by pouring a solution of sodium hydroxide or any other alkali
over the yellow mycelium. The fungus, in its growth on the agar,
gradually causes it to become alkaline in character, and the pigment
goes into solution and colors the medium purple. Pantanelli (34)
says that the pigment is a lipochrome. Quite recently it was isolated
and its chemical reactions determined in some detail by Cecil Thomas
of Wabash College.* In this excellent piece of research, he shows
that it does not resemble a lipochrome in any way except in color
and solubility but that it is one of the colored compounds known
chemically as the aurines. It is best isolated by extracting with
alcohol and then precipitating with hydrochloric acid.

The fans. In order for the germ tube to gain access to the host
tissue the spore must germinate in a wound. As reported in Bulletin
3 of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, all attempts
to produce infection without a wound have failed. The germ tube is
not able to bore through the cork layer nor to enter through lenticels.
Even if one secured an occasional infection without making a wound,
it would be difficult to prove that the bark was free from small abra-
sions which had escaped the notice of the experimenter. But if ger-
mination takes place in fresh wounds, the germ tube will thrive on the
injured and dead cells until it has produced a mass of mycelium.
Then, gradually accumulating strength as it increases in size, the
mycelium en masse pushes out through the living tissues of the bark.

*Master's Thesis. Publication of the Botanical Department of Wabash College.

15

Single threads do not seem to possess the power to penetrate alone
among the living cells. Starting from a narrow point, the hyphae
grow out in ray-like bundles, completely destroying the parenchyma
and collenchyma and cambium cells as they go. All the rays start-
ing from a single point are contiguous and they form a fan-like mat of
mycelium as shown in figure 50. These fans are flat because they
are not able to destroy the segmental bast zones but must squeeze
between them. The edge of the fan is quite regular and is surrounded
by a darker gelatinous band of the disintegrating host cells.
Whether the cells are killed by a toxin secreted by the parasite
or whether they are killed by the mechanical action of the mass of
hyphae was not determined. The fans vary in length from one-eighth
to three-quarters of an inch. The young ones, on the advancing edge,
are pure white but as they become older they become light yellow or
buff in color. This color, however, is not due to a development of
pigment, since the pigment is never found in the fans; it is probably
due to a decomposition product of the disintegrating host cells, which
stains the mj^celiam. Each ray consists of a loose bundle of hyphae
running almost parallel and branching only sparsely. They are much
more uniform in diameter than the hyphae in agar culture. They are
about 7 microns in diameter and are divided into cells about 30
microns long. They are not anastomosed in any way ; a section of a
ray showing their relation is represented in figure 9. The individ-
ual cells of the hyphae are densely filled with rather coarsely gran-
ular protoplasm. As the fans become older, however, the cells be-
come vacuolate. Like most of the other cells of this fungus, they
are multinucleate. The fans are produced only in the growing sea-
son. Although the canker spreads slowly in the winter, no white
fresh fans are found in that season.

Rate of growth. The rate of growth of the mycelium under natural
conditions on the tree can be measured by the increase in the size of
the cankers. During the last twelve months, a large number of
cankers have been outlined at the end of each month as shown in
figure 49, and the averages computed for the months. Table I gives
the increase in diameter during the last year. The increase in
length — up and down the tree — is greater but not so important since
it is not the growth in this direction that kills the tree. The table
shows the effect of winter temperatures on the growth. The last
winter in Pennsylvania, however, was exceptionally mild, especially
the months of December and January.

Even the most rapid growth in the summer time — as indicated by
the table — is less than one millimeter per day. But on artificial
media, such as chestnut bark agar, the writer has often seen a growth
of three millimeters per day. Also, in the dying bark after the tree is
cut, the mycelium will spread at a much more rapid rate than when

16

it is invading the bark of a healthy tree. In the latter case, it does
not advance by producing fans but by individual strands.

TABLE 1.
Showing the monthly rate of growth of cankers. Transverse diame-
ters of the cankers.

?.a

June, 1912

July, 1912

August, 1912, .
September, 1912,
October, 1912, .
November, 1912,
December, 1912,
January. 1913, .
February, 1913,
March, 1913, ..
April, 1913, ....
May. 1913

31

l.SS

20(J

2.78

1S6

2.S3

140

1.85

.53

1.92

27

0.00

Z7

*1.35

,X9

.r-1

S9

0.0

84

.7

21

1.1

41

2.4

*DoubtfuI record. No growth at all on a large number of other trees examined.

Vitality. The mycelium, like the spores has a remarkable vitality.
That it is not injured in the least by low temperatures in winter is
proved by the fact that successful isolations were made from under
the bark during every month of the last winter, and also by the vigor
with which the canker resumes growth in the spring. To see if freez-
ing would affect it when exposed while growing under artificial con-
ditions, colonies were started on agar plates which when they were
about one inch in diameter, were put out of doors and kept frozen up
during the whole month of February which was the coldest month
of the winter. When brought back into the laboratory, they resumed
growth as vigorously as fresh colonies. Desiccation also has no
detrimental effect, as shown by the following experiments: In the
first one, bark was removed from a canker and stored under perfectly
dry conditions in the laboratory. Isolations have been made each
month and at present — at the end of ten months — the isolations are
just as successful as when the experiment was started. The second
was like the first except that diseased wood was stored instead of
diseased bark. This has been in progress only six months, but the iso-
lations are still successful. That a pile of bark or chips may be a
source of infection for a long time on account of the mycelium is

17

indicated by the following experiment: One year ago, some diseased
logs were peeled and the bark thrown into piles. Isolations have been
made from these heaps at the end of every month — being careful to
avoid contaminations from spores of the fungus — and uj) to the pres-
ent have been entirely successful. The writer has been unable to find
any especially resistant cells in the hyphae which tide it over.

The mycelium also invades the sap-wood to a depth of about four
or five rings. The hyphae are not different here except that they
are smaller than in the bark and do not enter the wood as fans. They
grow through and destroy the cells of the medullary rays and wood
parenchyma to some extent, and are found in the vessels in abundance,
but the walls of the latter are not affected by them.

PYCNIDIA.

The summer spores in all cases are produced in pycnidia. The
stages in the development of this organ are most readily observed on
artificial media, such as potato agar or chestnut bark agar. The
process is the same whether it takes place on agar or under the cork
layer of the tree or superficially on the exposed wood. But on agar it
is more simple and more easily followed. It will therefore be taken
up in detail as it occurs on artifical media, and then more briefly on
the bark and on the wood, noting particularly the points in which
they differ.

Development o?i artificial media. The first stages can be watched
directly under the microscope in Van Tieghem cells. Cultures of
pycnospores are made just as stated previously in describing the
methods of artificial germination of these spores. At the end of
twenty- four hours they are germinating, and in about four or five
days, at summer temperatures, the beginnings of the pycnidia can
be seen. They appear first where the weft of mycelium is the thickest
but they are more easily followed if one finds them on more
isolated branches. At certain points short cells are developed in
the hyphae by laying down of new walls, thus dividing the old cells.
The cells also increase in diameter and in the amount of cell con-
tents. Each of these short cells now sends out stubby, septate
branches, the cells of which in turn send out other branches. Such
a stage is shown in figures 1 and 2. By the continued branching —
or budding — of these cells, a tuft of hyphae is formed which re-
minds one of a witches' broom. This tuft seems also to exert an
infiuence on the neighboring hyphae and the more distant branches
of the same hypha, because they now grow toward it and mingle
with its branches so that in another day or two, the mass of hyphae
becomes so dense that a surface view no longer shows what is oc-
curring. The little blocks of agar are then fixed in fixing solution,
2

18

sectioned and stained to be studied in cross section. Figure 3 shows a
cross section of a pycnidium grown in this way- It is merely a solid
ball of hyphae densely intertwined but not grown together in any way
by their lateral walls. The hyphae appear to be all alike in every
particular, that is, there is no differentiation of wall cells and core
cells.

The succeeding stages are best studied by the following method:
A single culture is made at the center of an agar plate and permitted
to grow until it has almost reached the edge of the plate. Beginning
at the center, concentric rings of pycnidia are formed as shown in
figure 51. Starting from the outermost, the pycnidia of each ring
are one day younger than those of the next succeeding ring. This
gives a perfect series of successive stages, from those which are so
small that they can barely be seen with the naked eye to fully mature
ones pushing out spore horns at the center of the plate. A perfectly
flat cross section of one on the outer ring is given in figure 4 and
shows that it corresponds to the stage observed in Van Tieghem
cells and represented in figure 3. It is merely a solid tangle of un-
differentiated hyphae. There is, as yet, no evidence of a cavity at
the center. In the next older stage, figure 5, the hyphae begin to
pull apart slightly and become loose at the center but are not other-
wise differentiated. Those branches which extend into this loose area
begin to lay down cross walls at regular intervals and as the cells,
thus formed, become mature they are cut off successively from the
ends of the hyphae and lie free in the cavity (Figure 57). These short
cells are the first pycnospores. As all the branches projecting into
the central area are cut up to make spores, the cavity is naturally
enlarged. But other branches now push in from the surrounding
hyphae and more spores are cut off from their apices until the cavity
becomes densely filled with them. The size of the cavity increases
then, first, by the constant cutting off of the branches and, second,
on account of the increased pressure from within caused by the pack-
ing of the spores. Also the crowding for space by the new conidio-
phores would tend to distend the walls. This pressure from within
causes the hyphae which are on the periphery to be crowded together
and to form a sort of a wall. This wall layer is not so distinct in
the pycnidia on agar because there is nothing on the outside to re-
sist the pressure but in the pycnidia on the bark it is quite distinct.
Also, the membranes of the wall cells become somewhat thicker at
this time. A section from the wall in this stage, showing the rela-
tion of the conidiophores, is shown in figure 6. There is no ostiole
whatever at this time but a little later the hyphae become loose at
a point on the upper wall of the pycnidium and the spores are forced
out through this by the pressure from within. The ostiole is thus
formed by the same process as the cavity itself. It is very indefinite

19

at first but as it becomes older and wider, it becomes surrounded by
a more definite wall just like that of the cavity.

When fully mature, the cavity may be as much as a fourth of a
millimeter in diameter. It is usually almost circular in cross section,
but "Sometimes shows the convoluted form which will be described
later as occurring in mature stromata on the bark. The conidio-
phores form a dense, brush-like fringe and extend directly out into
the cavit}' from every point of the wall. They are of uneven lengths,
the majority being 2040 microns long and about 1.5 microns in dia-
meter. Four of them are shown highly magnified in figure 7. In
an unstained section, the septa of the conidiophores cannot be made
out but, when properly stained with iron-alum haematoxylin and
erythrosin, the septa show up very plainly as unstained lines across
the sporophore. It will be seen that almost the whole length of the
conidiophores is divided into regular cells, each of which contains a
single nucleus. As the cells become mature, they break off success-
ively as conidia. Just how many break off from a single conidio-
phores was not determined. The majority of them are simple, but
branched conidiophores, as shown in figure 7, are not uncommon.
But they are never so frequent or so much branched in this type of
pycnidium as in the types to be discussed later. In the older
pycnidia they are longer than in the young ones. Among the con-
idiophores are certain longer branches which project further into the
cavity. These are evidently the structures which Pantanelli (89)
calls paraphyses. Yet he seems to have some hesitation in designat-
ing them by that name, because in a footnote at the bottom of the
page he adds; "Non tutte si possono considerare come parafisi o
pseudoparafisi, perche talvolta formano conidii alia loro estremita."
The writer also found pycnospores on the tips of them and they are
also divided into the same regular uninucleate cells as the conidio-
phores. They branch like the conidiophores and, as for their length,
all lengths can be found from 75 microns down to 10 microns. One
would be excusable for wondering on what basis they would be
distinguished from the conidiophores.

Factors influencing production. As indicated above, the time
required for the production of pycnidia on artificial media is very
short. When ascospores, naturally ejected from the perithecia, are
caught on plates of sterile chestnut bark agar, they germinate in a
few hours and at the end of from five to seven days — where they
fall thickly on the agar — a pycnidium containing mature spores
will be formed at every point where a spore or group of spores fell.
These pycnidia differ in no way from those described above. When
cultures are made from pycnospores by making streaks on potato
agar, pycnidia containing mature spores are usually developed with-
in eight days at ordinary summer temperatures. At lower tempera-

20

tures, the time required is much longer. As previously mentioned,
plates of the fungus exposed to out-of-doors temperatures during
the last winter showed considerable growth of the mycelium but in
no case were pycnidia produced on these plates. Also on the trees,
where the spread of the cankers was measured each month by a
painted outline, it was observed that no pycnidia or even "blisters"
were developed on the ' diseased areas that were added during the
winter. These experiments indicate that the fungus will grow at a
lower temperature than that at which it will produce pycnidia.

Another factor which influences the production of pycnidia is
light. When plate cultures are grown in total darkness on chestnut
bark agar, no pycnidia are developed, while on plates made at the
same time and grown in the light, the usual rings of pycnidia ap-
pear (Figure 57). Experiments were also tried in which the plate was
left in darkness until about half-covered with mycelium and then
brought into the light. Circles of pycnidia were developed, beginning
with the ring which marked the outermost limit of the colony when
removed from the dark chamber. The concentric rings which always
appear on agar cultures are due to the alternation of night and day.

When young trees in the woods are inoculated, the pycnidia do
not become evident as soon as on artificial media. But, even here,
the spore-horns have been observed in three weeks on inoculations
made with pycnospores. "Blisters," indicating the development of
the pycnidia under the cork layer, have been observed in eighteen
days.

Development of pycnidia on the young canker. The first outward
indication of the pj^cnidia is the appearance of numerous little raised
"blisters" just back of the advancing edge of the canker (Figure
45). They are perfectly smooth little mounds and, under the hand
lens, appear slick and somewhat translucent. Contrary to published
statements of investigators of this disease (e. g. 4: 187), they bear
no relation whatever to the lenticels. They seem rather to avoid the
lenticels. On account of their smooth, unbroken surface they can-
not be confused with the latter at this stage, but at later stages,
when they are broken open at the apices, they often give the er-
roneous appearance of having been formed in the lenticels. They are
much more numerous than the lenticels, often being so thick as to
be in contact with each other. If the cork layer is carefully re-
moved, the beginning of a single pycnidium will be found under each
of these raised places. At this stage they are hyaline, more or less
globose or biscuit-shaped cushions with a moist gelatinous appear-
ance, about half imbedded in the disintegrating collenchyma tissue,
the other half projecting upward and raising the cork layer to form
the pimple. In size, they vary from those on the outermost edge
which are almost microscopic to those a millimeter in diameter just

31

before the breaking of the phelloderm. There is no stroma at this
time, but each one is very early surrounded with a fringe of loose
mycelium which is the forerunner of the stroma. It is at first white
but begins to turn yellow even before the cork layer is broken.
When a cross section is made of this moist-looking cushion, it is
found to be a closely wound ball of hyphae corresponding to figure
4, as decribed under the development of the pycnidium in culture.
There are no pycnospores and as yet no indication of a cavity. From
the periphery toward the center of the canker the cushions are suc-
cessively larger and more of the developing stroma about them until
the cushions are entirely covered by the mycelial weft, which is
now bright yellow. The cavity, sporophores and pycnospores are
developed from this cushion in exactly the same way as described
above on agar plates and will not be again described. Where the
pycnidia originate very closely together, the stromata often come
into contact and coalesce so that we now have a compound stroma —
to all appearances, a single stroma containing several pycnidia. This
condition has been found by the writer in mature stromata several
times but seems to be rather the exception — a single much con-
voluted or labyrinthiform pycnidium in each stroma being the rule.
Apparently, even when by coalescence several pycnidia are thrown
into one stroma, the receding walls of the chambers soon come into
contact and portions of them are broken down so that there is now
one large, irregular cavity. So far as observed, the stroma never
precedes the pycnidium. A pycnidium first starts and later the
stroma forms about it. There is no rind layer on the stroma previous
to the breaking of the cork layer. This latter process is brought
about through pressure exerted by the growing pycnidium beneath.
By this time the spores have developed and soon push out in curling
tendrils through the rent in the cork layer.

Spore Horns. They are light yellow in color at first and have a
waxy appearance. As they become older they take on a reddish cast.
They vary in size from the diameter of a hair to a half-millimeter and
in length from a millimeter to more than 2.5 cm. The writer and
J. E. Guyer measured an exceptionally long one that was two and
one-half inches in length. On young cankers on smooth-barked trees,
they are usually small in diameter, single and twisted into several
coils, but on the bark of old trees, where they come from the lines
of stromata in the crevices, they are large, stout and irregular and
often a whole line of them are united eomb-like. Figure 48 shows
this condition in which they are coming out from rough, burnt-over
bark. In cross section, the horns are usually flat or irregular in
shape, and only rarely circular. This accounts largely for the w^iy
they curl. The irregular twisting is shown in figure 47. When dry,
they are hard and brittle, and it takes some little effort to break

22

them loose. It is doubtful if a wind is ever strong enough to break
them ofif and carry them away when dry. But when they become
wet, they swell and the spores — of which they are entirely com-
posed— separate and wash down the tree, but as soon as the rain is
over, new spore-horns appear with surprising rapidity. Just how
long a pycnidium will continue to produce spores has not been deter-
mined. During the last season, on young cankers produced by in-
oculation in the spring, the horns were abundant after each rain
until the latter part of the summer, when the pushing out of the
stromata indicated the beginning of the perithecial stage. After
that, very few spore-horns were found on these cankers. Heald and
Gardner (93) have shown that the p3''cnospores are produced in the
winter. Except in cases where they were protected and kept dry,
so that tendrils produced in the summer were not washed away,
the writer has not seen spore-horns in the winter, but this is prob-
ably due to the fact that they are produced at such a slow rate that
they are washed away before their size makes them noticeable. They
first began to appear this season, (1913), about the middle of April.

Pycnidia in the older stromata.^ About the middle of the summer,
on cankers produced by inoculations in the spring, there is an active
increase in the amount of stromatic tissue, and the pycnidia in the
top of this new stroma are pushed out through the cork layer. Mean-
while they continue to increase in size. During this increase, the
cavity does not remain round but becomes intricately labyrinthi-
form, as shown in figures 11 and 55. This shape is easily explained
when one considers the method by which the pycnidium increases
in size. As previously indicated, the walls are constantly receding
in all directions. The new stromatic tissue is mingled with portions
of the disintegrating host tissue, and when the receding wall comes
in contact with this tissue, it continues to recede on both sides of
it, but the part around the obstruction remains as a process jutting
out into the cavity. This is repeated many times until often the
entire stroma will be found honeycombed with numerous but com-
municating irregular chambers. A simple case is shown in figure
55. This explanation accounts for the shape of the pycnidium only
in part because this type is sometimes found on agar cultures where
there are evidently no such obstructions. When cross sections of
the stromata are cut, a single section usually shows a number of
cavities which do not appear to be connected, but if the entire stroma
is cut into serial sections, it will usually be found to contain but
a single many-chambered pycnidium. Occasionally however, the
writer has found stromata which contained three or four distinct
pycnidia.

The pycnidial form of this fungus has often been referred to the
genus Gytospora, based on the idea that the stroma typically con-

23

tains a number of pycnidia. Evidently this is a mistake. If there
is need of a distinct generic name for this stage, it should be referred
to Endothiella, a genus erected by Saccardo, (Ann. Myc. 4:7o),
based on the imperfect form of Endothia gyrosa. Saccardo did not
apply this name merely to the superficial type on wood, but under
this word he included all forms of the pycnidial stage. The laby-
rinthifoim pycnidium in the mature stroma becomes larger than
the forms developed on agar and on wood. Cavities more than a
millimeter in diameter have been found by the writer. Besides
diflfering somewhat in shape and size, this type also differs from the
type on agar in that the wall layer is more distinct, and the conidio-
phores are more branched and longer.

Superficial pycnidia. Another form of the pycnidium is found on
the cut ends of stumps and logs and both on the wood and the inside
of the bark where the latter has broken loose and an air space is
left between it and the wood. These are superficial, single pycnidia.
A group of them is shown in figure 12. A favorite place for them
is on the inside of the bark where it has drawn away from the
stump around the top, after the tree is cut. Also after a log or
stump on which there was a canker is peeled, the pycnidia will de-
velop on the surface very quickly if it does not dry out too soon.
Their production is largely dependent on the water supply. This
is illustrated by the fact that in dry weather they will develop on
the lower side of a log lying on the ground,' but not on the upper
side. Their shape also varies with the amount of moisture. In the
more moist, shaded situations, they are long pear-shaped or conical,
as shown in figure 12, or the base may be flattened out slightly on the
substratum. But on tops of stumps — where they occur abundantly
on the outermost four or five annual rings, and where the supply
of moisture is not constant — they are flattened out on the substratum
and do not stand out free as shown in the figure. Also they have
more of a tendency to run together here. In color they are deeper
red than the stromata, but have light yellow conspicuous ostioles
which project upward in a sort of neck or beak. They are surround-
ed by no stroma whatever, and stand out free so that they can easily
be picked off with a dissecting needle. They measure about a quarter
of a millimeter in diameter and the same in height. The outer wall
is perfectly smooth as seen under the hand lens. Often several of
them grow together, but their ostioles remain distinct and we have
the appearance of a single pycnidium with several ostioles.

The writer has not seen all the developmental stages of this type,
but there is no reason to believe that they differ essentially from those
on agar or under the cork layer. A cross-section of one when ma-
ture, (fig. 54), shows no differences in the configuration of the cavity,
the character of the conidiophores, etc. The walls are thicker and

24

much more dense, however, and the ostiole is more perfectly formed
than in the others previously observed.

Usually, this type of pycnidium is not followed by the perithecia,
but in two cases, where they were between the bark and the wood,
the writer has found perithecia developing among them.

STROMATA.

The stromata are more often seen and better known than any
other stage of this fungus. They are the reddish brown cushions
mentioned in the introduction, which are scattered thickly over the
canker and make it so conspicuous and easy of diagnosis. A canker
thickly beset with them is shown in figure 44. The beginning of the
stroma has been mentioned in treating of the pycnidium. As stated
there, it always starts as a loose growth of hyphae around the
pycnidium. It does not precede, but follows the first stages in the
development of that organ. This stage of the stroma may often be
observed on agar cultures where the pycnidia are rather far apart,
A fluffy growth of light yellow mycelium surrounds the pycnidium,
and covers it over until often nothing can be seen but a mass of
spores oozing from the top of a loose ball of hyphae. If these are
imbedded and sectioned, they will be found to contain a loose tangle
of undifferentiated hyphae surrounding a central pycnidium. No
rind layer is produced under these conditions. This corresponds
to the stage on the bark which precedes the rupturing of the cork
layer. But as soon as the cork layer is broken, the stroma under-
goes a change. There is a rapid increase in size, and at the same
time, a differentiation of the cells at the tips of those branches which
reach the exposed surface. These cells now become shorter and
thicker, acquire heavier walls, and are densely crowded together,
so that in cross section they appear as a pseudoparenchymatous tis-
sue (Fig. 10). The rind thus formed covers all of the exposed sur-
face of the stroma, and also grows up around the necks of the
perithecia (Fig. 11). The cells are pretty well filled with protoplasm
and stain deeply. They also contain more pigment than the other
cells. The interior or medulla of the stroma remains the same. As
shown in the base of figure 10, it is merely a loose tangle of hyphae
which are much branched and more often septate, but in all other
respects, like the usual vegetative hyphae. The cell contents, nuclei,
vacuoles, walls, etc., are just the same. They also contain a large
amount of pigment. Stone cells, bast fibres and remnants of the
walls of the collenchyma cells are scattered through the basal parts.
A diagrammatic drawing of a stroma showing the location of the
pycnidium, perithecia and rind layer is given in figure 11. When
they first come through the cork layer, they are lemon yellow in color
but with age the color deepens to orange, reddish brown and finally

25

cinnamon brown, But when cut into, they are found to be lighter
colored on the inside than on the surface. Fully mature, they aver-
age about 2.4 X 1.2 millimeters in size, being usually elongated hori-
zontally as shown in figure 44. They average about 1.3 millimeters
in depth. The size however, depends largely on the location and
the season. If they grow in a moist situation they are much larger
than where they are exposed to desiccation. On old rough bark,
they do not occur as shown in figure 44, but come out only in the
crevices of the bark, often united in a solid line for several inches
so that they apparently form one long stroma. Otherwise they do
not differ from those described above.

PERITHECIA.

Previous to the beginning of the perithecial stage, the cork layer
has been broken only by the emerging spore-horns. The small
amount of stroma that is developed lies entirely beneath this cork
layer, that is, none of it is erumpent as yet. The change to the peri-
thecial stroma has been observed within eight weeks after inocula-
tion. On trees inoculated in June the stromata have been observed
in August. The stroma increases very rapidly in size and pushes
off more of the cork layer. Not only does it fill up the enlarged rent
in the phelloderm, but it also grows out over the torn edges to some
extent so that they are included in the stroma as shown in figure
11. If one peels off the cork layer now, either the entire stroma, or
at least the top comes oft* with it. The stroma now has an erumpent
superficial appearance as shown in figures 43 and 44.

Primordia. When we speak of the perithecial stroma, however,
we do not mean that it contains perithecia as yet. Spot infections
have been under observation where the perithecial stromata were
in abundance on all the cankers in the early spring, but there was no
outward appearance of perithecia during the entire summer. On
the other hand pycnospores may be pushed out from these stromata
in numerous spore-horns during the entire season. Cross sections
of these stromata show that the pycnidia are now located in the
periphery, the mass of stroma having been formed beneath them and
pushing them out through the cork layer. Their location is shown
in figure 11.

The most noticeable feature in a cross section at this stage is the
numerous primordia — the earliest stages in the development of the
perithecia. These arise usually in the tissues of the bark below tbe
base of the original pycnidium and by their growth and the growth
of the new stromatic tissue about them, they push these disorganized
elements upward and apart so that scattered fragments of them are
found included throughout the base of the stroma. The primordia
do not always originate however in the lower layers. At times they

26

may be found well up in the stroma without a trace of the disorgan-
ized bark about them. A stained cross section shows one or two
very prominent large, deeply stained cells at the center of each
primordium, and running around these in close concentric circles
are enlarged strands of mycelium. These latter also stain quite
heavily so that the stain may be taken out of all the rest of the
stroma and still leave the primordia quite prominent.

The number of primordia in a single stroma may be very large —
over one hundred having been counted in one. They fill up most of
the available space in the base of the stroma and are often so close
that they give the appearance of double or triple primordia. All of
them however, do not develop into mature perithecia on account of
the lack of space and possibly of food supply. When the perithecia
are mature there are usually fifteen to thirty in a stroma. This
means that one out of every four or five primordia reaches maturity.
Their degeneration takes place at all stages almost up to the mature
perithecium, but by far the greater number never get past the as-
cogonial stage. Sections of the stroma at any subsequent stage will
show these starved primordia in the base. Both the ascogonial cells
and the enveloping hyphae lose their contents almost entirely, and ap-
pear as empty cells which no longer take the stain like those of the
healthy primordia and are usually pressed out of shape by the
growth of the latter.

The large central cells are part of the organ which was first known
as the Woronin Hypha but now more commonly called the car-
pogonium. The cells of the carpogonium lying within the envelop-
ing hyphae as described above are the ascogonial cells, or simply
the ascogonium. In a thin section usually only one or two of them
is seen, (Figs. 19 and 20), but if serial sections are examined, it
will be found that they number from two to five in each primordium
and are wound into a circle or, more often, a spiral of one or two
coils. Occasionally, the entire structure may be seen in one section
as shown in figure 21. The cells are elongate, oval and slightly
curved to fit into the segment of the spiral of which they are a part.
Fully mature, each measures about 10 x 25 microns. They are deeply
constricted at the septa and apparently are only loosely connected;
in fact in prepared sections they are very frequently not in contact
at all— especially the older ones.

They are very densely filled with protoplasm, and for this reason,
easily brought out by differential staining, retaining the protoplasmic
stains with great tenacity. They are best stained with Heidenhain's
iron-alum haematoxylin and erythrosin. The nucleoli are especially
tenacious of the haematoxylin, and in a properly differentiated cell,
the writer has counted as high as eighteen nuclei. They may be
quite readily brought out by Flemming's triple stain. These two

27

stains have been used interchangeably, their relative eflSciency de-
pending on the points to be brought out and the stage under con-
sideration. Outside the nucleolus, however, the resting nucleus does
not retain the stain when treated with the haematoxylin and a
definite nuclear membrane is made out only in the more favorable
cases. The usual appearance of the nucleus is shown in figure 20,
merely an intensely stained nucleolus surrounded by a circular clear
area. The nuclei are much more numerous in the ascogonial cells
than in the cells of the enveloping hyphae, usually only about two
to five appearing in each of the latter. They are also larger and
more prominent.

The ascogonial spiral does not terminate inside the primordium
but is continued up through the stroma as a large-celled, prominent,
deeply staining thread. The thread can be traced entirely to the
surface of the stroma. The cells are of a less diameter than in the
cells of the ascogonium and not curved and do not show such deep
constrictions at the septa. The cell contents, including the prom-
inent nuclei, are the same as in the ascogonium. Fourteen nuclei
have been counted in a single cell. This thread has been called the
trichogyne and the writer will continue to use that term, not im-
plying by so doing that it has the functions of a true trichogyne.
They are often found branching, and in the upper part of the stroma
they may be distinguished in great numbers on account of their
avidity for stains. It is not so easy to trace them through the
pseudoparenchymatous rind because the cells of the latter are quite
compact and stain deeply. The apical cells usually project slightly
beyond the surface.

So far as could be determined, the trichogyne is a useless organ
in the development of the perithecium. It is probably a remnant
of an ancestry in which a copulation with a free spermatium was
essential to the further development of the carpogonium. Lindau*
has suggested as the function of a similar organ in the lichens the
breaking of a way through the thallus for the emerging apothecium.
A similar function here, that is, making a path for the advancing
neck of the perithecium, is very doubtful. The trichogyne threads
become less distinct as they become older and finally cannot be seen
any more.

The stage containing the mature ascogonia is evidently a resting
stage for it has been found more numerously than any of the other
developmental stages of the perithecium. As a rule, the primordia
of one stroma are all in the same stage. The writer hoped to find
stromata in which the primordia were all in a younger stage, in
which he could determine the exact origin of the ascogonium. Up
to the present however, he has not secured such a stroma, and has

♦Lindau, G. "Uber Anlage und Entwicklung einiger Flechten Apothecien." Flora, ISSS.

28

had to depend on a relatively small number of apparently incipient
primordia which were found in older stromata. The earliest stages
found are represented in figures 15, 16 and 17. They show merely
a coiled hyphal branch, somewhat larger than the stromatal hyphae
which surround it and taking the stain very deeply. In figure 15
there is no indication of a differentiation of the surrounding hyphae
to form the envelope. Figures 16 and 17 show the beginning of such
a differentiation. Whether this young ascogonial branch is a new
formation, or whether it is merely a transformed pre-existing branch
of the mycelium, could not be determined with certainty, but the
writer is inclined to the latter view by what evidence he has seen.
The envelope is differentiated from the surrounding hyphae, and is
in no direct connection with the ascogonial branch. As the as-
cogonial cells increase in size, the number and size of the enveloping
cells also increases as indicated by the succession shown by figures
16, 17, 18, etc.

Degeneration of the ascogonium and growth of the enveloping
hyphae. Figure 21 shows the highest point of development in what
we have called the ascogonial stage. The entire primordium is now
about 50-75 microns in diameter. The material from which this fig-
ure was drawn was taken in the late fall. In the first week of the
following March, material was collected from the same tree, and all
the primordia now appeared in cross-section like figure 22. This is
the beginning of a new stage of development. The seat of activity
seems to have been removed from the ascogonium to the enveloping
hyphae. From this time on, the ascogonium degenerates. The dense
protoplasmic content gradually disappears, and now the contents are
represented either by ragged bridles across the lumen and irregular
masses around the walls, as shown in figure 22, or else the entire
contents draws up into a misshapen mass which stains very deeply
with safranin.

The behavior of the enveloping cells is quite the contrary. Their
contents now becomes more dense and retains the protoplasmic stains
more deeply than the ascogonial cells. Their nuclei also become more
prominent and apparently more numerous. Up to this time the in-
dividual hyphae can be traced, and there are open spaces between
them ; but now they have increased both in size and in number, and
filled up the intervening spaces. They appear as a pseudoparenchy-
matous tissue instead of a coil of hyphae. The increased growth
presses in the sides of the ascogonial cells which now have nothing
within to keep up their turgor.

The most important question at this time is in regard to the
branching of the ascogonium. Eeasoning from analogy with many
other Ascomycetes, we would expect the ascognia to give rise to
ascogenous hyphae before their degeneration. Many hours were

29

spent searching for these hyphae. Only in a few cases was a con-
dition found which would lead one to believe that there were such
branches. Three of these cases are shown in figures 24, 25 and 27.
All of these, however, occurred when the ascogonium was about ready
to break down. A distinct opening between the ascogonia and these
cells could be made out. The cells of these ''apparent branches" differ
little from the surrounding cells except that the first cell is usually
almost devoid of contents, like the ascogonium. Since there is no
way of distinguishing them from the surrounding cells, their identity
cannot be determined in subsequent stages. In the vast majority of
cases, no such branches were found, but this may have been due to
a lack of sufficient material in the right stage for observation of this
point.

Beginning of the differentiation. The primordium now increases
very rapidly in size. The cells at the center grow more rapidly than
those at the periphery and at the same time the contents become more
vacuolar. The reciprocal pressure gives them more and more the
appearance of a pseudoparenchj^matous tissue. The peripheral cells
on the other hand become elongated and flattened by the pressure
from the center, and at the same time are less vacuolar than the
central cells. This stage is shown in figure 23. As yet there is no
sharp differentiation of the wall cells. The crushed remains of the
ascogonium are occasionally seen at this stage but have not been
found later.

This period also marks the beginning of the neck, which is in-
itiated by a vigorous outgrowth of small cells at a point of the
periphery toward the exposed surface of the stroma, forming a blunt
cone (Fig. 23). The cells are very compact and have a dense pro-
toplasmic content with several small nuclei in each cell. It is not
possible at this time to trace individual hyphae- in the young neck.
No canal is evident.

The next step marks a complete differentiation of the core cells
and the cells which are to form the wall of the perithecium. The
cells at the center become larger and still more vacuolated. The
membranes remain very thin. They form a perfectly spherical core
and are set off by an even line from the wall cells which have now be-
come more distinctly elongated and flattened. The membranes of
the latter cells become thicker and the contents still remain dense
so that it is now easy in stained sections to tell the exact dividing
line between wall and core. The distinctness of this line gives the
impression of two different tissues. A camera lucida drawing of
a few cells on either side of this line is given in figure 28. It will
be noticed here that one of the cells seems to be differentiating into
a core cell at one end and a wall cell at the ot^er. Such a condition
indicates that these two tissues are not of different origin. The

30

core now measures about 135 microns in diameter and the wall is
composed of eight to twelve layers of cells and is about 35 microns
in thickness.

Pathological conditions. Peculiar pathological conditions of the
young perithecium are numerous at this as well as previous stages.
The delicate- walled core cells break down very easily and primordia
containing a central cavity, even before the beginning of the neck,
are common and misleading to any one searching for the normal be-
ginning of the cavity. Frequently very fine hyphae are found enter-
ing between the corecells and apparently living parasitically upon
them, causing them to break down and thus furnish a rich pabulum
for the invading hyphae. Soon a dense, deeply stained tangle of these
hyphae fills the lower part of the cavity. These are not the asco-
genous hyphae, as the writer suspected when he first saw them, and
such perithecia develop no further but may often be found crushed
out of shape between the naturally maturing perithecia.

The cavity and paraphyses. The normal formation of the cavity
appears about the time the length of the neck equals the diameter
of the perithecium. A portion of the cells in the lower part of the
core — not on the periphery of the core but inward by about two to
four layers of cells — begins to break down, and in this cavity are
now found only scattered, irregular masses of protoplasm, degener-
ated nuclei and occasionally a part of a wall. Sometimes an entire
cell may remain intact even after all the cells about it have broken
down. But there is never a large cavity at any one time. As soon
as a few cells are broken down, the cells which border on the cavity
below begin a new period of activity. Even at this time they can be
distinguished by more prominent and numerous nuclei; the walls
are more distinct and the contents increases slightly in density.
These are the initial cells of the paraphyses which are now pushed
out into the cavity and follow its receding upper limit. Their origin
is shown in figure 29. They yerj soon become septate and at subse-
quent stages their origin would be hard to determine. They are
composed of short, plump cells, very rich in protoplasm, staining
very deeply, and containing several nuclei. The paraphyses branch
frequently and are very crooked, and, hence dilficult to trace indi-
vidually in thin sections. Not only do they extend upward into the
cavity, but some of them run around the periphery and send out
frequent vertical branches into the cavity. They line only the bottom
and never come from the roof, at which place the core-cells remain
intact for a long time. A perithecium in a rather young paraphyses
stage is shown in figure 30. It is now about 200 microns in diameter.
There are no ascogenous hyphae or young asci at this time. The outer
wall has become more pronounced and is distinctly divided from
the bases of the paraphyses by several layers of large, clear core cells.

31

As the paraphyses become older, their component cells become more
elongated and slender. When the young asci appear they begin to
lose their dense contents and are soon not easy to distinguish.
But even after the first asci are mature, they may be seen as slender
filaments devoid of contents except for the nuclei, which persist for
a long time. Their function is probably to nourish the growing asci.

The asci. The writer was unable to determine the origin of the
ascogenous hyphae. The young asci arise as branches of a system
of hyphae which appear among the bases of the paraphyses, but
which cannot be distinguished from the paraphysogenous hyphae
by staining reactions or otherwise. They are undoubtedly a different
system and in no case has an ascus and a paraphysis been seea
coming from the same hypha. At the time the asci first appear the
perithecium is about 250 microns in diameter, and the neck is near-
ing the surface of the stroma but has not yet begun to turn black. So
far as could be determined from the material examined, the asci arise
as ordinary lateral or terminal branches. The young ascus is broadly
clavate. In the uninucleate stage, the protoplasm is gathered about
the large nucleus, which is usually at the center, the ends being less
dense and therefore taking less stain. By three successive divisions,
eight nuclei are produced and the protoplasm about them becomes
clear and is soon closed off from the epiplasm by a membrane. But,
at the same time, the nucleus is dividing again and by the time the
wall can be distinguished, there is also a distinct septum in the
spore. This condition, in which there is a single nucleus in each
end of the spores, does not persist very long but soon there is another
division, making two nuclei in each end and frequently, by successive
divisions, the mature spore has three or four nuclei in each end, as
previously stated. The details of the nuclear divisions and the
cutting out of the spores in the ascus, being purely cytological and
outside the scope of this work, were not followed more closely.

Mature asci with the spores in place are shown in figures 34, 35
and 36. The arrangement of the spores in the ascus is irregularly
uniseriate or subbiseriate. There is, however, no uniformity in their
arrangement and two asci can hardly be found in which the spores
are placed alike. The epiplasm is still very distinct, especially where
it tapers to a point at the top of the ascus. There is a thickened
ring — reminding one of a doughnut — about the upper extremity of
the lumen of the ascus which is very prominent and shows peculiar
staining reactions. It has been suggested that it is at this point
that the top of the ascus breaks off to free the spores. This explanation
is at least, plausible, but the writer has never been able to find the
asci in the process of liberating the spores, and is therefore, unable
to confirm the theory. When the ascus is lying flat on the side — as
is practically always the case in water mounts, the ring appears in

32

cross section as two highly refractive disks such as is shown in
figures 35 and 36. As figure 34 shows, the spore-bearing part of the
ascus is only about three-fourths of its total length. But in dried
specimens the point draws down until the ring is very close to the
spores as shown in figure 36. The natural shape is not recovered at
once on placing the ascus in water. This fact should be taken into
account in making measurements. It is best to use only fresh speci-
mens. Murrill (4), gives the dimensions of the ascus as 45 — 50x9
microns. The average of one hundred and fifty measurements made
by the writer was 51.2 x 8.9 microns.

Development of the neck. Even before the complete differentiation
of the core- and wall-cells, it is noticeable that the cells on the upper
side are pushing outward in a sort of a knob, and by the time the core
has become distinct, this structure has become a definite cone as
represented in figure 23. At this time the cells are small and very
compact, and distinct hyphae cannot be made out. The cone is a
perfectly solid mass, that is, there is no indication of a canal in the
center. But as the hyphae elongate toward the surface of the
stroma, they become less entangled, running almost parallel, converg-
ing toward the apex of the advancing cone and leaving an open canal
through the center. This advancing apex is shown in figure 31.
The hyphae, are slender, very densely filled with protoplasm and,
therefore, stain quite deeply. The arrangement is loose and indi-
vidual hyphae can be traced for long distances. The septa are far
apart. The converging apices are usually somewhat swollen. As
the apex pushes toward the surface, the stromatic hyphae are not
destroyed but are merely wedged apart to make room for the neck.
At a distance of about 50-75 microns from the apex, it will be noticed
that the hyphae are increasing in diameter and new branches are
being inserted. This process continues until the wall of the neck is
composed of densely packed hyphae and is quite firm. The walls of
these cells also become thick, and about the time the apex has
reached the surface, they become black. The apices of the branches
which extend into the central canal, however, do not take on these
latter characters but remain thin-walled and loose. These are the
periphyses. They extend outward and upward and their apices
almost come into contact. They are shown in figure 32. They are
confined to the neck and never occur within the perithecium proper.
But as yet the canal in the upper part of the neck is separated from
the cavity of the perithecium by the upper wall of the latter and
the cells of the solid cone which formed the beginning of the neck.
About the time that the paraphyses are maturing in the cavity, the
cells in a direct line from the cavity to the upper canal begin to draw
apart and to react differently to stains. These cells have not become
thick- walled like the other cells of the perithecial wall. There is prob-

33

ably also a disintegration of some of the cells which formed the
perithecial wall, but not of the cells of the original cone. These
latter merely draw apart, and the cells left projecting into the canal
thus formed take on the character of periphyses. Also where the
canal breaks through the wall, some of the cells are left projecting
like periphyses. These periphyses in the lower part of the canal differ
from those in the upper part in their irregularity, and in not pro-
jecting upward at an acute angle. An early stage in the formation
of the lower canal is shown in figure 32.

It is impossible to tell whether the neck follows the course taken
by the trichogyne up through the stroma since the trichogyne has en-
tirely disappeared by this time. The stroma is usually much broader
at the bottom than at the place where it breaks through the cork
layer. For this reason the necks seem to converge at the top. The way
in which the necks bend to get through the cork layer is shown in
figure 53. Where a broad stroma has formed, however, and a large
area of the cork has broken away, tlie necks extend almost straight
upward. There is not naturally a distinct valsoid disk in which all
the necks converge. The arrangement is diatrypoid rather than val-
soid. This fact is of importance in placing the species in its proper
genus. The neck does not usually end flush with the stromatic surf-
ace, but extends beyond as a little papilla (Fig. 11). The distance
to which the papilla extends depends largely on the location of the
stroma and the conditons under which it grows. In a dry situation
with plenty of sunlight, it may hardly project at all, while in
shaded places and especially where it is moist, it may project more
than a millimeter. Much longer ones may be produced by developing
them in moist chambers. These papillae are not composed entirely of
the hyphae which grow out from the wall of the perithecium but as
they push out beyond the surface, the rind tissue grows up about
them. A cross section of a papilla is shown in figure 33. If the ad-
vancing apex of the neck encounters a pycnidium in the stroma, it
grows directly through it or occasionally may curve slightly around
it

The mature perithecmm. When mature, the perithecium measures
about 350-400 microns in diameter and is mostly spherical in shape
but the shape is often modified by pressure of other perithecia. Ais
seen under the hand lens, the wall is gray or lead colored but not jet
black and shining like the wall of the neck. In cross section, the
wall now appears thinner than when the perithecium was young,
and the cells are more flattened. The cell-walls are heavy. The struc-
ture of the perithecial wall is shown in figure 30. The layers of large
core cells which previously divided the contents of the cavity from
the wall, have now entirely collapsed and, as a result, the a sens
mass is only loosely attached to the wall, and usually pulls away in
3

34

sectioning. The entire cavity is now tightly packed with asci. The
older ones, having been pushed up are at the center and in the upper
part, and the younger ones lining the walls. The writer has calculated
the number of asci in a full pei ithecium at 3600, or 28,800 spores.

Ejection of the spores. Rankin (59) has discovered that the asco-
spores are forcibly ejected from the necks of the perithecia into the
air, and showed that this occurs only during periods of rain.
Heald and Gardner (76, 93) demonstrated the effect of temperature,
showing that expulsion does not take place below 52° F., and that
after being subjected to loAver temperature, it requires three or four
days of favorable weather to cause further ejection. The writer and
Babcock (95) studied the phenomena of ejection with especial refer-
ence to its bearing on dissemination. The most essential factor in
producing ejection was found to be an abundance of moisture. Under
the hand lens it will be noted that there is a film of water over the
tip of each active ostiole, and that at each discharge this film is
broken and usually eight spores are shot outward, that is, the con-
tents of one ascus. What causes these asci to leave the body of the
perithecium and come up to the mouth of the neck was not determined
at that time.

If a fresh stroma containing mature perithecia is cut across with
a razor, the cut surface will remain level except where the perithecia
were cut through. Here the viscous contents will bulge out in a
prominent bead, showing that there is a tension inside the peri-
thecium. This is the force which drives the asci up through the
canal. There are at least three factors which aid in producing this
pressure: (1) The asci do not all mature simultaneouslj^ Young
ones are continually pushed up between the bases of the older ones.
As they become mature they are pushed up into the center and upper
part of the cavity which is soon densely packed, and new ones are
still yjushing for space. The remaining layers of core cells are first
pressed out flat .against the walls. (2) But when they would tend
to pass out the canal of the neck, the periphyses act as so many
little springs and press them back. (3) The most immediate cause
of the outward pressure, hoAvever, is the swelling of the asci them-
selves when they become moist. Figure 34 represents an ascus which
Tias been kept in water for several hours. When it is dry, the ascus
Avail is drawn so tightly up around the spores that it can hardly
be distinguished at all except at the top. Figures 35 and 36 show
stages of this process. The entire structure occupies less than half
the space occupied by the distended ascus. Thus the sudden addition
of water, tending to double the volume of the perithecial contents,
Avould easily driA^e the asci up the neck to the surface. Prepared
sections of perithecia which Avere fixed during the process of ejection,
showed that up to the tip of the neck the spores are still in the

35

ascus. Since the asci are never ejected into the air, it follows that
they must burst and liberate the spores when they arrive at the
surface film at the tip of the neck.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS.

1. Each pycnospoie contains a single nucleus which divides several
times before germination, and a polar body at each end. The asco-
si>ore contains from one to four nuclei in each cell.

2. Ascospores germinate readily in water; pycnospores require a
nutrient medium. Pycnospores germinate on twigs of a large num-
ber of common forest trees. They also germinate in humus about the
base of the tree.

3. At summer temperatures, pycnospores germinate in 12-36 hours ;
ascospores in 2-12 hours. Lower temperatures retard germination.

I. Both kinds of spores swell greatly before germination.

5. Pycnospores usually germinate by two tubes and ascospores by
four.

6. Ascospores in the perithecia and pycnospores in the ''horns''
retain their power to germinate at least a year. The longevity is
diminished when the spores are separated from each other and when
exposed to the air.

7. Winter weather conditions do not affect the vitality of either
kind of spores.

8. The cells of the mycelium are multinucleate under all condi-
tions. They are densely filled with protoplasm when young but be-
come vacuolated as they become older.

9. The mycelium and pycnosjjores are colored by a yellow pigment
belonging to the aurine group of compounds.

10. The mycelium does not invade the living tissue as individual
hyphae, but in flat fan-shaped mats.

II. The mycelium continues to grow in the bark even during the
winter months but much more rapidly in the summer. Its vitality
is not affected by winter temperatures.

12. The fungus may be carried over in the bark for a year or
more by the mycelium even when the bark is kept dry.

13. The pycnidium is produced symphiogenetically. In the simplest
type it is merely a loose tangle of hyphae, the central branches of
which become the sporophores. It has a indefinite ostiole.

14. The sporophores are branched and the pycnospores are produced
successively from their tips.

15. Pycnidia are not produced in the absence of light.

36

16. The pycnidium is started before the stroma is formed. It
occurs directly under the cork layer and bears no relation to the
lenticels. The stroma is formed about the pycnidium and typically
there is but a single pycnidium in each stroma.

17. Stone cells, bast fibers and walls of the collenchyma cells are
contained in the basal parts of the stroma.

18. The perithecia are produced at the base of the stromata in
which the pycnidia are contained.

19. The beginning of the perithecium consists of a coil of large
cells — the ascogonium — surrounded by ''enveloping hyphae." The
ascogonium is continued up to the surface of the stroma in a promin-
ent trichogyne.

20. The trichogyne is not functional as such.

21. The perithecium is differentiated from the "enveloping hyphae."

22. The cavity is formed by the breaking down of the core cells.

23. Paraphyses grow out from the wall into the cavity and almost
fill it. They have almost disappeared when the asci are mature.

24. The asci arise as branches of hyphae among the bases of the
paraphyses.

25. The neck of the perithecium is produced by an outgrowth of the
hyphae on the periphery of the forming perithecium.

26. The spores, still in the asci, are forced out of the body of the
perithecium and up to the tip of the canal by (a) the continued
growth of young asci from the walls, (b) the swelling of the asci when
they become moist.

37

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT.

1. '06 Merkel, Herman W. A deadly fungus of the American

chestnut. Tenth Ann. Rep't. of the N. Y. Zoological
Soc. for 1905; 96-103. Jan. 1906.

2. '06 Murrill, W. A. A serious chestnut disease. Jour. N. Y.

Bot. Garden 7: 143-153. June 1906.

3. '06 Murrill, W. A. Further remarks on a serious chestnut

disease. Jour. N. Y. Bot. Garden 7:203-211. Sept.
1906.

4. '06 Murrill, W. A. A new chestnut disease. Torreya 6:186-189

Sept. 1906.

5. '06 Taylor, W. A. Article on chestnut. Cyc. of Am. Hort. by

L. H. Bailey and W. Miller 2 :294-297. 1906.

6. '07 Rehm, H. Ascomycetes exs. Fasc. 39, No. 1710. Ann.

Myc. 5:210. 1907.

7. '08 Metcalf, Haven. The immunity of the Japanese chestnut

to the bark disease. U. S. Bur. Plant Ind. Bui. 121,
Pt. 6:55-56. Feb. 1908.

8. '08 Metcalf, Haven. Diseases of ornamental trees. U. S. Dept.

Agr. Yearbook 1907:489-90. 1908.

9. '08 Murrill, W. A. The spread of the chestnut disease. Jour.

N. Y. Bot. Garden 9:23-30. Feb. 1908.

10. '08 Gaskill, A. The chestnut blight. N. J. For. Pk. Res.

1907:45-46. 1908. Ibid. 1908:33. Ibid. 1909:48. 1910.
Ibid. 1910:69-70. 1911.

11. '08 Fullerton, H. B. Fatal Chestnut Disease — Long Island

Agronomist 1 :24. June 1908.

12. '08 Clinton, G. P. Chestnut bark disease, DiaportJie parasitica

Murr. Conn. Agri. Exp. Sta. Rep't. 1907-8:345-6. May
1908.

13. '08 Sterling, E. A. Are we to lose our chestnut forests?

Country Life in America 15:44-5. 1908.

14. '08 Murrill. W. A. The chestnut canker. Torreya, 8:111-12.

May 1908.

15. '08 Hodson, E. R. Extent and importance of the chestnut

bark disease. U. S. Dept. Agri. For. Ser. Circ. Oct.
1908.

16. '08 Murrill, W. A. Coneo+in<? fnTi<yi at Biltmore . Jour. N. Y.

Bot. Garden 9:135-41. 1908.

17. '09 Murrill, W. A. Number of trees destroyed by the chestnut

canker. Mvcologia 1:36. Jan. 1909.

38

18. '09 Morris, Sobt. T. Chestnut timber going to waste. Con-

servation 15:226. April 1909.

19. '09 Mickleborough, J. A report on the chestnut tree blight;

the fungus Diaporthe parasitica, Murr. Penn'a. Dep't.
For. unnumbered bulletin. May 1909.

20. '09 Clinton, G. P. Chestnut bark disease, Diaporthe parasitica,

Murr. Conn. Agri. Exp. Sta. Rep't. 1907-8:879-90.
July 1909.

21. '09 Metcalf, Haven, and Collins, J. Franklin. The present

status of the chestnut bark disease. U. S. Dep't. Agri.
Bur. Plant Ind. Bui. 141, pi. 5:45-54. Aug. 1909.

22. '09 Hohnel, F. von. Fiagmente zur Mykoiogie. Sitz. Kais.

Akad. d. Wiss. Wem 118, pt. 1:1479-81. ^^ov. 1909.

23. '10 Kane, F. W. The chestnut bark disease Mass. St. For.

Rep't. 1909:58. 1910.

24. '10 Davis, W. T. Note on the chestnut fungus. Proc. Staten

Island Assoc. Arts and Science 2:128-129. 1910.

25. '10 Conklin, Rob't S. Chestnut blight. Penna. Dep't For.

Rep't for 1908-1909:59-61. 1910.

26. '10 Chestnut tree blight; unnumbered circular, published by

the Main Line Citizens' Association, Harold Peirce,
Chairman, Haverford, Pa. Aug. 1910.

27. '10 Chestnut tree blight, unnumbered circular, published by the

Main Line Citizens' Association, Harold Peirce, Chair-
man, Haverford, Pa. Sept. 1910.

28. '10 Metcalf, Haven. The present status of the bark disease

of the chestnut. Sci. 31:239. Feb. 1910.

29. '10 Metcalf, Haven, and Collins, J. Franklin. The chestnut

bark disease. Sci 31:748. May 1910.

30. '10 Murrill, W. A. Occurrence of the chestnut canker. Myco-

logia 2:251. 1910.

31. '10 Millard, Bailey. The passing of the chestnut tree. Mun-

sey's Mag. 43:758-65. Sept. 1910.

32. '11 Stone, G. E. The chestnut disease. Rep't of Bot. in 23rd

Ann. Report of the Mass. Agri. Exp. Sta. 1910:24-25.
Jan. 1911.

33. '11 Cook, M. T. The relation of the parasitic fungi to the

contents of the cells of the host plants. Delaware Agri.
Exp. Sta. Bull. 91. Feb. 1911.

34. '11 Patanelli, E. Sul parassitismo di Diaporthe parasitica

Murr. per il castagno. Atti della R. Accademia dei Lin-
cei, Rendiconte classi di Science, 20:366-72. ser. 5.1. sem.
Mar. 1911.

35. '11 Rane, F. W. The chestnut bark disease. Mass. St. For.

Bui. :1.7. 1911.

39

36. '11 Clinton, G. P. Chestnut bark disease. Conn. Agii. Exp.

Sta. Rep't. 1909-10:716-17, 725. June 1911.

37. '11 Detwiler, S. B. The chestnut blight. Report of the 3rd.

annual meeting of the Montgomery County Horticultural
Asociation. Norristown, Pa., Sept. 1911.

38. '11 Wiliams, I. C. The new chestnut bark disease. Sci.

34:397-400. Sept. 1911.

39. '11 Williams, I. C. Additional facts about the chestnut blight.

Sci. 34:704. Nov. 1911.

40. '11 Metcalf, Haven, and Collins, J. Franklin. The control of

the chestnut bark disease. U. S. Dep't of Agri. Farmers'
Bui. 467. Oct. 1911.

41. '11 Detwiler, S. B. The progress of the fight against the

chestnut blight. Forest Leaves. Dec. 1911.

42. '11 Detwiler, S. B. Fighting the chestnut blight — 4 page leaf-

let published by Penna. Chestnut Tree Blight Comm.

43. '11 Rumbold, Caroline. A new record of a chestnut tree dis-

ease in Mississippi. Sci. 34:917. Dec. 1911.

44. '11 Collins, J. Franklin. The chestnut bark disease. Address

at Ithaca, N. Y. Reprint from the Second Ann. Meeting
of the Northern Nut Growers' Asso'n. Dec. 1911.

45. '12 Manson, Marsden. The chestnut tree disease. Sci. 35:269.

Feb. 1912.

46. '12 Rane, F. W. The chestnut bark disease. Mass. St. For.

Bui. 1912.

47. '12 Holmes, J. S. The chestnut bark disease which threatens

North Carolina. Report of Second Ann. Convention of
the N. C. Forestry Association :13-15. Feb. 1912.

48. '12 Report of the Penn'a. Chestnut Tree Blight Conference,

Harrisburg, Feb. 20 and 21, 1912.

49. '12 Metcalf, Haven, and Collins, J. Franklin. The present

known distribution of the chestnut bark disease. Sci.
35:420. Mar. 1912.

50. '12 Ridsdale, P. S. — The chestnut blight campaign — Ameri-

can Forestry 18:3. March 1912.

51. '12 Giddings, N. J. Chestnut bark disease. West Va. Agri.

Exp. Sta. Bui. 137. Mar. 1912

52. '12 Hoover, T. L. and Detwiler, S. B. Coppice growth and

the chestnut blight — Forest Leaves. Feb. 1912.

53. '12 Detwiler, S. B. The spread of the chestnut blight. The

Country Gentleman. Mar. 1912.

54. '12 Detwiler, S. B, Recent developments in the chestnut tree

blight situation. The Country Gentleman. Mar. 1912.

40

55. '12 Help save the chestnut trees. Unnumbered circular pub-

lished by the Society for the Protection of New Hamp-
shire Forests, Allen Hollis, Sec, Concord, N. H.

56. '12 Chestnut tree blight. Letter from the Secretary of Agri-

culture to the U. S. Senate. Document 653. 1912.

57. '12 Cook, Mel. T. Diseases of shade and forest trees. The

planting and care of shade trees. N. J. For. Park. Res.
Com. 1912:101, 102.

58. '12 Shear, C. L. The chestnut bark fungus, Diaporthe para-

sitica, Murr. Phytopathology 2:88-89. April 1912.

59. '12 Rankin, W. H. The chestnut tree canker disease. Phyto-

pathology 2:99. April 1912.

60. '12 Metcalf, Haven, The chestnut bark disease. Jour, of Ec.

Ent. 5:222-226. April 1912.

61. '12 Hopkins, A. D. Relation of insects to the death of chest-

nut trees. American Forestry 17:221-227. April 1912.

62. '12 Collins, J. Franklin. Some observations on experiments

with the chestnut bark disease. Phytopathology, 2:97.
April 1912.

63. '12 Graves, A. H. The chestnut bark disease in Massachusetts.

Phytopathology 2:99. April 1912.

64. '12 Detwiler, S. B. The fight against the chestnut tree blight.

The Bulletin Penn'a. Geographical Society, April 1912.

65. '12 Detwiler, S. B. The farmer and the chestnut blight. Proc.

Farmers' Ann. Normal Inst. Towanda, Pa., May 1912.
Bui. 229, Pa. Dept Agri.

66. '12 Detwiler, S. B. Some benefits of the chestnut blight.

Forest Leaves. Oct. 1912.

67. '12 Farlow, W. G. The fungus of the chestnut tree blight. Sci.

35:717-722. May 1912.

68. '12 Fulton, H. R. Chestnut bark disease. The Penna. State

Farmer 5:151-155. May 1912.

69. '12 Spaulding, P. Notes upon tree diseases in the Eastern

states. Mycol. 4:148-9. May 1912.

70. '12 Waldron, R. A. The chestnut tree blight disease. Thesis

for degree of M. A. at Penna. State College, June 1912.
(Not published).

71. '12 Schock, Oliver D. Fighting the chestnut tree blight.

American Forestry 18:573-579. Sept. 1912.

72. '12 Schock, Oliver D. Chestnut cultivation. The Forecast

4:213-218. Nov. 1912.

73. '12 Craighead, F. C. Insects contributing to the control of the

chestnut blight disease. Sci. 36:825. Dec. 1912.

74. '12 Craighead, F. C. Chestnut blight in Pennsylvania. Quar-

terly of Alpha Zeta, April 1912.

41

75. '12 Metcalf, Haven. Diseases of chestnut and other trees.

Transactions of the Mass. Hort. Society 1912:69-95. Aug.
1912.

76. '12 Penna. Chestnut Tree Blight Comm. The chestnut bark

disease. Penna. Chestnut Tree Blight Comm. Bui. 1:1-9.
Oct. 1912.

77. '12 Penna. Chestnut Tree Blight Comm. Treatment of Orna-

mental chestnut trees infected with the blight disease.
Penna. Chestnut Tree Blight Comm, Bui. 2:1-7. Oct.
1912.

78. '12 Shear, C. L. The chestnut blight fungus. Phytopathology

2:211-12. Oct. 1912.

79. '12 Smith, J. R. The Menace of the Chestnut Blight. Outing

October 1912.

80. '12 Rumbold, Caroline. Summer and fall observations on the

growth of the chestnut bark disease in Pennsylvania.
Phytopathology 2:100. April 1912.

81. '12 Anderson, Paul J. and Anderson, H. W. The chestnut

blight fungus and a related saprophyte. Phytopathology
2:204-10. Oct. 1912.

82. '12 Anderson, Paul J. and H. W. Endothia virginlana. Phyto-

pathology 2:261-2. Dec. 1912.
8u. '12 Clinton, G. P. The relationships of the chestnut blight

fungus. Sci. 36:907-14. Dec. 1912.
81. '12 Clinton, G. P. The chestnut blight fungus and its allies.

Phytopathology 2:265-9. Dec. 1912 .

85. '12 Rockey, K. E. Recent work on the chestnut blight. Proc.

3rd Ann. Meeting Northern Nut Growers' Ass'n. Dec.
1912.

86. '12 Rockey, K. E. The chestnut blight. Report x4.dams County,

Pa. Fruit Growers' Association. 1912.

87. '12 Detwiler, S. B. Control of the chestnut blight disease.

Southern Lumberman. Dec. 21, 1912.

88. '12 Pierce, R. J. Some problems in the treatment of diseased

chestnut trees. Proc. 3rd. Ann. Meeting Northern Nut
Growers' Association. Dec. 1912.

89. '12 Pantanelli, E. Sul la supposta origine Europea del can-

cro Americano del castagno. Rend. Accad. Lincei.
21:869-75. Dec. 1912.

90. '12 Carleton, M. A. Fighting the chestnut tree blight disease

in Pennsylvania. Am. Fruit and Nut Jour. 6.97. Oct.
1912.

91. '13 Shear, C. L. Endothia radicalis, (Schw). Phytopathology

3:61. Feb. 1913.

42

92. '13 Clinton, G. P. Chestnut bark disease. Conn. Agri. Exp.

Station Eep't. 1911-1912:359-453. 1913.

93. '13 Heald, F. D. and Gardner, M. W. Preliminary notes on the

relative prevalence of pycnospores and ascospores of the
chestnut blight fungus during the winter. Science 37:
916-917. June 1913.

94. '13 Anderson, Paul J. and Anderson, H. W. The chestnut

blight fungus and a related saprophyte. Penn Chest-
nut Tree Blight Comm. Bui. 4:1-26. Oct. 1913.

95. '13 Anderson, Paul J. and Babcock, D. C. Field experiments

on the growth and dissemination of the chestnut blight
fungus. Penna. Chestnut Tree Blight Comm Bui. 3:1-42.
Oct. 1913.

96. '13 Heald, F. I). The symptoms of chestnut tree blight, and a

brief description of the blight fungus. Penna. Chestnut
Tree Blight Comm. Bui. 5:1-13. May 1913.

97. '13 Shear, C. L. and Stevens, Neil E. Cultural characters of

the chestnut blight fungus and its near relatives. U. S.
Dep't of Agri. Bureau of Plant Industry Circ. 131:1-18.
July 1913.

98. '13 Penna. Chestnut Tree Blight Commission; Report July 1

to Dec. 31 1912. 1-67. 1913.

99. '13 Heald, F D. and Studhalter, R. A. Preliminary notes on

birds as carriers of the chestnut blight fungus. Science.
38:278-280. Aug. 1913.

100. '13 Heald, F. D. A method of determining in analytic work

whether colonies of the chestnut blight fungus originate
from pycnospores or ascospores. Mycologia 5:274-277.
1913

101. '13 Rankin, W. H. Some field experiments with the chestnut

canker fungus. Phytopathology 3:73. 1913.

102. '13 Anderson, Paul J. Wind dissemination of chestnut blight

organisms. Phytopathology 3:68. 1913.

103. '13 Pierce, R. J. Saving chestnut trees. American Forestry

19:4-248. April 1913.

104. '13 Stoddard, E. M. and Moss, A. E. The chestnut bark dis-

ease. Conn. Agr. Exp. Station Bui. 178:1-9. 1913.

105. '13 Shear, C. L. and Stevens, N. E. The chestnut blight para-

site (Endothia parasitica), from China. Science 38:974-
295.

106. '13 Fairchild, D. The discovery of the chestnut bark disease

in China. Science 38:974-295.

107. '13 Schock, Oliver I). The blight in Pennsylvania. American

Forestry 19:962-966. Dec. 1913.

NOTE. — Many titles were added to original proof slioets.

43

EXPLANATION OF PLATES*

PLATE I.

Figs. 1, 2. Initial stages in the development of the pycnidium,
x230.

Fig. 3. Cross section of a pycnidium on agar before the begin-

ning of the cavity, x 400.

Fig. 4. Same as figure 3 but a little older, x 430.

Fig. 5. Beginning of the cavity in the pycnidium. x 430.

Fig. 6. Section of p^^cnidial wall showing conidiophores.

X 430.

Fig. 7. Conidiophores. x 800.

Fig. 8. Mycelium from agar, x 800.

Fig. 9. Section of a ray from the fans in the bark, x 430.

Fig. 10. Section of a stroma showing the rind layer, x 600.

Fig. 11. Diagrammatic drawing of a stroma showing the rela-

tion to the cork \ajev and of the organs to each
other. X 25.

Fig. 12. Superficial pycnidia. x 14.

Fig. 13. Section of a germinating pj^cnospore. x 700.

Fig. 14. The resting pycnospore. x 3500.

PLATE II.

Fig. 15, 16, 17, Initial stages of the carpogonium. x 650.

Fig. 18. to 21, Later stages of the ascogonium. x 650.

Fig. 22. Degeneration of the ascogonium and growth of the

enveloping hyphae. x 650.
Fig. 23. The young perithecium and the beginning of the stage

of difl'erentiation. x 650.
Fig. 24, 25, 27, Apparent branching of the ascogonium. x 650.
Fig. 26. Degeneration of the tricgogyne cells, x 650.

PLATE III.
Fig. 28. Wall and core cells, x 650.

Fig. 29. Beginning of the paraphyses. x 650.

Fig. 30. Perithecium in the young paraphyses stage, x 230.

Fig. 31. Advancing tip of the neck, x 500.

Fig. 32. Lower part of the canal in the neck, x 460

Fig. 33. Cross section of papilla showing periphyses in the

neck. X 260.
Fig. 34, 35, 36, Asci showing stages of drying up. x 650.

*An drawings made w'tli the aid of camera lucida except 11 and 12.

44

Fig. 37. Mature ascospores. x 900.

PLATE IV.
Fig. 38. Outline drawings of germinating pycnospores.

PLATES V AND VI.
Fig. 39. Germination of pycnospores.

Fig. 40. Germination of pycnospores.

PLATES VII AND VIII.
Fig. 41. Germination of ascospores.

Fig. 42. Germination of ascospores.

PLATE IX.
Fig. 43. Canker showing atrophy.

Fig. 44. Canker showing stromata.

PLATE X.
Fig. 45. The blister stage.

Fig. 46. Stromata showing papillae, indicating the perithecial

stage.

PLATE XI.

Fig. 47. Spore horns on smooth bark.

Fig. 48. Spore horns in crevices of rough bark.

PLATE XII.

Fig. 49. Canker outlined with paint to indicate monthly

growth.

PLATE XIII.
Fig. 50. Mycelial fans under the bark.

PLATE XIV.
Fig. 51. Rings of pycnidia on chestnut agar cultures.

PLATE XV.
Fig. 52. Photomicrograph of pycnospores.

Fig. 53. Vertical section of a perithecium.

PLATE XVI.

Fig. 54. Photomicrograph of pycnidium on wood.

Fig. 55. Stroma containing labyrinthiform pycnidium.

PLATE XVII.

Fig. 56. Vertical section of stroma showing empty perithecia

and the black necks.
Fig. 57. Vertical section of young pycni.dium on agar showing

early stage in the formation of the cavity.

PLATE I.

Development of Pycnidium.

PLATE II.

Development of Perithecium .

PLATE III.

Development of Peritlieciiini .

ONE SPACE l£l niCRONS

PLATE IV.

Germinating pycnnspoi-i

RESTING

SPORE

9;zofi.n

z f!.n

PLATE V.
Germination of pycnospores.

J

NESTING SFOnS

f:3o/f/v.
/ci:3o/r/>7

^■.30 pn

i'iSfi.n

'^:3o y?^

ONE spm[ Z.S5 Micms

PLATE VI.

Germination of pycnospores.

PLATE VII.

Germination of ascospores.

PLATE VIII.

Germination of ascospores.

ri.ATi: IX.

Fig. 43. — Canker showing atrophy.

PLATE IX.

Fig. 44. — Canker showing stromata.

PLATE X.
Fig. 45. — Blister stage of canker.

PLATE X.

Fig. 46. — Stromata showing papillae, iiidicatiug parithecial stage.

PLATE XI.
Fig. 47. — Spore-horns on smooth bark.

PLATE XI.

Fig. 48. — Sporehorns in crevices of rough bark.

PLATE XII.
Fig. 49. — Outlined canker, indicating monthly growth.

PLATE XIII.

Fig. 50. — Mycelial fans under the chestnut bark.

PLATE XIV.
Fig. 51. — Petri dish culture of pycnidia.

i

PLATE XV.

Fig. 52. — Photomicrograph of pycnospores.

PLATE XV.
Fig. 53. — Vertical section of a perithecium .

PLATE XVI.

Fig. 54. — Photomicrograph of pycnidium on wood.

PLATE XVI.
Fig. 55. — Stroma containing labyrinthiform pycnidium.

PLATE XVII.

Fig. 56.— Vertical section of stroma showing empty perithecia and black necks.

PLATE XVII.

Fig. 57. — Pycnidium on agar showing early stage in the formation of the cavity.

g S a

I&5

a g

t;^ ID

'B 'O

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

FINAL REPORT

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree
Blight Commission

JANUARY 1 TO DECEMBER 15, 1913

1112 Morris Building, 1421 Chestnut Street,
PHILADELPHIA, PA.

HAERISBURG, PA.:

WM . STANLEY RAl , STATE PRINTER

1914

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight
Commission

MEMBERS OF COMMISSION

Winthrop Sargent, Chairman Bryn Mawr

Harold Peirce, Secretary Haverford

Samuel T . Bodine Villa Nova

George F. Craig, Rosemont

Theodore N. Ely Bryn Mawr

EXECUTIVE STAFF

Mark Alfred Carleton, General Manager
Samuel B. DetwUer, General Superintendent
Oliver D. Schock, A^istant General Superintendent
Thomas E. Francis, Field Manager, Western District
Joseph R. Wilson, Field Manager, Eastern District
David T. McCampbeU, Chief Clerk

Irvin C. Williams, (Pennsylvania State Forestry Department), Collaborator

SCIENTIFIC AND OPERATIVE STAFF

Frederick D. Heald, Pathologist

A. G. Ruggles, Entomologist

J. P. Wentling, Forester in charge of Utilization

Paul J. Anderson, Field Pathologist

F. P. Gulliver, Geographer

Caroline Rumbold, Physiologist in charge of Tree Medication

Joseph Shrawder, Chemist

Roy G. Pierce, Tree Surgeon

Keller E. Rockey, Forester in charge of Demonstration Work

(1)

(2)

Contents

Page.

Advance spot blight infections ; treatment of various plats, 76-79

Ants as carriers of blight spores ; experiments with, 44

Bast-miner ; relation of insect to dissemination of blisht, 45

'Beattie, Prof. R. Kent; Bibliography of the chestnut bark disease, 9.5-121

Bibliography of the chestnut bark disease, 9.5-121

Blight investigation and inspection of chestnut nurseries, 40

Blighted sprouts around stumps of trees cut at Hummelstown, 90

Burning over chestnut tree stumps; statement of results, 77

Carbon county, (Mahoning Valley), blight conditions, 64

Carleton, Mark A., General Manager, Penn.sylvania Chestnut Tree Blight

Commission ; Final report of, 27

Cicada sting wounds favorable for spread of chestnut bark disease, 45

Chemical investigations in connection with blight, 47

Chestnut trees a valuable factor in Pennsylvania forest wealth, 10

Chestnut trees, rapid growth of, 10

Chestnut trees in Pennsylvania ; threatened extermination of, 10

Chestnut cord-wood, reduced freight rates on, 57

Chestnut nursery stock ; regulations governing shipments of, 91

Chestnut orchards and nurseries, protection of against blight, 29

Chestnut bark disease ; fake remedies for, 30

Chestnut trees , various diseases of, 42

Chestnut tree medication, results of, 48

Chestnut tree blight exhibits at museums and schools, 58

Chestnut timber ; deterioration of blighted , 56

Chestnut tree blight ; methods of dissemination, 63

Chestnut tree blight ; combatting the fungus , 10

Chestnut trees ; products of blighted trees marketable, 11

Chestnut tree blight ; how destructive pest was spread, 11

Chestnut tree blight ; discovery of its prevalence in China , 28

Chestnut Tree Blight Commission; active work suspended with regret, 12

Chestnut tree blight infection in Western District, 37

Chestnut tree blight; first report of appearance in Pennsylvania filed by

Harold Peirce, of Haverford, Montgomery county, 17

Chestnut tree blight in Wildwood Park, Harrisburg; successful treatment of, 30

Chestnut tree blight exhibits ; where made, 32

Co-operative work of U. S. Department of Agriculture and Pennsylvania

State Forestry Department, 33

Creosoting peeled chestnut stumps ; tabulated results of, 78

Cutting-out process ; effectiveness of treatment of method, 27

Detwiler, Samuel B., Superintendent. Keports of observations on sanita-
tion cutting of blighted chestnut areas, 63

Discovery of chestnut bark disease in China , 28

Eastern Pennsylvania blight conditions, 67

Eradicating the chestnut blight ; estimated cost of operations, 78

Field work of scouts and valuable results obtained , 36

Field work in Eastern District, report relating to, 38

Field laboratory work and special investigations, 43

Galls on chestnut and relation to blight infections, 47

. (3)

Page.

Geographical work ; report of observations, 52

Gulliver, Dr. F. P., Geographer; Report of geographic work, 52

Harmless saprophyte in Western Pennsylvania, 38

Heald, Dr. F. D., Pathologist; Investigations of tree diseases, 40

Regulations for chestnut nursery inspections, 93

History of early efforts to eradicate blight in Pennsylvania, 17

Infection of chestnut in Western Pennsylvania ; tabulated report, 37

Infection centres on advance line of the blight, 71

Infection at Orbisonia, Huntingdon county; tabular statement, 72'

Insects ; beneficial by destroying spores of blight, 28

Insects as carriers of the chestnut blight spores, 42

Insect investigations; valuable facts ascertained by, 44

Law, amendment to chestnut blight, 94

Legislative action to control blight in Pennsylvania recommended, 22

Lime-sulphur solution to prevent spread of blight, 51

Local field work ; how conducted in generally infected districts , 40

Main Line Citizens' Association ; valuable services rendered by, 19

Message from the Governor suggesting legislative help, 21

Mickleborough, Dr. John W. ; combatting the chestnut blight, 19

Murrill, Prof. W. A.; plan proposed to combat chestnut blight, 23

Nursery inspections ; regulating shipment of nursery stock, 28

Nursery chestnut stock ; list of inspections , 43

Official letter from the Commission to Governor Tener, 9

Official report of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission , 9-13

Origin of the chestnut blight disease, , 11

Oldest infections located near New York City, 9

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, Members of, 1

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission ; Executive Staff of, 1

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission ; Scientific and operative

staff, 1

Pennsylvania initial State to combat spread of blight, 10

Pierce, Roy G., Tree Surgeon; Report of tree surgery work, 50

Production of blight spores, 41

Publications relating to the chestnut blight, list of, 95

Publicity work; valuable assistance rendered by newspapers, 59

Publications issued by the Commission ; reports and bulletins, 33

Pycnospores and ascospores ; development and dissemination of, 42

Reinspections for blight ; notes on, 86

Relation of soils to prevalence of blight, 52

Resistant and immume chestnut stocks ; search for, 32

Rockey, Keller E. ; Report of public demonstration work, 57

Rumbold, Dr. Caroline; Experiments in chestnut tree medication, 48

Ruggles, Prof. A. G. ; Report of results of special insect investigations, 44

Sargent, Win throp. Secretary of Commission; final official report of, 9

Schock, Oliver D., Assistant Superintendent; valuable co-operative work of

the press acknowledged, 60

Scientific research ; prompt and thorough work urged , 12

Scouting for the chestnut blight, 73

Shrawder, Joseph, Chemist; Report of chemical investigations, 47

Spot infections ; procedure to eradicate, : 73

Suggestions for information of chestnut timber owners, 38

Tener, Hon. John K., Governor; message to the Legislature relative to the

chestnut hlight disease, 21

Topton Mountain, Berks county; study of blight conditions, 68

5

Page.

Treatment of infected timber and disposal of lumber, 38

Treatment of infected chestnut areas, 74

Tree surgery ; examinations made and results of operations, 50

Unfinished work of Commission ; experiments in progress and work con-
templated, 34

Utilization of blighted chestnut a serious problem , 54

Value of chestnut destroyed in Pennsylvania, 59

Williams, Hon. Irvin C, Deputy Commissioner of Forestry; Report as

Collaborator of Pennsylvania Department of Forestry, 17

Wentling, Prof. J. P. ; Report upon utilization of blighted chestnut, 54

4^

^|r

(6)

Official Letter

to

Hon. John K. Tener

Governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

(7)

(S)

Scouting for the chestnut tree blight.

LETTEK OF TRANSMITTAL.

THE COMMISSION FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND CONTROL
OF THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT IN PENNSYLVANIA

1112 Morris Building, Broad and Chestnut Streets

Philadelphia, December 9th, 1913.
HON. JOHN K. TENER, Governor,

Harrishurg, Penna.

Sir: We have the honor to transmit herewith our report of the
operations of this Commission for a portion of the year 1913, this
being also the final report of the Commission.

Eastern Asia, the home of the San Jose scale, has been found to
be also the home of the chestnut blight. The disease has been found
definitely in northeastern China; probably it is also present in
Japan. There is no reason to doubt that it found its way to this
country in the same way that the San Jose scale did, on nursery
stock, and at about the same time, or perhaps somewhat later. Any
system of strict inspection of imported nursery stock could have
kept it out of this country, but no such system was then in use.
It would probably not have been possible at that time to secure a
law authorizing such inspection because of the lack of public ap-
preciation of the seriousness of imported fungous and insect epi-
demics.

The oldest known spots of chestnut blight infection are in the
neighborhood of New York Cit3^ Here again the disease could have
been checked at an early date and never found its way into Penn-
sylvania, but nothing of the sort was even attempted. In fact,
even up to 1911, no official work was done in New York upon the
disease. In 1908 Murrill* advocated cutting out all chestnut trees
within half a mile of diseased trees, but this plan was never put into
practice in New York. In general, the greatest conservatism has
prevailed regarding the seriousness of the disease. The view that
the fungus was native to America, and its great virulence due to
winter injury and other temporary climatic effects upon the trees,
has been strenuously advocated. The Commission from the first,
however, adopted the theory of the Department of Agriculture that
the disease was of foreign origin and hence to be considered in
the light of a dangerous invader. This view has since been amply

*Journal of the New York Botanical Garden, Vol. 9, No. 98, p. 30.

(9)

10

justified. Pennsylvania was the first state to treat the epidemic
seriously, but by the time the Commission was able to begin work
the disease was spread over the eastern half of the State too com-
pletely to make its eradication there possible.

Twenty years ago such an epidemic as the present one would
have attracted little attention, but now the prices of all classes of
timber have been for some years increasing, and promise to continue
to increase indefinitely. It is obvious that every possible care must
be taken of the present forest stand; upon this point there is no
longer disagreement. In Pennsylvania the chestnut is especially
valuable, standing in intimate relation to many of the leading indus-
tries of the State. Tt is distributed throughout the State, compris-
ing at least one-fifth, possibly one-third, of the timber. It is naturally
adapted to poor, hilly land not suited for agriculture, and will pro-
duce profitable yields of extract wood, fence posts, rails, etc., in 25
to 30 years; and ties, poles, and saw timber in 40 to 50 years. Be-
cause of its comparatively rapid growth, its superior ability to
perpetuate itself by means of sprouts, and the great variety of its
uses, the chestnut may be considered the most important forest
tree in the State. The ease with which chestnut can be managed
according to the principles of forestry made it, before the appear-
ance of the bliglit, one of the principal species depended upon to
solve the problem of the future timber supply of the State. On
steep slopes, where the per cent, of chestnut is high, serious de-
terioration, washing of the soil, and reduction in water supply will
undoubtedly follow the destruction of the chestnut trees.

The complete loss of the present commercial stand of chestnut in
Pennsylvania, which, now that the Commission has ceased work,
seems absolutely certain, is a calamity whicli will be fully realized
only in the future. In matters of this kind we have obligations to
the future, aside from the particular emergency in hand. This is not
the last tree disease that will sweep over the State. All efforts
to control this disease would be justified even if we only learned how
to control the next one. Methods which may not be practicable
now will be highly practicable twenty years from now on account
of the steady increase which is bound to come in timber values. The
mere fact that this campaign against the chestnut blight has been
undertaken at all shows a great advance of thought over that of
previous years.

With these facts in mind, it is obvious that three courses were
possible, when the extent and seriousness of the chestnut blight was
first realized in Pennsylvania.

First, — Do nothing.

Second, — Conduct scientific investigations of the disease with the

11

hope of determining by laboratory methods and very small field ex-
periments some method of control.

Third, — Conduct scientific investigations, and at the same time
immediately attack the epidemic by any and every means that seemed
to afford any possibility of checking or even delating the course of
the disease. To follow the first method would have been to emulate
simply the example of New York and New Jersey. The second
course had many points in its favor, but it was obvious that such a
course would yield no results in time to be used on the present epi-
demic, though possibly of the largest ultimate value. The third
course appealed to the Commission as the only one possible under
existing circumstances. The greatest handicap was the extent to
which the disease was already present in the State.

In the eastern half of the State the disease was obviously beyond
control. In the western half the best course available, and in fact
the only method that has been proposed at all for control of the
disease, was that of cutting out the advance infections. While this
method is open to many criticisms, nothing better has been proposed
even to the present time. The Commission adopted the cutting out
methods advocated by the U. S. Department of Agriculture with two
exceptions: (1) Spots of considerable size were cut out in some
cases; that is, the cuttings were not limited to strictly advance in-
fections. (2). No immune zone was established at first, although
this might have been done later. The method was essentially that
advocated by Murrill in 1908, except that trees were not cut to as
great a distance as half a mile from the source of infection. Detailed
reports of the cutting out work are appended. It is sufficient to say
here that the progress of the disease in the western half of the State
has been set back five years, and west of the line extending from
Bradford to Somerset counties there is little infection, and what in-
fection there is dates from 1913. There is no reasonable doubt that
the disease could have been kept mstatu quo indefinitely, had the
work of cutting out continued. As set forth in the appended reports,
the methods of cutting out have been improved, the cost determined
and reduced, and winter scouting established as a practical method.
These methods developed by the Commission are now in active use
in the States of Virginia and West Virginia, where the campaign of
eradication is being .vigorously pursued.

One of the most valuable results of the Commission's work was
the establishment of the fact that the wood of a blighted tree is en-
tirely fit for use, and if utilized soon after the death of the tree
from blight, can be disposed of in the regular way and at normal
values. The Commission has advocated the cutting out of all dis-
eased trees, since on account of the prejudice against blighted poles

12

and timber, and the possibility of the market becoming glutted, this
is the best plan. Also the cutting of diseased trees was urged be-
cause it would reduce the sources of infection. Since utilization
was all that remained to be done in the eastern half of the State, the
Commission secured a special reduced freight rate on blighted lum-
ber, determined what demand there was in and out of the State for
chestnut lumber and other chestnut products, and proceeded to bring
owners and dealers together. This work had just reached the point
. of its highest efficiency when the Commission ceased work. As there
is no longer any means of inspection and certification of diseased
lumber, the reduced freight rate is no longer available.

When the Commission began work but few investigations had
been made of the chestnut blight, and other States, as well as the
U. S. Department of Agriculture, were working on the disease with-
out special funds. The Commission by its example and by its direct
efforts, assisted in securing Congressional and State appropriations,
and practically all of the scientific work and all of the practical
work which has been done on this disease since 1910 was made pos-
sible by the efforts of this Commission. A National law was passed
which requires strict inspection of all imported nursery stock and
the prohibition from entry of certain classes of stock, and which
makes the repetition of such an event as the importation of the
chestnut blight impossible, or at least highly improbable. The
work of this Commission was one of the greatest factors in bringing
about the passage of this law.

Not only has the work of the Commission aroused public attention
throughout the Eastern States regarding this disease, but the public
is awakened as never before by the example of the destruction of one
species to the necessity of conservation of all timber resources. In
this State the Commission has carried on a liberal educational cam-
X)aign in which it has ^had the hearty co-operation of the State
Forestry Department, the Conservation Association, such organiza-
tions as the Boy Scouts, various lumber and trade associations, and
many other organizations, institutions, and individuals.

In conclusion, it seems necessary to call sharp attention to the
real lesson to be learned from the chestnut blight epidemic — viz.:
the necessity of more scientific research upon problems of this char-
acter ; to be undertaken early enough to be of. some value in compre-
hending, if not controlling the situation. We have seen that the
blight might have been kept out of the country in the first place by
inspection, or once in, that it might have been destroyed, or at least
checked before it had gotten widely distributed. But instead it
was permitted to enter, and to spread for many years without scien-
tific notice, and for several more years without any organized at-

13

tempt to control it, or even to study it seriously. Are we doing any
better now with reference to the future?

China has been shown to be the home of the chestnut blight. China,
then, would seem to be the obvious place to study it; but no path-
ologists are there, and state and federal parsimony has so far
failed to provide for any investigations of the disease on its home
ground by American pathologists.

It has been proposed to replace the chestnut in southern New Eng-
land by plantings of white pine, in itself the most important eastern
timber tree; but the white pine is in turn subject to a newly im-
ported disease, the blister rust. Tt is not certain that very serious
and united efforts are being made to investigate and control this
disease- even in the States that introduced it. As in the case of the
chestnut blight, scepticism has even been expressed as to its serious-
ness. Again, it would seem that the obvious place to determine the
seriousness of the blister rust was in Europe, its home; yet to date
neither state nor National government has dispatched a scientist on
this errand. In this connection it may not be amiss to call attention
to the fact that in Pennsylvania there is, aside from the employees of
this Commission, only one professional plant pathologist! Yet the
preventable damage which this one plant disease — chestnut blight —
has done, would pay for the work of more plant pathologists than are
now at work in the entire world.

The Commission closes its work with regret, knowing well that the
blight will now spread over the State without hindrance. There is
some satisfaction in knowing, however, that the work left undone
in Pennsylvania has been actively taken up in Virginia and West
Virginia, and that the States of Ohio and North Carolina are making
studies preparatory to combatting the disease as soon as it appears
in those States. The scientific research carried on by the Commis-
sion will be continued by the U. S. Department of Agriculture. We
may be certain that the war against this and other foreign epidemics
will not cease until science is so far advanced in both theory and
practice that they can be controlled.

Very truly yours,

WINTHROP SARGENT,

Chairman.

(14)

Report of
Hon. I. C. Williams

Deputy Commissioner of Forestry, Collaborator

(15)

(16)

l^t '>\!^ ^W^

A common mark of the blight. Small leaves which developed in the early spring
on a top recently girdled by the blight, showing midsummer condition. Withered
leaves above the canker; sprouts below.

A HISTOEY OF THE EARLY PENNSYLVANIA

EFFORT TO COMBAT THE CHESTNUT

BARK DISEASE.

BY HON. I. 0. WILLIAMS, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF FORESTRY,
COLLABORATOR, HARRISBURG, PA.

Preliminary to the final report of the Chestnut Blight Commis-
sion, it is thought desirable to make a statement detailing the his-
tory of the chestnut bark disease in Pennsylvania so far as known,
and of the efforts to combat it, leading up to the formation of the
Commission under the law of 1911, and the extended work of repres-
sion begun at that time.

The attention of the Pennsylvania Department of Forestry was
first attracted to the appearance of the chestnut bark disease in this
State by a letter from Mr. Harold Peirce, of Haverford, dated July
18, 1908, reporting its presence in Lower Merion Township, Mont-
gomery County, and by an article appearing in the November, 1908,
number of "Conservation," from the pen of Dr. John Mickleborough,
of Brooklyn. Subsequent correspondence with Dr. Mickleborough
revealed the fact that he had been a student of the disease for over
a year and had become familiar with it in all of its ordinary aspects.
To these two gentlemen, therefore, the State is primarily indebted
for the subsequent efforts made to study more particularly, and to
attempt to control this vicious tree disease.

The facts relating to the discovery of the disease in America and
its identification are pretty well known. It was first detected by Dr.
Hermann W. Merkel, in the Bronx Zoological Park, New York City,
in 1904, although it is almost certain that it existed in that neigh-
borhood for probably more than a year prior to Dr. Merkel's discov-
ery. Referred for identification to Dr. W. A. Murrill of the New
York Botanical Garden, he published a description of it in 1906*,
and by him the fungus was named Diaporthe parasitica, so called
because it was believed to be the only parasitic species of the genus.
The naming of the fungus has since been corrected by means of the
researches of Anderson, Clinton, Farlow, Shear and Stevens, and it
is now known systematically as Endothia parasitica.

Some controversy has been had over the origin of the disease and
the case is probably not yet settled. Dr. Clinton's contention is and
has been, that it is a native fungus, which, by means of weather con-

*See "Torreya," Vol. 6, No. 9.

(17)

18

ditions and possibly other factors, has taken on new attributes. Dr.
Metcalf, his co-worker Prof. Collins, Dr. Shear, and others believed
and still maintain that it is of foreign origin, introduced into
America by the importation of horticultural stock. Its first known
appearance in the region of New York City and its spread in con-
centric zones from that point as a centre of infection, lent much
plausibility to this theory. The recent discovery made by Mr. Frank
N. Meyer, of the same fungus in northeastern China, where it is
parasitic on CastcDien, and where, it appears, the host trees have
become rather highly resistant to its attack, leads further probabil-
ity of correctness to Metcalf's theory.

Possibly a great hope for America lies in this Chinese discovery.
Pathologists and foresters are anxiously looking forward to the
results of experiments now being made and which will be attempted,
we hope, on a much larger scale in the future. The regrettable, ever-
present fact is that this disease is with us here and now, and must
be reckoned with from every angle of attack. There seems to be no
present diminution sufficient to warrant the belief that it is likely
to wear itself out, or that our trees will become sufficiently resistant
to ward off the attack prior to the destruction of the trees them-
selves.

Subsequent correspondence between Dr. Mickleborough and the
Department of Forestry culminated in a letter from him under date
of March 9, 1909, in which he outlined a definite plan for the exami-
nation of a supposedly infected territory in southeastern Pennsyl-
vania, and offered his services to the Commonwealth for carrying
out plans of investigation. The proposed inspection was approved
by the Department on March 17, 1909, and the services of Dr. Mickle-
borough thus enlisted. The first inspection visit was made by him
in company Avith the writer, March 29, 1909, at Mt. Holly, in Cum-
berland county, but where no evidence of the disease was found at
that time.

Prior to the beginning of this work in 1909, Dr. Mickleborough
had been invited by Dr. Jane Baker, physician in charge of the
Chester County Insane Hospital, to speak before an educational con-
ference at Embreeville, Chester county. At this time the disease
was not generally prevalent in that region, but a number of infected
chestnut trees were found.

The work of inspection over the southeastern portion of the State
thus undertaken under the direction of the Department of Forestry,
as stated above, was conducted by Dr. Mickleborough, and carried
through or into almost every countj^ east of the Susquehanna. Dur-
ing the progress of this examination the chestnut blight was not
found north- and west of the South Mountain, although prior to this
lime the United States Department of Agriculture had reported the

19

existence of two spot iiifeetioiis in tlie western porlion of the State,
near Altoona, and a reexamination of tlie material relating thereto
by Dr. Metcalf and his assistants, seemed to leave no doubt as to
the correctness of this report. Certain it is that in May, 1909, there
was no large or extended infection west of the Susquehanna. Had
there been in existence at that time the means to carry on work of
control along both sides of the Susquehanna River, Avho can tell
what the result might have been, looked at in the light of our j)resent
knowledge ?

The report of Dr. Mickleborough's inspection and study was pub-
lished by the Department in the autumn of 1909. This is a 16-i)age
pamphlet illustrated by drawings showing a portion of the structural
formation of the fungus, and by a Lumiere color photograph of a
stem section of chestnut covered externally by the fruiting fungus.
This specimen of infected chestnut wood was sent in from Pike
county, in the upper Delaware valley, and was incubated and de-
veloped in a moist cell in the De])artment of Forestry during the
summer of 1909.

In the early part of the study of this bark disease, it was believed
that the Japanese species of Gastanea was either immune or highly
resistant to attack. Several specimens of Japanese chestnut were
under observation on Long Island, and fairly gave rise to this belief.
One grove examined near Westbury, in June, 1909, showed the
Paragons and common chestnuts badly attacked. The Japanese
showed no attack at all.

Through the courtesy of the Hicks nursery at Westbury, forty-
five young chestnut trees supposed to be Japanese, and one hundred
grafting scions were sent to the chestnut orchard of Mr. Levi Wise,
at Gap, Lancaster county, Pennsylvania, and distributed among four
persons of the neighborhood for planting and testing out for im-
munity. The bark disease was at that time particularly prevalent in
the chestnut woods at this place. Some of the newly planted trees
died from other causes, but enough of them were attacked and killed
by the blight to show that these particular trees, at least, were not
immune.

On the 29th day of March, 1910, Dr. Mickleborough delivered a
lecture on the subject of this tree disease before the Main Line
Citizens' Association at the Merion Cricket Club, Haverford, Pa.
This meeting was arranged largely through the efforts of Mr. Peirce,
who at that time was the owner of several acres of chestnut wood-
land, and of which tract Dr. Mickleborough made a rather extended
examination, finding the chestnut blight present in a number of trees.
This discovery and the lecture delivered on the subject brought the
matter prominently to the attention of the citizens of that neigh-

20

borhood, and later led to some very important developments with
respect to studying and combating the disease.

Following this address by Dr. Mickleborough, Mr. Peirce was in
correspondence with the Department of Forestry, calling attention
to the inroads being made upon the chestnut trees by this disease in
the neighborhood of his residence, requesting the Department to
render such help as it might be able in assisting the people to under-
stand the situation better, and, if possible, to eliminate or at least
attempt to control the trouble. This correspondence culminated in
the calling of a meeting on May 23, 1910, at the house of Mr. Robert
W. Lesley, at Haverford, which was attended by a number of the
residents and land owners of the neighborhood, by Dr. John W.
Harshberger, the botanist, representing the University of Pennsyl-
vania, and by the Deputy Commissioner, representing the Pennsyl-
vania Department of Forestry,

The preliminary arrangements for beginning an extensive survey
of this region were discussed at this meeting. The Department rep-
resentative made his report to the Forestry Commission at its meet-
ing held on June 3, 1910. On motion of Dr. Eothrock, the Commis-
sion directed that the Department render the desired help, and on
the same day a letter to this effect was sent to Mr. Peirce, the sec-
retary of the citizens' meeting. On September 1, 1910, a corps of
inspectors from the Department in charge of the Deputy Commis-
sioner, arrived at Haverford and Ardmore, prepared to begin their
work. Offices were speedily fitted up in the building of the Merion
Title and Trust Company at Ardmore, and the first inspection of
trees was made on the property of Mr. Lesley on Saturday, Septem-
ber 3rd. From this date forward until December 19, 1910, the work
was vigorously carried on, and a close inspection made of 296 prop-
erties, covering most of the region extending from Overbrook to
Paoli, and from the Schuylkill River on the north, to a considerable
distance south of the Pennsylvania Railroad. A draft of each prop-
erty was prepared showing the location of all chestnut trees and in-
dicating those which at that time were apparently free of disease, as
well as those showing the infection. Each property owner was then
furnished with a copy of the report and draft relating to his own
land.

To show the interest taken in this work by members of the Main
Line Citizens' Association, it is necessary only to state that the
work was carried on almost entirely at the expense of the associa-
tion. The individual contributions for the purpose amounted to
12,707.70.

During the progress of this inspection, a second public meeting
was held in the auditorium of the Merion Cricket Club, at which

21

time a preliminary report was submitted and discussion had with
respect to the situation as it then existed. This meeting was at-
tended by a large number of ladies and gentlemen, members of the
association, and much interest was shown in the progress reported.
The final report of the committee of the association having the work
in charge was printed and rendered to the members under date of
May 8, 1912. This committee was as follows: Messrs. Harold
Peirce, Chairman; Theodore N. Ely, Allan Evans, IMgar C Felton,
William Righter Fisher, Alba B. Johnson, and Robert W. Lesley.

In a letter bearing date the 12th day of March, 1909, addressed to
the Commissioner of Forestry at Harrisburg, Dr. Mickleborough
used this language. "As to remedy, the best that can be suggested
by anyone at present is Control and not Extermination, for various
reasons. This I think is also true of the San Jose scale." It will
thus be seen that the original idea involved in the attack on the
chestnut blight in Pennsylvania was control, just as the Department
of Agriculture of this State has always aimed at control of the San
Jose scale, suggested in the letter just quoted. After the pre-
liminary studies were completed, no one believed that extermina-
tion or eradication could be accomplished with the means at hand;
but it was thought then, and is still the belief of those who are most
closely associated with the work, that a control is possible, and that
it was much more possible then than now, after the lapse of a period
of five years.

During the progress of the inspection along the Main Line, it be-
came apparent that more than a local effort was demanded if any sub-
stantial progress were to be made towards preventing the spread of
the disease. Steps were taken to enlist the active interest of the Gov-
ernor and the Legislature, (then in session). On the evening of
April 10, 1911, Governor Tener sent a special message to both
houses of the Legislature, calling direct attention to the situation,
and asking the help of the General Assembly to combat the disease.
The Governor's message was as follows:

"Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,

"Executive Chamber,
"Harrisl}urg, April 10, 1911.
"Gentlemen of the Senate and House of Representatives of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania:
"I have the honor to call your attention to a new and virulent
disease of the wild chestnut tree, commonly known as chestnut
Might, recently discovered near New York City, and hitherto un-
known in America. The disease has continued to spread, destroying
the chestnut trees in the neighborhood of New York City and well
up the Hudson. It has invaded Long Island, beginning at the west-
ern end, sweeping eastward, practically covering the island. It has

22

progressed to the southwest, through the whole of the State of New
Jerse5% and all the chestnut trees there appear to be doomed to de-
struction. It has entered Pennsylvania and is prevalent in the
Delaware Valley. It has been discovered in the following counties:
Pike, Monroe, Northampton, Bucks, Montgomery, Chester, Phila-
delphia, Delaware, Lancaster, and southern Berks. In isolated places
it has crossed the Susquehanna, and is now detected in eastern York,
eastern Perry and one portion of southwestern Perry. Other points
of infection have been found near Altoona and Greensburg.

"Experiments made b}^ the Department of Agriculture at Wash-
ington demonstrate that it is possible to prevent the sjjread of the
disease by removing spot appearances as they are detected, and de
stroying the trees in which the disease occurs. By this means tht
region around Washington has been freed from the blight for at
least two years, and it has not re-invaded this area. In the south-
eastern portion of Pennsylvania, where the infection is severe and
almost complete, little hope exists for saving the trees, but in that
portion of the State west of the Susquehanna and north of the Blue
Mountains, it is hoped, by prompt action on the part of the State, to
prevent further damage. If this disease can be held within the
southeastern portion of the State, it will mean the saving of the
wild chestnut trees in the other parts of the Commonwealth, the
value of which extends into the millions of dollars.

"I therefore recommend that the Legislature give immediate at-
tention to this important subject and that a Commission be created
with sufficient power and appropriation of moneys to determine
upon and employ efficient and practical means for the prevention,
control, and eradication of this disease, and that said Commission
be authorized, in conjunction with the Department of Forestry, or
otherwise, to conduct scientific investigations into the nature and
causes of such disease and to adopt such means to prevent its intro-
duction and spread as may be found necessary.

"JOHN K. TENER."

The next day, April 11, 1911, a bill having this purpose in Adew,
and which had been previously carefully drawn and vigorously
criticised, was simultaneously introduced in both House and Sen-
ate. This bill became a law by the signature of the Governor, June
14, 1911*. The law creates a Commission of five members and vests
them with almost plenary power to carry out its mandates. An
appropriation of |275,000 became available at once. The appoint-
ment of the members of the Commission followed after an interval
of about two weeks. Organization was efi'ected, officers and assist-
ants chosen, and on August 23, 1911, the Commission was prepared
to proceed with its work.

While the major effort of the Commission from the beginning
was to get a control, the subject of eradication was vigorously de-
bated, and, as will be seen in subsequent pages, determined efforts
at eradication were undertaken under the advice and direction of

'See Pamphlet Laws, 1911, page 922.

the Commission. The feeling was that if there be any merit in
such effort, opportunity ought not to be lacking to prove it. The
early announced and decisive plan involving the cutting-out method,
proposed and outlined by Dr. Murrill, contributed very consider-
ably toward the decision to trj' out this method.

The Murrill plan (§) was as follows:

''Owners of standing chestnut timber within the affected area are
advised to cut and use all trees, both old and young, that stand
within half a mile of diseased trees, unless protected from infection
through wind-blown spores by dense forest growth or some other
natural barrier. This may not prevent the spread of the disease
through the agenc}^ of storms, birds and squirrels, but it will at
least retard its progress. Old weathered chestnut trunks that have
been dead several years have no power to spread the disease, and
these may be cut at leisure for the tannic acid factory or for fire-
wood. Trees of good size recently killed should be turned into lum-
ber as soon as possible; the fungus affects only the bark, but other
fungi may afterwards impair the value of the wood if allowed to
stand too long. Discarded branches and young trees of no value that
are cut near the edge of the infected area should be burned at once
in order to destroy the spores they contain; but if they are well
within the zone of infection, such precaution is useless."

Every element in the Murrill plan has been employed both by the
Commission and by the State Department of Forestry. The fact
that subsequently Dr. Murrill partially shifted his ground*, did not
seem sufficient reason to warrant the abandonment of a plan of at-
tack which in many cases was productive of satisfactory results.

The history of what work the Commission did, and of the results
accomplished form the substance of several preliminary reports sub-
mitted to the Governor from time to time. The final report is what
follows.

§W. A. Murrill: Jourual of the New York Botanical Garden, Vol. 9, No. 9S, p. 30. February,
1808.
*Harrlsburg Conference Report, 1912, pp. 194, 201, 202.

'>u^jj

(24)

Report of
Mark A. Carleton

General Manager Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree
Blisht Commission

(25)

e«H.'^5:«

( IQ »

Summer condition of a blighted tree. The withered leaves of the top above the
canker, and the vigorous sprouts below the canker are characteristic signs.

THE FIGHT TO SAVE THE CHESTNUT TREES;
FINAL EEPORT OF THE (lENERAL MANAGER.

By MARK A. CARLETON, GENERAL MANAGER,
PENNSYLVANIA CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT COMMISSION.

In closing the active work of this Commission, it is a great sat-
isfaction to be able to report constant progress to date, and the at-
tainment of good, practical results. The work began two years ago
in the midst of much skepticism as to its possibilities, but the op-
timism of the Commission and the wisdom of its methods of opera-
tion have in the main, been amply confirmed by the results since
obtained.

• PROGRESS OF FIELD WORK.

A more or less definite division has been maintained between the
slightly infected Western portion of the State and the badly infected
Eastern portion, known respectively as the Western and Eastern
districts. In a previous report it was stated that in the Western part
of the State the blight had been eradicated to the extent covering
nearly one-half of the area of the State. This area so far as is
known to date has been maintained free from the disease. In a few
cases new infections were found which have been removed. It is
important to note in this connection not only the fact that the
progress of the disease has been checked in Western Pennsylvania,
but that we have without mucli doubt prevented the blight from
gaining a foothold in Ohio, and nearby portions of New York and
West Virginia.

In the Eastern District since January first of this year, the field
work has developed almost entirely into a campaign of utilization,
no rigid sanitation work having been conducted except for the pro-
tection of chestnut orchards and nurseries.

EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CUTTING-OUT METHOD.

In the two years work no facts have yet been obtained which
would indicate the advisability of any change in our present method
of "cutting out" diseased trees and thorough cleaning of the stumps
for the eradication of the disease. A number of tracts where the
disease has been eradicated by Commission employees have again
been inspected recently, giving results, which are in tlie main, favor-
able. Of course, improvements have been made as to details all

(27)

28

along. It is not a pleasant prospect to consider the serious results
likely to follow after this method of eradicating the disease, con-
ducted by the Commission, is obliged to cease.

BENEFICIAL INSECTS.

It will be of interest to quote here the words of the Forest En-
tomologist, of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, in his comment
on a widely disseminated press notice of that Department, Novem-
ber 22nd, 1912, apparently based on the work of F. C. Craighead.

"The beneficial work of these insects can, however, be greatly
encouraged if the owners of the timber will dispose of the diseased
trees in the principal centers of infection, as recommended by the
Chestnut Blight Commission of Pennsylvania, and other State and
Federal officials. Thus, if the large majority of the infection is
disposed of, the beneficial insects will concentrate on. the remaining
scattering and isolated infections, and thus more completely destroy
the fruiting bodies and contribute to the protection of the remain-
ing living trees. In fact, it is a question of the owner securing the
greatest benefit from the natural agencies of control by doing his
share of the work."

NURSERY INSPECTION.

The inspection of nursery stock has been made even more rigid
than before. Not only has it been required that every individual
tree should be inspected by a competent employee of this Commis-
sion, but in shipping it has been required also that every individual
tree should be tagged. A copy of the revised regulations governing
the inspection and shipment of nursery stock is appended to this
report, which shows the form of tags required to be attached both to
individual trees and to bundles of trees. The fact that several of
the most serious infections in the State have been caused heretofore
by the planting of diseased nursery stock in new localities is suf-
ficient reason for so rigid an inspection.

DISCOVERY OF THE CHESTNUT BLIGHT IN CHINA.

It has recently been proved by authentic specimens and artificial
cultures of the material transmitted by the Explorer of the U. S.
Department of Agriculture, that the chestnut blight exists in East-
ern China.* This fact makes it all the more probable that the be-
ginning of the disease in this country may have come about by the

♦Science, Vol. 36, No. 937, p. 825, Dec. 13, 1912.

Winter condition of a cliestnut tree with a blight-girdled top.

29

introduction of sucli diseased stock from China or Japan. That
new centers of infection are often started by the introduction of
diseased nursery stock, is a common observation.

PROTECTION OF ORCHARDS AND NURSERIES.

It has been the policy of the Commission for sometime to protect
orchards and nurseries from outside infection in all cases where the
owners have expressed a desire for such protection, and have them-
selves taken care to control the disease as much as possible. This
work has been successful much beyond our expectations. The largest
and most important orchards thus protected are located at
Sunbury, Paxinos, and Berwick. The owners of neighboring forest
tracts have been required to remove all diseased chestnut trees
within one-half mile of the nearest point of the orchard in each case.
An interesting result in one of the most important of these cases is
the fact that these owners have been able to sell the products of
their diseased trees for an amount considerably above the entire
cost of removal, sanitation work, etc.

PREVENTION OR REMEDY.

At this writing no specific remedy has been found for the disease.
However, later information confirms the statements previously pub-
lished that the disease may be largely prevented from entering
healthy trees by contant and regular spraying with Bordeaux Mix-
ture made up in proportions of 5 pounds of lime, 5 pounds of copper
sulphate, and 50 gallons of water. The application of this mixture
simply prevents any new germination of spores, but has no effect
whatever, in cases where the disease has already started in the
tree. Because of the cost, it is, of course, not applicable in forests.

CONTROL OF THE DISEASE IN ORCHARDS.

By cutting out the cankers and coating with antiseptic solutions
and water proofing afterwards, the blight can be fairly well con-
trolled in chestnut orchards and in certain valuable lawn or park
trees. In connection with this treatment a spray of the Bordeaux
Mixture as above noted should be used occasionally. Excellent re-
sults along this line of experiment are shown in a large orchard at
Paxinos, and in several of the public parks of the State.

30

FAKE TREATMENTS, THEORIES OR CAUSES, ETC.

As often happens in the case of a public campaign against a
serious epidemic, we have been constantly besieged by the gratui-
tous offers of various and sundry remedies for the blight, which in-
clude applications of fertilizers to the soil, insertions of flowers of
sulphur and other compounds in holes bored in the trees, applica-
tions of coatings of different chemicals to the body of the tree, and
numerous other treatments, all of which we believed in the beginning
to have no value. However, all parties having theories to advance
or remedies to propose have been given a chance to prove their claims
by experimenting on trees controlled by the Commission for such
purposes at Emilie, Bucks count3^ A number of parties have taken
advantage of the opportunity. Recently, an examination was made of
the various treatments by a competent Board of Reviewers, whose con-
clusion Avas that not one of the treatments tried had any deterrent
effect upon the chestnut blight.

Many of the persons above mentioned were apparently sincere in
the claims they made, and were simply ignorant of the true cause
of the disease. Instances have come to our attention, however, of
parties practicing certain methods of treatment and charging for the
same, who are plainly impostors. Employees of the Commission
have no doubt benefited many people by exposing the methods of
these impostors.

EXAMINATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL TREES.

Excellent opportunities have been afforded the tree surgeon of
the Commission and his assistants to counteract the influence of
false theories and wortliless remedies such as above mentioned, in
responding to the numerous requests for the examination of indi-
vidual trees. These requests have continued to come to the Commis-
sion headquarters right up to the time of closing our work. No
other line of work has been so effective in arousing the personal in-
terests of the people. No request from any part of the State has
been ignored. In this connection much incidental advice has been
given to property owners as to the general handling of lawns and
orchards, and the management of small woodlots.

PUBLIC PARKS AND FARMB.

In co-operation Avith the officials of Wildwood Park, at Harris-
burg, the Commission has completely eradicated the blight from that
Park, about 150 diseased chestnut trees having been removed or

31

treated out of a total of 1,290 trees. Here in a few cases the peeled
stumps were creosoted to show that method of sanitation. Consid-
erable help has also been giv-en to the management of Fairmount
Park. Arrangements have also been made for the entire removal
of blighted chestnut trees from the State Live Stock Board's Farm,
in Delaware County. In the event of the continuation of our work,
it was also planned to eradicate the blight thoroughly from the Valley
Forge Park grounds.

BLIGHT EATING BEETLES.

It has been announced by the Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, that several species of beetles have been found
eating the spores of the blight fungus, and it is stated that "should
these insects prove as beneficial as the observations indicate, they
are certain to be an important factor in the natural control of the
dreaded chestnut blight disease." It is worthy of note in this con-
nection that the insect investigations of this Commission have shown
that a number of insects also carry large quantities of blight spores,
and may thus indirectly assist in the dissemination of the blight.
One of these insects which was found to carry an enormous number of
spores is one of the beetles above mentioned as eating the fungus.

CORD WOOD AND THE SPECIAL TARIFF.

Since writing the last report, there has been a considerable ship-
ment of chestnut cordwood, shippers taking advantage of the special
tariff issued by the Pennsylvania Railroad. At last accounts the
prospects were that there would be much business in this line right
along in the future, being encouraged by the special low rates.

PROMPTNESS IN UTILIZING CHESTNUT.

Observations made by Commission employees in company with com-
mercial lumbermen have shown that already in certain localities, dis-
eased chestnut has been dead so long that deterioration is beginning.
We have, therefore, made it plain to owners of such chestnut and have
advertised the fact as much as possible, that promptness is necessary
in getting rid of the diseased trees, if the owners wish to obtain the
most value possible from the trees.

INTENSIVE LOCAL UTILIZATION.

Our most difficult line of work has been that of utilization. Facts
as to the conditions could easily be obtained, but the difficulty has
been in bringing the buyer and seller together. Recently a plan was
3

32

adopted, which if we would be able to continue its operation, would
without question, hasten very rapidly the utilization work. This
plan, the details of which are given elsewhere, is to canvass particular
localities thoroughly, finding out just what can be offered in the way
of different chestnut products, ascertaining the local market for
the same, and then determining so far as possible, where else the
surplus may be marketed. Tn connection with the carrying out of
this plan, up to this writing as many as a dozen portable saw mills
have been located in one county, and in other localities many prac-
tical operations had already been started, thus tending to rapid
and clean cut work in utilizing blighted chestnut.

RESISTANCE AND IMMUNITY.

The discovery of the chestnut blight in China makes it now all
the more probable that resistant chestnut stocks may be obtained
in that country. It was, therefore, a wise movement last fall when
we took advantage of the opportunity to obtain a considerable
amount of seed of what is probably the most important chestnut
in Eastern China. A large quantity of the nuts were planted at
Paxinos, and the seedlings at this date which are from six to
fifteen inches high, are looking well. From the nuts sent also to
the State Forest Nursery at Greenwood, 75 seedlings are
at present growing, and from those sent to Asaph, Pa., there are
now 182 plants, averaging ten inches in height. All of these seed-
lings will be of much value in cross-breeding and other ways in the
important future work of developing blight resistant orchard trees.
In this connection it should be noted that in a recent bulletin is-
sued from the Arnold Arboretum a considerable discussion is given
of the possibilities in developing blight resistant chestnut trees
from Chinese introductions, a number of the latter now being grown
at the Arboretum. The two mentioned as the most important in-
clude the one of which we now have seedlings. So far these Chinese
chestnuts grown at the Arboretum have not become blighted.

According to the Kew Index, there are seven species of chestnut
and twenty-one of the chinquapin in the world. From all these
species there should be many other chances of obtaining blight
resistant trees that may be used in breeding and making our own
stock better.

CHESTNUT BLIGHT EXHIBITS.

Several exhibits of specimens showing the work of this Commis-
sion have been placed in public institutions which will remain as
monuments of our work. An excellent exhibit has been placed at

33

the Caruegie Museum at Pittsburgh. Another has been finally
completed in the State Museum at Harrisburg, and a third one at
the Commercial Museum in Philadelphia is not yet finished, but
has been planned on rather a large scale. It was contemplated
also to place another exhibit in the Everhart Museum at Scranton,
which may yet be done. An excellent exhibition of specimens and
illustrations of our work was made in connection with the State
Forestry Exhibition at Horticultural Hall, Philadelphia, in May.

PUBLICATIONS.

When this final manuscript is published, there will have been is-
sued the following publications of this Commission:

Report of The Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference. (Un-
numbered),

Bulletin No. 1 — The Chestnut Blight Disease.

Bulletin No. 2 — Treatment of Ornamental Chestnut Trees Af-
fected with the Blight Disease.

Report of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission,
July 1st to December 31st, 1912. (Unnumbered).

Bulletin No. 3— Field Studies in Blight.

Bulletin No. 4 — Chestnut Blight Fungus and a Related Sapro-
phyte.

Bulletin No. 5 — The Symptoms of Chestnut Tree Blight and a
Brief Description of the Blight Fungus.

Bulletin No. 6 — The Chestnut Tree. Methods and Specifications
for the Utilization of Blighted Chestnut.

Bulletin No. 7 — Morphology and Life History of the Chestnut
Blight Fungus.

Final Report of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Numerous
descriptive and educational circulars, charts, etc.

CO-OPERATION.

Very effective co-operation has continued to be maintained with
the Office of Forest Pathology, of the U. S. Bureau of Plant In-
dustry. Recently the salaries of all pathologists connected with
the Commission have been carried by that office, and there has been
constant communication and co-operation in reference to all re-
search work.

Much excellent help has continually been given by the State For-
estry Department at Harrisburg, the Deputy Commissioner, Hon. I.
C. Williams, being assigned as a collaborator with this C'Ommission.

The authorities of the University of Pennsylvania have been ex-
ceedingly courteous in granting ample space for laboratory work

34

in the new Zoology Building. Room has also been given for labora-
tory work in tree medication in the Botanical Building. Franklin
and Marshall College, at Lancaster, and the State College of Penn-
sylvania, have also provided room for laboratory work in the field
investigations.

There has been a liberal interchange of ideas and helpful sug-
gestions through correspondence with the State Conservation Com-
mission at Albany, N. Y., the State Forester and State Pathologist
of New Jersey, the State Forester of Maryland and of Massachusetts,
and with officials in Virginia, West Virginia, and Maryland.

MUCH IMPORTANT WORK UNFINISHED.

The cessation of the work at this time is particularly unfortunate
because so many important investigations, not yet finished,
would likely have had a very practical and beneficial bearing upon
the actual eradication of the disease.

First. — Very little- is known about the bast miner — the insect
which, as stated in another place, is probably one of the most im-
portant carriers of blight spores. A full knowledge of the life
history of this insect would probably very soon have been com-
pleted, and which would be a most interesting contribution to sci-
ence*.

Second.- — The Chemist and Physiologist in tree medication had
planned to use a new solution for injection into diseased trees,
which according to chemical work already done, promises to check
the growth of the blight.

Third. — The local intensive work in utilization had just begun,
and as stated elsewhere, bids fair to solve largely the difficult
problem of utilizing rapidly the diseased chestnut.

Fourth.- — The discovery of the blight in China and the posses-
sion by the Commission of a large number of seedlings of one of
the most important Chinese chestnuts, as well as immune and re-
sistant Japanese stock, opens a field for breeding experiments
which would without question have been of the greatest benefit to
the owners of chestnut orchards.

Fifth. — Although not demonstrated before, it- is now proved that
birds and insects carry enormous quantities of spores of the blight
fungus, which necessarily changes our viewpoint considerably with
respect to the eradication of the disease.

Sixth. — In a number of forest tracts and several orchards, thor-
ough ''cutting-out" work and up-to-date surgery treatments have

*Since writing the above, tliis work has already been finished, as stated in footnote on page

35

been started by expert employees of the Commission, which are
just now beginning to show evidences of the value of this kind
of work.

Brief statements of the results of the different lines of work con-
ducted by the Commission follow, credited to the respective parties
in charge.

FIELD OPERATIONS.

As heretofore, all field work has been conducted under the im-
mediate direction of the General Superintendent, Mr. S. B. Det-
wiler. In the following statements some of the principal features
of the work to date are pointed out by him, and also suggestions
grven to timber owners who may wish to clear their woods of blight
on their own responsibility. A statement in detail of the eflective-
uess of sanitation cutting in controlling the blight, by Mr. Detwiler, is
appended to this report.

REDUCTION OF FORCE.

A majority of the field agents of the Commission were dismissed
in January, 1913, because it was believed that very little work
could be done during the inclement months of winter and spring.
HoY/ever, the unusuall}' open winter made it possible for the small
field force retained to accomplish more for the time and money ex-
pended than at any previous time since our work was organized. An
average force of 36 men in the western district and 11 men in the
eastern district were in the field from the first of the year to July
25th, 1913, when all field work was discontinued.

BETTER WORK IN WINTER.

The experience of the past two years has demonstrated that more
can be accomplished in locating and destroying the blight after the
leaves have fallen than while the trees are in full foliage. Girdled
twigs and branches bearing withered leaves are prominent at great
distances in winter, and the increased amount of light admitted
through the tops of the trees makes it easier to see cankers on the
trunks and branches. The proper treatment of the infected trees
is no more difficult in winter than in late summer or fall, unless
the snow is very deep. In the badly blighted region in the eastern
part of the State, field men are able to accomplish better results
because most timber owners prefer to cut their timber in the win
ler, when they can spare the time from their farming operations.

36

FIELD WORK IN THE WESTERN DISTRICT.

Thorough scouting in 1912 has shown that no blight exists west
of a line drawn through central Somerset and Cambria counties,
along the extreme eastern border of Cameron County, to the north-
east corner of Tioga County. West of this line, nine isolated spot
infections were found in six counties, but all of these infections
were eradicated as soon as found, and have been under careful sur-
veillance since. These infected spots were located in Fayette, Elk,
Warren, Potter, Clarion and Indiana counties, and five out of the
nine spots were found to be due to the planting of diseased nursery
stock purchased from nurseries in the infected region. In April,
1913, the infection in Indiana County was discovered in a shipment
of three chestnut trees purchased from a nursery in New Jersey.
These examples show very strikingly the ease with which the blight
is widely distributed through the shipment of nursery stock. Per-
sons who have planted nursery grown chestnut trees in regions free
from the blight, should watch these trees carefully for the first ap-
pearance of the disease, and promptly destroy all infected trees.

Field work in the Western District during the period covered by
this report has been confined to Tioga, Clinton, Lycoming, Centre,
Huntingdon, Blair, Bedford, and Somerset counties. Tioga, Clin-
ton, Centre, and Blair counties have been scouted and most of the
diseased trees removed, but a considerable amount of infection still
remains in Lycoming, Huntingdon, Bedford, and Somerset counties.
In addition, Fulton and Mifflin counties still have a large amount
of infection remaining, since with the small field force it was im-
possible to continue the work in these counties.

The accompanying map shows the progress of the control work
in the Western District, and the location of infected areas. The
following tabulation is a statement of the number of infected trees
found and cut out in the Western District from the time the work
was begun until July 1st, 1913:

37

STATEMENT OF CHESTNUT BLIGHT INFECTION IN THE
WESTERN DISTRICT.

03 oi

S ii

Allegheny, . .
Armstrong, . .

Bedford

Bradford,

Blair

Beaver

Butler,

Cameron

Centre

Clinton,

Clearfield, ...

Clarion

Cambria

Crawford, ...

Elk

Erie

Fayette,

Ir'ulton,

Forest

Greene

Huntingdon,
Indiana,

JefCerson,

Lycoming, . . .
Lawrence, ...

Mifflin,

McKean

Mercer

Potter

Somerset,

Sullivan,

Tioga,

Venango,

Westmoreland
Washington,
Warren,

Total,

147
91

225

142
169

4,027
1,04S
1,884

2,556 ;
3,4S1 i

117 !
1

450

377

11
1,902

5,015
1^976

1

9,110

207

43

5,287
1

16

37,510

2,787

829

1,680

1,763

2,704

117

1

450

377

11
900

4,771

1

4,486
"i;468

1

8,093

207

43

16

30,705

38

A HARMLESS SAPROPHYTE.

Persons familiar with the appearance of the chestnut blight
fungus may easily confuse it with another fungus found in Wash-
ington, Greene, and Fayette counties. This fungus ( Endothia
radicalis Schw.), (Denot.) is related to the blight fungus (Endothia
parasitica (Murr.) (And.), but is found only on dead wood and bark
and does not attack living tissues. It has been thoroughly studied
by the field pathologist, since at first it was feared that it might
have parasitic tendencies. Continued investigation proves beyond
doubt that this fungus is a harmless saprophyte which need not be
feared. It need not be confused with the parasitic species by those
who have the opportunity to compare them,.

FIELD WORK IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT.

Field work in the Eastern District has been conducted mainly
on the plan outlined in the previous report. Inspections were made
on the request of timber owners and advice given as to the best
method of procedure in each case. Particular attention was given
to assisting owners of blighted chestnut in finding the best markets
tor the products. On the request of owners desiring to take ad-
vantage of the reduced freight rates on blighted chestnut cordwood,
inspections were made and necessary certificates issued. Super-
vision of enforced cutting of all blighted chestnut trees within a
half mile of chestnut orchards in which the owners are endeavoring
to keep the disease under control, was continued.

As the evidences of the blight become more noticeable and the
seriousness of the situation forces attention, owners of chestnut
timber in eastern Pennsylvania have shown an increasing interest
in the work of controlling the blight, and more requests for assist-
tnice were received than could be given individual attention. For
the guidance of owners who wished to clean their woods of blight,
either by doing the work themselves or having it done by contract,
the following suggestions were made by the Office of Utilization.
These suggestions are for use in eastern Pennsylvania only, where
the blight is general.

SUGGESTIONS FOR TIMBER OWNERS.

1. It is always advisable in cutting blighted chestnut to clean up
the ground thoroughly and burn all infected material, for the sake
of the future crop and the community as a whole. Even if financial
reasons make it impossible to treat the stumps properly, the brush

i^ffif-

i«p^'- ' ' ,^

i ■ ^:

^-^^f; mam

"j ■; ■■ /" ' ^^.t

-^,..,-..

:;f

.g. ^

^-::"i

' ■- '■ •^■' :

W-i

'^m

: ^..J^J.';'

' ■

■ .1 ■

^ft^

■^^^l'

r" '■'"■' .■. '■■

p:.

' 4Sii- ' jr"i**

^S

1 'sr\. ■ '""""'■■;-■■

■'S'MSssiP;

•-**^, ,, '

m^^^E^^a

■'^H

■'■' fvHW

H

.1^^

%i8'

B^P#'^ ^'^Ur^iP^*^

m

^^

^''^^SP-^rZ-S"!

.*i" ' ' '. : .-'■

-£|

U '. ; ' '

in

- V

mm^- S\wm

^^^^"

o

39

and refuse should be buiiied, and all merchantable material re-
moved from the tract within a reasonable period. ^Vhere the per-
centage of blight is very high, it is advisable to cut all the chestnut
trees rather than attempt to remove only the diseased trees.

2. Stumps should not be cut higher than the diameter of the
tree, but this maj^ be impracticable in sprout growth timber. A low
stump saves the best end of the log, and causes the succeeding
generation of sprouts to be firmly rooted.

3. Where practicable, all timber should be peeled. Poles, ties,
posts and rails, should be skidded to one or more convenient places.
The bark and chips collected at these points should be burned, since
this refuse is very frequently the breeding place of the blight
fungus.

4. It is advisable to remove all bark from the stumps down to
the mineral soil, to prevent the further spread of the disease by its
growth on this bark. Unpeeled stumps, even if free from blight at
the time the tree is felled, are \evy apt to become infected, and the
disease will then eventually destroy the sprouts at the base. Stumps
of trees cut in winter while the bark is "tight" may be left until
spring, and peeled when the sap is ascending. Stumps made in sum-
mer should be peeled at once.

5. All chestnut refuse, including the brush from the tops, bark
from stumps, chips, etc., should be collected and burned at as early
a time as may be done with safety from fire. Green tops of trees
felled in summer can be burned immediately by close piling over
a well-started fire. The danger of infecting the sprouts from the
stump is lessened if the fire be made over the stump after peeling.
Stumps can be more cheaply sterilized, however, by painting them
with creosote, and creosote also appears to be absolutely effective in
keeping the stump free from infection, whereas a fire seldom chars
the base of the stump sufficiently.

6. Woodsmen, while cutting and removing chestnut, should do
as little injury as possible to the remaining trees, whether large or
small. When the work is done by contract, trees carelessly broken
in felling chestnut should be paid for at their market value. Mer-
chantable chestnut left in the woods, either cut or uncut, when con-
tracts call for the removal of all of the same, should be paid for at
its market value.

7. Great care should be exercised in burning material so as not
to injure other trees, or allow fires to remain unwatched in the
woods. Forest fires may result, causing much damage. Burning
should not be done when the woods are very dry, or a high wind is
blowing.

40

LOCAL INTENSIVE FIELD WORK.

Early in the spring a more extensive plan of field work in the
southeastern portion of the State was adopted. A locality was se-
lected where the blight is beyond control, and immediate utilization
necessary to avoid serious financial loss. The boundaries of the
area selected were so made that the timber in all of the woodlots in
the area could be handled in much the same way as though the
woodlots comprised a single tract. A map showing the exact loca-
tion of all of the woodlots was made, and a field agent detailed to
estimate merchantable chestnut in the form of saw logs, poles, ties,
posts and cordwood in each woodlot. The local market for these
products was then ascertained, to determine whether all timber on
the area could be best sold locally on in outside markets. At the
same time the field agent interested the owners of the woodlots in
the prompt removal and utilization of their chestnut trees before
greater loss was occasioned by the blight. Usually the owner of a
considerable quantity of blighted trees is anxious to follow this
course, but the scarcity of competent woodsmen makes it difficult
or impossible. In such cases, the Office of Utilization presented the
data obtained by the field agent to operators of portable saw mills,
stave mills, pole or tie cutters, as the facts warranted, and as many
buyers as possible were interested in locating on the area. So far
as there was time to test this plan, it appears that this is the cheap-
est and most effective way of getting results in the eastern district,
since what is desired is to get cutting started on a sane and profit-
able basis, and this a mere general method of work usually fails to
accomplish. Success or failure depends on whether or not buyer
and seller can be brought together on a satisfactory basis. The
work must be profitable to both owner and dealer. A competent
and well-informed field agent can work out a comprehensive plan
for disposing of all the merchantable chestnut in a commmunity.
Through his knowledge of prices, rates, specifications, sanitation
measures, etc., he is the means of saving timber owners from much
of the loss occasioned by the blight.

DISEASE INVESTIGATIONS AND NURSERY INSPECTION.

As before reported, the investigation of the blight fungus and
the nursery inspection work are under the direction of Dr. P. D.
Heald. Mr. P. J. Anderson has given special attention to certain
field investigations, including the work at Charter Oak. State-
ments of some of the principal features of the work here follow:

41

GERMINATION OF SPORES.

Pycnospores of the blight fungus, sometimes called summer
spores, germinate much more slowly than the ascospores, or so-
called winter spores. The type of growth and size of colonies are
different in the early stages of development on culture media.

PRODUCTION OF PYCNOSPORES IN WINTER.

In the case of this fungus the term "summer spores" is very mis-
leading, as these spores are produced at all times of the year, being
washed down in large numbers from blight cankers following each
winter rain.

BIRDS DISSEMINATE THE FUNGUS.

Careful experiments show that birds act as carriers of spores of
the blight fungus. Thirty-six birds belonging to nine different
species have been tested. Nineteen were found to carry pycnospores,
the maximum number obtained from a single bird, (Downy wood-
pecker), being 757,074. The highest number was always obtained
from birds shot a few days after a rain period.

"SHOOTING" OF ASCOSPORES.

The ascospores are expelled forcibly, but this expulsion depends
upon temperature as well as moisture. No expulsion took place in
the field from November 26th, 1912, to March 21st, 1913, the tem-
perature during the winter rains being too low. Bark containing
ascospore pustules has continued to expel ascospores for over six
months, (in the laboratory).

EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE.

Pycnospores are easily killed by heat, (51°C). Ascospores are
slightly more resistant, only a few being able to survive 57 °C.

RESISTANCE OF PYCNOSPORES.

Pycnospores are easily killed under certain conditions, but can
survive in considerable numbers under certain other circumstances.
Their length of life in water depends to some extent upon the tem-
perature. Thirty-three per cent, survived in water at 55°C, after

42

42 days. A large percentage can survive freezing for a consider-
able period. They are washed down to the ground from blight
cankers, during every rain, and have never been found to disap-
pear entirely from the soil during the longest periods between rains.
As many as 12 per cent, of those originally present in a soil sample
have survived drying for 63 days. The longevity of the pycnosjwres
is greater in the ''spore horn" stage than when they are separated by
rains and then dried. They have been killed in twenty-four hours
by drying in certain tests, while the act of drying alone is gen-
erally responsible for the death of 50-60 per cent.

EFFECT OF DRYING ON ASCOSPORES.

Ascospores when shot on to glass slides have been reported as
being very resistant to drying. In nature they are generally sepa-
rated and washed by the rains. Laboratory tests under such con-
ditions indicate that they are very sensitive to dessiccation. Dry-
ing alone has been found to kill as many as 94 per cent, in certain
tests.

ENTRANCE OF BLIGHT IN GALLS.

A small gall on the chestnut due to a lepidopterous insect (fnoth)
has been found to be one of the places of entrance of the blight
fungus. Twenty-eight per cent, of those tested showed young blight
infections.

INSECTS AS CARRIERS OF THE DISEASE.

Insects may act as carriers of the spores of the blight fungus. Of
a total of 75 tested, many were found to be carrying spores. The
maximum number of spores of the blight fungus (336,900), was ob-
tained from a small beetle, (Leptostylns moculata), which has been
mentioned as a possible beneficial agent on account of its pustule-
eating habits.

OTHER DISEASES OF THE CHBSTNUT.

There is another "canler disease" of the chestnut prevalent in
the State which is entirely distinct from the blight. It is even more
important as a disease of oaks than chestnut, and is known to oc-
cur on chestnut oak, red oak, and white oak. A dieback of the
chestnut is not uncommon. Still another fungus appears to be as-
sociated with this trouble. A tip 'blight of the chestnut has also
been found, and in connection with it, a third species of fungus.

43

FIELD INVESTIGATIONS.

A field laboratory has all along been maintained at Charter Oak,
and much of the outdoor inoculation work and other experiments
have been conducted in that vicinity. Experiments have been con-
ducted here on the rate of growth of blight cankers, details of which
are tabulated in another manuscript, submitted for a bulletin. It
is sufl&cient to say here that the retarding influence of the winter
season is shown by these experiments. On the other hand, the
cankers have continued to spread even in the winter, though the
growth is much more rapid in the summer months.

Inoculations have been made both with ascospores and with
pycnospores during every month of the last year. No cankers have
appeared as yet from winter inoculations.

Other species of trees besides chestnut have been inoculated with
the blight fungus in larger numbers than last year, special atten-
tion being given to the oaks. As yet there is no evidence that the
blight fungus will establish parasitic relation with any other host,
although occasionally a canker will be produced.

Careful tree surgery experiments have been conducted at Charter
Oak, and to date only three cases are reported in which the canker
continued to spread after cutting out and treatment.

NURSERY INSPECTION.

The office records give the following information in regard to
each nursery inspection: — date, name and location of nursery, num-
ber of trees inspected, number of trees rejected, fungicides used for
dipping the stock, name and location of purchaser of stock.

The nurseries from which chestnut stock was shipped during the
fall of 1912 and .spring of 1913, are as follows: — C. K. Sober, Paxi-
nos. Pa. ; Hoopes Bros. & Thomas, West Chester, Pa. ; Lovett
Nursery, Emilie, Pa.; Rakestraw & Pyle, Kennett Square, Pa.;
Morris Nursery,. West Chester, Pa.; Cheltenham Nursery, Oak
Lane, Pa. ; Jos. Moore, Montoursville, Pa. ; S. L. Cummings & Co.,
Dewart, Pa., and Marietta Nursery, Marietta, Pa.

In the fall of 1912, 6,538 trees were inspected. Of these 81 were
rejected, and the remainder 6,457, distributed. In tlie spring of
this year 5,305 trees were inspected, of which 195 were rejected and
the remainder 5,110 distributed. The trees rejected were either in-
fected with chestnut blight, or showed doubtful incipient infec-
tions. In case of doubt the inspectors were instructed to reject the
tree. The number of rejected, trees, however, is no indication of

44 .

the percentage of blight in any nursery, since many diseased trees
are removed from the nurseries previous to the time of making ship-
ments, and only those thought to be healthy trees are offered for in-
spection.

Probably the greater portion of the trees went to purchasers in
either Pennsylvania or New York. In case of re-distribution by
other dealers, however, the final destination of the stock is not
known. According to available records, the trees were sold to
purchasers in the following States. — California, Colorado, Con-
necticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana,
Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska,
New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin.

INSECT INVESTIGATIONS.

The investigations to determine what part, if any, insects take in
the transmission of the chestnut blight have been continued under
the immediate direction of Prof. A. G. Ruggles. A number of
interesting facts have been determined, but several important studies
were just well under way when the work was suspended.

The relation of insects to blight dissemination comes under three
headings; first, insects that carry the spores of the fungus and
actually start new infections at the time; second, insects that
carry the spores but do not directly start infections; and third,
insects that make wounds in which infection readily takes place
through spores carried by some other agency.

INSECTS CAUSING DIRECT INFECTION.

To the present time very little definite data have been obtained
on this point, but the longer the subject is studied, the more prob-
able it appears that ordinary insects traveling over a tree, although
they may carry hundreds of spores on their bodies, do not directly
start new infections.

INSECTS CARRYING SPORES BUT CAUSING NO DIRECT

INFECTION.

Ants were allowed to run over cankers showing pycnidial pus-
tules or "spore horns," and also cankers where ascospores were
shooting, and then placed in flaskg gf sterile water and washed

45

from two to twenty-four hours. Plate cultures made from this ma-
terial showed in many instances the presence of blight spores on the
bodies of the ants. In the same way it was determined that other
insects to the number of about twenty species also carry the spores
of chestnut blight. The number of spores carried in each instance
varied from a very few to the enormous number of 336,900. The
particular insect, (Leptostylus maculata) , carrying the 336,900
spores mentioned, is one of the beetles named in a recent press no-
tice of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, as being very active
in eating spores of the blight fungus. Therefore this beetle while
destroying spores of the blight is at the same time covering its body
with thousands of other chestnut blight spores which it carries
from tree to tree, making it probably an injurious insect, instead
of a beneficial one in this respect.

INSECTS MAKING WOUNDS IN TEEES THUS OPENING THE
WAY FOR INFECTION.

This is probably the most serious way in which insects are re-
lated to blight dissemination. Among the most serious of wound
making insects are the seventeen-year cicadas, tree-hoppers, bark
borers, and bast miners. Of these only two have been studied
closely, — the cicadas and the bast miners.

CICADA STINGS.

In 1911 there was a brood of seventeen-year cicadas in several
counties in the eastern part of Pennsylvania. The relations that
these stings bore to blight infection have been studied near Lehigh-
ton. Many counts were made on trees and sprouts. While only
4.3 per cent, to 10.4 per cent, of all stings were found to be infected
with chestnut blight, from 86 per cent, to 93.8 per cent, of all infec-
tions were in stings. This cicada injury was studied where the
blight seemed most abundant. In the same tract where blight was
less prevalent, other counts were made with less striking results.
These observations would seem to show that blight infection is in-
fluenced considerably by the number of wounds made, but that
infection many times does not take place through a wound although
seemingly appropriate openings for catching blight may be present.

THE BAST MINER. "

The work of the bast miner was first called to our attention by Mr.
S. B. Detwiler. It is believed to be the most important insect causing
wounds in the chestput. Experiments and studies up to the pres-

46

ent time make it probable that the bast miner is responsible for
much blight infection. To understand thoroughly the relationship
of this insect to the blight fungus, the life history has to be known.
Much time has been spent upon this subject, but unfortunately to
date, the work has not been completed.* The injurious period of
its life history has been obtained, but the period that would have
to do with its suppression, namely the adult period and time of egg
laying, has not been discovered.

LARVAL EXIT HOLES AS POINTS OF INFECTION.

Hundreds of sticks of smooth bark trees of chestnut were ex-
amined during the past winter and spring to determine the num-
ber and nature of the larval exit holes of the bast miner. Every
piece a foot long and over two inches in diameter had bast miner
burrows present. The lowest number for a linear foot was one bur-
row while the highest was fifteen. The number of exit holes for a
small tree, therefore, would vary from ten to one hundred and
fifty. In one acre of chestnut trees the number of these exit holes
would be enormous. In the light of what we now know, recent
observations show that 50 per cent, of this class of infections origi-
nated in bast miner exit holes*

CROTCH INFECTIONS.

Many infections are known to start around crotches, and we
speak of them as crotch infections. The eggs of the bast miner are
laid near crotches and the newly hatched larvas may make entrance
holes sufficiently large to allow spores of blight to enter. Here
again the bast miner may be responsible, and if such proves to be
a fact, this insect would be the indirect cause of 90 per cent, instead
of 50 per cent, of the infection on smooth bark trees. All other in-
sects mentioned as making wounds, with perhaps the exception of
the tree hoppers, are local or else the number of wounds is not ap-
preciable; but in the case of the bast miner, the insect is found
wherever the chestnut grows.

EXPERIMENTS WITH ANTS.

Ants being found so commonly around blight cankers on chestnut
trees, it has been claimed that in some instances they are respon-
sible for as much as 90 per cent, of blight dissemination. To ob-

*Since writing the above, Prof. Ruggles has produced the mature insect in breeding experiments
and has thus completed our knowledge o£ its life history, and finds the insect to be a species
new to science.

47

tain information on this matter, it was decided during the winter
to experiment with ants in the greenhouse. Two rooms were set
oflf as an insectary. The inner of these two rooms being thoroughly
sterilized, was called the sterile room, and the outer room was called
the blighted room. In the latter as much blight material of the
kind required as could be obtained Avas kept and placed on the
ant table, where three colonies of ants made their homes. From
the table in this room the ants were allowed to run through a glass
tube to sterile seedling trees in the sterile room. The ants were
of the same species as those suspected of carrying the blight, and
were the common mound-builders, (Forrnica Integra)^ being ob-
tained in the region of Lewisburg, Union County.

The result of the experiment was that with the exception of a
few dried leaves on each tree which were chewed or worlied on by
the ants, the trees in the sterile room are as healthy as when first
placed on the table to be run over by the ants. The indication,
therefore, is that ants are not responsible for blight infection.

INFECTION IN GALLS.

A more or less cylindrical gall is found on the tips of branches
and on sprouts of chestnut, caused by an insect claimed to be a
moth. At West Chester and Valley Forge, these galls are very
numerous. Out of 161 galls examined by the plant pathologist,
forty-five of the 28 per cent, showed the presence of blight, while
49 per cent, showed the presence of another fungus. A gall that
shows the presence of chestnut blight in such a large percentage of
cases should be given careful study.

CHEMICAL INVESTIGATIONS.

EXCESS OF TANNIN IN DISEASED WOOD.

The principal features of the chemical investigations which have
been continued in charge of Mr. Joseph Shrawder, are as follows:

The abnormal tannin content of infected material was the chief
subject of interest in the last report. Invariably, infected wood
and hypertrophied material continue to show a higher tannin con-
tent than sound material from the same sample.

4

48

LOSS OF VOLATILE MATTER.

Moisture and other volatile matter proved of interest also. By^
prolonged heating at temperatures up to 155° 0, infected material
showed a greater ratio of loss.

CELLULOSE DETERMINATIONS.

A series of cellulose determinations was also made to note the
effect of the fungus on wood and bark. A higher percentage of
cellulose in sound material leads us to believe that it is being di-
gested with the formation of acids and other soluble matter. It
may als'o be that part of this soluble matter is reported as tannin
by the hide powder method. This, with the deficiency of cellulose,
may account for the relative high tannin content appearing on
analysis.

CHEMICAL CHANGES.

The determination of starch, reducing sugar, and nitrogen shows
that decided chemical changes are being produced by the fungus.
However, this work was not brought to a satisfactory conclusion
owing to the sudden termination of the work of the Commission.

NEW INJECTION MATERIAL FOR TREE MEDICATION.

Some preliminary work was also started in a search for a suit-
able injection — material to be used in the tree-medication experi-
ments. It is evident from the chemical investigation that a suit-
able injection-material must not coagulate the excessive tannin
and other colloids in the wood and bark, and that it must be able
to penetrate cutin in suberin in order to diffuse properly through
the infected area. A brief investigation of a modified chlorine solu-
tion showed that it fulfilled these requirements in many respects,
but its value in treating trees has not been determined.

TKEE MEDICATION.

The experiments in tree medication, in charge of Dr. Caroline
Rumbold, have been for some time conducted in a large chestnut
orchard located near Martic Forge, Lancaster County. The follow-
ing is a brief statement of recent work:

49

PLOTS UNDER EXPERIMENT.

In 1912 three plots were selected for experiment. Each con-
tained about fifty trees varying in age from seedlings to eighteen
years old. This year two new plots were added to the three of
1912. Some tree surgery work was done, and the trees sprayed
with lime-sulphur,

OBSERVATIONS OF THE WORK OF 1912.

Last year fifty-four trees were injected; 15 with salts of the
heavier metals; 5 with formaldehyde; 12 Avith stains; 22 with alka-
lies, and the remainder with water. An attempt was made to inject
two trees with canker extract, but the solution would not go into
the trees.

On June 7, 1913, results of observations on these trees injected
last year were made as follows:

To date, the injections of the salts of the heavier metals, (copper,
zinc, barium), appear not to have killed the trees, although they
mutilated them. Those injected with the copper salts suffered the
most. Inoculations made on these trees after they were injected
have taken, and the cankers forming are larger than those on the
check trees. Of the five trees injected with the formaldehyde, two
are alive, but mutilated. Inoculations on these trees have formed
cankers larger than those on the check trees. Most of the trees
injected with stains have been cut down, for observation. None were
killed, however, by the injection. The trees injected with water
are in good condition with the exception of one tree infected with a
canker, which is now girdled. The only unusual sign about the tree
is the large amount of suckers at its base.

FAVORABLE EFFECTS OF ALKALIES.

The trees injected with alkalies are all in good condition at pres-
ent. An encouraging feature of the experiment with alkalies is
that a number of inoculations on these trees did not take, and on
those which have taken cankers have formed smaller than those on
the check trees. These trees were cut into in April in order to
count the number oi inoculations that took, and in a number of
cases these cuts have formed callus.

INJECTIONS IN 1913.

The past spring, 69 trees have been treated — 21 with colloids, 18
with alkalies, 18 with acids, 17 with benzenes, one with methyl
alcohol, and two with methylene blue, while five are water checks.
The method of injection used this year is the same as in 1912.

50

EFFECTS OF THIS YEAR'S INJECTIONS.

The trees have not reacted to the injections this year as quickly
as last summer. The slowness of reaction may be clue to the season
of the year, the cool weather, and the large amount of rain since
injections began. As was to be expected, the trees have reacted
to the injections differently. Potassium chromate and bi-chromate
caused the fastest and most severe reactions. Reactions of the
trees to the chemicals are generally shown by discoloring, drying,
or falling leaves. Sometimes the trunk shows the path the solu-
tion followed by sunken areas, or long cracks in the bark, extend-
ing up the tree. So far no results can be given as to the effect of
this year's injections, either on the trees themselves or on the
canker growth. The full effect of the present injections probably
cannot be seen until next year.

TREE SUEGERY.

INDIVIDUAL TREE EXAMINATIONS.

The tree surgery work was continued in charge of Mr. Roy G.
Pierce. A brief statement of the work here follows: —

Numerous requests for examinations of individual trees have
been received continuously up to the time of closing our work.
These requests have come from owners of individual lawn trees,
owners of cultivated orchard trees, and owners of wood lots or
small forest properties. When desired the owners or the gardeners
were instructed how to take care of the trees. This is the most
satisfactory way of handling this kind of work, since frequent
examinations during the growing season are necessary to keep the
chestnut blight under control. The owner, if well informed, may
notice a diseased twig or branch at any time and remove it before
the infection has spread any further. On request, the names of
reputable tree surgeons have been given the owners.

ADVICE IN FOREST MANAGEMENT.

Frequently where there have been a large number of infected
chestnut trees in the forest, as on Mount Penn and on the Never-
sink Mountain at Reading, or at Galen Hall, Wernersville, Berks

Tree surgery. Operator has gouged outer rim of canker, leaving mycelium of
chestnut blight in center. Other cuts shown on tree were made at an
earlier period.

51

County, the owners have not been so desirous of prolonging the life
of the chestnut trees as of maintaining a grove or woodlot of trees
of different kinds. In such cases the first j)rinciples of forestry
have been recommended, namely, requiring the removal of trees that
were becoming badly diseased, thus giving place to other tree
species coming up beneath, such as hickories and oaks, instead of
advising any tree surgery.

CONTACT WITH THE PEOPLE.

In thus meeting the people themselves, it has been possible to in-
form them much more thoroughly on the real cause of the blight
than can be done through the medium of bulletins or newspaper
articles. Many still think that the chestnut blight is caused by
an insect or a mysterious something that kills the trees by descend-
ing on them as a vapor. To these people, however, "seeing is be-
lieving."

EXPERIMENTS.

Experiments have been started at different points: — (1) On
methods of cutting out cankers; (2) With substances used as
sterilizing agents and as water-proofing; (3) On the charring of
cankers for various periods of one to five minutes; and (4) On the
uses of various fungicides and water-proofings for painting over
the cankers.

EXPERIMENTS WITH LIME-SULPHUR.

The use of the lime-sulphur spray to prevent infection has been
experimentally tried at several places on orchard chestnut trees.
One of the most important of these experiments is one that was
started in Chester County in an orchard of 200 chestnut trees. 41
trees being used for the experiment, the trees ranging in height
from 15 to 35 feet, and about twenty-five years of age. At the time
of closing the w^ork of the Commission, these experiments have not
yet been continued for one year, therefore no definite results have
been obtained, nor can any definite conclusion be drawn.

ALLEGED CURES FOR THE BLIGHT.

Besides the trials of different treatments at Emilie, Bucks county,
mentioned elsewhere, three residents of Pennsylvania, who claim
they have cures for the chestnut blight, have been permitted to dem-
onstrate the efficacy of their cures at other points. Two of these
"cures" are already failing at the present time.

52

LOCATION OF CANKERS.

An observation which may be of importance is that blight cank-
ers are very seldom found to have started on the underside of
branches.

VALUE OF TREE SURGERY WORK.

The work of tree surgery thus far has shown that it is possible
to save chestnut trees that are diseased with the chestnut blight.
This can only be done, however, by the most careful tree surgery,
followed by frequent examinations for new infections and the
spread of the old ones. Young, smooth bark trees are more easily
saved than old thick bark trees, because it is much easier to dis-
cover the blight on the former than on the latter.

OTHER TREE SURGERY WORK.

In addition to the tree surgery work under the immediate direc-
tion of Mr. Pierce, other competent employees of the Commission
have done similar work at Emilie, Charter Oak, and in a large
orchard at Paxinos, the results of which up to this date are con-
sidered as largely successful.

The accompanying figures. No. I and No. II, will illustrate cer-
tain phases of the tree surgery work.

GEOGE APHIC WOKK.

WEATHER CONDITIONS.

A brief statement of some additional work by the Geographer, Dr.
F. P. Gulliver, follows :—

Since the last report very few definite facts have been obtained
as to the relation of rainfall to the spread of the blight, but noth-
ing has yet been learned which would contradict the opinion pre-
viously stated that blight dissemination increases much more
rapidly during rainy periods.

RELATION OF SOILS TO BLIGHT OCCURRENCE.

Considerable time has been given recently to a study of the char-
acter of the soils in different localities in the State where there is

S3

more or less chestnut blight, to determine whether there is any real
relation between the nature of the soil, and the amount of the dis-
ease in any locality.

LOCATION OF OBSERVATIONS.

After a careful survey of the State, it was decided to conduct this
study in — (1), Chester Valley; (2), The Kutztown Valley, Berks
County, and (3), Center County. To date, there has been time
only to make observations in the first two localities. In the Chester
Valley these studies have been much facilitated because of the con-
stant occurrence of limestone toward the base of the mountains,
and of shales toward the top. Usually, more chestnut blight was
found near the tops of the mountains, and less, as one descends to-
wards the valley.

RESULTS OF OBSERVATIONS.

The results of these observations on the relation of limestone or
other alkaline soils to blight distribution, are as follows, which
are simply, however, what appear to be the facts obtained from
studies to date, and are not put forth as absolute conclusions.

(1) — In every series of tracts taken from limestone to overlying
shale soils, the percentage of blight is least at a comparatively
short distance (50 to 200 ft.), from the edge of the limestone.

(2) — Tracts on soils derived from limestone which show the
highest percentage of blight seem to be those where the soil has
become acid from underground drainage, and consequent leaching
out of the alkalies.

(3) — Chestnut trees on soils derived from other alkaline rocks
show less blight than is found in the trees on shale soils with lime-
stone underneath.

(4) — Where the rocks have been faulted, and an older crystalline
rock has been brought up to the level of the later formed limestone,
there does not appear to be any less blight on the crystalline rock
near the limestone.

RELATION OF ALTITUDE TO BLIGHT DISTRIBUTION.

On about 200 tracts examined, there does not seem to be any re-
lation between the percentage of blight and the elevation above
sea level.

54
UTILIZATION.

At the time of the last report, the work of "Utilization" was in
charge of Professor J. P. Wentling. He continued to direct this
work until March 1, 1913, when his leave of absence expired, and
he resigned to resume his duties in the Forest School of the Uni-
versity of Minnesota. From that date, Mr. W. M. Kirby acted in
charge of the office work, while Mr. J. R. Wilson was made directly
responsible for the field operations. Until a suitable specialist
could be obtained, the General Superintendent, Mr. S. B. Detwiler,
has had general direction temporarily, of all the utilization work.

PRELIMINARY WORK.

For sometime, naturallj^ a great deal of information had to be
obtained as to timber owners, purchasers of chestnut products,
portable saw mills, demands for various kinds of products, etc., be-
sides working out a general plan of active procedure. This had
been largely clone by Professor Wentling, before leaving, and he
had already pointed out the importance of the portable mill opera-
tor, the necessity of experiments in deterioration of blighted chest-
nut, and of making tests of certain chestnut products through
reputable manufacturers, and also the desirability of a trial of
intensive local utilization in a few localities, and showed that it
was desirable to keep in close touch with the important lumber as-
sociations.

CONCLUSIONS OF UTILIZATION CONFERENCE AT

TRENTON.

At a Utilization Conference between various State and National
officials held at Trenton, New Jersey, certain conclusions were arrived
at as to special lines of work in utilization. Among these, it was
recommended that the individual States take up local market
studies.

LOCAL INTENSIVE UTILIZATION.

In accordance with the conclusions of the Utilization Conference
above mentioned, and in line with the suggestion of the Forester of
this Commission previously in charge of Utilization, it was decided
to try such local work at one or two points in this State, the work
being under direction of the General Superintendent. The first
place selected was in the vicinity of West Chester, Chester county.

5o

The local market for various chestnut products was thoroughly ex-
ploited to determine what amount could be taken care of in local
consumption, and afterwards it was determined so far as possible,
how much of the surplus could be disposed of at more distant mar-
kets. The results of the work have been very interesting, and bid
fair to solve largely the entire problem of utilization.

RESULTS OF THE LOCAL WORK.

In the short time that has been given to this work, up to the date
of closing, remarkable progress has been made, as the following
statement shows: —

, (1) — Careful estimates of timber were made of 14 tracts, in the
vicinity, ranging in size from 2 to 26 acres each.

(2) — Various satisfactory interviews were obtained with the tim-
ber oAvners, and in this connection, it was found that there has been
much change in the sentiment of owners, favorable to a rapid dis-
posal of blighted chestnut.

(3) — All local timber operators were interviewed.

(4) — It was found that the owners themselves could use a large
amount of their own timber for fencing.

(5) — Lists of buyers of chestnut products were obtained at West
Chester, Downingtown and vicinity, and along the Pennsylvania
Railroad main line.

(fi) — After getting the confidence of timber owners, they were
quite willing to place the disposal of their chestnut wholly in the
hands of Commission employees.

(7) — One thousand ties were sold to a street railway company,
and orders were expected for 5,000 more.

(8) — Arrangements were made for installing a saw mill in the
area.

(9) — At the time of closing the work, efforts were being made
to obtain 20,000 poles for a firm in New Jersey.

DIFFICULTY OF OBTAINING LABOR.

In the particular local work above referred to, the difficulty of
obtaining labor was encountered, as in all other cases of work of
this kind. Here again, however, the Commission employes were
able to aid timber owners and operators greatly by obtaining hands
from a distance, until finally eight different timber owners were
on the Avaiting list to use wood-cutters who had been imported
through our efforts,

5G

WORK IN OTHER LOCALITIES.

No doubt results similar to those mentioned above could be ob-
tained in the same way in other localities. Such work was suc-
cessful in Lebanon County, to the extent of being able to locate ten
different portable saw mills in active work in that county inside
of one month.

DETERIORATION EXPERIMENTS.

An experiment, probably the first of its kind, has been installed
by this Commission in co-operation with the United States Forest
Service, at Mt. Gretna, Lebanon County, Pennsylvania, to deter-
mine accurately the effect of the chestnut blight on the quality of
chestnut wood products, and upon the durability of such products.
Chestnut telephone poles, some diseased and some from healthy
wood, have been set. Thirty standard railroad ties, partly dis-
eased, and partly not, were placed in a siding of the Cornwall &
Lebanon Railroad. A fence was made with mortised posts and
rails, some of them from diseased trees, and others from healthy
trees. To determine the direct effect of blight lesions in telephone
poles, cross arms were placed through these lesions; also some
fence posts were set with lesions at the ground line. The complete
results of this experiment will not be possible for several years, but
it was expected to take records at regular intervals each year.

CHESTNUT EXTRACT CHIPS FOR PAPER PULP.

Spent extract chips from blighted chestnut wood which had been
run through the leaches of a tannin extract company, were sent to
the U. S. Forest Products Laboratory at Madison, Wisconsin, where
experiments are being carried on to determine whether or not these
chips can be used in the manufacture of paper pulp.

TESTS IN CO-OPERATION WITH MANUFACTURERS.

In connection with the above mentioned experiment, an attempt
has been made to make similar tests in a practical way through co-
operation with manufacturers. A small shipment of 'chestnut
chips was made to a company in New York State, to test its value
for the manufacture of plaster board. A similar shipment was
made to a company in Ohio which manufacturers special machin-
ery for reducing wood, the idea being to test these chips for the
production of paper pulp.

I

57

BLIGHTED WOOD NOT INJURED.

Careful studies to date have shown decidedly that blighted chest-
nut is injured very slightly, if at all, for use as lumber. The
blight lesions extend to only a fraction of an inch below the bark,
and even this portion is taken off in the slabs. To illustrate this
fact, small hand samples of blighted chestnut in board shape, have
been prepared and distributed to different chestnut users through-
out the State.

KINDLING AND FUEL TESTS.

There has always been considerable prejudice against the use of
chestnut for fuel, and investigations have shown that most likely
this prejudice is to a large extent unwarranted. It was intended
therefore, at the time of closing our work, to make practical tests
of chestnut for kindling, in comparison with the common kindling
"^oods now in the market.

MOVEMENT OF CORDWOOD.

The movement of cordwood under the special reduced tariff has
made an excellent beginning. Several hundred cords have already
been shipped, and a number of parties were preparing to ship large
amounts when our inspection work ceased. The discontinuance of
this inspection work will be a financial disadvantage to many tim-
ber owners, who were expecting to take advantage of the special
tariff, unless some arrangement can be made to continue such in-
spection under other auspices.

CaOPERATION WITH THE U. S. FOREST SERVICE.

A list of pole and tie dealers has been furnished by the U. S. For-
est Service. This list is being combined with a corresponding list
of wood-cutters prepared by this Commission, the whole to be
made out in duplicate, which will be of great use for future work-
ers in utilization in this State.

DEMONSTKATION WOEK.

The demonstration and lecture work has continued in charge of
Mr. Keller E. Rockey.

58

LECTURES.

The subjects of lectures include every matter of interest concern-
ing the chestnut blight. At intervals, parties engaged in other
lines of operation of the Commission have lectured on topics relat-
ing to the particular work they were doing. The most of the lec-
tures were given under the supervision of the State Farmers' Insti-
tute management. The lecturers were as a rule, supervisors of the
territory in which the lecture was given, and were, therefore, fully
able to give the audience news of the latest local developments,
and much valuable information.

Besides farmers' institute lectures, addresses were made at sev-
eral normal schools, before county fruit growers' associations, at
the meeting of the Northern Nut Growers' Association, and also at
various meetings of botanical societies, civic clubs, and in colleges
and schools.

CHESTNUT BLIGHT EXHIBITS.

Exhibits of specimens and illustrations showing in various ways
the operations of this Commission have been installed in the Car-
negie Museum, at Pittsburgh, and in the State Museum, in Harris-
burg. An unusually large exhibit has been started for the Com-
mercial Museum, Philadelphia, and it was planned to make an ex-
hibit at the Everhart Museum, at Scranton. An excellent display
showing the work of the Commission was made in connection with
the State Forestry Exposition, at Horticultural Hall, Philadelphia,
in May. Much interest was shown in this exhibit by people from
all over the State. Many minor exhibits have been made in con-
nection with farmers' meetings at various places.

DISTRIBUTION OF SPECIMENS.

Several hundred small boxes of specimens of disinfected bark
showing the chestnut blight were sent to various addresses all
over the State, to be placed on exhibition in high schools and other
public places. Photographs accompanied this material to add to
its interest and practical value.

FIELD DEMONSTRATION.

Very often in connection with the lectures, particularly at farm-
ers' institutes, the lecturers demonstrated the actual field work of
the Commission in neighboring forest tracts, explaining the nature
of the disease, the manner of removal, sanitation, and methods of
tree surgery.

59

CO-OPERATION OF THE PRESS.

lu comiectioii with the vast amount of active labor pei-formed
in field work, pathological research work, chemical and insect investi-
gations, etc., ill the effort to control the chestnut tree blight, the press
of Pennsylvania proved a most valuable ally in constantly acquainting
timber owners and the public in general with the symptoms and
characteristics of this comparatively new, but extremely destructive
tree pest.

The native chestnut tree is properly regarded as the best forest
tree remaining in a large quantity in Pennsylvania. The presence
of the deadly chestnut tree bark disease throughout eastern and
central Pennsylvania counties, and the actual and immediate neces-
sity for a concerted and active warfare against this parasitic disease
in order to prevent the threatened total extermination of the chestnut
tree in the Keystone State, naturally awakened the editorial fra-
ternity and other advocates of forest conservation to the great im-
portance of aiding in the fight to control and eradicate the dis-
ease.

It is admitted by scientific authorities that had the necessary work
towards stamping out the blight been inaugurated by other states
at the proper period, Penusyh aula's extraordinarily heavy loss could
have been confined to a minimum. It is believed however, that the
Commonwealth has already sustained a loss through the partial
destruction of chestnut, aggregating a total of |70,000,000, of which
enormous amount Eastern Pennsylvania timber owners suffered the
heaviest burden. The probervial "ounce of prevention" was sadly
ignored, and hence, the deplorable conditions that rapidly followed
this costly neglect of duty. Although the Keystone State has ceased
its activities in its efforts to save this invaluable species of trees
from destruction, the National Department of Agriculture and a
dozen other states are continuing the work with renewed energy, con-
fidently believing tliat the interests of timber owners and the public
in general deserved such recognition and protection. Many tax-
payers who were compelled to wage warfare against the spread of
the blight at their personal expense report gratifying results, thus
again demonstrating that by prompt action and thorough work,
the parasite might have been controlled and these extraordinary
heavy financial losses averted.

Oliver D. Schock, Assistant Superintendent, was in charge of this
important publicity department. Grateful acknowledgments are due
to the newspaper editors for their continued and liberal co-operation.
It is equall}^ gratifying to know that there was but little, if any
unfavorable criticism by the press of the entire State of the methods
pursued by the Commission in combating the blight.

^

Report of

Samuel B. Detwiler

General Superintendent Pennsylvania Chestnut
Tree Blight Commission

(61)

(e2)

OBSERVATIONS ON SANITATTOX CUTTTNCJ IN

CONTROLLING THE CHESTNUT BLTGIIT

IN PENNSYLVANIA.

By SAMUEL B. DETWILER,
GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT OF THE PENNSYLVANIA CHESTNUT
TREE BLIGHT COMMISSION.

INTRODUCTION.

In view of the continued rapid spread of the chestnut blight, and
the great damage sustained through this relentless parasite, it is
important at the present time to have more complete information
on the possibility of controlling its spread. It is now an estab-
lished fact that the disease exists in China, and that it was probably
introduced into America from the Orient. This disposes of the
theory that the blight is caused by a native fungus, originally a
saprophyte or weak parasite, which gained vigor, or appeared to
gain vigor because of the decadence of the native chestnut trees
from the effects of drouth and winter injury. It is evident that
it would be difficult, if not impossible, to control a native fungus of
wide dissemination, with predisposing factors in its favor. But
even the most severe critics have acknowledged that foreign origin
of the parasite affords "at least some basis for the fight for con-
trol."*

HOW THE BLIGHT SPREADS.

The pathological investigations of the Commission have shown
that wind, water (rain), and birds are the principal agencies in dis-
seminating the blight. A single spore thread may produce from
100,000,000 to 200,000,000 pycnospores, and even a small canker
produces dozens of spore threads in a season. A single perithecium
has been observed to eject ascospores almost continuously for a
period of 26 days, at the rate of 4.7 spores per second. Insects as-
sist by making wounds through which the spores of the fungus en-
ter the bark, and also, to some extent, by distributing the spores
locally. The ejection of ascospores into the air following rain, and
the washing of pycnospores down the trunks and into the soil dur-
ing rain, appear to be the principal agencies in spreading the dis-
ease. Birds have been proved to carry spores in great numbers,
and undoubtedly are responsible for a certain proportion of infec-
tions, at least, of advance infections.

"Clinton, G. P. Science 36: pp. 907-914, Dec. 27, 1912.

(63)

64

The planting of diseased nursery stock in regions free from the
blight appears to be one of the principal agencies in spreading the
disease to great distances. The disease was probably introduced into
this country on nursery stock, and in the early years, nursery stock
apparently played the most important role in getting the disease
quickly and firmly established. This point is well illustrated by a
shipment of three chestnut trees sent from a New Jersey nursery
into Western Pennsylvania in 1912. Through a misunderstanding,
these trees were not held at the State line for inspection, but were
carried direct to their destination. When the inspection was made,
the disease was found at two places on one of the trees, although the
nurserymen claimed to have carefully examined the trees before
shipment. At Warren, Warren county, Pennsylvania, 11 out of a
shipment of 12 nursery trees purchased in 1910 were found affected
with the blight in 1912. In Elk County, 34 diseased nursery trees
were found in a young chestnut orchard, and the disease had already
reached adjoining native chestnut trees. In Somerset County, there
is evidence to support the belief that an infected area covering
about one-third of the county spread originally from diseased scions
grafted on native trees. There are many similar occurrences out-
side of Pennsylvania.

All observers have noted that the blight advances by attacking
widely separated trees far ahead of the generally infected territory.
In Pennsylvania, the main spread of the blight has been from the
southeastern corner of the State. During rains and immediately
following, when the spores are being ejected, the wind is usually
from the south or east, thus tending to carry the spores north and
west. At least, it is a matter of common observation that the south-
ern and eastern edges of woodlots very frequently show the first
infections.

In order to learn more about the spread of the blight, two areas
in the region of general infection, one in the Mahoning Valley in
Carbon County, and the other in the vicinity of Topton Mountain,
in Berks county, were studied in the spring of 1913 by Mr. J. Wesley
Sitler, a field agent of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

STUDY OF BLIGHT CONDITIONS IN THE MAHONING

VALLEY.

In the Mahoning Valley, all timber tracts on an area about
7 miles square were mapped on a large scale topographic sheet, (Fig.
1). In round numbers this investigation covered about 50 square
miles of land which varied widely as to elevation and geological
formation. Spot infections of blight were accurately located on

of gullies; or, where a ridge slope forms a terrace-like flat. How-

64

The planting of diseased nursery stock in regions free from the
blight appears to be one of the principal agencies in spreading the
disease to great distances. The disease was probably introduced into
this country on nursery stock, and in the early years, nursery stock
apparently played the most important role in getting the disease
quickly and firmly established. This point is well illustrated by a
shipment of three chestnut trees sent from a New Jersey nursery
into Western Pennsylvania in 1912. Through a misunderstanding,
these trees were not held at the State line for inspection, but were
carried direct to their destination. When the inspection was made,
the disease was found at two places on one of the trees, although the
nurserymen claimed to have carefully examined the trees before
shipment. At W^arren, Warren county, Pennsylvania, 11 out of a
shipment of 12 nursery trees purchased in 1910 were found affected
with the blight in 1912. In Elk Count\% 34 diseased nursery trees
were found in a young chestnut orchard, and the disease had already
reached adjoining native chestnut trees. In Somerset County, there
is evidence to support the belief that an infected area covering
about one-third of the county spread originally from diseased scions
grafted on native trees. There are many similar occurrences out-
side of Pennsylvania.

All observers have noted that the blight advances by attacking
widely separated trees far ahead of the generally infected territory.
In Pennsylvania, the main spread of the blight has been from the
southeastern corner of the State. During rains and immediately
following, when the spores are being ejected, the wind is usually
from the south or east, thus tending to carry the spores north and
west. At least, it is a matter of common observation that the south-
ern and eastern edges of woodlots very frequently show the first
infections.

In order to learn more about the spread of the blight, two areas
in the region of general infection, one in the Mahoning Valley in
Carbon County, and the other in the vicinity of Topton Mountain,
in Berks county, were studied in the spring of 1913 by Mr. J. Wesley
Sitler, a field agent of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

STUDY OF BLIGHT CONDITIONS IN THE MAHONING

VALLEY.

In the Mahoning Valley, all timber tracts on an area about
7 miles square were mapped on a large scale topographic sheet, (Fig.
1). In round numbers this investigation covered about 50 square
miles of land which varied widely as to elevation and geological
formation. Spot infections of blight were accurately located on

Sketch map showing blight centers and percentage of infection in a portion of the Mahoning Vnlley, Carbon andSchiiylkill rounties. Pennsylvan

B.v .T. Wesley Sit'.er,
June, lfll3.

7.

1)
mi

iv/ca teu on

d

65

the map, and each spot was studied in detail as to the percentage
of surrounding infection, slope, exposure, soil, character of the
stand of timber, and surface features. Originally chestnut oak and
yellow pine occupied the steeper upper slopes, while the more gen-
tle and fertile lower slopes were covered with a stand consisting
of 50 to 70 })er cent, chestnut, with a mixture of red oak, maple, and
white pine. Very little chestnut grew in the valleys where the
forest consisted of heavy stands of white oak, white pine, red oak,
and maple. All of the flat bottom land and much of that along the
lower slopes has been cleared for farming, so that part of the area
studied consisted of woodlots with trees varjing in size from small
coppice to 20 inches in diameter. The area is traversed by several
ridges extending northeast and southwest, and the poor rocky soil
of these ridges, particularly^ north of the Mahoning Valley, is cov-
ered with young coppice of oak and chestnut, or with scrub oak
brush. Forest tires frequently burn over the ridges and the young
growth is therefore in poor condition.

At present no tract can be found on the area studied that is en-
tirely free from blight, but the chestnut trees south of Mahoning
Valley are diseased more than the stand north of the valley. The
southern slopes of the ridges, also the south and east portions of
exposed woodlots, are more seriously infected than the northern
exposures. There are thousands of cicada wounds in twigs of all
species growing in these woods. These wounds were made during
the invasion of 1911. It is very common on chestnut to find such
wounds infected, and the cicada has thus undoubtedly aided in
the genera] distribution of the blight throughout this region.

Every tract of chestnut timber shoAving the presence of blight,
when carefully examined, shows that the disease appears in spots.
By careful observation, tlie source of infection for the entire spot
can be traced to one or more badh^ infected trees which evidently
bore the original infection of that particular area. Such a tree
or group of trees is commonly referred to as an infection center, be-
cause from such centers the disease advances in all directions. The
age of these centers can be determined quite accurately from the
appearance of the original infection, by the concentric rings of
cankers and by the age of water sprouts and shoots at base of cank-
ers. Generally, the older the infection, the further it has spread
from the center.

Many of these infection centers have been carefully worked over,
but nothing definite can be said as to characteristic elevation, soil
conditions, exposure, or character of woods. Probably 90 per cent,
of these centers are found in the shallow depressions at the heads
of gullies; or, where a ridge slope forms a terrace-like flat. How-

66

ever, it is evident from a large number of observations, that such
centers develop under any surface conditions favorable to the growth
of chestnut. They are found on well drained gravel slopes, dry
knolls, steep rock slopes, and in low fertile flats.

The spread of the blight seems more rapid in young coppice
growth of nearly pure chestnut, than in a chestnut stand of large
trees. Tn old stands the percentage of infected trees decreases
abruptly from the infection center outward. Often, a distance of
twenty rods will take one from an area of 40-50 per cent, infec-
tion to a zone of one-fourth per cent, and beyond that no infection
may be found. In coppice growth the decrease is more gradual and
a zone showing less than 8-10 per cent, infection can seldom be
found on a tract with an infection center. The abundance of bast
miner galleries in the bark of young smooth-barked chestnuts prob-
ably explains the wide and even distribution of the blight in such
stands.

The importance of wind as an agent in disseminating blight can-
not be positively stated, but from observations made in this locality
there seems more evidence favoring wind distribution than any
other factor. The result of a large number of comparative observa-
tions show that: —

1. A large number of infections are in wounds made by cicadas
and are usually uniformly distributed around a blight center.

2. New infections are generally scattered through areas of young
shoots growing up after fire.

3. Freshly cut stumps with their new sprouts show a high per
cent, of infection even where the surrounding woodland is little
affected.

4. Trees standing in exposed places, such as isolated trees in
fields, and trees along southern edges of timber tracts, show a high
per cent, of infection.

Very little can be said about birds as carriers of blight. Numer-
ous scattered spots of infection show signs of having been started
by bird distribution. However, the observations gave little
reliable evidence on this point. Many spots have a large, dead-
topped tree standing near the center. Often these trees have been
infected on the lower branches, longer than any of the surrounding
trees. The dead, snaggy tops show no evidence of death from
blight. There is reason to believe that birds were attracted by the
open snag and carried the spores which later started the infec-
tions in the lower branches.

This locality furnishes numerous opportunities for comparing
the percentage of infected trees on the north and south slopes. The
stand of chestnut is similar on the two slopes. The results of de-
tailed examinations show that there is more blight on the south

67

slopes. Also, many of the woodlots show a higher per cent, of infec-
tion on the southern borders. To strengthen these observations
several miles of the Blue Kidge, (lying north of the Mahoning Val-
ley, and not included in the area studied), w^ere also worked over,
(Fig. 2.) This ridge is higher than any other within the limits of ai-ea
studied, and shows the typical high percentage of blight on the
south slopes, up to the summit. Immediately across the summit,
northward, the number of blighted trees decreases. However, at the
base of the north slope in almost pure chestnut, it increases but does
not average more than 60 per cent, of the amount of infection at
the base along the south side. There is a general decrease in the
amount of infection on each successive ridge to the north.

There are distinct differences in the moisture conditions in this
region. The stream valleys often have a clay loam soil too heavy
and moist to support chestnut. We find all variations in soil and
moisture from these valleys to the dry, rugged ridges where chest-
nut oak and scrub oak form most of the stand. The amount of in-
fection apparently does not depend on soil moisture, as is shown by
the percentages on the infection map. Tracts lying in the valleys
show similar percentages of infection to those on higher ground.
The theory that chestnut trees growing on or near limestone soils
are resistani to blight is not supported by these observations. A
belt of limestone borders Lizard Creek Valley on the south, and the
per cent, of infection is as high in that region as elsewhere. In-
fection centers have been found near limestone quarries, where the
roots of the chestnut penetrated to bed rock.

INFECTION POINTERS.

1. Each successive ridge shows a decrease in the number of old
infections, from the Blue Ridge northward.

2. There is more blight along the south slopes than on the ad-
jacent north slopes.

3. Recently cut stumps with their sprouts show a high per cent,
of infection even where adjacent tracts are clear of blight.

4. Centers of infection are found under all conditions. Slope,
exposure, drainage, rock formation, and fertility of the soil seem
to have no relation to origin of infections.

5. A large number of infections one and two years old began in
wounds made by cicadas in 1911.

6. Wind appears to be the most important factor in the dis-
semination of the blight. Birds may be factors as carriers of the
original infecting spores, but cannot be bla med for the local dis-
tribution of the blight around an infection center. This distribu-

68

tion is very imiforin, which presumably would not be the case had
birds been the principal carriers of the disease. In young cop-
pice growth much wounded by cicadas, the wounds on the twigs are
the chief points of entrance for the disease. Results of accurate
counting show that on certain tracts 80 to 90 per cent, of new in-
fections began in such wounds made by the 17-year cicadas during
their invasion of 1911. Many new infections are at and near the
bases of young sprouts, and there is little cause to believe that these
were due to birds, since they are usually about the same age and
at points that birds are not lilrely to frequent. Also, this condi-
tion exists on exposed north slopes little visited by birds. The
most plausible explanation seems to lie in the hypothesis of wind
dissemination. This explains the numerous infections starting in
cicada stings; also the rapid spread over a tract of young sprouts;
the common occurrence of new infections on trees standing alone,
in exposed places. The greater quantity of infection on south
slopes appears to be due to the fact that the prevailing winds are
southerly and easterly during the periods when ascospores are ex-
truded in greatest numbers.

STUDY OF BLIGHT CONDITIONS ON TOPTON MOUNTAIN,

BERKS COUNTY.

The highest point of this mountain rises about 600 feet above
the base, the summit being 1,230 feet above sea level. The long
axis of the ridge runs about 15 degrees north of east, the east end
of the ridge terminating abruptly. The area studied comprises
about 2,000 acres, about 600 of which are cleared, and the balance
bears a dense stand of timber whicli is mainly coppice growth be-
tween 10 and 25 years old. On the summit, and the upper and
middle slopes, chestnut is the predominating species, forming 80
to 90 per cent, of the stand. Below this is a zone in which chestnut
and chestnut oak constitute the stand in about equal proportions.
At the base of the mountain there is a narrow, irregular belt of
tulip, butternut, red oak, and ash, with a very low per cent, of
chestnut.

Strips four rods wide were run north and south across th-e moun-
tain, and also in an east and west direction over the top and along
the sides. Observations were made of all the chestnut trees on
each strip acre. In this way the tract was gridironed, and a fairly
comprehensive idea obtained of the relative amount of blight in
the various portions of it. (Fig. 3).

The infection nowhere runs less than 3 per cent., and it was im-
possible to find an acre with less than this amount of blight on it.

"a
o f^

P C

BE,

S3 f?

o (6

d 2.

69

On most of the ridge the percentage of diseased chestnut runs
from 17 to 30 per cent., although there are spots where it is much
higher. The centers of infection are not confined to any character-
istic slope or environment. Generally, the blight has spread over
larger areas on the summit and south slope than on the north
slope. The centers along the south slope and summit show more
trees killed by the blight than those of any other part of the moun-
tain. This is doubtless due to a more rapid spread of the blight
in these situations. Scattered dead trees are less common along
the north slope than elsewhere; however, several centers contain
ing a dozen or more large trees entirely killed are found on the
north slope.

The blight is so uniformly distributed between the centers that
it was difficult to determine the facts relative to the dissemination
of the disease by wind. However, most of the infected areas show
a wider zone of distribution east and north of the infection center,
giving the areas of thick infection an egg-shaped outline, with thf^
oldest infections nearest to the western boundary. No definite in-
formation was obtained on this tract concerning the part played by
birds as disseminators of the disease.

The south slope of the ridge is more dry and barren than the
north slope. The only springs found there are near the eastern end
of the ridge, and a few small springs are scattered along the lower
portions of the south slope, but these are below the zone of chest-
nut growth. The north slope is a more gradual incline, and there
are numerous shallow dips resembling miniature gullies. Some of
these are moist enough to support alder bushes and several species
of moisture loving ferns; also trees of the lowland types, such as
tulip and maple, are quite common in these depressions. Most of
these dips contain springs, but not all of them; however, there aie
numerous small springs scattered all along the north slope of the
ridge. Most of these are well down toward the base, but several
are well up toward the summit. So far as could be ascertained,
no relation exists between the thickly infected areas and moisture
conditions.

The data collected lead to the belief that the infection is dis-
tributed without any regard to elevation. For instance, along the
base of the north slope high percentages of infection are found.
Similarly, an increase in the percentage of blight is found half-way
toward the summit. While the summit seems to support more in-
fection than any other portion of the mountain, there is no reason
to suppose that this is due to elevation. The stand here is almost
pure young chestnut coppice, and the conditions appear to be more
favorable to the rapid spread of the disease in such stands. The

70

base of the south slope supports coppice growth similar to that
found at the summit, and here the per cent, of infection compares
very closely with that along the summit..

RESULT OF OBSERVATIONS.

No definite cause for the areas of high and low per cent, of in-
fection was determined. The highest percentages of infection are
found on the summit and on the south slope of the ridge. Also
this portion of the area supports more old infection than any other
part of the mountain. In part, this may be due to the higher per-
centage of chestnut on the summit and south slope, and to the
fact that most of it is young coppice. Such stands appear very
susceptible to the disease. The theory that varying chemical ele-
ments, derived from the rock strata, affect the amount of infection
is not supported by any evidence gathered in this work, for on the
three general rock formations of this tract, as well as along the
edge of the adjacent limestone, high and low per cents, of infection
seem equally common. No evidence sheds any light upon the be-
lief that the distribution of disease is along any definite compass
direction. If there is any proof at all toward this end, it lies in the
fact that infections on the south are more uniformly distributed
than on the north. It is probably true that the advance infections
came from the south and crossed the mountain north Avard, but areas
of thick infection are not confined to any character of topography,
slope, or elevation.

The accompanying maps give in detail the percentages of blight
found in the Mahoning Valley and Topton Mountain areas.

RATE OF INCREASE OF BLIGHT IN EASTERN PENNSYL-
VANIA.

The southeastern corner of the State has a higher percentage of
infection than any other portion of the State. The rapid increase of
the blight is well shown in this section by the record of 1,637 trees on
tracts in the vicinity of Philadelphia, which were examined for
blight in October and November, 1910, December, 1912, and Au-
gust, 1913. In 1910, 31 per cent, of these trees were infected with
the blight, and 29 per cent, were doubtful. In 1912, 79 per cent,
were infected, and in 1913, 88 per cent. If we include the 29 per
cent, doubtful trees with the 31 per cent, certainly infected in 1910,
the total becomes 60 per cent. This makes the annual increase in
infection approximate 10 per cent, per annum. In this connection
it is interesting to note that on the du Pont estate at Kennett

5 ^

71

Square, Pa., where tree surgery methods, supplemented by spray-
ing with Bordeaux mixture, liave been in use for the past two years,
the progress of the blight has been materially delayed. Mr. R. E.
Wheeler, forester for the estate, believes that these methods will
save the trees under treatment for at least five years more, and
probably for a much longer time.

Tree surgery without spraying has had little effect in delaying
the progress of the blight after it attacks a tree. In a large orchard
of Paragon chestnuts, in Northumberland County, in a block of
9,612 trees, 4 to 15 years old, thoroughly examined in the winter of
1911-12, 194 infected trees were found, (2 per cent, infection), 103 of
which were so badly diseased tliat they were cut out and burned, and
91 trees were treated by surgical methods. In the winter of 1912-1913,
this same block was again carefully gone over, and 1,064 infected
trees were found, (11.2 per cent, infection), 325 of which were
marked for removal, and the balance for surgical treatment. The
rate of increase in this case was over 500 per cent.

INFECTION CENTERS ON THE ADVANCE LINE.

In applying sanitation measures for the control of the blight, it
is not practicable to use tree surgery methods and spraying, (ex-
cept possibly in orchards), but only to cut out bodily every infected
tree and to sterilize the stumps. When the blight is generally dis-
tributed through a region, as is the case in southeastern Pennsyl-
vania, it is manifestly impossible to eradicate the disease by sani-
tation methods without also practically eradicating the host. A
detailed study of spot infections as they occur on the western ad-
vance line of the disease is therefore of more interest than the con-
ditions which exist in the generally infected territory.

On the advance line, as in the eastern part of the State, there is
no rule for the location of aji infection center, nor is there any
rule as to the part of the tree which is attacked first by the dis-
ease. It is true, however, that on the western advance line more
infections occur on isolated trees and on the edges of timber tracts
than elsewhere, and that the majority of infections first appear in
the tops of trees. Likewise, in its spread from tree to tree around
a center, the blight shows no general rule, except that the trees im-
mediately adjoining a primary infected tree are most apt to show
the first secondary infection. The following tabulation gives the
details of 175 infected trees in a spot infection of 271 trees, lo-
cated at Orbisonia, Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania, studied in
1911 by Mr. R. C. Walton.

72

TABLE I.
DETAILS OF INFECTION AT ORBISONIA, PA.

Origin of tree,

Slope,

Aspett,

Moisture,

Density of forest.

Infection on benches,

Orientation of lesions.

Coppice

Seedlins,

Gentle to medium steep

Gentle to steep

Gentle,

Steep

Very steep,

Medium steep,

North

Northeast

North\vest,

North to northwest, . . .
North to northeast

Lower slope,

Middle slope,

Along road,

Near road

Away from road,

Dry

Damp

T>ry to damp

Medium dry

Medium damp,

Windy, dry,

Dense,

Medium dense,

Kather open

North,

East,

South

West

Northeast

Southeast,

Northwest,

Southwest

136
39

108
16
41
7
3

23
152

73

The most important practical point in the study of spot infec-
tions, however, is the location of the secondary diseased trees with
reference to the original center of infection. Where a careful study
has been made, it has always been apparent that the disease spreads
from an original center of one or two trees to trees in the immediate
vicinity, as illustrated in the accompanying diagram, which is an
example of a typical small spot infection, (Fig. 4).

PKOCEDUEE IN EEADICATING SPOT INFEC-
TIONS.

SCOUTING.

The principal obstacle met in applying sanitation methods for
the control of the chestnut blight is the high cost of locating spot
infections. The cause of this lies in the great extent of territory
which must be covered, and difficulty in securing competent and
reliable scouts at reasonable salaries. Experience has proved, how-
ever, that thorough scouting can be done at a moderate cost under
efficient supervision. Eapidity and efficiency in scouting vary with
the size and density of the stand, the proportion of chestnut, the
topography and location of the tract, and the prevalence of blight.
The records of the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission show that
between October 3 and June 80, 1913, it required 11,651 days of
labor to scout 738,881 acres of timber, notify timber owners of in-
fections found, and supervise the work of removal. This is at the
rate of 63.41 acres per man per day, with the average of 2.07 in-
fections found, and 1.49 infections removed per man per day. The
average day, (not including time consumed in going to and re-
turning from work), consisted of 8.2 hours spent in the field, .4
hour lost on account of rain, and .4 hour lost on account of sickness
and leave. With thoroughly experienced and practical men under
competent crew leaders, an average of 100 acres or more per day
can be covered, unless the spot infections are very large and numer-
ous. In thick infection, one man can make thorough tree to tree
examinations of from 2 to 5 acres, depending on the character of
the timber. However, on the basis of past experience, it appears to
be more practical and economical to locate the boundaries of the
spot infection, and eliminate all of the chestnut trees within and
immediately adjoining the spot infection, instead of eradicating

74

only the diseased trees. This plan reduces the amount of tree to
tree inspection required, and one man should be able to scout at
least 50 acres per day, even when spot infections are numerous. It
has been found that a crew of two or more men can accomplish
more and obtain better results than in the case of men scouting
alone, except in a country where the woodlots are very small and
scattered.

In scouting, rapid and thorough work depends upon the experi-
ence and ca])ability of the crew . leader. The size of the crew de-
pends on the character of the timber to be scouted and the ability
of the crew leader to handle men. Except in a very heavily tim-
bered area, three men constituting a crew will usually accomplish
more than a larger crew. There is an added advantage in a small
crew in that two or three men can find accommodations near to
their work where a larger number of men cannot, and must conse-
quently spend more time on the road to and from work. In large
tracts of woodland, the best plan is to establish a camp as head-
quarters for several crews. A camp is too expensive for a small
crew, but for a number of men it is economical, and has the ad-
vantage of keeping the men close to their work.

The tracts must be scouted systematically. The best plan is to
go back and forth parallel to the backbone of the ridges, each man
inspecting a strip 50 to 100 feet wide. In large bodies of timber
four or five men can work together advantageously, each man being
separated by the distance best adapted to viewing all the trees in
the strip between himself and the men on either side of him. The
man on the outside marks the edge of the strip either by breaking
branches on the underbrush of species other than chestnut, or by
marking tree trunks with yellow lumber crayon. Unless eradicated
as found, diseased trees are located by pacing to the strip boundary
at right angles and marking a tree on the line with crayon to indi-
cate the location of the diseased tree. If a cutting-out crew closely
follows the scouting crew, there is less waste of time and effort
than where the scouting crew attempts to eradicate the infections
as found, unless infections are very few and limited to single trees.
With the cutting-out crew following the scouting crew, there is the
additional advantage that they may locate diseased trees missed
by the first crew.

The greatest aid to efficient scouting is a pair of good field glasses.
They often make it unnecessary to climb doubtful trees, and are of
further usefulness in the hands of an experienced scout, because
they enable him to locate many diseased trees from a high point of
land or from tree tops. In such cases compass sights are taken on
the diseased trees, and an assistant is dispatched to locate them.

ThDi'dUgh sciintina: fur the blight is uecessarv.

75

Such scouting, however, cannot entirely take the i)lace of more
detailed examination.

It has also been demonstrated that more and better work in
scouting can be done in the fall and winter, after the leaves have
fallen. In August and September the majority of new infections
become plainly visible on isolated trees, but in dense woods the
foliage makes it difficult to locate small infections. After the
leaves have fallen, however, more light is admitted, and a scout can
see for comparatively long distances through the bare tops, even
in dense woods. The dead leaves on girdled branches are consj>icu-
ous throughout the winter and early spring, and where cankers
have not yet girdled the parts, the increased light makes tliein
much more prominent than in summer. Winter scouting has the
disadvantage of fewer hours of daylight and occasional loss of a
day or two on acount of snow storms that tend to hide the cankers
on the trunk and branches. If the snow becomes very deep it is
not easy to examine the bases of the trees sufficiently, and the snow
also greatly interferes with the proper treatment of the blighted
trees.

In the work done by the Commission, the law required that the
owner of diseased trees be notified to remove them within 20 days.
A map or written description giving the location of the diseased
trees on the tract, was also required by law. On private land the
scouts kept field notes on the location of all diseased trees, blazed
each tree to the wood and marked a serial number on it with black
lumber crayon; on the side opposite from the blaze, a yellow manila
tag was attached to the tree. These tags bore a printed notifica-
tion that the tree to which one was attached must be cut in 20
days, with directions for treatment and a warning against starting
forest fires; they also bore the serial number of the tree, the name
of the scout, and the date when attached. In this way the trees
were easily identified later when approached from any direction,
and by means of the "location sheet" giving the direction and dis-
tance of each diseased tree from some fixed point, it was not dif-
ficult to find the trees. The "location sheet" was made out in dupli-
cate, one copy being handed to the owner of the tract, with a writ-
ten request to remove the trees within the 20 days granted by law.
The duplicate copy was sent to the field office, the scout retaining
his note book. Some system of this sort is necessary when the cut-
ting out is not done by the scouting force, but it is cumbersome
and very expensive. Frequently, it required more time to fulfill the
requirement of the law than would have been necessary to treat prop-
erlj^ the diseased trees on a tract. Much time was consumed also
in very detailed inspection of the trees around a blight center, so

76

that apparently healthy trees would not be cut, since the law pro-
vided that healthy trees ordered to be cut, myst be paid for. Not
only was this very detailed scouting a waste of time in the light of
recent investigations, but it resulted in decreased efficiency of con-
trol because so many of the trees permitted to remain, in reality
were infected. Although no disease could be found on them at the
time, the disease developed fully after the spot was treated, neces-
sitating several re-examinations before all infections could be re-
moved.

METHOD OF ERADICATING A SPOT INFECTION.

There are many points to be observed in removing diseased trees
in spot infections, if the disease is to be permanently wiped out. The
main point to keep in mind is the fact that the fungus propagates it-
self more readily as a saprophyte than as a parasite, so that un-
peeled logs, strips of healthy bark and chips from diseased trees or
nearby healthy ones, if left in the woods, are almost certain to be-
come infected. The principal object is to do the work in a thor-
oughly sanitary manner at a reasonable cost. An experienced man
acquired ^'tricks of the trade" that enabled him to do the work much
more thoroughly and in less time than an inexperienced hand can
do even a poor job. Great care was necessary in supervising the
work of removal carried on by the individual owners, since each
spot infection practically meant training a new man to do the work,
and unless an experienced man was constantly on the spot, the
work would seldom be done properly. On State forest reserves
and in cases of forced removals, the work was done by employees
of the Commission, and it was found that it was done at less cost
and much more effectively than was usually the case elsewhere.

The removal of an infected tree is best done as follows: First:
Where the ground beneath the tree is covered with a dense growth
of brush, this growth should be cleared away so that the chips and
branches may be easily picked up. Small chestnut or chinquapin
trees or sprouts should be cut flush with the surface of the ground
and the tops burned.

The stump should be made as low as possible. The bark should
be first removed from the lower 3 or 4 feet of the trunk to an inch
or more below the surface of the soil. If felled by sawing, peeling
may be done after the tree has been cut down. During the fall and
winter the bark is difficult to remove, and if the stumps are cut
low, it is easier and cheaper to split off the sap wood and attached
bark with an axe. In any case the stump and all exposed roots
must be cleared of every particle of bark, and all bark removed
must be carefully collected and burned.

^ Original infected tree, cut and burned December, 1911.
@ Secondary infected trees, cut and burned December, 1911.
® Secondary infected trees, December, 1912.
© Secondary infected trees, August, 1913.
O Healthy trees, 6 to 12 inches in diameter.
Scal(^

Figure 4.

Typical small spot infection, near Dry Run, Franklin County, Pa., showing
original center and secondary infected trees. If all chestnut trees within 35
feet of the nearest diseased tree cut in 1911 had been removed at the time of the
first cutting, and all stumps properly sterilized, it would have prevented the
appearance of the new infections of 1912 and 1913.

77

After the tree is felled, all portions above the stump which show
mycelium or pustules of the blight must be peeled of bark or the
entire piece cut out. This diseased material, the brush from the
tops, the bark, and portions of the felled chestnut trees which are
not peeled and which it is not intended to utilize must be burned.

After the stump is peeled, if fire can be made over it without
injuring the surrounding trees, and without danger of forest fires,
the brush and refuse is best piled over the stump and burned. The
fire must entirely consume or deeply char all of the material; no
uncharred ends of branches and small twigs can be allowed to re-
main without grave chances of reinfection. If it is impossible to
make the fire over the stump without injuring the surrounding
trees, the sides and top of the stump and exposed roots should be
thoroughly coated with creosote.

Portions of infected trees which show no evidence of the blight
should not be permitted to lie unpeeled in the woods over twenty
days, but may be safely handled and shipped with the bark on, if
shipped as soon as cut. If the logs from the diseased trees are not
removed from the woods within twenty days from the time the trees
are felled, they should be peeled and the bark burned, or else the
entire trees burned. Wood from diseased trees to be used where
exposed to the weather must be peeled, or the fruiting bodies are
almost sure to appear on the dead bark and become a source of in-
fection. Fire wood, if kept under dry cover, need not be peeled.

One of the most important time saving items is to peel the lower
portion of the tree before felling, and it is still more important to
cut the stumps as low as possible. Bark remaining between but-
tresses and deep crevices of stumps can be removed very readily
by chipping down from a position directly over the low stump,
which is not possible in the case of high stumps. A rake and a
large coal-burner's basket included among the tools used in burn-
ing, are very useful in cleaning the chips from the ground. Before
starting the fire, all the leaves and debris for a considerable dis-
tance around the place where the material is to be burned should
be raked into a pile on which the fire is started. The bark and
small particles of wood are raked together as soon as the brush is
piled, instead of waiting until all the tops are burned. In this
way, no large quantity of leaves and fine rakings are left until the
end to smoulder for a great length of time before burning, and thus
increase the danger of forest fire.

All possible care should be taken to prevent injury to surrounding
chestnut trees and sprouts in felling the infected trees. Observa-
tion has shown that nearby trees are too frequently injured through
carelessness, and the wounds are very apt to be a point of reinfec-

78

tion. Experience has also shown that unbarked stumps of blighted
trees and green tops which are permitted to lie for a month or two
on the ground are almost certain to become infected. The spores
germinate on the sappy surface of the stump, and the mycelium
grows downward through the cambium, and in the course of a
year or two reaches the sprouts which come up around the base of
the stump. In the case of the tops and particles of bark and wood,
the decaying bark appears to be a very favorable seed-bed for the
development of the spores that reach any portion of this material.
It must be impressed on the workmen that the stumps must be peeled
clean, and every particle of the diseased tree must be either burned
or utilized in such manner that no opportunity is given for the
saprophytic growth of the fungus.

It has been found that painting the thoroughly peeled stumps
with creosote is effective in keeping the stumps free from the
pycnidia of the blight fungus, but is not so desirable as hard burn-
ing over the stumps. In an experimental cutting at Wildwood Park,
Harrisburg, 55 per cent, of burned stumps later showed blight,
while only 23 per cent, of the creosoted stumps showed any signs
of it. However, it is possible that in the future, many of the cre-
osoted stumps will become diseased.

The results of an extensive experiment at Anderson Station, Mif-
flin County, are given below. This experiment deals with the ef-
ficiency of burning over stumps as compared with creosoting
stumps. The stumps in Table II were peeled at various times dur-
ing January, February, and March, 1913, and cold creosote ap-
plied with a brush. The cost of creosote and labor of application
was approximately one-fifth of a cent for each six-inch stump, cut
low. The data given below are the result of an inspection of these
stumps made December 12, 1913.

Center of spot infection at St. Mary's, Elk County, Pa. Tliis tree was infected
at least four years prior to the time the picture was taken.

■z. 0,2

ta

Ni

o

"^

u i-y

'j-'O' c c

x9

\

1 ^

1

_t

c

a H

1
1

A
M

79

TABLE II.
RESULTS OF CREOSOTING PEELED STUMPS.

+2

3

2

•2

1

3
O

3

C

a

Oi

O.

a

m

>

^

3
O

o

■a

0)

a
o

a

0-

o

§1

3i-i

■S

^ 1

v-<

^

a>

Wl3

i~i

O

■a

£1

03 O

XI

S

c

o

P

t- »

3

2S

z

-<

Z

=

go

Average,

14
8
S
6
4
4
5
3

12
7
4
3
1
6
2
5
2
6
2
4
4
6

10
3
1
3
<;

5
5
5
6
4
5
6
3
5
7
6
5
3
6
5
3
4
5
4
3
6

7
5
4
4

5

Yes '

Yes 1

i

Base

1

Base

Yes

1

1

Yes i

1

Yes
Yes

2

Base

1

Base

Yes

1

5.2

5.2

0.035
of sprouts

0.148
of stumps

No pycnidia were found on wood of peeled stumps after creosot-
ing, except in one case, where a large area of inner bark adhered
to the stump at time of creosoting, and later raised up, exposing an
untreated wood surface. The inner side of this bark and the uncre-
osoted area of wood were covered with pycnidia. Creosote painted
on thick bark at the base of stumps or on an exposed root does not
appear to hinder the growth of the fungus. Hence, since stumps
can be peeled but a very short distance below the soil, especially in
winter, it is believed that creosoted stumps are more apt to have
infected sprouts after a few years than burned stumps. The dan-
ger point is at the ground line, and exposed roots and the crotches
at the collar between roots are especially liable to have areas of
bark that are missed in peeling. If this bark becomes affected, it
brings the disease very close to the young sprouts that spring up
around the stumps, and sooner or later causes infection.

6

80

The stumps in Table III were burned in December, 1912, The
data given below are the result of an inspection made December
12, 1913.

TABLE III.

RESULTS OF BURNING OVER PEELED STUMPS.

m

"S »

fl

o

o

03

a)

■a

.a a

»

o

t-

.^

■O

di

d

^

■o

Number.

o

03

o

a! 3
X3 c

c! O 01

*J o

"S a

•Sp,

2a

n Q

g_bt^

S^

aa

Ss

S5

> >■—

O M

.2 M

'A

"

■ ?5

PL,

c

£1.

1

4
8
2
4
6
7
3
2
5
0
3
4
1
4
4
3
4
4
4
1
3

4
2

0
2
6
6

3.5

3
6

2
4
6
4
3
4
4
0
4
3
1
3
7
6
4
4
5
6
5
3
4
2
5
0
4
4
6

0
3

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1

0
2

*o.(y?8

to. 17

Base
Base

Base

Base
Base

■■"Yes

Yes

■■ "Yes

■■"Yes

Yes
Yes

2

3

5

Yes

6

Yes

S

9

in

11

19

13

14

16

17

Yes

1<!

19,

20

21

23

24, ...

26

27

2S

29,

Yes

4.5

One very heavily burned stump, cut close to ground, had an area
of diseased bark at crotch between roots, and a diseased sprout
(No. 27). The least charring was always in crotches between roots
at or near the soil line. Heavily burned stumps have weak sprouts
or none, as a rule, about one stump out of twenty having no sprouts.
Creosoted stumps usually have more and stronger sprouts than
burned stumps.

Creosoting is cheaper than burning over the stump, on account
of the labor saved. While it is apparently effective where the
peeling and creosoting are well done, burning is safer, although
mare expensive. A gallon of creosote costs about 15 cents and will
treat from 50 to 100 medium sized (10" — 15") stumps, varying
with the height of the stump and the temperature of the air and

_c

5-^

OQ ;:

^TH'"'*-:^'^

l^f^v

-K*' *

.^«^

... - ^ r

. -_- ^ . ^ -J^i—

■i^mR;^

•4-*

3 a

81

creosote. The creosote may be profitably used where other trees
will be injured by fire or where there is great danger of starting
forest fires. Other methods of treating the stump have been tried,
such as spraying the stumps with crude oil or kerosene and then
burning them, after peeling. The stumps have also been buried
under a mound of soil through which the sprouts had to penetrate.
These treatments are less efficient and more expensive than creo-
sote and cannot be recommended.

COST OF ERADICATION.

The cost of eradication will vary greatly according to the condi-
tions. If an average of 50 acres is scouted per day per man, at a
labor charge of |2.50 per day to include the cost of supervision, the
cost of scouting an acre is 5 cents. In a region of much blight, the
cost of efficient scouting will run four or five times this amount
unless the plan is adopted of determining only the edges of a spot
infection, and then cutting out all of the chestnut trees inside of
the area regardless of whether or not they show visible signs of
the blight. This seems to be the most sensible plan, since the re-
sults of reinspection show that it is the trees inside of the edges
of the spot infection which in almost every case show reinfection.
It will save money not only in scouting, but in future control. On
the Pennypacker forest reserve in Perry County where the infec-
tions were thickly scattered, the cost of scouting and removal in
1911 and 1912 on 1,620 acres was 73 cents per acre, or 52 cents per
diseased tree, and this is probably the lowest figure for which the
work can be done. The most expensive part of the work is the peel-
ing of the stumps, and here a great deal can be saved by following
the proper methods. In a large spot infection, the cost can be
reduced considerably because of the concentration of the work. A
spot infection of 822 trees, ranging up to 18 inches in diameter on
the stump (average 6 inches) was cut out at a cost of |70.50 or
8.58 cents per tree. This included peeling not only the stumps, but
all merchantable portions of the trees, burning the brush, steriliz-
ing the stumps, and cleaning up thoroughly. This cost, however,
does not include scouting, which in this case can be figured at 2
cents per tree. The total area of this spot was about three acres,
so that the total CQst of scouting and eradication was approximately
129.00 per acre. In all but very small spot infections, enough ma-
terial is produced to pay for doing the work.

In Mifflin County, three men treated 2,341 clumps of six-year-
old chestnut sprouts at an average cost of 20.3 cents per clump.
Each man averaged 15 clumps per day; cutting, peeling, cleaning

82

up and burning were yerj carefully done at a cost of 16,3 cents
per clump. Scouting, creosoting, and loss of time from bad weather
cost an additional 4 cents per clump. The average acre contained
205 clumps of chestnut sprouts, with an average of 5 five-inch
sprouts per clump; 29 clumps per acre or 14 per cent, were dis-
eased. The cost of thorough sanitation thus amounted to |5.89 per
acre. The average daily wage was |2.40, including the cost of
board and supervision.

EFFICIENCY OF THE CUTTING-OUT METHOD OF CONTROL.

To determine the efficiency of sanitation in controlling the dis-
ease, a careful reinspection of 67 spot infections which had been
treated a year or more previous to the examination, was made in
the fall of 1913. The results of these investigations are shown in
the following tabulation:

TABLE IV.

RESULTS OBTAINED, IN ONE YEAR, IN CUTTING OUT 20
ADVANCE SPOT INFECTIONS OF CHESTNUT BLIGHT.

County.

•d

0)

a

^

o

o

y

^

X3

«i

0

0)

Z

1

"S

V-fl

■o

_a

o .

-l*R

¥,°

•s

o p.

«3'S

X! a

lal

3.2

B2

Ei.S

■^*i

3 K<M

z

z

0^

Blair April, 1913,*

Clearfield, I Nov., 1912,*

Tioga, ! Dec, 1912,*

Tioga, ' Sept., 1912,*

Tioga Nov., 1912,*

Tioga : Sept., 1912,*

Bradford Jan., 1913,*

Bradford, Jan., 1913,*

Bradford \ Jan., 1913,t

Bradford Jan., 1913,*

Blair Dec, 1912,*

Cambria Jan., 1913,*

Tioga, ! Jan., 1913,*

Tioga I Dec, 1912,*

Huntingdon, ! Jan., 1913,*

Blair, ' Feb., 1913, §

Blair, Jan., 1913,*

Blair, I Jan., 1913,t

Blair I Jan., 1913,*

Huntingdon, I March, 1913,*

Averages,

Feb.,
Jan.,
Jan. ,
."^an.,
Jan.,
Jan.,
Jan.,
Jan.,
.Ian.,
Jan.
Aug.
Ji;n.,
Aug.
Jan.,
Jan.,
Aug.
^ug.
Aug.
-*ug.
Jan.,

1914,
1914,
1914,
1914,
1914,
1914,
1914,
1914,
1914,
1914,
1913,
1914,
1913,
1914,
1914,
1913.
1913,
1913,
1913,
1914,

1

0

1913

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

4

0

1913

5

0

1912

10

0

1912

1

0

1913

4

0

1912

3

0

1912

7

0

1912

1.75

0

'Sanitation well done — stumps well peeled, well lairned or creosoted, and refuse burned.
tSanitation fairly well done, but stumps not thoroughly peeled or burned.
§Sanitation poorly done— no burning done, and stumps poorly peelet' in some cases.

83

>

}^
pq
<

.1—1

-t-J

o
ft
m

<v
d
>

<

CO

O

a

pi

o

O

jajnao uiojj uopoaj

•notjoaj
-ni :js9pxo JO bSv BxqBqojj

■sjnojds pajDajai miM
sdniras pa^BBjj jo jaqain>j

•S39j; pajoajni jo jaqtnnj^

•sjnojds p9i38jni miM.
s(lmtt:^s pa}B8a:t jd jaqranjc

■paAooiaj
saajj papajni jo aaqnniN

•paAomaj
saaaj pe:joajai jo jaqmn^

•jaqmnn ;objx

OO<^OOe'e>©OOi^OOOr-t©Oe>OC»Or-tC»OC0Oe>^lOL

^OW&^OOI>e)CO'^<SrHiHM«C)fi^iH'STHrHC»THTHOOiOOC-

-a>

.^ -^ -f ^ -rp >* ^ '

T— It— (t— iT— (iSirH t— l(3iCTj i— It-HtHt

rH T-l rH T-H C-- T

3 3 3 3 03

^ p

: S ^ S S S P !

.p P3

t- t- 0- c 0/ a- t-

^^X!,o g ^ofcffl c] c^x;x;X5^ o^BjO^cjo^x: o o o o^

OOO'S'S'OoOOO'SOO'S'OC'OO^^OOc

3e>oe>e)ooo

sOOC'dooc^coiHOMO^t-oOi-He'ejL

H e-] CO e-3 o CO o lo

j„-w++S^S

!^^SS !

3^ -S _^6S -a^^^-S-^BS -^

j<s

- s s s --

? s o £:;=

3 o o CJ t-

ra i o c. Q.J

• t- t- C- =?; T-l T-l

■( t-H * * * T-l '

-a_s

C^l " rH ■ ri'^"^"'^ '"'^''-^ '^ S"w*'^ ^'
>i^ rH ^rH rH^^^rHrH^_j^_jr-i^

2 5h sS g

33rHOOcti3333p ^4^ 333333rH2C3p^pcJ3

o a
o o

..2 .9 S .9

■ a c "

s '3 '5 s § § js g ^i^ S '3 '3 3 '3 "3 5 '5 'S '5 '3 § '5 '5 '3 S § ? == '3

3t-OOOiOrH*QCO,*<L

jisa

(M C^ C^ N W CO

84

a

•T-l

-M

d
o

1 1

pq
+j
1=1
d

-M
W

o
m

d
a
>

<

CO

d
O

bJD
d

d
O

a;
o

<v
d

+->

O

M

jejnso mojj uopoaj
-nt jsBqjJtij JO aDUB^STci

-m :js9pxo JO aSu aiq^qoaj

•sjnojds pajoejni qjiAi
sdmnjs pa:n3a.i:( jo jaquinf^

SS§'"p5

■saa.ij pa:ioajU! jo aaqranjsi

•s:^no.^cIs pajoaju; qijiAV
sdnitiis pa^Baj; jo aaqoinsj:

Oj OJ 0 (1; GJ

rHe»iH©e

§

0!?i iH CCCl

si

•paAoniaa
sa^.^:^ pa^oejnt jo .laqoinM

•jaqinnu ;objx

5SSSS3

am M

- . cu a a

cS c3 OJ cS c3

SSoSm

o o J;

CO

a> S

ila

■^ O 03

ii da

-, m fcD

fe a a

2S °
£S a
^•^ I

a S- °
o P'O

85

W

o

>^

pq

EH

J/2
H
M
o

o

o

I— I

Q

H

O

Sg

CO

P
O

o

I— I

Q

M
O

P

02

H

•uousajni :(sapio jo 33v

■sinoads pa^osjui ii;tM
sdran^s pajBBJi. jo aaciuinsi

•saajj pa^oajui jo jaqinn.v

•Sjno.ldS p9J39JUt tJJlAi

sdran^s pa^Dajai j6 jaqmn^

■paAoraaj
S89j; pojoajut JO jatinin^j

"paAOinej
SB3ii po;oajn[ jo jsqmn{>j

^OSTH CD

5 S 3 C
P O) 3 3

OSiSOOOOO

''l* Cvi H^ eruM oft io

S S5

(- 01 3 g 0; n; oT oT

5 O rt CO O M

05 op CQ CD

<3S - $!2^ O^

Sfi 0) o o o cS

^o. '^ - "^ ' ^ 2

0^ o

a i g

•jaqmnn jobjx

86

NOTES OF EE-INSPECTION.

Over 60 spot infections located on the western advance line were
examined between August, 1913, and February, 1914. The spots
were located in 7 counties on the extreme western advance line of
the disease, and also some distance back of this line. The cutting
out had been done by practically as many owners as there were
spots, under supervision of various field men, so that the condi-
tions were averaged in every way. The point which was brought
out most prominently by the re-examination was the fact that
where the stumps were well peelfed and thoroughly charred and
where the tops and refuse were well cleaned up and burned, and the
merchantable material promptly removed from the vicinity of the
spot infection, there was no reinfection of the stumps or sprouts
of the treated trees. Where the work was carelessly done, there
was more or less reinfection. However, there were exceptions in
both cases. In some cases where the work was done only fairly well
or even poorly, there was less infection than might naturally be
expected. In some other cases where the work was done as well
as it can be expected under field conditions, there was a consider-
able reinfection. This variation is probably explained by other fac-
tors which undoubtedly enter into the effectiveness of sanitation
cutting. Probably the age of the original infection center is one
factor governing the number of new infections which appear after
the first cutting out. If the original infection is still so young
that there is a comparatively small canker, or if the condition of
the growth has been unfavorable for the production of ascospores,
a small amount of new infection may be expected, since the wind
apparently distributes most of the infection to the surrounding
trees. On the other hand, if the diseased area of bark at the center
of an infection is large and has produced a great number of peri-
thecia, and the climatic conditions have been favorable for the
ejection of ascospores, a large number of incipient infections are
very apt to be left in the surrounding trees at tlie time of the first
removal cutting.

Just how long after cutting it takes these incipient infections
to develop so that they can be detected in scouting depends on a
number of conditions, such as the location of the diseased area on
the tree and the height above ground where infection occurs, size
of the tree, season of the year and climatic conditions following
the occurrence of infection, location of the spot infection relative
to topography, etc. Probably the most important factor govern-
ing the number of new infections after a removal cutting is the
character and quality of the man who scouted the area. Certain

Healthy sprouts growing around a burned stuiap.

87

men have much better scouting ability than others, and in some of
the spots examined, at least, this factor alone is suflficient to account
largely for the conditions found on reinspection. However, even
the best scout cannot detect small twig infections in the tops of tall
trees before they have girdled the twigs, and it is frequently very
easy to miss w^ell developed cankers either at the base of large trees
when no fruiting bodies have been produced, or on the upper trunks
of tall trees before the tops have been girdled.

It was very noticeable that new infections appearing in a spot
where the original infection had been properly removed were al-
most always within a short distance of the original infection. Prob-
ably half of the new infections found, even after the second inspec-
tion, were on trees that grew on the same stump or in the same tree
group as an original infected tree, and 90 per cent, of the newly
infected trees were so close that their tops interlocked or were di-
rectly exposed to the tops of the previously infected trees. The ac-
companying diagram illustrates the characteristic manner in which
new infection appears. In several cases the farthest infection as
noted in the tabulated data was an old infection which was missed
at the time of the first inspection, and which really constituted a
separated spot infection.

Blight spots in northern Pennsylvania seem to be smaller, more
widely scattered, and to spread less rapidly from the center than
spots in the southern part of the State. One reason for this may
be that there is, as a rule, a much lower percentage of chestnut
in the forest and the chestnut appears to be sounder and in better
health than much of the chestnut in the southern part of the State.
Further south along the advance line, greater injury is noticed
on young trees from the bast miner; damage from ice storms and
hail storms also appears to be greater. Another possible factor is
that the climate is warmer, and favorable to the copious formation
and ejection of ascospores over a longer period than in the northern
part of the State. Another possible factor is differences in topo-
graphy which favor the carrying of spores long distances along reg-
ular "air lanes." This may be the explanation for long chains of
spot infections which occur along the lower edges of timber of the
long, forested ridges, and on benches half way up mountain sides.
This is put forth merely as a suggestion and not as a fact, although
there is some evidence to warrant a hypothesis of this kind.

The results of the investigation show clearly that the chestnut
trees immediately Avithin and adjoining a spot infection (say 25
feet beyond the outermost infected trees), should be cut out and
the stumps sterilized whether the trees appear to be infected at
the time the cutting is done, or not (Fig. 4). The investigation

88

proves that these trees in the majority of cases will become infected
later on, and it means extra expense and less effective control to
wait until the infection appears. In very small spot infections or
even those of considerable size, it is believed that such treatment
will avoid a recurrence of the blight in the majority of cases. How-
ever, to cut out these apparently healthy trees is not sufficient; the
sanitation work must be done as thoroughly as if the trees were dis-
eased. Even though the merchantable portions are taken out of the
woods and the tops burned, the unpeeled stumps are very apt to
become infected, especially if nearby diseased trees have been eject-
ing ascospores. Four treated spot infections were examined which
proved this very conclusively. The following facts relative to these
spots are interesting: —

Spot 1. Five infected trees in Huntingdon County were treated
in x\pril, 1912, b}^ digging up the trees, stumps and all, and burn-
ing them in an open field. In March, 1913, the spot was re-examined
and three infected trees found. The stumps were peeled and the
tops burned, but not over the stumps. At the same time all of the
chestnut trees on a half acre surrounding the spot that were large
enough for fence posts were cut out, the tops burned and the rest
of the trees removed. The stumps were left unpeeled and in Janu-
ary, 1914, 6 new infections were found on small saplings that re-
mained after the cutting, and all but 4 out of 75 stumps from which
the bark was not peeled showed pycnidia on the cut surface of the
wood or bark, pustules in the dead bark on the side of the stump,
and usually, mycelium growing downward toward the base of the
stump through the live bark.

Spot No. 2. Seven infected trees cut March, 1913; stumps well
peeled but not burned over. In January, 1914, 9 new infections
were found on adjoining trees and 50 new infections were found
on the stumps of healthy trees cut in close proximity to the spot
in March, 1913. These stumps were not peeled and the pustules
appeared in the bark on the side of the stump, and in many cases
showed mycelium running through the live bark of the lower part
of the stump.

Spot No. S. Seven trees cut June, 1912; stumps peeled and well
burned. March, 1913, 7 infections were cut out, the stumps poorly
peeled and not burned. At this time 17 healthy trees were cut
within a radius of 30 yards and the bark was not peeled from the
stumps. In January, 1914, no new infections had appeared on any
of the surrounding trees, but 8 of the stumps were infected.

Spot No. 4- One infection cut July, 1912. Stumps peeled and
burned. In April, 1913, 16 new infections were found on stumps
cut at the time the original infection was removed and immediately

89

surrounding the infected trees. These stumps were located as fol-
lows: One stump ?> yards west of center; 3 stumps northwest of
center (farthest 35 yards) ; 3 stumps north of center (farthest 20
yards) ; 5 stumps northeast of center (farthest 12 yards) ; 2 stumps
east of center (farthest 3 yards) ; 2 stumps southeast of center
(farthest 8 yards) ; these stumps were peeled and not burned over.
In February, 1914, 4 additional infected stumps were found, the
farthest being 12 yards from the center.

East of the advance line sanitation has proved effective in hinder-
ing the progress of the disease, but not in eradicating it. Inspec-
tions made of a tract of blighted chestnut at Haverford, Pa., cut
in 1910 and the stumps peeled, but not burned, showed both in
1912 and 1913, that only about 20 per cent, of the stumps and
sprouts were reinfected. On a nearby tract where the trees were
cut at the same time and stumps left unpeeled, the reinfection was
approximately 80 per cent. At Hummelstown, Pa., on several acres
of diseased chestnut, cut in the winter in 1911-12, a portion of the
stumps were peeled and lightly burned. In the spring of 1913, 80
per cent, of the peeled stumps and 90 per cent, of the unpeeled
stumps were reinfected. The reasons for the high per cent, of re-
infection was the fact that the ijeeled stumps were not well burned,
and the nearness of disease on trees in the adjoining woods and on
the adjoining unpeeled stumps. This is shown by the location of
the infection on the sprouts as follows:

90

^ TABLE VII.

INFECTION ON SPROUTS AROUND STUMPS OF BLIGHTED
TREES CUT AT HUMMELSTOWN, PA.

PEELED STUMPS.

Infected Sprouts.

5

.s

s

stump Number.

3

2

o

a

a
o

u

"

a

■g

0

<u

o

a

Ol

•a

'"

J3

Hi 05

^

y. M

Z

m

Average,

42

5

11

28

0

0

35

4

7

20

4

1

11

0

3

12

2

0

50

0

2

10

0

2

15

1

3

28

0

0

26.1

1.2

2.9

UNPEELED STUMPS.

15

4

3

24

0

4

30

1

0

10

0

2

2

0

0

46

0

4

54

1

3

55

1

1

23

0

1

40

1

3

29.9

.8

2.1

The investigation at Hummelstown shows that there is little
or no difference in the number and vigor of the sprouts produced
by peeled and unpeeled stumps. In many cases, the sprouts reached
a height of six feet or more in a single year's growth. The sprouts
from peeled stumps frequently spring from the roots, 2 to 4 inches
from the stump, and push through three inches or more of soil.
This will undoubtedly aid in keeping them free from disease, and
the new growth will be better rooted than ordinary stump sprouts.

91

RECOMMENDATIONS.

It has been shown that with the less effective methods of cutting
out spot infections used in the beginning of its work by the Penn-
sylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, the amount of blight
has been substantially reduced. It is reasonable to suppose that
much more efficient results will be obtained by using the methods
which have been developed by experience, and which are recom-
mended in this report:

(1) Cutting out all chestnut trees inside the limits of a spot
infection, also immediately beyond, regardless of whether or not
they all show visible signs of the blight.

(2) Great care in peeling the stumps and in burning or removing
from the woods all felled portions of the treated trees.

(3) Thorough disinfection of the peeled stumps, preferably by
burning.

(4) A force of well-trained and experienced men to do both the
scouting and sanitation cutting.

KEGULATING SHIPMENTS OF CHESTNUT NUR-

SERY STOCK.

The Commission issued the appended official regulations for the
better protection of buyers of chestnut nursery stock, and to aid
in the effort to prevent the spread of the chestnut tree bark disease.
So far as could be learned, the railway and other transportation
companies generally complied with these instructions, recognizing
their meaning and importance, knowing that diseased nursery stock
was a serious menace.

REGULATIONS RESPECTING CHESTNUT NURSERY STOCK;
ADOPTED BY THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT COMMIS-
SION, MARCH 4, 1913.

Whereas, It is found necessary to make certain regulations in
order to provide efficient and practical means for the prevention,
control, and eradication of the chestnut tree blight; therefore, in
pursuance of the powers conferred by Act of Assembly, it is re-
solved by this Commission that the following regulations be adopted.

92

aud as occasion may arise, sucli other and further regulations, and
the altering or amending of the same, as it may seem necessary.

Eegulation No. 1. Eailroad companies, express companies, and
other common carriers must not accept for shipment, until further
notice, any chestnut nursery stock which does not bear the official
inspection tags of this Commission. Chestnut nursery stock
shipped from without the State and intended for delivery within
the State not being accompanied by an official inspection tag issued
by the proper authorities of the State or Country wherein such
shipment originated, certifying apparent freedom from chestnut
blight, must be held at a convenient place within the State, and
this Commission immediately notified. Every such shipment must
be retained in its original package, unopened, and must not be de-
livered to the consignee until after an examination shall have been
made by an inspector representing this Commission, and then not
until the inspector shall have attached thereto the official inspector's
tag of this Commission.

The olficial inspection tag of the Commission bears the official
seal of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, and
reads as follows:

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

The Commission for the Investigation and Control of the Chestnut
Tree Blight Disease in Pennsylvania.

CERTIFICATE OF INSPECTION

This is to Certify that the chestnut nursery stock to which this
certificate is attached, under my supervision, was carefully ex-
amined, and at the time of shipment was found to be apparently
free from any infection by blight caused by the fungus Diaporthe
parasitica.

Dated 191 at Pa.

Inspector.

For the Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

Each bundle, bale, or package of chestnut nursery stock shall
bear the above tag, and in addition each tree shall have attached
thereto a numbered and signed tag of which the following is a copy:

Large sprouts growing around creosoted chestnut stumps.

93
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

The Commission For the Investigation and Control of the Chestnut
Tree Blight Disease in Pennsylvania.
Certificate of Single Tree Inspection,

Tree Number

This is to Certify that the chestnut tree to which this tag is at-
tached, under my supervision, was carefully examined, and at the
time of shipment was found to be apparently free from any infection
by blight caused by the fungus Diaporthe parasitica.

Dated 191 at Pa.

Inspector.

Regulation No. 2. No chestnut tree nursery stock shall be re-
moved from any nursery or other place where the same may be grow-
ing, for the purpose of sale or shipment until said trees shall first
have been inspected by this Commission and the official inspection
tag attached thereto. ^'Removed" is here construed to mean the
final tying up into an original package, transporting from the
premises where grown, or offering same to a common carrier for
shipment.

Regulation No. 3. All chestnut tree nursery stock intended for
sale or shipment must first be dipped into an approved fungicide
prior to delivery or shipment. The official inspection tag will not
be attached to stock unless first so treated.

Regulation No. 4. All chestnut tree nursery stock found to be
infected with the chestnut bark fungus must be immediately de-
stroyed. This regulation applies to diseased stock found at the
time of inspection for shipment, and also to inspections in the
nursery before stock is marketed.

Regulation No. 5. Nurserymen and common carriers, who, after
receiving notice of the above regulations, negligently or willfully
fail to refuse to be governed thereby, will, without further notice,
subject their chestnut stock and shipments to quarantine, which
will be maintained by this Commission.

All correspondence relative to nursery inspection should be ad-
dressed to Dr. F. D. Heald, Pathologist, Zoology Building, Uni-
versity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.

THE AMENDED CHESTNUT TREE BARK DISEASE ACT.

The work of the Chestnut Blight Commission was suspended not
because of the lack of a desire to proceed, or lack of OTiportunitv to
render most valuable services, but for reasons stated in the letter at
the beginning of this report, Wliile the legislation recognized the

94

need of continuing active work of this character by providing for
a continuation of the Commission, it did not see its way clear to have
the work advance with that vigor which the Commission believed
necessary in order to achieve the most marked success.

The original Act of Assembly approved June 14, 1911, provided
that the Commission should continue operations for a period of three
years from the date of the approval of the Act. This period would
have expired by limitation, June 14, 1914. To continue the Act
in force, and to provide for a Commission to take up the work at
any time, should it be thought in the future desirable to do so, the
original Act of Assembly was amended by extending the term of
the original Commission to a period of five years from the date of
their appointment, and to continue thereafter for so long, as in the
judgment of the Governor, it might be necessary to have work done
in accordance with the terms of the law. This makes the Commission
a continuing one to be revived at the pleasure of the Governor. Sec-
tion one, of foregoing Act, as amended* by the 1913 Legislature,
reads as follows :

"Section 1. Be it enacted, etc.. That a commission, to consist
of five members, to be appointed and commissioned by the Governor
for a period of five years from the date of their appointment, and to
continue thereafter for such period as, in the judgment of the
Governor, may be necessary to enable them to complete the work to
be done under this Act, and to be called The Commission for the In-
vestigation and Control of the Chestnut-Tree Blight Disease in Penn-
sylvania, is hereby created; with power to ascertain, determine upon
and adopt the most efficient and practical means for the prevention,-
control, and eradication of a disease of the chestnut tree, commonly
known as the chestnut-tree blight disease; and for this purpose, in
collaboration with the Department of Forestry, or otherwise, to
conduct scientific investigations into the nature and causes of such
disease and the means of preventing its introduction, continuance,
and spread; to establish, regulate, maintain, and enforce quarantine
against the introduction and spread of such disease; and, from time
to time, to adopt and prescribe such regulations and methods of pro-
cedure as to it may seem necessary and proper for carrying into
effect the purpose of this Act, and exercising the powers and au-
thority hereby conferred: Provided, That in the work of collabo-
ration by the Commission with the Department of Forestry, said
Department may employ such means, and make detail of such men,
and do such other things, as may seem to be necessary or expedient
to accomplish the purpose of this Act. Provided further. That if
the fungus causing the aforesaid disease be found to attack otber
species of trees, such trees shall be deemed to come within the pur-
view of this act."

*See P. L. 1913, p. 313.

[?■

Bibliography
of the

Chestnut Bark Disease

By R. KENT BEATTIE, FOREST PATHOLOGIST,

U. S. Department of Agriculture.

(85)

6" 'S'V^

(96)

A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE CHESTNUT BARK

DISEASE.*

Prepared for the Penusylvauia Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

By R. KENT BEATTIE, Forest Pathologist,

BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF AGRICULTURE.

DECEMBER 31, 1913.

The rapid rise and spread of the Chestnut Bark Disease since its
introduction into tlie United States from the Orient, probably in
the nineties, has called it to the attention both of scientific men
and the general public. The result of this almost universal notice
in the eastern states has been the production of numerous articles
written from many different standpoints.

It has been the effort in this bibliography to cite all the writings
of a scientific or semi-scientific nature, with the aim of making a
good working bibliography of the disease. Since it is manifestly
impossible for any such bibliography to be complete, the author
will be glad to have called to his attention any omissions or any
corrections in the citations here given.

Because of their importance in the chestnut bark disease problem,
references to Endothia radicalis and Endothia gyrosa as well as
those to Endothia parasitica have been included in this bibliography.

1. Anderson, H. W. Notes on the genus Endothia. Phytopath-

ology. Vol. 3, p. 67. February, 1913.

2. Anderson, P. J. Field Investigations in Pathology. Eeport

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1
to December 31, 1912. p. 4245. 1913.

3. Anderson, Paul J. Wind Dissemination of the Chestnut

Blight Organism. Phytopathology. Vol. 3, p. 68. Feb-
ruary, 1913.

4. Anderson, Paul J. and Anderson, H. W. The Chestnut Blight

Fungus and a Related Saprophyte. Phytopathology.
Vol. 2, p. 204-210. October, 1912.

5. Anderson, Paul J. and Anderson, H. W. Endothia virginiana.

Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 261-262. December, 1912.

*Publisho(i by permission of the Secretary of Agriculture.

(97)

98

6. Anderson, P. J. and Anderson, H. W. The Chestnut Blight

Fungus and a Related Saprophyte. Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin No. 4. Oc-
tober, 1913.
6a. Anonymous. Disease of Chestnut. Forestry Quarterly. Vol.
4, p. 320. December, 1906.

7. Anonymous. A Disease of the Chestnut. Woodland and

Roadside. Vol. 6, p. 31-32. June, 1907.

8. Anonymous. A New Tree Disease. The Outlook. Vol. 88,

p. 621. 21 March, 1908.

9. Anonymous. Destruction of Chestnut Forests. The Minne-

sota Forester. Vol. 1, No. 3, p. 31-32. March, 1908.

10. Anonymous. Are Chestnut Trees Doomed? American Fruits.

Vol. 8, p. 5. June, 1908.

11. Anonymous. Editorial. Engineering News. Vol. 60, p. 339.

24 September, 1908.

12. Anonymous. Fighting the Chestnut Blight. Country Life

in America. Vol. 15, p. 88. November, 1908.

13. Anonymous. Hope for the Chestnut. Country Life in

America. Vol. 15, p. 171. December, 1908.

14. Anonymous. News and Notes. Mycologia. Vol. 1, p. 136.

January, 1909.

15. Anonymous. [The Chestnut Tree Canker.] Torreya. Vol.

9, p. 214-215. October, 1909.

16. Anonymous. The New Pine and Chestnut Diseases. Wood-

land and Roadside. Vol. 8, p. 41. November, 1909.

17. Anonymous. Tree Diseases. Fourth Annual Report Commis-

sioner of Forestry, Rhode Island, p. 9-10. 1910.

18. Anonymous. [No title.] Torreya. Vol. 10, p. 99. April,

1910.

19. Anonymous. News and Notes. Mycologia. Vol. 2, p. 251-

252. September, 1910.

20. Anonymous. American Forestry Association, Thirtieth An-

nual Meeting. American Forestry. Vol. 17, p. 99-111.
February, 1911.

21. Anonymous. Editorial Appreciation of Pennsylvania's For-

est Management. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 3. Febru-
ary, 1911.

22. Anonymous. The Doom of the Chestnut Tree. Harper's

Weekly. Vol. 55, p. 15. February, 1911.

23. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight. Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 9,

p. 353. June, 1911.

24. Anonymous. Pennsylvania Forestry Legislation in 1911.

Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 50-51. August, 1911.

99

25. Anonymous. [Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Commission.]

Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 9, p. 518-519. September, 1911.

26. Anonymous. The Chestnut Bark Disease. American For-

estry. Vol. 17, p. 693. November, 1911.

27. Anonymous. Narrative of the Annual Meeting of the Penn-

sylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13,
p. 83. December, 1911.

28. Anonymous. [Work of the Pennsylvania Commission.] For-

estry Quarterly. Vol. 9, p. 651. December, 1911.

29. Anonymous. An Attempt to Suppress the Chestnut Blight.

Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests.
Eleventh Eeport. p. 5, 19-20. 1912.

30. Anonymous. Quaker City News. American Lumberman. No.

1912. p. 68. 6 January, 1912.

31. Anonymous. Proposed Forestry Legislative Procedure in the

Empire State. American Lumberman. No. 1913. p. 65.
13 January, 1912.

32. Anonymous. Chestnut Bark Disease. Eeport Maryland

State Board of Forestry, 1910-1911. p. 6, 8, 18-21, 30.
January, 1912.

33. Anonymous. Chestnut Tree Blight Conference. Forest

Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 97, 98. February, 1912.

34. Anonymous. The Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Ameri-

can Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 136. February, 1912.

35. Anonymous. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Scientific Ameri-

can. Vol. 106, p. 105. 3 February, 1912.

36. Anonymous. Fighting the Chestnut Tree Blight. American

Lumberman. No. 1917. p. 43, 10 February, 1912.

37. Anonymous. Resolutions passed at the Conference Called by

the Governor of Pennsylvania at Harrisburg, February
20 and 21, for the consideration of the measures to be
taken to control the chestnut tree bark disease. Report
Second Annual Meeting, Northern Nut Growers' Asso-
ciation, December 14 and 15, 1911. p. 122-123. 1912.

38. Anonymous. Conference of States on Chestnut Tree Blight.

The Southern Lumberman. Vol. 65, No. 857. p. 33-34. 24
February, 1912.

39. Anonymous. Conference on the Chestnut Tree Blight. Ameri-

can Lumberman. No. 1919. p. 73-75. 24 February, 1912.

40. Anonymous. Harrisburg Chestnut Blight Conference. The

Southern Lumberman. Vol. 65, No. 859, p. 24. 9 March,
1912.

41. Anonymous. Cure for the Chestnut Blight. The Southern

Lumberman. Vol. 65, No. 859, p. 46. 9 March, 1912.

100

42. Anonymous. The Chestnut Tree Blight. Scientific Ameri-

can. Vol. 106, p. 241-242. 16 March, 1912.

43. Anonymous. Three Enemies of Forests. The Southern Lum-

berman. Vol. 65, No. 860, p. 37. 16 March, 1912.

44. Anonymous. At Work in Pennsylvania. The Southern Lum-

berman. Vol. 65, No. 862, p. 27. 30 March, 1912.

45. Anonymous. Forestry Problems of Three Sections. Ameri-

can Lumberman. No. 1926, p. 51. 13 April, 1912.

46. Anonymous. Lumbermen and Forestry. American Forestry.

Vol. 18, p. 285. April, 1912.

47. Anonymous. Resolutions of Chestnut Tree Blight Conference.

Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 116. April, 1912.

48. Anonymous. The Chestnut Trees Must Go. The Guide to

Nature. Vol. 4, p. 395-397. April, 1912.

49. Anonymous. [The Harrisburg Conference.] Phytopathology.

Vol. 2, p. 91. April, 1912.

50. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight in Massachusetts. Country

Life in America. Vol. 22, p. 92, 94. 1 May, 1912.

51. Anonymous. [News Notes and Map.] American Forestry

Vol. 18, p. 335, 342, 347, 350. May, 1912.

52. Anonymous. The Chestnut Trees Going. American Forestry

Vol. 19, p. 457. July, 1912.

53. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight Warning, American Forestry

Vol. 18, p. 473. July, 1912.

54. Anonymous. Boy Scouts Aiding. American Forestry. Vol

18, p. 541. August, 1912.

55. Anonymous. Boy Scouts to Save Trees. American Forestry,

Vol. 18, p. 542. August, 1912.

56. Anonymous. Narrative of Bushkill Meeting of the Pennsyl

vania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p
146. August, 1912.

57. Anonymous. The Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference,

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p.
158. August, 1912.

58. Anonymous. Progress in Fighting the Chestnut Disease.

Hardwood Record. Vol. 34, p. 23. 10 September, 1912.

59. Anonymous. News Note. Science. "N. S. Vol. 36, p. 429. 4

October, 1912.

60. Anonymous. The Scientific and Operative Staff of the Penn-

sylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Science.
N. S. Vol. 36, p. 512. 18 October, 1912.
60a. Anonymous. The Chestnut Blight Disease. Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin 1. October,
1912.

101

()1. Anonymous. Treatment of Ornamental Chestnut Trees Af-
fected with the Blight Disease. Pennsylvania Chestnut
Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin 2. (><(:>ber, 1912.

62. Anonymous. [News Note.] American Forestry Vol. 18, p.

811. December, 1912.

63. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight. Forestry Quarterly. \'(il. 10,

p. 742-743. December, 1912.

64. Anonymous. News and Notes. Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 10,

p. 772. December, 1912.

65. Anonymous. Phytopathological Notes. Vol. 2, p. 274. De-

cember, 1912.

66. Anonymous. Narrative of the Annual Meeting of the Penn-

sylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13,
p. 178-179. December, 1912.

67. Anonymous. Pennsylvania Forestry Association. American

Forestry. Vol. 19, p. 21. January, 1913.

68. Anonymous. State News, Pennsylvania. American Forestry.

Vol. 19, p. 55. January, 1913.

69. Anonymous. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Journal of the

Board of Agriculture (London). Vol. 19, p. 848-850.
January, 1913.

70. Anonymous. Governor Tener on Forestry. Forest Leaves.

Vol. 14, p. 2. February, 1913.

71. Anonymous. Chestnut Tree Blight Bulletins. Forest Leaves.

Vol. 14, p. 11-12. February, 1913.

72. Anonymous. News and Notes. Mycologia. Vol. 5, p. 90.

March, 1913.

73. Anonymous. Use of Rev.'<)nd Growth Chestnut. Lumber World

Eeview. Vol. 24, No. 5. p. 24. 10 March, 1913.

74. Anonymous. Chestnut Tree Blight. American Lumberman.

No. 1974, p. 58-59. IT, March, 1913.

75. Anonymous. A Eemedy for Chestnut Blight. Hardwood

Record. Vol. 35, p. 27. 25 March, 1913.

76. Anonymous. Fighting the Chestnut Bark Disease. The Sci-

entific American. Vol. 108, p- 314. 5 April, 1913.

77. Anonymous. [No title.] Arnold Arboretum, Harvard Uni-

versity. Bulletin of Popular Information. No. 47. 26
June, 1913.

78. Anonymous. LTsing Blight-Killed Chestnut. Amcrirnn For-

estry. Vol. 19, p. 449. July, 1913.

79. Anonymous. The Chestnut Tree. Methods and Speciflcnii ms

for the Utilization of Blighted Chestnut. Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin 6. 15 Au-
gust, 1913.

102

80. Anonymous. Pennsylvania's Pi^ht Against the Chestnut

Blight is Suspended, American Forestry. Vol. 19, p.
556-558. August, 1913.

81. Anonymous. [No title.] Mycologia. Vol. 5, p. 280. Sep-

tember, 1913.

82. Anonymous. [No title.] The Outlook, p. 237. 27 September,

1913.

83. Anonymous. [No title.] Forestry quarterly. Vol. 11, p. 449-

450. September, 1913.

84. Anonymous. Report of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree

Blight Commission. Forest Leaves. Vol. 14, p. 77. Oc-
tober, 1913.
84a. Anonymous. Conquering the Chestnut Tree Blight. The St.
Louis Lumberman. Vol. 52, No. 11, p. 59. 1 December,
1913.

85. Ashe, W. W. Chestnut in Tennessee. State Geological Sur-

vey, Tennessee. Bulletin 10, part B, p. 11. January,
1911.

86. Baker, H. P. The Chestnut Blight and the Practice of For-

estry in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight
Conference Report, p. 137-143. 1912.

87. Baker, Hugh P. Blight Commission Instruction. American

Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 267. 1912.

88. Barney, Chas. T. Report of the Executive Committee. New

York Zoological Society. Tenth Annual Report. 1905. p.
40. January, 1906.

89. Barsali, Egidio. Aggiunte alia Flora Livornese. Bulletin©

della Societa Botanico Italiano. Anno 1904, p. 204. Mag-
giore, 1904.

90. Benson, W. M. Chestnut Blight and Its Possible Remedy.

Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Report, p.
229-233. 1912.

91. Berlese, A. N. and Peglion, V. Micromiceti Toscani. Nuovo

Giornale Botanico Italiano. Vol. 24, fasc. 3, p. 122.
Luglio 1892.
91a. Berlese, A. N., Saccardo, P. A., and Roumebuere, C. Contribu-
tions ad Floram Mycologicam Lusitaniae. Revue
Mycologique. Vol. 11. p. 117-124. Jiily 1889.

92. Besley, F. W. Mutual Forest Interests of Pennsylvania and

Maryland. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 39-41. June, 1912.

93. Bessey, Charles E. Fighting the Chestnut Blight. Science.

N. S. Vol. 37, p. 417. 14 March, 1913.

94. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 33.

June, 1911.

103

95. B[irkmbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 49.

August, 1911.

96. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 113.

April, 1912.

97. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 130.

June, 1912.

98. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 145.

August, 1912.

99. B[itler], F. L. The Chestnut Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol.

12, p. 148-150. August, 1910.

100. B[itler], F. L. Narrative of the State College Meeting of the

Pennsylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol.

13, p. 34-37. June, 1911.

101. Bizzozero, Giacomo. Flora Veneta Crittogamica. Part 1. I

Funghi. p. 220-221. 1885.

102. Briosi, Farneti. A Proposito di una nota dell Dott. Lionello

Petri suUa Moria dei castagni (Mai delP Inchiostro).
Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei, Series V, Rendi-
conti Classe de scienzi fisiche, matematiche e naturali.
Vol. 22, ser. 5, 1 sem. fasc. 6, p. 361-366. 16 marzo, 1913.

103. Britton, W. E. Twelfth Report of the State Entomologist of

Connecticut. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Sta-
tion. Report 12, p. 220. 1913.

104. Brooks, A. B. Fungi That Injure Bark. West Virginia Geo-

logical Survey. Vol. 5, p. 78-79. 1911.

105. Brown, Nelson C. Municipal Forestry. American Forestry.

Vol. 18, p. 781. December, 1912.

106. Brown, Nelson C. Making the Most of a Bad Situation. The

Country Gentleman. Vol. 78, p. 289-290. 22 February,
1913.
106a. Brunaud, Paul. Contributions a la Flore Mycologique de
I'Ouest. Annales des Sciences naturelles, La Rochelle.
p. 108. 1884.

107. Carleton, M. A. Fighting the Chestnut Tree Blight Disease

in Pennsylvania. American Fruit and Nut Journal. Vol.
6, p. 78-79. September-October, 1912.

108. Carleton, Mark Alfred. Report of the General Manager for

the latter half of the year, 1912. Report Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to December
31, 1912. p. 11-18. 1913.
108a. Cesati and De Notaris. Schema Sferiaceae Italianae. p. 207,
240. 1863.

109. Clinton, G. P. Chestnut Bark Disease, Diaporthe parasitica

Murrill. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station
Report 1907. p. 345-346. May, 1908.

104

110. Clinton, G. P. The Chestnut Bark Disease, Diaporthe parasi-

tica Murrill. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Sta-
tion Keport 1908. p. 879-890. July, 1909.

111. Clinton, G. P. Chestnut Bark Disease. Connecticut Agricul-

tural Experiment Station Keport 1909-1910. p. 716-717,
725. 1910.

112. Clinton, G. P. Some Facts and Theories Concerning Chestnut

Blight. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Ke-
port. p. 75-83. 1912.

113. Clinton, G. P. Chestnut Blight Fungus and Its Allies. Phyto-

pathology. Vol. 2, p. 265-269. December, 1912.

114. Clinton, G. P. The Kelationships of the Chestnut Blight

Fungus. Science. N. S. Vol. 36, p. 907-914. 27 December,
1912.

115. Clinton, G. P. Chestnut Bark Disease. Connecticut Agricul-

tural Experiment Station Report 1912. p. 359-453. May,
1913.

116. Clinton, G. P. and Spring, S. N. Chestnut Blight Situation

in Connecticut. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Confer-
ence Keport. p. 154-157. 1912.

117. Collins, J. Franklin. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Proceed-

ings Second Annual Meeting Northern Nut Growers'
Association, December 14 and 15, 1911. p. 37-49. 1912.

118. Collins, J. Franklin. Treatment of Orchard and Ornamental

Trees. American Lumberman. No. 1920. p. 34. 2
March, 1912.

119. Collins, J. Franklin. Some Observations on Experiments with

the Chestnut Bark Disease. Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p.
97. April, 1912.

120. Collins, J. Franklin. Address [on the Chestnut Bark Disease].

Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Report, p. 28-
39. 1912.

121. Collins, J. Franklin. Treatment of Orchard and Ornamental

Trees. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Report,
p. 59-69. 1912.

122. Collins, J. Franklin. The Chestnut Bark Disease on Chestnut

Fruits. Science. N. S. Vol. 38, p. . 857-858. 12 Decem-
ber, 1913.

123. Conklin, Robert S. The Chestnut Blight. Report Pennsyl-

vania Department of Forestry 1908-1909. p. 59-61. 1910.

124. Cook, A. J. The Chestnut Tree Blight. Monthly Bulletin

State Commissioner of Horticulture, California. Vol. 1,
p. 314. June, 1912.

125. Cook, Melville Thurston and Taubenhaus, J. J. The Relation

of Parasitic Fungi to the Contents of the Cells of the

105

Host Plants (T. The Toxicity of Tannin). Delaware
Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 91, p. 21. 1
February, 1911.

126. Cook, Mel. T. Diseases of Shade and Forest Trees. The Plant-

ing and Care of Shade Trees, Forest Park Reservation
Commission of New Jersey, p. 101-103. 1912.

127. Copp, G. G. A Disease Which Threatens the American Chest-

nut Tree. Scientific American. Vol. 95, p. 451. 15 De-
cember, 1906.

128. Craig, John. Nut Culture from the Northern Standpoint. The

Western New York Horticultural Society. Proceedings
of the fifty-seventh annual meeting, p. 100. 24-26 Janu-
ary, 1912.

129. Craighead, F. C. Insects Contributing to the Control of the

Chestnut Blight Disease. Science. Vol. 36, p. 825. 13
December, 1912.

130. Currey, Frederick. Sphaeria (Diatrype) radicalis Fr. in

Synopsis of the Fructification of the Compound Sphaeriae
of the Hookerian Herbarium. The Transactions of the
Linnaean Society of London. Vol. 22, p. 272. 1859.
130a. Curtis, M. A. Geological and Natural History Survey of
North Carolina. Botany, p. 143. 1867.

131. Davis, Nelson F. Chestnut Culture. Pennsylvania Chestnut

Blight Conference Report, p. 83-99. 1912.

132. Davis, William T. Note on the Chestnut Fungus. Proceed-

ings Staten Island Association of Arts and Sciences. Vol.
2, B. p. 128-129. July, 1908— February, 1909.

133. Deam, Charles C. Trees of Indiana. State Board of Forestry,

Indiana, eleventh annual report. 1911. p. 171. 1912.

134. Deming, W. C. Beginning with Nuts. The Northern Nut

Growers' Association. Circular No. 4. April, 1913.

135. .Deming, W. C. and Huson, Calvin J. (Correspondence on the

Chestnut Tree Bark Disease). Report Second annual meet-
ing, Northern Nut Growers' Association, December 14 and
15, 1911. p. 119-121. 1912.
135a. De Notaris. Sferiaceae Italianae. Vol. 1, p. 9. 1863.

136. Detwiler, S. B. The Chestnut Blight. Third Annual Meeting

Montgomery County Horticultural Association, Norris-
town, Pa. September, 1911.

137. Detwiler, S. B. The Progress of the Fight Against the Chest-

nut Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 88-89. December,
1911.

138. Detwiler, S. B. The Pennsylvania Programme. Pennsylvania

Chestnut Blight Conference Report, p. 129-136. 1912.

106

139. Detwiler, S. B. The Spread of the Chestnut Blight. The Coun-

try Gentleman. Vol. 77, p. 6. 9 March, 1912.

140. Detwiler, S. B. The War on the Chestnut Blight. The Coun-

try Gentleman. Vol. 77, p. 8, 27. 30 March, 1912.

140a. Detwiler, S. B. The Control of the Chestnut Tree Bark Dis-
ease. Proceedings of the Society of American Foresters.
Vol. 7, p. 131. 4 April, 1912.

140b. Detwiler, S. B. The Farmer and the Chestnut Blight. An-
nual Eeport Bradford County Farmers' Annual Institute,
Towanda, Pa. 22 May, 1912.

141. Detwiler, S. B. Some Benefits of the Chestnut Blight. Forest

Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 162-165. October, 1912.

142. Detwiler, Samuel B. Report of the General Superintendent.

Report Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission,
July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 19-34. 1913.

143. Detwiler, S. B. The Problem of the Chestnut Blight. The

New York Lumber Trade Journal. Vol. 54, No. 643, p.
34. 1 April, 1913.

144. Detwiler, S. B. The Chestnut Blight and its Remedy. Penn-

sylvania Arbor Day Manual, 1913. p. 170-179. 1913.
144a. Detwiler, S. B. Fighting the Chestnut Blight. Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Unnumbered circular.
No date.

145. Detwiler, S. B. and Besley, F. W. The Pennsylvania Chestnut

Blight Conference. 1912.

146. Ducomet, M . V. Contribution a 1' etude des maladies du

chataignier. Association Francaise pour I'Avancement
des Sciences. Comptes Rendus 40 Session, 1911. p. 502-
506. 1912.

147. Duggar, B. M. Fungous Diseases of Plants, p. 281-282. 1909.

148. Editors, Country Life in America. Wanted : A Remedy. Coun-

try Life in America. Vol. 15, p. 45. November, 1908.

149. Elliott, Simon B. The Important Timber Trees of the United

States, p. 290. 1912.

150. Ellis, J. B. and Everhart, B. M. Endothia gyrosa (Schw.) The

North American Pyrenomycetes. p. 552. pi. 36. 1892.
150a. Elwes, Henry John and Henry, Augustine. . The Trees of Great
Britain and Ireland. Vol. 4, p. 858. 1909.

151. Fairchild, David. The Discovery of the Chestnut Bark Dis-

ease in China. Science N. S. Vol. 38, p. 297-299. 29
August, 1913.

152. Farlow, W. G. [No title]. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight

Conference Report, p. 70-75. 1912.

153. Farlow, W. G. The Fungus of the Chestnut Tree Blight. Sci-

ence. N. S. Vol. 35, p. 717-722. 10 May, 1912.

107

154. Fisher, A. K. [No title.] Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Con-

ference Eeport. p. 103-104. 1912.

155. Francis, Thomas E. Field Work of the Chestnut Tree Blight

Commission. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference
Eeport. p. 233-235. 1912.

156. Fries, Elia. Eclogae Fungorum. Linnaea. Bd. 5, p. 541. 1830.

157. Fries, Elia. Elenchus Fungorum. Vol. 2, p. 73. 1828.
157a. Fries, Elia. Endothia. Summa Vegetabilium Scandinaviae.

Vol. 2, p. 385. 1849.

158. Frothingham, Earl H. Second-Growth Hardwoods in Con-

necticut. United States Department of Agriculture For-
est Service. Bulletin 96. p. 44, 56. 1912.
158a. Fuckel. Endothia gyrosum (Tul.) Symbolae Mycologicae.
p. 226. 1869.

159. Fullerton, Hal B. and Fullerton, Edith Loring. Fatal Chest-

nut Disease. Long Island Agronomist. Vol. 1, No. 24,
p. 1-2. 17 June, 1908.

160. Fullerton, Hal B. and Fullerton, Edith Loring. Doomed

Chestnut Trees. Long Island Agronomist. Vol. 2, No. 1,
p. 7-8. 29 July, 1908.

161. Fullerton, Hal B. and Fullerton, Edith Loring. Japanese,

Spanish and native Chestnuts. Long Island Agronomist.
Vol. 2, No. 9, p. 2. 18 November, 1908.

162. Fullerton, Hal B. and Fullerton, Edith Loring. Chestnut

Blight. Long Island Agronomist. Vol. 3, No. 3, p. 2. 25
August, 1909.

163. Fulton, H. R. Recent Notes on the Chestnut Bark Disease.

Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Report. p.
48-56. 1912.

164. Fulton, H. R. Chestnut Bark Disease. Penn State Farmer.

Vol. 5, p. 151-155. May, 1912.

165. Fulton, H. R. The Chestnut Tree Bark Disease. North Caro-

lina Agricultural Experiment Station. Press Bulletin
No. 26. 10 July, 1913.
165a. Gardner, M. W. Longevity of pycnospores of the chestnut
blight fungus iu soil. Abstracts of papers to be given
at the fifth annual meeting of the American Phytopatho-
logical Society in the State Capitol, Atlanta, Ga., De-
cember 30, 1913, to January 2, 1914. p. 14. 16 December,
1913.

166. Gaskill, Alfred. Report of the Forester. The Chestnut Blight.

Third Annual Report Forest Park Reservation Commis-
sion of New Jersey, p. 45-46. 1907.

108

167. Ga skill, Alfred. Eeport of the Forester. The Chestnut Blight

or Canker. Fourth Annual Report Forest Park Reserva-
tion Commission of New Jersey, p. 33. 1908.

168. Gaskill, Alfred. Chestnut Canker. Fifth Annual Report of

the Forest Park Reservation Commission of New Jersey,
p. 48. 1909.

169. Gaskill, Alfred. Chestnut Blight. Sixth Annual Report of

the Forest Park Reservation Commission of New Jersey,
p. 69. 1910.

170. Gaskill, Alfred. Chestnut Blight. Seventh Annual Report of

the Forest Park Reservation Commission of New Jersey,
p. 86-87. 1911.

171. Gaskill, Alfred. Report of the State Forester — Chestnut

Blight. Eighth Annual Report Forest Park Reservation
Commission of New Jersey, p. 75-76. 1913.

172. Gaylord, F. A. Forestry and Forest Resources in New York.

New York State Conservation Commission. Division of
Lands and Forests. Bulletin 1, p. 25. 1912.

173. Giddings, N. J. The Chestnut Bark Disease. West Virginia

Agricultural Experiment Station. BuUetia 137. March,
1912.

174. Gravatt, Flippo. The Chestnut Bark Disease in Virginia.

The Southern Planter. Vol. 7, No. 3, p. 295. March,
1913.

175. Graves, Arthur H. The Chestnut Bark Disease in Massa-

chusetts. Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 99. April, 1912.

176. Griggs, Robert F. Observations on the geographical composi-

tion of the Sugar Grove Flora. Bulletin Torrey Botani-
cal Club. Vol. 40, p. 488. September, 1913.

177. Gulliver, F. P. Report of the Geographer. Report Pennsyl-

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De-
cember 31, 1912. p. 52-53. 1913.

178. Halsted, Byron D. Fungi of Native and Shade Trees. Fourth

Annual Report of the Forest Park Reservation Commis-
sion of New Jersey, p. 108. 1908.

179. Hawley, Ralph C. and Hawes, Austin F. Forestry in New

England, p. 62, 94, 118-122, 341, 355, 359, 372. 1912.

180. Heald, F. D. Pathological Investigations. Report Pennsyl-

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De-
cember 31, 1912. p. 40-42. 1913.

181. Heald, F. D. The Dissemination of Fungi Causing Disease.

Transactions of the American Micfogcppical Society. Vol.
32, p. 5-30. January, 1913.

109

182. Heald, F. D. The Symptoms of Chestnut Tree Blight and a

Brief Description of the Fnngus. Pennsylvania Chest-
nut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin No. 5. 15 May, 1913.

183. Heald, F. D. A Method of Determining in Analytic Work

Whether Colonies of the Chestnut Blight Fungus Origi-
nate from Pycnospores or Ascospores. Mycologia. Vol.
5, p. 274-277. September, 1913.

184. Heald, F. D. and Gardner, M. W. Preliminary Note on the

Relative Prevalence of Pycnospores and Ascospores of the
Chestnut Blight Fungus During the Winter. Science. N.
S. Vol. 37, p. 916-917. June, 1913.

184a. Heald, F. D. and Gardner, M. W. The Relative Prevalence of
Pycnospores and Ascospores of the Chestnut Blight Fun-
gus During the Winter. Phytopathology. Vol. 3, p. 296-
305. December, 1913.

184b. Heald, F. D., Gardner, M. W. and Studhalter, R. A. Wind
Dissemination of ascospores of the chestnut blight fungus.
Abstracts of papers to be given at the fifth annual meet-
ing of the American Phytopathological Society in the
State Capitol, Atlanta, Ga., December 30, 1913, to Janu-
ary 2, 1914. p. 13-14. 16 December, 1913.

185. Heald, F. D. and Studhalter, R. A. Preliminary Note on Birds

as Carriers of the Chestnut Blight Fungus. Science N.
S. Vol. 38, p. 278-280. 22 August, 1913.

186. Henry, E. La Maladie des Chataigniers aux Etats-Unis et en

Europe. Revue des Eaux et Forets. Vol. 48, p. 422-432.
1909.

187. Henry, E. La Maladie des Chataigniers aux Etats-Unis et en

Europe. Annales de la Science Agronomique. 3 Ser. 4
ann. Tome 1, p. 241-247. 1909.

188. Henry, E. La Maladie des Chataigniers aux Etats-Unis et en

Europe. Bulletin des Seances de la Society de Sciences de
Nancy. 3 Ser. X. p. 72-82. March-April, 1909.

189. Hicks, Isaac, and Son. Trees for Long Island, p. 14. 1908,

190. Hirst, E. C. New Hampshire Forest Commission Biennial

Report, 1911-1912. p. 63-65. November, 1912.
190a. Hitchcock, Edward. A Catalogue of Plants growing without
cultivation in the vicinity of Amherst College, p. 63. 1829.

191. Hitchcock, Edward. Catalogue of Plants Growing Without

Cultivation. Massachusetts Geological Survey. Report
on the Geology, Mineralogy, Botany and Zoology of
Massachusetts, p. 647. 1833.

192. Hodson, E. R. Extent and Importance of the Chestnut Bark

Disease. Forest Service. (Unnumbered circular). 21
October, 1908,

no

193. Hohnel, Fr. v. Fragmente zur Mycologie. Sitzungsberichte

der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenscliaften. Mathe-
matisch-Naturwissenscliaftliclie Klasse. Vienna. Bd. 118.
Abt. 1. Halbband 2. p. 1479-1481. November, 1909.

194. Hollick, Arthur L. The Chestnut Disease on Staten Island,

Proceedings Staten Island Association of Arts and Sci-
ences. Vol. 2, p. 125-127. July, 1908— February, 1909.

195. Holmes, J. S. The Chestnut Bark Disease which threatens

North Carolina. Proceedings of the Second Annual Con-
vention of the North Carolina Forestry Association at
Kaleigh, N. C, 21 February, 1912. North Carolina Geo-
logical and Economic Survey. Economic Paper No. 25,
p. 12-15. 1912.

196. Holmes, J. S. Scouting for Chestnut Blight in North Caro-

lina. North Carolina Geological and Economic Survey.
Press Bulletin No. 88. 24 October, 1912.

197. Hoover, T. L. [No. title]. American Forestry. Vol. 17, p.

693-694. November, 1911.

198. Hoover, T. L. and Detwiler, S. B. Coppice Growth and the

Chestnut Tree Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 102-
103. February, 1912.

199. Hopkins, A. D. [No title]. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight

Conference Eeport. p. 180-184. 1912.

200. Hopkins, A. D. Relation of Insects to the Death of Chestnut

Trees. American Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 221. April, 1912.

201. Hornor, C. B. A Way Around the Chestnut Blight. House

and Garden. Vol. 16, p. 119. September, 1909.

202. Jordan, W. H. Director's Report for 1912. New York (Ge-

neva) Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 356, p.
559. December, 1912.

203. Kittredge, J., Jr. Notes on the Chestnut Bark Disease (Dia-

porthe parasitica Murrill) in Petersham, Massachusetts.
Bulletin of the Harvard Forestry Club. Vol. 2, p. 13-22,
1913.
203a. Lamy, C. E. Sphaeria radicalis. Simples apercu sur les PI.
Crypt, et Agam. du Dept. Haute Vienne. Compt. rend,
d. 1. 26 Session Cong. Sciences de France, Limoges. Sep-
tember, 1859. p. 31. 1860.

204. Lindau, G. Endothia, in Engler und Prantl. Die Natuerlichen

Pflanzenfamilien. 1 Teil. 1 Abteilung. p. 478. Febru-
ary, 1897.

205. M , W. Save your Chestnut Trees. Country Life

in America. Vol. 17, p. 444. February, 1910.

206. Manson, Marsden. Chestnut Tree Disease, American Fores-

try. Vol. 18. p. 286. April, 191^,

Ill

207. Manson, Marsden. The Cbe.stniit Tree Disease. Science. N. S.

vol. 35. p. 269, 270. 16 February, 1912.

208. Marlatt, Charles L. Pests and Parasites. National Geographic

Magazine. Vol. 17, p. 343-345. April, 1911.

209. Massee, George. American Chestnut Disease. Diseases of

Cultivated Plants and Trees, p. 210-211. 1910.

210. McCarthy, J. R. Chestnut Tree Blight in Pennsylvania.

American Lumberman. No. 1926, p. 51. 13 April, 1912.

211. Merkel, Herman W. A Deadly Fungus on the American

Chestnut. Tenth Annual Report New York Zoological
Society, 1905. p. 97-103. January, 1906.

212. Metcalf, Haven. The Immunity of the Japanese Chestnut to

the Bark Disease. United States Department of Agricul-
ture, Bureau of Plant Industry. Bulletin 121, part vi., p.
3-4. 10 February, 1908.
212a. Metcalf, Haven, Bark Disease of the Chestnut. The Nut-
Grower. Vol. 6, No. 7, p. 1-3, 5. February, 1908.

213. Metcalf, Haven. The Bark Disease of the Chestnut. Ameri-

can Fruits. Vol. 8, No. 3, p. 9, 20. March, 1908.

214. Metcalf, Haven. Diseases of Ornamental Trees. United

States Department of Agriculture Yearbook, 1907. p.
483-494. 27 July, 1908.

215. Metcalf, Haven. The Present Status of the Bark Disease of

the Chestnut. Science, N. S. Vol. 31, p. 239. 11 February,
1910.

216. Metcalf, Haven. Phytopathological Notes. Phytopathology.

Vol. 2, p. 91. April, 1912.

217. Metcalf, Haven. Further Notes on the Chestnut Bark Dis-

ease. Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 97. April, 1912.

218. Metcalf, Haven. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Journal of

Economic Entomology. Vol. 5, p. 222-226. April, 1912.

219. Metcalf, Haven. Phytopathological Notes. Phytopathology.

Vol. 2, p. 128. June, 1912.

220. Metcalf, Haven. Diseases of the Chestnut and Other Trees.

Transactions of the Massachusetts Horticultural Society.
Part 1, p. 69-95. August, 1912.

221. Metcalf, Haven. The Chestnut Bark Disease. United States

Department of Agriculture Yearbook, 1912. p. 363-372.
5 June, 1913.

222. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The Present Status

of the Chestnut Bark Disease. United States Department
of Agriculture. Bureau of Plant Industry. Bulletin 141.
Part v., p. 45-53. 30 August, 1909.

223. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The Chestnut Bark

Disease. Science. N. S. Vol. 31, p. 748. 13 May, 1910.
8

112

224. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. Further Notes on

the Bark Diseases of the Chestnut. Phytopathology. Vol.
1, p. 106. June, 1911.

225. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The Control of the

Chestnut Bark Disease. United States Department of
Agriculture. Farmers' Bulletin 467. 1911.

226. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The present known

Distribution of the Chestnut Bark Disease. Science. N.

5. Vol. 35, p. 420. March, 1912.

227. Mickleborough, John. The Blight on Chestnut Trees. Con-

servation. Vol. 14, p. 585-588. November, 1908.

228. Mickleborough, John. A Eeport on the Chestnut Tree Blight,

the fungus Diaporthe parasitica Murrill. Pennsylvania
Department of Forestrj^, unnumbered bulletin. May, 1909.

229. Millard, Bailey. The Passing of the Chestnut Tree. Munsey's

Magazine. Vol. 43, p. 758-765. September, 1910.

230. Montague, C. Notice sur les Plantes Cryptogames recemment

decouvertes en France, contenant aussi I'indication precise
des localit^s de quelques especes les plus rares de la Flore
francaise. Annales des Sciences Naturelles. 2 'Ser. Tome
1, p. 295. 1834.

231. Montague, C. Plantes cellulaires exotiques. Cryptogamarum

Guianensium. Annales des Sciences Naturelles. Botani-
que. 2 Ser. Tome 13, p. 359. 1840.

232. Montague, C. Cryptogamia guyanensis. Annales des Sciences

naturelles. Botanique. 4 Ser. Tome 3, p. 123-124. 1855.

233. Moon, F. F. Eeport on the Highlands of the Hudson Forest

Reservation. Fifteenth annual report of the Forest, Fish
and Game Commissioner of New York. p. 226. 1909.

234. Morris, Robert T. Chestnut Timber Going to Waste. Con-

servation. Vol. 15, p. 226. April, 1909.

235. Morris, Robert T. Notes on Immunity of Chestnuts From the

Bark Disease at Stamford, Connecticut. Proceedings of
the Second Meeting of the Northern Fruit Growers' Asso-
ciation. 14 December, 1911.

236. Mowry, Jesse B. The Chestnut Bark Disease. OflQce of the

Commissioner of Forestry of Rhode Island. Leaflet No.

6. 10 June, 1911.

237. Murdoch, John, Jr. Chestnut, Its Market in Massachusetts.

Massachusetts State Forester. Unnumbered bulletin.
1912.

238. Murrill, W. A. A Serious Chestnut Disease. Journal of the

New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 7, p. 143-153. June,
1906.

113

239. Murrill, W. A. Further Remarks on a Serious Chestnut Dis-

ease. Journal of the New York Botanical Garden. Vol.
7, p. 203-211. 1906.

240. Murrill, W. A. A New Chestnut Disease. Torreya. Vol. 6,

p. 186-189. September, 1906.

241. Murrill, W. A. The Spread of the Chestnut Disease. Journal

of the New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 9, p. 23-30. Feb-
ruary, 1908.

242. Murrill, W. A. The Chestnut Canker. Torreya. Vol. 8, p.

111-112. May, 1908.

243. Murrill, W. A. Collecting Fungi at Biltmore. Journal of the

New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 9, p. 135-141. August,
1908.

244. Murrill, W. A. The Passing of the Chestnut Tree. Suburban

Life. Vol. 8, p. 26-27. January, 1909.

245. Murrill, W. A. The Chestnut Canker Convention. Journal of

the New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 13, p. 41-44. March,
1912.

246. Nash, George V. A Visit to Letchworth Park. Torreya. Vol.

7, p. 212. November, 1907.
246a. Otis, Charles Herbert. Michigan Trees. University of Michi-
gan, University Bulletin. New Series. Vol. 14, No. 16,
p. 95. March, 1913.

247. Oudemans, C. A. J. A. Revision des Champignons taut su-

p^rieurs qu' inferieurs trouves jusqu'a ce jour les Pay-
Bas. Vol. 2, p. 204. Maart, 1897.

248. Oudemans, C. A. J. A. Revisio Pyrenomycetum in regno Ba-

tavorum hucusque detectorum. p. 127. 1884.

249. Pantanelli, E. Sul paratismo di Diaporthe parasitica Murrill

per il castagno. Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei.
Series V. Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, matematiche
e naturali. Vol. 20, 1 sem. fasc. 5, p. 366-372. 5 marzo,
1911.

250. Pantanelli, E. Su la supposta origine europea del cancro

americano del castagno. Atti della Reale Accademia dei
Lincei. Series V. Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche,
matematiche e naturali. Vol. 21. fasc. 12, 2 sem., p. 869-
875. 15 decembre, 1912.

251. Pearson, R. A. Address as Chairman. Pennsylvania Chestnut

Blight Conference Report, p. 19-20. 1912.
251a. Peck, Charles H. Endothia gyrosa. Twenty-fourth Report
of the New York State Museum, p. 99. 1872.

252. Peck, Charles H. Gastanea dentata (Marsh) Borkh. Report

State Botanist New York. Museum Bulletin No. 131, p.
29. 1 July, 1909.

114

253. Peck, C. H. Valsonectria parasitica (Murrill) Rehm. Report

of the State Botanist of New York. Museum Bulletin No.
150, p. 49. 15 May, 1911.

254. Peck, C. H. Report of the State Botanist of New York, 1910.

Museum Bulletin No. 150, p. 7. 15 May, 1911.

255. Peck, C. H. Report of the State Botanist of New York, 1911.

Museum Bulletin No. 157, p. 7. 1 March, 1912.

256. Peck, C. H. Report of the State Botanist of New York. Mu-

seum Bulletin No. 158. p. 51. 1 April, 1912.

257. Peck, C. H. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Report of the State

Botanist of New York. Museum Bulletin No. 167, p. 7. 1
September, 1913.

258. Perry, E. F. [No title]. American Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 204.

March, 1912.

258a. Peirce, Harold. (Chestnut Tree Blight.) Main Line Citi-
zens' Association. Unnumbered circular. 1 August, 1910.

258b. Peirce, Harold. The Chestnut Tree Blight. Main Line Citi-
zens' Association. Unnumbered circular. September,
1910.

258c. Peirce, Harold, et al. Chestnut Tree Blight. Main Line Citi-
zens' Association. Unnumbered circular. No date.

259. Petri, L. Richerche sulla malattia del castagno detta dell'

inchiostro. Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Series
V. Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, matematiche e
naturali. Vol. 21. 2 sem. fasc. 11, p. 775-781. 1 decembre,
1912.

260. Petri, L. Ulteriori ricerche sulla malattia del castagno detta

deir inchiostro. Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei.
Series V. Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, mate-
matiche e naturali. Vol. 21, 2 sem. fasc. 12, p. 863-869.
15 decembre, 1912.

261. Petri, L. Considerazioni critiche sulla malattia del castagno

detta dell' inchiostro. Atti della Reale Accademia dei
Lincei. Series V. Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche,
matematiche e naturali. Vol. 22, 1 sem. fasc. 7, p. 464-
468. 6 aprile, 1913.

262. Petri, L. Sopra una nuova specie di Endothia, E. pseudoradi-

calis. Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Series V.
Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, matematiche e natu-
rali. Vol. 22, 1 sem. fasc. 9, p. 653-658. 1913.

263. Pettis, C. R. Chestnut Bark Disease. Report of the Superin-

tendent of Forests. First Annual Report of the Con-
servation Commission of New York. p. 50, 1912.

115

263a. Pettis, C. K. Chestnut Bark Disease. Second Annual Keport
of the Conservation Commission (New York), 1912, p. 98.
1913.

264. Pierce, Roy G. Report of the Tree Surgeon. Report Pennsyl-

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De-
cember 31, 1912. p. 51. 1913.

265. Pierce, Roy G. Some Problems in the Treatment of Diseased

Chestnut Trees. Report of the Proceedings at the Third
Annual Meeting of the Northern Nut Growers Associa-
tion, December 18 and 19, 1912. p. 44-59. 1913.

266. Pierce, Roy G. Treatment of Ornamental or Cultivated Chest-

nut Trees. The American City. Vol. 8, p. 157-159. Feb-
ruary, 1913.

267. Pierce, Roy G. Saving Chestnut Trees. American Forestry.

Vol. 19, p. 248-251. April, 1913.

268. Pierson, Albert H. Wood-Using Industries of Connecticut.

Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin
174, p. 16. January, 1913.

269. Rane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Sixth Annual Re-

port of the State Forester of Massachusetts, p. 58. 1909.

270. Rane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Seventh Annual

Report of the State Forester of Massachusetts, p. 58.
January, 1911.

271. Rane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. State Forester's

Office, Massachusetts. 1911.

272. Rane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Eighth Annual Re-

port of the State Forester of Massachusetts, p. 27-28.
1912.

273. Rane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. State Forester of

Massachusetts. [Unnumbered Bulletin]. 1912.

274. Rankin, W. Howard. How Further Research May Increase

the Efficiency of the Control of the Chestnut Bark Dis-
ease. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Report,
p. 46-48. 1912.

275. Rankin, W. H. The Chestnut Tree Canker Disease. Phytopath-

ology. Vol. 2, p. 99. April, 1912.

276. Rankin, W. H. Some Field Experiments with the Chestnut

Canker Fungus. Phytopathology. Vol. 3, p. 73. Febru-
ary, 1913.

277. Record, S. J. Use of Blight-Killed Chestnut. Hardwood

Record. Vol. 34, p. 30-32. 10 September, 1912.

278. Reed, C. A. Nut Growing in the Northern States. Proceed-

ings of the Second Annual Meeting of the Northern Nut
Growers' Association, December 14 and 15, 1911. p. 51,
54. 1912.

lie

279. Reed, C. A. Nut Growing in the Northern States. National

Nurseryman. Vol. 20, p. 134-136. April, 1912.

280. Reed, C. A. A 1912 Review of the Nut Situation in the North.

Report of the Proceedings at the Third Annual Meeting of
the Northern Nut Growers Association, December 18 and
19, 1912. p. 91-93. 1913.

281. Rehm. Ascomycetes exs. Fasc. 39. Annales Mycologici. Vol.

5, p. 210. June, 1907.

282. Riley, Phil N. What Shall We Do About the Chestnut Blight?

Country Life in America. Vol. 20, p. 88, 90, 92, 94. 1
September, 1911.

283. Ridsdale, Percival S. The Chestnut Blight Campaign. Ameri-

can Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 178-180. .March, 1912.

284. Rockey, Keller E. Recent AVork on the Chestnut Blight. Re-

port of the Proceedings at the Third Annual Meeting of
the Northern Nut Growers' Association, December 18 and
19, 1912. p. 37-59. 1913.

285. Rockey, Keller E. Report of Demonstration Work. Report

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 —
December 31, 1912. p. 59-61. 1913.

286. Rollins, Montgomery. Help Save the Chestnut Trees. The So-

ciety for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests. [Un-
numbered circular]. [No date].

287. Rothrock, J. T. Report of the General Secretary of the Penn-

sylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 12,
p. 181-183. December, 1910.

288. Rudolphi, Fr. Plantarum vel Novarum vel Minus Cognitarum

Descriptiones. Linnaea. Bd. 4, p. 393. 1829.

289. Ruggles, A. G. Investigations of Insects Associated with the

Chestnut Blight. Report Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree
Blight Commission, July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 48-
49. 1913.

290. Ruggles, A. G. Notes on a Chestnut Tree Insect. Science. N.

S. Vol. 38, p. 852. 12 December, 1913.

291. Ruhland, W. Untersuchuugeu zu einer Morphologie der stromar

bildene Sphaeriales. Hedwigia. Bd. 39. p. 32-34. 1900.

292. Rumbold, Caroline. A new Record of a Chestnut Tree Disease

in Mississippi. Science. N. S. Vol. 34, p. 917. December,
1911.

293. Rumbold, Caroline. The Possibility of a Medicinal Remedy

for Chestnut Blight. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Con-
ference Report, p. 57-58. 1912.

294. Rumbold, Caroline. Summer and Fall Observations on the

Growth of the Chestnut Bark Disease in Pennsylvania.
Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 100. April, 1912.

117

295. Rumbold, Caroline. Report of the Physiologist. Report Penn-

sylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De-
cember 31, 1912. p. 45-47. 1913.
295a. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Mycologiae Venetae Speci-
men, p. 146-147. tab. 14, fig. 63-65. 1873.

296. Saccardo, P. A. Fungi Gallici. Michelia Commentarium My-

cologicum. Vol. 2, p. 59. 25 April, 1880.
296a. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Fungi gallici. ser IV.
Michelia Commentarium Mycologicum. Vol. 2, p. 583.
1882.

297. Saccardo, P. A. Fungi Gallici. Michelia Commentarium My

cologicum. Vol. 2, p. 596. 1 December, 1882.
297a. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Sylloge Fungorum. Vol.

1, p. 601. 1882.
297b. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia. Genera Pyrenomyceten schematice

delineata, tab. 6, fig. 6. November, 1883.
297c. Saccardo, P. A. Florula Mycologica Lusitanica. Boletim da

Sociedade Broteriana. Vol. 11, p. 18, 118. 1892-1893.
297d. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Sylloge Fungorum. Vol.

19. p. 647. 1910.

298. Sargent, Winthrop. Report of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree

Blight Commission, July 1 to December 31, 1912. 1913.

299. Schaeffer, Nathan C. Autumn Arbor Day. Forest Leaves.

Vol. 13, p. 162. October, 1912.

300. Schock, Oliver D. Fighting the Chestnut Tree Blight. Ameri-

can Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 575. September, 1912.

301. Schock, Oliver D. Chestnut Cultivation. The Forecast. Vol.

4, p. 213-217. November, 1912.

302. Schock, Oliver D. The Blight in Pennsylvania. American

Forestry. Vol 19, p. 962-966. December, 1913.
302a. Schweinitz, Ludovici Davidis de. Synopsis Fungorum in

America Boreali media degentium. 15 April, 1831.
302b. Schweinitz, Ludovici Davidis de. Synopsis Fungorum Caro-

linae Superioris. p. 3. No date.

303. Selby, A. D. Brief Handbook of the Diseases of Ohio. Ohio

Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 214. p. 387
1910.

304. Selby, A. D. Dressings for Pruning Wounds of Trees. Ohio

Agricultural Experiment Station. Circular 126. 27 May,
1912.

305. Shear, C. L. The Chestnut Bark Fungus, Diaporthe parasitica.

Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 88-89. April, 1912.

306. Shear, C. L. The Chestnut Blight Fungus. Phytopathology.

Vol. 2, p. 211-212. October, 1912.

118

307. Shear, C. L. The Chestnut Bark Fungus. Centralblatt fiir

Bakteriologie, Parasitenkunde und Infektionskrankheiten.
II Abt. Bd. 35, p. 546. 1912.

308. Shear, C. L. Endothia radicalis (Schw.). Phytopathology.

Vol. 3, p. 61. February, 1913.
30Sa. Shear, C. L. The type of Sphaeria radicalis Schw. Phyto-
pathology. Vol. 3, p. 191-192. June, 1913.

309. Shear, C. L. and Stevens, Neil E. Cultural Characters of the

Chestnut-Blight Fungus and its Near Relatives. United
States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant In-
dustry. Circular 131. 5 July, 1913.

310. Shear, C. L. and Stevens, Neil E. The Chestnut-Blight Para-

site (Endothia imrasitica) from China. Science. N. S.
Vol. 38, p. 295-297. 29 August, 1913.

311. Shrawder, Joseph. Report of the Chemist. Report Pennsyl-

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De-
cember 31, 1912. p. 49-50. 1913.

312. S , H. Hope for the Chestnut Tree. Country Life in

America. Vol. 24, p. 60. June, 1913.

313. Smith, J. Russell. The Menace of the Chestnut Blight. Out-

ing, vol. 61, p. 76-83. October, 1912.

314. Smith, J. Russell. The Chestnut Blight and Constructive Con-

servation. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Re-
port, p. 144-149. 1912.

315. Sober, Colonel C. K. Discussion. Report of the Proceedings

of the Third Annnal Meeting of the Northern Nut Grow-
ers' Association, December 18 and 19, 1912. p. 52-53.
1913.
315a. Sowerby, James. Sphaeria fluens. Coloured figures of Eng-
lish fungi or mushrooms. Supplement, plate 420 ( a part
of plate 438). 1814.

316. Spaulding, Perlej^ Notes Upon Tree Diseases in the Eastern

States. Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 93. April, 1912.

317. Spaulding, Perley. Notes Upon Tree Diseases in the Eastern

States. Mycologia. Vol. 4, p. 148-151. May, 1912.
317a. Sprengel, C. Peziza gyrosa. Linnaeus' Systema Vegetabilium.
Vol. 4, p. 515. 1827.

318. Sterling, E. A. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Engineering

News. Vol. 60, p. 332-333. 24 September, 1908.

319. Sterling, E. A. Are We to Lose Our Chestnut Forests? Coun-

try Life in America. Vol. 15, p. 44-45. November, 1908.

320. Stevens, F. L. and Hall, J. G. Bark Disease of the Chestnut.

Diseases of Economic Plants, p. 436-438. 1910.

119

321. Stewart, F. C. Chestnut Canker. New York (Geneva) Agri-

cultural Experiment Station. Report 1910. p. 219. 16
January, 1911.

322. Stewart, F. C. Pointed Paragraphs on Plant Pathology. The

Western New York Horticultural Society. Proceedings
of the Fifty-seventh Annual Meeting, p. 109. 24-26 Jan-
uary, 1912.

323. Stewart, F. C. Can the Chestnut Bark Disease Be Controlled?

Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Eeport. p.
40-45. 1912.

324. Stoddard, E. M. The Chestnut Tree Blight. The Connecticut

Farmer. Vol. 41. No. 25. p. 1-2. 24 June, 1911.

325. Stoddard, E. M. and Moss, A. E. The Chestnut Bark Disease.

Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin
178. September, 1913.

326. Stone, G. E. Report of the Botanist. Massachusetts Agricul-

tural Experiment Station. Twenty-third annual Report,
p. 76. January, 1911.

327. Stone, G. E. Diseases More or Less Common During the Year.

Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station. Twen-
ty-fourth Annual Report, p. 7. 1912.
327a. Studhalter, R. A. Insects as carriers of the chestnut blight
fungus. Abstracts of papers to be given at the fifth an-
nual meeting of the American Phytopathological Society
in the State Capitol, Atlanta, Ga., December 30, 1913,
to January 2, 1914. p. 14-15. 16 December, 1913.

328. Surface, H. A. The Chestnut Blight or Bark Disease (Dia-

portJie parasitica Murrill). Bulletin Pennsylvania De-
partment of Agriculture, Division of Zoology. Vol 2,
No. 6, p. 236.

329. Sykes, W. C. Lumbermen and Forestry. American Forestry.

Vol. 18. p. 271. April, 1912,

330. Tener, John K. Call to Order and Address of Welcome to

Delegates and Visiting Friends at the Pennsylvania Chest-
nut Blight Conference. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight
Conference Report, p. 15-18. 1912.

331. Tener, John K. Opening Address at Chestnut Tree Blight

Conference, Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 116. April, 1912.

332. Thorn, De Courcy W. More About the Blight. Conservation.

Vol. 15, p. 112. February, 1909.
332a. Thorne, Charles E. Chestnut Bark Disease. Thirty-second

Annual Report Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station.

Bulletin 268. July, 1913.
332b. Thuemeu, Felix von. Endothia gyrosum Fuck. f. Castaneae

vescae. No. 769. Mycotheca universalis, p. 12. 1879.

120

333. Traverse, J. B. Flora Italica Cryptogamia. Pars. 1. Fungi.

Pyrenomyceta. p. 180-182. 15 ottobre, 1906.
333a. Tulasne, Ludovicus-Kenatus et Tulasne, Carolus. Melogramma
gyrosum. Selecta fungorum carpologia. Vol. 2, p. 87-89.
1863.

334. Van Kennen, Geo. E., Fleming, James W., and Moore, John

D. First Annual Report of the Conservation Commission
New York. 1911. p. 10. 1912.

335. Vincenz, Freihernn v. Cesati. Die Pflanzenwelt im Gebiete

zwischen dem Tessin, dem Po, der Sesia und den Alpen.
Linnaea. Bd. 16. p. 236. 1863.

336. Von Schrenk, Hermann and Spaulding, Perley. Diseases of

Deciduous Forest Trees. United States Department of
Agriculture. Bureau of Plant Industry. Bulletin 149. p.
22. 30 July, 1909.

337. Walton, R. C. The relation of temperature to the expulsion of

ascospores of Endothia parasitica. Abstracts of papers
to be given at the fifth annual meeting of the American
Phytopathological Society in the State Capitol, Atlanta,
Ga.,. December 30, 1913, to January 2, 1914. p. 14. 16
December, 1913.

338. Wells, H. E. A Report on Scout Work on the North Bench

of Bald Eagle Mountain, between Sylvan Dell and Wil-
liamsport, Lycoming County, Pennsylvania. Pennsyl-
vania Chestnut Blight Conference Report, p. 235-241.
1912.

339. Wentling, J. P. Report of Forester in Charge of Utilization.

Report Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission,
July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 54-59. 1913.

340. Whitnall, C. B. The Blight on Chestnut Trees. Conservation.

Vol. 15, p. 112. February, 1909.

341. Williams, Henry Smith. Our Doomed Chestnut Trees. Hearst's

Magazine. Vol. 22, No. 2, p. 102-103. August, 1912.

342. Williams, I. C. The New Chestnut Bark Disease. Science.

N. S. Vol. 34, p. 397-400. 29 September, 1911.

343. Williams, I. C. Additional Facts About the Chestnut Blight.

Science. N. S. Vol. 34, p. 704-705. 24 November, 1911.

344. Williams, I. C. The Silvicultural Effect of the Chestnut Blight.

Report Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission,
July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 61-63. 1913.

345. Wilson, James. Studies in Forest Pathology. Report of the

Secretary. United States Department of Agriculture.
Yearbook 1910. p. 55. 1911.

121

346. Wilson, James. Chestnut Tree Blight. Letter from the Sec-

retary of Agriculture transmitting in response to Senate
Resolution of April 30, 1912, information relative to the
study and investigation of the so-called Chestnut Tree
Blight. 62d Congress, 2d Session. Senate document No.
653. 9 May, 1912.

347. Winter, Georg. Die Pilze. Rabenhorst's Kryptogamen —

Flora von Deutschland, Oesterreich und der Schweiz. Bd.
1. Abt. 2. p. 798, 803. 1887.

348. W[irt], G. H. The Chestnut Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol. 12,

p. 188-189. December, 1910.

349. Woods, A. F. The Wastes of the Farm. United States De-

partment of Agriculture. Yearbook, 1908. p. 211. 12
July, 1909.

(122)

THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT.

A typical lawn chestnut shade tree, with branch killed by blight. Note withered
leaves. Philadeljihia, Pennsylvania.

The Commission for the Investigation and Control of the
Chestnut Tree Blight Disease in Pennsylvania

1112 MORRIS BUILDING
PHILADELPHIA

Bibliography of the Chestnut
Tree Bhght Fungus

By R. KENT BEATTIE, Forest Pathologist
^V. S. Department of Agriculture

HARRTSBURa, PA.:

WM. STANLEY RAY, STATE PRINTER

1914

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight
Commission

MEMBERS OF COMMISSION.

Winthrop Sargent, Chairman, Bryn Mawr.

Harold Peirce, Secretary , Haverford .

Samuel T. Bodine, Villa Nova.

George F . Craig , Rosemont .

Theodore N . Ely , Bryn Mawr .

EXECUTIVE STAFF.

Mark Alfred Oarleton, General Manager.
Samuel B. Detwiler, General Superintendent.
Oliver D. Schock, Assistant General Superintendent.
Thomas E. Francis, Field Manager, Western District.
Joseph R. Wilson, Field Manager, Eastern District.
David T. McCampbell, Chief Clerk.

Irvin C. Williams, (Pennsylvania State Forestry Department), Collaborator.

SCIENTIFIC AND OPERATIVE STAFF.

Frederick D. Heald, Pathologist.

A. G. Ruggles, Entomologist.

J. P. Wentling, Forester in charge of Utilization.

Paul J. Anderson, Field Pathologist.

F. P. Gulliver, Geographer.

Caroline Rumbold, Physiologist in charge of Tree Medication.

Joseph Shrawder, Chemist.

Roy G. Pierce, Tree Surgeon.

Keller E. Rockey, Forester in charge of Demonstration Work.

(1)

Ill

FOKEWOED.

The rapid spread of the chestnut tree bark disease in New York,
Pennsylvania, New Jersey and other States and the almost incalcul-
able damage wrought by this parasitic fungus within a comparatively
few years awakened general interest in the subject throughout the
United States. The blight has already invaded at least a dozen
States, causing the destruction of many thousands of valuable chest-
nut trees, and is still spreading in various directions. The prevailing
opinion of some optimists that Nature would eventually introduce a
parasite that would speedily eradicate the chestnut tree bark disease
fungus and restore the equilibrium that apparently was missing, has
proven a futile hope.

The extensive scientific researches now in progress by both
National and State authorities give promise of a solution of the
trouble, but thus far no permanent and thoroughly eflficient remedy
has been discovered for the cure and treatment of the diseased trees.
Those in charge of laboratory work have entire confidence in the
belief that ultimately their efforts towards combating and eradicating
the disease will be successful.

The accompanying description of or reference to books, etc., relat-
ing to the chestnut tree blight fungus is of particular interest and
value at this time, as it includes a list of many books, bulletins and
manuscripts which contain a vast fund of practical and helpful in-
formation.

Prof. E. Kent Beattie, Forest Pathologist of the United States De-
partment of Agriculture, is deserving of gratitude for his careful and
thorough work in the compilation of the valuable bibliography which
is hereto appended.

O. D. S.

(3)

H-

w

(4)

Bibliography
of the

Chestnut Bark Disease

By R. KENT BEATTIB, Forest Pathologist,
U. S. Department of Agriculture.

(5)

(6)

THE CHESTNUT TREE BLIGHT.

Center of a spot infection located in Benzinger township. Elk County
Peniisj-lvania . The blight probably started on this tree in 1908.

A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE CHESTNUT BARK

DISEASE.*

Prepared for the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission.

By R. KENT BEATTIE, Forest Pathologist,

BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT

OF AGRICULTURE.

REVISED TO JANUARY 1, 191J,.

The rapid rise and spread of the Chestnut Bark Disease since its
introduction into the United States from the Orient, probably in
the nineties, has called ii; to the attention both of scientific men
and the general public. The result of this almost universal notice
in the eastern states has been the production of numerous articles
written from many different standpoints.

It has been the effort in this bibliography to cite all the writings
of a scientific or semi-scientific nature up to the end of the year
1918, Avith the aim of making a good working bibliography of the
disease. Since it is manifestly impossible for any such bibliography
to be complete, the author will be glad to have called to his attention
any omissions or any corrections in the citations here given.

Because of their importance in the chestnut bark disease problem,
references to Endothia radicalis and Endothia gyrosa as well as
those to Endothia, parasitica have been included in this bibliography.

The page numbers appearing in parenthesis at the bottom of the
pages refer to those used in the publication of the bibliography as a
part of the "Final Report of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight
Commission,'- (1914), and should be used in making citations.

1. Anderson, H. W. Notes on the genus Endothia. Phytopa-

thology. Vol. 3, p. 67. February, 1913.

2. Anderson, P. J. Field Investigations in Pathology. Report

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1
to December 31, 1912. p. 42-45. 1913.

3. Anderson, Paul J. Wind Dissemination of the Chestnut

Blight Organism. Phytopathology. Vol. 3, p. 68. Feb-
ruary, 1913.

4. Anderson, Paul J. and Anderson, H. W. The Chestnut Blight

Fungus and a Related Saprophyte. Phytopathology.
Vol. 2, p. 204-210. October, 1912.

♦Published by permission of the Secretary of Agriculture.

(97)

8

5. Anderson, Paul J. and Anderson, H. W. Endothia virginiana.

Phytopathology. Vol 2, p. 261-262. December, 1912.

6. Anderson, P. J. and Anderson, H. W. The Chestnut Blight

Fungus and a Eelated Saprophyte. Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin No. 4. Oc-
tober, 1913.
6a. Anonymous. Disease of Chestnut. Forestry Quarterly. Vol.
4, p. 320. December,, 1906. : .

7. Anonymous. A Disease of the Chestnut. Woodland and Road-

side. Vol. 6, p. 31^32. June, 1907.

8. Anonymous. A New Tree Disease. The Outlook. Vol. 88,

p. 621. 21 March, 1908.

9. Anonymous. Destruction of Chestnut Forests. The Minne-

sota Forester. Vol 1, No. 3, p. 31-32. March, 1908.

10. Anonymous. Are Chestnut Trees Doomed? American Fruits.

Vol. 8, p. 5. June, 19,08.

11. Anonymous. Editorial. Engineering News. Vol. 60, p. 339.

24 September, 1908.

12. Anonymous. Fighting the Chestnut Blight. Country Life

in America. Vol. 15, p. 88. November, 1908.

13. Anonymous. Hope for the Chestnut. Country Life in

America. Vol. 15, p. 171. December, 1908.

14. Anonymous. News and Notes. Mycologia. Vol. 1, p. 136.

January, 1909.

15. Anonymous. [The Chestnut Tree Canker.] Torreya. Vol.

9, p. 214-215. October, 1909.

16. Anonymous. The New Pine and Chestnut Diseases. Wood-

land and Roadside. Vol. 8, p. 41. November, 1909.

17. Anonymous. Tree Diseases. Fourth Annual Report Commis-

sioner of Forestry, Rhode Island, p. 9-10. 1910.

18. Anonymous. [No title.] Torreya. Vol. 10, p. 99. April, 1910.

19. Anonymous. News and Notes. Mycologia. Vol. 2, p. 251-

252. September, 1910.

20. Anonymous. American Forestry Association, Thirtieth An-

nual Meeting. American Forestry. Vol. 17, p. 99-111.
February, 1911.

21. Anonymous. Editorial Appreciation of Piennsylvania's For-

est Management. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 3. Febru-
ary, 1911.

22. Anonymous. The Doom of the Chestnut Tree. Harper's

Weekly. Vol. 55, p. 15. February, 1911.
.23. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight. Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 9,

p. 353. June, 1911.
24. Anonymous. Pennsylvania Forestry Legislation in 1911.

Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 50-51. August, 1911.

(98)

9

25. Anonymous. [Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Commission.]

Forest Quarterly. Vol. 9, p. 518-519. September, 1911.

26. Anonymous. The Chestnut Bark Disease. American For-

estry. Vol. 17, p. 693. November, 1911.

27. Anonymous. Narrative of the Annual Meeting of the Penn-

sylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol, 13,
p. 83. December, 1911.

28. Anonymous. [Work of the Pennsylvania Commission.] For-

estry Quarterly. Vol. 9, p. 651. December, 1911.

29. Anonymous. An Attemi>t to Suppress the Chestnut Blight.

Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests,
Eleventh Report, p. 5, 19-20. 1912.

30. Anonymous. Quaker City News. American Lumberman. No.

1912. p. 68. 6 January, 1912.

31. Anonymous. Proposed Forestry Legislative Procedure in the

Empire State. American Lumberman. No. 1913. p. 65.
13 January, 1912.

32. Anonymous. Chestnut Bark Disease. Report Maryland

State Board of Forestry, 1910-1911. p. 6, 8, 18-21, 30.
January, 191*2

33. Anonymous. Chestnut Tree Blight Conference. Forest

Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 97, 98. February, 1912.
31. Anonymous. The Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Ameri-
can Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 136. February, 1912.

35. Anonymous. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Scientific Ameri-

can. Vol. 106, p. 105. 3 February, 1912.

36. Anonymous. Fighting the Chestnut Tree Blight. American

Lumberman. No. 1917. p. 43. 10 February, 1912.

37. Anonymous. Resolutions passed at the Conference Called by

the Governor of Pennsylvania at Harrisburg, February
20 and 21, for the consideration of the measures to be
taken to control the chestnut tree bark disease. Report
Second Annual Meeting, Northern Nut Growers' Asso-
ciation, December 14 and 15, 1911. p. 122-123. 1912.

38. Anonymous. Conference of States on Chestnut Tree Blight.

The Southern Lumberman. Vol. 65, No. 857, p. 33-34.
24 February, 1912.

39. Anonymous. Conference on the Chestnut Tree Blight. Ameri-

can Lumberman. No. 1919. p. 73-75. 24 February,
1912.

40. Anonymous.. Harrisburg Chestnut Blight Conference. The

Southern Lumberman. Vol. 65, No. 859, p. 24. 9 March,

1912.^;

41. Anonymous. Cure for the Chestnut Blight. The Southern

Lumberman. Vol 65, No. 859, p. 46. 9 March, 1912.

(99)

10

42. Anonymous. The Chestnut Tree Blight. Scientific American.

Vol. 106, p. 241-242. 16 March, 1912.

43. Anonymous. Three Enemies of Forests. The Southern Lum-

berman. Vol. 65, No. 860, p. 37. 16 March, 1912.

44. Anonymous. At Work in Pennsylvania. The Southern Lum-

berman. Vol. 65, No. 862, p. 27. 30 March, 1912.

45. Anonymous. Forestry Problems of Three Sections. Ameri-

can Lumberman. No. 1926, p. 51. 13 April, 1912.

46. Anonymous. Lumbermen and Forestry. American Forestry.

Vol. 18, p. 285. April, 1912.

47. Anonymous. Kesolutions of Chestnut Tree Blight Conference.

Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 116. April, 1912.

48. Anonymous. The Chestnut Trees Must Go. The Guide to

Nature. Vol. 4, p. 395-397. April, 1912.

49. Anonymous. [The Harrisburg Conference.] Phytopathology.

Vol. 2, p. 91. April, 1912.

50. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight in Massachusetts. Country

Life in America. Vol. 22, p. 92, 94. 1 May, 1912.

51. Anonymous. [News Notes and Map.] American Forestry.

Vol. 18, p. 335, 342, 347, 350. May, 1912.

52. Anonymous. The Chestnut Trees Going. American Forestry.

Vol. 19, p. 457. July, 1912.

53. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight Warning. American Forestry,

Vol. 18, p. 473. July, 1912.

54. Anonymous. Boy Scouts Aiding. American Forestry, Vol.

18, p, 541. August, 1912.

55. Anonymous. Boy Scouts to Save Trees. American Forestry.

Vol. 18, p. 542. August, 1912.

56. Anonymous. Narrative of Bushkill Meeting of the Pennsyl-

vania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p.
146. August, 1912,

57. Anonymous. The Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference,

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p.
158. August, 1912.

58. Anonymous. Progress in Fighting the Chestnut Disease.

Hardwood Record. Vol. 34, p. 23. 10 September, 1912.

59. Anonymous. News Note. Science. N. S. Vol, 36, p. 429. 4

October, 1912.

60. Anonymous. The Scientific and Operative Staff of the Penn-

sylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Science.
N. S. Vol. 36, p. 512. 18 October, 1912.
60a. Anonymous. The Chestnut Blight Disease. Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin 1. October,
1912,

(IGO)

11

61. Anonymous. Treatment of Ornamental Chestnut Trees Af-
fected with the Blight Disease. Pennsylvania Chestnut
Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin 2. October, 1912.

^2. Anonymous. [News Note.] American Forestry. Vol. 18, p.
811. December, 1912.

63. Anonymous. Chestnut Blight. Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 10,

p. 742-743. December, 1912.

64. Anonymous. News and Notes. Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 10,

p. 772. December, 1912.

65. Anonymous. Phytopathological Notes. Vol. 2, p. 274. De-

cember, 1912.

66. Anonymous. Narrative of the Annual Meeting of the Penn-

sylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13,
p. 178-179. December, 1912.

67. Anonymous. Pennsylvania Forestry Association. American

Forestry. Vol. 19, p. 21. January, 1913.

68. Anonymous. State News, Pennsylvania. American Forestry.

Vol. 19, p. 55. January, 1913.

69. Anonymous. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Journal of the

Board of Agriculture (Loudon). Vol. 19, p. 848-850.
January, 1913.

70. Anonymous. Governor Tener on Forestry. Forest Leaves.

Vol. 14, p. 2. February, 1913.

71. Anonymous. Chestnut Tree Blight Bulletins. Forest Leaves.'

Vol. 14, p. 11-12. February, 1913.

72. Anonymous. News and Notes. Mycologia. Vol. 5, p. 90,

March, 1913.

73. Anonymous. Use of Second Growth Chestnut. Lumber World

Eeview. Vol. 24, No. 5, p. 24. 10 March, 1913.

74. Anonymous. Chestnut Tree Blight. American Lumberman.

No. 1974, p. 58-59. 15 March, 1913.

75. Anonymous. A Remedy for Chestnut Blight. Hardwood

Eecord. Vol. 35, p. 27. 25 March, 1913.

76. Anonymous. Fighting the Chestnut Bark Disease. The Sci-

entific American. Vol. 108, p. 314. 5 April, 1913.

77. Anonymous. [No title.] Arnold Arboretum, Harvard Uni-

versity. Bulletin of Popular Information. No. 47. 26
June, 1913.

78. Anonymous. Using Blight-Killed Chestnut. American For-

estry. Vol. 19, p. 449. July, 1913.

79. Anonymous. The Chestnut Tree. Methods and Specifications

for the Utilization of Blighted Chestnut. Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin 6. 15 Au-
gust, 1913.

(101)

^ 12

80. Anonymous. Pennsylvania's Fight Against the Chestnut

Blight is Suspended. American Forestry. Voll. 19, p.
556-558. August, 1913.

81. Anonymous. [No title.] Mycologia. Vol. 5, p. 280. Sep-

tember, 1913.

82. Anonymous. [No title.] The Outlook, p. 237. 27 September,

1913.

83. Anonymous. [No title.] Forestry Quarterly. Vol. 11, p. 449-

450. September, 1913.

84. Anonymous. Eeport of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree

Blight Commission. Forest Leaves. Vol. 14, p. 77. Oc-
tober, 1913.
84a. Anonymous. Conquering the Chestnut Tree Blight. The St.
Louis Lumberman. Vol. 52, No. 11, p. 59. 1 December,
1913.

85. Ashe, W. W. Chestnut in Tennessee. State Geological Sur-

vey, Tennessee. Bulletin 10, part By p. 11. January,
1911.

86. Baker, H. P. The Chestnut Blight and the Practice of For-

estry in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight
Conference Eeport. p. 137-143. 1912.

87. Baker, Hugh P. Blight Commission Instruction. American

Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 267. 1912.

88. Barney, Chas. T. Eeport of the Executive Committee. New

York Zoological Society. Tenth Annual Eeport. 1905. p.
40. January, 1906.

89. Barsali, Egidio. Aggiunte alia Flora Livornese. BuUetino

della Societa Botanico Italiano. Anno 1904, p. 204. Mag-
giore, 1904.

90. Benson, W. M. Chestnut Blight and Its Possible Eemedy.

Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Eeport. p.
229-233. 1912.

91. Berlese, A. N. and Peglion, V. Vicromiceti Toscani. Nuovo

Giornale Botanico Italiano. Vol. 24, fasc. 3, p. 122.
Luglio 1892. . '

91a, Berlese, A. N., Saccardo, P. A., and Eoumebuere, C. Contribu-
tions ad Floram Mycologicam Lusitaniae, Eevue
Mycologique. Vol. 11. p. 117-124. July, 1889.

92. Besley, F. W. Mutual Forest Interests of Pennsylvania and

Maryland. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 39-41. June, 1912.

93. Bessey, Charles E. Fighting the Chestnut Blight. Science.

N. S. Vol. 37, p, 417. 14 March, 1913.

94. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 33.

June, 1911.

(102)

13

95. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 49

August, 1911.
90. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 113.

April, 1912.

97. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 130.

June, 1912.

98. B[irkinbine], J. Editorial. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 145.

August, 1912.

99. B[itler], F. L. The Chestnut Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol.

12, p. 148-150. August, 1910.

100. B[itler], F. L. Narrative of the State College Meeting of the

Pennsylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol.

13, p. 34-37. June, 1911.

101. Bizzozero, Giacomo. Flora Veneta Crittogamica. Part 1. I

Funghi. p. 220-221. 1885.

102. Briosi, Farneti. A Proposito di una nota dell Dott. Lionello

Petri sulla Moria dei castagni (Mai dell' Inchiostro).
Atti della Keale Accademia dei Lincei. Series V. Kendi-
conti Classe de scienzi fisiche, matematiche e naturali.
Vol. 22, ser. 5, 1 sem. fasc. 6, p. 361-366. 16 marzo, 1913.

103. Britton, W. E. Twelth Report of the State Entomologist of

Connecticut. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Sta-
tion. Report 12, p. 220. 1913.

104. Brooks, A. B. Fungi That Injure Bark. West Virginia Geo-

logical Survey. Vol. 5, p. 78-79. 1911.

105. Brown, Nelson C. Municipal Forestry. American Forestry.

Vol. 18, p. 781. December, 1912.

106. Brown, Nelson C. Making the Most of a Bad Situation. The

Country Gentleman. Vol. 78, p. 289-290. 22 February,
1913.
106a. Brunaud, Paul. Contributions a la Flore Mj^cologique de
rOuest. Annales des Sciences naturelles. La Rochelle.
p. 108. 1884.

107. Carleton, M. A. Fighting the Chestnut Tree Blight Disease

in Pennsylvania. American Fruit and Nut Journal. Vol.
6, p. 78-79. September-October, 1912.

108. Carleton, Mark Alfred. Report of the General Manager for

the latter half of the year, 1912. Report Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to December
31, 1912. p. 11-18. 1913.
108a. Cesati and De Notaris. Schema Sferiaceae Italianae. p. 207,
240. 1863.

109. Clinton, G, P. Chestnut Bark Disease, Diaporthe para&ifica

Murrill. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station
Report 1907. p. 345-346. May, 1908.

(103)

14

Clinton, G. P. The Chestnut Bark Disease, Diaporthe parasi-
tica Murrill. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Sta-
tion Keport 1908. p. 879-890. July, 1909.

Clinton, G. P. Chestnut Bark Disease. Connecticut Agricul-
tural Experiment Station Eeport 1909-1910. p. 716-717,
725. 1910.

Clinton, G. P. Some Facts and Theories Concerning Chestnut
Blight. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Ee-
port. p. 75-83. 1912.

Clinton, G. P. Chestnut Blight Fungus and Its Allies. Phyto-
pathology. Vol. 2, p. 265-269. December, 1912.

Clinton, G. P. The Kelationships of the Chestnut Blight
Fungus. Science. N. S. Vol. 36, p. 907-914. 27 December
1912.

Clinton, G. P. Chestnut Bark Disease. Connecticut Agricul-
tural Experiment Station Keport 1912. p, 359-453. May,
1913.

Clinton, G. P. and Spring, S. N. Chestnut Blight Situation
in Connecticut. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Confer-
ence Eeport. p. 154-157. 1912.

Collins, J. Franklin. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Proceed-
ings Second Annual Meeting Northern Nut Growers'
Association, December 14 and 15, 1911. p. 37-49. 1912.

Collins, J. Franklin. Treatment of Orchard and Ornamental
Trees. American Lumberman. No. 1920. p. 34. 2
March, 1912.

Collins, J. Franklin. Some Observations on Experiments with
the Chestnut Bark Disease. Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p.
97. April, 1912.

Collins, J. Franklin. Address [on the Chestnut Bark Disease].
Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Eeport. p. 28-
39. 1912.

Collins, J. Franklin. Treatment of Orchard and Ornamental
Trees. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Ee-
port. p. 59-69. 1912.

Collins, J. Franklin. The Chestnut Bark Disease on Chestnut
Fruits. Science. N. S. Vol. 38, p. 857-858. 12 Decem-
ber, 1913.

Conklin, Eobert S. The Chestnut Blight. Eeport Pennsyl-
vania Department of Forestry 1908-1909. p. 59-61. 1910.

Cook, A. J. The Chestnut Tree Blight. Monthly Bulletin
State Commissioner of Horticulture, California. Vol. 1,
p., 314. June, 1912.

Cook, Melville Thurston and Taubenhaus, J. J. The Eelation
of Parasitic Fungi to the Contents of the Cells of the

(104)

15

Host Plants (I. The Toxicity of Tannin). Delaware
Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 91, p. 21. 1
February, 1931.
12G. Cook, Mel. T. Diseases of Shade and Forest Trees. The Plant-
ing and Care of Shade Trees. Forest Park Keservation
Commission of New Jersey, p. 101-103. 1912.

127. Copp, G. G. A Disease Which Threatens the American Chest-

nut Tree. Scientific American. Vol. 95, p. 451. 15 De-
cember, 1906.

128. Craig, John. Nut Culture from the Northern Standpoint. The

Western New York Horticultural Society. Proceedings
of the fifty-seventh annual meeting, p. 100. 24-26 Janu-
ary, 1912.

129. Craighead, F, C. Insects Contributing to the Control of the

Chestnut Blight Disease. Science. Vol. 36, p. 825. 13
December, 1912.

130. Currey, Frederick. Sphaeria (Diatrype) radicalis Fr. in

Synopsis of the Fructification of the Compound
Sphaeriae of the Hookerian Herbarium. The Transac-
tions of the Linnaean Society of Lontlon. Vol. 22, p.
272. 1859.
130a. Curtis, M. A. Geological and Natural History Survey of
North Carolina. Botany, p. 143. 1867.

131. Davis, Nelson F. Chestnut Culture. Pennsylvania Chestnut

Blight Conference Report, p. 83-99. 1912.

132. Davis, William T. Note on the Chestnut Fungus. Proceed-

ings Staten Island Association of Arts and Sciences.
Vol. 2, B. p. 128-129. July, 1908— February, 1909.

133. Deam, Charles C. Trees of Indiana. State Board of Forestry,

Indiana, eleventh annual report. 1911. p. 171. 1912.

134. Deming, W. C. Beginning with Nuts. The Northern Nut

Growers' Association. Circular No. 4. April, 1913.

135. Deming, W. C. and Huson, Calvin J. (Correspondence on the

Chestnut Tree Bark Disease). Eeport Second annual
meeting, Northern Nut Growers' Association, December
14 and 15, 1911. p. 119-121. 1912.
135a. De Notaris. Sferiaceae Italianae. Vol. 1, p. 9. 1863.

136. Detwiler, S. B. The Chestnut Blight. Third Annual Meeting

Montgomery County Horticultural Association, Norris-
town. Pa. September, 1911.

137. Detwiler, S. B. — The Progress of the Fight Against the Chest-

nut Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 88-89. December,
1911.

138. Detwiler, S. B. The Pennsylvania Programme. Pennsylvania

Chestnut Blight Conference Report, p. 129-136. 1912.

(105)

16

139. Detwiler, S. B. The Spread of the Chestnut Blight. The Coun-

try Gentleman. Vol. 77, p. 6. 9 March, 1912.

140. Detwiler, S. B. The War on the Chestnut Blight. The Coun-

try Gentleman. Vol. 77, p. 8, 27. 30 March, 1912.

140a. Detwiler, S. B. The Control of the Chestnut Tree Bark Dis-
ease. Proceedings of the Society of American Foresters.
Vol. 7, p. 131. 4 April, 1912.

140b. Detwiler, S. B. The Farmer and the Chestnut Blight. An-
nual Eeport Bradford County Farmers' Annual Insti-
tute, Towanda, Pa. 22 May, 1912.

141. Detwiler, S. B. Some Benefits of the Chestnut Blight. Forest

Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 162-165. October, 1912.

142. Detwiler, Samuel B. Eeport of the General Superintendent.

Eeport Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission,
July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 19-34. 1913.

143. Detwiler, S. B. The Problem of the Chestnut Blight. The

New York Lumber Trade Journal. Vol. 54, No. 643. p.
34. 1 April, 1913.

14'.. Detwiler, S. B. The Chestnut Blight and its Eemedy. Penn-
sylvania Arbor Day Manual, 1913. p. 170-179. 1913.

144a. Detwiler, S. B. Fighting the Chestnut Blight. Pennsylvania
Chestnut Tree Blight Commission. Unnumbered Circu-
lar. No date.

145. Detwiler, S. B. and Besley, F. W. The Pennsylvania Chestnut

Blight Conference. 1912.

146. Ducomet, M. V. Ccntritiition a Y etude des maladies du

chataignier. Association Francaise pour I'Avancement
des Sciences. Comptes Eendus 40 Session, 1911. p. 502-
506. 1912.

147. Duggar, B. M. Fungous Diseases of Plants, p. 281-282. 1909.

148. Editors, Country Life in America. Wanted: A Eemedy. Coun-

try Life in America. Vol. 15, p. 45. November, 1908.

149. Elliott, Simon B. The Important Timber Trees of the United

States, p. 290. 1912.

150. Ellis, J. B. and Everhart, B. M. Endothia gyrosa (Schw.) The

North American Pyrenomycetes. p. 552. pi. 36. 1892.
156a. Elwes, Henry John and Henry, Augustine. The Trees of Great
Britain and Ireland. Vol. 4, p. 858. 1909.

151. Fairchild, David. The Discovery of the Chestnut Bark Dis-

ease in China. Science N. S. Vol. 38, p. 297-299. 29
August, 1913.

152. Farlow, W. G. [No title]. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight

Conference Eeport. p. 70-75. 1912.

153. Farlow, W. G. The Fungus of the Chestnut Tree Blight. Sci-

ence. N. S. Vol. 35, p. 717-722. 10 May, 1912.

(106)

17

154. Fisher, A. K. [No title]. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Con-

ference Eeport. p. 108-104. 1912.

155. Francis, Thomas E. Field Work of the Chestnut Tree Blight

Commission. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference
Eeport. p. 238-235. 1912.

156. Fries, Elia. Eclogae Fungorum. Linnaea. Bd. 5, p. 541. 1830.

157. Fries,Elia. Elenchus Fungorum. Vol. 2, p. 73. 1828.

157a. Fries,Elia. Endothia. Summa Vegetabilium Scandinaviae.
Vol. 2, p. 385. 1849.

158. Frothingham, Earl H. Second-Growth Hardwoods in Con-

necticut. United States Department of Agiiculture For-
est Service. Bulletin 96. p. 44, 56. 1912.
158a. Fuckel. Endothia Lj'rosum (Tul.) Symbolae Mycologicae.
p. 226. 1869.

159. Fullerton, Hal B. and FuUerton, Edith Loring. Fatal Chest-

nut Disease. Long Island Agronomist. Vol. 1, No. 24,
p. 1-2. 17 June, 1908.

160. Fullerton, Hal B. and Fullerton, Edith Loring. Doomed

Chestnut Trees. Long Island Agronomist. Vol. 2, No. 1,
p. 7-8. 29 July, 1908.

161. Fullerton, Hal B. and Fullerton, Edith Loring. Japanese,

Spanish and native Chestnuts. Long Island Agron-
omist. Vol. 2, No. 9, p. 2. 18 November, 1908.

162. Fullerton, Hal B. and Fullerton, Edith Loring. Chestnut

Blight. Long Island Agronomist. Vol. 3, No. 3, p. 2. 25
August, 1909.

163. Fulton, H. E. Eecent Notes on the Chestnut Bark Disease.

Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Eeport. p.
48-56. 1912.

164. Fulton, H. E. Chestnut Bark Disease. Penn State Farmer.

Vol. 5, p. 151-155. May, 1912.

165. Fulton, H. E. The Chestnut Tree Bark Disease. North Caro-

lina Agricultural Experiment Station. Press Bulletin
No. 26. 10 July, 1913.
165a. Gardner, M. W. Longevity of pycnospores of the chestnut
blight fungus in soil. Abstracts of papers to be given
at the fifth annual meeting of the American Phy to-
pathological Society in the State Capitol, Atlanta, Ga.,
December 30, 1913, to January 2, 1914. p. 14. 16 De-
cember, 1913.

166. Gaskill, Alfred. Eeport of the Forester. The Chestnut Blight.

Third Annual Eeport Forest Park Eeservation Commis-
sion of New Jersey, p. 45-46. 1907.
2

(107)

18

167. Gaskill, Alfred. Eeport of the Forester. The Chestnut Blight

or Canker. Fourth Annual Eeport Forest Park Kes-
ervation Commission of New Jersey, p. 33. 1908.

168. Gaskill, Alfred. Chestnut Canker. Fifth Annual Eeport of

the Forest Park Eeservation Commission of New Jer-
sey, p. 48. 1909.

169. Gaskill, Alfred. Chestnut Blight. Sixth Annual Eeport of

the Forest Park Eeservation Commission of New Jersey,
p. 69. 1910.

170. Gaskill, Alfred. Chestnut Blight. Seventh Annual Eeport of

the Forest Park Eeservation Commission of New Jersey,
p. 86-87! 1911.

171. Gaskill, Alfred. Eeport of the State Forester — Chestnut

Blight. Eighth Annual Eeport Forest Park Eeserva-
tion Commission of New Jersey, p. 75-76. 1913.

172. Gaylord, F. A. Forestry and Forest Eesources in New York.

New York State Conservation Commission. Division of
Lands and Forests. Bulletin 1, p. 25. 1912.

173. Giddings, N. J. The Chestnut Bark Disease. West Virginia

Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 137.
March, 1912.

174. Gravatt, Flippo. The Chestnut Bark Disease in Virginia.

The Southern Planter. Vol. 7, No. 3, p. 295. March,
1913.

175. Graves, Arthur H. The Chestnut Bark Disease in Massa-

chusetts, Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 99. April, 1912.

176. Griggs, Eobert F. Observations on the geographical composi-

tion of the Sugar Grove Flora. Bulletin Torrey Botani-
cal Club. Vol. 40, p. 488. September, 1913.

177. Gulliver, F. P. Eeport of the Geographer. Eeport Pennsyl-

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De-
cember 31, 1912. p. 52-53. 1913.

178. Halsted, Byron D. Fungi of Native and Shade Trees. Fourth

Annual Eeport of the Forest Park Eeservation Commis-
sion of New Jersey, p. 108. 1908.

179. Hawley, Ealph C. and Hawes, Austin F. Forestry in New

England, p. 62, 94, 118-122, 341, 355, 372. 1912.

180. Heald, F. D. Pathological Investigations. Eeport Pennsyl-

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1. to De-
cember 31, 1912. p. 40-42. 1913.

181. Heald, F. D. The Dissemination of Fungi Causing Disease.

Transactions of the American Microscopical Society.
Vol. 32, p. 5-30. January, 1913.

(108)

19

182. Heald, F. D. The Symptoms of Chestnut Tree Blight and a

Brief Description of the Fungus. Pennsylvania Chest-
nut Tree Blight Commission. Bulletin No. 5. 15 May,
1913.

183. Heald, F. D. A Method of Determining in Analytic Work

Whether Colonies of the Chestnut Blight Fungus Origi-
nate from Pycnospores or Ascospores. Mycologia. Vol.
5, p. 274-277.' September, 1913.

184. Heald, F. D. and Gardner, M. W. Preliminary Note on the

Relative Prevalence of Pycnospores and Ascospores of
the Chestnut Blight Fungus During the Winter.
Science N. S. Vol. 37, p. 916-917. June, 1913.

184a. Heald, F. D. and Gardner, M. W. The Relative Prevalence of
Pycnospores and Ascospores of the Chestnut Blight Fun-
gus During the Winter. Phytopathology. Vol. 3, p.
296-305. December, 1913.

184b. Heald, F. D., Gardner, M. W. and Studhalter, R. A. Wind
Dissemination of ascospores of the chestnut blight fun-
gus. Abstracts of papers to be given at the fifth annual
meeting of the American Phytopathological Society in
the State Capitol, Atlanta, Ga., December 30, 1913, to
January 2, 1914. p. 13-14. 16 December, 1913.

185. Heald, F. D. and Studhalter, R. A. Preliminary Note on Birds

as Carriers of the Chestnut Blight Fungus. Science N.
S. Vol. 38, p. 278-280. 22 August, 1913.

186. Henr}'-, E. La Maladie des Chataigniers aux Etats-Unis et en

Europe. Revue des Eaux et Forets. Vol. 48, p. 422-432.
1909.

187. Henry, E. La Maladie des Chataigniers aux Etats-Unis et en

Europe. Annales de la Science Agronomique. 3 Ser. 4
ann. Tome 1, p. 241-247. 1909.

188. Henry, E. La maladie des Chataigniers aux Etats-Unis et en

Europe. Bulletin des Seances de la Soci6t6 de Sciences
de Nancy. 3 Ser. X. p. 72-82. March-April, 1909.

189. Hicks, Isaac, and Son. Trees for Long Island, p. 14. 1908.

190. Hirst, E. C. New Hampshire Forest Commission Biennial

Report, 1911-1912. p. 63-65. November, 1912.
190a. Hitchcock, Edward. A Catalogue of Plants growing without
cultivation in the vicinity of Amherst College, p. 63.
1829.

191. Hitchcock, Edward. Catalogue of Plants Growing Without

Cultivation. Massachusetts Geological Survey. Re-
port on the Geology, Mineralogy, Botany and Zoology of
Massachusetts, p. 647. 1833.

(100)

20

192. Hodson, E. E. Extent and Importance of the Chestnut Bark

Disease. Forest Service. (Unnumbered circular). 21
October, 1908.

193. Hohnel, Fr. v. Fragmente zur Mycologie. Sitzungsberichte

der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaf ten. Mathe-
matisch-Naturwisseuschaftliche Klasse. Vienna. Bd. 118.
Abt. 1. Halbband 2. p. 1479-1481. November, 1909.

194. Hollick, Arthur L. The Chestnut Disease on Staten Island.

Proceedings Staten Island Association of Arts and Sci-
ences. Vol. 2, p. 125-127. July, 1908— February, 1909.

195. Holmes, J. S. The Chestnut Bark Disease which threatens

North Carolina. Proceedings of the Second Annual Con-
vention of the North Carolina Forestry Association at
Ealeigh, N. C, 21 February, 1912. North Carolina Geo-
logical and Economic Survey. Economic Paper No. 25,
p. 12-15. 1912.

196. Holmes, J. S. Scouting for Chestnut Blight in North Caro-

lina. North Carolina Geological and Economic Survey.
Press Bulletin No. 88. 24 October, 1912.

197. Hoover, T. L. [No title]. American Forestry. Vol. 17, p.

693-694. November, 1911.

198. Hoover, T. L. and Detwiler, S. B. Coppice Growth and the

Chestnut Tree Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 102-
103. February, 1912.

199. Hopkins, A. D. [No title]. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight

Conference Eeport. p. 180-184. 1912.

200. Hopkins, A. D. Eelation of Insects to the Death of Chestnut

Trees. American Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 221. April, 1912.

201. Hornor, C. B. A Way Around the Chestnut Blight. House

and Garden. Vol. 16, p. 119. September, 1909.

202. Jordan, W. H. Director's Eeport for 1912. New York (Ge-

neva) Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 356, p.
559. December, 1912.

203. Kittredge, J., Jr. Notes on the Chestnut Bark Disease (Dia-

portJie parasitica Murrill) in Petersham, Massachusetts.
Bulletin of the Harvard Forestry Club. Vol. 2, p. 13-22,
1913.
203a. Lamy, C. E. Sphaeria radicalis. Simples apercu sur les PL
Crypt, et Agam. du Dept. Haute Vienne. Compt. rend,
d. 1. 26 Session Cong. Sciences de France, Limoges. Sep-
tember, 1859, p. 31. 1860.

204. Lindau, G. Endotliia, in Engler und Prantl. Die Natuerlichen

Pflanzenfamilien. 1 Teil. 1 Abteilung. p. 478. Febru-
ary, 1897.

(110)

21

205. M , W. Save your Chestnut Trees, Country Life

in America. Vol. 17, p. 444. February, 1910.

206. Manson, Marsden. Cliestnut Tree Disease. American Fores-

try. Vol. 18. p. 286, April, 1912.

207. Manson, Marsden. The Chestnut Tree Disease. Science. N. S.

vol. 35. p. 269, 270. 16 February, 1912.

208. Marlatt, Charles L. Pests and Parasites. National Geographic

Magazine. Vol. 17, p. 34.3-345. April, 1911.

209. Massee, George. American Chestnut Disease. Diseases of

Cultivated Plants and Trees, p. 210-211. 1910.

210. McCarthy, J. E. Chestnut Tree Blight in Pennsylvania.

American Lumberman. No. 1926, p. 51. 13 April, 1912.

211. Merkel, Herman W. A Deadly Fungus on the American

Chestnut. Tenth Annual Keport New York Zoological
Society, 1905. p. 97-103. January, 1906.

212. Metcalf, Haven. The Immunity of the Japanese Chestnut to

the Bark Disease. United States Department of Agri-
culture, Bureau of Plant Industry. Bulletin 121, part
vi., p. 3-4. 10 February, 1908.
212a. Metcalf, Haven. Bark Disease of the Chestnut. The Nut-
Grower. Vol. 6, No. 7, p. 1-3, 5. February, 1908.

213. Metcalf, Haven. The Bark Disease of the Chestnut. Ameri-

can Fruits. Vol. 8, No. 3, p. 9, 20. March, 1908.

214. Metcalf, Haven. Diseases of Ornamental Trees. United

States Department of Agiiculture Yearbook, 1907. p.
483-494. 27 July, 1908.

215. Metcalf, Haven. The Present Status of the Bark Disease of

the Chestnut . Science, N. S. Vol. 31, p. 239. 11 Febru-
ary, 1910.

216. Metcalf, Haven. Phytopathological Notes. Phytopathology.

Vol. 2, p. 91. April, 1912.

217. Metcalf, Haven. Further Notes on the Chestnut Bark Dis-

ease. Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 97. April, 1912.

218. Metcalf, Haven. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Journal of

Economic Entomology. Vol. 5, p. 222-226. April, 1912.

219. Metcalf, Haven. Phytopathological Notes. Phytopathology.

Vol. 2, p. 128. June, 1912.

220. Metcalf, Haven. Diseases of the Chestnut and Other Trees.

Transactions of the Massachusetts Horticultural So-
ciety. Part 1, p. 69-95. August, 1912.

221. Metcalf, Haven. The Chestnut Bark Disease. United States

Department of Agriculture Yearbook, 1912. p. 363-372.
5 June, 1913.

(Ill)

22

222. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The Present Status

of the Chestnut Bark Disease. United States Depart-
ment of Agriculture. Bureau of Plant Industry. Bul-
letin 141. Part v., p. 45-53. 30 August, 1909.

223. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The Chestnut Bark

Disease. Science. N. S. Vol. 31, p. 748. 13 May, 1910.

224. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. Further Notes on

the Bark Diseases of the Chestnut. Phytopathology.
Vol. 1, p. 106. June, 1911.

225. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The Control of the

Chestnut Bark Disease. United States Department of
Agriculture. Farmers' Bulletin 467. 1911.

226. Metcalf, Haven and Collins, J. Franklin. The present known

Distribution of the Chestnut Bark Disease. Science. N.
S. Vol. 35, p. 420. March, 1912.

227. Mickleborough, John. The Blight on Chestnut Trees. Con-

servation. Vol. 14, p. 585-588. November, 1908.

228. Mickleborough, John. A Eeport on the Chestnut Tree Blight,

the fungus Diaporthe parasitica Murrill. Pennsylvania
Department of Forestry, unnumbered bulletin. May,
1909.

229. Millard, Bailey. The Passing of the Chestnut Tree. Munsey's

Magazine. Vol. 43, p. 758-765. September, 1910.

230. Montague, C. Notice sur les Plantes Cryptogames recemment

decouvertes en France, contenant aussi I'indication pre-
cise des localities de quelques especes les plus rares de
la Flore francaise. Annales des Sciences Naturelles. 2
Ser. Tome 1, p. 295. 1834.

231. Montague, C. Plantes cellulaires exotiques. Cryptogamarum

Guianensium. Annales des Sciences Naturelles. Botani-
. que. 2 Ser. Tome 13, p. 359. 1840.

232. Montague, C. Cryptogamia guyanensis. Annales des Sciences

naturelles. Botanique. 4 Ser. Tome. 3, p. 123-124. 1855.

233. Moon, F. F. Keport on the Highlands of the Hudson Forest

Keservation. Fifteenth annual report of the Forest,
Fish and Game Commissioner of Nevs^ York. p. 226.
1909.

234. Morris, Kobert T. Chestnut Timber Going to Waste. Con-

^ servation. Vol. 15, p. 226. April, 1909.

235. Morris, Kobert T. Notes on Immunity of Chestnuts From the

Bark Disease at Stamford, Connecticut. Proceedings of
the Second Meeting of the Northern Fruit Growers' As-
sociation. 14 December, 1911.

(112)

23

236. Mowry, Jesse B. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Office of the

Commissioner of Forestry of Khode Island. Leaflet No.

6. 10 June, 1911.

237. Murdoch, John, Jr. Chestnut, Its Market in Massachusetts.

Massachusetts State Forester. Unnumbered Bulletin.
1912.

238. Murrill, W. A. A Serious Chestnut Disease. Journal of the

New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 7, p. 143-153. June,
1906.

239. Murrill, W. A. Further Eemarks on a Serious Chestnut Dis-

ease. Journal of the New York Botanical Garden. Vol.

7, p. 203-211. 1906.

240. Murrill, W. A. A New Chestnut Disease. Torreya. Vol. 6,

p. 186-189. September, 1906.

241. Murrill, W. A. The Spread of the Chestnut Disease. Journal

of the New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 9, p. 23-30.
February, 1908.

242. Murrill, W. A. The Chestnut Canker. Torreya. Vol. 8, p.

111-112. May, 1908.

243. Murrill, W. A. Collecting Fungi at Biltmore. Journal of the

New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 9, p. 135-141.
August, 1908.

244. Murrill, W. A. The Passing of the Chestnut Tree. Suburban

Life. Vol. 8, p. 26-27. January, 1909.

245. Murrill, W. A. The Chestnut Canker Convention. Journal of

the New York Botanical Garden. Vol. 13, p. 41-44.
March, 1912.

246. Nash, George V. A Visit to Letchworth Park. Torreya. Vol.

7, p. 212. November, 1907.
246a. Otis, Charles Herbert. Michigan Trees. University of Michi-
gan, University Bulletin. New Series. Vol. 14, No. 16,
p. 95. March,' 1913.

247. Oudemans, C. A. J. A. Eevision des Champignons taut su-

perieurs qu' inferieurs trouves jusqu'a ce jour les Pay-
Bas. Vol. 2, p. 204. Maart, 1897.

248. Oudemans, C. A. J. A. Eevisio Pyrenomycetum in regno Ba-

'tavorum hucusque detectorum. p. 127. 1884.

249. Pantanelli, E. Sul paratismo di Diaporthe para'sitica Murrill

per il castagno. Atti della Eeale Accademia dei Lincei.
Series V. Eendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, matem-
atiche e naturali. Vol. 20, 1 sem. fasc. 5, p. 366-372.
5 marzo, 1911.

(113)

24 -

250. Pantanelli, E. Su la supposta origine europea del cancro

americano del castagno. Atti della Reale Accademia
del Lincei. Series V. Eendiconti Classe di scifenzi
fisiche, matematich e natural!. Vol. 21. fasc. 12, 2 sem.,
p. 869-875. 15 decembre, 1912.

251. Pearson, R. A. Address as Chairman. Pennsylvania Chestnut

Blight Conference Eeport. p. 19-20. 1912.
251a. Peck, Charles H. Endothia gyrosa. Twenty-fourth Report
of the l^ew York State Museum, p. 99. 1872.

252. Peck, Charles H. Gastanea dentata (Marsh) Borkh. Report

State Botanist New York. Museum Bulletin No. 131, p.
29. 1 July, 1909.

253. Peck, C. H. Valsonectria parasitica (Murrill) Rehm. Report

of the State Botanist of New York. Museum Bulletin
No. 1^0, p. 49. 15 May, 1911.

254. Peck, C. H. Report of the State Botanist of New York, 1910.

Museum Bulletin No. 150, p. 7. 15 May, 1911.

255. Peck, C. H. Report of the State Botanist of New York, 1911.

Museum Bulletin No. 157, p. 7. 1 March, 1912.

256. Peck, C. H. Eeport of the State Botanist of New York. Mu-

seum Bulletin No. 158. p. 51. 1 April, 1912.

257. Peck, C. H. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Report of the State

Botanist of New York. Museum Bulletin No. 167, p. 7. 1
September, 1913.

258. Perry, E. F. [No title]. American Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 204.

March, 1912.

25Sa. Peirce, Harold. (Chestnut Tree Blight.) Main Line Citi-
zens' Association. Unnumbered circular. 1 August, 1910.

258b. Peirce, Harold. The Chestnut Tree Blight. Main Line Citi-
zens' Association. Unnumbered circular. September,
1910.

258c. Peirce, Harold, et al. Chestnut Tree Blight. Main Line Citi-
zens' Association. Unnumbered circular. No date.

259. Petri, L. Eicherche sulla malattia del castagno detta dell'

inchiostro. Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei.
Series V. Rendiconti Classe di scienze fisiche, matem-
atiche e naturali. Vol. 21. 2 sem. fasc. 11, p. 775-781. 1
• decembre, 1912.

260. Petri, L. Ulteriori ricerche sulla malattia del catagno detta

deir inchiostro. Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei.
Series V. Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, mate-
matiche e naturali. Vol. 21, 2 sem. fasc. 12, p. 863-869.
15 decembre, 1912.

(114)

25

201. Petri, L. Considerazioni critiche suUa malattia del castagno
delta dell' iiicliiostro. Atti della Reale Accademia del
Lincei. Series V. Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche,
matematiche e natiirali. Vol, 22, 1 sem. fasc. 7, i). 404-
468. 6 aprile, 1913.

262. Petri, L. Sopra una nuova specie di Endotliia, E. pseudoradi-.
calis. Atti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Series V.
Rendiconti Classe di scienzi fisiche, matematiche e natu-
rali. Vol. 22, 1 sem. fasc. 9, p. 653-058. 1913.

203. Pettis, C. R. Chestnut Bark Disease. Report of the Superin-

tendent of Forests. First Annual Report of the Con-
servation Commission of New York. p. 50. 1912.
203a. Pettis, C. R. Chestnut Bark Disease. Second Annual Report
of the Conservation Commission (New York), 1912. p.
98. 1913.

204. Pierce, Roy G. Report of the Tree Surgeon. Report Pennsyl-

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De-
cember 31, 1912. p. 51. 1913.

205. Pierce, Roy G. Some Problems in the Treatment of Diseased

Chestnut Trees. Report o£ the Proceedings at the Third
Annual Meeting of the Northern Nut Growers Associa-
tion, December 18 and 19, 1912. p. 44-59. 1913.

200. Pierce, Roy G. Treatment of Ornamental or Cultivated Chest-
nut Trees. The American City. Vol. 8, p. 157-159. Feb-
ruary, 1913.

267. Pierce, Roy G. ^f^ing Chestnut Trees. American Forestry.
Vol. 19, p. 248-251. April, 1913.

208. Pierson, Albert H. Wood-Using Industries of Connecticut.

Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin
174, p. 10. January, 1913.

209. Rane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Sixth Annual Re-

port of the State Forester of Massachusetts, p. 58. 1909.

270. Rane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Seventh Annual

Report of the State Forester of Massachusetts, p. 58.
January, 1911.

271. Rane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. State Forester's

Office, Massachusetts. 1911.

272. Rane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Eighth Annual Re-

port of the State Forester of Massachusetts, p. 27-28.
1912.

273. Rane, F. W. The Chestnut Bark Disease. State Forester of

Massachusetts. [Unnumbered Bulletin]. 1912.

(115)

26

274. Rankin, W. Howard. How Further Eesearch May Increase

the Efficiency of the Control of the Chestnut Bark Dis-
ease. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Report,
p. 46-48. 1912.

275. Rankin, W. H. The Chestnut Tree Canker Disease. Phytopath-

ology. Vol. 2, p. 99. April, 1912.

276. Rankin, W. H. Some Field Experiments with the Chestnut

Canker Fungnis. Phytopathology. Vol. 3, p. 73. Febru-
ary, 1913.

277. Record, S. J. Use of Blight-Killed Chestnut. Hardwood

Record. Vol. 34, p. 30-32. 10 September, 1912.

278. Reed, C. A. Nut Growing in the Northern States. Proceed-

ings of the Second Annual Meeting of the Northern Nut
Growers' Association, December 14 and 15, 1911. p. 51,
54. 1912.

279. Reed, C. A. Nut Growing in the Northern States. National

Nurseryman. Vol. 20, p. 134-136. April, 1912.

280. Reed, C. A. A 1912 Review of the Nut Situation in the North.

Report of the Proceedings at ihe Third Annual Meeting
of the Northern JsTut Growers Association, December 18
and 19, 1912. p. 91-93. 1913.

281. Rehm. Ascomycetes exs. Fasc. 39. Annales Mycologici. Vol.

5, p. 210. June, 1907.

282. Riley, Phil N. What Shall We Do About the Chestnut Blight?

Country Life in America. Vol. 20, p. 88, 90, 92, 94. 1
September, 1911.

283. Ridsdale, Percival S. The Chestnut Blight Campaign. Ameri-

can Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 178-180. March, 1912.

284. Rockey, Keller E. Recent Work on the Chestnut Blight. Re-

port of the Proceedings at the Third Annual Meeting of
the Northern Nut Growers' Association, Dec. 18 and
19, 1912. p. 37-59. 1913.

285. Rockey, Keller E. Report of Demonstration Work. Report

Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1
—December 31, 1912. p. 59-61. 1913.

286. Rollins, Montgomery. Help Save the Chestnut Trees. The So-

ciety for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests. [Un-
numbered circular]. [No date].

287. Rothrock, J. T. Report of the General Secretary of the Penn-

sylvania Forestry Association. Forest Leaves. Vol. 12,
p. 181-183. December, 1910.

288. Rudolphi, Fr. Plantarum vel Novarum vel Minus Cognitarum

Descriptiones. Linnaea. Bd. 4, p. 393. 1829.

(116) ,

27

289. Buggies, A. G. Investigations of Insects Associated with the

Chestnut Blight. Beport Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree
Blight Commission, July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 48-
49. 1913.

290. Buggies, A. G. Notes on a Chestnut Tree Insect. Science. N.

S. Vol. 38, p. 8.52. 12 December, 1913.

291. Buhland, W. Untersuchungeu zu einer Morphologic der stroma-

bildene Sphaeriales. Hedwigia. Bd. 39. p. 32-34. 1900.

292. Eumbold, Caroline. A new Becord of a Chestnut Tree Disease

in Mississippi. Science. N. S. Vol. 34, p. 917. December,
1911.

293. Bumbold, Caroline. The Possibility of a Medicinal Bemedy

for Chestnut Blight. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Con-
ference Beport. p. 57-58. 1912.

294. Bumbold, Caroline. Summer and Fall Observations on the

Growth of the Chestnut Bark Disease in Pennsylvania.
Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 100. April, 1912.

295. Bumbold, Caroline. Beport of the Physiologist. Beport Penn-

sylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to
December 31, 1912. p. 45-47. 1913.
295a. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Mycologiae Venetae Speci-
men, p. 146-147. tab. 14, fig. 63-65. 1873.

296. Saccardo, P. A. Fungi Gallici. Michelia Commentarium My-

cologicum. Vol. 2, p. 59. 25 April, 1880.
296a. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Fungi gallici. ser. IV.
Michelia Commentarium Mycologicum. Vol. 2, p. 583.
1882.

297. Saccardo, P. A. Fungi Gallici. Michelia Commentarium My-

cologicum. Vol. 2, p. 596. 1 December, 1882.
297a. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Sylloge Fungorum. Vol.

1, p. 601. 1882.
297b. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia. Genera Pyrenomyceten schematlce

delineata, tab. 6, fig. 6. November, 1883.
297c. Saccardo, P. A. Florula Mycologica Lusitanica. Boletim da

Sociebade Broteriana. Vol. 11, p. 18. 118. 1892-1893.
297d. Saccardo, P. A. Endothia gyrosa. Sylloge Fungorum. Vol.

19. p. 647. 1910.

298. Sargent, Winthrop. Beport of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree

Blight Commission, July 1 to December 31, 1912. 1913.

299. Schaeffer, Nathan C. Autumn Arbor Day. Forest Leaves.

Vol. 13, p. 162. October, 1912.

300. Schock, Oliver D. Fighting the Chestnut Tree Blight. Ameri-

can Forestry. Vol. 18, p. 575. September, 1912.

301. Schock, Oliver D. Chestnut Cultivation. The Forecast. Vol.

4, p. 213-217. November, 1912.

(117)

28

302. Schock, Oliver D. The Blight in Pennsylvania. American

Forestry. Vol. 19, p. 962-966. December, 1913.
302a. Schweinitz, Liidovici Davidis de. Synopsis Fungorum in

America Boreali media degentium. 15 April, 1831.
302b. Schweintz, Ludovici Davidis de. Synopsis Fungorum Caro-

linae Superioris. p. 3. No. date.

303. Selby, A. D. Brief Handbook of the Diseases of Ohio, Ohio

Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 214. p. 387
1910.

304. Selby, A. D. Dressings for Pruning Wounds of Trees. Ohio

Agricultural Experiment Station, Circular 126. 27
May, 1912.

305. Shear, C. L. The Chestnut Bark Fungus, Diaporthe parasitica.

Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 88-89. April, 1912.

306. Shear, C. L. The Chestnut Blight Fungus. Phytopathology.

Vol. 2, p. 211-212. October, 1912.

307. Shear, C. L. The Chestnut Bark Fungus. Centralblatt ftir

Bakteriologie, Parasitenkunde und Infektionskrank-
heiten. II Abt. Bd. 35, p. 546. 1912.

308. Shear, C. L. Endotliia radicalis (Schw.). Phytopathology.

Vol. 3, p. 61. February, 1913.
308a. Shear, C. L. The type of Sphaeria radicalis Schw. Phyto-
pathology. Vol. 3, p. 191-192. June, 1913.

309. Shear, C. L. and Stevens, Neil E. Cultural Characters of the

Chestnut-Blight Fungus and itS Near Eelatives. United
States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant In-
dustry. Circular 131. 5 July, 1913.

310. Shear, C. L. and Stevens, Neil E. The Chestnut-Blight Para-

site (Endothia parasitica) from China. Science. N. S.
Vol. 38, p. 295-297. 29 August, 1913.

311. Shrawder, Joseph. Keport of the Chemist. Eeport Pennsyl-

vania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, July 1 to De-
cember 31, 1912. p. 49-50. 1913.

312. S , H. Hope for the Chestnut Tree. Country Life in

America. Vol. 24, p. 60. June, 1913.

313. Smith, J. Kussell. The Menace of the Chestnut Blight. Out-

ing, vol. 61, p. 76-83. October, 1912.

314. Smith, J. Russell. The Chestnut Blight and Constructive Con-

servation. Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference
Eeport. p. 144-149. 1912.

315. Sober, Colonel C. K. Discussion. Eeport of the Proceedings

of the Third Annual Meeting of the Northern Nut Grow-
ers' Association, December 18 and 19, 1912. p. 52-53.
1913.

(118)

29

315a. Sowerby, James Sphaeria fluens. Coloured fibres of Eng-
lish fungi or mushrooms. Supplement, plate 420 (a part
of plate 438). 1814.

316. Spaulding, Perley. Notes Upon Tree Diseases in the Eastern

States. Phytopathology. Vol. 2, p. 93. April, 1912.

317. Spaulding, Perley. Notes Upon Tree Diseases in the Eastern

States. Mycologia. Vol. 4, p. 148-151. May, 1912.
317a. Sprengel, C. Peziza gyrosa. Linnaeus' Systema Vegetabilium.
Vol. 4, p. 515. 1827.

318. Sterling, E. A. The Chestnut Bark Disease. Engineering

News. Vol. 60, p. 332-333. 24 September, 1908.

319. Sterling, E. A. Are We to Lose Our Chestnut Forests?

Country Life in America. Vol. 15, p. 44-45. November,
1908.

320. Stevens, F. L. and Hall, J. G. Bark Disease of the Chestnut.

Diseases of Economic Plants, p. 436-438. 1910.

321. Stewart, F. C. Chestnut Canker. New York (Geneva) Agri-

cultural Experiment Station. Eeport 1910. p. 219. 16
January, 1911.

322. Stewart, F. C. Pointed Paragraphs on Plant Pathology. The

Western New York Horticultural Society. Proceedings
of the Fifty-seventh Annual Meeting, p. 109. 24-26 Jan-
uary, 1912.

323. Stewart, F. C. Can the Chestnut Bark Disease be Controlled?

Pennsylvania Chestnut Blight Conference Eeport. p,
40-45. 1912.

324. Stoddard, E. M. The Chestnut Tree Blight. The Connecticut

Farmer. Vol. 41. No. 25. p. 1-2. 24 June, 1911.

325. Stoddard, E. M. and Moss, A. E. The Chestnut Bark Disease.

Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin
178. September, 1913.

326. Stone, G. E. Keport of the Botanist. Massachusetts Agricul-

tural Experiment Station. Twenty-third annual Report,
p. 76. January, 1911.

327. Stone, G. E. Diseases More or Less Common During the Year.

Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station. Twen-
tj^-fourth Annual Report, p. 7. 1912.
327a. Studhalter, R. A. Insects as carriers of the chestnut blight
fungus. Abstracts of papers to be given at the fifth an-
nual meeting of the American Phytopathological Society
in the State Capitol, Atlanta Ga., December 30, 1913,
to January 2, 1914. p. 14-15. 16 December, 1913.

(119)

30

328. Surface, H. A. The Chestnut Blight or Bark Disease (Dia-

porthe parasitica Murrill). Bulletin Pennsylvania De-
partment of Agriculture, Division of Zoology. Vol. 2,
No. 6, p. 236.

329. Sykes, W. C. Lumbermen and Forestry. American Forestry.

Vol. 18. p. 271. April, 1912.

330. Tener, John K. Call to Order and Address of Welcome to

Delegates and Visiting Friends at the Pennsylvania
Chestnut Blight Coliference. Pennsylvania Chestnut
Blight Conference Keport. p. 15-18. 1912.

331. Tener, John K. Opening Address at Chestnut Tree Blight

Conference. Forest Leaves. Vol. 13, p. 116. April, 1912.

332. Thom, De Courcy W. More About the Blight. Conservation.

Vol. 15, p. 112. February, 1909.
332a. Thorne, Charles E. Chestnut Bark Disease. Thirty-second

Annual Eeport Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station.

Bulletin 263. July, 1913.
332b. Thuemen, Felix von. Endothia gyrosum Fuck. f. Castaneae

vescae. No. 769. Mycotheca universalis, p. 12. 1879.

333. Traverso, J. B. Flora Italica Cryptogamia. Pars. 1. Fungi.

Pyrenomyceta. p. 180-182. 15 ottobre, 1906.
333a. Tulasne, Ludovicus-Renatus et Tulasne, Carolus. Melogramma
gyrosum. Selecta fungorum carpologia. Vol. 2, p. 87-
89. 1863.

334. Van Kennen, Geo. E., Fleming, James W., and Moore, John

D. First Annual Eeport of the Conservation Commis-
sion New York. 1911. p. 10. 1912.

335. Vincenz, Freihernn v. Cesati. Die Pflanzenwelt im Gebiete

zwischen dem Tessin, dem Po, der Sesia und den Alpen.
Linnaea. Bd. 16. p. 236. 1863.

336. Von Schrenk, Hermann and Spaulding, Perley. Diseases of

Deciduous Forest Trees. United States Department of
Agriculture. Bureau of Plant Industry. Bulletin 149. p.
22. 30 July, 1909.

337. Walton, R. C. The relation of temperature to the expulsion of

ascospores of Endothia parasitica. Abstracts of papers
to be given at the fifth annual meeting of the American
Phytopathological Society in the State Capitol, Atlanta,
Ga., December 30, 1913, to January 2, 1914. p. 14. 16
December, 1913.

338. Wells, H. E. A Report on Scout Work on the North Bench

of Bald Eagle Mountain, between Sylvan Dell and Wil-
liamsport, Lycoming County, Pennsylvania. Pennsyl-
vania Chestnut Blight Conference Report, p. 235-241.
1912.

(120)

31

Weiitling", J. P. Keport of Forester in Charge of Utilization.
Keport Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission,
July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 54 59. 1913.

Whitnall, C. B. The Blight on Chestnut Trees. Conservation.
Vol. 15, p. 112. February, 1909.

Williams, Henry Smith. Our Doomed Chestnut Trees. Hearst's
Magazine. Vol. 22, No. 2, p. 102-103. August, 1912.

Williams, I. C. The New Chestnut Bark Disease. Science.
N. S. Vol. 34, p. 397-400. 29 September, 1911.

Williams, I. C. Additional Facts About the Chestnut Blight.
Science. N. S. Vol. 34, p. 704-705, 24 November, 1911.

Williams, I. C. The Silvicultural Effect of the Chestnut Blight.
Eeport Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission,
July 1 to December 31, 1912. p. 61-63. 1913.

Wilson, James. Studies in Forest Pathology. Keport of the
Secretary. United States Department of Agriculture.
Yearbook 1910. p. 55. 1911.

Wilson, James. Chestnut Tree Blight. Letter from the Sec-
retary of Agriculture transmitting in response to Senate
Eesolution of April 30, 1912, information relative to the
study and investigation of the so-called Chestnut Tree
Blight. 62d Congress, 2d Session. Senate document No.
653. 9 May, 1912.

Winter, Georg. Die Pilze. Kabenhorst's Kryptogamen —
Flora von Deutschland, Oesterreich und der Schweiz.
Bd. 1. Abt. 2. p. 798, 803. 1887.

W[irt], G. H, The Chestnut Blight. Forest Leaves. Vol.12,
p. 188-189. December, 1910.

Woods, A. F. The Wastes of the Farm. United States De-
partment of Agriculture. Yearbook, 1908. p. 211. 12
July, 1909.

Besley, F. W. Insect and Fungus Disease. The Forests of
Prince George County. Maryland State Board of For-
estry, p. 35-36. 1913.

Besley, F. W. Chestnut Bark Disease. Keport Maryland State
Board of Forestry, 1912-1913. p. 39-40. 1913.

B[irkinbiue], J. [No title]. Forest Leaves, vol. 14. p. 59.
i^ugust, 1913.

Brooks, A. B. Chestnut Blight and its Control in West Vir-
ginia. West Virginia State Crop Pest Commission.
Bui. 2. p. 12-16. September, -1913.

Cook, Mel. T. Some Diseases of Nursery Stock. New Jersey
Agricultural Experiment Station. Circular 35. 1913.*

-. U I

(121)

32

355. Halsted, Byrou D. Forest Fungi. Report of the Botari

Twenty-eighth annual Report New Jersey Agriculti
Experiment Station, p. 382. 1908.

356. Murrill, W. A. Occurrence of the Chestnut Canker. MycolO;

vol. 2. p. 251. 1910.

357. Record, S. J. Utilizing Blight Killed Chestnut Timber. L

ber World Review. 10 December, 1912.

358. Williams, Irvin C. Diseases of our Forest Trees, with spe

reference to Chestnut Blight. Forest Leaves, vol.
p. 57. August, 1913.

(The total number of references in this bibliography is 399.)

9745 *
4 6 6 8 X

'?'

(122)

PSU flrcli'. i)<-

V

A^0DDH3?^Jl^a

WERT

BOOKBINDING

Grantville, Pa.

MAY-IUNE 1995