Skip to main content

Full text of "The publications of the Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission, 1911-13"

See other formats 


Google 


This  is  a  digital  copy  of  a  book  that  was  preserved  for  generations  on  library  shelves  before  it  was  carefully  scanned  by  Google  as  part  of  a  project 

to  make  the  world's  books  discoverable  online. 

It  has  survived  long  enough  for  the  copyright  to  expire  and  the  book  to  enter  the  public  domain.  A  public  domain  book  is  one  that  was  never  subject 

to  copyright  or  whose  legal  copyright  term  has  expired.  Whether  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  may  vary  country  to  country.  Public  domain  books 

are  our  gateways  to  the  past,  representing  a  wealth  of  history,  culture  and  knowledge  that's  often  difficult  to  discover. 

Marks,  notations  and  other  maiginalia  present  in  the  original  volume  will  appear  in  this  file  -  a  reminder  of  this  book's  long  journey  from  the 

publisher  to  a  library  and  finally  to  you. 

Usage  guidelines 

Google  is  proud  to  partner  with  libraries  to  digitize  public  domain  materials  and  make  them  widely  accessible.  Public  domain  books  belong  to  the 
public  and  we  are  merely  their  custodians.  Nevertheless,  this  work  is  expensive,  so  in  order  to  keep  providing  tliis  resource,  we  liave  taken  steps  to 
prevent  abuse  by  commercial  parties,  including  placing  technical  restrictions  on  automated  querying. 
We  also  ask  that  you: 

+  Make  non-commercial  use  of  the  files  We  designed  Google  Book  Search  for  use  by  individuals,  and  we  request  that  you  use  these  files  for 
personal,  non-commercial  purposes. 

+  Refrain  fivm  automated  querying  Do  not  send  automated  queries  of  any  sort  to  Google's  system:  If  you  are  conducting  research  on  machine 
translation,  optical  character  recognition  or  other  areas  where  access  to  a  large  amount  of  text  is  helpful,  please  contact  us.  We  encourage  the 
use  of  public  domain  materials  for  these  purposes  and  may  be  able  to  help. 

+  Maintain  attributionTht  GoogXt  "watermark"  you  see  on  each  file  is  essential  for  in  forming  people  about  this  project  and  helping  them  find 
additional  materials  through  Google  Book  Search.  Please  do  not  remove  it. 

+  Keep  it  legal  Whatever  your  use,  remember  that  you  are  responsible  for  ensuring  that  what  you  are  doing  is  legal.  Do  not  assume  that  just 
because  we  believe  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  the  United  States,  that  the  work  is  also  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  other 
countries.  Whether  a  book  is  still  in  copyright  varies  from  country  to  country,  and  we  can't  offer  guidance  on  whether  any  specific  use  of 
any  specific  book  is  allowed.  Please  do  not  assume  that  a  book's  appearance  in  Google  Book  Search  means  it  can  be  used  in  any  manner 
anywhere  in  the  world.  Copyright  infringement  liabili^  can  be  quite  severe. 

About  Google  Book  Search 

Google's  mission  is  to  organize  the  world's  information  and  to  make  it  universally  accessible  and  useful.   Google  Book  Search  helps  readers 
discover  the  world's  books  while  helping  authors  and  publishers  reach  new  audiences.  You  can  search  through  the  full  text  of  this  book  on  the  web 

at|http: //books  .google  .com/I 


^1      I 

V.  f 


COMMONWEALTH  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 


THE  PUBLICATIONS 


OF  TIIK 


Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree 

Blight  Commission 


1911-1913 


HAUTUSBT'UG,  PA.: 
AVM.    STANKKY    RAY,    STATE    PRINTER 

1915 


\ 


CONTENTS 


1.  Tlie  Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Blight  Conference  Proceedings.   Harrisburg, 
February  20th  and  2l8t,  1912.    Pp.  254. 

2.  T\ie  Chestnut  Blight  Disease.  Means  of  IndentWcation,  Remedies  Sug- 
gested, and  Need  of  Co-Operatlon  to  Control  and  Eradicate  the  Blight. 
Bulletin  No.  1.     October,  1912.     Pp.  10. 

3.  Treatment  of  Ornamental  Chestnut  Trees  Affected  ^  ILl  the  Blight  Disease. 

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

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

Fungus,  by  Paul  J.  Anderson  and  D.  C.  Baboock.     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.  Andor- 

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. 

9.  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  Decembor  15.  1913.     (Un- 
numbered).    Pp.  122. 

'.  11.  Bibliography  of  the  Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Fungus,   by  R.  Kent   Beattie. 
(Separate).     Pp.  32. 

s 


:r 


K    : 


t^' 


292193 


I  'A  \ 


THE  CONFERENCE 


Called  by  the  Governor  of  Pennsylvania  to  G>nsider 

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 


HcpoHtd  by  GUILBERT  &  LEWIS 

5/9  Land  Title  Building 

Philadelphia,   Pa, 


HARRISBURG: 
O    E     AUGHINBAUQH,  PRINTER  TO  THE  STATE  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 

1912. 


FOREWORD. 


The  following  report  of  the  proceedings  of  the  llarrisburg 
Cliestniit  Blight  Conference  is  distributed  with  the  compliments 
and  best  wishes  of  the  State  of  Pennsylvania.  The  numerous 
papers  and  the  discussions  thereon  coiitain  many  new  and 
valuable  ideas.  It  is  believed  that  the  ultimate  worth  of  the 
Conference  will  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 
liave  hopes  that  information  may  be  found  in  the  following  pages 
which  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  Tork,   Chairman* 


PennsylTanla , 


lUiylud, 


>.     BecrttarUiB, 


(8) 


(4) 


OFFICIAL  CALL  FOR  CONFERENCE. 


Tbe  Official  Invitation  for  the  Chestnut  Tree  Bark 
Disease  Conference,  Issued  by  the  Governor 

of  Pennsylvania. 


t^ifn4JJim0/f^!yi^}'ty4y'M'/rr4>.  ,>%y^- 


/ 


(5) 


(«) 


Map  of  Pennsylvania  Showing  Infected  Zones  and  Percentage. 

1.  Bucks,  Montgomery,  Chester,  Delaware  and  IMiihidelnhia  counties,  80  per 
cent  2,  Pike,  Monroe,  Carbon,  Northampton,  Lehigh,  Berks,  Lancaster  and 
York  counties,  50  per  cent.  3.  Wayne,  Lackawanna,  Wyoming,  Luzerne,  Co- 
lombia, Montour,  Northumberland,  Union,  Snyder,  Juniata,  Perry,  Dauphin, 
Scbaylkill.  Lebanon,  Cumberland,  Franklin  and  Adams  counties,  15  per  cent. 
4.  From  the  western  boundary  of  these  counties  to  the  quarantine  line  indicated  on 
the  map,  the  infected  trees  are  estimated  at  1  to  5  per  cent. 


GOMMOMWKALTH  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 

THE  PENNSYLVANIA 
CHESTNUT  TREE  BLIGHT  COMMISSION. 

The  call  issued  by  the  Governor,  iu  which  be  urged  the  im- 
portance and  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  live  citizens 
for  the  purpose  of  thoroughly  investigating  the  Chestnut  Tree 
Bark  Disease  which  is  rapidly  destroying  the  chestnut  trees  of 
the  Commonwealth.  Thja  Act  placed  an  appropriation  of  |275,- 
OUU  at  the  disposal  of  the  Commission  for  the  investigation  and 
scientific  study  of  the  problem,  and  moi'e  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  was  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  work  of  the  pathological  staff,  will,  among 
other  matters,  be  presented  for  discussion  to  a  Convention  calleil 
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  will  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  urg(Ml." 

(7) 


(8) 


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 

THEQAPITOL 

Chamber  of  the  House  of  Representativea 

HARRISBURG       -        PENNSYLVANIA 


Jkn  O'fH^^  ^^'  registration  and  Information  will  be  opened  in  one  of  the 
^^^•.roonns  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  OP  THE  CONFERENCE. 

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

ing Friends,  by  the  Honorable  John  K.  Tener,  Governor  of 
Pennsylvania. 

Electioti  of  Permanent  Chairman  for  the  Conference, 

Election  of  Two  Secretaries. 

Designation  of  Official  Reporters. 

Appointment  of  a  Committee  on  Resolutions. 

2.  Responses  to  the  Governor's  Address  by  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  be  Controlled?'' 

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

(U) 


12 

5.  ^'JIoio  Further  Research  May  Increase  the  Epciency  of  the 
Control  of  the  (Jhcstnvt  Bark  Disease/' 

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

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

I?y  Prof.  H.  E.  Fulton,  Division  of  Patliology,  Pennsylva- 
nia State  College. 

7.  ^^The  Possihility  of  a  Medicinal  Remedy  for  Chestnut  BlUfhtJ' 

Hy  Dr.  Caroline  Runibold,  in  clifirge  of  the  Pennsylvania 
Chestnut  Tree  Rliglit  Commission's  Laboratory. 

8.  '^Treatvicnt  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  tliis  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  tlie  methods  of  con- 
trolling them  will  be  shown. 

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

2.  General  Discussion. 


«« 


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

EKADICATION  AIS'D  CONTROL  OF  THE  CHESTNUT 

BARK  DISEASE. 

1.  "?7ie  Pennsylvania  Programmed' 

By  Samuel  B.  Detwiler,  Executive  Oflicer  of  the  PcMiusyl- 
vania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Commission. 

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

sented, on  the  i>resent  extent  of  the  hark  disease  and  esti- 
mate of  the  present  and  possihle  future  loss. 

3.  ^^Vhestnut  liUyht  and  the  Future  of  our  Forests/' 

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

4.  ^'Chestnut  lUifflit  and  Constructive  (■onservfition."' 

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

5.  Open  Discussion  of  the  Problems  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 

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

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

and  Allied  or  Identical  Fungi,"  by  Prof.  W.  G.  Farlow, 

of  Harvard  University;  read  by  Prof.  G.  P.  Clinton. 

2.  A  paper  on  the  "Eelation  of  Insects  to  the  Chestnut  Bark 

Disease,"  by  Dr.  A.  D.  Hopkins,  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 

Eemedy,"  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 

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

5.  A  paper  entitled  "A  Koport  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  ORDER  AND  ADDRESS  OF  WELCOME  TO  DEL- 
EGATES AND  VISITING  FRIENDS,  BY  TUE  HON. 
JOHN  K.  TENER,  GOVERNOR  OP 

PENNSYLVANIA. 


GOVEKNOK  TENER:  Gentlemen,  the  meeting  will  please 
1k5  in  order. 

I^t  me  say  at  the  outset,  speaking  for  this  Commonwealth  and 
less  for  myself  personally,  that  we  are  gratified  indeed  at  the 
splendid  representation  *liere  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) 


10 

you  may  Ik;  able  to  arrive  at  before  yoii  leave  us.  We  kuow  that 
in  conventions,  we  cannot  exercise  any  governmental  function; 
3'et  we  want  this  to  be  something  more  tiian  a  "resolve  to  re- 
solve" meeting,  and  we  liope  that  something  really  tangible  will 
result  from  it.  1  have  noted  just  a  few  things  which,  as  I 
stated  before,  I  would  like  to  have  you  consider  in  your  delibera- 
tions : 

This  Conference  lias  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  knowai. 

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  nmke  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  w^ild  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  fortv  millions  of  dollars. 

The  best  chestnut  in  the  W'orld  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 

tbat  regiou,  but  is  steadily  tending  in  that  direction.  This  tree 
is  also  of  great  value  in  Ohio  and  the  remaining  Atlantic  Sea- 
board States,  and  by  reason  of  the  all  too  prevalent  forest  de- 
struction 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  larpe  proportions  and  great  value.  Every 
part  of  the  tree  is  valuable  for  making  tannic  acid,  used  in  the 
tanning  industry.  Telegrapli  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  \*ill  be  .the  only  means  of  checking  this  disease,  if  it  can 
he  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  view,  that  concerted  action  will  be  immediately  inaugurated, 
and  no  effort  left  unemployed  that  might  produce  desirable  re- 
snlts.  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  w^ell  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  work  that  the  Legislature,  at  its  last  session 
enacted  a  bill  creating  a  commission  and  defining  the  duties  of 
that  commission,  as  w^ell  as  appropriated  an  adequate  amount  to 
^arry  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  witJi  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  the  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  ifs  work, 
and  for  the  propef  recording  of  your  deliberations  to-day. 

MR.  HAROLD  PEIRCE:  I  w^ould  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.  Besley,  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.  Pearson  is  unaiiimously  elected 
chairman^  and  Messrs.  Besley  and  Detwiler  are  unanimously 
elected  secretaries.  I  would  suggest,  gentlemen,,  for  the  com- 
plete organization  for  the  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: 
1  appreciate  that  it  is  a  great  honor  to  be  asked  to  preside  over 
your  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  the  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  ^^'e  have  been  looking  forward  to  this  time 
as  an  epoch-making  event. 


20 

It  has  been  suggested  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  spirit  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,  what  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  you  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- 
ings, 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. 

The  Chair  will  now  recognize  Mr.  Samuel  T.  Bodine,  of  the 
Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Commission. 

•  MR.  BODINE :  In  order  that  the  deliberations  of  this  Con- 
ference may  be  properly  summed  up,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  move 
that  a  Committee  on  Resolutions  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  Btates  inter- 
ested in  the  wild  chestnut,  and  represented  at  this  Conference. 
The  motion  was  seconded. 

MB.  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  the  appoiutuieut 
of  a  Committee  on  Resolutions. 

The  motion  was  put  and  unanimously  carried. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :  The  Chair  will  Imj  pleased  to  receive,  if 
the  opportunity  offers,  suggestions  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 
Connecticnt  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  tbat  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  CH  AIRMAN :  The  District  of  Columbia.  This  in- 
cludes the  Federal  Department  of  Agriculture.  Is  Professor 
Collins  in  the  room? 

PROFESSOR  J.  FRANKLIN  COLLINS,  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  CHAIRMAN :  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  CHAIRMAN:    Georgia.     (No  response). 
Illinois.  (No  response). 
Indiana.     (No  response). 
Maryland. 

MR.  J.  B.  S.  NORTON :  Mr.  Chairman,  I  had  supposed  that 
Professor  Patterson  would  speak  for  our  Stale,  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  ques- 
tion to  us  than  to  sections  where  the  territory  is  entirely  covered 
with  the  disease. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :     Massachusetts.     ' 

PROFESSOR  F.  W.  RANE,  State  Forester:  Mr.  Chairman, 
I  was  sent  out  here  by  Governor  Foss.  I  had  an  opportunity 
to  have  a  conference  vrith  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,  Imt 
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  w^e  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 
i^ill  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 
i«  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  public  interest  and  welfare. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :     New  York. 

GEORGE  G.  ATWOOD:  Mr.  Chairman,  the  State  of  New 
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  work  under  the  advice  of  the  botanists 
of  our  stations,  and  we  hope  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.     (N.o  response). 
Ohio. 

DR.  AUGUSTINE  D.  SELB Y :  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  Avould  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  will  realize  the  advantages  of  such  a  Confer- 


25 

ence  and  such  work.    I  assure  you  that  whatever  efforts  are  made 

by  this  Conference,  or  whatever  conclusions  are  reached  by  this 

Conference  and  whatever  efforts  are  made  by  other  States,  these 

will  be  supplemented  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  wTought  incredible  damages;  that  it  will  continue 

its  aggressiveness  through  a  long  period  may  or  may  not  prove 

to  be  true.    If  it  prove  to  be  true,  then  our  difficulties  are  very, 

very  great.    If  the  conditions  prove  more  favorable,  our  forests 

may  be  preserved. 

THE  CHAIRMAN:     Rhode  Island. 

JESSE  B.  MOWRY,  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  inspection  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 :     Ten  nessee.     ( No  response ) . 

Vermont.     (No  response). 

Virginia. 

MR.  GEORGE  R.  KEEZELL :  Mr.  Cliairman,  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  tliese  delibera- 
tions. So  far  as  Virginia  is  concerned,  we  are  at  tin's  time  per- 
haps fortunate  in  the  fact  that,  if  we  Iiave  this  drea<l  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  may  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.  I  have  no  doubt  provisions  will 
be  made  by  the  Commonwealth  to  fight  the  ravages  of  this  dis- 
ease. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :    West  Virginia. 

DR.  N.  J.  GIDDINGS:  Mr.  Chairman  and  Ladies  and 
Gentlemen:  I  can  assure  you  that  the  people  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  Uotaniist 

DB.  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  partici- 
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- 
portation 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  connecteil 
with  chestnuts.  I  find  that  this  will  probably  be  the  only  means 
to  restrict  the  disease  to  the  States  in  which  it  is  found  at  the 
present  moment,  and  1  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  shall  be  extremelv 
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  Ilamlet  left  out,  when  we  fail  to  hear  from  the  great 
State  of  Pennsylvania;  but,  as  usual,  this  State  asserts  her 
modesty,  and  has  insisted  on  being  excused  for  the  present  The 
Chair  will  assure  you  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  that  all  resolutions  be  handed  in  at  the  desk, 
without  taking  the  time  of  the  Conference  to  read  them,  to  be 
referred  directly  to  the  Committee  on  Resolutions.  This,  how- 
ever, may  be  overruled  if  the  delegates  desire  to  take  the  matter 
into  their  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  position,  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  present  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 


V 


'    \ 


Hf     E     X     I      C     O 


No.  35.  Distribution  of  the  chestnut  bark  disease.  Horizontal  lines  indicate 
approximate  distribution  of  uninfected  chestnut;  dots  indicate  isolated  infected 
•pots;  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. 


No.  1.     Branoh  of  a  chestnut 


p  IfsioD  (in  smooth  bark. 


a  slartrti  around 


No.  4.     SurFace  section  of  cheslnu 
:hrea(lB  have  been  produrt^. 


29 

Sanday.  I  have  come  here  without  many  of  his  ideas.  However, 
he  has  some  slides  which  are  to  be  shown,  and  perhaps  I  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  the  Bronx  Zoological  Park,  in  New 
York  city.  He  noticed  that  chestnut  trees  were  dying  in  greater 
numbers  than  seemed  to  be  warranted  by  any  previous  knowledge 
of  the  dying  of  chestnuts.  Hejooked  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  tlie  fungus  which 
caused  the  trouble,  Diaporthe  parasiticay  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  tliat  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  years  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  then — certain  investigations,  both  in  the 
lalx)ratory  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.  My  point  here  is  to  give  you  a  general  idea  of  the 
disease,  what  it  looks  like,  how  it  affects  a  tree,  and  things  of 
that  sort, — a  general  discussion  of  the  topic.  This  review  will 
be,  will  necessarily  liave  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.  This,  to  begin  with,  shows  a  diseased  spot,  as 
we  will  find  it  on  the  smooth  bark  of  a  branch  of  a  chestnut  tree, 
a  branch  which  is  perhaps  anywhere  irom  three  to  six  inches 
in  diameter.     The  disease  is  a  fungous  disease,  and  starts  its 


30 

growtli  from  a  very  miscroscopic,  one-eelled  body,  which  we  know 
as  a  spore.  By  some  means  the  spore  reaches  a  place  in  tlie 
bark  of  the' chestnut,  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  you  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  w^e  know  as  the  fruiting  pustules  of  this  fungus.  Tlieso 
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 


31 

spots,  have  pushed  i>iit  a  little  mass,  a  threadlike  mass,  iu  much 
the  same  way  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  oflf  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  which  represents  a  branch,  from  which 
the  surface  of  the  bark  has  been  shaved  in  the  same  manner  as 
in  the  last  view,  but  here  we  have  tlie  cliaracteristic  fanlike  mott- 
ling, which  we  often  get  in  the  bark  beneath  the  surface.  Son^e 
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  tliose  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  sliould  have  expected  to  find  about  the  same 
condition  of  affairs  there;  but  here  we  have  shown  only'tlie  half 
circle  of  the  more  or  less  circular  area  of  the  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  the  disease  started  about  at  this  point  (indicating).  One 
of  these  cracks  probably  represents  the  position  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,  by  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  has  withstood  the 
weather  for  some  time. 

No.  11.  This  is  another  view  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 


;  the  bark  of  a  dJBeaaed 


No.  8.     A  Inrge  a 


No.  0.  BHrk  remoTed  from  over  a  cnnkpr, 
the  fan-slinije<l  sprend  of  tlip  .vcUowisli  fiina"ii 
the  cirpulnr  mnrfiii  of  the  (iiBfnsp. — I'liut'iym 


■ 

able  to  make  out  the  individual  little  spotM  whirli  go  to  make 
up  oue  of  these  common  masses.  The  winter  stage  of  this  dis- 
ease produces  its  spores  down  in  the  bark;  that  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  extrude<l  in  the 
form  of  these  threads,  while  the  winter  spores  are  not  extruded  in 
the  same  way,  although  they  are  extruded  later. 

No.  12.  This  view  represents  a  diseased  spot  on  an  orchard 
tree.  The  diseased  spot  is  less  than  three  years  old,  but  more 
than  two  years  old,  according  to  the  records  which  w^ere  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 
finally  we  have  simply  the  bare  trunk  or  a  bare  branch  left. 
Sometimes  this  bark  breaks  away  in  less  than  two  years,  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  the  smaller  twigs,  we  sometimes 
liad  an  enlargement  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  than  a  half  inch  in  diameter.  It  some- 
times occurs  in  larger  branches,  but  as  a  rule  we  get  it  quite  com- 
monly 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- 
r  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  much  for  the  disease  as  it  appejirs  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- 


h 


u 

moil  point,  down  the  trunk,  and  around  the  trunk.  When 
these  portions  of  the  disease  which  go  around  the  trunk  meet  on 
the  other  side,  we  liave  a  branch  or  a  trunk  which  we  speak  of  as 
girdled.  Now  a  girdled  branch,  or  a  girdknl  twig,  or  a  girdled 
trunk,  means  the  early  death  of  all  parts  of  the  tree  lx*yond  the 
girdled  area.  If  it  is  a  twig,  it  means  the  death  of  the  twig  Ikj- 
yond  the  girdled  area.  If  it  is  the  trunk,  it  means  the* death  of 
the  whole  tree  at  once,  or  soon  after  the  girdling  is  completed; 
not  immediately,  as  a  rule.  Now  1  want  to  call  your  attention  to 
some  of  the  obvious  effects  of  this  girdling  upon  the  foliage  of 
the  tree.  AVhen  you  are  looking  for  this  disease  during  the  sea- 
son of  foliage,  it  can  be  deti^cted  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  wiint 
to  call  vour  attention  to  now%  To  be  sure,  vou  must  bear  in  mind 
that  the  coloration  of  the  leaves  to  which  I  am  going  to  call  your 
attention  can  at  times  be  brought  about  by  other  things  than  this 
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  show^n  here  a  somewhat 
normal  chestnut  leaf.  It  is  a  little  broader  than  the  normal  leaf; 
this  is  intended  to  represent  not,  perhaps,  a  perfectly  typical 
chestnut  leaf,  because  we  have  on  the  margin  a  little  paler  green 
than  in  the  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,  perhjips,  the  le.af 
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  particuhar  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 


No.  10.     Bark  showini  luismlcs  of  a  (iark  c 


No.  12.     Diseaseil  clips'niit  tr.'e  H-OHiui  shrrtidwl  h-irk  nfto 
taction. — I'hotograph  b/i  Prof.  CoIIiim 


dispn^f.    At  tli@  Ufc  side 


35 

with  that  stem  is  down  here  w)iiu?wlu»n»,  down  Inflow  all  these 
dead  leaves.  That  applies  to  looking  for  the  disetise  on  tlie  tree, 
or  on  the  sprouts  or  suckers  wiiich  may  come  up  from  the  hase 

of  a  tree. 

No.  17.  In  very  young  nursery  st4>ek,  or  the  y(Hing  sprouts 
which  come  up  from  a  tree,  or  the  vigorous  growth  on  a  tree,  on 
the  twigs  at  least,  we  often  get  tliis  type  of  the  disease  at  it«  vei*y 
l)egiuning.  This  is  often  more  l)rilliantly  colored  than  shown  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  wiiich  shows  the  withered  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  wn'ther  after  awhile;  that  is,  they 
iTumph*  up  after  a  time  and  that  crumpling  is  shown,  to  a  certain 
extent,  in  this  view;  and  also  the  yello\v  color. 

No.  19.  A  little  later  we  have  the  deeper  cohu*.  This  shows 
the  browner  coloration  around  the  margin  of  the  leaves.  At  the 
left  we  have  two  leaves  which  show  merely  the  beginning  of  the 
discoloratjion.  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 
brancli  which  was  shown  three  views  back,  this  showing  a  larger 
view  of  the  same  thing. 

No.  21.  Finally  the  leaf  assumes  a  somewhat  brownish  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 
bow  the  disease  looks  in  the  landscape.  Here  is  a  large  tree 
which,  owing  to  lack  of  special  instruction  as  to  the  coloring  of 
H,  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  brown  color.  The  coloring,  however, 
was  not  noticed  in  time  to  give  instructions  in  regard  to  it.  This 
^iew,  however,  is 'shown  primarily  to  represent  the  type  of  tree 


36 

which  is  so  valuable  in  the  large  estates  in  the  various  States. 
This  particular  tree  had  a  circumference,  above  the  settee  which 
is  tliere,  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  with  this,  but  through  some 
slip  somewhere  they  were  not  forwarded  to  be  shown. 

No.  23.  Now  we  have  a  view  in  which  the  disease  has  a  start 
up  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  view  taken  on  Long  Island,  which  shows 
the  effect  on  the  tree ;  a  tree  which  has  been  nearly  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 
commonly  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  tlian  as  a  result  of  the  disease. 

No.  25.  Another  tree,  also  on  Long  Island,  in  which  all  but 
two  of  the  lower  limbs  on  tlie  left  hand  side  have  been  killed  by 
girdling  from  the  disease,  and  now  we  have  remaining  only  those 
two,  or  perhaps  tliree,  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  whicli  come  up  around  the  base,  and  the 
sprouts  which  come  from  the  trunk  at  various  places  up  in  the 
crown. 

No.  27.  Tliere  you  have  another  type  of  (he  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 


^'o-  I'i.  A  green-housp  tlipstntit  tree  in  pat     tlirc-  luontlis  nfr. 


Ho,  17.     Early  eflfecl  of  tlii 


ii[)on  jouD^  i?h<>stiiilt  aiiR 


nod  Dursery  stock. 


'd 


3 


Xo.    IS.     Characteristic    witherecl    and    y;>llr\visli    haves    nn    cliostuut    twig    infected 

,'with  the  disease. 


1 


37 

of  the  disease,  diseased  spots,  on  the  truuk  of  the  tree.  That  is 
the  way  the  tree  looks  wheu  this  disease  attacks  the  truuk.  That 
tree  is  practically  dead.  The  lower  part,  represeuted  by  tlie 
lower  half  of  that  i)icture,  shows  some  life. 

Ko.  21).  lu  the  course  of  two  or  three  years  we  liud  that  the 
hark  begins  to  peel  from  the  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  off.  The  one  which  is  so 
ju'ominent  is  probably  the  lirst  in  the  group  wliich  was  attacked 
an<i  killed,  and  the  bark  lias  practically  disappeared  from  the 
tree,  so  far  as  this  view  shows. 

No.  3t).  Now  to  consid(*r  the  more  general  appearance  of  the 
woodland,  here  is  a  view  taken  in  Forest  Park,  Brooklyn,  along 
the  Boulevard.  This  is  one  of  the  nmin  boulevards  through  the 
Park,  and  any  of  you  will  have  no  difficulty  in  picking  out  the 
chestnuts.  They  are  the  most  conspicu(ms  objects.  Not  one  of 
the  gret^n  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.  Tliis  view  was  taken  in  South-western  Vir- 
ginia, in  Bedford  county.  The  more  prominent  trees  tliere  have 
lost  the  bark  entirely.  Those  trees,  I  understand,  have  been  cut 
out  and  no  longer  exist. 

No.  33.  If  you  w^ant  to  see  wimt  the  cliestnut  disease  can  do 
in  a  very  nearly  pure  stand  of  chestnuts,  there  is  a  view  which 
will  show  it.  That  was  taken  in  Forest  Park  (ui  Long  Island. 
Any  of  yon  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  chestnnts  at  all.  This  one  up  here,  I  believe,  is  a  chestnut 
and  there  are  some  oaks  there  at  tlie  left. 

No.  35.  I  Tvant  to  call  your  attention  to  the  distribution  of  tlie 
chestnut,  and,  to  do  so,  I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  tliis  map. 


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  com- 
piled 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,  up  through  this  region  and  up  into  the 
northwestern  edge  of  Androscoggin  county  in  Maine.  In  New 
Ilampsliire  and  Vermont  there  are  only  a  few  cliestnuts  present, 
as  compared  with  the  region  farther  south.  Down  through  here 
(pointing  to  the  southern  Alleghauies),  we  have  our  great  chest- 
nut stand,  particularly  on  the  western  slope  of  the  mountains. 
In  the  State  of  Connecticut  a  bulletin  which  was  published  with- 
in a  few  years  stated  that  probably  more  than  fifty  per  cent,  of 
the  forest  trees  in  Connecticut  were  chestnuts.  That  w.as  on 
very  good  authority,  and  I  do  not  hesitate  to  quote  it.  In  Rhode 
Island  the  chestnut  is  of  a  little  less  importance,  but  probably 
pretty  nearly  half  of  the  trees  in  Ilhode  Island  are  chestnuts. 
The  proportion  further  south  I  am  not  so  well  informed  about, 
but  we  have  the  bulk  of  the  heavy  chestnut  timber  south  of  the 
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). These  vertical  lines  represent  the  approximate  limits 
of  what  you  might  call  somewhat  general  infection.  The  black 
spots  which  are  shown  there  represent  the  outlying  spots  of  infec- 
tion, so  far  as  we  knew  them  in  December.  Here  is  the  line 
through  Pennsylvania.  The  eastern  part  of  Pennsylvania  is 
pretty  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  throe 
minutes. 

Having  senn  what  this  disease  is  and  what  it  is  doing,  we  now 
com(*  to  th(»  qucsstion  wlii(*h,  I  take  it,  wo  are  gatluTod  h(*re  to 


ami   ciirline   of    teavM 


Carled  and  discolored  leaves  of  the  cbeBtDUl  Ht  an  advanced  stage  of  tbe 


39 

answer  as  best  we  can :    AVhat  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  ample  precedent  for  this  courses  ns 
well  as  ample  scientific  support.  Beyond  question,  this  is  tin? 
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.  Such  a  course  would  unquestionably 
yield  results  which  would  be  valuable  in  future  epidemics  of  dis- 
ease, but  it  would  not  save  the  chestnut  trees  at  this  time.  The 
President  of  the  Carnegie  Institution,  in  a  recent  address,  enun- 
ciated the  principle  that  the  results  of  scientific  research  must 
be  stated  in  decades,  not  in  years.  We  must  investigate  the  dis- 
ease as  thoroughly  as  ])ossiblo,  but  invest igati(U)  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- 
mediately whatever  measures  against  the  disease  appear  to  be 
most  promising,  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  ai)pointed  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  New  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  much 
the  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 
eleventh  hour,  as  he  has  done,  and  favoring  us  so  genei-ously. 


40 

PROFESSOR  SELBY:  Mr.  Chairman,  would  it  not  be 
proper  for  us  to  send,  on  behalf  of  this  Convention,  at  this  time, 
an  expression  of  our  sympathy  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  CHAIRMAN:  Such  a  motion  naturally  would  go  at 
once  to  the  Resolutions  Committee,  but  the  Chair  is  glad  to  make 
an  exception  in  this  case.  Professor  Selby  moves  tliat  this  Con- 
ference send  a  message  of  sympathy  to  Dr.  Metcalf,  with  hopes 
for  his  speedy  recovery. 

The  motion  was  put  and  unanimously  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 
Bark  Disease  be  Controlled?"  by  Professor  F.  C.  Stewart,  of  the 
New  York  Agricultural  Experiment  Station. 


CAN     THE     CHESTNUT     BARK     DISEASE     BE     CON 

TROLLED? 


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


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

I  assume  that  you  are  all  familiar  with  the  method  of  control 
which  has  been  recommended,  namely,  the  one  which  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  ai*e  not 
familiar  with  it,  you  will  become  familiar  with  it  before  the 
close  of  this  meeting. 


No.  25.  Tree  ncHrly  dedd  from  th?  dis 
bniii.'lii>s  reliiniu  alivt.  Scone  ni'.ir  CoM  Spri 
Colli.,>f. 


Tbe  chestDUt   tree  in  the  centre  of  the  picture  shnws  fuiir  well-developed 
leMiHif.—l'hologniph   bf   Prof.    VoUia*. 


No.  29.  Typiral  group  of  dead  chealnut  trees.  Note  dead  suckers  on  the  truaks. 
From  Irft  to  riglit;— the  firal  trunk  shows  the  dmensp  less  tlian  one  year  old, 
(nothnie  evidi'Dl  in  this  pholograph) :  the  Rccood,  an  iufei'tion  of  from  two  to  three 
rnn  old;  the  third  four  or  more  years  old;  nnd  the  fourth  about  three  yeare  old. 
Scene  near  Brooklyn,  New  York. — t'lmlograph  hy  Prof.  Collint. 


No.  XI.  <.'onip]pte  dpstruction  of  chps 
of  the  Ininkfl  havp  lost  their  bark.  Vii 
York.~I'hotoiiraph   by  Prof.  Volliiii'. 


No.  34.  Complete  destruction  of  ohpBtniit 
of  the  IrunkH  have  lost  their  bark.  Scene  ir 
York.— Photograph  b]i  Prof.  CuUioH. 


41 

It  is  my  opinion  that  we  are  rushing  into  this  enormously  ex- 
pensive campaign  against  the  chestnut  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  destroying  advance  infections  and 
establishing  an  *'immune  zone?"    This  is  a  technical  question  of 

fundamental  importance.  It  is  a  question  to  be  answered  by  ex- 
pert mycologists  and  plant  pathologists.  I  have  observed  that 
the  leading  advocates  of  the  method  avoid,  as  far  as  possible,  dis- 
cussion of  its  probable  eftVictiveness.  In  Farmers'  Bulletin  467, 
tlie  question  is  disposed  of  by  insertiug  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  wliat  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  appeared  and  we  are  still  in 
the  dark  as  to  the  imture  of  the  "experimental  data."  I  had 
lioped  that  it  might  be  presented  at  this  meeting.  In  justice  to 
the  public  it  should  have  been  published  before  Bulletin  467. 
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  467  is 
the  result  of  the  field  test^  which  they  made  at  Washington  and 
I  Bold  that  no  definite  conclusions  can  be  drawn  from  that  test. 
Tlie  chief  criticism  to  be  made  of  it  is  tliat  there  is  no  means  of 
knowing  w^hat  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  unfav(n*able  for  the  spread  of  the  disease. 


42 

Most  fungous  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  were  found  two  centres  of  in- 
fection previously  overlooked.^  One  of  these  consisting  of  a 
group  of  six  diseased  trees,  was  within  a  few  miles  of  Washing- 
ton.  In  company  with  Dr.  Metcalf  and  otliers  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  liad  been  diseased 
for  at  least  a  year  and  probably  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  nearby  tree. 
On  the  other  two  stumps  no  fungus  was  found.  The  first-men- 
tioned stump  had  not  sprouted,  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  were  diseased.  It  should  be  stated, 
how^ever,  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  covel*ed  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  knowni.     Now  does  it  seem  probnble  that  tlie 


43 

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  difficult  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, 
which  are  produced  (juickly  and  in  enormous  numbers  may  be 
widely  disseminated  in  several  different  ways,  some  of  which 
cannot  l)e  prevented.  The  work  will  be  exceedingly  expensive 
and  must  be  continued  indefinitely.  Taking  all  these  things 
into  consideration,  the  chances  of  success  are  much  too  small  to 
warrant  the  expense. 

It  is  true  that  some  fungous  diseasc^s,  notiibly  the  plum  black 
knot,  are  more  or  less  successfully  controlled  by  the  prompt  re- 
moval of  diseased  plants  or  parts  of  plants;  but  it  should  l>e 
noted  that  the  diseases  successfully  controlled  in  this  way  have 
two  characteristics  which  make  this  method  of  control  possible: 
(1)  The  diseased  plants  may  be  readily  detected  in  the  early 
stages  of  the  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  have  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, 
(•specially  woodpeckers,  which  visit  the  diseased  trees,  seeking 
borers,  in  the  tunnels  of  which  most  of  the  infections'' occur.*  It 
naturallv  follows  that  the  "Immune  zone"  must  be  manv  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,  Metcalf  and  Collins 


44 

say  :^  "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  the  "immune  zone"  be  lo- 
cated at  or  north  of  the  Potomac,  the  entire  States  of  Virginia 
and  West  Virginia  must  be  covered  by  such  inspection.  There 
is  no  knowing  when  or  where  the  dis(iase  may  break  out,  and 
when  conditions  for  its  spread  are  favorable,  a  single  diseased 
tree  overlooked  nuiy  start  an  uncontrolhible  epidemic  which  will 
necessitate  establishing  a  new  "immune  zone"  farther  scuith  and 
starting  all  over. 

It  is  quite  generally  admitted  that  it  will  be  difficult  to  locate 
all  of  the  diseased  trees,  but  therc^  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  be  reduced  to  that  extent.  This  is  very  improb- 
able. If  this  disease  behaves  like  fungous  diseases  in  general, 
its  spread  depends  more  upon  weatlier  conditions  and  the  sus- 
ceptibility of  the  host  than  upon  the  number  of  spores  produced. 
When  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  thorough h,  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  high  rank  as  a  destructive  parasite.  This 
indicates  that  it  may  be  expected  to  behave  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  pc^r- 
haps  to  both,  making  this  epidemic  possible.  Just  what  this 
may  be  I  am  unable  to  say.  There  is  no  reason  for  believing 
that  the  fungus  is  either  a  recent  creation  or  a  recent  introduc- 
tion from  abroad.  The  only  rational  theory  yet  advanced  re- 
garding the  origin  of  the  epidemic  is  Dr.  Clinton's  winter-and- 
drought-injury  theory,^  but  even  this  seems  insufficient  in  some 
resp(M*ts. 


45 

It  has  been  asked  "What  then  won  hi  yon  liave  ns  do?  Stand 
idle  while  the  disease  destroys  onr  (*ln»stnnt  forests  "  My 
answer  is  this:  It  may  be  well  to  r(»striet  the  transportation  of 
diseased  nnrsery  stock,  bnt  this  is  all  that  it  is  worth  while  to 
attempt  at  i)resent  in  the  line  of  eonibatin«;  the  disease.  It  is  bet- 
ter to  attempt  nothinf/  thnn  to'iraste  a  Innjc  amount  of  public 
money  on  a  method  of  control  which  there  is  ever)/  reason  to  be- 
Here  cannot  succeed.  I  believe  in  hein<jj;  honest  with  the  pnblic 
and'  admitting  frankly  that  we  know  of  no  way  to  eontnd  this^ 
disease.  I  favor  nunlerate-sized  appropriations  for  investigation 
of  the  disease,  bnt  none  at  all  to  be  used  in  attempts  to  control  it 
by  any  method  or  methods  at  present  known. 

What  will  be  the  future  course  of  the  disease  can  only  be  con- 
jectured, but  it  can  be  safely  predicted  tlmt  nothing  which  man 
can  now  do  will  materially  alter  its  course.  However,  the  situa- 
tion is  by  no  means  hopeless.  That  the  disease  has  already  rea(*h- 
e<l  its  zenith  and  will  now  gradually  subside  is  (piite  possible. 
There  have  been  other  epidemics,  and  other  kinds  of  trees  and 
plants  have  been  threatened  with  destruction  through  disease, 
but  such  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  extx?rminated. 

THE  (IIAIRMAX:  It  occurs  to  th(»  Chair  that  the  situation 
would  suggest  discussion  at  this  time,  but  it  would  probably  be 

bett<»r  to  continue  with  our  programme  as  it  was  ably  laid  out  by 
those  who  have  provided  for  this  Conference,  and  have  the  dis- 
cussion aft(T  wig  have  heard  the  papers.  We  will,  tlierefore,  call 
for  the  next  paper,  entitled  "How  Furtlier  Research  may  Increase 
the  Efficiency  of  the  Control  of  the  Chestnut  Bark  Disease,"  by 
Professor  W.  Howard  Rankin,  Cornell  University,  Ithaca,  New 
York. 

1.  ifctralf,  II.  and  rollfn?.  J.  F.    The  control  of  the  dicMnut  bark  dispasc.     IJ.  8.  D.   A. 
Farmers'  Bui.  4(J7,  28  O.   lOTl. 

2.  Loc.  cit.  p.  11. 

3.  R<»portcd  by  Dr.   Mctcalf  at  a  confcrcnrc  on   the  chrKhiut  bark  disease  held  In  Albany, 
N.  Y..  October  19.  1911. 

4.  V.   8,  Jy.  A.   Partners'  Bui.  407:11. 

5.  U.  8.  D.  A.  Farmers*  Bui.  4fl7:10. 

8.    Metcalf  and  CoUfos.    The  present  stattip  of  the  chestnut  bark  disease.    U.  8.  D.  A.  Bur. 
Plant  Indus.  Bui.  141,  Part  V,  p.  46.  SO  8.  1909. 

7.    Clloton.  O.  P.    Beport  of  the  Botanist,  1906.    Conn.  Exp.  8ta.  Rpt.  of  1907-1906:  879-aK). 


46 


llOW  FUKTIIEK  KESEAKC^n  MAY  INCREASE  THE  EFFI- 
CIENCY OF  THE  CONTROL  OF  THE  CHEST- 
NUT BARK  DISEASE. 


UY  PUOFE8SOU   W.   IIUWAUD   RANKIN,    Vornvll   Univvrisity,    Ithaca,    N.    \\ 


ilr.  Cliainuaii,  Ladies  and  Ck*ntleineii :  Up  to  this  time  investi- 
gations concerning  the  chestnut  tree  canker  disease  and  the 
causal  fungus  have  not  brought  forth  facts  as  rapidly  as  we 
could  wish.  It  was  the  opinion  of  the  conference  lield  at  Albany, 
N.  Y.  last  October  that  we  did  not  have  facts  enough  about  the 
disease  and  that  scientific  research  was  the  one  thing  needed.  To 
enipliasize  this  point  we  may  consider  some  important  phases  of 
the  disease  which  are  yet  little  understood,  !mt  the  knowledge  of 
wliich  is  fundamental  to  devising  efticient  control  metliods.  Con- 
cerning the  means  of  spread  of  the  fungus  from  one  tree  to 
anotlier  we  have  nothing  except  secondary  evidence.  JMost  writ- 
ers have  theorized  on  the  different  metliods  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 
known  of  the  behavior  of  many  fungi,  such  agencies  as  borers, 
birds,  ants  and  the  wind,  etc.,  have  been  suggested  but  in  no  wise 
]»roved  to  be  responsible.  It  seems  that  the  ascospore  stage  has 
not  becMi  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  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  shot  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 

lions  took  place  last  summer  in  the  Hudson  Kiver  Valley  was 
evidently  about  the  time  when  the  aseo8i)ore  stage  was  just  be- 
coming abundant.  It  is  an  important  matter  then  to  determine 
the  spore  stage  and  the  agen(*y  responsible  for  the  spread  of  the 
fungus  before  we  can  hope  to  advise  an  efficient  and  effective  con- 
trol. For  example,  such  i)recautionary  measures  as  the  peeling 
of  logs  iKifore  allowing  them  to  be  moved  could  be  limited  to  the 
time  of  vear  when  this  was  necessarv  and  thus  obviate  a  great 
cost. 

Ijikewise  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- 
lecte<l  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 
Lynchburg,  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  sapropliytic  fungus, 
or  the  fungus  has  developed  a  parasitic  habit  independent  of 
any  change  in  the  host.  Possibly,  of  course,  both  factors  nuiy 
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 by  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- 
titure  on  the  chestnut  tree  in  connection  with  the  production  of 
susceptibility  is  highly  important 


M 


48 

If  the  results  of  J)r.  Jliinch  on  tlie  cause  of  susceptibility  and 
inmiuuity  of  forest  trees  to  disease  should  prove  true  in  the  case 
of  this  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  by  ob- 
servation and  experiment  The  present  method  of  inspection 
and  cutting  out  would  be  inefficient  if  the  fungus  lives  commonly 
as  a  saprophyte  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  tlie  other  hand,  it  exists  only  as  a  wound  parasite, 
then  inspections  would  be  possible  and  the  cutting  out  method 
effective.  However,  with  such  problems  as  these  undecided,  no 
one  can  pronounce  definite  judgment  upon  the  efficiency  of  the 
cutting  out  method.  Once  however,  these  facts  are  established, 
moditications  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,  the  metliod  may  be  altered 
to  suit  our  knowledge  and  thus  its  efficiency  assured. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :  The  next  paper,  entitled  "Recent  Notes  on 
the  Chestnut  IJark  Disease,''  will  be  d(»liv<»red  by  Professor  H.  R. 
Fulton,  Division  of  Patliology,  Pennsylvania  State  College. 


RECENT  NOTES  ON  THE  CHESTNUT  HARK  DISEASE. 


KY   PROFESSOR   II     R.   FrLTON,    Pmusylrania  State  College,    State 

College,  Pa. 


The  steady  and  devastating  spread  of  the  cliestnut  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  check  effectively 


>-  Yf>Tk.—l'lioli>i/iai,li   bv  Pt: 


Biamples  ot  tree  surgery,  showJDK  healing  process  after  cultins  out  •.'ankprs,   io 
'         nent   ot  orcharrt   trt4"».     Thin   trratmi'nt   iindniilitedly   prnlonva   (lie   life  i)f   the 
— l-hotograiih   by  t'riif.  fdlliim. 


K\amiile  ot  tree  siiraory,  Bliowiuj-  henllna  nroi-i-ss  after  eulline  nut  cankers  in 
treatment  ot  orchard  trees.  Will  iirolruu;  lite  of  uv.w—l'hotograiih  ba  J'rof. 
CoUia*. 


g  uu  iipp^r  part 


Lnrso  ciiPBtnut  tree  parlly  dPBd.  Note  aprouls  with  ienves  near  tlie  top,  the 
dwnrfwl  IfnvpB  on  the  middle  riciil-liand  limb,  nud  ilie  lieallhy  lower  branchpe  widi 
noj-mnl  lenv.-s.     Scene  al  Itnwlhiaville,   reana.—l'holnijrapk  by  Prof.  CoUin». 


I^arly   singe  of  iiiF 


Complete  destniciioii  of  the  clicstDut  tr<H'N  in  m 
diCion  of  IropB  of  ol1i>>r  siit^i^a.  Virna  iilnnic  ^.m\g  I 
Hill,  New  York,— /'Aof'^ro/ifc  &//  Frof.  Culliu". 


Complete  destruction  of  chestnut  Itpi-k  in  nitxnl  stnnda,     NolP  hpnJthy  condition 

of  trees  of  otber  species.     Views  aloni;  Long  Island  Itniiroad.  near  Itichmonil  Hill, 

Xew   York. — I'hvloginph   by  I'ru/.   Coffins. 


Smnll  orclmnl  chestnut  npnrly  tivitil—l'hoto'jraph  hv  Prof.  Collini 


A  dying  trm-  od  J.oag  Island,   New  York. 


Examples  of  tri^  BurKprr,  showiDg  heallDg  process  afler  cuttiuK  out  ciiDk«rt,  In 
treatment  oE  orirhan]  irees.  This  Ireatment  unduubledty  prnloogs  tba  life  of  the 
trees. — Photograph  by  Prof,  Coltint. 


49 

the  spread  of  this  disease?     Is  it  worth  while  doing  so?     What 
are  the  best  methods  to  use      While  no  one,  perhaps,  will  ven- 
ture to  i)rophesy  the  outcome,  all  doubtless  agree  that  the  great 
interests  at  stake  justify  an  aggressive  fight;  and  all  alike  are 
anxious  to  see  the  warfare  waged  in  the  most  effective  way. 
Other  contests  against  fungous  foes  have  been  won  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  i)ests  that,  in  the  wide  interchanges  incident  to  modern 
civilization,  have  been  brought  into  contact  w  ith  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  undtP  United  State  jurisdiction,  as  notable 
examples  of  success  that  hass  in  recent  times  come  from  complete 
knowledge  of  the  situations,  combined  with  efficient  administra- 
tion.    As  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 


50 

fungous  diseases  thai  adeirl  our  crops, — less  speetacular  iw  Uieir 
working,  but  none  tlic  less  damaging  in  their  effects?  Or  is  it 
that  well  recognized  factors  are  liere  found  in  a  unique  combina- 
tion that  adds  to  the  seriousness  of  the  situation?  Is  this  dis- 
ease inlierently  more  serious  than  pear  bliglit  or  cotton  wilt  or 
wheat  stem  rust?  Answers  to  such  questions  involve  considera- 
tion of  the  habits  and  value  of  the  liost  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. 
l>roadly  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  matt^Tial  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.  We  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 
liave  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, 
whieh  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  may  lessen  the  susceptibility  of 
the  host.  Other  points  in  the  general  life  history  of  the  organism 
may  be  of  interest  and  importiince,  aside  from  any  direct  rela- 
tion to  the  setting  up  of  infection. 


51 

Realizing  the  importance  (o  the  pnblic  welfare  of  more  (*om- 
plete  knowledge  along  these  lines,  the  Pennsylvania  Agricultural 
Experiment  Station,  through  its  laboratory  of  plant  pathology, 
has  undertaken  certain  investigations  upon  the  life  history  of 
D'mporthe  parasitica,  in  hearty  co-operation  with  the  work  of  the 
Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  151ight  Commission.  While  a  com- 
plete rei)ort  cannot  be  made,  in  the  nature  of  the  cas(»,  for  a  long 
time,  we  beg  to  submit  a  brief  pn^liminary  report  on  the  labora- 
tory work  now  being  carried  on  by  Mr.  R.  A.  Waldron,  of  the 
Experiment  Station  staff;  to  which  is  added  at  the  request  of  the 
Executive  Officer  of  the  Pennsylvania  Commission,  a  summary 
of  field  studies  made  by  Mr.  R.  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. 

Tlie  tests  were  made  with  the  blast  from  an  electric  fan,  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.     Tlie  tests  were  made  with  these 
tendrils  dry,  with  them  moist,  and  with  the  spray  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  m.ay  be  detached  by  strong  air 
currents,   and   carried   short  distances.     Tlie  detachment  w^as 
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. 

The  leii<^th  of  time  that  conidia  retain  their  power  to  genninate 
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  (JERMINATION. 

Conidia  germinate  best  at  a  temi)erature  of  (JO  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  fr(»ezing.  These  facts  indicate  that  the  ascos- 
[)ores  may  play  a  more  important  i)art  in  causing  infection  under 
cert^iin  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  laboratx)ry. 

EFFECT  OF  TEMPERATURE  ON  EARLY  GROWTH. 

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  myceliiim  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 

GROWTH  ON  OTHER  MATERIALS  THAN  CHESTNUT. 

lu  the  laboratory  the  fungus  grows  well  on  a  variety  of  artiii- 
cial  luedia^  perhaps  most  readily  ou  potato  agar  that  has  been 
made  slightly  acid.  Material  was  submitted  to  us  of  white  oak 
and  black  oak  bark,  collected  by  Mr.  J.  R.  Guyer,  agent  of  the 
Tennsylvania  Commission,  which  bark  had  been  killed  by  lire  pre- 
vious  to  its  observation,  and  siiuvi* .  pustules  of  what  seemed  to 
be  Diaporthe  parasitica.  Careful  microscopic  examination  show- 
ed that  the  morphological  features  corresponded  closely  to  those 

of  Diaporthe  parasitica^  as  did  also  the  growth  of  the  fungous  in 
artificial  culture.  Ked  oak  twigs  killed  by  steaming  in  the  process 

of  sterilization,  were  readily  infected  by  Diaporthe  parasitica  ob- 
tained from  a  typical  chestnut  lesion.  While  it  is  desirable  to 
carry  on  further  cross  inoculation  exijerinients,  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  Cast  an  ea, 
if  these  portions  are  already  dead.  We  have  found  no  evidence 
that  the  fungus  produces  in  any  sense  a  disease  of  such  trees  as 
the  oak. 

RELATION   TO    LKMITNING    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  w^ood  rather  than  on  bark,  ilany  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,  when  tested,  gave  good 
germination  of  spores.  Probably  the  bark  infection,  which 
seemed  to  date  far  back,  existed  at  the  time  of  the  stroke,  and  the 
fungus  spread  from  this  to  the  sh<attered  wood,  the  lightning 
presumably  not  having  killed  the  fungus  in  the  vicinity. 


54 

DEVELOPMENT  IN  SAPWOOD  AND  HEARTWOOD. 

Where  a  gectioii  of  a  large  infected  branch  was  kept  in  a  moist 
atmosphere  constantly,  an  abundant  development  of  pycnidial 
fruit  bodies,  was  noted  in  about  two  months  from  both  sap  wood 
and  heartwood  at  the  more  moist  cnt  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  botli  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. 
Kather  severe  tire  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  apparently 
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  that 
153  trees  in  soutlieastern  Pennsylvania,  near  Haverford  exposed 
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,  ])erliai)S,  of  the 
rapidity  of  the  spread  ol  the  disease,  where  observations  were 
made  upon  that  point. 


65 

Out  of  18  sprouts  showing  two  lesions,  13  had  the  younger 
lesion  above  and  5  the  older,  which  might  indicate  the  probable 
work  of  insects  in  carrying  infection. 

Sprouts  were  originally  infected  at  the  base  in  more  than  fonr- 
fifths  of  the  cases.  Forty  per  cent,  of  the  oldest  lesions  on 
sprouts  showed  twigs  as  a  centre  of  infection ;  eighteen  per  cent, 
showed  cracks,  fourteen  per  cent,  wounds;  thirteen  per  cent, 
beetle  holes,  eleven  per  cent,  crotches,  and  four  per  cent,  were  in- 
determinate. 

More  infections  wert  found  in  medium  dense  growth  tlian  in 
dense  growth,  and  very  few  in  rather  open  growth.  Of  all  in- 
fections recorded,  47.3  per  cent,  were  within  twenty  feet  of  old 
logging  roads,  7.4  per  cent,  from  20  to  50  feet  away,  and  45.3 
per  cent,  at  greater  distance.  Many  more  infections  were  found 
where  soil  conditions  were  moderately  moist  than  wliere  they 
were  dry.  Of  150  original  sprout  infections,  G2,  or  41  per  cent, 
had  a  north  to  northeast  exposure;  20  or  13  per  cent,  a  south  to 
southwest  exposure;  and  the  remainder  were  about  equally 
divided  between  the  other  two  quadrants  of  the  compass.  This 
might  suggest  moisture  again  as  an  importiint  factor. 

There  were  28  cases  of  pycnidia  observed  developing  on  wood. 
Only  eight  trees  larger  than  seven  inches  in  diameter  showed  in- 
fection. One  of  these  had  a  lesion  apparently  two  years  old;  and 
half  had  the  oldest  lesion  less  than  one  year  old.  All  of  the  tree 
infection  was  in  the  bark  of  the  trunk,  none  in  the  tops.  Half 
had  development  of  watersprouts  in  connection  with  the  lesions, 
lesions  in  the  bark  of  stumps  showed  fissures  at  their  centres 
in  almost  all  cases,  and  in  the  oldest  ones  the  pustules  were 
usually  dark  and  in  the  ascus  stage. 

In  connection  with  lesions  on  sprouts,  trees,  and  stumps,  there 
were  abundant  evidences  of  animal  association,  principally 
beetle  and  other  large  insect  larvae,  tunnels  and  holes;  but  also 
woodpecker  holes  and  claw  marks,  and  ant  nests  and  trails. 
Mo.«^t  of  the  ant  nests  were  in  old  dried  stump  stubs.  Fully  nine- 
tenths  of  all  old  lesions  showed  beetle  larvae  in  or  near  them. 
These  were  mainly  a  species  of  I^eptura.  Of  the  youngest  lesions, 
about  two-fifths  showed  larvae  in  or  near  them;  and  in  all  cases 


5G 

there  were  about  twice  as  many  larvae  in  as  near  the  lesions.  It 
would  seem  that  these  usually  follow  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  tl»e  present  very 
complete  records,  whicli  it  has  b(H»n  possibU*  to  summarize  only 
briefly  in  this  account. 

A  good  deal  is  known  about  this  parasite;  very  nnich  remains 
to  be  learned.  As  far  as  our  present  knowliMlge  goes,  tlie  promi)t 
stamping  out  of  advance  spot«  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  difliculties  of  finding  infection  and  thor- 
oughly removing  it  in  sparsely  settled  tractts  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 
will  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  Bumbold,  who  is  in  charge 
of  important  research  work  at  the  laboratory  of  the  University 
of  Pennsylvania,  will  present  a  paper  in  relation  to  m(»dicinal 
remedies  for  the  chestnut  tree  bark  disease. 


57 


THE    POSSIBILITY    OF   A    MEDICINAL    REMEDY    FOR 

CHESTNUT  BLIGHT. 


BY   DIL   CAUOLINE   KUMBOLI),    IN  ClIAlUiE  OF  THE  PENNSVLVAMA 
CHESTNUT  TUEE  liLUHlT  COMMISSION'S   LAIJOltATOUY. 


Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  (ientlcnu'n :  Although  in  the  pro- 
gramme, the  title  of  my  remarks  has  been  given  as  the  possibility 
of  a  medicinal  remedy  for  eliestnnt  bliglit,  1  much  prefer  to  con- 
fine myself  to  a  question  of  medicinal  treatment  as  1  believe  it 
would  lijuit  me  too  much  were  1  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  between  the  chestnut  tree  and  the  fungus  which  causes 
its  death ;  consequently  my  work  is  with  individual  trees. 

The  question  of  medicinal  treatment  should  be  considere<l 
broadly  from  two  sides.  Firstly,  the  side  of  securing  better 
health  conditions  for  the  chestnut  trees,  in  order  that  thev  mav 
have  the  ability  better  to  resist  tlie  (lis(»ase.  This  we  will  call 
preventive  treatment.  Secondly,  the  aspect  of  curative  treat- 
ment. 

Under  the  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  resi>onsible  for  the  spread  of  the  disease  in  tlie  chestnut 
tree.  I  am  now  conducting  experiments  in  which  chestnut  trees 
are  being  exposed  to  infe(!tion  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  crowd(»d  co])i>i(*e, 
while  trees  growing  on  the  ridge  of  a  hill  arc*  uninfected. 

In  the  matter  of  food,  vari<ms  fertilizers  are  being  subj(*cted  io 
tests  on  growing  trees. 

I  am  about  to  start  a  series  of  experimcmts  in  which  young 
trees  are  to  be  grown  in  solutions  of  different  chemicals,  with 
the  object  of  hastening  the  growth  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  work  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,  tliat  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  groAvn  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  deadlv  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  l)een  set 
aside  for  my  work.  A  greenhouse  has  been  recently  completed, 
in  which  a  number  of  small  chestnut  trees  are  noAV  growing. 

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


r»9 


TREATMENT  OF  ORCHAKD  AND  ORNAMENTAL  TREES. 


BY  PROFESSOR  J.  FRANKLIN  COLLINS,  U.  S.  DEl»*T  OF  AiUlICULTURK, 

WASHINGTON,   D.  C. 


Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Oeutleinen :  Fur  the  purpose  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  opening  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  slightly  ditJerent  setting. 

The  programme  of  experimentation  thus  outlined  seems  for- 
midable, but  this  work  must  be  thorough  if  any  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  txiU,  lean  man,  with  a  grizzled  beard  and  the  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  was  something 
the  matter  with  them.    ITow  much  will  it  cost?' 

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


GO 

^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  willinj;ly 
pay  twenty  dollars  to  have  them  saved.'  ^\11  right.  I^t  me  gel 
my  outfit' 

He  went  to  his  buggy,  brought  back  a  paper  bag  of  powder  and 
a  whitewasli  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  tlie  buggy,  said  ^(J id- 
dap'  to  his  horse,  and  was  down  at  the  n(»xt  door  yard,  swabbing 
more  trees  and  pocketing  more  dollars." 

It  is  true  that  many  unscrupulous  persons  liave  been  making 
monev  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  appropriation  to  combat  it  in  Pennsylvania,  have  sud- 
denly brought  to  light  numerous  unsuspected  infallible  cures  for 
all  the  ills  (including  the  chestnut  bark  disease)  to  which  tre(\s 
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  IJlight  (Tommission  of 
Pennsylvania  might  relate  scmie  of  their  experiences  ahiug  this 
line  that  would  make  more  interesting  reading  than  the  above, 
though  the  incidents  were  less  profitable  financially  to  the  fakirs. 

The  nmin  point  that  I  want  to  emphasize,  however,  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  undoubtedly  attains  its  highest  value  as  an  ornament^xl  tree. 
You  will  all  recall,  I  am  sure,  certain  estates  where  one  or  more 
chestnut  trends  are  the  main  aesthetic  or  dtvorative  featurc^s.  Per- 
haps the  tree  may  have  been  a  veteran,  famous  in  the  country- 
side, long  before  the  present  owner  purchased  the  land  and  built 
his  domicile.  Oftentimes  the  value  of  the  (»rnamental  tree  is 
largely  enhanced  by  its  location  with  reference  to  the  house,  and 
even  more  largely,  at  tinu^s,  by  historic  or  ancestral  traditions 
with  which  it  may  have  been,  long  since,  associatcHl.  The  value 
placed  by  the  oAvner  of  th(»  estate  upon  such  tree  may  occasion- 
ally be  almost  without  limit. 


CI 

The  very  fact  tluit  the  tree  is  of  iiiurh  greater  value  to  its 
owner  than  any  tree  in  the  forest  could  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  that  would  not  for  a  moment  be 
considered  in  connection  with  a  tree  in  the  forest. 

At  the  very  beginning  of  the  experimental  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  trec»s 
that  would  be  worth  the  expense  involved  in  an  attempt  to  save 
them ;  however,  on  account  of  their  snmller  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  iKissibilities  of  being  able  to 
control  fully  the  Cliestnut  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  this  highly  de- 
sirable 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  may  have  upon  control  work  of  this 
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  followed  in  the  experimental  work  mentioned. 


62 

This  lias  been  fully  described  in  Farmer's  Hulletiii  No.  467,  of 
the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture,  and  n(»ed  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  apply  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 
Ijrominent  a  characteristic  of  diseased  bark.  It  is  extremely  im- 
portant that  the  gouge  be  kept  scrupulously  sharp.  If  it  is  dull, 
the  pressure  required  in  forcing  it  through  the  bark  will  invari- 
ably result  in  some  injury  to  the  delicate  cambium  cells  at  the 
edge  of  tlie  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,  we  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. 

At  most  seasons  of  the  year,  it  is  highly  important  that  tlie 
edge  of  the  cut  along  the  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  il  ('\';m'  would  under  perfectly  normal 
conditions.  By  using  a  sharp  gouge  and  promptly  covering  the 
cut  edges,  we  luive  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  painted  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 

In  dii!»ciisKiiig  the  possibililic^s  pro  and  run  of  conlrolliiig  the 
diseiise  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  e(iuipi)ed.  From 
numerous  points  of  view  it  is  extremely  unfortunate  that  the 
disease  has  spread  with  such  rapidity  from  its  first  known 
centre,  that  nearly  every  person  who  has  been  detailed  by  the 
States  or  the  Federal  Government  to  w^ork  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  spread 
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  few  of  these,  its 
origin,  methods  of  dissemination,  detailed  effects  upon  the  host, 

immediate  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 
resi)onBible  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- 


G4 

peatedly  deiuonslrated  in  tlu'.  conrso  of  oxpeiimentul  work,  that 
are  worthy  of  consideration  at  this  time.  1  want  to  mention 
and  very  briefly  discnss  six  of  tliese: 

(1).     Lateral  or  oblique  conduction. 

There  seems  to  be  a  rather  widespread  (but  erroneous)  idea 
that  the  crude  and  elaborated  sap  of  a  tree  can  pass  up  and 
down  the  trunk  or  branch  only  in  a  longitudinal  direction;  that 
is,  lengthwise  of  tlie  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  direction  in  a 
healthy  uninjured  tree  may  be  Inie  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  groAv  over,  an  area  of  bare  wood  where  the  bark  has 
been  removed.  It  is  common  knowledge  to  all  observant  persons 
that  these  scars  heal  over  mainly  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  injury  the  fibres  are  curved  out- 
ward around  the  injury,  and  continue  in  a  nearly  longitudinal 
direction  both  above  and  beloAv  the  scar.  When  the  scar  is  par- 
tially covered,  the  newly  formed  fil)res  are  straighter,  and  fiimlly 
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  possibility  of  oblique  conduction,  a  tree 
that  had  a  large  lesion  extending  half  way  around  the  trunk 
on  the  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 


65 

writer  very  nearly  succeeded  in  an  attempt  to  force  this  new 
growth  to  produce  fibres  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  watery  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  primarily  convey  sap  should  be  severed,  as  when  a 
diseased  spot  has  been  cut  out  of  tl^e  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  upper  and  lower  edges  of  a  scar  by  means  of  the  dead 
ends  of  the  conducting  tubes  as  readily  and  rapidly  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  indirectly  to  the  inability  or  great  diflSculty 
that  the  sap  has  in  reacliing  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  tl»an  it  does  for  one  an  inch  long  and  an  inch 
wide,  simply  because  the  healing  over  depends  almost  entirely 
npon  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. 


G6 

The  mycelium  of  tlie  fungus  almost  always  produces  a  very 
characteristic  mottled  fau-like  appearance  iu  the  bark,  and  aj)- 
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  sajjwood  very  freely,  when  the  disease  reaches 
as  deep  as  the  w-ood,  as  it  generally  does  sooner  or  later;  but, 
unlike  its  effect  in  the  bark,  no  pronounced  discoloration  is  i)ro- 
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  witliout  destroying  the 
tree,  it  is  of  course  necessary  to  gouge  out  this  disease  infected 
sapwood.  The  depth  to  wliich  it  is  necessary  to  remove  it  can- 
not at  present  be  definitely  stated,  as  insufficient  time  has 
elapsed  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  liow  being  wat^^hed 
for  results.  However,  in  a  diseased  six)t  from  three  to  foui*- 
inches  in  diameter  apparently  at  least  three  annual  layers  of 
wood  in  the  centre  of  the  diseased  spot  nuist  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  brandies  directly  above  the 
cut-out  area  will  show  much  wilted  leaves  within  an  hour  or 
two.  This  is  a  direct  and  inevitiible  result  of  the  suppression, 
from  any  cause  whatsoever,  of  a  considerable  portioji  of  the  sup- 
ply of  water  for  the  leaves. 

Considerable  careful  judgment  nmy  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 
nuich  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  dectay. 

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  tUe  chestnut, 


07 

moreoverj  there  is  tlie  additional  danger  of  infection  from  the 
8i)ores  of  Diaportlic  parafsitica.  In  order  to  reduce  the  chances 
of  infection  from  wood  rotting  and  other  fungi,  it  has  been  the 
prevailing  custom  for  many  years  iji  this  country  as  well  as 
abroad,  to  paint  all  exposed  surfaces  of  wood  wth  tar  or  lead 
paint.  Judging  from  our  own  experience  perhaps  these  are  as 
good  general  preparations  for  this  purpose  as  any  that  we  care 
to  recommend  at  this  time,  though  they  are  not  ideal  and  they 
do  not  prevent  the  checking  of  the  wood.  Alorever,  they  must 
be  renewed  from  time  to  time  in  order  to  accomplish  permanent 
good.  Creosote  is  excellent  for  a  preliminary  coating,  but  it 
suiks  into  the  wood  readily  and  ai)parently  lias  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  under 
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 
our  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,  thougli  dormant,  fruiting  pustules  were  present  in 
the  majority  of  cases.  To  take  one  particular  case :  In  March, 
1911,  some  diseased  spots,  with  good  fruiting  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 

tlirouglioutthe  spring,  through  the  hot  dry  weather  of  early 
July,  and  the  drought  of  July  and  August.  In  early  Sei)teml)er, 
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  chii)s  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  n(H*essity  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  begijining  work  on  Ihe  disease  in  1!)08,  our  atten- 
tion was  irresistibly  drawn  to  the  evident  intimate  relation  that 
insects  bore  to  tlie  spread  of  the  disease.  It  is  singularly  inter- 
esting to  note  that  i)racti('ally  every  person  who  has  been  work- 
ing on  tlie  disease  in  the  fiehl  for  any  length  of  time  has,  sooner 
or  later,  been  strongly  inipressed  with  this  very  apparent  inter- 
relationship between  insects  and  the  chestnut  l)ark  disease.  Per- 
sonally, we  have  made  many  observations  upon  the  topic,  l)ut  a:? 
this  work  properly  belongs  to  another  liureau  of  the  U.  S.  Dept. 
of  x\griculture,  we  have  limited  our  work  to  observations.  Here 
is  a  phase  of  the  work  that  could  easily  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. 

(G).     Immunity. 

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


CO 

would  appear  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  that  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,  w^here  Japanese  varieties  have  been  killed  by  tliis  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  anyw'here  on  the  Japanese  portion.  Naturally,  this  fact 
in  itself  is  strong  proof  of  tlie  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  i>lants  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 
few  years  are  truly  gratifying,  but  the  future  will  witness 
greater  results.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  we  may  even- 
tually see  an  immnnn  hybrid  chestnut  that  will  rival  the  Ameri- 
can sweet  chestnut  in  flavor  of  the  nut,  and  the  Paragcni  in 
size. 

THE  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  s^tated  that  he  had 


70 

some  results  which  he  desired  to  preseut  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  arc  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  jour  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.     (Applause). 

PROFESSOR  GEORGE  P.  CLINTON  (Botanist,  Connecti- 
cut Agricultural  Station) :  Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentle- 
men: The  first  paper  that  I  will  i)resent  is  written  by  Profes- 
sor Farlow,  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  fungi  and  has  some  of  the  best  herbaria  dealing  with 
fungi,  especially  those  bound  in  book  form,  known  as  Exsiccati, 
in  the  w^orld.  He  took  up  the  study  of  the  nomenclature  of  the 
cliestnut  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  PROB^ESSOR  W.  G.  FARLOW^    HARVARD  UNIVERSITY, 

MASSACHUSETTS. 

The  cause  of  the  disease  of  chestnut  trees  prevalent  in  our 
Eastern  States  is  ascribed  to  tlie  growth  of  the  fungus  named 
Diaporthe  parasitica  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  tlie  microscopic  structure  and 
pathogenic  action  of  the  fungus,  but  we  should  see  whether  we 
nmy  not  get  some  practical  suggestions  from  what  has  been 
written  in  regard  to  the  distribution  and  patliological  action  of 
fungi  which  are  most  nearly  related  to  our  chestnut  fungus. 

The  first  question  we  may  ask  is:  Is  Diaporthe  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  intmduced  from  some  otlier  country? 
In  disease  due  to  fungi  the  presunii)tion  is  always  in  favor  of  the 


71 

theory  that  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  Diaporthe  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  si)ecimens  in  the  older  herbaria 
and  a  summarj'  of  the  often  obscure  and  conflcting  descriptions 
to  be  found  in  old  treatises,  even  if  desperately  dull,  will  enable 
us  to 'form  certain  practical  conclusions. 

When  I  first  received  fresh  specimens  of  the  fruiting  fungus 
of  tlie  chestnut  tree  I  was  struck  by  their  great  resemblance  to 
what  is  generally  know^n  in  American  herbaria  as  Endothia 
g/jrosa.  Unfortunately  most  of  the  specimens  of  that  species  in 
herbaria  are  sterile  and  from  the  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  on 
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  which  I  refer  is  No.  986,  First  Series  of 
the  Erhario  Crittogamico  Italiana,  issued  in  18G3.  Tlie  label 
states  that  the  fungus  grew  on  chestnut  trunks  at  Locarno  on 
I^ke  Maggiore,  where  it  was  collected  by  Daldini  in  1862.  The 
name  there  given  is  Endothia  radicalism  but  the  question  of  the 
name  need  not  be  considered  at  present.  As  other  Ijotanists 
have  examined  the  specimen  just  mentioned  and  agree  as  to 
the  identity  of  the  Endothia  radicalis  and  the  Diaporthe  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  t^>  have  been  known  on  chestnuts  in 
Italy  fifty  years  ago. 


72 

It  may  be  well  to  glance  at  what  has  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.  jmbens  and  Castanca  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  specimens  were  distributed  in  Rabenhorst's  Herbarium 
Mycologicum,  Thuemenis,  Mycotheca  Universalis  and  Saccardo 
Mycotheca  Veneta ;  but  in  the  copies  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  (jyrosa.  It  is  said 
to  grow  on  Aesculus,  Alnus,  Carpinus,  Castauea,  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  Oestri(*h  in  Nassau,  and  Winter, 
in  1886,  in  Rabenhorst'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  tlie  history  of  the  chestnut 
fungus  in  Europe,  we  may  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  hosts  on  which  it  is  said  to  grow 


I 


73 

are  not  merely  chestnuts  and  oaks  but  a  considerable  number  of 
deciduous  trees.  Yet,  although  the  fungus  has  been  so  well 
known  in  Italy,  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. 
Were  it  a  fact  that  the  Endothia,  whatever  specific  name  w^e 
please  to  call  it,  is  a  species  endemic  iji  Italy  but  not  found  in 
North  America  until  tlie  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  nnlike  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  Sphacria  radicalis  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- 
onj-my  is  too  complicated  to  be  followed  liere  but  some  reasons 
why  it  is  so  complicated  should  be  stated.  Prior  to  the  publica- 
tion of  8.  radiiMlis,  Schweinitz  had  in  1822  described  a  Sphaeria 
gyrosa  from  North  Carolina  said  to  gi'ow  on  Fagus  and  Juglans. 
Later  Fries  made  this  species  the  type  of  a  new  genus,  Endothia. 
The  earlier  Italian  writers  regarded  /?.  f/yrosa  and  S.  radicalis 
as  two  distinct  species,  apparently  basing  tlieir  opinion  on  the 
fact  that  Fries  placed  the  two  in  diflfcTcnt  sections  of  the  old 

genus  Sphaena  rather  than  on  an  examination  of  American 
specimens  of  the  two  species.    Traverao  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  Scic^nces 


\ 


74 

in  Philadelphia,  and  I  have  also  examined  Schweinitzian  speci- 
mens in  the  Curtis  Herbariiim  at  Harvard.  Unfortunately  I 
have  not  as  yet  succeeded  in  finding  a  Schweinitzian  specimen  of 
S.  radicalis  which  sliows  ascospores;  possibly  none  of  the  so- 
called  S,  radicalis  has  ascospores,  but  I  am  not  yet  certain  that 
that  is  the  fact.  Specimens  supposed  to  be  ^^  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  8.  gyrosa.  I  have,  however,  seen  no  specimens  in  the  older 
American  herbaria  where  the  fungus  supposed  to  be  8,  gyrosa 
was  certainly  growing  on  chestnut.  In  general  the  hosts  were 
not  specificially  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  liabit  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  wliat  is  called  Diaporthe  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  Sehweiuitz  and  therefore  ex- 
cept by  an  examination  of  authentic  specimens  we  are  not  able 
to  say  wliether  the  form  on  oak  should  be  considered  the  true  8. 
gyrosa  of  Schweinitz  or  not.  As  I  have  said,  I  have  not  yet  been 
*able  to  complete  my  examination  of  original  material,  not  as  y(»t 
having  found  mature  Sf.  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  that 
on  chestnut  in  Italy  collected  by  Daldini  in  1862  are  identical  as 
far  as  can  be  determined  by  a  study  of  the  dried,  lierbarium 
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  Endothia  on  oak  not  uncommonly  found  in  fruit  in  the 
Southern  States  which  has  spores 'which  seem  to  me  to  be  speci- 
fically different  from  those  found  on  tlie  chestnut.  The  (juestion, 
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  the  considerable 
number  of  specimens  I  have  examined,  than  the  form  with  nar- 
row, linear  spores. 

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

THE  CHAIRMAN :  That  ^eems  an  excellent  ,^uggeHtion. 
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,  bv  Professor  Clin- 
ton.     (Applause). 


SOME   FACTS   AND   THEORIES   CONCERNING   CHEST- 
NUT BLIGHT. 


BY  PROFESSOR  ORORGR  P.  CLINTON.  BOTANIST,  AGRIOIILTTtRAL  EX 

PERIMENT  STATION,    CONNECTICUT. 


Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen: — 
At  a  recent  meeting  of  tlie  American  Pliytopathoh).i?ical  So 


76 

ciety  held  in  Washington,  D.  C,  during  a  discussion  of  tlie  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).     Tliat  it  is  a  previously  described  species. 

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

(5).  That  it  is  impossible  to  eradicate  it  l)y  tlie  cutting  out 
method. 

(G).  That  there  will  in  time  be  a  decline  in  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  chestnut  blight  is  a  recently  introduced  disease,  apj)areutly 
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  AnnTican  fungus,  apparently  also 
indigenous  to  Europe,  and  that  weather  and  other  unfavorable 
conditions,  which  have  Aveakened  the  vitality  of  the  chestnut 
trees  in  the  northeastern  United  States,  have  had  nuu^h  to  do 
with  its  sudden,  destructive,  and  wide-spread  appearance,  and 
that  it  will  not  necessarily  wijx*  out  all  of  our  chestnuts,  as  it 
is  likely  to  decline  gradually  with  the  disappearance  of  the  fac- 
tors that  hfive  favored  its  rise  into  j)rominence. 

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      • 

ance  iu  tliis  country  depend  in  large  measure  the  practicability 
or  impracticability  of  the  only  method  now  advocated  for  its 
control,  namely,  the  cutting  out  and  destruction  of  the  diseased 
trees. 

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

(1).  The  trouble  appeared  suddenly  and  seriously,  and  as  it 
is  unusual  for  a  fungus  thus  to  spring  up  in  a  country  where 
it  lias  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 
unusuallv  favorable  surroundings. 

(3),  The  Japanese  species  of  chestnut  has  apparently  shown 
considerable  immunity  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  nuich  less  resistant  to  its  attacks,  has  suddenly 
spread  through  the  regions  in  which  it  is  now  known  to  occur. 

(4).  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 thirty-five  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 
prevent  its  further  spread  through  the  south  and  west. 

Now,  if  the  preceding  points  are  true,  Pennsylvania  has  pos- 
sibly taken  a  wise  st«p  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  tlie  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  eifort«  for  control  planned  for  this  State  will  be 
time,  money  and  trees  thrown  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  tliis  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  that  it 
has  caused  no  very  noticeable  trouble  on  that  continent,  and  yet, 
when  introduced  here,  kills  oti'  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  theory,  let  me  take  it  up  point  by 
point. 

First,  that  the  cliestnut  blight  is  a  native  of  this  country.  In 
11)0!)  I  sent  to  Professor  Farh)W,  of  Harvard  University,  the  lirst 
si)ecimen  of  Diaporihc  panntitiva  that  he  had  examined,  and 
asked  liis  opinion  as  to  whether  or  not  it  was  the  same  as  a  cer- 
tain species  that  Schweinitz  had  years  before  described  on  chest- 
nuts from  tliis  country.  lie  replied  that  it  was  not,  but  that  it 
agreed  more  perfectly  with  the  genus  Endothia  than  with  Dia- 
porthe,  and  that  it  was  closely  related  to,  but  apparently  dis- 
tinct from,  Endothia  gijrosa.  Endothia  f/f/rosa  was  originally 
described  from  Carolina  and  Pennsylvania  by  Schweinitz  as 
Hphiicria  radiculis  and  Sphaeria  (ijjrom,  and  reported  by  him  on 
Fagus  and  Juglans.  It  has  since  be(»n  reported  in  the  United 
States  on  Licpiidambar  and  Quercus  species,  chiefly  on  the  lat- 
ter. 

With  the  clue  furnished  l)y  Professor  Farlow,  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'^  ilyc.  Univ.  No.  769,  and  that  so  far  as  its  gross  ap- 
l)earance  and  pycnidial  stage  (the  only  stage  present  in  my  speci-. 
men)  were  concerned,  I  could  not  distinguish  it  from  Diaporthc 
parasitica  Murr.  As  the  ascospore  stage  was  not  present,  I  did 
not  venture  to  claim  that  they  were  the  same  species. 


70 

The  writer  has  since  made  a  careful  hunt  for  Kndolhia  f/yrosu 
and  has  specimens  of  it  on  two  si)ecie8  of  oak  coHected  in  Cou 
necticut  and  the  District  of  Columbia.  Cultures  have  been  made 
of  these,  and  from  Diaporthc  parasitica  on  chestnut  obtaineil 
from  the  same  localities.  Our  studies  of  tliese  cultures  and 
specimens  from  various  localities  are  not  yet  complete,  but  Ihey 
have  gone  far  enough  to  say  definitely  that  Diaporthc  paramtica 
belongs  in  the  same  genus  with  the  Endothia  ffyrom  on  oak,  and 
at  least  is  very  closely  rehite<l  to  it,  thougli  at  present  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  ffj/rosa  on  chestnut  in  this  country  before  the  outbreak 
of  Diaporthe  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  oi)portunities  for  investi- 
gation along  this  line.  If  it  is  ever  prove<l  that  our  Endothia 
fjyrosa  €n  tlie  oak  is  exactly  the  same  as  Diaporthc  parasitica  on 
the  chestnut,  of  course  it  is  at  once  apparent  tliat  Diaporthc  para- 
sitica is  a  imtive  and  not  an  imported  fungus. 

A  second  observation  that  leads  me  to  believe  that  Diapnrthn 
parasititca  is  a  native  species  is  the  fact  that  frequently  in  (Con- 
necticut I  have  found  it  as  a  languishing  parasite  on  tlie  roots 
and  Imse  of  trees,  where  it  was  doing  no  very  apparent  harm, 
and  this  is  somewhat  the  way  Endothia  f/f/rosa  occurs  on  oak 
here  and  elsewhere,  and  is  also  tlie  wav  that  the  so-called  En- 
dothia  fjyrosa  on  chestnut  acts  in  Europe,  where  it  causes  no 
particular  trouble.  This  makes  me  believe  that  these 
particular  occurrences  of  Diaporthc  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  countiy  is  merely  an 
unusual  development  of  the  fungus  wiiich  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 

tmd  in  this  country,    In  Europe  Endothia  gyrom  b«s  been  re- 


80 

ported  on  eliestiiiit,  oak  and  various  otiier  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,  Winter  reportx^d  that  jt  produced  its 
pycnidial,  but  not  its  perfect  stage,  though  both  are  found  in 
Italy.  Now,  if  Endothia  (jjjrosa  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- 
jjarent  that  Endothia  (/yrosa  has  been  reported  mucli  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.  Eti- 
dotliia  (jyrosa  has  been  found  on  as  many  hosts  in  this  country 
as  in  Europe,  and  likewise  chiefly  from  the  south.  Why  may  Ave 
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  deThuemau'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  Endothia  (jyrosa,  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  (ho  IlarrlsbnrK  roiifcrourp  tlii»  wrilt-r  went  SiniMi  rspccinlly  (o  s<»c  If  Efut^thia  Plfi'OSa  or 
Diaporth'f  pnraxitim  ofviirnNl  tiicro  (ni  clu'stnnt,  as  Ructrf^torl  In  this  |>nper,  though  npvor  having; 
h(M»n  so  roportoit.  Stops  were  mndc  nt  Itonnoko  nn<l  Phu-kHbiirK,  Va.,  Bristol.  Va.,  and  in  Ten- 
noHHco  nml  nt  Ashpvillo  and  Tryou.  North  Ciirollna,  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 
fung'iH  occurred  as  a  langtilshlng  parasite  or  ns  a  saprophyte,  usually  at  the  base  or  on  the  roots  of 
the  trees,  and  was  never  found  forming  Isolated  cankers  on  the  otherwise  sound  sprouts,  as  Is 
Diaporthe  pnraMtirn  in  the  North.  Ai^parently  this  fungus  is  the  same  on  both  the  oak  and 
ehwtnut,  and  the  sHuie  thing  as  the  so-ealled  Kndnthia  gyro^a  on  the  same  hosts  in  Europe.  What 
Its  exact  relationship  is  to  IHaportha  paratiitira  has  not  yet  been  fully  determlnt»d.  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- 
Htica.  but  the  asco-s|K>n>s  are  evidently  as  n  whole  less  luxuriant;  that  is,  they  are  somewhat 
smaller,  and  especially  slightly  narrower.  Whether  these  differences  are  those  of  a  strain,  vartetJTt 
or  distinct  species,   is  yet  to  be  determined  by  cultures,  Jnocnlations,  aAd  further  stud^. 


81 

The  third  point  in  my  theory  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  Avinter  of  1903-4.  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,  who  has  made  a  specialty  of  the  diseases  and 
injuries  of  shade  and  forest  trees.  Various  experiment  stations 
and  other  publications  shoAV  that  the  fruit  trees  in  New  York, 
Michigan  and  Ohio  suffered  from  tliis,  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  thte  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 

6 


82 

sturdy  old  seedling  trees.  How  many  times  Ave  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 
wrong  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  and  burning  method  perhaps 
no  one  now  thoroughly  conversant  with  the  trouble  wall  d<.Miy, 
though  there  are  those  that  evidently  believe  it  can  be  controlled 
in  this  way.  Man  never  yet  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  wiiy  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- 
plete 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 
w^e  aim  to  save  not  only  the  healthy  plants  but  the  infected  ones 
as  well.  I  know  of  no  similar  practice,  outside  of  nursery  in- 
spections, except  that  applied  in  a  few  regions  for  the  control 
of  peach  yellows.  There  <he  infected  trees  only  are  destroyed, 
but  the  vellows  would  kill  those  anv  w^av  in  a  short  time.  There 
is,  however,  no  National  effort  to  control  peach  yellows  even  in 
this  w.iy  and  at  least  one  St<nte,  Connecticut,  that  started  under 
authority  of  law  to  inspect  orchards  and  to  destroy  all  infected 
trees,  repealed  that  law^  after  n  few  ^^nrs'  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  conditions  for  the  chest- 


83 

nut  will  of  course  bring  about  tlio  decline  of  the  fungus,  unless  it 
Im^  already  attained  an  unusual  and  lasting  virulence  from  its 
present  aggressiveness. 

That  chestnuts  have  in  the  past  in  our  southern  States  suffere<l 
from  disease  or  injury  of  some  kind  yet  unaccounted  for,  no  one 
\fho  has  looked  up  the  literature  of  the  subject  can  deny.  I  have 
gathered  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  Diaporthe  pasasitica,  despit-e  the  statement  of 
two  or  three  observers  who  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  Diaporthe  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  CHAIKMAN:  We  are  now  to  be  favored  by  hearing  an 
illustrated  lecture  on  Chestnut  Culture,  the  speaker  being  Pro- 
fessor Nelson  F.  Davis,  of  IJucknell  University,  Lewisburg,  Pa. 


CHESTNUT  CULTURE. 


AN   ILLUSTRATED   LECTURE   BY   PROFESSOR   NELSON   P.    DAVIS,   OP 

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. 
1  wish  to  show  you  to-night  what  has  been  done  in  spite  of  ene- 


84 

mies,  by  Mr.  C.  K.  Sober,  who  has  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  everything  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, 
sucli  as  the  weevil,  and  another  Avorse  than  tlie  weevil,  the  burr 
worm.  There  are  two  species  of  the  burr  worm,  one  of  which  is 
new  to  scientists.  It  belong  to  the  genus  Ilolcocera,  and  has  been 
named,  in  honor  of  Mr.  Sober,  Ilolcocera  Soberii,  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  nut*s 
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  enem3\  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  shoAved  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  typu-nl  cluster  of  burrs  of  tin- 


86 

Some  could  be  used,  of  course,  for  pulp  wood;  but  notice,  among 
the  old  stumi>s,  there  are  a  few  sprouts  coming  up.  These  are 
sprouts  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  present  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  Ave  approach  the  farm,  coming  near  to  the 
buildings,  you  can  see  tlie  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  tlie  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 
alK)ve  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 
ck*aring  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  gathering  the  nuts,  which  have  been  placed  in  bags  at 
this  particular  portion,  so  that  wo  are  just  entering  the  grove. 


86 

In  the  next  view,  the  largest  tree  at  the  right  is  about  nine 
years  old.  Really  tlie  work  from  1896  until  1900  consisted  in 
experimenting.  When  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  up  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  tliis  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  protected;  when 
fires  are  made,  to  burn  the  brush  and  rubbish,  theSe  need  to  be 
protected.  A  sawmill  was  set  up,  and  what  wood  was  valuable 
used  either  for  railroad  ties,  or  mine  props,  or  pulp  wood,  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  tw'o  on  this  side  were 
cut  off  about  the  point  where  the  hand  is,  and  these  two  were 
selected  because,  coming  from  tlie  stump,  tliey  came  from  lower 
down  and  a  little  farther  out  and  apparently  had  better  roots. 
So  two  were  selected  and  tw-o  wore  left.  The  two  were  grafted 
on  this  side  and  two  left,  in  case  of  injury  to  the  other  two;  so 
that,  if  anything  happened,  the  others  could  be  grafted  the  next 
season. 

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


r 


87 

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

This  shows  another  tree  from  wliich  four  sprouts  were  gi*afted. 
This  was  grafted  in  May,  and  in  June  the  sprouts  were  started. 
Of  course,  all  buds  below  the  graft  were  removed  in  order  to  pre- 
vent the  strength  passiu<;  uuw  tiu'  l>u<Ls. 

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  seiison's  gi-owth,  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  spring  this  limb  would  be  cut  off  here  (indicating),  this 
one  and  the  one  at  that  point,  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  sc^ason  is  very  short  during 
which  this  could  be  used,  because  the  bark  separates  from  tlie 
stock  so  early  that  the  union  won  hi  not  take  place. 

This  view  shows  one  of  the  trees,  showing  a  successful  union 
of  the  wedge  graft.  This  is  one  of  the  ohh»s<  trees  now  to  be 
secMi  in  the  grove. 


88 

Tliis  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,  1)8,  and  99  lived, 
so  that  there  are  only  a  feAV  of  these  surviving.  The  wedge  graft 
method  was  consequently  abandoned. 

Then  budding  was  tried.  This  metliod  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  them  lived.  The 
next  view  shows  such  a  case;  two  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  whij) 
graft.  It  should  be  inserted  at  a  considerable  dejith.  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  tliere  (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  comj)lete 
all  the  way  around. 

The  next  view  shoAvs  a  through  section,  showing  the  complete 
union.  Here  is  the  tongue  Avhich  held  them  together;  and  here 
is  another  section  through.  Occasionally  th(\y  decay  at  ihat 
point.     This  shows  a  perfect  union  of  the  whip  graft. 


89 

It  is  very  necessary  to  keep  tbe  buds  removed  from  below  the 
graft.  Tlie  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  Par*agon  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  veyy 
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.  The  wind  also  will  frequently  break 
off  a  tree  at  the  point  of  union,  if  the  union  is  not  perfect.  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,  many  were  lost  in  this  Avay  where  the  union  was  defective. 

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

Here  we  have  a  view  of  it  a  little  later.  All  the  roots  of  the 
other  trees  begin  to  sprout  and  rt  is  necessary  to  clean  out  every- 
thing. If  the  underbrush  is  allowed  to  grow,  it  will,  sooner  or 
later,  choke  out  the  trees  and  will  allow  enemies  to  develop;  you 
cannot  keep  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  mower.  In  many  places  the  grass  is  beginning  to  grow. 
I  wish  you  would  notice  how  clean  the  grove  is  in  places.  This 
is  the  condition  soon  after  the  grafting.  Then  it  was  necessary 
to  employ  from  twenty-five  to  fifty  men  to  clean  out  and,  in 
order  to  save  the  young  grafted  trees,  screens  were  made.  At 
one  time  I  saw  as  many  as  tAventy-fiA^e  of  these  screens.  They 
were  covered  with  asbestos  to  protect  them  from  the  fire,  and 
the  young  sprouts  that  h^ave  been  grafted  are  back  of  tlie  screens. 
These  men  are  grubbing  out  and  cleaning,  trying  to  get  the 
ground  clean  enough  to  raise  grass. 

Tliis  view^  shows  one  of  the  screens  a  little  nearer  and  some 
of  tlie  men,  who  rested  a  moment  wliile  I  took  the  pliotograph. 


90 

Here  they  are  again.  Even  after  tlie  trees  are  of  this  size,  it 
is  necessary  to  finish  the  cleaning.  Tliey  are  cleaning  out  every- 
thing; any  suspicious  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  oflf  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  trcv*  grafted  at  the  top,  and  this  a 
younger  tree,  two  years  old,  beginning  to  bear  nearly  as  many 
nuts  as  the  grafts  at  tlie  top  of  the  other  tree.  You  can  see, 
therefore,  why  that  method  was  abandoned.  The  Paragon  be- 
gins to  bear  very  early,  the  second  year  after  grafting;  occa- 
sionally the  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  typical  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. 

■ 

This  view  shows  two  trees  by  the  roadside,  one  two  years  old; 
<he  other  in  the  third  season  of  its  growth.  Notice  the  shape. 
They  were  cut  low,  so  as  to  secure  this  low  crown,  wliich  makes 
it  convenient  in  liarvesting  the.  nuts.  It  keeps  the  trees  low. 
It  is  like  it  is  with  a  peacli  troo;  the  shjipe  is  much  the  same  as 
that  of  a  peach  tree. 


Group  of  Paragon  chestnut  trees,   two,  tout     anil  aix  years  old. 


91 

This  is  a  view  of  an  ideal  tree,  three  years  old,  with  a  low 
crown,  two  feet  from  tlie  ground. 

In  this  view,  the  huckleberries  are  beginning  to  grow  under- 
neatb;  all  through  the  grove  the  huckleberries  have  filled  prac- 
tically everything.  The  ground  has  been  burned  over,  to  burn 
up  the  leaves  and  the  burrs,  which  contain  the  enemies,  and  the 
huckleberries  and  chestnut  sprouts  are  coming  up;  but  it  is  nec- 
essary to  keep  these  down. 

This  view  shows  how  that  same  ground  was  cleared,  and 
how  it  appeared  in  the  winter  time!  Everything  that  could 
be  removed  was  grubbed  off  and  huriUMl,  the  screens  which  you 
saw  before  being  used. 

This  is  a  young  tree,  three  years  old,  in  the  third  summer. 
Prom  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  portion  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  by  the  edges,  as  the 
sprouts  come  up.  They  were  grafted  until  there  is  a  stand  all 
over  the  fonr  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 
October  and  the  nuts  were  ripening  on  the  tree. 

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


92 

tiiue.  Ill  that  row,  in  wliicli  there  are  altogether  about  twenty- 
iiiue  trees,  three  yeurs  ago  there  inalured  niue  and  a  half  bush- 
els of  nuts,  just  on  tliat  old  hedgerow,  tluit  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  on  single  trees.  The 
trees  on  the  four  hundred  acres  last  yi^ar  were  practically  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  neinled. 

This  view  shows  the  same  trees  in  1911.  The  fence  by  the  side 
shows  the  growth  from  1904  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  wliich  might  have  existed  up  to  the  top  of  the  ridge. 
That  is  Mr.  Sober's  line.  A  fence  is  built, — j^ou  can  just  see 
the  posts, — and  that  fence  is  a  mile  long,  running  from  one  end 
to  the  other,  and  below  it  is  what  you  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  tlie  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  tlie  edge.  This  has  been  possi- 
ble with  Mr.  Sober,  and  it  is  possible  anywhere  wiif^re  the  chest- 
nut grows.  You  can  make  the  change  from  this  to  what  you 
saw  before. 

This  is  the  identical  spot  that  you  wore  looking  at  in  the  pic- 
ture preceding.  The  preceding  picture  was  taken  five  yc^ars 
ago,  and  here  it  is  to-day.  Th<»se  trees  have  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  tliat  last  y(»ar  on  tliis  fifty  acres  there  was 
scarcely  a  weevil,  and  scarcely  a  burr  worm,  in  the  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  sheep  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 
were  gathered.  The  men  harvested  the  nuts  and  afterwards 
the  pigs  were  turned  in  and  found  enough  to  fatten  themselves. 
I  think  that  on  the  wasted  mountain  land  in  this  State,  you  could 
fatten  on  chestnuts  all  the  pigs  that  we  raise,  if  we  used  it  for 
nothing  else. 

In  han'^esting,  the  nuts  gathered  in  1911  were  hauled  to  a 
threshing  machine.  It  was  necessary  to  have  a  ma(*hine  made, 
the  problem  of  thresliing  the  nuts,  getting  them  (uit  of  the  burrs, 
becoming  so  great.  This  shows  a  photograph  of  the  men  hauling 
the  burrs  before  they  are  (piite  ripe,  and  placing  them  in  piles. 
They  rii)en,  the  burrs  open,  and  the  nuts  can  then  be  picked  out. 

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

Harvesting  before  we  had  the  machine.  The  men  had  to  pick 
them  out.  The  nuts  were  taken  out  and  placed  in  sacks,  all 
by  hand.  This  shows  a  pile  of  burrs.  Every  burr  had  to  be 
opened  with  gloves,  and  it  was  very  t (id  ions.  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  bj^  a  little  gasoline  engine;  the  nuts  ran  out  into  a  basket, 
were  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  was  sent 
to  Seattle,  Washington.  After  the  season  was  over,  orders  were 
taken  for  two  carloads  to  be  delivered  at  Seattle  next  fall,  and 


94 

tlie  same  iduu  may  take  tbe  entire  crop  next  year.  What  that 
will  be  I  cannot  say.  This  year  it  was  betwc*en  three  and  four 
thousand  bushels,  including  good  and  bad  nuts. 

In  this  view  typical  burrs  are  shown.  Notice  liow  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  slirunken  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  ffbm  one  tree,  a 
little  seedling  three  years  old. 

Forest  fires  were  started  in  the  mountains  above  by  hunters, 
carelessly  or  otherwise.  They  run  down  into  the  grove,  so  that 
it  is  necessary  to  watch  cautiously.  Perhaps,  however,  the  burn- 
ing of  the  part  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. 

Tliis  shows  another  point,  showing  on  one  side  where  the  fire 
just  went  through.  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  w^as  girdled 


95 

by  a  meadow  mouse,  lly  keepiii};  them  clean,  however,  eiittiiig 
the  grass  away  and  burning  it  over,  the  meadow  miee  are  kei)t 
down  with  the  other  enemies. 

The  seventeen  year  locust  is  another  enemy.  There  is  a  brood 
of  them  every  three  of  four  years,  it  seems.  In  1903,  1906  and 
1910  thousands  of  them, — millions,  I  supi)ose, — 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  crawh^d 
out. 

This  view  show\s  a  little  wild  indigo  plant,  on  whicli  tliere 
were  two  hundre<l  and  fifty  cicadas.  The  injury  comes  when 
they  deposit  their  eggs. 

The  next  view  shows  two  branches  recently  stung  by  the 
cicada.  The  eggs  are  dei)osited,  making  holes  through  wliicli 
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  branches  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  1906  and  the  photograph  was  taken  in 
1910.  They  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. 

This  tree  was  stripped  by  the  striped  oak  worm.  There  are 
other  enemies.  Mr.  Sober  and  I  have  been  fighting  enemies  for 
ten  years.  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  the  chestnut  blossoms,  a  little  motli  lays  aii  egg  on  the 
young  fruit.  The  egg  hatches  and  a  little  worm  burrows  its 
way  into  tlie  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  hole  and  the  nut  afterwards  frequently  moulds. 

This  shows  the  adult  moth,  the  Holcocera  Soberii.  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  the  cocoon  is  made  in  tlie  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. 

Tills  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  scarcely  injured;  but  if  tlioy  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,  tlie  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 


07 

plan  to  encourage  the  binln  or  not.  Tin*  woodpeckers  are  there, 
feeding  on  insects  and  the  beetle  larvae  under  the  bark.  It  may 
be  a  good  chance  to  spread  the  chestnut  bliglit,  but  they  help  to 
control  the  moths.  They  feed  on  hundreds  of  them.  You  see 
them  hunting  every  \yhere.  Th(»  insect-loving  birds  are  there. 
You  find  the  vireos,  the  red-eyed  vireo  especially;  you  find  the 
American  redstart;  ycni  find  warblers.  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  BelaninuSy  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,  whicli  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  lielanivs. 

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  t^ken  in  July.  In  al)out  two  weeks 
they  mature.  The  next  view  shows  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  liavc  never  been  able  to  see  tliem  do  it, 
but  in  some  way  I  tliink  tlie  eggs  must  be  inserted  by  this 
method. 

The  demand  for  tlie  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 
bushels  of  nuts,  burying  them,  and  now  a  little  later  they  will 
begin  to  sprout.  When  they  are  sprouted,  in  beds  of  sand, 
tliey  <are  taken  out  and  planted.  The  method  is  before  the  nuts 
are  planted,  to  pinch  the  large  tap  roots  oflf  at  this  point,  so 
that  a  fibrous  root  is  started.  Otherwise  this  (indicating)  is 
wluit  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.  This  one  was  not  pinched  oflf,  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,  and  liere  you  see  them  after 
the  first  summer's  growth  in  the  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  bett>er.  Last  year 
fifty  seedlings,  two  and  three  years  old,  had  nuts  on  them. 

This  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.     Tliey  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. 


I  I'araeon  nuts — lo  be  graft<Kl  with  Solit'r  I'arngoD  dies 


Paragon  chestnut  trees,   9  yenrs  after  grafiiag 


1)9 

Now  we  Avill  ji^o  to  the  barn  cind  j;(»t  otir  liorse  and  go  hack  to 
the  station  at  Paxinos.     Ciood  night.     (Applause). 

DR.  MICKLEnOROUGII:  Will  you  permit  a  question? 

THE  CHAIRMAN:  We  will. 

DB.  MICKLEROROUGn:  I  would  like  U>  ask  the  Professor 
if  the  blight  has  appeared  in  the  Irish  Valley? 

THE  CHAIRMAN :  If  you  do  not  mind  withliolding  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 
shonld  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  beeta 
appointed.  ' 

The  committee  as  made  up,  is  as  follows: 

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

Maine, Charles  E.  Lewis. 

New  Hampshire, Philip  W.  Ayres. 

JIassachusetts,    F.  W.  Rane. 

Rhode  Island,   lesse  I>.  Mowry. 

Ccmnecticut,    (ieorge.P.  Clinton. 

New  York,   (l.  G.  Atwood, 

If.  P.  Marshall, 

George  L.   Barrus. 

New  Jersey, Melville  T.  Cook. 

Pennsylvania,  I.  C.  Williams, 

Harold  Peirce, 

W.  T.  Creasy, 

Henry  S.  Drinker. 

Delaware,  Wesley  Webb. 

Maryland, J.  B.  S.  Norton, 

William  McCulloh  Brown. 
Virginia, George  A.  Kerr, 

George  B,  Keegjell. 


100 

AV^est  Virginifi, N.  J.  (luldings. 

Ohio,    A.  I).  Solby. 

II.  II.  Heclitel. 

North  Carolina, II.  K.  Fulton. 

Tonnosseo,   J.  \V.  Fisher. 

Canada,    " Dr.  If.  T.  Giissow. 

Inni  very  rongli  way,  it  has  be(Mi  endeavored  to  have  tlie  num- 
b(T  of  members  from  tlie  States  indieate  something  as  to  the 
nnnd)er  of  persons  who  accepted  invitations  to  attend  this  Con- 
ference. The  Cbair  will  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  pnrpose  of  organizing. 
Now,  according  to  tlie  program,  we  are  to  have  a  general  discus- 
sion. The  presiding  officer  almost  feels  tliat  lie  should  oflFer 
yon  an  apologj%  because  he  is  not  personally  ac(inainted  with  all 
the  persons  who  may  wish  to  si)eak.  He  appnn'iates  that  there 
are  some  illustrious  persons  in  the  audience  and  that  he  ouglit 
to  know  them;  but,  as  he  do(»s  not  know  everyone,  he  will  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 
clearlv. 

The  papers  tliat  we  hav(*  heard  are  all  b(»fore  you  for  discus- 
sion. It  is  your  meeting.  The  Cbairman  is  your  servant,  and 
if  you  desire  to  have  tin*  course  of  procedure  changed  in  any 
way  at  any  time,  it  is  your  duty  so  to  state.  We  will  now  heiir 
the  first  question. 

DR.  MICKLEROKOUCUI,  of  Brooklyn :  My  questicm  was,  Mr. 
Chairman,  whether  the  Diaporthc  pamsitica  had  appeared  in 
the  Irish  Valley. 

TROFESSOK  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  nurs<^ry  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 


101 

fire  that  so  closely  resembles  it  that  it  is  hard  to  tell  it.  It  is 
sometimes  doubtful.  1  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 

1)R,  J.  liUSSELL  SMITH,  of  Pennsylvania:  Mr.  Chairman: 
before  the  cutters-out  and  antl-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  iiass- 
iiig,  that  the  waste  land  of  this  Stale  would  feed  as  many  pigs 
as  the  whole  State  iu'(m1u((»s.  Wo.  have  lots  of  pigs,  yi^t  that 
assertion  as  to  the  po.ssibiliti(%s  of  (lie  waste  land  is  uiiderst^ited. 

Man,  in  looking  at  the  botanical  realm,  began  at  the  wrong 
end.  When  the  hunmn  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  gianta  of  nature,  bearing  hickory  nuts,  wal- 
nuts, persimmons,  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  dillicult  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 
crop.  Chestnut-growing  in  Europe,  as  in  Italy  for  example,  is 
an  established  industry.  Oflicial  reports  show  an  annual  pro- 
duction of  chestnutij  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 
nmny  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  those  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  i)ig  feed.  Furthermore,  it  permits  the  use  of 
land  which  ia  now  entirely  unusable  for  anything  except  forest, 
which  is  a  very  low  grade  i)roducer  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  laughed  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  t(}u  thousand  dollars  for  the  people  of  the  n(vxt  decade.  (Ap- 
plause). 

DR.  MERKEL,  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 
\ alley  and  out  of  the  surrounding  country? 

PROFESSOR  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  Diaporthc^  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,  when  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  tliink  it  is 
the  same  thing. 


103 

DK.  MERKEL:  Then,  apparently,  the  clean-cutting  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? 

PROFESSOR  DAVIS :  Yes. 

DK  A.  K.  FISHER,  of  the  Bureau  of  Biological  Survey, 
Washington:  Mr.  Chairman:  I  would  like  to  ask  Dr.  Stewart 
what  evidence  he  has  to  show  thjU  birds  are  important  factors 
in  spreading  the  disease?  Dr.  Metcalf  made  that  statement 
in  the  Farmers'  Bulletin,  that  birds  were  one  of  the  irai)ortant 
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  thought  it  most 
probable.  Now  the  very  birds  which  are  accused  of  carrying 
blight  are  the  woodpeckers,  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 
I>air  or  more  of  birds,  which  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  much  more  liable  to  carry  the  germs  of  this  disease.  Wlien 
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 
kind  and  the  conditions  are  favorable,  the  infection  is  going  to 
occur.  That  is  the  kind  of  evidence.  It  is  inferential.  As  for 
actually  knowing  that  infections  have  resulted  in  that  way,  we 
have  no  evidence.  Of  course,  it  is  exceedingly  dilHcult,  if  not 
impossible,  to  get  it.  As  to  thii  migration  of  tlie  woo(li)eckers, 
I  have  it  on  the  authority  of  a  compeleiit  ornithologist  that  some 
kinds  of  them  do  travel  long  distances. 

DR.  FISIIER :  There  are  certain  forms  of  woodpeckers  which 
go  south  in  winter,  but  those  are  not  the  birds  whicli  are  highly 
specialized  whicli  secure  their  food  from  the  trees.  They  are 
birds  which  seek  their  food  like  the  flicker,  which  feeds  largely 
on  nuts,  and  the  redheaded  woodpecker,  which  feeds  quite  ex- 
tensively on  grasshoppers  and  other  ins<^cts,  as  well  as  fruits; 
but  our  woodpeckers,  our  native,  resident  woodpeckers,  are 
rarely  migrators.  As  to  the  injury  to  the  trees,  the  nut  gatli- 
erers,  it  seems  to  me,  produce  very  many  more  wounds  than  the 
woodpeckers  produce.  They  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. 

MR.  DETWILER:  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  which  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  begun  this  study,  has  had  its  bark  punctured  by 
woodpeckers,  in  most  cases  with  scores  of  holes." 

The  other  pertinent  observation  is; 


105 

"We  were  surprised  by  tlic  large  number  of  grubs  we  were  able 
to  find  in  infected  trees.  They  seemed,  too,  to  be  generally  dis- 
tributed throughout  the  bark  of  the  tree." 

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

PROFESSOK  DAVIS:  Air.  Sober  wishes  me  to  extend  an  in- 
vitation to  any  of  you,  or  all  of  you,  to  visit  his  place,  when  he 
will  show  you  this  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? 

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

DK.  A.  H.  GRAVES,  of  New  Haven:  Mr.  Chairman:  There  is 
one  thTng  that  has  been  overlooked  here,  and  that  is  that  the 
spores  are  very  sticky  in  these  exudations  from  the  pustules. 
They  all  stick  together,  and  the  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  might  possibly  be  washed  down  the  tree  by  the  rain 
and  mingle  with  the  dust  at  tlie  base  of  the  tree;  but,  as  is  said 
somewhere  by  some  authority,  these  chestnut  trees  do  not  usually 
grow  in  the  dusty  places.  Tlie  spores  that  are  washed  down  the 
tree  would  be  covered  up  by  leaves  and  there  would  be  very  lit- 
tle likelihood  tliat  the  wind  would  carry  them.  I  think,  Mr. 
Cliairman,  the  sticky,  nature  of  the  spores  sliould  be  considered 
in  this  connection,  with  the  dissemination  of  the  spores  by  birds 
and  insects. 

DR.  W.  J.  GIDDINGS,  of  West  Virginia:  Mr.  Cliairman:  I 
want  to  say  sometliing  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- 
sibility, in  states  where  they  do  not  feel  it  would  be  wise  to 
nuike  tlie  inspection  a  thorough  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  the  number  of  chestnut  trees 


106 

thei'e,  and  the  aiiioimt  of  iiifiH'tion.  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  has  been  suggested  by  some,  and  possibly  get  those 
stiites  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.  HARSHBERGER,  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.  1  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  years. 

Pennsylvania  is  the  Keystone  State.  She  is  so  situated  with 
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- 
iiig  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  Stat^  has  appropriated  is  merely 
a  drop  in  tlie  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 

ft 

ment  in  Pennsylvania  will  be  held  up  as  an  example  of  a  patrio- 
tic movement  of  the  entire  people  in  an  attempt  to  prevent  the 
destruction  of  our  native  forests,  which  are  going  all  too  fast. 
So  this  movement,  it  seems  to  me  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  result  is  reached,  we 
can  point  with  pride  to  the  attempt  which  has  been  made  to 
check  the  disease. 

At  one  point  there  occurred  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  suggested  that  the  chestnut  blight  came  from  Italy.  A 
friend  of  mine,  a  botanist  in  New  York  city,  said  that  he  had 
often  noticed  that  around  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 
8ome  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,  PresidcMit  Lumber  lilanufactur- 
ers'  Association  of  Connecticut:  Mr.  Chairman:  I  noticed  on  tlie 
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  many  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  afifected.  I  know  two  men  about  sixty 
years  of  age  who  state  that  they  are  positive  that  they  saw  this 
blight  tw^enty  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  us  tomorrow  inoriiing,  whether  there  is 
any  data  to  show  what  the  expense  is  to  cut  out,  remove  and  take 
up  the  infected  chestnut  trees  where  the  blight  is  known  to  be 
working. 

MR.  I.  C.  WILLIAMS:  In  answer  to  the  gentleman's  ques- 
tion, I  would  like  to  say  that  tlie  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  what 
knowledge  we  liave  on  that  subject,  will  be  laid  before  you  in 
the  morning  in  the  first  paper. 

Some  of  tlie  speakers  tliis  aft4»rno(m  se(*med  U}  be  utt<Tly  aj)- 
palled  at  the  fact  tliat  I\»nnsylvania  hiis  thrown  two  hundred 
and  seventy-live  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  liy  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  <lollars  ui)on  which  we  are  privilegcnl 
U>  go  until  the  firs(  of  June,  1J)13.   (Applause). 

This  Commission  is  built  upon  business  prinei[)les.  It  is  not 
being  dashed  about  wildly,  like  a  iK)tato  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  that  it  will  get  lost  in  the  blighted  chestnut 
woods,  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  there  is  anj^  virtue  in  them,  they  will 
be  followed  to  a  finality.  If  there  is  no  virtue  in  them,  we  want 
the  world  to  know  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  work  of  this  Commission.  (Ap- 
plause).     We  do  not  care  a  rap  what  someone's  belief  is.    If  he 


109 

has  any  facts  to  bring  to  us  and  lay  before  lis,  we  are  willing 
to  accept  them.  We  want  facts;  we  want  knowledge.  We  bave 
heard  a  great  deal  about  Kcientific  inquiry.  1  understand  that 
science  is  the  pursuit  of  knoAvledge,  and  that  its  business  is  to 
get  facts.  Science  simply  describes.  It  has  nothing  to  do  with 
explanations.  Therefore,  if  s<»ience  will  describe  to  us  the  things 
that  we  are  trying  to  learn,  we  will  be  greatly  indebted  to  science, 
c  and  we  by  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  tlie  help  of  every  scientist  in  the  land  who 
is  interested  en<nigh  to  pursue  a  line  of  work  and  make  deduc- 
tions therefrom  that  are  useful  in  a  work  of  this  kind.  We  want 
to  go  liand  in  hand  with  everybody  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  deU^rmine  whether  or  not  a  thing  can 
or  cannot  be  done.  The  experiment^  that  are  being  made  by 
the  Commission  are  for  the  purpose  of  finding  out.  We  heard  a 
great  deal  al)Out  the  iueffeotualness  of  the  cutting-out  method 
of  combating  this  disease,  or  checking  its  spread.  I  do  not  know 
upon  what  foundation  or  upon  wliat  i)remises  these  conclusions 
are  drawn.  We  have  attemi)ted  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  ineffecttual,  and  how  much 
cutting  out  they  have  done,  and  what  real  knowledge  they  have 
derived  from  that  kind  of  work.  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- 
memlKir  was  one  continued  negation,  I  would  like  to  ask  him  to 
lell  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 
stf)ck.  Now  if  there  is  no  use  in  cutting  out  a  diseased  tree,  if 
there  is  no  real  effectual  value  in  doing  any  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  hands  in  impotent  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  that,  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  ouglit  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  interested  in  hearing  it.     (Applause). 

Dll.  STEWART:  I  will  answer  that  question  in  this  way: 
That  tliis  diseased  nursery  stock  may  transmit  the  disease  long 
distances.  In  that  way  tlie  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  notliing  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  subject  in  which  I  took  a  deep  interest, — one 'which 
leads  to  this  matter,  During  tlie  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  there.  In  going  from  here 
to  Washington,  or  going  anywhere,  if  I  knew  of  any  farmer  who 
lived  in  that  neighborhood,  I  would  ask  him  what  he  knew  about 
it,  and  none  of  them  could  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  those  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  w^hether  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  ti^r  food,  and  I  suppose  there 
are  not  enough  coming  back  to  pick  up  all  the  fruit  which  is 
planted,  and  that  this  is  the  way  it  grows  up  into  scrub  oaks. 
(Applause). 

PROFESSOR  W.  D.  CLARK,  Pa.,  State  College :  Ladies  and 
Gentlemen:  I  came  here  to-day  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  unscientifit  manner 
of  taxing  timber  lands,  and  to  tlie  disease  known  as  forest  fires. 
Here  are  two  diseases  wliieli  tlireaten  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  planting  and  growth  of  any  forest  trees.  These 
diseases  are  not  well-known  diseases  which  are  beyond  our  con- 
trol. They  are  entirely  within  the  control  of  human  agents,  and 
I  would  be  grateful  if  I  could  impress  upon  the  mind  of  every 
member  in  attendance  upon  tliis  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  immupe  from  this  dreaded  dis(iase,  pine  tretis, 
oak  trees,  hickory  trees,  poi)Iar  trees,  valuable  timber  trees,  we 
would  have  so  many  timber  trees  flourishing  in  the  State  of 
Pennsylvania  that  it  really  would  not  nmtter  a  very  great  deal  if 
we  had  no  more  chestnut  trees.  We  could  possibly  get  along 
without  them.     (Applause). 

ME.  F.  B.  JEWETT,  of  Susquehanna  county,  Pa. :  Mr.  Chair- 
man and  Gentlemen:  I  Citine  to  the  City  of  Harrisburg  to-day 
not  particularly  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  phase  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  tlirown  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  harv(\sted.  The  question  that  I  wish  to  ask,  if  Professor 
Djivis  is  present,  is,  how  they  could  get  those  green  burrs  off 
from  the  trees  witlumt  injuring  them?  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  merchant  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  shipment  of  chestnuts,  with  this 
advice:  ^'Ship  chestnuts  as  fast  as  possible.  Your  shipment 
was  the  first  that  came  iuto  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  Y''ork  that  same  fall 
brought  me  only  |2.o0  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.  ]5ut  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  was  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  tliose  sunflowers  came  there?  If 
you  will  tell  me  that,  I  will  tell  you  what  spreads  the  fungus  on 
your  trcHJs.  It  is  nature.  You  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  seventy-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  l''ork 
State  can  sympathize  with  us  somewhat  in  the  matter  of  Capi- 
tol graft.  You  remember  you  got  through  with  it  in  Albany.  We 
got  thrcmgh  with  it  without  as  many  years  of  experience  as  you 
(lid,  but  I  remember  very  well,  after  the  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" 
grewj  and  we  got  out  of  it  with  thirteen  millions.     T  am  very 

8 


^      114 

thankful  that  the  "chestnut"  of  the  old  appropriation  i^  improv- 
ing; that  we  have  the  two  hundred  and  seventy-live  thousand 
dollars  appropriated,  and  that  we  are  getting  out  of  it  with 
about  tw^enty  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  which  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 
w^hen  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  w'e  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  tlie  spread  of  the  disease  by 
the  spores:  During  the  summer  the  conldial  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,  w^hen  they 
are  dissolved,  it  takes  about  eight  or  nine  thousand,  put  end  to 


115 

end,  to  measure  an  inch.  They  are  exceedingly  small  micro- 
scopic objects  and  they  are  readily  carried  by  the  wind,  and  not 
very  much  by  the  woodpecker.  That  is  my  judgement  of  the  case. 
The  wind  will  carry  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  lias 
spread  with  a  great  deal  of  certainty  and  rapidity.  Now  these 
spores,  when  they  are  lodged  upon  a  chestnut  tree,  are  washed 
down  by  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  was  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  would 
like  to  raise  some  questions  in  connection  with  Dr.  Clinton's 
statement.  I  infer  two  things  from  it :  One  is  that  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? 


IIG 

PROFESSOR  CLINTON :  I  do  not  know  that  I  made  the 
statement  tliat  gypsy  moth  work  in  Massachan setts  was  not 
effective,  I  said  it  meant  a  long  light  and  a  continuous  fight. 
This  chestnut  blight,  from  the  re-infection,  would  make  the  fight 
a  continuous  one.  You  could  not  do  it  up  and  leave  it  tliere. 
You  would  have  to  keep  at  it  forever,  provided  the  material  con- 
tinued. Regarding  the  peach  yellows  law,  my  statement  was 
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  ihul  that  same  difficulty  with  the  farmers 
in  Pennsylvania  that  you  W(nild  in  Connecticut. 

DR.  MERKEL,  of  N.  Y. :  Mr.  Chairman:  I  have  been  on 
my  feet  continuously  ever  since  Mr.  Williams  spoke,  and  was 
about  to  give  it  up.  Some  of  the  points  I  wanted  to  bring  out 
have  already  been  brought  out.  However,  I  want  to  thank  Mr. 
Williams.  1  want  to  thank  the  great  State  of  Pennsylvania  for 
passing  that  law.  Pennsylvania  has  shown  all  the  other  States 
in  the  Union  what  it  is  t )  [jiiss  an  unselfish  law%  If  we  could 
only  have  a  Federal  law  that  would  be  as  broad  as  the  law  of 
I^ennsylvania  ought  to  be  and  could  easily  be  made,  by  simply  in- 
si^rting  the  words  after  "the  chestnut  tree  bliglit,"  "and  any  other 
fungous  or  insect  pest,"  we  would  have  no  trouble  with  our  fun- 
gous or  insect  pests  after  a  certain  length  of  time.  Sometime  ago 
I  WTote  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  tlieir  plans.  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  unselfisli  effort  for  their  fello-w  men. 

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


117 

year,  and  in  that  desk  is  about  everything  that  has  been  said, 
or  thought,  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-day  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  that  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 wiiat  they  would  do  with  a  chestnut  tree  in  their  own  yard 
that  was  infected  with  this  disease,  they  would  probably  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  tlie  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  sliglitly  infect(*d,  asking, 
urging,  forcing  them  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,  their  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  the  borders  and  carry  on  u 
missionary  work,  or  something  stronger,  and  see  if  we  cannot 
cut  a  dividing  line?  Let  scientific  men  go  on  with  tlieir  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  tliousand  dollars  spent  now 
may  result  in  a  saving  of  that  valuable  property  lying  all  to  the 
west  and  south  of  us.     (Applause). 

DR.  J.  RUSSELL  SMITH,  of  Pennsylvania:  Mr.  Cliairman: 
Professor  Clinton  advanced  a  v(*ry  interesting  i)oint;  that  it 
was  the  dry  weather  that  made  tliese  trees  amenable  to  blight. 
The  evidence  was  that  people  in  Connecticut  tliought  the  dry 
weather  had  killed  other  trees  tlmt  died,  if  I  remember  the 


118 

geutlemaii  corivctly.  It  s(M»nis  to  mo  tliat  that  matter  of  the 
drought  would  be  much  better  tested  by  sliowing  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  CHAIltMAN:  Can  j^ou  answer  that  in  a  word,  Pro- 
fessor Clinton? 

PEOFESSOR  CLINTON:  I  was  giving  the  various  things 
that  weaken  trees.  Drought  is  one  of  them.  AVe  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  the  drought,  because  when  a  tree  is  trained  to  live  in 
a  moist  place,  during  a  drought  it  will  suffer  more  tlian  a  troi? 
on  higher  land  which  has  been  used  to  dry  soil. 

MR.  CRANMER,  of  Pennsylvania:  Mr.  Chairman:  While 
still  well  on  the  sunny  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,  commonly  called  the  potato  bug.  As  a  little 
boy  about  this  high  (indicating)  I  was  put  in  between  the  rows 
to  cat^h  those  fellows  and  get  them  off  the  vines.  Naturally 
they  appeared  on  the  vines  of  other  farmers  in  that  section,  and 
many  of  tlie  old  fellows  shook  their  heads  in  despair.  They 
said  "We  will  never  raise  any  more  po<a(x>es.  Tlie  potato  crops  . 
are  done  in  America."  My  fatlier  did  not  feel  that  way,  although 
I  would  have  been  i)retty  well  satisfied  if  he  had.  lie  made  me 
hunt  potato  bugs,  and  then  we  later  began  to  use  tJie  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  hold  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  liave  heard  much  to-day.    There  have  been  numer- 


119 

ous  expressions  of  oi)Jnioiis  and  of  gnesswork.  We  have  yet 
to  hear  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  any  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  8.  Drinker,  whose  name  appears  in  the  roster 
of  officials  of  the  American  Forestry  Association^  and  who  is 
president  of  Lehigh  University.  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  hardwoods  of  Pennsvlvania.  We  were  exceed- 
ingly  fortunate,  some  years  ago,  in  having  heard  from  the  lips 
of  Mr.  C.  W.  Levitt,  an  eminent  landscape  engineer  of  New  York 
City,  the  warning  that  our  chestnut  trees  were  likely  to  be  visited 
with  an  insidious  enemy,  which  would  destroy  them  all.  It  was 
not,  however,  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  which  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  brown  pustules. 
This  tree  was  immediately  cut  down  and  portions  sent,  after  all 
other  portions  were  burned,  to  Mr.  I.  C.  Williams,  Deputy  State 
Commissioner  of  Forestry  of  Pennsylvania,  who  placed  it  in 
incubation  and  pronounced  it  the  chestnut  bark  blight,  or  dis- 
ease. I  am  not  familiar  with  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,  when  it  appeared, 
and  in  1911,  we  have  done  exactly  as  was  recommended  to  us 
by  Mr.  Williams  and  by  Dr.  Rothrock,  who  visited  us  during 
this  period  of  time  and  walked  through  our  coppice  grove  of 
chestnut.  I  am  not  able  to  say,  after  extended  experience  along 
this  line,  that  all  trees  which  are  treated  by  severe  pruning, 
which  have  been  touched  by  this  blight,  may  be  saved.  We  do 
know,  however,  that  we  have  tided  trees  over  one  ye^r  and  two 


120 

years,  that  were  strikcMi  with  tlie  blight,  by  removing  all  such 
portions  as  were  afTeitt^d  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  Kiver  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  tlie  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  wo,  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 
w^e  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  lino.     (Applause). 

DR.  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 
inst«ances, — probably  there  is  more  there  than  we  think, — 
but  we  have  observed  this  that  wherever  it  has  been  found,  that 
it  was  at  an  altitude  of  loss  than  800  feet.  Most  of  the  chestnut 
timber  that  is  healthy,  and  tlie  greatest  majority  of  it,  is  at  an 
altitude  of  more  than  a  thousand  feet,  <ind  on  none  of  that  which 
is  more  than  a  thousand  feet  above  the  sea  level  has  anv  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  CIIAIEMAN :  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  kindly  answer  that  question? 

PROFESSOR  DAVIS:  In  September,  when  the  burrs  are 
gi'een,  you  can  shake  them  from  the  trees  as  you  can  apples, 
and  the  entire  crop  has  Imhmi  harvested  witliout  frost.  W  hen 
they  are  shaken  off,  they  are  allowed  to  dry  a  little  while.  When 
you  shake  them  off  in  September  they  color  up  brown  and  the 
frost,  I  think,  has  nothing  to  do  with  it. 

THE  CUAIRMAN:  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  cliestnut  bark  dis- 
ease?" Of  course,  it  will  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  what  has  been  accomplished,  and  in  a  word, 
the  main  features  of  the  method,  1  feel  sure  it  will  be  appre- 
ciated. 

DR.  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 
where  spores  have  been  found  on  the  stump  of  an  old  tree.  In 
many  cases,  I  am  sure  from  Dr.  Metcalf'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  miglit  very 
well  be  expected  to  have  tlie  fungus  at  this  time. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :  It  seems  now,  the  time  being  half  past 
ten,  that  Ave  had  best  do  one  of  two  things:  either  take  a  recess 
until  to-morrow  morning  at  sharp  nine  o'clock,  or  deciide  to  spend 


122 

the  rest  of  the  night  here  and  finish  this  subject  The  Chair 
learns  that  Mr.  H.  P.  Marshall  is  not  here  and  therefore  cannot 
serve  on  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  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. 

MR.  THALHEIMER,  of  Reading,  Pa.:  Mr.  Chairman:  I 
was  listening  to  the  gentleman  from  New  York.  I  think  he  has 
the  proper  theory,  that  is,  tliat  the  spores  are  spread  by  tlie 
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,  Lancewood  in  English  and  Para- 
dise tree  ill  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  they  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  CHAIRMAN:  As  President  Drinker  cannot  serve  on 
the  Committee  on  Resolutions,  Mr.  Green  is  asked  to  serve  in 
his  place. 

We  will  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,  February  21,  1912,  9  o'clock  A.  M. 

THE  CHAIKMAN:  The  meeting  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  ('hairman,  and  he  very  heartily  ap- 
proves of  the  suggestion,  tliat  we  should  start  our  morning  ses- 
sion with  a  good  taste  in  our  mouths,  which  would  be  provided 
by  hearing  a  few  remarks  froin  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.  ROTnRO(4v:  Mr.  Cliairmau  and  Gentle- 
men: This  question  of  chestnut  blight,  although  of  course  it  is 
a  portion  of  the  forestry  work  of  the  State,  is  somewhat  foreign 
to  the  line  in  which  1  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  DelJarry  at  Strass- 
burg,  Germany.  DeRarry  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  driftetl  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  l)usily  en- 


gaged  in  liudiiig  out  liow  (lie  fiiii{;iis  Ibat  produced  the  trouble 
in  the  wine-growing  districts  found  its  access  into  the  vines.  I 
had  the  pleasure  of  liaving  Professor  DeHarry  point  out  to  me 
himself  the  first  spore  that  I  ever  saw,  sending  its  germ  threads 
down  into  the  tissue  of  the  plant.  I  do  not  know  who  discovered 
the  Bordeaux  mixture,  hut  I  do  know  that  that  was  very  in- 
fluential in  limiting  the  spread  of  the  disease  and  rc^storiug  the 
wine  industrv  to  its  normal  and  natural  condition.  I  do  not  be- 
lieve,  however,  that  it  was  dis(*over(*d  by  our  scientific  friends; 
but  they  did  discover  tlie  life  history  of  the  disease,  which  was 
a  most  important,  permanent  conlributiou  to  the  vine-growing, 
wine-produciug  iiuluslry  of  tlie  Ohl  Worhl.  Now  it  secans  to 
me  that  we  are  in  a  sonu'wiuit  siiuihir  condition  here.  We  have 
with  ns  a  pest,  which  is  destroying  (uir  forests.  It  seems  to 
me  that  the  proper  thing  to  do  is  to  destroy  every  spore-prodnc- 
ing  specimen  tliat  we  know  is  actively  engaged  in  disseminating 
and  widening  the  area  of  the  disease.  That  would  seem  to  be 
one  commonsense  remedy  to  adopt.  It  is  along  the  line  of  wliat 
we  know  in  the  treatment  of  contagious  and  infectious  diseases. 
In  the  meanwhile,  let  our  laboratory  men  go  on  with  renewed 
energy  and  keep  np  the  work.  I  think  that  every  State  in  this 
Union  ought  to  have  a  laboratory  of  well  equpiped  scientific 
men,  men  who  follow  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  everv  State  in  this  Union 
have  a  laboratory  well  e(juii)ped  and  well  provided  with  all  that 
is  necessary  to  produce  effective  work.  ^lark  Twain  on  one 
occasion  nmde  the  remark  that  they  had  a  queer  way  of  dealing 
with  criminals  out  West,  lie  said  "They  hang  them  first  and 
try  them  afterwards.''  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.  HAROLD  PEIRC^P:,  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  Cfiucus  room.  I  would  also 
move  that  no  resolutions  be  received  after  10.30,  and  that  up 


llT) 

to  that  time,  all  resolutions  that  are  desinMl  to  be  brought  to 
the  Committee  on  Resolutions  be  sent  to  the  desk,  to  be  presented 
to  the  Resolutions'  Committee. 
Seconded  by  Dr.  Russell  Smith,  of  rennsylvania. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :  The  motion  is  that  we  adjourn  this  meet- 
ing at  11.30,  to  reconvene  at  2  o'clock,  and  that  at  11.30,  the 
Resolutions'  Committee  meet  in  the  House  (^xucus  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.  PEIRCE:  I  have  a  letter  that  has  been  sent  me,  that 
I  think  it  would  be  well  to  have  read. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :    Let  the  Secrt^tary  read  the  letttT. 
Secretary  Resley  read  the  following  letter,  written  ui)on  letter 
head  of  the  Ilarrisburg  Hoard  of  Trade: 

*'l)ear  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  Ilarrisburg. 

1.  The  Capil^)l  Ruilding,  itself  easily  one  of  the  ten  great 
huildiiigs  of  the  world,  with  its  appropriate  and  memorable  art 
decorations,  is  an  exhibit  worth  h)()king  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  Ilarrisburg  is  a  civic  exhilnt  w<»ll  worth  the 
attention  of  any  visitor  to  the  confei'eiu'e.  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;  its  great  park  system,  including  749  acres,  which  last 


12C 

your  cared  for  more  than  a  million  and  a  qnartcT  visitors;  its 
notably  efficient  and  pleasing  Avater  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  Roard  of  Trade,  Mr. 
James  A.  BeH,  to  present  this  to  you  and  to  proffer  his  assistance 
in  connection  with  any  information  about  the  city. 

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

Yours  truly, 

J.  HORACE  McFARLAND, 

President." 

THE  CHAIRMAN:  The  Chair  would  suggest  that  if  Presi- 
dent McFarland  will  kindly  do  so,  it  would  be  most  agreeable 
if  he  would  be  in  the  ante-room  at  the  close  of  this  session,  to 
meet  delegatxis  who  d(*sire  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  that  have  come  to  liim  for  other  matters  than  those 
mentioned  on  the  programme  to  be  presented  in  the  short  session 
of  this  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  woud  save  a  little  time  if  Air.  Slieppard 
would  tell  us  just  how  he  defines  those  points,  there  being  four 

papers. 

• 

MR.  SHEPPARD:  First,  the  Pennsylvania  programme,  the 
third,  the  chestnut  blight  and  the  future  of  the  forests,  and  the 
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 
with  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  exception 
being  made  by  unanimous  consent. 

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

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  would  be  well  for  that  resolution 
to  carry  this  morning,  not  in  order  to  cut  off  discussion,  but 
because  the  pn)gramme  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 

Mil.  CASSEIiL,  of  P(Minsylv<iuia:  Do  you  think  it  might  1h» 
well,  under  the  circumstances,  to  make  No.  2  on  your  programme 
No.  4?  Then,  if  we  have  time  for  it,  it  could  come  up  and  souie 
of  our  friends,  who  have  come  prepared  to  report  under  that, 
would  have  their  opportunity. 

THE  CrrAIU]\rAN:    Do  von  olTer  that  as  an  anu^ndnient? 

Mil.  OASSELL:    Yes,  sir. 

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

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

Tlie  amendment  was  put  and  carried. 

TIIP]  (•HATKMAN:  Now  you  have  the  original  motion  as 
amended,  that  discussion  be  strictly  confined  to  the  three  sub- 
jects. Is  there  anj^  desire  to  open  up  the  insect  question  this 
morning?     If  so,  we  should  hear  another  amendment. 

PKOEESSOK  (U.INTON:  I  understand  that  Mr.  Hopkins 
has  something  to  say,  and  I,  for  one,  should  like  to  hear  what 
he  has  to  say.  I  move  that,  at  sometime  at  l(*ast,  we  hear  from 
him.  I  do  not  care  whether  it  is  this  morning  or  this  after- 
noon. 

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

PllOFESSOIl  KANE,  of  Massachusetts:  It  seems  to  me  that 
we  are  losing  a  good  di^al  of  time  on  these  anu^ndments.  I  should 
lik(»  to  hear  the  papers,  and  then  also  hear  Professor  Hopkins 
on  the  insect  question. 

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


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

(The  motion  was  put  and  carried). 

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

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

THE  CHAIRMAN:  Having  executed  the  criminal,  we  Avill 
proceed  with  the  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  with  my  plans;  but,  if  it  is  the  wish 
of  the  meeting,  I  will  submit. 

THE  CHAIRMAN:  It  wouhl  be  very  kind  of  Professor  Hop- 
kins to  remain  over.  It  Ke(»ms  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.  R.  Detwiler.     (Applause). 


THE  PENNSYLVANIA  PROGRAMME. 


By   S.   B.   DETWILER.    EXP^CHTIVE  OFFICER,    PENNSYLVANIA  CHEST- 
NUT TREE  BLKUIT  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  efiforts,  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 


130 

June,  1911,  for  the  purpose  of  thoroughly  investigating  the 
chestnut  blight,  to  devise  and  apply  ways  and  means  through 
Avhich  it  might,  if  possible,  be  stiimped  out. 

In  1909,  according  to  the  report  of  the  State  Auditor  General, 
there  were  7,633,180  acres  of  forest  land  in  Pennsylvania,  of 
which  it  is  estimated  that  21  per  cent,  or  approximately  one- 
fiftli,  is  chestnut  timber.  Allowing  two  poles,  four  ties,  aud 
two  cords  of  wood  per  acre,  and  allowing  |2.00  per  pole,  33  cents 
per  tie,  fl.OO  per  cord  for  wood,  the  total  value  of  the  cliestnut 
timber  in  Pennsylvania  would  be  $55,000,000,  in  round  numbers. 
If  we  allow  $15,000,000  as  the  total  value  of  the  nut  crop,  and 
orchard,  park,  and  shade  trees,  the  tot^il  value  becomes  |70,000,- 
000.  This  does  not  consider  the  value  of  chestnut  forests  as 
l)rotectiou  for  water-sheds.  By  dividing  the  counties  in  the 
eastern  half  of  the  State  into  zones,  as  shown  on  the  map,  on 
(he  same  basis  as  the  al)ove  estimate  is  made,  the  value  of  the 
chestnut  trees  alreadv  killed  or  affected  by  bliii:ht  in  Pennsvl- 
vania  is  estimated  at  #10,000,000.  Of  this  amount  $7,000,0(M) 
is  the  value  of  poles,  ti(»s,  and  other  wood  ju'oducts,  and  $3,000.- 
000  is  estimated  as  tlie  value  of  orchard,  park,  and  shade  tnn's, 
the  loss  to  nurserymen,  and  to  real  estiite  owners.  It  is  believiMl 
that  $3,000,000  is  a  low  estimate  for  the  value  of  these  trt^es,  since 
the  loss  to  real  estate  owners  and  to  owners  of  shade  and  orchard 
trees  has  been  particularly  severe  in  the  soutlieastern  corner  of 
the  State  where  the  chestnut  tree  is  of  great  impcu'tance  in  this 
res[)ect. 

No  reliable  esMumte  of  the  annual  income  frcnn  the  sale  of 
chestnut  products  in  Pennsylvania  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 $20,000,000.  Of  this  amount,  about  one-half  was  the 
value  of  lumber,  lath,  and  shingles,  the  other  half  representing 
the  value  of  poles,  ties,  and  extract  wood. 

The  Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Commission  began 
its  investigations  in  August,  1911.  The  general  plan  adopted 
by  the  Commission  is  that  recommended  bv  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  the  advance  points  of  the  infection.  The  dis- 
eased trees  of  these  spot  infections  are  destroyed  as  soon  as 
possible  after  being  located.  Ultimately,  it  is  planned  to  es- 
tablish a  zone  free  from  the  disease  which  will  be  constantly 
patrolled  for  new  infections.  The  i)ortion  of  the  State  west  of 
this  zone  will  l)e  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  will  be  made 
to  eradicate  the  disease,  partly  because  most  of  the  energy  will 
be  required  to  fight  the  disease  in  the  immune  zone  and  west- 
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  thorn  in  finding  a  market  for  this  material.  In  com- 
munities east  of  (he  general  advance  line  where  (he  per  cent,  of 
blight  is  not  high  and  the  owners  desire  (o  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<*li  governs  the  work  of  the  Pennsylvania 
Commission. 

Section  1.  A  commission  consisting  of  five  persons,  (o  serve 
for  tliree  ywirs,  is  created. 

They  are  given  power  to  us<i  all  i)ractical  means  to  des(.roy 
the  chestnut  tree  blight. 

The  Department  of  Forestry  is  dire(*(e(l  to  work  in  collabora- 
tion. 

Section  2.  The  Commission  and  its  agents  or  employes  aro 
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  the  Com 
mission  in  applying  remedies  or  doing  any  act  directed  to  be 
done  to  prevent  further  spread,  the  Commission  may  give  him 


132 

twenty  (lays'  notice  that  it  will  proceed  if  he  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  tlie 
Commission  or  any  of  its  agents  or  employes,  within  Um  days 
after  receiving  his  notice.  The  (bmmission  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  sturapage  prices.  In  case 
an  owner  be  dissatislied  with  an  amount  allowed  him  for  the 
destruction  of  good  trees,  he  may  appeal  to  a  court  for  such 
remedy  as  he  thinks  he  may  be  entitled  to. 

Section  5.  Violations  of  this  Act  or  any  of  the  n^guhilions 
adopt(Hl  by  the  Commission,  or  resistance  to  an  ollic(»r  of  tlie 
Commission,  are  declared  to  be  a  misdemeanor,  and  upon  con- 
viction, the  defendant  may  be  fined  |1()0  or  imprisoned  one 
month ;  and  the  provisions  of  the  Act  are  extended  to  corpora- 
tions as  to  individuals. 

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

Th(»  superintendent  of  Uuildiugs  and  (Jrounds  shall  furuisli 
them  with  suitable  ofDces. 

Twenty-five  thousand  dollars  is  appropriated  for  scientific  re- 
search and  office  expenscis,  and  |25(),()0()  additional  for  general 
field  work. 

Section  7.     Repeals  all  inconsistent  legislation. 

A  quarantine  on  the  shipment  of  chestnut  nursery  stock  was 
declared  by  the  Commission  soon  after  its  organization.  Eegu- 
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 
jnixture,  in  the  presence  of  an  inspector.    Nurserymen  are  pro- 


hibited  from  shipping,  and  transportation  companies  from  carry- 
ing chestnut  stock  not  bearing  the  Commission's  tag.  Chestnut 
nursery  stock  shipped  into  the  iState  from  without  is  to  be  held 
at  the  border  of  the  State  for  inspection.  The  nurserymen  and 
transportation  companies  of  the  State  des^irve  credit  for  will- 
ingly co-operating  with  the  Commission  to  make  this  regulation 
effective. 

A  field  force  of  over  thirty  men  has  been  (U'ganized  and  the 
extent  of  the  blight  in  the  State  has  been  determined  api)roxi- 
nuitely.  The  infected  region  in  Tennsylvania  occupies  the  east- 
ern two-fifths  of  the  State.  The  western-most  line  of  giMieral 
advance  may  be  shown  by  drawing  a  line  from.  Susquehanna  to 
WilUamsport,  and  southward  through  Huntingdon  to  the  south- 
ern boundary  of  the  State,  although  there  are  scattered  s})ot  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 U)  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  burn  the  bark  from 
visibly  diseased  or  cankerous  portions  of  the  trees,  lie  is  also 
recpiired  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  practical 
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, field  meetings,  circulars,  newspaper  articles,  and  otluT 
work  of  an  educational  nature,  such  as  interesting  school  chil- 
dren and  boy  scouts  in  the  movement.  So  far,  no  seriohs  oppo- 
sition has  been  met  with  in  the  work  of  eradication ;  on  the  con- 
trary, we  have  had  exceptional  co-operation  from  all  classes 
of  timber  owners. 

The  Commission  maiiiUiins  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.  Tliese  ex- 
periments are  being  pushed  forward  as  rapidly  as  may  be  done, 
but  no  remedy  will  be  endorsed  by  the  Commission  until  its 
efficiency  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  proceedings  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 what  agents  are  of  primary  importance  in  distributing  the 
spores,  or  to  what  extent  the  disease   may   bo   si)read   by   the 


135 

transportation  of  barked  and  unbarked  products  of  diseased 
trees,  two  points  which  have  a  direct  bearing  on  cost  and 
efficiency  of  control. 

The  woodpecker  and  other  birds  have  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.  We  feel 
a  sentimental  interest  in  the  birds.  Nevertheless,  this  does  not 
free  us  from  also  investigating  them  to  And  out  scientilically 
their  exact  relation  to  the  spread  of  this  disease.  In  other  words, 
we  must  investigate  evei'ything,  whether  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. 
Many  lines  of  co-operative  investigation  and  experiment  are  in 
progress  and  others  are  planned.  Detailed  knowledge  of  the 
agents  causing  infection  and  the  time  of  year  when  infection 
occurs,  which  will  be  obtained  as  the  work  progresses,  will  un- 
doubtedly assist  in  making  control  more  effective  and  in  cheapen- 
ing the  cost  of  the  work  of  eradication,,  by  pointing  out  the 
simplest  methods  required  to  give  satisfactory  results.  In  the 
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  agc^iey 
which  spreads  tlie  disease. 

In  my  opinion,  the  big  problem  whicli  confronts  us  and  wliich 
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 
which  must  be  disjwsed  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  chestnut  owners  cannot 
be  willingly  secured  if  they  must  do  the  cutting  at  a  loss.  We 
have  found  that  owners  wlio  were  relnetant  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  te  find  a  market  over  a  much 
wider  territory  than  at  the  present.  The  greatest  present  dilli- 
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  happy ;  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,  we 
have  the  educational  value  along  forestry,  conservation,  and 
patliological  lines;  an  object  lesson  to  the  State  and  Nation,  of 
which  Ave  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  colkn^tion  of  facts,  not  through 
hypotheses.     (Applause) . 

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


137 


THE  CHESTNUT  IJLKHIT  AND  THE  PKACTIOE  OF  FOR 

ESTliY  IN  PENNSYLVANIA. 


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


Mr.  ( 'liairman,  Ladies  and  Gentleinen :  I  am  glad  indeed  of 
this  opportunity  of  presenting  a  very  informal  paper,  and  I 
Avisli  von  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  Maria tt,  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 
l)roduce  repeated  yields  of  posts,  poles  and  ties,  and  that  within 
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 

1  caiiuot  bolicvo,  in  view  of  (ho  groat  vahio  of  chostnut  wood 
and  the  rapidity  and  vigor  of  its  growth,  that  we  can  get  along 
without  it  in  our  Pennsylvania  forests,  or  in  our  eastern  forests. 
I  am  optimistic  naturally,  and  I  do  not  believe  that  we  will  ever 
carry  on  forest  management  in  this  country  without  using  chest- 
nut. 

With  the  possibility  of  the  complete  commercial  destruction 
of  this  valuable  tree,  it  is  indeed  time  that  the  foresters  of  the 
country  consider  w^hat  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.  These  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  working  in  a  well  settled  region  of  the  coun- 
try, and  at  a  time  when  botli  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  whicli  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  help  us  to  appreciate  somewhat  our  problems  in  connection 
with  the  blight.  In  1882  the  Larch  Saw-fly  w^orm  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.  Bv  destrovin^  the  needles  of  the  trees  it  caused 
their  slow  death  and  not  until  the  territory  had  been  pretty  thor- 
oughly covered  by  tlie  insect  and  until  certain  natural  enemies 
arose  did  this  insect  finally  disappear.  Nothing,  of  course,  was 
done  to  combat  the  insect  or  prevent  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  sw-amps  of  the  Northern  Lake 
States.    It  is  reported  that  Michigan  is  studying  this  pest  with 


/ 


131) 

the  liope  of  being  able  to  do  some  effective  work  against  it,  I 
mention  this  pest  because  it  practically  wiped  out  the  tamarack 
in  northern  New  IJngland  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  Appalacliians,  that  the  chestnut  will  become  extinct. 

The  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 
Uy  tlu-^  use  of  bands  or  rings  of  viscous  tar  on  the  trees  prevented 
tlie  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,  the  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- 
western 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  that  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  Germany  often  a  half  mile  wide  Avere  left  Aviiile  the 
cleared  areas  ranged  from  a  dozen  rods  up  to  a  quarter  mile  in 
Avidth,  depending  both  upon  the  age  of  the  forest  and  topography. 
The  Government  having  the  right  of  condemnation  entered  pri- 
vate holdings  at  any  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,  howev(*r, 
proceed  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  wiiich 
Avill  perpetuate  best  the  remaining  chestnut  and  other  hard 
woods. 

The  two  pests  described  above  are  unlike,  of  course,  a  fungous 

m 

disease  sucli  as  the  blight.  Insects  are  ahvays  more  easily  con- 
trolled than  fungous  diseases.  I  mention  this  last  one  to  bring 
out  especially  the  fact  that  Gennany  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 wiiere  there  are  good  markets  for  ties,  mine  props,  acid 
wood,  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 
w^ood  forests.  The  United  States  Forest  Service,  in  a  recent 
statement  as  to  the  possibilities  of  this  sprout  land,  estimates 
returns  as  follows: 

"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  years  these  lands  wn*ll  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  tlie  fifty-year 
period  required  to  produce  them,  eight  aud  one-half  cents  ou  the 
stump  to  return  live  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,  1  believe,  stimu- 
late a  market  for  certain  forest  products.  I  know  that  many 
siiy  we  cannot  help  the  ijresent  market  conditions,  but  I  am  op- 
timistic in  this  as  great  manufacturing  concerns  are  stimulating 
the  market  for  certain  special  products.  Why  should  we  not  be 
able  by  showing  fully  the  uses  of  chestnut  stimulate  its  use  to  a 
greater  extent  than  at  present,  at  least?  We  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 
cliestnut  being  as  hardy  as  possible  against  the  w^ork  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  aiid  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 
<lepleted.  The  trees  are  just  hanging  on,  w-e  might  say,  and  no 
wonder  they  are  susceptible  to  any  disease  that  may  come  along. 
We  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  whidi 
there  is  chestnut,  have  been  cut  very  carelessly  and  little  or  no 
protection  given  the  developing  sprouts  from  either  fire  or  graz- 
ing. Then*  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  done  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  system  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  reproduce  by  sprouts.  Another  cause  for  unsatis- 
factory results  from  reproduction  by  sprouts,  and  perhaps  a  jus- 
tifiable one,  in  view  of  present  nmrkets,  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  pay  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  tliese  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  product  will  be  of  value  for  posts  and  mine  props  only.  If, 
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  soutli- 
eastern  part  of  the  State,  on  small  tracts,  if,  in  the  place  of  tliis 
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 
rai)idly  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-cuttiugs  until  the  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  in  the  southeastern  part 
of  the  State.  When  one  tliinks  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  rapidly  and  healthfully  and  that 
we  will  do  more  toward  keeping  the  blight  out  and  perpetuating 
the  chestnut  than  going  here  and  there  through  that  gi*eat  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  Pennsylvania,  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 

owTiers  which  will  continue  beyond  the  life  of  the  Commission? 
At  the  present  time,  by  the  practice  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  temporarily  the  blight,  but  if 

at  the  same  time  you  can  introduce  a  system  of  management  that 

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. 


IJJ 


THE   CHESTNUT   BLIGHT   AND   CONSTRUCTIVE    CON 

SERVATION. 


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

OF  PENNSYLVANIA. 


"A  horse,  a  horse,  my  kingdom  for  a  horse!"  In  those  words 
Sliakespeare  makes  tlie  defeated  King  Kichard  HI  express  tlie 
value  of  a  certain  piece  of  property,  as  he  pae(»d  the  field  of  de- 
feat, seeking  flight, — not  Avhat  the  horse  wonld  actually  cost  in 
the  horse  market;  not  what  lie  would  bring  in  the  horse  nmrket, 
was  the  basis  of  valuation,  but  what  was  going  to  happen  to 
Richard  III  if  he  had  to  go  witliout  him. 

On  that  basis  I  question  if  the  estimates  of  the  value  of  the 
chestnut  species  have  been  placed  anywhere  near  high  enough. 
The  United  States,  with  a  big  timber  cut,  is  within  from  one  to 
three  decades  of  an  era  of  timber  scarcity  whicli  will  put  us  in 
the  position  of  having  to  go  7riise  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  eiBciency. 

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  ([uality  which  makers  it  a  standard 
telegraph  and  telephone  pole,  and  a  good  railroad  tie  or  mine 
prop.  It  is  durable  above  ground,  giving  it  many  virtues  as  lum- 
ber. It  is  also  a  beautiful,  prized,  and  much  us(m1  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. 


r 


145 
The  Blight  Threatens  a  National  Loss.     Who  Loses? 

If  anybody  thinks  lie  is  not  a  loser  because  he  has  not  a  chest- 
nut forest  all  his  own,  he  has  another  tliink  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?  The  pulp  tliat  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 
one  of  the  best  telegraph  and  teleplione  poles. 

(e)  Do  you  go  a-trolleying?  The  chestnut  is  the  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  should  not  forget  its  value,  and 
especially  its  possibility  as  a  producer  of  food  for  man,  and  sheep, 
goats,  hogs,  and  possibly  otiier  livestock.  Already  the  chestnut 
orchards  of  Europe  make  rough  mountain  sides  worth  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  dollars  per  acre,  ('ompare  that  to  American  farm 
lands.  The  chestnut  forests  of  Italy  are  reported  to  make  more 
bushels  of  nuts  year  after  year  than  the  ccmtimiously  cropped 
lands  of  Dakota  and  Minnesota  vield  in  wheat.  Fullv  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  wju^at  and  corn  crops  combined. 
It  w^ould  make  this  one  of  the  greatest  she(*p  and  pig  fattening 
states  of  the  country. 

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

10 


■■■ 


146 

United  States  was  insured  last  year  against  fire,  at  an  average 
rate  of  1.14  per  cent,  or  four  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  aflford  to  i>ay  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- 
ing 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  stop  it. 

If  there  is  any  such  thing  as  constructive  conservation,  this 
chestnut  blight  is  blowing  the  whistle  for  us  to  come  and  C(m- 
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  ti'ouble. 

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  appropria- 
tion of  ten  thousand  dollars  to  fiftv  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  ctnit.  insurance  rate  on  the  pro- 
perty involved. 

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


147 

shown  that  when  a  forest  fire  jumps  your  fire  line,  you  jump  on 
it  while  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  who  have  had  the  cour- 
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 
us  that  he  thinks  drought  and  other  climatic  causes  may  be  re- 
si)onsible.  This  is  very  reasonable,  but  it  is  astonishing  •that 
the  gentleman  did  not  bring  something  that  was  at  least  neaj*- 
evidence.  If  drought  is  the  promoting  factor,  there  have  been 
abundant  opportunities  to  compare  trees  that  were  in  different 
relations  with  respect  to  water.  Connecticut,  with  its  many 
infestations  of  blight  has  given  great  opportunity  to  find  chest- 
nut trees  languishing  for  water  on  rocky,  sandy,  shaly,  and  other- 
wise 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.  Such  comparisons  would  be  in  the  nature 
of  proof  for  what  is  otherwise  an  entirely  unproved  theoretical 
suggestion.  Mr.  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,  Va.,  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  Sa7i  Jose  Scale. 

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 
soap  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  lakes  the  State,  and  ftiuch 
better,  all  of  the  States,  to  stop  the  ehestinit  blight,  for  he 
travels  faster  than  the  scale. 

A  National  ^Scientific  Campaiyny  or  a  National  i^tandnjf  Fi(/ht, 

An  Example  from  Africa. 

AA'e  have  national  corporations,  national  parties,  national  co- 
operation to  make  a  meal  even,  and  now  we  have  got  to  make  a 
national  organization  to  fight  a  tree  enemy  just  as  we  would  to 
fight  a  man  enemy.  The  problem  is  big,  but  we  know  how  if 
we  will. 

We  have  a  splendid  example  in  th(»  Sontli  African  cattle 
plague.  It  swept  for  hundreds  of  miles,  taking  all  cattle  before 
it  as  frost  does  the  flies.  Then  the  South  African  (jovernments 
drew  a  quarantine  line  around  it  and  fought  it  to  a  standstill 
right  there.  The  United  States  should  ti*y  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.  Tlie  first  is  that  it  is  a  sure  kill  for  trees,  the  second 
that  it  can  be  controlled  by  rigid  quarantine.  I5efore  we  knew 
the  second  fact,  the  disease  had  actually  broken  up  communities, 
as  in  tlie  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  peacli  trees  tlian  ever  and  are  again 
])rosperous. 

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

The  foot  and  mouth  disease  in  this  State, — which  cost  us  the 
life  of  one  of  tlie  luost  eflictient  men  we  have  (iver  had,  namely 
the  brother  of  our  Chairman,  Dr.  Leoiuird  Pearson, — the  foot 
and  mouth  disease,  which  is,  practically,  sure  and  (|uick  death, 
and  so  contagious  that  a  stableman  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,  stilT,  stand-up  fight,  it 


149 

was  absohitely  stainp<Ml  out  in  a  few  weeks  hy  llie  rigonms  es- 
tablishnuMit  of  a  dead  line.  I  tliink  tliis  ehestniit  disease  calls 
for  constructive  conservation  of  just  that  kind.     (Applause). 

THE  CHAIRMAN:  l^ast  call  for  resolutions:  All  resolutions 
sliould  be  presented  without  delay  at  the  desk. 

We  are  now  to  hear  reports  by  State  Forest<;rs.  What  is  your 
l>leasure  in  reference  to  the  time  to  be  assigned  to  this  part  of 
the  programme?  Do  yim  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? 

PROFESSOR  HARSHBERGER,  of  Pennsylvania:  I  believe 
Tve  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  CHAIRMAN :  In  your  opinion,  would  it  be  well,  then,  to 
limit  the  reports  to  say  eight  minutes,  except  by  unanimous  con- 
sent for  more  time? 

PROFESSOR  HARSH  1?ERC,ER:  I  would  imagine  so;  eight 
minutes  with  two  minutes  leeway,  making  it  ion  minutes  in  all. 
I  make  tliat  motion;  that  llie  papers  be  limited  to  eight  minutes, 
with  tAso  minutes  allowance. 

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  Maine?  (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  CHAIRMAN:  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  lessees."  In  answering  Professor 
Kane'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 

TKOFESSOll  KANE:  Mr.  Cbairmuu  and  Geiitleiueii  of  the 
Coiiveiitiou :  In  so  far  as  Massachusetts  is  concerned,  we  have 
this  chestnut  bark  disease  and  we  have  also  gone  at  it  in  what 
seems  to  us  a  practical  way.  I  simply  wish  to  give  you  an  idea 
of  how^  we  are  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  tlie  whole  State.  He  spent  the 
months  of  June,  July,  and  August,  visiting  on  a  motorcycle  all 
the  forest  sections  of  the  State,  to  study  tlie  problem,  and  we 
found  that  the  disease  was  far  more  prevalent  than  even  Dr. 
•  Metcalf  realized.  Now  wiien  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  money.  Most  of  you  know  undoubtedly  that  we 
have  been  tackling  the  gypsy  and  browntail  moth  problems,  and 
that  these  depredations,  w^hich*  have  been  pretty  much  confined 
to  Massachusetts,  and  more  recently  New  Hampshire  and 
Maine  have  incurred  much  expense.  Now  we  have  been  tackling 
I)roblems  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  that  have  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  our  forest  states  and  nation,  a  more  definite  forestry 
management  from  a  fundamental  standpoint.  The  whole  prob- 
lem, it  strikes  me,  of  insect  and  fungus  depredations,  is  one  of 
looking  at  it  and  studying  it  from  the  broader  viewpoint,  namely 
that  of  the  system  of  forestry  management.  We  have  had  the 
gypsy  and  browntail  moth  work  in  Massachusetts,  more  or  less 


151 

similar  in  a  general  way,  to  this  chestnut  disease.  We  are  spend- 
ing in  Masachusetts  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  businesslike  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  fight  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  w^e  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  systematize  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 
l>een  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  have.  I  was  out  with  a  man  owning  seven  thousand  acres  in 
the  western  part  of  tlie  State  last  Friday.  The  disease  w^as  the 
worst  wliere  thinnings  had  been  made  and  a  few  trees  allowed  to 
stand  because  they  were  not  large  enongh  to  cut  into  ties. 
These  forests  were  unbalanced  and  the  air  and  sun  allowed  to 
get  in.  The  blight  was  on  Ihe  southern  side;  the  cankers  showed 
up  largely  there.  But  in  the  stands  where  we  had  normal  con- 
diticms,  we  found  only  a  diseased  tree  once  in  awiiile.  There  is 
an  unbalancing  condition  again  where  forest  fires  have  raged 
through  the  State  year  after  year  and  the  trees  are  abnormal 
and  only  lialf  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 
will  lose  all  our  chestnut^s.  The  way  that  we  are  endeavoring 
to  solve  this  problem  in  Massachusetts  is  this:  I  have  a  forest 
warden  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 
dise«ase.  We  have  notified  all  of  our  papers  throughout  the  SUite 
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  s;^nding  out  liti^rature.  We 
have  just  sent  out  a  recent  bulletin.  The  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  tlie  office,  at  the  expense  of  tlie  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  mauagemeut  will 
ultimately  solve  the  problem  as  much  as  anything.  There  are 
lots  of  ideas  that  I  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  gypsy  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.      (Ajiplause). 

THE  CHAIRMAN:  Does  anyime  wish  (o  ask  one*  short  ques- 
tion of  Professor  llane? 

IMtOFKSSOK  (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  Kane  had  the  authority 
to  send  men  into  jjrivate  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 
his  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, — we  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  Avas 
some  question  as  to  whether  the  disease  was  there  or  not,  but 
they  thimght  they  had  better  cut  it  out  anyway,  this  man  did  not 
fei»l  as  if  he  was  equal  to  the  occasion.  It  was  prac^tically  im- 
possible to  do  anything  along  those  lines  and  the  trouble  was 
that,  even  among  the  experts,  there  was  qxiiUi  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  ths  usual  appropriations  of 
our  State.    We  are  asking  for  no  special  fund. 

I  have  a  paper  which  I  desire  to  present,  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  Experiment  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.  lie  also  stated 
that  lie  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  example,  Mr.  G.  H.  Ilollister,  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. 
In  the  winter  of  1909,  Mr.  Newton  J.  Peck  brought  a  specimen  to 
the  Station  from  Woodbridge,  New  Haven  County,  and  stateii 
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  not^d  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  tliirty-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  Loudon  County.    Thus  we  found  tlie  disease  present 


155 

in  all  of  the  counties  of  the  State,  and  in  seventy-two  of  the 
towns.  Of  these  only  seven  towns  were  east  of  the  Connecticut 
River,  but  this  region  liad  not  been  carefully  examined.  At  the 
Albany  conference,  held  October  19,  1911,  w^e  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  Iladdam),  and  we  have  every  reason  to  believe  that  a 
careful  search  would  reveal  its  presence*  in  these  four  towns. 

PrcHcnt  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  cm  three  sides  by  states  that  have  the  disease 
more  or  less  abundant  in  their  dilTerent  counties.  On  the  south, 
we  are  separated  by  Tjong  Island  Sound  from  Long  Island,  which 
also  has  the  disease. 

In  Fairfield  ('ounty  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  the  chestnuts  are  affected 
or  dead.  New  Haven  County  began  to  show  evidence  of  trouble 
in  1908,  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.  Hartford  and  Middle- 
sex counties  also  last  year  began  to  show  its  presence  in  their 
forests,  in  some  places  very  prominently.  These  counties  are 
all  west  of  the  Connecticut  liiver.  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  ivork  in  the  field,  besides  locating  the  disease,  has  been 
along  the  following  lines:  . 


150 

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

(2).  Setting  out  seedling  cliestnuts,  including  a  few  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  coiUrol  by  the  cutting  out  method  in  a  state 
forest  where  the  disease  was  not  cons])i(!uous.  This  work  has 
just  been  started  in  our  forest  at  Portland.  l*r(»vi(nis  to  1911, 
only  a  few  diseased  trees  had  been  seen  in  this  for<»st.  Our  pre- 
liminary survey  this  winter,  however,  has  shown  it  now  present 
more  abundantly  than  we  expected.  On  account  of  the  time  it 
took  to  locate  the  diseased  trees  and  the  labor  and  cost  of  cutting 
them  out,  we  cannot  advocate  this  as  a  practical  nu^thod  for 
general  use  in  the  State,  even  if  it  proves  successful,  which  we 
doubt,  since  the  disease  is  generally  present  in  the  neighbor- 
hood. 

Rrcomniendutlous, 

In  Connecticut  we  are  not  asking  the  legislature  for  any 
special  appropriation  to  fight  this  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  dis]>osed  of  in  the  ordi- 
nary Avay.  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  cordwood,  as 
their  size  may  permit.  We  have  no  uniform  recommendations 
for  treatment  of  sprout  growth  too  small  for  nmrket  purposes. 
We  are  trying  to  prevent  a  glut  of  the  nmrket  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 


157 

the  railroads  has  evidently  gone  down*  On  the  whole,  however, 
there  has  been  more  timber  cut  than  usual.  We  have  no  small 
factories  for  the  utilization  of  waste  products,  such  as  bark  and 
wood  for  tannin.  The  brass  factories  and  the  brick  kihis  use  up 
most  of  the  chestnut  cordwood  in  their  vicinities,  thus  preventing 
much  of  a  glut.  Lime  kilns  also  utilize  considerable  of  the  cord- 
wood.    A  relatively  snuill  amount  is  made  into  charcoal. 

THE  ClIAUtMAN:  Are  there  any  questions  for  Professor 
Clinton? 

jNIK.. CHESTER  E.  (MIILI):     I  would  like  to  ask  Professor 
Clinton  what  was  the  result  of  the  cutting  out  of  the  infected 
trees  on  any  tracts  or  estates  he  knows  about;  where  the  affect e«i 
trees  were  removed,  what  was  the  result  on  the  trees  that  re 
maincd? 

PIJOFESSOK  (M.IXTON:  That  was  on  the  estate  of  (me  of 
the  wealthiest  men  in  ConntH-ticut,  so  he  had  money  enough  to 
rut  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  sutTer  more  from  drought,  etc.,  and  be  more  injured  liy  blight. 
^Ve  also  found  that  by  cutting  cnit  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  would  go  on  if  we  wanted  to  continue  t\vo.  exp(»ri- 
ment,  but  he  thought,  as  far  as  he  wils  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  doAvn  and 
burning  the  bark  and  all  that,  but  it  was  about  the  way  a  prac- 
tical man  w^ould  do  it. 

THE  CHAIRMAN:  There  is  time  for  one  more  (juestion,  if 
anyone  desires  to  ask  one. 

JIR.  THALHEIMER:  Have  ycm  found  out  whether  the  con- 
ditions differ  between  low  and  high  ground  and  the  exposure,  on 


158 

the  southern,  northern, '^)r  eastern  and  western  sides;  that  is, 
Avliether  you  found  any  infected  trees  on  the  eastern  side  of  the 
mountain? 

PKOFESSOK  CLINTON:  It  sliows  most  frequently  on  the 
eastern  and  southern  side  and  around  to  the  western  and  south- 
ern side  of  exposed  trees.  That  is,  the  more  northern  slopes  are 
generally  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.  Jjook 
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. 

MK.  G.  L.  BARRUS,  of  the  Conservation  Commission:  Mr. 
(•hairman:  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  1  regret  to  say  that  we 
have  not  any  definite  statistics  to  give  as  to  the  value  of  the 
chestnut  or  the  amount  that  has  been  destroyed.  1  think  this 
<luestion  has  brought  up  the  need  of  such  statistics;  if  it  has 
not  doiKi  anything  more,  it  has  brought  up  that  need.  We  have 
been  coniining  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  past 
as  regards  forest  management.  This  (piestion  of  chestnut  bark 
dis(»ase  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  way  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  that  we 
sent  about  four  thousand  ciiTular  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,  from  all  parts  of  the  State,  and  in  that  way  we  are 


15!) 

enabled  to  give  a  rough  map  of  the  state,  showing  where  tlie 
chestnut  is  found  and,  to  a  certain  degree,  where  the  chestnut 
.  disease  is  found. 

We  find  that  the  chestnut  belt  of  New  York  State  covers  forty- 
six  per  cent,  of  the  total  area  of  the  State  (approximately  23,- 
000  8(iuare  miles),  and  on  that  area  I  think  it  is  conservative  to 
say  there  are  thirty  million  dollars  worth  of  chestnut  timber. 
The  diseased  area,  or  I  might  say  the  chestnut  belt,  includes  the 
Hudson  Valley  and  th(*  southern  part  of  the  western  half  of  the 
State.  The  Adirondack  region  has  no  chestnut,  and  the  siune 
may  be  said  of  the  Catskill  n^gion.  The  diseased  area  is  confined 
primarily  to  the  Hudson  Valley,  and  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  County,  on 
the  Pennsylvania  line;  one  case  in  Hroome  County,  near  tlic 
Pennsylvania  line,  and  in  two  or  three  eases,  in  Delaware 
(/ouiitv;  a  matter  of  from  one  to  twentv  trees  in  a  batch.  That 
is  the  best  information  we  have  at  the  present  time. 

The  h>ss  due  to  the  chestnut  bark  disease  cannot  be  estimat(*d, 
inasuinch  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  utilized.  The  problem  of  utilization  is 
a  big  one  in  New  York  Stat^  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,  and  that  market  is  not  flooded  at  the  present 
time.  There  is  also  a  good  market  for  cordwood  in  most  portions 
of  the  State. 

I  just  want  to  say  one  other  thing  in  regard  to  Professor 
Clint(nrs  attitude  toward  this  question:  It  seems  to  me  that  it 
is  an  encouraging  fact,  if  the  j^oints  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  vitalitv.  In  Xew  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  Avood-lot  sections,  as 
I  say,  outside*  of  the  pr(»viously  reportiul  preserved  area,  brought 
to  our  attention.  It  oc(*urs  to  me,  who  should  get  the  credit  for 
bringing  out  thes(»  i)oints?  Who  should  g(»t  the  credit  for  this 
Conference  luTe  to-day?  AVho  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  to 
give  it  to  the  men  who  were  afraid  to  stake  their  scientific  repu- 
tations, and  who  say,  "It  cannot  ))e  done."     (Applause). 

THE  ('IIAIltJIAN:  Is  there  any  inquiry  regarding  the  New 
York  situaticm  and  methods? 

Mil,  el.  W.  FISHER,  of  Tennessee:  1  would  like  to  know 
what  i)er  cent,  of  old  timber,  as  against  young  timber,  is  infected 
by  this  disease;  whether  or  not  the  young  timber  is  the  princi- 
pal timber  that  is  infected. 

MK.  BARRUS:  In  those  sections  of  New  York  State  when* 
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  whi(*h  is 
sprout  growth  of  small  dimensions.     I  should  estimate  that 


161 

one-fifth  of  the  chestnut  is  of  iiierchautable  size  and  perhaps, 
in  the  district  where  the  disease  is,  more  than  four-fifths  is  under 
merchantable  size. 

ME.  FISHER :  Does  it  not  appear  that  the  several  years  of 
scant  rainfall  which  the  whole  ejustern  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? 

MR.  BARRUS :    I  believe  that  is  a  question  touching  on  the 

technical  and  scientific  side,  and  perhaps  Professor  Clinton 

• 

THE  CHAIRMAN :  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. 

DR.  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  suffered  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  si)ecial  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 
caA  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  trimminirs. 

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  were  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  western 
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 
Penneylvania  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  stuflP  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. 

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? 

PROFESSOR  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  with  regard  to  this  climatic  matter? 


164 

MR.  WILLlAMfc5 :  1  happened  to  be  iu  charge  of  that  Main 
Line  investigation,  and  probably  know  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  holes  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  trei.^s  there  was  occasionally  a  single  dead 
branch,  and  that  always,  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  tliose  big  trees, 
when  we  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  likewise  found  sprouts  no 
tbicker  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  work  with 
the  older  trees. 

THE   CHAIRMAN:     Does  that  answer  the  question,   Mr. 
Fisher? 


165 

MR.  FISHER:    Yes,  sir. 

DR.  J.  M.  BACKKNSTOE,  of  Pennsylvania:  Mr.  Chairman: 
I  would  like  to  a«k  the  speaker  with  reference  to  the  treatment 
that  was  given  to  these  thonsand  dollar  trees. 

MR.  WILLIAMS:  We  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  olf  every  infected  piece  of  bark  or  branch,  and  cover  the 
wound  with  some  dressing.  But  in  the  process  of  doing  this 
work,  tliey  used  telephone  linemen's  climbers.  This  they  thought 
was  the  proper  thing,  so  they  did  it.  We  discouraged  that  and 
finally  broke  it  up.  We  did  not  think  that  method  of  treatment 
was  good.  Then  we  wen*  ni(*t  with  the  idea  of  throwing  some 
chemical  on  the  ground,  in  order  that  when  the  rains  would  dis- 
solve this  material,  it  would  enter  the  soil  and  be  taken  up  by 
the  roots.  Generally,  we  were  met  witli  a  proposition  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  tlie  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.  Tliat  may  have  been  entirely  true ; 
but  the  method  of  treatment  was  to  run  down  a  series  of  two-foot 
lengths  of  two-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  and  moisten  the  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,  where 
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  who  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 :  All  trees  down  there  are  thousand  dollar 
trees. 

» 

THE  CHAIRMAN:    Delaware. 

PROFESSOR  C.  A.  McCXIE :  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 
way  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- 


16T 

propriating  any  public  money  for  methods  of  eradicaition  of  thi^ 
particular  disease.  I  think  the  disease  is  scattered  too  generally 
tliroughout  the  State.  We  have  no  need  of  a  quarantine  line 
on  the  east,  because  we  have  the  Delaware  Biver  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  we  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  chestnut  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  suflfering  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  tliat  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  Japanese  chestnuts  in  Delaware  or  not.  We 
have  a  lot  of  varieties  called  Japanese,  but  the  probabilities  are 
they  are  natural  hybrids  with  the  American;  yet  we  have  found 
infection  in  the  so-called  Japanese^  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  prevent  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  here  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  shoujd  be  remembered  at 
this  time  that,  Pennsylvania  has  only  taken  it  up  recently.  There 
has  been  less  than  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  tihat  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  tx>  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  not/?,  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-fourth  of  the  State  has  been  generally  invaded.  Prob- 
ably about  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  was  prompted,  at  least,  by  the  very 
excellent  example  that  we  have  in  Pennsylvania,  because  we  felt 
that  we  might  use  it  as  data,  not  only  for  the  State  of  Maryland 
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  we  have  introduced  a 
bill,  which  is  practically  a  copy  of  the  Pennsylvania  law,  into 
the  Legislature  of  Maryland,  now  in  session,  carrying  a  small  ap- 
propriation for  the  purpose  of  putting  this  work  into  operation. 
Now  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  where  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  will  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  will  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  immediately  diseased,  and  the  whole  tree  dies 
very  quickly.  What  has  been  done  has  furnished  the  basis  of 
the  proi)osed  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.  T  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 

MR.  DETWILEE :  Mr.  Besley  asked  for  some  definite  facts 
concerning  the  efficiency  of  the  cutting-out  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.  II.  S.  REP]I) :  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.  We  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.  Metcalf  last  fall,  but  we  were  unable  to  find 
the  disease  in  the  field.  We  have,  however,  in  the  State,  a  dis- 
ease which  has  existed  for  about  twenty  years  and  has  caused  a 
very  considerable  destruction  of  chestnut  timber,  south  and 
east  of  Lynchburg.  T  visited  this  region  about  ten  days  ago 
and  found  there  a  fungous  disease,  of  which  we  have  not  yet  been 
able  to  detx»rmine  the  exact  nature.  Some  of  the  gentlemen  who 
are  here  have  found  the  Djaporthc  fungus  near  Lynchburg.  If 
the  Diaporthc  fungus  has  been  there  for  the  last  twenty  years, 
it  is  (evident  that  it  is  acting  somewhat  differently  from  what 
it  is  acting  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,  wliich  will  not  per- 


178 

mit  of  any  extensive  eradication,  but  we  hope  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  actuallv  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  whicli  have  been  going  on  there,  as  I  understand 
the  infected  trees  could  not  be  found  last  fall.  AVe  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  Stat^.  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  AVest  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,  w^ould  make  twenty -five  million  dollars  for  the  chestnut 


174 

in  West  Virgiuia,  and  certainly  some  ejffort  will  be  made  to  deter- 
mine the  extent  of  infection  and  the  best  methods  of  handling 
the  disease  in  the  State. 

ME.  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. 

ME.  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  amouut  of  it  is  the  original  forest.    We  have 
very  far-sighted  Congressmen  down  our  way,  who  have  been  for- 
tifying, or  are  about  to  fortify,  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  Eegion.    Just  last 
week  the  Government  purchased  eighty-five  thousand  acres  near 
me,  in  eastern  Tennessee,  for  a  forest  reserve,  and  will  continue 
to  purchase  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  tlie  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.     1  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,  1  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  supply 
or  water  sources  will  \ye  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  CHAIEMAN:  Is  there  any  inquiry  from  Tennessee? 
The  next  is  Canada,  Dr.  Gussow. 

DR.  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,  I  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  Mr.  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 
photograph, — at  tlie  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  ^o 
at  once  to  the  main  entrance,  so  a?  to  be  in  this  photograph, 
whether  you  choose  to  buy  it  or  not. 

Deputy  Commissioner  Williams  will  present  a  communication 
from  the  President  of  the  United  States. 

MR.  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 

mation  which  is  available  in  his  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  efiforts  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  secondcHl  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  Taft,  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  Department  of  Agriculture, 

Bureau  of  Plant  Industry, 
OflSce  of  Chief  of  Bureau. 

Washington,  D.  C,  February  19,  1912. 

MEMORANDUM  FOR  THE  SECRETARY. 

Regarding  present  status  of  chestnut  bark  disease. 

This  disease,  which  was  first  recognized  as  serious  in  the 
vicinity  of  New  York  City  in  1904,  appears  to  have  been  present 
on  Ijong  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  Pennsj-lvania,  northern 
Delaware,  and  northeastern  Maryland  the  chestnut  trees  are 
practically  all  infected.  Outside  of  this  area  from  the  northern 
border  of  Massachusetts  and  from  Saratoga  county,  New  York, 
southw^estward  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  known  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  which  it  infests.  The  financial  loss 
from  this  disease  in  and  about  New  York  City  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  Jieaviest  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 


»  "r" 


178 

of  the  States  of  Maine,  New  Hampshire,  Vermont,  Massadm- 
setts,  Rhode  Island,  Connecticut,  New  York,  New,  Jersey,  Penn- 
sylvania, Delaware,  Maryland,  Virginia,  West  Virginia,  Ohio, 
Indiana,  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina, 
Georgia,  Alabama  and  Mississippi  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  knoAvn  and 
no  method  of  treating  or  curing  them  when  once  attacked  is 
certain  in  its  results.  Tliis  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  sufficientlv  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,  witli  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  areas 
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  with  which 
the  matter  is  regarded  there.  Congressional  action  with  a  view 
to  making  possible  effective  co-operative  effort  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,  Washington,  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  tliat  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  meei 
in  this  room  at  1.30  P.  M.,  fifteen  minutes  before  bur  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 


AFTERNOON  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. 

DR.  HOPKINS:  Mr.  Chairman:  I  regret  exceedingly  that 
the  insects  are  interfering  in  this  trouble,  and  making  more  of 
it.  Heaven  knows  they  are  making  enough  trouble  of  their  own 
all  over  the  country.  They  are  killing  the  merchantable  sized 
pine  in  the  Rocky  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  tJ: ! 
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  the  abstract,  whicli  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  that  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 
know^n  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, 
Soutli  Carolina,  North  Carolina  and  Virginia,  it  is  surprising 


•  percentage  of   the 


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  tliat  these  agen- 
cies have  been  in  operation  in  the  area  afifected  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  two-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  pul>lished  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. 

Recent  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  plain  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  iniiabit  the  chestnut. 
We  find  that  other  observers  have  recorded  one  hundred  and 
sixty-four  species.  l\y  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  them  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  lU'ancli  of  Forest  Insects  of  the  Bureau  of  Entomology. 
This  investigation  will  be  extended  into  all  parts  of  the  country 
where  the  chestnut  is,  or  has  been,  an  important  forest  tree,  and 
especially  in  those  States  and  sections  where  the  people  represent- 
ing the  private,  municipal,  and  State  ownership  manifest  a 
special  interest  in  this  phase  of  tlie  problem.  We  are  assured  of 
the  co-operation  of  the  Commission  and  other  State  officials  iij 
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  may  be  stated  that  under  certiiin  con- 
ditions of  public  interest,  with  facilities  for  utilization  of  the 
affected  product,  and  with  a  knowledge  of  the  fundamental  facts 
and  principles  relating  to  the  depredators  and  their  control,  it 
is  entirely  possible  and  as  a  business  pn)position  it  will  pay. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  has  been  forcibly  demonstrated  in  a 
number  of  cases  that  have  come  under  our  observation  that  any 
direct  attempt  to  combat  an  insect  depredator  without  a  knowl- 
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  will  accomplish  more  than  many 
thousands  of  dollars  expended  without  such  knowledge.     In 


183 

other  words,  practical  application  must  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  import- 
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  will  work,  and  we 
have  proved  it  in  a  number  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  stopped  insect 
depredations  which  had  been  going  on  for  twenty  or  thirty  years 
and  killing  an  enormous  amount  of  timber.  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 


J84 

certain  to  be  a  success,  and  we  will  be  prouder  of  it  than  any- 
thing else  we  have  done,  because  it  show-s  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 
recoguized  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 
only  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  tliey  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  own  timber  but  they  will  realize  that  there  is 
a  common  interest  involved  and  will  be  impelled  to  help  their 
neighbors,  their  county,  and  their  State. 

I  have  some  photographs  here  w-hich  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  CHAIRMAN:  Dr.  Hopkins  has  some  photographs  here 
illustrating  some  of  the  insect  pests,  and  I  am  sure  he  will  be 
glad  to  show  them  to  those  who  arc  interested,  after  this  session 
is  over.  The  paper  of  Dr.  Hopkins  is  open  for  discussion.  I 
know  he  will  be  ghid  to  answer  questions  that  may  arise  pertain- 
ing to  the  relation  of  the  insects  to  the  chestnut  bark  disease,  or 
any  other  questions  tfiat  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? 


186 

DR.  HOPKINS:  That  is  not  known.  We  have  no  way  of 
determining  how  far  they  \vill  go.  Bnt  they  have  wings  and  can 
fly.    There  is  no  reason  why  they  should  not  go  long  distances. 

DR.  REED,  of  Virginia:  I  would  like  to  ask  how  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  six)res.  When  the 
insects  hatch  from  the  (*ggs,  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  nmny  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 

MR.  BARRUS,  of  New  York :  I  would  like  to  ask :  Is  there 
any  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? 

DR.  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  certainly  ouglit  to  know  something  about  what 
we  are  doing. 

MR.  BARRUS :  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. 

DR.  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  working  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  bark  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 


^    187 

trees.  So  that  the  others  live  in  various  ways.  If  a  lot  of  in- 
sects is  found  in  a  diseased  tree,  we  must  know  which  of  these  are 
the  insects  that  attack  the  living  bark  and  wliich  come  in  after 
the  bark  begins  to  die,  or  after  it  is  dead,  and  whether  or  not  any 
of  them  can  carry  spores  after  they  transformtnl  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  w-inged  stage,  and  emerge 
from  the  bark,  they  fly  away  very  quickly,  as  if  to  escape  some 
enemy.  They  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  whether  in  your  estimation,  the  Leptura  species  of  borer 
precede  infections  of  the  blight,  or  follow  it? 

DR.  HOPKINS:  That  is  a  problem  we  are  working  on,  but 
we  are  not  ready  to  form  an  opinion  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  CHxlIRMAN :    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  twenty  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  tbey  claim  they  are  dying 
from  wet  weather.  We  have  demonstrated  conclusively,  I  think, 
that  insect  troubles  dc)  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  rapid  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  tliroughout  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  tlie  winter  of  1893,  in  Januai'y, 
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  way  nortliward  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  ext<en- 
sive  cutting  of  infested  trees  by  the  oAvners  in  carrying  out  our 
recommendations,  and  I  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  words  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  with  the  one  subject  pre- 
sented this  afternoon,  under  the  rule  adopte<l  this  morning  and 
continue  along  that  line  until  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  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.  3IICKLEBOROU(m,  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  which  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.  T  think  perhaps  one  or  two  errors 
may  have  been  stated  here,  and  I  want  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  spermatia.  Besides  being  very  small 
they  possess  great  motility.  There  is  a  fourth  kind  also  de- 
veloped in  a  flask  or  perithecium  which  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  pycnidium  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  sporidiay  the  thread  mass  are  conidia,  the  minute 
spores  (or  cells)  are  the  spermatia,  and  the  pycnidial  product  are 
the  sporules. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :  Doctor,  I  think  I  will  have  to  ask  for 
unanimous  consent,  because  we  have  now  gone  to  the  limit  of  our 
rule. 

DR.  MICKLEBOROIKHI:  I  would  ask  consent  that  I  mav 
be  able  to  present  a  statement  that  I  think  is  of  some  importance 
in  the  work  which  I  have  been  doing  just  lately. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :  Can  you  give  us  an  idea  of  the  time? 

DR.  MICKLEBOROUdH :  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 with  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. 

ME.  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  ways  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.  MICKLEBOROUGH :  I  have  no  desire  to  prolong  this 
discussion  at  all  against  the  wish  and  the  unanimous  consent  of 
the  Conference,  and  I  am  not  wishing  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  CHAIRMAN:  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  has  raised  the  liope  that  the  dead  line  is  to  be 
effective.  Tossibly  Dr.  Crowell  can  tell  us  something  about  it, 
or  some  other  member  of  the  Department 

THE  CHAIRMAN:  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. 

PROFESSOR  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  Farmery's  Bulletin  which  has  been 
published,  the  statement  is  made  that  those  experiments  were 
conducted  chiefly  by  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-five  miles  from  Washington 
is  apparently  free  from  the  bark  disaese,  although  new  infections 
must  be  looked  for  as  long  as  tlie  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  two  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  unaflFected.  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,  aft«r  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  exx)eriment  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 


194 

cutting-out  experiments  can  be  made,  and  the  end  will  give  re- 
sults of  great  value,  on  account  of  the  difference  in  local  conditr 
ions. 

DR.  MURRILL,  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  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. 

5.  Supposing  that  it  might  be  possible  to  eradicate  all  ad- 
vance infections,  what  method  is  proposed  that  is  at  all  feasible 
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  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  atay  the  disease  will  be  abondoned,  especially 
when  the  main  line  of  advance,  which  is  now  in  northern  Mary- 
land, reaches  the  Potomac  River.  (Applause). 

MR.  CASSELL,  of  Philadelphia :  1  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.    .(-^PP^^^se). 

PROFESSOR  STEWART:  Mr.  Chairman:  I  wish  to  speak 
of  two  points  mentioned  by  Professor  Collins  in  connection  with 
the  Washington  experiment  I  think  that  he  has  left  the  im- 
pression that  those  points  of  infection  discovered  after  June, 
1911,  could  be  regarded  as  new  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.  Another  point :  Professor  Collins  states  that 
in  those  two  cases  where  the  trees  were  cut  and  the  stumps  left 
unbarked,  that  the  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  my  paper. 

MR.  I.  C.  WILLIAMS :  Mr  Chairman :  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  you  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,  witJi  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  which  itiuch  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  wiH  just  bear  with  me  a  moment,  he  will  get  an  oppor- 
tunity when  I  am  through. 

THE  CHAIRMAN:  l"he  three-minute  limit  having  expired, 
we  will  understand,  unless  there  is  objection,  that  Mr.  Williams 
has  unanimous  consent  to  continue. 

MR.  WILLIAMS:  I  liold  before  this  meeting  that  it  is  a  case 
of  ridiculous  and  absurd  foolislmess  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  usiless. 
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 
wiien  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  Iiis  pre-('onvention  efforts 
in  some  way  to  cook  up  a  sentiment,  or  an  apparent  sentiment, 


197 

against  what  possibly  niiy:ht  be  done  iit  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  mystery  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  imj)ossible  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*  tliat  it  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  infei^tions  originating  from  millions  of 
spores  produced  on  these  trees  and  distributed  by  birds,  insects,, 
sipiirrels,  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.  Tt»  ilate 
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  the  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.  Hy  what  process 
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  anything  at  all?  Now  if  there 
is,  let  us  use  it.  If  there  is  not,  let  ns  look  for  one.  We  are  in- 
terested in  looking  for  one.  We  claim  no  method  that  is  of  great 
virtue,  but  we  do  claim  that  we  are  interested  in  looking  for  a 
method,  and  that  is  the  thing  we  want  to  do. 

"When  an  appropriation  is  asked  for,  it  is  customary  to  point 
to  some  good  reason  for  hope  of  success  provided  the  appropria- 
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 
whether  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, 
that  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 


190 

whether,  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  would  have  redounded  to  the 
benefit  of  the  other  States,  as  Massachusetts  has  done  in  her 
gypsy  moth  fight?  (Applause).  If  instead  of  sitting  down 
and  nursing  their  hands  in  idleness  and  allowing  this  scourge 
to  go  on,  simply  because  they  could  not  originate  sufiicient  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  we  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  down  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 
yellow  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 
w^e  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. 

That  is  the  keynote  of  our  work  here.  I  would  like  this  Con- 
vention to  carry  away  with  it  the  idea  that  we  are  in  this  work 
just  for  wliat  ever  result  we  can  accomplish,  and  we  do  not  care 
in  what  direction  the  inquiry  goes.  That  makes  no  difference 
whatever.    What  do  we  care  wliether  this  fungus  went  on  a 


200 

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  l)e  as  it  may. 
The  thing  to  do  is  to  deal  with  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  whoh^  effort  and  I  think  we 
have  discharged  our  duty  to  tlie  public.     (Applause). 

PROFESSOE  SUEFACE:  Mr.  Chairman:  1  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.  lie  has  brought  our  attention  to  the  fact  that  there 
are  four  hundred  and  seventyrtwo  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  woodpeckers  carry  the  disease  germs; 
but  let  iis  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  mucli  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  tliat  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:  I  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  (Joast  I  found  there  had  been  a  Convention  or  a 
Conference,  in  Albany,  and  1  found  tliat  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  with  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  shown  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 
through  mj'  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 

vestigation.  The  papers  of  all  the  delegates  have  referred  to 
being  ou  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  wish  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, 
aft^r  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). 

PROFESSOR  RANE :  I  simply  rise  just  to  make  this  point: 
It  seems  to  me  that  a  discussion  is  w  hat  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  pnt  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  w^as  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  problem  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  to 
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  tliere  are  constantly  new  outbreaks  in  new  places,  and  a 
few  good  specialists  on  eacli  problem  are  blotter  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  well  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. 

MR.  STEVENS,  of  the  Lehigh  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,  (•arried  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  Kesolutions  will  have  something 
of  a  constructive  order  to  suggest. 

MK.  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 
believe  th(\v  can  lielj)  the  St^ite  to  solve  a  great  problem,  and, 
so  far  as  I  liave  b<H*n  able  to  size  np  the  situation  in  Pennsyl- 
\ania,  from  the  jKijjers  and  th(»  discussions  which  have  been 
offered  here,  1  should  say  that  the  Pennsylvania  plan,  in  a  word, 
is  to  set^k  the  truth  and  when  the  best  course  is  found,  then  to 
follow  that  course.  What  else  can  we  consider  to  be  the  policy 
in  this  State?  Remember  that  the  Legislature  of  Pennsylvania 
has  appropriated  two  hundred  and  seventy-five  thousand  dol- 
lars, and  we  heard  yc^sterday  that  only  twenty  thousand  dollars 


205 

has  been  expended.  That  money  is  l>eing  used,  it  appears  to 
me,  to  determine  which  of  various  methods  is  the  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  satisrt/d  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  think  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). 

DR.  MURRILL:  I  just  want  to  concur  heartily  in  every- 
thing the  Chairman  lias  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(> 

man  that  is  backing  up  their  work.  Professor  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  CHAIRMAN :  We  will  now  proceed  to  hear  the  report 
of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions. 

MR.  WILLIAMS :  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  Ms 
programme  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  f400,000,000 ;  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  he  has 
shown. 

That  we  appreciate  the  interest  of  the  l*resident  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  presenti^d  by  the 
Chestnut  Blight  problem. 


207 

That  the  Comniissiou  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  urge  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 
180,000  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  laboratory  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.  Russell  Smith. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :     Are  there  any  remarks? 

DR.  MURRILL:  Possibly  I  have  taken  too  much  of  your 
time,  but  I  have  a  niessiige  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  timbjer 
owners  just  when  to  cut  and  utilize  their  timber  to  the  greatest 
advantage.  The  State  should  have  this  knowledge.  *rhen 
also  pay  heed  to  science  and  further  investigation. 

THE  CHAIRMAN :  What  you  are  giving  is  undoubtedly  of 
great  value,  but  it  occurs  to  the  Cliair  that  it  is  not  directly  in 
line  wath  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  CHAIRMAN:  The  resolutions  seem  to  have  passed. 
They  have  passed. 

DR.  J.  W.  HARSHBERGKR,  of  Philadelphia:  Mr.  Chair- 
man: Just  one  suggestion  that  I  Avant  tx)  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  chestnut  tree.  Just 
as  the  man  in  the  western  states  provides  his  sheltc^r  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  inmuine,  or 
where  the  chestnut  blight  disease  will  practically  be  cut  off  from 
reaching  the  chestnut  trees.  Tliat  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. 

DR.  MURRILL :  eTust  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  b(*tter  the  chestnut  tree,  the  better  it  grows  on  it. 

14 


210 

It  is  a  mistake  to  say  that  forest  maiiageinent  will  eradicate 
blight.  It  will  eradicate  most  other  diseases,  insects,  and  so 
forth,  but  it  does  not  affect  the  blight. 

Utilization  is  the  real  issue;  the  practical  use  of  the  lumber, 
and  that  is  in  the  hands  of  those  who  own  chestnut  timber.  The 
present  is  yours.  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  about  this  trouble,  just  as  you  would  the 
opinions  of  hardheaded  business  men.  I  thank  you  for  your  at 
tention.     (Applause) . 

THE  CHAIRMAN:  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? Why  was  it  unknown  until  recently,  and  then  why  so 
violent? 

7.  Will  it  attack  other  trees  besides  species  of  chestnut? 
Much  depends  on  this.  Trees  nearest  the  chestnut  should  be 
used  for  experiment. 


211 

8.  What  is  the  futnre  of  the  disease?  Will  it  run  lt«  course 
and  disappear?  Will  it  become  less  virulent?  Will  resistant 
varieties  appear?  Can  such  varieties  he  made  bj'  selection,  hy- 
bridization, etc.?  Can  chestnuls  be  grown  with  safety  beyond 
the  Mississippi  river?  How  long  after  death  of  all  our  trees, 
may  chestnuts  be  again  planted  witli  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  CHAIRMAN:  It  has  been  suggested  to  the  Cliair  from 
two  directions  that,  as  we  have  in  this  audience  a  number  of 
men  of  large  commercial  interests,  the  opportunity  should  be 
extended  to  them  to  make  remarks.  Tlie  Chair  is  pleased  to 
accept  that  suggestion.     Mr.  Thalheimer. 

MR.  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  away  back  from  their  forefathers,  and  I  think  it  would 
he  proper  for  this  Commission  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  otT  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  blue  with  big  horns,  worse  than  the  Massachusetts  kind. 
They  were  about  two  inches  long  and  about  a  quarter  of  an  inch 
thick.  They  walked  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  under  the  tree.  When 
I  came  to  take  that  seat,  it  was  literally  covered  with  those 
gypsy  moths,  coniinji:  off  of  that  tree.  What  I  want  to  say  to 
you  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 :     Wliere  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  Qccurs  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 
DR.  MURRILL :  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. 
I  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  oflE  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 
sliould  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  has  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. 

MR.  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  liave  been  able  to  learn  of  it,  and  that  is  the  line 
we  hope  to  follow,  following  their  advice. 

DR.  MICKLEBOROUCIH:  Dr.  Murrill,  have  you  been  cut- 
ting the  cliestnut  growtli  up  at  the  Hronx  (larden? 

DR.  MUKRILL:  We  are  now  cutting  down  the  last  trees. 
It  has  cost  us  five  thousiind  dollars  to  cut  down  fourteen  hun- 
dred trees  in  fiftv  acn»s  of  the  Bronx  Park. 

DR.  MICKLEBOROUGH :  I  would  like  to  ask  Dr.  Murrill 
another  question,  and  tliat  is,  in  tlie  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  where  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  hopeless,  and  the  area  of  the 
disease  was  so  great  as  to  make  it  i)ractically  impossible  to  cut 
these  trees.  We  have  not  b(»en  abli*  to  get  money  enough  appro- 
priated by  the  Parks  juid  public  in  New  York  City  to  <*ut  out 
the  dead  wood  caused  by  (his  disease*. 

Mr.  E.  A.  WELMElv,  of  Lebanon,  Pa.:  Mr.  Cliainnan  and 
(ientlenien :  1  would  like  to  address  a  few  unscientific  remarks 
to  the  owners  of  wood  lots  or  forests,  and  if  my  scientific  friends 
wish  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.  1  think  that  I  have  the  honor,  with  the  Hon.  Mr.  Elliott, 
who  is  here,  and  Dr.  Drinker,  in  discovering  the  first  entry  of 


216 

the  blight  into  Pennsylyania.  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  you  this  to  demonstrate  the  care  that  is  nec- 
essary to  take  in  getting  rid  of  the  refuse  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  north,  south, 
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  Department  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  the  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,  twenty-seven  cords,  were  to  come  from. 

I  then  suggested  to  Mr.  Fox,  who  remained  on  the  job,  that 
we  start  cutting  down  the  trees  around  the  focal  centers,  and, 
if  we  found  trees  not  infected,  we  would  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  t«ll  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 
(lust  at  the  roots  or  base  of  the  stump,  until  last  year,  yet  the 
tops  of  the  trees,  in  certain  sections,  are  all  dead;  they  started 
dying  several  years  ago. 

I  want  to  say  one  thing  more.  The  farmers  can  help  the 
I*ennsylvania  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 
bliglit  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 
will  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  you  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 
ilie  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  highly  illuminated.  Under  any  other 
condition  you  would  not  see  these  spores,  as  they  would  be 
liidden  by  the  shadows  cast  by  the  bark.  Now,  say  in  two  hours, 
after  the  sun  has  illuminated  another  portion  of  the  tree,  you 
had  better  go  through  that  tract  again.  In  other  words,  start 
f»nt  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  nietliod  in  a  place  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  ^ith 
the  blight  from  top  to  bottom.  If  you  think  you  do  not  have 
the  blight  among  your  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  you  another  thing.  We  may  not  be  able  to 
control  the  blight  by  cutting  down  the  treses,  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  oflf  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  thr 
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  bum  the  stumps, 
it  will  produce  the  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  oflE  the  second 
time,  if  necessary.  You  can  also  spray  the  young  growth  with 
lime-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  completely 
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  the  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). 

PROFESSOB  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 
letain  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 

a  little  more  conclusive  if  the  gentleman  would  try  cultures  to 
see  if  they  would  grow. 

MR.  WEIMER:  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 
with  reference  to  the  life  of  spores?  I  have  a  little  vial  with 
me  in  which  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  And  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  sproutings  under  the  microscope, — the  mycelium  threads. 
I  w^as  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. 

Tjet  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 
both,  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- 
joumijient? 

A  DELEGATE :    I  move  you  that  we  adjourn  at  4.15  p.  m. 

MR.  PEIRCE :     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  CHAIRMAN:  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  CHAIRMAN:  What  is  your  pleasure  with  reference 
to  appointing  a  committee  to  wait  on  the  Governor? 

PROFESSOR  RANE :    I  so  move  you. 
Seconded. 

THE  CHAIRMAN:  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  CHAIRMAN :  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  Rane  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. 

DR.  HARSHBERGER,  of  Philadelphia:  A  very  simple  test 
could  be  made  of  the  vitality  of  those  spores  wiiich  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  CHAIRMAN:  The  suggestion  is  made  by  Dr.  Harsh- 
berger  that  Mr.  Weimer  be  requested  to  send  tlu*  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. 

MR.  WEIMER:  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  the  matter,  theu,  with 
the  understandiug  that  Mr.  Weimer  will  take  it  up  with  the 
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 Anil  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- 


date  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,  ninety  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. 

PROFESSOR  RANE :  I  have  some  resolutions  which  I  would 
like  to  present  at  this  time : 

"Resolved,  That  the  delegates  and  others  in  attendance  at 
this  Conference  desire  to  express  their  high  sense  of  apprecia- 
tion of  the  many  courtesies  tendered  them  by  the  officers  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  put  and  unanimously  carried. 

PROFESSOR  RANE :    I  have  another  resolution : 

"Resolved,  Tbat  tlie  thanks  of  this  convention  be,  and  are 
hereby  tendered  Hon.  R.  A.  Pearson  for  his  able  and  courteous 
way  of  handling  tlie  duties  of  permanent  Chairman."  (Ap 
plause), 

MR.  BESLEY  (in  tlie  Chair) :  Mr.  Pearson  is  too  modest  to 
put  that  resolution,  so  I  take  pleasure  in  putting  it  before  this 
house,  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). 

MR.  PEARSON:  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  yoil  it  has 


223 

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. 

MB.  MEBKEL :  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-day  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  SPBOUL:  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  CHAIBM AN :    We  all  know  you. 


224 

SENATOR  SPROUL :  I  am  very  glad,  iudeed,  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 
1  trust  that  the  good  work  will  go  on,  not  only  here  but  every- 
v/here  where  this  disease  is  threatening  so  much  harm.  (Ap- 
plaus(0. 

THE  CU AIRMAN:  A  request  has  been  made  that  Deputy 
Commissioner  Williams  say  a  word  before  we  adjourn,  and  at 
the  siinie  time  advise  you  how  extra  reports  of  this  Conference 
may  be  secured,  if  persons  wish  to  have  them. 

MR.  WILLIAMS:  I  had  no  intention  of  speaking  again. 
All  I  can  say  is  that  we  hope,  and  the  Commission  hopes,  to 
have  this  report  transcribed  and  published  at  an  early  date. 
When  it  is  printed  every  person  who  has  registered  here,  as 
visitor  or  delegate,  who  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  their  requests  will  be  complied  with.  Just 
how  soon  it  ^v^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  what  we  can  to 
produce  the  greatest  good.  What  we  are  aiming  at  in  Pennsyl- 
vania is  to  get  results,  and  I  take  it  that  when  tliis  problem 
ife  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 

16 


226 

At  the  request  of  Governor  Tener,  the  Commission  prepared 
the  programme,  but  in  arranging  for  the  speakers  it  tried  to 
provide  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 
will  at  once  inform  us  of  it. 

Messrs.  Bodine,  Merkel,  and  Bane  then  escorted  the  Governor 
to  the  floor  of  the  Convention. 

THE  CHAIBM AN :  Governor  Tener,  I  desire  to  report  to  you 
that  during  these  two  days  we  have  been  discussing  the  various 
phases  of  the  cliestnut  tree  blight.    Many  valuable  points  have 


227 


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 
will  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  bad 
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  tlie  Convention,  I  will 
entertain  a  motion  to  adjourn. 

DR.  MURRILL :    I  move  you,  Sir,  that  we  adjourn. 
Seconded  by  Professor  Rane. 
The  motion  was  put  and  carried. 

GOVERNOR  TENER:     I  now  declare  tliis  Convention  ad 
journed  sine  die. 


ADDENDA. 

Newport,  Perry  County,  Pa,, 

February  21,  1912. 

To  the  Officers  of  the  Chestnut  Blight  Convention: 

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. 


225) 


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  reieived  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  experience  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  with  a  coating  which  has 
to  be  removed  by  hammering  it  loose.  Acids  that  will  eat  the 
lime  off  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  presence 
of  lime  in  the  liquors  is  regarded  as  a  good  sign  of  plenty  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- 
tainSy  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  place  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  Knoxrille,  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  sup- 
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  the  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 
arrowing  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,  /  would  recominend  that  solutions  of  lime  water 
J)€  soaked  into  the  ground  thoroughly  around  trees  known  to  he 
affected  with  the  blight,  and  soak  the  ground  around  the  trees 
as  far  as  the  branches  above  extend  out.    Soak  the  ground  thor- 
oughly for  a  distance  of  tvx)  or  three  feet  down,  so  that  every 
root  big  and  little  will  get  a  little  lime  in  solution  in  which  shape 
it  is  readily  taken  up  by  the  roots.    Then  spray  the  trees  above 
with  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- 


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 
the  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  it.s  weight  of  lime;  80  pounds  of  lime,  costing  about  10 
to  12  cents  wholesale,  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  liere  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  whole  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  will  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  thein  bark  or  wood,  or  both,  require 
lime  for  their  vigorous  growth.  For  instance,  the  bark  of  the 
pear  tree  is  known  to  contain  a  fair  percentage  of  taiinin.  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  ifound  to  be 
so,  then  the  costly  and  irritating  job  of  forcing  relucbint  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  mucli  easier  to 
put  in  force,  as  it  will  have  the  hearty  co-operation  of  the  public, 
in  the  generous  etforts  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  will  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  WORK  OF  THE  CHESTNUT  TREE  BLIGHT  COM- 
MISSION. 


By  THOMAS  E.  FRANCIS,  FIELD   SUPERVISOR. 

During  the  six  months  the  field  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  liave  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 
meanw^hile,  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  consiste<l 
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- 
ing 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  inspection  of  individual 
tracts,  showing  that  the  woodland  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, 
and  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 
and  stumps  from  December  1,  1911  to  February  15,  1912.     In 


235 

CTery  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  REPORT  ON  SCOUT  WORK  ON  THE  NORTH  BENCH 
OP  BALD  EAGLE  MOUNTAIN,  BETWEEN  SYLVAN 
DELL  AND  WILLIAMS l^ORT,  LYCOMINO  COUNTY, 
PA. 


By  H.  E.  WELLS,  FIELD  SUPERVISOR. 

In  order  to  determine  as  nearly  as  possible  the  number  of 
cases  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,  president  of  the  club,  and  the  members  of  the  Associa- 
tion. 

The  work  of  felling  infected  trees  and  burning  the  bark  and 
brush  was  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  whetlier  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  healthy  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  liay  in  tlie  mow,  often  lasts  long 
into  the  winter.  Generally,  though,  the  persistent  leaves  in 
winter  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  leavers,  small  undeveloi)ed  and  unopened  burs  ar^» 
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  tendency  is  to  put  out  these  hiterals.  These  sprouts  are 
almost  always  infected  and  quickly  girdled,  so  in  late  fall  or 
Avinter,  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  w^as  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  tchich  are  in  the  part  that  has  heen  allowed  to  go  without 
manorgement  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  Sudquehanna  river.     The  tracts  are  mostly  farmers' 


288 

woodlots,  ranging  in  size  from  a  few  acres  up  to  several  hun- 
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  park,  except  where 
some  cutting  has  been  done,  and  here  the  brush  aud  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  portion 
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  Cunmiiugs  township, 
in  the  west>central  part  of  Lycoming  county.  The  timber  is 
fully  90  per  cent,  cliestnut  and  is  a  clean,  thrifty  young  pole 
stand  averaging  six  to  ten  inches  in  diamter,  with  250  trees  to 
the' acre.  On  less  than  jSve  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  lias  been 
present  for  two  or  three  years. 


239 

Infections  of  every  kind  were  found  at  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  the 
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  would  be  studied  in  the  same  way. 
Here  and  there,  scattering  cases  of  infection  were  found,  not 


240 

ill  a  center,  tlioiigli  perhaps  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  oflf 
and  graft  with  Paragon  scions,  the  natural  stock  on  550  acres 
of  land  located  one  mile  w^est  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  timl)er  are  found.  The  purity  and  density  of  the 
stand,  however,  without  a  doubt  accounts  for  the  number  of 
infections  present,  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 
atrip  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  live  men  in  here  under  the  direction  of  a  man 
familiar  witli  tlie  territory^  tlie  wliole  region  will  be  carefully 
£<couted. 

All  knc^wn  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  supe^ntending  the  removal 
of  infected  trees. 

A  fair  estimate  is  4  acres  per  day  per  man  for  a  close  inspec- 
tion, working  the  tract  in  ZO  feet  strips.  In  a  very  close  tree 
to  tree  winter  insi)ection,  two  men  can  cover  four  to  five  acres 
or  two  to  two  and  a  half  acres  per  day  per  man. 


LONGEVITY  OF  LIFE  OF  SPORES. 


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 
"Philadelphia,  April  19,  1912. 


Mr.  I.  C.  WilliamSy 


Deputy  Ck>mmi88ioner  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  Crozler  Bldg.,  PhUadelphla,  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.  Barros,  Albany,  N.  T. 


243 

H.  H.  Bechtel,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

George  Bell,  Marysvllle,  Pa. 

F.  W.  Beeley,  John  Hopkins  Univ.,  Baltimore,  Md. 

John  Blrklnbine,  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.  Ciunpbell,  B.  ft  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.  I'oim 

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,  TroxelvUle,  Pa. 

Hon.  Robert  S.  Conklin,  Commissioner  of  Forestry,  Hariisbuig.  Vh 

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,  Catawlssa,  Pa. 

Hon.  N.  B.  Crltchfield,  Seoy.  or  Agriculture,  Harrisburg,  Pa. 

S.  L.  Cummlngs,  Dewart,  Northumberland  Co.,  Pa. 

Prof.  Nelson  Flthlan  Davis,  Bucknell  University,  Lewlsburg,  Pa. 

Jos.  W.  Derrick,  care  of  Harison  Townsend,  10th  and  Chestnut,  Phlla. 

S.  B.  DetwUer,  Executive  OfFlcer,  C.  B.  Comm'n.,  Bala,  Pa. 

Mrs.  S.  B.  Detwller,  Bala,  Pa. 

Dr.  Samuel  G.  Dixon,  State  Health  Comm'r.,  1900  Race  St.,  Phlla. 

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  ft  Bro.,  Pottstown,  Pa. 

Dr.  J.  B.  Emerson,  40  E.  4l8t  St.,  New  York  City. 

S.  B.  Enterllne,  Pottsvllle,  Pa. 

Samuel  L.  EiSUnger,  Lemoyne,  Cumb.  Co.,  Pa. 

J.  K.  Esser,  Field  Agt.  Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Comm.,  Mauch  Chunk,  Pa. 

Thomas  E^vans,  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.  ft  F.  Nurseries,  Springfield,  N.  J. 

F.  W.  Finger,  Philadelhpia,  Pa. 

W.  Rlghter  Fisher,  Bryn  Mawr,  Pa. 

Dr.  Wm.  R.  Fisher.  Swlftwater,  Pa. 

J.  W.  Fisher,  Newport,  Term. 


244 

Dr.  A.  K.  Fisher,  Bureau  of  Elologlcal  Survey,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Amos  Fleisher,  Newport,  Pa. 

P.  Hartman  Fox,  Austin,  Pa. 

James  G.  Fox,  Hum mels town.  Pa. 

W.  W.  Frazier,  250  S.  18th  St,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

Thomas  B.  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,  Blgstone  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  Gup  till.  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.  Hibbe,  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,  E2mporium,  Pa. 
Geo.  G.  Hutchinson,  Warrior's  Mark,  Pa. 

F.  B.  Jewett,  Brookljrn,  Pa. 

Henry  C.  Johnson  ft  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  ft  Co.,  Lsmchburg,  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.  Landls,  Bunker  Hill,  W.  Va. 

W.  J.  Lawson,  Andora  Nurseries,  Chestnut  Hill,  Pa. 

Chas.  E.  Lewis,  Orono,  Maine. 


246 

Bdw.  Lienhard,  Maach  Chank,  Pa. 

K.  Lockwood,  State  ChemiBt»  New  York  City. 

Hon.  Amoe  F.  Lunn»  State  Senate,  No.  Smithfleld,  R.  L 

Llndley  R.  Lynch,  Providence,  R.  I. 

Garfield  McAlllBter»  Harrisburg,  Pa. 

Prof.  Chas.  A.  McCue,  Dover,  Del. 

John  McNabb,  Howard  Bstate,  Lower  Merlon,  Pa. 

James  E.  McNeal,  Lancaster,  Pa. 

Miss  M.  A.  Maffet,  264  8.  Franklin  St.,  Wilkes-parre,  Pa. 

E.  Mather,  Harrlsburg,  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.  8.  Mlnehart,  Orrstown,  Pa. 

Sidney  R.  Miner,  Penna.  Conservation  Asso.,  Wilkes-Barre,  Pa. 

C.  O.  Mlnick,  Ridgway,  Pa. 

F.  F.  Moore,  Amhert,  Mass. 

James  N.  Moore,  Legislative  Ref.  Bureau,  Harrlsburg,  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.  Nevln,  Landenburg,  Pa. 

J.  B.  S.  Norton,  State  Pathologist,  College  Park,  Md. 

Hon.  W.  C.  Norton,  Waymart,  Pa. 

J.  S.  Qmwake,  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  ft  Co.,  Ardmore,  Pa. 

John  M.  Phillips,  Board  of  Game  Commissioners,  Harrlsburg,  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,   Harrlsburg,   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,  MiUersvllle,  Pa. 

J.  W.  Root,  A.  W.  Root  ft  Bro.,  Manhelm,  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  ft  Co.,  Shickshlnny,  No.  1,  Pa. 
Dr.  Augustine  D.  Selby,  Ohio  Agr.  Expt.  Station,  Wooster,  Ohio. 
J.  W.  Seltzer,  Cobum,  Pa. 

C.  E.  Seville,  McConnellsburg,  Pa. 
S.  T.  Seybert,  Berwick,  Pa. 
W.  E.  Shafer,  Miffllnburg,  Pa. 

G.  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,  Shippensburg,  Pa. 
Michael  Smyser,  York,  Pa. 

Hon.  Henry  C.  Suavely,  Cleona,  Pa. 
Dr.  F.  Herbert  Snow,  Harrisburg,  Pa. 
C.  K.  Sober,  Lewlsburg,  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,  Plttston,  Pa. 
O.  T.  Swan,  Forest  Service,  Washington,  D.  C. 
Luke  H.  Swank,  Swank  Bldg.,  Johnstown,  Pa. 
F.  H.  Swayze,  Western  Electric  Co.,  11th  ft  York,  Phila. 
William  Teas,  Marion,  Va. 
A.  Thalhelmer,  Reading,  Pa. 
Rep.  Thomson  Chemical  Co.,  Baltimore,  Md. 
A.  L.  Towson,  Smithsburg,  Md. 
Albert  H.  TutUe.  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-Whi taker  Co.,  381  Fourth  Ave.,  New  York 
City. 

E.  A.  Welmer,  Lebanon,  Pa. 

R.  A.  Wheeler,  Kennett  Square,  No.  4,  Pa. 
Hon.  N.  P.  Wheeler,  Wheeler  ft  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. 

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 ,   116 

Attractions  of  Harrisburg,    1 123 

B. 

Backenstoe,  Dr.  J.  M. ,   remarks  by,    165 

Bacterial  investigation,  result  of,  191 

Baker,  Dr.  H.  P.,  The  blight  and  practice  of  forestry 137 

Barms,  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  cheBtnut  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  Penno.  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 195 

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  conservation 144 

Cliestnut  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 

(^hestnut  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 

CollinB,  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.   Mrlvilh*  T. ,    Remarks  by 28 

Cook,  Dr.  Melville  T.,  The  blight  in  New  Jersey 161 

Cranmer,  J.  C,  Remarks  by, 118 

Cutting  out  diseasefl  parts,  experience  with ,    67 

Cutting  out  experiments  at  Washington,   D.  C'.,    77 


I 


D. 

Danger  signals  of   the   blight ,    , 236 

Davis,  Prof.  Nelson  F. ,  Address  by,  83 

Dead-line,    establishing,     221 

Defining  Diaporthe  par<uitica ,    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 

"Deyirs  paint  bnisli /*  how  eradicated,    203 

Diaporthe  para9itica  in  Pennsylvania  groves,   100 

Diaporthe  parantica  in  the  South ,    80 

Diaporthe  parasitica,   infective  material  of,    50 

Diseased    trees,    locating,     44 

Drought  favorable  to  blight,    81 


E. 

Early  history  of  Dinporthc  paraniiica ,    72 

Eliminating    blight    infected    trees,     14H 

Endoihia   gyrota, 79 

Enterline,   S.  M.  Remarks  by,    21 

Epidemics ,   sudden 71 

Eradication  of  blight  by  cutting  out 82 

Experimenting  with   cutting  out  process,    VX^ 


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 23H 

Fighting  enemies  of  the  chestnut i>5 

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  ascoRpores,    52 

Giddings,  N.  J.,  Means  of  control, 105 

Giddings,   N.    J.,    Remarks    by,     26 

Giddings,  N.  J.,   The  blight  situation  in  West  Virdnin 173 

Grafting  chestnut,   how  suooessful ,    .' 87 

Grafting  native  chestnut  sprouts,    84 

Graves,  Dr.  A.  II. ,  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 


260 

H. 

Page. 

Harrisburg  Board  of  Trade,  Letter  from  the,  126 

Harshberger ,   Dr.  J.  W. ,  Remarka  by,    106 

Harvesting  cultivated  chestnuts 98 

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 

L 

Immune  pure-bred  varieties  of  chestnut,   09 

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  conunenced ,    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,    26 

L. 

Laboratory   experiments,     134 

Lesson  from  the  San  Jos^  Scale 147 

Lightning  injury  seat  for  inoculation ,    63 

Lime  in  chestnut  wood  ashes,    229 

Lime  water  as  a  remedy  for  the  blight 231 

Ix>ngevlty  of  conidia  and  ascospores 62 

Ijoss  incurred  in  Penna.  by  chestnut  blight,    130 

M. 

Machine  for  removing  chestnuts  from  burrs > 93 

Main  Line  investigations  of  blight,    164 

McFarland,  Horace,  Letter  from,  125 

Meetings  to  discuss  blight,   234 

Medicinal  remedies  for  chestnut  blight,  67 

Merkel,   Dr.  Herman  W.,   Pennsylvania's  unselfish  law 116 

Metcalf ,  Dr.  Haven ,  Address  by, 28 


251 

Page. 

Method   of  controlling   blight, 40 

Mickleboroogh,    Dr.  John ,    Remarks  by,    114 

Mowry ,  Jesse  B. ,  Remarks  by ,    . . ; 26 

Marrill,  Prof.  W.  A.,  Treatment  of  chestnut  blight,    194 

Murrill,  Prof.  W.  A.,  Questions  for  scientific  investigation, 210 

McGue,   Prof.  G.  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 

Ofllcers  of  Harrisburg  Conference ,    18 

Official  call   for  Conference,    6 

Official  programme  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 

Pelrce,  Harold,  The  need  of  co-operative  work,   225 

Peirce ,  Harold ,    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  utili»ition  of  chestnut,   136 

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  Massadiusotts,   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 

•      Ptge. 

Register  of  delegates  and  guests,    . .". 242 

Relation   of  birds  to  spread  of  blight ,    103 

Rumbold,   Dr.    Caroline,    "Possibilitj    of    Medicinal    Remedy   for    Chestnut 

Blight,"    : 67 

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 

8. 

Sap ,   flow  in  chestnut  trees,    65 

Scout  work  in  I^ycoming  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, 12t> 

Smith,  Dr.  J.  Russell ,  Effect  of  drought  on  trees,    118 

Smith,  Dr.  J.  Russell,  Chestnut  blight  f^nd  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  address  by,    227 

Temperature ,   effect  of  early  growth ,    52 

Temperature,   effect  on   germination ,    52 

Thalheimer ,   A. ,    Remarks  by ,    110 

Thalheimer,  A. ,  Obsen'ations  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  Pennsylvaiiia,    129 

Value  of  chestnut  timber, 16 

Value  of  individual   trees,    60 

Vitality  of  old  spores  of  the  blight,   241 

Walton ,  R.  G. ,  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,   106 

Williams ,  Hon.  I.  C. ,  Naming  official  reporter,   19 

Williams,  Hon.  I.  C,  Best  methods  to  combat  blight,   196 

Wilson,  Hon.  James,  liCtter  relating  to  blight,   175 

Wind  spreading  chestnut  blight ,    115 

Woodpeckers  and  insects,  relation  to  blight,    185 

Z. 

Ziegler ,  Mr. ,  Remarks  by ,   213 


BULLETIN  NO.  L 


OCTOBER,  1912. 


THE 


Cljejitnut  S^ligftt  jl^feeajie. 


MEANS  OF 


IDENTIFICATION.  REMEDIES 
SUGGESTED  AND  NEED  OF 
CO-OPERATION  to  CONTROL 
and  ERADICATE  the  BUGHT. 


ISSUED  BY 


THE  COK4MISSION  FOR  THE  INVESTIGATION  AND  CONTROL  OF 
THE    CHESTNUT    TREE    BLIGHT  DISEASE   IN    PENNSYLVANIA. 


1112  Mortis  Building, 
Philadelphia. 


HARRISBURG: 

r.    K.    AUGIIINBAUtJH.    I'UINTKR    TO    THK    STATE    OF    PENNSYLVANIA 

1912. 


NOTE. 


The  Oommission  for  the  Investigation  and  Oontrol  of  the  OhestAHt 
Tree  Blight  Disease  in  Pennsylvania  was  authorized  b/  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  pirevention,  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 
prevtenting  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 
te  accomplish  all  of  the  purposes  of  the  Act  in  every  possible  maMier. 


THE  CHESTNUT  TREE  BLIGHT  DISEASE. 


THE  DANGER 


In  1904,  Dr.  H.  W.  Merkel  first  called  attention  to  the  disease 
now  known  as  the  chestnnt  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  they  found 
diseased  chestnnt  trees  on  portions  of  Long  Island,  as  early  as  1893, 
which  had  every  appearance  of  suffering  from  the  blight.  There  are 
accounts  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  known  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  now 
known  to  occur  from  New  Hampshire  and  eastern  New  York  to 
western  Pennsylvania,  Virginia  and  AVest  Virginia.  It  is  feared 
that  the  disease  will  sweep  through  and  destroy  the  great  chestnut 
forests  of  the  South.  The  blight  has  virtually  exterminated  the 
native  chestnut  trees  on  western  Long  Island,  and  in  southwestern 
Connecticut  and  northern  New  Jersey.  An  inoi'easingly  greater  pro- 
portion of  uninfected  trees  is  found  as  the  distance  from  New  York 
City  becomes  greater.  However,  Ijevdid  the  region  of  general  infec- 
tion there  are  centers  of  disease,  sometimes  of  considerable  extent, 
where  all,  or  almost  all,  of  the  chestnut  trees  are  seen  to  be  hope- 
lessly affected. 

In  Southeastern  Pennsylvania,  the  disease  has  affected  a  veiy  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  Watervllle,  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  17,000,000  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  country. 
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,  (125,000,000).  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.  Few  persons  in  eastern  Pennsylvania  realize 
how  rapid  has  been  the  progress  of  the  blight,  but  to  be  convinced 
of  this  fact,  it  is  onlv  necessarv  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  resembles  in  many  ways  the 
moulds  that  form  on  decaying  food.  It  gi'ows  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 


3 

nuinGrous  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  destruction  of  the  underlyfng  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 
and  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  spores,  (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  wormhole  or  other  wound  in  the  bark,  where  thej  can 
develop  into  minute  plants.  From  these  isolated  trees  as  centem, 
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  ag^icy  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  present,  in  order  to  cause  an  infection,  the  spores 
must  enter  a  wound  or  an  abrasion  in  the  bark,  hence  the  boring  in- 
sects are  especially  harmful  on  account  of  the  holes  they  make  through 
which  the  sppres  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  distributicm.     When  the  suuinieiL  spoi'es  are  in  the 

"horn"  stage,  or  when  fragments  of  a  horn  are  carried  to  other  ti-ees, 

ft 

the  gelatinous  mass  is  readily  dissolved  by  the  first  rain,  and  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  usually 
quickly  girdles  the  trunk  or  branch  on  which  it  grows.  A  canker 
three  inches  in  diameter  has  been  ob.served  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 
exi)ected  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  way  in 


II 

H 

i 

il 

■'i 


Untreated  orrhard  trpc  showing  blight  infection  Id  upper  branches. 


which  the  disease  may  be  widely  scattered.  Nursery  stock  shipped  iu 
Pennsylvania,  must  in  accordance  with  law,  be  previously  examined 
and  tagged  by  a  duly  appointed  agent  of  the  Chestnut  Tree  Blight 
Commission. 

The  disease  may  be  located  and  recognized  by  some,  or  occasionally 
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  the 
branches  attacked  after  the  leaves  have  fully  developed,  the  leaves  as- 
sume their  yellowish  or  reddisli-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  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  flrat  intimation  that  the  disease  is  present,  and  every 
owner  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  which  burrow  beneath  the  bark  and  girdle  the 
ti*ee  or  branch,  or  they  may  be  killed  by  some  physical  injury. 

2.  Cankers  on  diseased  branches  or  on  the  trunk  of  smooth  barked 
trees.  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- 
tween the  wood  and  bark  caused  by  the  decay  of  the  inner  bark.  All 
hollow  sounding  bark  is  not  necessarily  diseased,  however. 

3.  Small  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  threat ds  which  exude 
from  the  pustules  can  be  seen. 

4.  The  mycelium  of  the  fungus  which  occurs  in  small,  irregular 
fanshaped  areas  of  a  yelloxoish  or  buff  color  within  the  bark.  As  fur- 
ther proof  that  a  tree  is  diseased,  shave  off  the  surface  of  tine  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  tenter  sprouts,  which  dei^elop  at  the  base  cf  tJie 
cankers,  or  at  the  base  of  the  diseased  tree.  They  are  frequently 
very  numerous,  and  grow  vigorously  for  one  or  two  seasons,  after 
which  they  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  tho  pustules),  to  the  Chestnut  Blight  Lab- 
oratory, Zoology  iJuildiiig,  University  of  Pennsylvania,  Philadelphia, 
Pa.  for  examinatiim.  To  prevent  spread  of  infection,  each  specimen 
should  h^  wrapped  in  a  separate  paper  or  enclosed  in  a  paper  bag, 
or  a  tight  box,  and  securely  wraj)ped  for  sliipment.  With  each  speci- 
men there  should  l)e  information  as  to  where,  when,  and  by  whom 
it  was  found,  (including  the  post-ot!ice  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  a  lacked  by  blight.  Hy  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  eflicient  means  of  combating  the  disease,  so  far  as  known, 
is  to  cut  down  diseased  trees  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  kei)t  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  presemt. 

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  infecticm  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  commonJy  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 
furtiier  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  thess  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  trees.  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- 
l>hone  and  telegraph  poles  are  not  usually  accepted  for  this  purpose  if 
they  have  been  affected  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 
jirevent  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  doini? 


8 

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  by  many  that  extremely  dry  or  cold  and  unfavorable 
weather  conditions  have  favored  the  growth  of  the  fungus,  and  that  it 
will  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  already  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.  Telephone  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  f 25,000  for  scientific  investigations, 
and  $250,000  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 


owners  of  chestnut  trees,  when  notified  to  remove  the  diseased  speci- 
mens, refuse  to  co-o|>erate  with  the  Commission,  it  is  fully  empowered 
to  do  this  work  at  the  expense  of  the  owner.     (See  note). 

The  Ck)mmis8ion  began  its  war  on  the  blight  in  the  latter  part  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  scoute  to  locate 
infected  trees,  and  see  that  they  are  removed  under  the  proper  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. 


(10) 


PENNSYLVANIA  CHESTNUT  TREE  BLIGHT  COMMISSION* 


1112  Morris  Building,  Philadelphia. 


BULLETIN  NO.  2. 


OCTOBER ,  1912. 


TREATMENT  OF  ORNAMENTAL 


CHESTNUT  TREES 


AFFECTED  WITH 


THE  BUGHT  DISEASE 


jfe 


HARRISBURG: 

0.  ■.  AUOaiMBAtJOH,   PBINTBR  TO  THB  8TATB  OF  PBNNSTLYANIA 

191Z 


Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Commission. 


MEMBERS  OF  COMMISSION. 

Winthrop  Sargent,  Chairman,   BryB  Mawr. 

Harold  Peirce,  Secretary,  HaTorford. 

Samuel  T.  Bodine,  Villa  NoTa. 

George  F.  Craig,   Rosemont 

Theodore  N.  El j Brrn  Mawr. 


EXECUTIVE  STAFF. 
Mark  Alfred  Carleton,  General  Manager. 
Samnel  B.  Detwiler,  General  Superintendent. 
Oliver  D.  Schock,  Assistant  to  General  Superintendent 
Thomas  B.  Francis,  Field  Manager,  Western  District. 
Joseph  R.  Wilson,  Field  Manager,  Eastern  District 
Darid  T.  McCampbell,  Chief  Clerk. 


Irrin  C.  Williams,  (Pennsylvania  State  Forestry  Department  Oollahorator). 


SCIENTIFIC  AND  OPERATIVE  STAFV. 
Frederick  D.  Heald,  Pathologist 
J.  P.  Wentling,  Forester  in  charge  of  Utilization. 
Paul  J.  Anderson,  Field  Pathologist 

Caroline  Romhold,  Physiologist  in  charge  of  Tree  Medioati«i. 
Roy  G.  Pierce,  Tree  Surgeon. 
Keller  B.  Rockey,  Forester  in  charge  of  Demonstration  Wm%. 


NOTE. 


The  Commission  for  the  Investigation  and  Ck)ntrol  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 
previenting  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  WfTH  THE 

BLIGHT  NSEASL 


This  bulletin  is  intended  as  a  guide  fo^  the  treatment  of  individual 
rhestnut  trees  affected  with  blight,  which  on  account  of  their  value 
as  orchard  trees  or  for  decorative  purposes  warrant  the  expenditure 
of  considerable  time  and  money  for  their  preservation. 

DBSCRIPTION  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  pustules  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,  has 
a  somewhat  circular  or  oval  shape.  The  rate  of  growth  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,  obsMTvations  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  tbem  be  found  succesafol,  the  public  will  be 
so  informed.  At  the  present  time,  however,  we  can  recommend  noth- 
ing but  the  treatment  herein  outlined,  whicli  will  hare  to  be  carried 
out  thoroughly  if  any  considerable  degree  of  success  is  to  be  attained. 
The  work  cati  be  done  by  the  owner  himself  in  some  cases,  especially 
if  the  trees  are  small  or  ea»ih-  ilimbed.  A  good  working  knowledge 
of  the  characteristics  of  tbe  disease  is  essential,  but  the  owner  can 
be  sure  when  he  does  the  work  himself  that  the  proper  precautions 
are  taken.  The  owner  shonid  also  make  numerous  eramlnations 
after  the  first  treatment  1b  concluded,  and  should  be  in  a  position 
to  remove  the  incipent  infections,  when  this  can  be  done  cheaply 
and  before  the  trees  are  much  harmed. 

TREATMENT 
The  treatment  consints  principally  in  cutting  away  the  infected 
portions  of  the  tree.    The  mycelium  quickly  discolors  the  hark  and  a 
sharp  line  between  the  apparently  healthy  and  infected  bark  is  usually 
seen.     However,  the  mycelium  penetrates  into  the  apparently  healthy 
bark,  and  if  possible,  the  cut  should  he  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     off     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  ba.se  of  a   branch,   care  should  be 
taken  to  see  if  any  of  the  mycelium  has  grown  into  the  truuk.     A 
gouge,  chisel  and  mallet  are  the 
proper  tools  for  use  in  such  work. 
The  gouge  should   be   kept   very 
sharp,  so  that  the  tissues  at  tht 
edge  of  the  cut  are  not  unneces- 
sarily   bruised,    and    the  healing 
over  of  the  wound  thus  delayed. 
With  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  baniij  tools  Id  tree  Burgery.       Often    above   and    below    a    broad 


wotmd  a  ttiangnlar  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  broadlj  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  have  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  all 
cut  surfaces. 

Waterproof  coverings  to  follow  as  soon  as  antiseptic  is  dry: 

1.  Coal  tar. 

2.  Lead  paint. 

3.  Shellac,   (of  twnporary  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 
tree.  This  is  important.  The  fungus  will  live  in  this  bark  for  a 
l(mg  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 
an  active  condition  after  a  year  or  more.  All  underbrush,  etc.,  should 
be  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  spend  money  for  the  first 
treatment.  2.  The  tree  must  be  guarded  against  new  infection. 
For  this  reason  if  the  tree  is  located  in  a  r^on  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  sufiBcient  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 
their  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 
trunk  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  solutlona 
win  be  found  in  Farmers'  Bulletin  No.  243,  which  can  be  obtained  free  upon  application  to  the 
Secretary  of  Agriculture,  Washington,  D.  O. 


II 


treatment  is  apt  to  seriouBly  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%) 
(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 

All  wild  and  cultivated  varieties  of  American  'and  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, 


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  once  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  mycelium  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  tht 
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. 


iFtelb  <;&tubte!S 


ON  THE 


)^ti(i(emtnatton  anb  <$t0tDt(i 


OF  THE 


Ciiejitnut  2^Ust)t  ipungusJ 


BY 


PAUL  J.  ANDERSON  AND  D.  C.  BABCOCK 


HABBISBUBG: 
O.  S.  AUGHINBAUOH.  PRIMTEB  TO  THE  STATE  07  PEMMSTLVAIOA 

IMS. 


Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight  G)mmission. 


MBMBBRS  OF  COMMISSION. 

Winthrop  Sargent,  Ohatrman^    Bryn  Mawr. 

Harold  Pelrce,  Secretary,  Haverford, 

Samuel  T.  Bodlne ^ Villa  Nova. 

George  F.  Craig,  Rosemont. 

Theodore  N.  Ely, Bryn  Mawr. 


EXECUTIVE  STAFF. 
Mark  Alfred  Carleton,  General  Manager. 
Samuel  B.  Detwller,  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. 


Irvln  C.  Williams,  (Pennsylvania  State  Forestry  Department),  CoUaV>rator. 


SCIENTIFIC  AND  OPERATIVE  STAFF. 

Fiederick  D.  Heald,  Pathologist. 

A.  G.  Baggies,  Entomologist. 

J.  P.  Wentllng,  Forester  In  charge  of  Utilization. 

Paul  J.  Anderson,  Field  Pathologist. 

F.  P.  Gulliver,  Geographer. 

Caroline  Rumhold,  Physiologist  in  charge  of  Tree  Medication. 

Joseph  Shrawder,  Chemist 

Roy  G.  Pierce,  Tree  Surgeon. 

K^er  B.  Rockey,  Forester  in  charge  of  Demonstration  Work. 


CD 

J 


(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  may  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) 


4N 


—II— 


(4) 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


Page. 

Official   roster  of  OommlBsion,    1 

Note, 3 

Dissemination  of  the  fangas,  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 

Inoculatioos  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 13 

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  desfiication  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  sporee,   30 

Summary,   33 

LoDgevity  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  young  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  eftect  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  OP  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  through  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  will^lso  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  says,  "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:  "I  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- 


•G<yi1iii«     J    F  ,  The  Chestnut  Bark  DtMase.     Reprint  from  ProceedlngB  of  the  Second  Annnml 
Meeting  of  the  Northern  Nut  Growers'  Association,    Ithaca.    N.  T.,   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. 

m 

CHANNELS  OP  ENTRANCB  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  Jbark  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  hav^  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  tliat  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  infection3.  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  ^oung 
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  clim])ers. 

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  sufliciently  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  io  carry  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  material  used. 


a 

o 


1 

o 
a 


u 

a 


Ijongltudlnal  slit — 

Longitudinal  silt 

Diagonal  slit 

Diagonal  slit, - 

V-sbaped  cuts, 

V-shaped  cuts - 

V-sbaped  cuts,   

Artificial  borer  holes,  

Natural  Insect  holes, 

Natural  Insect  holes, 

Natural  insect  holes,  

Peeling  down  bark 

sub  with  knife 

Stab  with  knife 

Stob  w;th  knife 

Scraping  off  outer  cork  layer. 

Cut  stubs,   — 

Broken  branches, 

Natural  cracks,    

Gimlet  tioles, 

Hypodermic  needle,    


Diseased  bark, 

Mycelium  from  culture, 

Mycelium  from  culture, 

I^  spore  homs 

Obnidia  In  water,   

Ascospores  In  water 

Ascospores  shot  In  dry, 

Mycelium  from  culture,  .... 

Mycelium  from  culture, 

Conldia  in  water.   

Ascospores  In  water, 

Mycelium   from  culture.    .. 

Ascospores  in  water,  .. 

Oonldia  In  water 

Dry  spore  homs,  

Mycelium  from  culture,  . 
Mycelium  from  culture,  ... 
Mycelium  from  culture,  ... 
Mycelium  from  culture,  ... 

Ascospores  in  water, 

Ascospores  in  water,   


464 

9b 
10 

m 
« 

128B 
OB 
18 
28 
22 
26 
S47 
81 
96 
25 


45 
25, 
1S5 

54I 


96.a 

80.2 

96.0 

98.7 

9B.8 

94.3 

8B.6 

54.4 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

88.0 

80.9 

88.8 

79.1 

0.0 

81.8 

71.9 

0.0 

52.6 

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  II. 

Showing  results  of  inoculation  in  removed  bark. 


Date. 

• 
Method  of  nuking  inoculations. 

Where  kept. 

1 
1 

15 

■ 
* 

Jnne    i 

June    I 

June    I 

Mycelium  from  culture  in  slit, 

Cooidia  put  in  slit  in  bark, 

Ascospores  put  in  slit  in  bark, 

Dnr  ground  where  sun  was 

shining. 
Drr  ground  where  ran  was 

shining. 
Drr  ground  where  sun  was 

shininc. 
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 

15 

6 

3 
3 

12 

7 

31 

o 
o 
o 

July  S3 

Mycelium  from  culture  in  slit, 

lOO 

July  23 

July  aj, 

Ascospores  in  water, 

Piece  of  diseased  bark  tied  on, 

Piece  of  diseased  bark  tied  on, 

Washed  with  water  containing  asco- 
spores. 

Mycelium  from  culture  in  slit, 

lOO 
lOO 

Aug.  31 

lOO 

ABg.ai» 

lOO 

Attg.ai, 

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 


16 

« 

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  alt  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  sptcico  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,  diseased  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  not  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  conclusiv-e  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  lini(bs,  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  oflf  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. 


une  s,. 
one  17,. 
une  II,. 
wly    7,. 


6 

12 
36 


:ulation8. 

* 

W 

M 
« 

Date. 

Method  of  inoculation. 

5 

0 

*o 

age  8uc( 

• 

Ji 

a 

Z 

B 

s 

S 

g 

Sprayed  with  atomizer  in  V-ahaped  cuts,. 

Dropped  into  stab  in  the  bark, 

Dropped  into  atab  in  the  bark 

Dropped  into  V-ahaped  cut, 


1 

57  , 

89.4 

S3 

S4.7 

96 

S5-00 

40 

1 

92.S 

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  pven 
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. 


[une  10,. 
fune  II,. 
fune  17,. 

[uly  17,. 


o 

Ok 


10 

15 

16 


« 

e 

9 

0 

3 

»■> 

»»• 

M 

m 

• 

s» 

^ 

it 

X 

S 

Method  of  inoculations. 

.9 

3 
m 

*S 

& 

a 

9 

3 

a 

z 

Oil 

Dropped  into  stabs  in  bark,.... 
Dropped  into  stabs  in  bark,.... 
Dropped  into  stabs  in  bark,.... 
Dropped  into  V-Shaped  cuts,. 


184 

144 

59 

88 


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  entrafice,  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  going  to  another  place, 
and  boring  another  hole  there,  thus  carrying  the  disease  from  one 
tree  to  the  ftext.  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  idea  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  carry 
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  Leptostylua 
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  often  be  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  gn*eater  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,'tf  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  506  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  Ezpoture. 

Perithednm  A. 

Perithedum  B. 

I,  

so  tecoods, 

ai3 
109 
103 

lar 

a,  

30  leoondt, 

118 

$t  

30  aeoonds, 

63 

This  gives  us  the  further  data : 

The  greateat  number  of  tporet  per  teoood, 7.1 

The  tmattett  number  of  tporet  per  accond, a.i 

Average  number  of  tporea  per  aecond {.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  ostiola  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. 


28 

Length  of  time  required  for  germination  of  ascospores. — In  favor- 
able weather,  ascospores  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  oC  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  500  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  IS  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. 


Number  of  liters  of  air. 


V 

s 

a 

o 


V 

u 

o 
m 


30 a  ft.  a&d 

30.  i  I  ft.  and 

8.  I  4  ft. 

I  2  ft. 


5  in... 
II  in.,. 


6  in.,. 

5  >«•» 
2  in.,. 

6  in.,. 


I  ft. 

2  ft. 
I  ft. 

sft. 


3  in. 


■ 

^ 

^ 

•0 

0 

u 

s 

•£ 

1 

> 

« 

0 

3 

*s 

§ 

ber 
ted. 

3  •* 

6  in., 
22  ft. 

14  in., 
6  in., 

1  ft 

2  ft. 

I  ft. 
Sft- 
Sft. 


ao 
12 


10 
33 


40 


SO 

250 

no 

75 

8S 

60 

180 

810 


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. 


i6. 
15. 
13. 
S3. 
40, 
16, 


I    inch 

I    inch 

I    inch 

1*6    inch 

6-2A  inch 

2^36  inch 

3-9    ft. 
^30  ft. 

30.51  ft. 

1-4    iochai 
6-36  inches 

6-36  inchei 

3-5    min. 

3-5    man. 

3*35  min. 

a-30  min. 

3-30  min. 
15-00  min. 
10-80  min. 
ao-60  min. 
60-90  min. 


'22 

78 

»90 

33 

5« 
S 
5 
S 


Exposed  to  side  and  Back  of  the  Trees. 


Back  of  log. 


To  side  of  log. 


I3» 

I4» 


1-26  in. 


ia-9o  inches. 


lo-as  mm. 
5-60  min. 


3 

7 


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  fime,  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. 


Kliid  of  woond. 


I 

« 


9 


i 


a 

o 


V-cot,    — 

V-«it,    

V-cut,    

V-cut 

V-cat 

Broken  braudiM.  .. 
Taneeotial  lUce,  ... 
BrniBes  from  itooe, 

V-cot,    .... 

LoBgitiidtnal  allt,  . 
Jacged  knife  cut,  .. 

V-cut, 

V-cut,    


Itaudi, 
1  inch, 
I  inch, 
1  inch. 
I  inch,' 
i  inch, 
lineii, 
incfa^ 
inch, 
inch, 
inch, 
taieh. 
Inch, 


\ 
\ 

\ 

\ 

1 


t  . 

1 

» 

15  min. 

» 

11  hn. 

SIB 

16  min. 

2S 

Ihr. 

m  ; 

Ihr. 

1» 

46   min. 

188 

Ihr. 

IB 

2hn. 

40 

1  min. 

£0 

1  hr. 

12 

m 

1  hr. 

a 

2  bn. 

12 

1 

g 

I 


12 
370 
136 
26 
27 
40 
47 

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. 


Kind  of  wound. 


V-cut, 
Vnnt, 
V-cut, 


§1 

Sg 


fr-Uin. 
l-#   ft. 
1-8A  ft. 


5 


I 


B 

o 

I 


e 

I 


10  min. 
10  min. 
16  min. 


10 


16 
le 
06 


Another  method  of  inoculating  with  dry  ascospores  was  to  crush 
the  ascospore  stromata  in  a  mortar  and  then  blow  the  fine  dust  into 
2 


32 

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,  — — 230 

Shot   hole,    - 19 

Breaking  off  dead  limbs,  .^ 120 

Hitting  tree  with  blunt  axe,   _ _ 100 

Jagged  knife  cut,  _ — _.  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  agency  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  25 
minutes  with  mercuric  chloride.  These  wounds  were  then  covered 
with  fine  meshed  wire  (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  were  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  every  rain  these  are  thrown  out  into  the  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  OP  THE  SPORES. 

In  studjrin^  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  confipletely  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  each  series  were  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  11),  - __ 4  test  90%  check  90% 

After  lour  weeks,  _- - - test  15%  check  86% 

Alter  six  weeks -^ test  10%  check  96% 

Alter  eight  weeks - ___ test  10%  obeck  87% 

Alter    thirteen    weeks, test     .09%  check  88% 

Mt.   Gretna. 

At  time  ol  ejection  (August  2nd),  _ test  96%  cheek  06% 

Alter  two  weeks, _ test  96%  ehe^  0B% 

Alter  lour  weeks,  __ _ test  60%  check  97% 

Alter  seven   weeks _ test  26%  check  89% 

Alter  seventeen  weeks,   — test  14%  ebeck  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  25th,  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  28tli.  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  3r4). 
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  in 
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 
pf  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  diflFerent  conditions  to  settle  some  of  these  points. 


35 


RATE  OF  GROWTH  OF  THE  CANKERfi  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  summer  of  1912. 

Using  transverse  diameter  of  the  cankers. 


M 

a 


9> 


♦*  D 


Montb.  »       \      ut 

o 


B 


Si 


JSS - - 81  1         1  8W 

Jtty*  .- — 200 

AniWt,     - _ ^ ]3g 


oetober, rnrrrrr~~ri      « 


2.779 
2.834 
1.84a 
1.02 


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  W4S  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  would  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  InchcSp 

3  Inches, 

4  incbes, 
8  inches, 

12  Inches, 


2   months    and    12   days. 

6  months  and  19  days. 

8  monttis  and  IS  days. 
11  months  and  9  days. 
22  months  and  15  days. 
94  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 

o 

"^ 

4J 

« 

ul 

s 

a 

"^ 

«H 

o 

S 

o 

09 

tk 

Q 

4 

May  29 

Diseased    tissue    In    silt, 

Diseased  tissue  In  slit, 

Ascospores  in  stab,   ^ 

Conldia   In  stab 

81     July    11 

Oct. 

4,-.- -  — - 

8, 

10 

12,  —  .^. 

23 

87, 

33,- 

June   9, 

June   9 

June  11, 

June  26, 

June  27 

July  12, 

n 

184 
96 
S5 

47 
20 

July     6.^ 

July    US,. 

(No    data) 

July    26,_ 

(No  data) 
S^t.    «, 

Sept. 

Oct. 

opt 

Diseased  tissue  In  slit, 

Dlst'usod  tissue  In   ^lit,   _. 
Diseased  tissue  in  slit 

Sept. 

Oct. 

Oct. 

8 
8 
1 
2 
5 
8 
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  PUNaUS  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  was  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  jusf  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  ag^in  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  cultures  of  Endothia. 


GROWTH  ON  THE  GREEN  SHOOTS  OP  THE  CURRENT  TEAR. 

Murrill  (1)  does  not  believe  that  the  shoots  of  the  first  year  be- 
come infected.  So  far  as  the  literature  shows,  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  twigfs.  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  explanation  of  why  they  are  so  rarely  found 
there  in  nature. 

TABLE  XIII. 

Showing  results  of  inoculation  in  first  year  shoots. 


1 

• 

a 

o 

• 

9 

B 

« 

<s 

1 

1 

1 

a 

8 

) 

Method  of  inoenlatlon. 

% 

6 

• 

• 

1 

S 

lot 

1 

Q 

^ 

1 

^ 

£ 

July  87, 
July  27, 
July  27. 
Julys?, 


48 
48 
48 
48 


ABcospores  in  slit  protected  with  cotton 

Aacospores  In  slit  nat  protected  with  cotton, 

Diseased  tissue  in  slit  protected  with  cotton 

Diseased  tissue  in  slit  not  protected  with  cotton. 


S5 

4.» 

M 

flT^ 

18 

loa.o 

6 

88.8 

39 


OOMPARISON  OF  SUBOBFTIBIUTY  OF  TBEfiS  IN  THB  OPEN  AND  IN 

DBN8B   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  underbnish  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. 


JtazM  IB, 

a 

Aof.  6. 

60 

Aag.  6 

60 

Aor,  15 

6i 

AQff.  15, 

6i 

Myetflum  fzoflu  cultim  In  ilit, 
OonJdla  in  watar  in  V-cats.  .. 
Afleotpom  in  water  In  V-cuta. 
Anoapom  In  water  in  V-cuta, 
~  time  In  slits,  


50 

7B 


8B.5 
79.8 
£5.5 
44.4 
100.0 


40 


Dense  Coppice. 


1 

1 

m 

a 

o 

at 

£ 

•                                                                                                                                 g 

§ 

a 

P 

Metbod  of  Inocolatlon.                              ^ 

o 

a 

• 

1 

1 

5 

Q 

s 

(I4 

June  S7, 
June  87, 
Aug.  &, 
Aug.    3, 


30  Mycelium  trom  culture  in  slit,  . 

j»  Diseased  tissue  in  sUt 

51  Conidla  in  water  in  V-cuts, 

51  Ascosporee  in  water  in  V-cnts,  . 


40 

ao 

30 


75.0 
100.0 
fiO.OO 

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  always 
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  the  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  tlie  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. 


o 


9^ 
19» 


§ 


a 


I 


I 

P 


Jana  27,  i  40 

June  27 1  40 

June    7,  M 

Jane  18 .{  80 

June  18,  I  44 

June  21, » 


Location. 


Summit  of  dry  ridge  1200  ft.,  lOO.O 

Summit  of  dry  ridge  1800  ft. ,  82.6 

Half  way  up' the  lidge _.  90.8 

Half  way  up  tbe  ridge,  _  80^ 

Half  way  up  the  lidge, ,  06.6 

Marsh  Dear  creek,   ^ i  88.7 


Growth  per  montli. 


i 

• 

• 

a 

• 

-< 

1 

1.08 

8.6B 

2.14 

1.66 

2.28 

i.ae 

2.06 

8.10 

2.78 

8.66 

2.0» 

2.78 

2.21 

2.0B 

i        2.90 

2.81 

8.10 

2.40 

^Inoculations   made  by  placing  canker  tissue  in   longitudinal  slit. 

tinoctiiations  made  by  placing  mycelium  from  culture  (No.  81  Charter  Oak)  in  longitudinal 
sUt. 
tinoeulations  made  by  placing  myoeUam  from  eoltura  (Mo.  82  JU.  Gretna)  in  longltodlMl  rilt. 

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  the  same,  has  been  collected  and  sent  to  us  or 
has  been  found  by  the  writers  on  the  following  hosts: 

Quercus  velutina    (Black  Oak). 
Quercusalha   (White  Oak). 
Quercus  pi'inus   (Chestnut  Oak). 
Rhus  typJUna    (Staghorn  Sumac). 
Acer  rubrum  (Red  Maple). 
Carya  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  lightning-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  STBRILIZBD   TWIOS   OF  VARIOUS   8PBGIBB. 

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). 
Qtiercus  prinus    (Chestnut  Oak). 
Quercus  maorocarpa  (Burr  Oak), 
Quereus  velutina    (Black  Oak). 
Quercus  rubra   (Red  Oak). 
Quercus  coccinea    (Scarlet  Oak). 
Rhus  typhina  (Staghorn  Sumac). 
Nyssa  sylvatica  (Sour  Gum). 
Acer  ruhrujn  (Red  Maple). 
Liriodendrcm  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 


•  «• 


43 


TABLE  XVI. 

Showing  results  of  inoculations  on  chestnut  with  strains  of  the 

fungus  from  other  hosts. 


I 


HotI  from  wliieb  iMlstad. 


3 

9 


o 

I 
I 


Joirso, 


BlMdr  Oak. 

Wblta  Oak, 

Somae  (Staffhom), 
Bed  Mapla,   


10 
10 


96.6 
66.9 
96.0 
76.0 


INOCUIATIONS  WITH  BNDOTHIA  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  XVIL 

TABLE  XVII 

Showing  the  results  of  inoculation  with  Endothia  parasitica  on  hosts 

other  than  chestnut. 


Method. 


a 

o 


a 


I 


e 

V4 


£ 


Jimt  10.^ 

June  9V,— ....... 

June  S8» i 

jQiMia, 1 

Jme  ifty... ..*.•-' 


July  18.. 

Jolj  12.. 

July  !».• 

Jidj  l».. 

July  19.. 

Jolj  19,. 

Jolj  10.. 

Jalf  19.. 

July  19.. 

July  19,. 

Mf  19.. 

My  10.. 

jmy  19.. 

Jtty  19.. 

My  »,. 


^«&  i«IIi 


u 

A14 


87 
87 

87 
«7 
«7 
«7 

87 
87 

«r 

87 
87 
87 
40 
41 


oak.. 

Black  oak.  .. 
Wblte  oak.  .. 
Soniae. 

Somae. 

Tdlow  poplar, 
Oheetnnt  oak. 
Obeatnat  oak. 

Hickory.  

Hickory.  

Hickory 

Hickory.  

Scarlet  oak,  . 
Scarlet  oak.  . 
Scarlet  oak,  . 
Black  oak.  .. 
Blaek  oak,  .. 
Black  oak.  .. 
White  oak.  ... 
Blaek  oak.  ... 
If  .--.■—' 


Diseased  tissue  in  sUt, . ' 

Diseased  tissue  in  silt { 

Mycelium  from  colture  in  silt. 
Ascospores  in  stab  proteetea.l 
AscoBpores  In  stab.     Unpro-  | 
tected.  I 

Diseased  tissue  In  slit. 

Diseased  tissue  In  slit. 

Ascospores  In  V-cut, 

Oonldia  In  V-cut,   

Oonldia  in  V-cut. 

Ascospores  In  V-eut. 

Mycelium  from  cdltuze  In  slit. 

Diseased  tissue  In  silt, 

Ascospores  In  VHSUt. 

Oonldia  In  V-eut 

Diseased  tissue  In  silt. 

Diseased  tissue  in  silt. 

Oonldia  In  V-cuts — 

Ascospores  In  V-cots. 

Mycelium  from  colture,  ...... 

Mycelium  from  culture.  . :. 

MyoeUom  from  eoltova.  ...... 


S4 

41 

» 

.•...-.M.B 

90 

....««..-. 

a 

78.4 

SB 

s 

71.9 

93i 

88 



80 

.......... 

n 

27 
10 



100 

IB 

12 

0 

12 

12 

19 
10 

9 


100 
100 


1 


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  whether  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 
>*  eak  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  he  the  means  of  keeping  the  fungus  over  in  a  locality 
where  the  diseased  chestnut  has  all  been  destroyed. 


45 


LITERATURE  CITED. 

(1)  '06  Miirrill,  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  importance  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  Mickelborough,  John.  A  report  on  the  chestnut  tree  blight. 
The  fungus  Diaporthe  parasitica  (Murrill).  Commonwealth  of 
Pennsylvania,  Dept.  of  Forestry.     May  1909. 

(7)  '10  Metcalf,  Haven,  and  Collins,  J.  Franklin,  The  chestnut 
bark  disease.    Sci.  N.  S.  STl  :748.    May  1910. 

(8)  '10  Rane,  F.  W.  The  chestnut  bark  disease,  (unnumbered) 
State  Forester's  Office,  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. 


ColoDleB  of  the  blfght  fungus  on  agar  ptate  resulting  from  naturally  ejected 
ascoapores.  Bark  with  active  perttbecia  placed  one  lacb  above  the 
plate  over  the  dark  line  at  bottom  of  plate.  Each  black  point  Indicates 
one  colony. 


Stromata  Eho'^lng  the  nechs  of  tbe  peritbecla. 


Hypertrophy  type  of  C 


Cankers  showing  stromata. 


iDoculatlon  with  ancoeporee  in  stab  In  the  bark. 


Inoculatioa  vltb  dlBeosed  bark. 


Inoculation  at  the  base  of  broken  twigs. 


Artificial  wind  inoculation  with  bellowB. 


TestiDg  the  carrying  power  of  the  wind.  Sterile  plates  exposed  on  tripod  at 
the  right.  Active  perltbecia  on  the  upright  lege  at  the  left.  Wind  hlow- 
ing  from  the  loga  toward  the  plates. 


tf«S« 


SI 


si 


LoBglnB  experiment  at  Mt.  Gretna,  Lebanon  Co.,  Fa. 


Commontoealtf)  ot  gcnngplbania. 


REPORT 


Penngplijania  Cljesitnut  ^ree 
2?lisijt  Commisigion. 

July  1  to  December  31,  1912. 


1112  MORRIS  BUILDING,   1421  CHESTNUT  STREET, 
PHILADELPHIA. 


HAHRISBURG: 

C.  E.  AOOaiNBAtlOa,  PtilKTEB  TO  THE  STATE  OF  FENHSTLVANU 

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  th^  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) 


(2) 


K 


It  IB  only  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  prohibitoi^y,  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. 


(8) 


(4) 


Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Commission. 


MEMBERS    OF    COMMISSION. 

Winihrop  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,  (3hief  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  IN  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: 

Organization.  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  Operations.  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 
area,  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. 

Insect  Investigations.  Next  follows  a  brief  statement  of  the  work 
so  far  done  in  the  study  of  insects.  This  was  begun  very  recently 
and  there  is  little  to  report.    Suffice  it  to  say,  however,  that  there  is 


no  postiye  evidence  obtained  that  insects  carry  the  disease,  though  it 
is  still  suspected.  Much  time  has  been  given  to  the  study  of  ants 
with  no  positive  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  spoi'es,  and  to  a  slight 
extent  at  least,  take  part  in  diminishing  tlie  disease. 

Chemical  Invest igatio^is.  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  leatlier. 

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  yety  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  hidimdual  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  w^ork  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. 

(ieograpliic  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  aiTangements  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  w^ork. 

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. 


9 

There  is  finally  appended  a  statement  by  the  Deputy  Commissioner 
of  Forestry  on  "the  silvieultural  effect  of  our  sanitation  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  effect  of  a  production  of  much  more  healthy  and 
vigorous  new  trees,  which  are  not  likely  to  be  injui'ed  by  decay  from 
within,  as  in  cases  where  the  sprouts  occur  up  on  the  stump  and 
are  supported   by  a  decayed  and  weakened  base. 

No  remedy  has  yet  been  obtained  for  the  blight  disease  through 
the  work  of  any  institution.  However,  with  the  efforts  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  staff'  of  scientitic  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  effect  of  our  op- 
erations on  the  bordering  states  of  Ohio  and  portions  of  New  York, 
West.  Virginia  and  Maryland,  where  the  chestnut  may  be  largely,  if 
not  entirely  saved  from  the  disease  through  our  own  operations,  just 
as  Massachusetts  has  helped  other  states  in  connection  with  her  work 
with  the  g^'psy  moth. 

To  eificiently  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  inci*ease  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,    . 

WINTHROP  SARGENT, 

Chairman. 


(10) 


11 


EEPORT  OF  THE  GENERAL  MANAGER  FOR  THE  LATTER 

HALF  OP  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  diflPerent  restrictions  are  maintained  with  respect  to 
the  method  of  procedure  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  c()m[)lete  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. 

PATHOLOGIOAL    INVESTIGATIONS. 

As  the  chestnut  tree  blight  disease  is  caused  by  a  fungus  parasite, 
at  present  known  technically  by  the  name  of  DiaportTw  parasitica^ 
Murr.,  and  as  little  or  nothing  was  known  of  the  nature  of  this 
parasite  at  the  time  tlie  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  J)een  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  investigations  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    INSEGTS. 

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  T'.  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  an  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  wavs.  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  art  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.  8.  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  n^lected.  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  o'^ 
casionally,  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  iu  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  obtaining  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  information  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 


in 

special  lectures  and  exhibits,  at  dififerent  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  Harrisburg  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  twelve  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  pathological  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 


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  crossbreeding  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 
exi)ected,  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  dilTiculties  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    INSPEKJTION. 

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.  T  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.  By  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  repori:8  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  Deputy  Commissioner  of  Forestry,  in  another  place, 
is  the  good  effect  it  will  have  on  forestry  management  in  the  State. 

We  hnve  organized  such  a  splendid  force  of  scientists  and  for- 
esters tliat  our  work  will  go  on  in  the  future  with  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  different  men  in  charge  are 
available,  if  desirable  to  obtain  further  details,  not  here  abstracted. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

MARK  ALFRED  CARLETON, 

General  Manager. 


19 


KEPOKT  OF  THE  GENEKAL  SUPJCKINTENDENT. 

(Figs.  1-21.) 


THE  CHESTNUT  TKEE  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  sweeping  westward  across  the  State.  The  Commission 
was  created  to  find  out  the  facts  relating  to  the  fungus  and  to  apply 
the  best  available  measures  in  an  attempt  to  eradicate  oi  check  ii. 
At  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  know  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  geogi'aphic  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  Srusquehanna  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  tbe  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  i)ortiou  of  the 
State  where  the  chestnut  trees  were  reported  as  being  unhealtliy.  Only 
one  case  of  blight  was  found  out  of  over  one  hundred  inspections  dis- 
tributed throughout  all  the  counties  west  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. 


21 

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  tlie  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  chestnut  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  tJmber  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  many  scouts  as  necc^ssary  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  efifort  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  forced 
cutting  being  done  by  the  Commission,  but  much  efifort  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  "Oonnellsville  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,  tlie  field  men  were  placed  in 
counties  further  east.  Cambria  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  Bradforc^  counties.  The  latter  counties  will 
be  completed  as  soon  as  the  more  western  counties  are  finished. 

THE  OONNELLSVILLE  FUNGUS. 

In  December  1911,  Mr.  John  K.  Uibbs,  a  Field  Agent  of  the  Com- 
mission found  a  fungus  at  several  points  in  Washington  and  Fayette 
counties  which  w^as  apparently  the  chestnut  blight  fungus,  Diaporthe 
parasitica.     Specimens  of  this  fungus  were  submitted  to  various 


23 

pathologists  who  pronounced  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  efl'ect  of  smoke,  which  has  done 
much  damage  to  the  trees  in  the  localities  where  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  by  the  Field  Pathologist  to  be 
a  harmless  saprophyte  which  belongs  in  the  same  genus  as  Diaporthe 
parasitica^  but  is  a  distinct  species.  The  difference  in  appearance 
between  the  two  fungi  is  very  minute,  being  principally  in  the  size 
of  the  spores.  While  this  complicates  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  parasitic  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  week's 
training,  they  were  not  employed.  After  they  were  given  a  chance 
to  demonstrate  their  ability  in  practical  work  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  were  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  woods  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  leixves  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  infectious  everything  depends  ujxm  the  man.  The  work 
of  scouting  retiuires  a  man  with  trained  jjowers  of  observation,  who 
can  withstand  the  arduous  physical  exertion  required  in  tramping 
for  eight  or  ten  hours  through  dense  woods  in  a  rough  country.  Ue 
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  willing  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  KRADICATING  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  put  on  the  blaze  with  a 
marking  hammer,  and  the  infected  trees  ai-e  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  owner  is  immediately  interviewed.  If  he  can  be  induced 
to  do  so,  the  trees  are  cut  while  the  tleld  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,  who  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  u]Km  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  which  it  is  not  intended  to  utilize  must  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  ajs  the  diseased 
portions  of  the  trees  extended  after  the  tree  was  felled,  are  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 
being  allowed  to  remain.  If  it  is  impossible  to  make  the  fire  over  the 
stump  without  injuring  the  surrounding  trees,  the  sides  and  top  of 
tlie  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  lie  handled  and  shipped  in  the  same  manner  as 
logs  or  wood  of  other  species  of  trees,  provided  they  are  shipped 
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  trees  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  expense  of  peeling 
and  to  save  merchantable  timber  in  the  log. 

3.  Destroy  all  diseased  portions  of  the  free  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  peeled 
stumps,  since  in  this  case  they  must  start  from  beneath  the  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  alomg  the  ad- 
vance line  and  to  the  westward  was  begun.  The  general  methods  out- 
lined in  the  preceding  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  infections  numbered  thirteen  trees.  In  the  forty- 
two  spotjs  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  work 
in  burning  the  infections.  At  least,  it  is  interesting  to  note  that 
all  but  thirteen  of  the  82  new  infections  were  within  a  hundred  feet 
radius  of  last  yearns  infections  which  were  not  very  carefully 
burned. 


28 

OCCURRENCE  OF  SPOT  INFECTIONS. 

Spot  infections  of  the  blight  appear  in  all  kinds  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  oases  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  U[>land  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  healthv  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  exam])le  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  100  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.  Tn  1910,  24  trees,  in  1911,  100  trees,  and 
in  1912,  166  trees  were  infected,  making  the  total  number  in  the 
s]K)t  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  1250  feet  from  the  original  center.  In  contrast  to  this, 
a  spot  infection  in  Somerset  county  may  be  cited.  Here  the  original 
infection  occurred  in  190S.  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 
shows  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  tlie  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  years 
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  Rothrock  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  f 60,000.  The  total  cost  of  the  work  in  both 
divisions  thus  amounts  to  ?320,000. 


FIELD  WORK  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, 
however,  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 


NOTE. 

Figs.  2,  7,  ft,  13,  ]S,  nml  70  an-  fr..m  i.li.ii.iKviiiiU  iii.uli'  ly  K.  T.  Kirfc. 
FigB.  3t>,  41,  42,  48  stid  4<J  arc  fnini  i>liutuKra|jl)K  iiindt  by  Wm.  Itovle.  AH 
otiier  illuBtraticnn  hitc  pliotogrnphi'il  l>y  Mr.  Wni,  Ciirrio,  thp  CommlBBiail 
photograpber.  under  the  BiipprviKii:ii  oF  th<>  rcx|H't'tivi-  [l>']iiii'tin«ur»  to  which 
tlii'f   are  creditrd. 


s  killi'd   by   HliKliI, 


r 

I 


Fig.  4. 
nttacked    b;    bligbt      PbiladeliiliiH,    rtiiiiuylvii 


Grafied  cliPHtnut  Ire^  in  orohard  atta<?k(^  by  blight.  BiickB  Coiinty.   PennBylvii 


i. 

^9 


Blights  chestnut  tree  showing  how  "The  Diin;;er  Signals"  appear 


wiihpred    knvea. 


Sprouts  kilM   by  blielit  ou  tract  near  Oxford,    in  Cheater  Coi 


PiR.     1«. 

Chestnut  sha<lp  tro«-  killnl  by   bliftlil.     IMiilaclfiphla,   Ta. 


Fig.  11. 

in  orchani,  killed  by  ctifstriiii  blight.     Bucks  couuty.   PEnDBylve 


Virgin  forest  of  cheatnut  and  white  pin 
diameter. 


t  npnr  0\for(l,  Chester  CouDty,   Penn- 


Somi'i'sct   County,    I'ennsylvs 


I   larK«  chestnut  trees. 


L. 


ill 

H 
III 
ti 

ir 


r 


iS 


;l 


ac- 

t)ts 

or 
rer 
ter 
ire 

so 

me 
)e^ 
la- 
m. 
at 
Tie 
on 
ire 

Bt- 

ic- 

jes 
in 
he 

ty 

DS 

he 
It. 
re 
n- 
he 

he 

r3 

e; 
a 

ly 

to 


•y 

id 
le 


v^MmAJBi 


.  ...i^    ^f^    «>«^    «>JW«>   ^A 


x.  uiiie  UI18  not  lorced  cutting  of  diseased 


Z 


31 

southern  border  of  the  8tate  from  Bucks  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  so.  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  which  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-  jj 
delphia  in  co-operation  with  the  Main  Line  Citizens  Association.  jj 
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- 
companying 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  Pennypacker  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. 
In  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  time  has  not  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  regicm  to  cut  all  diseased  trees,  and  where 
the  amount  of  blight  is  80  \wv  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  reduee  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  in  the  East  the  importance  of 
utilizing  the  diseased  timber  has  been  emphasizeil.  Throughout  the 
summer  the  field  agents  were  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  cordwood.  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  OUTTING-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,  an,d  the  stumps  peeled,  and  all 
brush  destroyed  by  burning,  but  the  burning  was  not  done  over  the 


33 

stumps.  On  this  tract  a  hundred  stumps  had  V\M  vigorous  sproula, 
on  254  of  which  the  blight  was  present.  In  other  words  82  per  cent 
of  these  sprouts  were  free  from  disease  and  ol  the  infected  spr(mts, 
99,  or  39  per  cent  were  infected  at  the  base  mostly  from  diseased  bark 
left  on  the  stump. 

The  second  tract,  used  for  conij»arison  with  this,  is  located  about 
one-half  mile  distant  frnni  the  lirst  tract  and  was  cut  about  the  same 
time^.  The  brush  was  burned  and  all  the  merchantable  wood  used, 
but  the  stumps  were  not  pechHl.  As  near  as  could  be  determined,  the 
two  woodlots  received  ideutitai  treatment  except  that  the  stumps 
were  peeled  in  one  case  while  ihvy  were  left  with  the  bark  on  in 
the  other.  On  this  tract  the  100  stuni[)s  had  140G  vigorous  sprouts, 
1115,  or  79.3  per  cent  of  which  were  inl'ected,  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  x)€eling,  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  were  recovering  from  the 
disease,  in  some  cases.  To  test  this  matter  Mr.  K.  E.  l^ockev,  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  Conmiission  have  been  appointed  Deputy  Fire 
Wardens  (unsalaried)  by  the  Department  of  Forestry.  During 
November,  field  agents  of  the  Commission  took  charge  in  extinguishing 


34 

eight  large  forest  fires.  Over  7,000  acres  of  timber  land  was  bnrneci 
over  in  these  fires.  Only  one  forest  fire  is  known  to  have  occurred  as 
a  result  of  burning  infections.  The  fire  started  while  burning  brush 
in  an  enforced  cutting.  About  five  acres  of  woodland  were  burned 
over  before  the  fire  was  extinguished. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

SAMUEL  K.  DETWILER, 
General  Superintendent. 


35 


OQ 


;5 
PS 


hi 
o 

> 
u 

a 
a 

(A 


'saoi)9adsa|  }o  *o>^ 


B)jvd      p3)D3ja(      pav 

J9AO    )n9    B)3VJ)    }0     *0|{ 


'uoi^daioi  JO  %  oJBJdAY 


*)na)Sdqo  Jo  %  oaojoAV 


JO  d^indJOB  ojDuijxoiddY 


'pauiJ^qiiip 
JO  aavajjH  9)nin|xoJddv 


9 

O 

a 

09 


O 


S 


s 


o 


Su 
li 
II 
II 
II 
II 

«>  if 
II 

u 
n 
II 
II 

r,  11 
II 
li 
II 


S 


Ok  fh  lO  t«  ei>  O  O 
e«  eor-4      iii-if-i 


8? 


3 


S! 


a 


• 


Sll 

li 
II 
II 
II 


i 


to 


ill 

■i 

11 

II 

n 

II 

^11 
•^11 

M 

II 

II 

II 

II 

kO 


% 


«  Si  n  rH  9)  oS 


it      to  -I*  o  Ci 

ti      <«  ^  ^  S 


II     ^. 


s 


^ 


^ 


p 


O  «  I-"  CO  O  eO 
<5  "^  i~-  5<  O  -f> 
36  j3»  t-»'5  Jc  o 

S^  C  ■^  Ci  c" 
i3  OO  i-t  i-i  O 


II     <«  ^  «e  1 


O   I'        QQOMO 


■ 

o 
'A 


a     *=^ 


CO 

o 


'«2 
a  «  a 


•a 

a 


I  I 
I 


o 


,3  Eao^^3g 


5  O  O  O^  * 


o 


«  «  «  H 
£  3,2  o 


36 


a 
o 


H 
O 

m 


H 


o 


a> 

p. 
3 
(A 


'suoi).>j<l3iii  }o    o.v; 


jdAo  ina  spBi)  JO    -ox 


'ao|}dd;ai  jo  %  o^fitjoAv 


')nn)Sdqa  ;o  %  oaojSAy 


'noDMdsai   Jaquii) 
10  odTJojoB  o^Btnixojddv'    ' 


•pawijoqrun 
JO  o3R.ij.in  9i!unixojd(lv 


3 
O 

a 

« 


s 


3 


'<A 


a^ 


s»$ 


?1    -5 


•?* 


CO 


■z 


04 


S 


s 


CO 


p 

aa 
w 


I*^ 


CO  cOf-i  ««• 


■^  -H  CI  «  (N  f: 


T  <0  I 


Q 


J- 


<1. 


r.   . 


', 


^  C:  C  /.  O  uo  •  I 
•.:  .»  ^  t  -  I-  '»  ^ 


J-  w-.  I-  -•  — <  C-.  /     I  '/    .  ;:; 


/,    -  ■?!  X  ;::  -*  —    I  ^       v5 


::?r^::^.;ir 


ci 


O 


-    5 

•:3  c3 


o 

5^ 


»^S 


^4 

C;  .  .         - 

4J  <     -  O 

S3  -  3  eft 


IO 


g 

OB 


O 


«      '.St:     o     m 


a 

OS 


S.      oE  t  a  3 

C  3  5  >  r*^  .5 


Q 

l-H 

H 

GO 


o 

I 


'ICAOOZOJ   JO   Bsaoojd 
iq    9d3J^   p9%3dJXl\   JO    'OK 


'paAOuz 

-M   Saaj)   P9}M}Q|   JO    'O^I 


-panoj 

8931}      p»)04jni      JO       '0}{ 


'8)DBJ)    pd)93jai    |o    'ON 


'ina^saqo  jo  %  oSvjaAy 


JO  asvdjov  0)Bai}soi(](Iv 


JO    3399109    »l«[ITJXOjddV 


a 

6 

a 

03 


siS" 


».     •» 


ssa" 


CO  p-4  fiO  i-l 


CO  o  a»H 


■*  O  JO  »^ 

M  ^  «  Ik 


m 

O 

?4 


60 


O 

■ 


§1! 

II 
II 
II 


SS 


9  II 
I! 
II 
II 
II 

"11 


II 
II 


s 


'8 


(p  II 
*-|| 

R 
I! 
11 
II 


aoo 


gll  i^ 


r^MI 


So 


rSii 
J5  11 

r-'    II 
i     *      II 


"if 


IN 

O 


o 


::gs 


iS» 


iQtoeo 


£ 


8 


3 


r-«  i-iSmS 


M      ak      M      »      » 


§0  rH  O  fH 


8 


Pi 

So 


S 


s 


«0 


S 


§l§ 


6 


i;*»a 


9 

10 


-Y900 

C4 


s 


1^  i 

SI 


U3 
i-l 

00 


■ 

O 


o 


2n 

►*"   VI  C   5?  '-' 


o 


o 
M  a 


o 


3S 


.O 

3 

a 
o 


V 

*^ 

41 

»~ 

A 

s 

o 

a 

O 

SI 

a 


a 

a 

o 

a 

a 
o 


u 


c 


4.' 


a 

a 

o 

V 


H 
I—* 

H 
02 


GO 

ft  , 


'l«Aoaiai  20  maoojd 


eg  io 


i^s;; 


•pdAOtU 
-DJ    SdAl)   p9\M}U\   }0    'OX 


X    11 

ft  II 


II 

n 


•panoj 
saajj     papjjai     jo     -O}^ 


S)JUJ4   pj).)j;ii|   }o    'Oil 


)IUUS;HIJ    10    %    dSVJOAy 


lO    dlSUdJJB    d)UUI|XOJ(l(iV 


M  US  I 


U3r«l 


J-OQ  CO 


C  04  fH 


00 


s 


^g«^ 


<D 


O    'I 


MG^S 


C<i 


74      n 


'pun[j:)quii) 
}o  dSB.ijDB  d)oin|i'oidd\i 


q 

6 

•a 
a 

OS 

Q 


O  <f5  SO 

■t      »      * 
«5  3  "T 


17  00  » 
Cl  V^  "O 

O    w.   <?« 

•        •        •■ 

o*  T  -< 

,3  0  ;s 


C» 


»- 

ri 
1- 


6l  O  "»•  J- 

_^«  f-  00  uo 

V-l  f  T-<  sC  r^ 


•o  t-  w  flo 

re  iJO  b-  O 

•^  -1  to  r-« 


n 


o 


d 


•a 


--3 


^-v, 

C/}^ 


^£ 


ti  "^  ff"  -f  5> 


<M 


f-i  r>  r-«  1^  r^  C4  r-l 


i>.  M  ec  -^  ^  O  00 
■•>*'«>•*  ^  t~  «s  cQ 

2  11  "ft  t"  ■*  o  I-  o 


.15 


M 


00 


M  CO  OQ  Ot  A  rr4 1-> 

4-  CC  CO  ■^  ^  A  fit 

(M  ^  ^  ^i<.  25  cy 

V         *         «        Ik        f^         M         K 

*"-  <M  l"-  OC  O  «  CM 
O  t-  •*  »  *-  O 


•A 

eo 

U3 


'••tfti- 


Co  So< 


oco<: 


x; 


a      o 


O 


be 

n   "  «p  Ji  o  83 
<u  S  »-•  o**  £  Q 

eS  4)  S-«  *-<  ej  c 


o 


■•a 

»-l 


39 


1 

a 

•mm 

a 
o 


c 


P 


'|KU)|||.1J    JU    MdOOJd 


'PSAOUI 

-01  8dej4  pai-^juf  ;o  'oi»{ 


•panoj 
f«daj4     pd)Jd)n}     JO     *ox 


iJpBi)  pd).>d)af  JO    'Oil 


'4na)s>ii|o  JO  %  dJBBjdAv 


JO     dSBdJdD     »)BUI{XOJd<IV 


'paB[jaqin{) 


n 


'- 

is 

(dII^ 
-118 

I 

00    1 

11 

c^tpo 


m  tnSd 


Sill 


eo 
S3 


II 


05  iH  f-» 

8SS 


gill 
Siii^ 

11 V 


4> 


8 

o 


tea  _^ 

—  i<  * 

2  C  £ 
C3  ea  b 


5  a 

O         L, 


s 


40 


PATHOLOGICAL  INVESTIGATIONS. 

(Figs.  22-38.) 


The  pathological  investigations  in  charge  of  Dr.  F.  D.  Ileald  aw 
conducted  in  Philadelphia  in  the  Zoological  Building  of  the  Universii^y 
of  Pennsylvania.  Dr.  Heald  was  not  appointed  until  August  16th, 
and  has,  therefore,  only  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  w  as  begun  in  the  Commission  laboratories  on 
September  2:Jrd  and  since  that  time  a  total  of  twenty-six  have  been 
enrolled.  It  has  required  from  five  days  to  two  weeks  for  each 
scout  to  complete  the  course  outlined.  This  length  of  time  has  varied 
in  accordance  with  tlie  i)revious  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  OITice  for  identification  were  turned  over  to  this  labo- 
ratory for  examination.  The  accurate  determination  of  the  specimens 
has  required  a  considerable  amount  of  time,  involving  both  cultures 
and  microscopic  examinations.  In  addition  to  the  specimens  of  Dia- 
porthe  parasitica  which  predominate,  various  other  fungi  growing 
upon  the  chestnut,  have  been  submitted.  Some  of  these  have  been 
mistaken  for  Diaporthe  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  Diaporthe 
colonies  in  Petri  dish  cultures,  a  preliminary  study  has  been  made  of 
germination  in  agar  hanging-bloek  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  snmller  percentage  of  successful  infect icms  is  secured  in  artificial  in- 
oculations with  conidiospores  than  with  ascospores.  At  the  end  of 
twenty-four  hours  the  germ  tube  of  conidiospores  is  (»nly  slightly  in 
excess  of  or  sometimes  double  the  length  of  the  swollen  spore.  During 


41 

the  first  part  of  the  |?erniiiiatioii  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  figures  36-37). 

DIFFERENTIATION  OF  ASOOSPOKE  AND  CONIDIOSPORE  (COLONIES  ON 

PETRI  DISU  CULTURES. 

The  tests  made  in  hanging  drop  cultures  in  regard  to  the  rapidity 
of  germination  of  the  two  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  per  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  examinatiim  has  been  made  by  means  of  cultures  of  small  insect 
galls  occuring  on  one  year  shoots  of  the  chestnut  1o  determine  whether 
an  infection  had  already  taken  place.  The  insects  causing  these  galls 
are  not  available  at  this  time  of  the  year  but  they  ai*e  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  haye  been  made  also  to  determine  whether  certain 
insects  frequenting  blight  lesions  were  carrying  spores,  with  n^ative 
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  ^ate  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  DiaportJie  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  exiieriment  was  conducted  at 
one  of  the  principal  nurseries  of  the  State  in  which  twelve  twigs 


42 

of  chestnut  were  immersed  in  water  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  and  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  extTacts  of  soil.  This 
is  important  in  indicating  the  possibility  of  their  persistence  when 
washed  to  the  ground. 

Second,  the  exi>ulsion  of  ascopores  from  the  i)erithecia  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  beiftg  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  fungus  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  inrestiga- 
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  different.  The  behavior  in  culture  media  is 
quite  different,  and  artificial  inoculations  with  the  Connellsville  form 
on  young,  healthy  trees  do  not  pi"oduce  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  te<*hnical  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  fungus  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- 


44 

mer.  The  fungus  does  not  advance  into  the  healthy  tissue  in  fan- 
shaped  mats  of  mycelium.  The  edj?e  of  the  canker  is  more  regular  and 
is  circumscribed  by  a  black  line  between  tlie  healthy  and  dead  tissue, 
which  line  was  not  there  during  the  Summer.  The  average  growth 
in  diameter  of  fifty-tliree  cankers,  for  October  was  1.92  cm.  For 
twenty-two  days  of  November  and  all  of  December  cankers  showed 
no  increase  in  diameler,  indicating  that  the  weather  had  become  too 
cold.  No  inoculations  made  during  October,  November  and  December 
show  any  signs  of  infecticm.  Whether  the  spores  will  remain  and 
begin  growth  when  the  weatlier  becomes  warm  again,  is  yet  to  be 
determined. 

FrTRTnp:R  rksttf.ts  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  iuiplemenls  on  surrounding  trees  facing  the  can- 
kers of  the  diseased  tree.s  and  the  bark  was  previously  sterilized.  These 
wounds  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  drenclie<l  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  reported,  sixty- 
thrw  sterile  wounds  were  made  in  the  trunks  of  trees  and  shooting 
l)ark  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-l)ellows  for  tiftoen  minutes  and  then  the  wound  protected 
with  cotton.  Twenty-four  out  of  the  sixty-three  wounds  developed 
ankers. 

LONGEVITY  TESTS. 

Results  of  tests  in  the  longevity  of  spores  arti  as  follows: — 

First — Ascospores  after  being  ejected  from  the  perithecia  and  kept 
dry  on  slidi*s  in  the  laboratoiy,  retained  their  vitality  twenty-four  (24) 
weeks ;  limit  not  yet  i*eached. 

Second Ascospores  kept  dry  in  the  bark  without  being  dis- 
charged from  the  perithecia  retained  their  vitality  thirty-four  (34) 
weeks ;  limit  not  yet  reached. 

Third — Conidia  kept  dry  as  spoi-e  horns  in  the  laboratory,  retained 
their  vitality  twenty-eight  (28)  weeks;  limit  not  yet  reached. 

F<:nrlh  -Hotli  ascospores  and  conidia  collected  at  regular  intervals 
from  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 

CULTURAL  AND  TAXONOMIC   STUDIES. 

The  true  blight  fungus  has  been  much  confused  with  several  other 
very  closely  related  species  of  this  genus.  Cultures  of  all  these  forms 
from  various  localities  in  America  and  Europe  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  United 
States:— First.  The  true  blight  fungus.  Second.  The  Connellsville 
fungus.  Third.  The  long  spored  s»/dthein  fiHigus.  Only  the  first  two 
of  these  are  found  in  Pennsylvania  and  cmly  the  first  one  of  the  three 
causes  any  injury  to  the  trees. 


REPORT  OF  THE  PHVSIOLOOIST 

(Figs.  39-40.) 


The  investigations  in  tree  medication  have  been  in  charge  of  Dr. 
Caroline  Rumbold,  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  lonijxjnnds,  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  sufl'icient  to  kill  the  fungus. 

EFFECT  OF  ALI^ALINE  SOLUTIONS  ON  GROWING  PLANTS. 

Rooted  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  to  absorb 
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  transplanted  into  pots,  were  injected  with  lithium  carl)ona(e 
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  twigs  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  readily  as  the  other  trees  absorbed 
the  alkaline  solution.  On  inoculating  the  trees  injected  with  lithium 
carbonate  and  the  controlled  trees  with  the  chestnut  blight  fungus,  tJie 
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.  DetailF 
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. 


Afoueboid  in  feci  io 


AmMboid  infection  <: 


liarh  hns  bcea  i 


FiK.  24. 
infectioD  on  (wo  jear  o 


Tjpe   of  sprout   tDfecttOD 


Fig.  27. 
e  from  inftH'tion  shown  ii 


Rough  bark  shuwios  broad  bandx  of  peritliedal  piiHtuleB  in  the  crevicea.  Spore* 
shot  fmm  this  si.pi'inn'n  wtv  iikpcI  io  makins  ihe  nsoosporp  i-ulliirps  dpiwribpd  Id 
this  report. 


Fis.  ;n. 

PerllliPciHl   [iiigtules  from   i 


Culture  of  Diaporlhe  pHmiiitica  oblainM  from   pycnc 
on  Civo  year  oE<I  wood  pile,   BroDii 


Si- 


ll ^ 
I- 

ft 


Potato  agar  culture  growD  in  lii:ht  showing  the  pronounced  zonalion. 


e 


0 


o 


i 


% 


.9 


o 


0 


& 


& 


^ 


ll 


^ 


^ 


6 


Fig.  30. 


Germination  of  Oonidiospores  in  3  per  cent,  ghioosc  agar.  22^0.  1  after  12  honra; 
2  after  16  hours ;  3  after  22  hours ;  4  after  30  hours ;  5  after  36  hours ;  6  after 
36  hoars. 

These  illustrate  tlie  Jinoar  aud  y  types  of  germination. 


Fig.  37. 

Germination  of  Ascospores  in  3  per  cent,  glucose  agar.  22*^0.  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. 

In  4,  each  cell  has  produced  two  hyphae.  In  5.  one  cell  has  produced  two  hyphae, 
while  a  strong  lateral  has  grown  out  from  tne  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. 


I--,J 


Fig.  30. 
Mcdioil  of  imni'bins  tiilio  for  iDJpctiii 


Tree  So.   27.     Plot   B.     Msrlii-  Forge  1012. 
1   per  cent,   formaldehyde.     Tree  injected   August   14   (consumed   1445   < 
Photographed  August  27. 


Fig.  42. 
r  forcinR  a  cork  against  a  tree. 


Big.  43. 
Tree   No.  31.     Plot  A,     1912   Manic   Forge. 
Injected  Octnber  7  with  .01  per  cent.  Coneo  Red.     Trpp  cunsumed  2  giila.    Btain. 
Tree  (lit   down  October  13. 


Fig.  44. 
Tree   Nii.  I!0.     I'lot  A.     WV2  .Martio   F.u- 
Iajpet«l  Ootobor  7   with  ,01  per  « 


•TDCC     Ajn  C7 


[•'ig.  Jo. 
M   A.     1U12  llau 


TREE  65 


FiB.  40. 
Tree   No.  63.     Plot  A.     1012  Martic   Forse. 


Fix.  47. 
Plot  A.     1012  Mank-  Fofr 


Injpcled   AiigiiHl   20   \ 


Fig.  48. 
No.  1:4.     riot   A,     V.IV2   Mnrtic  Fiht-p. 

itii    vm    M<-tli}-l    sr-'in,      ( Vrn^iiiii'iI    nliniit    onp    qunrt    of 
Altdni'rlipr  nlioul  ■_'  1-2  iiIiiIh  luumimcil.      Tree  cut  down 


47 

As  evening  appiimrned,  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  fibres  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  with  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  bo  of  value  in  tree 
medication. 


48 


INVESTIOATIONS  OF    INSECTS   ASSOCIATED   WITH   TUE 

CHESTNl^T  BLIOUT. 


These  investigations  are  in  charge  of  Professor  A.  U.  Riiggles,  for 
merJy  associated  Entomologist  of  the  Minnesota  Agricultural  Experi- 
ment Station,  and  at  present  on  leave  of  absence  for  work  witJi  this 
Commission. 

As  in  the  case  of  other  invesligaticms.  Professor  lluggles  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^vs : — 

1st.     The  relation  of  insects  to  the  blight  as  possible  carriers  of  the 
disease. 

2nd.     The  study  of  insect  wounds  that  may  form  a  good  lodgin;^ 
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  being  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  infcH'tion  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  ihe.^ 
were  found  carrying  mycelial  threads  of  the  fungus.  75  to  90  per 
cent,  of  the  cases  of  infection  were  attributed  to  ants,  particularly  in 
dry  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  winter  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  wiiat  species 
make  these  wounds.  Some  wounds  now  thought  to  be  insignificant 
may  have  a  sj^ecial  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  oi  merest igation  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.  Afterward  many  insects  help  in  its  destruc- 
tion. Eecent  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.    (Pig.  50.) 

Our  inyestigation  should  show  how  long  a  tree  dying  with  blight 
may  remain  standing  and  still  be  useful  for  telephone  poles  or  lumber. 

m 

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,  ])lant  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  sri/iB  5pray.  It  is 
desired  to  determine  the  toxic  properties  of  certain  *flmmon  fungicides 
that  readily  mix  with  insecticides  to  the  proporti  i  best  adapted  to 
kill  the  chestnut  blight  fungus,  and  tlie  amount  of  iraying  necessary. 
Some  fungicides  have  also  an  insecticidal  value. 


REPORT  OF  THE  CHEMIST. 


The  chemical  work  of  the  Ck)nimisRion  is  in  charge  of  Mr.  Joseph 
Shrawder,  and  has  been  under  way  since  about  July  1,  1912.  The 
chief  object  of  tJie  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 
(luring  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  expu..-.i-tl 
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 
«>f  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).  Removing  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,  ia  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  gi*eater  advantage  without  storing  it  in  the  woods  or  shipping  it. 


SliMp  aUn  tanBin  ia  extract  fron  Miud 
chcatBUt  bark 


8he«p  akin  taanii  extract  froai  Inftctwl 
cheatBBt  bark. 


ShMp  aUa  taaned  In  extract  tnm  chestnot 


s" 


51 


REPORT  OF  THE  TREE  SURGEON. 

(Figs.  52-55.) 


The  work  of  examination  of  individual  trees  on  lawnss  and  in 
private  parks  as  well  as  orchard  trees  with  the  idea  of  attempting  lo 
save  such  trees  by  possible  surgical  or  other  treatment  is  in  ehar.t;o 
of  Mr.  Roy  G.  Pierce,  Tree  Surgeon. 

Requests  for  examination  of  individual  trees  are  very  frequent. 
Within  the  past  four  months  208  such  exnniinatiims  have  been  made  by 
the  tree  surgeon  and  one  assistant,  ^lost  of  these  examinations  were 
made  in  the  vicinity  of  Pliiladelphia  and  in  Montgomery,  liucks,  Dela- 
ware and  Chester  counties. 

FAIRMOTTNT  PARK. 

An  examination  of  the  chestnut  trees  in  Fairmount  Park  is  in 
progress.  Over  2,000  diseased  trees  have  already  been  located  iu  the 
East  and  West  Park,  not  including  Wissahickon  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  reliability  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  them. 
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- 
]>iled.  Bulletin  No.  2,  **Treat'ment  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  resulib  >i;  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. 


62 


BBPOBT  OF  THE  UEOQBAPHEB. 


The  investigations  of  rainfall,  temperature,  altitude  and  geuei-al 
topography  of  the  JState  in  relation  to  the  distribuliou  of  the  chest- 
nut tree  blight  disease  is  in  direct  charge  of  Dr.  F.  I\  Gulliver, 
Geographer.  The  work  has  been  uuder  way  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  tiekl 
agents  as  to  the  location,  distribution  and  percentage  of  the  bliglit, 
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 
ditt'erences  in  succeeding  years.  The  relation  of  greater  or  less  rain- 
fall and  more  or  less  humidity  to  blight  distribution  are  being 
studied. 

POSSIBLE  RELATION  OP  SUMMER  RAINFALL  TO  THE  SPREAD  OP 

THE  BLIGHT  DISEASE  IN  1911  AND  1912. 

It  appears  that  in  the  summer  of  1012  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  iii  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  ILLT'STRATINC;  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. 


63 

PHYSlOURAPfllO  TKATt'liKS. 

A  careful  study  is  being  made  nf  the  relation  of  iiiountaiiis  and 
valleys,  and  the  direction  of  the  wind  to  the  s[)read  of  the  blight 
disease,  but  there  has  not  been  sufficient  time  to  obtain  any  results. 

PUBLIC  HIGHWAYS. 

As  the  blight  disease  is  so  often  found  along  public  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 


BEPOKT  OF  FOEESTEli  IN  CHAHCiE  OF  UTILIZATION. 

(Figs.  62-70.) 


The  exploitation  of  diseased  chestnut  Avood  in  various  forms  for 
market  is  in  charge  of  Professor  J.  P.  Wentling,  Forester,  who  is 
assisted  by  three  other  men.  The  work  has  been  under  way  about 
four  months,  although  good,  thorough  work  witli  a  central  olllce  and 
a  capable  force  of  assistants  was  not  possible  until  after  November 
first. 

EXPLOITATION  OF  lUJGllTED  (^llESTNUT  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  in  the  eastern  part  of  the  State, 
warranted  the  entire  attention  of  the  men  engaged  in  this  work.  For 
the  present  at  least,  it  seems  therefore  best  to  carry  on  most  of 
the  work  east  of  the  Susquehanna  River.  At  present  it  is  thought 
best  to  do  as  much  of  the  active  work  a£i  possible,  in  the  southeastern 
part  of  the  State  where  the  conditions  seem  to  demand  immediate 
attention. 

METHODS  OX  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  lands  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 
Hjis  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  obtaiued  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  Eiver.    In  this  investigation  the  county  is  taken  as  a 


56 

unit  and  the  facts  are  (abuhUeil  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  grtate  Department  of  Foresti-y  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  owneVs  frequently  ask  what  they  shall  make  of  their  timber 
in  order  to  realize  the  most  protit.  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 

DETERIOUATIOX   INVESTIGATIONS. 

A  few  cases  have  come  to  our  attention  where  telephone  poles  have 
been  rejected  because  of  a  condition  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  stump  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  OIASSiFIOATION. 

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  sii  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  Luinbermeji's  Association  in  this  city.*  Officers  of  this 
association  have  promised  their  hearty  co-operation. 

PUBLICATIONS. 

Manuscripts  now  in  preparation  for  publication  include  a  ^^Hand- 
book  of  Chestnut  Utilization"  for  the  use  of  agents  of  this  Commis- 
sion; "Chestnut  Utilization"  a  more  popular  publication  for  the 
people,  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  winter.  A  well-known  lumberman  at  Reedsville 
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  Avith  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  millmau  see  the  property  and 
then  negotiate  with  the  owner.  Recently  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  chestnvt  and  deliver  it  at  the  railroad  to  be  shipped  to  New- 
port, will  be  conducted. 

CLEAR  CUTTING  OF  c6eSTNUT. 

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 
l\.    Chestnut  in  a  50  per  cent,  mixture 

4.  Chestnut  in  a  30  per  cent,  mixture 

5.  Chestnut  in  a  15  per  cent,  mixture 

G.     Individual  trees  scattered  throughout  cleared  areas. 


59 

An  eflfort  will  be  made  lo  interest  outside  concerns  in  the  conversion 
of  spent  chestnut  chips  from  extract  factories  into  wood  pulp.  Work 
of  this  kind  has  already  b^un. 

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  contractor  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. 


KKPORT  OF  DKMONSTHATION  WOEK. 


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.  Hockey,  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  thirtj'-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  publicatit>iis  were  distributed  and  placards  and  a  map 
of  the  blight  distribution  were  displayed.  The  total  cost  of  our 
exhibits  was  almost  nothing  in  c<unparison  with  those  made  by  other 
State  Departments,  but  the  Blight  Commission  exhibits  compared  very 
favorably  in  value  and  public  interest  shown.  At  several  fairs,  on 
request,  the  rejiresentative  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  wei-e  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  roistered  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  olflcers,  members 
of  the  L^islature,  newspaper  men,  students  from  the  normal  schools, 
boy  scouts,  park  commissioners,  and  employees,  tree  doctors  as  well 
as  owners  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  that  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  given  before  the  Adams  County 
Fruit  Growers'  Association  at  Bendei-sville,  the  Northern  Nut  Grow- 
evfi'  Association  at  Lancaster,  the  Perry  County  Fruit  Growers'  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  w^ere  selected  as  being  located  where  they 
would  be  of  the  most  value  for  our  purpose.  The  subject  matter  of 
each  lecture  is  outlined  and  approved  before  the  Institute  begins. 

EXHIBITS. 

Arran:7ements  have  been  made  to  install  a  permanent  exhibition 
m  the  Philadelphia  Commercial  Museum,  which  will  be  as  complete 


01 

as  possible.  AdcMiuate  cabinet  space  and  whatever  print injij  is  neces- 
sary will  be  furnished  by  the  Museum.  Twenty  small  photographs 
are  now  being  enlargc^d  by  the  Aruseum,  for  this  purpose. 

It  was  arranged  to  place  a  similar  exhibit  in  the  State  Capitol 
Museum  at  Harrisburg.  Other  exhibits  not  so  elaborate  might  be 
pla<ed  in  other  places  where  conditions  are  favorable. 

TKACIIKUS*    INSTITIJTKS. 

Kxhibits  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  jiublications  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  COLLKGES. 

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  illustratetl  lecture  and  exhibit  |at  these  in- 
stitutions. 

In  the  full  report  appended,  a  complete  list  of  fair  exhibits  and  all 
farmers'  and  teachers'  institutes  is  given. 


THE  8Ilvioult[:kal  effect  of  the  chestnut  blight. 


By  Hon.  I.  C.  Williams,  ColUihorator,  State  Forestry  Department, 

The  following  statement  as  to  the  silvi cultural  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 
r^eneration  of  sprouts  probably  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  ils 
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 
sc^edling  primeval  forest.  A  knowledge  of  these  facts  brought  to  the 
people  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 firroves  but  have  them  of  better  character  than  ever  before. 


Pboloera[ih 


Spreyinj*  Bordeaux  Mixture  4'5'>i0  on  large  cliestnut  trees  at  es 
Sprayed  every  two  weeks  from  April  lo  middle  of  Novei 
Square,   Pa. 


ber,   1012.     Kennett   Square,   Pa. 


In 

S5S' 


n 


V'S- 


ji 


p  of  tnlll  whicb 


FiK.  64. 
s  made  from  blighteil  chpstnnt,   hiinclle<l,   ready  tor  shipprng. 


Shingles    ready    fur   BhippinK-      Prodni'i'd    by    portable    shingle   mill    from    blighted 


Fig.  fifi, 
rtiflpil  pnsls  inmlp 


rorinbU-  Sow  Mill-Tlip  i 


^^BiS 


I    btielitril   rhestiii 


Fig.  00. 
Oieatnut  on  ihe  fann.   Bailii  for  uae  In  mortised  posts  made  from  bligbtcd  chestnut- 


If 


63 

A  further  result  of  the  experience  had  in  cutting  out  blighted 
chestnut  wood  is  that  when  the  work  is  properly  done  and  refuse 
completely  burned  on  top  of  the  sturap,  which  should  be  deeply 
charred,  the  resulting  sprouts  show  little  or  no  attack  of  the  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  Pennsyl- 
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  expenditure  of  all  the  money  and  all  the 
labor  even  if  no  other  result  will  be  obtaineil. 

A  further  result,  however,  is  almost  certain  to  follow  in  that  the 
people  of  our  State  will  have  had  their  attention  very  jmintedly 
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  which  are  of  little  or  no  value  for  any 
other  purpose  than  producing  trees. 


REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  TREATMENT  OF  TREES  FOUND 

INFECTED  WITH  CHESTNUT  BLIGHT. 


ADOPTED   BY   THE   CHESTNUT   TREE    BLIGHT   COMMISSION,   JAN- 
UARY 7,  1913. 

WHEREAS,  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  Conunissiou  that  the  following  regulations,  be 
adopted,  and  as  occasion  may  rise,  such  otlier  and  further  ii^gulalicms, 
and  the  altering  or  amending  of  the  same  as  may  seem  to  it  neces- 
sary. 

5 


G4 

REGULATION  No.  1.  For  the  purpose  of  quarantine,  a  division 
shall  be  made  between  the  slightly  infected  Western  portion  of  the 
State,  and 'the  badh'  infected  Eastern  imrtion.  The  line  of  demar- 
cation at  ])resent  shall  be  as  follows: — the  eastern  boundary  lines  of 
Fulton,  Huntingdon,  Mifflin,  Centre,  Clint<m,  Lycoming,  Sullivan  and 
Bradford  counties..  These  portions  shall  be  known  i-espectively  as 
the  Western  and  Eastern  Districts. 

RE(;ULATION  No.  2.  In  the  Eastern  District  the  Idight  is  so 
])revalent  that  ajiparently  the  only  course  of  procedure  practical  is 
the  ultilizatiou  of  all  diseaseil  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  ajiplying  adequate  protective  meas- 
ures. In  all  other  portions  of  the  Eastern  District,  owners  are  urgeil 
to  cut  all  diseased  trees,  and  where  the  amount  of  blight  is  80  i)er- 
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. 

Ownere  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. 

REOTTLATION  No.  8.  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  TRKE  IS   INFECTED  WITH  THE  OIIESTNUT  BLIGHT. 

This  tree  must  be  felled,  the  diseased  bark  removed  and  the  stump 
peeled  to  the  ground,  within  twenty  days  after  notice  to  owner  or 


65 

agent.  All  bark  and  unused  portions  of  the  tree  shall  be  burned  on  the 
stump.  Where  such  burning  will  injure  adjoining  trees  it  should  be 
doue  at  a  safe  distance,  in  which  case  the  stump  must  be  painted  with 
creosote,  in  place  of  burning.  Portions  of  this  tree  to  be  utilized  must 
be  removed  within  twenty  days  after  felling.  Poles,  posts,  rails,  and 
other  products  exposed  to  weather  shall  be  peeled  of  bark.  Take  spe- 
cial care  to  prevent  forest  fires. 

Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Commission, 


By 

Field  Agent. 

Following  this  a  sheet  showing  the  approxiumte  location  of  each 
diseased  tree  shall  be  delivered  to  the  owner  of  the  trees,  his  agent, 
or  em])loyee,  or  other  jjerson  res[M»nsible  for  (he  care  of  the  j)roi)erty, 
together  with  written  or  verbal  explanation  of  the  necessity  for  the 
removal  of  (he  diseased  tree  and  the  method  of  procedure.  A  dupli 
cate  copy  of  the  infecti(m  sheet,  marked  with  (he  date  of  notification 
and  the  name  of  the  person  interviewed  shall  be  maibMl  to  the  Held 
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  growth  may  be  cleared  so  that  the 
diseased  chips  and  branches  may  be  easilj'  picked  up,  provided  that 
any  small  chestnut  or  chiiuiuapin  trees  or  sprouts  shall  be  cut  Hush 
with  the  surface  of  the  ground  and  the  tops  burned. 

All  the  trei»s  should  be  felled  so  as  to  leave  as  low  a  stump  as 
possible.  If  felled  with  an  axe  the  bark  shall  first  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.  Jf  felled  by  sawing,  such  peeling  may 
be  done  after  the  tree  has  been  cut  down.  In  either  case  the  stum]> 
and  all  exposed  roots  must  be  clearcMl  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  toi)S,  the  bark,  and  portions 
of  the  felled  chestnut  trees  which  are  not  jieeled  and  which  it  is  not 
intended  to  utilize  shall  also  be  burned. 

After  the  stump  is  peeled,  if  fire  can  be  made  over  it  without  in- 
juring the  surrounding  trees,  and  without  danger  of  forest  fires,  the 
brush  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 
l)ortions  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 
stump  shall  l>e  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  diiys,  but  may  be 
handled  and  shipped  with  the  bark  on  [>rovided  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  must  be  peeled  and  the  bark  burned,  or  else  wood  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  Ihe  regulalions  of  the  Commission, 
or  if  the  work  has  been  imjiroperly  d<me,  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 
th(»se  trees  was  first  given,  tlie  agent  of  the  ('ommissi(m  shall  employ 
laborers  and  begin  the  work  of  removing  such  infected  trees  according 
to  the  method  above  described.  Immediately  after  such  work  is  per- 
formed he  shall  furnish  to  the  field  headquarters  a  detailed  statement 
of  the  expenses  so  incurreil  by  the  Commission.  The  amount  of  these 
expenses  must  be  paid  by  the  owner  within  sixty  dfiys  from  date  of 
presentation  of  a  bill  for  the  same. 


67 


CHESTNUT  TREE  BLIGHT  COMMISSION. 
Fiiiaiicial  Statement  showing  account  December  17th,  1912. 


Received  from  State  Trfasurjr. 


Aagtut   22,    1911 1       le.OOOOO 

November  22,  1911,  i        3,000  00 

April  4,    1912 3.000  00 

June  11,    1912.    3.000  00 

June  18.  1912 .  

August   16.    1912,    '  .  .. 

October  3,   1912 

November  14,    1912,    _ 5.000  00 

December  17.  1912,  _ _■ 


Interest  from  Comml.  Trust  Co.,  Dec.  31,  1911... 
Interest  from  C\)nin]l.  Trust  Co.,  July  1,  1912.  ... 


$16,000  00 
15  21 
18  44 


Expenditures  as  per  detailed  statement  below,..- 

Bal.  available  In  Phila.  Dec.  3,  1912,  plus  warrant  de- 
posited Dec.  17,   1912 

Contingent  fund   (8.   B.   D.),   __       9700  00 

Contingent  fund  (M.   A.   C), 800  00 

Commonwealth  Trust  Co.,  af7,l33  12 


$10,083  05 
11,222  «2 


$4,811  03 


Balance  In  State  Treasury. 


$38,033  12 


9,000  00 


Balance  of   appropriation,    _ $13,811  03 

Vouchers  ready  for  submission, 1,307  38 


Net  resources,    

Balance  in  State  Treasury, 


$12,508  05 
9,000  00 


Balance  on  hand  In  Philadelphia,  Dec.  17,  1912,... 


93,508  66 


• 

•o 

"3 

m 
o 

o 

H 

$B.0OO0O 

ao.ooooo 

20,000  00 


30.000  00 
30.000  00 
30.000  00 
20.000  00 
30.000  00 


$188,000  00 

85  18 

105  94 


$188,251  12 
1.54.429  08 


$33,822  09 


02,000  00 


$96,822  00 
9,788  04 


$86,084  05 
02.000  00 


$24,034  06 


$10,000  00 
23,000  00 
23,000  00 
3,000  00 
30,000  00 
30.000  00 
30,000  00 

•  25.000  00 
30.000  00 


$804,000  00 
100  39 
184  38 


$204,281  77 
165.051  66 


$88,633  12 


71,000  00 


$109,033  12 
11,096  42 


$98,587  70 
71.000  00 


$27,587  70 


DETAILS  OF  EXPENDITURES. 


o 

a 

ea 


a 


•a 

a 


n 

a 


o 
Eh 


Scientific   research, 
OflSce  furniture.    ... 
Field  equipment.    .. 
Travding  expenses. 

Office  salaries,   

Office  expenses 

Field  expenses 

Field  salaries,    


$1,131  57 

1.660  10 

125  57 

60  20 

4,890  58 

809  10 

44  00 

1  SO 


$3.763  08 
13,104  74 


6  SO 
58.897  53 
83.657  88 


$11,222  62       $154,429  08 


$4,131  57 
1,660  10 
3,888  60 

13,104  94 

4,390  58 

815  40 

53,941  53 

83,656  88 


$165,051  65 


Kespectfully  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  Submitted  December,  1912,) 


Tli( 


Chestnut  Blight  Fungus 


AND  A 


Related  Saprophyte 


BY 


PAUL  J.  ANDERSON  and  H.  W.  ANDERSON. 


HARRI8BURG: 

O.  S.  AUOmirBAUQB.  PEIMraB  TO  THX  STATE  OV  PXNNBTLYAIIU 

1918. 


Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Commission. 


MEMBERS  OF  COMMISSION. 

Winthrop    Sargent,    Chairman,    Bryn  'Mawr. 

Harold   Peiice,   Sivi  rtai  y 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.   Schofk,  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.   Ileald,  rathologist. 

A.   G.   Ruggles,    EntomoIogiBt. 

J.  r.  Wentlinjr,    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.  Rdckey,  Forester  in  charge  of  Demonstration  Work. 


(2) 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


Page. 

IntroductioD ,     5 

Obsen-ations  on  the  natural  habitat  of  the  fungus,    6 

Microspocic  examination  and  comparison  with  the  Eastern  fungus,  . .  7 

Isolations ,     10 

Inoculations ,    11 

Cultural    comparisons ,     13 

Distribution  of  the  Connellsville  fungus,    15 

Taxonomic    relations,     10 

Literature    cite<l ID 


(3) 


(4) 


THE  CHESTNUT  BLIGHT  FUNGUS  AND  A 
RELATED  SAPROPHYTE 

By  P.  J.  and  H.  W.  ANDERSON 


INTRODUCTION. 


When  the  Pennsylvania  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  w-as 
apparently  the  blight  in  a  few  of  the  extreme  south  western  counties. 
In  these  localities  a  fungus'  was  found  quite  commonly  on  the 
chestnut  trees,  which  suiierticially,  c(mld  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  Fungu.s'' — by  which  name  w^e  shall  des- 
ignate the  fungus  occurring  in  these  southweslein  counties,  ^fr. 
J.  K.  Hibbs,  supervisor  of  tliis  southwestern  district,  being  in  doubt 
as  to  the  identity  of  the  fungus,  submitted  specimens  to  all  the  lead- 
ing pathologists  who  have  cimcerned  themselves  with  this  disease. 
They  uniformly  agreed  that  this  fungus  was  the  true  blight  organ- 
ism, Diaporthe  parasitica,  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.  StiJl  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  February  of  last  year,  although  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- 
Fion,  it  was  thought  best  to  make  a  careful  study  of  the  vroslern 
problem  and  for  this  purpose  a  field  laboratory  was  located  at  Con- 
ncllsville,  where  the  so-called  western  fungus  was  quite  com^ion. 
The  results  of  the  investigation  carried  out  at  this  laboratory  are  set 
forth   in  the  following  pages. 

OBSERVATIONS  OK  THE  NATURAL  HABIT  AND  HABITAT  OF  THE 

FUNGUS. 

In  external  macroscopic  appearance  this  fungus  resembles 
Diaporthe  parasitica  in  all  its  stages  and  there  seems  to  be  no  Wiiy 
in  which  it  can  be  distinguished  from  this  fungus  in  the  field,  ex- 
cept by  the  absence  of  the  areas  of  fan  shaped  mycelium.  On  young 
bark  the  western  fungus  develops  small,  scattered  orange  pustules 
under  the  epidermis.  Areas  of  orange  colored  mycelium  are  oftcn 
found  throughout  the  thin  bark.  The  pycuidia  are  formed  in  the 
pustules  beneath  the  epidermis  and  the  spore  horns  develo)>  singly, 
pushing  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  the  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  light  yellow  color  and  pulverulent  in  the  young  condition, 
darkening  and  hardening  with  age.  A  number  of  pycnidia 
may  be  formed  in  e^ch  of  these  stromata.  Perithecia  may  be  found  at 
any  season  of  the  year  and  are  developed  in  the  same  manner  as 
in  Diaporthe  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.  Small  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  Conference,  Feb.  1912,  pages  47  and  80. 


Special  attention  was  given  to  the  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  removed  one  or  two  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  coppice  at  the  base  of  an  infected  stump  were  made 
since  this  was  a  common  point  of  infection  by  Diaporthe  para8ticay 
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 
pen/etrated  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  conidial  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,  fhe  most  marked  of  which  were  the  size 
and  shape  of  the  ascospores.  There  was  also  a  very  pronounced  dif- 
ference in  the  length  of  the  asci.  In  the  following  table  is  given  the 
measurements  of  the  asci  and  ascospores  of  Diaporthe  parasitiax 
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. 


The  Connellsville  Rpeeiraens  were  collected  from  various  localities 
about  this  citv  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 l^etween  the  fungi  collected  from  these  various  localities. 
All  measurements  were  made  with  a  1-12  oil  immersion  objective. 


tablp:  I. 

Showing  the  relative  size  of  the  ascospores  of  the  Connellsville 
fungus  and  Diaporthe  parasitica. 


Connellsville  Fungus. 


Locality. 


Diameter. 


leneth. 


3 

c 

s 

i-i 

«i 

m 
o 


o 

u 

s 

s 


u 
*» 

a 

OS 


c 


a 

a- 


B 


tti 


y. 


Oonnellsvllle  No  50,    

Gtonnellsville  No.   51,   on   oak 

CooDellsville  No.  5?,   

OonnellBvIlle  No.  5.>,  _. 

Connellsville   Nc.    50,    

Greene   Co.,    Pa.,    

Lynchburg.  Va.,   

Erwin,   Tenn.,    _ 

Fauquier  Co.,   Va.,    

Albornjarle  Co.,   Va.,    ._ 

Mor&antown,    W.    Va.,    


55 

1 
2.93 

55 

6.78 

61 

8.2    1 

61 

6.» 

57 

2.91 

57 

«.o 

a 

2.93 

fi.S 

(i.5 

:{i) 

3.1 

m 

7.22 

:» 

3.0 

39 

fi.8 

r-o 

3.1     ' 

90 

fi.a 

40 

8.1 

40 

h.9 

81 

3.1 

81 

fi.86- 

-^ 

3.0 

50 

6.88 

5C 

2.4 

50 

ti.<J8 

Diaporthe  parasitica. 


ift.    Gretna,    Pa.,    _ _ 

Highland,    X.Y.,«    _ 

Somerset,     Pa.,     _ _ _. 

Connellsville,   Pa.   M.  Gray  orchard.  Imported, 

•Measured  by  W.  H.  Rankin, 


62 
75 
f50 
25 

1 

4.54 
4.40 
4.4     , 
4.6 

hi) 
76 
60 
25 

8.52 
S.8 
8.2 
8.4 

9 


m 


TABLE   II. 


Showing  the  relative  length  of  the  asci  of  the  Cunnelisville  Fungus 

and  Diaporthe  parasitica. 


Connellsville  Fungus. 


Locality. 


ConnelJsvlllc   No.    .V) 

Connellsville  No.  51,  on  Oak, — 

ConnellflvlUe   No.    58,    _ _ , 

Connellsyille  No.  55,  _._ __ 

CoDDellflTille,    No.    56 

tireene  Co.,  Pa.,  _ _ 

Lynchburg:,   Va.,   _ 

Erwin,   Tenn.,    — _ i 

Fauquier   Co.,    Va.,    _ 

.41bermarle   Co.,    Va 

MorRantovn,   W.   Va., _ 


— 

-  - 

-     -               ■           * 

4^ 

a 

« 

B 

» 

f.1 

3 

Ob 

• 

es 

JZ 

a> 

** 

a 

«« 

«• 

o 

kl 

» 

«/ 

bC 

j3 

s 

•-* 

h 

S 

c 

3 

> 

y. 

^ 

50 

.•?3.ai 

30 

35.73 

51 

32.1 

43 

32.0 

56 

38.05 

30 

34.7 

40 

30.7 

40 

32.4 

eo 

34.29 

51 

32.52 

GO 

»l.72 

Diaporthe  Parasitica. 


Mt.  Gretna,   Pa.,  _ _ __ 

Somerset,  Pa.  No.  77,   

Highland.    N.    !.,•    

ComiellsTille,  Pa.     M.  Gray  orcharri,  Importt'd, 


'Measured  by  W.  H.  Banlcfn. 


35 
60 
75 
18 


51.7 
4S.6 
.W.O 
53.0 


In  general,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  ascospores  of  the  Connellsville 
fungus  leverage  7x3  mikrons,  while  those  of  Diaporthe  parasitica  aver- 
age 8.5x4.5  niikrons.  The  uiaximuni  and  niiuimum  sizes  aie  as 
follows:  Connellsville  fungus,  8.8-5.7  niikrons;  Diaporthe  parasitica, 
9.94-7.1  niikrons.  Th^  average  length  of  all  asci  nieasure<l  gave  :U 
niikrons  for  the  western  fungiLs  and  51.8  niiki-ons;  for  Diaporthe 
parasitica.  The  maximum  and  minimum  sizes  are  as  follows:  Con- 
nellsville fungus,  45.5  28.4  mikion^;  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  evident  and  a 
distinct  sinus  may  be  seen  on  the  mature  spores,  while  an  indistinct 
septum  and  a  veiy  slight,  if  any,  sinus  is  the  rule  in  the  Connells- 
ville fungus.  These  characteristics  are  so  evident  that  a  glance 
at  the  spores  under  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,  tlie  asci  of  the  two  fungi  are 
similar,  except  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  Virginia,  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  Avere  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  western  fungus  aiuee  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,  however,  success- 
ful isolations  were  made  in  this  way,  since  the  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  conidial  streak.  If  the  specimen  showed  the  fungus  to  be  in  the 
pycnidial  stage — sumuier  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 
the  ascospores  were  used.  In  the  first,  the  stroma  with  the  en- 
closed perithecia  was  removed  and  the  bottom  cut  off  with  a  sharp 
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  water  containing  the  spores  drawn  into  a  fine  capil- 
lary tube  from  which  it  was  blowm  into  a  sterile  petri  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  was  found  to  be  the  most  convenient 
of  all.  With  these  four  methods  it  was  found  possible  to  isolate  the 
fungus  from  any  kind  of  a  specimen  sen<t  in,  provided  the 
spores  and  mycelium  were  not  entirely  dead.  Isolations  were  made 
from  specimens  collected  in  over  fifty  different  localities.  Most  of 
these  were  in  southwestern  Pennsylvania,  but  a  few  of  them — as 
elsewiiere  mentioned — were  from  Virginia,  West  Virginia  and  Ten- 
nessee. All  of  them  were  identical,  however,  and  need  not  be  dis- 
cussed separately,  i.  e.,  they  all  showed  the  same  cultural  char- 
acters. Nor  did  it  seem  to  make  any  difference  whether  the  isola- 
tion was  made  from  mycelium,  ascospores  or  conidla;  they  all  grew 
alike.  Isolations  were  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  witli 
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,  was  introduced  into 
this  slit.  These  are  called  slit  inoculations.  When  conidia  or  ascos- 
pores  are  used,  thejse  are  shaken  up  in  a  quantity  of  water  and  intro- 
duced thus,  or  the  dry  spore  iiorns  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  80  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  wftiich 
spore  horns  were  fre(|uently  found,  but  the  growth  of  the  fungus 
was  limited  to  the  area  in  which  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  betweefu 
the  dead  and  living  tissue  and  no  fan-shaped  areas  of  mycelium  wei*e 
present.  In  all  inoculation  wounds  a  healthy  callus  had  formed 
and  in  those  made  tbree  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  quiolcly  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  madie  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  with  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  parasite. 

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  where  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  produce  conidial  spore 
horns  in  much  the  same  manner.  If  these  spore  horns  are  streaked 
on  a  potato  agar  slant,  Diaporthe  parasitica  will  produce  an  orange 
streak  within  four  days  at  room  temperature.  This  orange  streak 
broadens,  keeping  pace  with  the  grow*ih  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  the 
conidia  of  the  Connellsville  fungus  even  afler  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  agai*,  show  a  recognizable  difference  between  the 
two  fungi  but  this  difference  is  not  so  marked  as  that  of  the  color 
on  potato  agar. 

On  potato  agar  cultures  from  mycelial  transfers  a  fan  shaped  or 
irr^ular  wavey  growth  is  noticeable  at  the  edge  of  the  advancing 
mycelium  in  the  case  of  Diaporthe,  while  the  ConnellsvilUe  fungus 
has  an  even  unbroken  edge.  Furthermore,  there  is  a  marked  con- 
trast in  the  amount  of  aerial  mycelium  developed — Diaporthe  de- 
veloping scarcely  any,  while  the  Connellsville  fungus  has  a  fluffy  ap- 
pearance, due  to  a  white  mycelial  growth  above  the  surface  of  the 
agar.  Also  the  contfast  in  color  between  the  growths  on  potato  agar 
is  evident;  especially  in  cultures  about  three  weeks  old.  Diaporthe 
develops  an  oran]B;e  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  mycelial  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 


15 

nature  of  the  growth.  We  have  used  these  tests  on  fungi  from  over 
fifty  different  sources  and  have  never  failed  to  get  these  characteristic 
reactions.  These  tests  are  always  checked  when  possible  by  asco- 
spore  measurements  and  often  by  inoculation  on  live  trees.  No  doubt 
many  other  cultural  differences  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  would  show  additional  differences. 

In  culture  thc\  fungi  collected  at  various  points  in  Virginia, 
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  the  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.  ICarly  in  the  investigation,  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  Stat^  revealed  the 
same  condition  of  the  chestnut  timber  as  about  Connellsville.  As  re- 
ported on  a  previous  page  the  microscopic  and  cultliral  characters 
were  found  to  correspond,  so  that  there  is  no  doubt  as  to  the  identity 
of  the  two  fungi.  Specimens  were  also  sent,  by  Mr.  J.  K.  Esser, 
from  various  parts  of  Eastern  Tennessee,  and  these  were  found  to 
be  the  same  as  the  Connellsville  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  several  other  States. 

There  is  another  fungus  found  in  the  extreme  south — ^Florida, 
Alabama,  South  Carolina  and  Mississippi — which  is  very  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.  1956),  where  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  width  than  the  Gonnellsyille  fun- 


16 

gus.  They  are  cylindrical  in  shape  and  are  very  well  represented  in 
Ellis  and  Everhart's  North  American  Pvrenomvc^efcs.  Besides?  the 
exsicicati  we  have  also  received  specimens  of  this  fnn^is  from 
several  points  in  North  and  ^onth  Carolinia. 

TAXONOMIC  RELATIONS 

What  is  the  Connellsville  fnngus?  There  is  no  question  but 
that  it  is  very  closely  related  to  Diaporthe  parasitica  and  should  be 
placed  in  the  same  genus.  Following  Sacoardo*s  system  of  classifica- 
tion it  undoubtedly  falls  in  the  genus  Kudothia  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  syuonomy  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  definition  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 
Sc,hweinitz  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.  Gar.  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  Avails  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.  1269),  is  an  en- 
tirely  different  fungus  from  tlie  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  says,  "Ostioles  cylindrical,  very  black 
within,  orange  red  externally,  everywhere  elevated  on  the  surface, 
easily  falling  off — whence  the  exposed  surface  shows  black  points,  on 
account  of  the  black  shining  ducts  hy  which  the  ostioles  are  con- 
nected ^dth  the  perithccin"  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  descriptious  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,  "x\  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  8.  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  Schw(»initz,  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  184G.  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  'the  Characters  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,  then  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 


IS 

his  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)  without  any  explanation,  put  the 
two  in  the  same  genus,  and  in  the  same  year  we  find  them  combined 
by  Tulasne  (7)  under  the  genus  Melogramma.  Since  that  time  all 
authorities  without  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  would  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  Everhart.  According  to  our  present  system  of 
classification,  the  form  on  which  Fries  erected  the  genus  Endothi^ 
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, 
w«ould  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.  Virginiana  and  for  which  we  have  published  a  description.* 


•Phytopathology   2:261-262,    Dec.    1012. 


19 


LITERATURE  CITED. 


1.  1912  Farlow,  W.  G.  The  Fiingus  of  tbe  Chestnut-Tree  Blight. 
Sci.  N.  S.  35:  717-722.    May  10,  1912. 

2.  1846  Fries,  E.  Summa  vegetabilium  Scandinaviae  p.  386,  1846 

3.  1822  Schweinitz,  L.  D.  Synopsis  Fungorum  Carolineae,  p.  5, 
1822. 

4.  1831  Schweinitz,  L.  D.  Synopsis  Fungorum  in  America  Boreali 
media  degentiuni  p.  197,  1831. 

5.  1828  Fries,  E.  Elenchus  Fungorum  2:73.    1828. 

6.  1863  De  Notaris,  G,  Speriacei  Italici.    Cent.     I.    Pasc.  I,  p.  9, 
1863. 

7.  1863  Tulasne.    Selecta  Fung.    Carpologia.  Tome  11 :87.  1863. 


(20) 


Fig.  1.    Fans  or  mafs  of  mycelium  of  chestnut  blight  fungns  i: 
cambium  and  iauer  bark.    Plioto  by  E.  T.  Kirk. 


Fig.  2.  A.  Binglel  ascospore  of  the  Connellsville  fungus.  B. 
Siugle  aseoHpore  of  the  chestnut  Wight  fungus.  C.  Ascua  of  the 
ConDellsTille  fungus.     D.    Ascus  of  the  chestnut  blight  fungus. 


23 


T.T7T 


g  ^ 

5  ^ 

in 

tr 

a  2. 
3  ^ 

OB 

MS- 

si  5' 

30     ^ 

'     o 


tr 

O 

o 

d 

00 


c 
d 


-i  \t  ■ 


>      et«irt««VKttt 


Fig.  i.  Jiioculaiions  of  1  14  imlies  (ree  with  Cimnellsville  fun- 
gus, after  fire  months  fright) ;  inoculation  of  1  1-2  inches  tree  wi)b 
blight  fungus,  after  three  months  (left).  Both  outlined  with  paint  to 
show  extent  of  growth.    Photo  hy  E.  T.  Kirk. 


Fig.    5.    Hark  cut  away  from  inoi-nlatioii  with  tlie  Cohiiellsville 
fuDgUB,  sbowing  the  even  outline.    Photo  t>y  E.  T.  Kirk. 


Pig.  6.  Two  iDoculatious  with  the  Connellsville  fuagus  showing 
calluB  formed  around  each.  Trees  1  inch  and  1  l-2-inche8  in  diameter. 
Photo  l^  B.  T.  Kirk. 


PENNSYLVANIA  CHESTNUT  TREE 
BUGHT  COMMISSION 


1112  Moira  Building,  Philadelphia 

Bulletia  No.  S  MAY  IS,  lOlS 


The 


Symptoms  of  Chestnut  Tree  Blight 

and 

A  Brief  Description  of  the 

Blight  Fungus 


by 
F.  D.  Heald,  Pathologist 


1913 


Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight 

Commission 


MEMBERS  OF  COMMISSION 
Winthrop  Sargent,  Chairman       ... 
Harold  Peircc,  Stcretary         .... 
Samuel  T.  Bodine  .... 

George  F.  Craig         ..... 
Theodore  N.  Ely 


Biyn  Mawr 
Hayerford 

Villa  Nova 
Roaemoiit 

Brya  Mawr 


EXECUTIVE  STAFF 

Mark  Alfred  Carleton,  General  Manager 
Samuel  B.  Detwiler,  General  Superintendent 
Oliver  D.  Schock,  Aniitant  to  General  Superintendent 
Thomas  E.  Francis,  Field  Manager,  Western  District 
Joseph  R.  Wilson,  Field  Manager,  Eastern  District 
David  T.  McCampbell,  Chief  Clerk 


Inrin  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  Utilisation 

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. 

Sjrmptoms  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  t3rpe  (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  ftmgus  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 

8 


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  ftmgus  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 
simimer  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  moisturie 
and  will  be  retained  in  a  moist  atmosphere.  In  all  cases 
if  the  fungus  is  present  and  is  alive,  bright  yellow  or  orange. 


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  pronotmced  enlargement,  or  hypertrophy.  This 
enlargement  may  involve  the  entire  invaded  portion  (Figs. 
6,  7)  or  it  may  be  more  pronounced  at  the  upper  end  of  the 
lesion  (Fig.  6).  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 
sijse  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 

5 


branches  commonly  remain  hanging  upon  the  tree  during 
the  winter,  constituting  another  evident  S)rmptom  for  the 
detection  of  blight  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  blight  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  myceliimi  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  myceliimi  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  accxmiulation  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. 

8.  The  perithedal  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  ntunber  of  minute  raised  papillx  or  a 
number  of  minute  black  dots,  the  ostioles  or  openings  of  the 
perithecia  or  flask-like  bodies  buried  deq>  in  the  stroma 
(Figs.  16,  17). 

Each  perithecia!  pustule  is  a  dense  aggregate  of  ftmg- 
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  ntimbers  (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 
papillae  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 

0 


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  dissemination.  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  pusttdes  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  waa  made 
by  £.  T.  Kirk. 

PLATE  I 

Fig.  1.  Amoeboid  infection  on  two-year-old  shoot.  Bark 
has  been  removed  and  spread  out  flat 

Fig.  2.  Amoeboid  infection  on  three-year-old  shoot. 

PLATE  II 

Fig.  8.  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  tesion  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. 


IS 


Plate  XVI 


a> 


Fig.  26a 


Fig.  26b 


The  Commission  for  the  Investigation  and  Control  of  the 
Chestnut  Tree  Bught  Disease  in  Pennsylvania 


1112  MORRIS  BUILDING 
PHILADELPHIA 


THE  CHESTNUT  TREE 

METHODS  AND  SPECIFICATIONS 

FOR  THE 

UTILIZATION  OF  BLIGHTED  CHESTNUT 


BULLETIN  No.  6 
August  15,  1013 


Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight 

Commission. 


MEMBERS  OF  COMMISSION. 
WnmiROP  SABGairr.  Chairman Bryn  Mmwr 

RAMnijfc  PuBCBt  SeCTBiary ..IT^VHjfnwi 

SamublT.  BoDora^. ^YiUs  Norm 

ObobobF.  Cbaio RoMmont 

Thbodobb  N.  Elt ,. Brya  Mbwt 


EXBOUTIVE  STAFF. 

Mask  Altbbd  Cablbton,  Qeneral  Mmnacer. 
Samubl  B.  Dbtwilbr.  General  Superintendent. 
OurBB  D.  ScHOOK,  Aitabtant  to  Qeneral  Superintendent. 
Thomab  E.  Fbancib,  Field  Manacer,  Western  Distriot. 
Jmbfh  R.  WtLOON.  Field  Manacer.  Eastern  District. 
David  T.  MoCakpbbll.  Chief  Clerk. 


iRmr  C.  WiujAMS,  (Pennsylvania  State  Forestry  Department),  Collaborator. 


SCIENTIFIC  AND  OPERATIVE  STAFF. 

Fbbdbbicx  D.  Hbald,  Pathologist. 

A.  Q.  RnooLBS,  Entomologist. 

J.  P.  Wbmtlino,  Forester  in  charge  of  Utilisation. 

Paul  J.  Ahdbbson,  Field  Pathologist. 

F.  P.  QuLUVBB,  Geographer. 

Cabolotb  Rumbold,  Physiologist  in  charge  of  Tree  Medication. 

JoBBPH  Shbawdbb,  Chcmlst. 

Rot  O.  PiBBca,  Tree  Surgeon. 

HTpT-wjea  E.  RocKBT,  ForestCT  in  charge  of  Demonstration  Work. 


THE  CHESTNUT  TREE. 

The  genus  Castaneaf  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  denUxta),  Some  botanists  recognize  a  third 
species  in  the  United  States,  this  being  Castanea  alnifolia,  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. 

SoMB  UsBS  OP  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  bairels  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. 


Fnar-CiAflB  Polbs 

SBOOOID-CLiLflS  Pout 

Length 
of  Pole 

Top  Ciroumfeienoe 

Circumference 
6  Feet  from  BuU 

Lencth 
of  Pole 

Top  Circum- 
ference 

6  Feet  from  Butt 

25  feet 

30   " 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

60 

65 

70 

75 


U 

a 
a 
u 
a 
a 
u 
a 
a 


24  to 
24  to 
24  to 
24  to 
24  to 
24  to 
22  to 
22  to 
22  to 


25  inches 

25     « 

25 

25 

25 

25 

25 

25 

25 

22 

22 


a 

a. 

u 

a 

a 

a 
tt 
a 


33  to 
36  to 
40  to 
43  to 
47  to 
50  to 
53  to 
56  to 
59  to 


36  inches 

20  feet 

22  inches 

40     « 

25   « 

22     « 

43     « 

30   « 

22     « 

45     « 

35   « 

22     « 

48     " 

40   « 

22     « 

51      « 

45   " 

22     « 

54     « 

50   « 

22     « 

57     " 

55   « 

22     « 

60     « 

60   ' 

22     « 

63     " 

65   « 

22     « 

66     « 

70   " 

22     « 

31  to 

32  to 
34  to 
38  to 
43  to 
47  to 


30  inches 

33     " 

36     ' 

40 

43 

47 

50 

53 

56 

59 

62 


a 


tt 


a 


Some  electric  companies  make  two  more  dasses,  with  specifi- 
cations as  follows: 


Tbibi><;l&h  Polu 

Length 

Top 

Ciieomfeienee 

LenStb 

Top 

CiroamferaDoe 

ofPoia 

Circninterenee 

OFeetftamBatt 

of  Pole 

Ciiemnferenoe 

aPeetfromButt 

25  feet 

20  inches 

30  inches 

26  feet 

20  inches 

27  inches 

30   « 

20     « 

33     « 

30   " 

20     « 

31     « 

35   « 

20     " 

36     « 

35   " 

20     « 

36     « 

40   « 

20     « 

40     « 

40   « 

20     « 

39     « 

45   " 

20     " 

43     " 

45   « 

20     " 

43     « 

60   « 

20     « 

46     " 

60   " 

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  dass,  and  were  in  a  few  cases  disregarded 
so  that  the  figures  given  would,  compare  with  the  average  pole  sped- 
fications: 

Size  op  Pole  prom  Trbb. 


Diunettr  BceMt-bigh 
(D.  B.  H.) 

Length  of  Pole 

Diameter  at  Top 

6  Feet  from  Butt 

11  inches 

12  « 

13  " 

14  « 

15  « 

16  « 

17  « 

18  " 

19  « 

20  « 

25  feet 
30  « 
35  « 
35  « 
40  « 
40   " 
45   « 
45   « 
60   « 
50   « 

8    inches 

8       « 
8       " 
8i     « 
8i     « 
8i     « 
8i     « 
8i     « 
8i     « 
8i     « 

10|  inches 
Hi     « 
12i     « 
13i     « 
14J     « 
15i     « 
16i     « 
17i     « 
18       " 
19i     « 

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.    Bach  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.* 

QuAUTY  OP  Timber. 

Ties  must  be  cut  from  sound  timber,  which  is  free  from  imper- 
fections which  might  afifect  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. 


POIA 

Squabbd 

Sawed 

Hewed 

Sawed 

Hewed 

7  X  7'  X  sy 

7  X  7'  X  sy 

7  X  8'  X  Si' 

7  X  8'  X  8i' 

No.  2. 

POLB 

Squabbd 

B^wed 

Hewed 

Sawed 

Hewed 

6  X  7'  X  Si' 

6  X  7'  X  Si' 

7  X  7'  X  Si' 

7  X  7'  X  8i' 

No.  3. 

POLB 

Squabbd 

Sawed 

Hewed 

Sawed 

Hewed 

5  X  e''  X  Si' 

6  X  6"^  X  Si' 

6  X  6'  X  Si' 

6  X  6'  X  8i' 

•  Bulletin  118,  Forest  Serrice. 


Tat  VoLxncs  Tabls,  giving  Avbkags  NmcBSR  o9  Pols  Tibs  (8.5 
feet  long  by  7  by  9  inches)  m  Trsss  op  Difpbkbmt. 

Hbights  and  Diambtsrs. 


D.  B.  H.  IiicHM 


SO 


W 


TO 


80 


SO 


Ntmaas  or  Tna  ram  Taaa 


100 


10 
11 
12 
13 

14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 


0.7 

0.9 

1.1 

1.2 

1.1 

1.3 

1.5 

1.7 

1.7 

2.0 

2.3 

2.5 

2.3 

2.7 

3.1 

3.5 

2.9 

3.4 

3.9 

4.3 

3.4 

4.1 

4.7 

5.1 

3.5 

4.3 

5.0 

5.6 

3.7 

4.6 

5.4 

6.0 

3.8 

4.8 

5.7 

6.3 

3.9 

4.9 

5.8 

6.5 

4.1 

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 


Flam  BulUtin  10-B,  TennMsae  a«oloci04kl  Surrey. 


6 


TROLLEY  TIES. 

The  usual  sizes  of  trolley  ties  are  6  X  S"' X  8',  6  X  T"' 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: 

Tie  Volume  Table,  giving  Average  Number  of  Ties  (8  feet  long 

by  6  by  8  inches)  from  Trees  of  Different 

Heights  and  Diameters. 


Hbiqbt  IK  Fsn 

M 

w 

70 

80 

80 

DiAnami  BiBAsr-BiaB 

Vauna 

Tin 

:z\^ 

Top- 
wood 

TiM 

Top- 
wood 

Tie* 

wood!  **■ 

Top> 
wood 

Isehet 

10 

11 

12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 

No. 

1 
1 

2 
3 
3 
5 
6 

CnJt. 
9.0 

8.2 
7.6 
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 

CaJ^ 
10.3 

9.6 
9.0 
8.3 
7.8 
7.6 
7.2 
6.7 
5.9 
6.6 
5.1 
6.1 
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 

CaJt. 

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 

CoJt. 
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  inohes. 
From  U.  8.  Forest  Service,  Bulbtin  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  dimendons  and  prices  for  flat  ties  vary  conaderably. 
One  thousand  ties  weigh  about  20  tons,  and  100  will  nuke  a  good  load 
for  two  hcnrses.  From  1,000  to  2,000,  depending  upon  size,  may  be 
placed  in  a  box  car. 


The  usual  sizes  are: 


8  X  6'  X  6' 

5  X  5'  X  6' 

6  X  6'  X  6i' 
6  X  6'  X  6J' 
5  X  5'  X  5i' 
4  X  6'  X  5Y 
4  X  6'  X  5i' 

4  X  4'  X  5i' 
3  X  5'  X  5i' 

3  X  4'  X  6i' 

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.  Fcm*  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.  Axialyses  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  manufacture  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  to  the  dark-colored 
extract  made  from  Southern  chestnut. 

Spscipications  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. 

Chsstnut  Wood  for  Charcoal. 

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  ftunaces.  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  Fubl. 

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 


9 

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. 

Spsciai^  Taioff  on  Bughtbd  CHBSTNxrr  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  appUed  only  upon 
shipments  of  cordwood  entirely  within  the  state. 


11 


PENNSYLVANIA    RAILROAD    COMPANY 

NORTHERN  CKNTRAL  RAILWAY  COMPANY 

PHILAOKLPHIA.  ■ALTIMORK  4  WASHINOTON  RAILROAD  COMPANY 

WKST  JCRSKY  4  SCASHORK  RAILROAD  COMPAttY 


LOCAL  FREIGHT  TARIFF 
BLIGHTED  CHESTNUT  CORD  WOOD 

CARLOADS 

ALL  STATIONS  ON  PENNSYLVANIA  RAILROAD 


KXCKPT  aRADFORD,  CAI 


IN  STATE  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 


Qovermd,  exeopk  m  othorwiw  proviiM  harain,  by  th«  Official  Claattflcition,  L  C  C-O.  C  Na  38 
(F.  S.  Hotbrook,  Ao«nt),  supplomanti  thoroto  and  raittuot  thoraof ;  and  by  Exoaptiona  to  aaid  Clawlfieation, 
Q.  O.^I.  C  C  No.  3774^  auppiamanta  tharalo  and  raiaauaa  tharaof. 


TABLE  OF  RATES. 


Tha  followlffio  raiaa  will  ba  appliad  to  and  from  alationa  on  tha  Pannaylvania  Rallioad,  aa  pravidad  on 
thia  pao*b  for  movamant  wholly  witfiin  tha  Stata  of  Pannaylvania»  and  liati  of  atationa  and  milaaoaa  will  ba 
aaoartainad  l»y  rafaianca  to  Q.  O.^I.  C.  0.  No.  380O  (Q.  O.  No.  402),  auppiamanta  tharato  and  laiaauaa  tharaof. 


MILKS 

RATES 

1  to  70  in 

duaivt 

#...„...      . 

36( 
40 
46 
60 
66 
60 
66 
70 
76 
80 
86 
90 
96 
100 

lanti  pir  2QQU  oounda. 

71  to  80 

81to  90 

91  to  100 

101  to  110 
111  to  120 
121  to  130 
131  to  140 

•..^,>^..~....~^.~...^.......^,.._.».. 

141  to  160 
161  to  160 
161  to  170 
171  to  180 

181  to  190 
191  to  272 

.-^ 

YUl.  A-- 

ta*  L,...^ 

_-l    L-._    Ml  .  J    ...?aL    «.L.  .     ■.A-_l.- 

L.    ^%. 

-^    fS 

m 

.!..       . 

.»    1A    t-    ?_A.^J-J    &-    k-     ---ir-J 

ThIa  tariff  haa  not  been  fliad  with  tha  Interstate  Commaroa  Commission,  as  it  is  intended  to  ba  applied 
only  on  traffic  entirely  within  the  State  of  Pennsylvania,  and  the  ratea  contained  herein  must  not  ba  uaed 
to  or  from  any  junction  points  with  connecting  lines. 


ISSUCDJUNCI9,1912,BV     GEO.  D.  OGDEN, 

BMtrsI  Frsiikt  Afnt. 
nilsisiplila,  Pa. 


EFFCCTIVC  JUNC19, 1912 


[otsb] 


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  OP  PENNSYLVANIA. 


The  CoiiMissiON  for  the  Investigation  and  Control  op  the 
Chestnut  Tree  Bught  Disease  in  Pennsylvania. 

Certificate  oj  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-split,  split  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  Manufacturb. 

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  Resxti^t  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  day  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. 

Tabi^  Showing  Number  of  Hewed  and  Round  Posts  Obtainable 
From  Forest-Grown  Chestnut  Timber. 


Dluobteb 

Numbbb  op  7- 

Numbbb 

OP  Posts 

Total  Nuubbb 

BBBASr-BiaB 

f  OOT  V^UTS 

Split 

Round 

or  Fon. 

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 

NoTB.— 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  11,500  to  $1,750.  To  operate  such  a  mill  requires  seven  or  eight 
men,  only  three  of  which  na^  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  ptupose  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, 
i  inch  thick  at  the  butt  end,  16,  18  or  24  inches  in  length  They  are 
usually  sold  in  btmdles  containing  250  shingles.  Foiu:  btmdles,  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. 

DXJRABIUTY. 

No.  1  chestnut  shingles  on  a  roof  of  }  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  durabiUty  to  No.  1  white  pine  or  to  cedar  shingles. 

QUALHY  OF  TiMBBR. 

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  dear  of  defects. 


16 


TO  FIND  THE  VOLUME  OF  STANDING  TREES. 

A  "nile  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. 

VoLUMB  IN  Board  Pbbt  op  Chbstnut  by  the  Doyle-Scribnbr 

Rule,  Southern  Appalachian  Region. 


D.  B.  H.  Ikcbu 

HaiQBT  OF  TSBS  IN  FUT 

50 

60 

70 

80 

M 

100 

VoLum  DC  Board  Fbbt 

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.  FoTMt  Service.  BuUetin  36. 


The  Commission  for  the  Investigation  and  Control  of  the 
Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Disease  in  Pennsylvania 

1112  MORRIS  BUILDING 
PHILADELPHIA 


The  Morphology  and  Life  History 


OF  THE 


Chestnut  Blight  Fungus 


By  PAUL  J.  ANDERSON,  Field  Pathologist 


BULLETIN  No.  7 

DECEMBER,  1913 


HAKKISBUEG,  PA. : 

WM.  STANLEY  EAT,  STATE  PBINTBB 

1914 


Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight 

Commission 


MBMBBRS   or   COMMISSION. 

WINTHROP  BARGBNT.    Chairman Bryn  Mawr. 

HAROLD  PEIRCB.    Secretary Havcrford. 

SAMUEL  T.   BODINB Villa   Nova. 

GEORGB  P.  'CRAIG Rcwemont. 

THEODORE   N.   ELY < Biyn   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. 


IKVIN  C.  WILLIAMS.    (Pennsylvania  State  Forestry  Department).    Collaborator. 


SCIENTIFIC   AND   OPERATIVE   STAFF. 

FREDBRICK   D.   HBALD.    Pathologist. 

A.    G.   RUGGLES.    Entomologist. 

J.   P.  WENTLING,   Forester  in  charge  of  Utilization. 

PAUL  J.  ANDERSON.  Field  Patfaologiat 

F.   P.   GULLIVER,    Geographer. 

CAROLINE  RUMBOLD.    Physiologist  in   charge  of  Tree  Medication. 

JOSBPH  SHRAWDBR.  Chemist. 

ROY  G.   PIERCE.    Tree  Surgeon. 

KELLER  B.   BOOKS  Y.   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 

I                                      Development  of  pycnidia  on  young  canker .' 20 

Spore-horns 21 

I*                                       Pycnidia  in  older  stromnta 22 

Superficial    pycnidia 23 

STROMATA 24 


PBRITHECIA 25 

Primordia 25 

Degeration  of  the  ascogonium  and  growth  of  the  enveloping  hyphae...  28 

Beginning  of  the  differentiation 29 

i                                       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) 


The  Morphology  and  Life  History  of  the 
Chestnut  Blight  Fungus 


By  PAUL  J.  ANDERSON,   Field  Pathologut 

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  exlensi\e.  Eighty-five  of  the  piincipal  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,  Endothia 
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) 


6 


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  sliortly  after 
rain  periods.  If  one  of  these  "spore-horns"  is  put  in  water,  it  swells 
up  and  then  apparently  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. 

Oermination.  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.  Entirely  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  hindeis  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 


9 

pimple  at  one  end  which  rapidly  in-creases  in  length.  So  far  as  ob- 
served, the  tubes  are  always  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  39  and  40.  This  is  an 
average  growth  in  potato  agar  in  Van  Tieghem  cells  at  21-26  degrees 
C.  The  pycnospores  generally  pioduce  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  befoie  the  germ  tube  is  pushed 
out,  shT)w  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. 

Vitality,  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  stroma ta  and  (c)  from  superficial  pycnidia  on  bare 
wood  and  tested  for  germination  in  bark  decoction.  The  percentage 
of  spores  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  eflPect  on  their  vitality.  Heald  and 
Gardner  (93)  also  found  that  freezing  does  not  affect  the  vitality 
of  the  pycnosporea.  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  ^ere  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  aie  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  3  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  8.63  X  4.49  microns.  These  were  from  points  in  Pennsylvania. 
In  the  same  bulletin  seventy-five  measurements  of  a^cospores  made 
by  Bankin  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  longspored  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  MurrilFs  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, 
lain  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  ascospoies  was  25  per  cent  in  24  hours  aud 
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  hot  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  ascospoies.  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  approxi- 
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 
pi  ogress  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 


1^ 

from  20  to  50  microns.  The  apical  cells  have  very  dense  protoplasm, 
but,  further  hack  in  th6  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  diflPused  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  OoUeffe. 


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  mycelium.  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. 


• 

Month. 

• 

M 

a 
«t 
u 

s 

0 

Averagre   growth   per   month   in 
centlmetera. 

June,    1912,    

SI 

200 

186 

140 

68 

27 

27 

89 

89 

84 

21 

41 

1  88 

July,    1912 

2.78 

AueuBt,    1912 ; 

2  SS 

September,    1913,    

1.86 

October,    1912 

1.92 

Novcmlier,     1912 - 

o.nu 

December,    1912,     

t...-. 

•1.85 

January,    1913 

.M 

February.    1918 

0.0 

Ma  rcli ,    191 8.    

.7 

April,    191S 

1.1 

May.    1918,    

2.4 

*Donbtful  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  up  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  develojiment  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  on  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  ^ve 
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 
influence  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  oft*  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  thronf^h  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  cavity  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  pycnidia  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  coUenchyma  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 


ai 

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  i9 
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  f6und  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.  R.  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  comb-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  way 
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  off  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  pycnospores  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  Cytospora,  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  elected  by  Saccardo,  (Ann.  Myc.  4:73), 
based  on  the  imperfect  form  of  JEndothia  gyrosa.  Baccardo  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- 
rinthiform  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 
differing  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  ihe, 
more  moist,  shaded  situations,  they  are  long  pear-shaped  or  conical, 
as  shown  in  figure  12,  ot  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  (Pig.  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  coUenchyma  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,  Bnt  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  off  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.  Gross  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  the 
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. 
B\illy  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  efficiency  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 


•Lbidaa.   6.     "Uber  Anlagc  und  Entwlcklung  elnlger  Flechten  Apotheclen."     Flora,   1888. 


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  enveloi)e.  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 
p>rominent  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.  Keasoning  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  wflts  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  pseudoparenchymatous  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  vacu6lated.  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  other.  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  tliickness. 

Pathological  conditions.  Peculiar  pathological  conditions  of  the 
young  perithecium  are  numerous  at  this  as  well  as  previous  stages. 
The  delicate- walled  coie  cells  bieak  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  tine  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  layeri^  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 
a^o  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  very  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  difficult  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  aie  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  seen 
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 
ftgnres  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  ^e  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  46 — 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  paraphyaes  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,  the  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  sunlijjbt,  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  perithecium.  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.  As 
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  youngs 
{)iid  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  ascus 
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  itheciuni  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  lower  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 
tlie  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  simultaneously.  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  pushing  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,  however,  is  the  swelling  of  the  asci  them- 
selves when  they  become  moist.  Figure  34  represents  an  ascus  which 
has  been  kept  in  water  for  several  hours.  When  it  is  dry,  the  ascus 
wall  is  drawn  so  tightly  u])  around  the  spores  that  it  can  hardly 
bo  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, 
would  easily  drive  the  asci  up  the  neck  to  the  surface.  Prepared 
sections  of  perithecia  which  were  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- 
sj^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. 

4.  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  pycnospores  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. 

11.  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 
tj'pe  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  coUenchyma  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  OP  THE  CHESTNUT  TREE  BLIGHT. 


1. 


2. 


3. 


4. 


5. 


6. 


7. 


8. 


9. 


10. 


11. 


12. 


13. 


14. 


15. 


ir>. 


17. 


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. 
06  Murrill,  W.  A.    A  serious  chestnut  disease.    Jour.  N.  Y. 

Bot.  Garden  7:  143-153.    June  1906. 
06  Murrill,  W.  A.     Further  remarks  on  a  serious  chestnut 

disease.     Jour.   N.   Y.   Bot   Garden    7:203-211.     Sept. 

1906. 
06  Murrill,  W.  A.    A  new  chestnut  disease.    Torreya  6:186-189 

Sept  1906. 

06  Taylor,  W.  A.    Article  on  chestnut.    Cyc.  of  Am.  Hort.  by 

L.  H.  Bailey  and  W.  Miller  2:294-297.    1906. 

07  Rehm,  H.     Ascomycetes  exs.  Fasc.  39,  No.   1710.     Ann. 

Myc.  5:210.    1907. 

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. 
08  Metcalf,  Haven.    Diseases  of  ornamental  trees.    U.  S.  Dept. 

Agr.    Yearbook   1907:48990.    1908. 
08  Murrill,  W.  A.    The  spread  of  the  chestnut  disease.    Jour. 

N.  Y.  Bot.  Garden    9:23-30.    Feb.  1908. 
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. 
08  Fullerton,  H.  B.      Fatal  Chestnut  Disease — Long  Island 

Agronomist  1:24.     June  1908. 
08  Clinton,  G.  P.    Chestnut  bark  disease,  Diaporthe  paraMtica 

Murr.     Conn.  Agri.  Exp.  Sta.  Rep't.     1907-8:345-6.    May 

1908. 
08  Sterling,  E.  A.    Are   we   to   lose   our    chestnut   forests? 

Country  Life  in  America  15:44-5.     1908. 
08  Murrill,  W.  A.    The  chestnut  canker.     Torreya,  8:111-12. 

May  1908. 
08  Hodson,  E.  R.     Extent  and  importance  of  the  chestnut 

bark  disease.     U.  S.  Dept.  Agri.  For.  Ser.  Circ.     Oct 

1908. 

08  Murrill,  W.  A.    Collectins:  funsri  at  Biltmore  .    Jour.  N.  Y. 

Bot  Garden    9:135-41.     1908. 

09  Murrill,  W.  A.    Number  of  trees  destroyed  by  the  chestnut 

canker.     Mycologia    1:36.     Jan.  1909. 


88 

18.  '09  Morris,  Bobt.  T.    Chestnut  timber  going  to  waste.    Ck>n- 

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,  Q.  P.    Chestnut  bark  disease,  Diaporthe  paraMtica, 

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.  8.  Dep't  Agri. 
Bur.  Plant  Ind.  Bui.  141,  pt.  5:45-54.     Aug.  1909. 

22.  '09  Hohnel,  F.  von.     Fiagmente  zur  Mykologie.      Sitz.   Eais. 

Akad.  d.  Wiss.  Wem  118,  pt.  1:1479-^1.    2s-ov.  1909. 

23.  '10  Bane,  F.  W.     The  chestnut  bark  disease    Mass.  St  For. 

Bep'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,  Bob't  S.     Chestnut  blight     Penna.   Dep't  For. 

Bep'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.    Bep't  of  Bot  in  23rd 

Ann.  Beport  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  B.  Accademia  dei  Lin- 
cei,  Bendiconte  classi  di  Science,  20:366-72.  ser.  5.1.  sem. 
Mar.  1911. 

35.  '11  Bane,  F.  W.    The  chestnut  bark  disease.     Mass.  St.  For. 

Bui.   :1.7.     1911. 


39 

36.  '11  Clinton,  O.  P.    Chestnut  bark  disease.    Conn.  Agri.  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  Met  calf,  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.  e.  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 

66.  '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. 

66.  '12  Chestnut  tree  blight.    Letter  from  the  Secretary  of  Agri- 

culture to  the  U.  S.  Senate.    Document  653.    1912. 

67.  '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. 

68.  '12  Shear,  C.  L.    The  chestnut  bark  fungus,  Diaporthe  para- 

aitica,  Murr.     Phytopathology  2:88-89.     April  1912. 

69.  '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,  AprU  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  Sd. 

35:717-722.     Mav  1912. 

68.  '12  Fulton,  H.  R.     Chestnut  bark  disease.    The  Penna.  State 

Farmer  5:151155.     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  Schook,    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  Craiirhead,  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 
2:20410.    Oct.  1912. 

82.  '12  Anderson,  Paul  J.  and  H.  W.    Endothia  virginiana.    Phyto- 

pathology  2:261-2.    Dec.  1912. 

83.  '12  Clinton,  G.  P.     The  relationships  of  the  chestnut  blight 

fungus.     Sci.  36:907-14.     Dec.  1912. 

84.  '12  Clinton,  Q.  P.    The  chestnut  blight  fungus  and  its  allies. 

Phytopathology   2:265-9.     Dec.  1912  . 
86.    '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  Adams  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  Rep't.    19111912:359-453.    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  Tiee  Blight  Comm  Bui.  3:1-42. 
Oct.  1913. 
96.-  '13  Heald,  F.  D.  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  D.    The  blight  in  Pennsylvania.    American 

Forestry  19:962-966.     Dec.  1913. 


NOTE.— Many  titles  were  added   to  original  proof  slioetB. 


43 


EXPLANATION  OF  PLATES* 


Fig. 

4. 

Fig. 

5. 

Fig. 

6. 

Fig. 

7. 

Fig. 

8. 

Fig. 

9. 

Fig. 

10. 

Fig. 

11. 

Fig. 

12. 

Fig. 

13. 

Fig. 

14. 

Fig. 

15, 

PLATE  I. 

Figs.  1,  2.        Initial  stages  in  the  development  of  the  pyenidium, 

x230. 
Fig.    3.  Cross  section  of  a  pyenidium  on  agar  before  the  begin- 

ning of  the  cavity,    x  400. 

Same  as  figure  3  but  a  little  older,    x  430. 

Beginning  of  the  cavity  in  the  pyenidium.    x  430. 

Section  of  pycnidial  wall  showing  conidiophores. 
X  430. 

Conidiophores.    x  800. 

Mycelium  from  agar,    x  800. 

Section  of  a  ray  from  the  fans  in  the  bark,    x  430. 

Section  of  a  stroma  showing  the  rind  layer,    x  600. 

Diagrammatic  drawing  of  a  stroma  showing  the  rela- 
tion to  the  cork  layer  and  of  the  organs  to  each 
other.     X  25. 

Superficial  pycnidia.    x  14. 

Section  of  a  germinating  pycnospore.    x  700. 

The  resting  pycnospore.    x  3500. 

PLATE  il. 

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  diiTerentiation.    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. 


•All   drawings  made   with   the  aid  of  cainora   lucida   except   11   and   12. 


44 
Fig.  37.  Mature  ascospores.    x  900. 

PLATn.IV. 

Fig.  38.  Outline  drawings  of  germinating  pycnospores, 

PTATES  V  AND  VI. 


Fig.  39. 
Fig.  40. 

Germination  of  pycnospores. 
Germination  of  pycnospores. 

PLATES  VII  AND  VIII. 

Fig.  41. 
Fig.  42. 

Germination  of  ascospores. 
Germination  of  ascospores. 

PLATE  IX. 

Fig.  43. 
Fig.  44. 

Canker  showing  atrophy. 
Canker  showing  stromata. 

PLATE  X. 

Fig.  45. 
Fig.  46. 

The  blister  stage. 

Stromata  showing  papillae,  indicating  the  peri 
stage. 

PLATE  XI. 

theci 

Fig.  47. 
Fig.  48. 

Spore  horns  on  smooth  bark. 

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  pycnidium  on  agar  showing 

early  stage  in  the  formation  of  the  cavity. 


PLATE  I. 
Development  of  Pycnidiu 


J 


PLATE  II. 
DcTelopment  of  Perithecium. 


PLATE  III. 

Dev^liipmeut  of  Perithccii 


Iiiiiliml 

PLATE   IV. 

Germinating  pycnnspon  k 


5P0R£ 


Z/f.rf 


9:Z0Jin 


/0:9o^jf. 


PLATE  V. 
Germination  of  pycnospores. 


PLATE  VI. 
GenuinntiuD  of  pycnospores. 


Rfcfinf  spoie 


10 


PM      ^TITam   ^yTTfn    (/fpi^      o^xpf^   ^xvf ' 


PM 


PLATE  VII. 
Germination  of  ascospores, 


r  SfMC9  -  3  l/A 


PLATE  VIII. 

Germination  of  ascospores. 


PLATE  IS.  PLATE  IX. 

Fig.  43.— Canker  showing  atropby.  Fig.  44— Canker  showing  s 


PLATE  X. 
—Blister  stage  of  canker. 


PLATE  X. 

— StromatH  ahowins  papillae,  indicating  paritbecial  stage. 


PLATE  XI. 
FIk.  47.— Bpore-honu  on  mootb  bark. 


PIRATE  XI. 
— Sporeboms  Ji 


I 


PIATE  xir. 
Fig.  IS. — Outlined  canker,  indicatJDg  montbl;  growth. 


PLATE  XIII. 
— Mfi^lial  fans  under  the  chestnut  baifc. 


p:,ate  XIV. 

Fig.  51.— Petri  dlsb  culture  of  pTCuldia. 


^ 


\ 


1 


PLATE  XV, 
Fig,   53.— Pbotomicrograph  of  pycnoaporeB. 


PLATE  XV. 

Fig.   63. —Vertical  sectioD   of  a   perithecium. 


PLATE -XTI. 

— Photnmicrogmph  of  pycnidiu 


PLATE  XVI. 
—Stroma  coutaiDing  labfriothiforvi  pycnidiiim. 


PLATE  XVir. 
.  56.^Vorticn1  soction  ot  stroma  sbuwing  empty  pcrithecia  and  blnck  oecks. 


PLATE  XVII. 
Fig.  37 .— Pycnidiuin  on  agar  Bhowing  enrly  stage  in  the  formation  of  the  cavity. 


^ 


>■ 

Id 

*  «> 

§ 

X 

v: 

* 

^ 

^ 

^ 

V 

-- 

'  S 

■^ 

g 

§^ 

'  1 

1 

' 

o 

< 

'i 

, 

S! 

N 

> 

1 

*  « 

1 

(C 

!_ 

"  &> 

< 

1 

z   ^ 

z 

^ 

z 

" 

-  J  S_J 

-^  '^I     i  ^ 

\  ^'  - 

o 

■J 1     > 

I     3t 

Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania 


FINAL   REPORT 


OF  THE 


Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree 
Blight  Commission 


JANUARY  1  TO  DECEMBER  15,  1913 


1112  Morris  Building,  1421  Chestnut  Street, 
PHILADELPHIA,  PA. 


HARRISBURG,  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.  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) 


(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  blight,  45 

Seattle,  Prof.  R.  Kent;  Bibliography  of  the  chestnut  bark  disease,  05-121 

Bibliography  of  the  chestnut  bark  disease,  95-121 

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 

Garleton,  Mark  A.,  General  Manager,  Pennsylvania  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,  01 

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,  08 

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,  87 

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.     Reports  of  observations  on  sanita- 
tion cutting  of  blighted  chestnut  areas,  03 

Discovery  of  chestnut  bark  disease  in  China,  28 

Eastern  Pennsylvania  blight  conditions,    07 

Eradicating  the  chestnut  blight ;  estimated  cost  of  operations,  78 

Field  work  of  scouts  and  valuable  results  obtained,  30 

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  obaeryations,  

Gnlliyer,  Dr.  F .  P . ,  Geographer ;  Report  of  geographic  work,  62 

Harmless  saprophyte  in  Western  Pennsylvania,  38 

Heald,  Dr.  F.  D.,  Pathologist;  Investigations  of  tree  diseases,  40 

Regulations  for  chestnut  nursery  inspections,   03 

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;  ta;bular  statement, 72 

Insects ;  beneficial  by  destroying  spores  of  blight,  28 

Insects  as  carriers  of  the  chestnut  blight  spores,  4S 

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,  Si 

Local  field  work;  how  conducted  in  generally  infected  districts,  40 

Main  Line  Citizens'  Association ;  valuable  services  rendered  by,  10 

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,  60 

Production  of  blight  spores,   41 

Publications  relating  to  the  chestnut  blight,  list  of,  95 

Publicity  work ;  valuable  assistance  rendered  by  newspapers,  69 

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,  62 

Resistant  and  immume  chestnut  stocks ;  search  for,  32 

Rockey ,  Keller  E . ;  Report  of  public  demonstration  work,  SI 

Rumbold,  Dr.  Caroline;  Experiments  in  chestnut  tree  medication,  48 

Ruggles,  Prof.  A.  G. ;  Report  of  results  of  special  insect  investigations, 44 

Sargent,  Winthrop,  Secretary  of  Commission ;  final  official  report  of,  9 

Schock,  Oliver  D.,  Assistant  Superintendent;  valuable  co-operative  work  of 

the  press  acknowledged,  00 

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  blight  disease,  21 

Topton  Mountain,  Berks  county;  study  of  blight  conditions,  


Page. 

Treatment  of  infected  timber  and  disposal  of  lumber,   38 

Treatment  of  infected  cbeatnat  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,   09 

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 


(6> 


Official  Letter 

to 

Hon.  John  K.  Tener 

Governor  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania 


(7) 


(8) 


Scoutinc  for  the  cbestnut  tree  blight. 


LETTER  OP  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, 

HarrxBburg,  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  City.  Here  again  the  disease  could  have 
been  chocked  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.  80. 

(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.  It  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  blight,  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  which  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. 

Thirds — 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  delaying  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  instatu  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,  an4  winter  scouting  established  as  a  practical  method. 
These  methods  developed  by  the  Commission  are  now  in  active  use 
in  tlie  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  aU  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- 
paign 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- 


IS 

■ 

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!  Tet  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, 

Ohairman. 


(U) 


Report  of 

Hon.  I.  C.  Williams 

Deputy  Commissioner  of  Forestry,  CoUaborator 


(U) 


(M) 


.   .  ..    mark  of  tbp  blight.     Small  leiivps  whicb  developed   in  the  early  sprinc 

a  top  r»:piitly  girdled  by  tho  blicht,  showing  midaummer  cimdition .    Witberea 

leaves  nbove  the  cnnker;  eproiits  below. 


A  HISTOKY  OF  THE  EAELY  PENNSYLVANIA 
EFFOKT  TO  COMBAT  THE  CHESTNUT 

BAEK  DISEASE. 


BY  HON.   I.   C.  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  jyen  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  Castanea,  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  with  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  r^on,  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  county  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 
time  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture  had  reported  the 


19 

existence  of  two  spot  infections  in  the  western  portion  of  the  State, 
near  Altoona,  and  a  re-examination  of  the  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  Stisquehanna  River,  who  can  tell 
what  the  result  might  have  been,  looked  at  in  the  light  of  our  present 
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-page 
pami^let  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  Department  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  Cdstanea  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.  Mickleborongh,  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  ^ble  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.  Rothrock,  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  op  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  pvop- 
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 
$2,707.70. 

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,  Edgar  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, 
"Harrisburg,  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 
Jersey,  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  by  the  Department  of  Agriculture  at  Wash- 
ington demonstrate  that  it  is  possible  to  prevent  the  spread  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  view, 
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  effected,  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. 


23 

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  try  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  agency  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. 


9W.   A.  Mnnill:   Journal  of  the  New  York  Botanical  Garden,   Vol.  9,    No.   98,   p.  80.    Febraary. 
1908. 
*Harrisbnrg  Conference  Report,  1912,  pp.  194,  201,  202. 


(M) 


Report  of 

Mark  A.  Carleton 

General  Manager  Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree 
Blight  Commission 


(25) 


(26) 


THE  FIGHT  TO  SAVE  THE  CHESTNUT  TREES; 
FINAL  REPORT  OF  THE  GENERAL  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  much  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  the  main,  favor- 
able.    Of  course,  improvements  have  been  made  as  to  details  all 

r27) 


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.  IS,  1912. 


n  of  a  cbrataut  tree  with  n  blight-girdle  top. 


29 

introduction  of  such  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  weU  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  county.  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 was  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  worthless  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  FARMS. 

In  co-operation  with  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 


SI 

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  given  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. 

BLTGHT-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. 

CORDWOOD  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  l?e  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 


S3 

the  Carnegie  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. 

Beport  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  Belated  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  Commission. 

The  authorities  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania  have  been  ex- 
ceedingly courteous  in  granting  ample  space  for  laboratory  work 


84 

in  the  new  Zoology  Building.  Boom  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   TMPOBTANT   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,  this  work  lias  already  been  finished,  as  stated  in  footnote  on  page  46. 


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 
given  to  timber  owners  who  may  wish  to  clear  their  woods  of  blight 
on  their  own  responsibility.  A  statement  in  detail  of  the  effective- 
ness 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. 
However,  the  unusually  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 
avferage  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 
ter,  when  they  can  spare  the  time  from  their  farming  operations. 


86 


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 comer  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  Mifilin  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: 


III 
HI 

in 

|li 

a-=3 


2    I 


87 


STATEMENT  OF  CHESTNUT  BLIGHT  INFECTION  IN  THE 

WESTERN   DISTRICT. 


County. 


Allegheny,  . . . 
Armstrong.    . . . 

Bedford,     

Bradford,     — 

Blair 

Beaver 

Bntler,    

Cameron 

Centre,     

Clinton.      

Clearfield,     — 

Clarion,     

Cambria,     

Crawford,     . . . . 

Elk 

Erie,    

Payette,    

Fulton.     

Forest,    

Greene 

Huntingdon,  . 
Indiana,        .... 

Jefferson 

Lycoming,    — 

LAwrence 

Mifflin,     

McKean,     

Mercer,    

Potter,    

Somerset 

Sullivan,     

Tioga 

Venango 

Westmoreland, 
Washington,  . 
Warren,    


147 

91 

226 


2 
90 


233 
1 


259 


96 


1 

92 
22 
12 


4,027 
1,048 
1,884 


877 


I 


11 

1,902 


5,287 
1 


5,015 

"i,'m 


1 

9.110 

207 

43 


16 


2,787 

82d 

1,680 


142 

2.556  1 

1,763 

169 

3,481 

2,704 

9 

117 

117 

1, 

11 

1 

9' 

450  1 

450 

877 


11 
900 


4.771 
1 


4,486 
'ii468 


1 

8,086 

207 

43 


16 


Total, 


1.600 


OT,510 


80,706 


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  f  EndothAa 
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- 
ance were  received  than  could  be  given  individual  attention.  For 
the  guidance  of  owners  who  wished  to  clean  their  woods  of  blight, 
cither  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 


moved  from  the  tract  withm  a  reasonable  period.  Where  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  may  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  ski^lded  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.  TJnpeeled  stumps,  even  if  free  from  blight  at 
the  time  the  tree  is  felled,  are  very  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  suflSiciently. 

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  PIELD   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: 


MM 


GERMINATION  OP  SPORES. 

Pycnospores  of  the  blight  fungus^  sometimeiB  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  pycnospores 
is  greater  in  the  "spore  horn"  stage  tlian  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  ASOOSPORES. 

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  (moth) 
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,  (Lepfostylus  maculata),  which  has  been 
mentioned  as  a  possible  beneficial  agent  on  account  of  its  pustule- 
eating  habits. 

OTHER  DISEASES  OF  THE  OHBSTNUT. 

There  is  another  "canker  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  diehack  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. 


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  sufficient  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  wiater,  though  the 
growth  is  much  more  rapid  in  the  summer  montlis. 

Inoculations  have  been  made  both  with  ascospores  and  with 
pycQOspores  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  do  evidence  that  the 
blight  fungus  wUl  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  tn  regard  to 
each  nursery  inspection: — date,  name  and  location  of  nursery,  num- 
ber of  trees  inB]>ected,  number  of  trees  rejected,  fungicides  nsed  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. ;  B.  L.  Cummings  &  Co., 
Dewart,  Pa.,  and  Marietta  Nursery,  Marietta,  Pa. 

In  the  faU  of  1912,  6,538  trees  were  inspected.  Of  these  81  were 
rejected,  and  the  remainder  6,457,  distributed.  Id  the  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  tJie  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  flasks  ot  sterile  water  and  washed 


teriai  snowea  in  many  instances  tne  presence  oi  Diignt  spores  on  tne 
bodies  of  the  ants.  In  the  same  wav  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  TREES  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  werie  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  ch^stnutt    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  ^gs  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  aboye,  Prof.  Riuglei  has  produced  the  mature  Insect  in  breeding  experiments 
and  has  thus  completed  oar  knowleqipe  of  its  Ufa  history,  and  tUi<!|a  %h%  insect  to  ha  a  ipectea 
new  to  science. 


F 


r 


to  experiment  witn  ants  in  tne  greennouse.  two  rooms  were  set 
off  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  was  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,  (Formica  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  worked  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°C,  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  also  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. 


TEEE  MEDICATION. 


The  experiments  in  tree  medication,  in  charge  of  Dr.  Caroline 
Rumbold,  have  been  for  some  time  conducted  in  a  large  diestnut 
orchard  located  near  Martic  Forge,  Lancaster  County.  The  follow- 
ing is  a  brief  statement  of  recent  work: 


taioed  about  &fty  trees  varying  in  age  from  seedlings  to  eighteen 
years  old.  This  year  two  new  plots  were  added  to  the  three  of 
1912.  Some  tree  sargery  work  was  done,  and  the  trees  sprayed 
with  lime-snlphur. 

OBSERVATIONS  OF  THE  WORK  OP  1912. 

Last  year  fifty-fonr  trees  were  injected;  15  with  salts  of  the 
heavier  metals;  5  with  formaldehyde;  12  with  stains;  22  with  alka- 
lies, and  the  remainder  with  water.  An  attempt  was  made  to  inject 
two  trees  with  canker  extract,  bat  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, 
Rinc,  bariam),  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  formalddiyde,  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 
nre  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  * 
count  the  number  oi  inoculations  that  took,  and  in  a  onmbe'' 
cases  these  cuts  have  formed  callus. 

INJECTIONS  IN  1913. 
The  past  spring,  69  trees  have  been  treated — 21  witf- 
with  alkalies,  18  with  acids,  17  with  benxenes,  on' 
alcohol,  and  two  with  methylene  blue,  while  five  f 
The  method  of  injection  used  this  y^r  is  the  sair 


60 


EFFECTS  OP  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  due  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  bichromate 
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. 


TEEE  SURGEEY. 


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,  Berths 


1 


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  principles  of  forestry 
have  been  recommended,  namely,  requiring  the  removal  of  trees  that 
were  becoming  badly  diseased,  thus  giving  place  ta  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  work  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. 


62 


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  WOEK. 


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 


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  Vall^,  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  hare  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. 


u 


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.  Unt41  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,  naturally,  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  done  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. 


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  tlie  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 owners,  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. 

(6) — 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  diflSculty  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  waiting  list  to  use  wood-cutters  who  had  been  imported 
through  our  efforts. 


66 


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  \chestn\it 
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. 


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. 

CO-OPERATION  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. 


DEMONSTRATION  WORK. 


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  aU 
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. 


i 


CO-OPERATION  OF  THE  PRESS. 


In  connection  with  the  vast  amount  of  active  labor  performed 
in  field  work,  pathological  research  work,  chemical  and  insect  investi- 
gations, etc.,  in  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,  Pennsylvania'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  170,000,000,  of  which 
enormous  amount  Eastern  Pennsylvania  timber  owners  suffered  the 

ft/' 

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  that  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. 


60 

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  equally  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  Pennaylvania  Chestnut 
Tree  Blight  Commission 


(«) 


(O) 


OBSEKVATIONS    ON    SANITATION    CUTTING    IN 
CONTKOLLING  THE  CHESTNUT  BLIGHT 

IN  PENNSYLVANIA. 


By  SAMUEL  B.  DETWILBR, 

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  diflScult,  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 
c  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,  ^91i. 

(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,  althoogji  tiie 
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  sdons 
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  comer  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  60  square 
miles  of  land  which  varied  widely  as  to  elevation  and  geological 
formation.     Spot  infections  of  blight  were  accurately  located  on 


•% 


[ 


r 


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- 


land  which  varied  widely  as  to  elevation  and  geological 
n.     Spot  infections  of  blight  were  accurately  located  on 


66 

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  per  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  varying  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  fires  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  general  distribution  of  the  blight  throughout  this  region. 

Every  tract  of  chestnut  timber  showing  the  presence  of  blight, 
when  carefully  examined,  shows  that  the  disease  appears  in  spots. 
By  careful  observation,  the  source  of  infection  for  the  entire  spot 
can  be  traced  to  one  or  more  badly  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 
rankers  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.  In  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  Ridge,  (lying  north  of  the  Mahoning  Val- 
ley, and  not  included  in  the  area  studied),  were  also  worked  over, 
(Fig.  2.)  This  ridge  is  higher  than  any  other  within  the  limits  of  area 
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  resistant  to  bli2:ht  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  blamed  for  the  local  dis- 
tribution of  the  blight  around  an  infection  center.     This  distribu- 


68 

tion  is  very  uniform,  which  presnmably  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-yeap  cicadas  during 
their  invasion  of  1911.  Many  new  infections  nre  at  and  near  the 
bases  of  young  sprouts,  and  tJiere  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  likely  U  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  ^e  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  which  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  the  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. 


ts5  9^ 


4-  ^i,   lO^ 


•1 

n 

3 


•I 
"*     »   OB 


01 
•1 

P 


•a 

O   M» 

H 

P  o 
orq  S 

o 

O  0 

rt  p 
O  ro 

3.P 

»— • 

r  *^ 

►1 

p 
o« 

c 

09 

o 
»1 

5 
o 
"^ 

rt 


rt 

ra 
rt 

o 

rt 


OQ 


i  S 


T 

CO        ^-^ 


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  deternalne  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  tlie 
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  are 
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  unifomdy  distributed 
than  on  the  north.  It  is  probably  true  that  the  advance  infections 
came  from  the  south  and  crossed  the  mountain  northward,  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,  S8  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 


tbe  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  snrgery  withoat  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  eicamined  in  tiie  winter  of 
191112,  194  infected  trees  were  found,  (2  per  cent,  infection),  103  of 
which  were  so  badly  diseased  that  they  were  cut  ont  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  600  per  cent. 

INFECTION  CENTERS  ON  THE  ADVANCE  LINE. 

In  applying  sanitation  measures  for  the  control  of  the  Might,  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  Bontbeastem  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  th^  occur  on  the  western  ad- 
vance line  of  tbe  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  an  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  tbe  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, 


73 


TABLE  I. 
DETAILS  OP   INFECTION  AT  ORBISONIA,  PA. 


Origin  of  tree. 


Coppice, 
8<*edlinf(, 


Slope. 


Gentle  to  medium  steep, 

Gentle  to  steep 

Gentle 

Steep 

Very  steep,    

Medium   steep 


Aspect, 


Location, 


Moistnre, 


North 

Northenst,     

Northwest ,      

North   to  northwest. 
North  to  northeast, 


Lower   slope, 
Middle  slope, 


Along  road,   

Near  road 

Away  from  road. 


Dry 

Damp 

Dry  to  damp.  . 
Medium  dry.  .. 
Medium  damp. 
Windy,   dry,    .. 


Density  of  forest, 


Dense, 

Mod  I  urn    dense. 
Rather  open,    . 


Infection  on  benches, 


Orientation  of  lesions. 


North 

East 

South 

West,     .... 
Northenst, 
Sou  t  Ilea  St, 
Northwest, 
Southwest, 


Number. 


U6 
8» 


6 

24 

6 

n 

0 

a. 


106 

16 

41 

7 

8 


i&a 


76 
28 
71 


S7 

IS 

20 

8 


72 

97 

6 


84 

» 
14 
81 
28 
10 
9 
6 


.  1 


73 

The  most  important  practical  point  in  the  study  of  spot  infec- 
tionSy  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). 


PROCEDURE     IN    ERADICATING     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.    Rapidity  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  30,  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  tliorough  tree  to  tree 
examinations  of  from  2  to  6  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  exi)eri- 
ence  and  capability  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,  tliree  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. 


:'iiutiiig  fur  Ihr  blieht  i 


76 

Such  scouting^  however,  cannot  entirely  take  the  place  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  conspicu- 
ous throughout  the  winter  and  early  spring,  and  where  cankers 
have  not  yet  girdled  the  parts,  the  increased  light  makes  them 
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- 
erly the  diseased  trees  on  a  tract.    Much  time  was  consumed  also 
in  very  detailed  inspection  of  the  trefBS  around  a  blight  center,  so 


76 

that  apparently  healthy  trees  would  Bot  be  cut,  since  the  law  pro- 
vided that  healthy  trees  ordered  to  be  cut,  must  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  tin- 
peeled  logs,  stfips  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  trunt  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. 


o 

o 

H 

o 

<^ 

f 

o 

o 

® 

0 

o 

k 

^° 

o 

S 

o 

eg 

o 

0       o 

c      ^ 

• 

• 

• 

c 

• 

• 

• 

o 

o 

® 

o 

# 

• 

o 

0 

o 

o 

•o 

o 

o 

o 

^ 

o 

9% 

c 

) 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

0 

o 

■ 

o 

^m^ 

o 

o  o 
o 

o 

o 

^  Original  infected  tree,  cut  and  burned   December,   1911. 
#    Secondary  infected  trees,  cut  and  burned  December,   1911 
0    Secondary   infected   trees,    December,    1912. 

O   Secondary  infected   trees,   August,    1913. 

O   Healthy  trees,  6  to  12  inches  in  diameter. 

Scale — 


■   ■ 


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. 


•  • 


After  the  tree  is  felled,  all  portions  above  the  stump 
mycelium  or  pustules  of  the  blight  must  be  peeled  of 
entire  piece  cut  out.     This  diseased  material,  the  bru 
tops,  the  bark,  and  portions  of  the  felled  chestnut  tree 
not  peeled  and  which  it  is  not  intended  to  utilize  mus 
After  the  stump  is  peeled,  if  fire  can  be  made  ovei 
injuring  the  surrounding  trees,  and  without  danger  of 
the  brush  and  refuse  is  best  piled  over  the  stump  and 
fire  must  entirely  consume  or  deeply  char  all  of  the  i 
uncharred  ends  of  branches  and  small  twigs  can  be  al 
main  without  grave  chances  of  reinfection.     If  it  is  ii 
make  the  fire  over  the  stump   without  injuring  the 
trees,  the  sides  and  top  of  the  stump  and  exposed  roo 
thoroughly  coated  with  creosote. 

Portions  of  infected  trees  which  show  no  evidence  o 
should  not  be  permitted  to  lie  unpeeled  in  the  woods 
days,  but  may  be  safely  handled  and  shipped  with  the 
shipped  as  soon  as  cut.    If  the  logs  from  the  diseased  t 
removed  from  the  woods  within  twenty  days  from  the  ti 
are  felled,  they  should  be  peeled  and  the  bark  burned, 
entire  trees  burned.    Wood  from  diseased  trees  to  be 
exposed  to  the  weather  must  be  peeled,  or  the  fruiting 
almost  sure  to  appear  on  the  dead  bark  and  become  a  f 
fection.     Fire  wood,  if  kept  under  dry  cover,  need  no 
One  of  the  most  important  time  saving  items  is  to  pe 
portion  of  the  tree  before  felling,  and  it  is  still  more  i 
cut  the  stumps  as  low  as  possible.     Bark  remaining  h 
tresses  and  deep  crevices  of  stumps  can  be  removed  i 
by  chipping  down  from  a  position  directly  over  the 
which  is  not  possible  in  the  case  of  high  stumps.     A 
large  coal-burner's  basket  included  among  the  tools  us 
ing,  are  very  useful  in  cleaning  the  chips  from  the  gron 
starting  the  fire,  all  the  leaves  and  debris  for  a  consi 
tance  around  the  place  where  the  material  is  to  be  bu 
be  raked  into  a  pile  on  which  the  fire  is  started.     Th 
small  particles  of  wood  are  raked  together  as  soon  as  1 
piled,  instead  of  waiting  until  all  the  tops  are  burne 
way,  no  large  quantity  of  leaves  and  fine  rakings  are  le 
end  to  smoulder  for  a  great  length  of  time  before  burnin 
'^  increase  the  danger  of  forest  fire. 

rV  All  possible  care  should  be  taken  to  prevent  injury  to  i 

chestnut  trees  and  sprouts  in  felling  the  infected  treei 
tion  has  shown  that  nearby  trees  are  too  frequently  inju 
carelessness,  and  the  wounds  are  very  apt  to  be  a  poini 


,-:ii.' 


78 

tion.  Experience  has  also  shown  that  unbarked  stamps  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  ca^e  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. 


r.v'd,   KIk  CouQtr,   Pii.    This  tree  w 
to  the  time  the  picture  was  taken. 


s  t|  Jit  Hi!  U       \  ,,/,  J 
i?ii-h!i!i!li;?"l'!    M'' 

6  «s  "f^so.-iir.  i'f ',,,']]i 


i.  iV 


.ll  7  i!:i; 


iil  il 


,,!,r"i 


ii:i;r"!ii|if;ii 

;|,  M'!-. ■i;f^.!lll^.■ 
V•''!^{;l,',;.l! 


il-'f' 


^'.I'lyij    ___ii 


*.  °  '■■■'  *».*'   °°'^  ''i't ' 


TABLE  II. 
RESULTS  OF  CREOSOTING  PEELED  STUMPS. 


Namber. 


• 

a 

• 

i 

g 

2 

• 

1 

g 

s 

2 

t 

& 

V 

& 

S* 

5 

1 

1 

g 

1 

eight 
feet) 

5 

2 

"S 

ja'" 

o 

•o 

1 

erage 
prouta 

1 

o 

1 

a 

a 

a 

9) 

B 

>  ■ 

0 

o 

SS 

-< 

z 

»4 

P 

a 
B 

m 

li, 

04 


I 

2 

8 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

18 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

a 

22 

28 

24 

25 

26 

27 

Arerage, 


14 
8 
8 
6 
4 
4 
5 
3 

12 
7 
4 
3 
1 
6 
2 
5 
2 
6 
2 
4 
4 
6 

10 
8 
1 
3 
ft 


0.086 
of  Bproats 

0.148 
of  stnmps 


Base 


Yet 
Yea 


Base 


Yea 


Yea 


Baae 
Baae 


Yea 
Yea 


Yea 


No  pycnidia  were  found  on  wood  of  peeled  stumps 
ing,  except  in  one  case,  where  a  large  area  of  inner 
to  the  stump  at  time  of  creosoting,  and  later  raised 
untreated  wood  surface.    The  inner  side  of  this  bar 
osoted  ^rea  of  wood  were  covered  with  pycnidia. 
on  thick  bark  at  the  base  of  stumps  or  on  an  exf 
appear  to  hinder  the  growth  of  the  fungus.     F 
can  be  peeled  but  a  very  short  distance  below  f 
winter,  it  is  believed  that  creosoted  stumps  « 
infected  sprouts  after  a  few  years  than  bur- 
ger point  is  at  the  ground  line,  and  exposecf 
at  the  collar  between  roots  are  especially 
bark  that  are  missed  in  peeling.    If  this 
brings  the  disease  very  close  to  the  you 
around  the  stumps,  and  sooner  or  later 


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. 


Namber. 


1 

^5 

0 

4 

1 

§ 

g 

M 

► 

1 

« 

J 

1 

V 

XI 

«4 

« 

o 

M 

o 

Int   of 
proato 

SB 

d  ■ 

>,   >  w 

9  ■ 

£" 

JS  « 

Z, 

< 

S5 

c 

a 
o 


1. 

2. 
3. 
4. 
5, 
6, 
7. 
8. 
9. 
10. 

11, 
12. 
13. 
14. 
15. 
16. 

n. 

18. 
J9. 
20. 

21. 

•>') 
*-  I 

23, 

ZA, 

26, 

26. 
27. 
28, 
29, 


Average, 


4 

8 

2 

4 

6 

7 

S 

2 

5 

0 

S 

4 

1 

4 

4 

8 

4 

4 

4 

1 

3 
2 

4 

2 
S 
0 
2 
6 
6 

S.5 


3 

6 

2 

4 

6 

4 

3 

4 

4 

0 

4 

S 

1 

8 

7 

6 

4 

4 

5 

6 

5 

3 

4 

2 

5 

0 

4 

4 

6 


4.6 


0 
8 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
0 
0 

» 

0 
0 

1 

0 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 

1 

2 


•0.078 
10.17 


Baae 
Base 


Tea 
Tea 


Tea 


Base 


Tea 


Base 
Base 


Tea 


Tea 


Tea 

Tea 


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  ^ective  where  the 
peeling  and  creosoting  are  well  done,  burning  is  safer,  although 
more  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 


=i 


si 


S3 

ii 

Si 


ox 


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, 
8uch  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  OP  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  cost  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 


up  and  burniDf;  were  very  carefully  done  at  a  cost  of  16.3  eeats 
per  clump.  Scouting,  creosoting,  and  loss  of  titnfe  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;  20  clumps  per  acre  or  14  per  cent,  were  dis- 
eased. The  cost  of  thorough  sanitation  thus  amounted  to  f5.89  per 
acre.  The  average  daily  wage  was  $2.10,  including  the  cost  of 
board  and  supervision. 

EFFICIENCY  OP  THE  CUTTING-OUT  METHOD  OF  OONTBOL. 

To  determine  the  eflQciency  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  OP  CHESTNUT  BLIGHT. 


! 

CounlT. 

Is 

•i 

Ii 
1- 

1 

Ji 

Ii 

i 

1 
! 

i 

B..lr^.. 

«■  a: 
£■  ii 

;:!•:■    a: 

11 

Feb.;          SU.'l 

ii    ii 

Pi^b..    13H 

in 

m 

10 

8 

nog. 

Tlog. 

Tlog" 

jis '  iiii"  ■■'■■■ 

i"::  Is":  ::::::: 

1 S::  S: ;::;;:: 
S    ,  ti;  !S  :::;::; 

»        1   .1....    WW 

^^ 

"« ■■ 

Huntingdon 

n 

' 

'» 

'■" 

• 

' 

Lm«]  or   creosoted.   uid   nTotA  burned. 

ighlr   peeled  or  bnmed. 

a  poorlj  peeled  la  whb*  cmm. 


'■MJ)  pJiHjni  JO  nqniiiN 


I  :i  i  i  I  :^  :il  !gi§i  lis  lis  isis  :S  Is 


lllll|'liPllllllllll||lli'!=| 


:^- 


^iy. 


•■jhg 


84 


i 


• 

('iipi«i> 

■  S 

0 

ja^nod       CDOjj        DODOdj 

-ni    jwqvinj    jo    aDav)B|a 

«9« 

• 

MCM 

QM       .       . 

•M 

-aopddj 

SSS^S  : 

O 

O 

•u|  )B8pio  )0  aJffv  aiqvqojd 

TirHf^rHfM     •     • 

'sinoJds  pa^Mjai  q){M 

MA^OA 

• 

■doings  pd)«dj)  )o  jaqinnM 

-M 

"   * 

■^ 

jd 

n 

ti 

'saaj)  pe|Ddja{  jo  jaqomM 

<e  AooM^ 

e< 

•f7 

^^^^ 

' 

PQ 

•    ■    • 

-M 

■ 

d 

§ 

a 

-M 

o 

* 

a 

SSass 

o 

H^ 

•  •iT ^*  * 

o 

■s 
I 

&  0)  O'  0.  & 

P 

o 

febQbh 

•43 

0) 

'v^noJda  pa)Dajai  q)iM 

rlOfM^O 

s 

1 

waiuiiis  paiBau)  jo  jaqmiiM 

<M 

1 

a 

1  US 

» 

hH 

OAf4MA 

eq 

1 

-M 

o 

■ 

p^ 

•       ■        • 

QQ 

'S 

• 

o 

8 

• 

0 

•2 

03 

s 

0 

> 

0. 

■♦*' 

0   S 

a 

1 

•    •    •  •    ■ 

A    3 

CO 

0 

i    'J 

O 

acS  «  as 

!•:  •-  di 

bo 

a 

'paAouidJ 

^»9«S^ 

M 

«e 

2 

0 

Baaaj  pa^odjaT   jo  jaqiun^i 

•     •     • 

g^g 

O 

''k'- 

P 

a 

i     111 

•fH 

0 

5Ss 

■^ 

•V 

ij 

2  ■ 

QQ 

it 

=5- 

^ 

m* 

•♦- 

a>     -o 

2 

a 

••- 

.• 

gVcsT 

•a       • 
oL  «  «< 

O 

P 

•  rH 

£ 
Eh 

a  OB  to 

P 

a  a  o 

BO  g 

5 

a 

0 

o 

P 

o 

o 

•pa 
5 

2 

ft 

*     • 

5« 

a 
I 

2 

> 
•< 

!    Hi 

Mt      «<     ^ 

CQPQUPQffl 

S^<9 

'jaqmnn    |jbjx 

s 

>£^ 

>ss< 

Sig 

f 


TK-noijai  lupio  JO  »av 

§ 

isliiil 

n 

^ 

•dinnia  miiaj)  )a  jjqmnn 

"•  i  |-"= 

3 

(Mil  P«t»)n|  JO  JiiqniiiH 

"S  ;  laa-a 

s 

1 

1 

1 

■E 

lini 

tdntDia  pal  M]  Hi  JO  j^iqniOK 

soeeeees 

• 

«dJ1   [«i»,u,   ,o  JSiiniON 

-gsssts-a 

i 

>  00 

11 

CO 

■^ 

in 

O 

•JiJI   p^»)n|   JO  JsqmiiK 

««a§SSII 

i 

O 

5 

Q 

1 

1 

L:         J 

: 

i 

1 

iiiiii 

1 

-laqmnD   jsuj. 

- 

1 

I  s 


lis 


86 


NOTES  OF  RE-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  peeled  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  the  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 


Henltby  sprouts  growing  around  b  burned  a 


men  have  much  better  scouting  ability  than  others,  and  in  some  of 
the  spots  examined,  at  least,  this  factor  alone  is  sufficient  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  well  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  within  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  eflfeetive  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  April,  1912,  by  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  tlie  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  inamediately 


4 


surrounding  the  infected  trees.  These  stumps  were  located  as  fol- 
lows: One  stump  3  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  stumi>s  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  peeled  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  OP  BLIGHTED 

TREES  CUT  AT  HUMMELSTOWN,  PA. 

PEELED  STUMPS. 


Stamp  Number. 


5 


u 


4> 

Xi 

a 


Infected    Sprouts. 

If 

•** 

t 

1 

• 

§ 

1 

a 

0 

S 

o 

«4 

•2 

^« 

a 

t;3 

■3 

J** 

>  it 

d 

"5^ 

p 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

«.     

8 

9.     

10 

Average, 


42 

5 

11 

28 

0 

0 

86 

4 

7 

20 

4 

1 

11 

0 

8 

12 

2 

0 

60 

0 

2 

10 

0 

2 

15 

1 

8 

28 

0 

0 

26.1 

1.2 

2.9 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 

1 

0 


0.1 


UNPEELED  STUMPS. 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8,      

9 

10 

Average, 


15 

24 

30 

10 

2 

46 

54 

55 

23 

40 

3 

29.9 

.8 

2.1 

0 

1 
1 
1 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 


The  investigation  at  Hummelstown  shows  that  there  is  little 
OP  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. 


> 


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  efScient  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. 


EEGULATING   SHIPMENTS   OF  CHESTNUT  NUE- 

SEEY  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 

and  as  occasion  may  arise,  such  other  and  farther  regulations,  and 
the  altering  or  amending  of  the  same,  as  it  may  seem  necessary. 

Regulation  No.  1.  Railroad  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  anfl  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  official  inspection  tag  of  the  Commission  bears  the  official 
seal  of  the  Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Bli^t  Commission,  and 
reads  as  follows: 

COMMONWEALTH  OP  PENNSYLVANIA 


The  Commission  for  the  Investigation  and  Control  of  the  Chestnut 

Tree  Blight  Disease  in  Pennsylvania. 

CERTIFICATE  OP  INSPECTION 

This  i8  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  chestuut  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: 


iiig  t»r  thp  bligbt  i 


COMMONWEALTH  OP  PENNSYLVANIA 


The  Commission  Fop  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- 
tachedy  under  my  supervision,  was  carefully  examined,  and  at  the 
time  of  shipment  was  found  to  be  apparentiy  free  from  any  infection 
by  blight  caused  by  the  fungus  Diaporthe  parasitica. 

Dated 191 at Pa. 

Inspector. 

B^n^l^tion  No.  2.  No  chestnut  tree  nursery  stock  shall  be  re- 
moved from  any  nursery  or  other  place  where  the  same  may  be  grow- 
ingy  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  conmion  carrier  for 
shipment 

Kegulation  No.  3.  All  chestnut  tree  nursery  stock  intended  for 
sak  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,  negligentiy  or  willfully 
fail  to  refuse  to  be  governed  thereby,  wiU,  without  further  notice, 
subject  their  chestnut  stock  and  shipments  to  quarantine,  which 
will  be  maintained  by  this  Commission. 

All  corresi>ondence  relative  to  nursery  inspection  should  be  ad- 
dressed to  Dr.  P.  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  oDportnnity  to 
render  most  valuable  services,  but  for  reasons  stated  in  the  letter  at 
the  beginning  of  tiiis  report.    While  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  eflScient  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 
eflfect  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  otLer 
species  of  trees,  such  trees  shall  be  deemed  to  come  within  the  pur- 
view of  this  act." 


•See  P.  L.  1913,   p.  S13. 


Bibliography 
of  the 

Chestnut  Bark  Disease 

By  R.  KENT  BEATTIE,  FOREST  PATHOLOGIST, 
U.S.  Department  of  Agriculture. 


(95) 


(96) 


A    BIBLIOGEAPHY    OP    THE    CHESTNUT    BABK 

DISEASE.* 


Prepared  for  the  Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Commission. 


By  B.  KENT  BEATTIE,  Foreti  Pathologiat, 

BDliEAU  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  the  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  gyroaa  as  well  as 
those  to  Endothia  parasitica  have  been  included  in  this  bibliography. 

1.  Anderson,  H.  W.    l!^otes  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. 
6.    Anderson,  Paul  J.  and  Anderson,  H.  W.    Endothia  mrginiana. 
Phytopathology.    Vol.  2,  p.  261-262.    December,  1912. 


*Pnbli8h(H!L  by  permlsalon  of  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture. 

(97) 


98 

6.  Anderson,  P.  J.  and  Anderson,  H.  W.     The  Chestnut  Blight 

Fungus     and     a     Related     Saprophyte.     Peunsylvania 
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 

26.    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  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,  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,  igi2. 

39.  Anonymous.    Conference  on  the  Chestnut  Tree  Blight.  Ameri- 

can Lumberman.    No.  1919.    p.  73-75.    2¥  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.  18,  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    Disuse. 

Hardwood  Record.    Vol.  34,  p.  23.    10  September,  1912. 

59.  Anonymous.    News  Note.     Science.    Jt  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 

61.  Anonymous.     Treatment  of  Ornamental  Chestnut  Trees  Af- 

fected with  the  Blight  Disease.     Pennsylvania  Chestnut 
Tree  Blight  Commission.    Bulletin  2.    October,  1912. 

62.  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.    Jaiiuary,  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.   6,  p.   90. 

March,  1913. 

73.  Anonymous.    Use  of  Second  Growth  Chestnut.    Lumber  World 

Review.    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 

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.     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. 


102 

80.  Anonymous,     Pennsylvania's    Figjht    Afi;ainst    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  Livomese.     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. 
Ola.  Berlese,  A.  N.,  Saccardo,  P.  A.,  and  Roumebuere,  C.    Contribu- 
tions   ad     Floram     Mycologicam     Lusitaniae.       Revue 
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. 
98.     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[irkinbiiie],  J.     Editorial.     Forest  Leaves.    Vol.  13,  p.  49. 

August,  1911. 

96.  B[ipkinbine],  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.  146. 

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,  Qiacomo.    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  dell'  Inchiostro). 
Atti  della  Reale  Accademia  dei  Lincei.  Series  V.  Bendi- 
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 
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  parasitica 

Murrill.  Connecticut  Agricultural  Experiment  Station 
Report  1907.    p.  345-346.    May,  1908. 


104 

110.  Clinton,  G.  P.    The  Chestnut  Bark  Disease,  Diaporthe  paraH- 

tica  Murrill.    Connecticut  Agricultural  Experiment  Sta- 
tion Report  1908.    p.  879-890.    July,  1909. 

111.  Clinton,  G.'  P.    Chestnut  Bark  Disease.    Connecticut  Agricul- 

tural Experiment  Station  Report  1909-1910.     p.  716-717, 
725.     1910. 

112.  Clinton,  G.  P.    Some  Facts  and  Theories  Concerning  Chestnut 

Blight.     Pennsylvania   Chestnut  Blight  Conference  Re- 
port,   p.  75-83.    1912. 

113.  Clinton,  G.  P.    Chestnut  Blight  Fungus  and  Its  AUies.  Phyto- 

pathology.   Vol.  2,  p.  265-269.    December,  1912. 

114.  Clinton,  G.  P.     The  Relationships    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 Report,    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  Forestiy  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  (I.  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.  DetwUer,  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 Report  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  Gteneral  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  V  ^tude    des  maladies  du 

chataignier.  Association  Francaise  pour  TAvancement 
des  Sciences.  Coraptes  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 Report,    p.  103-104.    1912. 

156.  Francis,  Thomas  E.  Field  Work  of  the  Chestnut  Tree  Blight 
Commission.  Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Blight  Conference 
Report,     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.  FuUerton,  Hal  B.  and  FuUerton,  Edith  Loring.    Fatal  Chest- 

nut Disease.     Long  Island  Agronomist.     Vol.  1,  No.  24, 
p.  1-2.    17  June,  1908. 

160.  FuUerton,   Hal   B.   and   FuUerton,   Edith   Loring.     Doomed 

Chestnut  Trees.    Long  Island  Agronomist    Vol.  2,  No.  1, 
p.  7-8.    29  July,  1908. 

161.  FuUerton,  Hal  B.  and  FuUerton,  Edith  Loring.      Japanese, 

Spanish  and  native  Chestnuts.    Long  Island  Agronomist. 
Vol.  2,  No.  9,  p.  2.    18  November,  1908. 

162.  FuUerton,   Hal   B.   and  FuUerton,   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  in  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.  GaskUl,  Alfred.    Report  of  the  Forester.    The  Chestnut  Blight. 

Third  Annual  Report  Forest  Park  Reservation  Commis- 
sion pf  N^w  Jersey,    p.  45-46.     1907. 


108 

167.  Gaskill,  Alfred.    Report  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.  OaskUl,  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  Jersqr. 
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.    Bulletin  137.    March, 
1912. 

174.  Gravatt,   Flippo.     The  Chestnut  Bark   Disease  in  Virginia. 

The  Southern  Planter.     Vol.  7,  No.  3,  p.  295.     Macrch, 
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  Microscopical  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  Fungus.  Pennsylvania  Chest- 
nut Tree  Blight  Commission.  Bulletin  No.  5.  15  May,  1913. 

183.  Heald,  F.  B.     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  cJiestnut  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-TJnis  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  Stances  de  la  Soci^t^  de  Sciences  de 
Nancy.    3  Ser.  X.    p.  7282.    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, 


110 

193.  Hdhnely  Fr.  v.     Pragmente  zur  Mycologie.     Sitzungsberichte 

der  Kaiserlichen  Akademie  der  Wissenschaften.  Mathe- 
matisch-Naturwissenschaftliche  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 
Raleigh,  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  Report,     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.  Homor,  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  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.  Endothia,  in  Engler  und  Prantl.    Die  Natuerlidien 

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.  Hanson,  Marsden.    Chestnut  Tree  Disease*    American  Fores- 

try.   Vol.  18.    p.  286.    April,  1912. 


Ill 

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.  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  Qisease  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.  8.    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. 
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  Report  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,  con  ten  ant  aussi  indication  precise 
des  localit^s  de  quelques  esp^ces  les  plus  rares  de  la  Flore 
francaise.  Annales  des  Sciences  Naturelles.  2  6er.  Tome 
i,  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.    Report  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.    OlBce  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. 


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'  inf^rieurs  trouv^s  jusqu'{\  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  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  flsiche, 
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.    Castanea  dentata  (Marsh)  Borkh.    Report 

State  Botanist  New  York.  Museum  Bulletin  No,  131,  p. 
29.    1  July,  1909. 


lU 

253.  Peck,  C.  H.    Valaonectria  parasitica  (Murrill)  Bdim.    R^>ort 

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  delF 

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 

dell'  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. 


IIS 

263a.  Pettis,  C.  K.  Chestnut  Bark  Disease.  Second  Annual  Iteport 
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.  4648.    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. 


116 

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  Work  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.  Untersuchungen  zu  einer  Morphologie  der  stroma- 

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. 


11? 

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    gallicL    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.  Schaefifer,  Nathan  C.     Autumn  Arbor  Day.     Forest  Leaves. 

Vol.  13,  p.  162.    October,  1912. 

300.  Schock,  OUver  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  fflr 

Bakteriologie,  Parasitenkunde  und  Infektionskrankheiten. 
II  Abt  Bd.  35,  p.  546.    1912. 

308.  Shear,  C.  L.    Endothia   radicals      (Schw.).    Phytopathology. 

Vol.  3,  p.  61.    February,  1913. 
308a.  Shear,  C.  L.     The  type  of  Sphaei-ia  radicaUa  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 (EndotMa  parasitica)  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  Annual  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,  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?    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  Report,  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-tliird  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.  Stndhalter,  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  Pl^ytopathological  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- 

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  Chest- 
nut Blight  Conference.  Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Blighl 
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.  Thom,  De  Courcy  W.    More  About  the  Blight.    Conservation. 

Vol.  15,  p.  112.    February,  1909. 
332a.  Thome,  Charles  E.     Chestnut  Bark  Disease.     Thirty-second 

Annual   Report  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. 


120 

333.  Traverse,  J.  B.    Flora  Ttalica  Cryptogamia.    Para,  1.    Fungi. 

Pyrenomyceta.    p.  180-182.     15  ottobre,  1906. 
333a.  Tulasne,  Ludovicus-Renatus  et  Tulasne,  Carolua,    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 

zwlschen  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,  T.  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,  1913.    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.  WUson,  James.    Chestnut  Tree  Blight.    Letter  from  the  Sec- 

retary of  Agi'iculture  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    ICryptogamen — 

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. 


THK  CHKSTNUT  TltKK  Dr.IfJUT 


The  Cominission  for  the  Investigation  and  Control  o^  the 
Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Disease  in  Pennsylvania 

1112  MORRIS  BUILDING 
PHILADELPmA 


Bibliography  of  the  Chestnut 
Tree  Blight  Fungus 


^  » 


By  R.  KENT  BEATTIE;  Foiest  Pathologist 
U.  S.  Department  of  Agricultare 


HAKRT8BDRO,  PA.: 

WM.  STANLEY  BAY,  STATE  PRINTER 

19U 


.  '   '  ■ 


I   I 

*   • 


t  '. 


Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Tree  Blight 

Commission 


MEMBERS  OF  COMMISSION. 

Winthrop  Sargent,   Chairman,    Bryn  Mawr . 

Harold   Peirce,    Secretary,    Haverford . 

Samuel  T.   Bodine,    Villa  Noya. 

George  F.   Craig,   Roaemont. 

Theodore  N.  Ely,   Bryn  Mawr. 


EXECUTIVE  STAFF. 

Mark  Alfred  Carleton,  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,  EJastem  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  Surgeoii. 

Keller  E.  Rockey,  Forester  ii^  charge  of  Demonstration  Work. 

(1) 


Ill 


POEEWORD. 


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  efficient  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.  R.  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. 


(8> 


(4) 


BibUography 
of  the 

Chestnut  Bark  Disease 

By   R.    KENT  BEATTIE,   Forest  Patholoffiat, 
U.    S.   Department  of  Agriculture. 


(«) 


Till-:  CHESTNUT  Ttti:H  Itl.IOHT. 


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,  191k. 


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 
1913,  with  the  aim  of  making  a  good  working  bibliography  of  the 
disease.  Hince  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  Endothda  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.  4245.    1913. 

3.  Anderson,  Paul    J.      Wind    Dissemination    of    the    Chestnut 

Blight  Organism.    Phytopathology.    Vol.  3,  p.  6&.    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. 

*Pttbllslied  by  permission  of  the  oqc^^^^  ^^  Agriculture. 

(97) 


8 

5.  Anderson,  Paul  eT.  and  Andeison,  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    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  Boad- 

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,  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. 


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 Eorestiy  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  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,  1912. 

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. 

(90) 


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- 

bei  man.    Vol.  65,  No.  862,  p.  27.    30  March,  1912. 

45.  Anon}^mous.     Foi'estry  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,  J).  541.    Augirst,  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.  3(),  p.  512.    18  October,  1912. 
60a.  Anonymous.      The   Chestnut    Blight    Disease.      Pennsylvania 

Chestnut  Tree  Blight  Commission.    Bulletin  1.  October, 
1912. 

(100) 


11 

61.  Anonymous.     Treatment  of  Ornamental  Chestnut  Trees  Af- 

fected with  the  Blight  Disease.  Pennsylvania  Chestnut 
Tree  Blight  Commission.    Bulletin  2.    October,  1912. 

62.  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  (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  Second  Growth  Chestnut.    Lumber  World 

Review.    Vol.  24,  No.  5,  p.  24.    10  Mar^h,  1913. 

74.  Anonymous.     Chestnut  Tree  Blight.     American    Lumberman. 

No.  1974,  p.  58-59.    15  March,  1913. 

75.  Anonymous.     A    Remedy    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   I^ni- 

versity.  Bulletin  of  Popular  Information.  No.  47.  26 
June,  1913. 

78.  Anonymous.    ITsing  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, 19^3, 

(101) 


12 

80.  Anonymousr    Pennsylvania's    Fight    Against    the    Chestnut 

Blight  is  Suspended.    American  Forestry.    Voll.  19,  p. 
556-558.    A)igU8t,  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  flight    The  SL 

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.      Bulletino 

della  Societa  Botanico  Italiano.  Anno  1904,  p.  204.  Mag- 
giore,  1904. 

90.  Benson,  W.  M.     Chestnut  Blight  and  Its  Possible  Remedy. 

Pennsylvania  Gfcestnut  Blight  Conference  Report     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  Roumebuere,  C.    Contribu- 
tions   ad    Floram    Mycologicam    Lusitaniae.      Revue 
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. 

96.  B[irkinbine],  J.    Editorial.     Forest  Leaves.    Vol.  13,  p.  113. 

April,  1912. 

97.  B[iikinbine],  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,  191 1. 

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  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.    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    Mycologique    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  Notaiis.     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. 

(103) 


14 

1 10.  Clinton,  G.  P.    The  Chestnut  Bark  Disease,  Diaporthe  parasi- 

tica Murrill.    Connecticut  Agricultural  Experiment  Sta- 
tion Report  1908.    p.  879-890.    July,  1909. 

111.  Clinton,  G.  I^.     Chestnut  Bark  Disease.    Connecticut  Agricul- 

tural Experiment  Station  Report  1909-1910.    p.  716-717, 
725.    1910. 

112.  Clinton,  G.  P.     Some  Facts  and  Theories  Concerning  Chestnut 

Blight.     Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Blight  Conference  Re- 
port,    p.  75-83.     1912. 

113.  Clinton,  G.  P.     Chestnut  Blight  Fungus  and  Its  Allies.  Phyto- 

pathology.   Vol.  2,  p.  265-209.    December,  1912. 

114.  Clinton,  G.   P.     The  Relationships  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.    I*ennsylvania  Chestnut  Blight  Confer- 
ence Report,    p.  154-157.    1912. 

117.  Collins,  el.  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  Re- 
port,    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 

(104) 


15 

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.     Rphaerki     (Dintrype)     radicalis    Fr.    in 

Synopsis    of    the    Fructification    of    the    Compound 
Sphaeriae  of  the  Hookerian  Herbarium,    The  Transac- 
tions 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  Eeport.     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  Countj'  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  CJoan- 

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 Report  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.     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. 

1  i*.  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  Circu- 
lar.   No  date. 

145.  Detwiler,  S.  B.  and  Besley,  F.  W.    The  Pennsylvania  Chestnut 

Blight  Conference.    1912. 

146.  Duromet,   M.    V.     Conliil.iviion   a    Y   6tnde   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. 

(106) 


17 

154.  Fisher,  A.  K.  [No- title].    Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Blight  Con- 

ference Report,     p.  103-104.     1912. 

155.  Francis,  Thomas  E.     Field  Work  of  the  Chestnut  Tree  Blight 

Commission.  Pennsylvania  Chestnut  Blight  Conference 
Report,    p.  233-235.    1912. 

156.  Flies,  Elia.     Eclogae  Fungorum.    Linnaea.  Bd.  5,  p.  541.  1830. 

157.  FiieSjElia.    Elenchus  Fungorum.    Vol.  2,  p.  73.     1828. 

157a.  FrieSjElia.     Endothia.      Summa   Vegetabilium  ^candinaviaa 

Vol.  2,  p.  385.    1849. 

158.  Frothingham,  Earl  H.     Second-Growth    Hardwoods    in    Con- 

necticut.   IJniled  States  Departuient  of  Agiiculture  For- 
est Service.    Bulletin  96.    p.  44,  56.    1912. 
158a.  Fuckel.     Endothia   Lyrosum    (Tul.)      Symbolae   Mycologicae. 

p.  226.     1869. 

159.  FuUerton,  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    FuUerton,   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.  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  in  soil.  Abstracts  of  papers  to  be  given 
at  the  fifth  annual  meeting  of  the  American  Phyto- 
pathological  Society  in  the  State  Capitol,  Atlanta,  Qa., 
December  30,  1913,  to  January  2,  1914.  p.  14.  16  De- 
cember, 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. 

2 

(107) 


18    . 

167.     Gaskill,  Alfred.     Report  of  the  Forester.    The  Chestnut  Blight 

or  Canker.  Fourth  Annual  Report  Forest  Park  Res- 
ervation Commission  of  New  Jersey,  p.  33.    1908. 

1(18.     Gaskill,   Alfred.  Chestnut   Canker.     Fifth    Annual   Report   of 

the  Forest  l*ark  Reservation  Commissicm  of  New  Jer- 
sey,   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  Reserva- 
tion 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.       Bulletin     137. 
March,  1912. 
171.     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  Rei>ort  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,  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  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.  I).     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  IJardner,  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.  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  Stances  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. 


20 

192.  Hodson,  E.  R.     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  Akaderaie  der  Wissenschaften.  Mathe- 
matisch-Naturwissenschaftliche  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* 
Raleigh,  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.     No\'ember,  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  Report,    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  PL 

Oypt,  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  Natuerlicheo 

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.     Chestnut  Tree  Disease.     American  Fores- 

try.   Vol.  18.    p.  286,  April,  1912. 

207.  Manson,  Marsden.     The  Chestnut  Tree  Diseiase.    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  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 
vL,  p.  34.     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  Febru- 
aiv,  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. 

(lU) 


22 

222.  Metcalf,  Haven  and  Collins,  J.  Franklin.     The  Present  Statnsi 

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- 

senation.    Vol.  14,  p.  585-588.     November,  1908. 

228.  Mickleborough,  John.     A  Report  on  the  Chestnut  Tree  Blight, 

the  fungus  Diaporthe  pardsitica  Murrill.  Pennsylvania 
Department  of  Forestry,  unnumbered  bulletin.  May, 
1909. 

229.  Millard,  Bailey.     The  Passing  of  the  Chestnut  Tree.   Miinsey's 

Magazine.     Vol.  43,  p.  758-765.     September,  1910. 

230.  Montague,  C.     Notice  sur  les  Plantes  Cryptogames  recemment 

decouvertes  en  France,  contenant  aussi  Tindication  pre- 
cise des  localities  de  quelques  especes  les  plus  rares  de 
la  Flore  franca ise.  Annales  des  Sciences  NatureUes.  2 
Ser.  Tome  1,  p.  295.    1834. 

231.  Montague,  C.     Plantes  cellulaiies  exotiques.    Cryptogamarum 

Guianensium.  Annales  des  Sciences  NatureUes.  Botani- 
que.     2  Ser.     Tome  13,  p.  359.     1840. 

232.  Montague,  C.     Cryptogamia  guyanensis.    Annales  des  Sciences 

naturelles.  Botanicpie.    4  Ser.  Tome.  3,  p.  123-124.  1855. 

233.  Moon,  F.  F.     Ke|)ort  on  the  Highlands  of  the  Hudson  Forest 

Keservation.  FiftccMith  annual  report  of  the  Forest, 
Fish  and  Game  Commissioner  of  New  York.  p.  226. 
1909. 

2:U.  Morris,  Kobert  T.  Chestnut  Timber  Going  to  Waste.  Con- 
sent tion.    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'  As- 
sociation.   14  December,  1911. 

(112) 


•^ 


23 

236.  Mowiv,  Jesse  B.     Tbe  Ohestiuit  Bark  Disease.    Office  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.  T'^nnumbered  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  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  tlie  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  Funji^  at  Biltmore.    Journal  of  the 

New  York  Botanical  (larden.  Vol.  9,  p.  135-141. 
Au^ist,  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  T^tchworth  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- 

I)^rieurs  qu'  inf^rieurs  trouv^s  jusqu'i\  ce  jour  les  Pay- 
Bas.    Vol:  2,  p.  204.     Maart,  1897. 

248.  Oudemans,  C.  A.  J.  A.     Revisio  Pyrenomycetum  in  regno  Ra- 

ta vorum  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,  matem- 
atiche  e  naturali.  Vol.  20,  1  sem.  fasc.  5,  p.  366-372. 
5  marzo,  1911. 

(113) 


24 

ft 

250.  Pantanelli,  E.     Su  la  supposta  origine    europea    del    cancro 

americano  del  oastagno.  Atti  della  Reale  Accademia 
del  Lincei.  Series  V.  Rendiconti  Glasse  di  sdenzi 
liRiche,  matematich  e  natural!.  Vol.  21.  fasc.  12,  2  sem., 
p.  869-875.     15  decerabre,  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.     Castanea  dentata  (Marsh)  Borkh.    Report 

State  Botanist  New  York.  Museum  Bulletin  No.  131,  p. 
29.    1  July,  1909. 

253.  Peck,  C.  H.      Valsoncctria  parasitica  (Murrill)  R^hm.    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. 

25G.  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. 

2r)8c.  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  delF 

inchiostro.  Atti  della  Reale  Accademia  del  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. 

(lU) 


25 

261.  Petri,  L.     Considerazioni  critiche  sulla  malattia  del  castagno 

detta  deir  iuchiostro.  Atti  della  Eeale  Accademia  dei 
Lincei.  Series  V.  Eendiconti  Classe  di  scienzi  flsiche, 
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- 

calls.  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  pon- 
servation  Commission  of  New  York.  p.  50.    1912. 

263a.  Pettis,  C.  R.     Chestnut  Bark  Disease.    Second  Annual  Report 

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. 
2C5.    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,  Rov  G.      Pn^ing  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 

OflSce,  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  Research  May  Increase 

the  Efficiency  of  the  Control  of  the  Chestnut  Bark  Dis- 
ease. i*enusylvanlu  Chestnut  Blight  Conference  Report, 
p.  4G48.     1912. 

275.  Rankin,  W.  H.     The  Chestnut  Tree  Canker  Disease.  Phytopath- 

ology.    Vol.  2,  p.  99.     April,  1912. 
270.     Rankin,  W.  H.     Some  Field  Experiments  with  the  Chestnut 

Canker  Fungus.  Pliytopathology.  Vol.  3,  p.  73.  Pehni- 
ary,  1913. 

277.  Record,    S.    J.     Use    of    Blight-Killed    Chestnut.      Hardwood 

Recoid.    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  the  Third  Annual  Meeting 
of  the  Northern  Nut  (irowers  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? 

(buntry  Life  in  America.  Vol.  20,  p.  88,  90,  92,  94.  1 
September,  1911. 

283.  Rid.sdale,  Peicival  S.     The  Chestnut  Blight  Campaign.   Ameri- 

can Forestry.     Vol.  18,  p.  178-180.     March,  1912. 

284.  Rockey,  Keller  K.     Recent  Work  on  the  Chestnut  Blight.    Re- 

l)ort  of  the  I^roceediugs  at  the  Third  Annual  Meeting  of 
the  Northern  Nut  (irowers'  Association,  Dec.  18  and 
19,  1912.     p.  37-59.     1913. 

285.  Rockey,  Keller  E.     Report  of  Demonstration  Work.     Report 

Pennsylvania  (^hestnut  Tree  Blight  Commission,  July  1 
—December  31,  1912.     p.  59-61.     1913. 

286.  Rollins,  Montgomery.     Heli>  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- 

svlvania  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.  Keport  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.  852.    12  December,  1913. 

291.  Buhland,  W.  Untersuchungen  zu  einer  Morphologie  der  stroma- 

bildene  Sphaeriales.    Hedwigia.    Bd.  39.    p.  32-34.  1900. 

292.  Bumbold,  Caroline.    A  new  Record  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.  4547.     1913. 
295a.  Saccardo,  P.  A.     Endothia  gyrosa.    Mycologiae  Venetae  Speci- 
men, p.  146147.  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  Pyrenomj'^ceten  schematice 

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) 


80 

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  Conference.  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  Rei)ort  Ohio  Agricultural  Expenment  Station, 

Bulletin  263.    July,  1913. 
332b.  Thuemen,  Felix  von.     Endothia  gyrosum  Fuck.  f.     Castanea^ 

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 

gj^rosum.  Selecta  fungorum  carpologia.  Vol.  2,  p.  87 
89.    1863. 

334.  Van  Kennen,  Geo.  E.,  Fleming,  James  W.,  and  Moore,  Johr 

D.  First  Annual  Report  of  the  Conservation  Commis 
sion  New  York.     1911.     p.  10.     1912. 

335.  Vincenz,  Freihernn  v.  Cesati.     Die  Pflanzenwelt  im  Gebietc 

zwischen  dem  Tessin,  dem  Po,  der  Sesia  und  den  Alpen 
Linnaiea.    Bd.  16.    p.  236.    1863. 

336.  Von  Schrenk,  Hermann  and  Spaulding,  Perley.    Diseases  o: 

Deciduous  Forest  Trees.  I'nited  States  Department  o: 
Agriculture.  Bureau  of  Plant  Industry.  Bulletin  149.  p 
22.    30  July,  1909. 

337.  Walton,  R.  C.    The  relation  of  temperature  to  the  expulsion  o: 

ascospores  of  Endothia  parasitica.  Abstracts  of  papen 
to  be  given  at  the  fifth  annual  meeting  of  the  Americai 
Phytopathological  Society  in  the  State  Capitol,  Atlanta 
Ga.,  December  30,  1913,  to  January  2,  1914.  p.  14.  1( 
December,  1913. 

338.  Wells,  H.  E.     A  Report  on  Scout  Work  on  the  North  Bencl 

of  Bald  Eagle  Mountain,  between  Sylvan  Dell  and  Wil 
liamsport,  Lycoming  County,  Pennsylvania.  Pennsyl 
vania  Chestnut  Blight  Conference  Report,  p.  235-241 
1912. 

(120)