— ations Eau Investig: of Bur ‘Crop r, Chief PIPER, rage- ary ‘ ss WAY of Februa se rge L in Cleary _~ Issued an grostologist err Pee mag ewe: Bul..229, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Dept. cf Agriculture. PLATE I. SEEDLINGS OF COWPEA (LEFT) AND CATJANG (RIGHT), SHOWING RELATIVE SIZE. (One-half natural size.) / i 5s. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. : BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY—BULLETIN NO. 229. B. T. GALLOWAY, Chief of Bureau. AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA AND IMMEDIATELY RELATED SPECIES. / | ; BY C.'V. PIPER, Agrostologist in Charge of Forage-Crop Investigations. Issued February 29, 1912. WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1912, /¥ ) \ 1 AA 5 WAY V2 v fale 5 B205 Cl BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY. Chief of Bureau, BEVERLY T. GALLOWAY. Assistant Chief of Bureau, WILLIAM A. TAYLOR. Editor, J. E. ROCKWELL, Chief Clerk, JAMES E. JONES. FORAGE-CROP INVESTIGATIONS. SCIENTIFIC STAFF. Cc. V. Piper, Agrostologist in Charge. J. M. Westgate, Agronomist. ; Rk. A. Oakley and H. N. Vinall, Assistant Agrostologists. S. M. Tracy, Special Agent. A. B. Conner, A. B. Cron, M. W. Evans, Roland McKee, and W. J. Morse, Assistants. 299 | i 2 - LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. U. 8. DeparTMent or AGRICULTURE, Bureau or Piant Inpustry, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF, Washington, D. C., July 3, 1911. Str: I have the honor to transmit herewith and to recommend for publication as Bulletin No. 229 of the series of this Bureau the accom- panying manuscript, entitled “Agricultural Varieties of the Cowpea and Immediately Related Species.” This paper’ has been prepared by Prof. C. V. Piper, Agrostologist in Charge of Forage-Crop Investigations. The cowpea is now the most important legume grown in the cotton States. At the present time about 15 varieties of this crop are in common cultivation in these States. The varieties grown in a small way number perhaps twice as many more. Owing to the fact that the seed is still largely hand picked, the tendency is for whatever variety was first introduced in a locality to persist. The increased commercial handling of cowpea seed in recent years has to a consid- erable extent changed this condition of affairs, but varieties of relative inferiority are still too largely grown. In investigating the varieties of cowpeas the effort has been made, with the assistance of the Office of Seed and Plant Introduction, to obtain as many as possible of the existent varieties from all parts of the world, so that a comprehensive idea of them could be obtained with the end in view of determining which are most valuable. In this collection are also included many varieties of the closely related species, the asparagus bean and the catjang. While it is very certain that the list of varieties that have been brought together for com- parison and study is far from exhaustive, yet it is believed that the series is sufficiently complete to exhibit all of the characteristics which occur in this group of plants that are likely to be of value either directly or to the plant breeder. On account of the importance of the cowpea various extensive investigations of the crop have been undertaken by this Bureau. The present bulletin presents the results obtained by a comprehensive 229 3 4 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. study of the varieties, not only of those already occurring in this country, but of numerous lots from abroad obtained mainly by the Office of Seed and Plant Introduction. Largely on the basis of facts ascertained in these studies a great amount of breeding work is being conducted by Mr. George W. Oliver, with the idea of developing im- proved varieties by combining the best of the traits exhibited. In close connection with this work Prof. W. J. Spillman is studying the Mendelian behavior of the hereditary characters. The work of Mr. W. A. Orton in hybridizing Iron and other cowpeas to develop varieties with high yield of forage and seed, together with resistance to wilt and other diseases, is also closely allied with these investi- gations, In the preparation of this paper the author desires to acknowledge the assistance of Mr. W. F. Wight on various botanical problems involved. Mrs. K. S. Bort has rendered much painstaking aid in the compilation of the voluminous notes which have accumulated and in authenticating the specimens which have been preserved each year so that possible errors might be avoided. Very respectfully, B. T. Gatitoway, Chief of Bureau. Hon. James WILson, | Secretary of Agriculture. 229 CONTENTS: Page. meeewlievated species of Viena...............---------.-- Be SR INOS a eae aa “i ee boetsnica! history of the cultivated vignas ....:.....5...-.-...--..---+----- 9 POETS ELE | SEIT 5 Se he 8 eee aS a age oe ot ee ee 9 (TE Bbc ec csc sch, 5 a i iP ae GS a 10 Sateen fn Rehr ee eo aes Sa es ee a oe 11 Desirable characters in varieties of cowpeas.....-.-.-------------+-----+---+- 14 perme ETE OM Cd.- 2/5. se ges bee She Sie ee eet 15 Pnstimenve characters of cowpea varieties... ..-- 0.2.2.2 252.222. 19 2 2.]2) 00 7) San A ee ee eee ee ent ae ee 19 eee nae ne ee Sr rs IO NIETO ES Ghee Le 20 er are OE IW A SP. Ih20 we TP ELD as cee econ beac cucae Be er 7 | are aee anc ams PR Cine ER _ by A Sy SOU TIE. Pe 21 ie ey i Sa Sf oc ein aOR EL ye 23 wolb TS EDLE Ls. te a ea ee eA ea 24 eee epeEmnterer Pernt ae ty tat EY ER eA SOL tL at est 24 Sasecepummlity and resistance to diseases... 0... 2.220.020 25 Mie cawpea Hower and its’ pollination’./-.2.0.... 02202... 2. 2b e eee 25 nem olen wartoiies: 1255 l. 05. Se Se Le fo i es ds 27 Similarity in habit of varieties from the same source............---.-.------- 28 2 TIDE IDLER rie Ae Ge ee ear eevee ee 30 maatctal hybrid cowpeas of known origin... 2.222205)... 2.2.2.2 22222...2.. 33 Agricultural history of the cowpea and its varieties in America.............-- 34 Pesneneo. teste dilierent varieties. ...--6......5..022. 2.46202. 30 2000.22. 37 Een IEIe (SCS OLCOW PEASE © <5 .5 2.5 2c) j0 oe wail ae pd Sn eas dene Sho ele es 38 Bpeetee ete Ariciies OL COW PCAs... - 5 6 «ses Je oe sine ooo ed on oe eee eee ee ec ee- 43 Names that have been applied to varieties of cowpeas and related species... - - a4 pylep-ien varieties. by seed colors..............-.2.0..2.22522.-.0.52----- 72 Camusue and descriptions of varieties. ..............-......2-222- 22-5 ¢-2-- 75 2 DRT SLIDE cS cee ae ae 142 LUST cecc2 cd Se cle GME Ae nein ee nS Agena De egee e 145 229 ILLUS TRATIOOS Page. . Seedlings of cowpea and catjang, showing relative size...... Frontispiece. . Flowers and young pods of catjang. ..----- . =. - cee eee eee 8 . Flowers and young pods of the asparagus bean and of the Cream COWPECD 2s 5. Sea cnc cede ensue ce ee ob eee cee er 10 . Fig. 1.—Photomicrograph of a section of extra-floral nectary of the cowpea flower. Fig. 2.—Two samples each of seven varieties of cowpeas, showing the different types of color distribution...... 20 | . Seeds of sixteen varieties of Vigna, showing range in variation of shape, size, and color..........-=s%--:::<-5 -4-2e)— een 22 . Pods:of ¢atjang No. 22888. 2... .5...2. 3-20-52 -3-24-5 ee 24 . Pods of two varieties of cowpeas having curved or coiled pods. ..... 26 . Greenhouse-grown plant of Cream cowpea No. 0632, showing cyatho- phylly and other abnormalities of leaves. ..........-....----..-- 28 . Pods of two varieties of cowpeas with kidney-shaped seeds......-. 100 . Pods of two crowder varieties of cowpeas ......-...-.-------------- 114 . Greenhouse-grown plant of cowpea No. 22958, showing the peculiar swelling on the base of the stem characteristic of this variety... -- 120 . Pods of two varieties of cowpeas with half crowder seeds. .......... 136 229 6 B. P. I.— 693. AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA AND Poe DIATELY KELATED SPECIES. THE CULTIVATED SPECIES OF VIGNA. The botanical genus Vigna, to which the cowpea belongs, is closely related to Phaseolus, which includes the common kidney bean. The chief diagnostic distinction is that the keel is only slightly curved in Vigna and is twisted or spirally coiled in Phaseolus. Vigna has also been much confused with Dolichos, which has a keel similar to Vigna but has a terminal stigma, while in Vigna the stigma is lateral. Botanical works contain descriptions of about 60 species of Vigna. Omitting the three cultivated species hereafter mentioned, according to Mr. W. F. Wight, these species are distributed as follows: Africa, 40; Madagascar, 2; Asia, 5; Java, 2; Australia, 2; Hawaiian Islands, 2; South America, 1; and cosmopolitan, 3. Most of the species of Vigna are annual, but some are perennial. Several are more or less woody. Judging from descriptions alone, very few of the noncultivated species seem to possess any characters that would be desirable for the plant breeder. Thus far, none of the wild species have been grown excepting the common Vigna luteola (Jacq.) Benth. (V. glabra Savi), cosmopolitan in subtropic regions, and V. vexillata (.) Benth., obtained from Matanzas, Cuba. The latter has the keel somewhat curved and bearing a lateral horn very like that of Phaseolus calcaratus. It would therefore seem that the original reference by Linnzeus of the plant to Phaseolus is correct. The cultivated species are three, namely, the asparagus bean, Vigna sesquipedalis (u.) W. F. Wight; the catjang, Vigna catjang (Burm.) Walp.; and the cowpea, Vigna unguiculata (.) Walp. The differ- ences in the botanical characters by which these species are distin- guished are comparatively slight (Pls. I, IT, and ITI) and, further- more, the species are connected through intermediate varieties. Whether we consider that all the varieties are referable to one botanical species or to more is of little practical importance. All three of them can be readily hybridized, as proved by the work of 229 7 8 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. Mr. George W. Oliver, and it is not improbable that some or all of the forms connecting these species may, in fact, be hybrids. The most ancient cultivation of*the vignas seems to have been in India and to have spread in prehistoric times to China, the whole of the Malayan region, and probably much of Africa. It was known in southern Europe at least as early as the beginning of the Chris- tian Era.1_ As might be anticipated, varieties received from different sources are in the main distinct, even if the differences in many cases are slight. The very long cultivation of the cowpea in Africa is attested by the fact that the varieties from different parts of that continent are with few exceptions distinct from those grown else- where. The numerous varieties of cowpeas that have become established in America during the past hundred years probably came, in part at least, either from India or China, as the black-eyed and brown-eyed varieties are, and probably always have been, practically the only ones cultivated in southern Europe.? In regard to some of the more important varieties, special data will be found in connection with their descriptions. Notwithstanding the great difficulty in defining clearly the three supposed species, each, nevertheless, represents a group of varieties having much in common. For the present purposes the species may be contrasted as follows: Vigna sesquipedalis.—Seeds elongated kidney form, 8 to 12 mm. long, their thickness much less than their breadth; pods pendent, much elongated, 1 to 3 feet long, fleshy and brittle, becoming more or less inflated, flabby, and pale in color before ripening, and shrink- ing about the widely separated seeds when dry. Vigna catjang.—Seeds small, usually oblong or cylindric and but slightly kidney shaped, 5 to 6 mm. long, nearly or quite as thick as broad; pods small, not at all flabby or inflated when green, mostly 3 to 5 inches long, erect or ascending when green, remaining so when dry or at length becoming spreading or even deflexed. Vigna unguiculata—Seeds mostly 6 to 9 mm. long, varying from subreniform to subglobose; pods 8 to 12 inches long, early becoming pendent, not at all flabby or inflated when green. As thus defined the great majority of the varieties classify readily into one of the three species. In each species there is a wide range of closely similar seed colors, greatest in Vigna unguiculata, least in V. sesquipedalis. The small seeds and erect or semierect pods of the catjangs are seemingly correlated characters, the erectness of the pods apparently being due in large measure to their relatively small 1Compare Wight, W. F., Bulletin 102, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1907. 2 Compare notes given under Dolichos monachalis, p. 11. 229 Bul. 229, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE Il. FLOWERS AND YOUNG Pops oF CaTJAN@: No. 11076B ON Lert, No. 21508 ON RIGHT. (Natural size.) THE BOTANICAL HISTORY OF THE CULTIVATED VIGNAS. 9 weight. It is an interesting fact that several varieties here referred to V. unguiculata that have become naturalized in the South have unusually small seeds. It is quite possible that V. catjang and JV. unguiculata are merely varieties of a single species, the small-seeded varieties only tending to persist when growing wild or constantly subject to weevil attack. It is undoubtedly a fact that the forms with small and hard seeds are less injured by weevils than those with larger and softer seeds. It may, indeed, be true that this one factor tends constantly to eliminate the large-seeded forms when growing wild so that only the small-seeded ones persist. Of the three species the cowpea is by far the most important, and excepting where specially indicated the following pages particularly refer to this species. Where all three species are considered collec- tively they are spoken of as “ vignas.” THE BOTANICAL HISTORY OF THE CULTIVATED VIGNAS. In view of the very numerous varieties of cowpeas, catjangs, and asparagus beans, it is not at all surprising that descriptive botanists have confused them greatly. It must be borne in mind that the older botanists had as material for investigation only one, or, at any rate, only a few forms, and were, therefore, unable to judge properly of the weight to be given to each character. The earliest history of the cowpea has been very fully given by Wight. The following data regarding the purely botanical history of the three agricultural species present the conclusions arrived at from the study of the large amount of material we have grown. ASPARAGUS BEAN. The asparagus bean was first described by Linneeus, in 1763, under the name of Dolichos sesquipedalis. His material came from America, though the plant is undoubtedly native to southern Asia. There could seem to be no question regarding the identity of this species, and no other specific name has ever been given to it. Its proper botanical name is Vigna sesquipedalis (L.) W. F.. Wight. Martens (Die Gartenbohne, ed. 2, 1869, p. 100) makes the error of identifying it with Dolichos sinensis Stickman, which name unques- tionably applies to the cowpea. He further quotes Dolichos ses- quipedalis as a synonym. ‘This species does not seem to have been figured by any pre-Linnean authors, but a handsome colored plate is given by Jacquin. (Hortus Botanicus Vindobonensis, 1770, vol. 1, pl. 67.) 1Wight, W. F. Bulletin 102, pt. 6, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Dept. of Agri- culture, 1907. 229 10 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. COWPEA, Since the beginning of the use of binomial nomenclature in botany, at least eight different specific names have been given to the cowpea. (1) The name Dolichos unguiculatus L. (1753) was based on plants grown in the Botanic Garden at Upsala, Sweden, the seeds haying been obtained from Barbados. Linneus briefly describes the plant in his Hortus Upsaliensis, 1747, and again in his Species Plantarum, 1753. He states that the seeds were purple black. There can be but little question that Linneus’s plant is the cowpea, but most sub- sequent authors did not recognize this fact. Even Linnzus himself later (1758) referred to this species Rumphius’s Cacara nigra, a wholly different plant. The figure of Dolichos unguiculatus in Jacquin, Hortus Botanicus Vindobonensis, 1770, volume 1, plate 23, is really that of a catjang.? (2) The name Dolichos sinensis Stickman (1759) was based on the excellent description and plate of Rumphius’s Dolichos sinensis. (Herbarium Amboinense, vol. 5, p. 375, pl. 134.) This is clearly the cowpea, but a very vining variety. Rumphius had a wide knowl- edge of East Indian plants, but apparently knew but two varieties of cowpea—one with white and the other with reddish seeds. (3) The name Phaseolus sphaerospermus lL. (1763) is based pri- marily on Browne’s description of the black-eyed pea (Civil and Natural History of Jamaica, p. 292), and secondarily on Sloane’s description in his catalogue of the plants of Jamaica and the figure of the Calavance in his natural history of Jamaica. Both authors give practically the same description, describing the plant as erect. There is scarcely any doubt that the variety is the cowpea known as Blackeyed Lady or sometimes Gallivant, characterized by its small, globose, black-eyed seeds. (4) Thunberg (Transactions Linnean Society, 1794, vol. 2, p. 339) gives a brief description of Dolichos umbellatus, but does not describe the seeds. He mentions, however, the plant that he had previously described and referred to D. unguiculatus L. (Flora Japonica, 1784, p. 279). In this first description Thunberg gives the Japanese name as “ Sasage ” or “ Naga sasage.” Under Sasage the Japanese include, according to Useful Plants of Japan, both the asparagus bean (Juroku sasage) and the cowpea (Sasage, Aka sasage, Hata sasage, etc.). To what variety the name Naga sasage refers is uncertain, but Sasage alone seems to be used for vining varieties, especially one with white seeds. To judge wholly by the figure in Useful Plants of Japan, which represents a variety not as yet obtained from Japan, Thunberg’s plant would be referred to Vigna unguiculata. Among the varieties the Japanese cultivate are forms referable to V. catjang, V. 1See note on page 143. 229 Bul. 229, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PranceLllz FLOWERS AND YOUNG PODS OF THE ASPARAGUS BEAN (LEFT) AND OF THE CREAM COWPEA (RIGHT.) (Natural size.) iT * ’ * f ~’ = ’ 7 ’ i; ¥ ‘ . m : " x i mel, — ° } \ Ns i ' ‘ 1 . 7 ‘ , : . . ; ; j 1 5 eer .) ¥ < e : = v é ’ . ‘ ’ uJ » * > ; ade Fi 4 ? fl a “4% 7 - . ¢ " =" 3 : 4 abby THE BOTANICAL HISTORY OF THE CULTIVATED VIGNAS. 11 sesquipedalis, and V. unguiculata, as well as others that are probably of hybrid origin between these species. It should be pointed out, however, that Maximowicz, followed by Prain (Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1897, vol. 66, p. 429), inclines to the view that Thunberg’s plant is to be referred to Vigna vewillata (L.) Benth. (5) Dolichos monachalis Brotero (Flora Lusitanica, 1804, vol. 2, p. 125), commonly called “ Feijao fradibono,” is said to be cultivated throughout Lusitania, Portugal. Brotero describes the plants as bushy or but little vining and the seeds as subreniform, 24 lines broad, 4 to 5 lines long, white or whitish with a black eye. He states that this color is the most frequent, but that varieties with yellowish, red, black, and black-spotted seeds occur. He considers the plant to be either an American degenerate or more likely a hybrid between Dolichos catjang and D. sinensis, both on account of its close affinity and also “ because occasionally, though very rarely, it produces seeds like the parents.” Under his description of Dolichos sinensis, Brotero says the plant is twining and the seeds whitish, adding that it “ de- generates very quickly and is changed into Dolichos monachalis.” Under Phaseolus nanus, he notes that it is a dwarf variety arising under cultivation “just as our Dolichos monachalis is a dwarf variety of D. sinensis.” From these notes there can be practically no doubt that Brotero based his species largely on its bushy form and that his type is one of the common varieties with black-eyed white seeds. (6) The name Dolichos melanophthalmus DC. (1825) is based on a black-eyed variety of cowpea cultivated in Vasconia (Gascony, France, now the provinces of Landes and Gers) and in Italy. (7) The name Dolichos oleraceus Schumacher (1827) is based on a plant from Guinea, West Africa, the seeds of which are de- scribed as variegated. It is in all probability a variety of cowpea. (8) The name Dolichos bicontortus Durieu (Actes, Société Lin- néeme de Bordeaux, 1896, vol. 27, p. lii1) is based on two Japanese varieties, one with buff (fulvous) seeds, the other with red, the pods in both being circinate or coiled. The variety with buff seeds is illustrated by a beautiful colored plate in Flore des Serres, 1873, volume 19, plate 1985. It is very similar to S. P. I. No. 21296A, from Rangoon district, Burma, India. The red-seeded form is certainly the same as No, 29278 from the Tokyo Botanic Garden. The distinc- tion of the curved or coiled pod seems to be of formal value only. Under botanical rules, the proper name for the cowpea is Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp., all of the other names being synonyms.* CATJANG. The catjang has had a much simpler botanical history than the cowpea, with which many authors have united it as a variety. 1See note on page 143. 229 12 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. (1) Burmann (Flora Indica, 1768, p. 161) gives a brief description of Dolichos catjang and refers to Rumphius’s description and plate of Phaseolus minor (Herbarium Amboinense, vol. 5, p. 383, pl. 139). Rumphius’s plate is excellent and there can be no doubt as to the identity of his plant, which was a bushy, nontwining, low variety with black-eyed white seeds. Linnzeus (Mantissa, 1771, vol. 1, p. 269) refers to Burmann’s description of Dolichos catjang, the description and plate of Rumphius above cited, and Rheede’s description and plate of the Paeru (Hortus Malabaricus, 1688, vol. 8, p. 75, pl. 41). Rheede’s figure is without doubt the catjang. He speaks of the seeds being yellowish to red. In the Systema Plantarum, edition 13, 1796, volume 2, part 2, page 1105, the specific name is changed to a Latin form “ catianus.” (2) Forskal (Fl. Hgypt, Arab., 1775, p. 133) states that Dolichos lubia is frequently cultivated in the fields of Egypt. The plant is described as diffuse and procumbent. The size and color of the seeds are not given but the pods are said to be erect and scabrous. The Arabian name is given as “ Lubia baeladi.” This plant is probably the catjang, but the scabrous character of the pod is suspicious. No varieties of either cowpea or catjang have been imported from Lower Egypt. (3) The plant Dolichos tranquebaricus Jacquin (Hortus Botanicus Vindobonensis, 1776, vol. 3, p. 39, pl. 70) is beautifully figured by Jacquin from specimens grown at Vienna, the seeds from Tranque- bar, Madras, India. It is a twining catjang with purple flowers, blooming late, small pods 24 inches long, and buff seeds 4 mm. long. It is very similar to, if not identical with, S. P. I. No. 29305. The technical name of the catjang under botanical rules is Vigna catjang (Burn.) Walp. It is not unlikely that some of the other botanical names under the genera Phaseolus and Dolichos also apply to the above species of Vigna. It probably would require an examination of the original specimens to determine this positively. Some botanical authors have considered that the catjang and the cowpea are mere varieties of the same species, and have thus classified them. Exactly the same argu- ments, however, apply to the asparagus bean. As a matter of con- venience it would seem preferable to maintain all three as oe though a complete series of connecting forms exists. Besides the above three species of Vigna two others have been re- ported to be cultivated. One of these is Vigna nilotica Delile, which Sir J. D. Hooker (Niger Flora, p. 311) says occurs in Lower Egypt, Nubia, Abyssinia, Senegambia, German East Africa, Mozambique, and nike 4 in Syria, adding that it is known as “mash” by the Arabs. The original description of this plant was by Forskal, who errone- ously referred it to Dolichos sinensis. He states that it occurs in wet 229 THE BOTANICAL HISTORY OF THE CULTIVATED VIGNAS. 13 fields in Egypt near the Nile, the roots frequently being immersed. Delile later published a beautiful figure of the plant, and states that it is abundant in Egypt on the borders of the Nile, especially about Byrimbal (Berimbal) and Metoubis (Matubis). Delile’s figure, as well as authentic botanical specimens, shows this species to be very different from any of those described above and easily recognizable by its small, sharp-pointed, hairy pods, which are borne in clusters of 5 to 10. It seems not unlikely that Hooker confused the cowpea with this species, as the cowpea is abundantly cultivated throughout Africa, and thus far we have not obtained Vigna nilotica from any source. Under Vigna capensis Walp., Hiern (Catalogue of African Plants collected by Welwitsch, 1896, vol. 1, p. 257) gives a field note of Welwitsch on a single specimen to the effect that this is planted in fields of sugar cane near Boa Vista, Portugese West Africa. It is quite likely that this particular specimen is really the cowpea, as this is commonly grown by the natives in Africa. Two different plants have been named Vigna capensis, both from South Africa, where no botanist has spoken of them as being cultivated plants. The treatment of the agricultural varieties of cowpeas and cat- jangs by botanical writers is very diverse. Hasskarl, 1842 (Flora, 25th year, vol. 2, Beiblatter, pp. 50, 51), calls the cowpea Dolichos sinensis and describes four varieties: Ater with black seeds; rubigi- nosus with reddish seeds; elongatus with pods 14 to 18 inches long and punctulate reddish seeds; and maculatus with reddish seeds spotted with chestnut. His “var. elongatus” is perhaps a variety of asparagus bean. Miquel, 1845 (Flora Indiae Bataviae, vol. 1, p. 187), adopts all of Hasskarl’s varieties under Vigna sinensis. Voigt, 1845 (Hortus Suburbanus Calcuttensis, p. 232), apparently unites the cow- pea and the catjang under one species, Dolichos sinensis, calling the former “ var. eccremocarpus” on account of its pendulous pods and the latter “ var. orthocarpus”’ owing to its erect pods. Martens, 1869 (Die Gartenbohne, ed. 2, p. 99), takes up DeCandolle’s name Dolichos melanophthalmus for the black-eyed cowpea and describes as “ var. oryzoides” a buff-seeded form he obtained in Venice. As a sub- variety of this he also mentions a brown-seeded form from Berlin, Lisbon, Tivoli, and Stuttgart. For the asparagus bean he errone- ously adopts Dolichos sinensis in preference to D. sesquipedalis, and under it lists the four varieties of Hasskarl mentioned above. Mar- tens’s conception of Dolichos catjang L. is given under four different varieties, viz, niger, rufus, luteolus, and variegatus. The first two are catjangs mentioned by Louriero (Flora Cochinchinensis, vol. 1, p. 539) under the vernacular names “ Dau den” and “ Dau dea,” the former with black, the latter with reddish seeds; var. luteolus is Vigna luteolus Jacquin, a perfectly distinct species; var. variegatus is based 229 14 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. on seeds secured in Berlin, the seeds being yellowish sprinkled with dark specks. DESIRABLE CHARACTERS IN VARIETIES OF COWPEAS. The numerous varieties of cowpeas exhibit a considerable range of characteristics, but owing to the indeterminate nature of the plant’s growth, and the great fluctuating variations caused by soils or sea- son, the characters are often obscured. The characteristics that are most important in the cowpea when considered purely as a forage crop are as follows:? . Size and vigor. . Habit, especially erectness and height. . Prolificness. . Disease resistance. . Weevil resistance of seeds. . Ability to retain leaves late in the season. . Time of maturity, or life period. . Evenness of maturity. ONnaow»rkwh Fe From our present knowledge of the cowpea we would define the ideal forage variety to be planted alone as follows: Tall; vigorous; bushy in habit; leafy, the leaves persisting late; prolific, the pods well filled and held well above the ground; the seeds hard and there- fore rather small; medium early, maturing in 80 to 100 days; and immune from or resistant to serious diseases. Toward the north earlier maturing is desirable. For planting in corn or sorghum, a strong vining habit is an additional desideratum. Fortunately, some varieties are half bushy when planted alone, but sufficiently vining where a support is available. Where cowpeas are to be used as human food or to be pastured by hogs, the yield of pods and seeds is most important, the erectness of the plant being a secondary consideration. A number of existing varieties, as Whippoorwill, New Era, and Tron, approach the foregoing ideal. There can be little doubt that by the judicious crossing of these and other varieties this ideal, or any similar one, can be closely realized. — The seeds of white or nearly white cowpeas usually sell for a higher price than do other varieties, owing to the fact that they are used as a table vegetable. It is therefore desirable, if possible, to develop a first-class forage cowpea with white or nearly white seeds. Unfortunately, none of the white or nearly white seeded varieties have the habit most desired in a forage cowpea. The crosses thus far made to develop such an all-purpose cowpea are not satisfactory, but the end is worthy of much more effort. 1Compare Galloway, B. T., Yearbook, U. 8. Dept. of Agriculture, for 1908, p. 147. 229 VARIABILITY OF THE COWPEA. is It is doubtful if any of the very late varieties of cowpeas, which means those that require, under American conditions at least, 120 days to mature their first pods, will find a place in our agriculture. According to Prof. P. H. Rolfs, a very late cowpea that could be planted in May and would not mature until late September would be desirable in Florida, as it would shade the ground during the summer and mature at the best season for curing hay. A large num- ber of very. late varieties were tested in Florida in 1909 with this end in view, but none proved satisfactory, and it seems probable that other legumes will meet the need much better than cowpeas. VARIABILITY OF THE COWPEA. Under different conditions of soil or climate most varieties of the cowpea exhibit marked fluctuating variations. On rich soil, or when planted early, the general tendency is to produce a large amount of vine and but few pods. Unusually moist seasons seem to have the same effect. On poor and especially on sandy soils, or when sown late, the plants tend to be much more prolific of seed and to produce decidedly less herbage. Moderate drought has a very similar effect. Very severe drought, however, prevents most varieties from producing pods. Thus, at Chillicothe, Tex., in 1910, the drought was so severe that such varieties as Whippoorwill, Brabham, Groit, Iron, and others produced scarcely a pod, though making fair vegetative growth. In marked contrast, Blackeye No. 22050 produced a good crop of pods. A number of varieties, like New Era and Whippoor- will and to a less extent Iron, are half bushy when grown thickly. When grown isolated, all these will produce long, trailing branches and be decidedly decumbent; when planted in corn their vining char- acter is accentuated. These fluctuating variations are so marked, the number of varieties of cowpea so large, and the seed so often mixed that the idea has not unnaturally arisen that the cowpea is in an almost continuous state of change, new varieties arising constantly, many of them not permanent. This idea has been upheld by a num- ber of writers on cowpeas, but in no case has satisfactory evidence of its truth been advanced. ; A few varieties, such as Whippoorwill, New Era, Iron, and others, have been well known for at least a decade. If these were constantly varying, we should expect that seeds from different sources would yield different looking plants. To test this, seeds of Whippoorwill were obtained from the following different sources: Richmond, Va.; Fayetteville, Ark.; Hickory, N. C.; Newbern, N. C.; Felton, Del.; Memphis, Tenn.; Blodgett, Mo.; and Coulterville, Tll. These seeds were planted in 1908 at Arlington Farm and grown in comparison with a strain of the same variety that has been grown 229 16 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. at Arlington for five successive years. A careful study of these plants during the season failed to show any marked differences. They were as nearly identical both in habit and time of maturity as the plants of the same variety that had been grown at Arlington Farm for the preceding five years. In 1909 seed of Whippoorwill or supposed Whippoorwill was obtained from 101 additional sources in the following States: Vir- ginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Geor- gia, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas, and Arkansas. These were planted in rows at Arlington in 1910 for comparison with several pedigreed lots that had been grown there for at least three years. With a few exceptions, the striking thing about these lots was their exceed- ingly close likeness with respect to habit, size, and date of maturity. Indeed, it was difficult to select rows that showed any evident supe- riority. There can be no question as to their representing the same agricultural variety. No evidence whatever was shown in these lots of any tendency for northern-grown seed to mature earlier or for extreme southern-grown seed to mature later. Six numbers of the lot were found to be somewhat earlier and of lower stature, and these all proved to have diverse seeds, varying in some cases from marbled to brown, even in the same pod. As this is exactly what occurs in certain Whippoorwill crosses, the hybrid origin of these lots is scarcely to be questioned. Indeed, they match certain known hybrids of Whippoorwill almost exactly. Two lots were identical with Peerless, S. P. I. No. 26495, the seeds of which are scarcely dis- tinguishable from Whippoorwill. One lot, Office No. 01122, from Brookhaven, Miss., was so late that it matured no pods. This is almost certainly the same as S. P. I. No. 25369. The evidence, therefore, indicates that Whippoorwill is a very uniform variety, but that at least two other varieties, namely, Peer- less and No. 25369, have practically identical seeds. Of the New Era variety, seven lots from different sources were tested in 1908 and several additional lots in 1910. They all proved to be identical in size, habit, and life period. Black-seeded cowpeas with subreniform seeds, so far as American sorts are concerned, belong mainly to two varieties, Early Black or Congo, S. P. I. No. 17336, and Black, No. 29292. Forty-nine lots of seed were obtained in 1910 from as many different sources, and most of these belong to one or the other of these two varieties. In- deed, only two of the lots are really different, S. P. I. No. 29302 and Office No. 01054. Some slight degree of difference is shown in the maturing of the various lots of Black and of Early Black, amounting to about a week in each case. Such differences may be permanent or merely fluctuations, 229 VARIABILITY OF THE COWPEA. Ke In a few instances it has been noted that varieties of cowpeas which matured together in one season showed differences in another season; thus, Blackeyes Nos. 17335, 17329, and 22050 all matured together in 1909. In 1910, No. 17335 was ten days later than No. 22050 and five days later than No. 17329. Such differences have not, therefore, been considered of varietal value unless accompanied by other characters. In the case of these three black-eyed varieties the difference in time of maturing seems quite clearly a fluctuating variation, but it is by no means certain that all or most such differ- ences are of this character. With buff-seeded cowpeas the case is far more complicated. Lots of buff-seeded kidney cowpeas obtained from 142 different sources in the States of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Indiana, and Kansas were planted in 1910 and compared with about 20 lots pre- viously obtained. After eliminating several lots identifiable with Tron and two lots that proved to be Cotton Patch, the remainder showed great similarity in habit but varied greatly in their life periods and correlated size. They could be fairly well classified into four groups as regards their time of maturity—early, medium, me- dium late, and late—requiring respectively about 70, 80, 90, and 115 days to mature their first pods. The early lots are apparently identifiable with what has been commonly known as Warren’s Hy- brid or Warren’s Extra Early; the medium and medium late make up most of what is currently known as Clay; while the late is what is known for the most part as Unknown or Wonderful. It must be ad- mitted that each of these groups shows much more variability in life period than Whippoorwill, for example. Indeed, almost every pe- riod of maturity was represented in the series, from the earliest to the latest. A number of lots in each group might properly be con- sidered distinct varieties except for the fact that, under Arlington conditions at least, the difference amounted principally if not wholly to a few days more or less in time of maturing. It would require several years’ testing to determine whether these differences in life period are permanent or only transitory. Most American cowpeas with maroon kidney-shaped seeds go as Red Ripper. About forty different lots with such seeds were tested in 1910. These clearly represent at least eight distinct varieties by habit and seed characters. If slight differences in life period are considered, twice as many varieties could be distinguished. Great discrepancies in published data concerning the Red Ripper are, there- fore, to be expected, and unquestionably several different varieties have been used by different experimenters under this name. 2968°—Bul. 229—12—_2 18 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. It is quite possible that marked differences in earliness, prolific- ness, etc., may be developed in any variety by selection either natural or artificial, but no good evidence of any such change has yet been shown where selection does not enter. It is doubtful, indeed, how much selection alone will do toward improving the cowpea. But little work has been done along this line so far, because hybridizing has seemed to offer better promise. It must not be assumed from the above discussion that a variety should be of equal value regardless of soil or climate. On the contrary, it is perfectly certain that varieties that are valuable in certain parts of the country are of distinctly less value elsewhere. For example, the Brabham cowpea, a new variety, has proved its high value in the sandy lands of South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, in the semiarid lands of the Texas Panhandle, and elsewhere. Farther north it is unreliable, tending to go largely to vine. This was also the experience with it on the rich muck lands near Stock- ton, Cal. At Arlington Farm it produced very little seed in 1908, a normal season as to rainfall, while in 1909, an abnormally dry season, it was at least equal to the best of over 100 varieties grown. A study of the data accumulated regarding this variety points to the conclusion that it has too great vegetative vigor under favorable conditions to seed heavily and that the retarding effects of com- paratively poor soil or of light rainfall are necessary to make it highly productive of fruit. On the other hand, it is well to remem- ber that such well-known varieties as the Whippoorwill and New Era are grown with satisfaction over a wide area with many different soils and climates. In apparent contrast to the above conclusions, Newman? records - that different lots of seed of Whippoorwill, Clay, Unknown, Black- Red Ripper, New Era, and Blackeye gave greatly different results as regards yield of hay when planted side by side. ‘Thus different lots of Whippoorwill varied in yield per acre from 1,300 to 2,200 pounds; Clay, 3,800 to 8,700; Unknown, 3,300 to 7,000; Red Ripper, 2,300 to 4,600; New Era, 700 to 1,900; Blackeye, 700 to 4,000. Prof. Newman hazards the suggestion that these wide variations in yield are— probably due, in part at least, to the greater or less adaptability of the soil or climate, or both, where the tests were made as compared with the soil and climate where the seed was grown. Another cause for the variation may be due to the development of strains of the different varieties from their having been grown in certain localities for a number of years. The point is one of importance and needs to receive further atten- tion. The testing work at Arlington has in no case, where the identity 1 Bulletin 80, Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, p. 73. 229 DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERS OF COWPEA VARIETIES. 19 of the variety was certain, shown any notable variations in size or vigor of the plants. DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERS OF COWPEA VARIETIES. The distinguishing characters of cowpea varieties are, except for the color of flowers and color and shape of the seeds, subtle and diffi- cult to define. In the descriptions here given the following categories of characters are considered and their various differences defined as indicated. HABIT OF PLANT. The different varieties of cowpeas show every possible habit stage from perfectly prostrate to perfectly erect. With a very few ex- ceptions the branches are viny and also twining, at least toward the tips. Notwithstanding the great differences in habit the type of branching is the same in all the cultivated vignas. The great differ- ences displayed are dependent primarily on the degree of develcp- ment of the branches. The development of the lower or basal branches is much greater when the plants are isolated. When grow- ing close together the development of these branches is inhibited or else they become ascending, due to crowding and shading. For com- parative purposes it is perhaps most useful to consider the type of habit exhibited by a variety when planted in rows 24 to 3 feet apart. a common method of planting. When planted in corn the vining habit of the plant becomes more greatly developed and when sown thickly broadcast the bushy habit predominates. For convenience five types of plants as to habit may be recognized and defined as follows: 1. Prostrate.—The whole plant lying prone on the ground. 2. Procumbent.—Stems and branches weak, forming a low, flat mass. When planted in a row the mass of vines is two to four times as broad as high. 3 Low, half bushy.—Mass of vines in rows once to twice as broad as high; basal branches prostrate or but slightly ascending; pods, therefore, held low, many of them touching the ground. 4. Tall, half bushy. Main axis tall and comparatively stout, usually twining at top; branches mostly ascending, few, if.any. prostrate; pods, there- fore, held comparatively high. Examples, Whippoorwill and New Era. 5. Treelike or erect.—Main axis tall, erect, twining not at all, or only at the top; branches mostly short, the long basal ones being absent or only occasionally found. Unsatisfactory as this or any such classification may be, it never- theless indicates with a reasonable degree of clearness the range of habit exhibited by the cultivated vignas. All these characters show much variation due to vigor, stoutness, and richness of branching, in which there is practically every possible step represented in our 229 20 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. series. The most important characteristics from an agronomic stand- point are height, vigor, and prolificness. Practically all of the really valuable varieties fall in groups 3, 4, and 5, the very best being in group 4. The ideal habit for field use would seem to be exhibited by the more vigorous arborescent varieties, such as catjangs Nos. 21292, 21602, and 22759, but unfortunately the best of these are very late and, under American conditions at least, not prolific. The procum- bent and prostrate varieties are of little value except for use as pas- ture or as a cover crop. It would seem highly improbable that the seed of any of these last could ever be grown cheaply enough to com- pete with the half-bushy varieties, notwithstanding that several of the procumbent sorts, such as No. 21006, are the most vigorous growers of all. There is often marked difference in the appearance of plants grow- ing isolated and those of the same variety when more or less crowded. This is especially marked in the half-bushy varieties. In these the basal branches grow inordinately when the plants are isolated so that the result is a procumbent mass. On the contrary, when the plants are grown close together the development of the basal branches is usually much inhibited and the main stem is correspondingly taller so that the plants are much more bushlike in habit. In the varieties that are normally procumbent or prostrate this effect is much less marked, as the vines of such varieties are seldom stiff enough to hold up. The few truly upright (arborescent) varieties, which have no trailing basal branches, seem to maintain this character whether growing isolated or close together. STEMS. The stem possesses very few characters which are of value as dis- tinguishing marks. Such differences in stoutness as exist may be characterized by the terms coarse, medium, and fine. The color of the stems is correlated with that of the leaves. Thus, pale stems are associated with pale leaves and purple stems with purple leaves, but the stem may show all degrees in the extent of purple color. The coloring is most common at the nodes and on the peduncles. A small amount of purple in the stems may or may not be associated with purple coloration in the leaves even in the same variety. The first cold nights of autumn not only cause an increase in the amount of purple coloration but also cause it to appear in varieties where it was not before evident, especially on young pods. LEAVES. Economically, the most important leaf character is the ability to persist on the vines till the pods are mature. This is very character- istic of the Iron variety. Other characters observable but difficult 229 Bul. 229, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE IV. FIG. 1.—PHOTOMICROGRAPH OF A SECTION OF EXTRA-FLORAL NECTARY OF THE COWPEA FLOWER. FROM A SECTION PREPARED BY DR. ALBERT MANN. Fig. 2.—TWO SAMPLES EACH OF SEVEN VARIETIES OF COWPEAS, SHOWING THE DIF- FERENT TYPES OF COLOR DISTRIBUTION. (Natural size.) DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERS OF COWPEA VARIETIES. 21 to define are the size of leaves, varying from small to very large; color, ranging from very pale to very dark; and number, varying from few to very numerous, the number being correlated with the length of the internodes. Such characters are of definitive value only when approaching one extreme or the other. In a few cases closely related varieties may be distinguished by the leaf surface; for example, Iron has nearly plane leaves, while most other buff-seeded varieties have leaves decidedly undulate. FLOWERS. The flower of the cowpea occurs principally in two colors: White, or nearly white, and pale violet or purple, in each case the eye being yellow. The violet color merges by almost insensible degrees to the white. The back of the standard is paler and often yellowish in the white flowers or greenish in the violet. White flowers are mainly associated with white or partly white seeds. The violet-flowered sorts are far more numerous. SEEDS. Seeds of cowpea varieties differ in color, shape, and size. These seed characters are by far the most useful by which to distinguish varieties. Unfortunately, however, there are many examples of per- fectly distinct varieties whose seeds are indistinguishable. On the other hand some varieties are distinguishable only by the seeds. Color.—The seeds of all three species of Vigna have practically the same range of colors. These may be classified into two groups, (1) those in which the coloration is not uniform over the whole seed and (2) those in which the color or pattern is uniform. Seeds whose color or color pattern is not distributed over the whole surface exhibit four types of variation: (1) Spotted, with round or roundish spots. (2) Marbled, with spots elongate and running together, as in Whippoorwill. (3) Speckled with minute dots; as, for example, in Taylor and New Era. (4) Marbled and speckled; as, for example, in Groit. The commonest type has the second color concentrated about the hilum, as in Blackeye, Browneye, etc. The term hilum as here used refers to the scar at the place where the seed was attached to the pod. It is always nearest the chalazal end of the seed and is lanceolate in out- line, the broad end being next to the micropyle. The hilum is always whitish in color, excepting its sides, which are nearly always dark olive. In most cowpeas the raised circle about the hilum is different in color from the body of the seed, in which case it is referred to as the iris. This “eye spot” varies in different varieties from small (in seeds designated “eyed”) to very large (in “saddled” seeds). 229 22 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. Where a larger area is colored, the color tends first to cover the micropylar end of the seed. A third extension of the colored area appears usually in isolated blotches of varying size and position as in Holstein No. 22725 (Pl. V). In the fourth type the whole seed is colored excepting the chalazal end (Pl. IV, fig. 2). Im these va- rious distributions of the second color it is to be noted that speck- ling and marbling both behave in the same manner as a single color. Marbling, so far as known, occurs in but four combinations—brown on a buff ground, brown on pink, black on red, and buff on black. Speckling occurs as blue (diluted black?) on buff and brown on buff. Three varieties, Groit, No. 29295, and No. 11076B, have a combination of both marbling and speckling. That these color distributions are really definite types would seem to be proved by the fact that each type occurs in several different color combinations and that no other types of color distribution occur. The known results from hybridizing are all confirmatory of the above conclusion. In unicolored seeds buff or clay occurs in more varieties than any other color, followed by black and by maroon, respectively. The other colors are represented by only a few varieties each. These are all intergrades from white to yellowish, buff to pink, and pink to maroon. Black in all cowpeas is really very dark violet, as may be seen in immature seeds or in seeds that for any reason have ripened prematurely. Furthermore, certain hybrids with black as one parent have violet-colored seeds by dilution of the black. In several cases of varieties having bluish or purplish seeds the color is not uniform in shade, the depth or amount of color varying on different seeds or in different parts of the same seed, or both. The presence of a small amount of black blood in buff-colored varieties of hybrid origin is often indicated by occasional seeds having splotches of violet, especially on the ends. Some hybrids with black exhibit a dirty gray or dirty violet black with a granular appearance; as, for example, Watson. At times this granular coloration is similar to the speckling found in Taylor, but certainly is not the same. From various hybrids that have been made there are suggestions as to other interrelations of the colors that occur, the complete elucidation of which will re- quire much investigation. Some suggestions may be hazarded as to which of these colors or color patterns are primitive. The evidence would seem to indicate that black, black-eye, marbled, and speckled are all fundamentally different, and it is doubtful if any one of these can be derived by combination of pure strains of the others. The same may be true of white, cream, and maroon. Buff can be obtained by crossing marbled and speckled, some of the hybrids losing the markings and 229 Bul. 229, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE V. SEEDS OF SIXTEEN VARIETIES OF VIGNA, SHOWING RANGE IN VARIATION OF SHAPE, SIZE, AND COLOR. THE TOP THREE ROWS ARE CATJANGS, THE BOTTOM TWO Rows ARE ASPARAGUS BEANS, AND THE OTHERS ARE COWPEAS. Beginning with the top row, the varieties are as follows: No. 21934, Upright; No. 21603B; No. 21293D; No. 0625H; No. 17420, Blackeyed Lady; No. 17406, Michigan Favorite; No. 22052, Black Crowder; No. 17480, Iron; No. 27867; No. 22721, Sport; No. 22725, Holstein; No. 17342, Taylor; No. 27548, Ram’s Horn Blackeye; No. 22746; No. 25149; No. 25148. (Natural size.) DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERS OF COWPEA VARIETIES. a having only the buff ground color left. Much additional work is necessary to determine all these points with certainty. The colors of the seeds as here given are based on fresh, uninjured seeds. Old seeds become much darker, so that buff, pink, and maroon finally may become indistinguishable. Where the ripe pods have been frequently wet by rains and covered with black mold, the seeds also become discolored, usually yellowish or brownish. The termi- nology used for the colors is based on Ridgway’s Nomenclature of Colors. Shape.—Cowpea seeds may be conveniently if not very clearly put into five categories as to shape—reniform or kidney shaped, sub- reniform, oblong, rhomboid, and globose. In some varieties the whole seed is rounded and plump, in others the sides may be shrunken so that the back of the seed is more or less conspicuously “ keeled.” The seed coat is usually smooth, but often transversely and finely wrinkled, especially in white or nearly white seeds. As both smooth and wrinkled seeds may occur in the same pod, the character has little distinctive value except in a few cases. The shape of the seed is closely correlated with that of the pod. Where the seeds are separate from each other while developing they are invariably reniform or subreniform, more elongated or less in .proportion to the distance they are apart. Where the seeds touch each other while growing, flattened ends and usually a more oblong shape result. If the seeds are crowded so closely that they become cuboid or rhomboid, such varieties are designated as “ half crowders.” Where the seeds are closely crowded while developing they become when mature either globose or compressed. Such pods and varieties are called “crowders.” Crowder pods are commonly cylindric in form or else broader than they are thick, and the pod is usually of rather thick and brittle texture. It must be borne in mind that the seeds are largest just before they mature and it is the pressure at this time that in the main determines their form; hence, considerable variation in the shape of seeds may be noted even in the same pod, depending on the position in the pod and the amount of pressure experienced. Size—The size of the seeds from the smallest catjangs on the one hand to the Taylor variety, the largest extreme on the other, is well shown in the illustrations. To some extent these also show the vari- ation in size in each variety. This variation may be considerable even in different pods on the same plant. The latest formed and therefore half-starved pods are often undersized, with correspond- ingly small seeds. PODS. The general interrelations of seeds to pods have been already described. The shape of the pod is usually curved or faleate. In 229 94 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC, some varieties, however, it is practically straight and in a very few coiled into one or even two complete turns. (See Nos. 21296A and 29278 in Pl. VIL) In most varieties of cowpeas the pod is more or less torulose; that is, constricted between the seeds. In others, however, the pods are terete, not at all torulose. The color of the mature pods is drab in a comparatively few varieties, straw yellow in most. In the latter case the yellow may be more or less tinged with purple, a few varieties having uniformly purple pods. In such cases the purple coloration is usually evident in the immature pods also. In at least one variety, No. 25786, the pod is yellowish with short, linear, purple splotches. Most varieties of cowpeas do not shatter their seeds at all. Some, however, dehisce much more easily than others, this character being usualiy associated with thin pod valves, which sometimes become coiled after separating. In a few of the catjangs the pods shatter much like vetches, the valves coiling immediately into a close spiral. The most marked example of this is No. 21565A. (PI. VI.) LIFE PERIOD. There is a wide variation in the time required for different kinds of cowpeas to mature. Furthermore, accurate comparisons are diffi- cult, because the period of fruiting extends overa considerable length of time, which varies according to the season. Perhaps the safest basis of comparison is the riperfing of the first pod, which is usually about 10 to 15 days before most of the pods ripen. The earliest cowpea known to us 1s No. 29282, which ripens its first pods at Arling- ton Farm in 65 days. Varieties called early usually require 80 days or more. Whippoorwill matures its first pods in 82 days. The latest varieties that mature at Arlington Farm require 130 days, but many of the lots received from tropical sources do not even bloom under Arlington Farm conditions. The length of time between planting and the ripening of the first pods also varies with the time of planting. Thus, Mooers* found that the Whippoorwill varied in time from planting to maturity as fol- lows: Planted April 15, 183 days; May 1, 168 days; May 15, 153 days; June 5, 132 days; June 17, 113 days; June 29, 101 days. The life period also varies in some cases from season to season, not only in actual period of time but in comparison with other varieties, as before mentioned. MALFORMATIONS. Cowpea leaves with four or five leaflets are by no means uncom- mon. The small amount of evidence available indicates that this character is to some degree hereditary, probably comparable in this 1 Bulletin 82, Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station. - 229 PLATE VI. Bul. 229, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. oo EN aS PODS OF CATJANG No. 22888. (Natural size.) THE COWPEA FLOWER AND ITS POLLINATION. 25 respect to the heredity of the 4-leaved and 5-leaved clover plants as determined by De Vries. A rare malformation of the leaves among cowpeas is the forma- tion of pitchers or ascidia. Some illustrations of these curious growths are shown in Plate VIII. SUSCEPTIBILITY AND RESISTANCE TO DISEASES. The cowpea is affected by a considerable number of diseases, the most common being wilt (Veocosmospora vasinfecta var. nivea Erw. Sm.) ; root-knot caused by the nematode worm (Heterodera radici- cola (Greef) Miill.); rust (Uromyces phaseoli); white leaf-spot (Amerosporium economicum) ; red leaf-spot (Cercospora cruenta) ; and mildew (Sphaerotheca sp.). Root-knot and wilt are so common throughout much of the cotton belt that most cowpea varieties suffer serious damage. The Iron variety and some recently bred hybrids of Iron are completely resistant to these diseases, and only such should be grown where these diseases prevail. (See Webber and Orton, Bulletin 17, Bureau of Plant Industry, United States Depart- ment of Agriculture. ) Rust is a disease to which most standard American varieties of cowpeas are immune. Many recently imported varieties, especiaily from China and India, are, however, very susceptible to this disease and suffer severe injuries from it. That other varieties are com- pletely immune to rust would appear from the fact that they are ~ never affected even when growing contiguous to a rusted variety on the same ground for several years in succession, which has been the experience at Arlington Farm. This disease was very much in evidence at Arlington in 1908 and 1909, but was entirely absent in 1910. The two leaf-spot diseases are very common and most varieties of cowpeas are subject to one or the other of them—many, indeed, being affected by both. The most serious apparent result is the early fall- ing of the leaves, or in very susceptible varieties their almost com- plete destruction. The best varieties are but little affected by these diseases, but it is doubtful if any variety is completely immune. In general, cowpeas display a great range of susceptibility and resistance to the various diseases to which they are subject. Among the best varieties there is great or even complete resistance to all the more serious of these diseases, so that any serious loss from this source ean probably be obviated by breeding. THE COWPEA FLOWER AND ITS POLLINATION. The flowers of all the cultivated vignas are practically identical. They are borne in pairs in a short spike at the end of a stout peduncle, the pairs alternately arranged. From 1 to 12 closely 229 26 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. approximate pairs appear in each spike, but usually only one pai develops. By preventing the formation of pods each pair of flowe=s may be forced to bloom successively. The pedicel of each fl cc is very short and bears three boat-shaped, acutish bracts which are early deciduous. The calyx in most varieties is conspicuously rough- ened by transverse ridges. The calyx lobes vary much in length and breadth in different varieties of each of the species. Between the flowers or buds of each pair is an oblong raised cushion haying usually two to eight circular extra floral nectaries commonly ar- ranged in a single row which exude a sweet liquid that becomes white when dry. An analysis ef this substance by Dr. W. W. Garner shows it to be principally glucose. A small amount of some acid, probably malic, is also present. This liquid attracts numerous insects, including ants, honeybees, and flies. Occasionally a very large cushion will have as many as 20 scattered nectaries. The structure of these nectaries is well shown in Plate IV, figure 1, from a microscopical section prepared and photographed by Dr. Albert Mann. The secreting cells are elongated and club shaped. The flowers of the cowpea open early in the morning and nearly all are closed before noon. Later in the day but few open blossoms can be found. Each flower opens but once, wilting and collapsing after blooming. The corollas vary in color from almost pure white to lilac purple. In purple flowers the color is deepest on the wings, the keels being nearly white. In nearly white flowers the last trace of purple lingers on the upper edge of the wings. The back of the standard is paler and often yellow or yellowish green, which gives a greenish cast to the purple when viewed in front. On wilting, the standard falls into the same position it occupied in the bud. Such wilted flowers are nearly always yellow, which doubtless has given rise to the error repeated in botanical works that the flowers are “yellow” or “yellowish.” In nearly all varieties a small, usually W-shaped, yellow eyespot appears at the base of the standard, to the base of which more or less conspicuous “ guide lines” extend. On each side of the eyespot is a sharp vertical ridge which apparently functions to raise the standard to a vertical position. At the base of the corolla are nectaries which secrete a small amount of honey. This honey can be reached only by long-tongued insects, such as bumblebees and butterflies. It would seem that a heavy-bodied insect, such as a large bumblebee, could certainly push down the keel enough to expose the stamens and stigma, though no instances are on record where such action has been observed. At Arlington Farm bumblebees have frequently been seen obtaining the nectar from the flowers, but in no case under observation was the stigma extruded asa result. Butterflies also can get the fioral nectar 229 70 Bul. 229, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE VII. PODS OF TWO VARIETIES OF COWPEAS HAVING CURVED OR COILED Pops: UPPER FiGuRE, No. 21296A; Lower Figure, No. 29278. (Two-thirds natural size.) THE ORIGIN OF NEW VARIETIES. 7] without bringing about the extrusion of the stamens and stigma. At Arlington Farm, during the season of 1909, a few of the flowers had their stamens and stigmas extruded. Whether such extrusion is due to insects or not remains to be determined. It has never been observed in the hundreds of plants grown in the Department green- houses. THE ORIGIN OF NEW VARIETIES. The fact of the existence of numerous varieties of cowpeas calls for some explanation of their origin. Mention has already been made (p. 15) of the fluctuations or fluctuating variations so marked in the cowpea. It is now the general belief that such variations are not hereditable in any plants, and if such is true this type of variation can have had no effect in producing the large number of varieties which exist. A second method by which new varieties arise is that commonly spoken of by gardeners as “sports,” that is, the sudden origin of a form differing markedly from all others. There can be no question as to the occurrence of what are termed “ud sports”; that is, where one branch of a plant bears flowers or leaves different from the other portion, which can be propagated and maintained by cuttings. As to the occurrence of true sports among seedlings, the evidence is not so absolute; but it is the common belief that such seed sports do occur and that they usually breed true. A third method by which new varieties are believed to originate is that of gradual variation, which differs from sporting only in that the variations are slight, though they tend to continue in the direction started. The fourth method is that of hybridization. There is no question whatever that new varieties can be originated by the crossing of two old varieties, and a very large number of cultivated varieties not only of the cowpea but of other plants are known to have originated in this way. It is evident, however, that there can be no hybrids until at least two distinct varieties exist, and it is, therefore, absolutely necessary first to admit the origin of the primitive varieties either by sporting or by gradual variation. Thus far there is no satisfactory proof of the existence of either sports or of gradual variation in the cowpea. It is clear that such evidence can be obtained only by growing pure cultures of varieties under conditions where hybridization or accidental admixture of seeds is out of the question. Nevertheless, it seems reasonably certain that a considerable num- ber of the American varieties of cowpeas have originated in this country; at least, many of them have not been found in the very numerous importations made from abroad, though varieties closely similar in their seed characters have been obtained. As an example, 229 28 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. the Whippoorwill, which is the most important American variety, has never been obtained from a foreign source. The Whippoorwil: mark- ing on foreign seeds occurs principally in Chinese varieties, though such colored seeds have also been obtained from South Africa and from India. The Chinese varieties resemble most closely the Ameri- can Whippoorwill, but none of them are identical with it. One of two explanations must, therefore, be true: Either (1) that the original source of the Whippoorwill variety has not been found, or (2) that it has originated in this country by hybridizing or otherwise. A simi- lar line of argument might be applied to other varieties. On the other hand, in the collections of seed from abroad varieties indis- tinguishable from some American varieties with black or black-eyed seeds have been obtained, and from places. which in all probability had not obtained the seed previously from America. It is an interesting fact that most of the cowpeas imported from China, as well as many from India and from Africa, are very much subject to bean rust (Uromyces phaseoli). American varieties, on the other hand, are apparently wholly immune to this disease. Mr. W. A. Orton makes the interesting suggestion that this points to this fungus being an American native, and that by natural selection the American varieties may have become immune to this disease in the same way that the Iron cowpea has become immune to wilt and to root-knot. In regard to the seed colors of the numerous varieties of cowpeas, practically every color represented in American varieties of cowpeas has been obtained from abroad, so that so far as this point is con- cerned all of the American varieties may have been introductions from foreign countries; but plenty of evidence exists that many of the American varieties have originated by natural hybridizing in this country. Over the greater part of the region where the cowpea is grown, natural hybrids are of very infrequent occurrence. Never- theless, a new kind of seed as regards coloration would easily attract one’s attention and there can be little doubt that many of the Ameri- can varieties have thus originated as chance hybrids. Im at least two localities in the country, as hereafter explained, cowpea hybrids occur in great numbers, so that there is no difficulty in accounting for the numerous American varieties in this way alone, especially when we remember that several varieties were introduced as early as the beginning of the eighteenth century. SIMILARITY IN HABIT OF VARIETIES FROM THE SAME SOURCE, One of the rather startling results of testing cowpeas derived from the same foreign source is that the varieties often turned out to be extremely similar in habit and appearance notwithstanding the fact that the seeds were very different. Thus in a series obtained from 229 > ar Bul, 229, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE VIII. I GREENHOUSE-GROWN PLANT OF CREAM Cowpea No. 0632, SHOWING CYATHOPHYLLY AND OTHER ABNORMALITIES OF LEAVES. (About one-half natural size.) HABIT OF VARIETIES FROM THE SAME SOURCE. 29 Celebes, No. 21813 had buff-eyed seeds; in 21814 they were marbled like Whippoorwill; in 21815, black-eyed ; in 21816, buff; and in 21817, black. In all cases the plants proved to be perfectly prostrate with large, very pale leaves, and so late that they did not even bloom at Arlington; indeed, the plants were indistinguishable from each other. In a similar series from Mount Selinda, Rhodesia, the seeds were as follows: No. 22929, buff; 22930, blue; 22931, speckled, resembling New Era; 22932, black; 22933, speckled, resembling Taylor. All these proved to be very procumbent, forming flat masses of herbage and being practically indistinguishable. Where several kinds of seeds are mixed together, the resultant plants are generally very similar. Thus in No. 11076, from Abyssinia, three kinds of seeds—marbled, speckled, and marbled and speckled— were mixed. These all bred true in the greenhouse. In the field the plants formed very viny procumbent masses that were indistinguish- able from each other, though quite different from other varieties. A number of similar instances can be cited, so that it would ap- pear to be generaly true that varieties from the same source are very similar in habit. 34 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. black is diluted and diffused through the testa, excepting about the eye, which remains black. In the Holstein the black and white are irregularly blotched. Where one parent was Taylor and the other a black-eyed pea, the hybrids included peas with the Taylor mark- ings—fine specklings of blue on buff, wholly about the eye (No. 22727)—and others where the Taylor coloring is blotched in irregular spots and masses (Nos. 17409, 22715, and 22717). From the crosses of Whippoorwill on Lady (a pure whitish pea) the progeny had the Whippoorwill colors distributed after the manner of Holstein (Nos. 17408 and 22730). Another cross is between Warren’s Extra Early (a buff kidney pea) and Sugar Crowder (a yellowish globose pea). The hybrid sent to the Department (Nos. 17422 and 22729) is a yel- lowish kidney pea colored very much like the Sugar Crowder. Prof. Newman describes his method of cross-pollinating as follows: In 1898 single-plant selections were made from one of the Black varieties and from the Extra Early Blackeye, then growing on the Arkansas Experiment Station grounds. These varieties are of quite a different type and several crosses and reciprocal crosses were made. Enough of the corolla was torn from the female parent blossoms to permit the remoyal of the stamens (with curved forceps) and the emasculated blossoms inclosed in paper bags. This was done in the afternoon. On the following morning between 9 and 12 o'clock blossoms for the male parent were removed, the corolla torn away, and the pollen applied to the stigma of the blossoms prepared the previous day. The blossoms furnishing the pollen were sometimes protected by paper bags, but more frequently were not. The bags were usually removed in less than 24 hours after the transference of the pollen and a record label attached. A large proportion of the blossoms treated failed to “set” and many that matured pods developed but few peas and these were often irregular in shape. The peas secured from these crosses were planted the following spring 1 foot apart in rows 34 feet wide. From this first crop single-plant selections were made. In some cases all the hybrid peas germinated and grew, in others none grew, and in many cases a part only germinated. The following year some oi the varieties grown for crossing were planted alternatively in the same rows, two blossoms (one emasculated) brought together, tied, and inclosed in a paper sack. This method was more tedious than the first and was successful to about an equal degree. Since 1904 Mr. W. A. Orton, of the Bureau of Plant Industry, has been engaged in breeding cowpeas better resistant to wilt and root- knot, using the well-known resistance of the Iron variety as the basis. Dari ing the last three years Mr. G. W. Oliver, of the Bureau of Plant ieniseeys has made a very large number of hybrids with the general end in view of originating better varieties. AGRICULTURAL HISTORY OF THE COWPEA AND ITS VARIETIES IN AMERICA. The cowpea is known in the earlier American literature under the names of Indian pea, Southern pea, Southern Field pea, and Cornfield pea. It has also been called Chinese or China bean, and in 229 HSTORY OF THE COWPEAS AND ITS VARIETIES. 30 South Africa its common appellation is Kafir bean. The early history of the cowpea has been fully discussed by Wight.t Early in the nineteenth century it became of considerable agricultural im- portance throughout the Southern States, an importance which has grown greater in recent years. During the nineteenth century a number of articles on the cowpea were written for agricultural journals and have been preserved. As early as 1822 Mr. John MacLeod, of Johnston, N. C., wrote in the American Farmer as follows: I have myself been in the habit of planting as many as five different kinds of peas for the last seven or eight years, and am acquainted with nearly as many more. Of these there are three that possess superior advantages as stock crops; others are esteemed more delicate for the table, and are consequently more commonly grown for market. The former are what we here call the Cow pea, the Tory, and the Black pea. The comparative values of the three kinds according to my experience are that the Cow pea, of a light-gray color, is rather the most prolific, the pods being much the largest, though not quite so thick set on the vine; they are also, I think, more inclined to vine horizon- tally, not attaching themselves so much to the corn as the others, consequently doing it less injury; and they are a little preferred by laborers as a diet, who give either kind a preference to any other vegetable production accom- panying their meat. But they lack the durability of the other two kinds and will never remain in the field without rotting, as the others will, until late in the winter. This is the first published record we have found of the name “cowpea,” which, as used by Macleod and by later writers, was applied to a particular variety, apparently one of the varieties now known as Clay. In an article on the Indian pea in the Farmers’ Register for 1835 (vol. 2, p. 752), “J. M. G.” gives considerable information regard- ing the varieties of the cowpea grown at that date. Among the sorts mentioned by the writer are six Crowder varieties: Jet Black, White with a black eye, Gray, Straw-Colored or Sugar pea, Claret- Colored, and Yellowish Brown. Of other varieties, not Crowders, the following are mentioned: (1) The North Carolina pea, having white seeds with a pale-greenish eye; (2) the common black-eyed pea, of which there are two varieties, one with large seeds and one with small; (3) the Ladies pea or Gentleman pea; (4) a white pea with a brown eye, also called the Yohorn (a name which this author states is sometimes applied to two other very different varieties) ; (5) a red-and-white pea; (6) the Cow pea, also called the Yeatman pea, with yellowish-colored seeds; (7) the Tory pea, with jet black seeds. Most of these varieties are described in considerable detail. The next writer found mentioning varieties of cowpeas is Mr. P. M. Edmonston, in his “ Essay on the Properties and Value of the Bulletin 102, pt. 6, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1907. 229 86 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. Southern Pea, or ‘Cornfield Pea’” (Transactions of the Virginia State Agricultural Society, 1853, vol. 1, p. 172). This writer says the varieties of Cornfield pea are very numerous, and if all the names which could be collected in the country were written their number would fill several pages, because the same pea in different sections goes by different names. Edmonston gives brief agricultural descriptions of seven varieties, as follows: The Shinney pea; the Clay or Gray pea; the Red, Tory, or Bass pea; the Blackeye pea; the Calivant; the Three Crop pea or Tribus pea; and the Black pea. Edmund Ruffin, in 1855, published a most excellent account of the cowpea (Essays and Notes on Agriculture, “* The Southern Pea,” pp. 344407). He gives good descriptions of eight varieties of cowpeas, as follows: (1) The buff-colored pea, usually called either the “ cow ” or “clay” pea; (2) the Bass (red) pea; (3) the blackeye pea; (4) the early black pea; (5) the mottled or Shinney pea; (6) large black or Tory (late) pea; (7) small black, late pea; (8) green- eye white pea. Ruffin was evidently acquainted with other varieties, as in another place he speaks of “ sundry other white peas.” He also mentions crowder peas, describing clearly the differences between the crowder form of seed and the kidney form of seed. He also says: Again, the same variety is known by several different names in different localities. Thus, of the names “ cow-pea”’ and “ tory-pea” each has been used for varieties of red, black, and buff color, and for several varieties of both red and black peas. A writer in the American Agriculturist (1876, vol. 35, p. 139) states that he grew and distinguished 20 varieties. He writes as follows: We have classified our 20 varieties according to their color and markings and make the following groups in each, naming the largest variety first. (1) Seeds cream color, with a minute olive-green line at the eye: White Table (also Mush and Dennis’s Field), Lady, Six-Oaks Field. (2) Cream colored with a brownish stain at the eye: Red-Hulled White, Sugar Crowder, White Crowder (both nearly globular), Browneye, White Field. (3) The same, but with a distinct black eye: White Crowder (different from the one above named), Blackeyed White. (4) Drab, usually darker at the eye: Claybank, Joiner’s Long-Pod. (5) Yellowish brown, with a minute dark line at the eye: Yellow Crowder, Yellow Cow. (6) Purplish-brown, or reddish-chocolate color, with dark line at the eye: Red Ripper (also Tory), Breack, Red Cow. (7) Yellowish or purplish brown, mottled with very dark brown or black, especially toward the eye: Speckled Java (also Early Bush), Whippoorwill (also Speckled ditto, and Shinney). (8) Jet black, with small white scar: Black Field. Since the establishment of the agricultural experiment stations in 1885 many of them have made collections of cowpea varieties and issued publications concerning them. From the above it is evident that even as early as the middle of the nineteenth century numerous varieties of cowpeas were known 229 METHODS OF TESTING DIFFERENT VARIETIES. 6 in the United States and that already considerable confusion in re- gard to the names of the varieties had arisen. With the increase in the number of varieties grown the confusion has become much greater as there are now several or many varieties for every seed color. Some endeavor has been made to ascertain the actual identity of varieties which have been described or mentioned in publications, but in many cases it is no longer possible to do this, and in other cases the identification can be only approximate. METHODS OF TESTING DIFFERENT VARIETIES. The comparative data concerning the numerous varieties here given are based largely on the testing conducted at Arlington Farm since 1903. During the first two years the work was conducted by Mr. C. R. Ball; during 1905 to 1910, inclusive, by the writer, with the assistance of Mr. H. T. Nielsen, in 1905 to 1908, and of Mr. W. J. Morse in 1909 and 1910. Most of the testing has been in cultivated rows 3 feet apart (except in 1909 and 1910 when they were 34 feet), the rows being usually 8 rods long, but in many cases shorter owing to the small supply of seed. As new varieties have been in- troduced each year the period of testing varies from eight years down to one year. In many cases the variety did not mature seed at Arlington, but of most of these enough seed was grown in the greenhouse to plant a second year. The collection of 1909 was almost complete, and except where otherwise indicated the compara- tive descriptions are based mainly on the behavior during that sea- son, which was an exceptionally dry one, so that the plants were rather smaller than usual. The characteristics of the varieties dur- ing the different seasons held remarkably true, so that many of their distinctive peculiarities of habit could easily be recognized. The principal obscuring fluctuation due to better soil or more favorable season was the tendency of the upright-growing varieties to lodge. Apparently, there are no phenomena exhibited in cowpeas that could be called new-place effects unless changes in seed color (as exemplified under No. 16167) are such, which is at least doubtful. In all cases where such seed color forms or varieties were selected out they bred true. No cases of natural hybridization in cowpeas have been observed at Arlington, notwithstanding the fact that numerous varieties have been grown in close proximity for several years. Ina few cases where diversity occurred from the same lot of seed it seems clearly explainable by previous hybridization. While this method of testing does not give comparable yields, it does furnish an excellent method for comparing the varieties as to habit, disease resistance, vigor, fruitfulness, life period, etc., and it is believed that the conclusions reached as to the most desirable 229 38 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. varieties are as accurate as could be determined by any other feasible method. A large proportion of the varieties can at once be eliminated ‘on account of poor habit, extreme lateness, or susceptibility to disease. In such varieties the yield signifies but little. Of the really desir- able varieties the yield of hay or of seed or of both, considered with reference to habit and ease of harvesting, is, of course, determinative. Many of the more desirable varieties have thus been tested at Arling- ton Farm and at Chillicothe, Tex. Various experiment stations have conducted similar work. Further comparative plat trials of the six or eight most desirable varieties need to be conducted, however, as there is still considerable difference in opinion as well as divergence in results regarding the relative values of the best varieties. Such plat trials should be separate both for hay yield and for seed yield, and ease or cost of harvesting should be given due consideration. THE BEST VARIETIES OF COWPEAS. After five years of extensive testing of cowpea varieties at Arling- ton Farm, and to a less extent at Chillicothe, Tex., Monetta, S. C., and Biloxi, Miss., the conclusion reached is that, everything con- sidered, the most valuable American varieties of cowpeas from a forage standpoint are Whippoorwill, Iron, and New Era, and their hybrids, Brabham and Groit. Important, but of distinctly secondary value, are such varieties as Unknown, Clay, Red Ripper, Black, and a considerable number of others not grown extensively. Among the little known varieties that are deserving of most careful testing are Peerless, Red Yellowhull, and Red Whippoorwill. In regard to table varieties, no opinion is vouchsafed. The general prejudice for such purpose is in favor of white-seeded or nearly white-seeded varieties. In order to ascertain the opinion of the various experiment-station agronomists, based upon their experimental work and their knowledge of their respective States, a letter was addressed to each, asking the following questions: ‘“* What five varieties of cowpeas do you regard as the best for your State?” and “ What five varieties of cowpeas are most commonly grown by the farmers of your State?” The answers, briefly digested, are as follows: For Virginia, Mr. T. B. Hutcheson thinks the most commonly grown varieties are Blackeye, Whippoorwill, New Era, Black, and Clay. The Blackeye grown as a table pea has perhaps the greatest acreage. The best varieties he thinks are Whippoorwill, Iron, New Era, Black, Unknown, and Clay. For the same State, Commissioner G. W. Koiner would place the list of the five leading varieties as follows: Blackeye, Whippoorwill, New Era, Unknown, and Clay. 229 THE BEST VARIETIES OF COWPEAS. 39 _ For North Carolina, Prof. B. W. Kilgore regards the five best varieties to be New Era, Iron, Red Ripper, Whippoorwill, and Clay; and the varieties most generally grown to be Whippoorwill, Taylor, Black, Clay, New Era, Red Ripper, Unknown, Iron, and Large Blackeye. For Tennessee, Prof. C. A. Mooers regards both as the best and most extensively grown the following: Whippoorwill, Clay, Black, and New Era; the Red Ripper is grown to a shght extent. For South Carolina, Prof. J. N. Harper considers the best varieties to be Iron, Unknown, Red Ripper, New Era, Clay, Whippoorwill, Red Crowder, and Extra Early Blackeye. From all the information at hand, the varieties most commonly grown are placed in the follow- ing order: Unknown, New Era, Clay, Whippoorwill, Iron, Red Ripper, Red Crowder, and Extra Early Blackeye. For the same State, Prof. C. L. Newman considers the best varieties to be Whip- poorwill, Clay, Black, New Era, and Unknown; though in several localities the Southdown, or Calico, rivals the Whippoorwill in value. In the order of their acreage, he places them as follows: Clay, Whip- poorwill, Unknown, New Era, and Black. For the State of Georgia, Director M. V. Calvin selects the follow- ing as the best varieties: Calico, Clay, Unknown, Red Crowder, Red Ripper, and Whippoorwill. For Florida, Prof. J. M. Scott states: “The varieties most com- monly grown in the State are Whippoorwill, Clay, New Era, and several Crowder varieties, such as Sugar Crowder and Speckled Crowder.” For Alabama, Prof. J. F. Duggar, basing his opinion on extensive experimenting, would select as the five best varieties the Iron, Whip- poorwill, Unknown, New Era, and Browneye Crowder, the latter especially as a table pea. From the information at hand, Prof. Duggar thinks that Whippoorwill is most commonly grown, with Unknown second. For the State of Mississippi, Prof..S. M. Tracy thinks the most valuable are the following: Whippoorwill, Clay, Unknown, New Era, and Blackeye (the last for table use). Probably greater areas of Whippoorwill and Clay are grown than of all of the others combined. For the States of Alabama and Mississippi combined, Mr. M. A. Crosby, who has traveled extensively in these States, thinks that fully 90 per cent of the cowpeas grown are Whippoorwill or Whippoorwill mixed, but Iron and New Era are both growing in popularity. — 229 40 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. For Louisiana, Prof. W. R. Dodson states that Clay and Whippoor- will are grown almost to the exclusion of other varieties, though Unknown is grown to a considerable extent. In the northern part of the State, Lady and Large Blackeye are grown extensively for table peas. The New Era variety is increasing in popularity. He regards the Coffee and Calico varieties as excellent: likewise the Conch. which is comparatively unknown in the State. For the State of Texas, Mr. A. B. Conner regards the best varieties, at least for northern Texas, to be Brabham, New Era, Iron, Whip- poorwill, and Clay. The Whippoorwill is more largely grown than any other variety, followed by the Blackeye and a crowder, which is probably Michigan Favorite. The Clay and Iron varieties are grown to a slight extent. Mr. B. Youngblood, who is intimately acquainted with Texas agri- culture, thinks that 90 per cent of all the cowpeas grown in that State are Whippoorwill. Among others grown are Clay (especially for hay), Unknown, Black (on bottom lands), and various white-seeded varieties for table use. For the State of Arkansas, Prof. C. L. Newman selects as the best varieties: Whippoorwill, Warren’s Extra Early, New Era, Black, and Clay. In some sections the Southdown and Calico rival the Whip- poorwill. In the northwestern part of the State, Warren’s Hybrid gave maximum yields of seed. The varieties most commonly grown in Arkansas are Whippoorwill, Clay, and Black. Mr. A. D. McNair writes that, for Arkansas— Whippoorwill is by all means the most popular variety, and I presume there are 10 times as many bushels of that variety sold as all others put together; Clay is second in importance. Other varieties grown are the Black, the Un- known, and the Blackeye, the latter for table purposes. A few farmers grow New Era, Gray Goose, and Black Crowder. For the State of Oklahoma, Mr. W. L. Burlison, writes: So far the Whippoorwill has no peer in this State. The New Era, California Blackeye, Clay, and Iron are four of the varieties which are most promising out of the long list which has been grown here for three years. The Whippoorwill is the leading one in this State: California Blackeye may be considered a close second. For the State of Kansas, Prof. A. M. Ten Eyck writes that he would recommend in the order named: New Era,t Gray Goose, Whip- poorwill, Blackeye, and Warren’s New Hybrid. For the northern half of the State,.Groit is easily first. For the southeastern and south-central parts of the State the Whippoorwill may be preferred for forage, but no variety exceeds the Groit for seed production. The varieties most extensively grown in the State are New Era and Whip- 1The New Era grown at the Kansas experiment station for the past several years proves to be Groit. 229 THE BEST VARIETIES OF COWPEAS. 41 _poorwill. Other varieties are planted, such as Clay, Iron, Blackeve, Crowder, and Unknown, but none of these produce seed well in Kansas. For Missouri, Prof. A. E. Grantham writes that Whippoorwill is most generally used, followed by Clay, New Era, and Black. The New Era is increasing in popularity, especially to sow after wheat, but he thinks that Groit is superior to New Era, and perhaps the best of all varieties with which he is familiar under Missouri con- ditions. For the State of Illinois, Mr. O. D. Center writes: The varieties that are most commonly grown and give the best satisfaction -In the southern section of the State, in the order of their importance, are Whippoorwill and New Era.’ For the central part of the State the varieties in the order of their importance are Michigan Favorite, Blackeye, New Era, Black, and Whippoorwill. For the northern part of the State only Michigan Favorite and Blackeye are of any value. For the State of Kentucky, Prof. H. Garman says: The Whippoorwill has been longest and most generally sown, although it is not as highly valued as the New Era. We think very favorably of the Iron and the Taylor. For Indiana, Prof. A. T. Wiancko would place the varieties for forage production in the order of their merit as follows: Iron, Clay, Red Ripper, New Era, and Michigan Favorite. For grain pro- duction, in like order, he names Early Blackeye, Whippoorwill, New Era, Michigan Favorite, and Warren’s. Whippoorwill, Karly Blackeye, and New Era are most commonly grown, while Michigan Favorite and Warren’s in northern Indiana and Iron, Clay, and Red Ripper in southern Indiana are more or less used. For Maryland, Mr. Nickolas Schmitz says the varieties most com- monly grown are Whippoorwill, New Era, Black, and Unknown. In the order of their value he regards the following as best for eastern and southern Maryland: Whippoorwill, New Era, Groit, Brabham, and Unknown. The last named he regards as the best for planting in corn for ensilage. For northern and western Maryland he would put them as follows: New Era, Groit, Whippoorwill, and Unknown. Only the New Era and Groit can be depended on for seed production. For Delaware, Prof. A. E. Grantham thinks Whippoorwill, New Era, and Blackeye are most commonly grown. 4He considers the best varieties to be Whippoorwill, Groit, and possibly Clay. The foregoing data are summarized in Table I. 1Most of the so-called New Era grown in southern Illinois is Groit.—C. VY. P. 229 42 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. TABLE I1.—Summary of reports upon cowpeas, by States. BEST VARIETIES, IN ORDER OF MERIT. State and authority. 1 2 3 4 5 Ajabama? Duggan: 2-22. -5- = - lhreys eee eee Whippoorwill) Unknown....| New Era..... Browneye Crowder. Arkansas; Newman........--- Whippoorwill Vee New Era....-. Black: 2: sab Clay. tra Early Delaware; Grantham..........|...-- 052525... |/ Grote: ose Clay & oscc cue ede ae eee Georgia Calvilte..-- 2224-2 = = Calico..-..... Clays 2-2-2 Unknown....| Red Crowder.| Red Rip- er. Indiana; Wiancko: “5 For, grains... 5 32.2 sees Early Black- | Whippoorwill] New Era...-- Michigan | Warren’s. eye. Favorite. For hay. 32 eee Tron. 30 2.22 Clay n 5 soso Red Ripper. .| New Era.....| Michigan Favor- ite. Kansas Teneiy@ke = see - eee Grote eee) Laylors noe Whippoorwill} Blackeye.....| Warren’s New Hy- brid. Kentucky; Garman........-..- New Era...--.- Whippoorwill) Iron........-.- Paylorsscee Maryland; Schmitz: Eastern and southern......| Whippoorwill} New Era...-.- Groit..2420 523 Brabham. ...} Unknown. Northern and western....- New Era.-... Grolt> WwW HiEpoohay Unknown.... MASSISSIP Die L TAC Vinee eee eee Whippoorwill) Clay.-..-.....- Unknown....| New Era..... Blackeye. North Carolina; Kilgore......- New Era..... Tron 2. ee Red Ripper... Whippoorwill) Clay. Oklahoma; Burlison........--. Whippoorwill] New Era....- California 4:Clayaro-cee Tron. Blackeye. South Carolina: PHarpervses. eee eee eee | Sironesee 2% Unknown...-.} Red hap fee New Era.....| Clay. Newmans 4+ -45.-4heplosee: Whippoorwill) Clay.......... Baek 255 = eee do.......-| Unknown Mennessee; Mooerss222-- 2c es |e ee oe 6 a ae se aaa a “la = mse Red Rip- er. Texas: ‘Conners. «.22 ose aeee =e | Brabham. ...| New Era..... Tron. vis. fees bee chaps ay: Virginia; Hutcheson..-.....---- | Whippoorwill) Iron.......--- New Era..-..- Black 35-2. 5 Unknown. VARIETIES MOST CULTIVATED, IN ORDER OF ACREAGE GROWN. Ajabama; Duggan: 22-225... -- Whippoorwill) Unknown.... oi) OO Arkansas: McNait. o22 2.2258: Aowseen|enese dO cecien Clay. sa ceens Blak. 2-522o6 hits -| Blackeye. INE wimian: = 2s ees cee Bee (6 (Oey ees ro [6 ee aes es hs 2 do ios eee Delaware; Grantham........-|..... doce 5- New Era.. Blackeye.. ow s2 ale 2 ataine eee lonida7Seobtas.-eseee eee ee doses Clay: 2 322 ee New Erace Iron. Progeny of 13460. See 8418. Taylor. A selection of 13476, but quite the same. See 17342. From the Mark W. Johnson Seed Co., Atlanta, Ga., March, 1903. See 17350. Brown Crowder, From Mr. L. Cameron, Jacksonville, Fla., March, 1903. Vigorous, half bushy, viny, the row mass 20 inches high, 16 inches broad; trailing branches medium coarse, few, about 2 feet long, green or purplish; leaflets dark, small, immune to rust, much affected by red leaf-spot; flowers pale violet purple; pro- lific; pods moderately well filled, held medium high, straw colored, about 6 inches long, the first maturing in about 80 days; seeds vinaceous buff, subglobose, smooth, about 7 by 7 mm.; iris brown. The Brown Crowder is taller than most crowder varieties, but has no great merit. It has been grown at Arlington Farm for six years, and also at Chillicothe and Amarillo, Tex., and Stillwater, Okla. Whippoorwill Crowder. From Mr. L. Cameron, Jacksonville, Fla., March. 1903. Medium low, half bushy, moderately vigorous, the row mass 12 to 14 inches high, 23 feet broad; trailing branches green, coarse, few, 2 to 4 feet long; leaves medium in size and color, immune to rust, little subject to leaf-spot; flowers pale violet purple; fairly prolific; pods held rather low, straw colored, 5 to 6 inches long, the first maturing in about 75 days, 90 per cent being ripe 30 days later; seeds subglobose, about 6 mm. in diameter, buff marbled brown. Decidedly inferior to ordinary Whippoorwill in the six Seasons it has been grown. Wight Black Crowder. From Cairo, Ga., April, 1903. Procumbent, the coarse stems mostly lying on the ground, 1 to 3 feet long; the row forming a thin mass 6 to 10 inches high, 2 to 3 feet broad; leaflets large, immune to rust, much affected by leaf-spot, shed early; flowers violet purple; prolific; peduncles stout, erect; pods 6 to 7 inches long, as broad as thick, straw colored or purplish, slightly torulose, the first mature in about 85 days; valves thick; seeds subglobose or somewhat compressed, about 8 mm. in diameter. It is hardly distinguishable from a variety from Mr. George M. Simms, Canyon. Tex., grown four years under No. 0802. Compare 22052. Delicious or Small Lady. From Texas Seed and Floral Co., Dailas, Tex., March, 1908. See 17359. Red Whippoorwill, From Mr. C. E. Brush, Atlanta, Ga., May, 1903. Tall, vigorous, viny, the row mass 30 to 36 inches high, 4 feet broad; trailing branches many, 3 to 6 feet long; leaflets dark green, medium large, free from rust and leaf-spot, held late: flowers violet purple; moderately prolific; pods well filled, held high, straw colored, 6 to 7 inches long; seeds subreniform, maroon marbled with dark brown or black, 6 by 8 mm. At Arlington Farm the first pods matured as follows: 1905, in 120 days; 1906, pods did 17375. 173876. 17377. 17378. 17379. 17380. 17381. 17382. 17383. CATALOGUE AND DESCRIPTIONS OF VARIETIES. 93 not mature in 127 days; 1907, in 136 days; 1908, in 101 days; 1909, in 104 days. The Red Whippoorwill in a general way resembles Whippoorwill, but is much later, decidedly more viny, not so upright, and less prolific. The same variety was obtained from the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station through Prof. C. L. Newman in 1908, and grows as 0608 and 17416. Later and taller with paler foliage and less prolific are 01398 with seeds like 1737 and 013899 with pink marbled seeds, both from Mr. J. C. Little, Louisville, Ga., 1909. From Sumbalpur. district, Central Provinces, India, 1903, under the vernacular name “Jhunga.” Seeds buff, oblong, 6 by 9 mm. Very procumbent, the row mass 10 inches high, with prostrate branches 5 feet long; late, no pods maturing at Arlington Farm in 132 days before being killed by frost. At Chillicothe, Tex., it was of very similar habit but did not come to bloom. Catjang. From Satara, Bombay Presidency, India. Vernacular name “ Chauli.” Low, half bushy, not at all twining, the row mass 8 to 12 inches high; trailing branches medium in number, 1 or 2 feet long; leaflets small, dark, considerably attacked by rust, not much by leaf-spot; flowers, pale violet purple; prolific; pods well filled, held erect, straw colored, 3 to 4 inches long, the first maturing in about 110 days; seeds oblong, white with a buff eye, about 3 by 4 mm.; iris dark brown. A remarkably distinct variety of catjang that has been grown for four seasons. The small, thickish leaflets are often paler along the midrib. It is not of any particular promise. Catjavg mixed with 17381 from Coimbatore, Madras, India, 1903. Seeds buff, oblong, 4 by 5 mm.; plants procumbent, 18 inches high with trailing branches 3 to 4 feet long; first pods maturing in 82 days in 1905. Too low and viny, as well as too shy a seeder to be valuable. Catjang. From United Provinces, India, 19038, under the vernacular name “ Bhadela.” Seeds buff, oblong, variable in size, 3 to 5 by 5 to 7 mm. Very similar in all respects to 17375 in 1905, the only season. grown. An admixture in the preceding, the seeds darker, a difference due to weathering. Grown in 1905, when it was not distinguishable from 17378. Mixed with 17382 from Jabalpur, Central Provinces, India, 1903. Seeds reddish, oblong, 5 to 6 by 7 to 8 mm. Plants procumbent, 12 to 15 inches high, with trailing, slender branches 3 to 4 feet long; no pods mature in 130 days in 1905 when killed by frost. Too late and sprawling to be valuable. Catjang from Coimbatore, Madras, India, 1903, under the vernacular name “ Choli.” Indistinguishable from 17377 both as to seeds and plants. Frem Jabalpur, Central Provinces, India, 1903, under the vernacular name “ Barbati.” Not distinguishable from 17380. Melear. From Mr. R. T. Melear, McKenzie, Tenn., December, 1903. This variety closely resembles both Unknown 18468 and Clay 17340, being about intermediate between them, and difficult to dis- tingnish excepting where the three are growing side by side. 229 94 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. Mr. Melear writes that it is the progeny cf a single plant that he found in a field of Black cowpeas. He further writes that this variety does not climb when planted in corn and that the seeds will lie in the field all winter and be sound in spring. 17384. Black X Iron. A hybrid from Mr. W. A. Orton, his No. 14a2-2-1. See 27859. 17385. Black X Iron. A hybrid from Mr. W. A. Orton, his No. 14a2-2-1. See 27859. 17386. Sixty-Day. From Mr. I. F, Cherry, Rocky Mount, N. C., in 1905. Low, half bushy, vigorous, the row mass 18 inches high, 2 feet broad; trailing branches many, 4 feet long; leaflets medium in size and color, immune to rust, moderately affected by leaf-spot; flowers violet purple; not prolific; pods well filled, held medium high, straw colored, 7 to 9 inches long, the first maturing in about 100 days; seeds cream buff to vinaceous buff, oblong to rhomboid, about 6 by 8 mm., rather strongly keeled. Judging from its be- havior at Arlington Farm, it is not a desirable variety; grown for Six Seasons. 17387. Sixzty-Day. From Mr. F. I. Meacham, Statesville, N. C., June, 1905. Identical with the preceding. 17388. From the Amzi Godden Seed Co., Birmingham, Ala., April, 1905, as Lady Finger. This proved to be identical with 17359. 17389. Black X Iron. A hybrid from Mr. W. A. Orton, his No. 14a—5-1-1. See 27859. 17390. From the Amzi Godden Seed Co., Birmingham, Ala., April, 1905, as Grayeye. Low, half bushy, vigorous, the row mass 22 inches high, 4 feet broad; trailing branches coarse, many, 6 to 8 feet long; leaflets large, medium dark, immune to rust, a little affected by both red and white leaf-spot; flowers almost white; not prolific; pods well filled, held rather high, straw colored or sometimes tinged with purple, 43 to 53 inches long, the first maturing in about 90 days; seeds subreniform, white with a medium reddish-buff eye, 5 by 7 mm. Grown four seasons. 173890A. Similar in habit and date of maturity; pods 6 to 7 inches long; seeds oblopg, 5 by 7 mm., white with a small buff eye; iris olive. 17391. From Monetta, S. C. ot eee 47 Boss: - 2.252.526.2052. sa deepening ee 47 Brabham?) 2 225% 15, 18, 38, 40-42, 47, 67, 74, 89, 111, 125, 131, 143 Breack 2052 0.65 02. 2. ok 2 c2 ee ee 36, 47 Brown and White....:.....-....<.). 22 eee 47 Speckled Crowder: +2222): ssa ees 47 Coffee2s dci.k teens oe ee ee 30, 47, 74, 95, 128 Crowder: .. 220.224 .<4 22ceceh Aa 48, 72, 92 Browneye......--.-.--+--.-+--++-5 2ig@e) a0 ie ees Crow@eér ss) (ioch< ial 48 39, 42, 48, 73, 88, 95 Browneyed Sugar. --... .0c.912. 22 eee ee 48 Buckmoran: »...... 2.5.02)... 2...) ee 48 Buckshot. .o..... 202. 2 Us So ee teas Le ee 48 Buffs. 222.2 ee cn ee eee eee 48, 56 Burbudl...-3) 2.2. oe wes coon eee 48 Bush Conch... 2. 2.22.22 po eee 48 Calavanceor Calavence!:. i oS * ie ae 10, 48, 49, 53, 60 Cale oss! ener ja tere Ae an ak ine a ee 39-40, 42, 48-49, 87, 97 California, California Bird’s-Eye, or California Black- Cyel “sak ere eee ee eee 40, 42, 44, 49, 81, 86, 133 Calivant: 2. ....60s.. -2kee B.A oe ee ee 36, 48, 49 Calvins) - 202.2225 225.55 ce eee eee 49 Camden 0. Sb a ee ee eee 49 Capehart’s Red: Pea: __- ...... See. eee 49 Cardinal 22. 226 oo eee 49, 89 Carolinan. 2.222) ee ee eS eee eee 43, 49 Oasérta ical iso le ee 83 Chickasaw iiss). 2 Se eae 49 Chinese Blackis: 7.0 So eco 2 ee Oe es 74, 83 Brownéye.0 2 a Ne ee 49 H Ried open Airdate Sh keary hu nireetiains rears. a 49,78, 84, 115-116 Whippoorwill: 22.2008. 02) cB eee 49, 74, 84 INDEX. 149 Page. Memanesewarieties, Chocolates... 00.25.40. sc cee eek sche SLR ai eS 50 MENTO GL ET ree at its apo ek ce Ae iene ret Oe 8 i ee 50 Claret-Colored=@rowdet.2c< 5 2s ee EO os 30, 50, 55 Clay...- 17, 18, 30, 31, 35, 36, 38-44, 50, 63, 72, 81, 87, 91, 100, 141-143 Clangnimkamere er ee) css hmmm CN eae ad 36, 50 @laya Colaned tae si 4 5 te ee Me ee be cs on 50 PSST ENS Ele GIN goat Staticee ee RU ME ED RG Ser “Rena acon San 72-73, 117 (ON ITO tpt Us ee i a eRe A ROY AE on ge eae gE 5 Oita ee eC I WA eS Si Ce eR AQ, 50, 51, 87, 97 POUT AG si WC ENA WA Eat el ee ote ete ae Oe eee ol Gel ora don yon ees enh re ie RR ol ok Sw ie 76 (ON TIT ag Se ea esse Yay eae Ae ner ee See ea 49, 50, 51 Orne Ge 6 eee ee eC ee 2 a a A EE peg ly 40, 44, 48, 51, 52, 72, 97 (MOTD GR a SANS doi RN OO a ea BRUNE Gur oe Ree a Gea 16, 51, 86, 139 WONs HURON et ele 2 etn BREA Oe Su ig Sac ee ks 51 Corresyela te meer Ne RCE RM Li ae eee ele at ls 1122; JOST hess es Rs a TE CEE, SCR Ge 82 Croco a hens a pec ee ee a nce vy) Rags tea Lea 17, 51, 138 POONA VOR EN uae ene nga MN Le ul el Pe see a a 52 MBC eee she sais Ee AU mA INANE os Ca ada ales 35-36 GG Sonny eee RA 2S, L len gm Sy ME SARE Co wa 30, 31, 43, 52, 72, 100 INTE Se te SCSI 20 cee NAIL es OS A Ra ee 52 Groh det on BER ON oN ces oh hs Pee 30-32, 35, 41, 52, 143 MirremOnduc I MCKEDse a Ney 2 A a eid RE yo ae 2s 52 Welcingaker incr en ee ah we ch ea PE 138 1D YETICOTOTOIS WE ae Ses Oe ea ote ee oak nes ae rt sO Pe Cees aa 52, 92 JO YSVOREAVT SSI ERTS GE SAE Gee ea eae acta he shee), Menge ese 36, 52 HO SRV oh aes ee eet eo ean ON SVE CNROLEDS Cua ga a a 52 Mowmc: Harkye ipemersss96. 8s e Ss eee eee ts ol. fe. 52, 84, 1038 rgart Nin ip poonmilbe, 2o eee has ee oe 52 TE ECPI AAT) OVS RE Bes Sil h a uU e cea pea ST RN a 52 Bilereee es Gea Ga AG. 552 74, 81.86, 88, 139 Blaelce yer oles fo.) oe Ll welt 41-43, 52, 84, 86, 114 EVO Oe ese a alae line, I rane PARK 52, 79 BS KO iy WGI ie een ale eak age nt Ij a he Oe 52 Bulloch sok es Tete Nay sto oo iy Oc Se 52 IEP Slois Awe Gwe ote te RON aera 25007 Mi, as ee 36, 52 Canary se ter ere ee WRN Nees PER So. OL cae 49, 52 He Berge gE NE ie iy LR Go at ana Bsns (3, 126 NVhertinekeme heer dene uli ie hie me os ak et 43, 52 VOUS 2 a ake AN a eh Sa aa Ur ERIS ML) aC NEE 52 Hi verlasbiie een tine on poe Oe OREO Ce tae bee ci 52-53, 68 IBpes tear clraliye as tre bs ta a aes as a tae Go 53 Blackeye vee tent 34, 39, 53, 81, 84, 86, 97, 98, 116 HESO WARLO yes eee St Sy SN pcm RD Se TN 53 Men anor waUese ki Ae eR eRe ee pee es 11, 102, 120 Miele White Pa bles os iow h se oc eens Chee See a ae 53 LRN ad RWCECG a A AMR UN pacha ets. Se eR Re 53 IE Lran pe te eG aE TO Br A Ce pin RD Fa ee Ss a aS 53 UNOS EYES i ues thes ee aoe SG ancy Sig Mee Lp 53 Hontye Day eles er! Aer EEE Sa Ny te cea ale 53 GaltyantGallavant. or Gallivamt:... bass cot... ol ee... 10, 48, 53 Gem enneees Se ele aa en cali SRE ve NR TA eS A 30, 03, 56 229 150 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. Page. Cowpea, varieties, Giang don......2..20.2.2. a. bose e eee 53, 119 Gourd... el Ba eee Se SE 53-54, 58 Granite Crowder......2..-3:02)2 ic he 54 Gray ee. 2t kis etd ee Oe 35, 36, 50, 54, 63 Crowder. .222522220) no... 4) 39, 43, 87 Grayeye, or Greyeye...-:..-..-.-22 322 ee 54, 94 Gray Goose... 242225). 4 eee 40, 43, 54, 88 Prolific... 2250.25.00 sss 222s 00256) eee 54 Grecian. is... ese .s00 ey) st eee 54, 78, 85 GYGOD © 2b se es teie ei on ee 54 Collard..).22.-22..4-520)...22) 51, 54 Coloreds.2.. 2.2 s22254 24 2 54 Eye White: ...-.2....2..4.21. 1 36, 54 Grey Crowder... 02.0. 516222 2b 4 Eye. See Grayeye. Groit.... 2.22 peo Se eee 15, 21, 22, 29, 38, 40-42, 47, 54, 75, 85, 88, 89, 97, 103, 126, 131, 143 Guermsey. s. 2. e222 2. ae eee 54, 75, 89, 96, 97 Guess. . 2.262 21sec eee Sens op 55 Halesteime.......2... 02.4 2: J2 5 ee 55 Hammond’s Black. . .....J2¢.2.-¢ ..22 (22S eee 55, 86 Extra Early... ... 222 2220822 55 Han chiang doh.....2....2: 20.2222, eee ee 55 Hollybrook. :..2..-2..-22..3. MSS S23 5d Holsteim..........-...----. 22, 30-31, 33, 34, 45, 55, 74, 83-84, 96, 97 Indian... 02:20... 00-24-23 ee 35, 55 Red. oi... 252. steel dee ee 55 Innominate..:.....-2.22.4...2.20.2 200 55 Tronic Joo een see ae eee 14, 15, 17, 21, 25, 28, 38-44, 55, 57, 62, 65, 72, 79, 81, 92, 94, 95, 99-101, 111, 113, 115, 125, 127, 132, 134, 143 Tronelad..2..2. 2.22.2 2.02 2-05-21 4 eee 55, 79 Tron Mountaim.:...: J. 200... 2-< 2 eee 55, 79, 98 * Black..22 cc.4825-25.. 2. See eee 127, 134 Large Blackeye. .:... 02s. 2232: Ree. 22 134 Whippoorwill .«: :e: Oe Se eee 127, 128, 134 Java, Jervis, or Jervy:.. 2... 2.025: 222822 Jet Blacks: 20.20.5220. 4412. eee 35 Jhunga 6.2.22 oS oe eee 55, 93, 108 Joiners Long-Pod._:2.. 2.2.2. 522.221) eee 36, 55 Jones’s Perfection White and Jones’s White.........--...- 5d Khed-jhunga...--) ./.0..2.52125 2222.17 eee eee 109 King S23... icseie i hie eee . 56 Kaintohi; or Kutohi.: 0.22.2. 212i 2) Se eee eee 56, 78 Kurakake: coc.) ios. oc Ce eee 56, 78 Ladiesie2s C3. (ek eS 35, 53, 56 at ae 30-32, 34, 36, 40, 42, 43, 53, 56, 57, 63, 70, 72, 91, 117, 141 Pinger. 20th eee eee eee same 56, 94 Iharge Blacks: sc feo Sa eee 36, 56 iBlackeye:cs ie Sie ieee ee 39, 40, 43, 56, 81, 88, 91, 134 Harly Black. .2222 222. 62 2 ee ee 5€ Ihady fo. 50 2k oe Sos ei Sicee ele ee 56 Red. 5. io 5che er e eee ee 56 White..... cob be Sb RSS Sue Rte eRe ee oe a 57 229 INDEX. 151 Page Meee anictics, Warse White Blackeye. .-.:2.-2.2. 24.0225 ld. 57 CHOI = cece, Aen ake oe st ge a ee caer oa 50 COTA ON AC |B Is Oar see eat oe ee 57 SOG er ele eee say SOBER ess oe 57, 116 TEEN ORAS LD eR I eee ea JE ee a Oo” iiefes lenient aS eS ae 57 estonesssehs jas ul aRIGS Bie ain ile Sa eae ae ee a a 57,78 Biriienrved Pod igen nc tt OE So 57 Mace EO Wal pe ee ae ee eee ws Dh hosot 1 DIAG Ines SE eS ee et Maat S02, Oy oe 57 LES ae te Re ae Ae ees Eager ce eg ea 57 LOGY 2) eae Se Se ET Oe gle 12 ee 57, 106, 112 TOTS, SENG Va Ae STS es TN cr 22g 57, 91 Louisiana Wild. See Wild Louisiana. Tes iE SIS oe SIS? reel oP PEE oe Son) SR toc ig 57, 102 IVECIN Te ci ee Bere en eh. coh, WP RR Ss CB are cin 58 AWEY SINT OU SLE 2G) iene aay per hase a ey 2 ea ire ee aE See 57 (BS Es a areata CARs ate os ec ea a es ea 57 IVBIST SS AS of RES A aa areas ere inte eee ot Ie ea pea 57, 126 JHE DSSS at Bor a SRA AS i 53, 58 NUN BRIIER (CIB SMS CSE Ee eae eRe AEG. 2 ice 2 MR ROS esa 58 Wai) Dae. Se tah ee aE tag a RO Sea Ue to ee 58, 72, 87, 93-94 Michican, Favorite.:... 2222. :i.- 30, 40-42, 58, 72, 80-83, 95-96, 99 LL TTUL eye aR NS i rate REC OTR 5 7 ee 58, 141 miscellaneous, Unnamed - ...). 2552 SLs be. eee 72-80, 82-85, 88, 90-91, 93-103, 107-109, 112-117, 119-132, 135-137, 139-142 eiireior oper mers DU cae ly ieee See RE ee 76 Diligmen haley pyr pls os cers 5 PME RIN ol ae 36, 58 NOVI DO NIRV OR asd ae Gre i Deane a2 Sa” UU na ee 58, 87, 99 ielicgsarni aia ORO WOLEDE 2.5 uns ane Rene ee UE Ca 58, 72, 138 AV era ieee ep ee rs TN 6 eS 130-131 AV iss ibe yeeros cia ae ML namie Lyte amuse SER TEIE Ci 36, 58 New Era..... 1 a yaa anee a ae r ea," Loeb! A ee cr 14-16, 18,19, 21, 29, 38-44, 47, 52, 58, 70, 75, 77, 82-85, 95, 97, 101, 103, 106, 132-133, 142, 143 [SENSIS oe wee pe da Mery Os BATS ete cet ce ee rrr 58 INI ere erage ee eee BN OEE SN eS Gas 58 Nico Nien eens arr melee ae UR eR Sa. No ae 58 AN conta trla Ga Te RTN A eres Sag at, Ser ere eb AN SAGE RS 35 TN Ort me Tata ee reo ea Cm ee al aang RRS RT ee 58 LOCO BIG GRE Cateye pea igen eves aatey iat REr eg Sait RE) Bae Rea 58, 72, 90-91 NT SEERA GL tae ee ee aE ea nek es ee oe ek 58 Egat hese eee lee ere est Saree PMO REN A ee Ee 58 Emmure sWariy: WOMGer. sats: Sight 0s en gs ee 59, 132 IR CArOn be: back wood sia=ee rg. oan el Sr ements ieee 45, 58, 59 Reerless 522 21s 6294 520 2 5 AIO 438,59,. 63-74-75, 89, 127-128 1) Ole Cate poe tet aos ae ae ee Seen eo Sak 2s 53, 59 1 DTT ees a ie Nan ees ray 15 <2 pag eee a gO eR a 59 LEC OTG 250A eg AR gs fa ONAL PRO Np mg a RD eR 59 Poor Man’s Friend. See Pea of the Backwoods. Powell Hark Prolifics 28) M5000 we Se 59, 72, 87, 94 ialtnp bene peers ee UR 5S CEs 18 ie AEN S EN os 59 AEM ey eee Gi OS id. oe RSA 57, 60 152 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. Page. Cowpea, varieties, Purple Hull Crowder... 2. s2s:02 222_0- 3 ee 60 Podded Clay... at 3. . 22. 2 72, 100-101 Quadroons «i 2). \- «seo SOPERB ED. 2 ee 60 Queen of Carolina... ....-.-.--be0)...2---25222 eee 60 Oinlieks 6 loot bec net ae eee Wen tot. go er 60 Ram ’s-Horn. . 2 22.42-:~ 215: ---5- 6 eee 60 Blackeye... ... . ».-.-..i- 22 60, 133 Red; Very. on Basso. oe 22 OO 35, 43, 45, 60-61, 68 Red-and-White Speckled... .._........ 2 ae 61 Carolina... «2.0.2.2 4 sem acta, 2 Se 61, 89, 99 Cs) nin 36, 61 (CROW CR og oe os i ee ee 39, 42, 61, 73, 91, 94, 98, 99 Redding ..2- 2c ae en ise 62 Red-Hye....g2222.:. 55.4 22. ..J4) eee 61 Eyed. Red Pod:.........-.......-_. 2 61 Hulled White. ........ 2.....2:2.- 2 ee ee 36, 62 Tron. 202 2 Jae. eh cee ee 62 Ltt 62 Bippet. 2s) 5./2-20 s454tesu ese 17, 18, 36, 38-39, : 41-44, 49, 61, 62, 73, 89-91, 101, 125-126, 133, 142, 143 River...22:-25+..-.-.2m.+..... 222 eee 62 Running + 222. se ee oe ne rr 62 Sport’. ......-...--2- +. See 62, 138 TOL 22e.- sien ee hee one 62 Unknown........ .-Qeuiceelt 226s 62 Winppdorwalli:29) 3) 08. Ae ee 38, 62, 74, 92-93, 97 Yellowhull.... 4202.0 A 38, 62, 73, 89, 92, 137 Yellow Pod..........2...-... eee 62 Regular Lady .......-.-..+4.-40: 33: 04 Ge ee 63 Rice. 2225-85 -46es:2.4-.q-4-.. 2 eee 63, 72, 95, 141 Ross. White... .<.2.5-.-2-0..-:...2..-. Se 63 Running Speckled. .. .-.2,-.-.-.-.-.-\-.2.-.205- 5 63, 127-128 Saddleback :....=....-..-:-:2++-22+---- eee 63 Sand s.Je: 0h. Ao seb oy 2 2 63 Self-Seeding Clay..2i.¢-.'--.--- 262. 4 22 ee 138 Sherman’s Northern Prolific. ...... s.aec335-- 58, 63 Shiminey or Shinty: oi See a eee 36, 53, 58, 63-64, 88, 89 SHTIMP 2-4 2s en ace hs ee eee 64 Six-Oaks Freldi- 0. 2... 0. 2... ..2...0c eee. Sa 36, 64 Sixty-Day. 75 ee a 64-65, 72, 87, 94 Small Black .- 2.00.0 2002. ks te ee 36, 65 Black Crowdet.....-:-... 2244-2 3 137 Blackeye...25- 4 222.2..52502 5: so ee eee 65 Lady... -2...5.4888a8. ¢ es eee 65, 92 Smallpox.-..2.. :..¢, .. saweeee ee eeeeeeeeee 65, 122 Smalb Red sor Dory... -. - 205550 36. ee 65 White... /2..52..2.0 25 eee 65 India. 2 oo ee ee 65 Smiley soc sane. wc len een ele ee 65 Smite eno. att te null gud" heen we ee a 65 Smith’s.Nos. 45:7; 9, 14, andi? hace shee eee 65-66 Southdown, or Southdown Mottled-........... 39, 40, 66, 73, 86-87 Sonthernss 0-7 oo a ea ee ge 36, 66, 77 Blackeye.......... etn oe cae 63, 66 229 2 INDEX. 153 Page Semmoa varieties, Southern Whippoorwill.-.......... 5.222.220... 05) S2 2.2 66 | Bric Menrren: Cpa SNe ere sa cs uta 66 SVOGUELS SCS es SR a2 SCR en tan 4 en GEA RIE a 66, 88 COXON SIA BEE ich vk re eR etc Cd Me 39, 67, 75, 91, 114 aE NG US ie Ghee ee ana, 23 36, 55, 67, 87-88, 97 ERs ep sete ene ine ae 67, 111 NiO Orwell 36, 67 pe flee ie etre ep cei. ace aia) SAMS oa od BU et 67 NS] Da oA a Pe NE te oe Mi sic eo 67, 74, 99 SET ee ee ee RY SEN REE. Oo Se as 67 SEER TT/SS eI oir = rena oe oe 67 Straw-Colored Crowder. ........ ME Ey aioe Kok wei 25 STDS TS ES eer Mere ON ee 8 agen a 35, 67 DBlear Growdlers seeds Seu ok ei 34-36, 39, 67 Melee tc cay ie ps ee Sy! M=93199-39 34. 3941-49. _ 51, 54, 55, 67, 71, 75, 77, 82, 87-88, 91, 92, 95, 97, 116, 117, 143 CRONE GR toy tae a se aA a ee sours 31, 54, 75 ADO UY AEM a 20), c1 Clue Biot oP 0! eee Satu get =e ee 67-68 Remnersees© lays es See ee Pee ee een IN 43 Gro yeh ree eh) i ke POA eS Si: 68 PBS Or ys eg So OE Be RN i a Sk NE oes 36, 68 LOT ENG (UVTI aoa ANG aR PSY SS ae Ce 9 2 76 LUE EAD a Lien aera ge eR as | eg a 68 ‘| OS REE a), OC ee aie eee a 35, 36, 45, 56, 60-61, 63, 65, 68 ANOS DEG LSS os RS Te eee 68, 73, 132 “ENS cane eee en rae ee 36, 68 SSH 4l (CPN GR) Ss) ey eae pees pe nee ea 2 ee age 84, 142 | NTE TIEN Pets OE Gl (of 2a ns a ase er aie ae en ee 68, 113-114 POs Oren terre ie iy Boe te eta de cai i Lesh eas 44, 68, 138 tbe)inal crn ome era Ae ls en hbk Bee sun as ks ae yee 18, 38-44, 47, 58, 60, 68, 71, 72, 81, 87, 90, 91, 133, 141-143 Hite Kae ates ee eee el aE MS eanaae AL FER 68, 133 Upright. See Poona. \VECOU TTT tales 50 fe een a as Nee RA Pos Su ee. er ar ee 68 QRIIILCCE isos oa. ys eG a rey ea ge Qe tt bas 23 68, 115 Ran emkeenumOD ram ee Fe eee ue ekki ae nk 115 VEERen OF Warren’ soot ibey. earthed sp fe sr ceteny) CL 41, 42, 68, 80 Warren’s) Wixtra.Warly: -s52 2.005 5 17, 30, 34, 40, 42, 68-69, 81, 90 Gmucar Crowder 2.2. eek. na 69, 98 Hey bridhon New: -Elybnid 6 23 es eek L7: 40, 42, 69, 72, 81, 87, 88, 90, 117 Watson, or Watson’s Hybrid......... 22, 30-33, 47, 69, 74, 83, 98-99 AW Dane pp co rave Eos esi pe ea cates, eS Neds ar 14-19, 229 21, 24, 28-31, 34, 36, 38-44, 52, 63, 66-67, 69, 74, 75, 77, 82, 88-89, 91, 96, 101, 102, 111, 125, 132, 134, 143 Grower ean ee at ts ah ee aes 31, 69, 74, 92 DAadiehaG@he asta hang Sie iyreeeta hk leek 69, 97 NDR ae eer wea sic Morin aie tebed os Cie 35, 36, 69 and Brows speckleds vo: 0 is see ee nS oe 69 Blncke yer Rea as copy a OS ea ore 43, 69 ErOMMaMOr uN arinee ions ages Te mee Beetle 69 Borovets eevee cy Rinrcce et OUR street ER See gah 70 @rowcenyes sss ec? iS gine Bose a Ge Ae 35, 36, 70, 88, 91 iDremOr Ne we biat esc oye os So ae OR gee 7 154 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. Page Cowpea; varieties, White Field./...<...u... tor) 2) eee eee 36 Florida. =. 220... 222 ee eee 70 Gintitec lo7 ee dite 70, 92, 140-141 Grayeye..- 2.2 s.2.0 27 MW 43, 70 Lady... 22 2200 00 vo 5 i510 43, 70 Prolific... s220.0.i0s ote Ee 70 Sugar...... 05.42. . UP eee ee 70 Table -). soc bon sede aoe 36, 52, 70-71 Whittle, or Whitley. 2. ....222.0. ccc. cee 71, 87, 88, 95 Wight Black Crowder... 2: -...s..1...c.. eee 71, 74, 92, 114 St eT 133-134 Wild Goose..2.......... Rie, eee 71 ROWAN. hes eet oe ee 29, 43, 57, 73, 95, 115, 128 Williams, or Williams Hybrid...222: 2 eee Th Wonder. 2220422 sec ee ee 71 Wonderful: “2 =... fia asin eee 17, 43, 71, 77, 81, 82, 126, 133 Woods Wonderful... 2.2.0... SL ee 71 Neatmag 20 olvio cae sea .. LO! ASS eee 39, 71 Yellow Cow... -.s-.2cc.i2-2 i SIC 36, 71 Crowder......-2..cs. 1.2292 s eee 36, 71 FOV On retire ci 4 er cation woe a soon ee Sate phe es eee 71 Yellowish Brown Crowder. .......:..9 03S 35 Yellow Pod... ...2c.ccccs eet 71 Prolifie.....2 25.62.52 ee eee eee 71 Sugar, or Yellow Sugar Crowder........-.--- 71, 72, 94-95 Yohorms iti oie ee sess oo es Loe ee 35, 71 See also related topics; as, Color, Diseases, Experiments, History, Hybridiza- tion, Nomenclature, Seeds, etc. Crenshaw Bros. Seed Co., distributors of commercial varieties of the cowpea. 44, 48; 68 Crosby, M. A., cowpeas in Alabama and Mississippi................----.----- 39, 42 Cross-pollination of cowpea. See Hybridization. Cuba, source of species of Vigna... 2/...3asscce ee Set: 7 Dalhart, Tex. See Experiments. Delaware, source of varieties of: vignas. -..-.2::..--.-...- 002 eee 15, 41, 42, 45, 48, 49, 51-55, 57-64, 67-71, 86, 99, 103, 138 Diament, C; G., distributor of cowpea seeds__.2.0¢12_ 0. 5. see 99 Diseases, susceptibility and resistance of the cowpea.....-....-------------- 25, 28, 29, 79, 99, 126, 138, 142, 148 See also names of diseases; as Leai-spot, Mildew, Rust, etc. District of Columbia, source’of varieties of vienas-_.......< 3-222 eeeeeee 103, 125 Dodson, W. R., on varieties of cowpeas in Louisiana........-:.-.-.---------= . 40, 42 Dolichos bahiensis, name applied to cowpea from Italy.............-.-------- 77 bicontortus, synonym for Viena simensis. ..._... 2.222 -5252 ase 11, 77, 106 catjang, synonym for Viena Catjane 2 ..... 25.2 eee 11,12 comparison with Viowa: sac. . 2a 115 Honeybees, relation to pollination of the cowpea............-.-.------------ 26 Hooker, J: D:, on the occurrence of vignass 4. 2.2uia22._. a 12-13 Hutcheson, T. B., on varieties of cowpeas in Virginia.............-...-.---. 38, 42 Hybridization, relation to origin of varieties. ................--.--- 27, 28, 30-34, 37 See also names of hybrids or sorts used in hybridization; as, Groit, Holstein, Tron, ete. Ulinois, source-of varieties.of Vignas:. ... . 4... -.s343).5- -.oeee ee eee 15, 41, 42, 49, 52, 54-56, 58, 61, 66, 68, 69, 81, 82, 85, 126, 131 India, source of varieties of vignas.... 222.6 -c- os) 45 oe 8, 10-12, 25, 28, 45, 56, 57, 59, 60, 77, 79, 93, 100, 103-109, 112, 113, 118, 129, 131, 134, 135, 143 Indiana, source of varieties of vignas......- 2222-2 2:2: --+ ese oe a7, 30, 32, 41, 42, 82, 84, 90, 95, 99, 114, 116, 133, 137, 141, 142 Industrialist, The, articles descriptive of the cowpea. .......-...------------ 58, 68 Insects, relation to pollination of the cowpea. .... 24.522. 42-222Seeee ane 26-27, 32 Iowa Seed Co., distributors of cowpea seeds... ...---.---.--=:5 25-222 eee 85 Towa, source of variety of cowpea:.....-.2.2...-2626) 2.4 85 Italy, source-of varieties of virnas. 4 .22uh.8) 24... 13, 77, 82, 114, 129, 136, 137, 143 Jamaica, source of variety of the cowpeas... ....-.:-.--=---:323)2505==eeeeee 135 Japan, source of varieties of vignas................. 10-11, 77, 78, 85, 106, 107, 136, 143 Jaya, source.ol varielies.of viengs) <= 22 ee 7, 109-111, 117, 118 Johnson, J..M., distributor of cowpea seeds... ._. -......- 5. 22 = ee 95 Johnson, M. W., Seed Co., distributors of cowpea seeds. ._......-.----------- "89,92 Junge, Henry, distributor of cowpea seeds. -.-.-...-.2- 221.2 =e ee 141 Kafir bean. See Bean, Kafir. ™ Kansas; source Of varieties of Vienas--.._._... >. --2-.---.-2---- 17, 40, 42, 43, 46, 49, 50, 53-56, 58, 59, 62, 69-71, 81, 85, 86, 88, 90, 99, 103, 140 Katjang, vernacular name applied to varieties of vignas...-.....----------- 109-111 Kentucky, source of varieties of vignas...-.-...-.. 41, 42, 43, 48, 49, 53, 56, 61, 71, 81, 88 Kilgore, B. W., on varieties of cowpeas in North Carolina..........---- 39, 42, 59, 71 Koiner, G: W.; om varieties of cowpeas in Virpimiag — 3... -2---- = ee 38, 42 Korea. See Chosen. Krauss, F. Gagdistributor of cowpea seeds. --.. 2222-5... 222. 5.5 eee 133 229 INDEX. 157 Page. Leaf-spet, susceptibility and resistance of the cowpea. .--....----- 25, 78-98, 100-142 eaves cowpea, distinctive characters... ....-.--.----..--.--2-..-2------ 20-21 Life period of cowpea. See Maturity. Ramer Garouis, on/species of Viona_-2.. 2... ...2-.J2..-.----- +. 7,9, 10, 12, 143 eee ©, disiributor of cowpea seeds. --.~..... 2. =... 222 2 eee. 85, 93, 103 Seperate Source OF Varieties Of Vionas.....--_. 22.2.2... 2.222 eo ee- ese 16, 17, 29, 40, 42-63, 65-71, 81, 83, 88, 89, 92, 25-97. 99, 100, 163, 114, 115, 128, 141 Lubia baeladi, Arabian name for Dolichos lubia -............:............-. 12 McCullough’s Sons, J. M., distributors of commercial varieties of the cowpea. 81, 86, 87 McLean, J. H., & Sons, distributors of cowpea seeds... .......----.----...--- 87, 126 MacLeod, John, on varieties of the cowpea. ........-..-.--- ee er 30 een t)- distributor Of cowpea seeds... _. 222.2: 22s 2k Je es ee 140 Peet 0) Or Yarieiies Of COWpPeAaS.-._.... =... .-... 2222... -l +--+... 126, 140 McNair, A. D., on varieties of cowpeas in Arkansas.......__.......-.-...-.-- 40, 42 Madagascar, source of species of Vigna...-.........-.-. J es Mee ee een 7 Madison, Ind., experiments with cowpeas. See Experiments. Malay Archipelago and Peninsula, ancient source of vignas..--.-.....--..----- 8 Malformations of the cowpea, distinctive characters.-.........-.....--------- 24-25 Meuehuria, source Of varieties of Vienas._..__.-. 2. -.-.--2 2.22222 eee 101, 103 Mann, Albert, study of the flower of the cowpea. —.-.......-.......--------- 26 Seenwast os. W_. disirihutor of cowpea seeds. 2... 222-2221 0.2.22 ee. 140 Seman. - )” disiributor of cowpea seeds... -..-.. 222225... 22 222. - eee. ee 89 Pee Me diniributor ol cowpea seeds. ....--..... 222.521.2222. +. -- 114 meeps source of varieties Of Vienas. ._ _.--2 2.2220 2.- 2222). eee - 4], 42, 43, 87 Meee or. Ta titrinulor OL COW pea Seeds... L222 ee Seen eee 114 Ee Peamacee af yarictics of cowpeas. 6. 25 8 56 Matthews, G. B., & Sons, distributors of cowpea seeds.....-.-.......--------- 103 Mare variation of tiie period of cowpeas.--.......-.----22. 2-2 2--l eis. 24 Maule, W. H., on varieties of MIM ree ee es 58, 66, 68, 69, 81, 90, 132 May, D.F., distributor of PGW Cal Sees us -vnenenp eer rere | tet OOO 114 Meacham, Fr. fon varieties of the cowped_<* 22.522 .2 2 2. 2. =: - 71, 87, 91, 94, 95 Meee 1 experience with cOwpeds. 2.20 be oo 2 ee Le 93-94 Mesto sonrce Of variety of asparagus beanz.-...:-./.-2-.-2-. 222252. -..----- 77 Michigan Agricultural College. See Experiments. Michigan, source of varieties of vignas..._...-...-. 33, 46, 55, 57, 71, 80-83, 95, 126, 140 Ben ureuttence Of ime COWPEed..-. 2°... = 1-222 2-222 eo. fe fille. s Boen9 miner AOA. diniribntor of cowpea seeds*. 9). 22 2 eee eek 163 Minnesota, source of varieties of vignas.......... Spree ee en See 59, 08, 66, 70, 71 Mississippi, source of varieties of vignas_...........-...---...----- is Soaaac o 16, 17, 38, 39, 42, 45-48, 50, 51, 53-71, 102, 115, 128 Missouri, source of varieties of vignas... 15, 41, 42, 43, 46, 49, 53, 61, 69, 79, 85, 86, 91, 136 Monetta, S.C. See Experiments. Mase, ©. A. on varieties of the cowpea.-.---..-.--- 2-2-2 22--+--- ee ee 24, 39, 42 Menctunee.., A... Of varieties Of -fhe Cowpea... ..-.-22---.. 22 25--2-2- 2. - 70 Morse, W. J., sepence EBEBEe Htaes C Ona pes Soe fee ier es ee a 37 Gee cahigue, occurrence of Vigna nilotica........-. Sig ots eulalacee geen apne ENE 12 Names of the cowpea. See Nomenclature. Nebraska, source of varieties of the cowpea..--.---.----.----------------- 46, 50, 81 Nectaries, floral and extra-floral, relation to pollination of the cowpea....-.- wee 32 Nematodes, cause of root-knot of the cowpea..-.-.-.-..------------------ 25,17 (8, 127 Neocosmospora vasinfecta, cause of wilt of the cowpea.-....-.-.-.----------- 25 229 158 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. Page. New Hampshire, source of varieties of vignas..............-.......22..02.7) 66,7 1 New Jersey, source of varieties of vignas...........-...- 49, 56, 65, 69, 81, 87, 99, 126 Newman, C. L., experiments with cowpeas. ...2..2. 2). 2, ae 18, 33-34, 39, 40, 42, 52, 83-85, 87, 90-91, 93, 96-99, 116-117, 137-139 New Mexico, source of varieties of the cowpea................---.------- 45, 48, 52 New South Wales, source of varieties of vignas..............-......-- 59, 67, 112, 113 New York, source of varieties of vigmas. 0555.22. 42). eee eee -. 49, 54, 60, 67, 7 Nielsen, H. T., assistance in testing cowpeas: ._2_...._ 7222.0 222 Saeeeeeee 37 Nipper, J. L., distributor of cowpea seeds. ..-..........-525- 520 eer 139 Nomenclature of the cultivated vienuss.2 9.22 ee ee 9-14, 34-37, 44-71, 143 North Carolina, source of varieties of vignas:. ¢--_ 1. 2) 9) ee 15-17, 39, 42, 45-51, 55, 56, 58-71, 77, 87, 91, 94, 95, 103, 114, 128, 139, 140 Nubia, occurrence of Vigna nilotica: .... 21.27.22... 32. 12 O’Bier, W.S., distributor of cowpea seeds. .:. 225225. 2: Sa 103, 138 Ockels, Herman, distributor of cowpea seeds... 2._._--> 2 aes ee 83, 103 Ogemaw Seed Co., distributors of commercial varieties of the cowpea-:.......-.- 83 Ohio, source of varieties of vigmas +. 42.22. 2.325 2 ee 81, 86, 87, 99 Oklahoma, source of varieties of the-cowpea..-...2_- 112222 50 a ee 16, 40, 42, 46, 49, 69, 70, 83, 88, 92, 96, 97, 100, 103, 114, 140-142 Oliver, G. W., hybridizing work with cowpeas.......-.....-:-..-...-- 7-8, 34, 72, 85 Orange Judd Farmer, article on the cowpea. =. 2...) 1) 22 ee 52 Orton, W. A., and Webber, H. J., on diseases of the cowpea.............-..-- 25 on the cOWDEd )- <2 oie oon see 28, 34, 65, 66, 76-79, 94, 95, 127, 134, 138 Osborn, Burr, distributor of cowpea seed ...-... 222225. 22h e 22 ee 114 Panama, source of varieties of the cowpea.---.).--2- 22) 224-20 geee eee 76 Pea, cornfield, variant name for cowpea:.-..+.. 222... 4)-2- eee 34, 36 cow. See Cowpea. Indian, variant name for cowpea.....-.-..= . Saas: © o> See 34-35 southern, variant nanie for cowpea. =...) .)).-+.55 = 2 34, 36 field, variant name for cowpeas... 21. 2242 2345982 ee 34 Pedigreed seeds. See Seeds of cowpea, pedigreed. Pennsylvania, source of varieties of vignas .. 49, 52, 54-58, 61, 63, 66, 68, 69, 81, 90, 132 Phaseolus, comparison with Viena.: 2). 2.4.26 2-7 - 7, 12,143 antillanus, examination of plant in London herbarium........-.--- 143 nanus, name applied to dwarf variety of the cowpea...-.---...---.- 11 radiatus, botanical name of the mung bean. 15:22 422 49 sphaerospermus, synonym for Vigna Sinensis -.........-......--.- 10 Philippine Islands, source of varieties of vignas-......-...----------------- 78, 79, 115 Pitchers, malformation of leaves of the cowpea..-....-.-..------------------- 25 Piper, C. V., on nomenclature,of the cowpea: .- °..--2-s--462 4555 41,143 Plant Seed Co., distributors of commercial varieties of the cowpea .------------ 43, 91 Pods of cowpea, distinctive characters....2--+.-42. 5-6) 45-20- 11, 23-24 Pollination of cowpea flowers: :.3..-- 9)... See oe ee 25-27, 32 Portugal, source of varieties of vienas.... le. .3.. 3 oe 113,432 Portuguese East Africa, source of varieties of cowpeas. -.....-.---.------------- 122 West Africa, ‘source of cultivated Viena -2-.....20 22. 13 Potts, H. W., distributor of cowpea seeds2c2 221.42 5) se. 59, 131 Powell, William, on origin of Powell’s Early Prolific cowpea... -....--.---.---- 59 Rayn, W.4d., distributor of cowpea seeds:2222- 2 = oe 140 Redson, O. 4., distributer of cowpea seeds. 2222-29-22. 9 ee 128 Register,.J. RK... distributor of cowpeaseeds-. (2-22) 8 eee ee 138 229 INDEX. 159 Page. Rhodesia, South Africa, source of varieties of vignas........... 29, 119, 120, 131, 143 Richardson, H. B:, distributor of cowpea'seeds. i222 .-22.-.202. 222242.) 22252585. 140 Role: EH, om desirable characters of the cowpeas... -.2 2-222 000-2 .2 52.22. 15 Romans, Bernard, on varieties of cowpeas in Florida -....--.............. 52, 65, 70 ioot-knot, susceptibility of the cowpea....5-222224.02.--520-- 25928. 34 7901 127 Rufiin, Edmund, on the cowpea...--...-. 36, 45, 46, 48, 49, 54, 56, 61, 64, 65, 68, 89, 139 Rust, susceptibility and resistance of the cowpea.-.....-..--- 25, 28, 29, 78-98, 100-143 Sasage, Japanese name for the asparagus bean and the cowpea.....-.-..--..-.. Loe TT Schmitz, Nickolas, on varieties of cowpeas in Maryland.-...................... 41, 42 Seo ve. om varieties of cowpeas in Florida..-..--1....2222-25......0. 2. 39, 42 meeds of cowpea, distinctive characters--:-...---..2.2-222--- 8-9, 21-23, 28-29, 72-75 pecuonced. Motes ConCermmgn a: Meese si 44-7] Seema coccurrence of Viena milotica/s. 0.28 2 2 Siemias Mas. MH: W.. distributor of cowpea seeds: ...- 2.2... .6..-0 722222. 128 emma Gel, distributor of cowpea seeds... 2222-22 5.2 eae le. 92,114 manger at- distributor of cowpea seeds... -225..-- 00 cee 87 Senet Gistriolwtorol cowpea seeds 2.) 22.2222. 6 2 oes ee. 87 See Gicinibutor of cowpea seeds: 2). 2.2222 se. eb. 128 Pinckney, originator of varieties of the cowpea..-.-.-..--...-....--..- 65-66 Soll mamence on habitslof growth of cowpeas: -.5)-.2... 2-2-2222 2 ee ee 18 Sources of species and varieties of cultivated vignas.........-.............-- 7,143 See also names of domestic States and foreign countries. Sau dtes. source-of varieties of viemas 2...) 13), 28, 29, 35, 74, 75, 103, 119-120, 124, 130-131, 143 See also countries in South Africa; as Rhodesia, Transvaal, etc. Somumamernes, coutce of varieties of vignas-!\..-2..... 6206.22.25... 2 200.02. 7h See also countries in South America; as Brazil, Chile, etc. Somemearoluna) source of varieties of vignas. 22.62) 0220052 ol. el. 16-18, 38, 39, 42, 46, 49, 53, 54, 62, 65, 67, 69, 76-79, 81, 83-84, 87, 89, GL, 94,95, 101 VI V4 116,118, 122, 127, 128, 131, 134,138, 142 Somumeakor- cource ol varieties of cowpeas. .o..2.... 22.2.2... ke 81, 82, 99 Spameamice mlavariely Ol catjang 2. Golo Oe 141 Sphaerotheca sp., cause of mildew on the cowpea.......-.-.-.-.----......-+-- 25) Spillman, W. J., experiments with natural crosses of cowpeas................. 33 See nela lon tO OLlOIM Of Varieties. 9- 02.22... aes. ef ee ek ee ee 27 Spragg, F. A., experiments with natural crosses of cowpeas -...............--- 33 Suarmnes. EN, on description of cowpea varieties..........4.2...22..002---5 86, 90 Steckler, J., Seed Co., distributors of commercial varieties of the cowpea...... 43, 53, 95; 96, 115, 128, 141 Stems of the cowpea. See Habits of growth. Stillwater, Okla. See Experiments. SPE eOOUrce, OLvaricly, OL COWDea nce et ee 126 Bumatra, source Of varieties of Vigmas. 61.1 ....22... 25.22.2222. Hage, aK, Te ae Seoenculvivation @bulrercowpeaiy se onl. 8 oe ee 10, 143 Syme soceumence on, Viera milotica...0 00s Woo I eo) 12° Ten Eyck, A. M., on varieties of the cowpea in Kansas..............--- 40-41, 42, 88 Tennessee, source of varieties of vignas............--- 15, 39, 42, 46, 49, 52, 93, 114, 115 Tests of varieties. See Experiments. Texas Seed and Floral Co., distributors of varieties of the cowpea-.-... - 43, 81, 92, 100 SOURCE.OL Vanleties Ol Viemas 92.2660 c ts... 2 15, 16, 18, 38, 40, 42, 43, 45-47, ae d1, 53, 54, 56-58, 61, 63, 65, 66, 68-70, 78, 81-84, 88, 92, 93, 96, 100, 113, 114 160 AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES OF THE COWPEA, ETC. Page Thompson, C. M., distributor of cowpea seeds. ........-..-------.---2-2.-.-- 114 Townsend, E. C., distributor of cowpea seeds...........-..2-22--22--02--225- 132 Tracy, S. M., on varieties of cowpeas in Mississippi.................. 39, 42, 102, 128 Transvaal, South Africa, source of varieties of cowpea..........-.......--- 124, 130 Trinkle, J. W., experiments with cowpeas. 30-32, 84, 95, 99, 114, 116, 133, 137, 141, 142 Turkey, Asiatic, source of varieties of the cowpea.....-....--------.-.------- 76-77 Turney, Mr., distributor of cowpea seeds-_:.2-. ...-220 2252 De ee 113 Uromyces phaseoli, occurrence on the cowpea. - - ..-. -s!-20. S522 eee 25, 28 Variability of the cowpea...-..--.: .-- .3..e? «-.-.-¢o=oe ae 15-19, 27-28 Varieties. See lists under plant names: Bean, Catjang, and Cowpea. Varn, Kline O., grower of variety of cowpe....... ....- -: 3-2 ee 45 Vaulx, Joseph, on volunteer variety of ee Pee ee 115 Venezuela, source of variety of cowpea... ----- 4-2 =-.4-52=5—e- oe 79, 115 Victoria, Australia, source of variety of cowpea. - - -.--...---.--------------- 62 Vigna capensis, cultivation in Africa... ..2.-+-s-.4s2- 3 -3e see oe 13 catjang, botanical name of the catjang_\........-.- 12-2 eneeeeee ee 7-8, 12 comparison with Dolichos and Phaseolus. .-...-..--.-.-.---+-----.--- 7,12 glabra, synonym of V. luteola.\. . x. 2... «1 2s 258 ee ee 7 luteola, cultivation in subtropic regions... .. 2...4.-- , =f2 ue. =eeeeeeeee 7 luteolus, relationship to the catjang.-.....-- 2=-=22.5655 sae 13 nilotica, culture in Africa and Syria.:.. ... 2.22 ages eee 12, 13 sesquipedalis, botanical name of the asparagus bean.......-.-.------- 7,9, 45 sinensis, botanical name of the cowpea. -----.----.--22..-5eeeeee 13, 136, 143 unguiculata, synonym for Vigna sinemsis........--..-------------«-.--- 7-11 vexillata, relationship to the cowpes..... »~-..-+-2462432-05eeeee eee 7,11 Vignas, peed history of cultivated species. .....-<': =f: css =p eee 9-14 See also Bean, asparagus; Catjang; and Cowpea. Virginia, source of varieties.of Vignas: . -....). -=.=:4- 32 pees eee ee 15, 17, 38, 42, 43, 46, 48-50, 56, 60, 61, 63, 66, 68, 69, 77, 81, 82, 85-89, 95, 99-101, 114, 125, 126, 132, 133, 139, 141 Sce also Experiments with cowpeas at Arlington. Watters, J. F’., distributor of cowpea seeds....---_.--- -55s5 pee eee 140 Webber, H. i ., and Orton, W. A., on diseases of the cowpea.-..---.-----.-.-- 25 Weevils, susceptibility of vignas to attack..-._.: -__. 2. 225 eee 9, 143 West Indies, source of varieties of cowpea.----.----.=--2-5.5255 53ers 52 Wiancko, A. T., on varieties of cowpeas in Indiana..-.-_..-_-_..=:----s------ 41-42 Wight, W. F.,:on the history of the cowpea. ...----.-.-.-- 225 5====eeeee 7-9, 35 Willet, N. L., Seed Co., distributors of seed of cowpea varieties. ........----- 44, 48, 52, 53, 55, 57, 63, 71, 103, 113, 127, 131, 139, 141 Williams, T. S., on origin of the Iron cowpea..-..-=-.-=-.-5. =e 78 Wilt, ene of the cowpea... -.- 25, 28, 34, 76-79, 94, 111, 118, 122-123, 127, 134 Wood, Stubbs & Co., on the relative demand for varieties of the cowpea-.-.---- 43 Wood, T. W., & oan distributors of commercial varieties of the cowpea... -.- 43, 60, 61, 66, 81, 82, 85-89, 95, 99-101, 103, 125-126, 132, 133, 139, 141 Wreyford, Samuel, distributor of cowpea seeds.........-.--.----------------- 128 Youngblood, B., on varieties of the cowpea in Texas. .-......--.---.-------- 40, 42 Yueng pian doh, Chinese name for asparagus bean...........---------------- 122 229 O SU ooooTz0bbar ~¢