L^il
"•:^^«(7-
■.•s^<^>,
■ -:it^t^-^t^^
r---^'
>Wh^<<jv^*^v^-
ii- i
v;
;^v^-^
^rll4;6iSK'
UNIVERSITY OF B.C. LIBRARY
3 9424 05047 460 7
U.B.C. LIBRARY
THE LIBRARY
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Prof
• A.H.' fiutchinson.
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2010 with funding from
University of British Columbia Library
http://www.archive.org/details/peachleafcurliOOpier
X
Bulletin No. 20.
V. p. p.— 72.
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ACzRICULTURE.
DIVISION OF VEGETABLE PHYSIOLOGY AND PATHOLOGY. B. T. GALL^OWAY, Chief.
PEACH LEAF CURL:
ITS NArURE AND TREATMENT
BY
TsTEAVTOlSr B. PIERCE,
lu Charge of Pacific Coast Laboratory, Santa Ana, California.
WASHINGTON:
(iO VKKNMENT PRINTIN(; OFFICE. 1 <) 0 0
DIVISION OF VEGETABLE PHYSIOLOGY AM) PATHOLOGY.
SCIENTIFIC STAFF.
B. T. Galloway, Cliiif <iJ Dirislon. Albeut F. Woods, Assistdiil Cliicf.
as.s^)(■iates.
Ekwin F. Smith, 1'. 11. 1>()Ksktt,
Mekton B. Waite, Oscak Loew,
Newto.v B. Pierce, W.m. \. Outon,
llEHIiEHT ,1. WeIJHEK, KkNST A. BeSSEY,
M. .\. Cakleton, Fi.oKA W. Patterson,
Maucis L. Fi.oyi).*
I\ ('IIAKdlO OF l.AMOUA roIUES.
>\m!EKT v. Woods, I'lmil riii/sia/iK/i/.
Krwin 1*'. Smith, J'Imil I'tilliolni/i/.
Newton i'>. I'iickci;, I'tn-ijii- CuukI Liiliiir<ili>ri/.
Herbert .). Weisbkr, J'lant Brccdimj.
Oscar Loew, I /'l<(iii Nutrition and Ftrnicnidtion.
*I)cluilcil as lohacco cxpi-Tt, Divisiim of Soils.
till (liuitjL' of loliacco liiiiKiitalioii iiivtsligutions, Division of Soil.s.
.EITER OF TRANSMHTAl
U. 8. Dei'aktment of Acjkicultuke, Division of Vegetable Physiology and PAXiioLOciY,
WasJungUm, D. C, February '20, IDOO. 8ik: I respectfull}' transmit herewith a report on peach leaf curl, prepared by Mr. Newton B. Pierce, who has charge of the work of this Division on the Pacific coast, and reconnncnd that it be published as Bulletin No. 20 of the Division. The report embodies the results of investigations and experiments carried on for a number of years, and shows conclusively that peach leaf curl can l)e controlled l)v com- paratively simple and inexpensi^'e treatment. Respectfully,
B. T. Galloway,
Chief of DivUloi). Hon. James Wilson,
Secretary of Agriculture.-
3
HTTER OF SUBMITTAL
Pacific Coast Laboratory, Santa Ana., Cal., Deconhcr 15., 1899. Sir: I herewith submit a report of investigations on the nature and treatment of peach leaf curl. The experiments described were con- ducted under the most varied conditions of soil, climate, etc., in all the leading peach centers of the United States, and it is believed that the recommendations for treatment here given are equalh' applicable wherever peaches are grown.
Respectfully, Newton B, Pierce,
lu ( '/i(fr(//; of Pacific ( ''oast Laljoratorij.
Mr. B. T. CirALLOWAY,
Chief., Division <f Yajetahlc Physiology and J\ttholo</y.
5
CONTENTS.
Page.
Chapter I. — Primaky Considerations Relative to Pkacii LeaeCi-ri 11
Introduction 1 1
General characteristics t)f the disease 12
Geographic distribution 12
Origin of the disease 18
Losses from the disease 19
Chapter II.— Nature op Peach Leaf Curl 22
Physical conditions influencing the disease 22
The fungus causing the disease ;^1
Relations of the fungus to tlie host 40
Chai^er III. — History of the Treatment of Peach Leaf Cfri 46
Tlie European situation 46
1 )evelopinent of the present methods of treatment 4S
Chapter IV. — Plan of Preventive 8prav Work Condicted hv the Depart- ment 67
Preliminary plans for the work 67
Spray work conducted in 1894 70
Spray work conducted in 1895 : 72
General consideration of sprays applied 75
CiiAi^ER V. — Influence of Sprays on the Vecjetation of the Trees 77
Saving of foliage from injury by curl 77
Comparisonsof weight and color of foliage from sprayed and unsprayed trees. SS
CJrowth of branches and leaf buds on si)rayed and unspraye(l trees 91
Tlie development of new fruit buds and fruit spurs for the year following
an attack of curl 95
Chapter VI. — Influence of Sprays on the Fruitino of the Trees 10;>
Thinning the fruit of sprayed trees ^ 108
(iathering fruit of sprayed and unsprayed trees 10(>
(■omparative quantity, quality, and cash value of fruit fioiu sprayed and
unsprayed trees 112
Comparative value of sprays in relation ti > fruit 115
Comparative size of fruit on sprayed and unsprayed trees 119
Color of sprayed and unspraj'ed fruit 1 20
Method of thinning and cost of picking peaches 121
Thinning by hand and by curl 121
Co.st of picking peaches 122
The local action of curl on foliage and fruit 122
Records of trees sprayed on one side ' 1 22
CiiAPfER VII. — Preventive Spray Work Conducted rv ()r( iiahdists 126
General consideration of the auxiliary work 126
Notes on the auxiliary experiments in Michigan 127
Notes on the auxiliary experiments in Oregon 135
Notes on tlie auxiliary experiments in California 140
Notes on the auxiliary experiments in New York, Indiana, and other
peach-growing States 144
7
8 CONTENTS.
Page. Chapter VIII. — Preparation, Composition, and General Characters of
Tii E Sprays Used 1 46
Preparation of the copper sj^ra ys 140
Copper sulphate sohition 147
Bordeaux mixture 149
Eau celeste l'>2
Modified eau celeste l-ili
Ammoniacal copper carbonate 1 •">:>
Preparation of the sulphur sprays 154
Preparation of combined co])per and sulphur si)niys aii<l notes on other
si)rays tested 1 Hi
Bordeaux mixture and sulphur sprays combined Uil
Miscellaneous sprays 1 (il
General chaiacters of the sprays tested 1 <>-
The enduring qualities of the sprays - . . 1(>2
The corrosive action of the spi-ay s 1 (U
Advantages of discernible and indiscernible sprays Kia
Sprays adapted to use in wet and in dry localities 1 (>(>
Chapter IX. — The Application of Sprays 1()7
( ieneral accessories for winter spraying 1<)7
Nozzles suited to winter work 1 ()7
Hose and extension pipes 1 ()H
Protection of the sprayer 1 70
Pumps for various sized orchards 171
Spraying tanks 1 7r)
A])i)lying winter sprays for curl 17")
The time for winter spraying 1 7()
The manner of applying winter sprays 1 7()
Spraying where other diseases are present with curl 177
I'rune rust on the peach {Puccinla ])rinii Pers.) 177
Mildew of the peach {I'orlo.'<]))i:rr(i ii.ii/dcinillur l)e P>. ) 1 78
Brown rot of the peach {Mojiilitt friiclifffiid Pers.) 1 7S
Black spot of the jn-ach {('IddoxporiHtn (vrpoj)lilli(in Thiim.) 1 7S
Winter blight of the peach and other spot and shot-hole diseases, such
as I'liyUoxtirta nrcniniic'tstfd Berk., ('crronjxirK f/fYrwyy/.sr/.v.s-a Sacc., etc.. 170
Sooty mold of the peach 17il
Animal parasites of the j)each tree ISO
Chai-ter X. — Nati're and Soihck ok riiE Si'uavino Maiioui.m.s I'sed ISl
Cop])er sulphate IS!
Copper c-arbonate IS.!
AnuMonia 1S5
Sodium carljoiiate IS7
Sulphur i!tO
Cmai-i i:it \I. — Pi:a( II N'arietiis and Xiusery Stock in Uei.ation io Ci hi.. I;t4
( 'oiiiiiari.son of peach varieties : 1!M
Treatment of nursery stock L'tHi
Summarv l-'()2
ILIllSTRATIONS.
PLATES.
I 'use.
Plate I. Curl -infested peach slioot from Rifigs, Cal 11
II. Rlyccliuni of E.ronsais dcfmnnaii — the fungus causing peacli leaf curl . 85
III . Fruiting stages (»f Exonscus dej'ortiKiux 36
IV. Germination of the ascospores of E.rodsciix (h'/onnaiix 88
V. Terminal peach twigs infested with peach leaf curl 42
VI . Sprayed and unsprayed peach branches 42
VII. Sprayed and unsj)rayed Crawfords Late trees, Live Oak, Cal 77
VIII. Unsprayed trees in Lovell orchard, Biggs, Cal 89
IX. Lovell trees sprayed with Bordeaux mixture. Biggs, Cal 89
X. Fruit produced by row 15, experiment block. Biggs, Cal... 107
XL Lovell trees sprayed with sulphur, lime, and salt. Biggs, Cal 112
XII. Lovell trees sprayed with sulphur and lime. Biggs, Cal 112
XIII. Lovell trees sjjrayed with Bordeaux mixture, Biggs, Cal 115
XIV. Lovell trees sprayed with eau celeste. Biggs, Cal 115
XY. Lovell trees sprayed with modified eau celeste, Biggs, Cal 115
Y VI /^^e- ^' -^I^'mt^r of spraying trees on one side, Biggs, Cal "I ,^.j
iFig. 2, Action of curl on trees sprayed on one side. Biggs, Cal'
XVII. Condition of trees sprayed on one side at maturity of fruit 124
XVIII. Fruit gathered from sprayed and unsprayed halves of tree 124
XIX. Showing fruitfulness of sprayed half of tree 124
XX. Sprayed and unsprayed Crawfords Late trees, I.,ive Oak, Cal 142
XXI. Steam sprav-cooking appliances for small orchards 158
XXII. Steam spray-cooking appliances for large orchards 1(51
XXIII. Appearance of (jrchard at close of spray work, Biggs, Cal 17(i
XXIV. Cnj)runed trees, too late for spraying 1 76
XXV. An orchard properly pruned, but too late for spraying 176
XXVI. An outfit for spraying small orchards 204
XXVII. An outfit for spraying medium-sized orcliards 204
XXVIII. Spraying eight trees at a time, Rio Bonito orchard. Biggs. ( al 204
XXIX. A power sprayer in use at Santa Barbara, Cal 204
XXX. A power sprayer, San Diego, Cal 204
FICUUES.
Fk;. 1. Cyclone nozzle, w'ith direct discharge and degorger 168
2. Cyclone nozzle, with lateral discharge, for thin sprays 168
8. Heavy cyclone nozzle, with oblique discharge, I'or thick si)rays 168
4. Wire-extended suction hose 169
5. Bamboo extension pipe 169
6. Spray pump for use on barrel or tank 171
7. Spray pump for use on barrel or tank 172
8. Spray pum}) for general orchard work, upright lever 178
9. Spray i)ump for general orchard work, upright lever 174
10. Pneumatic pump for general spraying 175
9
Bull.20, Div. Veg. Phys & Path.. U. S. Dept. Agriculture.
Leaf Curl.
H-Ii-r
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE T.
Curl-infested peach .shoot from Biggs, Cal. Leaves of tliis character are badly infested with Exoascus deformans. The greatly broadened and distorted leaves, which are characteristic of this disease, are shown, and the whitened, spore-covered surface of some of the more elevated portions of the upper surface may be distinguished. The petioles of the affected leaves are greatly enlarged, the branch is much bent and distorted, and the internodes of the diseased portion of the branch are greatly shortened. A branch thus badly diseased is apt to die during the year unless con- ditions for growth are very favorable. It is in shoots of this character that the mycelium occurs in greatest abundance, but the hyphaj have been seen to spread only a short distance beyond the parts showing the hypertrophy. (Compare with Pis. V and VI.)
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
By Newton li. Pierce.
CHAPTER I.
PRIMARY CONSIDERATIONS RELATIVE TO PEACH LEAF CURL.
INTRODUCTION.
This bulletin has been prepared to place before the peach growers of the United States the results of experiments conducted during- sev- eral years past for the prevention of peach leaf curl. The losses arising from this disease frequently' amount to several millions of dol- lars annually, and it is believed that a wide dissemination of the results obtained by the experiments here outlined will lead to a large saving to the peach industry. During the progress of the Department's work over one thousand six hundred peach growers in all peach-growing States have ))een requested to test the preventive measur(\s here rec- ommended. A large number have done so, and some of the more important results of their work are also given. From conservative data it has l)een estimated that the experimental work thus widely set on foot l)y the Department has saved to the coiuitry in a singU^ year the sum of three-fourths of a million dollars. This is but a fraction, however, of what may easily be saved in the future, when all growers have obtained a more thorough understanding of the disease and its prevention.
The obscure views held by many growers in the past upon the true nature of peach leaf (uu'l, and the total lack of previMitive UK^asures up to a recent date, make it desirable to thoroughly consider the sub- ject at this time and to record the detailed work upon which the con- clusions reached arc l)ased. These conclusions are that peach leaf ciirl may be prevented Avith an ease, certainty, and cheapness rarely attained in the treatment of anj' serious disease of plants, and that there is no longer a necessity for the losses annually sustained from it in the
United States.
11
12 PEACH lp:af cukl: its nature and tkeatment.
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DISEASE.
The disease of peach trees here considered is variousl}^ known in dilterent regions and languages. In the United States it is commonl}^ know as peach leaf curl, or curl leaf of the peach; in England and all Britisli possessions, as leaf blister, leaf curl, or curly leaf; in France, as cloque du pecher; in Germany, as Krauselkrankheit; in Italy, as Fillorisseraa, etc.
Peach leaf curl is a disease which seriously affects the leaves, flowers, tender shoots, and fruit of the peach. Its action is most severe in the spring of the year, shortly after the hnifing of the trees, and the greatest injuries are caused in wet settsons and in humid localities. The leaves become enlarged, thickened, much curled, and distorted. As the dis- ease progresscvs the healthful green of the foliage is changed to a yel- lowish, sickly appearance. The leaves soon fall, and the newly formed fruit ceases to grow, yellows, wilts, and likewise falls. The total loss of foliage and crop is common in seasons favorable to the disease. A second growth of leaves develops more or- less rapidly, according to the severity of the disease and the favorable or unfavorable soil and atmospheric conditions prevailing at the time. If the soil and atmos- phere are dry and the temperature high, new foliage may appear slowly and nuich of the terminal growth may die throughout the orchard. In severe attacks young trees are frequently killed. The second crop of leaves, appearing on affected trees after the spring defoliation, usually remains c()m})aratively free from curl for the rest of the season. The amount of disease which will appear upon this later crop of foliage depends largelj'^ upon the humidity or dryness of the atmosphere, excessi\'e moisture favoring a continuance of the ti'ouble. The action of the disciise upon spi'ing branches causes them to enlarge, become curved iind distorted in various ways, and often to dry up and die.'
GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION.
IN'ucli Iciif cui'l exists in most peach-growing countries. Its distri- Itutioii in llic I'liitcd States extends from the Gulf of Mexico to Can- ada and Ironi tlie Atlantic to the Pacific. The cent(M-s of greatest prevalence, and where the greatest losses are sustained from tiiis cause, are in tiie leading ))each-growing districts bordering the Great Lakes, e.s|)ecijilly in Michigan and w(^stern New York; in the central, north- ern, and co:ist I'egions of California; and west of the C^ascade Moun- tiiins in Oiegori juid Washington. Tlu^ disease is less serious, or is of minor importance, in tlios«i peach-growing counties of New York most distant from the lakes, in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and in southern California. Still less injui'y is reported fiom New .Jersey, Dtdawaie, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Mary-
GEOGEAPHIC DISTRIBUTION. 13
land, Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina South Carolina, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ala- bama, and Florida, but in most of these regions occasional serious outbreaks are reported in seasons favorable to curl or in particular localities. It prevails rather more seriously in portions of Geor- gia, Kansas, and Missouri. In Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and Colorado it has occasioned but little loss and is not widel}^ known. Reports from Utah and Nevada are meager, but it is probal^lc that the disease prevails to a limited extent in both States. The more northern States not mentioned here have either failed to report the prevalence of the disease or are properly included within that portion of the United States unsuited, by rigor of climate, to successful peach culture.
In Canada both Ontario and British Columbia, which are the leading peach-growing provinces, are favoral)ly situated for the serious devel- opment of peach leaf curl in wet seasons. Mr. John Craig, horticul- turist of the Central Experimental Farm, Ottawa, writes that the disease "obtains in Canada in all the peach-growing districts, including British Columbia and the Province of Nova Scotia." It is known to cause considerable losses of fruit in some sections.*
Peach leaf curl exists also in some if not all the peach-growing coun- tries of South America. In Chile the peach is widely grown, being planted from the snow line of the Andes to the Pacific Ocean, and from Copiapo south as far as Valdivia, a distance of 800 miles. Mr. C. T. Ward, Jr.,^ of the Hacienda Loreto, Department of Limache, says that the parasite of peach leaf curl "exists all over the country where the peach grows," but that no satisfactory method of control is A^et practiced there.
In Europe Dr. K. Sadebeck'' records the disease from Denmark, Ger- man}^, Austria, Switzerland, and Ital}^ He states that in central Ger- man}^ it prevails more extensively than in the vicinity of Hamburg.* Among the many German scientists who have written upon this
' ^Ir. L. Woolverton, secretary of the Fruit Growers' Association of Ontario, said, in 1890, in a paper entitled, Points onPeach Growing in the Niagara District, pul)- lished in the Annual Report of the Society for that year, pj). 50 and 57: "The peach has its share of enemies and diseases, chief among which are the curl, curcnlio, the borer, and the yellows. For the curl I know no remedy. It is not often severe, but sometimes with the diseased leaves the fruit also drops." Mr. John Craig, in writing from Ottawa under date of October 7, 1897, says, relative' to the disease in Ontario: " It is only severely injurious here during years of unusually heavy rainfall. This year it was very l)ad."
2 Letter of March 22, 1890, to Mr. J. M. Dobbs, U. S. Consul at Valparaiso, Chile.
^Sadebeck, Dr. R., Die para.sitischen Exoasceen. Fine Monographic, Hamburg, 189:5, p. 94.
'Sadebe(;k, Dr. R., Untersuch. iilx-rdie Pilzgattung Exoiuscus, Hamburg, 1884, p. 115.
14 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
disease luid its cause are Sadebeck/ Winter,- De Ear\^,'' von Tavel,* Haitig/ Zopf.« Tubeuf/ Ludwig,* Sorauer,' Frank/" Kirchncr," Fuckel,'' and others. Winter says (1. e.) that the fungus of this niahid}' causes great damage by early defoliation of the trees, and that it even kills the diseased trees by its repeated occurrence.
In Great Britain peach leaf curl has been common for a great many years. In 1821 it was accurate!}' described 1)}^ an English gai'dener under the name of "blight." He says:" "Under this denomination [])light] are frequently confounded two varieties of disease materially dillerent in their appearance, and which I shall distinguish ])y the appellation of Mister and curl. The former is generally confined to such peach trees as have glandular leaves, which are mostly subject to it in the months of April and May, and when attacked it is not until the latter part of the season, if at all, that the}' become healthy. The leaves so attacked are crisp, and assume a swollen, crumpled, and succulent appeai'ance; the shoots themselves are atfected l)y it in the same manner, and never produce either good blossom or healthy wood." Berkeley '* has described the fungus causing this disease, and it has been mentioned by Bennett and Murray^'' and many other English writers. (Consult a poi)ular article on Peach Blister, by W. G. Smith, Gardeners' Chronlde.^ Vol. IV, pp. 36, 37.)
'tSadebeck, Dr. K., see locations cited; also Einige neue Beobachtungeii uiul krit- ische Bemerkungen iiber die lilxoascacejc, Bot. Ges., 1895, Band XIII, Heft 0.
^Winter, Dr. Georg, Die durch Pilze verursachten KninkluMtcii d(>r Knltnrge- wiichse, Leipzig, 1878, p. 47; also Ral). Krypt. Flora, 18S5, II, p. (i.
^De Bary, Prof. A., Comparative Morjjhology and Biology of the Fungi, INIyceto- zoa, and Bacteria, English edition, Oxford, 1887, p. 265; see also in the same volume various other references to the arrangement and jxtsition of tiie Exoascus group.
'Tavel, Dr. V. von, Vergleicliende ^Morphologic der Pilze, Jena, 1892, pp. 55,5(5.
•^Ilartig, Dr. Robert, Lehrbuch der Baumkrankheiten, Berlin, 1889, j). 118; also the English edition, Text-lx)ok of the Di.seases of Trees, London, 1894, j). WVl.
"'Zopf, Dr. Wilhelm, Die Pilze in mori)hologischer, phy.siologisclici', biologisclier, und systematischer Beziehung, lireslau, 1890, pp. 2:^6,282.
'Tubeuf, Dr. Karl Ennheer von, rilauzenkrankheitcn durch Uryptogamc I'ara- siti-n verursacht, Berlin, 1895, pp. 167-188.
''Ludwig, Dr. Friedrich, Lehrbuch der Niedcrcn Krvptoganuii, Stuttgart, 1892, p. 205.
'•'Soraucr, Dr. Paul, ilandl)U(li der i'llau/.cukranUlicilcu, /wcitcr Tlicil, Die para- sitiircri KranUhi-itcn, Ik-rlin, 188(), p. 278.
'"Frank, Dr. \. B., Dit; Krankheiten der IMlauzcu, l>aiid 11, Die I'ilzpanisitarcu Krankhcilcu, I'.re.siau, 1896, pp. 24!», 250. Fdition of 1880-81, Vol. II, p. 52().
"Kirchncr, Dr. O.^kar, Di(t Krankheiten und Heschiidigungen unserer lamhvirl- wrhaftlichen Kuiturpflanzeh, Stuttgart, 1890, j.p. ;}24, -107.
'M''u(;kel, L., Synd)ohe niy(!ologica', 1869, j). 252.
'•' See (juotation in li<'port of Miciiigan Pomological Society for 187:5, i>p. 16, 17.
" l'.erkfley, M. .1., Introduction to Cryptogamic liotany, 1857, p. 284, and Outlines of r.rilisli Fungology, Lfindon, 1S60, pp. :)76, 444, tab. 1, lig. (i.
'' IJcniifIt, .\. W., and Murray, < Icorgc, .\ Handbook of {"ryptogamic I'.otany, I.on<Ion, IHH9, p. :179.
GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION. 15
Tulasne,^ Prill ioux,- and others (Cours complete d'aj^riculturc, T. XV, p. 255, art. Pechcr) have .studied this disease more or less care- fully in France, where it often develops in a serious form. In June, 1890, the writer saw the peach trees near the Mediterranean, particu- larly about Montpellier, in anything but a healthy condition. On the 3d of June leaf curl was l)ad, and the ends of branches were seen to be dying in some cases. In Italy Briosi and Cavara,* Berlese,* and Comes ^ are among those who have described this malady. The dis- ease varies in its j)re valence tli rough Italy in accordance with its habits elsewhere. The trees of northern Italy appeared more health- ful than in the south of France during the visit of the writer in 1890, but considerable gummosis, perhaps due to the same cause, was observed in both regions. In western Sicily, near Palermo, leaf curl was again encountered in severe form. The situation in Spain and Portugal is not known, but in the more humid coast regions it should not be materially different from the condition found in Italy. In Greece, as stated l)y Prof. P. Genardius," the disease rarely causes any damage of importance, because of the dryness of the climate, and for this reason, he states, no treatment has been tried. In Austria- Hungary the situation respecting leaf curl is iiuich the same as in Italy. Dr. Johaim BoUc, director of the Institute of Experimental Agricultural Chemistry, at Gorizia, writing from the island of Cherso, under date of October 25, 1897, states that in rainy weather the disease appears some years with great intensity and causes great damage. In Koumania the situation is much the same. Prof. Wilhelm Knechtel, of the Agricultural School of Herestrau, states in a letter dated Bucharest, October 17, 1897, that in that country leaf curl of the peach is also a troublesome and destructive disease to which the trees are subject in man}^ vears. He states that Roumania has in the region of the lower Danube almost a steppe climate — in sunnner ver}" hot and dry, in winter cold, with very abrupt temperature changes, so that the variations of temperature within twenty-four hours not infre- quently amount to from 1(P to 15° R. (22.50° to 33.75° F.). When such changes of temperature occur in the spring at the time of leaf development the disease is certain to appear. The growth of the vegetation, which has been favored through the preceding warm days, is checked during succeeding days of lowered teiuperature, when
'Tulasiic, L. R., Ann. d. Sci. Nat., 1866, ser. 5, T. V, p. 128.
■' rrillieux, Ed., Bull, de la Soc. Bot. do France, 1872, T. XIX, pp. 227-280; Conipt. Rend. 3; also Maladies des Plantes Afrricoles, Paris, 1895, T. I, pp. 394-400.
* Briosi-, G., and Cavara, F., Fungi Parassiti d. Plan te Colt i v. od Utili, essice., delin. e descr., 1891, fasc. 5, No. 104.
' Bcrlese, A. N., I Parassiti Vegetali d. Piante Coltiv. o Utili, Milano, 189.o, j)p. 124-126.
•''Conies, O., Crittogamia Agraria, Napoli, 1891, pp. 1(53, 165-167, 549.
« Letter dated Athens, Sept. 12, 1895.
1<> PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS MATURE A>'D TREATMENT.
the development of the fuiitru.s liegin.s. .so that in Juno all leaves at the ends of the young branches are curled and deformed and perhaps all the blossom buds fall off. If the more developed leaves at the l)a.se of the 3'oung shoots prove more resistant to the fungous action, then fresh shoots are formed in June, even if not in normal condition, but yet somewhat healthy, so that the tree remains intact. In the more pro- tected hill regions of the vineyards, at the foothills of the Carpathian Mountains, this disease is also troublesome, but less intense than in other parts of the country.
Peach leaf curl exists in South Africa, and prolxibly also throughout Algeria and other peach-growing portions of 'the continent. Profes.sor ^lacOwan. of the department of agriculture of Cape Colony, has written of the disease in South Africa, giving his views as to the proper manner of treating the same. ^ He also writes that it is '"a great plague at the Cape." ^
A peach grower of Drysdale. Frere, Xatal. in writing to the Cape Colon}' agricultural department under date of October 81, 1893, .says that he has a good many peach trees of the yellow, white, and St. Helena varieties, and that they are all affected with the discolored and curled-up leaves characteristic of this disease; that several of his neigh- bors are complaining that their peach trees are suffering like his: and that the disea-se seems to be spreading. The young trees were simi- larly affected. ^
Perhaps no foreign country has suffered more from peach leaf curl than New Zealand. Mr. W. M. Maskell, of "Wellington, writes as follows : * ■■ The curly blight has ])een for many years prevalent in this country — so nuich so that whereas in the early days peaches were exceed- ingly luxuriant and fine, they have dwindled to comparatively very sn)all and poor trees and in many i)arts of the eolony almost di«'d out. In the last two or three years the people have been advised to emi)loy remedies, and have done so to sonic extent, so that thcic is a marked improvement in the j)each orchards. * * '^ I can myself recollect, early in the sixties, when the most sj)lendid peaches used to grow wild in the warm iiortheiii distiicts. wheic now scarcely a tree is seen; and thecui"ly blight has been a dicadful curse all over the colony."
Australians r«'p(»rt peacii leaf curl among their serious plant dis- eases. In South Australia it "has been known (jiiite twenty years."'* and })rol>ably longer, and occasions consi(leral)le losses in seasons favoring it. The situation is much the same in New South ^\'ale>.
' MacOwan, Prof. P., Agricultural Journal, puhlishtMl by the department of a>;ri«'ultnn' of CajK- CVdony, 1H92, Vol. V, pp. 2.">2, 2n:i.
- Ix'tter<lat<'<l Cape Town, Oct. 2<i, ISit.").
' Ajjriculfiiral .lournal, ('a|K.' Colony, Vol. VI, No. 2.3, j). 4.'i1.
Matter (lafe<l \Vclliii>j;t<.ii, New Ziahiiid, I)c'ceniUT24, l.S«».'i.
^()l>s«TvationH of .Mr. \. Molineiix, jiencnil secretary for the atrrienltural l>iinaii of South .\uftralia, l«'tt«T <late<l .\<lelai<le, Fel)niary 11, ISW.5.
GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION. 17
Prof. N. A. Cobb,^ pathologist for the agricultural department of that colony, has described the malady quite fully, and although he fails to specify particular localities, it is probable that his descriptions are drawn from observations made in the colony for which he writes. He says that in the most severe cases of the disease '' the fruit falls about three weeks after setting, and not a peach is left to ripen. This occurs on trees on which the disease is chronic and severe. * * * Such trees are worthless, nay, worse than worthless; they are a constant menace to the peach trees in the neighborhood. The sooner they are cut down and burned, and thus utterly destroyed, the better it will be for the peach industr}-. * * * j have now described the disease in its worst form, a form in which it is not common. The milder forms of the disease are much more frequent."
Peach leaf curl also prevails in Victoria, where it has been placed, according to jSIr. D. McAlpine," pathologist for Victoria, among the specified diseases in the vegetable diseases bill, recently passed in that colony. Mr. Mc Alpine also says that according to Mr. George Neilson, chief inspector under the vegetation diseases act, it has been known in Victoria since 1856, and affected peach trees were just as bad then as now. Mr. Mc Alpine adds: "The disease is distributed all over the colon3^ In the cooler districts it is generally more severe than in the northern and warmer districts, and it is generally more prevalent in a moist and cool spring than in a dry, warm one."
The situation in Japan has been learned through the obliging and careful inquiries of Prof. K. Mij^abe,^ of the Sapporo Agricultural College. He writes that Exoascus deformans is at present a serious pest to the peach trees at Sapporo, north island, and states that his attention was first called to its presence in that place some three or four years since, but that there is no dou))t of its existence from the time of the first introduction of American peach trees, al)out twenty- three years ago. The Japanese flowering (double red) peach trees and nectarines were introduced at Sapporo by a florist about six or seven years ago from Echigo Province in the northern part of the main island or Honsiu. These varieties were found to be attacked to some extent during these few}' ears. American varieties are now most seriously affected, and many persons have been obliged to cut down their trees on account of the disease. Respectiiig the distril)ution throughout Japan, Professor Mij'abe sa3'S : ''As to the rest of Hokkaido [the northern island] I found the fungus in 1890 at ]VIombetsu, a farming village on Volcano Bay, settled about twenty-seven j-ears ago ))}' the people from Sendai. I could not tell wiiether the peach trees culti- vated there were of American or Japanese origin. In Honsiu, or
' Cobb, Prof. N. A., paper in tiie Agricultural Gazette, 1892, Vol. Ill, pp. 1001-1004. '' Letters dated Melbourne, Australia, July 14, 1896, and Oct. 12, 1897. * Letter dated Sapi)oro, Hokkaido, Japan, ]^ov. 22, 1897. 19093— No. 20 2
18 PEACH LEAF CUKL'. ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Main Island, the peueh curl seems to be prevalent only in the northern provinces, * * * i sent letters of inquirj^ relating to this question to the g-raduates of our colleg-e, who studied especially about the parasitic fungi in our laboratory, and whose opinions I can trust. From Mr. Y. Takahashi, at Morioka, in Rikuchu Province, I received the following answer: 'Peach curl is very prevalent in this town. Almost ever}" tree is more or less attacked b}' the fungus. T saw some trees entirely attacked. At the end of summer [spring ?] all the dis- eased leaves fell to the ground and new leaves were produced. ' " In the southern island, Kumamoto, a correspondent reported to Prof essor Miyabe that the disease had not been seen there b}' him. From Tokyo Professor Shirai, of the College of Agriculture, reports that he has not yet found the disease in that section of the main island.
In China, as the writer is informed, peach leaf curl prevails to a very large extent, and the losses are probably considerable from this cause. ^
ORIGIN OF THE DISEASE.
The country of origin of peach leaf curl is not positively known. It was hoped that the inquiry as to distribution would develop posi- tive information respecting this point, but such has not been the case. That seedling peaches are remarkably susceptible to the disease, and that the Chinese Saucer peach is among those most subject to it, appears to indicate that the home of the peach is the source of the disease, and that the two may have come to us together from a com- mon point of origin. Recent studies have been constantly tending to reduce the number of species of plants once thought to be subject to curl. At present it is believed that it is confined almost wholly to the peach or its derivatives, as the nectarine and i)cach-almond. The exceptions to this, where the disease has been noted on tlie ])lum, almond, etc., are rare, and not sufficiently luimerousor general to mate- rially allect the evidence that the peach is the natural host of the fungus. Thus far, however, it has been impossible to learn if the peach in the interior of China, its supposed home, is affected by this troul)le. though in the coast regions it is said to prevail extensively. Such information as has been obtained from Japan indicates the recent introduction of the disease in that country, and that the United States is ]n-o))ably its source rathei- than the near-l)y continental coast. I'n Australia, how- ever, this may properly be questioned, for, as already mentioned, Mr.
' Ix'tt<'r from Aufinftus Whitt', Esq., forwardi'd April 8, KSilti, throiifrh tlic kiinlm-SM of Mr. KufuH S. Ka«tlack, tlii'ii U. S. Deputy Con.sul-(Jeneral at Sliungliai. Cliiiia. Mr. Wliitc! sayH, in concludiiif^ his Htatciiietits, that tlio Chinew, i«;noraiit of I he us(. of tfie knife in pruning;, trust solely to an animal inspection of the trees at the lime the l)ios.soms set, when they carefully pick off all excess of fruit, and with it all »liHeaH«;(l leaves, etc., but allow these to fall to the ^,'round ami remain under the trees to rot or reprodiun; the plague, as natun; thinks best.
LOSSES FROM THE DISEASE. 19
George Ncilson, chief inspector under the vegetation diseases act of that colony, states that peach leaf curl has been known in Victoria since 1856, This dates the presence of the disease in Australia back to a time when its importation from America to that countr}' would be doubtful. Its European origin, however, may not be improba])lc.
The severity of the disease in the gardens of China and the fact that the peach probably reached Europe and America from the East make it still d(^sira])le to learn if the trouble is prevalent among the wild or escaped peach trees in the interior of the Chinese Empire.
It may be pertinent to state, in view of the fact that Darwin holds the peach to be derived from the ahnond, that none of the many Avidel}^ cultivated varieties of the almond in California, either of local or for- eign origin, are subject to peach leaf curl, even when growing beside peach orchards denuded by it. Trees which are apparently the result of almond and peach crosses are somewhat affected, however, and sev- eral of the nectarines, which are derived from the peach, are quite subject to it. Seedling peaches, as stated, are very commonly attacked, but of some forty to lift}^ varieties of seedling almonds examined by the writer none has thus far shown the disease.
LOSSES FR03I THE DISEASE.
The direct annual losses to the peach interests of the United States from peach leaf curl are very large, and are usually much greater than is suspected ])y the growers themselves, as the nature and action of the disease are misunderstood b}" them, and its effects frequently attributed to other causes. In case an orchard is so affected that it fails to hold the crop, or sets but a partiid crop, the grower has l)ut little ground for an opinion as to what the yield would have been had curl not prevailed, hence the estimates of losses made b}^ growers are frequently \'ery unsatisfactory. In case curl occurs after a severe cold spell in spring, as is quite conmionly the case, the orchardist is apt to charge the loss of fruit to the low temperature rather than to the disease. The preventive spray work conducted by the Depart- ment has shown, also, that the loss estimates are nearh^ alwa3's too low.
By preventing the disease upon a portion of the trees of an orch- ard the amount of injur\' sustained })y the untreated trees has been determined most accurately by direct comparison. Such comparative work has now been conducted for several years in man}' of the leading peach-growing centers of the country, and these tests enable the writer to state that the losses sustained by the peach industry are probably not overdrawn in the following estimates: Of a large num- ber of peach growers who replied to a circular letter sent them in 1898, there were 251, living in 35 peach-growing States and Terri- tories, who stated whether or not their orchards were affected ])y curl.
20 TEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Sixty-three per cent of these (158 g-rower.s) reported that their orchard.s were affected, and 37 per cent (93 growers) reported that their trees had not been troubled by it. Of the 158 whose trees were atiected, 66 per cent (101 growers), or about 12 per cent of the 251 orchardists reporting on this disease, reported more or less loss. The growers who reported loss were residents of 21 States, and were scattered from the Atlantic to the Pacitic. The losses sustained varied from a small amount of fruit to the entire crop, and in some instances many of the young trees were killed. Of the entire number of reports received as to the presence or absence of curl in the orchard of the grower, 93 came from States or sections of the country where little leaf curl prevails, as Texas, Delaware, Florida, Kansas, etc.. so that the data should l)e strictly representative of the peach-growing coun- try as a whole. The replies received were from Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas. California. Colorado. Connecticut, Delaware, Florida. Geor- gia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky. Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jer- sey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and West Virginia.
The amount of loss sustained by the 12 per cent of the growers reporting losses is given in the replies in various ways. Some growei-s have reduced their loss to dollars and cents; others have indi- cated the loss in percentage of crop; while still others have used some term, such as "slight" loss, '' small" loss, etc., as a repl}^ to the inquiry. In estimating the true loss sustained by these growers a uniform system has been adopted. Where the loss has ])een stated in dollars the amount has been recorded as given. Where the loss is given in percentage of crop the cash loss has l)een determined from the basis used by the United States Census Bureau in determining the \alue of peach crops for the Eleventh Census. A full peach crop was valued at ^150 per acre, and all portions of a crop at the same rate. Where the i-epoi't of the grower was indefinite, the statement being that the loss was small, it has been placed at ^2.50 per acre, which amounts to about 2i cents per tree as usually planted. It is ijrohable that this is iiMich below the average loss in such cases, as a loss so small as this would usually escaj)!' notice. Tn all the caiculacions in these esti- mat<'s an efl'ort is made not to o\'en:ite the loss. T1h>sc calculations ga\-e a loss to the gi-owers averaging >:^1(>.1»5 per acre for the aci'cage r('port('<l as sullcring from the disease, or 12 ))(>r c(Mit of the full aresi. This IS (•(|iii\alcrit to about !i^l.t)(» per acre foi' the entire acreage", or about 1 cents \)vr tree. At first thought this may seem high, t)ut this is more ajjpaicnt than real. If one l(»-acr(M)rchar(l loses its cro}) from curl, valued at $150 ])cr aci-c. the loss amounts to ^1. .■"><»(). There may lie ;'>2 other oi'chards of K) acres each all about this orchai'd where not a [)each is lost, yet the average for such a district is the same as that Htat<'<l. Tins is peilia|t> a clearer manner of putting the matter than
LOSSES FROM THE DISEASE. 21
by placing an average loss for all orchards. The loss may ))e viewed in still anotlun* manner. If an orchardist has grown peaches for 82 years and lost only one crop during that time from leaf curl his loss for the third of a century will average as high as here calculated.
There are large sections of the country where curl is scarcely known, as in portions of Texas. For such regions the preceding estimates may appear high. On the other hand, there are other prominent sections of the country devoted to peach culture where these estimated losses will certainly ])e far too low.
If the preceding calculations and statements are accepted as fairly representing the situation throughout the country, the annual losses fi'om curl in the United States may be approximated. The Eleventh Census reports the orchards of peach trees in the United States at that time (1889-90) as 507,786 acres, and from replies to our circular we are led to believe that curl was present in 63 per cent of these orchards and that 12 per cent sustained some loss from the disease.
Most of the orchards included in the 12 per cent sustained only a slight loss, but a very small percentage sustained a heav}^ loss, some- times amounting to the entire crop. The average loss for the 12 per cent of the orchards is found to amount to $10.95 per acre, or about 10 cents per tree, averaging the trees at 108 per acre. The total acreage of the country being 507,786, the loss should be calculated upon 12 per cent of this, or 213,219 acres, which gives a total esti- mated annual loss from peach leaf curl of $2,335,076. In this estimate no account has been taken of the groat injury to the growth of trees, the injury to nursery stock, the death of young orchard trees, nor the loss to succeeding crops from the reduced number or quality of fruit buds on affected trees. There is also the loss arising from the culti- vation and pruning of unproductive orchards, which, if it could be determined, would probably bring the entire annual loss to the country up to $3,000,000 or more.
Since 1898, when the investigation of this disease was undertaken by the writer, a vovy large amount of correspondence has been con- duct(Kl with peach growers in all parts of the Union who have sus- taiiied losses from curl, and this correspondence has resulted in the accumulation of a large number of facts respecting these losses. These data, however, have not l)ecn drawir upon in the above esti- mates, as it might ])e claimed that they were from growers only who have suffered from the disease, and consequently would not fairly represent the industry as a whole — a claim which can not be made against tlu^ circular letter, the basis of tlu^ estimates, which was addressed to peach growers in general in all parts of the United States. In fact there* appears to have been a larger percentage of replies received from sections of th(^ country where curl is scarce than from the more affected portions.
CHAPTER II.
NATURE OF PEACH LEAF CURL.
The study of the nature of plant diseases is intimately linked with the study of plant physiology, and the true science of vegetable pathology is largely, as Ward has defined it, the study of abnormal plnsiologv. (Introduction to Hartig's Text-book of the Diseases of Trees.) These facts become evident when studying the etiology of peach leaf curl and the conditions attendant upon its widespread development. The direct cause of peach leaf cui'l has long been known as a parasitic fungus, Exoascus (Jcforinanx (Berk.) Fuckel, but it is evident from a careful study of the disease that the injurious development of the fungus is distinctly correlated with special physi- ological phenomena of the peach tree itself. These conditions of the tree are in turn dependent upon such external influiMices as tem- perature, the humidity of the soil and atmosphere, and others. Such facts were foreshadowed by the theories advanced by p(>ach grow(M's as to the cause of the disease. Many growers have considered peach leaf curl as tiie direct result of excessive moisture and low tem- perature or sudden changes, and as these physical conditions cer- tainly have an important bearing upon the injurious de\ elopment of the disease, they are considered together with the direct relations of the parasite to its host. However, too nuich stress can not be placed upon the fact that the fungus alone is responsible for the injury to the tree.- Without the parasite not a leaf would curl nor a peach fall on account of this malady — in fact, no such disease would exist. This is shown by the work hereafter detailed. It is fortunate that the direct cause of peach leaf curl is a parasitic fungus rather than unfavorable atmospheric conditions^ for the latter could not be controlled, while the conti'ol of tin; fungus has been found practicable, simple, and inex- pcnsivi!.
I'llVSICAI, CONDniONS INFLIiKNCIM! TIIK DISKASK.
Tlx' influences of temi)erature, humidity, situation, soil, etc., upon leaf curl are often so well marked that they have frecpiently and in fact<iuit(» generally been mistaken for the active cause of the dis(>ase. Indeed a Nci'v large ])ercentage of peach growers have maintained, to within the past ten or fifteen years, that sudden changes of tiMuperature occuning in conjunction with west w«>ather are the solo cause of the curling and 22
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS INFLUENCING THE DISEASE. 28
loss of foliage. Notwithstaiidino- the nunil)er of known facts to the contrary, there are even now many growers who retain this idea to the utter and needless loss of their crops. The writer has met men who so firmly believe that leaf curl is due to uncontrollable climatic influences that they would not consider other explanations, bcMng unwilling to visit the orchard, though the crop was being lost through curl and by so doing future crops might have been saved.
To gather the experience of peach growers in general respecting the conditions under which leaf curl develops most severely, a circular of inquiry was addressed to several hundred orchardists in November, 181);:>. The replies to some of the questions are presented. Among the inquiries the growers were requested to state if they had observed the disease to be more prevalent after a cold spell in the spring. To this question 97 replies were received, 89 affirmative, 6 negative, and 2 growers said they had observed no difference, which shows that the orchardists are almost unanimous in holding that a cold spell in the spring favors the development of curl.
To the second question, as to whether the trees were most affected by curl in a wet or dry season, there w^ere 104 replies. Of these, 78 stated that peach trees were most affected in wet seasons, 8 that the}" were most affected in dr}^ seasons, and 18 that there was no difference. Here again is seen a marked agreement in the replies, a great majority of the growers recognizing that wet years favor the disease.
The above-considered conditions — a cold spell in the spring and wet weather — may be explained by stating that such conditions favor, on the one hand, the serious development of the fungus causing the dis- ease, and, on the other, they result in a much greater susceptibility of the tissues of the peach leaves to the attacks of the parasite. Where both cold and rain occur together in the spring, about the time the leaves are pushing, the disease is liable to develop seriously and few varieties can then resist it. The action of wet, cold weather upon the tissues of the peach, making them much more subject to curl than they otherwise would be, has been considered in relation to other plants in a paper by Prof. H. Marshall Ward,^ who sa3'S that irJten the combined effects of tJie physical eiwironment are uiifavorahle to the host, hut not so or are even favorable to the parasite, 'wefind the dtseaxe axKuinhxj a more or less j^ronoimced epidemic chara,cter. He is not here speaking of curl, but the statement holds perfectly true for that disease. A cold, w^et spell succeeding warm spring weather, has a tendency to saturate and soften the tissues of the peach, as in the case of other plants. The sudden checking of active transpiration, due to lowered temperature and saturated atmosphere, soon results in the tissues of the plant being suffused Avith water. "'The stomata," as Ward puts tt, ''are nearly
^Wanl, Prof. W. Marshall, The Relations between Host and Parasite in Certain Diseases of Plants, Croonian Lecture, IVoc. Roy. Soc, Vol. XLVII, No. 290.
24 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
closed, the cell walls bounding the intercellular passages and the air in the passages themselves arc thoroughly saturated with water and aqueous vapor, respectiveh', and the movements of gases must be retarded accordingly; turgescence is promoted, and the water contents accumulate to a maximum, owing to the disturbance of equilibrium between the amounts absorljed by the active roots in the relatively warm soil and those passing off into the cold, damp air; much more water is absorbed by the roots in the relatively warm soil than passes off as vapor in equal periods of time." Further than this, Ward states that "'the low temperature, feeble light, and partialh'^ blocked ven- tilation system have for a consequence a depression of respiratory activity and the absorption of oxygen genei-alh'."' This must give a lowered vitality and an accumulation of organic acids. The reduced light also leads to a decided reduction in the assimilative power of the leaves. "The turgid condition of the cells, and the diminished inten sity of the light," Ward says, "will favor growth." If this takes place, "the tendency will be for the very watery cell walls to Ijecome relatively thinner than usual, as well as watery, because the ill-nourished protoplasm does not add to the substance of the walls in proport^pn. This being so. we have the case of thinner, more watery cell walls acting as the only mechanical protection between a possible fungus and the cell contents."
It is generally known that the conditions of moisture and shade, which are above shown as making the tissues of a host plant more tender and watery (more subject to fungous attacks), are also the conditions most favorable to the development of fungi. This holds ec^ually as good for J'J.rod.scus defoi'man.'t as for other forms. In speak- ing of these conditions in relation to a fungus known as Botrijtis^ Pro- fessor Ward gives some generalizations equally applicable to Kiy>ai<cu.'< (h'forrnans in its relation to curl. He says that just those external climatic conditions which are disturbing the well-l)eing of the green host plant are either favorable to the fungi considered or, at any rat^, not in the least inimical to their development. "Thus," he says, "the oxygen respiration of the fungus goes on at all temperatures from 0^ C. to 80-^ C. and higher, and althougli we still want information as to details, experiments have shown that the mycelia flourish at tempera- tures considerably below the o])timum for higher plants. Moreover. light, so indispensable for the carbon assimilation of the green host, is al)solutely unnecessary for the development of the fungus. Then, again, the dull, damp weather and saturated atmosphere, so injurious to higher vegetation, if prolonged, because they entail intei'ference with the normal performance of \arious correlate(l functions, as we have seen, and rendei- the plant tender in all respects, are distinctly favoi"al)le to the <le\ clopment of these fungi; conse(|uently the \ cry set of external circumstances which make tin; host plant least al)lc to
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS INFLUENCING THE DISEASE. 25
withstand the entry and devastation of a parasitic fungus like Boti'i/tis^ at the same time favor the development of the fungus itself."
The writer thinks, as the result of observations in the field, that Exoascus deformans is favored in both its entrance and spread within its host by the conditions which have just been considered. It is a widely observed fact that leaf curl usually develops sparingly in a uniformly warm and dry spring, and it is also noticed that where infection has occurred a return of warm, dr}^ weather, or even the occurrence of a hot, dry wind, will check the development of the fungus within the tissues. An infected leaf may fail to develop the spores of the fungus under such circumstances. The thin, satu- rated cell walls and the moist intercellular spaces thus appear to be closely correlated with the active vegetation of the fungus. The growth and consequent tenderness of the tissues is also important in this connection. Where soil, elevation of orchard, and atmospheric conditions are unfavorable to a saturated condition of the plant paren- chyma, the disease is not likel}' to run more than a short and feelile course. Soil and elevation are here considered with atmospheric con- ditions, for it is found that on the same farm a difference of elevation or soil moisture may determine the degree of virulence of the disease. The influence of elevation may be of only secondary nature — that of maintaining a higher temperature — but its action on the disease is fre- quently well marked. Of 92 orchardists who expressed their views as to whether trees are afl'ected by curl most on high or on low land, 48 say that trees suffer most on low land, 14 on high land, and 30 think there is no difl'erence. While the majority claiming that trees on low land are most afi'ected is not as large as some of the majorities obtained in replies to other questions, it represents over one-half the replies received to the question under consideration and is more than three times as great as the number who believe trees to be most affected on high land, hence is sufficient to establish confidence in its reliability, even if it were not indorsed by man}' published statements to the same eflect.
Mr. Thomas A. Sharpe, superintendent of the experiment farm at Agassiz, British Columbia, has made several comparative I'eports on the action of peach leaf curl on trees planted in the valley and upon the more elevated bench lands of the farm. A few brief statements from these reports should be of value in connection with the above statements.^ In 1892, Mr. Sharpe says, the peach trees sutt'ered from a severe attack of leaf curl. "Only .5 varieties of those planted m the valley escaped" the disease. "The trees planted on the bench lands did not sufler so much, and appeared to recover much more rapidly than those in the valley" (1. c, p. 278). In 1898, it is said,
' See rei)()rts of oxi)eriiuei)tal farms, Ottawa, Canada, for the years indicated.
26 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
the t'lU'l leaf in the peach and nectarine trees was worse than it had ever been l)efore, the Malta being the only variety that was entirely healthy on level laud. The varieties received from England and planted on the level land were just as l)adly affected as the others. The tii'st and second l)ench orchards suffered alike with those on the level gi'ound. but the orchard highest up, at an elevation of SOO feet, had no curl in any case, and the trees appeared to have suffered less from cold than those lower down (1. c., p. 342). Mr. Sharpe says that in 1890. "as heretofore, the trees on the upper bench(^s, both nectarine and peach, escaped the curl leaf entirely" (1. c, p. 4A9). Again, it is said that "the peach crop on the level land this year [in 1898J was almost an entire failure. The curl leaf was very prevalent, nearly every tree being seriously affected by it.'" Relating to the orchard on the l)ench lands, it is stated that "curl leaf did not affect the foliage there; in fact, it has never injured the foliage on either peach or nectarine trees on the benches over 300 feet above the valley" (1. c, p. 403). These facts have an especial interest and value in that thej' were recorded by a single ol^server on one farm and during successive years and epidemics of curl, and they are in perfect harmony with the experience of a majority of the growers whose views are presented above.
The soil may exert its influence b}' abundantly or feebly supplying the transpiration stream, in accordance with the degree of accessibility of the moisture it contains, to the root hairs of the tree. It may be said, however, that as leaf curl commoidy develops at the beginning of spring growth or at the close of the winter's rains, the soil will rarely be found so deficient in moisture as to greatly retard the devel- opment of the disease where other conditions are favorable. It is prob- ably equally true that the excess of water usually found in the soil in the spring is favorable to the special development of the disease at that season in its worst form.
Besides the influence of temporary excessive humidity of the atmos- phere upon leaf curl, which has already been considered, there are other atmosphei'ic influences and relations of importance, which depend upon the local or general ge()grai)hic, topogra])hic. and climatic fea- tures of couiiti-y. Some of these more i)r()iniiient atmospheric influences may here b(^ brietly considered, together with their most l)r()bal)le causes.
Proximity to large bodies of water, whether salt or fresh, greatly favois the development of curl. The cause fortiiis clearly rests in the I'esuiting greater humidity and lower temperature of the atmosphere. Plants grow iiig in a constantly humid atmos[)here luuc normally more Huc<-ulent and tender tissues than those gi-owing in a drier legion. The reasons for this ha\'e already l)een allu(le<l to for special castas of (sxti't'ine atm()S[)herie humidity and lowered temixTatui'e. Near large
PHYSICAL CONDITIOTSTS INFLUENCING THE DISEASE. 27
bodies of water spring fogs couimonly occur, and these lead to the increase of the atmospheric humidity at a time when the foliage is tender and growing rapidly, thus stimulating a development of curl almost annually and over wide stretches of country. Independent of fogs, the atmosphere about large bodies of water is also nmch more humid than in an inland region. Instances of the influi^iice of large bodies of water on the general prevalence and frequent occurrence of curl in a region are found in western New York, near the shore of Lake Ontario; in Ontario, Canada, near Lakes Erie . and Ontario; in Michi- gan along the shore of Lake Michigan; in California about the liay of San Francisco and at other points along the Pacific coast; in Washing- ton and British Columbia about Puget Sound; and in many similar situations in all portions of the world where the peach is grown. The writer believes, however, that the influence of large bodies of water upon the development of curl depends in part upon the normal spring temperature of the region, and likewise upon the source of the prevail- ing winds. Where the prevailing spring winds are from a dry, inland region instead of from the water, the atmosphere does not feel the influences of the latter. Moreover, where the spring temperature is high, transpiration may proceed normally even in the neighl^orhood of large bodies of water, and curl may not commonly prevail.
In contrast to the influences of large Ijodies of water are those of neighboring dr}^ and arid plains or desert regions. In the midst of such influences peach leaf curl can rarely attain to an epiphytotic development, and then only under special favoring seasonal condi- tions. The atmosphere is normally too dry in such situations to exert a predisposing action upon the host, and it certainly does not favor the serious development of the parasite. Exemplifying these condi- tions are large areas in Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Texas, Kansas, and California. Little or no curl is reported from the more arid portions of these sections of the country, its absence being- due, at least in part, to the influences here considered.
Another of the broader influences aftecting the general and perma- nent prevalence of curl over extensive regions is the normal annual rainfall. Comparisons of this kind umst be made, however, between regions of approximately similar temperature. Under such condi- tions it may be said that the general animal prevalence of leaf curl increases with the increase of normal annual precipitation. Compari- sons of this kind can hardly be justly drawn in the Mississippi Valley or on the Atlantic coast, as the temperature conditions vary too greatly in those regions from north to south. On the Pacific coast, however, owing to the modifying influence of the Pacific Ocean, the temperature prevailing from Lower California to British Columbia, a distance of about one thousand three hundred miles, presents no such great variations as are found in a like distance from south to
28 PEACH LEAF CUKL: ITS NATDEE AND TREATMENT.
north on the Atlantic coast, so that the relations of annual rainfall to the constant prevalence of curl nuu' be more fairly decided.
In the following remarks on this subject I have left out of consid- eration the temporary influence of exceptional seasons and, as far as possible, the special influence of local features. The subject should be viewed from the broad field above pointed out. In southern C'ali- fornia leaf curl is not recognized as a generally prevalent and serious trouble, but there is evidence which shows that its prevalence increases from San Diego northward to the San Bernardino Mountains. The average annual rainfall varies from about 10 inches at the former place to 10 inches at Los Angeles, which is not far from the mountains. In the San Joaquin Valle}' the prevalence of curl increases as a whole from the south central portion toward Sacramento and the north. The average annual rainfall, which is 7 inches at Tulare, !♦ inches at Fresno, 11 inches at Merced, and 11 inches at Stockton, reaches 20 inches at Sacramento, about which center curl is quite prevalent. The average rainfall at Oakland is 23 inches, and curl is ([uite trou))lesome there. In the Sacramento Vallej' curl is frequently ([uite pre^•alent, and the rainfall varies from 20 inches at Sacramento and Chico to 31 inches at Redding. About Ashland, in southern Oregon, the rainfall is 23 inches, and the disease is about as in the Sacramento Valley. Farther north in Oregon curl becomes decidedly more prevalent and injurious at the west of the Cascade Mountains, and increases as Portland is approached. The rainfall is 35 inches at Koseburg, 1(5 inches at Alban}', and !*.> inches at Portland. From Albany to Portland the peach industry has been greatly injur<>d by curl, and on its account many growers in this region have considered peach culture a failure.
Curl, it seems, was introduced into the central part of the Willamette Valley. Marion County, nearly half a century ago. Prior to that time the peach was successfully grown in that region in spit(> of the humidity of tin; climate. In the Patent Oftice Report for 1855, p. 298, there is a statement of the situation in Polk and ^Marion comities from 1852 to 1855. This statement was from Mr. Amos Harry, of FaiiM \'idlev, Polk County, Oreg., and is of special interest in this connection. Mr. Harry says: "The peach in this county has been attectcd with a disease known as the 'curled leaf,' which threatens to destroy the trees. It made its ai)p(>ai-ance at Mill Creek, in Marion County, in 1852, and extended considerably on that side of tli(> rixcr (Willamette River) in 1853, but had reached most parts of tho valley in 1S51-55. Some trees seem to escape it much more than others, but if tlu' malady irici-cascs for two years to come as it has foi* two ])ast, 1 fear we shall conif entirely short of this delicious t'l-uit. Some think It is owing to cold, wet w<'ather. and reconnnend shortening all the limbs as a remedy, and some experiments seem to taxor this id(>a. Others think it i> produced by an insect, and that no icniedy will save the tree- iird<» it can l»e applied to llie whole siiit'ace of the leaves."
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS INFLUENCING THE DISEASE. 29
The rainfall at Portland, as already said, is 41> inches, and eurl is com- monly prevalent and severe. At Umatilla, east of the Cascade jMoiui- tains, l)ut a])out the same distance north as Portland, the rainfall is only 10 inches, while on that side of the mountains the peach industry is extensive and everywhere prosperous, leaf curl beino' nuich less prevalent and of secondary importance. This shows that it is not the distance north and the consecjuent lower temperature which makes curl more severe at Portland than at Los Angeles for instance, T)ut that it is the excess of rainfall, for at the east of the mountains, near Umatilla, the temperature goes equally as low or lower than at Portland, and curl is of little importance there. In the Puget Sound region peach culture has never developed extensively, the general prevalence of curl and its injurious action being one of the chief reasons. The rainfall is 50 inches at Seattle and 56 inches at Ol3"mpia. It is only 7 inches at Kennewick and 9 inches at Ellensburg, on the east side of the Cas- cade Range. The peach orchards of North Yakima and neighl)oring sections on the east side of the Cascades and near Ellensburg, where this rainfall is taken, are noted for their extent, thrift, and general health, and curl is not a serious trouble. This case is parallel with that of Portland, already considered. The rainfall at the west of the mountains is 60 to 56 inches or more, while at the east it is only 7 to 9 inches. In the former region peach growing is not listed ])v the Washington Board of Horticulture as one of the horticultural indus- tries, but in the latter region the peach is a leading fruit, ))eing extensiveh' and successfully grown. The winter temperature east of the mountains should range fully as low Avhere the peaches are grown as at the west of the range. The contrast in peach culture in the two situations results from the difference of rainfall, and the heavy rain- fall at the west of the Cascades results in a development of curl almost prohibitive to peach growing.^
In replying to a circular letter sent to the peach growers of Mary- land, Novem})er, 1893, Mr. T. C. Staj'ton, of Queen Anne, makes some statements which bear directly on the matter here considered and are of nuich interest as resulting from personal observation. After speak- ing of the conditions in Maryland, Mr. Stay ton sa3's: ''I was in Washington State during the months of April, May, June, etc., this year, and I find they can not grow peach trees west of the Cascade Mountains or in western Washington, as that part of the State is called, as that is a ver}' wet part of our country.'' He adds that this was especially true in 1893, and continues: "Ahout all the .young trees that had been planted in that part of the State died from curl leaf, or so nearly so that they were worthless, ])ut over in eastern Washington I did not notice any curl leaf, the climate being dry."
'For a full and accurate account of the rainfall conditions i)revailin<i on the Pacific coast, see Report of the Rainfall on the Pat-ilic Slope for from Two to Forty Years, Washington, 1889; also other reports of the Weather Bureau.
30 PEACH LEAF OFRL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Peach leaf curl appears to be more prevalent in late than in early springs. This is probabl}^ due to the lower temperature and greater rainfall usually accompanying the former. Of 80 growers who gave their experience in relation to this matter, 43 stated that curl affects trees most in late springs, 23 believed it affects them most in early springs, and 14 had noticed no difference.
The question as to whether peach leaf curl affects trees most after a cold or warm winter was submitted to the growers, and of the 67 who replied. 27 stated that trees were most affected after a cold winter, 21 that they were most affected after a warm winter, and 19 growers had observed no difference.
The question of the influence of heavj^ dews on curl was also sub- mitted to the orchardists, and the views expressed in their replies exhil)it a remarkable agreement, 47 out of the 58 expressions of opinion received stating that the disease is no worse after a series of heavy dews. To the writer it appears probable that these answers are in perfect accord with the facts. Heavy dews can exert but slight influence upon the tissues of the peach, as they occur at night, when transpiration from the leaf is largely che(;ked by the reduced light and lowered temperature of the atmosphere, resulting in the stomata being nearly closed. With the return of light and warmth the dew evapo- rates with the resumption of transpiration, and can have ])ut little influence upon the tissues of the leaf. It might seem that dew would ha^■e a dii'ect action on the germination of the spores of the fungus and in that way lead to a serious development of the disease after one or more heavy dews. This view, however, is not supported by observa- tions either in the held or in the laboratory. In regions having little cloudy weather, with exceptionally clear skj^, as in manj' portions of th(^ Southwest, the heat of the soil radiates rapidly aftei- sunset. In such sections of the country the days are hot and the nights cool or cold in comparison, the range of temperature between night and day ))eing often considerable. In such regions dew is conmion ;uid often heavy, but it is here that least curl occurs.
Relative to the action of dew on the germination of the spores of Kxod.HciiH <lA'f(yniianH^ it may be said that something more than dew is required for such germination. The writer has tested this matter most thoroughly, not oidy with dew, l)ut with many forms of culture nicdiii at various temperatures and with varying supplies of oxygen. Hrcfcld has also shown that moisture alone is not sufficient for germi- nation, h<' having utterly Failed to induce germination in a single instance after months of work with cidture media in li(|uid I'oi-ni. l')udding of the spores is easy to obtain in all li(|uids, and is more iilmndant and continuous in suitable noniishing cultures than in dew oi' rain water. I'Ml'tv-eighl growci-s i'ej)lied to an in(|uiiy on this suljjeet, 47 stating that llic disease is no worse after a s(>,ries of hca\ \ dews, 7 (iiat it is W(^-s<!, and I that no dill'crcncc was obseived.
THE DIRECT CAUSE OF PEACH LEAF CURL. 31
THE FUNGUS CAUSING THE DISEASE.
The fungus causing peach leaf curl, now known as Exoas<yus defonnans (Berk.) Fuckel, is a member of the subfamil}' of fungi known as Exoascem. The Exoamea'. are low or simple Asco)itycete>i^ or fungi liear- ing their spores in cases or asci.
The classification of the Eroaxcen', which now la^vs greatest claim to scientific permanence is that outlined in the recent writings of Sade- beck, who has given careful study to these forms. ^
Of the five genera which he recognizes, only the last directl}^ concerns us at this time, as it is to this genus {Exoascus) that the peach curl fungus belongs, as well as numerous other species injurious to horti- culture. In considering this genus Sadebeck ^ has grouped thirty of its species according to certain characters of development. He recog- nizes the following characters of the genus:
ExoAscus Fuckel.
A. The mycelium is perennial in the iimer tissues of the axial organs.
a. The development of the hymenium occurs only in the floral leaves of the ' host i)lant. Eight species.
h. The development of the hymenium occurs only in the foliage leaves of the host plant. Seven species, including E. dcfonnaui^.^
c. The development of the hymenium occurs upon the leaves as well as upon the fruits. One species.
B. The mycelium is perennial in the l)uds of the liost plant and develops only subcuticularly in the leaves.
'Sadebeck, Dr. R., Die parasitischen Exoasceen, Hamburg, 1893, p. 43. Sadebeck recognizes five genera in the Exuasccrv, which he arranges and character- izes in the following manner:
EXOASCEjE : Ascoinycetes whose asci are not xinited in a fruit body.
A. The asci arise as swellings at the end of the branches of the mycelial threads.
1. Eiidomyrcs Tulasne. Four-spored asci, no conidia within the same; the sterile threads develop chlamydospores and oidia.
2. Maymmclld Sadebeck. Parasitic. Asci with more than four spores; usually conidia formations in the ascus. Oidia and chlamydospores wanting.
B. The asci take their origin fi'om a more or less loose hymenium.
3. Ascocortk'inm Bref. Saprophytic on bark. The ascus layers are arranged in a loose hymenium upon the mycelium.
4. Taphrbia Fries. Parasitic. Without perennial mycelium. In the formation of the ascogenous cells differentiations of material occur. Forming leaf spots.
5. Exodscufi Fuckel. Parasitic. With i)erennial mycelium. In the formation of the asci no differentiations of material appear. The subcuticular mycelium changes directly to ascogenous (xdls. Causing sprout deformations.
■^Sade])eck, Dr. R., Einige neue Beol)achtungen und kritisclie IJemerkungen iil)er die Exoascaceaj, pp. 277,278, reprint from den Ber. d. deutsch. hot. Ges., 1895, Bd. XIII.
"Dr. von Derschau has described the occasional fruiting of E.mnxrus tfrformans in the blossoms of the peach. The figures given by this author do not show the nor- mal development of ascogenous cells in the blossoms which are so conunon in the leaf Vjlade of the peach. His figures show the asci as arising from lateral l)ranches of a continuous mycelial hypiia, and this mycelium is situateil beneath the epidermal cells instead of between the cuticle and t-pideruiis (Landw. Jahrb., Berlin, 1897, pp. 897-901, and Table XLI).
32 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATUEE AND TREATMENT.
ti. The develoimu'iit of the hynienimu occurs only in the Horal leaves of the host plant. Three sjiecies.
h. The develoiiiuent of the hynieniuni oix-nrs only upon tlie foHajre leaves. Ten species.
c. The resting mycelium extends intercellularly in the deformations of the leaves. One siiecies.
It may be seen under A 7) of this arrang-enient that Kromcus defor- m<in>< is said to possess perennial mycelium, inhabiting the inner tis- sues of the axial organs, and that the development of the hymenium occurs only in the foliage leaves of the host plant. As will be seen in another part of this l)ulletin, it is perhaps a perennial nature of the mycelium of E. deformans which makes it difficult to thoroughly rid an orchard of curl by means of spray treatment, but this matter requires further careful consideration.
The synonymy of Exoascus deformans (Berk.) Fuckel has been given b}' numerous writers. Sadebeck^ gives it as follows:
Aacomyces deformarnf Berk. Intro, to Cryptogamic Botany, 1857, \i. 284.
AscoKporiiDn (h'foDiiauH Berk. Outlines, 1860, p. 449.
T(q}hrhm deformans Tul. Ann. Sci. Nat., 1866, V. Ser., t. 5., p. 128.
Exoascus deformans Fuckel. («) Persicx Fuck. Symbola? Micolog., 1869, }>. 252.
This fungus has been very commonly observed and frc(j[uently desci'ibed ])v ])otanists since Berkeley called attention to it in 1857. It has thus been known as the cause of curl for a little less than half a centur3\ The peculiar behavior of peach foliage under its action has })een observed by horticulturists, however, for a nnich longer time. The disease was well descri})ed in England in the early part of the present century.
In spite of the very conmion appearance of Exoasous deformmis upon peach foliage in peach-growing countries, the descriptive litera- ture relating to its life history is not free from conflicting statements. Several species of Exoasceo} have been confounded with this species in some instances, and subseqiuMit writers have perpetiiat(>d the confusion.
Some eai'liei' wi'itrrs believed this species inhabits a considerable lunnbci" of host plants, tluis resulting in tlu^ (lescrij)ti()ii and disti'ibu- tioii of sciveral distinct species as Exod.scu.'^ dcfornttiits. To avoid such confusion it would 1)c best to confine remarks upon this species to the fungus as it develo])s upon the peacli {Pnimi.s perslca L.). which if ii(»1 its only host, is certainly its most coiiunon one.
At least two modes of infection of the peach 1 i'C(> by Exiklscu.^ dij'oriiKiiis ai'c said to exist (1) by means of perennial mycelium, and (2) by means of the s))<)rcs of the fungus.
SadebecU ' is authority for the stat(Mncnt, that the niyceliiini winters o\er in the youngest poilionsof the one-yeaioid Inanchesof the host
'Sadeheck, i)r. II., Dif parasilisclicn I'lxoasceeii, llamlmig, ls;i;'>, p. 53. ^Jdeni, I.e.
THE IlSrFECTION OF THE HOST. 33
plant, and may be seen in the primary cortex, in the medulla, and in the medullar}^ rays of the first shoots of each period of \egetation, but has not been o])served in the soft bast. With the beginning of the new season of growth the mycelium, according to Sadebeck, extends into the leaves of the young shoots, penetrates first the inner tissue of the leaves, and finally progresses to the development of the subcuticular hymenium. From what foundation of experimentation Sadebeck has arrived at these views respecting this particular species, I am unable to state, but he has given the outlines of his investigations upon other species.'
The facts given b}^ De Bary ''' can not be cited here, for this work was done upon the Exoascus infesting the cherry tree, and which is now considered to be distinct from E. deformans.
The general acceptance of the view that spring infection of the peach foliage is largely due to the extension of the internal perennial myce- lium into the new shoots and leav^es from the shoots of the previous summer, has probably considerabh^ retarded the progress of prevent- ive treatment. Pathologists have thought it improbable that any considerable amovmt of disease could be prevented after a tree Avas once generally aflected, as the perennial mycelium, being internal, could not be readily reached by external sprays. Prillieux,'' writing in 1872, advises the gathering of the diseased leaves and the cutting away and burning of the diseased branches. Frank* has made like recommendations in both editions of his work on plant diseases. Assmning the mycelium to be perennial, he says that the curing of the disease might be aimed at through cutting back of the diseased branches and the prevention through <|uick removal of the diseased leaves. Winter' suggests a somewhat similar line of treatment, with the additional recommendation that the trees be protected from rain during the unfolding of the leaves. Dr. Cobb," as late as 1892, after speaking of the perennial mycelium of this fungus, discusses pre- ventive and curative measures, such as the destruction of diseased leaves, prunings, etc., while in the more severe cases he says the sooner the trees are cut down and burned the better it will be for the peach industr3^
^Sadebeck, Dr. R., Die parasitischen Exoasceen, Hamburg, 1893, pp. 24-28. — Das perennirende Mycel der Exoascus- Arteii.
'■'De Bary, A., Com. Mor. and Biol, of the Fungi, Mycetozoa, and Bacteria, Eng- lish edition, 1887, p. 26(5.
•'rrillieux, Ed., Bui. de la soc. hot. de France, 1872, T. XIX, p. 2m
* Frank, Dr. A. B., Die Krankheiten der Pflanzen, Breslau, 1881, Part II, p. 526; second edition, 1896, Vol. II, p. 250.
^Winter, Dr. Georg, Die durch Pilze verursachten Kranklieiten der Kulturge- wilchse, Leipzig, 1878, ]>. 47.
«Cobb, Dr. N. A., Tlie Agricultural (iazette, Sydney, New Soutli Wales, IS92, Vol. Ill, pp. 1001-1004.
19093— No. 20 3
34 PEACH LEAF CURL". ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Relative to the use of fungicides the same writer sa^'s: "These treatments are of doubtful value as far as the curl is concerned, and were it not that they are viseful in other ways I would not mention them." It is evident that these views are the result of Dr. Cobb's belief that the perennial uncelium is responsible for the major portion of the spring infection of the tree. The writings of others to the same effect could be cited, but the views of the workers already named are sufficient to show that their recommendations for treatment have been based upon the hypothesis that the spring infection could not be prevented by treatment with fungicides, as it arose mainly from in- ternal mycelium rather than from the germination of external spores. That this view has held back the preventive treatment of the disease, as already claimed, can not be doubted, and that a perennial mycelium is not responsible for more than a very small percentage of the spring infections seems evident from the results of the present experi- ments; in fact it may even be questioned if such infection takes place except under exceptionally favorable conditions. Our experiments have demonstrated that as high as 98 per cent of infections may be prevented b}^ a single thorough application of a suitable fungicide. This is as high a percentage of control as is often obtained in the treatment of fungous diseases where no pei'ennial mycelium exists, aJid it seeuis probable that the infections by this means luay not com- monly exceed 5 per cent of each spring's infections. Were this not the case we would be forced to assume that the spray has a direct effect upon the hi))ernating mycelium, which certainly would be unusual and scarceh' to be expected.
The second mode of spring infection — that by means of spores — is probably much more general and important in this disease than has been supposed. That 90 to 98 per cent of the infections of tlie tree are i)revented by a single spraying suggests that at least such ])ei-cent- ag(? of the infections is by means of spores.
The mycelium of Kroa.sciis difoi'iiKinx as found in the ])(>acii. shows great differences in the form and appearance of its hyplne. These differences depend ui)on the stage of development of the funglis and the various functions of the mycelium. Th(> writer recognizes three types of hyphte, which may he teinied vegetative, distributive, and fruiting.
'I'he vegetative hypha* are found most connnonly in the leaf ])ai(>n- chyma, but are also met with in the leaf stalk and cortical ])ai'eiichyma {*f l)adly diseased and distorted l)i'anches. These hyphic may l>e most distinctly seen, and ar«> most highly developed, in infested leaves which have not yet foi'ined the hyiueniuni of ascogenous cells, but in which the parasite has been present a sutKcient time to (Mitirely altei- the (•hara<-ter of the palisade tissue and caus<' the loss of the chlorophyll. In the leaf l)lade the palisade tissue first shows the serious action of
BULL. 20, DIV. VEQ. PHYS. a PATH., U. S. OEPT. AGRICULTURE.
MrCELIUM OF EXOASOUS DCPORMANS, THE FUNOUS 0AU8INQ PEACH LEAF CURL.
A.ll<,niik I'll, Mil, ll,illli,>„i„
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE II.
Mycelium uf Exua-scus deformans (600/1) . Figs. 1 and 2, normal vegetative hypha?, as ff)imd in the leaf parenchyma, showing characteristic septation, modes of branch- ing, etc. ; figs. 3, 4, and 5, usual type of distributive hypha^ found in swollen branches in the cortical parenchyma and medulla; figs. 6, 7, 8, and 9, fruiting hyphie, show^- ing successive stages in the development of ascogenous cells from the subcuticular mycelium (6) to the half-formed ascogenous cells (9). (See PL III for further stages in the development of the ascogenous cells and asci. )
THE MYCLIUM OF THE FUNGUS.
85
the vegetative hyphiv. \s • ii are usually found somewhat later among the cells of the spoiitix i n -(ichyma, below the vascular network. 'IMie loss of chlorophyll fK m ' h two classes of leaf parenchyma commonly preserves the order hvv ij-en. The form of the vegetative hypha' is very irregular, and tlicir ements, or cell members, are often of dif- ferent size, length. uimI sape. The cells vary greatly in diameter from one end to the oi : laro frequently much curved and twisted, and oftentimes appear ,r.ngular in cross section. The branches may arise from greatly I'mrged triangular bifurcations, or in other instances directly from the'des of the cells. These vegetative hyphju are all intercellular so fai' a observ' ed, but are commonly found adher- ing closely to the cell walls>f the host, frequentl}' w' rapping al)out the parenchyma cells. The wds of the hyphte are semitranspurent but firm, commonly having :i light yellowish cast. The se})ta present peculiar characters. Two iljoining cells of a hypha have the appear- ance of being separately deed at the end and united with each other by means of an intervening plate, which if it should be dissolved or lost would leave the cells scprated but closed. These peculiar septa are remarkably refractive and caractei'istic. They are well shown in the drawings of Sadebeck (Dioarasitischen Exoasceen, llaml)ui-g, l.sj»3. Tab. II, figs. 7, 8). The pidominating characters of the vegetative hyphoe are shown in PI. II. i^s. 1 and 2, of this bulletin. The hyphiv there shown were carefully eparated from the leaf parenchyma and drawn under the camera. Tie vegetative hyphas of the branch are
much the loose, bun
e Iciif. nd have been seen most couunoidv amono-
' the cortex just exterior to the bast fiber
never been found by the writer in the
..+2^' that the mycelium has been found in
vn ill PI. II, tigs. 3, -t, and 5. ill the tissue lying close beneath wigs, and in great abundance in I in groups of several hyphse but id following a course parallel to le cells composing these hyphae tivc or the fruiting forms, while uniform diameter. The septa other forms of the mycelium )h» have been followed for some of the peach twig, and the name )arent fun(;tion of spreading the aiich by bifurcation, the branches ul to the parent hypha and the
THE MYCELIUM OF THE FUNGUS. 35
the vegetative hyphae, which are usually found somewhat later among the cells of the spongy parenchjMiia, below the vascular network. The loss of chlorophyll from the two classes of leaf parenchyma commonly preserves the order here given. The form of the vegetative hj^phae is ver}^ irregular, and their elements, or cell members, are often of dif- ferent size, length, and shape. The cells vary greatl}" in diameter from one end to the other, are frequently much curved and twisted, and oftentimes appear triangular in cross section. The branches may arise from greatly enlarged triangular bifurcations, or in other instances directly from the sides of the cells. These vegetative hj^phje are all intercellular so far as observed, but are commonly found adher- ing closely to the cell walls of the host, frequently wrapping about the parenchyma cells. The walls of the hyphte are semitransparent but firm, commonly having a slight yellowish cast. The septa present peculiar characters. Two adjoining cells of a hypha have the appear- ance of l)eing separately closed at the end and united with each other by means of an intervening plate, which if it should be dissolved or lost would leave the cells separated l)ut closed. These peculiar septa are remarkal)ly refractive and characteristic. They are well shown in the drawings of Sadebeck (Die parasitischen Exoasceen, Hamburg, 1893, Tab. II, figs. 7, 8). The predominating characters of the vegetative hyphre are shown in PI. II, tigs. 1 and 2, of this bulletin. The hypha? there shown were carefully separated from the leaf parenchyma and drawn under the camera. The vegetative hyphre of the l)ranch are much like those of the leaf, and have been seen most commonly among the looser parenchj^ma cells of the cortex just exterior to the bast fiber bundles. Thus far they have never l)een found by the writer in the caml)ial tissues. Sadebeck states that the mycelium has been found in the pith and medullary rays.
The distributive hyphae are shown in PI. II, figs. 3. 4, and 5. They have been found by the writer in the tissue lying close beneath the epidermal cells of diseased peach twigs, and in great al)undance in the pith. They are occasionally found in groups of several hypha^ but slightly separated from each other and following a course parallel to the longitudinal axis of the shoot. The cells composing these hypha? are much longer than either the vegetative or the fruiting forms, while they are nearly straight and of more uniform diameter. The septa are characteristic of those found in the other forms of the mycelium of this fungus. Such distributive hypha^ have l)een followed for some little distance in the swollen portions of the peach twig, and the name has been given them from their apparent function of spreading the fungus in the branch. Such hypha- bi-anch ])y bifurcation, the branches commonly assuming a course parallel to the parent hvpha and the direction of the peach limb.
36 PEACH LEAF CUELt ITS NATUKE AND TREATMENT.
The fruiting hyphse have been seen to arise in Exoasaus deforma/ns from the vegetativ^e hyphse after the latter have become well developed in the parenchyma of the leaf. Large, well-nourished vegetative hypha? commonly develop just below the epidermal cells of the upper leaf surface.^ From these hyphse arise branches which penetrate between the cells of the epidermis, and press themselves between the epidermis and the cuticle. Such hyphje may be seen both in section and surface view. These subcuticular hyphaj now branch freeh', and follow with more or less regularity the triangular space formed by the juncture of two adjoining and somewhat rounded epidermal cells with the cuticle. This is presumably the line of least resistance to the advance of the hj'phre. By opening and following these channels the mycelium assumes the outlines of a quite uniform network l)eneath the cuticle. While this manner of following the line of juncture of adjoin- ing epidermal cells with the cuticle is conmion, it is not invariably the practice of the fungus, cases occurring where apparently no such agreement exists. Series of straight and parallel hyphje, at regular distances apart, are sometimes met Avith beneath the cuticle as the precursors of the hj^menial layer. These send off lateral branches on either side, which ])y enlarging, branching, and curving eventually occupy most of the surface of the epidermis between the main hypha\ It is probable that the path followed by the first subcuticular hypha? depends largely upon the firmness with which the cuticle is attached to the epidermal cells, and which ma}' largch' depend upon the amount of water in the tissues and upon the age and rapidity of their growth. With the leaf tissues full of water and making a rapid groAvth, the hypha' could naturally pursue a more direct course beneath the cuti- cle than under contrar}' conditions. After the esta])lishment of a much-))raiiched filamentous ni^twork of subcuticular hyplnv. the cells of which are usually slender, of medium length, thin-walled, and of comparative!}' uniform diameter (PI. II, fig. 6), these cells begin to distend, and are shortened ])V the formation of new transverse septa (PI. II, fig. 7, and PI. Ill, fig. 22). About this time all septa become much more distinct. At a later stage the cells become still more distended and subspherical (PI. II, fig. 8). As these enlarged cells
' Miss E. L. Knowles (Bot. Gaz., Vol. XII, No. 9, p. 217) has called atten- tion to th(! fact that Winter's statement that "the asci break throujili tiie lower si<l(; of the leaf" does not hold jiood for the peach (Kryp. Flora, Asco., p. <>, and Krank. Kultur-dewiichse, I^'ipzijr, 1878, p. 47). Winter is not alone in statinji that thea.«<i of K. ih/oniKinxurm'im the luider .surface of the leaves. Robinson says: "The asci are borne on both sides of the leaf, l)nt in greater luunbers upon the lower sur- face" (Koltinson, I?. 1>., Notes on the; (Jenus Taphrina, Ann. Bot., Nov., 1887, Vol. 1, No. 11, J). H)8). Atkinson also says: "The asci are developed on both surfaces of the leaf" (Atkinson, (Jeo. F., I>eaf Curl and I'luni PiK-kets, ('ornell Ajrr. Kxp. Sta. I?ull. No. 7.'{, 1894, p. .'{25). These and other like statements have probably arisen from a Htudy of other foliap- than that of the j)each, and of other species of Exoaaciis, and qave been i)er[>etMat<'<l thnm^'h iiisullicient reference to nature.
DESCRIPTION OK IM.ATK TIT.
Fruitiiifi stages of Kni<(xciti< deformans. F'igs. I to 11^ (fiOO/l), various stages and conrlitions of the asci and ascospores of t!u' fungus. Fig. 14, section of peach leaf, showing sul)epi<leriiial and suV)cuticular myccliuiii, the latter already jiartially dif- ferentiated into a.'^cogenous cells. Fig. 15, section of peacli leaf showing three suc- cessive stages in the formation of the asci from the ascogenous cells: a, the i)ushing of the ascogenous cells; //, the ascus nearly full-formed, but with the contents still connected with the ascogenous cell; <•, the asci separated by a sejitum from the ascog- enous cell, wliich now forms the stalk cell of the ascus. Figs. 1() to 20 (tiOD/l), the first stages in the formation of the asci from the ascogenous cells, the latter being rui)tured above and the asci pushing ui>ward. Fig. 21, the pushing of a forming ascus tlirough the leaf cuticle (()00/l). Figs. 22 to 27 (600/1), various stages in the fonnation of ascogenous cells from subcuticular mycelium. (P'or several early stages in this process see PI. II, figs, (i to 0). Figs. 28 to 30 (000/1) show fully developed asc(jgenous cells as seen from above.
BULL. 20, DIV. VEQ. PHYS. & PATH., U. S. DEPT. AGRICULTURE.
PLATE in.
NVwt.in II Picni- ;«1 iwit H':l
FRUITING STAGES OF EXOASCUS DEFORMANS.
i.llurn< r».l.iil>. Ka
THE FEtTlTlNG HABITS OF THE FUNGUS. 37
spread out between the epidermal cells of the leaf and the cuti- cle they are much distorted, curved, and lobed, the branches and lobes eventually tilling, in a quite uniform and continuous manner the entire space between the elevated cuticle and epidermis so that a more or less perfect and continuous hymenial layer of 'ascooonous cells is formed (PI. II, fig. 9; PI. Ill, %s. 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27). At this time the cells become well rounded and heavv-walled, and thev may or may not become loosened and separated^ from each otheT (PI. Ill, tigs. 28-30). These are now the fullv developed ascoge- nous cells of the hymenium, and they are fully stored with nutritive materials for the development of the asci. In their compact, continu- ous, and rounded condition they resemble, when viewed from the sur- face, the stones in the pavement of an old Roman highway.
The various phases of the development of the hymenium of ascog- enous cells may often be observed at one time in a single infected leaf. The center of a swollen spot frequently shows the fully devel- oped hymenium, while at the margin of the spot the first filamentous hypha' are just spreading beneath the cuticle. In such instances nearly all stages in the development of the ascogenous cells may be studied in a single well-prepared specimen. The development of a subcuticular hymenium has been observed in the petiole as well as in the ])lade of the leaf.
The formation of the asci from the fully developed ascogenous cells has been carefully followed in the study of a large number of prepara- tions. Thus far no sexual phenomena have been observed in connec- tion with the formation of the ascogenous cells or with the develop- ment of the asci. As already said, the walls of the ascogenous cells are heavy. The early steps in the development of the asci from these cells (the development of a papilla-like elevation on the upper surface of the cells) cause the rupture or dissolution of the heavy wall where the elevation occurs. The phenomenon is that of the germination of a heavy-walled spore, or, perhaps, more properly, the outgrowth or prolongation of an endospore through the rupture of the epispore (PI. Ill, figs. 17, 18, etc.). The fact to be noted is the perfect rest- ing condition into which the ascogenous cells may pass before the development of the ascus, as shown by the marked delimitation between the thin wall of the forming ascus and the heavy wall of the ascogenous cell. The entire isolation of single ascogenous cells or groups of cells from all sources of vegetative supply indicates that the ascus is entirely dependent for its nourishment upon the stored materials of the cell from which it arises. The pushing of the ascus after the com- plete development of the ascogenous cell instead of in direct con- tinuation of the development of the latter, also points to a probable cessation and renewal of the reproductive activity of the ascogenous cell.
38 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
In view of these facts, it seems possible that the asoogiMious cells may be capable of enduring, under especiall}^ favorable conditions, a resting period of considerable time. Such resting ascogenous cells have been sought for upon the swollen branches of the peach, how- ever, without success. Further research along this line is desirable. As the fungus is already known to fruit upon the ))lade and petiole of the leaf and upon the blossom, and a vegetative mycelium is found growing thriftily in the swollen branches, there seems to be no good reason why the parasite may not fi'uit upon the infected twigs.
The perpendicular growth of the developing asci in the leaf soon rup- tures or pierces the cuticle, and where largo numbers of asci develop at the same time the cuticle is lifted, torn, and lost, the asci forming a more or less continuous plush-like surface growth. Isolated asci press through the cuticle so as to form separate perforations (PI. Ill, fig. 21). The contents of the forming ascus are finel}^ granular, and as the ascus elongates these contents crowd into the upper portion and a septum is formed across the basal part in such a manner as to cut off the now emptied ascogenous cell as a stalk cell for the ascus (PI. Ill, tig. 15). When fully developed the asci are usually broader at the top than at the base, and often somewhat clavate in form. A series of asci measured \aried in length from 3-1: to -i-i /<, the average being 38 M '■, the width of the asci ranged from 10 to 12 yw, and the height of the stalk cells varied from 8 to 13 ;^, the average l)eing slightly over 10 m (PI- III, tigs. 1-18).
The formation of the ascospores in Exoascus deforrrums has not been carefully studied by th(^ writer. Sadebec^k has shown, however, for E. turg'iduH^ that mitotic nuclear division occurs in the ascus in connec- tion with spore foi'mation (Untersuch. iiber die Pilzgattuiig Exoas- cus, Hamburg, 1884, PI. Ill, tig. 20). The ascospores devek)ped in the asci of E. deformans varj^ in number from 3 to 8, the latter being the full and typical numl)er. When matures they are surrounded l)v a moderately tirm cellulose wall, which is rather inconspicuous, owing to its transparency. The spores are usually somewhat oval in form, being longer than broad, but occasionally some are seen which appear nearly or (^uite spherical. Fresh ascospores sometimes show distinct nuclear phenomena. This has been obscu'ved with spores still within the ascus, as well as in many which have escaped. The nucleated appearance seems less common in budding or germinating ascospores than in those in a resting condition (PI. IV, tigs. I, 2, 3, 4, and 10). Th(^ average; length of the ascospores measuivd was T/f /<, the length vaiying from <> to 9 a*, and the average width was (>,•',, /<. varying from 5 to 7 }i. The ascospores escape from the ascus through an ajjical I'up- tuic of the latter.
(icrmiriation of the ascospores has been observiMl by the writci" to pi'oce(;d in two ways: (1) \\\ means of budding or conidia formation; (2) by nutans of stocky germ (iil»t's. often one branched and rcsiMnbling promycelia.
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE IV.
Germination of tiie ascosporet- an<l conidia of Kroascus deformans. Figs. 1 to 12 (al-KJut 800/1), a.scof?ix)res, of whifli five show nuclear phenomena and several are budding. Figs. 13 to 21 (800/1 j, thin-walled conidia, several of which are ]»roducing hu<1s; tlie remaining spores, uniuniilK're<l, show various modes of proiiiycdium f<jnuation or mycelial germination.
JLL. 20, DIV. VEG. PHYS. St PATH., U. S. DEPT. AGFUCULTUBE.
N'pwttiri H.l'ifuc lui.iint del
GERMINATION* OF THE SPORES OF EXOASOUS DEFORMANS.
A. Hum, *- <■« Liili B.illhiiurv.
1
GERMINATION OF THE SPORES. 39
Budding- of the ascospores occur.s either before or after the escape of the spores from the aseus. In the formation of the bud conidia the process may take place from the ascospore direct, one conidium after another being produced, or the contents of the ascospore may pass into a thin-walled conidium nearly or quite equal in size to the ascospore, this large conidium then assuming the function of bud production. Ordinarily the ascospore buds at one point only, but bud formation at two points has lieen seen. Budding occurs most commonh" at one end of the ascospore, but occasionalh^ lateral buds are observed. In the earh' stages of budding the ascospore sometimes shows a nipple-like swelling at one end, reminding- one of the germinating end of the sporangium in the Peroiiosporece. The successive primary conidia bud- ding- from an ascospore ma}' become loosened and turned to one side by the following conidium, which swells from the same germ pore of the ascospore. In other cases several conidia may remain united with each other, but when this condition is observed it is frequently the result of the secondary or tertiary budding of the primary conidium, several orders or generations of buds remaining united. When the process of primary conidial budding can no longer take place the empty ascospore may or ma}^ not become separated from the last primary conidium. With the exception of the case above referred to, the dif- ferent orders or series of conidia (primar}', secondary, tertiary, etc.) when grown in pure water, are each smaller than the preceding, and the conidia are considerabh' elongated in form, sometimes almost cylindrical. The walls of the conidia are more delicate than those of the parent spore. In a suitable nourishing fluid, as the extract of malt, the conidia take up nourishment and increase in size, thus enabling them to continue the Inidding process for considerable periods of time, as in the yeasts (Saccharomyces). Whether the conidia of Exoascus defoivnans are able to induce an alcoholic fermentation through their growth in saccharine culture media is not known, but Sadebeck states that the conidia of other species of this genus certainly possess this fermenting power.
The second method of germination of the ascospore of Exoascus defornuuhs, that is, the pushing of germ tubes, is rarely met with except upon the host plant itself. Such mode of germination is shown in PI. IV. The germ tube produced from the ascospore is usually much swollen near the spore and tapers considerably toward the cxtremit}', though not infrequently considerable constrictions occur at one or more points in its course. It seems probable that this tube is in many cases capable of directly infecting the host, probably through a stoma, as observed by Sadebeck in Exoascus tosquinstii^ and that its function is not wholly the abjointing of sporidia. Such separation of sporidia, in fact, has not thus far been observed. The germ tube, or promj'celium, is connected with the spore by a verj'^ narrow and short tube, with straight and ])arallel walls. The same mode of con- nection is also observable in the formation of the bud conidia, and
40 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATUEE AND TREATMENT.
ivininds one of the .sterigmatti bearino- the sporangia of P]nii(>j>hi}t(>r(i hifextaiix.
Thus far efforts to induce tilamentous gerniiiiation of the bud eonidia or of the ascospores of ExoancuH defonnmis in culture media have proved unsuccessful. Brefeld has worked with this problem for months, and the writer has frequentl}' attempted to ol)tain this form of germination.' Budding occurs, as alreadj^ indicated, quit(^ readily in various luitrient solutions, and short promycelia from the ascospores have been found in some cultures. In nearly if not all cases, however, the ascospores showing promycelia or short m^^celial germination have .shown that this germination occurred under natural conditions upon the peach leaf, the germinated spores l)eing transferred from the leaf to the culture^ in preparing the latter. It may be added here that the ))ud eonidia are also formed in vast numbers upon the surface of the infested leaf after the maturing of the ascospores. It i-; largely these eonidia which give the infested leaf the marked white appearance conmionly observed at the height of the disease. The leaf appears as if covered with flour or a heavy white bloom.
RELATIONS OF THP: FITNGUS TO THE HOST.
Under a previous heading in this chapter the physical conditions which influence the serious development of peach leaf curl liave been considered in accordance with the light which we now have relative to such influences, and there remain to l)e taken up at this time the more intimate and direct relations of the host and parasite. These relations includ(> the action of the fungus upon the cell contents, the cell walls, and the cellular tissues of the host; the pi'obal)le mode of infection and the spread of the parasite within the tissues; the wintering of the fungu.s upon the tree; etc.
'A very considerable number of cultural experiments have been tried. The cul- tureH oi asco.sporeH and eonidia liave been subjected to temperatures nnich below tlie freeziiifr i)oint and to various degrees of heat in the thermostat. Sudden changes of tcmjK'rature have l)een tried. Increased and diminished amoimtsof o.xygen, as con- trasted with that of the normal atmosphere, have been tested. Even a chamber tilled witli nearly ])ure oxygen has produced no ai)parent effect. Water from various sources, such as rain water, dew, ice water, distilled water, tap water, et(;., has been testcfl. Solutions of tlie various sugars, malt extract, sterilized beer, plum extract, etc., were tried. Hanging drop cultures of various nutrient media and plate cultures of potato-peptone-sugar gelatin have not shown germination. Drojjs of variou- nutrient solutions placed upon newly forming leaves dissected from unopened peacii buds and thes(! lield in moist chambers have given oidy negative results. The same is true for peach i)itH brought near to germination and the cotyledons treated with a weak solution of diastase, the spores jilaced between theui and held at various tem- I)(Tatur<'s in moist ehamlM'rs. Sections of such cotyledons with spores placed upon them were also prepared in moist ciiambers. A brief treatment <>f tiie spores with ellii-r was tested without bringing about germination.
I'rillieiix states that attempts to artilicially infect the leaves or shoots luivc not thus far succerde.i (>hil. .1. I'lantes Agr., Vol. 1, p. :{!«>).
RELATIONS OF THE FUNGUS TO THE HOST. 41
As al ready indicated, the writer's work witli sprays seemed to siiow that not more than a small percentage of each year's infections ordinarily arise from a perennial mycelium. In the Lovell orchard, where the personally conducted work was carried out. it would appear that not to exceed 2 to 3 per cent of the infections could have arisen from that cause. On the other hand it would seem that at least 95 per cent of the infections arose from spores, for, as already stated, H5 to !t8 per cent of the spring infections could be prevented ])y a single spraying, and this was actually accomplished where the spraying was done with sufficient thoroughness. It is believed by the writer, however, that these percentages wnll vary within moderate limits iji diti'erent locali- ties, with different varieties, and in different seasons. The following observations will explain these views.
The mycelium of diseased leaves is found to l)e comKH-tcKl through the leaf petiole with the nwcelium of the infected limb. From the writings of Sadebeck and many others it might ])e supposed that the leaves were infected from the perennial mycelium in a majority of cases, and that the mycelium met with in the petiole of the leaf origi- nated from the perennial mycelium of the ])ranch. That such spring infection really occurs from the wintering mycelium of the branch should perhaps be admitted, but that such is the common mode of infection of the leaves is certainly doubtful. The writer's studies have shown that the mycelium in the branch close to a cluster of infected leaves diminishes in amount as it passes upward or downward in the branch from such leaves. This fact is as obvious from microscopic studies of the infested tissues as from the external hypertrophies observable to the e^^e. A macroscopic examination of diseased and swollen branches will show that the enlarged parts may extend upward or downward along the branch from the ])ase of the petioles of the leaves, which seem to represent the center of infection. In a majority of cases these swollen ridges terminate before reaching another leaf bud, though in some instances they are seen to extend along the })ranch throughout the entire length of one or more internodes. and in such cases it is fair to suppose that the mycelium may have infected the young leaves of a second or third bud in its course. It should be remem))ered, however, that this mycelium, in a great majority of instances, indicates no connection with a previous year's mycelial growth, but has evidently just entered the branch from one or more infected leaves. The microscopic evidence supports these conclusions, which are, to some extent, in harmony with B.'nton's observations, to be hereinafter considered, but the writer is scarcely prepared to admit the large percentage of spring infections arising from new myc(>lium entering the branch which the observations of that writer schmu to imply. ^ The microscope shows that the hyph.v whicli ])ass away from
'Pacilic- Knral Press, Aug. 2, 1890, p. 88.
42 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
the ba.se of tlie leaf petiole gradually deer(>ase in ininibers as they recede from the leaves, and the}' appear to l)e wholly lost at a short distance from the point of entrance into the shoot. As a rule, little or no niyccliuinhas been found extendino- more than 1 or 2 inches })e3'ond a point where external macroscopic evidence of disease exists.
The preceding facts lead to the belief that where mycelial infection of foliage takes plac(^ from the branch it is usually done in the spring from hypha^ arising from spore-infected leaves of the same season, and that this occurs only in comparatively few instances or in bad cases of disease. They also indicate that living perennial nn'celium which succeeds in accomplishing spring infection, is comparatively rare. Badly infested and swollen branches are apt to die and dry out, tluis affording no living tissue for the support of the infesting myce- lium. Such branches, even if living until the following spring, are not apt to produce much growth, and frequently produce none what- ever. Furthermore, the badly swollen mycelium-infested branches are comparatively few, and it is believed that the infested winter buds of these l)ranches very rarely exceed 2 to 3 per cent of the total num- ber of ))uds upon the tree. Most branches appear to suffer from the disease only in an indirect manner, that is, by the fall of attected foliage. It seems probable to the writer, therefore, that the swollen })ranches, in which the swelling is apparent to the eye, constitute the trne and almost exclusive home of the perennial mycelium, and there- fore supply the only possible source of spring infection by the win- tering hyphai, and consequently the only source of infection not (•ontrollal)le by sprays. This is in harmony with the results of wide- spread orchard treatment. All ))ut 2 to 3 per cent of infections have been prevented by a single spraying. (See the results of work on half-s])rayed trees.) That such spraying did not prevent the si)read of the mycelium in the inner tissues of the host is shown by the fact that when it is delayed until the leaves have fairly started and hav(> become infested, the treatment is inefl'ective and the disease will con- tiruie to develop and both foliage and crop may be lost. It is not the checking of the spread of the my('(>liuin fioni tiie bi-ancli to the new leaves, therefoi-e, that results from spraying, but the i)r(>v(Mition of the early spore infections from without; and as all but 2 to 3 ])er cent of the year's infections may he thus prevented, all of such infection^ UHist be considei'ed as arising from s])oj'es.
Tln" limitation of tlie peremiial myceliiun of Krod.^cu.^ <h'f<>nriaiis to the swollen l)raM(hes or branch parts, as here held, is in harmony with ohser\('<l facts respecting other species of Kxodxcciv. It is not under- stood, foi- instance, that trees developing witches' brooms are infested in all their Inanches, but that the branch-infesting mycelium is limited in its clistribution to those centei-s which develop the al»normal uuilti- plication of shoots, the swellings and other external manifestations of (lis(!ase. (See I'ls. I,\'.and \' I. and descripl ions, in connection with
DESCEIPTION OF PT.ATE V.
Terminal peach twigs badly affected by curl. The mycelium of the fungus has entered the growing end of these shoots, and the conditions being favorable, it has developed to such an extent as to prevent further elongation of the twig, thus form- ing a compact head, with greatly shortened internodes. It is in shoots of this char- acter that the mycelium is found, and its extent is nearly coincident, so far as observed, with the swollen portions of the branch. Such swollen branches consti- tute a striking feature of the disease, but rarely involve more than 2 to o i)er cent of the buds of a tree. Specimens were collected at Santa Ana in the sjjHng of 1S99 and photographed natural size. (Compare with Pis. 1 and VI.)
Bull 20, Div, Veg, Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate V.
Peach Twigs and Leaves Affected by Curl.
'I'Ik' (iistrihutivc iiiyct'liuiii of tlic fuuf,'us is louiid in .-uch swolk'ii branchc't
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE VI.
Sprayed and unsprayed branches of Lovell peach trees in the experiment block at Biggs, as they appeared in 1895. The sprayed branches at the left show the large amount of fruit and healthy foliage on the sprayed trees; the unsprayed branches at the right have lost most of their foliage and all the fruit from curl. These unsprayed l)ranches show the typical and conunon effects of curl. Hypertrophy of the branch is not shown, and it is probable that these branches carry little if any perennial mycelium. Thorough winter treatment of such branches with proper fungicides will prevent 98 per cent of the spring infections and conduce to the development of foliage and fruit, as shown on the branches at the left. All these trees were ecjually infected by the fungus in 1893, when the orchard suffered severely from curl, and had the branches at thi' left not been sprayed before the leaf buds oj)ened in the sjjring of 1895, they would have been in the same condition as those at the riglit of the plate. (Compare with Pis. I, V^, and VII.)
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate VI
Ml
CONCLUSIONS REGARDING SPRING INFECTIONS. 43
tlio present remarks on infested and noninfestcd branches.) It seems probable, therefore, (1) that most of the spring infections of the peach occur from spores which have wintered on the tree and about the newly formed buds; (2) that most of the infected leaves fall off without infecting- the branch which bears them; (3) that the mycelium of badly C ^ased leaves sometimes infects the branch through the leaf petiole; (4) that such mycelium after entering the branch may pass upward or downward, and in some instances may follow the branch for the length of one or at most a few internodes, and possibl}^ infect one or two adjoining buds; (5) that badly infested branches usuallv die during the year, while in comparatively few instances they may sup- port a living mycelium capable of inducing spring infection of opening- buds; (()) that most infected branches show by external hypertrophy the presence of the parasite, which mav commonly be removed by pruning off the hypertrophied parts at a point a few inches below the swelling; (7) that seasons, atmospheric conditions, localities, and varieties may have a limited bearing on the extension of the mycelium in the branch and upon the amount of nwcelium wintering in an active state, although the results of spraying in many parts of the country, continued for several years, have shown the variation in these respects to be contined within comparatively narrow limits.
The direct infection of the peach leaf by means of the spores of Exoasc'us deform an s has not been seen. The efforts made to observe the germination and penetration of the fungus have already been touched upon. One thing seems certain, viz, that under ordinary conditions this form of infection occurs at a very earl}' period in the development of the leaf, but evidently not before the opening of the leaf buds. Very young leaves are found to be already infected, but spraying just before the buds expand will prevent this infection, i. e., infection may be prevented by the treatment of closed buds, which would scarcely be true if a perennial mycelium were within. If we may judge by analogy, the germ tube of the fungus enters the leaf through a stoma. Sadebeck reports that such was his observation in EvoaacuH tosqulnetii^ in which species the germ tube creeps for a short distance on the leaf surface, and then enters a stoma, nuich as in the germination of the conidium of Phytophthora omnivora.
The major portion of the spring infection of foliage occurs while the latter is 3'oung and tender, but it is observed that new infections may take place for a considerable time if the various influencing con- ditions continue favorable to the fungus. These conditions act chiefly in suddenly retarding the transpiration of the host, and some of them have already been discussed. On the other hand, a short period of spore infection may ])e expected when external influences are such that transpiration is rai)id and normal. The longer or siiorter course of the disease in spring may be said to depen<l largely, therefore, upon the greater or less susceptibility of the tissues of the host, mostly
44 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
resultiiio- from atmospheric influences. The injury which the fungus may do after infection is also dependent, where development of the funous has not progressed too far, upon a very nice bahmce of the atmospheric conditions. Newly infected leaves may he g;reatly distorted and fall at an early date, or they may be only slightly injured l)y the fungus, according to the atmospheric conditions prevail- ing and their influence toward softening or hardening the tissues and moistening the intercellular spaces of the host. A few days favorable to the drying and toughening of the parenchyma of the infested Leaf may entirel}' check the spread of the fungus. The action of the myceliiun of E. deformanH upon the tissues of the leaf and branch of the peach has been widely remarked. The hypertrophies of peach branches, due to this parasite, are as striking and characteristic as are the witches' brooms caused on other hosts by various Exoascece. In tiie case of the peach, however, there is rarely if ever any increase noted in the number of shoots, as upon the cherr}', the hypertrophy manifesting itself in enlargements and twistings of the infested branch. There is often a great reduction in the length of the infested portion of the shoot and a shortening of the internodes, so that the approximated and enlarged leaves give a tufted orphaned appearance to the shoot. An examination of transverse sections of such enlarged shoots shows that the enlargement is due to a great increase in the mmi})ei- of cells of the cortical parenchyma, and frequently an entire separation of such cells into a network or series of chainlike cells. The stiucture of the infested parenchyma is altered, the cells being enlarged and much more angular than normally, while the thickness of the tissue from the ])ast ti])ers to the epidermis is freciuently eight or ten times as great as usual. The parenchyma cells lose the chloro- ])hyll and all matter which the eye can detect, IxH'oming (juite trans- pai'cnt. The cell walls vary nuicli more in thickn(>ss tiian normally, some of them l)eing heavier and others lighter than in healthy cells. Tratisverse and longitudijial sections of swollen peach twigs show that the pith cells are greatly injured along the course of the infesting mycelium. The location of the mycelium may often l)e detected by treating transvei'se sections with Bismark l)r()wn, tiie infested nu^dul- lary tissue taking less stain than that not harboring the fungus. The walls of the healthy cells of the medulla become reddish brown, while (hose of the infested tissue assume scarcely more than a light yellow or yellowish brown. The cells of the infested tissue are also much more angular and irregular than those in which the mycelium does not exist, while in some instances the cells c()lla]>se.
The action of /'/. (leforiiuni^ on the tissues of the peach leaf has been (considered by ditterent writers, as rrillieux,' Knowles," and others.
'IVilli<Mix, Ivl., Mai. <1. riantcs y\frr., Vol. II, pp. :«M-4nO; also Bull, dc la S..c. i'.ot. .Ic France, 1872, T. \IX, Coiiii). KcikI. d'Sri., :{, pp. 227-2;'.0. M\nowl(H, Kttu L., r.ol. (ia/,., 1KK7, V<il. Xil, pp. 21()-21H, with plau.
ACTION OF THE FUNGUS ON THE LEAF TISSUES. 45
The badly infested leaves become greatly increased in thickness and breadth and the weight is often much increased above the normal, the tissues become stiffened in a coriaceous or cartilaginous manner, the cell walls become greatly thickened, and the cells become more com- pressed. The cells of the palisade tissue are increased in size and number, and suffer an entire loss of chlorophyll, as in the case of the cortical parenchyma of the branch. The walls of the epidermal cells become considerably thickened and the multiplication of the paren- chyma cells on either side of the midrib causes a pronounced gather- ing and distortion of these tissues. As the midrib does not elongate in proportion to the increased extent of the parenchyma, it acts as a gathering string passing through the leaf from end to end, and the parenchyma becomes folded upon itself. The increase in the number of cells occurs more extensively among the palisade tissue of the upper half of the leaf than among the cells of the spongy parenchyma of the under leaf surface; hence the majority of l)adly diseased leaves are convex above and concave ])elow. though this appearance is often lost sight of, owing to the number and variety of folds w^hich the leaf blade assumes.
CHAPTER III.
HISTORY OF THE TREATMENT OF PEACH LEAF CURL. THE EUROPEAN SITUATION.
That the present outline of the gradual development of methods for the treatment of peach leaf curl in the United States ma}' be properly appreciated, it is desirable to first show the conditions prevailing in Europe as presented by some of the leading European writers on plant diseases. Prillieux, in an interesting papei' on peach leaf curl, pre- pared in 1872, describes the fungus £lwascus defo/'//tans and its action on the tissues of its host.^ He states that the fruiting fungus should 1)6 looked upon as the center of infection, and that it is desirable to remove the diseased leaves as thoroughly as possible and to destroy them. He also states that this work should be supplemented bj^ the cutting off and burning of diseased branches. In 1878 Winter"^ stated that the only way to prevent this disinise is to destroy the fungus by carefully removing the affected leaves, and by protecting the trees from rain during the unfolding of the leaves, as rain favors the spread of the l)ai-asite. Tlie same year Felix von Thiimen wrote of E.roascvs pruni^ the fungus causing plum pockets and closely related to E.v(><(KCut< defor- vimis of the peach,'* l)ut made no recommendations for its treatment. In 1885, however, he again spoke of the plum pocket disease and pointed out that it can not be removed except by severe cutting back of the new and old wood of the affected trees.* In 1880-81 Frank, in the second volume of the first edition of his work on plant diseases, rec- ominends the cutting back of tlie twigs as a cure for leaf curl, and the (|ui<k removal of the diseased leaves for prevention.'*
1 n 1886 the well-known work of Sorauer on plant diseases* appeared. 'i'hc treatment recommended l)y tiiis author is somewhat similar to that recommended Ijy Frank. He says, in speaking in a geniM-al way
•Prillieux, Fxl., Bull, de la Soc. Bot. de France, 1872, T. XIX, pp. 227-230.
^Winter, Dr. (Jeorg, Krankheiten der Knitnrgcwiichse, Leipzig, 1878, p. 47.
"Thumeu, Felix von, Die Pilze und Pockcii iuif Wein und Ohst, Berlin, 1878, 111, I'migi Poiiii(;oli, pp. 88, 8J).
'Tliiimen, Felix von, DielH'k:imi)fun^'dcr I'ilzkniiiklicifcii nnscn'rKiiltin-jrt-wiichse, N'ienna, 188(), p. 71.
'•{•"riiiik, Dr. A. 1'.., Die K nitiklicilfii dcr I'llanzcii, I?rcsl:\n, ISSO-Sl, Tlicil II,
!'• ■'•-•■'• '■■ Soraiii-i, Dr. I'aiil, I lan<ll)ucli <ler I'lluiizenkrunklieiten, second (.'ditiuii, riicil II,
p. 2SI.
40
HISTORY OF TREATMENT. 47
of the Exoascem^ that it has been proved that the mycelium winters over in the youngest parts of the shoots and in the buds, and he reconmiends the removal of isolated slightly diseased leaves soon after the first appearance of the blister-like swellings. When through the attack of a majority of the leaves of a branch it is shown that the mycelium is alread}' present in the axial organs, it is advised that all of the }■ oung wood of the affected branches be cut off. Hartig de- scribed peach leaf curl in 1889/ and again in the English edition of his work published in 1894,^ but he leaves the subject without making any suggestions as to treatment. In 1890 Dr. Kirchner published a work on plant diseases,^ in which he recommends the cutting off of diseased branches for the control of the disease. In 1891, Dr. Comes, in writing of this disease, states that no direct means for combating the parasite exists. He discusses the gathering and burning of dis- eased and fallen leaves, the cutting back of infected })ranches, and the application of cultural methods in their influence on the disease.* A most excellent work on plant diseases by Dr. Tubeuf appeared in 1895.^ This writer groups the diseases caused by the Exoascece among those maladies which should be combated by the removal of the diseased living plants and plant parts (pp. 8(5, 87). The second edition of Frank's work on plant diseases appeared in 1896, fifteen 3^ears after the publication of the first edition, but the same recommenda- tions for the treatment of curl are again made, word for word.*^ In all the preceding works there is no recognition of the methods of treat- ment being adopted and discussed in the ITnitcd States and in Aus- tralia. The recommendations for cutting awa}" the diseased branches so generally presented are the same as advanced by Ehrenfels nearly a century before for the control of mildew of the peach.'
It is hardh' necessary to say here what most orchardists have learned by experience, that is, that it is impossible to eliminate the disease by ordinary' cutting back of the branches, and that in the orchard it is equally impractica])le to prevent the disease by the early removal of the diseased leaves.
About this time the work being done on this disease appears to have attracted the attention of Europeans. In 1891, in his work on vege- table parasites, Berlese recommends for this disease in Italy the use
'Hartig, Dr. Robert, Lehrhuch der Baumkrankheiton, Berlin, 18S9, pp. 118,119.
2 Idem, The Diseases of Trees, London, 1894, pp. 132, 133.
* Kirchner, Dr. Oscar, Die Krankheiten nnd Beschiidigungen iinKercr landwirt- schaftlichen Kulturpfianzen, Stuttgart, 1890, p. 324.
■'Comes, Dr. O., Crittogamia Agraria, Naples, 1891, Vol. T, j)p. 1()7, 168.
^Tiibenf, Dr. Karl Freiherr von, Pflanzenkrankheitcn dnrrh kryptoganie Para- siten verursacht, Berlin, 189.5, pp. 86, 87, and 184.
•'Frank, Dr. A. B., Die Krankheiten der IMlanzen, second c<lition, Breslau, 1896, Bd. II, pp. 249, 250.
■'Ehrenfels, J. M. Ritter von, Ueber die Krankheiten und Verletzungen der Frucht- oder Gartenbtiume, Breslau, 1795, p. 225.
48 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
of Bordeaux mixture in the .spring, although he adds, as if doubting its utility, that the mycelium of the parasite winters over under the cortex of the liranches/
In France, in 1895, Prillieux published the first volume of a work on plant diseases, devoting seA^eral pages to the consideration of peacn leaf curl.' In this work the recommendations for treatment appear- ing in his paper in 1872 are not given, but instead it is statecC that treatments with the salts of copper seem sometimes to produce good results in preventing the multiplication by spores; but, as in the case of Berlese, he adds, as if in doubt of the value of such treatments, that they are without effect upon the perennial mycelium hidden in the tissues.
By the year 1898 the true idea of the preventive treatment of curl had been grasped in Germany. Professor Weisz, in his paper on plant diseases.'' published that year, cites the present method of con- trolling curl. After renewing the older recommendations to cut off' and burn the affected twigs, he says that the trees should be sprayed with copper-soda or copper-lime solution (eau celeste or Bordeaux mixture), the first time hefore the buds open. That these recom- mendations are not the results of work done by Weisz, however, appears probable, for his description of the disease is evidently quoted, as he falls into the error of Winter, Frank, Kirchner, and other writers in stating that the bloom produced by the fruiting of the fungus appears upon the under surface of the leaves. Had he worked upon this disease in the field he would not have been apt to follow the above authors in their erroneous description of the fruiting habits of the parasite.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE TKESENT METHODS OF TREATMENT.
The successful treatment of peach leaf curl dates from the time when fungicides were first applied to dormant peach trees. So far as learned, this treatment Avas first practiced in California, being intro- duc(Hl ])y the winter application of sprays for the destruction of the San Jose scale {^Aapldlotus perniciosus). This insect was first discov- ered in the Santa Clara Valley about 1870, but some time had elapsed between the date of its introduction and the use of the stronger winter sprays for its control.
Caustic soda and potash were early tested against this insect, and afterwards sulphur was added, the sulphides of potassium and sodium being used by many growers. Somewhat later whale oil soap andsul-
' IVtIcsc, a. X., I Para-SHiti Vogotali ilcllc Tiantc^ Coltivati^ o TTtili, prefaci' datul ls<)4, i>i). 124-126.
■' rrillicux, EfL, Mai. d. Planten Agr., I'arin, ]8«)5-<»7, i-p. :{!l4-4()().
' Weisz, .1. E., Die HfliiidiichHton Kraiikheik'ii hiihitit Fold-, Obft-, Cicuuiw- mid Garten-Gewachse, Miinchen, 1898, p. 45.
HISTORY OF TREATMENT. ' 49
phur were combined ^yy boiling-, and still later a caustic spray contain- ing lime was tested. All the above chemicals, even the milk of lime, were applied to dormant trees, and they are all known to possess suffi- cient fungicidal action to control peach leaf curl to a large extent if applied to the trees shortly before they bloom.
While many growers were using these caustic and sulphide sprays, another spra}' containing much larger quantities of sulphur Avas being used, and proved of much greater power, both as a fungicide and insecti- cide. This was a spra}' containing sulphur and lime, or a sulphide of calcium, and the history of its introduction is of special interest and is inseparable from the early history of the treatment of curl. Mr. Alex- ander Craw, quarantine officer of the California State Board of Horti- culture, has published an account of the introduction of this spra}' in a recent number of the Pacific Rural Press, ^ but the following facts were gleaned from those who were the first to use and introduce the spray.^ Mr. A. T. Covell, who first applied this spra}' to dormant peach trees, near Fresno, Cal., does not supply exact dates relative to the work, but Mr. N. W. Motheral, of Hanford, and Mr. I. H. Thomas, of Visalia, agree in placing its first use as a spray in the year 1880 or 1881. The writer is informed by Mr. Motheral that the lime, sulphur, and salt solution was originally used as a sheep dip in Aus- tralia, where it was known as the "Victoria lime-and-sulphur-dip" for scab. He states that it was recommended b}^ a Dr. Rowe, and offi- cialh" indorsed for a sheep dip in that country'. This dip, it is also said, was introduced in California by Mr. Charles Hobler, of Hanford, and Mr. Hobler claims to have first recommended it to Mr. Covell, then living near Fresno, for the treatment of his infested peach trees. Mr. Covell disputes this claim, but holds that he (Covell) first used this solution as a spray upon his trees with success in the control of the San Jose scale. As soon as this spray was found to be a practical suc- cess, Mr. Covell, Mr. Thomas, and Mr. Motheral worked for its gen- eral adoption in the treatment of scale. Mr. Thomas states that he sprayed his own orchard the winter after seeing the action of the spra}^ on Mr. Covell's trees, and about this time the facts were given to the press. Mr. Thomas writes that this spray was in general use in and about Visalia as early as 1883, 1881, and 1885, and in Mr. Motheral's section, near Hanford, at the same time. It may here be stated, however, that lime and sulphur had been united by boiling in water and used as early as 1852, at least in hothouses, for controlling the dis- eases of plants. (See Revue Horticole, 1852, p. 168, and Gardeners' Chronicle, 1852, p. 419.)
1 Pacific Rural Press, July 29, 1899, p. 68.
^Letters from I. H. Thomas, Visalia, Cal., Sept. 6, 1899; \. W. :\IotlK'ral, Han- ford, Cal., Sept. 0, 1899; and A. T. Covell, Woodbridge, Cal., Oct. 13, 1899. 19093— No. 20 4
50 PEACH LEAF CURL! ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
It will be seen by the preceding outline that strong fungicidal sprays were in general winter use upon peach trees throughout nuich of Cali- fornia in the years 1880 to 1885, during which time the peach or- chards of many portions of the State were badly affected hy curl. In a report by Mr. W. G..Klee, who inspected the orchards iii many counties of California from Juh' to September, 1886, it is stated that in Alamedii County the cultivation of peaches must be confined to such varieties as are very little subject to leaf curl; in Santa Cruz County, that "peaches, of course, are subject to curl}' leaf, and can not, as a general thing, be considered profitable;" and that in the Santa Rosa Valle}^ the peach is "of course subject to curU" leaf."^
As peach leaf curl was quite prevalent throughout California in 1880-85, and as a large number of peach growers treated their dor- mant trees with fungicidal sprat's during that period, it is not strange that they soon learned that the winter sprays prevented curl. Mr. I. H. Thomas, of Visalia, informed the writer^ that it was about the 3'ear 1885 that he noticed that the orchards sprayed with the lime, sulphur, and salt solution were entirely free from leaf curl, while orchards con- " tiguous were affected so badly that all the foliage fell off*.
In 1886 Mr. W. G. Klee said,^ when speaking of an inspection he made of the orchard of Mr. A. Block, of Santa Clara, Cal. : ' 'A treat- ment of peaches affected with curly leaf attracted ni}' attention. Trees not subjected to this treatment were in very poor condition, while the others, favored with it, were in fine, healthy bearing." Mr. Block says respecting this work* that he was making experiments for the destruc- tion of scale insects when he detected a perceptible difference in the amount of curl on the treated and the untreated trees. He thinks this was one or two years before Mr. Klee had seen his trees in 1886. After having noticed the action of the sprays applied for scale in the prevention of curl, he went to work to ascertain what particular ingredient caused the prevention of the fungous disease. These direct experiments, Mr. Block states, were carried out on a row of 23 trees in his orchard. Among the chemicals tested were caustic soda, caustic potash, carbolic acid, tobacco, and sal soda, all more or less combined with whale oil. Among the numerous sprays used, Mr. Block thinks that a strong solution of caustic soda gave the ])est results. All these sprays were applied while the trees were dormant.'' The stronger
' Klee, W. G., Reports and Papers by the Inspector of Fruit Pests, read at Sacra- mento, November, 188(), Kept. CJal. .State Bd. H(jrt., 1885-86, pp. 344, 347, 34!t, 350.
'■'Letter dated Vinalia, Cal., Sept. 6, 1899.
"L. c, p. 347.
M>etters dated Santa Clara, Cal., Sei)t. 1 and 10, 1899.
'^ It may be noted that whale oil soaj) was thus u.sed by Mr. Block with success against curl in 1885 and 1880. Prof. L. K. Taft, in a letter dated A^'ricultural College, Mi(;h., Aug.'31, 1899, says that he had gocxl re.'^ults in the treatment of curl witli linu'water, lye, and whale oil soaj). (See al.«o records of «'Xi)crimctits by the writer with milk of lime, etc.) Mr. F. M. Webster rei)orts uatisfactory results with whale
HISTORY OF TREATMENT. 51
caustic spray recommended by Mr. Block consisted of 1 pound of 98 per cent caustic soda to 6 or 7 gallons of water. The same 3'ear, 188G, Mr. Sol. Runyon, of Courtland, Cal., reported that he had met with success in controlling a "blight "'of peach trees, the name of the dis- ease not being known to him. This l)light had previously caused all the leaves to fall from ever}^ tree he had, especially the young ones. He used a caustic spray on the dormant tree, as did Mr. Block, and states that the trees which he treated were not affected by the blight at all, while the untreated trees, right beside the treated ones, were badly affected.^ There is little doubt that Mr. Runyon was treating curl, as it is a very serious trouble in that section of the State. After the leaves had fallen in the autumn of 1886 and during the winter of 1886-87, Mr. Runyon sprayed many of his peach trees with a spra}^ composed of 2 gallons fish oil, 10 pounds of caustic soda (98 per cent), and 5 pounds of copper sulphate to 100 gallons of water. This spray, as applied, was certainly a preventive of curl, and as a portion of his peach trees were left untreated the contrast should have been marked. Unfortunately, however, I have l)een unable to get further details of this early work with copper sulphate, as Mr. Runyon is no longer living.^
In Noveml)er, 1888, Mr. W. (1. Klee stated at the Chico meeting of the California State Board of Horticulture, that an experienced and suc- cessful fruit grower in San Jose had used successfully for the purpose of killing scale insects, the so-called sal soda and whale oil wash, and that he maintained that ever since he had been using that wash he had been free from leaf curl in his orchard.^ Mr. Joseph Hale, of Stock- ton, Cal., reports * that he sprayed his peach trees, while doruiant, in the years 1888, 1889, and 1890, as well as in subsequent years, and that as a result he sustained no loss from curl during these years. He used the lime, sulphur, and salt spray. Mr. G. W. Ramsey, of Lotus, Cal., states that he began spraying his orchard with lime, sulphur, and salt in 1890 or possibly in 1891. In 1895, in Avriting of his past spray work, he states that his trees had not ))een affected in the least by leaf curl since he had been using the above wash. He says: "It completely exterminated the scale the first two years 1 used it, but I continue to apply it to my trees once a yeaj' to prevent leaf curl." He further states that this wash nuist be applied when the buds are dor- mant, and that it is generally applied in February in his section.
oil soap (South Australian Journal of Agriculture, March, 1899, Vol. II, No. 8, p. 630) ; see also the results reported by Henry Rofkar and W. Y. Latham & Son, of Catawha Island, Ohio, as reported by A. D. Selby, Bull. No. 104, pp. 208, 209, Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta., March, 1899.
>Rept. Cal. State Bd. Hort., 1885-86, p. 221.
-Ihid., 1887-88, p. 9?,.
^Rept. Cal. State Bd. Hort., 1889, j). 172.
* Reply to circular letter of Nov. 25, 1893,
52 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
As early as 1890 the effectiveness of lime, sulphur, and salt against curl appears to have been observed in Oregon. Mr. J. D. Whitman, of ]\Iedford, Oreg., who Avas horticultural commissioner for the third district of that State, wrote under date of January 27, 1894, that four years' observation as commissioner had demonstrated beyond a doubt that a spray of lime, sulphur, and salt is an effectual remedy for leaf curl. He states that the application in every instance was made for the purpose of destro3'ing the San Jose or pernicious scale, and gener- ally on onh" a portion of the orchard, the other portion showing the curl as usual.
The first practical experiments with copper sprays on dormant trees for the control of curl, after the sprays applied by Mr. Sol. Runyon in 1886 and 1887, were conducted, so far as learned, in the year 1890. The summer use of these sprays had been tested in Australia, and probal)lv elsewhere, for several years, but with slight success in the control of curl.
About the 1st of December, 1889, Mr. L. E. Benton, then of Berke- ley, Cal., wrote to the United States Department of Agriculture for information relative to the nature and treatment of curl. These inqui- ries w(;re answered at length, the literature on Exoascius deformans being quite fully cited. No method of controlling this disease was then known at Washington, and as winter spraying had not yet reached its present importance, the recounnendations for treatment were nec- essarily inadequate, and were based upon the then accepted views respecting the strict ])erennial nature of the mycelium of the fungus, and the consecjuent difficulty of controlling the parasite hy sprays.
After gathering such information as he desired, Mr. Benton insti- tuted a series of spraying experiments in the university orchard at Berkeley in the spring of 1890. The work done by Mr. Benton, although limited in extent, was of the utmost practical importance, as well as of great theoretical int(>rest. vV sununai-y of his results was published in August, 18iH).' Three copper sprays were tested, the amnion iacal (•()[)per carbonate, l)asic copper acetate solution, and Bor- deaux mixture. The ammoniacal copper (■arb()nat(^ was applied on Febi'uaiy 28, 1890, before tiie opening of the huds. All three of the sprays mentioned were also tested soon aftei' the leaves started. The results demonstrated that winter treatment of the trees with tlie saUs of copper will cflectively conti'ol the diseas(>, ])ut that sunnner treat- ment will not control it, and also that infection of the spring growtli by perennial mycelium was the exception and not the rule with this disease facts of the utmost practical imi)ortance for the orchardist. Mr. Benton's studies likewise led him to the view that the mycelium, pa.ssing from infected leaves to the stem, is able to infect new foliage
•racilic Rural IVcsh, Auu;. 2, 1890.
HISTORY OF TREATMENT. 53
by following' close ])ohind tlio growing- point of the stem. His observa- tions seemed to point to this young mycelium, resulting from the tirst spring infections, as the source of the later infections through the branches rather than the perennial mycelium of the previous year. He says that not onl}^ does the fungus live in the leaf of the peach, but it at once pushes its way into the young growing- stem, following the growing point as fast as it lengthens and passing into the leaves as fast as they appear. On this account he concludes that no external appli- cations can stop such a fungous growth, and spraying after the buds burst and the fungus has become established will have little effect. It may be added that several 3^ears' observation in large blocks of trees sprayed after the foliage had started has shown the writer that the dis- ease can not thus be controlled, and that Mr. Benton's conclusions are correct. Whether this failure is due to the causes pointed out by Mr. Benton, however, or simply to the lack of the prevention of the infec- tion by spores, or to both sources of infection, should be given further study. Mr. Benton states that in the spring of 1890, the time his experiments were undertaken, "no remedy was known; since, some practical growers have found successful means of combating it, and these experiments now deserve no further credit than that they were intentional and not a matter of chance." It is now known that curl had been controlled by numerous growers in widely separated regions in California through the use of various sprays many years prior to 1890. Mr. Benton says he»was unaware of these facts when he began his work, and his experiments are worthy of full credit, not alone for the enterprise shown in undertaking them, but for the results of unquestioned value to which they led.
In 1891 the copper treatment for peach leaf curl was independently discovered and clearly demonstrated in Australia. The successful results of this work were observed in November and December, 1891, and were published in the South Australian Register of March 30, 1892. At a meeting of the Nuriootpa branch of the South Australian Agri- cultural Bureau, held in Angaston during November, 1890, the sub- ject of fungous diseases affecting fruit trees was discussed and the appointment of a committee to conduct preventive experiments was considered. At a subsequent meeting Messrs. F. C. Smith, W. Sage, and A. B. Robin were selected for this work. During the interval before spraying, Mr. Smith corresponded with those in charge of the pathological departments in Australia, England, California, and Wash- ington. The report in the South Australian Register says that among the replies received was a series of valuable reports from Professor Galloway, showing that up to 1889 modified eau celeste, ammoniacal copper carbonate, and Bordeaux mixture had proved most successful in the United States. "'These were therefore selected by the conmiit- tee for their experiments." Mr. Smith, of this coumiittee, informed
54 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
the wi-iti'i- that their work was ])ased largvly upon that of Vrui. K. S. Cxoti' on Fusichidiuni.'
The spray work Avas begun in »Iuly, before the trees leafed out, the main object being to control apple scab and the shot-hole fungus on the apricot. The sprayed apricot trees belonged to Mr. Trescowtiiick. and were treated with Bordeaux mixture. In the block was one peach tree, which was spraj^ed when the apricots were treated. This tree had suffered severel^^ from curl, so much so, in fact, that it had not borne for four or live years, ])ut after spraying it yielded eight cases of fruit of 50 pounds each, or 400 pounds, the curl being almost entirely prevented. Mr. Smith writes, respecting this Avork, that when applying Bordeaux mixture from Juh' to October, 1891, for the various diseases with which they were coping he had not the slightest idea that this or any of the fungicides would have any effect whatever on curl leaf, and the memliers of the committee w^ere the more sur- prised to see its marvelous effects in January and February. ''It was the most conclusive of all our tests," it was stated.^
The work whs continued the following season, and some contrasts obtained on the place of Messrs. Sidney Smith & Son, of Yaluml)a, are of interest in this connection. In an article published at that time it is stated that the effects of spraying with Bordeaux mixture upon both peaches and apricots were ver}^ noticeable. On one side of the fence was seen a healthy set of trees, well clothed with fruit and dark green foliage, and with no curled leaves, while on^he other side, where spra\'- ing had not been done, was a Idock of apricots, among which were a few peach trees very badly attacked by leaf curl. At this time the orchard of Mr. A. B. Robin, of Nuriootpa, secretary of the committee for experiments, w^as inspected l)y Mr. Molineaux, general secretary of the South Australia Agricultural Bureau, and by several prominent horticulturists, and was found to have a splendid crop of fruit, nearly all tiie ai)ricot and peach trees having been sprayed. One peach tree had been si)i'ayed on ordy one side with the Bordeaux mixture, and on this side the foliage was clean and healthy, while on the unsprayed side it was curled. "Ilei-e again," says th(> rejjorter of this examination, "■was absolutely <'onclusive evidence of the preventive effect of spray- ing for curl leaf."
In the United States, in 1892, tiie use of both the sulphur andcopixM- sprays on dormant trees was nuich mon^ common. The control ol curl was a new discovery to several growers who had not heard oi the ])ublish(!d ("xperimcMits. Mi'. George Woolsey, of lone, ('al., had been considerably troubled by ashot-hole fungusall'ecting jjcach twigs a conunon li'ouble in the northern })<)rtion of the State. A bundle of the uffecttnl twii'-s was sent to Professor W'oodwortli. of Berkeley, who
'l,ctl.T ihitcd AnK!i.«ton, Snutli Aiislruliii, Fch. II, 1S})5. -'Ix'ttcr .lalc<l Aii^'iistoii, Soiitli AuhI rnliii, Apr. (>, ISitf).
HISTORY OF TREATMENT. 55
advised the use of Bordeaux mixture; but as this fungus is active in the spring before the trees leaf out, Mr. Woolse}' sprayed the trees while dormant. He says, in relation to his results, that he found Bordeaux mixture corrected the trouble with the twigs, and at the same time acted as a specific for the leaf curl. ^ His work for the control of curl in the following year was strikingly conclusive as to the effectiveness of this spray. Mr. D. W. Sjdvester, of Geyserville, Cal., conducted some spraying experiments in 1892 with the direct object of controlling curl. His spray was composed of 12 pounds of copper sulphate and 20 pounds of lime to 100 gallons of water, and was applied to the dormant trees. Mr. Sylvester states that having formed the opinion that the disease was of fungous nature, and knowing of the value of copper sulphate as a fungicide, he determined to test it against curl. He believed better results would be obtained by killing the "germ" than by waiting until the disease appeared, and this, he says, induced him to make the appli- cation to the dormant trees. For the experiment he selected a row of 10 trees, spraying 5 and leaving 5 unsprayed for comparison. He states that the 5 sprayed trees held their leaves and fruit and bore a crop, but the others shed every leaf and every peach, and for more than a month looked as if a fire had gone over them. In spite of this experience, Mr. Sj'lvester neglected to spray in 1893, when, he states, the trees shed all their leaves and nearly all their fruit through curl, ^ and adds that the best time to spray is just as the buds begin to swell. A portion of the peach trees on the Rio Bonito ranch at Biggs, Cal. , were sprayed with the lime, sulphur, and salt spray in 1892, the spray being applied to the dormant trees as elsewhere. The contrast that season between the spraj^ed and unspra3^ed trees was well marked, the unsprayed trees being much affected hj curl, while those treated were practically free from it. These observations were made at the time by Mr. McDonald, the foreman, and by others on the ranch.
The preceding examples could be greatly extended if necessary, as winter spraying was a common practice in California after 1885. By 1892 the San Jose scale had also become more widely distributed in Oregon, and was being quite generally treated by winter sprays in that State. Mr. A. H. Carson, of Grants Pass, Oreg. , began spraying his orchard about this time. In reply to a communication sent to him November 25, 1893, Mr. Carson says that his knowledge as to the lime, sulphur, and salt remedy for leaf curl was gained by observing that trees on which this remed}^ was used to destro}' the San Jose scale were not affected by curl, although they were varieties much subject to the disease. On the other hand, he states that unsprayed trees, with the same conditions as to exposure, altitude, etc., were badly affected. Mr. J. H. Stewart, of Medford, Oreg., writes that hespra^'ed his peach
1 Letter dated lone, Cal., Aug. 26, 1899.
^Letters dated Geyserville, Cal., Nov., 1893, and Sept. 18, 1899.
56 PEACH LEAF CFKL! ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
trees in 1892.' He says he used a spra}^ in 1892, 1893, and 1894, which was effectual against scale and most fungi. This spray was composed of lime, sulphur, and sulphate of copper, and was applied in the winter.
In the East, about this time, mildew, brown rot, black spot, rust, and curl were attracting the attention of peach growers and causing serious losses in some sections, and a good many growers were trying summer sprays for the control of one or more of them. Mr. F. P. Herr, of Ridgely, Md., writes^ that for three successive years prior to 1895 he sprayed with limewater, Bordeaux mixture, and arsenical mixtures, and that everything he used produced absoluteh' negative results, except the arsenites, which injured ))oth foliage and fruit. It would appear probable from these results that the sprays were applied too late to be effective against curl. Mr. L. B. Geiger, of Hoffman, Pa., writes'* that he was formerly troubled with leaf curl in his orchard, but has had ver}' little of late j^ears. The reason of this, he thinks, is the fact that he has sprayed his peach trees with Bor- deaux mixture several times each year since 1892. He states that at least 75 per cent of the crop of one variety was thus saved. Whether the spray work was done in the winter, or whether, owing to the number of applications made, the summer spray persisted in its action through the following winter, is not known.
It was in 1892 that Prof. L. R. Taft, of the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station, first obtained the idea that peach leaf curl could be controlled ))y the application of winter sprays. This gentleman has supplied the leading facts respecting his work.* He says: "In 1892 I was making a series of experiments with Bordeaux mixture and solutions of copper sulphate to learn the strength that could be used upon various plants and trees without injury. These materials were applied at different times, the sprayings being at intervals of about four weeks, from April to July, and while some trees received but on(^ application, othei's were sprayed two, three, and four times. It was noticed, the trees spra} ed in April with either copper sulphate or Bordeaux mixture had no curled leaves, while unspra3'ed trees iind those that were not sprayed until June or July were seriously injured by leaf curl.
''From the marked dilierence in the injury from the leaf curl to the sprayed and unsprayed trees, I felt very confident that the disease could ])(' held in check to a large extent by the use of fungicides, and in writing Bulletin 92, in December, 1892 (published in March, 1S1>;5), I make the statement that ' it is ([uite certain that the disease can be, to some ext(>nt, hiild in check b}' their use,' in referring to the effect
' lA-tU-TH dated Medford, Oreg., Dec. 14, 1894.
M>-tt«T dated Ridjicly, Md., Feb. IT), 1895.
•'I/-lt«T<liit<'d Iloffinan, Ta., Mar. 18, IWt.'i.
Matter dated Agricidtiiral College, Mich., .\iig. :;i, ISiH).
HISTORY OF TREATMENT. 57
of fungicides in preventing- the development of leaf curl on peach trees. "
It would seem that the work in Australia, as well as that of the pre- ceding ten years in California, had not come under the notice of Pro- fessor Taf t at the time of his observations in 1892, and that the same was true at the close of the succeeding j^ear's experiments. In his article on curl, published in the American Agriculturist for February, 1894, he saj^s,^ in speaking of the treatment of curl prior to his work in 1893: "Although there were some vague suggestions as to the possible value of some of the fungicides as remedies for this dis- ease, nothing was really known until the past season."
May 20, 1893, while working on plant diseases at Yuba City, Cal., in company with Mr. R. C. Kells, then horticultural commissioner of Sutter County, that gentleman told the writer of a peach orchard in the vicinity where peach leaf curl had been controlled ])v the previous winter's spra3^s. The orchard was that of Mr. W. H. Campbell, of Yuba City, and was at once examined b}^ the writer in company with Mr. Kells. The trees were of the Orange Cling variety, and had been sprayed with lime, sulphur, and salt up to the base of the smaller branches of the main limbs, for the purpose of killing the San Jose scale upon the older wood, the spraying of the tops of the trees not being necessary. The result of this treatment was to protect the lower half of the trees from the attack of curl, while the tops were left unprotected. Curl developed seriously in the Sacramento Valley that spring, and as a consequence these trees were badly diseased and stripped of foliage down to the line where the limbs had been spra3'ed for San Jose scale. The resulting appearance was most striking, and showed the advantages of spraying in a marked degree. The lower half of the trees was well supplied with normal green foliage, while the upper half was either bare or the leaves present were yellow and badly curled. Photographs of these trees were taken on May 21, 1893.
May 22, 1893, the writer visited the Riviera orchard, at Live Oak, Cal. This orchard is situated on the Feather River bottom and is under the management of Mr. A. D. Cutts, of Live Oak, one of the proprietors. In this orchard was found a most striking case of the pre- vention of curl by the use of winter sprays. In the winter of 1892-93 one block of trees was thoroughly sprayed for San Jose scale with lime, sulphur, and salt. After this work was completed the weather became unfavorable for further spraying. The soil was so wet from rains that a 40-acre ])lockof Crawfords Late trees could not be sprayed, and it was so late in the winter before the work could be done that Mr. Cutts feared it might injure the fruit buds if he sprayed the trees entire. He therefore had the trees in this block examined, and rags were tied upon the limbs of those which appeared to most need a thorough
^The Curl of the Peach, American Agriculturist, Feb., 1894, pp. 71, 72.
58 PEACH LEAF CURL". ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
spraying for scale. riu\so inarkt>d trees were scattered, here and there one, throughout the entire 40-acre block. In February" the marked trees were very thoroughly sprayed over all parts, as much as two gallons of spray being applied to each tree. After this work was completed the entire block, with the exception of the trees already treated, was spraved as high as the forks of the main limbs, thus avoiding any injury to swelling buds. As before stated, curl devel- oped seriously in the Sacramento Valley in the spring of 1893, and the result was that the unspraved trees, as well as those spraj'ed only on the main limbs, were nearly denuded by the disease, while the scattered trees which had been sprayed throughout were in full and vigorous foliage and growth. In the writer's notes upon the examination of this orchard on May 22, 1893, it is stated that the trees fully treated in this T)lock were loaded with fruit and in full leaf, while the trees sprayed only to the forks of the limbs were nearl}' bare and almost wholly destitute of fruit on the unsprayed parts. Such fruit as was found on the unsprayed branches was inferior in size and quality. It is fui'ther stated that the absence of fruit on the untreated branches as compared with the abundant yield of the treated branches gives such a striking contrast as to be almost beyond lielief.*
Mr. AVilliam N. Runyon, of Courtland, Cal., treated a large acreage of peach trees with lime, sulphur, and salt in the winter of 1892-93. He states that the trees sprayed once while dormant were practically free from cuil, while trees of the same variety not sprayed were badly aiS'ected.^ He also gives an observation of interest in connection with the habits of the fungus, and one since indorsed ])y the writer, that is, that the disease "will not spread from an unsprayed to a sprayed tree." In letters from Mr. Runyon'' relative to this work, he remarks that although he had heaid that a mixture of lime, sulphur, and salt was beneficial in controlling curl, \u\ had no idea that the result would be so nearly a complete prevention. He says that it was only when curl leaf had become quite prevalent on unsprayed trees that he noticed its almost total absence on those that had been sprayed. The most striking instance, he states, was where about 50 three year old nectarine trees stood in rows adjoining about a dozen full-grown trees of the same variet}'^ that had shown curl for years. The young trees, not having shown any scale, were left unsprayed, and weiv a niass of curl, while the old trees, which were given the regular treat- ment, wen^ almost entiivly fi'ee. In this orchard about <)0 acres of peach trees were also sprayed, the work being done about the 1st of
'For further n<>t<'s and tsihnlatcd ri'conlH of soiiio of this work of (lie Hj)riii<r of W.y.i tli(! reader is referred t(t Cliajjter VII under Notes on the Auxiliary Kxperi- iiieut.H ill (California.
'■' AiiHwer to eiri-ular letter of Nov. 25, 1H93.
' Ix'ttern dated ( 'oiirtlaiid, Cal., Jan. .".I, and >hir. K, l.S<)4.
HISTORY OF TREATMENT. 59
Fehriiarv, and 4-0 acres of young trees left unspruyed. In the Santa Clara Valley the sulphur spraA's were in general use by the leading gi'owers in 1893. Mr. A. B. Elder, of Santa Clara, writes, in reply to a circular letter of November 25 of that year, that this spray is giving good satisfaction for the control of curl and "is used by large growers of peaches.'' Mr. John Rock, of Niles, Alameda County, Cal. , writes, under date of December 28, 1893, that a mixture of lime, sulphur, and salt is a preventive of curl if applied before the flower buds expand.
Bordeaux mixture was used in the winter of 1892-93, in the Carmel Valley, near Old Monterey, with the express pui'pose of controlling curl. Mr. Daniel Snively, -of Gubserville, Cal.. writes^ that his brother used Bordeaux mixture for the control of this disease, and that its action is '^ so certain that any twig not touched is sure to curl.'"' Mr. George Woolsey, of lone, Amador County, Cal., spra^^ed his orchard with Bordeaux mixture in the winter of 1892-93, for the express purpose of controlling curl, and as a result of his experiments in the winter of 1891-92, to which reference has already been made. Relative to his work in the spring of 1893, Mr. Woolsey says^ that he sprayed all of his apricot trees, but as time pressed he found that he would not be able to spray all of his peach trees, so he spra3'ed the most valuable portion, i. e., the young lower growth, and left the top unsprayed. He states that the season of 1893 was damp, and leaf curl very prevalent in his neighbors' orchards, but on his place all the trees and parts of trees sprayed were exempt, all the others being badly affected by curl and the crop on them almost a failure. A healthy growth on the lower sprayed part of the trees, and the branches denuded of foliage on the upper unsprayed part, formed "a most striking object lesson," and, Mr. Woolsey adds, has made him "an enthusiast on Bordeaux mixture." A few demonstrations such as he obtained in the season of 1893, he remarks, would convince the growers of the profitableness of the work.
Many peach orchards were sprayed in Oregon in the winter of 1892-93. A favorite spra\' was a combination of the sulphur spra}^ with copper sulphate, although the former Avas used separately by some growers. The object of the combined spray was to unite, as far as possible, the insecticidal qualities of the sulphur spray with the fungicidal qualities of the copper salts.'' The winter application of ammoniacal copper carbonate was tested in Oregon also, by Mr. M. O. Lownsdale, of Lafayette. In reply to the circular letter dated Nov- ember 25, 1893, Mr. Lownsdale says he had fair success in prevent- ing curl with lime, sulphur, and salt applied in the winter, followed
» Reply to circular letter of Nov. 25, 1893.
■^Letter dated lone, Cal., Mar. 26, 1894.
*See results of the tests of combined sprays made by the writer, pp. 84, 86, 117, 118.
60 PEACH LEAF CURL I ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
hv throe applications of amnioniat'al ooppor carbonate after the appear- ance of the foliage. He had better success, however, from aninioniacal copper carbonate applied in late winter, before the swelling of the buds, followed ])y three applications of a weaker solution upon the foliage. ••This.'' he says, "was a complete success.""
In Michig-an the work in 1893 was verj^ satisfactory. Mr. Charles Youngreen, of Whitehall, sprayed one row of peach trees before they leafed out in the spring. He states^ that not one of the sprayed trees showed curl, while the unsprayed trees were all affected. The follow- ing year he sprayed the entire orchard and not a tree suffered from the disease. At Shelby. Oceana County, several growers sprayed with Bordeaux mixture with good success. Mr. R. Morrill, of Benton Harbor, stated at a meeting of the Michigan Horticultural Society held at Shelby, June 14 and 15, 1893, that he found there, in four or five cases, that men had sprayed peach trees with Bordeaux mixture, and the effect in decrease of leaf curl was plain to be seen." Mr. Morrill fails to state, however, whether the lirst spraying was done while the trees were dormant. The effects of curl at Shelby at that time were marked, the same gentleman remarking that in one morning he had seen enough damage done by it to pay for spraying all the orchards within five miles.
Prof essor Taf t reports his work in 1893 as follows:'' "In order to secure definite knowledge upon the subject [treatment of curl], I arranged for a series of experimiMits, and in the fall of 1892 had a immbcr of peach trees sprayed with a solution of copper sulphate (1 pound in 25 gallons), and in a similar experiment at South Haven Bordeaux mixture^ was used as soon as the leaves dropped in Novem- ber, 1892. During the first half of April, 1893, the same trees were again sprayed with similar mixtures, and other trees were treated that had not ])een sprayed in the fall of 1892. The result was that where fully 50 per cent of the leaves and all of the fruit dropped from the unsprayed trees, there was little injury to the same varieties that were ticated in both fall and spring or that were sprayed only once, in April; but where they were not sprayed until after the leaves had come out only a slight benefit was secured. The results were given in Bull(;tins 103 and 104 of the Stjition. On June 14, 1893, I gave the results, up to that time, at th(^ meeting of the State Ilorticultui'al Society."
The orchai-ds of the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station at South IIa\'cn, in charge of Mr. T, T. Lyon, had suffered se\'erely from curl in ls9<). ISDI. and 1892.' Mr. Lyon sa^'s, respecting the spray
' l^'ttcr diil«'.l Wliitcliiill, Mich., Sept. 6, 1899.
■' Ii<'iit. .Midi. Stut(! llort. Hov.., W.V.i, p. OH.
M>-tt<T elated A);ri(;nitural Colici^iS Midi., Aug. :U), ISiH).
♦Hee Repta. Mich. Hurt. Soc, 1890, p. 144; 1891, p. 228; 1892, pp. KJO, Kil.
HISTOKY OF TREATMENT. 61
work done in the winter of 1892-93,^ that as the apparent result of the fall and .spring- spra3dngs, there was almost a total absence of leaf curl, although it had usually been quite prevalent there in early spring, and was present in 1893 in neighboring orchards, causing many of the leaves and fruits to drop. He says'^ further, that to him "the effect of the spray upon leaf curl in particular was a revelation." The work of Professor Taf t in this orchard in 1893 was reported on several occa- sions during 1893 and 1894.'
The work of the writer began in Michigan by the publication, in the fruit belt of that State, in the latter part of July, 1893, of notices of the work done in California,* and of requests for the names of peach growers who had sustained losses from this disease. In August, plans for experiments at Shelby and Ludington were in progress, and in November a circular letter, stating that leaf curl had been successfully prevented in California, was addressed to the peach growers of all the leading peach centers of the country. In this circular it was stated that "It is proposed to carry on during the coming season some work in different parts of the United States." The circular reached many of the leading peach growers of Michi- gan. During the winter, that of 1893-91:, plans for the testing of winter sprays for the control of curl were undertaken by growers, at ihe request of this Department, at Whitehall, Albion, Ganges, Beulah, Riverside, Benton Harbor, St. Joseph, Kalamazoo, Covert, Hawk- head, South Haven, Ludington, Shelby, Douglas, Millgrove, Custer, Amber, Mears, Hart, Gobleville, Ortonville, Monterey, Fenville, Saugatuck, Allegan, Way land, Bradley, Peach Belt, etc. During the winter of 1894-95 the above list was greatly extended. Within these two years over 400 Michigan peach growers were sent full instruc- tions for controlling curl. Each grower was requested to make his tests according to an experiment sheet sent him, leaving unsprayed trees for comparison. In this way many striking object lessons were obtained, aiding materially in the early and widespread introduction of the methods of treatment recommended. Reports of a few of these experiments are given in a subsequent chapter.
The Department's tests in Ohio were instituted through a circular letter in November, 1893, announcing to a large number of peach growers in that State the successful, treatment of curl in California, and stating that experiments would be undertaken in the East. As a result of replies to this circular, full instructions for controlling curl
^Mich. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 104, pub. Feb., 1894, pp. 64, 65.
■'' Letter dated South Haven, Mich., Dee. 16, 1897.
=• Paper read at Shelby, June 14, 189.3, Kept. Mieh. llort. Soe., 189:5, pp. 66, 67, and 79; article in Allegan Gazette, July 1, 1893; Mich. Kxp. Sta. Bull. No. 104, j). 64; pub. Feb., 1894; American Agriculturist, Feb., 1894, pj). 71, 72.
* Ludington (Mich.) Appeal, issue of July 20, 1893, quoted by ShcUjy Sentinel, etc.
62 PEACH LEAB' CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
wero .sent to a number of orchardists in the peach-growing centers of Ohio in the winter of 1893-94. During this and the succeeding wintei" over tifty orchardists, located in twenty-live different peach- growing centers of the State, received carefully prepared instructions for winter spraying for curl. The instructions for both winters were planned in the usual manner of experimental work, a number of unsprayed or control trees being left for comparison with the trees to t)e treated with each spray to be tested. The object in thus planning the work Avas the same as for that in Michigan and elsewhere — that is, to obtain such striking contrasts between sprayed and unspraj^ed trees that they would form long-remembered Object lessons for all who should chance to see them.
The spray work of the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station after 1800 was quite extensive; but the treatment of peach leaf curl is not mentioned in the bulletins on orchard spraying pul)lished by tliat station in December, 1891, and February, 1893,' although in the latter (Bui. No. 48, p. 12) the spraying of peach trees for other diseases is considered. In the spring of 1893, however. Prof. W. .1. Green spra\'ed a considerable number of young peach trees, just planted, the object being ''to determine the truthfulness of the statements that had been made concerning the effect of spraying upon peach trees." In relation to curl. Professor Green says that he "did not see any effect until tlie season of 1884," during which and in 1895 •'thei'c was some effect noticeable." He says further, in this connec- tion: ''I am aware that other work in this direction had been done before 1 commenced, because I received my suggestions from some other source, but I can not now recall the particular case." (Letter dated September 30, 1899.)
L'l^on these results obtained liy Professor Green, and supported l)y the work of Benton in California and Taft in Michigan, were based the subse(|U(Mit experiments of Prof. A. D. Selhy in the orchard of William Miller, of Gypsum, Ohio. '^ These experiments were begun, accoiding to Professor Selby, in April, 1895,'' but no results with Icjif curl wei'e ol)tained until 189(5.' as in 1895 theiv was no difference between sj)i-aye(l and unsprayed trees in the amount of curl developing, it being so insignificant as to be without evident effect. The curl which <le\-el()])ed in l<S!>«t enabled Mr. Selby to obtain some contrasts l)et\veeii sprayed and uns])raye<l trees, but these contrasts were not as
Mircci), W. .t., The Si)rayii)K <>f Orchards, Ohio A<rr. Kxj). Stii. I5nh No. n, Dec, l«91, Vol. IV, Hccoiid series; Bui. No. 48, Vah., 189:{, p. 12; and a letter from Tro- 1('s«or (ireei), dated Wooster, Ohio, Sej)t. ;W, 1899.
■'letter from Prof. A. D. Selhy, dated Wooster, Ohio, Sept. i:'., lS<t!».
^I>. c; also Ohio Agr. Kxp. Kta. Bill. No. 92, March, 1898, pp. 2:57-24r).
'()hio Aur. Exj). Sta. Bill. No. 92, March, 1898 j). 245; also Thirtieth Aim. Kept. Ohio Slate llorl. Soc., pp. 87.
HISTOKY OF TREATMENT. 63
marked as the^^ would have been had the disease developed seriously.^ As it was light in 1895 and 1896, no gain in fruit was shown b}' sprayed over unsprayed trees these years. In 1897 the work was con- tinued, and owing to the serious development of curl the desired contrasts in foliage were obtained. Unfortunately, however, the fruit buds had been killed by cold and no fruit records were obtainable. The first contrasts in fruit on sprayed and unsprayed trees in Mr. Miller's orchard were reported to Mr. Selby in 1898, and they are both valuable and conclusive."^
The announcement of the Department's work on leaf curl Avas sent to the growers of peaches in Illinois, Indiana, and Pennsylvania at the same time that it was sent into Ohio and other States of the East, viz, in November, 1893 ; and during the winters of 1893-94 and 1894-95, 135 peach growers in Pennsylvania, 81 in Indiana, and 36 in Illinois were requested to spray for the control of curl and report to the Department. A complete plan for these tests, control trees l)eing provided for in every case, was sent to each of the growers. So far as reported, where instructions were followed, the results of this work were satisfactory in all cases where curl developed and where frost did not prevent the obtaining of results.
Winter spraying for the control of curl began in New York, so far as known to the writer, in the winter of 1893-94, during which and the following winter over seventy peach growers of the State received from the writer full instructions for the treatment. These instruc- tions were sent out through personal correspondence with orchardists in over twenty of the peach-growing centers, and b}^ means of care- fully prepared circulars. Among others, Mr. W. T. Mann, of Barkers, undertook spra}' work for the Department in the winter of 1893-94. Carefully planned experiments were carried out by him in his young orchard, the spraying being done on April 9, and before growth started, and alternate rows being left untreated for comparison. Mr. Mann reported the results of this work as satisfactory, and they are elsewhere given in this bulletin. Mr. James A. Staples, of Marl- boro, also conducted spray work for the Department in 1894, 1895, and 1896, and where the instructions were carried out respecting the time of first spraying his results were fully satisfactory. Prof. L. H. Bailey'' reported thew^ork of Mr. Henry Lutts, of Youngstown, for the spring of 1894; and Mr. A. D. Tripp, of North Ridgeway, reports excellent results from his work.
'Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 92, pp. 246,247.
''Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 104, March, 1899, p. 210; also Kept. Oliio State Hort. Soc, 1898, p. 13.
* Bailey, L. H., Inii)ressions of the Peach Industry in Western New York, Cor- nell Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 74, Oct., 1894, pp. 382,383.
64 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
A ])ulletin of the Cornell Agricultural Experiment Station, by Georo-e F. Atkinson.^ which appeared in September, 18W, treats of leaf curl and plum pockets. Respecting the treatment of leaf curl, ]Mr. Atkinson says that some experiments had been made in various places bv spraying the trees with Bordeaux mixture for the prevention of the disease. Some of the experimenters regard it as certain, he states. chat the disease can to some extent be cheeked by this method, and adds: *' It is quite likely that, in some cases at least, another disease is confused with leaf curl, and this fact might account in those instances for the results claimed.'' The doubts here expressed as to the results of the work in New York do not appear to have been supported by an}' tield work of the station , and may have arisen from Mr. Atkinson's under- standing of the perennial habits of the fungus causing the disease. Th(>re seems to have })ecn no winter spraying for curl by the Cornell Station before the spring of 1898, and the results then obtained aVe in perfect accord with those obtained in 1894 by growers cooperating with the Department. In the spring of 1898 several experiments were instituted and carried out In' B. M. Duggar and H. P. Gould. The results of this work are given in a ])ulletin by Mr. Duggar, published in February, 1899.'
The ctiorts to control peach leaf curl by winter sprays in Canada, so far as concerns the work of the Canadian Government, appear l( have begun nearly simultaneously in Ontario and British Columbia.
At the experiment farm at Agassiz, British Columbia, the peach orchard had suffered severely from curl prior to the introduction of winter spraying. The superintendent, Mr. Thomas A. Sharpe, reported for 1892 that of the large number of peach varieties at that time on the farm — about 110 — only 5 escaped leaf curl, and the attack was severe.'' In the r(>port for 1893 it is said that leaf curl was worse that year than ever before. Of alxiut 129 varieties on the farm the Malta was the only variety on the level land that was entirely free.* In the spring of 1894 the trees were sprayed with strong Bordeaux mix- ture when the leaves were partly expanded, but no leaf curl developed that year, even the unsprayed orchards not being troubled by it/ It should ])e stated h(n'e, however, that the work done was too late to hav(^ given good results had curl developed, and that it did not properly constitute a prevcuitive s])raying. Whether this late spraying was owing to the nature of the season, or wlietlier it was supposed tlisit siicli f icatincnt would control the disease, is not known to the writer.
' Atkinw^n, Geo. F., I^af Curl and Plum Pocketa, Cornell Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 7:5, Sci)t., 1H94, pp. :i24-32(;.
M)uwiir, n. M., Virdrh Ia-hI Curl, etc., ("onicll .V^r. Kxp. .-l.^. Bull. No. 1(>4, Keh., 1S!)'.», pp. :{77-:W4.
"Kept. Kxji. KartiiH, ]H<I2, p. 27K.
M{cpt. Kx|). FarniH, iHiC!, pp. :{42, :U:i.
Mic'i)!. K\\>. FaniiH, lHii4, p. 404.
HISTORY OF TREATMENT. 65
In 1895 Mr. Sharpe reports that the peach trees at Agassiz were sprayed with Bordeaux mixture before leafing out, and again when the leaves were nearly full grown. He states that the sprayed trees had very little curl, and made a very strong and healthy growth, while on a few unsprayed trees of several varieties the leaves were nearly all destroyed by curl, and the trees themselves made a very feeble growth. ^
This treatment, so far as known, is the first successful experiment for the control of curl by the Canadian Government. Leaving con- trol trees for comparison added greatlj- to the value of the work, which was also strengthened by the results at Agassiz the following year, 1896.^ The writer regrets to add, however, that unfavoral)le results attended the spray work at Agassiz in 1898.^ The reasons for this failure are not apparent.
In Ontario the early results were not so satisfactory as at Agassiz, owing to the nondevelopment of the disease in Ontario. Mr. John Craig, horticulturist of the Central Experimental Farm, at Ottawa, planned the Ontario work. He states that the Avork on peaches in 1894 was planned to prevent the rotting of fruit and injury from insects, and that the first spraying was not given until May 1.* Mr. Craig's work on leaf curl began in 1895, by the application of winter sprays,^ but owing to the absence of the disease that 3'ear no con- clusive results were obtained. Later work, I am informed by Mr. Craig, has given more conclusive and satisfactory results.* The vari- able results reported in Bulletin No. 1, second series, leads the writer to wonder, however, if the early spray work Avas done with sufficient thoroughness. Mr. W. M. Orr, of Fruitland, Ontario, met with very convincing and satisfactory results from winter spraying in 1898.'' The same is true for the experiments of Mr. A. H. Pettit, of Grimsby, Ontario, who carried on work in 1898 and 1899, the results of the latter year, when one row of trees was left untreated for comparison, being very striking.
The work of this Department in extending the use of spraj's for the control of curl on the Pacific coast began in the spring of 1893. In the fall of that A'ear a circular letter on the subject was addressed to man}^ Pacific coast growers, and this was closely followed by requests that growers undertake preventive spray work in the winter of
' Kept. Exp. Farms, 1895, p. 396. ''Kept. Exp. Farms, 1896, p. 449. ^'Rept. Exp. Farms, 1898, p. 403. *Rept. Exp. Farms, 1894, pp. 110, 111.
* Peach Culture in Canada, Bull. No. 1, second series, pp. 35-37; Central Exp. Farm, Dept. of Agr., Ottawa, Canada, Sept., 1898. 6 Letter dated Ottawa, Oct. 7, 1897. 'Canadian Horticulturist, Jan., 1899, i)p. 18-20. 19093— No. 20 5
66 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
1803-94. During the winters of 1893-94 and 1894-95 the writer sent full instructions for preventing curl by winter sprays to over two hundred and seventy California peach growers, and requests to carry on spraying experiments, with similar instructions, to more than one hundred growers in Oregon, and to many in Washington. In all of this work for the extension of spra3nng an effort was made to intro- duce it in as large a number of leading peach-growing centers as pos • sible, especially in those sections of the coast where leaf curl had been most prevalent. The results of some of these experiments are given in Chapter VII, and the facts gathered and experiments conducted under the direct charge of the writer in 1893, 1894, and 1895 are detailed in full in other portions of this bulletin, and require no discussion here.
CHAPTKR IV.
PLAN OF PREVENTIVE SPRAY WORK CONDUCTED BY THE
DEPARTMENT.
PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR THE WORK.
The partial control of peach leaf curl in the spring of 1893, in a few orchards of the Sacramento Valley in which the trees had received a winter spraying for the control of the San Jose scale {Aspldlotiis per- niciosus)^ showed to the writer the importance of conducting careful experiments for the prevention of curl. As a foundation for experi- mental work a circular of inquiry was sent to some 1,500 peach growers of the United States in the fall of 1893. The facts thus obtained were of much value, but the general lack of accurate knowledge respecting })oth the nature and control of the disease, as well as the heavy losses reported from this cause in diflferent sections of the country, strikingly emphasized the need for widespread and thorough preventive experi- ments.
After careful consideration it was concluded to inaugurate two series of experiments. The first, which had been planned before the sending out of the circular, was to bo conducted in California under the direct supervision of the writer, and the second, planned somewhat similarly, though on a more limited scale, was to be carried out by the growers themselves in various peach-growing sections of the country. The personally conducted work is described here, while the results of the cooperative work are given farther on.
Observation and correspondence had alread^'^ shown which sections of California were most subject to frequent and serious recurrences of the disease. Facts thus gathered led to the opening of correspondence with Mr. George F. Ditzler, the manager of the Rio Bonito orchard, situated in the Sacramento Valle}', in the bottom lands of the Feather River, near Biggs, Cal. This orchard is the property of the Hatch & Rock Orchard Company, and comprises some 1,600 acres, several hundred of which have as fine peach trees as any in the State. " Among the varieties of peaches in this orchard is a large acreage of Lovell trees. The Lovell, it was learned, while presenting as thrifty growth, as any variety in the orchard during years when curl did not prevail, had been especially subject to it in seasons favorable to its develop- ment, the crop of this variety, which would amount to several
G7
68 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
thousand dollars, having been largely lost in 1893. After a l)rief correspondence Mr. Ditzler kindly offered to allow the Department to select from the orchards of Lovell peaches a block of several hundred trees of exceptionally uniform and vigorous growth and especially suited to the purposes of the experiments planned, and no tiner or more uniform block of trees has ever been seen by the writer than that eventually selected and assigned to this experimental work. It consisted of nearh' 600 trees at the southwest corner of a -It »-acre block of Lo veils, and was nearly level. The soil was sandy loam — deep, rich, and almost uniform in quality. The trees had been set in orchard less than live years, were 25 feet apart each way, and had grown so vigorously that l^efore pruning the branches met l^etween the rows in many cases, thus presenting tops of exceptional size for trees so young.
The experiments planned included a rectangular block of the orchard, 20 trees wide from east to west by 29 trees long from north to south. The tract selected was 500 feet east and west by 725 feet north and south, or nearly 8i acres in extent. At the south of these Lovells is an ahuond orchard of the same age; at the west a young apple orchard.
Through the center of the experiment tract, extending from south to north, was planned a driveway, thus dividing the trees into two long rectangular blocks, each block being U> trees wide from east to west, and 29 trees long from north to south. Each cross row of 10 trees was numbered. The south 10 trees, forming the south east-and-west row on the east side of the driveway, was designated 1; the second row from the south, 2; the third row, 3; etc., the north row on the east of the driveway being row 29. On the west of the driveway the south row was 30, the second row 31, etc., the north roAV beting 58. This arrangement gave 580 trees, divided into 58 rows of 10 trees each, one-half of these, rows 1 to 29, being east of the driveway and the other half, rows 30 to 58, west of the same. This arrangement may })e fixed more clearly in the mind b}' the diagram on page »)!>.
This diagram, in addition to showing the arrangement of the rows, as already described, is plaimed to i-c))resent and distinguish the i-ows which were to be treated with sprays from those wliicli were to be hift untreated as check or control trees in each experiment. 'I'lie trees of the rows to be ti-eated are rei)r(>sented l)y a star (*) and the treses to be, left uiisprayed are shown by a (Circle (^), with the exceptions to be noted. It may thus be s(>en that each row of 10 trees iiitciided lor trcatnicnt lias at its side 10 untreated trees as a cIhm-U or control row. With the e.\ce])tion of rows 29 and 58 each control row serv(>s for comparison with two s|)ra\('d rows, one on either sid(>. This method (»f <ont rastiiig each conti-ol I'ow with a sjn'ayed row on either side admitted of the plainiing of )>S experiments in the block of 5S rows, each c\p(>riment comprising 20 trees K) s])i'mv«'(I and lo unsprayed. in two immediately adjoining and parallel rows.
PLANS FOR SPRAY WORK,
C^{)
After locating and numbering each of th(>. 38 experiments to be tested the block was carefully examined to determine if any of the trees were missing or so injured as not to represent entire trees. The results of this examination are also embodied in the plat. Where trees were missing the fact is shown by a cipher (0) in the place of the
North.
West. 3
56 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
5 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
55 |
o |
o |
o |
° |
° |
° |
° |
o |
o |
o |
° |
° |
° |
° |
° |
° |
° |
° |
o o |
54 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
53 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
6 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
52 |
o |
o |
o |
° |
o |
o |
o |
o |
° |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
° |
o |
° |
° |
o o |
51 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
50 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
49 |
" |
° |
° |
° |
° |
o |
o |
o |
° |
° |
o- |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
° |
° |
o o |
48 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
47 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
46 |
° |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
° |
° |
° |
° |
° |
o |
o |
° |
° |
o |
o |
o o |
45 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
44 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
43 |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
° |
o |
o |
° |
° |
o |
o |
o |
o |
° |
o |
o |
o o |
42 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
41 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
4 |
* * |
40 |
o |
o |
° |
o |
° |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
° |
o |
° |
o |
° |
° |
° |
o o |
39 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
0 |
0 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
38 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
4: |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
37 |
o |
° |
o |
° |
o |
° |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
° |
o |
° |
o |
° |
o |
° |
o o |
36 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
35 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
o |
* |
+ |
6 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
34 |
o |
o |
° |
° |
° |
° |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
" |
o o |
33 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
8 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
8 |
* |
* |
* * |
32 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
31 |
° |
° |
o |
° |
o |
° |
o |
o |
" |
o |
o |
° |
o |
o |
o |
5 |
o |
" |
o o |
30 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* * |
10 |
9 |
8 |
7 |
6 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
■> |
1 |
10 |
9 |
8 |
7 |
0 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
2 1 |
|
■ — |
— Tree immbi-rs. |
|
— ' |
- — |
|
— Tree numbers |
|
24§ 23
* Sprayed in 1894 and 1895, except wliere noted.
"^ Unsprayed in 1894 and 1895.
§ Sprayed in 1894 and left unsprayed in 1895.
tree, but it was found that only two trees, both from row 39, were wanting in the block. The cross (+) in row 35 represents a nectarine tree, omitted in results of work. In cases where main limbs had been broken off or the tree otherwise injured, the proportion of the tree remaining is expressed in numerals, i. e., 8 in the place of a tree indi- cates that the tree was eight-tenths perfect, 5 that it was ilve-tenths
70
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
perfect, etc. As will be seen, however, there were very few imperfect trees.
In all the following calculations of fruit, etc., these few discrepan- cies in the number of trees are carefully taken into account in arriv- ing at results intended for comparison with other rows. The amounts produced b}' the trees of each row are first divided b}^ the number of trees actually in the row to obtain the average per tree, and this amount is multiplied by 10 to obtain the amount a full row would yield at the given average. By reference to the plat it may be seen that the trees and parts of trees missing amount to but 5.8 equivalent trees for the entire block, that 51 of the 58 rows have the whole com- plement of 10 perfect trees, and that the missing trees or parts of trees are divided among the remaining 7 rows.
SPRAY W'ORK CONDUCTED IN 1894.
The spray tests conducted in the Rio Bonito orchard in 1894 included the application of sprays prepared according to 88 diflFerent formula, making 38 distinct experiments. Each experiment included two adjoining rows of 10 trees each, one sprayed and the other unspra\Ted for comparison. Of these 38 experiments 11 involved two sprayings of the trees treated and 27 a single treatment. All treat- ments were made during the dormant period of the trees and varied in date from February 1 to March 6. The consideration of the preparation of sprays for this work will be discussed in a subsequent chapter devoted to that subject, as will also the methods of applica- tion, which will be given for use in both small and large orchards.
The table which follows is prepared to show as concisely as possible the arrangements adopted for the experiments of 1894. The rows of trees once treated and those twice treated are shown, the date or dates of treatment and th(; formula or fornmhe used in each case.
Table l.—ShuwinythefonmilKof the sprays applied in 1894, dates of opplicaiion, and
rows treated.
Row No.
Date of spraying,
Feb. 20
Feb. 24 /Ki'b. l(i \\'\-\>. 28
l'\'b. 23 Feb. 24
Feb. 23 /Feb. 20 \Mur. a
Feb. 24 Feb. 13
Feb. 13 /Feb. 2(J \Mar. 6
Formulae for 45 gallons of spray.
16 lbs. sulphur, 30 lbs. lime, 10 lbs. salt.
Control row. 10 lbs. Mil|plHir. 'JD lbs. linu", 7 lb.<!. .salt. 10 lbs. sulphur, 2(1 ll)s. liiiu-, 7 lbs. salt. .') U><f. sulphur, U) lbs. linic, 3 lbs, salt.
Cdiilrol row. 5 lbs. sulphur, 10 lbs. lime, 3 lbs. .salt. l.-> lbs. sulphur. 30 lbs. lime.
Cunt rill row. 10 lbs. siilphur, 20 lbs. lime. 10 ll>s. sulohur, 20 lbs. lime. f) lbs. .sulphur, 10 lbs. lime.
Control row. 5 lbs. sulphur, 10 lbs. lime. 20 lbs. lime, 20 lbs. suit.
Control row. 20 lbs. lime.
45 lbs. .milt (hot).
46 lbs. salt (hot).
SPRAY WORK OF 1894.
71
Table 1. — Showing the formula; of the sprays applied in 1894, dates of application, and
rows treated — Continued.
Date of spraying.
Formulse for 45 gallons of spray.
18 |
Feb. 26 |
19 |
Feb. 27 |
20 |
|
21. |
/Feb. 16- IFeb. 20 Feb. 21 |
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
/Feb. 6 \Mar. 1 Feb. 23 |
25 |
|
26 |
|
27 |
/Feb. 6 \Mar. 1 Feb. 26 |
28 |
|
29.... |
|
30 |
Feb. 2 |
31 |
|
32 |
Feb. 2 |
33 |
/...do... \Mar. 2 |
34 |
|
35 |
Mar. 3 |
36 |
Feb. 27 |
37 |
|
38 |
Feb. 26 |
39 |
/Feb. 1 iFeb. 28 |
40 |
|
41 |
Feb. 23 |
42 |
/Feb. 14 \Mar. 3 |
43 |
|
44 |
Feb. 24 |
45 |
Feb. 27 |
46 |
|
47 |
/Feb. 14 |
48 |
\Mar. 3 /Feb. 14 |
49 |
|
50 |
Feb. 14 |
51 52 |
Mar. 3 |
53 |
/Feb. 14 |
54 |
\Mar. 6 Feb. 27 |
55 |
|
56 |
Mar. 6 |
57 |
do |
58 |
Control row.
3 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. sulphur, 10 lbs. lime.
2 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. sulphur, 10 lbs. lime.
Control row. 5 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. lime. 5 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. lime.
4 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. lime.
Control row. 4 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. lime.
3 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. lime. 3 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. lime.
Control row.
3 lbs. copper sulphate, 2 lbs. lime. 2 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. lime. 2 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. lime.
Control row. 2 lbs. copper sulphate, 3 lbs. ammonia. Control row.
4 lbs. copper sulphate. 2 lbs. copper sulphate.
2 lbs. copper sulphate.
Control row.
4 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. soda, 3 lbs. ammonia.
3 lbs. copper sulphate, 10 lbs. sulphur. 10 lbs. lime.
Control row.
5 oz. copper carbonate, 3 lbs. ammonia. 5 oz. copper carbonate, 3 lbs. ammonia. 5 oz. copper carbonate, 3 lbs. ammonia.
Control row.
5 lbs. copper sulphate, 10 lbs. lime.
6 pints spray .solution. 6 pints spray .solution.
Control row. 6 lb.s. copper sulphate, 15 lbs. lime. 3 lbs. copper sulphate, 15 lbs. lime.
Control row. 8 pints spray solution. 8 pints spray solution. 6 pints spray .solution, 3 lbs. lime. 6 pints spray solution, 10 lbs. lime.
Control row. 8 pints spray solution, 3 lbs. lime. 5 lbs. sulphur, 5 lbs. lime.
Control row. 10 lbs. spray solution, 1 lb. soap (hot). 8 pints spray solution, 1 lb. soap (hot). 3 lbs. copper sulphate, 10 lbs. lime.
Control row. 8 pints .spray solution, 2 lbs. copper sulphate, 10 lbs. lime. 5 lbs. sulphur, 15 lbs. lime.
Control row.
The spray work outlined in the above table was fully completed before the opening of many of the peach blossoms in the spring. Following this work, plans were laid for the preservation of records of fruit thinned from the trees, etc., should peach leaf curl develop. As the spring advanced, however, it became evident that the disease would not appear to any serious extent in that portion of the State that sea- son, it not being sufficiently severe to produce a contrast either in foliage or fruit between the sprayed and unsprayed trees, hence the action of the sprays applied could not be determined. While this fail- ure to arrive at the results hoped for in 181M was much regretted, the failure, nevertheless, led to the acquisition of certain facts at a later date which are of prime importance to the orchardist wishing to com- bat the disease with sprays. The treatment of the trees in 1894 made it possible when the work was resumed in 1895 to ascertain if the
72 PEACH LEAF CURL! ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
effects of one year's treatment extended to the crop or foliage of the second year.
While peach leaf curl did not develop seriously in the Sacramento Valley in 1894, it prevailed quite extensively in other portions of the United States. This resulted in acquiring facts bearing on the experi- ments for 1895 in the Rio Bonito orchard. The experiments planned by the Department and carried out by growers in the East and in the north Pacific States, where leaf curl developed, showed that one thorough spraying during the dormant period of the tree was sufficient. The experiments of 1895 were consequently modified from those of 1894 in respect to the number of applications made, as well as in other respects found to be advisable.
SPRAY WORK CONDUCTED IN 1895.
In the spra}^ work in the Rio Bonito orchard during the winter and spring of 1895^ the same block of Lovell peach trees was selected as that treated the previous year, and in each case the same unsprayed or control rows were left as in 1894. In 1895 the number of experiments made in this block was 38, as in the previous year, but three of the 38 rows were not sprayed, being left without treatment for the purpose of observing the action of sprays applied in 1894 upon the crop and foliage of 1895. These three rows were numbers 4, 24, and 53, each of which had received two treatments in 1894. The facts thus learned are considered farther on. The spray work of 1895 included but a single spraying of each row designed for treatment. As already indi- cated, each experiment included one treated and one untreated row, each row having 10 immediately adjoining trees. By treating one row on either side of each control row the latter served as a contrast row for both sprayed rows. By referring to the plat of the block, p. 69, this arrangement may be seen. Row 1 is sprayed; row 2, unsprayed; row 3, sprayed. These three rows make two experiments — rows 1 and 2 compared make the first experiment, while rows 3 and 2 com- pared make the second experiment. In like manner rows 4 and 5 and 5 and 0 make two experiments. These illustrations will be sufficient, as the entire block, with the exception of the three rows jil ready noted, was treated according to the same general plan.
In considering the application of sprays in the experiments of ISIh"), the nature of the sprays used, the fonnuhe according to which tlu>y were prepared, the location of the rows treated, and the dates of a])i)li- cati(Mi, as well us the location of the control rows for comparison, are set foi-th in the table- which follows. That the I'eader may better grasp the nature of all treatments which each row had received the previous year, the formula' foi- the s])rays applied in 1S94 ai-e jjlaced at the left of the treatment ifix en the same rows in 1895.
SPRAY WORK OF 1895.
73
es
OO
c5 o
p, |
;-; |
.Q^ =; |
o |
||
G |
||
O -^ 0 >- |
||
J3 |
||
p, |
OJ5 (2.C O. |
|
3 |
>■. |
■^^ 31^" |
.^- |
ft |
o^-^oB |
t3 |
||
o |
||
3 3
■3-3 s s S a
s ~
5 ^5^3:5
.p 47 s:~- >-P
s |
0) a |
lOiO |
0 |
lO |
0 |
ifl |
M |
*"* ..^ C<1 |
^' |
Ic.S |
^ i7 |
o a> |
Q) |
0 |
0 |
cT |
cJ- oT S |
0" |
|||
s d |
S |
:S |
C3 |
■;rt |
53 rt p; |
cs a |
||||
K ^ |
.Q |
,CJ3 |
M |
43 |
J5 |
J5 j: ^ |
^ |
^x: |
||
^ . C |
a . |
c . |
a |
&.&•?< |
ft |
|||||
5P |
-:, |
C K X o |
3 |
K 0 |
0 |
?.% |
c i S |
|||
■S i: a |
CI, |
7; <p c^t; |
C P. |
P |
■g |
0. |
Illll 0 0 0 0 g |
ft |
° ftft |
|
-■CO |
3 |
C 0 0 3 |
c |
C C |
f^ |
0 c |
0 |
c |
ceo |
|
r/ ° '^ |
0 0 t; 0 |
•J |
0 0 |
0 |
||||||
S'^^ |
Ot^^O |
cr |
rrO |
& |
rrU |
TO |
^ zr •/ |
|||
^ ^ |
^ |
J2^ |
^ |
U2 |
C |
^ |
X5 |
^ ^ 5 |
x: |
.O.Q |
<N O |
to |
COIN |
10 |
-^ |
Ui |
CO |
Tfi |
(N M CO |
CO |
•*co |
i: ft £ c£2§P
^ s ?; ?:; c p; r:;s 6
s^
as g Qft
3^
aa
d C^l o .,
O CO jj C^I
^ 3 *-■ 3
•M O ^ O ;2 ^
00
3 3 ftft
0) jj 5J
aaa
O 0) D
aaa
oj a> o
aaa
cTaTar
-■ ft
3c:Si^'3r^«??r^f?5'^'r^«'^1-'.^5S'f-^ ^r- ^ r^ r^'r- ^ - ^r- ^o ^"^ C*"!- o" C C r- C Sr^ 5'
rH I— I lO
iCIN
:-- -7.
3 C p 3 C C .
jQjQ ££;0 £53 £;2;2 ;2
COCJ iOiC'l' -"J-COCO COC-1M M
? 3 = P C g C O 3 1
1> o ^
X3X1.0 a> a a>
feSfr,
£— £
•*eo
r-l!MCO •>J< 1001^0005 O rHC
!■ i/: -^ 1- 30 0» O >-l <N CO T)< iC O l~
JOJOi-HCS CO -^iCeDt^CO
icscococo CO coeococoeo
74
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
o "
r-1 lO
2<"
o g 2^
ft ■ 5
c *
£• on:
•fe & — S E -b o « S = ,• - c
iC X
<NC<3
■S O K a o C o c K tK 1
; s
c o
sa
aa
J2 — COr-(
c _o a c
5=11
^^o
s r^a
X s s ^
a* ^ c c "• ■'■ c - c c '' '' "' '' c "' 's s w ''- - c '■ "s n . . o „; c a t^ K »/-' c c c c ^ c y; ^ •£ a '/J o c tn ^
&-R£ -Kja
8 §g y 3g;!S« ■; s? 5SSS S? 3as§J5S
GENERAL CONSIDERATION OF SPRAYS APPLIED. 75
The methods of preparing and applying the sprays used in 1895 are considered in subsequent chapters. In each case an effort was made to do thorough work in applying the sprays, ])ut, as is true with all such work in the field, more or less variable results could not be avoided owing to the weather conditions and other influences. The treatment was given the 35 rows during the ten days immediately preceding the general opening of the flowers, that is, at the close of the dormant period of the trees, or from February 26 to March 5. In a few of the more forward trees a small percentage of the flowers had opened before the completion of the work.
GENERAL CONSIDERATION OF SPRAYS APPLIED.
Several distinct types of spraj^s Avere tested in the preventive work on curl in 1895, and these were prepared in many forms and propor- tions. The two fungicidal bases, copper and sulphur, which are now recognized in all countries as most valuable for this class of work, enter into the composition of a large proportion of the sprays used, in one form or another.
In testing sprays considerable weight was given to the fact that the peach tree is subject to the attacks of certain serious insect pests, prominent among which is the San Jose scale, and that a spray com- bining both fungicidal and insecticidal properties would often prove of greater value than one the action of Avhich was solely fungicidal. Having these facts in mind, and knowing the demonstrated value of the sulphur, lime, and salt spray as an effective remedy for the San Jose scale, this spray, together with various modifications, was tested and compared (rows 1, 8, and 0). Besides quantitative modifications of the spray, tests of its constituents were made to acquire such facts respecting their value as were obtainable. The sulphur and lime united were tested in several proportions without salt (rows T, 9, 10, 12, 16, 51, and 57). The lime and salt were tested together (row 13), and the lime was tested separately (row 14). The trial of a strong salt solution was made the previous 3'ear (row 16), but as it injured the foliage somewhat it was omitted in 1895. Other modifications of the sulphur spray were prepared l)}^ adding different fungicides, with the hope of increasing its fungicidal action without detracting from its (effectiveness as an insecticide. Sulphate^ of copper was added in different proportions (rows 18, 19, and 36), and the addition of iron sulphate was also tried (row 56).
The copper sprays tested for leaf curl were numerous and were variously prepared and combined. As alread}' said, copper sulphate was added to the sulphur sprays, but it was most extensively .used in the preparation of the Bordeaux mixture, in which form it was applied in many experiments and of various strengths (rows 15, 21, 22, 25, 28, 33, 41, 45, and 54). Copper sulphate with ammonia (eau celeste) was
76 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
tested (rows 27 and 30), as was the modified eau celeste, composed of copper sulphate, sal soda, and ammonia (rows 35 and 39), Two experi- ments were also conducted with ammoniacal copper carbonate (rows 32 and 38).
The action of sulphide of potassium was tested (row 47), as well as sulphide of potas.sium combined with milk of lime (rows 42 and 48).
Iron sulphate in connection with lime was applied in one experiment (row .50). and. as already stated, was also used in connection with sulphur and lime (row 56).
Of the three rows left unspra3'ed in 1895 (rows 4, 24, and 53), one (row 4) had received two applications of the sulphur, lime, and salt spray in 1894; another (row 24) had been twice sprayed in 1894 with Bordeaux mixture; and the third (row 53) had received two spra}^- ings in 1894 with a hot saponified solution of sulphide of potassium.
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Pnys. & Patn.. U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate VII.
O £
I- £
$ -
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE VII.
Sprayed and im.^prayed Crawfords Late trees in the orchard of Mr. A. D. Cutis, Live Oak, Cal. The tree seen at the right was sprayed with lime, sulphur, and salt in February, 1893; that at the left was unsprayed and was denuded of foliage and fruit by curi. (See records of fruit of sprayed and unsprayed trees in this orchard, p. 141.) The trees were photographed in May, after most of the curled leaves had fallen from the unsprayed tree. (Compare with PI. XX.)
CHAPTER V.
INFLUENCE OF SPRAYS ON THE VEGETATION OF THE TREES.
SAVING OF FOLIAGE FKOM INJURY BY CURL.
(PI. VII.)
The etfectivenoss of the winter tsprays discussed in the previous chap- ter in saving- the foliage of peach trees from injury by peach leaf curl has})een carefully considered. The relative importance of this matter appears from the fact that it is the injury from the loss of foliage which is responsible for the ultimate loss of the fruit. The spray work alread}" mentioned was completed, in iSlto, about the close of the first week in March. From this time on the flowers opened rapidh^, and they were soon followed by the pushing of the leaf buds and the com- plete resumption of the vegetative growth of the year. By the mid- dle of April the trees were well in foliage, while peach leaf curl was nearing the height of its development. By the 22d of the month the contrast between healthy and diseased foliage on the spra^^ed and unsprayed trees had become so great that a careful estimate was made of the percentage of the diseased leaves upon every tree in the block.
The first estimate of the condition of the foliage was made to deter- mine the amount and percentage of disease present on sprayed and unsprayed trees. The estimate of each tree was calculated upon the basis that the foliage present represented 100 per cent, and the amount of badly diseased leaves was taken as a certain per cent of the leaves present at that date. BadW diseased leaves were considered as those seeming to have sufiicient curl present to cause their premature fall from the tree. The ultimate comparisons of sprayed with unsprayed rows are not based upon this first estimate of foliage as the disease was still progressing. The parasite was still in the vegetative state, few of the swollen leaves as yet showing the fruit of the fungus, and still fewer having fallen from the trees. The trees sprayed with the stronger sulphur preparations were injured somewhat by the spra3's, many of the more tender twigs being killed. This delayed the leafing of these trees, and resulted in their showing rather a smaller percentage of diseased foliage at the time this estimate was made than would have been the case had the leaves pushed earlier. These discrepancies influence only a few of the sprayed rows. In other respects, it is believed the numerous influencing conditions would apply, so far as
could be told, with ee[ual force to all rows.
77
<8 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AXD TREATMENT.
In taking the percentage estimates of disease shown in the following table, the trees were examined in north and south rows. This was done so as to work across the lines of the experiment rows rather than with them, and for the purpose of avoiding any influence which a knowledge of the sprays used on the trees estimated might be thought to exert.
Table 4. — Eslimaled percentage of diseased leaves on trees April ^3 and 23, 1895.
Row No. |
Percentage of diseased leaves estimated Apr. 22 and 23, 1895, on tree No.— |
Average per cent of dis- eased leaves per tree in sprayed rows. |
Average per pent of dis- eased leaves per tree in control rows. |
|||||||||
1. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |
7. |
8. |
9. |
10. |
|||
1 |
10 90 30 70 80 40 20 75 30 30 80 25 -10 80 5 16 80 25 8 80 7 8 82 80 8 80 17 20 85 8 85 25 10 90 20 25 75 50 27 78 9 r)0 85 13 14 85 70 30 90 :« 30 85 85 17 85 30 26 5)0 |
15 |
15 |
10 85 40 80 85 50 30 85 42 40 85 35 40 78 13 45 85 40 16 90 26 9 &5 85 18 90 21 30 90 15 85 35 10 90 20 10 75 35 |
10 &5 35 85 80 40 25 75 25 35 85 34 45 75 16 37 87 29 25 90 17 16 85 85 27 90 21 26 90 10 90 30 5 90 12 15 75 25 |
10 90 30 85 90 45 35 70 27 27 85 50 50 76 16 31 78 32 •2Z 90 10 9 80 85 15 85 15 24 87 15 85 30 10 85 10 10 75 19 15 80 18 65 85 35 11 90 70 38 80 42 30 85 85 20 80 9 20 87 |
15 90 30 80 85 35 30 70 25 23 85 45 35 77 9 20 65 40 35 90 11 10 85 80 9 a5 24 30 87 15 80 30 10 90 8 15 65 17 20 75 18 55 87 31 18 85 70 30 87 45 35 80 85 15 85 20 18 88 |
15 85 30 80 90 40 30 75 29 30 80 50 50 80 12 20 80 31 20 90 10 10 80 85 11 85 26 31 90 15 85 35 10 90 15 20 60 25 15 80 23 60 85 28 12 80 75 40 a5 43 22 85 85 15 85 18 16 90 |
20 &5 25 85 90 »5 35 80 47 27 80 45 60 80 11 30 82 35 23 90 10 |
15 85 20 80 85 30 30 80 45 36 80 47 35 80 13 25 90 60 36 90 9 |
13.5 |
|
2 |
90 90 |
87.5 |
||||||||||
3 |
35 80 80 60 25 85 34 32 90 47 45 80 11 35 90 30 15 90 11 10 85 80 12 80 20 21 90 5 80 35 10 90 15 15 75 45 35 85 14 45 80 27 12 85 70 40 87 40 26 80 80 10 75 22 31 89 |
35 80 85 40 25 80 46 40 90 15 55 78 8 30 a5 33 13 90 16 15 80 80 12 85 17 21 90 15 85 30 10 85 15 10 70 40 18 80 12 50 80 16 12 90 60 40 85 40 28 80 80 11 80 30 31 85 |
31.0 080.5 |
|||||||||
4 |
||||||||||||
5 . . |
as.o |
|||||||||||
6 |
41.5 28.5 |
|||||||||||
8 |
77.5 |
|||||||||||
9 |
35.0 32.0 |
|||||||||||
10 |
||||||||||||
11 |
84.0 |
|||||||||||
12 |
39.3 45.5 |
|||||||||||
1.3 |
||||||||||||
14 . . |
78.1 |
|||||||||||
15 |
11.4 28.9 |
|||||||||||
16 |
||||||||||||
17 .... |
82. 2 |
|||||||||||
18 |
is. 5 21.4 |
|||||||||||
19 |
||||||||||||
20 . |
8>t. 0 |
|||||||||||
21 |
i2.7 10.7 |
|||||||||||
22 |
12 , 8 90 85 S5 i 80 |
|||||||||||
23 |
83.7 |
|||||||||||
24 |
(i82. 5 13.7 |
|||||||||||
25 |
15 90 23 15 88 20 80 35 10 90 12 12 65 24 15 85 13 55 a5 30 12 a5 75 28 as 35 :V) a5 80 16 82 19 15 90 |
10 85 17 19 90 15 a5 30 5 a5 10 10 65 10 18 78 17 60 85 25 13 a5 75 42' as 33 28 80 as 18 87 13 11 88 |
||||||||||
26 |
as. 5 |
|||||||||||
27 |
20.1 2:^.7 |
|||||||||||
28 . |
||||||||||||
29 |
88.7 |
|||||||||||
30 |
13.3 |
|||||||||||
31 |
81.0 |
|||||||||||
32 |
3i.5 9.0 |
|||||||||||
33 |
||||||||||||
34 |
a8.5 |
|||||||||||
35 .... |
i.3.7 14.2 |
|||||||||||
37 |
70.0 |
|||||||||||
29.0 20.3 |
||||||||||||
39 |
||||||||||||
80 13 |
82 90 |
80.3 |
||||||||||
41 . |
15.7 55.0 |
|||||||||||
55 55 85 : 88 |
||||||||||||
43 |
84.5 |
|||||||||||
30 12 90 50 38 85 50 25 80 80 12 80 25 32 90 |
30 10 80 &5 37 a5 45 32 80 a5 12 85 22 21 85 |
26.5 12.6 |
||||||||||
45 . |
||||||||||||
as. 5 |
||||||||||||
47 . |
68.0 36.3 |
|||||||||||
49 |
85. 1 |
|||||||||||
40. 8 29.1 |
||||||||||||
51 |
||||||||||||
82. 1) |
||||||||||||
53 |
(laS.O 14.6 |
|||||||||||
55 |
82.4 |
|||||||||||
20.8 22. 1 |
||||||||||||
57 . . |
||||||||||||
88.2 |
||||||||||||
aKuw8 apraycd in 1894. but left uusiprayed in 1895.
SAVING OF FOLIAGE. 79
General consideration of the above table develops some striking contrasts. By adding the figures corresponding to the average per- centage of diseased leaves on the trees of the control rows, and dividing this amount by the number of rows, we find that in the entire block, containing 200 control trees, 83.6 per cent of the leaves were badly diseased at the date of this estimate. In contrast to this, the total of the average percentages of disease shown In^ the trees of the sprayed rows, divided by the number of spraA^ed rows in the block, shows the average amount of disease in the sprayed rows to have been 26.2 per cent. Evidently this average is much above the percentage of disease shown at that date hy many separate rows, as it included the rows treated with noneffective sprays as well as those giving the best results. Adding the averages of rows 4, 24, and 63 and dividing the amount by 3 gives 82 per cent of disease as the average of the three rows. As noted in the table, these rows were not sprayed in 1895, but were left in order to ascertain the effects of the sprays applied to them in 1894, and the average of disease is seen to be prac- ticall}'^ as great as upon rows never sprayed.
From the date of this first estimate the progress of the disease in the orchard was very marked. Within the next two weeks the fungus fruited quite generalh" upon the swollen leaves, and a large percentage of the worst diseased leaves had fallen from the trees. By May 9 the contrast between sprayed and unsprayed trees had quite generally reached its highest point, and any irregularities of special trees, etc., could no longer be considered. On May 9 a second careful estimate of the foliage was made. In this work, however, it was impossible to estimate the amount of disease on the trees as compared with the total amount of foliage present, as had first been done, for much of the diseased foliage had alread}^ fallen. To avoid this difiiculty a new method of estimating was adopted. From the entire block of trees were selected two rows, Nos. 21 and 22, which showed only from 4 to 6 per cent of disease, and were in other respects in perfect foliage. A careful study of these rows was made to get a clear idea of the con- dition of a tree in full foliage at that date, and with these types in mind each tree of the entire block was carefully examined. An esti- mate was made for each tree, based on the twent}^ t3'^pical trees studied, to determine the per cent of perfect foliage upon it, taking* the amount which should l)e upon the tree at that date, if no disease existed, as 100 per cent. The following table gives the results of this work. The percentages in the last column represent the gain in leaves of sprayed trees over the average of all control trees in the l>lock. The manner of obtaining these percentages is discussed on page 85.
80
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Table 5. — Estimated percentage of healthy foliage on the sprayed and unsprayed trees May 9, 1895, as compared with the amount a healthy tree should have at that date.
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2o 26 27 28, 29 30 31 32 3;} 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 II 42 43 44 45 46 47 4H, 19 ;')0 51 52 53, {>!
•'i*;,
57,
')8,
Percentage of healthy foliage eompared with the amount the tree should have, estimated May 9, 1895.
Tree No. —
1. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |
92 |
93 |
93 |
92 |
94 |
95 |
9 |
10 |
12 |
9 |
15 |
10 |
90 |
85 |
80 |
82 |
m |
85 |
15 |
8 |
15 |
10 |
15 |
20 |
10 |
12 |
12 |
10 |
18 |
15 |
85 |
65 |
87 |
80 |
85 |
60 |
95 |
a5 |
90 |
85 |
83 |
84 |
10 |
i; |
13 |
9 |
12 |
10 |
88 |
75 |
87 |
80 |
90 |
80 |
90 |
SO |
88 |
8;: |
90 |
82 |
9 |
8 |
10 |
20 |
11 |
20 |
92 |
80 |
«8 |
85 |
80 |
80 |
87 |
87 |
75 |
85 |
65 |
86 |
« |
10 |
15 |
10 |
20 |
i;5 |
95 |
89 |
95 |
90 |
90 |
88 |
92 |
65 |
80 |
80 |
80 |
v- |
20 |
11 |
12 |
10 |
8 |
16 |
92 |
85 |
90 |
85 |
88 |
86 |
90 |
8,5 |
90 |
91 |
85 |
85 |
10 |
9 |
9 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
97 |
95 |
97 |
89 |
92 |
99 |
96 |
% |
96 |
90 |
90 |
98 |
8 |
10 |
14 |
10 |
8 |
10 |
8 |
9 |
11 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
89 |
90 |
92 |
85 |
88 |
87 |
10 |
10 |
9 |
8 |
10 |
12 |
91 |
92 |
97 |
87 |
92 |
91 |
87 |
88 |
96 |
88 |
85 |
92 |
9 |
10 |
12 |
10 |
8 |
13 |
% |
95 |
92 |
91 |
90 |
96 |
11 |
18 |
20 |
20 |
15 |
22 |
65 |
50 |
55 |
60 |
65 |
45 |
92 |
92 |
94 |
94 |
90 |
90 |
9 |
9 |
16 |
20 |
16 |
14 |
86 |
90 |
88 |
92 |
92 |
90 |
65 |
80 |
85 |
90 |
75 |
SO |
10 |
13 |
10 |
12 |
15 |
15 |
65 |
45 |
68 |
70 |
70 |
75 |
73 |
82 |
93 |
(c) |
(0 |
92 |
15 |
10 |
10 |
12 |
10 |
12 |
93 |
92 |
95 |
85 |
85 |
80 |
45 |
25 |
45 |
28 |
45 |
50 |
10 |
12 |
15 |
10 |
15 |
18 |
78 |
75 |
80 |
55 |
65 |
55 |
89- |
89 |
80 |
90 |
90 |
95 |
11 |
16 |
13 |
15 |
25 |
20 |
40 |
40 |
40 |
45 |
28 |
45 |
70 |
75 |
55 |
70 |
65 |
50 |
9 |
10 |
20 |
18 |
20 |
15 |
70 |
65 |
50 |
60 |
40 |
50 |
80 |
70 |
75 |
70 |
70 |
65 |
9 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
18 |
12 |
20 |
15 |
18 |
8 |
15 |
15 |
85 |
87 |
90 |
70 |
82 |
85 |
9 |
14 |
10 |
9 |
15 |
15 |
85 |
80 |
70 |
75 |
65 |
<K) |
70 |
83 |
6r> |
60 |
75 |
87 |
H |
10 |
11 |
10 |
12 |
12 |
7. 8. 9. 10.
Average per cent
of health}- leave.s per tree
in
sprayed
rows.
92.3
84.7 a 14. 8
76.8 85.4
83.1 86.4
81.0 79.6
90.0 82.0
84.7 83.2
95.9 94.6
a9.4 89.8
91.2 89.3
52.5 91.9
91.8 78.2
70.3 83.4
87.0 41.6
58.8 86.7
38.8 58.0
67.0 68.5
a 14. 8 82.2
75.8 74.8
Average per cent
of
healthy
leaves
per tree
in control
rows.
Gain in leaves of sprayed trees "over average of all con- trol trees, expressed
in percent.
10.1 'u.5
'u'.i 'ii'.h'
iis' "i6."7
"i2.'2
12.2
9.7
14.2 "u'.8
'i'i's 'ii.h' 'ib.h' 14.' i' '13.0 ii's 'io.'-y
549
13
488 554
536 554
620 509
689 528
549 537
634 624 639
688
698 684
302 CM
603 499
438 639
666 219
350 656
197 344
336 424
13
629
480 473
a Trees sprayed in 189-1, but un.sprayed in 1896. /) Gain of^ control row over row sprayed in 1S9I.
(Tree missing.
TliP, conipiirison of .some of tho jronoriil fact.s brouf'-lit out in thrcsti- niatcs of foliajrc April 23 and 23 jind ]Ma\' 1), l«i>5, .shows the progress of the di.sea.se durinj^ that time.
SAVING OF FOLIAGE.
81
Table 6. — Comparative percentage of diseased foliage on sprayed and unsprayed trees April 22 and 23 and May 9, 1895.
Trees examined. |
April 22 and 23, 1895. |
May 9, 1895. |
Average per cent of disease on the trees of all control rows |
83.6 26.2 82.0 |
86.9 |
Average per cent of disease on the trees of all spra ved rows |
21 2 |
|
Average per cent of disease on the trees of the three rows sprayed in 1S94, but left unspraved in 1895 ! . . |
87 0 |
|
These comparisons show 3.3 per cent more diseased foliage on the control trees May 9 than April 22. The percentage of foliage of the sprayed trees showing disease had decreased, however, 5 per cent. Of the total foliage of the trees sprayed in 1894. but left unsprayed in 1895, 5 per cent more was diseased at the second date than at the first. These figures indicate that the divergence in the percentage of disease on sprayed and unspraj-ed trees was still increasing just prior to the second estimate. The second estimate may thus be considered as taken before anj^ of the trees had begun to recover from the effects of the disease. The time of maximum contrast was the true time to make the estimates, and it is believed the date of this second estimate was certainlv not too late to fully comply with this requirement. This belief was substantiated b}^ a third partial estimate made a week later, which gave in general very similar results to those obtained May 9. It should also be said that the decrease in the percentage of disease on the sprayed trees between the dates of the first and second estimates did not indicate that the second estimate was made too late, or after the trees had begun to recover, but merely that the leaf buds had not fully pushed at the time of the first estimate. This is further shown by the fact that the percentage of disease was still increasing on unsprayed trees up to that time.
Before considering the action of individual sprays in saving the foliage from curl, the following comparisons are given of the action of the classes of spra3^s used:
T.VBLK 7. — Percentage of healthy foliage on trees differently sprayed.
Percentages of healthy foliage shown by trees sprayed with different cla.sses of .spravs. Estimated April 23 and May 9, 1895.
Average of 30 trees sprayed with sulphur, lime, and salt
Average of 70 trees si)rayi>d with sulpluir and lime
Average of 100 trees sprayed with the two preceding sulphur sprays
Average of 90 trees sprayed with Bordeaux mi.xture
Average of 20 trees sprayed with eau celeste
Average of 20 trees sprayed with modified eau celeste
Average of 130 trees sprayed with the three preceding copper sprays
Average of 20 trees sprayed with ammoniacal copper car- bonate
19093— No. 20 6
71.4 69.3
70.3 86.2 83.3 83.0
84.2
69.8
84.6 80.0
82.3 89.6 91.7 87.6
89. 6
13.2 10.7
12.0 3.4
8.4 4.6
5.4
CQ -. M >-;
8.4
82 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS MATURE AND TREATMENT.
Table 7. — Percentage of healthy foliage on trees differently sprayed — Continued.
Percentages of healthy foliage shown by trees sprayed \rith different classes of spravs. Estimated April 23 and May 9, 1895.
iC>,J1.1 '^■■'~
^ so^^.g
Average of
and lime
Average of
Average of
lime Average of Average of
lime Average of Average of
30 trees spraved with copper sulphate, sulphur, (a) ".
10 trees sprayed with iron sulphate and lime
10 trees sprayed with iron sulphate, sulphur, and
f 10 trees sprayed with sulphide of potassium
f 20 trees sprayed -with sulphide of potassium and
10 trees sprayed with milk of lime
10 trees sprayed with milk of lime and salt.
76.3 59.2
79.2 32.0
M.3 73.5 54.5
82.0 57.0
75.8 38.8
49.8 58.8 79.5
2.2 3.4
6.8
4.5 14.7
a Compare text.
The table show.s the average of liealthy foliacife on the trees .sprayed with the sulphur sprays (sulphur, lime, and salt, 3t_> trees: sulphur and lime, To trees) to have been 82.3 per cent Mav 0. The average on the trees sprayed with the leading copper sprays (Bordeau.x mi.xture. 90 trees; eau celeste, 20 trees; modified eau celeste. 20 trees) was 89.6 per cent. The average amount of healthy foliage saved on trees spra,yed with a combination of these two holding classes of sprays (Bordeaux mixture added to the sulphur and lime sprays. 3(> trees) was no greater than the average saved by all sulphur and lime sprays alone, being 82 per cent as against 82. 3 per cent for the sulpluir sprays. This result was a surprise, but by carefully h)oking into the rea.son it would .seem that the low average in the case of the combined sprays was due to the low average of the single row 36. while the high averag(» of the sulphur sprays arose from including in the average the results of tho.se sprays which contained much more sulphur than was used in the combined sprays. Notes on the spray applied to row 36 show that considerable sulphur was precipitated in cooking, probably through overheating, and foi' this reason it Avould ])e as well to omit this row in detennining the average saving of the combined spraj's. The two i-emaining rows, 18 and 19, sprayed with combined spraj^s, showed 84.7 and 83.2 per cent of healthy foliage, respectively — an average of 83.9 per cent. The formula for each of these experiments contjiined 5 pounds of sulphur. In the experiments with uncombined sulphur sprays there were four formula; contjiining 5 pounds of sul- phur each. The average per cent of saving of tiiese four experiments was 75.3. These facts show that when the amount of sulphur was equal there was an average gain of 8.6 per cent in healthy foliage resulting fi-om the addition of Bordeaux mixture to the sulphur sprays.
The average p(!rcentiige of foliage saved by the us(> of the ammo- niacal coppci- carlionatc (2'> ti-ccs) was. May 9. r.l.k .\s tlic ammoiiiacal
SAVING OF FOLIAGE. 83
copper carbonate sprays used contained much less basic copper car- bonate than the other copper sprays applied, their comparatively low effectiveness against curl is fully accounted for, and for this reason they were not included when calculating the average action of the copper sprays in general. They were outclassed by the amount of copper used in the other sprays.
The foliage saved by the use of iron sulphate and lime (10 trees) was but 57 per cent May 9. This shows a nuich less satisfactory action than cither the copper or the sulphur sprays. The iron sulphate com- bined with the sulphur and lime sprays showed a saving of foliage Ma}' S< of 75.8 per cent. While this is a good showing, the beneficial action was evidently due to the sulphur of the spra}' and not to the iron, and the result was even below the average obtained by the sulphur sprays alone, or equal to those having the same amount of sulphur.
One experiment (10 trees) was made with sulphide of potassium, but the average percentage of foliage saved by this spray was, May 9, only 38. S. Sulphide of potassium combined with milk of lime (20 trees) showed a greater saving of leaves, being 49.8 per cent, but as the sulphide alone gave a saving 11 per cent lower, and as milk of lime saved as high as 58.8 per cent, it is questionable if the lime was not the more active agent in the combination. As alread}^ stated, the milk of lime applied as a spray (10 trees) showed a saving of 58.8 per cent of the leaves, which was quite satisfactory for a spray con- taining none of the standard fungicides. The spray prepared from lime and salt (10 trees) gave a high record, the healthy foliage May 9 being 79,5 per cent. AVhile it is possible that the fungicidal action of this spra}- may be somewhat higher than that of milk of lime alone, it is perhaps more pvobable that the results noted arose from another influence. It was learned in the previous year's work that a solution of salt injured the new growth and tender leaves, and it is thought likeh' that in the present case the earliest growth and that which first showed disease was destroyed by the spray, and that the foliage estimated was a new and somewhat later growth, showing much less disease than the first foliage would have shown. It woukl be well, however, to repeat this test.
Some interesting fa(;ts are brought out hj the preceding ta])le in relation to the continued action of the fungicides used. By comparing the first column, the percentages of healthy foliage taken April 22 and 23, with the second column, the percentages taken Ma}^ 9, it will be seen that the percentage of healthy foliage on all trees sprayed with the sulphur or copper spraj^s increased decidedly between th(> two dates of estimate, as shown in the third column. On the other hand, the action of the weaker sprays was overcome I)}' the disease, and the percentage of healthy foliage May 9 was much less than April 23, as shown in the fourth column. These weaker sprays checked the
84
PEACH LEAF CUKL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
action of the fungus at first, but were not sufficiently active or per- sistent to prevent its gradual increase upon the trees. An apparent exception to this in the case of the sulphide of potassium appears to arise from the fact that the disease was never greatly checked by this fungicide, the amount of healthy foliage being only 32 per cent April 23. Another and more marked exception is seen in the trees sprayed with lime arid salt in solution. It is thought, however, that the trui' explanation of this exception is that given in the preceding paragraph.
What has been stated will be sufficient to indicate the comparative value of the main classes of sprays used in these experiments. It is shown that the highest degree of effectiveness in saving foliage is possessed by the cop[)er sprays, that the sulphur sprays also possess a high degree of fungicidal activity, and that where Bordeaux mixture is added to the sulphur sprays the etlectiveness of the latter is some- what increased. It is also made clear that sulphide of potassium, sulphate of iron, and several other sprays, as tested, are of secondary \alue in this work. It should l)e noted that the average saving o))tained from the use of the sulphur sprays is sufficiently high to well warrant the use of these sprat's, either in combination with Bordeaux mixture or alone, in cases where it is desired to use a spray ha\ing both fungicidal and insecticidal (lualities.
It will now be advantageous to briefly consider the leading indi- vidual sprays composing the classes of sprays already discussed, in respect to their action on peach foliage and peach leaf curl. The fol- lowing table gives a compact presentation of the numhc^r and nature of these sprays, as well as their action in controlling curl:
Table 8. — Nature and cornpo.vlion of uprays applied.
Row No. |
(Masses and formula; of sprays applied. |
Average per cent of healthy foliage May 9, 1895. |
Net gain per cent of healthy foliage over average per cent of all control trees. |
go m Ill |
1 |
Sulphur, lime, hihI suit : 15 lbs. suli>luir, :;i) lt)s. lime, 10 lbs. salt |
92.3 84.7 76.8 86.4 83.1 8.5.4 82.0 74.8 81.0 (iH. 5 78.2 84.7 83.2 iK). 0 |
607 649 488 564 636 ,564 628 473 520 424 499 649 637 589 |
80 |
3 |
10 lbs. snli)hiir, 'JO ll)s. lime, 5 lbs. .salt |
60 |
||
6 |
.') lbs snlpliur U) lbs. lime, 3 lbs. .salt |
60 |
||
7 |
Sillpliiiriiiid lime: |
60 |
||
g |
10 lbs suli>linr 20 lbs lime |
60 |
||
10 16 |
10 lbs siilplnir S lbs llnic |
60 |
||
80 |
||||
67 |
60 |
|||
12 |
60 |
|||
61 |
60 |
|||
86 |
Bordciiiix iiii.xtiirc ami siilpbiir spnivs coinbiiicd : |
70 |
||
18 |
nibs copper Kiilpliiitt' 5 lbs siiliilmr, 10 lbs lime |
80 |
||
19 |
80 |
|||
16 |
Bordiim.x inixtiirc: (i lbs. coijper siilpbnic, ir> lbs. llnio |
100 |
SAVING OF FOLIAGE.
85
Table 8. — Nature and composition of uprays applied — Continued.
Row No.
Classes aiid l'(>runihi» of sprays applii'd.
O 0) o
>
a> o i* =0
9 X-::
3' lbs. copper sulphate, 15 lbs. lime
5 lbs. copper sulphate, 10 lbs. lime
3 lbs. copper sulphate, 10 lbs. lime
3 lbs. copper sulphate, 10 lbs. lime
5 lbs. copper sulphate, .5 lbs. lime
4 lbs. copper sulphate, h lbs. lime
3 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. lime
2 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. lime
Eau celeste :
4 lb.s. copper sulphate, 3 pints ammonia
2 lbs. copper sulphate, 3 pints ammonia
Modified eau celeste :
4 lbs. copper sulphate, 5 lbs. sal soda, 3 pints ammonia
2 lbs. copper sulphate, 3 lbs. .sal soda, 2 pints ammonia Ammoniacal copper carbonate :
5 ounces copper carbonate, 3 pints ammonia
3 ounces copper carbonate, 2 pints ammonia
Iron sulphate and lime :
6 lbs. iron sulphate, 10 lbs. lime
Iron sulphate, sulphur, and lime :
5 lbs. iron sulphate, 5 lbs. sulphur, 10 lbs. lime
Potassium snl)>hide solution :
8 pints potassium sulphide .solution
Potassium sulphide solution and lime :
12 pints potassium sulphide solution, 10 lbs. lime
8 pints potassium sulphide solution, 5 lbs. lime
Lime and salt :
20 lbs. »ime,20 lb.s. salt
Lime :
20 lbs. lime
*91.9 87.0 85.7 82. 2 95.9 94.5 89.8 89.3
91.2 t92.2
91.8 83.4
70.3 52.5
57.0
75.8
38.8
58.0 41. G
79.5
58.8
*604 566 556 529 634 624 588 584
598 t606
603 539
438 302
336
480
197
344 219
509
350
80 100
90 SO 100 100 80 80
SO tlOO
80 80
80 60
40
40
40
50 40
60
50
* Exceptional, see p. 87. t Outside row, next to driveway.
The above table is planned to give for each experiment the following facts: (1) The number of the row to which *he spray was applied; (2) the nature and amount of the ingredients used in each case; (3) the average per cent of healthy foliage shown by the trees of the row May 9, 1895; (4) net gain in healthy foliage above the average per cent of healthy foliage produced by all of the control trees of the block (200 unsprayed trees), and which is expres.sed in per cent; (5) thrift of uninfected leaves in color, texture, and size. The figures under the foui-th head were obtained in the following manner: The average percentage of healthy foliage of all the trees of each control row was first ascertained. These amounts were added together and divided by the number of rows (20) to obtain the average percentage of healthy foliage of all control trees of the block. This average was 13.00. From the average percentage of each sprayed row was then subtracted the average of all control trees to obtain the gain in healthy foliage of each sprayed row. This net gain was then divided by the 13.0() per cent of the .-ontrol trees to obtain the net gain per cent of each sprayed row. For example, take row 1 : 92.3 % — 13.06 % =79.21 % gain; 79.21: %-^ 13. OG 7c shows tiie net gain to ht> '(;} '=007 70 of the
86 PEACH LEAF CURL*. ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
average amount of healthy foliage of the control trees. The fifth sub- ject, thriftiness of leaves, is discussed in the next general head of this chapter.
In considering the saving of foliage induced through the use of the sulphur, lime, and salt spraj^s (rows 1, 3, and 0) in comparison with the average saving of sprays containing an equal amount of sulphur but no salt (rows 7, 9, 10, 16, 57, 12, and 51), there appears to be a slight gain in favor of the former spraj^s. The average saving from both classes, taken together or separately, is in proportion to the amount of sulphur contained in the spray. With 15 pounds of sul- phur the average net gain in healthy foliage was 580 per cent; with 10 pounds, 54:7 per cent; with 6 pounds, 528 per cent; and with 5 pounds, 480 per cent.
In considering the combined sulphur and copper sprays (rows 18, 19, and 3(j). it is well to omit comparisons of row 30, on account of the injury caused to the effectiveness of the spray applied to it through the precipitation of a portion of the sulphur in boiling, as has alreadj^ been noted. Rows 18 and 19, containing 3 pounds and 2 j)ounds of copper sulphate, respectively, and each containing 5 pounds of sulphur and 10 pounds of lime, show a gain in healthy foliage of 549 per cent and 537 per cent, or an average gain of 543 per cent. The average gain from the sulphur sprays, which contained the same amount of sulphur but no copper, was, as already stated, 480 per cent. This shows the advantage of adding the copper to the sulphur sprays.
In the table the experiments with the Bordeaux mixture are arranged according to the amount of copper and lime used in each. The results obtained in the 9 experiments bring out some valuable facts respecting the most desirable proportions of copper and lime to be used. Of the 9 experiments with Bordeaux mixture, 2 fornuihe contained 15 pounds of lime each, 3 formula? 10 pounds each, and 4 formula' 5 pounds each.
By comparing rows 15 (0 pounds copper sulphate, 15 pounds lime), 41 (5 pounds copper sulphate, 10 pounds lime), and 21 (5 pounds cop- per sulphate. 5 pounds lime), it will be seen that there was a gain in liealtiiy foliage of 5.S1» per cent, 5(j() p(>r cent, and (IIU per cent, respec- tively. Dividing these gains by the iiunibei- of pounds of copp(>r in th<', res])ectiv<' fonnuhe, which may he fairly d()n(\ owing to tii(> nearly e(jual amounts of coi)per contained in each, the following results will be obtiiined:
IVr fcul. Kow 15 (6 poniids copper Hulphate, IT) pounds lime = l ixmud copper to 2.5
poiindH lime) hIiuwh a j^aiii of foliage ])er pound of copper milphatti of i)8
Row 41 (5 poundH copfRT Hulpliate, 10 jjounds lime = l pound copjier to l'
l)OUiidH lime) hIiowh a gain of foliage per ))ound of copper sulphate of Illi
Kow 21 (5 pound.M copper nulpliate, 5 pounds lime = 1 ))ouiid copin-r to 1 pound
lime) ahowH a gain of foliage per jjounil of copper nulphate of 127
SAVING OF FOLIAGE. 87
These comparisons indicate a decided increase in activity of the sprays as the percentage of lime is lessened — the total amount of cop- per remaining the same, at least to that point where the number of pounds of copper sulphate and lime are equal. The formulae contain- ing 3 pounds of copper sulphate can not all be compared as justly as the above formulse have been, owing to a difference in the make of copper sulphate used on row 33. However, rows 45 and 54, each hav- ing been sprayed with a formula containing 3 pounds copper sulphate and 10 pounds lime, may be compared with row 25, which was treated with 3 pounds of copper sulphate and 5 pounds of lime. The average saving of foliage per pound of copper sulphate in the former two experiments (10 pounds lime) was 180 per cent. The saving per pound of copper sulphate in the latter experiment (5 pounds lime) was 190 per cent. These comparisons also show most gain in foliage per pound of copper sulphate where least lime was used.
That no misconception may be formed from the preceding com- parisons, it is well to consider that the sprays were applied in these cases immediately before the opening of the buds, so that prompt action of the copper was of greater importance than the enduring qualities of the sprays. As will be elsewhere shown, however, the endurance of sprays upon the trees is largely increased with the increase of the amount of lime they contain. A large increase of lime above the absolute requirements for the Bordeaux mixture is not necessary when the spray is applied so near the date of the opening of the buds that its action can not be deWed without loss in effectiveness. On the other hand, if the spray is applied at an earlier date, so that it is required to withstand weathering for a longer period, a considerable increase in the amount of lime may be an advantage in increasing its enduring quality.
The amount of copper sulphate used in the preparation of the Bor- deaux mixture varied from 2 to 6 pounds for 45 gallons of spray. Of the nine formulae tested, that containing 5 pounds of copper sulphate and 5 pounds of lime (row 21) gave the highest gain in foliage over the average healthy foliage of the control trees, or 634 per cent. There was an actual average saving of 95.9 per cent of the spring foliage of the 10 trees sprayed, consequently the average loss of foliage in this experiment was only 4.1 per cent. The next best results were o})tained with the spray containing 4 pounds copper sulphate and 5 pounds lime (row 22). This spray gave a gain in foliage above the average produced by the control rows of 624 per cent. The average amount of foliage saved on the 10 trees was 94.5 per cent, showing that all but 5.5 per cent of disease had been prevented. While row 33 shows the next highest saving in foliage, these results, as already indicated, are exceptional, as shown by comparison. The yield of fruit which this row produced also shows the foliage records to be exceptional, and they ma}- properh' be omitted in these comparisons.
88 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
The results olitained hy the use of eau ceh^ste and nioditied eau celeste were very satist'aetory. l)ut in no case Avas as hioh a percentaj^e of foliage saved by them as in the better tests with Bordeaux mixture. The exceptional]}' high percentage of foliage saved on row 30 with but 2 pounds of copper sulphate may be in part due to the fact that the row was an exterior one of the block and next to a driveway, where the trees may have been better nourished than those of interior rows. Ry comparing the formula used on row 27 with that used on row 3o (each containing 4 pounds of copper sulphate) it will be seen that tlie saving of foliage was about equal with eau celeste and modified eau celeste. Comparison of these results with those shown ])v row 22. which was spi-ayed with Bordeaux mixture containing the same amount of coppei". will show that the latter saved the highest percentage of foliage.
Amnion iacal coppei carbonate gav^e less satisfactory results than the preceding sprays, probably owing to insufficient copper. The various results given l)y the other sprays tabulated require no special comment.
Another fact is made evident In' the preceding table. Of two fornud* of the same class, as the Bordeaux mixtures, one containing n)ore of the fungicide than the other, the percentage of foliage saved for each jwund of fungicide will l)e the greater in the weaker spray. Each of the Bordeaux mixtures used in spraying rows 21, 22, 25. and 28 contained .") pounds of lime, l)ut the amounts of copper sulphate used were 5, 4, 8, and 2 pounds, respectively. The total net amount of foliage saved by these sprays and the net saving per pound of copper sulphate each contained ma}' be thus shown.
Row 21: 5-poun(l formula, 6M percent saved; jut pound of c-opper sulphate, \'27 per cent.
Kow 22: 4-]»i)iind forniiila, <;24 pt-r cent saved; per ixmiid of (■oi)i)er sulphate, I'lG per cent.
Row 25: 3-poinid formula, oSS i)er cent saved; i)er pound of copper sulphate, 19(5 per cent.
Row 28: 2-pound formula, 584 i)er cent saved; per juiimd of copper sulphate, 292 per cent.
These figures show a gradual decrease of the total per cent of foliage saved as the amount of the fungicide isdecreas(Hl. but a decided increase in the percentage of foliage saved per ])()iuid of fungicide.
CO.'NIl'AKlSO.NS OK WEIGJIT AM) COLOR OF 1"0LL\(;K FROM SFRAYED AM)
UNSPRAYED TREES.
Besides the di reel loss of loaves through infection by KrodKcii.sdcfor- iiKiiiit^ there is an indii'ect loss llii'ough the retarding of growth of such foliag<' as has not been dii'cctly infected l)y the fungus. A limited examination of this matter was made May 17 and is. IS!C». Two typical trees were selected in adjoining rows, one of which had been
II. 20. Div, Veg. Phys & Pa;n,, U, S. Dept of Agncultur
Plate VIII.
COMPARATIVE WEIGHT AND COLOR OF FOLIAGE. 89
spraj'ed and the other not. These were trees No. 10 of rows 20 and 21. Tree No. 10 of row 21 was sprayed the tirst week in March, 1895, with Bordeaux mixture (5 pounds copper sulphate, 5 pounds lime). Tree No, 10 of row 20 had not been spraj^ed. From each of these trees was gathered 2 pounds of healthy foliage. Careful measurements were made of the length of the branches of 1894 growth necessary to yield this weight of healthy leaves, and it was found that on the unsprayed tree it required 186 feet 2 inches, while on the sprayed tree it required only -49 feet 4 inches. The work was done as similarly as possible on both trees. The 2 pounds of foliage from the spra3^ed tree contained 2,428 leaves, and the 2 pounds from the unsprayed tree 2,546. In other words, 118 more healthy leaves were required from the unsprayed tree than from the spraj^ed tree to equal 2 pounds in weight, or 59 more leaves per pound. This result is due to the indi- rect rather than the direct action of the disease. The leaves from the unsprayed trees, being healthy, should average as great in weight as those from the sprayed trees, were it not for the retarding and impoverishing action of the disease upon the general growth of the tree. In comparing diseased with healthy leaves, however, this ratio would be reversed. The number of diseased leaves I'equired for a given weight would be much less than the number of healthy leaves required. The diseased leaves are greatly curled and distorted through the irritation or stimulative action of the fungus present in the tissues, and in many instances they also become enormousl}^ increased in width, thickness, and weight.
The contrast observed in the color and general appearance of the leaves of the sprayed and unsprayed trees was very marked. The foliage of the trees treated with the stronger copper sprays, especially the Bordeaux mixtures, presented the finest appearance. On May 8, 1895, two months after the spray work was completed, and at the height of the disease, the foliage on trees thus spraj-ed presented the greatest perfection. It was so abundant and so dense as to throw very dark shadows beneath the trees, making it difficult to obtain good photographs among them. This dense foliage existed upon both the lower and the upper branches. The leaves were of a very dark and rich green color, long, soft, and beautiful. Upon the unspraj^ed trees comparative!}' few leaves presented the appearance of full health, and much of the diseased foliage had already fallen, leaving many trees nearly bare. The color of much of the remaining foli- age was yellow and sickly. Many of the uncurled leaves were small and light colored on both the lower and the upper limbs. What growth these trees had made up to that date was largely terminal, very little health}' or comparatively healthy growth being apparent from lateral buds. (Compare Pis. VIII and IX.)
90 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
The influence of the various spra^vs on the thriftiness of the leaves was especially examined. This examination was contined to such foliage as was free from infection bv the fungus, but was extended to spra3'ed and unsprayed trees alike, and to all rows of the block. In recording the comparative thrift of uninfected foliage, attention was given to the depth of the green color, to the softness of texture, and to the size of the leaves. These features of the foliage were considered collectively and recorded on the scale of 100; for instance, the most thrifty foliage was recorded at 100 per cent of thrift, and the less thrifty at a lower percentage. This method enables one to distinguish at a glance those sprays giving the best results in color, texture, and size of leaves — in other words, in functional ability. The records for each row and formula are given in the general table under the preceding head of this chapter, to which the reader is referred. It will there be seen that the trees of 5 rows produced foliage of the highest quality in spite of the presence of disease. These rows were all sprayed with the copper spra3's, and all but one with Bordeaux mixture. Owing to the fact that row 30, showing first-quality foliage, was an outside row, it may be well to omit it in comparisons. The remaining -1 rows, Nos. 15, 41, 21, and 22, were all sprayed with Bordeaux mixture, containing 6 pounds, 0 pounds, 5 pounds, and -i pounds of copper sulphate, respectively. Smaller amounts of copper sulphate did not give equally high results.
The average results shown ])v the different classes of sprays are as follows :
Per cent.
Sulpluir, linii', and wait {'.i rown) 67
Sulphur and lime (7 rown) 63
Bordeaux, .sulphur, and lime coudjined (3 row.s) 77
I*>ordeaux (9 rows) 90
Bordeaux, 4, 5, and 6 pound fonuuLc (4 rows) 100
Kau celei^te (2 rows) 90
Modified eau celeste (2 row.s) 80
Aiiinioniacal ('oj)per carbonate (2 rows) 70
Iron snlj)hate and lime (1 row) 40
Iron sul]»liate, sul])luir, and lime (1 row) 40
Potassium sulj)liide (1 row) 40
l'ota,«sium sulphide and lime (2 rows) 45
iJme and salt (1 row) 60 '
i.ime (1 row) TiO
Trees si)ray(!d in 1894, hut not in 1895 (3 rows) 20
("ontrol trees (19 rows) 20-
Thc i»(»i(l('!iii.\ mixture is licrc shown to give the best av»M'age results as to thrift of foIiag(;. The (^\('('llen(•e of textur<\ color, and size of the l(;av«!s on rows sprayed with the stronger Bordeaux mixtures would be hard to sui'pass.
' First leaves prohahly injin<'<l by spray.
^(hw. exceptional row, showin); 40 per cent, omitted; ))erhap.s benefited by wind- borne spray.
INFLUENCE OF SPRAYS ON THE VEGETATION OF THE TREES.
91
GROWTH OF BRANCHES AND LEAB^ BUUS ON SPRAYED AND tTNSPKAYED
TREES.
Besides knowing the action of the disease and of the sprays upon foliage, it is desirable to ascertain their action on leaf buds and the growth of branches. Two months after growth started — from May 10-14, 1895 — a study was made of the growth of 20 trees in the experi- ment block, 10 sprayed and 10 unsprayed. The rows selected for this work were Nos. 20 (unsprayed) and 21 (sprayed). These rows were types of the injurious action of the disease and of the l)eneticial action of the spra}^ applied, which was 5 pounds of copper sulphate and 5 pounds of lime. Much time was given to making measurements of the new growth and recording tlie results, the time being equally divided between the 10 sprayed and the 10 unsprayed trees. Typical limbs were measured upon ])oth the lower and upper portions of the trees, and the length and compurati^'e liealth of the new growth was recorded. The length of 1891 growth and that which was older was first ascer- tained, and was followed by careful measurements of all spring growth of 1895 arising from wood of 1891 or from that which was older. The results of this work are shown in the following table:
Table 9.
-Records of ineasurementfi of Iwalthii and diseas^ed wood on unspraijed and sprayed trees, taken May 10-14, 1895.
Row 20, unsprayed trees. |
Row 21, sprayed trees. |
||||||||
o Coo n |
Length of .spring growth of 1895^ |
a o |
Length of spring growth of 1895— |
||||||
Tree No. |
On wood of 1894. |
On wood more than 1 year old. |
On wood of 1894. |
On wood more than 1 vear old! |
|||||
.a ■ "3 |
a $ 5 |
"3 a |
-d 0! s |
Healthy. Diseased. |
£ 1 w |
•d § s |
|||
1 |
In. 1,422 1,614 1,364 1,304 1 , 576 1,886 1,366 1,7.58 1,986 1,912 |
In. 492 570 301 .557 499 298 .527 686 977 670' |
In. 249 229 251 304 326 2.57 230 .516 .550 582 |
In. 76 219 83 234 85 182 18 .53 120 .56 |
In. 91 134 22 29 41 41 32 8 2 |
In. 674 664 592 666 702 976 998 1,068 938 982 |
In. In. 1,189 11 908 1 6 768 1 4 1,,580 , 6 1,100 3 1,2.59 4 1,348 4 2, 7.51 2 2,100 1,869 |
In. 194 494 46 330 45 325 183 195 84 220 |
In. 2 |
2 |
14 |
||||||||
3 |
|||||||||
4 |
|||||||||
6 |
1 |
||||||||
7 . |
|||||||||
8 |
|||||||||
9 |
|||||||||
10 |
|||||||||
Total |
16, 188 |
5,577 |
3,494 |
1,126 |
402 |
8,260 |
14,872 40 1 |
•> 110 1 17 |
|
From the footings in the preceding table it appears that the total length of 1894 wood measured upon the unsprayed trees was nearly twice as great as that measured on the sprayed trees. This arose from the scarcity of new growth on this unspraved wood, hence an equal time given to taking measurements upon each tree included more old wood upon unsprayed than upon sprayed trees.
92
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
On the unsprayod trees, prior to the middle of May, the total amount of new growth on 16,188 inches of 189-1 Avood, including the older wood from which this arose, was 10,599 inches. On the sprayed trees the new growth amounted to 17,01.5 inches during the same time (two months) on 8,260 inches of 1891 growth, including' the older growth from which the latter arose. This was a net gain of 215 per cent, length of old wood considered, over the growth produced by the unsprayed trees. Otherwise stated, the unsprayed trees had averaged a new spring growth of 7.85 inches per running foot of 1891 wood and older, while the sprayed trees had produced a growth of 21.75 inches per foot of 1891 wood and older during the same time. This shows a gain in growth on the sprayed trees during these two months of 16.90 inches per foot of old wood. The importance of this matter will appear to all growers who have peach oi-chards situated Avhere the spring growth represents the major part of that of the season, as is true in many peach-growing regions. In such orchards this would frequently represent a reduction of 25 per cent in the annual growth. In the peach, the growing wood of one year is the bearing wood of the next, hence the amount of wood produced would have added sig- nificance.
Considering the total growth of the spring of 1895 from wood grown prior to 1891 — the pushing of dormant or quiescent buds — an analysis of the table shows a net gain by the old wood of sprayed trees of 178 per cent above the growth produced from like wood of unspraved trees. This action of spray enables the grower to renew bearing wood on the lower portions of his trees, which is an advantage where trees are old or close set and tending to grow upward, or where curl or other causes have tend(!d to denude the lower limbs of 3'oung and productive wood. This tendency of Bordeaux mixture to aid in the forcing and active growth of dormant buds was especially well marked in the case of a tree sprayed ver\' thoroughly on one side (6 pounds copper sul l)hate, 1 pounds quicklime, 45 gallons of water) and left uiisprayed on the other. From the base of the main liml)s on the sprayed side there arose i;'. shoots from dormant buds during the first two months of spring growth, while the unsprayed limbs produced practically none. Th(; 1;^ shoots on flic sprayed side had made the following growth to May 17, gi'owth beginning about the close of the first week in March:
Shoots. |
]. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
6. |
6. |
7. |
8. |
9. |
10. |
11. |
12. |
13. 2;! |
Total |
lA^ngth in inches |
36 |
44 |
29 |
37 |
46 |
21 |
36 |
36 |
36 |
46 |
22 |
21 |
SC. feci 1 i |
|
As sli(»WM by the table, the growth coining from i:! (ioriniml buds at the base of tiic main limbs of the sprayed side of the tree during the first two months of .spring growth amounts to 30 feet and 1 inch,
COMPAEATIVE GROWTH OF BRANCHES AND LEAF BUDS. 93
or an average of over 3H inches for the 13 shoots. That this astonish- ing pushing of new basal buds was not due to injury of the top by the spray was shown by the immense amount of dark green foliage the spraved half of the tree produced and from the amount and perfec- tion of the fruit it bore. It was evidently an aided or stimulated basal growth. In table 9 is shown the comparative health or disease of the spring Avood measured. Where shoots had suffered from disease to such an extent that they were enlarged, crooked, or otherwise dis- torted or injured by the disease, they were classed as diseased; when not so injured, they were classed as healthy. In respect to this classi- fication the table gives the following facts: On the unsprayed trees the new shoots measured on growth of 181)4: or older amounted to 10,599 inches, of which 6,703 inches was of healthy wood and 3,896 inches of diseased wood, or, in other words, 63 per cent of the wood was healthy and 37 per cent diseased. On the sprayed trees the total length of new shoots measured on 1894 growth or older was 17,045 inches; of this, 16,988 inches was of healthy wood and only 47 inches of diseased wood, or 99f per cent was healthy and ^ per cent diseased.^ Many peach orchards are cultivated under conditions of moisture and nourishment that enable the trees to grow throughout the entire sum- mer. In such situations trees badly diseased in the spring are apt to so far recover before frost that there is little apparent difference between them and the trees saved from curl by the use of sprays. That this recovery is not entire, however, is shown by actual comparisons. In the Riviera orchard, Live Oak, Cal. , were obtained the following records, in February, 1894, f ron 10 sprayed and 10 unsprayed Crawf ords Late peach ' trees. The trees are fully described under the following heading of this
^ These comparative records of the length of healthy and diseased branches upon sprayed and unsprayed trees fully serve the purpose of comparison for which they are here intended. There is another phase of the matter, however, which should not be overlooked or misunderstood at this time. A branch classed as diseased does not mean that it was diseased or swollen throughout its entire length, but that external signs of a diseased or injured condition were noted at some point in its course. If it be supposed that one-third of the injuries noted were dead ends or other imperfections not due to the infecting of the branch by the fungus, but indi- rect injuries arising from the loss of foliage, there remain two-thirds of the injuries which may be properly assumed to be due to the infection of branches by means of mycelium coming from diseased leaves. There would then appear to be 25 per cent of the cases which might be classed as diseased from mycelium infection. As already indicated, however, this does not mean that these branches are infected throughout their entire length, but show one or more points of infection at the buds. It is thought by the writer that not more than 1 bud in 10 is actually infected in these diseased branches. If this estimate is approximately correct, the number of infected buds on the unsprayed trees would be represented by one-tenth of 25 per cent, or 2.5 per cent of tlie buds on the tree. In brief, it is believed that it is rare. for more than 3 per cent of the buds of a badly diseased tree to become infected by the mycelium from diseased leaves — in other words, that rarely more than tliis percentage of buds of one year carry a perennial mycelium to the next spring.
94
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
chapter, and it will here be sufficient to state that the growth on the sprayed and unsprayed trees could be fairly compared. The spraj'ed trees were treated with the sulphur, lime, and salt spray in the winter of 1892-93. Leaf curl developed seriously in the orchard in the spring of 1893. The sprayed trees saved their foliage and 1)ore a full crop of fruit in 1893, while the unsprayed trees, everywhere surrounding those that were spraA'ed, lost the spring foliage and most of the fruit. All trees stood upon moist, deep, rich river bottom land, where growth could continue throughout the season. In the fall of 1893 the unspraj^ed trees had apparenth' largely overtaken the sprayed trees in growth, as the former had carried little crop, while those that were sprayed had matured a full crop. That the unsprayed trees were not, however, fully abreast of the sprayed trees when growth ceased in 1893, is shown by the measurements recorded in February, 1894 (table 11). These measurements were made on various sides of each tree, and on lower and upper limbs, and as a week was devoted to the work, the measurements are believed to be sutficientl}' extensive to give reliable results.
Table 10. — Gain in number of lateral shoots and spurs from old wood on sprayed trees.
Records. |
Trees. |
|
Sprayed. |
Unsprayed. |
|
Length of old wood, measured in inches, on sprayed and unsprayed trees Number of lateral shoots and .spurs that pushed from old wood in 1893 |
8,255 2,922 0.3539 13 |
7,363 2,300 0. 3124 |
Gain in favor of spnivcd trees per cent.. |
||
The above table shows that 13 per cent more buds had pushed into shoots and spurs on the sprayed trees, in the summer of 1893, than on the unspra^'ed trees. All represented new growth from old wood.
The following table shows that the length of the new growth for the entire season of 1893 on the sprayed trees was 6.4 per cent more than that produced on the unsprayed trees. Tliis was in spitt^ of the facts that the unsprayed trees were .so situated that growth could continue until frost and that they had not carried a crop of fruit as had the sprayed trees:
Table 11. — Gain in length of new growth in favor of sprayed trees.
Records. |
Trees. |
|
Sprayed. |
Unsprayed. |
|
Ix;nKth of old wood, inea.sured in inches, on sprayed and unsprayed trees |
8,255 |
7,363 |
18, 174 2,692 |
16,390 |
|
1,100 |
||
20,866 |
17.490 |
|
2.527 2.376 |
||
Gain in ncwKrowlh iii favor of sprayed Irecs percent.. |
6.4 |
|
|
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE YIU.
Experiments at Biggs, Cal. (Unsprayed.) Looking north through the Lovell treew from row 28 of the exi)erinient block, showing the nnsprayed trees on both sides as they appeared May lo, 1895, in the nnsprayed orchard. These should be contrasted with the two sprayed rows, 21 and 22, shown in I'l. IX.
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate IX.
DESCEIPTION OF PLATE IX.
Experiments at Biggg, Cal. (Bordeaux mixture.) Looking east between rows 21 and 22, May 15, 1895. Row 21 was treated before blooming with 5 pounds copper sulphate, 5 pounds lime, and 45 gallons of water, and row 22 with 4 pounds copper sulphate, 5 pounds lime, and 45 gallons of water. Row 21 matured 4,44.3 pounds of fruit, and row 22, 4,421 pounds, while row 20, unsprayed, just south of row 21, matured only 648 pounds, and row 23, unsprayed, just north of row 22, matured only 712 pounds. Row 21 set 22,164 peaches, and row 22 set 21,478, while row 20 set only 1,911, and row 23 only 2,127; or, in other words, row 21 set eleven times as many peaches as row 20, and row 22 ten times as many as row 23 (p. 111). (Com- pare with PI. VIII.)
COMPARATIVE DEVELOPMENT OF FRUIT BUDS AND SPURS,
95
The number of leaf buds produced on the sprayed and unsprayed trees per lineal inch or foot of old wood did not greatly differ. There was, however, a gain of 1 per cent in favor of the sprayed trees, as shown below:
Table 12. — Gain in number of leaf hudfi infaror nfspraijed trees.
Records.
Length of old wood, measured in inches, on sprayed and unsprayed trees
Number of leaf buds
Average n umber of leaf bud.s to inch of wood
Gain in favor of sprayed trees per cent. .
The tendency of the new growth to send out lateral branches and spurs was much more marked upon the sprayed than upon the unsprayed trees, the gain in this case being lOiJ per cent. This is a decided advantage, for the tree is thus enabled to bear a heavier and more equally distributed crop than where such laterals are few.
Table I'A. — (rain in niimhcr of lateral shouts a)id spurs fro))i new vood on sprayed trees.
Records. |
Trees. |
|
Sprayed. |
Unsprayed. |
|
Length of new wood, measured in inches, on sprayed and unsprayed trees... |
18,174 640 0. 0302 109 |
16,390 276 |
0. 0168 |
||
A complete tabular presentation of the data from which the four preceding tables have been drawn will be found under the following heading.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW FRUIT BUDS AND FRUIT SPURS FOR THE YEAR FOLLOWING AN ATTACK OF CURL.
In Februar}", 1894, Avhile the action of the sulphur spra3^s was being considered in the Riviera orchard, the question arose as to the rela- tive ability of sprayed and unsprayed trees to produce fruit buds and fruit spurs for the year following a severe attack of curl. Many trees in this orchard had been sprayed ^yith the sulphur spra3^s in the winter of 1892-93 for the destruction of the San Jose scale {Aspidio- tus 2)<ivn-icioHw<). The manner in which this work was done furnished an excellent opportunity to ascertain the facts desired respecting the development of fruit buds. It was noted during the early part of the winter that individual trees, scattered through a -lO-acre block of 4-year- old Crawfords Late, had become infested with San Jose scale. A careful examination of this part of the orchard was then made, and each tree found to be infested with the scale was marked for spraying.
96 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Later in the winter Mr. A. D. Cutts, one of the proprietors and the superintendent of the orchard, had these marked trees thoroughl}^ sprayed with sulphur, lime, and salt, the formula used being- as fol- lows: Sulphur 15 pounds, lime 30 pounds, salt 10 pounds, water 60 gallons.
While this spray was known to be effective against San Jose scale, it also proved very effective against curl, which developed seriously in the orchard in the spring of 1893, The result of the spraying was to produce a most striking effect. When the disease developed, the unspra3^ed trees, which represented the major portion of this l:0-acre orchard, were almost wholly denuded of foliage and largeh' of fruit, while the sprayed trees, scattered through the block, were in full foliage and fruit. This orchard was selected as a very suitable place in which to study the relative thrift and number of fruit buds and spurs pro- duced on sprayed and unsprayed trees for the year following, and for this purpose 20 trees were selected from this block in February, 1894. Ten of these trees had been sprayed in the winter of 1892-93, and had thus escaped serious injury from curl in the spring of 1893, while 10 of tliem had not ])een sprayed and had suff'erc^d considerably from the disease. These 20 trees were all Crawfords Late, 5 j^ears old in the winter of 1893-94, and similar in other respects, the soil, situation, etc... being the same.
The work of counting and grading buds upon these sprayed and unsprayed trees was begun about the middle of February, 1894, and continued for a week, an equal amount of time being given to each tree. To make all records as representative as possible of all portions of the trees studied, the limbs were measured and the buds counted and classi- fied upon different sides of each tree and upon both lower and upper limbs. In the selection and measurement of lim])s, as well as in the counting and classification of the buds, an effort was made to correctly represent the conditions existing in all parts of each tree, and of all trees alike. After the selection of a limb for study, all wood grown prior to 1893 was measured and the length recorded. Following this all the shoots and spurs of 1893 growth, and arising from the old wood nu^asui'cd, were counted and the nunil)er set down. All these new shoots, with the exception of fruit spurs 4 inches or less in lengtii, were then measui'ed. Records were kept of the length of the new shoots, the number of well-d(^veloped fmitl)uds, th(^ inunberof ])()()rly developed fruit buds, and the number of leaf buds they bore. A record of the num])er of lateral shoots and fruit spurs from the growth of 1893 was also preserved. Th<' results of this work are brought tog(!ther in the two tables wiiicli t'<tli()\v:
COMPARATIVE DEVELOPMENT OF FRUIT BUDS AND SPURS.
97
^
6
s |
50 |
o^ |
|
cri |
on |
f-i |
|
'^ |
|
S |
|
s- |
|
^ |
§• |
°? |
<4> |
O |
^^ |
K |
50 |
c^
Oi CO 0 CC -f ^ iC |
,— 1 |
lO c^ |
00 |
||||||||||||
coi^05aoOrHa>'^--D-r |
■^ |
||||||||||||||
•(snipu! |
«.C^Tr«lOIM05M'5' |
0 |
|||||||||||||
tn qjSuai) pooM pio |
■^ |
||||||||||||||
i |
|||||||||||||||
_a |
OirHO^OOCOOOrH «>■«** |
__, |
|||||||||||||
t^ldi-HOlOOOCOi-ltOi- |
00 |
||||||||||||||
0 |
Ui |
•S(Ooqs JO jaqninM |
03 |
||||||||||||
0 |
<u |
||||||||||||||
^ |
0. |
||||||||||||||
2 |
is |
as'^osoooeoo^Oieoco |
M |
||||||||||||
0 a 0 |
l^TC«0DCMI:~!N-<5<COeO |
CO |
|||||||||||||
•sjnds JO jaqinnsj |
iC |
||||||||||||||
u |
|||||||||||||||
t^QOCCt^^OiOOiC'^O |
t^ |
||||||||||||||
.G |
•(saqoui |
aioooOTj«c40oico»c^ |
0 |
||||||||||||
c^c^Trco-^-T-^iOiC-^ |
c^ |
||||||||||||||
0 |
ui q^uei) pooM pio |
TP |
|||||||||||||
a |
|||||||||||||||
incOt^M-N^«01^!N |
0 |
||||||||||||||
1«iC:O«5t^I^^0000T- |
05 |
||||||||||||||
0) 0 |
•s^ooqs JO joqtnnvi |
||||||||||||||
h-] |
CO |
||||||||||||||
i |
•sjnds JO jaqninK |
r |
■■0 |
||||||||||||
a>rHOoo(Nooi-it^i-i?J |
to |
||||||||||||||
■spnq jBOi JO jaqnin^ |
r-((MC<5COC^<Nm<N-Vrr |
IN CO |
|||||||||||||
eciO«iooicai(NO>0!N |
01 |
||||||||||||||
K |
•pado |
■^ t^ |
|||||||||||||
13 3 |
-taAap .<iJ[oo<i |
•rP |
|||||||||||||
.Q |
|||||||||||||||
■3 |
-^-^CCOOiTJ-OJcsOOsiO |
00 |
|||||||||||||
10000500^000^-^ |
|||||||||||||||
a |
(x< |
•p9dot9A3pn9jW |
^ 00 CO U5 to t^ 30 -0 00 t~ |
02 |
|||||||||||
• |
|||||||||||||||
ut |
|||||||||||||||
TfOOC^C-JOOt^t^Or-l-O |
^V |
||||||||||||||
A |
•(saqoui ui |
dOJC^f-tcOiOOOOOOCO 00O5O5I— I05l— tlOl— tl— II— f |
01 |
||||||||||||
q^Saai) pooAV avo^j |
0" |
||||||||||||||
c^eo(N-*-*>ooo^oi^ |
--0 |
||||||||||||||
•sjooqs |
C^i-(C^»OCOC^O'^--D(M |
§ |
|||||||||||||
JO jgqranu 'sinjojui |
|||||||||||||||
wc<l(NWC<5t^-<J"Oi<5 00 |
t~ |
||||||||||||||
(M rHi-l(N rHrHIN |
■^ |
||||||||||||||
■6 |
•sands jo laqranfi |
*"* |
|||||||||||||
0 |
|||||||||||||||
^ |
OC^'O-^OOrHOOOOMt- |
l^ |
|||||||||||||
oicni^ocoiosSiOc- |
00 |
||||||||||||||
0 ^ |
•spnq jiMi JO j.Kiranjj |
CJi-IC^C^C^lrHrHC^tMi-H |
■m" |
||||||||||||
COC^lOO'-OCOOOCTSOiiCO |
CO |
||||||||||||||
•pedo |
cooiOTfi^csooiraosoj |
TT^ |
|||||||||||||
COC^COCOC-)rtCO'N!NCO |
0 |
||||||||||||||
3 |
-toAop Xiaood |
CO |
|||||||||||||
X! |
|||||||||||||||
t^-^OOt^THtOOOOiHOi |
^ |
||||||||||||||
X |
'3 |
gg^og^i^SSS |
|||||||||||||
1 |
1X4 |
•p8doiaA9pii8AS. |
lO |
||||||||||||
t^ |
|||||||||||||||
<D |
05t^O-!I<r-lt^(N«OM |
0 |
|||||||||||||
•(saqoui UI |
i^Oi^y^cOrHciOi^Joo tOiOOO-OC-iOOO-OOOOO |
||||||||||||||
1 |
qjSuax) pooAV avbn |
t-" |
|||||||||||||
r-lCOCOOM |
cOiOtTOO |
^ |
|||||||||||||
•sjooqs |
(N r^ |
CO |
|||||||||||||
joaaqoinu 'sibjojbi |
|||||||||||||||
m |
n »c M |
l-l-H |
1- |
-1> |
|||||||||||
c^ |
|||||||||||||||
Kjndx JO joqmnN |
|||||||||||||||
d ■ 2; |
|||||||||||||||
0) |
|||||||||||||||
1 |
2; |
^ |
■^ |
t^ |
OC |
c- |
"5 1 |
||||||||
•~ |
' |
19093— No. 20-
98
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
• (saqoui
••sjooqs JO joquin^
•sjndti JO jaquin^
CO lO -^ CO Oi "^ »0 CO t--
OOt^i-l-^-^tOOi-ltO
cocoaic^a>t-<^HcocDi-H
l^OiCQOC^-^XCCClOi
t^ O iC 00 (N -T" rHINr-lrH -*
■ (saqoni niq?3a3i) pooAvpio
i-HC^MOCOrHOOCCroO lOOtCiOOOi-^OWOO r-tC^CJC^C^C^COTj<cOCO
■ffjooqs JO JOquiii>j
•sands jo jaqran^j
CO O -O CO -^ l~ O) ,-H X' o
CO"<tl:^T*<CO'^(N005
C0-*1N005- i-ICCrHCOrHC
spnqjiioi jojoquitiN
^Oi-tr^rHOXCO'MO i-(COXCO(Mi-H005:Oi-< C^C^ICOC^-'J^JN^COC^CO
•pado • [OAO p Xpooj
Oi iC X O '^ CO X X >Ci-H Xl^XC^i-tO'^iO'fOJ COCO^COl-^COCOXiCCO
•padoiaAap n3,vv
OXXCOiCt^cOC^CO-J^ -^ CO »0 X X CO i-H l^ CO ^ C^iCiC-rJ^-^I^cOiOCOCO
• (soqoui up q-jSuai) pooA\. 'mom
en t^ Ol t CO CO X O t^ rH XXOCOCDtJ^XCOCOCO lO t^ O 05 rH l^ tH C^ C- t-H
■sjooqs JO joquinu 'situo^Trj
C^C^COCOCOXtH(M-^CO Wi-ir-l (N eOrH rH
t-HC^COiCO-^CivCCO
■sinds JO joqmnsj
spnq ji!.)i joj,)(imii>i
CO lO CO I^ lO t^ t^ X CO CO OJOit'-O^I^i-HiCcO^CD
•pado - 1 0 A a p Xijooj
CD iC -1* CO C^ I^ O OS M X
CO -r i^ CO X -^ ai t^ 1^ — j*
C^lC^C^^iOC^CO-TCOCO
•padoiDAap IPAV
Iftr-IXr-C^t^lCCOMOi lOXOOt-OlOrHOKS
i-ie^co<NcoeOTi<-*-^Ti<
■(raqotn HI q^Suai) pooAv 'a\o>i
-r -r lO I» ST. -»< CD X I
•sjooqs JO jDqmnu 's[iJja}B7
•^IHCO *O»C0 'COCOlO
sjiuls JO j.i<(iiiiij^;
>-l CI CO -f iC 'D I- X (J> o
COMPARATIVE DEVELOPMENT OF FRUIT BUDS AND SPURS. 99
111 the preceding tables, the number of shoots and spurs of 1893, which arose from wood of 1892 or earlier (old wood), as well as the length of the old wood itself, are classed under the general head of new growth from old wood. The measurements of the growth of 1893, and the number of lateral shoots and fruit spurs, as well as the number of fruit and leaf buds the new growth produced, are classed under the head of new wood. The buds were counted in a uniform manner upon all growth measured, except the buds borne by fruit spurs, which are estimated at 3 buds per spur in the tabulated calcula- tions which follow. The fruit buds have been divided into two classes — well developed and poorly developed.
In considering the information given in the preceding tables, only those facts having a direct bearing on the fruit buds of the sprayed and unsprayed trees will be taken up under this heading. Those relating to length of new growth, number of new shoots, and number of leaf buds have already been considered under the preceding head- ing of this chapter.
The following digest from the general tables shows that 23,879 fruit buds of all kinds were produced by the new growth arising from 8,255 linear inches of old wood on 10 sprayed trees in 1893 — an average of 2.892 buds per inch of old wood. The average number of buds per inch of old wood on the 10 unsprayed trees, obtained in a similar man- ner, was 2.686. These figures show that the sprayed trees produced 7f per cent more fruit buds of all kinds in the summer of 1893 than were produced by the unsprayed trees. These were fruit buds for the crop of 1894, and upon trees bearing a full crop in 1893, while the contrasted unsprayed trees bore very little.
Table 16. — Gain in total number of fruit buds on sprayed trees. |
||
Records. |
Trees. |
|
Sprayed. |
Unsprayed. |
|
Length of old wood, measured in inche.s, on sprayed and unsprayed trees |
8,255 23,879 2.892 71 |
7,363 19, 777 |
Average number of same to inch |
2.686 |
|
Gain in favor of sprayed trees per cent. . |
||
The percentage of gain in the gross number of fruit buds shown by the sprayed trees is considerable, but it represents only partially the advantages derived from the spray. Examinations of the iiiispra3'ed trees showed that a large percentage of the fruit buds they had pro- duced in 1893 were imperfect, many of them being so poorl}" developed that fruit could not be expected from them. The following table shows the average number of imperf ecth" developed fruit buds on the sprayed trees to be 0.944 per linear inch of old wood, while on the unsprayed trees the average per inch of old wood was 1.249. This shows 32 per cent nior(> imperfect fruit liuds on the unsprayed than upon the sprayed trees at the close of the growing season of 1893.
100
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Tahi.e 17. — Excess of imperfectly developed fruit buds on unsprayed trees.
Records. |
Trees. |
|
Sprayed. |
Unsprayed. |
|
Length of old wood, measured in inches, on sprayed and unsprayed trees |
8,255 7,792 0.944 |
7,363 9,200 1.249 32 |
Average nunibtT of imperfectly developed fruit buds to inch of wood |
||
In comparing the number of well-developed fruit buds which were produced in 1893 by the sprayed and unspraA'ed trees, independent of the number of spur buds, it was learned that the number upon the sprayed trees Avas 20 per cent greater, as shown in the following table, than the nimiber produced by the unspraj-ed trees.
Table 18.
-Gain in aril-developed fruit buds, exclusive of spurs, on sjtrayed over unsprayed trees.
Records. |
Trees. |
|
Sprayed. |
Unsprayed. |
|
Ix-npth of old wood, measured in inches, on sprayed and unsprayed trees |
8,255 12,049 1.459 |
7,363 8,927 1.212 |
Gain in favor of sprayed trees per cent. . |
20 |
Taking the aggregate of all well-developed f I'uit l)uds, including the spurs, at an average of 3 l)uds each, the sprayed trees make a still better showing when contrasted with the unsprayed. The average number of all well-developed buds on the sprayed trees was 1.949 per linear inch of old wood, and on the unsprayed trees 1.437 per inch of old wood. This shows a gain of 35 per cent in well-developed fruit buds in favor of the sprayed trees. These facts are shown in tabular form as follows:
Tahle 19.
-Gain in spur buds and other well-developed fruit buds on sprayed over unsprayed trees.
Records.
Lenjfth of old wood, mea.sured in inches, on sprayed and unsprayed trewf. .
AKPregate of spur buds and of other well-developed fruit buns
A veraKC iinmbcr of sjune to inch
(iain in favor of .sprayed trees per cent
Trees.
Sprayed. Unsprayed.
8, 255
lfi,087
1.919
7,363 10, 577 1.437
One of the most striking contrasts shown ]>v the data obtained in thes(' field studies is that existing l)etween the numl)er of fruit spurs and spur buds produced by the sprayed and unsprayed trees in 1893. There was a net gain in the number of fruit spurs and spur l)uds on the spraye(l trees of 118 per cent above the numl)er produced l>y the unsprayed trees, a fact that should certainly appeal directly to the business faculties of every grower of peaches. It should also be remembered that these sprayed trees had carried a crop while pro-
COMPARATIVE DEVELOPMENT OF FRUIT BUDS AND SPURS. 101
ducing- these fruit spurs for the following- 3'ear, while the unspra3^ed trees had borne but few peaches. The facts here discussed are shown in the table that follows.
Table 20. — Gain in number of spur buds on ftprayed over unsprayed trees.
Records.
Trees.
Sprayed. Unsprayed.
Lenfrth of old wood, measured in inches, on sprayed and unsprayed trees...
Total number of spurs
Number of spur buds, estimatwl at 3 buds per spur
Average number of spurs jier inch
Average number of spur buds per inch
Gain in favor of sprayed trees per cent.
8,255 1,346 4,038 0.163 0.489 118
7,363 550 l,6ri0 0. 075 0. 224
Besides comparing the number of fruit buds produced in 1893 by the spra3^ed and unsprayed trees, it is desirable to contrast the bud- producing a])ilities of the upper and lower portions of these trees. It is generally conceded as desirable that the crop of a peach tree should be borne as largely as possible upon the lower limbs, and an3'thing tending to this result ma3' prove of value. Peach leaf curl, being due to a fungous parasite, has a tendency to do more injur3^ to the lower than to the upper portions of the trees affected. The atmospheric con- ditions are more favorable for the germination of spores and to fungous growth in the lower and more shaded portions of the tree, and the lower branches accumulate greater numbers of fungous spores than the upper branches. In the following table it is shown that the total number of fruit buds produced b3^ the lower limbs of the spra3'ed trees was 7 per cent greater than the number produced by the upper limbs, com- paring equal lengths of new wood in each case. On the unspra3^ed trees, however, the upper limbs produced 5 per cent more fruit buds per linear unit of new wood than the lower limbs. This shows a difference of 12 per cent in favor of the spra3"ed trees. The tabulated figures are as follows:
Table 21. — Gain in total number of fruit buds on lower limbs of sprayed trees over those of unsprayed trees, as compared with upper limbs of each, respectively.
Records. |
Trees. |
|
Sprayed. |
Unsprayed. |
|
10, 964 1,358 |
9 770 |
|
Length of spurs, estimated at 2 inches per spur |
554 |
|
12,322 |
10,324 |
|
Length of new wood, measured in inches, on lower limbs |
7,210 1,334 |
6,620 546 |
Length of spurs, estimated at 2 inches per spur |
||
8,544 |
7,166 |
|
Total number of fruit buds on upper limbs |
13,724 10, 155 1.114 1.189 7 |
11 901 |
7,876 |
||
1 153 |
||
1.099 |
||
Gain in favor of lower liml)s on sprayed trees per cent. . |
||
5 |
||
Difference in favor of sprayed trees do |
12 |
|
102
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE ANr> TREATMENT.
By contrasting only the well-developed and spur fruit buds it is learned that there was 1-1 per cent in the number of buds in favor of the lower limbs on the sprayed trees and -i per cent in favor of the upper limbs on the unsprayed trees. This showed a difference of 18 per cent in favor of the lower limbs of the sprayed trees. The entire comparison is given in the table which follows:
Table 22. — Gain in number of well-developed and spur fruit buds on the lower limbs of sprayed over unsprayed trees, as compared with upper limbs of each, respectively.
Records. |
Trees. |
|
Sprayed. |
Unsprayed. |
|
10,964 1,358 |
9,770 554 |
|
Length of spur.s, estimated at 2 inches per spur |
||
12,322 |
10,324 |
|
7,210 1,334 |
6,620 546 |
|
8,544 |
7,166 |
|
8,975 7,112 0.728 0. 832 14 |
0,340 4,237 |
|
0.614 |
||
0.591 |
||
Gain in favor of lower limbs on sprayed trees per cent. . |
||
4 |
||
Difference ir favor of sprayed trees — ". do — |
18 |
|
CHAPTER Vl.
INFLUENCE OF SPRAYS ON THE FRUITING OF THE TREES. THINNINft THE FRUIT OF SPRAYED TREES.
The ojonoral discussion of the spray work conducted in the Rio Bonito orchard will be found in Chapter IV, and it is therefore not necessar}" to review these matters here. As soon as growth was well started in this orchard in the spring of 1895, it became evident that the fruit would have to be thinned on a portion of the Lovell trees comprising the experiment block. The peaches were setting thickly on both spra3'ed and unsprayed trees, but as leaf curl developed, the young- fruit upon the control trees began to fall, while that upon the sprayed trees remained firmly attached and grew rapidly.
When the young peaches had reached the size of hickory nuts, and the pits were forming, the danger of dropping from curl had passed, and the thinning of fruit on overloaded trees was then undertaken. To enable the writer to make just comparisons of the merits of the various sprays in saving fruit, it became necessary to carefully record the amount and number of peaches thinned from all trees in the experi- ment block. Thinning fruit is an equalizing process, and to equalize the crop upon sprayed and unsprayed trees or upon trees treated with different sprays, would ))e to destroy the contrast in the amount of fruit arising from the use of different formula\ This would result in the loss of the verj^ facts which it was hoped to obtain from the experi- ments, unless records of the fruit thinned off were preserved. For the preservation of such records the following plan was adopted: Canvas sheets of large size, commonly used in the harvest of the almond crop in the same orchard, were spread beneath the trees to be thinned. The yoiuig peaches were allowed to fall upon the canvas as picked, and the canvas was moved as necessar3^ The fruit thus thinned was poured from the canvas into picking boxes beneath the tree from which it was thiimed. By this plan the fruit thinned from each tree was kept by itself. After an experiment row of 10 trees had been thinned, the fruit picked from each tree was separated weighed and the weight recorded. From 3 trees of the row sufficient fruit was now taken to amount to 25 pounds. The peaches in this 25 pounds were then counted, the inim])er entered with the other records of the row, and on this basis the average numbor of small peaches per pound for the row was determined. By nmltiplying the number of pounds of young peaches thinned from each tree by the average number of peaches per pound, as above obtained, the writer was able to determine quite accurately the number of peaches thinned from each tree of the row.
103
104
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
When the work on one experiment row was completed, the fruit from a second row of 10 trees was gathered, weighed, and counted in like manner, and this process was followed for each row of the block which required thinning.
From the held records thus gathered two tables have been carefully compiled, the first showing the actual weight of young peaches picked from each tree thinned in the block, and the second the computed number of peaches which these weights represent, as determined by the above-described method.
Table 23. — Weif/Jit of peaches thinned from tJte sprayed Lovell peach trees in the experi- ment block of lite Rio Bonito orcliard in the spring of 1S95. (a)
Row No. |
Actual weight in pounds of thinned peaches from trees Nos. — |
Total weight of peaches in row. |
Number . of peaches in 25 pounds. |
Average number of peaches per pound. |
Total number of |
|||||||||
1. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |
7. |
8. |
9. |
10. |
peaches per row. |
||||
1 |
16 |
16i |
18 |
33 |
20i |
22i |
27 |
45 |
50 |
35 |
Pounds. 282} |
482 |
19.28 |
5,442 |
2 |
||||||||||||||
3 |
27 |
22 |
15 |
20 |
221 |
21 |
30i |
m |
29 |
16 |
2194 |
550 |
22.00 |
4,829 |
4 |
||||||||||||||
.5 |
||||||||||||||
(i |
18 17 |
2 25 |
15 11 |
6 7i |
15 12 |
3 |
21 i 15 |
5 6 |
19 5i |
164 84 |
121 117 |
486 484 |
19.44 19. 36 |
2,352 |
7 |
2,265 |
|||||||||||||
8. |
||||||||||||||
9 |
36 30 |
21 30J |
15 24 |
131 10 |
18i 17 |
25 25 |
36 40 |
6i 19J |
6 17 |
204 |
185 2334 |
522 466 |
20. 88 18.64 |
3,863 |
10 |
4,352 |
|||||||||||||
11 |
||||||||||||||
12 |
31 23i |
13 Hi |
3 2 |
10 2i |
6 18 |
164 |
n n |
19i 2i |
m 34 |
224 54 |
1334 93 |
511 495 |
20. 44 19.80 |
2, 729 |
13 . . .. |
1,841 |
|||||||||||||
14 |
||||||||||||||
15 |
82 20i |
44 6 |
27 15 |
31 |
24 9i |
40 5 |
45 17 |
23 m |
29i 14 |
22 13 |
3674 121 |
528 496 |
21. 12 19.84 |
7,762 |
16 |
2,401 |
|||||||||||||
17 |
||||||||||||||
18 |
32 24 |
17 35 |
26 29 |
16 16 |
17 25 |
8 14 |
10 13 |
6 11 |
14 7 |
4 12 |
150 186 |
504 486 |
20.16 19.44 |
3,024 |
19 |
3,616 |
|||||||||||||
20 . |
||||||||||||||
21 |
68 33 |
48 51 |
26 35 |
28 21 |
481 35 |
49 58 |
58 41 |
21 22 |
294 29 |
614 60 |
4374 385 |
484 472 |
19.36 18.88 |
H,470 |
22 |
7,269 |
|||||||||||||
23 |
||||||||||||||
24 |
||||||||||||||
25 |
42 |
20 |
22 |
18 |
28 |
21 |
37 |
38 |
43 |
51 |
320 |
449 |
17.96 |
5, 747 |
26 |
||||||||||||||
27 |
34 18 |
34 21 |
35 32 |
11 29 |
14 31 |
35 33 |
30 34 |
22 30 |
21 63 |
23 50 |
259 341 |
495 421 |
19.80 16.84 |
5, 128 |
28 |
5,742 |
|||||||||||||
29 |
||||||||||||||
30 |
55 |
49 |
42 |
43 |
60 |
43 |
41 |
35 |
70 |
86 |
524 |
487 |
19. 48 |
10,208 |
31 |
||||||||||||||
32 |
31 47 |
15 51 |
18 34 |
20 40 |
22 22 |
18 39 |
27 33 |
8 29 |
159 381 |
514 483 |
20. 50 19.32 |
3,269 |
||
33 |
39 |
47 |
7,361 |
|||||||||||
34 |
||||||||||||||
35 |
62 23 |
03 35 |
23 14 |
io' |
57 11 |
42 31 |
46 26 |
.57 31 |
54 28 |
62 46 |
466 255 |
r.22 480 |
20. H8 19. 20 |
9,730 |
36 |
4,896 |
|||||||||||||
37 |
||||||||||||||
38 |
16 40 |
6 26 |
C 39 |
8 |
10 |
22 37 |
26 34 |
17 29 |
15 34 |
25 27 |
150 266 |
.553 547 |
22. 12 21.88 |
3, 318 |
39 |
5,820 |
|||||||||||||
41 |
54 |
52 |
27 |
24 |
26 |
12 |
27 |
8 |
36 |
'28 |
293 |
508 |
20. 32 |
5,953 |
42 . |
||||||||||||||
43 |
||||||||||||||
44 |
6 26 |
8 23 |
11 21 |
5 11 |
6 22 |
36 196 |
537 504 |
21.48 20. 16 |
773 |
|||||
45 |
17 |
20 |
16 |
27 |
14 |
3, 961 |
||||||||
47 . . |
|
|||||||||||||
48 |
7 |
6 |
3 |
5 |
8 |
4 |
33 |
511 |
20. 44 |
676 |
||||
49 . |
||||||||||||||
50 |
||||||||||||||
61 |
15 |
22 |
8 |
12 |
11 |
12 |
12 |
13 |
18 |
17 |
140 |
533 |
21.32 |
2,985 |
62 |
||||||||||||||
fA |
||||||||||||||
54 |
30 |
31 |
44 |
18 |
17 |
27 |
30 |
21 |
36 |
17 |
274 |
rm |
20. 32 |
5,668 |
55 |
||||||||||||||
60 |
22 21 |
-10 35 |
41 16 |
IH 20 |
17 11 |
27 19 |
30 20 |
21 29 |
36 82 |
17 37 |
272 240 |
520 647 |
20. 80 21.88 |
5,658 |
57 |
6,251 |
|||||||||||||
58 |
||||||||||||||
|
<i For jtliit of orchard sec p. 69; for s]>niys applied see j). 73.
THINNING THE FRUIT OF SPRAYED TREES.
105
By referring to the above table it will be seen that only those rows which were sprayed in the spring of 1895 were thinned, and that a portion of these required but little thinning. The reasons for this lie in the severe action of the disease upon the unsprayed rows and those sprayed with weak or unsatisfactor}^ spraj^s, in which cases the fruit fell from disease. The table shows the weight of thinned peaches j^er tree, the total weight of peaches thinned from the row, the number of peaches contained in 25 pounds, the average number of peaches per pound, and the total number of peaches thinned from the row.
In the table which follows the pounds have been reduced to show the num])er of peaches, the reduction being made according to the method already described. Comparison of the total number of peaches thinned from the separate rows, as given in the two tables, will show slight variations in the units column in several cases. These varia- tions arise from the gain or loss in fractions resulting from the use of the different methods which it Was necessary to employ in obtain- ing the figures shown in the two tables.
Table 24. — Number of peaches thinned from the sprayed Lovell peach trees in the experi- ment block of the Rio Bonito orchard in the spring of 1895. (a)
Row |
Number of peaches |
thinned from sprayed trees Nos |
- |
Total. |
|||||||
No. |
1. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |
7. |
8. |
9. |
10. |
|
1 |
289 |
318 |
347 |
636 |
390 |
434 |
521 |
868 |
964 |
675 |
5,442 |
2 |
|||||||||||
3 |
594 |
484 |
330 |
440 |
495 |
462 |
671 |
363 |
638 |
352 |
4,829 |
4 |
|||||||||||
5 |
|||||||||||
6 |
350 329 |
39 484 |
292 213 |
117 145 |
292 232 |
58 184 |
418 290 |
97 116 |
369 106 |
321 165 |
2,353 |
7 |
2,264 |
||||||||||
8 |
|||||||||||
9 |
752 559 |
438 569 |
313 447 |
282 186 |
386 317 |
522 466 |
752 746 |
136 363 |
125 317 |
157 382 |
3,863 |
10 |
4,352 |
||||||||||
11 |
|||||||||||
12 |
634 465 |
266 287 |
61 40 |
204 50 |
123 356 |
337 267 |
31 148 |
399 50 |
215 09 |
460 109 |
2,730 |
13 |
1,842 |
||||||||||
14 |
|||||||||||
15 |
1,732 407 |
929 119 |
570 298 |
655 69 |
507 188 |
845 99 |
950 337 |
486 347 |
623 278 |
465 258 |
7,762 |
16 |
2,400 |
||||||||||
17 |
|||||||||||
18 |
045 467 |
343 080 |
524 564 |
323 311 |
343 486 |
161 272 |
202 253 |
121 214 |
282 136 |
81 233 |
3,025 |
19 |
3,616 |
||||||||||
20 . |
|||||||||||
21 |
1,316 023 |
929 963 |
503 661 |
542 396 |
939 661 |
949 1,095 |
1,123 774 |
407 415 |
571 548 |
1,191 1,133 |
8,470 |
22 |
7,269 |
||||||||||
23 |
|||||||||||
24 |
|||||||||||
25 |
754 |
359 |
395 |
323 |
503 |
377 |
665 |
682 |
772 |
916 |
5,746 |
26 |
|||||||||||
27 |
673 303 |
673 354 |
693 539 |
218 488 |
277 522 |
693 656 |
594 573 |
436 505 |
416 1,061 |
455 842 |
5,128 |
28 29 |
6,743 |
||||||||||
30 |
1,071 |
955 |
818 |
838 |
1,169 |
838 |
799 |
682 |
i,364 |
1,675 |
10, 209 |
31 |
|||||||||||
32... |
637 908 |
308 985 |
370 657 |
411 773 |
452 425 |
370 753 |
555 638 |
164 560 |
3,267 |
||
33 |
753 |
908 |
7,360 |
||||||||
34 |
|||||||||||
35..^ 36 |
1,295 442 |
1,315 672 |
480 269 |
""i92' |
1,190 211 |
877 595 |
960 499 |
1,190 595 |
1,128 538 |
1,295 883 |
9,730 4,896 |
37 |
|||||||||||
38 |
332 875 |
133 569 |
133 853 |
177 |
221 |
487 810 |
575 744 |
376 635 |
332 744 |
653 691 |
3,319 |
39 |
5, 821 |
||||||||||
40 |
|||||||||||
41 |
1,097 |
1,057 |
549 |
488 |
528 |
244 |
549 |
163 |
711 |
569 |
5,955 |
42 |
a For plat ol orchard see p. 69; for sprays applied see p. 73.
106
PEACH LEAF CUKL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Table 24. — Number of peaches thinned from the sprayed Lovcll peach trees in the experi- ment block of tlie Jiio Bonito orchard in the spring of 1895 — Continued.
How |
Number of peaches thinned from sprayed trees Nos.— |
Total. |
|||||||||
No. |
1. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |
7. |
8. |
9. |
10. |
|
43 |
■ |
||||||||||
44 |
129 504 |
172 464 |
23G 423 |
107 222 |
129 444 |
773 |
|||||
45 |
343 |
403 |
323 |
544 |
282 |
3, 952 |
|||||
46 |
|||||||||||
47 |
|||||||||||
48 |
143 |
123 |
61 |
102 |
1G4 |
82 |
675 |
||||
49 |
|||||||||||
50 |
|||||||||||
51 |
320 |
469 |
171 |
256 |
235 |
256 |
256 |
277 |
384 |
362 |
2,986 |
52 |
|||||||||||
53 |
|||||||||||
54 |
610 |
691 |
894 |
366 |
345 |
549 |
610 |
427 |
732 |
345 |
5,569 |
55 |
|||||||||||
56 |
458 459 |
832 766 |
915 350 |
374 438 |
354 241 |
562 416 |
624 438 |
437 635 |
749 700 |
354 810 |
5,659 |
57 |
5,253 |
||||||||||
58 |
|||||||||||
t |
■■■ 1 |
i |
1 |
GATHERING FRUIT OF SPRAYED AND UNSPRAYED TREES.
The fruit of the Lovell variety ripened rapidl}^ in the Sacramento Valley after the middle of August, 1895. On the experiment trees a large portion of the crop was sufficiently matured for shipment to the canneries by the 20th of that month. By that date the plans had been made for the gathering of the crop, which >^erk was completed before the 1st of September. The fruit was gathered at two pick- ings, the second picking beginning shortl}^ after the close of the first. The crop was marketed in three ways:
(1) All pcu'fect peaches abovt^ a standard siz(^ adopted l)y the can- neries, and sufficiently firm to ])ear shipment by rail from Biggs to Oakland, Cal., a distance of about 110 miles, were sokl to a firm at the latter point at $30.80 per ton, f. o. b. cars at Biggs., This fruit comi)rised a])out 51 p(>r cent of the yield of the experiment block.
(2) All perfect peaches of canning size which were too mature to bear the delay and long shipment by rail to Oakland were ship])(>d to a cannery at (^hico, Cal., a distance of about 80 miles. This fruit brought $80 per ton, f. o. b. cars at Biggs. It comprised about 80 per cent of the yield of the experiment block.
(3) Such fruit as was below cannery size, ovei'mature, or impcM'fect in any ivspect was sent to the diying ground to be dried. In the cal- culations of the present work this fi'uit is valued at tiiree-fourths of a cent \n\Y [)()un(l in the green stat(>. This is less than the etjuivalent of dried fruit was worth at the time of curing after allowing for the cost of drying. 'Ilie fruit sent to the drying ground rcpi'csiMited about 10 per cent of the yi(^ld of the experiment block.
The work of gathering, weighing, and grading (he ciop of lh(> (^\p(M"iment rows was cai'efully systematized. As before shown, the expciiincnl block was 2<» frees wide from east (o west, and through tlir cciitci' from north to south a (lri\('wa\ was made, so that the rows
Bull. 20, D,v. Veg Phys & Patn. U S. Dept of Agr,.u.tur
Plate X.
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE X.
Experiments at Biggs, Cal. (Bordeaux mixture.) Fruit gathered from row 15 of the experiment block of the Rio Bonito orchard in the summer of 1895. The formula for the spray used on this row was 6 pounds copper sulphate, 15 pounds quicklime, 45 gallons of water. The 10 trees of the row matured 4,351 pounds of tine peaches, which ^re shown in the picking boxes. The trees of the adjoining unsprayed row. No. 14, bore only 928 pounds. The value of the fruit matured on row 15 was $60.02; on row 14 it was $13.24, a net gain from spraying 10 trees of $46 after allowing for the cost of spraying. This gain resulted after more than one-third of the peaches had been thinned from the sprayed row, while none had been thinned from row 14. The total number of peaches set by the trees of row 15 was 21,272, by those of row
14 it was 2,855. The comparative average net gain shown by the spray used on row
15 was G19 per cent.
GATHEKING FRUIT OF SPRAYED AND UNSPRAYED TREES. 107
on either side were 10 trees long from east to west. One picker was assigned to each tree of the row across the block, thus making ten pickers on each side of the drive, or twenty in all, and an extra man was assigned as superintendent of the twenty pickers, to see that all instruc- tions were carefully carried out. Every man was instructed to leave all fruit he picked beneath the tree from which it was gathered, pick- ing boxes having been previously distributed for this purpose.
The work of picking began at the south end of the experiment block. When the fruit which was sufficiently matured had been gathered and placed in the boxes beneath a tree, the picker proceeded to the next tree north, thus following the same north-and-south row until he had passed entirely through the block, and when each man had thus completed his north-and-south row the entire block had been picked over, the fruit being beneath the trees from which it came. The first and second pickings were conducted in this manner, but the second was not begun until after the first was completed and- the gathered fruit had been removed from beneath the trees.
The process of collecting the fruit of the first picking began as soon as the pickers had completed an east-and-west row and had proceeded to the next row toward the north. Four men were cmploj^ed to collect and weigh the peaches — two to collect the fruit in the orchard and two to weigh, count, and keep the records. The fruit was brought from the east and from the west to the central driveway on a low plat- form wagon drawn by one horse. The boxes of fruit gathered from the 10 trees of each experiment row were piled at the side of the driveway, close to the last tree of the row. The boxes of fruit from each tree were also distinguished by means of cards ])earing the number of the tree from under which the boxes were taken (PI. X).
The weighing began as soon as the fruit from the 10 trees of an experiment row had been piled at the side of the central drive. Plat- form scales were placed on a level base close to the fruit boxes, and the fruit from each tree of the row was weighed separately. The gross weight was recorded for each tree, as well as the number of picking boxes. The average weight of the picking boxes used was afterwards carefully determined, and from these data the net weight of fruit was ascertained and tabulated for each tree of each row of the block. After the weight of fruit for each tree of an experiment row was thus learned, 100 pounds of peaches were weighed out from typical l)oxes of several trees of the row. The number of peaches in this 100 pounds of fruit was then ascertained by counting, the numbcn- ))eing recorded with the other data for the row. The fruit of all the experiment rows was weighed and the average size of the peaches determined In^ count- ing, as here indicated.
Following close after the weighers came five or six sorters. These men graded the fruit, according to the requirements already outlined, into three classes — one for an Oakland cannery, one for a Chico can- nery, and a third class for drying. These tliree classes constituted
108
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
really Ijiit two (jualities of fruit — a first quality for canning, and a second quality for drying. After the fruit of a row was graded a careful count of the number of picking boxes of each class of fruit was made, and the numbers recorded. From these figures were deter- mined the proportions of the total yield of the row which belonged to the difl'erent classes of fruit. The same process of picking, collecting, weighing, counting, grading, and recording was followed for the second picking as for the first.
In the following table are shown the net weights of fruit gathered at the first picking from each tree of the entire block of 58 experi- ment rows, with the total weight for each row.
Table 25. — Weight of peaches of first picking from the Lovell trees of the experiment block of the Rio Bonito orchard, gailiered in the fall of 1895.
Row No. |
Weight of fniit. in pounds, gathered at first picking from trees Nos.— |
Total net weight of fruit in row. |
Number of trees in row. |
Average weight |
|||||||||
1. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |
7. |
8. |
9. |
10. |
per tree. |
|||
1 |
75 51 164 69 42 190 88 93 259 216 65 229 232 121 492 157 133 383 251 61 426 3fU 22 65 380 70 345 |
109 89 121 71 74 75 267 29 271 275 71 166 192 55 357 112 56 241 324 99 438 524 80 50 236 121 400 385 36 198 152 139 |
142 122 140 129 36 193 139 22 162 332 30 111 200 114 538 303 55 322 365 110 470 539 88 65 386 71 438 573 98 237 127 132 159 94 237 129 69 140 330 65 274 128 108 246 296 64 139 137 61 214 277 126 62 449 97 314 277 99 |
207 137 147 31 56 175 169 11 202 89 86 191 70 109 253 87 52 242 144 109 405 257 54 48 180 16 116 298 64 258 134 252 401 53 27 166 |
147 54 157 57 73 228 181 39 218 219 83 304 161 47 474 298 88 341 331 32 498 544 62 43 426 19 166 400 60 323 149 315 250 107 563 188 198 273 |
118 111 179 120 140 97 183 151 248 240 107 154 203 114 474 216 119 233 304 27 431 556 95 52 424 62 425 489 90 219 179 218 373 148 491 354 84 234 384 49 200 145 45 |
262 90 289 87 159 212 180 115 233 249 114 247 209 91 573 451 58 296 245 32 617 469 75 48 565 109 .513 489 33 296 111 209 |
190 140 241 74 100 212 222 39 234 297 41 168 187 114 340 235 89 144 201 22 2.52 324 38 56 459 90 290 379 95 318 199 298 |
180 165 200 69 64 237 169 53 153 407 106 240 145 47 453 291 44 288 189 23 343 332 105 24 285 49 200 421 25 236 215 299 387 127 424 315 138 274 339 114 314 299 .52 182 326 103 190 151 74 295 299 94 90 29-1 92 268 327 51 |
140 48 49 34 66 204 110 16 121 169 70 147 77 32 273 198 21 119 180 .59 427 340 53 90 430 45 217 379 40 342 215 243 208 146 448 310 143 403 414 222 400 211 84 220 286 53 228 181 32 :{.50 310 132 5-1 285 94 .50^1 471 52 |
Pounds. 1,570 1,007 1,687 741 810 1,813 1,708 568 2,101 2, 553 833 1,957 1,676 844 4, 227 2,348 715 2, 609 2,594 574 4,307 4,275 672 547 3,771 658 3,116 4, 120 576 2,615 1,5,52 2,282 3,189 1, 102 4,034 2,()81 1,125 2,4.52 2,804 936 3,464 1,924 6.55 1,742 3,288 727 1,572 1,347 695 2,114 2,W1 1,067 753 3,797 1,024 3.298 3.412 859 |
10 9.5 10 9.8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9.4 . 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9.8 10 8.6 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9. 6 10 10 9. 5 10 10 |
Pounds. 157 |
2. |
106 |
||||||||||||
3 |
168.7 |
||||||||||||
4 |
75.6 |
||||||||||||
5. |
81 |
||||||||||||
6 |
181.3 |
||||||||||||
7 |
170.8 |
||||||||||||
8 |
56.8 |
||||||||||||
9 |
210.1 |
||||||||||||
10 |
255.3 |
||||||||||||
11. |
83.3 |
||||||||||||
12 |
208.2 |
||||||||||||
13 |
167.6 |
||||||||||||
14.. . . |
84.4 |
||||||||||||
15 |
422.7 |
||||||||||||
16 |
234.8 |
||||||||||||
17.. |
71.5 |
||||||||||||
18 |
260.9 |
||||||||||||
19 |
259. 4 |
||||||||||||
20 |
57.4 |
||||||||||||
21 |
430.7 |
||||||||||||
22 |
427.5 |
||||||||||||
23 |
67.2 |
||||||||||||
24 |
54.7 |
||||||||||||
25 |
377.1 |
||||||||||||
26 |
65.8 |
||||||||||||
27 |
311.6 |
||||||||||||
28 |
313 29 188 71 177 |
412.6 |
|||||||||||
29 |
57.6 |
||||||||||||
30 |
261.5 |
||||||||||||
31... . |
155.2 |
||||||||||||
32 |
228.2 |
||||||||||||
33 |
283 , 271 87 ' 128 393 1 291 298 ' 213 80 96 246 91 283 1 154 |
428 1 429 79 ; 133 597 590 365 ' 3(k5 127 1 163 284 341 439 461 53 47 |
325.4 |
||||||||||
34 |
110. 2 |
||||||||||||
35 |
469 |
||||||||||||
36 |
268.1 |
||||||||||||
37 |
112.6 |
||||||||||||
38 |
245.2 |
||||||||||||
39 |
850.5 |
||||||||||||
40 |
1*5 412 287 92 171 328 52 130 97 77 250 26-J 162 140 337 |
123 2(W 176 8.5 150 220 87 149 155 91 284 330 99 68 457 l(i6 \m 400 64 |
59 451 157 32 |
69 430 179 32 |
93.6 |
||||||||
41 |
410 223 97 139 413 42 105 |
305 119 28 231 363 73 169 |
346.4 |
||||||||||
42 |
192.4 |
||||||||||||
43 |
65.5 |
||||||||||||
44 |
163 70 164 |
174.2 |
|||||||||||
45 |
222 107 118 106 95 |
510 324 90 56 228 116 117 79 78 1 60 |
328. 8 |
||||||||||
46 |
72.7 |
||||||||||||
47 |
157.2 |
||||||||||||
48 |
182 1 142 8(; : 41 118 229 251 193 25 (A 44 73 392 408 137 67 244 :{81 313 3'.»9 83 46 |
134. 7 |
|||||||||||
49 |
r)9. 5 |
||||||||||||
50 |
147 ' 107 120 263 1 247 207 135 147 84 lft5 54 ; 63 443 311 1 421 HO 45 1.53 415 294 181 359 ' 254 2«2 92 1 86 195 |
211.4 |
|||||||||||
51 |
261. 1 |
||||||||||||
62 |
100. 7 |
||||||||||||
53 |
78.4 |
||||||||||||
64 |
379. 7 |
||||||||||||
,% |
9:1 336 |
102. 4 |
|||||||||||
66 |
347. 1 |
||||||||||||
67 |
3:i0 |
341.2 |
|||||||||||
68 |
91 |
hf).« |
|||||||||||
|
GATHERING FRUIT OF SPRAYED AND UNSPRAYED TREES. 109
At the side of the total column in the preceding table is given a col- umn showing the number of trees in each row. The total amount of fruit gathered at the first picking from each row has been divided by the number of trees in the row, giving the average amount of fruit picked per tree for each row of the block. This average is shown in the right-hand column.
In the table which follows is given the net weight of fruit gathered at the second picking from each tree of the block not picked clean at the first picking.
Table 26. — Weight of peaches of second picking from the Lovell trees of the experiment block of the Rio Bonito orchard, gathered in the fall of 1895.
Row No. |
Weight of fruit, in pounds, gathered at second picking trom trees Nos. — |
Total net weight of fruit in row. |
Number of trees in row. |
Average weight |
|||||||||
1. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |
7. |
8. |
9. |
10. |
per tree. |
|||
1 |
54 25 79 12 |
121 6 124 |
41 12 33 44 13 60 99 8 26 25 5 |
133 99 151 39 90 32 28 |
112 |
127 |
132 25 26 4 |
112 41 162 26 |
242 67 108 34 23 3S 30 IS 26 63 IS 15 14 12 22 6 7 14 13 5 53 S 2 4 ..... 16 39 |
168 68 187 51 37 43 140 20 66 90 31 54 55 18 38 58 9 30 17 18 33 80 12 13 70 "5i' 62 5 385 148 210 218 57 80 53 44 37 29 23 100 25 22 32 33 14 ..... 5 10 |
Pounds. 1,242 343 1,109 255 236 452 517 107 357 415 136 146 184 84 124 152 43 91 118 74 136 146 40 52 217 14 100 137 26 2,526 786 1,136 1,082 222 840 393 245 424 439 173 566 198 84 265 203 47 102 92 61 55 91 64 47 266 75 92 91 43. |
10 9.5 10 9.8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9.4 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9.S 10 8.6 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9.6 10 10 9.5 10 10 |
Pounds. 124 2 |
2 |
36 1 |
||||||||||||
3. |
151 "ei' 83 120 |
88 45 12 20 |
110 9 |
||||||||||
4 |
26 |
||||||||||||
5 |
23.6 45 2 |
||||||||||||
6 |
49 00 11 31 29 7 11 23 19 33 20 11 23 10 7 12 11 6 6 23 5 |
8 9 10 16 10 5 12 13 6 6 11 '"io' 6 3 8 28 |
109 31 27 82 76 31 41 35 8 7 11 5 |
10 ""is" " "'is' "is' "28" |
|||||||||
7 |
51 7 |
||||||||||||
8 |
10 7 |
||||||||||||
9 |
14 16 11 |
96 19 |
"87' |
35 7 |
|||||||||
10 |
41 5 |
||||||||||||
11 |
36 6 |
||||||||||||
12 |
13 |
15 5 |
|||||||||||
13 |
21 "is" IS 11 "ie' 15 13 19 |
"'s' |
23 |
18 4 |
|||||||||
14 |
8 4 |
||||||||||||
15 |
12 4 |
||||||||||||
16 |
15 2 |
||||||||||||
17.. |
4 3 |
||||||||||||
18 |
14 "'5' |
9 1 |
|||||||||||
19 |
31 22 |
14 4 12 |
11 |
11 S |
|||||||||
20 |
7 4 |
||||||||||||
21 |
13 6 |
||||||||||||
22. . .. |
14 6 |
||||||||||||
23 |
13 |
7 5 24 6 |
"is' 29 "ie" |
4 |
|||||||||
24. |
6 11 |
5 2 |
|||||||||||
26 |
28 |
32 |
21 7 |
||||||||||
26 |
1 4 |
||||||||||||
27 |
9 19 3 191 107 145 192 62 2.51 75 31 62 142 32 103 73 "'is' 16 12 11 |
8 |
10 |
||||||||||
28 |
17 5 201 27 10 3 |
13 7 |
|||||||||||
29 . .. |
1 295 33 150 212 62 63 119 "so' 108 30 149 23 9 60 18 |
'267' 85 81 126 |
12 199 103 113 104 |
2 6 |
|||||||||
30 |
270 40 200 113 8 89 6 12 23 26 15 47 21 7 16 19 3 10 11 5 4 12 |
138 27 107 14 13 35 "'g' 24 23 |
141 23 30 19 6 94 72 24 "il' |
439 193 90 81 14 146 ""si' 30 |
252 6 |
||||||||
31 |
78 6 |
||||||||||||
32 |
113 6 |
||||||||||||
33 34 |
110.4 22 2 |
||||||||||||
35 36 37 |
"42' 55 77 |
30 11 44 63 |
52 15 27 27 67 25 62 38 13 41 17 7 32 15 13 10 13 12 12 55 18 17 30 |
97.6 39.3 24 5 |
|||||||||
38 |
42 4 |
||||||||||||
39 . |
54 8 |
||||||||||||
48 48 |
17 3 |
||||||||||||
41 |
15 13 7 15 17 2 6 "9' "is" "io' |
21 5 12 9 26 9 9 12 2 10 10 3 9 18 26 |
21 "si' S3 "25' 6 5 11 15 6 |
56 6 |
|||||||||
42 |
19 8 |
||||||||||||
43 |
14 43 |
"24" |
8 4 |
||||||||||
44 |
26 5 |
||||||||||||
45 |
20 3 |
||||||||||||
46 .. |
4 7 |
||||||||||||
47 |
9 IS 17 |
10 2 |
|||||||||||
48 |
30 10 14 25 6 9 17 16 27 |
9 2 |
|||||||||||
49 |
6 1 |
||||||||||||
50... |
5 5 |
||||||||||||
51 |
11 9 10 92 11 32 |
9 1 |
|||||||||||
52 |
6.4 |
||||||||||||
53 |
7 19 |
"2i' 4 "is' |
4 9 |
||||||||||
54... |
34 |
20 6 |
|||||||||||
55 |
7 5 |
||||||||||||
56 |
3 1 |
13 ..... |
""ie" |
9 7 |
|||||||||
57 |
""26" |
26 6 |
9.1 |
||||||||||
58 |
4.3 |
||||||||||||
110
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
The total jield of the trees and rows of the experiment block is shown in the following table, which was compiled from the preceding records of fruit gathered at the first and second pickings.
Table 27. — Total wcifjht uf peaches of first and second pickings gathered from the Lovell trees of the experiment block of the Rio Bonito orchard in tlie fall of 1895. (a)
Row No.
Total weight in pounds of fruit gathered at first and second pickings from trees Nos.
1.
6.
9.
10. Total.
1 2 3 4 .') 6 7. 8. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16, 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25, 26, 27, 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 5:i 54 55 56 57 58
129
76 243
81
42 239 148 104 290 245
72 240 255 140 525 177 144 406 261
68 438 395
28
71 403
75 345 313
29 458 111 377 396
95 482 304
92 269 309 150 459 308
99 187 347
55 140 108
82 254 276 162 147 3.56
93 339 331
91
230
95 245
71
74
83 276
39 287 285
76 178 205
61 363 123
56 251 330 102 446 552
80
56 247 121 409 404
39 389 259 284 463 190 542 288 127 153 296 155 371 249
85 168 236
99 160 155
91 284 330
99
(18 478 170 361 418
(^4
183 134 173 173
49 2.53 238
30 188 357
35 111 221 114 556 321
66 322 381 125 483 558
88
65 414
71 446 573
99 532 160 282 371 156 300 248
(i9 220 438
95 423 151 117 306 314
64 148 155
78 214 288 135
72 .541 108 346 277
340 236 298
70 146 197 197
11 216 105
97 191
70 117 253
87
52 256 144 109 410 257
67
48 180
16 116 298
64 525 219 333 527
53
186 82 243
259
54 308
57 134 311 301
39 314 238
83 304 184
47 474 298
88 341 362
54 498 544
62
43 4.58
19 166 417
65 524 176 325 2.53 107 593 199 242 336
107 499 1.57
46 206 222 107 118 136 105 161 288 141 114 460
96 442 359
92
69 430 179
32
70 534
90 228 117
78 107 247 147
54 311
45 294 254
86
245 111
267 165 152 117 183 151 248 327 107 167 203 114 474 216 119 233 364
27 431 556
95
52 424
62 425 489 102 418 282 331 477 148 543 369 111 261 451
74 262 183
58 205 341
63 148
94
73 130 220
96
75 47() 171 198 312 195
394 115
315
91 159 321 211 142 315 325 145 288 244
99 580 462
63 296 259
36 629 469
82
53 589 115 513 489
33 434 138 316 442
92 632 365 135 308 462
53 425 236 104 154 430
44 111 182
95 118 251
43
44 402 137 244 313 109
302 181 403 100 100 222 222
52 234 '297
69 168 187 127 340 263
89 144 212
22 252 324
38
74 488
96 306 379
95 459 222 328 448 139 684 437 187 341 475
47 326 124
40 210 389
82 178 154
43 239 203
66
82 426
93 381 425
52
422 232 308 103
87 275 199
71 179 530 184 255 159
59 475 297
51 302 202
28 396 340 107
28 285
52 222 460
25 675 408 389 468 141 570 315 138 305 369 114 335 •299
52 213 359 103 215 157
79 306 314 100
90 328
92 281 327
62
308 116. 236
85 103 247 250
36 187 259 101 201 132
50 311 256
30 149 197
77 460 426
65 109 500
45 268 441
51 727 363 453 426 203 528 363 187 440 443 245 500 236 106 258 319
67 228 181
32 356 315 142
54 285
94 504 487
52
2,812 1,350 2,796
996 1,046 2, 265 2,225
675 2,458 2,968
969 2,103 1,860
928 4,3.51
2, .500 7.58
2,700 2,712
648 4,443 4,421
712
599 3,988
672 3,216 4,263
602 5,141 2,338 3,418 4, 271 1,324 4,874 3,074 1,370 2,876 3,243 1,109 4,030 2, 122
739 2,007 3,491
774 1,674 1,439
756 2,169 2,732 1,131
800 4,063 1,099 3,390
3, .VKi 902
a For plat of orchard see p. 69; for sprays applied see p. 73.
A.s idi'ciuly said, after the weight of fruit for each tree of ii row had been ascertjiined and recorded, the number of peaches in 100 pounds of this fruit was determined by coiniting. From several picking boxes of fruit, coming fiom diU'ereiit ti'ees of the row, was weighed out 100 pounds of peaches fairly representing th(^ fruit of the row. The jx'aches of this 100 pounds wer(» then carefully co\uited and the nunihri- recorded. This was done both foi the tirst and second pick-
GATHERING FRUIT OF SPRAYED AND UNSVRAYED TREES, 111
ings !ind for the sprayed and unsprayed rows. Where less than 100 pounds of fruit was gathered the number of peaches per 100 pounds was determined by counting a less weight of fruit, usually 50 pounds. The following table gives the results of this work for both hrst and second pickings:
Table 28. — Number of peaches per 100 pounds; weight, of fruit gathered; and number of peaches thinned, gathered, and set by the trees of each row in tlie experiment bhcJ: of the Rio Bonito orchard in 1895. (a)
Nmnber of
peaches in 100
pounds.
259 295 285 300 303 278 280 282 288 282 292 283 293 306 309 294 296 300 289 290 308 320 296 292 284 280 276 291 277 292 304 294 291 290 325 285 282 282 289 300 284 303 293 309 309 303 2«9 308 292 287 299 303 300 306 295 293 •298 282
317
310
335
323
324
326
322
323
313
316
321
312
6 324
362
317
6 327
6 339
6 340
6 332
6 314
6 362
6 344
6 356
6 368
6 354
6 360
6 370
6 360
313
326
311
335
330
345
332
330
330
328
312
339
335
6 304
337
346
6 330
356
6 324
6 312
6 366
6 356
6 336
6 325
6 352
6 334
6 384
6 370
6 360
Pounds of fruit —
1,570 1,007 1,687
741
810 1,813 1,708
568 2,101 2, 653
833 1,957 1,676
844 4,227 2,348
715 2,609 2,594
574 4,307 4,275
672
547 3,771
658 3,116 4,126
576 2,615 1,552 2,282 3,189 1,102 4,034 2,681 1,125 2, 452 2,804
936 3,464 1,924
655 1,742 3,288
727 1,572 1,347
695 2,114 2,641 1,067
753 3,797 1,024 3,298 3,412
859
CO
1,242
343
1,109
255
236
452
517
107
357
415
136
146
184
84
124
152
43
91
118
74
136
146
40
52
217
14
100
137
26
2,526
786
1,136
1,082
222
840
393
245
424
439
173
566
198
84
265
203
47
102
92
61
55
91
64
47
266
75
92
91
43
Number of peaches gath- ered at —
4, 066 2,971 4,808 2,-223 2,454 5,040 4,782 1,602 6, 051 7,199 2,432 5,538 4,911 2,583
13, 061 6,903 2,116 7, 827 7,496 1,665
13, 266
13, 680 1,989 1,597
10,710 1,842 8,600
12,006 1,596 7,636 4,718 6,709 9,280 3, 196
13,111 7, 641 3,173 6,915 8,104 2,808 9,838 5, 830 1,919 5, 383
10, KiO 2, 203 4,543 4,149 2,029 6,067 7,897 3,233 2,259
11,619 3,021 9, 663
10,168 2,422
cc
3, 577
1,087
3,438
854
762
1,464
l,68f,
345
1,153
1,299
430
469
574
272
449
482
140
308
401
246
427
529
138
185
799
50
360
507
94
7,906
2,562
3,533
3,625
733
2,898
1,305
809
1,399
1,440
540
1,919
663
255
893
702
155
363
298
190
201
324
215
153
936
250
353
337
155
Number of peaches —
7,643 4, 058 8,246 3,077 3,216 6,504 6,467 1,947 7, 204 8, 498 2, S{i2 6,007 5, 485 2, 855
13,510 7,385 2, 256 8,135 7,897 1,911
13, 693
14,209 2, 127 1,782
11,509 1,892 8,960
12, 513 1,090
15, 542 7,280
10, 242
12,905 3,929
16,009 8,946 3,982 8,314 9,544 3, 348
11,757 6, 493 2,174 6, 276
10, 862 2, 358 4,906 4,447 2, 219 6,268 8,221 3,448 2,412
12, 555 3,271
10,016
10,505 2,577
OS:
u o
5,442 '4,'829
2, 352 2, 265
3, 863 4, 352
2, 730 1,841
7,762 2,401
3,024 3,616
8,470 7, 269
5,747
5,128 5, 742
10, 208
3,269 7,360
9,730 4,896
3,318 5,821
5,953
773 3,951
675
2, 985
5, 568
5, 659 5, 251
13, 085 4,058
13,075 3,077 3,216 8, 856 8,732 1,947
11,067
12, 850 2, 862 8,737 7,326 2, 855
21,272 9,786 2, 256
11,159
11,613 1,911
22, 163
21,478 2,127 1,782
17, 256 1,892
14,088
18, 255 1,690
25, 750 7,280
13,51]
20, 265 3,929
25, 739
13,841' 3,982
11, 632
15, 365 3, 348
17, 710 6,493 2,174 7,049
14,813 2, 358 4,906 5, 122 2,219 6,268
11,206 3,448 2,412
18. 123 3,271
15, 675
15, 7.56 2,577
10
9.5 10
9.8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
9.4 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
9.8 10
8.6 10 10 10
8
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
9.0 10 10
9. 5 10 10
Average number of peaches set
per tree.
1,308
1,307
886 873
1,107 1,285
929 733
2, 127 979
1,116 1, 151
2,216 2, 148
1,726
1,409 1,825
2, 575
1,351 2,068
2,993 1,384
1,103 1,921
1,771 649
705 1,481
491 512
627 1,120
1,812
1,6.50 1,576
o For plat of orchard sec p. 69; for sprays applied sec p. 73.
6 Number calculated from a less weight than 100 i)ounds, usually from .50 pounds
112 PEACH LEAF CURL! ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Following the figures in the above table which .show the number of peaches in 100 pounds of fruit are those giving the num})er of pounds of fruit gathered at the first and second pickings. From tliese four columns of figures has been calculated the number of peaches gathered from the trees of each row of the block for ))oth the first and second pickings. By adding these numbers the total number of peaches matured by the trees of each row was quite accurately determined. To this amount is now added the number of peaches thinned from the trees, where thinning was required, the grand total representing the number of peaches firmly set by the trees of each row. By dividing this grand total by the number of trees in a row it has been possible to show the average number of peaches set per tree on both sprayed and unsprayed trees, and for every row in the experiment block.
COMPARATIVE QUANTITY, QUALITY, AND CASH VALUE OF FRUIT FROM SPRAYED AND UNSPRAYED TREES.
(Pis. XlandXII.)
The actual yield in pounds of peaches, the (quality, and the ca.sh value of the fruit produced by the sprayed and unspra^'cd trees of the experiment rows of the Rio Bonito orchard in the season of 1895 are fully and accurately shown in the table which follows. This table gives a full record of the yield as it was taken in the orchard, and the results are of the greatest value from a practical standpoint, convey- ing an accurate idea of the cash gain resulting from this spray work. If the read(>r will compare the average value of the fruit produced l)y the sprayed trees of row 21, for example, with that of the fruit pro- duced by the unsprayed trees of row 20. some conception of the po.ssil)le gains resulting from thorough spraying may be ol)tained. In studying this table, it should be remembered that the results shown were obtained from the use of 35 different formuhv and sprays. Some of the sprays were of little value, others of medium value, etc., hence the gains shown for the entire block are far below what they would have been had the trees of each of the rows been sprayed with such .spiays as those used upon rows 21, 22, or others of the better-yielding rows of the block.
DESCRIPTION OF PLATP: XL
Experiments at Biggs, Cal. (Sulj)hur, lime, and salt.) Looking west between rows 2 and 3, May 14, 1895. Itow 2 was unsprayed; row 3 was sprayed before blooming with 15 i)()unds sulphur, 20 pounds lime, 5 pounds salt, and 45 gallons of water. The average value of fruit matured per tree in row 2 was !fl.96 and in row 3 §3.90. The spray used showed a net gain from the treatment, as determined by the compar- ative value of the i)eaches set by the trees of both rows, of 210 per cent (p. 117).
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Pnys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agncultute.
Plate XI.
= $
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XII.
Experiments at Biggs, Cal. (Sulphur and liuie.) Looking west ])et\veen rows 5) and 10, INIay 14, 1895. Botli rows were sprayed before blooming. Row 9 was treated with 10 iiounds sulphur, 20 pounds lime, and 45 gallons of water, and row 10 with 10 pounds suljihur, 8 pounds lime, and 45 gallons of water. Row 8, adjoining row 9 at the south, and row 11, adjoining row 10 at the north, were untreated. The aver- age value of fruit matured per tree on row 9 was 13.35, and on row 8 only 91 cents. The average value of fruit matured per tree on row 10 was $3.90, and on row 11, $1.35. As determined by the comparative value of the peaches set by the trees, the spray used on njw 9 showed a net gain over row 8 of 457 per cent, and that used on row 10 showed a net gain over row 11 of 337 per cent (p. 117). It may be seen that the lower limbs are not as thickly covered with foliage where the sulphur sprays are used as where the copper sprays are used. This is especially true where the former is applied too late or too strong. (See PI. XI.)
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path , U. S. Dept. of Agricultur
Plate XII.
COMPARATIVE QUANTITY, QUALITY, AND VALUE OF FRUIT. 113
<3^
■^901% paXuadsufi
•saoj^ paXTSids
• ^ • COiO
CO |
CO CO |
coco |
COCJ |
0-* «>co |
coco |
to to |
Sit |
•A\oj ui 888JJ JO jaqnmM
ooiooiooooooooJooooooooooooooooo
t-HCO'^OOrHOOt^'^C>1i/:)C^OOlC'^(NC<I^"^lCOtOCOtOQOt*lOiOr^CO
iOOOiC»CrHCOrHiCOiOCOrt*(NOrH:OCCOOOd^COOOOC^f-(rH
^woDaico'^"rHoaicoo^coaiiocooT3-c:>y3ioairHi-HOiGO'^oicot^oD
CO iH CO 1-1 i-H CO CO CO CO r-( <N O) iH to CO IH CO CO tO tO iC ■* lO
OvArHC0t0rHt>.i-f^(N^iO<N'<**C0C030C^»HC0Wt000i-(t^i-IOvCas t^COtOtOrfftMOlOOOOCOOC^t^tHt^C^COlO-^aiOiCiOtNT-HCOTHlOOO
^'^rH COO rH'^TJHt>^^COo6oGiOI>i/iailOCOt^cOci'^"cOCOtdcOrHOc4 (N iH C^ i-( rH C^ C^ (N C^ iH i-( CO i-l i-l rH COCO (M C^ CO
COOOlCCOOOOtO-t^OSOOQOO^COirtCO-^OOCOtOtOOit^ast^C^t^t^iO rHtOiOt003C^^COCO(NT}<05C^T)'OlO>OtOtOCOC^a>'^05r-(I>tHOOTf
^GOiOC^rHrH-^C^ 'vOO*^odl>iriasrH'^'^CO"^*»Ci-HTfCOC^-^t^ai'T' rH 1-1 rHiH i-l i-l C^ M C^ i-l rt .
iCOOOC^iOt^Ot^^'^OiC'T^I^'T^tOC^'frH.-tXX'-IQOCOC^lOOiC'^ tOtOOOCOrHt^OO^COTJiOi-t-^tOC^COl^'-OXt^tOXCOXJt^OO^l^OO
^TlH r-H C^" r-I r-J c4 CO 'cOOrHC^ri '»OCO *CO*-^ *tJ*tjI,-; 'iOrH"^tO
t^t^-'^Oi-^r)*iCrHtO»OtOt^XtOC^OiasiC»-l(Ni/5-^Oi'^>Ot-ll^t^CO -/•^lOt^OtOrHCOC^ lOiOCOrH'^C^XXlCCOtOtOCOOCOi— l"tJ<C^OCOCn ^t01>iCI>I>«OtDvCtOmiOIMOTl<eOIMCOC^r-INr-(CO<N(Nt~(NT»<Or-l
l"^ rn" rH i-Ti-T i-Tth" tH i-T Cvfr-T r-Ti-T 0^" cf iH~ r-Tc-r
luuj JO gniBA iw}ox
•panod J9d SJU30 f X ?B 'XjauuBO puBi^iBo Joj }nuj JO aniBA
•pnnod jad SJU30 It IB 'Xjauuuo ooiqo joj jmjj jo aniuA
■punod jad juao sqiJnoj-aaaq} jb 'SaiAjp aoj jmjj jo eni^A
•iCiauuBO puBi -•5[vo JOJ jmj^
•iCjauuBO ODiqo joj :iinj^
^ast^ast^oo-^totoaja^toc^ooscooiOirH-^toxtoxicici o5-t*t^cooc^xtO'MiCxa5aixtoi^:oor^oa>X'0 0oi^rHTP';
.QiOCOXrHrHC^.-( COtOC^lO"^COC^t^COaiOiC^O-^*C^C>l'^CO»-"C
rH rHrt Oi
•SuiiCjpjojjitijjf
tOOiHrHt^r-ttOcyiiH
•A\OI J8d
spunod ui imjj jo piatx
CqotOtOtOimOlOXXO^COOXrHOXOC^XCOrH(NO^X(N:OCOM rH»OOiO^T^tD(Nl^lCtOtOOtD(MiOOiOOrH"rf^C^rHasXl-^iH'>0 0 -^ — • -' — ■■ -' - - . to Tj* -^ I> iC C71 CO C<I OJ to
XCOl^OiOtNOltOTj^OSO^r-tXaiCOiOt^l-*
CJ I-l O iHOQM C^ C<l C^rH ■* c^ ?je-) -^-i"
^ ^ Qi
> s
•saaj'j pa^CBidsufi
^ |
to to S3 |
in |
<3> |
00 |
00 in |
00 -: S : |
5 |
•S83i:) paXutds
Ito • |
lOiO |
OCX |
t^ |
tH |
c^ |
COrH '■ |
X |
toco |
;g2 : |
iCtO |
CO to <M X (NiH |
mo |
TTCA • 55 : |
li |
•Avojc UI saaij jo jaqratiH
OOTOCnOOOOOOOOlOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ^
•S83J| paX'Bidsun
g |
to to • OlO • |
to ' |
to ■ |
X • g : |
X • 1? : |
X • S : |
3g |
||
'-' |
rH ■ |
■soaaj pa^^Bidg
iCiO too) |
si N'rH |
4,351 2,500 2,712 |
COiH |
co |
eo-* |
||||
'§;? |
^ |
s^s |
t^ irate lOiHcr |
■*xS |
T)<olcOrHX-f ca ic -^ c?s iH t^ |
to too co'i<Tr |
c- |
t~-* |
0 CO C-l |
"Suij^otd puooa^
CNCOi-HC^C^TTliCi-ICO'^rHr
oi-^t^i-ioccoooc>i-tcocor^!r>-pt-XiCOi-t*'^r^»cc^i--»-Hoc-^too
*J^Ul5li)ld 'JSJt^i
-OCC'^.-I.-hOX>OiOC
1-^ -r C^l -T ^ O Oi l^ O I- l^ -f I^ >0 rH c^ t
iOO':Ol^CCQOl^iOi-liCCCas:OOOC^COl^'-OiCiOCCC'10iOl^'^rHrHiO r-Ti-rrH' r-Tr-H" iNCs" iH i-T '^cT cicf "^TtT CO C0'"<1<"
r-t(NCO-^iOCD|>GOOiO'HC^CO'***iO<Or*OOasOr-ie^CO-^iC^r^OOO>
19093— No. 20-
HtN<N6)e^C^OIiMC^INiM
114
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
^:^
^4
1 I
S--V,
1^
^ =
I
"saoj} poXiijUsufi
<» |
CO |
oc i |
s |
Ira r-i |
° |
o '■ |
CO o |
^■^ |
t |
<2 A
•saajj pajjBjdg
•Avoa lit saajj jo jaqran^;
•jinjj JO aniBA I'B^ox
e*t-^
S3§ |
O CO |
'^lO |
;OQ0 iOIM' |
C4 T-< |
c^'co |
88 : |
00 «3
<o
•punod jad sjnaD f i jb 'Xjouuh,:) puBi^iBO Joj jiiuj JO auiBA
•punod jad sjuao f x :iB 'itiaunBO ooiqo joj ;injj jo ani^A
•pnnod aad
'Suj.ijp JOJ ju'uj JO 81HBA
•XjaauBO pu'B[ -3[-B0 aoj %mi^
■XiauuBO ooiqo JOJ ?injj[
OOOCiOXOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOsOOOiOO (NrHCDOX01'^iraclC0"^t^-^C<I^C^e0C^C0t^0^00'^05(N'»^iOlCt^
t^Ttc^i-t-*c^iccOi-ii-(iraT-iXOC^o^i^ira:cCMr-ico^ji^i-tiOiOOO ^oc4o6ffiod3^coai»-^oira--iDxoi~^oocooioc>r^irao»0'<^t^o^<N
t^CO'^lCTHy2"T»-H'^*<7'i— liOC^li— IC^Ttr-ltNi— (r-fC^tCi— It-tirarHTf-^r-i
lO-^r^-^QC^rHira-^-^o.— i^H^HC-ivraira^coc^oii^ot^ocooooio ^c^!N^i>cs»cc^xoiraira3it^-o-^c-iOi-<irat^CT)cocoascocoi^o>
^cit^oaiocadi-Hai"^oocoiC"^Tj'TtiraoTrcoo6ira^oi--^t>^t-^(N"^
■<tr-tCOCO coco CM C^ T-^ Tj- .-( t-< CO i-H »H CO CM 04
OOSXO»-li-H ccO'r>X'^XTt<Tj<OCMOT-HiCXiOCMrHCMO'^»OQOt^ l>-'3<OiracO'»^OCOCMiOOiC003CMt^O!^OilO«000(NC^'^CM05t^?0
*■^CM-*-*<»tooa)•^^^eooda>•^oj^^■^c^c<^lrf^^t-^•»^icOI-^ui^o<Nlri
r-lt-II-HlH CMiH T-lrH i-l Ol i-( i-l O)
r^CDrHOOlt^l^OCMi-HOXCTSt^O^lOXXirat^iOOiCOOCM'^OOilA C0COO0iC0XCMlOOlOr-tCMa5OXTJ<00iO0iOC0W0t^CM00aaC0Tt<^
^^O C^' CO ■*' r4 CO CM iH CM Cm' ri' ■^ Cm" rH cj iC ' r-i i-i i-H CO CO r-< r-i iC i-i CO CO iH Ot-HXCOira^^r^X>;CO.-li-HrJ*iCt^OCMCMiftCOXOiCl^f-H0050
^■i-iiraf-H-rxa^Or-»>ccoooorHi^cft»rao^cotcCiCMCMcMascMi-ico
^COr-lO!i5iraiOrHOOr^t^CJ»OC005CMCO;OCiCMCMCO«^iC'^CO^CO *-? CO'i-TciCM" cm" cm" rHr-T CM-tH Cm" i-T CM" i-ri-r
OC0l3it^-^r;:i-HC0r-ICMC00iC0C0t^Xl^t-Hr^0iOift)-(iOO05O0»00 ■ -^lOl^^OiCOXTrtoOOCOl^l^iOOOT-CO-^COTHt^
•SuiAjp JOJ %nu^
■A\oj jad spunod ui itiuj JO pi9]A
-^s-=
•soojj poXnadsufi
•soai^ pa^Bjds
•A\oj in saoij JO jaqnin^
a^
■S o
o
•saaa:j paXBjdsufi
•soajj paXuads
•SuiJiaid puoaag
•Xui^jaiil isai^.1
i-(Tf^r-(iftt^cMoas»ra:oococM>c-.or^.-ioc^ioasoocoaiOif:>-^ ^idcooxT-ioo^co-^i^cTJ-TXCMi-H^tca^-^t^cocoi^ira-^coOi
§XCO'*:Oi-nOCOCMCMCOrHiCCOTHCOt^rHCMCMrH'^-:f<CMrHI>CM'^'<5*i-(
2
T^xxi-f»t'^'^o:ocoaiOoiast^^'^-^c^«5aiCMf-iocoa50cocM
■^COf-tt^CMl^l-i^l^'^OCOCMC0005t^l^COiOOCOCOO--OCJ5C7SOO i-IC0'^CMC0XOC0XCMi-lOi-it~O-*l^OTl'l~r-II^i-lXOOC0mCn
io"cM"co-<a<"rH->jreor-rcMeot-i"-^"cM cm"co i-Tt-T CM-^fr-T ■^i-Tcoco
CO i |
Tjl |
O |
d |
CO |
rf |
in |
1-HCO 2S8 |
en 1 |
CO t^
too
lOCO
OCM
822
OS CM
«dco
rH t^
CM(N
O O O OS O X O O O X o o o o o o o o o o o o o o> o o o> o o
ff |
!- |
o CO |
8 |
~fi |
g |
.-lO rH |
1 |
XrH |
•!OCO •00?) |
gS |
11 |
1-- CO tO-T |
OVCM toco |
||
CO ^ |
'I' CO |
•CM CO |
-^fCM |
CM CO |
'-"-' |
CM CM |
CO -oeo
O •COlO
toco«5c-ie^ocoira-j«oscoo«-
, 2'*U5COt~CMCM.-linrH-^t^;OlOCJrHCO
CMXC0XCM-t'0s-1'CMC0I^t0OS00«5O'<1<O0SOt0as;0Tj<C0C*0S0aTj' lOC^l-HOCMOOCOCM-^-'J'rHiOT-l CMCM rH CM
joSSc!
? M -^ 'J5 t ■* iQ C-1 C
• CM 1^ lO -C tH 1^ CO 1- -!• C
CMiHCMCOr-l-rC-li-ICMCM COrH r-lCO i-Hr-l CMCMi-t COrtCOCO
Mcoio?oe!ScoMco«*^-r-T-?''?i<^'Sl<SinioSiAioBioS
Bull. ?0 Di,-. Vee. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept, of Agncu'ture.
Plate XIII.
o ;
LU 2
O t cc -
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XIII.
Experiments at Biggs, Cal. (Bordeaux mixture.) Looking west between rows 20 and 21, May 11, 1895. Row 20 was unsprayed; row 21 was sprayed before bloom- ing with 5 pounds copper sulphate, 5 pounds lime, and 45 gallons of water. The average value of fruit matured per tree in row 20 was 90 cents; in row 21, $6.19. The spray used on row 21 showed a net gain over row 20, as determined by the com- parative value of the peaches set by the trees of both rows, of 1,028 per cent (p. 117) .
5u;l. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XIV.
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XIV.
Experiments at Biggs, Cal. (Eau celeste.) Looking west ])etween rows 26 and 27, May 11, 1895. Row 26 unsprayed; row 27 sprayed })efore blooming with 4 pounds cop- per sulphate, 3 pints ammonia, and 45 gallons of water. Average value of friiit matured per tree in row 26 was 90 cents; in row 27, |4.32. The spray used on row 27 showed a net gain over row 26, as determined by the comparative value of the peaches set by the trees of both rows, of 662 per cent (p. 117).
Bu I. 20, Div. Veg. Phys & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agncultuie.
Plate XV.
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XV.
Experiments at Biggs, Gal. (Modified eau celeste.) Looking east between rows 34 and 35, May 14, 1895. Eow 34 unsprayed; row 35 sprayed before l)lo()niing with 4 pounds copper sulphate, 5 pounds sal soda, 3 pints ammonia, and 45 gallons of water. The average value of fruit matured per tree in row 34 was $1.84; in row 35, $8.05. The spray used on row 35 showed a net gain over row 34, as determined by the comparative value of the peaches set by the trees of both rows, of 608 per cent (p. 118).
INFLUENCE OF SPEAYS ON THE FKUITING OP THE TREES. 115
COMPARATIVE VALUE OF SPRAYS IN RELATION TO FKUIT.
(Pis. XIII, XIV, and XV.)
A review of the preceding table will show that no account has been taken there of the peaches thinned from the trees, and for this reason the results given in dollars and cents for the different rows can not be taken as representing the full comparative value of the sprays used. The value of a spray in controlling curl, so far as quantit}- of fruit is concerned, shoidd be based upon its power to prevent the fall or loss of fruit from the disease. A spray may enable a tree to set more fruit than it can carr}'^ to maturity in a favorable season, but the value of the spray should not be decided from the amount of the crop after thinning. This will be evident from a consideration of the fact that in many years the trees may not set more peaches than can be properly matured without thinning. In such cases it would be the spray that enabled the trees to set and hold the greatest number of peaches in the presence of curl which would prove of the highest value to the grower. A less effective spray would not enable the trees to set and hold a full crop. It is thus seen that the comparative value of several sprays rests in their power to prevent the fall of the greatest num- ber of peaches from disease, this being, of course, where other influ- ences of the sprays are equal. Thinning is necessary only when the trees can not carry all the fruit set, or when it is desired to improve the size and quality of the fruit, and it bears no direct relation to the value of a spray in preventing curl.
In view of the preceding facts, a table has been prepared embodying those features of the fruit records by which the comparative value of all the sprays used may be determined.
To show the full comparative value of all influences of each spray upon the fruit, it has also been necessary to consider the quality as well as the number of peaches and weight of same. To obtain the ultimate comparative value of the sprays the writer has been obliged to treat the thinned peaches as if matured, assigning them the same value, in proportion to number, as the matured fruit. There is also one other calculation in the table which requires explanation. A con- siderable percentage of the better quality of fruit was picked while still immature. This fruit is tabulated as that for the Oakland can- nery. It was necessary to gather this fruit while still hard so that it would arrive at the Oakland cannery in good condition. By weighing a large number of matured peaches and an equal number of peaches as picked for the Oakland cannery it was learned that the Oakland fruit should be increased by 11 per cent to make it equal in weight to mature fruit. This has been done, so that the quantity, quality, and full comparative value of all fruit considered could be accurately determined.
116 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
It has been possible in the manner just outlined to calculate the total comparative value of all fruit set by the trees of each row, as determined by the actual cash value of fruit of equal (juality when matured. By dividing this sum by the number of trees in the row the average comparative value per tree of all fruit set is shown, both for sprayed and unsprayed rows. While these average values do not represent the money actually obtained, as in the case of the preceding table, the}^ accurately show the average values for comparison of all fruit set by the trees, as determined by the market price of that fruit which the trees were able to bring to maturity. For these reasons the figures for the difl'erent rows may be rightly compared, and they fairly determine the comparative values of the 35 sprays tested in the block, so far as those values relate to the quantit}' and quality of the fruit.
To further facilitate the comparison of the values of the sprays in increasing the quantity and quality of fruit, as determined b}' the cash value of such fruit when matured, the results have been reduced to average net gain per cent of the sprayed trees of each treated row over those of the adjoining unsprayed row. For illustration, it ma}- be seen that in row 30, sprayed, the average calculated value of all fruit set per tree would have been when matured $12.63; in row 31, unsprayed, $3.13. Deducting the calculated average value of the fruit set on the trees of row 31 from that set. on the trees of row 30, there is shown an excess of $9.11) in favor of the trees of the sprayed row, and by divid- ing this excess by $3.43, the calculated average value of fruit set by the trees of the unsprayed row, there is shown to be a net gain of 208 per cent resulting from the use of the spray applied to the trees of row 30. The gain per cent has in this manner been calculated for every spray tested in the block, and it may be seen that on row 21 the spray gave a net gain of 1,028 per cent.
COMPARATIVE VALUE OF SPRAYS IN RELATION TO FRUIT. 117
•saajj pa.^Bjdsun i9A0 S33J} pajCujds JO 'jnao J3d ui-bS %9u sSBjaAV
2S
■■O'-O ■ 00 t~ iC t^ 00 • !N i-l 1-1 CO -^ t005
OS |
^ X |
00 |
!0 05 |
•paAvidsu[i
s§ |
8 |
^. |
o |
^ |
OS 00 |
^ |
OC |
■pa.CBjdg
5.67 6.29 ""4.' 86" 3.63 |
ccS |
ooi |
00 |
t-^od I |
•SMOJ
HT SO 3a} JO jaqrari^
001003000000001000000000000000000
•AVOJ JO S33J}
A'q los Jiiuj iiii JO
t^OO^HiCr^OC^1001rfOOt>-(NCSrHCO'MO:C003iCTfOi— <Ot— IO(N OOOOOt^l^Ol^OOO^tOC^OOOC^COO'^OiOt^'^COTr^OCOiCCN
?0003O-^iC^TfO>cc^)"^iC:0^OX'T-H
tOi-ICOrHT-HTj^^r^iC'COTH'rPCCTHO"^^*
coico^ccoooiXiooi'-tooao'^
lOlC OOl 00 l> 00 IN
•p3arnT?in irsm st? 3}i!j 3ta'BS}ii iitijj p3uu!q} JO 0 n 1 ^ A p3;i?nii}S3
S : |
MO |
4U |
t^O |
":(<00 |
^S |
04 rH |
TT 0> |
j§S |
iC CO O CO
•poanjura uaqAi 1 T n J J iasuuBO pun Siipljp JO aiq-BA iBjox
C000C0»Cr^C0C^Oi^01OO»r^C^i0C0C000t^C0OC4iC'1*»CrH00C0O00 CNQOySt^l^OOrHOC^^'^COrHOOC^tNoOt^'^^fMt^^OTj'iCiCtOi— I
^OOirHTj<iCCOCOOOi-H-^rHr^"^COOrHo6r^oiiriiC^od«3oiiOOod«3 "^ tH Tji T-H ^^ CO CO rH MtJI rH CO OJ T-1 CD CO rH CO CO COO lO "^ O I>
•paaniBin u3qA\ imjj puBiJiBO JO 3 Ti f V A p3}Bniijsa
oi o o o C4 o 04 r^ t^ oi 01 o -^ oi CO T*^ r^ 1^ CO o »c lO t^ t^ lO t^ CO i-< 1— < T-H cl
"^ cool Xt^OOt^O iC 00 Ol 04 -^ OSCOCO OilC COCOiOCOOiiO OO-^ Ol 04 i-H ^
^r^o4coi-Hoicor--ccr--ioodoi>t^OirHioooi^iCoococo03cocococo»o o)
Ol i-H 04 rH rH 04 Ol Ol 04 04 fH CO 04 Ol tH COCO OvI 04 CO ITS aj
•punod
J 3 d S1U3 0
^XlTjTnjjoDiqo
COOOiCCOOOOO-^OlXOCOiCOiCCO'^OOCOCOCCiOit^Olt^Olt^I^iOO 'SZ t-H CO lO O O 04 "* CO CO 04 -^ Ol 04 -^ O iC iC CO :0 CO 04 Oi -^ OS ^^ r- rH 00 T1< l> ^
*OD»004f-irH'CjJo4 'lOO"^'Gldf*lOoir-I^-^CO-^iCrH-^C004'^t^ciT3i- ^
r-(T-( rHiH 04 04
Ol iH r-H rl
•punod
J3d ;u3D f
iC00004»Ct^OI^'^'^0»0'^I^'^COO^'^rHrHOOOCrHaOC00400iO'^t^ £ COCOOOCOrHt^OOlCO-^OrH-^CDOlCOl-^COOOt^COOCCOOOt^OOl^XCO ^
' Tl< rH 04 Tl T-c Ol CO C0mTH040J lOCO
< rH lO 11 ^ CO CO
•psjiUBia tiaqAV ; I n a J p u u i jj it o Jo }qSi3AV poit!unis3 iwjox
-OOr^OOOOOOCDii^i— <COGC"TCOGCi— 101»— lOt^iC00l>iC04^^'
04'3;'^aC'^01^J'l^C00401iCC0 04'T<0)01
:OH^iCCOCOCO"^COCOt-hI
00COI>I-XI^00lO00t^lCCOi-nOCO-^COCOO4O4COiOO4O4OlO4iCO4O4CO
•JIIUJ PUBI^IHO Ol p3
-ppn }qSi3A\. JU30 J3d XX
^^COCOOO^t^COI^04^H01'Tif^0104^HOiCOOOOiOCOCO'^04*^>C)"^i— '-^ OOOOI:-l^OOI^COiOOOt^iCCO^HiCO'^COC00404COl00404C7104l00404ci f-H r-i t-t 1-1 rH iH i-l T-H 04 tH i-H r-< 04 04 r-H iH 04 C^
•pajsqiBS u 3 q Ai. jia3u
-U'BO pUBIJlBO
•Xjsuu'b.t ooiqo
•SniAiQ
t^r^-^OSTji-^iCi— ICOiCcOt^OOC004 010iU7r-»01iC^O-^xCrHt^t^COO «:"*vOt^OCO^^C0 04iO>OCOr-»Tl^GCCOlOCOCOCOCOOCO^HTJ<C^OC001^- .gcOt~iOt^l^cOCOiCCOiOiOO)0-*COOIC004i-l04rtC00404t^O)-^Oi-HCO
1^ t-i" t-T r-TiH i-TiH r-Ti-T of t-T rHr-T oToj" i-h" i-ToT Co"
-for^o>t^oOTfcDcooi05coo)003coo>oiT-(Tj<cooocooooiOicr^o
c/'rr^C0O0400CO04lO00010S00COt^C0Ot^Q0500CO0>C0I>»-|-<}*0401Qp ^iOC000THrtO4r-l C0CO04lO-^C0(Nl^C0O10i04CO-cJ<O104-*C0rHC004O>
i-c<J<»Ot^ld-HOOCOt^'^t^COOOS01COC004vC'^^HiC01iCCO'^^^04^H C3
. . _, . , -■* t . _, . - - _
^04rHOOt^iCt^OCO-^04COOOOJ01C^-rOsaD-r0304»Ot^t-HCOCOC .^ CO 04 CO t-( T-H CO -^ iH -^ t-* rH 04 CO "~ " "
■^CO COCOr-tTHl^i— ICOOrHOO
•AVOJ JO S33J1 Xq 138
S3qaiS3d jo loquinu iBjox
iCaoiOi>coi^04r^r^oo4r^coiC04cocoo>co»-H-<^oor^o4coo4ooiOOO
OCiCl^t^rHiOCO'^COiOCOC004iOI^OD»CiOrHr-(COI^0400i00200»001iO OOOO0400l^01O0000t^C00004l^04i-<l001rH^i-ir^04GCO04C0t^
CO'-^CO^COCOOOodrH^T-H C^ of 00 t^C^'woT of T-T r-Trn' of r-Tc^" T-T r-rr-r-^o6"r-r lO"
rHrH Ol 04
1-H riTH OJ
s p.
•AVOI JO S33J1
Xq pajin^i^
COOOCOt^cOiOt^I^-^0004t^.OiCOiCCOiftt^rHCOOX^010040C0004
-riO-rt^r-iOCO-^OOlcOC
lOrHooirrcooirHoooixooicoi-Hcrs'^
OO04O04iO^0104-rf00OTI<00iCC0 01r-HX01c0 01rHl^i0 0C01iCC0l0 l>-"'^QCf CO"cO co'co"T-ri>rotr04"cOic"c^CO t-^oTx^r^r-TcO ■v'oTr-fi-rT-Tx'of i-Tid'
•AVOI JO S33J1
raojj psuuiqx
04rH
coo
t^04"
■*CO 04rH
oco co~co
r-.04CO^iCcDt^XOSOrH04CO'^lOCOl^QOO>0*H04CO-^iftCOt^X030 I-H i-( 1-1 1-1 rl 1-1 r-li-(i-lr-l 0104 04 04 04 04 04 0)0104 CO
118
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
•saaj} pa.'CBjdsnn J9.\0 J9d uibS }au 8SBJ8AV
r-li-c -rHO)
mo |
Oi-H |
00 (N |
||||
■«< |
(N "^ |
■^ t-i |
»-lf-( |
C!*3 I
•paXBjdsnfi
•paX-Bjds
s |
o • c4 I |
o |
in o |
■ CO • • t^ '< 'COO |
CO |
cooo
•S4V01
Til S99JJ JO jaqiimN:
OOOiOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOiOOOaOO
•MOi JO S9aj:j Aq las jiTUj it's Jo
OniBA p3:i'BUIIJS3 IB^OX
<N«3iOCCaOOI^"^QOCiCOO^r^'*m»— I.— f^cOi^^OOOiOi-HCOt-H CCOw-^.-H!NOCCOCy3Xy5»OCCt-<CCiCrrOC^QO(NiC»OCOi-ICOCO
CCOO^^-*^^t^C^Ot^T-HOiCOr-<COsDT-i(NC^THCOmT-<»HOOrHt^t^i-<
aniBs jiJ apijj pauuiq; JO 8 n I ij A pajuniijsa
6j I 'So '• '(M " : is : is |
■p3jni'Bni naqAV 5 in J J XjaunBO puB SiiUjp JO 8niBA imox
^-^ i-Jcoa>CCt^OCCOCcdOOOXOr-^-TrHOr-<OC-^^ciiCOrHc4
•pajnjBui uaqAV ITTUJ puiqjtuo JO 3 n 1 H A pojBuiijsa
r-^^COI^C^OiC^iOas^CCCDC^C^C^XOtOasOO:OCOOOr-(CC(N'g*
^oicc"^oico-^ot^o6i-Ho6r^iocoodi6oir5coo:ooi>c^odoiO*d
i-HCO-^ T^ CC r-1 O) C^ ^ -^ rH r-l CO tH i-H d T-1 •<*' CO C^
■punod aad SI II 80 IXli'linajooiqo
■pnnod
J8d 1U90 t
CnXOrHi-ICOC-JiX-fX-l-l'OI^Oi-liCOOiCflt-.lNO-I'lOQOt^
-ra)uc:C'^occc^icascociC^t^o:cdir::coxc^c^^c^05i>co ' e^ ■<r -T< x' -^ o x' -T" 1^ CO x' ai ■q- oi ^-' -r oi « ic t-^ t^ -*' CO r-I lO CO cj lO
HrHrt (NrH rt ri
CA tH
CCt— ICCOit^t^O'N^HOXCil^CsutXXid^iCC^COOrN'^OaiiO
cooaiccx(MicoiOr-.c^050x-rxioc:;ocoict^c^xo>co-^-*
^?4cO"^r-!cOOai-!(N<Nr-!-^c4rH(NlO 'i-Hi-Hr-IcOCOrHi-JlOi-icOCOi-i
•paitHBin noqA\ Itnij pn-Bt^jno JO iqSwA^ poj-Buiiiso IBJOX
XO-^CTiC^fNiOXt^t^OXOitNasXOOOf-irHC^XlNiOiCOCOyS
i~-o<co-5>«coxccni-c^i^-rx^x«5^«gj3;xt-o-wc>ix«:
C^C^05^XCOOX05t^C^r-<COOiCCOOOC^CO'^0'<J'XiCOOCO r-Tc^'c^r Cfc^ , T-Ti-T CC'rH^ r-Tcf i-T rH C^ (N'i-T
t^c^T-H-r^^-xc^j^t^Cit^iCt^c^x^-TOX-rxt^x-^ot^co
(NC-JOS^XCO-sCXCTit^^-r- "C0OmC0J0OC^C0'T'tD'»rt^»0OC0C0 iHXCO»OOT-(|-^^?DOr-lw1'iCr^OC^C^<CCOXOiCt^»-H0050
./iCT-H'.^ccosor-iiocooo'O^i^aiico-rcoicasfNc^fNairjt-Hco
^r-tO«3tOiOi-t^cOl^l^aiOCOCiC^CO'«05<N(MCO^-^lO'<1'XmcO '^i-r<N'c4' C^Tc^r rHr-T C^r-T C^ r^ C^ t-Ti-T
•jinaj puB[5ji?o 0} pa -ppu jqSio.w juaD jad xi
•pajaqjeS u a q Av X jan
-UB.1 paBIJIBO
■XjauuBD ODiqo
COOSt^'*i^rHrHCOr-((NCOOiCOCO^-Xl^»-*I^OiO»Or-(iOOasOC500 :COOOlOOr^lOiOl^OlOOXTP«DOCDCOt^t^iCX^!C-^COT-tl^ iXC>OaiOt*OlOOir-lC^»C^C^'«-^COX(NCO'^QOC4C^t^COr-n/5CO
•SuiXJd
■.1*rH.-(iCr^<MOCSiC^OX'M>C0 1^r-*0'M:OC^OO^O^OiC-rf
r,' iC O X> X tH O O 'w CO -r 1-^ Oi -^ X O I— < ^H ^ ^ 'T I^ CO ^ 1^ »o -^ CD Oi ^CO'^CDiHiCCOC^OICOr-*iCCO^COl^.— CNCMrHTj'-.fC^li-il^C^'^-^i-H
•Avoj JO saoj) .<q las saqDiJad jo joqumu iwjox
C^ n C^l C-1 »C X O CO -^ Ci CO X CO 0-) Oi X tC X C^ CO r^ iC CD t^
c^co-txcocon''-'Oit'-'J'^m 0'M*--coo-rt-<c^i^i^ioi^ — - -^ coi^-r^oxcooi^c^c^in^'^rHc^coi^m
C^ iC r J Oi l~^ OtJ CS CO CO
i~coc>co~m"cocoi-H'm'cdt~"coe^"i-»"-»"c^~-^"m"c^co"i— "coc^"x"co">c"io'ci
Mi-( rHi-l ^
s a.
•MOI JO soaji Xq pajiiinK
OC^iCOC^CO'M'^^tXI^CO-rcOC-iXCOI^O^X^^XC-IiC^HCOmt^ X"T"OC^C'tXr-''T*'^>COit^l^COmO-^rHCCC^TtHiCI^»-'Qt^
c^'M^aiOo^cscoutcoi^-^rHc^xcoo^'^nnc^'^'^iOc^OioiO
I^OnCOCOXCOXCTJCO^COfNCCOC'l-
"C^coxcoc^rjcoooM
•MOi JO saajj laojj pouuiqx
Xi-c
eooc coirT
oil—
«MMe!«cceoe^cO"r-»"^i'5^'r^-r"rS5iOi«33ioS>ciS>
INFLUENCE OF SPRAYS ON THE FRUITING OF THE TREES.
119
COMPARATIVE SIZE OF FRUIT ON SPRAYED AND UNSPRAYED TREES.
Owing to the fullness of the records obtained relative to the weight and number of peaches gathered from the sprayed and unsprayed trees in the present experiments, it is possible to learn the compara- tive average weight of the fruit produced on treated and untreated trees. It might seem that the unsprayed trees, having to mature on an average 291.3 peaches per tree, would yield larger fruit than the sprayed trees, which had to mature 919.2 peaches per tree; in other words, that the increased number of peaches upon sprayed over unspra3'ed trees would, to a considerable extent, be counterbalanced by an increase in the size of the fruit on the lightl}" loaded unspra3^ed trees. It has been found, however, that where the conditions for vig- orous growth of a tree are present, and where the fruit upon a tree is so thinned that the tree is not overloaded, the peaches of the full- bearing tree are practically as large when mature as are those of the tree which has lost much of the crop from curl. The following ta])le has been compiled from the facts in hand upon this matter. It is shoAvn in this table that the fruit from the sprayed trees averaged for the whole block (315.3 trees) 299.0311: peaches per 100 pounds, and the fruit from the unsprayed trees averaged for the whole block (228.9 trees) 299.0312 peaches per 100 pounds. This shows that the gain in size of peaches on unsprayed trees over those on sprayed trees, as determined by the average number of peaches to 100 pounds, is roWoo per cent, or only al)out ^oVg of 1 per cent. This amounts to nothing from a practical standpoint.
Table 31.-
-Size of fruit on sprayed and unsprayed trees as determined by the average number of peaches per 100 pounds.
Num- ber of trees in block |
Fruit produced by all trees of block. |
Average production |
Average number of peaches— |
Proportion- ate percentage |
Aver- age num- ber of peacbes per 100 pounds per tree. |
Average per- centage of gain |
|||||||
per tree. |
Per 100 pounds. |
Per tree. |
yield of trees. |
in size of fruit on un- sprayed trees over that of sprayed trees. |
|||||||||
First pick- ing. |
Sec- ond pick- ing. |
First pick- ing. |
Sec- ond pick- ing. |
First pick- ing. |
Sec- ond pick- ing. |
First pick- ing. |
Sec- ond pick- ing. |
First pick- ing. |
Sec- ond pick- ing. |
||||
Sprayed Unsprayed |
:m5.S 228.9 |
Lhs. 95,094 19,035 |
Lbs. 14,. 504 3,257 |
U)S. 275. 4 83.2 |
Lbs. 42 14.2 |
293.2 293.6 |
337.4 330.8 |
S07.5 244. 3 |
141.7 47 |
86.8 85.4 |
13.2 14.6 |
299. 0344 299.0312 |
106 100000 per cent, or about 1 1000 of 1 per cent. |
It should not be understood by the above that a crop of 950 peaches draws no more heavily upon a tree than a crop of 300 peaches when other conditions are equal. All observation tends to show that such is not the case. A tree too heavil}' loaded will often produce
120 PEACH LEAF CURL". ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
much smaller fruit than a properly thinned tree, even upon exceed- ingl}^ rich soil. The facts given in both the preceding text and table show clearly, however, that the severe attack of curl in the spring of 1895 drew upon the vitality of the unsprayed trees as heavily as did the excess of 65C peaches each on the sprayed trees. Otherwise stated, the trees averaging 300 peaches were drawn upon as heavily by the attack of curl, combined with • the maturing of 3(M) peaches, as were the sprayed trees in maturing 950 peaches. If this had not been the case, the unspraj^ed trees would have better nourished their crop, and would have produced larger and heavier fruit than those which were sprayed. These facts should receive the attention of all thoughtful growers, as no one can afford to have his trees drawn upon to the extent of two-thirds of a crop of peaches without return, even when frost or other causes would not have allowed him a crop on, sprayed trees. To permit trees thus to suffer from curl even in sucli a year would be equivalent to draining them of much vitality, oven though they failed to show this drain in the reduction of wood or fruit buds for the ensuing year. But it has already ])een shown that a marked reduction in the number and (|uality of fruit buds is a result of a spring attack of curl. The soil is also certain to sustain an unnec- essary drain upon its resources.
Another phase of this subject is made clearer by the above table. There are ver}' many varieties of peaches so resistant to leaf curl that the fruit does not drop, even when a large percentage of the leaves are lost. Many growers leave such varieties unsprayed. thinking that the saving of the fruit is the all-important point, and that the loss of the spring foliage alone does not warrant the spraying of such varie- ties. The above facts will show the error of such deductions. When the loss of the foliage upon the Lov(;ll is ecjual to the drain upon the tree brought about in maturing two-thirds of a crop, the loss of the foliage upon a somiresistant variety must be approximately the same. This drain will be apt to show also in the size and weight of the fruit, if not in the number of peaches. Certainly no grower is warranted in leaving any variety unsprayed simply because that variety holds its fruit in spite of the loss of foliage. The trees have suffered in such a case, and the orchardist can scarcely avoid feeling tln^ loss in the reduced vigoi- of his trees, the reduced weight and size of his fruit, and the added drain upon his soil.
("()L()1{ OF Sl'KAYKI) AM) IJNSl'KAY KD KUIIT.
The Lovcll |)c!i(li is normally a fruit of line color, but uiulcr the action of certain of the sprays used its color was greatly heightened. In ol)scr\ing this action of the sprays no color scale was used, but the marked Inightcning on cei'tain spi-ayed rows was too distinct to be mistaken bv the most careless obserxcr. This heightening ot" color
METHOD OF THINNING AND COST OF PICKING PEACHES. 121
was not due to excess or lack of crop, for it was distinct on both heavily and lightly loaded trees, where the fruit was of medium size and where it was exceptionally large, but was due to the use of the copper sprays, especially of the stronger Bordeaux mixtures applied. Here is another advantage in the use of the copper salts. This increase in color would certainly mean dollars to the grower where the fruit was placed on the market in competition with luisprayed fruit, even of the same variety. The writer regrets that a color scale could not have been used in this connection, so that the true heightening of color could ])e stated, but the contrast between sprayed and unsprayed fruit, where the spraying was done with the Bordeaux mixture, was observed and discussed by many who had this fruit to handle.
METHOD OF THINNING AND COST OF PICKING PEACHES.
THINNING BY HAND AND BY CURL.
An argument advanced by certain peach growers and requiring con- sideration is that a moderate spraying under ordinar}^ conditions is sufficient. B}^ avoiding too thorough work enough curl is allowed to develop to cause the dropping of one-fourth to one-half of the peaches being set by the tree. If soil conditions are favorable it is thought the trees will still retain a sufficient crop, and the expense of thinning will be avoided.
At first thought the plan here suggested might seem the easiest and cheapest way of thinning fruit. A consideration of all points involved will show, however, the faults of this method. To do effective pre ventive spraying against curl the spray must be applied to the dormant tree, and to judge of the severity of a coming attack of curl before growth l)egins is too uncertain a method to warrant the indorsement of practical growers. All influencing conditions may appear to favor a light attack of curl till after the spraying is completed, when a sudden change of temperature or a cold rain may develop a severe attack within the course of a few days. Under such conditions, incomplete or light spray work may cost the grower the major })ortion of his crop.
In case the severity of curl is about as presupposed, the number of peaches remaining on the tree being about what the tree should carry, it is still very probable that the grower has sustained a loss in the stoppage of growth of wood and fruit and in the fall of foliage equal to or above the expense of thinning. There is also a difference between hand-thinned trees and those thinned by curl. This disease is local in its action, not general. If one branch in the midst of dis- eased branches is thoroughly sprayed it will hold its fruit, while the peaches will fall from those not sprayed. This will show that the peaches of a diseased tree are not thinned evenly, as the disease is fre- quently not uniformly distributed over all branches of the tree. Then
122 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
the fruit is for the most part nourished by the foliage of the l)ranch which bears it. and hence if tlie disease is not equally distributed the foliage will be unequall}" distributed and the fruit unequally nourished. One portion of a tree may have an excess of fruit, even to the break- ing of lim])s. while another portion shows a deficiency. Besides the ' unequal thinning of fruit on different portions of a tree, arising from the unequal action of curl over the tree as a whole, there will also appear an unequal thinning of the fruit of individual branches. In this respect, one of the prime objects of hand thiiming, the equalizing of the fruit distribution upon the branches, is lost when the thinning is caused by curl. Such fruit as remains upon the curl-thinned branches is apt to be largel}^ toward the ends of the limbs.
The statements here made respecting the local action of the disease and the local nourishing of the fruit upon a limb or portion of a tree, are known to be correct, and have been established by a series of care- fully conducted experiments on sprayed halves of trees. The details and results of this work are given in the concluding section of this chapter.
COST OF I'ICKINO PEACHES.
When considering the picking and sorting of peaches from sprayed and unspra3'ed trees a marked difference is noted in cost in favor of those sprayed. In the Rio Bonito orchard, where our experimental work was prosecuted, it has cost the proprietors !?1 per ton to pick fruit from fully loaded sprayed trees. In contrast to this the cost of picking and sorting the fruit of the unsprayed trees just north of the experiment })lock, in the sunnner of 18!>."). was $8 pei- ton. This was on account of the scattered condition of the fruit on these trees, which were affected b}- curl in the spring like the control trees of the experiment block. This cost pen- ton was calculated with wages at ^1 per day, the men ))oarding themselves, and where one sorter to five pickers was employed. We have how a difference of $2 per ton in the cost of picking and sorting fruit from sprayed and uns})rayed tives. This added expense on unsprayed trees arises, of course, thi'ough the necessity of picking over a greater expanse of tree and orchard surface to ol)tain a given amount of fruit. It is l)elieved that in this single item of picking the fruit enough is sav(>d to more than cover the expense of spraying the trees and thinning the fruit.
TIIK I-OCAl. ACTION OK ("Ulil, ON FOIJAiiK AM) FKUn'.
UHCDEtDS Ol' TUERS SI'KAVEI) ON ONE SIDE.
The study of the liahits of /Cr/xiscu.s tlt^fn/-//t<//i.s iu\d its inllucncc upoJi its host led to the following imcstigation into the localization of (he parasite upon llie ti-ee and its local ratliei' than general eU'ects.
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XVI
1^ >r- ? . J.^- |
t - i |
|
^s^^mammMX |
■a |
|
■J |
: ■.,--■1 |
|
:'j#-'".v:-\'^^^S$i| |
||
\ |
l^^^p |
|
^^^^^^ |
^?* |
|
P^^^ |
||
^^I^B |
i 1* |
|
^^-^^^^^h^^Hh^ |
V * |
|
^^^^^Hm^^Hni |
< ^
Uj Q- O. CO
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XVI.
Fig. 1 shows the condition of the trees sprayed on one side (considered in the text, p. 123). The right side of the tree shown was sprayed with Bordeaux mixture, the left side was unsprayed. (Compare with Pis. XVII, XVIII, and XIX.)
Fig. 2 shows the condition of the tree sprayed on one side after curl had largely denuded the unsprayed half at the left.
LOCAL ACTION OF CURL ON FOLIAGE AND FRUIT.
123
Just north of the experiment block, in the continuation of the same orchard, was selected a row of 6 trees for treatment on one side. The spray used on half of each of the first three trees from the east was the standard Bordeaux mixture recommended by the Department, viz, 6, pounds copper sulphate, 4 pounds quicklime, and 45 gallons of water. The spray used on the following- three trees was lime and sulphur, con- sisting of 10 pounds sulphur, 20 pounds lime, and 45 gallons of water. In doing this spraying an effort was made to treat only one-half of each tree. Each tree was first examined, and, in some instances at least, a large canvas stretched through it in such a manner as to divide it as nearly as possible into two equal parts. All the branches on one side were thoroughly sprayed, the canvas preventing any of the spra}" reaching the limbs of the other half. In this way the half of each of three trees was sprayed with each of the above-mentioned sprays.
A photograph showing the appearance of one of these trees shortlj'^ after treatment is shown in PI. XVI.
May 10 and 18, 1895, when curl had reached its highest development, careful estimates of the loss of foliage were made for the spi-ayed and unsprayed sides of the 6 trees used in the experiment. The following table shows the results of these estimates:
Table 32. — Folitiye hMfroin ^pnoji'd tind unaprayed Jialve-9 of trees.
Percentage of leaves which fell from-
Trees treated with Bordeaux mixture, (a) Tree No.— |
Trees treated with sulphur spray. (6) Tree No.— |
||||
1. |
2. |
X |
4. |
5. |
6. |
2 92 |
4 92 |
G 90 |
18 85 |
15 85 |
15 85 |
Sprayed half .. Unsprayed hal.
a Foliage estimated May 18, 1895.
6 Foliage estimated May 10, 1895.
On Ma}" 8 the trees were examined, and the notes made at that time state that the sprayed and unsprayed sides presented a striking con- trast. It is said that "the foliage on the sprayed half of the trees is perfection itself in almost all cases. It is very dense and abundant, both below on the liml)s and above. The leaves are of a very dark, rich green, and are long, soft, and beautiful. The growth is very thrifty, in fact, unusually so. There are probably not more than 2 to 3 per cent of the leaves curled at all on the spraj^ed half, and these are confined to points at the top of the branches not properly sprayed. On the unsprayed half of these trees there is very little healthy growth. Probably 95 per cent of the leaves are curled, and most of them ])adly curled and distorted. Probably not less than 90 per cent of those produced thus far this spring will drop. The color of the foliage is yellow and sickly. Such leaves as aie not curled are small and light in color. The foliage upon both lower and upper limbs is badly affected.
124
PEACH LEAF CFRL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
What little growth there is which is thus far free from curl is termi- nal— very little healthy or comparatively health}' growth is seen from lateral buds. As to fruit. I may say that much is dropping- from the curled side and little from the other." (Pis. XVI and XVII.)
The work of thinning the fruit from the spraj-ed halves of these trees was not conducted at the time the sprayed trees of the general experiment block were thinned. The writer believes that the records of the fruit thinned from these trees were not kept except for one tree sprayed on one side with Bordeaux mixture. The fruit on th(^ spra}' ed half of this tree was thinned May 8, 1896, and amounted to 1,145 peaches, which weighed 23 pounds, or very nearly 50 peaches to the pound. These peaches were very uniform in size and stuck tightly to the limbs. If they could have grown to the usual size when picked in the fall they would have given 381 pounds of fruit. No peaches were thinned from the unspraN'ed half of this tree.
The yield of the 6 trees was carefully determined by weighing and counting the fruit from the sprayed and unsprayed sides of each tree separately. The results of this work are shown in the following table:
Table 33. — Ykld of sprayed and utisprayed Iialven of trees.
Bordeaux mixture, tree No. —
Sulphur sprav, tree Ko —
Pounds of fruit gathered from —
Spniyod half
riisjiruycd lialf
Number of luaclius gathered from —
Sprayed lialf
Unsprayed half
284.8 14.3
718 40
361.6 50.6
1,064 147
286.7 25.3
836 74
112.2 48.6
303 132
189.3 80.4
450 220
64.6 35.3
172 94
By the preceding ta])le it is shown that the sprayed half of tree 1 bore 718 peaches, weighing 284.8 pounds, while the unsprayed half bore only 40 peaches, weighing 14.3 pounds. In this case, as in the case of the other trees of this series, the localized position and action of the fungus of curl upon a tree is shown. The unsprayed half of the tree suffered so severely from the disease that it lost 92 per cent of its foliage and all but 14.3 pounds of fruit. This severe attack on one side of the tree ap[)eared to have no influence whatever over th(i sprayed limbs of the other side, as th(^ fruit on the sprayed half was thinned of 1,145 peaches, lost but 2 per cent of its foliage, and bore 284.8 pounds of as fine peach(>s as any in the orchaid. On the other hand, the; full and healthy covering of foliage on tlie sprayed side of the trecap])ears to have had no beneficial infhience over the diseased side. Had it liad any well-niai'ked l)eneficial inlluence the fruit of the unspraNcd lialf would haxc l)een retained, which wa.s not (lie cas(\ The same local action of the disease, and the same local nouiishing influence due to the assiniilati\e action of (he heallhv foliauc ina\ be
DESCRTPTTOX OK TLATE XVTI.
Tliis plate shows the condition of one of the trees sprayed on one side at th{' time of ])icking the fruit. The leaves have l)eeu cut away with prnninjij shears to enable the i)hotograph to show the fruit upon the sjjrayed half (right side) of the tree, and the absence of fruit upon the unsprayed half (left side). The sprayed half matured 284.8 pounds of the finest peaclies; the unsprayed half matured only 14.3 i)ounds. Over 1,100 peaches w'ere thinned from the sprayed half of this tree to enable the limbs to bear the crop, while the unsprayed half was unthinned except by curl. (For records of this and other trees sprayed on one side see Chapter VI, also compare with Pis. XVI, XVIII, and XIX.)
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XVII.
DESCRIPTION OF I'LATE XVTII.
Peaches gathered from the tree sprayed on one si(lt> shown in the preceding plate. The fruit shown on the two drying trays at the left, together with that in the lower compartment of the tray at the right, was gathered from the sprayed half of this tree. The peaches shown in the upper right-hand con^j)artment were all that matured on the unsprayed half of the same tree. The sj)rayed half hore 718 peaches, weighing 284.8 pounds; the unsi)rayed half hore oidy 40 i)eaches, weighing 14.8 jwunds. (Compare with Pis. XVI, XVTI. an.l XIX.) "
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys, & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XVIII.
l
v^*
V „-
^-
'^''
"P 1
K-
t
t^ w ^^ «* »^ _ ^ _ , .
\
DERCRIPTION OF PLATE XIX.
This is a photograph of a limb of the sprayed half of the tree shown in Pis. XVI and XVII, after the removal of the leaves with pruning shears. A good idea of the size and perfection of this fruit maj^ be obtained from the plate. The color was strikingly high and rich. The size of the fruit is further shown by the fact that the peaches averaged 252 per 100 pounds. (See note on this work at the close of Chap- ter VI, p. 122; also refer to Pis. XVI, XVII, and XVIII.)
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XIX.
LOCAL ACTION OF CURL ON FOLIAGE AND FRUIT. 125
seen in the condition of the foliage and crop on the sprayed and unspra}' ed sides of the other trees inchided in these experiments.
It even appears likely, both from observation of the trees and from the general laws of use and disuse and supply and growth, that the influence of the sprayed upon the unsprayed portions of the tree, in the presence of an attack of curl, is detrimental rather than beneficial. It is probable that the half of the tree in full foliage, instead of lend- ing material aid to the defoliated side, tends to further rob that side, at least of the crude sap coming from the roots.
For the purpose of showing the reader the striking results obtained from these trees, several photographs were made at the time the crop was matured. In order that the fruit might be seen upon the tree the foliage was carefully cut away and a screen placed behind the tree (PL XVII). A single limb was also photographed, as shown in PI. XIX. The fruit gathered from the sprayed and unsprayed halves of tree 1 is likewise shown in PI. XVIII. The unusual size and brightness of color of the fruit from the sprayed half of this tree was very marked. The peaches averaged 252 per 100 pounds. The aver- age of peaches for the large experiment block was, as before stated, 299 per 100 pounds. There was thus a gain of 18.66 per cent in size of fruit on the spi*ayed half of this tree over the average for the block.
CHAPTER VII.
PREVENTIVE SPRAY WORK CONDUCTED BY ORCHARDISTS. GENERAL CONSIDERATION OF THE AUXILIARY WORK.
While planning the experiments already detailed it seemed desirable to set on foot a similar line of work among peach orchardists in gen- eral. It was thought that several advantages could be attained from such auxiliary and coincident work: (1) It would indicate the effective ness or noneff'ectiveness of the sprays recommended, in controlling curl under the various conditions of variety, situation, soil, temperature, atmospheric humidity, seasonal variations, etc., existing in the man 3" peach-growing sections of the country. (2) It would eliminate the personal element of the other experiments being conducted, and would introduce various new conditions of orchard work, thus point- ing out the efficienc}' or needs of the general grower and indicating what features of the work should receive special attention in offering final recommendations. (3) It would introduce the methods of treat- ment in many peach-growing centers, and by means of the object lessons thus set up, it would effect a much more rapid and general adoption of such spraying methods than could be hoped for otherwise.
In advance of the inauguration of this work, whic;h was begun in the fall of 1893, correspondence was opened with over 1,(300 peach growers in all peach-growing centers of the United States. To each of these growers was sent a circular describing the nature and cause of peach leaf curl, outlining a series of spraying tests which it was desirable to have conducted for its prevention, and suppljnng the spray formuhe known to have given good results in California. Each grower was given the facts necessary to enable him to carry out the work, and was requested to furnish the Department with the results of his experiments.
A very large number of growers expressed their willingness and desire to assist in <;ondu(;ting these experiments, and a very consider- able number have done so in many of the peach-growing centers. It may also be said that the number of growers who have adopted annual spraying methods as a result of this introductor}- ex])(>rimcntal work is large and is constantly iiurreasing. In fact, the spraying of p(>ach tre(!S for curl has become very general in many of the peach-growing c(!nt<;rs of the United States where the disease prevails. 126
AUXILIAKY WORK. 127
Of the reports which have been received of work conducted by the growers, it is thought best to include a few from those regions where curl is most common. The reports given are of much value, and in numerous cases they show that the experiments were carefully carried out. Representative reports will be given from the lake shore fruit belt of Michigan, from, the Willamette Valle}^, Oregon, where peach culture has been greatly checked by curl, and from several growers in California and elsewhere. An effort has been made to present these reports, which have been carefully tabulated, in as compact form as possible.
NOTES ON THE AUXILIARY EXPERIMENTS IN MICHIGAN.
A very considerable number of peach growers in the more northern portion of the Michigan fruit belt received from the Department a request to undertake spraying experiments in the winter of 1893-94 for the prevention of peach leaf curl. Among these orchardists was Mr. Smith Hawley, of Ludington. This gentleman, as well as several other growers of Mason and Oceana counties, entered heartil}^ into the work, the result being that at present a very large number of orchardists are annually spra3"ing for curl in that region. The work conducted by Mr. Hawley involved the testing of a number of spraj^s in early and late winter with one and two applications. It was very carefully carried out, and as the disease developed quite seriously in that region in the spring of 1891 his results are most interesting and valuable. The data supplied by his report are presented in the fol- lowing table and notes:
128
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
•S88J) po-tuadsnii
■sa9a^ paXTJjdg
o a* C g (u
ja OS
saaji p9X'Bjdsun.
in iC
00 to
•S33J1 poXBldg
CO iC X
SaiAujds puoDog
•SuiXujds isji^^
•paXwdsufi
•poX^ads
c °
^. • • |
||
7^ • • |
T^ • • |
|
^, |
W >. '• |
rt t-. : |
t-< |
"^"^2 |
m-r; u |
w |
So |
So |
1- |
b^ w |
2«3 |
K |
oKW |
otdM |
•Hiouipodxo JO ofy' l>iiv uiiiuuoj JO J.))]-)'!
AUXILIARY WORK. 129
The preceding- table gives the details of eight of Mr. Hawley's experiments. The experiments are distinguished by numbers (1-8), and the formulae used b}^ letters (A, B, and C). Mr. Hawley's notes on these experiments were written chiefly on two dates, the first immediately after the estimates of foliage were made and the second shortly after the fruit was gathered. His statements in general are given in the following notes:
Experiment I.- June 23, 1894. — This experiment was made under rather unfavorable circum- stances, as the wind came up quite strong after I had commenced, and consequently I could not do the work as thoroughly as I wished, but the results now promise to be entirely satisfactory. The foliage is perfectly fresh and green, and apparently the peaches are going to hang on. Another thing that now appears to be well estab- lished is that the earlier spraying is the better. [See notes under experiment 2.] There is now quite a perceptible difference to be noticed between early and late spraying as regards the foliage.
October 1, 1894. — This experiment has demonstrated the effectiveness of the spray used. While the crop was not large, owing to the unhealthy state of the trees from leaf curl last year, yet it was about three times as large on the sprayed as on the unsprayed trees. The fruit was much nicer. I could easily pick out the baskets of fruit from the sprayed trees.
Experiment 2:
June 23, 1894. — This experiment has given entire satisfaction so far, as the foliage of the trees is perfect and the fruit is hanging on well. This experiment, taken in connection with the others, indicates that the blue vitriol solution, C, acts quicker than the sulphur solution. The winter sprayings seem fully as effective with the sul- phur solution as with the blue vitriol, but the spring spraying is not quite as good.
October 1, 1894. — While the difference in the amount of fruit gathered from the sprayed and unsprayed trees is not as great as in some of the other experiments, yet the effect is fully as apparent, for these trees were not nearly as badly affected last year as some others, and consequently they all had a fair load of fruit. There was a far greater difference noted in the foliage than in the fruit.
Experiment 3:
The first spraying of this experiment was on January 19, and was followed by a heavy rain storm, which lasted twenty-four hours, and will undoubtedly prevent the full benefit of the work from being realized, but the work was very thoroughly done and may be effective.
June 23, 1894. — The second spraying was well done, and at this date the effect seems to show (1) that formula B is not strong enough to have the desired effect; and (2) that two sprayings are not much better than one, provided the work is thoroughly done with one spraying, and provided, also, the spraying is followed by good weather.
October 1, 1894. — This experiment has given greater satisfaction than anticipated. The proportion of sprayed to unsprayed fruit is better than expected at the time of the estimate on the loss of foliage.
Experiment 4:
June 23, 1894. — The contrast between the sprayed and unsprayed trees at this date is very decided in this, experiment. The first spraying was on the same date as experiment 3, and followed by rain. The last was done April 12 with formula C, and was well done, and the trees now look fine. 1901)3— No. 20 y
130 PEA.CH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
October 1, 1894. — The results of this experiment are rather disappointing, as I was led to believe when I made the estimate of the loss of foliage in Jmie that tlie results would be more satisfactory than with experiment 3. Whether the solutions used had the effect of neutralizing each other, or whether formula B, having been first applied, prevented any benefit from formula C, I can not tell.
Ejj>erimeni ,5:
June 23, 1894. — The first spraying of this lot was followed by ten hours' rain, the last spraying by good weather. The treated trees present a fine appearance, but the con- trast is not so great as in some other experiments, for the control trees are an outside row and apparently not as badly affected as those farther in the orchard. I do not anticipate a very large difference in the fruit yield.
October 1, 1894. — This experiment has turned out just as I thought it would. The difference in the amount of fruit from the sprayed and unsprayed trees is not great, yet it is quite satisfactory considering the conditions.
Experiment 6:
June 23, 1894. — This experiment was thoroughly made, but was unfortunately followed by twenty-four hours of warm rain, commencing ten hours after the spray- ing, so that the result is not as satisfactory as desired, but the effect is so noticeable that the difference can l)e seen half a mile away.
Octol)er 1, 1894. — The results of this experiment are entirely satisfactory. In spite of the fact that the spraying was followed by rain and then by very cold weather, the yield of fruit was one-third more on the treated trees than on the imtreated trees, but what pleases me most is the very great difference in ajipearance of the trees now. Those that were treated have made double the growth this season tliat the untreated hrees have. They are holding their leaves late and have twice the buds set for another year, and are fresher and healthier in every way.
Experiment 7:
June 23, 1894. — The result of this experiment thus far seems to show that the. formula used is not strong enough to accomplish the work desired. There is at this date less difference to be noted between the treated and untreated trees than in any other experiment.
Octol)er 1, 1894. — This experiment has resulted about as I thought it would, from the appearance of the trees in June. I do not think formula B is strong enough.
Experiment 8:
June 23, 1894. — I regard this as one of the most valuable experiments in the series. It has so far shown the U'st results. The untreated trees look as though a bliglit had struck them, api)earing at this date as if they were going to die, while the sprayed trees look as fresh and healthy as young trees that never had any disease. One curious thing I have noticed is in relation to a branch from one of the untreated trees which reaches across to one of the treated ones. This ))ranch, of (tourse, got sprayed when the tree was Hpraye<l with which it mingles, and it is as full of leaves and fruit as tlie treated tree, while the balance of the tree to which it l)elongs is bare of leaves and fruit.
()cto})er 1, 1894. — The final results of this experiment have proved what I exiR^cted. Tliere is a greater difference in yield than in any other exi)erinient, while the differ- ence in ajipearance l)etween the treated and untreated trees is yet very marked. The treated trees look as fresh and healthy as young trees, while the others still look very bad. These trees have always lx!en very heavy iK'arers, and consecjuently have not attained a very large size. They were never very badly affected by leaf curl till thia year.
AUXILIARY WORK.
131
In the eight experiments described l)}^ Mr. Hawley the percentages of net gain in fruit of the sprayed trees over the uusprayed were as follows:
Table 35. — Percentages of net gain in fruit shown in eight spraying experiinents conducted by Mr. Smith Hawley, of Ludington, Mich.
Experiment No. |
Formula.a |
Net gain. Per cent. 191 •16 174 41 |
Experiment No. |
Formula. |
Net gain. |
1 |
A |
6. . |
C |
Per cent. 35 |
|
9 |
C |
6 |
A |
49 |
|
S |
B * . ... |
B |
24 |
||
^ |
B and C . . |
8 |
C |
1,424 |
|
a See table 34.
Owing to the fact that Mr. Hawlej^'s experiments were conducted with different varieties of peach, an accurate comparison can not be instituted between them. From the very excellent results obtained in experiment 8, where the unsprayed trees lost 90 per cent of their leaves and the sprayed trees only 3 per cent, and where the net gain in fruit by the sprayed trees was 1,424 per cent of the yield of the unsprayed trees, the writer believes Mr. Hawley 's conclusions are correct, viz, that the spray used in this experiment gave the best results. That the same spray did not give equally striking contrasts in experiments 2, 4, and 6 is pro})ably due mainly to the fact that the trees of these experiments were not of the same variety as those of experiment 8, but were much more resistant to disease, hence no spray could have produced in the former experiments the same con- trast between spraj^ed and unsprayed trees. That the trees of experi- ments 2, 4, and 5 were not as badly diseased as those of experiment 8 is shown to be a fact, for the unsprayed trees of the latter experiment lost 1)0 per cent of their leaves from curl, while those of the former experiments lost only 50 per cent. The same evidence is given b}^ the fruit. The unspraj^ed trees of experiment 8 bore only 3.7 pounds of fruit per tree, while the unsprayed trees of experiments 2, 4, and 5 averaged 45.7, 11.6, and 32.4 pounds of fruit per tree, respectively.
From the preceding facts it appears that the most active and satis- factory spray used by Mr. Hawle}^ was that containing 5 pounds of copper sulphate, 5 pounds of quicklime, and 45 gallons of water. This is especiall}' interesting from the fact that this spray also gave the best results among the 35 formula tested by the writer in the Sacra- mento Valley.
The relative value of the stronger sulphur spray (formula A) and the Bordeaux mixture used by Mr. Hawley (formula C) is well brought out in an experiment conducted by him on a somewhat similar scale, but with a single variety of peach — Hills Chile. This experiment admits of very satisfactory comparisons being drawn, and is summarized in the following table:
132 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Table 36. — Experiment No. 9, conducted by Mr. Smith Hawley.
Row No. |
Formula used. |
Variety of trees. |
Age of trees. |
Num- ber of trees. |
Date of .spraying. |
Total yield of " fruit. |
Net gain of fruit over yield of \m- sprayed trees. |
1 |
A |
Hills Chile |
rears. 5 5 5 5 |
6 6 6 6 |
April 12 Unsprayed February 8 January 19 |
Pounds. 270 63 306 189 |
Per cent. 328 |
2 |
do |
||||||
3 . |
C |
....do |
354 |
||||
4 |
A |
...do |
200 |
||||
The preceding experiment shows that Mr. 'Hawley obtained from his Hills Chile trees a net gain in fruit of 85-1- per cent b}' spraying with the Bordeaux mixture (formula (-), and a net gain of 328 per cent with the stronger sulphur spray when applied on April 12 and 200 per cent when applied on January 19. These results indicate that the early winter treatment will probably not prove as effective in Michigan as a treatment of the trees shortly before the buds swell in the spring. It is probable, however, that the copper spraj^'^ will act more quickly than the sulphur sprays, on which account the latter should be allowed somewhat more time for a(;tion than the copper sprays, by applying them a little earlier in the spring. The copper sprays may be applied until the first buds begin to open, if neces- sary, but such a late application of the sulphur sprays would endanger the liuds and new growth.
The following are Mr. Hawley's notes on this experiment :
E.vperimeni. 9:
June 23, 1894. — This experiment, althougli on a small scale, lias been very inter- sting and instructive, and has been noted and admired by all who saw it. The reea stand on a slope, and a person standing on the opposite slope, only a few rods away, can see every tree, and the best possible chance is had to observe the effect of the different sprays, and to compare the treated with the untreated trees. The con- trast at this time is very remarkable. The trees were quite badly affected by leaf curl last year.
Octol)er 1, 1894. — The contrast between the treated and untreated trees is very great as regards yield of fruit, and the contrast in the trees them.selves at this date is (juite as remarkable. The treated trees look fresh and healthy and have made a fine growth, while the untreated trees look sickly and have mad(^ very little growth, looking, in fac;t, a year or tw(^ younger, as regards size, tliuii tiic others.
Late in the season of 1894 Mr. Hawley tested the sulphur and copper sprays to ascertain the comparatixc action of the sani(> upon buds which were considerably swolh'n. lie h>iinic(l tliat the sulphur si)ray injured the buds to such an extent as to reduce the yield, while it prevented curl. The copper spray, however, prevented cuil and gave a decided increase in yield, lie tliiis icaclies Die conclusion that foi'mula A is more injurious to buds than t'oniuda ('. While this is ti'ue if the spray is apj)lied at loo late a date, it may l»e safely applied at an earlier date. It should als(; !)»• nienti()ne(i that (he sul|)hur sprays
AUXILIARY WORK.
133
have insecticidal properties much superior to those of the copper sprays.
The Department work conducted by Mr. Hawley seems to have clearly demonstrated the possibility of controlling the most severe attacks of curl in the lake shore region of Michigan with a single spraying, when this is done thoroughly and at the proper time. In experiment 8 the untreated trees were so badly affected that, as already stated, 90 per cent of the foliage and all but 3.7 pounds of the fruit fell from the trees, but by spraying similar trees Mr. Hawley saved all liut 8 per cent of the leaves — a gain of 2,900 per cent of foliage — besides increasing the yield of fruit 1,424 per cent. In other words, the sprayed trees held 30 times as much spring foliage and over 15 times as much fruit as the unsprayed trees at their side, all being of the same variety.
In the southern portion of the Michigan fruit belt a number of growers assisted the Department in conducting experiments. Among the reports received from that section is one by Mr, George Lannin, of South Haven. Mr. Lannin's work is summarized in the following table :
Table 37.
-Experimental work conducted hy Mr. George Lannin, of SoutJi Haven, Mich., in the spring and summer of 1895.
[Nature of soil, sandy.]
-= a |
Formuloe for -15 gallons of water. |
Variety of trees. |
Age of trees. |
Number of trees — |
Date of — |
Percentage of leaves lost by — |
Date when loss of leaves was esti- mated. |
Fruit produced by— |
||||
O o |
o |
p. |
First spray- ing. |
Second spray- ing. |
CO |
0) ;-< 'O 0) S' p. a t3 |
V 1 1 02 |
01 P. a |
||||
flO lbs. sul- |
] |
years. |
Lbs. |
Lbs. |
||||||||
1 |
) phur, 20 lbs. ) lime, 5 lbs. (, salt. |
parnard |
(1 |
10 |
10 |
Apr. 10 |
May 17 |
20 |
40 |
July 10 |
1,200 |
830 |
2 |
5 lbs. copper sulphate, 10 lbs. lime. |
Hills Chile |
(1 |
10 |
10 |
...do.. |
June2r) |
15 |
35 |
...do.. |
1,300 |
(500 |
3 |
(2 lbs. copper 1 sulphate, ;! I pts. ammo- l nia. |
Ulales Early .... |
IJ |
10 |
10 |
...do.. |
...do.. |
20 |
40 |
...do.. |
1,7(50 |
080 |
4 |
[5 oz. copper 1 carbonate, 3 j pts. ammo- [ nia. |
Crawfords Late. |
(; |
10 10 |
...do.. |
.Tune 8 |
10 |
30 |
...do.. |
1,800 |
700 |
The spray formula? tested by Mr. Lannin were not included in the work of Mr. Hawley, and are therefore characterized as Formula? D, E, F, and G. As Mr. Lannin sprayed different v'arieties of peach trees with 4 formulae, the experiments can not l)e compared with one another
134
PEACH LEAF CUKL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
to advantage. The value of all the sprays used is shown, however, by the gain in fruit obtained. The percentage of net gain in fruit was 44, 116, 158, and 1.57 per cent, respectively. These figures show that the eau celeste (Formula F) and the ammoniacal copper carbonate (Formula G) gave satisfactory results. The action of the disease on the foliage of the trees of experiment 3 was more severe than it was on the foliage of the trees of experiment 4. The unspra3^ed trees of the former experiment lost 10 per cent more of their leaves than the trees of the latter. The percentage of gain in fruit from the sprayed trees of experiment 3 was, however, fully as great as that from the sprayed trees of experiment 4. This shows that the eau celeste (Formula F) was more effective in combating the disease than the ammoniacal copper carl)onate, which was applied in experiment 4.
Mr. F. N. Chesebro, of South Haven, sprayed 19 Crawfords Late and 19 Oldmixon trees in the spring of 1894, leaving 19 trees of each variety for comparison. The formula used was 15 pounds of sulphur, 30 pounds of lime, and 10 pounds of salt to 60 gallons of water. Mr. Chesebro did not report the exact jdeld of his trees, but stated that the sprayed trees lost 20 per cent of their foliage and the unsprayed trees 80 per cent — a saving of 60 per cent of the foliage by a single spraying. His report is as follows:
Table 88. — Experimental work conducted by Mr. F. N. Chesehru, of South Ilavai, Mich.,
in the spring of 1894.
[Variety of trees, Crawfords Late and Oldmixon Cling; nature of soil, sandy loam.]
Formula.
fl5 lbs. sulphur I^Olbs. liiiK'....
10 lbs. salt
loo gal. water . .
Number of |
Per cent of |
||||
trees— |
be |
leaves lost by— |
|||
•/ |
|||||
o |
|||||
o |
|||||
a; 0/ |
2 a. |
-O |
|||
i2 |
d |
>■. |
Of |
■a |
>-. |
'o to |
s 0. |
a |
3i a |
||
< |
02 |
o |
« |
«j |
0 |
Vcurn. 1 |
|||||
1 " |
m |
38 |
Mar. 7 |
•20 |
80 |
Date when
loss of
leaves wius esti- mated.
Mr. J. F. Taylor, of Douglas, Mich., reported favorably upon the spray work conducted by him in 1894. He used three different spmys, treating 50 trees with (!ach, and leaving a lik(^ luunbcr unsprayed for comparison. The formula' used wert^ those designated as A, B, and C, in th(; spray work of Mr. Smith Hawloy. Mr. Taylor says, in regard to his work:
Tlw hlosHorii I)ii(1h liail hwoUcii Homowhat when I iK'^ii'i H])rayin>i, but tlu- U'uf hiulH vviTC! fiuiU; (loriiiiint. Foriiiiila ;\ was used on March 2(1, Formula 15 on April (i, and Formula (; on .Xprii 20. HloHHoms be^an to open on tlie la-^t dayn of Ai)ril, and by the (iih of May trees were well covered with bloom. The tree.M sprayed were (5 years
AUXILIARY WORK. 135
old, and of the following varieties: St. John, Barnards Early, Hinman, Switzerland, Gold Drop, and Early Freestone. Some of these varieties curled very badly last year, especially Early Freestone. The soil is quite uniformly a gravelly loam, with clay subsoil under all varieties. I made only one application with each formula. I think two applications would have been better. I sprayed 50 trees and then omitted 50 in each plat, or with each formula. I think Formula C gave as good results as any of them.^
After the trees were in full l(;af I invited neighboring fruit men to go through the orchard and note the conditions of the trees sprayed and misprayed. They found the foliage of trees that had been sprayed almost fr(« from curl, while the imsprayed trees were badly curled. * * * The misprayed trees had a larger percentage of small dead limbs through the top than those that were sprayed, and the prospect for future crops is therefore better where the trees were sprayed. * * * i hope to follow the work up more extensively next spring, and will begin the work earlier in the season, if necessary. If Formula C will continue to give as good results as it did last spring, I prefer to use it.
Mr. S. I. Bates, of Shelby, Mich,, sprayed a few Stump the World trees in the spring of 1894, leaving an equal number unsprayed for comparison. The crop from the sprayed trees Avas double that from the unsprayed trees at their side, and a large percentage of the foliage was also saved. Mr. Bates states that the spray seems to put new life and vigor into the trees, especially young trees. With respect to the action of curl on old trees, he writes that there is an old orchard just across the road from his own which has had curl until the trees have no bearing wood left except at the extreme tops, and the owner "does nothing to prevent the disease and gets but little fruit. "^
NOTES ON THE AUXILIARY EXPERIMENTS IN OREGON.
The climatic conditions under which peach culture is pursued in Ore- gon and Washington vary greatly. At the east of the Cascade Mountains the conditions approximate in many districts those pre- vailing in much of California. At the west of this range local influences determine the greater or less adaptation of each valley or region to the cultivation of the peach. Generally speaking, however, the humidity of the atmosphere for a major portion of the year is much in excess of that prevailing generally at the east of the Cas- cades or in California. In this respect also this northwest region is quite distinct from the conditions met with in most of the peach- growing regions of the East. In fact the climate of western Oregon and Washington is such as to call for separate consideration in connec- tion with our present work. For this reason special effort has been
'This is the same formula that waa found very satisfactory by Mr. Smith Hawley, at Ludington, Mich., and by the writer in the Sacramento Valley.
^ There are thousands <jf such peach orchards in the peach districts of the United States. To those who are interested in the renewal of yomig and bearing wood upon lower limbs and upon old trees, the writer would refer to the data presented in Chap- ter V of this })u]letin, wliere the influence of sprays on the vegetation of trees haa been quite fully considered.
136 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
made to carry out spraying- experiments in western Oregon, so that the needs of the growers west of the Cascades could be supplied.
The great rainfall Avhich annually occurs on the west side of the Cascade Mountains makes the vegetation of that region especially liable to fungous diseases, and the peach is no exception to this rule. In the "Willamette Valley. Oregon, along the lower Columbia, and in the basin of Puget Sound in Washington, peach leaf curl has become a great hindrance to extensive peach culture. In view of these facts, many peach growers of Oregon and Washington were requested by the Department to conduct experiments for the control of the disease, and it was taken up by a number in 189-1: and again in 1895. Several of the gentlemen who conducted such work prepared reports of the same, which should prove of much interest and value to the peach growers of both States.
Among those who entered heartily into the work was ]\lr. ]\1. O. Lownsdale. of Lafayette, Oreg. This gentleman conducted very extensive spraying tests according to plans supplied hy the Depart- ment, both in 1891 and 1895, using in his work as many as 30 acres of young peach trees in 1894. At the close of his experimental spray work ]Mr. Lownsdale ga^e the following general facts respecting the situation in the Willamette Valley, in which Lafayette is situated, being the center of an extensive fruit-growing region of Yamhill County: *
I hand j'ou herewith my report of experiments for the prevention of peach leaf curl for the reason of 1895, to which 1 de^^ire to add a few' words u{)on the status of the peach industry in the Northwest.
Peach {rrowing has been abandoned to a great extent in the Ayillamette Valley because of the attacks of the shot-hole fungits and leaf curl. (Irowers have not understood the causes of their tn^ubles, and liave attributed them to peculiar climatic condition.*, or have grouped them under tlie indefinite term blight; but now that the nature of these fungous troubles is ])etter understood, and the remedies suggested have proved so efficacious, it seems that the abandonment of the industry mav have l)een premature. The success of the i)reliminary experiments has restored the con- fidence of orchardists in a great measure, and as it becomes widely known that our fungoTis troubles can be controlled, increased attention will be given to peach growing.
Kxperiments through a .series of four years on a block of (J acres of Early Char- lotte ))eaclR's indicate that it may be j)ossible to prevent these destructive fungi from getting a footlwjld in an orchard. This block of trees, which was i)laiitcd in dormant bud, has received an annual treatment in October and two treatments eacli spring with the ammoniacal cojiper carbonate, with the excei)tion of the si)ring of ]HUr>, when your modified Bordeaux was apjtlied. Neitiier leaf curl nor sliot-liole fungus has develoi)ed in this block. A faircroj)of fruit was harvested this sununer — tlie fourth from the bud — and the trees are healthy and have grown luxuriantly. If intending jilanters wtmld select perfectly healthy trees — (Mther yearling or dormant buds — and would give them one treatment in autumn, jis the Department has sug- gested, in addition to the sjjring treatment for leaf curl, it is i>robab]e that lu-acli growing would again })ecome pro(ital)le in the Willamette Valley. I am convinced that if the edicacy of the niodilicd I'xirdcaiix iiiixtiirc for the coMtnil of leaf curl hid been known live years ago tlif industry umild have been liourishing to-day, for
AUXILIARY WORK. 137
with the treatment for leaf curl, which adds so much vigor aud sturdiness to the tree, as indicated by the pushing out of dormant buds on lower branches, the liability to attacks of other fungi would have been lessened, and it would then have been difh- cult for the great shot-hole wave to sweep over our orchards as it did in 1893 and 1894.
The (juality of peaches grown in the Willamette Valley is unsurpassed. No locality in the United States can produce more delicious fruit. It seems judicious, then, to attemj^t to save this industry and render it profitable again. To this end it is to be hoped that the Department's methods for the prevention of these fimgous attacks will be widely adopted.
The spra}" work conducted b}^ Mr. Lownsdale in the spring of 1894 involved the sprajdng of some 1,700 3'oung trees and the testing of 10 spray formulae. With each of the 10 experiments was included a considerable number of unsprayed trees left for comparison, these control trees being of the same variety as the trees sprayed in the same experiment, and in each case they were so located at the sides or among the sprayed trees as to admit of just comparison. Mr. Lowns- dale's report upon this extensive work is given below. All the spray formulae prepared by him were for 15 gallons of water:
Thirty acres of peach trees were devoted to experimental work under your direc- tion. These trees were Crawfords Earl}- and Earh- Charlotte (a seedling from the Crawfords Early) . In addition to these tests 10 acres were left wholly untreated as a block check against the main experiments. All these trees were 3 years old, and had curled so badly in 1893 that they had twisted into shapeless masses, though they had partially recovered later in the season. The general plan of work was to treat a block of at least 100 trees with each formula, leaving intervening check rows untreated. In some instances check rows were interspersed through the treated block, it being desirable to have all conditions as nearly alike as possible. . Formula A (10 pounds sulphur, 20 pounds lime, 10 pounds salt) was applied March 21, 1894, to 264 trees in 8 rows, with 2 control rows on each side of the block. Curl appeared in about 3 per cent of the foliage of the sprayed trees, while 60 per cent of the foliage of the untreated controls was affected.
Formula B (5 pomids sulphur, 10 pomids lime, 5 pounds salt) was applied March 23 to 204 trees in 4 rows, with 2 check rows on each side of block. About 3 per cent of foliage was affected, while untreated check rows curled very badly.
Formula C (5 pounds sulphur, 10 pounds lime) was applied to 166 trees on March 22 in a block 4 rows wide, with the customary 2 check rows. Curl developed on about 10 per cent of the foliage of the treated trees, and upon about 60 per cent of that of the controls.
Formula G (6 pomids copper sulphate, 10 pounds lime) was applied to 42 trees on March 17. About 5 per cent of foliage was affected on the sprayed trees, but the controls were so ))adly affected that they scarcely survived the sunmier.
Formula H (3 pounds copper sulphate, 5 pounds lime) was applied March 20 to 186 trees in a block 6 rows wide. About 8 per cent of the foliage of the sprayed trees was affected, while the controls were as under Formula G.
Formula I (2 pounds copper sulphate, 3 pints 26° ammonia) was applied March 20 to 26 trees with 26 clieck trees. About 5 per cent of curl developed on treated trees, while the check row was very badly injured.
Fornmla J (4 pounds copper sulphate, 5 pounds sal soda, 3 pints 26° anmionia) was appliccl March 20 to 26 trees, with 2 check rows of 26 trees. Curl developed on 3 per cent of the foliage of the treated trees, but the controls were almost destroyed.
138 PEACH LEAF CURL! ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Formula K (5 pounds sulphur, 15 pounds lime) was applied ^larch 19 to 278 trees in a block 10 rows wide, with control rows of 69 trees each on each side. Curl appeared on about 2 per cent of the foliage of the treated trees, while the check rows were, as in the previous year, a mass of curled leaves and twisted V)ranches. Formula K was also applied to 25 Salway trees and to 15 Alexanders, which had curled very badly for many years, the Salways always being defoliated completely. These trees were 8 years old. No curl appeared on either variety.
Formula L (5 pounds copper sulphate, 15 pounds lime) was applied March 18 and again March 21 to 262 trees, with 7 check rows interspersed through the l)lock. Less than one-fourth of 1 per cent of curl appeared on the treated trees of this test, while the check rows were almost destroyed by the disease. The greater ])ortion of these untreated trees have been dug up and replaced (February 13, 1895) . Treated trees in this block made an excellent growth, though cultivated only moderately, and a great majority were absolutely free from curl.
The anmioniacal copper carbonate, Formula M (5 ounces copper carbonate, 3 pints 26"^ ammonia) , was applied March 22 to 210 trees, 2 check rows oi 69 trees being left alongside. Less than 3 per cent of curl appeared on the block, while 65 per cent of the foliage of the control trees was curled. This formula was also applied twice, at intervals of two weeks, upon 5 acres of trees upon which no curl could be found. This experiment, though remarkably successful, was not as conclusive as desired, as no control trees were left. This was upon a block of thrifty trees, of which I did not care to sacrifice any portion to an experiment. The same treatment had j)re- served them, the previous year, and I feared a change.
All my treated trees have grown satisfactorily this year, ))ut the 10-acre check block of untreated trees was so nearly destroyed by curl that all the trees will be dug up. Several hundred are dead, and of the remainder I think no tree has had a growth of 12 inches.
It will be .seen from Mr. Lownsdale's report of the work in 1894 that several of the sprays used gave most excellent results. On May 18 of that year he wrote:
Curl ha.s developed moderately, and everywhere the better condition of treated over untreated trees is apparent. The trees treated with 5 pounds of copper sul- phate and 15 pounds of lime may be said to be absolutely free from the curl and the experiment a success. This block was sprayed twice in March. The check rows in this block and alongside are curled as badly as any trees except seedlings.
The modified eau celeste (Fonnula J) is also giving good results, as is the 5 pounds of sulphur and 15 pounds of lime; but I believe the copper sulphate, 5-pound for- mula, is in the lead. This may be attributed to more thorough work, as most of the other sprays were only applied once.
Owing to the fact that no fruit records could ])e obtained from Mr. Lownsdale's expcirimcnts in 1894, as the trees were yet too small, arrano-ements were made for the testing of some of the more valuable spravs in the spring of I8t>5. The experiments of 1895 siiow the gain in both foliage ajid fruit, though the yield was low, resulting from the u.se of 5 sprays — 1 sulphur and 4 copi)er. The expcu'iments were con- fined to the Crawfords Early variety, and in each experiment the trees received two sprayings in March. All trees were 4 years old, Imt rather small. Mr. Lownsdale's data on this work arc })i'cscnted in th(! followinLf tiiMc:
AUXILIARY WORK.
139
Table 39. — Experimental work conducted by Mr. M. 0. Lownsdale, of Lafayette, Orey., in the spring and summer of 1895.
[Variety of trees, Crawfords Early; nature of soil, red hill.]
Formulse for 45 gallons of water.
[10 lbs. snlphur . . .
20 lbs. lime
[5 lbs. salt
[5 lbs. copper sul phate
10 lbs. lime
['2 lbs. copper sul- phate
1 3 pts. ammonia. . .
|5 oz. copper car- bonate
[3 pts. ammonia..
[5 lbs. copper .sul- phate
15 lbs. lime
Age
of
trees,
Yrs.
Number of
trees.
Date of-
First spray- ing.
Mar. 7 ...do... Mar. 9 Mar. 8 Mar. 9
Second spray- ing.
Mar. 27 ....do... ....do... Mar. 28 ....do...
Leaves lost by-
Perct. 10
Tr i- fling.
Per ct. 35
35
30
30
40
Date when loss of leaves was esti- mated.
June IS ....do... ....do... ....do... ....do...
Fruit pro- duced by—
Lbs. 346
480
807
1,264
1,048
Lbs. 187
62
193
But few comments upon the preceding table are required. It makes the fact perfectly evident that two spring- sprayings are sufficient to almost absolutel)^ control leaf curl in the Willamette Valley. In a letter written June 25, 1895, Mr. Lownsdale says:
Peach leaf curl has not developed as badly in this section as it did last year. I have estimated that about 40 per cent appeared on most of my control trees. Two sprays with lime, 10 and 15 pounds, and copper sulphate, 5 pounds, were an abso- lute success. Lime in the amount of 15 pounds gives the best results, there l)eing 100 per cent of healthy foliage on trees sprayed with this amount and 5 pounds of cop- per sulphate. Practically the same results were obtained with two applications of the ammoniacal copper carbonate. It is impossible to find a curled leaf on acres and acres of treated trees.
In the Rogue River Valley, in the southern tier of counties of Oregon, the conditions are somewhat more favorable for peach culture than in much of the Willamette Valley. The climate is somewhat intermedi- ate in character between that of northwestern Oregon and northern California. Peach culture is quite extensive about Ashland, Medford, etc. The reports of Mr. E. F. Meissner, of Kerby, Josephine County, and of Mr. N. S. Bennett, of Medford, Jackson County, are fairly rep- resentative of those received from experiments conducted in southern Oregon. Mr. Meissner's report again shows the great effectiveness of 5 pounds of copper sulphate, 10 pounds of lime, and 45 gallons of water. With this formula he sprayed 4 Salway trees 4 years old, leavingan equal number unspra3^ed for comparison. Two treatments were given, the first February 22, the second March 10, 1895. From the sprayed trees 10 per cent of the foliage was lost from curl, while from the
140 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
unsprayed trees 90 per cent was lost, leaving the trees nearly bare. Unfortunateh', frost killed the buds, and no comparison of fruit was possible, but it is safe to say that the fall of 90 per cent of the leaves would have caused the loss of the crop, while 10 per cent loss would have occasioned little, if any, falling of fruit. Mr. Meissner writes respecting his work that the copper sulphate spray "has given far better results than the sulphur, lime, and salt," and that "the trees sprayed with the bluestone mixture look the best of any in the orchard."
Mr. Bennett used the 5-pound formula for the Bordeaux mixture as given for Mr. Meissner. He sprayed but once, on March 11, 1895. The 29 trees sprayed averaged 44 pounds of fruit per tree, while the single control tree yielded but 9 pounds, or a net gain in fruit of 388 per cent. The fact of most interest in connection with this work is, however, that the variety treated was the El])erta, which is probabh' more universally susceptible to leaf curl than any other variety now grown in the United States. The control of curl on this variety was almost absolute, as will be seen from the following letter from Mr. Bennett:
I send you to-day a report of the spraying for leaf curl. The experiment was an honest trial, and I feel very jul)ilant over the success. 1 have reported only the Elherta variety, as it was one of that kind which I left unsprayed. I am more than pleased with the results, and can say tliat a good trial is all that any man needs who has the welfare of his orchard at heart (his poeketbook as well) . The peaches from the sprayed trees were first-class, clean, and sold at the highest market price. I notice a very marked difference in the general health of the trees in favor of those sprayed. The leaves lost by the sprayed trees were, perhaps, one-half of 1 per cent. The unsprayed tree was a little above an average tree in the spring. There were 29 sprayed trees, which yielded an average of 44 pounds of choice fruit to tlie tree, nearly hah" of wliich packed 56 peaclies to the l)ox. 1 sprayed 75 Wheatland trees witli the same sncicess as far as leaf curl is concerned. They are fine, liealtliy trees n(jw, and bore a good crop this season. They have been bad about curling, l)ut I left an Klberta l)ecause that variety is the worst to curl, and if si)raying did them no good I intended to grub them out.
Mr. P. W. Olwell, of Centralpoint, Oreg., applied the sulphur spray to 400 Muir trees in his orchard, leaving 25 trees unsprayed for compai'ison. The fonnuhi used by Mr. Olwell was 1 5 pounds of sulpliur, 30 pounds of lime, and 1<) pounds of salt to (!0 gallons of watei-. Ilis trees were 5 years old, growing in black, loamy soil. They were sprayed Mar(rh 10. The sprayed trees did not lose any foliage from dis«!ase, while the control trees lost 25 per cent. The fruit records were not r('i)()ited.
NOTES ON THE AUXIMAllY KXTEKIMENTS IN (CALIFORNIA.
Besides th(^ experiinciilid work conducted by the writer in lh(> Sac- ramento Valley in the years l!S!>4 and !S!)5, a coiisidcriibic number of groweis assisted in canying on experiments in dillerent portions of
AUXILIARY WORK.
141
California. Reports have been received from several of these growers, and while in some instances they are not as complete as desired, the results shown are amply sufficient to determine the practical value of the work undertaken.
Among the more complete and carefully prepared reports is one from Mr. A. D. Cutts, of Live Oak, Sutter County. The work was carried out in the winter of 189ii-93, and was one of the experiments which led to the writer's detailed series of experiments outlined in the present bulletin. In this orchard the spra}' was not used in 189B for the control of leaf curl, but was applied for the purpose of destro^ang the San Jos^ scale, which was gaining a foothold in the orchard. The trees infested by scale were scattered through a 40-acrc block of the Crawf ords Late variety. These trees had been marked, and in Febru- ary, 1893, were thoroughly sprayed with the sulphur spray, consist- ing of 15 pounds sulphur, 30 pounds lime, 10 pounds salt, and 60 gal- lons water. Only a few of the trees were entirely sprayed. As curl developed seriously in that region in the spring of 1893, the contrast between the scattered sprayed trees and the remainder of the block was very striking, and Mr. Cutts kindly consented to preserve the records of yield of a few of the sprayed and unsprayed trees for use in this connection. In the table which follows is shown the amount of fruit produced by each of the 9 sprayed trees included in Mr. Cutts's records, as well as the weight and number of lirst, second, and third quality peaches. The same facts are given for an equal num- ber of neighboring unsprayed trees for comparison.
Table 40. — Experimental vjork conducted by Mr. A. D. Cvtts, of Live Oak, Cal., in the spring and summer of 1893.
[Crawfords Late, 4 years old.]
Sprayed trees. |
Unsprayed |
trees. |
||||||||||||
Total pounds of— |
Number of — |
Total pounds o |
f— |
Number of — |
||||||||||
>, |
X |
^ |
^_ |
>> |
x |
j^ |
>. |
j,_. |
^ |
|||||
ai |
ci m |
Ci 72 |
cS |
C3 |
cS x |
03 Ji |
||||||||
tree. |
3*J |
3<J |
S-^ |
%Z |
P*i |
0^2 |
3*; |
3 aj |
3 CD |
|||||
^a |
^d |
■ii; |
^ cS |
-S 03 |
'C as |
•,S |
■Oil |
^i^ |
Jj CS |
-r,^ |
-o^ |
|||
u |
m 1> |
S a) |
c^ |
m 0) |
C <" |
|||||||||
t |
o |
u^ |
c ft |
••-■ |
o |
oft |
||||||||
E |
J5 |
S |
1 |
E |
CO |
.a Eh |
s |
|||||||
1 |
156 |
115 |
32 |
9 |
276 |
96 |
29 |
41 |
23 |
12 |
6 |
102 |
56 |
56 |
2 |
226 180 119 180 176 279 55 126 |
189 145 100 146 154 225 38 106 |
20 28 13 25 17 34 12 15 |
17 7 6 9 5 20 5 5 |
735 615 385 605 568 815 148 367 |
126 no 70 138 86 161 60 65 |
130 45 54 60 32 139 30 27 |
2 1 |
2 1 |
4 3 |
||||
3 |
||||||||||||||
4 |
||||||||||||||
5 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
|||||||||||
6 |
||||||||||||||
7 |
1 3 8 |
'""?,' |
1 3 |
8 |
||||||||||
8 |
||||||||||||||
9 |
18 |
|||||||||||||
Total. |
1,497 |
1,218 |
196 |
83 |
4,514 |
902 |
546 |
58 |
31 |
21 |
6 |
120 |
79 |
56 |
The average yield of fruit of the sprayed trees given in the table was 16(5.22 pounds per tree, while the average yield of the unsprayed trees was but 6. -14 pounds. This represents a gain in fruit by the
142 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
sprayed trees above the yield of the unsprayed trees of 2-4.8 times the jdeld of the latter. In other words, there was a gain in 3'ield of 2,481 per cent from spraying-. Much valuable information was also supplied b}' Mr. Cutts in relation to the preparation and application of sprays, and the writer has considered these subjects in other portions of the bvdletin. Some of the more striking photographs of spraj'ed and unspraj^ed trees have also been obtained from Mr. Cutts's orchard, as well as the records of fruit buds elsewhere discussed (Pis. VII and XX).
The report of a test of the Bordeaux mixture (5 pounds copper sulphate, 10 pounds lime, and 45 gallons water) was furnished by Mr. H. B. Gaylord, of Auburn, Placer County. This experiment was made in the spring of 1895. Mr. Gaylord sprayed 10 Heaths Cling peach trees and 4 nectarine trees, the variety of which was not stated. The spraying was done February 15. Mr. Gaylord states that the unspraj-ed nectarines curled so badly that they bore no fruit at all, while the 4 sprayed trees jdelded 320 pounds. He says that every alternate tree was sprayed in a row of nectarines, and that the sprayed peach trees were in the worst places in the orchard. Respecting the result of the work Mr. Gaylord writes, in part:
I herewith send you a partial report on the experiment for leaf curl. I used only one formula. The result is i)erfectly satisfactory. I sprayed some peach and some nectarine trees, both with jrood results. One nectarine tree si)rayed has not a curled leaf, while one of the same kind, a])out 15 feet from it, which was not sprayed, has lost nearly all its leaves. The contrast is so great that it would be worth while to have them photographed. A neighbor, Mr. G. P. Dixon, used formula .S (2 pounds copi>er sulphate, 3 pints ammonia, and 45 gallons water) with the same results, so that I am satisfied that the copper sulphate is what does the work.
Mr. Gaylord also states that no heaves were lost from the peach trees sprayed, while all of the leaves curled on the unsprayed trees of the remainfler of the orchard.
In Amador County an extensive experiment was made in the spring of 1895, by Mr. George Woolsey, of lone. Mr. Woolsey sprayed some 2,500 trees of various varieties of peach and nectarine with 5 pounds of copper sulphate, 10 pounds of lim(% and 45 gallons of water, and left 720 trees unsprayed for comparison. The spraying was done from February 20 to March 10. Most of the sprayed trees lost no foliage, but a few in a wet situation lost not to exceed 25 per cent, while the unsprayed trees lost not less than 50 per cent of the leaves and a large amount of fruit.
Ml'. VV^oolsey gives some notes respecting the work in the s])ring of
1895, as follows:
A block of about 200 trees, Salways 12 to 15 years old, on well-drained soil, and 500SalwayH4 years old, atijoining, I did not spray, thinking they were curl i)roof. I regret 1 did not si)ray them. * * * The leaves are dropping, as well as a large percentage of the fruit. 1 shall certainly spray them in the future. * * * The
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XX.
Sprayed and unsprayed Crawfords Late trees in the orchard of Mr. A. D. Cuttf>, Live Oak. The tree at the right was sprayed in February, 1893, with lime, sulphur, and salt; the trees at the left were untreated. See "Notes on anxiliary experi- ments in California," for a full account of the work at Liveoak. (Photojjraphetl in May, 189:5, after most of the disea.sed leaves had fallen from the unsprayed trees. Compart' witli Pi. VII.)
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agricultur
Plate XX.
AUXILIARY WORK. 143
apparent result of spraying, one application, is as follows: Four control trees of Early Rivers, adjoining trees sprayed March 2, are badly curled, leaves dropping, and also the greater jjortion of the fruit. The adjoining sprayed trees of this tender variety are all right (no cnrl) and make quite a marked contrast. Besides these, 4 white nectarines and 4 Bilyeau peaches, left at the same time, show curl and loss of fruit, although not as badly as the Early Rivers. The surrounding sprayed trees look vigorous and healthy, with no curl.
Mr. Woolsey was among the first peacli growers to adopt the copper sprays for the control of curl. His first experiments were made in 1892, and they proved so satisfactory that he sprayed quite extensively in 1893 and again in 1894. The work in 1893 was of special interest, as the following extract from a communication received from him will show:
I sprayed nearly all my jieach and apricot trees. I say nearly all; for, time press- ing, I foimd I would not get over all the peaches, so to save what I considered the most valuable portion, viz, the young lower growth, I liad that sprayed and left the tops unsprayed. The season w^as a damp one and leaf curl was very prevalent with my neighbors. On my place all trees sprayed were exempt, all others badly affected and crops on them almost a failure. On the ones partly sprayed there was a healthy growth on the lower part of the trees, while they were denuded of foliage above.
Mr. Woolsey's work in 1894 was negative, owing to the nondevelop- ment of the disease that season.
Two peach growers of Eldorado County, Mr. John M. Day, of Placerville, and Mr. A. L. Kramp, of Diamond Spring, furnished the writer with reports of their experiments conducted in the spring and summer of 1895. Mr. Day tried 4 formulae, each showing a decided saving of foliage, but the fruit was lost from frost. The spray used by Mr. Kramp was composed of 10 pounds sulphur, 20 pounds lime, 5 pounds salt, and 45 gallons of water. Ho sprayed GOO trees, 3 years old, of the Hales Earlj^, Briggs Early, and Wilcox Cling varieties, and 3,000 unsprayed trees were left for comparison. The sprayed trees lost no foliage and yielded 48,000 pounds of peaches, while the unspraj^ed trees lost not less than 50 per cent of their leaves and yielded 60,000 pounds. The average yield of the sprayed trees was thus 80 pounds per tree, while the average yield of the unsprayed trees was but 20 pounds, a net gain of 300 per cent.
Gen. N. P. Chipman, of Red Bluff, has been using for at least two 3^ears a formula for Bordeaux mixture which gave the writer exceed- ingly good results at Biggs (see row 21 of the writer's experiments, p. 117). Mr. Chipman writes that his experiments were upon several varieties of peach trees and that excellent results were obtained. He further says: "I used equal parts, or 5 pounds bluestone, 5 pounds quicklime, and 45 gallons water. I believe you have found an infalli- ble remedy. I have used this spray two years with good effect." Mr. Chipman first observed the effects of this spray in the experiment block at the Rio Bonito orchard, in the summer of 1895.
1-14 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
NOTES ON THE AUXILIARY EXPERIMENTS IX NEW YORK, INDIANA, AND OTHER PEACH-GROWING STATES.
Much experimental work for the control of leaf curl has hoeu under- taken at the suggestion of the Department ))y the peacli growers of New York, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky, Maryland, Penn.sylva- nia, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, Arkansas, Missouri, Kansas, and other peach-growing States not already considered in this bulletin. For instance, SO prominent peach growers of various peach-growing centers of New York were given full instructions for the control of curl in the winters of 1893-01: and 1891—05, and requested to report their work, Avhich in a luimber of instances Avas carefulh' done. The same is true of 51: growers in Ohio, 135 in Pennsylvania, etc., and in each case where the work was properly conducted the results were in har- mony with those already discussed in this chapter. For this reason, as well as from the fact that the work already considered has been selected from those sections of the country which arc full}' represen- tative of the different climatic conditions, it is not thought necessary or desirable to enter much further into the details of the work. One or two experiments may be mentioned, however, before closing the consideration of this phase of the subject.
Mr. Joseph ]\I. Cravens, of Madison, Ind., i-eported almost a])solute success in the control of curl in his orchard. The sprayed trees of the 4 experiments made in no case showed more than 3 per cent of curled leaves, while the amount of curl on the foliage of the unsprayed trees ranged from 25 to 45 pi-r cent. Mr. Cravens states in a letter accompanying his report that he sprayed separate rows through his orcliard which were sufficiently far apart not to have the spray affc^ct the intervening rows even if the wind blew at the time of application, and further that he is satisfied that two of the sprays used would have given absolute results had they been applied to every portion of every twig.
Mr. W. T. Mann, of Barkers, N. Y., sprayed 25 trees with the lime, sulphur, and salt spray Api'il 0, 1804, and left 25 trees at their side without spraying for comparsion. On May 28 only 42 diseased heaves were found on the 25 sprayed trees, while as high as 40 per c(>nt of curled foliage was i)resent on some of the unsprayed trees. On the same date as the other spraying was done 25 trees were sprayed with Bordeaux mixture, while 21 were left for comparison. By May 28 only 51> curled leaves had developed on thc^ entire 25 sprjiyed trees, whih; of the 21 unsprayed trees several had as high as 30 to 35 per cent of curled leaves. Mr. Mann says that from the fact tiiat among the 50 trees treated not one showed an appr(>cial)le amount of disease, while all through the orchard trees weic badly aflecti'd, was to him veiy satisfactory evidence of tiie value of the licatmeiit, es[)eciully as
AUXILIARY WORK. 145
he did not undertake the work with any great degree of confidence as to successful results.
Mr. James A. Staples, of Marlboro, N. Y., states that in the sea- sons of 189-1:, 1895, and 1896 he made the spray tests on peach trees for leaf curl which had been suggested by the writer, and says he is well satisfied that the disease can be controlled by proper spraying. He states that the winter treatment gave him the best results.
Mr. A. D. Tripp, of North Ridgewa}^ N. Y. , states in his report of spray work for curl that he treated 208 trees and left 320 trees unspra3^ed. From the sprayed trees he gathered "360 baskets of as fine fruit as ever went to market." The baskets were one-third of a bushel, and the peaches averaged 66 to the basket. From the untreated trees only 15 baskets were gathered, and a portion of this fruit was imper- fect. The variety was the Elberta. 19093— No. 20 10
CHAPTER VIII.
PREPARATION, COMPOSITION, AND GENERAL CHARACTERS OF
THE SPRAYS USED.
PREPARATION OF THE COPPER SPRAYS.
It is not the intention to consider in this place the man}^ forms of copper spra} s which have been used at one time or another in the treatment of fungous diseases, but to confine the discussion to those forms tested in the present work.
Most of the f ormukie for those copper sprays which have been tested in the treatment of peach leaf curl have been personally prepared at one time or another and the results they gave have been carefulh^ studied. Several other formuhe have been recommended by the writer, but these were prepared and applied by the growers themselves, so that for the results of this work their reports have been consulted. There are still a few other formulfe for copper sprays which have been reported upon, but these are the suggestions of others or were chosen by the growers themselves.
The different copper sprays which have been tested in separate form (not in union with other fungicides) are shown in the following list. This list includes 22 distinct formula?. Each formula is that used with 45 gallons of water, except the first for Bordeaux mixture, which was with 48 gallons.
Table 41. — Copper spraya applied for the coiilrol of peach leaf curl.
Copper sulphate solution:
*4 j)otindH copper sulphate, 45f;;allons -water.
*2 pounds copper sulphate, 45 fralloiis water. Bordeaux mixture:
t24 pounds copper sulphate, 45 pounds lime.
*6 fiounds copper sulphate, 15 pounds lime.
t 5 pounds copper sulphate, 15 pounds lime.
*'i i)Ounds <;opper sulphate, 15 pounds lime.
to pounds copi)er sulpliat-e, 10 ])ounds lime.
*5 pounds copj)er sulphate, 10 pounds lime.
*3 i)Ounds copper sulpliate, 10 pounds lime.
*5 poiHids c(tpper sulphate, 5 pounds lime.
*4 pounds copp(>r sulphate, 5 pounds lime.
*:i pounds coi)per sulphate, 5 pounds lime.
* Prepared and tested l)y the writer, aiid in many cases also tested by jrrowei-s. t Chosen and tested ])y >;rower.
t Recommended hy the writer, hut tested hy the growers. 14(j
PREPAKATION OF THE COPPER SPRAYS. 147
Bordeaux mixture — Continued.
*2 pounds copper sulphate, 5 pounds lime.
*6 jjounds coi)per sulpliate, 4 pounds lime.
*6 pounds copper sulpliat(>, 3 pounds lime.
* 3 pounds copper sulphate, 2 pounds lime. Eau celeste:
*4 pounds copper sulphate, 8 pints ammonia (26°).
*2 poiuids copper sulphate, 3 pints ammonia (26°). Modified eau celeste:
*4 jiounds copper sulphate, 5 ])ounds sal soda, 3 pints ammonia (26°).
*2 pounds copper sulphate, 3 pounds sal soda, 2 pints ammonia (26°). Ammoniacal copjier carbonate:
*5 ounces copper carbonate, 3 pints ammonia (26°) .
*3 omices copper carbonate, 2 pints ammonia (26°) .
* Prepared and tested l)y the writer, and in many cases also tested ])y growers.
The preparation of the copper sprays containing- different chemical constituents will bo considered in the order in which they appear in the preceding- list.
COPPER SULPHATK SOLUTION.
Copper sulphate (CUSO4.5H2O), commonly called blue vitriol or bluestone, forms, when dissolved in water, one of the most active fungicides known. This chemical, the composition, manufacture, and sources of supply of which will be more fully considered in a follow- ing chapter, dissolves in cold water, but somewhat more readily in hot water. As usually sold, the crystals are large, but a fine form may also be had in the market. If the large crystals are purchased and it is desired to dissolve them rapidly, they may be ground in a bone or shell mill before placing in the water. This has frequently been done by the writer when quick work was necessary.
Copper sulphate may be manufactured by dissolving the black oxide of copper in sulphuric acid, or by the various modifications of this process hereinafter discussed. A watery solution of this chemical is strongly acid, and for this reason a simple solution of copper sulphate is very corrosive and injurious to tender plant tissues, as foliage and opening buds. To avoid this injurious action, efforts have been made to obtain from the copper sulphate solution a spray retaining the fungicidal action of the copper, but ])y the addition of other chemicals to neutralize or largely remove its acid reaction and consequent cor- rosive effects upon plants. As a result there are a very considerable number of copper spraj^s, representing various modifications of the simple solution of copper sulphate.
Owing to the acidity of a solution of copper sulphate, the sulphate should not be dissolved or handled in metal dishes of any kind, espe- cially those of iron. The copper will often go to the metal, thus injuring the effectiveness of the spray, and the acid may also injure or destroy the dishes. The most suitable vessels for dissolving copper
148 PEACH LEAF CURI/. ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
sulphate for work such as here discussed are those composed wholly of wood, preferably of oak, and may be in the form of barrels, casks, vats, or tanks, of a capacity corresponding- to the respective needs of the growers. For small orchards a few good oak barrels of 45 or 60 gallons capacity are very suitable. As concentrated solutions of cop- per sulphate can be made, enough of the sulphate can be easily dis- solved in a 60-gallon l)arrel to serve for 300 or even 1,200 gallons of spray when properly reduced. It is well, when possible, to use 2 gallons of water to each pound of sulphate when dissolving the latter, but stock solutions nux}" be of two to four times this strength. A solution of copper sulphate is heavier than water, so that it is an advantage in hastening the dissolving process to retain the chenucal near the top of the water. If this can be done, the heavier copper solution will settle to the bottom of the l)arrel, leaving the purer water to continue th<' dissolving action upon the sulphate. The placing of the copper in a gunny sack and suspending the latter in the water has been recommended, but it is thought that other means more suitable ma}' be found. The use of sacks or other cloths about the spray tanks is hardly advisable, as the freer the tanks are kept from lint, strings, fibers, etc., arising from straining cloths, sacks, f raj^ed staves, and stirring sticks, the less trouble the spra3'"er will have with his nozzles in the orchard, and the better, quicker, and cheaper can the spray work be done.
Instead of a sack, a clean willow or hard-wood splint ])askct may be used for suspending the chemicals. A box may also be easily made for the purpose. It should have a diameter, when about 1 foot deep, sufficient to hold the copper sulphate to be dissolved, and it should l)e open at the top, with strong 1-inch slats across the ])ottom, the latter to be set one-fourth inch apart. If the ])ox be fitted with a strong hoop bail it may be suspended in the barrel l)y placing a stick through the bail and across the top of the barrel. As a rule, how- ever, the writvr has found it sufficient to place the copper sulphate directly in the bottom of a good oak barrel, tilling tlie latter one-third to one-half full of water, and stirring and crushing the crystals with a clean hard-wood pounder. A half hour's woi-k is sufficient to dissolve many pounds of copper sulphate in this maimer. With three or four good barrels one man can thus keep a large spraying gang supplied with material, if the water l»e convenient. It is always an advantage to place tli(! copper in water in the bai'rels over night, when i)()ssible, as sufficient material is thus easily made ready in the morning for a half day's spraying. It is jin advantage to strain all water before the (•<)])per sulpiiate is added, as afterwards oidiiiary strainers are liabU^ to be injured by the acid, and, as lu'fore stat(>d, the use of cloth straiiiei's is not advisable.
The «^yes and liands sliould be protectiHl as nuicii as possible from
PREPAKATION OF THE COPPER SPRAYS. 149
injury by this spray (p. 171). The unaltered solution of the copper sulphate is not only unpleasant to handle and apply, and injurious to tender vegetable tissues, but it is quite injurious to all metallic parts of pumps, hose, extension rods, and nozzles, nozzles being eaten out very rapidly by it. For these various reasons the solution of copper sulphate is rarely used as a spray in an unmodified form. In most cases its corrosive action is more or less altered or neutralized through the addition of some modifying agent. In other words, the copper sulphate solution is used as a base or stock solution for the preparation of several more or less noninjurious and equally effective sprays, as the Bordeaux mixture, the eau celeste, the modified eau celeste, the ammoniacal copper carbonate, etc. For this purpose it may be prepared in a concentrated solution, to be used as a stock solution for the preparation of any of the modified sprays mentioned, as alread}^ pointed out.
A convenient strength for stock solutions is 1 pound of copper sul- phate to 1 or 2 gallons of water. In using stock solutions, two matters should always be considered: (1) The pails, barrels, or tanks used should be carefully gauged and marked, so that the number of gallons of water or of the solution they contain may be known and not guessed at.^ (2) Before dipping from a stock solution any required number of gallons, the solution should be thoroughly stirred, otherwise the last dipped out will be vevj much stronger than that coming from the top, and consequentl}^ the work will be inaccurate and often very unsatisf actor}' ; moreover, neglect of this precaution might, in many cases, lead to the injury or even to the destruction of the plants treated. It may also be said that the copper sulphate solution should be cold when used in the preparation of Bordeaux mixture, eau celeste, modified eau celeste, or ammoniacal copper carbonate.
BORDEAUX MIXTURE.
Bordeaux mixture is prepared by uniting the milk of lime with a solution of copper sulphate. The reaction which takes place when the two solutions are united as well as the other chemical phases
' The following rules for measuring square and round tanks and casks may i)rove of value in this connection:
Circular cistemn. — Multiply the square of the diameter in feet by the depth in feet and the product by 5| for the contents in gallons.
Circular cai^ks or harrek. — Multiply the square of the average diameter in inches by 34, and that by the height in inches, and point off four figures. The result will be the contents in gallons and decimals of a gallon. The average diameter of a barrel naay usually be obtained by adding the greatest diameter to the least diameter and dividing by 2.
Square tanks. — Multiply the width in feet by the length in feet, and that by the depth in feet, and that again by 7j%%, which will give the contents in gallons. Another and simple method is to multiply the length, width, and depth in inches, and divide by 231, which will also give the contents in gallons.
150 PEACH LEAF CURL! ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
of the subject, have formed the base for much discussion and investi- gation, which it is not necessary to consider here, especially as these chemical changes are variously interpreted by different writers. Those interested in the history and chemistry of Bordeaux mixture may learn of the extensive literature upon these subjects b}^ referring to the writings of Lodeman/ Fairchild,^ and others.
In the union of the milk of lime with a solution of copper sulphate there is produced a mixture haA*ing great value as a general fungicide, and, as alread}^ shown, of especial value for the treatment of peach leaf curl. The mixture possesses several advantages for orchard work over a simple solution of copper sulphate: (1) The addition of suffi- cient milk of lime to a simple solution of copper sulphate neutralizes the acids of the latter to such an extent that the resulting mixture is practically noninjurious to foliage and buds, while still retaining the fungicidal qualities of the simple sulphate solution. (2) The corrosive action of Bordeaux mixture upon pumps, pipes, nozzles, etc., is com- paratively slight. This is of great advantage in doing uniform and thorough Avork. (8) The lime of Bordeaux mixture causes the spray to become visible upon the trees sprayed, and Avhile this is not desirable in the spraying of maturing fruits, and is avoided by adopt- ing other sprays, it is of very great value in the treatment of bare dormant trees, as it enables the workman to distinguish the sprayed from the unsprayed portions of the tree, and thus to complete his work more thoroughly than could otherwise be done. In case of the employment of hired help for applying sprays, as is usually done, the superintendent or owner of the orchard may know beyond question by the appearance of the trees whether or not his men are doing satis- factory work. As thoroughness is a matter of prime importance in the treatment of peach leaf curl, too much stress can hardly be placed upon this advantage of Bordeaux mixture over several other sprays. (4) The adhesive qualities of Bordeaux mixture are very great, and therefore it is even more desirable for a winter than for a summer spray. This is especially so in portions of the country where the summers are dry, as on the Pacific coast. (5) The whitening of the trees by the use of Bordeaux mixture, provided the spraying is done somewhat early in the Avinter, is claimed to retard the develop- ment of the buds. The unsprayed trees absorb more heat, which causes the ])udH to swell during Avarm days in Avinter, thus making them liable to injury from su])se(juent cold.''
The methods of preparing Bordeaux mixture for large and small orchards may vary according to the ro([uircments and faciliti«>s of tlu'
' Ivfulemun, E. (i., Tlui Si)ruyin>^ of Plant.M, ]\[ac'iuillaii & Vn., 1890.
'Kaircliild, D. (i., Bordeaux Mixture as a Fungicide, Bull. No. 6, Division of Vege- tiihle Pathology, U. S. Ik'pt. of Agr.
» Wliitt<-n, J. C, WinU'r Protection of the Peach, Mo. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 38. Sf)nie of the conclunioiiH from the work f)f Mr. Whitten are: Whitening the twigs and VnidH by Hprayiiig tlictii with whitewa.«h is the iiiont i)roniising method of winter ])ro- tection tried at the Misaouri Station; wliitcticd l.ud.s remained practically dormant
PREPARATIOISr OF THE COPPER SPRAYS. 151
growers, but the general principles involved remain the same. AvS a common example, the manner of preparing the 5-pound formula will be described: In a 45 or 60 gallon barrel place 5 pounds of copper sul- phate and add 10 or 12 gallons of water. Pound and stir the copper sulphate until wholly dissolved. In a half barrel slake 5 pounds of quicklime and reduce with 10 or 12 gallons of water. Strain the milk of lime into the copper solution, stir thoroughly, and add sufficient water to make 15 gallons in all. The copper and lime solutions should both be cold when united. When the water is added and the whole is well stirred the spray is ready to be applied.
For the manner of preparing the stock solution of copper sulphate to be used for Bordeaux mixture the reader is referred to pages 118 and 119, where full instructions will be found. In respect to the addition of lime to the copper solution, it may be said that the milk of lime result- ing from the slaking of 2 pounds of good quicklime in 6 or 8 gallons of water is sufficient to neutralize a solution of 3 pounds of copper sulphate. Larger amounts of copper should receive larger amounts of lime in proportion. In case foliage is to be treated, however, it is well before using the mixture to test it according to one of the methods given, '^ or to bring the weight of quicklime used to three-fourths,
until April, when unprotected buds swelled perceptibly during warm days late in February and early in March; whitened buds blossomed three to six days later than unprotected buds; 80 per cent of whitened buds loassed the winter safely, and only 20 per cent of unwhitened buds jjassed the winter imharmed. These facts point to those sprays having large amounts of lime as most valuable in protecting buds, and they should be considered in those sections of the c(juntry where the buds are liable to winter injury. A fall spraying may also be a decided advantage in such situations in addition to the early spring spraying for curl.
See also on this subject the January nmnber of the Canadian Horticulturist, 1899, pp. 18-20.
' There are at present several convenient methods practiced in making Bordeaux mixture to determine if enough lime has been added to the copper sulphate solution to prevent injury when the mixture is applied to foliage. - We adapt the following two tests from Farmers' Bulletin No. 38 of this Department, p. 7: {a) After the milk of lime and copper sulphate solutions have been united and thoroughly stirred, hold the blade of a penknife in the mixture for at least a minute. If metallic copper forms on the blade or the polished steel surface assumes the color of copper plate, tlie mixture is still corrosive and should receive more milk of lime. If the blade remains unchanged, the mixture may be safely applied to most foliage under favor- able weather conditions, {b) Pour some of the mixture into a saucer, hold between the eyes and the light, and breathe gently upon it for at least half a minute. If the mixture is properly made, a thin pellicle, looking like oil on water, will begin to form on the surface. If no pellicle forms, more milk of lime should be added. A third test (c) may be made with a 20 per cent solution of ferrocyanide of potassium : After the milk of lime is added to the copper sulphate solution, and the whole is thoroughly stirred, dip up a coffee cup full and add to this a few drops of the ferrocyanide of potas- sium solution. Allow the cup to stand a few minutes and then j)our off the mixture carefully. If a red precipitate is found at tliel)ottom of the cup, the mixture requires more milk of lime, which sliould be addcil until no smjh red precipitate is formed when the test is repeated.
152 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
four-fifths, or five-sixths of the weight of the copper sulphate used. With the present experiments it has been unnecessary to take this matter into consideration, for the spray was applied to dormant trees, not likely to be injured by any moderate spra}'. In nearly all the for- mulae tested for curl the pounds of lime employed were equal or greater than the number of pounds of copper sulphate used.
The lime used in preparing Bordeaux mixture should be unslaked lime or quicklime of the l)est quality. There is no economy in using poor lime, and air-slaked lime should neyer be used. The use of poor or air-slaked lime is apt to result in an imperfectly neutralized, and very granular, unsatisfactory spray. While the slaking of lime and the preparation of a milk of lime is a yery simple matter, it is one which few people not accustomed to the process will do well the first time. If not properly slaked, there are apt to be hard particles in the spray, causing trouble with the nozzles. In slaking lime, water should be added to the lime only fast enough to keep it from overheating, adding a little more each time as the heat increases. With some lime the use of a little hot water to start the slaking will hasten the pro- cess. With a little practice this work can be done so as to result in a perfect putty or cream of lime. When the thick, creamy consistency is obtained, it is well to allow the mixture to stand for half an hour, if possible, while hot, being sure that enough water is present to pve- vent drying out. If the Bordeaux mixture is then to be made, cold water should ])e added to the lime J^utty, or cream, and the whole stirred until it becomes a milk of lime and is cool. About 3 gallons of water should be added for each pound of lime. This cool or cold milk of lime should now be strained through a wire sieve or strainer into the copper sulphate solution, previously prepared, and the whole thoroughly stirred.
The solution of copper sulphate should also be cold when the milk of lime is added. After the two solutions are thoroughly united the mixture may be reduced to the required amount with cold water, when the spray is ready for use. The lime and copper solutions should never be united more than a few hours before the s])ray is to be applied. When making Boi-deaux mixture wooden vessels should be used, as l)arrels, half ))arrels, tanks, etc.
For peach leaf curl the amount of copper sulphate and lime to ])e used to 45 gallons of water will vary according to the views of tiie growei-, after making a study of the results obtained from the diti'erent foi'inulic tested in the present series of experiments.
KAU CKIJOSTK.
The pr(;parati()n of can celeste is veiy siMipl(\ To each 2 })ounds of copper sulphat(! dissolved in <> oi- S gallons ol" water add .'5 pints of strong ammonia, stir thoroughly, mimI dilute to 4^> gallons. 'I'lie stock
PEEPAEATION OF THE COPPER SPRAYS. 153
solution of copper sulphate may be used in preparing this spray. Four pounds of copper to 3 pints of ammonia for 45 gallons of water has also proved an effective winter spray.
For dormant trees this spray is safe, but for the treatment of foliage it is too corrosive and burning. It is also quite corroding to nozzles and other metallic portions of the spraying outfit.
MODIFIED EAT CELESTE.
The modified eau celeste is less injurious to foliage than the eau celeste, but is more liable to injure tender leaves and buds than is well- made Bordeaux mixture. Its preparation is nearl}^ as simple as that of the eau celeste. To 4 pounds of copper sulphate dissolved in 10 or 12 gallons of water add 3 pints of strong ammonia, dilute with water to 45 gallons, and stir in this mixture 5 pounds of sal soda (common washing soda) until dissolved. In preparing this spray of different strengths the same proportions of the chemicals maj^ be maintained.
AMMONIACAL COPPER CARBONATE.
The ammoniacal copper carbonate spray is one of great usefulness in the treatment of fruits for fungous diseases, especially where the spotting of fruits by the use of lime is to be avoided. The fungicidal value of this spray is, however, far inferior to the ordinary Bordeaux mixture. In the treatment of peach leaf curl it has proved kss satis- factory than several of the other copper spraj^s.
The manner of preparing this spray is simple. Place 5 ounces of copper carbonate in the bottom of a 3-gallon crock. From a 2-gallon vessel full of water pour about one-half pint of water upon the copper carbonate and stir the latter until it becomes like paste. Now add the remainder of the 2 gallons of water, stir again, and then pour into the mixture 3 pints of 26° ammonia. After this has been thoroughly stirred, it should be covered and allowed to stand for half an hour, when the whole should be added to a barrel containing 43 gallons of water. When well mixed this spray is ready to be applied.
A concentrated solution of copper carbonate in strong ammonia may be made as above described, using but one-half of the amount of water. If such a solution is very tightly stoppered in a large demijohn or jug it may be kept as a stock solution, read}" for use at any time. By knowing the amount of copper carbonate in each quart of such a stock solution enough may be measured out at any time to prepare a given number of gallons of spra}" of any desired strength.
The copper carbonate used in the preparation of the present spraj^ is frequently not obtainable in quantity at the drug stoi-es in smaller towns. It is also frequently the case that druggists in sucli places charge two or three and s(mietimes four or five times as nuich as it is worth, making the ultimate cost of tlie spray Ixnoiid the reach of the
154 PEACH LEAF CFRL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
grower. For this reii:?on the writer gives, on page 1S3 of this bulletin, a simple way of preparing the copper carbonate on the fann at a minimum figure.^
PREPAKATIOX OF THE SrXPHTTB SPRATS.
While the use of copper sulphate as a base for sprays intended for the control of fungous diseai:es is veiy genei"al. there are special dis- eases or combinations of diseases which may be more cheaply, and often more successfully, treated with sulphur in the fonu of powder or spray. The world-wide use of sulphur for the control of powdery mildew of the grape is a well-known example. It is also known that sidphur possesses valuable insecticidal qualities, and many of the scale insects and mite diseases of our fiiiit trees may be readily controlled by the use of sulphur so combined and prepared as to be applicable as a spray. For many years the most successful and almost the only treatment of the San Jose scale on the Pacific coast has been by sulphur sprays. This scale is very injurious to peach trees, and the time for the application of sulphur for its treatment is during the winter, at the time of treatment for peach leaf ciu'l. when the tree is dormant. It has already been shown in this bulletin that such a winter treatment of the peach tree with sulphur spi-ays will also control peach leaf curl. For this reason, and the fact that the San Jose scale is constantly spreading throughout the East, much attention is here given to the presentation of this form of spray, one application of which may con- trol two serious diseases. Experiments conducted by the writer have shown that the pear leaf mite may be controlled by the winter use of sulphur sprays, and it is thought probable that their use will also con- trol the oyster-shell bark louse of the apple, which has become almost a scoui'ge over much of the Ea<-t and in the Pacific Northwest.
As in the ca.se of copper sulphate sprays, it has also been found that the sulphur sprays may be most satisfactorily prepared by com-
' In view of the work of ifr. C. L. Penny, published in Bulletin 22 of the Delaware Agr. Exp. .Sta., 1893, the amount of water recommended to Ije added l>efore the strong ammonia water i.< ])oureil ujxm tliecarl)onateof copper is nmch greater than formerly used by the Department. Mr. Penny conducted a somewhat extended series of experiments to a.«certain the s^olubility of copper carlx)nate in ammonia gas as it is contalne^l in ammonia water of different strengths. He found that a given amount of ammonia gas in a weak s<dutionof ammonia water dissolves more copj)er than the same amount of gas in a strong sohition. A given weight of ammonia gas in a 2 to 4 per cent .S4jlution of anmionia water dissolves more copper carbonate than an equal weight of gas in either a weaker or stronger solution. The gas in a 2 to 4 per I'ent ammonia water will dissolve its own weight or more of copi>er carl>onate. On tlie other hand, tlie aumionia gas in a 10 per cent sohition of ammonia water will dis- solve but 60 i>er cent of its weight of copi>er carlxmate, and anmionia gas in a 20 per cent solution diss<jlvea only alx)ut 3.5 jK'r cent of its weight of copjx^r. Furthermore, the ammonia ga.s containe*! in ammonia water of U-ss than 2 jH'r cent stn-ngth rapidly loueti its power to dissolve copi>cr <-arlN>nat«.' jis tlie .-roiutiuu is weakened.
PREPAKATION OF THE SULPHUR SPRAYS. 155
bining sulphur with lime. Salt has also been used in connex^tiou with these sprays in several f ormulse.
In the following table are shown the various formulae for sulphur sprays which have been tested for the control of peach leaf curl. All formulse are for 45 gallons of water, except where otherwise stated.
Table 42. — Sulphur sprays applied for the control of peach leaf curl.
* 15 pounds sulphur, 30 poundn lime, 10 pounds salt, 60 gallons water.
* 10 pounds sulphur, 20 poiuids lime, 10 pounds salt, 60 gallons water. 1 15 pounds sulphur, 30 pounds lime, 10 pounds salt.
* 10 pounds suljjhur, 20 pounds lime, 10 pounds salt. 1 10 poinids sulphur, 20 pounds lime, 5 pounds salt.
* 5 pounds sulphur, 10 pounds lime, 5 pounds salt.
1 5 pounds sulphur, 10 pounds lime, 3 pounds salt. 1 15 pounds sulphur, 30 pounds lime.
1 10 jjounds sulphur, 20 pounds lime. 1 10 pounds sulphur, 8 pounds lime.
1 6 pounds sulphur, 4 pounds lime. 1 5 pounds sulphur, 15 pounds lime. 1 5 pounds sulphur, 10 pomids lime. 1 5 pounds sulphur, 5 pounds lime.
* Recommended by the writer, but tested by the growers.
t Prepared and tested by the writer, and in numerous cases also tested by growers.
It takes longer and is more difficult to prepare the sulphur than the copper sprays; but where the sulphur may be obtained at liberal whole- sale rates the expense of the two classes does not vary greatly. For facts respecting the sources of sulphur, etc., the reader is referred to page 190.
The sulphur sprays are prepared by boiling the ingredients (sul- phur, lime, and salt, or sulphur and lime) in water for not less than two hours. So far as the writer's experiments are concerned, there has resulted no apparent advantage in the treatment of curl by the addition of salt to these sprays. The usual method which growers having small orchards follow in preparing sulphur sprays is to slake one-third to one-half of the lime required, in the vessel in which the boiling is to be done. When slaked to a thin cream the sulphur is stirred in, all lumps of sulphur having been first pulverized. Boiling water is now added to make one-half to two-thirds the amount required by the formula. This mixture is boiled for not less than one and one- half hours, only boiling water being added if it becomes necessary to reduce the mixture. If the boiling is done in a kettle or iron pan, great care is necessary to prevent the caking and burning of the materials. When the mixture has boiled for the time stated or longer, the remainder of the lime is slaked and the salt is added to it and well stirred in. This lime and salt mixture is now added to that which has been boiled and the boiling is continued for at least one-half hour longer. The boiled
156 PEACH LEAF CUKL: ITS NATUEE AND TREATMENT.
spra}' should now be strained through a fine wire strainer into the spray tank or barrel, and enough boiling water added to make up the full amount of spray required hj the formula. The spray maj^ be boiled to advantage longer than two hours, but should never be boiled for a less time if the best results would be obtained. The sprays should be applied to the trees as hot as possible. The spray is more effective and easier to apph" when hot, and contact with the air cools it suffi- ciently so that twigs of dormant trees are not injured by the heat.
The method of preparing the sulphur sprays here outlined is prac- tically that which has been followed in California for many 3^ears. In the series of experiments here described, however, an effort has been made to ascertain if salt is necessary in this spray, and also whether there is any disadvantage in uniting all of the lime and sul- phur at tirst. After a comparison of the results obtained from sprays with and without salt and of those in which the lime was added in two portions and at different times with those prepared by adding all of the lime and sulphur at first, it has not been possible to detect any advantage from the salt nor from the more complex method of pre- paring. This relates, of course, to the use of these sprays for the con- trol of curl, but it is believed that the same will hold true in their use for the control of insect pests. The writer has personally prepared and tested a very large number of these sprays, and recommends the omission of salt, and further, that all of the lime and sulphur })e united and reduced with boiling water before the cooking ])egiiis in all cases where the spray is to be applied either as a fungicide or insecticide, and where the method of boiling below described is followed. This will both cheapen and simplify the process.
While many growers may feel obliged to prepare the sulphur sprays in kettles or iron pans, experience has shown that the}' may be boiled much more uniformly, more easily, and oftentimes better in l)arrels or wooden tanks hy using live steam as the source of heat. These facts are widely recognized on the Pacific coast, and the knowledge is put into practice })y some of the leading fruit growers, many of whom have established special steam cooking plants for ])reparing and hand- ling the sulphur sprays. Some of these spray-crooking appliances are on ([uite an extensive scale and others more limited, Ix'iiig adapted to the needs or facilities of the growers. As the sulj)hur sprays have been widely used in California and Oregon, and are likely to become much more generally used throughout the East, especially as they are particulai'Iy intended for winter a])plic:iti()n to all d(>ciduous trees and are known to be of marked value l)oth as insecticides and fiuigicides, the more; improved methods of preparing them Avill b(> of general interest to orchaiflists. and several are her(> given. Thre(> tyjx's of cooking plants are described: (i) One ada])ted to the needs of an orchard of 10 acTes, (2) one suited to the needs of an oicliaid of loo acres, and (3)
PREPARATION OF THE SULPHUR SPRAYS. 157
one of sufficient capacity to prepare sprays for the treatment of 500 to 1,000 acres of trees.
For small orchards sulphur sprays may be prepared in barrels by the use of steam. Upon a solid plank platform 3 feet wide, 12 feet long, and raised 18 inches above the ground, place three oak barrels holding 60 gallons each. Each barrel should have a bunghole through one side about 1 inch above the bottom, which is stopped with a long wooden plug while the spra}^ is boiling in the ))arrel. The upper heads of the barrels should be removed, and each may be nailed in two parts to serve as a cover for the barrel while the spray is l)eing boiled. Near one end of the row of barrels is set the boiler in which steam is to be generated. From the dome of this boiler a steam pipe should extend horizontally over the row of barrels, and not less than 2 feet above them. The farther end extends downward at a right angle, by means of an elbow, to within 6 inches of the bottom of the last barrel. Where the pipe passes over the first and second barrels, downward- extending pipes are connected by means of proper couplings, and extend to within 6 inches of the bottoms of the respective barrels into which they reach. In each of the downward-extending pipes is fitted a valve about 18 inches above the barrels, by means of which the inflow of steam ma}' be controlled for each barrel separately. The lower end of each of the pipes leading into the barrels is left open for the escape of steam. With a sufficient head of steam a barrel of water may be brought to the boiling point with such an appliance in about five minutes. By having three barrels, as here suggested, two may be kept almost constantly filled with boiling sprays, w hile the third is filled with l)oiling water for use in slaking lime, filling the barrels after the sulphur is added, and reducing the spra}- to the required amount in the spray tank. With such an appliance for boiling, pro- vided the two barrels for spray are charged alternately one hour apart, 60 gallons of well-made spray ma}-^ be sent to the orchard about once an hour, after allowing each lot two hours of constant boiling. In pre- paring the spray for ])oiling, the lime is first slaked to a cream of lime in the bottom of the barrel, the pulverized sulphur is stirred in, the barrel is filled two-thirds full of boiling water, a top is placed over the barrel, and the steam is turned on by opening the valve above the barrel. Within a ver}^ few minutes the steam will bring the contents to a seething boil, and this can be maintained for the two hours required without danger of overheating and with little care, except of course that re(|uired to maintain and regulate the steam supply. The steam stirs the spray sufficiently when boiling. When thoroughly boiled the bunghole near the bottom of the barrel is opened by remov- ing the long plug, and the spray is drawn off into, pails and strained into the spray tank through a fine wire strainer. When the barrel is nearly empty enough boiling water is added to make up the amount of
158 PEACH LEAF CURL*. ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
spray required b}' the formula, and this is then drawn oti'. Before a new charge of spray materials is placed in the ])arrel, the latter should be removed from beneath the steam pipe and cleaned. Convenient boilers suited to boiling one or more barrels of spray are show n in the illustrations given. (PI. XXI.)
For orchards of 100 acres the boiling of sprays in l)arrels i.s too slow. The plan adopted by Mr. A. D. Cutts, at the Riviera Orchard, will here be given as admirably answering the purpose for such orchards. In this spray -boiling plant the live steam is obtained from the dome of the boiler of a 20-horsepower thrashing engine, and while cooking sprays from 60 to 80 pounds steam pressure is main- tained. The spray is boiled in two rectangular vats or tanks, ])uilt of 2-inch dressed sugar pine. The inside measure of these tanks is, length 5 feet, breadth 3 feet, depth 30 inches. These tanks have the ends mortised into the side and bottom planks from one-fourth to three-eighths of an inch. Two long bolts run diagonally across at each end to hold the head in place, and in addition the planks arc nailed together with -iO'* cut nails. Each of these tanks will hold approxi mately 280 gallons of spray. They are raised 4 feet above the ground upon a strong and well-braced framework. They stand side by side with a platform between about 4 feet wide, on which a man may stand to attend to the spray while boiling. One end of each tank is toward the boiler, and the other, which is supplied with a faucet or sirup gate for drawing otf the spray, extends to the side of a driveway. The steam is supplied to each of the tanks directly from the dome of the boiler. From the steam dome a l^-inch pipe leads to near the ends of the tanks. This is coimected with a transverse 1 -inch horizontal pipe extending laterally to a point opposite the center of each tank and level with the tops of the tanks. The ends of this 1-inch pipe now turn at a right angle and extend to the center of the top of the ends of the tanks, turn down on the inside of the tanks to the bottom of the same, and then extend along the center of the bottom to near the farther end, where they are closed by having an iron cap screwed over the end. Til rough each side of that portion of the 1-inch pipe which extends along the inside of the bottom of each tank arc drilled 0 small holes for the escape of the steam into the tanks. In the pij)e leading to <'ach tank is placed a glolx' valve for separately controlling or ])rcvcnt- ing the liow of steam to each of the tanks. A\'licii a (aide of spray is ready to go to the orchard, the spray is run into another taidc situated on a low truck wagon, the tru(^k IxMiig first driven under the end of the ))oilitig taid< which is to be empti<'d. The low truck with (he spray is then di-iven (o the spi'ay tatiks in the oichard, and (iu> spray is punijx'd from the truck (ank (o the spray (ank, wi(h<)ut delaying the work of (he spi'iiyei-s. Thesj)ray is strained (wice, lirs( when <h-awn oil from (he boilino- \jits tlirouuh (lie faucet, and second when it is
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XXI.
Steam spray-cooking applianoe!* for small orchards. Figs. 1 and 3 show boilers snited to cooking sprays in 1 to 3 barrel lots; fig. 2 shows a boiler connected with a tank in which larger <]uantities of spray may he lx)iled at one time. These cooking appli- ances are well adaj)ted to use in ten-acre orchards (p. 157). (Compare with PI. XXII. j
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Oept. of Agriculture.
Plate XXI.
PREPAKATION OF THE SULPHUR SPRAYS. 159
piiinpod from the truck tank into the spra^v tank in the orchard. The brass strainer cloth employed by tinners in making strainer pails is used for this purpose. It is very necessary to strain well, as in the unstrained spray there are always dregs that fill the nozzle and delay work. Mr. Cutts says that in tanks of this kind it is necessary to stir the spray frequently while boiling to thoroughly mix the different ingredients. Three hours' boiling is better than two. He also says that one man, at $2 per da}'', will tend the boiler and prepare from 1,500 to 2,000 gallons of spray per day, and that it will require about one-half cord of 4-foot wood to generate the steam in such a boiler as he uses.
In preparing the sulphur sprays for orchards containing 600 to 1,000 acres of trees it is desirable to have tanks of larger size than those used by Mr. Cutts and to avoid as much pumping and trans- ferring of the sprays as possible. One of the most convenient and complete spray -cooking plants for orchards of large size which has thus far been seen by the writer will here be described. This plant is at the Rio Bonito orchard. The water for preparing sprays at this orchard is obtained from a well and is forced b}" means of a rotary force pump run by steam power into a large storage tank elevated upon a heavy framework some 30 feet above the ground. About 10 feet above the ground and at one corner of the open framework of the tank house is placed a circular tank holding about 300 gallons. This is a storage tank to receive the spray when prepared for the orchard. The bottom of this circular tank is supplied with steam pipes, so that the contents may be kept hot and ready for use. From the outer side of this storage tank, near the bottom, is a discharge pipe with valve and hose attached, through which the spray may be run by gravity into the tops of the 300-gallon spray tanks on wagons which are used in the orchard. These wagons are driven to the side of the storage tank and filled with boiling spray in a few minutes, much as street-sprinkling tanks are driven under the elevated hydrants and fiUed. The boiling tank proper is built of 2-inch surfaced pine plank within a firm framework, properly bolted, and rests firmly upon the ground. It is situated within the heavy framework of the water tank house. This boiling tank is approximately 18 feet long, 3 feet wide, and 3 feet deep, and its full capacity is 1,200 gallons. In the center of the tank house is a water pipe connected with the large water tank above. Near the bottom of this standpipe are hydrants for the attachment of hose, thus allowing of water being drawn directly from the water supply above into the boiling tank by opening a hydrant. An unlimited supply of cold water is thus always at hand without the necessity of lifting a pailful by hand. The steam pipe for heating the sprays in the boil- ing tank extends from end to end along the bottom within the wooden tank, and every 2 or 3 feet along this pipe are cross pipes leading toward each side of the tank. The ends of the central pipe and its branches
160 PEACH LEAF CUKLI ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
are closed. Along l)oth sides of this main pipe and its lateral branches are drilled small holes for the escape of steam into the tank. The flow of steam to the tank is controlled b}- means of a glo])e valve in the steam supph' pipe, the valve being conveniently placed for the workman at the tank. Broad l)oard covers are made for covering the whole tank when the boiling is in progress. As in the cas(> of the spray-boiling plant of Mr. Cutts, the main steam pipe leads from the tank directly to the steam dome of the boiler. The spray is prepared in the boiling tank of double strength, and when sufficienth' boiled is elevated to the storage tank above by means of an appliance planned like an injector of a boiler. An iron pipe about 2 inches in diameter leads from the boiling tank upward and over the top of the storage tank described. In this pipe is placed the injector, which is supplied with two lateral connections. One of these connections is with the cold-water supply pipe, and the other is with the main steam supply pipe. In each of the pipes connected with the injector are placed globe valves for the control of the inflow of water, steam, and hot spra3\ When it is desired to till the storage tank above with hot spray from the boiling tank below, the valve opening into the steam pipe leading from the injector to the steam dome is opened. The live steam at once escapes through the injector into the pipe leading to the storage tank and then out of the end of the pipe. The valves leading to the boiling tank and the cold-water su])ply are now opened in such a manner that about equal parts of cold water and hot spray are admitted to the injector, and the escaping steam, by means of its tendency to foi'm a vacuum, soon causes a combined stream of hot spra}' and cold water to follow up the pipe and escape into the storage tank above. There is thus established a kind of steam siphon, which soon carries up 150 gallons of boiled spray and an equal amount of cold water, HUing the 800-gallon stoi'age tank with spray of the required strength, the strength of the spray in the boil- ing tiink Ix'ing dou])le'that re(|uired. This work is accomplished ])y a careful adjustment of tla^ inflow of steam, spray, and water to the injector, the storage tank being filled without the necessity of lifting a pound of spray T)V hand. The combining of the cold water with the hot spray in the injector is found to be necessary to the proper working of the latter as the temperature of the injector would otheiwise become too high for efficient work. When the storage tank is full, steam is turned into the pi})es situated at its bottom, and the s])ray is again heated to the boiling ])oint and kept very hot until drawn ofl' into,a spray tank and taken to tiie orchard. The facility with wiiich a plant <;f Ihis description may l)(^ ojx'i'ated will depend to (luitc^an extent u])()n the nature and capacity of the boiler used foi" generating steam. The njore easily steam can bo generated and the greater ca})acity for steam which the boiler possesses the better for the work.
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Pnys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agticultur
Plate XXI
Steam Spray-cooking Appliances for Large Orchards.
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XXII.
Fig. 1 shows i^ulphur, lime, and salt spray-cooking aiipliances used on tlie Rio Bonito Raneho. The lieavy framework at the left supports a large water tank not shown in the photograph. This tank is filled from a well by means of a steam rotary force pump, and supplies all water required in cooking and reducing sprays. On the ground, at the farther side of the framework of the tank, is shown a long wooden vat from"\vhich steam is issuing. This rectangular vat, described on yrnge 159, is capa- ble of cooking about 900 gallons of sulphur spray of double strength, and is seen in full operation in the illustration, the heat being applied by means of steam pipes at the bottom. The steam pipe is shown leading from the dome of the boiler in the shed at the right and in the background of the photograph. The round tank shown above the right end of the cooking vat holds 300 gallons of spray, ready for appli- cation to the trees. This tank is filled from the cooking vat by means of a steam injector, described on pJige 160, and the spray is maintained at a high temperature by means of steam pipes in the bottom, as in case of the cooking vat proper.
Fig. 2 should be considered in connection with fig. 1. The large, round tank, standmg above the barrels, is the storage tank for sulphur spray after it has been prepared in the long vat below. This tank holds 300 gallons — sufficient spray to fill the tank seen on the wagon. The wagon tank is filled by gravity, the spray flowing into it through hose running directly from a spout at the bottom of the storage tank. A valve in this spout regulates or stops this flow of spray as desired. One of the spray wagons used in this large orchard is shown. The pump stands crosswise .behind the corner stakes at the back of the wagon. These stakes serve to prevent the hose from falling beneath the wheels, as all lines of hose extend from the rear of the wagon when in use in the orchard.
PREPARATION OF COMBINED COPPER AND 8ULPHUR SPRAYS. 161
By referring' to PI. XXII and the descriptions of tigures the reader may obtain a good idea of the arrangement of this extensive spray cooking pUint, as well as of the ])oiler supplying steam.
PREPARATION OF COMBINED COPPER AND SULPHUR SPRAYS AND NOTES ON OTHER SPRAYS TESTED.
For many years the use of coml)ined copper and sulphur sprays has t)een practiced ])y peach growers in Oregon, and as they have reported good results the writer prepared the following four fornuihe of this character for the control of curl.
BORnEAUX MIXTURE AND StTLPIIUK SPRAYS f'OMniN J':i).
The formula of the combined Bordeaux mixture and sulphur sprays tested are given in the following list:
Lifit of ftuJpJnrr >f}>raiis cotnliincd irllli llordeanx mixture.
8 poundy ('()])per sulphate, 10 pounds sulphur, 20 pounds lime. .S pounds copper sulphate, 10 pounds sulphur, 10 pounds lime. '?> pounds copper sulphate, 5 pounds sulphur, 10 jumnds lime. 2 pounds copper sulphate, •"> pounds sulphur, 10 pounds lime.
In preparing these combined sprays, which were found somewhat moi'e effective in the control of peach leaf curl than the sulphur sprays alone, the Bordeaux mixture was added to the fully prepared sulphur spra3^ A portion of the lime given in the formula was reserved for making the Bordeaux mixture, while the remainder of the lime was C(nnbined and boiled with the sulphur in the manner already described. When the sulphur spray had ])een placed in the spray tank, the Bor- deaux mixture, which had been freshly prepared from the copper sulphate and the remainder of the lim(\ was added, and after thorough mixing was at once applii^l to tlie trees. The luiion of the yeliow sulphur spray with the blue Bordeaux mixture forms a spray of a distinct green color. The application of this spray is similar to that of the sulphur spray, requiring the sam(> class of nozzles.
MISCICI.I.ANKOIS srUAVS.
A large number of sprays not includcnl in the preceding descrip- tions have been prepared and tested for peach leaf curl, and some of them have been discussed in other portions of this bulletin. Several of them were tested for the purpose of learning the value of the separate ingredients of the leading spra^^s, as salt, lime, etc. Among these were lime, applied as a simple milk of lime; salt, applied in solutions of different strengths; and lime and salt combined, applied as a whitewash. Sulphur was tested in the form of sulphide of potassimn, applied in various strengths in li(iuid form, and the union of this sul- phide of potassium with milk of linu^ was also testinl. Iron sulphate, 1901)3— No. 20 11
162 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
sulphur, and lime were tested in combination by adding to the sulphur spray a mixture prepared by uniting the milk of lime with a solution of iron sulphate. The union of the milk of lime with the iron sulphate solution produced a lead-colored mixture resembling Bordeaux mix- ture in consistency, and when united with the sulphur solution the color was dark green or approaching black. Iron sulphate and lime were also tested separately.
While some of these sprays gave evidence of consideral)le fungi- cidal action, none of them gave results which would warrant their substitution for the spra3'^s alread}' considered in previous chapters, and hence it is unnecessar}^ to enter further into details respecting their preparation. The results of their use may be learned in the chapters of this bulletin which relate to the action of the sprays on the foliage and the fruit.
GENERAL CHARACTERS OF THE SPRAYS TESTED.
There are certain general characters of sprays adapting them or making them unsuital)le for various classes of work, and to these it may be well to allude.
THE ENDURING QUALITIES OF THE SPRAYS.
In the worK here described careful notes were made on the enduring or weathering (lualities of the sprays tested.
During the last week in April and first week in March, 181)5, 35 sprays, of different formulae, were applied in the experimental block in the Rio Bonito orchard, most of them to 10 large trees, as has heretofore been shown. On August 10, or five months after the spraying was completed, the trees of each experiment row were examined to ascertain as far as possible the enduring or weathering qualities of the sprays, and according to the notes made at that time the appearance of the sprays upon the trees, after five months' weather- ing, may be grouped under the following four heads or classes:
(1) Sprays showing ([uite distinctly upon the trees on August 10.
(2) Sprays moderately evident on August 10.
(3) Sprays little evident on August 10. (I) Sprays not observal)le on August 1<».
The sprays classed under the first head, were those applied to rows 1, 3, 7, 9, 13, 15, 18, 19, 21, 22, 25, 33, 3(1, 41, U, 45, 50, 54, 56, and 57; under the second head, those ui)plied to rows 0, 10, 12, 16, 2S, 42, 48, and 5L; under the tiiird head, those applied to rows 27 and 35; and under the fourtli head, those applied to rows 30, 32, 38, 39, and 47. By refeniiig to page 73 the reader will find a table giving the fonnuhv for sprays applied to each of the rows nani<>d, and an examination of these fonnuhi' will l)ring out the following facts: All the sprays
GENERAL CHARACTEES OF THE SPRAYS TESTED. 163
included under the first two headings contain lime, while those under headings 3 and i contain none; all formuhe containing 15, 20, or 30 pounds of lime to 45 gallons of water fall under the first head. Of the 18 sprays containing 4, 5, 8, and 10 pounds of lime, 10 fall under the first heading and 8 under the second; copper sulphate enters into the composition of 8 of the 10 sprays falling under the first head, while the remaining 2 contain iron sulphate; of the 8 sprays which fall under the second heading, only 1 contains copper sulphate, and that but 2 pounds, while 5 are sulphur sprays.
These facts seem to show that the union of copper sulphate and lime produces a spray possessing decidedly greater weathering qualities than the union of sulphur and lime.
In the following list are shown the pounds of lime contained in the various spra3^s tested; the numbers of the rows of trees to which each amount of lime was applied; the position of each spray as grouped according to its apparent weathering qualities into classes 1, 2, 3, or 4; and references showing the nature of all the sprays containing lime:
WeatJier-resistlng qualities of sprays.
30 pounds lime in formula, class 1, rows 1 f and 71-
20 pounds lime in formula, class 1, rows 3t, 9t, ISf, 36t*, and 44°.
15 pounds lime in formula, class 1, rows 15*, 33*, and 57t.
10 pounds lime in formula, class 1, rows ISf*, 19t*, 41*, 45*, SOft, 54*, and 56ttt;
class 2, rows 6t, 12t, and 48t°. 8 pounds lime in formula, class 2, row lOj. 5 pounds lime in formula, class 1, rows 21*, 22*, 25*; class 2, rows 28*, 42t°, and
51t. 4 pounds lime in formula, class 2, row 16t. No lime in formula, cla-^s 3, rows 27 and 35; class 4, rows 30, 32, 38, 39 and 47.
t Sulphur and lime, or sulphur, lime, and salt.
t* Copper sulphate, sulphur, and lime.
°Lime.
* Copper sulphate and lime.
ft Iron sulj)hate and lime.
tttlron sulphate, sulphur, and lime.
t° Potassium sulphide and lime.
It may be well to state in connection with the above list that while all the sprays not containing lime are classed under the third and fourth heads, this arrangement may not correctly represent their respective enduring qualities. As thev are without lime, the eye can not detect their presence in man}^ cases where it ispo.ssible the chemi- cals may realh^ be present in effecti\e quantity, and it is therefore apparent that the value of such a list is largely of a comparative nature among those sprays containing more or less lime in various combinations.
The general facts appear to })c, as already indicated, that the copper sprays are more enduring than the sulphur sprays, considering pound
164 PEACH LEAF CUKL: ITS NATURE AND TEEATMENT.
for pound of lime in their composition, and also that the amount of lime may be much less in the copper than in the sulphur sprays and still maintain the enduring- qualities. It is likewise the opinion of the writer that where a winter spray of copper and lime has pi'oved of poorer weathering quality than is desirable in a given climate, the cop- per should be increased as well as the lime when greater resistance to weathering is sought. In other words, while the increase of lime enhances the weathering qualities of the spray, it also has a tendency to retard or obscure the action of the copper it contains, unless the latter is increased somewhat in proportion to the increase of lime.
THE CORROSIVE ACTION OF THE SPRAVS.
As the present use of sprays has been limited to their winter appli- cation, the notes on their corrosive action relate largely to the action upon dormant trees or upon the vegetation immediately following the commencement of spring growth. In each case these remarks relate to the use of spra3\s upon peach trees, which are known to be among the most tender deciduous fruit trees commonly grown in the temperate zone.
.The sulphur sprays of the greater strengths used in these experi- ments caused in many cases the loss of some of the finer and weaker inner growth of the trees. This is more apt to be the case, it is believed, when the spray is applied shortly before growth begins in the spring. Where very strong sprays of this class are to be used, it is well to apply them comparatively early in the dormant period, say four weeks earl ier than the copper sprays. Sprays having not more than 1 0 pounds of sulphur to 45 gallons of spray may be used with little danger up to within four weeks of the swelling of the ])uds.
There is no danger of injuring twigs or l)uds with th(^ copper s])ra3's if properly prepared and applied before the l)uds have opeiuHl. Well- made Bord<>aux mixtui'emay be used e\'(>n as latx^ as the opening of the first blossom l)U(ls. Tlie annnoniacal copper carbonate may also b(> safely used to a late (hite. and both may l)e again applied, if desired, after the trees ha\'e passed out of bloom. The simple solution of coj^per sul- phate and the eau celeste may be safelv used to within a \ve(>k of the opening of peach ))u(ls, but they should never ])e used upon the foliage of tiie tree. Modifi«>(l (>au celeste is less corrosive than the eau celeste, and may ))e used until th(^ first buds ))egin to open, but from observa- tion in other classes of spray work it is believed to be unsafe to apply this spray to the leaves of the ])each.
The injurious action of the sulphur si)rays wIkmi combined with Bor- deaux mixtun^ is fairly to be compared with the action of (h(> sulphur sprays alone when containing e(|ual amounts of suli)hur.
The spi-ay composed of iron sulphate and lime is more a|)l to in jur(> tender shoots and buds than the Bordeaux mixtuii'. •md such a spray can not be recommended for use upon foliage.
GENERAL CHARACTEKS OF THE SPRAYS TESTED. 165
Milk of lime appears to be practicall}^ harmle.ss when applied to dormant trees or to trees in leaf; hence any injurious action resulting- from the use of sprays containing- lime should be charged to the other ingredients or to the lime as altered or modified through combination with such other constituents.
ADVANTAGES OP DISCERNIBLE AND INDISCERNIBLE SPRAYS.
Reference has been made in a brief way to the advantages possessed by certain sprays in forming a visible deposit upon the surfaces sprayed. While sprays forming such a visible deposit arc decidedly advantageous for all winter work, those leaving no sucb distinct deposit are most desirable for the treatment of fruit, especially when approach- ing maturity. The advantages of white sprays in the winter treat- ment of deciduous trees are obvious, it being possible with such sprays to clearly see what portions of the plant have been thoroughly and properly covered. This advantage may even make the difference between success and failure in the work.
Some recent experiments in applying whitewash or spra3's contain- ing large amounts of lime have tended to show that the opening of the buds may be somewhat retarded b}^ such winter treatment. The theory is that whitening the trees prevents, to some extent, their absorption of heat from the sun's rays, and that this aids in keeping the trees in a dormant condition somewhat later than would otherwise l)e the case. Whether this will prove of enough ihiportance to warrant the outlay for spraying remains to be shown. An illustrated article on this sub- ject appeared in the Canadian Horticulturist for January, 1899.^
All sprays, both copper and sulphur, which contain lime are adapted to the purposes here considered. The Bordeaux mixtures and sulphur sprays used in the work described are distinctly observable upon the trees when applied, and after drying for a very short time the treated trees become decidedly white. The greater the amount of lime the whiter the trees. (Pl."^ XXIII.)
In the summer treatment of trees and plants having fruit approach- ing maturity, the use of clear spra3^s is often most to be recommended. The spray now best adapted for this purpose is the ammoniacal copper carbonate. A stronger spray, though making less showing than Bordeaux mixture, is the modified eau celeste. As this is apt to cause injury in some cases, it is desirable to use Bordeaux mixture for siunmer work up to a date when the fruit is approaching maturity, and then to adopt the anmioniacal copper carbonate. The time at which the sunnner use of Bordeaux mixture should be discarded for the ammoniacal copper carbonate will depend largely upon the amount of summer rains in the locality where used. In New York State, for instance, where summer showers are frequent, the lime-containing
^ Orr, W. M., 1. c, pp. 18-20. See further remarks on this subject on p. 150.
166 PEACH LEAF CURL! ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Bordeaux mixture could be used upon fruit luitil a later date in the summer than it eould in California, where almost no summer showers occur, and where the lime would remain upon the fruit until the latter was mature. This matter leads us naturally to the consideration of sprays adapted for wet and for dry localities.
SPRAYS ADAPTED TO USE IX WET AND IX DRY LOCALITIES.
Little can be said on this subject that has not been previously touched upon in this bulletin. A few general remarks, however, may be of advantage to the grower. The enduring qualities of sprays containing lime increase where the ratio of the other ingredients is maintained, very largely in proportion to the increase of the lime which the formulae contain. For instance, the relative proportions of copper sulphate and lime being maintained, a Bordeaux mixture which contains lU pounds of lime to -io gallons of spray will obviously endure much longer upon the trees in a wet climate than a Bordeaux mixture containing but 5 pounds of lime to the same amount of spray. To avoid the loss in activity' and effectiveness of a spray containing a large amount of lime, the fungicide, be it copper or sulphur, should be increased so as to maintain the same or nearly the same ratio between the copper and lime which exists in the spray containing less lime. It is advised, therefore, that sprays to be used in a wet climate, especially those intended for winter application, should be made stronger, both in lime and in the essential fungicide they contain, than is found necessary in a dry climate. If two sprayings are neces- sar}', both should be given the dormant trees.
In wet climates the conditions favorable to the development of curl and other fungous diseases are increased. This supplies a further reason for using sprays containing increased amounts of fungicide and having greater enduring qualities than sprays used in dry localities. The soil conditions in wet situations are apt to delay spray work till the last moment compatible with effective work. In such cases the amount of copper should be sufficient, if this class of sprays be used, to act promptly. If the Bordeaux mixture be applied under such circum- stances, it Avill not l)e found desira))le to reduce the copper below the e(iui\ alcnt of 1 pound of copper for each pound of lim(>. and a higher prcjportion may often be used to advantange on dormant trees.
CHAPTER IX.
THE APPLICATION OF SPRAYS. GENERAL ACCESSORIES FOR WINTER SPRAYING.
To those who have sprayed for years and have learned by experience the most suitable appliances for such work the present remarks may not prove of direct value. They are especially intended, however, for those undertaking such work for the first time.
NOZZLES SUITED TO WINTER WORK.
The past few years have seen in the United States a very g-reat increas-e in the styles and places of manufacture of nozzles and other spraying appliances. At the present time the number of styles and makes of nozzles often leads to confusion in the mind of the prospective spraj^er. In fact, however, there are but few essential features to a good nozzle. The form of greatest importance for most classes of work is that which gives to the discharged spray a rotary or cyclone motion. This movement is given in a very simple manner by admitting the stream at an angle into a circular chamber in the nozzle, so that it first strikes the curving side of the chamber, and is thus forced to assume a circular or rotar}" motion. The revolving stream then passes through the small central opening of the discharge plate and widens into a cone- shaped spray, which gives to this nozzle certain advantages not enjo3^ed by several other types now on the market. Spray from such a nozzle covers a greater area without moving the nozzle than is covered with most other types. There are nozzles, however, capable of throwing spray to greater heights. The rotary motion assumed by the spray in the cyclone or Vermorel nozzles is a dissipation of force, at least in most forms of these nozzles, so far as concerns the throwing of sprays to a great distance. A type of nozzle first used near San Jose, Cal., and now bearing the name of that town, is perhaps better adapted to long-distanc(^ spraying, and has been extensively used on the Pacific coast. The spray is formed by the fluid passing, under high pressure, through a narrow slit in a rubber or metallic plate. Where the rubber plate is used the escape of small particles ma}" take place through the temporary expansion of the opening in the plate.
The cyclone nozzles are now made by many manufacturers in different portions of the country, and may be obtained through any first-class
167
168
PEACH LEAF CUKL: ITS NATURE AND TEEATMENT.
l-ICi. 1.— C'vi-1 Jliu iio/.zU
with direct dischargo and degorgcr, for thin sprays.
hardware dealer in the United States. The San Jose nozzle is also obtainable through hardware dealers generally.
There are many types and styles of cyclone nozzles. Some are planned to throw the spray away from the workman, with direct or forward discharge (fig. 1). Others are so constructed that the spray is discharged laterally or at a more or less acute angle (figs. 2 and 3). In using these nozzles for winter work on deciduous trees it has been found that most thorough and most satisfactory work can 1 )e done ^vith less waste of spray when nozzles having a lateral discharge are employed. The reasons for this are evident. Donuant deciduous trees are but a skeleton or framework, presenting to the sprayer hut a limited surface for stopping a direct spray. For this reason, where a nozzle hav- ing a direct discharge is employed, a large portion of the spray will of necessity pass through the limbs of the tree and fall upon the ground, whik^ at best it will pass through the tree but once. By using the cyclone nozzle with lateral discharge, however, the cone of spray may be directed upward through the whole top, and in falling back it passes through the tree a second time. Here is a decided gain in the liml) surface which will be reached by the use of a given amount of spray. The nozzle having lateral discharge can also ])e handk'd to nuich greater advantage than the nozzle Avith direct discharge. B}' turning the extension pipe which l)ears the nozzl(>. the conc> of spray may be
directed upward, downward, or laterally upon the limbs as desired. This has proven of great advantage in doing thorough work.
The ordinary lateral discharge cyclone nozzles aie suitabk' for use with most of the copper sprays. For use with the sulphur sprays or Bordeaux mixture containing a large amount of lime, tlie connnon X'ermorel or cycloiu' nozzle* is lather too liglit and the opening. too small. In Califoi Ilia a sj)ecial form of nozzle is in use for theapplicationof such s})iays (tig. ;5). This nozzle is mjuiufactuicd in San Francisco, and may be obtained from the leading hardware linns of that city. The iioz/.h' i> of the cyclone pattern, liut is much larger, iieavier, and strongei" than the ordinary tyju'of cyclone or Vermorel. The dis- charge opening is of sulficient size to allow of the use of thick sprays, and the (lisciiai'ge plate is heavy enough to withstand much wear from corrosive fluids. A l'a<'t of prime iiiiMoilancc. howcNcr. lor the work
Fig. 2.— Cyclone nozzli', with lateral dis- chargi", for thin si)rays.
Fir;. 3. —Heavy cycluiic no/. zlu.withohlifiucdischurge. for thick .spruy.s.
GENERAL ACCESSORIES FOR WINTER SPRAYING,
169
being- considered, is that the nozzle diseliarg-es the spray at an angle of about 45° Avith a line leading* directly from the spraA'er. This gives the nozzle the advantages of both the lateral and direct dis- charge. The work of either of these types (figs. 1, 2, and 3) may be aceomplished with this angular discharge.
Makers of cyclone nozzles of all kinds are usually able to supply the discharge plates of the nozzles separately, and this is convenient for the grower, where the original discharge plates have been worn out. The separate discharge plates usually sell at 25 cents each.
HOSE AXI> EXTENSION I'lI'ES.
Fig. 4. — Wirc-cxtuiidcd surtioii hose.
Ru])ber hose of good ({uality is most satisfactory for all kinds of spray work. The strongest and best hose will usually pro\'e cheapest if properly cared for. All hose should he thoroughh' washed, l)otli insid(> and outside, at the close of each day's work, and it shoidd ])e Avell scrubbed, washed, and dried when the spray work is com- pleted, and stored in a luuformly cool, dark, and medium dry place.
Practice varies somewhat as to the internal diameter of hose used. One-half inch is perhaps the most connuon size. The external diameter of the hose should not be so small nor its flexibility so great that it will easily kink and tAvist upon itself. Hose which does this is a constant source of annoyance, causing loss of time and often endangering itself. Where possible, it is best to have all lines of discharge hose leading from tlie pump pass from the back (md of the wagon, between two short stakes, one at each corner. AVith such an arrangement there is little danger of its being caught in the Avheels or run over by them. Manj^ lines of hose are injured or destroyed in this Avay. The stakes at the back corners of the Avagon also serA^e as a means of winding up the hose preparatory to going to or from the orchard.
Couplings for connecting 1, 2, 8, or 4 lines of hose Avith the pump nuiA' usually be obtained from responsible hard- ware firms, or through them from the manufacturers of the ])umps used. The more connnon hose couplings are nearly always in stock at such hardware houses.
For most pumps it is well to supply wire-extended suc- tion hose (tig. tt). Some styles have the spiral wire coil within the interior; others have it embedded in the rubber. When the metallic spiral is exposed to the spray in the interior of the hose it should be of brass, if possible, Jto enable it to Avithstand the corrosive action of the sprays.
170 TEACH LEAF CURL*. ITS NATUKE AND TREATMENT.
Brass suction pipe strainers for attachment to the end of the pipe may be had of different forms. They are necessary when the end of the suction pipe is simply lowered into the spra}" tank or when it rests upon the bottom of the tank.
The extension pipes used by different growers vary. Some adopt common three-eigiiths or one-fourth inch iron tubing, while others obtain the bamboo-covered extensions, which latter contain one-fourth inch pipe. The essentials of an extension pipe are a brass coupling for connecting the hose, a good brass stopcock for controlling the flow of spray, a metallic pipe of sufficient length (which should be determined by the height of the trees to be sprayed), and upon the end of the pipe a thread and shoulder for the attachment of th'e nozzle and the recep- tion of a washer. The ordinary length of extension pipes is 8 or 10 feet, but where trees are large a 12-foot pipe may be needed. Either of these lengths are now obtainable from dealers in spraying supplies in the form of bamboo extensions (fig. 5). There are advantages in the bamboo extension pipes over uncovered iron tubing. Where hot sulphur sprays are used the bamboo cover prevents the hands from feeling the heat, and where cold sprays are applied in verj^cold weather the bare, wet pipe is liable to. chill or even freeze to the hand. The greater size of the extension pipe which is covered b}' bamboo also adds to the ease with which the pipe may be held and turned in the hands.
PROTECTION OF THE SPRAYER.
The nature of spray work makes it unpleasant for the workman, but much of this inconvenience arises from an incomplete or improper preparation for the work. Men who would not care to work in a rain storm without suitable covering are often improperl}' protected against the similar or worse conditions prevailing when they are spray- ing. In the spraying of hirge orchards it has Ix'on U^arned that one of the most suitable (-overings for men who are applying sprays is a sail- or's oilskin suit and sou'wester. This covering is light, impervious to w'ind and water, and is not as liable to crack as rubber clothing. AVliat- e\'cr form of head covering ma}' be chosen it should be soft, so as not to ])e interfered with by limbs, and it should extend in front to pro- tect the eyes and Ix^hind to ])rotect the neck. It is always desirable to protect the hands with long rubber gloves, and these can usually be obtained from or through druggists. In selecting such goods, how- ever, it is well to learn how long they have been held in stock by the deaha-, and if they have been k(>,pt for more than a year it is Ix'st to orrlci- new ones from the manufacturer, as such goods soon lot wIumi held in stock. Besid(;s, new stock is no more ex])ensive than old, and it will fre(nu'ntly endure twice as much use. Numbers 11 or 12 are usuallv altout the ri<rht siz(;s for ordiiiuiN hands. Most wvav c:in be
SPKAY PUMPS.
171
obtained from gloves which are large for the hands, and in such the hands are not as apt to perspire. Where rubber gloves are not obtain- able the hands may be greatly protected and kept soft by rubbing them thoroughly, as often as necessary, with a piece of beef suet.
If corrosive spra3^s are to be applied, such as the simple solution of copper sulphate, eau celeste, etc. , it may be found necessary to protect the eyes. For this purpose ordinar}'^ clear glass goggles may be used, or the sprayer may provide himself with mica goggles of large size, such as are worn in some portions of the country by men employed about thrashing machines. Both the glass and the mica goggles may be usually purchased through druggists.
PUMPS FOE VARIOUS SIZED ORCHARDS.
The selection of a good spray pump is advisable. The difference between the first cost of a poor pump and that of a good one is little, while the difference in the ex- pense of spraying an orchard with a poor and a good pump is apt to be considerable.
There are some features which every spray pump should possess. It should be furnished with an air chamber for the regulation of the flow, and the wearing parts should be of brass or brass lined. It should be strong and work easily, be supplied with means for firm attachment, and have capacity sufficient to maintain the required pressure without undue rapidity of stroke.
Pumps for small orchards should be capable of throwing two good sprays. Such pumps, suited for attachment to the top or side of barrels, or to other raised tanks or foundations, are shown in figs. 6 and 7. These pumps are supplied with air chambers and are of sufficient capacit}" for ordinary orchard spraying. Each has a con- nection for a small pipe leading down from the discharge pipe to the bottom of the barrel or tank. By opening a stopcock in the pipe a stream may be forced back into the tank close to the end of the suction pipe, thus serving to free the suction from deposit and to agitate th(; spray. These pumps can be obtained with brass-lined cylinders. The stroke is upward and downward. (See also PI. XXVI.)
Fig. ('). — Si)rny piinii) for use on harrol or tank.
172
PEACH LEAF CUKLI ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
For orchiuds of niediuin to larg-o .size it is better to obtain more powerful pumps — those eapul)le of throwing- four strong- sprays. The pumps shown in tigs. 8, 9, and 10 are admirably suited for this class of work. Pumps of the tj'^pe shown in fig. 8 are used in the 1,600- acre Kio Bonito orchard. In this orchard one man pumps for four men spra^ying (Pis. XXVII and XXVIII). In many portions of California the pneumatic pump, shown in fig. 10, is a favorite. It has been used extensively in the spraying of orange groves Avhere the trees are large and where high pressure is necessary to throw the spra}' to their tops. The pumps shown in ligs. 8 and 9 have perpen-
Fic. 7. — Spray jmini) for use (in liiirrcl nr lank.
dicuLii- levers, thus avoiding the IxMiding or stooping motion of the ()|)ci:itor. Tlie levers of each of the three styles shown an' long, and bolli the sti-engtli and eapaeity of llie ]nuu\) is sullieient. 'ilie style of j»um])s, both foi" small and large orchards, to which attention is here called, will be found figured and listed in catalogues usually to be foiuid in the hands of leading hardwafe dealei's.
Within the past few years leading orchai'dists and others have tested, with varying success, the application of ditterent motive ])oweis to the opeiiition of spiav pumps. Steam and gasoline engines ha\e i-eeei\ed nio-l attention for thi> purpose. Many of the power
SPKAY PUMPS.
173
spra3^ers as now constructed are heav}', ciimbersonK^ affairs, which could never be of practical value in everyday orchard work. Of the machines or descriptions of the same which have come to the writer's attention, none have thus far appeared bettcT adapted to practical and continuous orchard work than one in use at San Diego. This machine was planned and constructed for Mr. H. R. Gunnis, of San Diego, and has seen practical service for several years. It has been more or less changed and perfected from time to time, such improvements being made as have seemed best from experience gained in actual and extensive orchard work. This machine, as first called to the attention of the writer l)y Mr. Gunnis in the early part of July. 180.5, is illus- trated in PI. XXIX. The .
photograph from which this plate was made was taken while the machine was being used in spraying a young orchard near Santa Barbara. In reference to the changes made since this photograph was taken, Mr. Gunnis writes:
"The changes made in the machine since I corresponded with you regarding it in 1895 consist in the addition of a rotary supply pump and the use of a tender cart for haid- ing the material to the machine instead of having to shut down and go to the material every time the tank is emptied."" Mr. Gunnis further says, under date of March 10, 1890: ''The machine is still in constant use, and I can still Hii}\ as I wrote you over three y<>ars ago, that it has developed no defects whatever. Sonu^ of the parts wore out from actual service and have been replaced, but no changes have l)een made in its construction. * * * The use of the supply pump and tender increases the capacity of the outfit 25 or 30 per cent, especially in large orchards. In very small places it can also be used economically 1)V two m(ni, both spraying, as a good, steady team can soon be taught to move and stop at the word. In this case it is not necessary to use the tender."
While it is believed that the machine which Mr. (nmnis has built and operated is superior to any other of its class, I am informed that the gentleman contemplates still further iniprovements. In regard
Flo. 8.-
Spray pnmp for g-oncral orohard wnv'k, nprisht lever.
174 PEACH LEAF CUKL: ITS NATUEE AND TEEATMENT.
to these chang-e.s Mr. Giinnis saj's that he is now building from nis own designs, and has ahnost completed, a small gasoline engine of 3 to 4 horsepower, weighing less than 200 pounds. This engine is intended for use with a spraA'ing machine embod^'ing all the features of his old apparatus, but lighter and more compact. He also has plans under way for a self-propelling machine, in which the extra power required will not cost half of what it does to feed a team, and which can be much more easily controlled.
Fig. 9. — Spray pump for general f)rchiir<l work, upright lever.
PI. XXX shows the right and left sides of Mr. Gunnis s sprayer as it appeariid after the addition of the rotary pump for tilling the spray tank. A detiiiled description of this machine was prepared by Ml', (hinnis and ])iiblished in the Yearl)ook of tlie r)ej)artment for IS'.MJ (pages 73 and 74), in an article liy L. O. Howard, on the use of steam apparatus foi- spraying. Those wishing more complete details may refer to Mr. (iuiinis direct, to whom tin- w liter is indel)ted for the illustrations and facts here yi\i'ii.
THE APPLICATION OF SPRAYS.
175
SPKAYING TANKS.
A great variety of forms and sizes of spray tanks are in use. For small orchards, scarcel}" anything better could be desired than large oak barrels holding 60 to 80 gallons. These may be swung upon wheels separateh' if desired, but the most convenient way is to place them firmly in a one or two horse wagon. Large tanks, well hooped, are also very suitable for large orchards. Casks of this kind, holding 300 gallons, may easih" be placed in the bottom of a two-horse wagon, leaving abundant room for placing and operating the heavy hand pump. Such casks are shown in Pis. XXVII and XXVIII. The manner of securing the tank by placing side timl)ers inside of the wagon bolsters is shown in PL XXII, as is also the stirring stick which projects from a square hole in the top of the cask.
Rectangular plank tanks arc used by some, but it is generally found more difficult to keep them from leaking than in the case of casks, where the hoops may be tightened at will. Numerous spray carts, bar- rel attachments, etc., are illustrated in E. G. Lodeman's work on The Spraying of Plants.
The use of iron tanks is rare, and is hardly to be advised for general spray work, owing to the corrosive action of many sprays. For special sprays, as the kerosene emulsion, such tanks may, however, be safeh' employed.
All spray tanks should be arranged in such a manner as to be easily cleaned, especially where Bordeaux mixture or the sulphur spraj's are to ))e used, and the}^ should be provided with some means for stirring or agitating the spray. The entrance to all suction pipes should be guarded with fine brass wire screen. It is well to ^vash the tanks out thoroughh' at least once a day.
Fig 10. — PuL-uiiuitie pump for Kwicral spraj-ing.
APPLYING WINTER SPRAYS FOR CURL.
A study of the many experiments conducted by the growers and described in this bulletin will give much infonuation relative to the proper time for apph' ing sprays for the control of curl. A presenta- tion of a few general principles involved may, liowever, ])e j)roperly made in this place.
IVC) PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATT^RE AND TREATMENT.
rriE TIME I'OU WIXTEli .SPKAYIXG.
The proper tini(> for the application of winter sprays for the control of peach loaf curl depends ver}- largely upon the conditions of climate, season, and situation of the orchard. The object to be attained is to prevent the fungus from infecting the first growth of spring. It has become apparent from the man}' and widely separated experiments which are here described that nearh' if not all this infection result, from the spores of the fungus, which are present upon the tree and not, as formerly supposed, from a perennial mycelium, and it natur alh" follows that these spores are to ])e destroyed or their germination prevented if the new growth is to be kept exempt from curl. When a spore is about to germinate or has just begun to germinate, its mem- branes are most tender and susceptible to fungicides. That most of the spores of Exoancm^ deformans enter upon the stage of germina- tion at or about the time of the pushing of the first leaf buds in the spring admits of little doubt. That is the time when the tissues of the peach leaf are most tender, and when their infection by curl is actually known to take place.
The preceding facts indicate tliat the time whiMi the fuiigici(K^ is apt to do the greatest good is just before or at the tim(> of the earliest push- ing of the peach leaf buds. The spray should l)e evcnywhere present upon the trees just prior to the beginning of growth. To obtain this object it should be applied from one to three weeks before growth begins. This time may usually be determined by carefully watch- ing the fruit buds, which show signs of swelling some timc^ b(»fore the}' open. When they first begin to swell, the spray may be at once applied (Pis. XXIII, XXIV, and XXV).
This plan relates to regions of moderate rainfall, where a single thorough spraying, with sprays sufficiently strong and active, will prove sufficient. In regions of heavy precipitation more spray should l)e applied to the trees. It should l)e strongei- and have greater adher- ing ((ualities, or else more than one spraying during the winter will be required to give the best results. If two sprayings are gixen. it is better to apply both to the dormant tree than to delay the second treatment till the leaf l)uds have openinl The first spraying may be given in the fall or a few weeks before the second.
THE .MANNEIi ()!•' A I'I'I.YI \( 1 WINTEU SI>I!AVS.
The source of infection of the spring foliag of the ]>each by th(> fungus of leaf cuil is local — i. e., it is to be found upon every portion of the tree. This fact is suliicient to shov that any portions of the tree not I'cached b\- the s])ray will be as subj(>c to the disease as if no sj)rM\ ing li:i<l liccn done. It tlnis becomes :il)i);irent llial \vv\ tJioi'ough woi'l< i-~ e<>enli:d Id the gcneiid control of the dise;ise upon the I re(\
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XXIII.
This plate ."hows tlio condition of tlio trees in the experiment hlock of the Rio Bonito orchard at the close of tlie spray work in the spring of 1895. The row of trees at the left has been sprayed; that at the right has been left unsprayed for com- parison. The first 10 trees on the left have been treated with a spray containing a moderate amount of lime; the second 10 in the same row were treated with a spray containing more lime, and they are much whiter than those in the foreground. Each row of 10 sprayed trees on the left and the corresponding row of 10 unsprayed trees on the right constituted an experiment. The uniformity in the size of tlui trees in these experiments is liere shown to advantage. It should l)e noted that the buds are still closed, while the spraying is completed.
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XXI
I)?:8CRIPTI0N OF I'LATK XXIV.
A portkjii of tlie LovrH trees in the Rio Bonito orchard left unprnned until too late to Hpray, many of the flowers being already open. This plate should be com- pared with ri. XXV, which shows how the orchard should be pruned before si)i-ay- ing, and also with PI. XXIII, which shows how far bud development may ordinarily be allowed to advance in the spring up to the time the spray work is completed.
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XXIV.
W rn c m
— >
~ rn
'4f r .J.
Ai?*
-^"-*t^
^^f
.a**"*^! 1,
i.V-.
DESCRIPTIOX DF PLATE XXV.
A properly pruned ])ortion of the Rio Bonito orchard, wliit-li lias developed too far for the lK>st res^ults of spraying. Spraying should be eonipleted by the time the buds have developed as far aa those shown in PI. XXIII.
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XXV.
S O
SPEAYING WHERE SEVEEAL DISEASES ARE PRESENT. 177
Thorough spray work requires that the sprays be applied in as calm weather as possible. Wind greatly retards and lowers the class of work done. Sprays should likewise not be applied when the twigs or limbs of the trees are covered by frost, snow, or sleet, or by the water of rains, dew, or heavy fogs. To avoid the presence of hanging drops of dew upon the limbs, it is frequently necessary to delay spraying until late in the morning. Such delay is preferable to the application of spray to the dripping trees. When the twigs are dry the spray dries where it strikes, and succeeding dews or showers, if the latter are not too heavy, will not wash oil' the spray to a very injurious extent.
If the sprayer is provided with suitable extension pipe and nozzle with lateral discharge, the work of spra3'ing peach trees of ordinary size ma}^ be rapidl}^ and easily done. The cone of spray is first turned upward under the base of one of the main limbs of the tree and the pipe moved so that the spray passes outward toward the end of the limb, spraying the entire under surface of the limb from base to tip. The sides and top of the limb are now sprayed, together with all of its terminal branches and twigs. Each main limb of the tree is treated in like manner, the sprayer passing about the tree as the work is com- pleted. The habit of actively moving the nozzle back and forth while at work will soon be acquired by the workman desirous of doing good work, and by this means the most uniform spraying is accomplished.
SPRAYING WHERE OTHER DISEASES ARE PRESENT WITH CURL.
There are many peach diseases which mny coexist upon the tree with curl. Many of these are amenable, in whole or in part, to treat- ment adapted to the control of curl, but in some cases where two or more are present it may be advisable to make slight alterations in the treatment. The following notes on some of the more common dis- eases may prove of value.
PRUNE RUST ON THE PEACH {Puccittia pvuni Ters.) .
It is a fact which does not appear to be generally known that prune rust infests the tender branches of the peach as well as its leaves. This has been found especially true in 3^oung trees. Spore clusters are found upon the young shoots before growth begins in the spring, showing that the disease winters over by means of spores produced upon and remaining attached to the branches, as well as b}'^ the spores produced upon the leaves and scattered over the tree. Where the trees are suffering from rust it is therefore apparent that a thorough winter treatment is required to clean the tree and prevent the spring infection, hence such spraying is recommended for the control of both curl and rust, though the full control of the latter disease is very 10093— No. 20 12
178 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
difficult and will, at best, be necessarily followed by several summer treatments. There can be little doubt, however, that a thorough winter spraying will prevent a greater portion of the injury from rust than an}^ single spraying applied at a later date, as it gives a practi- cally clean tree at the opening of the season of growth. Winter sprays for the control of rust must be strong; but summer sprays if strong should be positively neutral and noncorrosive, as peach foliage is exceedingly tender.
MILDEW OF THE PEACH {Podosplisera oxyaxianthx De B.).
Peach mildew is widely distributed in the United States and m Europe. The fungus causing it attacks the leaves, fruit, and tender branches in the early part of the summer. The branches serve for the wintering over of the spores, thus aiding in supplying the source of spring infection. Winter treatment of the trees, with either the copper or sulphur sprays, will largely limit this spring infection, but later treatment wnth weak sprays will often ])e necessarv for full control.
BKowx ROT OF THE PEACH {MoniUa fructigena Teis.) .
Brown rot of the peach has become one of the worst fungous dis- eases of the peach over large portions of the United States. It is quite general throughout most peach-growing sections of the East, and has become well established in the Pacific Northwest. It has been shown by Erwin F. Smith that the fungus winters over in the diseased branches and in the dried fruit adhering to the tree. These facts point to a thorough winter spra3"ing with active fungicides as one of the first steps required in its treatment. Summer spra3'ings will also be required, and even when thoroughly followed up, the disease will prove hard to control. Too much stress can not be laid, however, upon the necessitj' of disinfecting the dormant tree as perfectly as possible by thorough winter treatment.
BLACK SPOT OF THE PEACH {Clodosporium carpophilum Thiim.y .
This disease, which produces black spots upon the peach, is well known in many portions of the United States and in Europe, and in th(! East and South, especialh' in Texas, it has l>ecome (juite tr()ul)le- some. In some parts of Europe it has been known as a true epiphy- totic. Whether this Cladosporium infests the ])ranches the writer can not say, but it appears not improbal)le that such is true, or in any case that the spores probably find winter lodgment upon the tree itself. Black spot has been controlled in Texas by the use of the copp(>r sprays, and there seems no reason t<^ doubt that the winter treatment of th(! infected trees would largel}' tend to disinfect (hem and materi- ally reduce the summer development of tlu^ disease.
SPRAYING WHERE SEVERAL DISEASES ARE PRESENT. 179
WINTER BLIGHT OF THE PEACH AND OTHER SPOT AND SHOT-HOLE DISEASES, SUCH AS
Phyllosticta circumscissa berk., Cercospora circumscissa sacc, etc.
In the Northwest, on the Pacific coast, there are several diseases of the peach not generally known throughout the East, and also several other diseases common to both sections of the countr3^ These troubles are generally known as leaf spot or shot-hole diseases. One very widely distriliuted disease is that produced b}^ Cercospora cirmiinscissa Sacc, but one of the most troublesome diseases of this class that occurs in California and Oregon, is induced b}^ a fungus not yet fully studied, which infests the tender and bearing branches and appears to begin its vegetative activity some time prior to the blooming of the tree in the spring. On account of the habit of the fungus to grow in the dormant or semidormant branches of the tree, the disease is termed by the writer the white/' Might of the peach. It is one of those dis- eases which destroys the most valuable young growth of the tree, i. e., the shoots which are low and suited to the production of the finest fruit. This disease, in common with another quite prevalent on the Pacific coast and which is probably induced by a Coryneum^ does most damage in the more humid localities. Both do their more serious work so early, as is also true of peach leaf curl, that summer spraying would have but little eflfect toward their control. Both induce gum- mosis of the affected branches, as is true of the action of many fungi, and is a well-marked result of the presence of Coryneum hyerlnckti Ond. Winter blight has already been successfully treated with the winter spraj^s, and it is believed that such spraying is sufficient for its control, provided the work be done thoroughl}^ and repeated each 3^ear.
There is no doubt that the winter treatment of the peach for curl is properly and essentially the first step for the control of any of the above-mentioned diseases. Too much can not be said in favor of this treatment, which disinfects the trees before vegetative growth begins. The striking thoroughness of such disinfection work may be seen from the records given below.
SOOTY jArOLD OF THE PEACH.
When the Department spra3dng experiments beg-an in the Rio Bonito orchard, there was ever}" where present on the trunks, inner limbs, and older bark of the experiment trees a fungous "smut," or "sooty mold," giving the bark a black appearance when closely examined. Of the 58 rows included in this block, 35 were sprayed, as before stated, prior to March 10, and 23 left unsprayed for com- parison. On August 10, 5 months after the spraying was completed, all but it rows were examined for the presence of sooty mold, with the following result:
Spraj^ed rows showing no sooty mold August 10: Nos. 1, 3, 6, 7, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 25, 27, 28, 33, 35, 30, 38, 39, 41, 45, 47, 48, 50, 51, 54, 56, and 57 — total, 30 rows.
180 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Sprayed rows showino- a trace of sooty mold: Nos. 42 and 44 (sul- phide of potassium was applied to row 42 and simple milk of lime to row 44) — total, 2 rows.
Unsprayed rows showing the presence of sooty mold upon the trees August 10: Nos. 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, IT, 20, 23, 20/29, 34, 37, 40, 43, 46, 49, 52, 55, and 58 — total, 19 rows,
Unspraj'^ed trees showing no sooty mold, none.
Rows sprayed in 1894, but not sprayed in 1895: No. 4, no mold apparent; No. 24, some mold present; No. 53, a little mold present — total, 3 rows.
Rows for which no notes on sooty mold were o>)fained: Nos. 9, 30, 31, and 32 — total, 4 rows.
The above notes show that records of the sooty mold were obtained from 32 rows of spra^^ed trees 5 months after treatment. Of these, 30 rows showed no sooty mold, while 2 showed a verj' little. Neither of these exceptional rows was sprayed with a generally recognized fungicide. On the other hand, of the 19 unspra3^ed rows examined, all showed sooty mold. The record for rows sprayed in 1894 but left unspra}' ed in 1895, shows that the trees had but little mold upon them 17 months after spraying.
The preceding facts show the disinfecting >'alue of a single winter spraying, qxgu where the whole tree sui;face is covered with fungous mycelium and spores.
ANIMAL PARASITES OP THK PEACH TREE.
Among the insect pests of the peach tree now prevalent in many parts of the United States, the San Jose scale {Asj>ldlotus jperniciosm Com.) is probably the most injurious. This pest, as is already well known on the Pacific coast, can be controlled by winter spraying with the sulphur sprays considered in this bulletin. Where the insect is known to be present, the strongest of these sprays described shoidd be used, and it would be well to apply it somewhat earlier in the spring than where weaker sprays are used.
All leaf-eating insects depositing winter eggs upon the tree may be largely controlled by the winter use of sulphur sprays. There is also a mite {Phytoptus sp. ?) infesting the peach leaves in Califor- nia, which the writer believes may be destroyed in this manner, lioni the fact that experiments conducted in 1895 in the Sacramento Viillcy showed that the same line of treatment is effective in the destruction of a related mite {I^/iytojAua pyri Sor.) upon the pear.
Mr. William N. Runyon, of Courtland, Cal., makes the following statvuKMit r<'s])e( ting tlu^ pcMicli moth, which may also prove of value to growers sull'ciirig from this pest: ''Incidentally 1 would stat(» that experience shows that peach trees sprayed with lime, sulpiiui'. and salt are not siihjcct to the attacks of tiie larva of the i)each moth. Somt! groivers claim a saving of IM) per cent of allected fruit."
CHAPTER X.
NATURE AND SOURCE OF THE SPRAYING MATERIALS USED.
The following notes on the chemicals for sprays are presented for the general information of the fruit grower. The facts given are those which every sprayer should understand.
Spraying is frequently retarded or prevented owing to a want of information relative to the nature, sources of supply, or true value of the chemicals required. A grower uninformed upon the last-named point is often at the mercy of local druggists or other dealers. For example, copper carbonate can be made by the grower himself at from 13 to 14 cents per pound, and ammonia of 26° strength may be pur- chased at about 00 cents per gallon, while local prices have been known to range as high as $1 per pound for copper carbonate and $1.50 per gallon for ammonia, which makes it impossible to undertake spray work. The writer has found the same conditions prevailing in respect to prices for sulphur, which is used ver}^ largel}: in the sulphur sprays and for the treatment of mildew. In some cases the prices asked by dealers in the East have been 400 or 500 per cent higher than growers have for years been paying in California. It can not be expected that the sulphur sprays will be generally used in the East under such conditions.
COPPER SULPHATE (fonuula CuS0^5H20).
Of all fungicides thus far known, copper sulphate is the most important. It is commoidy known as l)lue vitriol or bluestone in the United States. Its foreign names arc largely equivalents of these terms, although the Germans also apply the name of copper vitriol ( Klip few itr ioT) .
When pure, copper sulphate crj^stallizcs in large, blue, triclinic prisms. It contains about 25.3 per cent of copper, and dissolves in four parts of cold water and two parts of boiling water.
The presence of iron is indicated by a greenish color of the crystals or at the surface of a watery solution when exposed to the air. A solution of pure copper sulphate should be blue. The presence of a small amount of iron, which commonly occurs when copper sulphate is manufactured as a by-product in modern smelting works, does not necessarily detract from its value as a fungicide, while this by-product
181
182 PEACH LEAF CURL! ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
may often be purchased at a somewhat lower figure than a purer article. Spraying tests have been made b}" the writer for the com- parison of pure commercial bluestone with that obtained as a by-prod- uct of smelting works, and which contained a considerable amount of iron, and the results showed that the latter article contained fully as great fungicidal value as the former.
The manufacture of copper sulphate is carried on at a considerable number of establishments in the United States, and various processes are followed. A large amount of this chemical is also imported, chietly from England.
Bluestone is prepared by dissolving cupric oxide in sulphuric acid, or b}' oxidizing the sulphide of copper, the latter being the cheaper process. Mr. Alfred Rapp, a gentleman who has enjoyed a wide experience, has kindl}^ supplied the following facts respecting the manufacture of copper sulphate b}^ a leading smelting firm of the Pacific coast. He states that the copper is mainly derived from mattes produced in the blast furnaces, and, sec^ondl3^ from an acid solution of sulphate of copper resulting from the precipitation of sih^er by metallic copper out of a sulphate solution. To bring the copper in the different mattes in solution they are first crushed and pulverized to ai)out one-thirty -second of an inch or finer, and subjected to a roasting process by which the sulphur is nearlj^ all oxidized. The roasted matte contains the copper as oxide and partl}^ as sulphate, with a small amount still as sulphide. This material is pulverized once more and f(^d into lead-lined leaching tanks, where the acid copjx'r sulphate solution is added, and, if necessary, sidphuric acid. The whole mass is heated by steam running through lead pipes. The copper oxide and the copper sulphate in the roast is thus l)r<)ught in solution as a sulphate. A})out 80 per cent of the copper contained in the mattes is thus leached out. The resulting solution, of course, is not a neutral one, })ut still contains an excess of free sulphiiric acid. This solution is transf(!rred to other lead-lined tanks, containing, suspended from wooden sticks, strips of lead about 3 inches wide, the central portion of which is lient downward between the sticks so as to form a loop, which is held by the ends of the lead strips being l)ent over the sticks. The copjx'i- sul|)hat«' when run down to tiiese crystallizing tanks is about y>i') to 44 li. During tiie cooling ])rocess, which takes a])Out four to sev(;n days, th(^ copper sulphate, or ratiiei- })art of it, separates out (jf the sohition as ])lue crystals, which are deposited upon th(> strips of lead. These crystals are dried and ])acl<ed in barrels ready for th(! market. This, Mr. Rapp adds, is the g(Mieral way in which bluestone is made the world o\-cr, except that they haxc at the woi'ks considci'cd. in addition to the copper in the mattes, the acid copper sulphate solution from a silver relinci\ .
NATURE AND SOURCE OF SPRAYING MATERIALS. 183
Water draining from copper mines sometimes carries copper sulphate in solution, in which case the crystals are procured by evaporating- the excess of water. Barrels of copper sulphate weigh from 300 to 600 pounds.
The manufacturer's price of copper sulphate will depend largely upon the price of copper and sulphuric acid — two leading constituents, as the}^ are sold in the market — and upon supply and demand. The cost to the manufacturer will not, however, necessarily depend upon the market value of copper and acid, for one or both may be obtained by him as by-products in other regular and profitable lines of manu- facture, such as the smelting of gold and silver ores, etc.^
COPPER CARBONATE.
Copper carbonate as usually prepared shows the following formula: CuCOj. CuHgOg. It is widely used in the preparation of ammoni- acal copper carbonate sprays, and is especially well adapted to the treatment of maturing fruit where subject to fungous diseases. As commonly sold on the market, the carbonate of copper is green and finely granular or powdery. It contains about 57.4 per cent of cop- per. Native minerals of similar composition occur, such as malachite and azurite.
Copper carbonate is manufactured by a number of firms in the United States, but much less extensively than the sulphate. In most cases it is prepared by adding to a solution of copper sulphate an excess of sodium carbonate (sal soda) in solution. This gives a floc- culent mixture of pale blue color, afterwards changing to green. Heating makes the precipitate more granular.
Owing to the difficulty of obtaining carbonate of copper in smaller towns, as well as the high price usually charged for it, the Depart- ment has usuall}^ recommended that the fruit growers prepare it. The following instructions for this work were published by the writer in a circular sent to the peach growers of the country in 189-1-95: In a barrel dissolve 6 pounds of copper sulphate in 4 gallons of hot
' Owing to the somewhat enhanced value of copper at this time (March, 1899) , the wholes-jale price of copper sulphate hasadvanced. San Francisco producers quote copper sulphate in barrels, f. o. b., at 5^ cents, and carload lots at 5 cents per pound; Omaha quotations are, by the ton or carload, 5^ cents; one New York firm quotes 5| cents by the barrel or ton and 5^ cents by the carload, and a second firm quotes 6 cents by the barrel, Sf'o cents by the ton, and 5| cents by the carload; Denver quotations are 6 cents by the barrel, 5| cents by the ton, and 5|- cents by the carload ; Cleveland quotes 6 cents per pound in any quantity; one Philadelphia firm quotes 6 cents by the barrel, 5|- cents by the ton, and 5| cents by the carload, and a second firm quotes 5| cents by the barrel, 5j cents by the ton, and 5| cents by the carload; Baltimore quotes 5| cents by the barrel, SJ cents by the ton, and 5^ cents by the carload; Great Falls, Mont., quotes 4| cents per pound in carload lots and 5 cents per pound for less than carload lots, etc.
18-4 PEACH LEAF CUKL: ITS NATURE AISTD TREATMENT.
water. In another wooden vessel dissolve 7 pounds of washing or sal soda, in 2 gallons of hot water. The soda should be clear (translucent), and not white and powdery, as it appears when air slaked. When cool, pour the soda solution slowh' into the copper solution. As soon as bubbles cease to rise fill the barrel with water, stir thor- oughly, and allow the mixture to stand over night to settle. The next day siphon off all the clear liquid from the top with a piece of hose, fill the barrel with water, stir thoroughly, and allow it to stand a second night. Siphon off the clear liquid the second day, fill the bar- rel with water, stir, and siphon off' the clear liquid once more the third day. Now pour the wet sediment from the barrel into a crock or other earthen dish, strain out the excess of water through a cloth, and dry slowlv in an open oven, stirring occasionally', if necessary, to prevent overheating. Prepared in this manner there should be obtained, if none of the sediment in the barrel be lost, about 2.65 pounds of carbonate of copper.
Owing most probably to the comparatively limited sale of carbonate of copper, the market price has been and still remains too high. It can rarel}' be obtained for less than 30 to -40 cents per pound, which is from two to three times the cost to the grower when it is prepared at home. This condition reacts upon the manufacturer by causing the grower to make his own carbonate, the market never feeling his demand. With fungicides which the grower is unal)le to prepare the conditions are different. His needs increase the demand in the market, and increased demand tends ultimately to lower prices.
The cost of copper carbonate when prepared by the grower will depend upon the cost of copper sulphate and sal soda. Quotations of March and April, 1899, placed copper sulpliat(> at 5 cents per pound by the l)arrel and sal soda at 1*0 of a cent per pound in like (|uan- tity. At these rates the grower should be able to prepare the car- bonate of copper at about 12.3 cents per pound. Quotations on larger lots of sal soda and copper sulphate placed the price at -^\- of a cent and 4rf cents per pound, respectively. At these prices the raw mate- rials for a pound of copper carbonate would cost about 11.8 cents. These facts show that wholesale druggists and manufacturing chemists could place the carbonate upon tlu^ market at 15 or 2(> cents per pound and still make a good profit, even when l)uying their sodium carl)onate and copper sidi)hate in the open market. If we go a step farther ))ack, h()wev(;r, we may see that the Hi-st cost of co^jper carbonate can be greatly reduced Ix'low any figures here given. Ten-elevenths of the cost is seen to depend upon the price of copper sulphate, and the first cost of this hitter depends ui)()ii the cost to the nianufacturcM- of sulj)huric acid and copper. Both of these articles may l)e produced aw by-])roducts of modern smelting processes. A lirni at Blacksburg, S. C. informs the wi'iter that they employ gold-bearing i)y rites for the manufactun; of sulphuric acid, the sulphui- fumes l)eing driven
NATURE AND SOURCE OF SPRAYING MATERIALS. 185
off with heat and condensed in lead chambers in the usual wa}'. The acid, the firm states, pays the expenses, hence the gold collected is a by-product with them. For the same purpose sulphur may be obtained by heat from several kinds of pyrites — that is, from the sulphides of copper and iron. As already shown in the notes on copper sulphate, copper for the production of this chemical ma}^ he derived largely from the mattes of silver smelting works. In view of the fact that both the copper and sulphur of copper sulphate may be obtained as by-products in the extensive gold and silver smelting works, the first cost of this chemical can certainly be placed at a figure admitting of the manufacture of copper carbonate at a very low cost. It could probably be placed on the market to-day by the leading smelting companies at 15 cents per pound and still leave a liberal profit on first cost. It is to be hoped that this matter will be looked into by some of the larger smelting firms, and that the carbonate of copper ma}^ soon be had on the market at prices which are not prohibitive to its purchase by the horticulturists of the country.^
AMMONIA (ybrmt/Z(2 NH 3).
\ Ammonia is of gaseous nature and strongly alkaline in reaction. It is readily taken up or dissolved in water, in which form it is used in preparing the ammoniacal copper carbonate, eau celeste, and modified eau celeste — three of the more important copper sprays. A strong solution of ammonia may be commonly had on the market or from the manufacturers. Such a solution contains, by weight, about 28 per cent of ammonia gas, and is sold as 26° ammonia, as shown by Baume's hj^drometer test. A weaker solution is often prepared by druggists and is sold as ammonia water, or aqua ammonia. This often contains no more than 10 per cent of ammonia gas, and is obtained by reducing the stronger article with water. It is scarcely necessary to add that there is no economy in buying this dilute liquid. The price is apt to be out of proportion to the strength, and if quantities are to be shipped long distances there is a needless increase of freight, owing to the
^The following quotations on copper carbonate were received March, 1899: St. Louis quotes 10-pound lots at 272 cents per pound, 100-pound lots at 25 cents per pound, and 1,000-pound lots at 23 centa per pound, f. o. b. ; one Philadelphia firm quotes 10-pound lots at 23 cents per pound, 100-pound lots at 22 cents per pound, 1,000-pound lots at 21 cents per pound, f. o. b., and a second house quotes 28 cents per pound for ordinary quantities and 21 cents per pound by the barrel; New York quotes 10-pound lots at 85 cents per pound, 100-pound lots at 28 cents per pound, and 1,000-pound lots at 22 cents per pound f . 0. b. ;" Boston quotes 10-j>ound lots at 20 cents per pound, 100-pound lots at 18 cents per pound, and 1,000-pound lots at 16 cents per pound.
The writer invites attention to the great variation in quotations from different centers of trade. It is satisfactory to note that quotations just received from Boston indorse the view already expressed, that carbonate of copper can be placed upon the market at about 15 cents per pound and leave a sufficient profit to the manufacturer.
186 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
added percentage of water. It is always desirable to specify the strength of the ammonia solution when obtaining quotations.
Plants and annuals furnish the main sources of conunercial anunonia. In each case the ammonia is obtained through the decomposition or destructive distillation of the organic matter. Mr. Mallinckrodt, of the Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, of St. Louis, and president of the Pacific Ammonia and Chemical Company, states that there are, as already indicated, but two prime sources from which aqua ammonia is obtained, viz, "bone liquor," obtained as a by-product in the manu- facture of bone coal, and "gas liquor,'' obtained from the scrub]:)ing of gas in works for the manufacture of coal gas. A similar source is also found in the making of coke. It is further stated that ammonia is obtained from l)one liquor almost exclusively in the form of sulphate of ammonia, often of crude quality, which is used in the manufacture of fertilizers. Gas liquor is partly worked into a sulphate of superior quality, but mostly into aciua ammonia, by what is called the direct process. It is redistilled and aqua ammonia made therefrom. Aqua ammonia obtained from this source is largely used in the manufacture of ice and for other technical purposes. 01)tained in this way. it is said to be the cheapest article of good quality that can be supplied.
A crude concentrated ammoniacal licjuor is also largely made ))y concentrating gas liquor without purification. This concentration is carried on mainly at smaller works for the purpose of transporting the liquors in a more concentrated form, to save the expense of freight, to works where crude liquor is redistilled and maiuifactured into pure aqua ammonia. The concentrated li([uor is, hoM'ever, also largely used in the preparation of nitrate of ammonia, which is used in the manu- facture of powder, Ijut most largely in the manufacture of soda ash. This crude liquor contains, besides a small amount of free anmionia (NHg), a considerable amount of carbonate, sulphide, cj'anides, and other ammonia salts, together with tarry and empyreumatic matter resulting from the destructive distillation of coal. The strength of this liquor can not be made greater than 15 to 20 per cent, and it is doubtful if it could })e advantageously used as a sul)stitute for aqua anunonia in the preparation of spi-ays. The anunoniacal liquors obtained in the manufacture of coal gas are entirely a by-product.
As th(; gas works of the United States have been largely supplanting coal gas with water gas, in the maiuifacture of which anunonia is not ol)taiii('d, the <|uantity of anunonia ])ro(luce(l in the country has been steadily (Icci'casing, and the (IcniiiiKl is hciiig sui)plied piMncipally from England. Hoth aqua anunonia and anhydrous ammonia are made largely fioin imported sulphate of ammonia, and very large (|uantities of tin; iinpoited article ar<' also consnnied in the manufactnre of ffitilizerH.'
'San i'"ruiiciMC()'H (inolatioii on anmioniii water of 2(i° liyilroiiictcr Ic.'^t, in drnniH of about ToO i»oiuniH, f. o. I)., i.M 7\ ccnt.s per jujund.
NATURE AND SOURCE OF SPRAYING MATERIALS. 187
SODIUM CARBONATE {formula Na^COj-lOHjO).
Sodium carbonate, sal soda, or washing soda is used in making car- bonate of copper from the sulphate of copper and in preparing the modified eau celeste. As obtained in the market it is in colorless, monoclinic crj^stals, showing a strongly alkaline reaction to litmus paper. When exposed to the air much of the water of cr3^stallization is lost from the crystals, which rapidly effloresce or slake to a white powder. When perfect, nearly two-thirds of the cr^'stals, l)}- weight, is water.
Carbonate of soda dissolves in 1.6 parts of water at 59° F. and in 0.2 part of boiling water. When a solution of sal soda is added to the solution of copper sulphate in making copper carbonate, or to any other acid solution, a decided effervescence takes place, so that in making the copper carbonate the two solutions used should be united slowly or they may overflow the containing vessels. The more com- mon impurities found in sodium carbonate are sodium chloride (common salt) and sodium sulphate (Glauber's salt). These impurities are due to the source and manner of manufacture of the sal soda, but are not usually present in the latter in sufficient amount to require attention in the spray work being considered.
The sources of sodium carbonate are somewhat numerous, but the commercial supply of to-day is derived mainly from connnon salt or from natural deposits of the carbonate. In nearly all arid countries carbonate of soda is frequently found in the soil in such quantities as to be injurious to vegetation . West of the Missouri River large accumu- lations of the different soluble salts of the soil are frequently met with. In the East such accumulations are prevented by the greater rainfall, the salts being eventually washed from the soil and carried to the sea, but in the West they often coat the ground, appearing white or black, and are known as "" alkali beds," owing to the frequent pres- ence of strongly alkaline salts, such as sal soda. The most a])undant constituents of these deposits are sodium sulphate, sodium chloride, and sodium carbonate. The sodium chloride and sodiiun carbonate are, when in excess, so injurious to vegetation as to constitute a leading bane of the horticulturist of the western half of the United States. In the great plateau region between the Rock}' Mountains and the Sierra Nevada and Cascade ranges are vast stretches of alkaline soils, the soluble salts of which accumulate in lakes and along water courses through the drainage of the winter rains. During the long, dry sum- mer these waters evaporate to a considerable extent, leaving the salts deposited along the margins of the lakes and rivers.^ In some cases these deposits of alkali are composed largely of sodium car])onate, and in several instances, after passing through a simple purifying process,
^ These deposits are very well shown in the illustrations of Bull. No. 14, Division of Soils, U. S. Dept. of Agr.
188 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
this salt is obtained in a quite pure state, the original deposits contain- ing as high as 90 per cent of sal soda. This latter is obtained from the soda lakes of South America, Egypt, etc. , as well as from those of the United States. There are several such soda lakes in Wyoming, Nevada, and California. Large amounts of sal soda are cr3"staUized from crude carbonate of soda obtained from Soda Lake, near Ragtown, Nev. This lake is known as Big Soda Lake, to distinguish it from a smaller soda lake near b}' . The lake is a beautiful sheet of water, l3'ing in a depression of the desert, the water being about 150 feet in depth at the deepest point. It is very close to the old emigrant road running from the sink of the Humboldt River to Carson River. The separa- tion of carbonate of soda from the waters of this lake is largely by solar evaporation. In the fall the salts deposited are taken up, washed, passed through a furnace, and shipped in sacks to San Francisco, where the soda is relined and bleached for various uses. The principal uses on the Pacific coast are in glass-making and borax-making. It is stated that sal soda obtained as here described is practically a pure article, though the natural color is somewhat yellow or brownish. It is generally useful, except as a fancy article for the retail trade. For such purposes it must be bleached with chloride of lime, after which it presents l)eautif ul f rystals.
There is also a large plant in operation at Owens Lake, Cal., get- ting out carbonate of soda from the waters for the Pacific market. This product, with that above descri])cd, is nearh' equal in strength and purity to the eastern and the imported product, so much so that consumers are safe in using the western product, if desired. All or most sodas (carl)onates) found on the Pacific coast proper are in the form of sesquicarl)oiiutes, and are often so much contaminated with sulphates and chlorides that much expense is entailed in their separa- tion, and they are therefore of littk^ value as sources of suppl}'.
The second great connnercial source of sal soda is common salt. The salt deposits of the country are vast and inexhaustible in quantit}\ The Onondaga Salt Group of the Upper Silurian alone underlies much of tiic large extent of countr}', as well as the (ireat Lakes, situ- ated ])etween Salina, N. Y., and Green Bay, Wis. At certain points the salt deposits of this group are known to exceed 100 feet in thick- ness. The deposit is tapj)ed by wells at Warsaw, N. Y., in western Ontario, in eastern and in western Michigan, and elsewhere. The rock salt of western Michigan is 20 to 'M) feet in thickness, and is reached at a depth of 1,800 to 2,200 feet. Other large salt (le])osits are found in Kansas ;ind in numerous other portions of the country.
Sal soda is manufactured from salt on a commercial scale according to two leading j)roces,ses. The older of these is known as the L(»blanc ])rocess, and has been extensively employed in England and through- out Kurope. It involves two steps in th(> maiuifacture, (i) the conver-
NATURE AND SOUKCE OF SPRAYING MATERIALS. 189
sion of salt into sodium sulphate, and (2) the decomposition of sodium sulphate and its conversion into sodium carbonate. The first opera- tion is known as the "salt-cake" process, and the second as the "soda- ash" process. The first step is carried out by the application of sul- phuric acid to the salt and the decomposition of both in a furnace, the double decomposition resulting- in the formation of hj^drochloric acid and sodium sulphate. The h3^drochloric acid is condensed and pre- served, while the salt is converted by heat into a hard cake of acid sodium sulphate. There is usually in this cake, however, more or less unaltered sodium chloride. In the second step the salt cake is pul- verized and mixed with an equal weight of pulverized limestone or chalk and half its weight of fine coal. This mixture is heated to fusion in a furnace, being constantly stirred or revolved. The com- bustion of the coal under the heat which is maintained seems to con- vert the sodium sulphate into sodium sulphide, and the decomposition of the sodium sulphide and limestone, with the interchange of ele- ments, produces calcium sulphide and sodium carbonate. The resulting mass is cooled in iron receivers, broken up finely, and digested in tepid water. The alkali dissolves and leaves the insoluble impurities. The sodium solution is evaporated, and when dry the mass is calcined with one-fourth its weight of sawdust, to more fully convert the alkali into carbonate. This product^ — the soda ash of commerce — is again dis- solved in hot water, and the solution filtered and allowed to cool. As the solution cools the carbonate of soda is deposited in large, trans- parent crystals, such as are supplied to the trade. Soda ash was formerly largely imported from England, but in the last few years has been made in the United States to a very large extent. The dissolv- ing of the soda ash and the crystallizing of the sal soda i-s carried on extensivel}^ by firms not manufacturers of the ash. A St. Louis firm states that the}^ crystallize the solution of soda ash in tanks holding about 8,000 pounds each. After the crystallization has progressed sufficiently, which takes from ten to fourteen days, according to the temperature of the weather, the mother lye, which contains all the impurities, is drawn off and the sal soda is then broken, dried, and packed in barrels. It is stated that a newer process is to crystallize the solution in small tanks, holding perhaps 200 pounds. In this small quantity the liquid crystallizes in a very short time, say over night, but does not give any mother lye, and consequently no impurities are removed.
A system entirely different from the Leblanc process is in use in the United States in some of the leading salt regions and has come very largel}^ into use in Europe. It is known as the ammonia soda process, or the Solva)'^ process. It consists in decomposing a solution of com- mon salt with ammonium bicarbonate, whereby the greater part of the sodium is precipitated as bicarbonate, while the ammonia remains in solution as ammonium chloride. This latter salt is heated with
190 PEACH LEAF CURL'. ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
lime to liberate ammonia, which is then reconverted into bicarbonate by the carbonic acid evolved in the conversion of the sodium bicar- bonate into monocarbonate by heat. The ammonium bicarbonate thus reproduced is employed to decompose fresh portions of sodium chlo- ride, so that the process is made continuous.^
SULPHUR {symhol S).
The value of sulphur as a fungicide, insecticide, and germicide nas been known for many years. Its use in a powdered state has been long followed in hothouses and vineyards, and its application in the treatment of parasitic skin diseases of man and the lower animals, and in the control of fermentation in fruits and wines is equally well known. In connection with potash and soda it has been applied to the treatment of fungous diseases in the form of sulphides of these bases.
The recent marked use of sulphur in preparing sulphide of lime for the spraying of trees is believed to have been first suggested in Cali- fornia, the idea coming*, it is thought, from the use of sulphur in a similar form as a dip to kill scab mites on sheep. The spraying of trees infested by scale insects was a natural application of its known insecticidal qualities to the needs of the orchard. In combination with lime and salt it is now very wideh" used on the Pacific coast. These chemicals are boiled together for a considerable time, and result in the formation of one or more of the sulphides of calcium in liquid form. While the value of this spray is well established in regions west of the Rocky Mountains, its introduction in the East has been slow, though it is almost certain to have a wide application in that section in coming years, when the full importance of winter spraying for the control of insect pests and fungous diseases is more fullj'^ appreciated. This is more especially true where both of these classes of diseases occur at one time on the same host plant.
Sulphur is obtainable in the market in several forms and degrees of purity. The forms most common are known as brimstone, the flour of sulphur, and flowers of sulphur. Brimstone is sulphur in the solid form, flour of sulphur is ground brimstone, and flowers of sulphur is sulphur which has been sublimed. Common brimstone is the cheapest form on the market, flour of sulphur stands next in price, while flowers of sulphur comes still higher. The purity of any of these
' QiiotatioriH on Hal soda were received as follows during March and April, 1899: San Francisco (juotcs 50-sack lota at 60 cents per 100 pounds, 10-barrel lots at 70 cent« per 100 pounds, and smaller quantities at 75 cents per 100 pounds; 1^)8 Angeles (piotes by the barrel $1.25 per 100 pounds, and by the car in sacks %\ jkt 100 pounds; St. Louis (juotes by the car load in l)arrels 55 cent.s jM'r 100 ])()un<ls; New York (jiiotcs, f. o. I>. Syracuse, in jobbing IoUj, barrels of ;?75 jxiuiuls, 40 tvnta per 100 pounds; Fair^iort, N. Y., quotes 50 ccnt.s per 100 pounds, f. o. b.
NATURE AND SOURCE OF SPRAYING MATERIALS. 191
forms is usually sufficiently high for the use of the horticulturist. Brimstone and flour of sulphur are usually about 98 per cent pure, while flowers of sulphur is almost entirely pure. Brimstone weighs most, flour of sulphur less, and flowers of sulphur least for a like bulk.
The horticulturist uses sulphur in all the above-named forms, brim- stone being employed for bleaching fruit, nuts, etc., while flour and flowers of sulphur are used in fi.eld work for the control of insect and fungous pest5. A simple mode by which one may test the purity of sulphur is to weigh out any desired amount and then dr}-^ and burn it; the weight of the remaining incombustible portion, added to the amount of weight lost in drying, determines the amount of impurities.
The sources of the sulphur supply- of the United States are numer- ous and A'aried. A large amount of crude sulphur is imported, although much of the sulphur now used in the production of copper sulphate, sulphuric acid, and various other chemicals is obtained in the United States through the decomposition of several native metallic sulphides, such as the sulphides of iron and copper, which are known as iron and copper p3a'ites. It has been estimated that the amount of sulphur consumed in the United States in 1892 was 243,151 tons. The sources of this sulphur were as follows:
From 100,721 tons of imported brimstone (98 per cent) 98,707 tons.
From 1,825 tons of domestic brimstone (98 per cent) 1,787 tons.
From 210,000 tons of imported pyrites (43 per cent) 90,300 tons.
From 119,000 tons of domestic pyrites (-l-i per cent) 52,360 tons.
At the present time the amount used is probably much greater than in 1892.
Great deposits of native sulphur are found in many foreign coun- tries and in various portions of the United States. Most of the natural deposits occur in past or present mountain regions, and are of volcanic origin. "The exhalations of volcanoes include, as a rule, sulphurous acid (SO^) and sulphureted hydrogen (H^S), which two gases, if moist, readil}^ decompose each other into water and sulphur, a circumstance which accounts for the constant occurrence of sulphur in all volcanic districts." It is estimated that 5,000,000 tons of sulphur exist in one deposit in Japan. The deposits of Sicily are famed the world over, and 400 distinct workings are said to exist in that island. In central Sicil}^, at Assoro, Imera, Villarosa, and elsewhere, large amounts of brimstone, in the form of short truncated pyramids, are commonly seen piled near the railroad stations, as wood is piled in the United States. These large blocks, probabl}^ weighing 100 pounds each, are brought to the railroad on the backs of donkeys driven down from the mines in the mountains in long trains. Large refineries, devoted to the refining of such brimstone, are located at Catania. The aimual outputof sulphur in Sicily is said to exceed 300,000 tons, and the present
192 PEACH LEAF CUKL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
importation of the United States from Sicil}" is about 120,000 tons. The richer sulphur ores of Sicily run from 30 to 10 per cent of sul- phur. A considerable quantity is also imported from Japan.
The leading native sulphur deposits of the United States are located in Nevada, Utah, California, Wyoming, and Louisiana. AVhile the amount of sulphur ore in the country is inexhaustible, the writer is informed by a New York dealer that not to exceed 3.000 tons are mined here annually, which, of course, does not include the amount extracted from pyrites. Respecting the Utah sulphur mines, which are located in the foothills of the Wasatch Mountains and in Beaver County, about 200 miles from Salt Lake City, the writer has received the following interesting data from Mr. C. F. G. Meyer, of St. Louis: The sulphur supply at these Utah mines is practically unlimited, and the price of the product is governed entirely b}' foreign markets. The sulphur is found in an immense bed, the ore beginning at the sur- face of the earth and extending down to unknown depths. This ore is of a very soft character, containing sand, gypsum, and gravel, and has from 15 to 95 per cent sulphur. The profitable ore is mined through open cuts and hauled on a tramway to smelters. The smelters are cast-iron retorts and hold a ton of ore. Each charge is her- metically sealed and the retort is subjected to 10 atmospheres of steam pressure. Under this heat the sulphur percolates, in the shape of licjuid sulphur, through the foreign matter into a pot below, from which it is drawn off and passes into a distilling vat for the purpose of per- mitting all foreign substance to settle to the bottom of the taidv; thence it is drawn off into wooden molds, holding about 200 pounds, and allowed to cool, after which it is passed through a grinding process in an attrition mill. The product obtained by the above process is about 99 per cent pure, and forms the flour of sulphur, which is extensively used, as already indicated. For obtaining what is commonly known as flowers of sulphur, which is chemically pure, the ground sulphur is passed through a resubliming vapor process.
Respecting any possible advantage to the horticulturist ])v purchas- ing sulphur refined in Europe in preference to that refined in the United States, a prominent sulphur refiner of San Francisco has kindly supplied the following facts:
The sulphur refined is mostly from imported Sicilian and Japanese products. While there exists the remnant of a former prejudice against California sulphur, it should be of interest and value to know that there is al)solutely no difl'erencc between that maiuifactui'cd here and that manufactured in France, Italy, Denmark, and other European countries. Both start with tin; same raw material coming from Sicily, tlu; sanu! apparatus is employed, and even experienced foreigners are hired to refine the brimstone in the identical maimer in which it is treated in the above places. There comes to the horticidturist no
NATUKE AND SOURCE OF SPRAYING MATERIALS. 193
advantage, therefore, to offset the present duty of $8 per ton levied on the refined imported sulphur, and our agricultural population, it is claimed, is duped when demanding- French, Italian, or other European refined sulphur. The same manufacturer further states that Sicily sulphur of 98 per cent purity is at present admitted to the United States duty free, and that it can be ground or sublimed in this country and sold at a price below the cost of the imported foreign-refined sul- phur. It is also said, as to the comparative value to the horticulturist of ground (flour) and of sublimed sulphur (flowers), that for ordinary purposes domestic ground or powdered sulphur, which averages less than 1 per cent of impurities, will answer all requirements in a wash, being finer than the imported, the onlv impurity being a neutral, inert volcanic ash. The sublimed sulphur, as before stated, is identical with the imported and contains little, if any, trace of anything but elementary sulphur. It is lighter in bulk and more stringy than ground sulphur (if examined under the microscope), but is not usually enough better for agricultural purposes to offset the difference in price. In other words, the difference in purity percentage between ground sulphur and sublimed sulphur is not in any wa}^ commensu- rate with the difference in price, and a great saving could be effected by substituting the former for the latter in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred.
To these views the writer would add that the flour of sulphur is cer- tainly what should be used in the preparation of sprays. As to the rela- tive value of flour of sulphur and flowers of sulphur for powdering vines for mildew, there is a difl'erence of opinion among vine growers, the ease with which the fumes are given off' being considered of prime importance in the treatment of this disease.^
^ Quotations on sulphur in March, 1899, were as follows: New York quotes flour of sulphur in 250 pound barrel lots at $2.20 per 100 pounds, 100 pound sacks at $2.15 per 100 pounds, and car loads in barrels at $1.80 per 100 pounds, and in sacks at $1.75 per 100 pounds, all f. o. b. A second New York firm quotes roll l)riinstone at $2 per 100 pounds; flour of sulphur, heavy, at $2.20, and light at $2.25 per 100 pounds by the barrel; sublimed flowers of sulphur at $2.87i per 100 pound.s, in carload lots, f. o. b. ; roll brimstone, $1.70 per 100 pounds; flour of sulphur, heavy, 100 pound bags, $1.75; 250 pound barrels, $1.80 per 100 pounds; light, 175 pound barrels, $1.85 per 100 pounds; flowers of sulphur, sublimed, $2 per 100 pounds. San Francisco quotes powdered sulphur, sacks or barrels, by the car load at $1.50* per 100 i)ounds, less (juantity at $1.60 per 100 pounds; sublimed (flowers of sulphur), sacks or barrels, car load lots, $1.75 per 100 pounds, less quantity, $1.85 per 100 pounds; roll, barrels only, $1.85 per 100 pounds; refined, barrels only (quality same as roll), $1.75 per 100 pounds; crude, sacks, $1.40 per 100 pounds.
lyoya— No. 20 — 13
CHAPTER XI.
PEACH VARIETIES AND NURSERY STOCK IN RELATION TO CURL. COMPARISON OF PEACH VARIETIES.
It is a woll-known fact that certain peach varieties are less suscep tiblc to curl than other.s. When planting-, many g-rowers strive to select varieties which are known to be comparatively resistant. This has led nurserymen to select and grow as hardy varieties as possible, and such selection has resulted in cultivated varieties becoming to some extent more hardy than the majority of seedlings. Of 97 peach growers who have stated whether, in their opinion, seedling or budded trees are most affected by curl, 50 say that seedlings are most affected, 19 think Imdded trees are affected most, and 28 growers have observed no difference between budded and seedling trees in this respect.
In spite of the fact that some varieties of budded peaches are quite hardy, many of the finest peaches grown are much subject to curl. There are also varieties which are hardy in one locality and liecome very subject to the disease when grown under different conditions. There are, in fact, so many influences, such as season, soil, situation, etc., that it has been difficult to decide, except in a few cases, whether a variety may be fairly classed as hardy or susceptible. It is found by wide inquiry that a peach which is considered hardy in one portion of the country is not resistant to curl in another. The views of peach growers vary so widely respecting the hardiness of varieties that it has been thought best to give the results as obtained, rather than strive to draw from them any final conclusions. Of a hirge number of growers who have been asked whether early or late-blooming varieties are most affected, 70 have expressed their views. A majority, or 42 of these growers, think there is no difference between early and late blooming varieties, 23 believe early blooming varieties most subject to the disease, and only .5 believe the late l^loomers most affected. It would .seem that the late l)looming varieties may be less liable to injury, owing to the increased warmth when they push in the spring, but the difference is certainly not well marked. Respecting the hardi- ness of early or hite maturing varieties, there appears to be little dif- ferenc^e from the replies to the circular letter. Among 79 peach growers who have expressed their views, 22 think early varieties most .subject to the disease, 10 believe the late varieties most subject to it, and 41 think there is uo difference. 1U4
PEACH VAEIETIES IN RELATION TO CURL.
195
Besides the facts respecting- tiie hardiness of varieties gathered by a circular letter addressed to the peach growers of the country in 1893, the following list contains such information on this subject as it has been possible to glean from the publications accessible to the writer. In this list are tabulated 191 peach varieties and a few nectarines in relation to their resistance to curl. So far as possible the form of the glands, the season of ripening, and the adhesion of pit is shown. ^ The susceptibility to curl is shown in three columns — little susceptible, mediiun susceptible, and very susceptible. Every record for or against a variety has been obtained from a distinct source from all other records for that variety, and the list includes over 1,000 records. As a record under medium susceptible or very susceptible is against the variety, showing that it is subject to the disease, these two columns are added and the sum carried to a final column. This final column may thus be fairly contrasted with the first column, which gives the records of varieties little susceptible to curl. The entire list goes far to show that few varieties arc practically free from curl in all locali- ties, and that some of the finest varieties are very susceptible to it. (See for example the records under Crawf ords Late, Crawf ords Early, Elberta, Heath Cling, Lovell, etc.)
Tablk 43. — Relations of peach varieties to peach leaf curl, with records of glands, time of ripening, and adhesion ofj)it.
No. |
Peach varieties. |
"o u 4) . O |
s •c . II o i 03 |
c o |
ft s . 3 |
o |
ft & |
|
1 |
r g ? r r r r r g g r |
e 1 e e e e 1 e 1 1 c 1 |
f f f c f f c f f c f f |
...... 18 2 ""s |
1 |
1 |
||
0 |
Albriglit |
|||||||
S |
11 |
6 |
17 |
|||||
■1 |
||||||||
"S |
2 5 1 |
...... ...... 3 4 |
2 |
|||||
fi |
Amsden.. T |
7 |
||||||
7 |
1 |
|||||||
8 |
Beatrice |
2 |
||||||
9 |
4 ...... 1 1 2 |
2 2 |
6 |
|||||
10 |
6 |
|||||||
n |
Bishops Early |
|||||||
12 |
3 |
3 |
||||||
IS |
Boston |
|||||||
11 |
g |
1 1 e e 1 |
f c |
2 1 1 4 |
1 ....„ 1 2 |
3 |
||
15 |
Brett (Mrs.) . .. |
1 |
||||||
Ifi |
1 |
|||||||
17 |
r |
f f c c c f |
4 1 |
7 |
||||
1« |
1 |
|||||||
]y |
California (cling) |
2 |
||||||
■>() |
g |
c |
4 ...... |
|||||
■21 22 23 21 |
1 1 |
1 |
||||||
1 |
||||||||
Chairs (choice) |
r |
1 |
f |
2 |
2 |
^lu some instances it ia known that the form of the glands of a variety is reported differently by different writers, and on this account a few errors may have crept into the table here given, but where it lias been possible to determine such (luestions by referring to several authors it has been done. Unfortunately the writer has not l)een able to study this matter in the orchard except for a portion of the varieties given.
196
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Table 43. — Jiekilions ofpeadi varieties to peach leaf curl, villi records of glandu, time of ripening, and adhesion of pit — Continued.
No. |
Peach varieties. |
0 u O' on* u |
5 .£■ "^ ti 0 § |
< |
0 0 H 0 |
6 |
1 > |
ii ■§>. . 5 c 0 |
V5 |
Charlotte |
4 |
...... |
3 10 |
3 12 |
|||
Vfi |
r r r r S |
1 1 1 1 e |
c f f f f c |
|||||
f~ |
Clemence |
|||||||
?R |
...... 2 |
1 ""'i 1 |
1 1 5 X |
|||||
'^ |
Com et |
|||||||
?X) |
||||||||
81 |
Cots (cling) |
|||||||
3'' |
e e 1 'i 1 |
29 10 1 |
||||||
S'^ |
g J? r r r r |
25 18 |
26 27 |
51 45 |
||||
8-1 |
Crawfords Late |
|||||||
S=) |
Crimson Beauty |
|||||||
Sfi |
Crocketts White |
1 1 1 |
...... |
1 |
||||
S7 |
Crosbv |
1 |
||||||
S«! |
||||||||
81 |
Do\^'ning |
1 |
||||||
40 |
Dumont |
r |
e c c e e e e e e ] e 1 c 1 1 e 1 c |
1 |
||||
41 |
Early Albert |
1 1 1 |
1 |
|||||
4'' |
l' |
|||||||
4S |
Earlv May |
1 |
||||||
44 |
Earl V (red) Knrcripe |
r |
1 1 |
|||||
4t |
3 |
7 1 1 30 1 |
10 |
|||||
46 |
1 |
|||||||
47 |
Earlv Slocumb |
1 |
||||||
48 4<< |
Elberta |
r r |
1 -'-VI |
5 2 |
35 3 |
|||
fiO |
Flori n |
|||||||
*)! |
5? |
1 7 |
1 3 1 i |
2 |
||||
f)'' |
10 |
|||||||
fS'^ |
Fox (seedling) |
1 |
||||||
54 |
General Bidwell |
2 2 i |
i 2 3 3 1 |
6 |
||||
5=) |
George the Fourth |
K |
2 |
|||||
•16 |
Georges Late |
4 |
||||||
57 58 |
Globe Gold Dust |
{? |
6 1 |
|||||
59 |
Golden Cling 1 |
2 |
||||||
60 |
Golden Drop ■. Governor Briggs |
r |
1 e c |
4 1 1 |
||||
61 |
... |
|||||||
ff> |
||||||||
m |
Governor \\ oo<l 1 |
1 |
1 |
|||||
64 |
Grave Cling |
1 1 |
||||||
6t |
S |
c 1 c 1 |
- |
3 13 |
5 |
|||
66 |
Grover Cleveland |
2 |
||||||
67 68 |
Hales Early |
g |
11 1 |
4 1 |
17 1 |
|||
6<t |
Hurdv ^\ hite Tuscany |
2 |
||||||
70 |
Hard V Yellow Tuscany |
:.::;:::::: |
4 4 5 2 |
|||||
71 |
Heath Cling |
r |
1 |
3 1 |
24 1 |
27 |
||
7? |
Heath Free |
2 |
||||||
7S |
r r |
1 1 c |
||||||
74 |
Hills Chile |
5 1 |
7 |
12 |
||||
1 |
||||||||
7'; |
Honey Cling |
2 |
||||||
1 1 |
1 |
|||||||
78 |
r |
1" |
1 |
|||||
70 |
Iiinian Blood (cling) Ingles (seedling) |
9 |
||||||
80 |
1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 |
|||||||
81 |
Ironclad ! |
;:;;;:;:;::i:: :: |
||||||
82 |
.lacques Kareripe .laiian Bloofl |
r |
1 |
3 1 |
3 1 |
|||
Kl |
.Icnny Worrell 1 |
|||||||
85 |
.Jenny \\ orthen |
r R r |
e 1 e |
:::::::::::: |
||||
86 |
.Jones (seedling) |
|||||||
87 |
||||||||
KH |
||||||||
8<t |
||||||||
<Kt |
K iles Honey |
............ |
...... 5 2 8 1 2 8 1 |
2 |
||||
\)1 |
Ivudy I'alnierslon |
r r |
1 1 |
2 1 |
2 |
|||
S*?. |
La Fleur |
2 |
||||||
%\ |
Iji Grunge |
6 |
||||||
<M |
Ijirge Karl v York, Jltmcst John |
8 K |
0 1 |
G 1 |
4 2 |
6 |
||
•I;') |
6 |
|||||||
1N°> |
Ijirge Yellow |
1 |
||||||
«7 |
r |
1 1 1 |
2 |
|||||
«ts |
I.iite BiiriiMnl |
1 |
2 |
10 |
||||
yj |
Lute October |
1 |
PEACH VARIETIES IN RELATION TO CURL.
197
Table 43.
-RelcUions of peach varieties to peach leaf curl, with records of glands, time of ripening, and adhesion of pit — Continued.
No. |
Peach varieties. |
o Oi ^ "a fi |
S S* i'" t |
a o < |
^ . o 3 |
as ■OS |
0- 0) ^ . >. u > |
n a ^3 0 03 y |
100 |
Late Rareripe . |
r r r |
1 1 1 0 |
f c f f |
1 1 |
1 |
||
101 |
Lemon Cling |
5 1 2 |
- |
3 |
||||
10'' |
Lemon Free |
|||||||
108 |
"'i' |
1 ...... 1 13 2 ...... |
1 |
|||||
104 |
1 |
|||||||
105 |
Lola (Miss) . |
r g r |
e 1 1 1 |
f f f f |
1 |
|||
106 |
Lord Palmerstoi' |
1 1 |
1 2 |
2 |
||||
107 |
15 |
|||||||
108 |
Lovetts White |
2 |
||||||
109 |
Lovetts Wonder |
1 |
1 |
|||||
110 |
1 |
c |
1 |
|||||
111 |
4 |
2 1 |
2 |
|||||
112 |
McClish |
1 |
||||||
113 |
McCoIlister |
1 |
||||||
114 |
McCowan (cling) . . . |
c c c |
1 1 1 1 2 |
1 |
||||
115 |
2 1 |
1 2 |
2 |
|||||
116 |
McKevitts (cling) |
3 |
||||||
117 |
1 |
|||||||
118 |
Moore |
r |
e e 1 c 1 e |
f f c f f f c f c f f c |
...... 1 10 9 4 3 '"'e' 1 2 7 2 |
1 5 |
1 |
|
119 |
Morris White |
7 |
||||||
1'>0 |
Mother Porter |
|||||||
l-^l |
r |
5 11 |
4 4 |
9 |
||||
T>? |
Muir |
15 |
||||||
123 |
||||||||
1?4 |
||||||||
T'5 |
s g g r r (?) |
e 1 1 e 1 |
1 3 4 2 |
...... 10 1 |
1 |
|||
1?6 |
Oldmixon Cling |
4 |
||||||
T'T |
14 |
|||||||
1?8 |
Onderdonk |
2 |
||||||
19q |
2 |
|||||||
^'^o |
Oregon |
|||||||
131 |
g r |
e e |
f f |
1 2 ...... 1 |
I |
|||
is'> |
VQeu-To, South China Saucer |
2 |
||||||
1S3 |
Perkins |
1 3 |
1 |
|||||
1S4 |
Picquets Late |
r |
1 |
f |
3 |
5 |
||
135 |
Plummer |
1 |
||||||
136 |
Pratt |
r g |
e 1 |
f f |
1 1 |
|||
137 |
||||||||
138 |
Red Ceylon |
1 1 |
1 |
|||||
139 |
Red Cheek |
g |
1 |
f |
1 1 |
1 |
||
140 |
Red Madeline |
|||||||
141 |
g |
e |
f |
1 1 |
1 |
|||
142 |
Reeds Early Golden. |
1 |
||||||
143 |
g |
1 |
f |
2 1 |
4 |
4 |
||
144 |
Reeves Golden Yellow.. |
|||||||
145 |
r r g s g s r |
1 e 1 e 1 0 1 |
f f c f c f f |
1 |
1 |
|||
146 |
2 1 |
|||||||
147 |
1 2 |
....„ 1 1 13 1 2 |
1 |
|||||
148 |
Royal George |
1 |
||||||
149 |
Riinyons Orange . |
3 |
||||||
150 |
Sallie Worrell |
1 |
||||||
151 |
Sal way |
11 |
12 |
25 |
||||
15'' |
1 |
|||||||
153 |
Sellers Cling |
c f f |
5 1 1 1 |
1 1 |
1 |
|||
154 |
Sellers Free |
|
3 |
|||||
155 |
r |
e |
||||||
156 |
||||||||
157 |
g |
1 |
1" |
2 1 ...... |
2 |
|||
158 |
1 |
|||||||
159 |
r r r r g r r |
1 1 1 e e 1 1 1 |
£ f - f f f f f f c £ £ c £ |
2 7 3 2 5 |
1 8 |
1 |
||
160 |
11 |
|||||||
161 |
||||||||
16'> |
Snows Orange |
4 4 |
'""3' 2 |
4 |
||||
163 |
7 |
|||||||
164 |
Steadly |
2 |
||||||
165 |
2 7 '"'i' |
|||||||
166 |
Stilsons |
1 10 1 |
""X 6 |
1 |
||||
167 |
4 |
|||||||
168 |
Stump the World, Jersey Stump |
g g g r |
1 e 1 1 |
16 |
||||
169 |
1 |
|||||||
170 |
||||||||
171 |
6 1 1 |
6 |
||||||
172 |
5 |
4 |
||||||
173 |
g g |
1 c |
f f |
1 |
||||
174 |
Tillotsoa (early) |
3 |
2 |
2 |
198
PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
Tablk 43. — lii'htlions of peach varieties to peach leaf curl, irlih records of (jlands, time of ripening, and adhesion of pit — Continued.
175 176 177
178 179 180 181 l.sii I8;i IM IS-J
i8t;
187 188 189 190 191
192 193 I'M 195 196 197
Peach varieties.
Thissells White
Troths (early)
Tuskena, Tiii'can Cluu;.
Ulatis
Wager
Wards Late Free
Wattrloo
Wheatland ( early)
White Eiif<Iish
White Meloeoton
Wilcox Cling
Wilev
Wil kins Cling
Willow (peach )
Winters
Wonderful
Yellow Rareripe
NKCT .BRINKS.
Boston
Karly Newington
Hardwicks Seedling .
Lord Napier
Rivers Orange
Victoria
2 >■.
A digest of 98 reports on peach varieties in respect to the form of glands, earliness or hitoncss of ripening, and adhesion or nonadhosion of the pits, as these characters mav or may not be rchitcd to suscepti- bility to curl, is given in the following ta})lo.
Table 44. — Comparative suscepiiJnlity of 98 peach varieties in relation to form of (jlamk, earliness or lateness of ripening, and adhemm or nonadhesion of pit.
Character of glands.
Hcniforni, 5u varlctli's.
Glohose, 12 varieties.
Serrale, (; varieties.
Period of rii)eniiig and adhesion of pit.
Number of varie- ties—
Very
stiscepti-
ble.
Little
suscepti
ble.
Total varieties —
Very suscepti- ble.
Little suscepti- ble.
Ill tlie above, tabic a most striking correlation appears between j)eacli \aiieties with serrate leaves and susceptibility to curl. AH the si.\ varieties foi- which full infoiination could ))c obtained are litllc susccptil)lc, which is all the more interesting from th(> fact that the varieties with serrate leav«^s hiixc long been known to be very
PEACH VARIETIES IN RELATION TO CURL.
199
subject to mildew. A list of seven such varieties for which the char- acters of the leaves hav^o been obtainable is here given in contrast to the above.
Table 45. — List of peaches subject to mildew.
Characteristics. |
||||
Glands (ir |
leaves. |
Ripens. |
Adhesion. |
|
Brings Ma v |
Serrate . |
Pearly ...do |
Free. |
|
Downing |
do |
Do. |
||
do |
...do |
|||
Early York |
. ...do. |
...do |
||
do |
...do |
Do. |
||
do |
...do |
Do. |
||
Tillotson |
do |
...do. |
Do. |
|
Some correlations of the shape and aliscnce of leaf glands with the time of maturity of the fruit and the adhesiveness of the pit have been compiled from over 400 A-arieties, and these correlations are shown in the talkie which follows.
Table 46. — Correlation of shape or absence of the leaf glands of the peach with the jwriod of maturity of the fruit and, the adhesivenrss or nonudhesiveness of the pit.
Serrate
leaves, or
without
glands.
Early
Late
Free
Cling
Early free . Late free . . Early cling Late cling .
Reniform |
Globose |
glands. |
glands. |
40 |
130 |
ito |
50 |
124 |
166 |
G2 |
14 |
35 |
120 |
89 |
40 |
14 |
10 |
48 |
4 |
This table shows that of 208 earlj^-f ruiting varieties, -46 have reniform glands, 130 globose glands, and 32 serrate leaves; while of 101 late varieties, 110 have reniform glands, 50 globose glands, and 1 serrate leaves. In other words, of the early varieties given there are nearly three times as many with globose glands as with reniform glands. On the other hand, of the late varieties, there are nearly three times as man}^ with reniform glands as with globose glands. The table also shows that there are 120 early free globose to 35 early free reni- form varieties, while there are 89 late free reniform to 16 late free globose varieties. This table is given as a step in the direction of future investigations along this line, which appear warranted 1)}^ the correlations found to exist between the form of glands, the date of maturity, the date of bloom, etc., andthe little or great susceptibility of varieties to curl and mildew. Such facts may prove of nuich impor- tance when taken in connection with future work in originating hardy or otherwise desirable varieties by cross breeding.
200 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
The preceding records, showing the comparative susceptibility to curl of nearly 200 varieties of peaches, will enable the gTower who contem- plates setting an orchard to make his choice of varieties advisedl3\ As alread}' said, however, many superior varieties are very subject to curl, hence the practical methods of preventing it as detailed in this bul- letin make it possible to successfully grow the most susceptible varie- ties in tbe most unfavorable situations, so far as this disease is concerned. Such varieties are in fact saved to the pcjich industry of large sections of the country by means of this preventive treatment. The Elberta, a favorite in both the East and the West, and the Lovell, a favorite in California, may now be cultivated to any desired extent in regions from whitli they have heretofore been practi(;ally excluded by curl — advantages that are certainly not the least of those arising from the recent work in the treatment of that disease.
As a striking illustration of what has just been said, the following, contained in a letter recently received by the writer from a gentleman in noi-thern California, is given: He states that the Lovell variety will curl in his locality so as to be of little use, if not sprayed. One of his neigh])()rs. who had a small orchard of that variety, stated that he intended grafting the trees to some other peach, as the}^ did so badly on account of curl. l)ut our correspondent advised the winter use of Bordeaux mixture, cautioning the grower to spray his trees thor- oughly. This was done, and the trees bore a fine crop of fruit. The work was so satisfactory that instead of grafting over the Lovell variety a block of Fosters was grafted to the Lovell, the variety with which the detailed experiments of the writer were conducted in the Sacramento Valle}^ in 1894 and 1895.
TREATMENT OF NURSERY STOCK.
The nursery is not only the source of the orchard, but also very largely the source of orchard diseases, and its health is therefore of conunon interest to the oi'chardist and luirseryman. Could a luirscry be freed from curl, many orchards planted from it would not suffer from the disease for years, especially if isolated. Tliere rs little doubt that curl has been largely disseminated throughout the world by means of nurseiy trees.
It has been su]3posed that the main source of spring infection of tr(»es was from the perennial mycelium already in the buds, and were this hypothesis tru(^ nurserymen could scarcely hope to procure buds for their seedlings which were free from this disease. The spray work upon curl has shown, however, that the single external a})plica- tion of a fungicid<i is sufficient to prevent ilo to 98 per cent oH curl when th<^ trcatnjcnt has been thoroughly made. This appears to indorse the view that at least 9S per cent of tlui spring infections are, as el.scwherc ciaiincd in this bulletin, from spores upon the tree, prob- ably largely resting upon or within the bud scales themselves.
TREATMENT OF NUKSEEY STOCK. 201
The facts given are sufficient to warrant some genei'al considera- tions and recommendations:
(1) The trees from which buds are to be selected should be thoroughly- sprayed with strong copper sprays before the buds are removed. (2) Where the last year's branches are removed as a whole, the buds to be cut out while budding is in progress in the nursery, the bud-bearing shoots should be thoroughly dipped once or twice in a well-made Bor- deaux mixture before being taken to the nursery.^ (3) After the nurs- ery trees are budded they should be sprayed with Bordeaux mix- ture, no portion of the tree or newly inserted bud being omitted. This treatment should be repea,ted as often as found advisable, and the more thorough the better, especially after the removal of the seedling top.
The writer feels that these recommendations are for the best inter- ests of the nurseryman, as well as the prospective purchaser. The Bordeaux mixture will not only prevent the injurious action of the disease, but will increase the diameter and height of the trees more than sufficient to warrant the outlay, and will make them in every way more valuable to the nurseryman and orchardist.^
Messrs. Dressel Bros., proprietors of the Hart Nurseries, Hart, Mich., sprayed their peach nursery in the spring of 1894 with Bor- deaux mixture. They reported good success from this work in the control of curl. In the spring of 1895 the}^ undertook an experiment with the use of 5 pounds of copper sulphate, 10 pounds of lime, and 15 gallons of water, this experiment including 110,000 nursery peach trees one year old and of several varieties. The sprayed trees were treated twice, the first spraying being done April 1 and the second April 16. On July 21 the foliage of sprayed and unsprayed trees was estimated, and it was found that while none of the leaves had fallen from the sprayed trees, 15 per cent had fallen from those unsprayed. There were 100,000 sprayed trees and 10,000 unsprayed trees in this experiment.
Dressel Bros, state respecting this experiment that they considered the work very successful, that their nursery stock showed good results, and that the work would be continued. The sprayed stock showed an increase in height. In 1897 they again treated their trees^
^ This is a matter calling for careful and detailed experiments. It should be com- paratively easy to dip such shoots one, two, three, or four times, and to have the buds frorri such shoots inserted in seedling trees of separate nursery rows. By such method a record could be kept of the number o'f trees showing curl upon the push- ing of the first leaves. In this manner much could be learned about the disease, and a standard could be determined for the treatment of tjie shoots to be used as the source of buds.
"^ In relation to the added size and weight of sprayed over unsprayed ni^ery trees, the reader is referred to Bull. No. 7, Division of Vegetable Pathology, U. S. Dept. of Agr., 1894. This bulletin relates to the effect of spraying with fungicides on the growth of nursery stock.
202 PEACH LEAF curl: its nature and treatment.
leaving unsprayed trees for comparison. The trees of the spi-ayed block, it is stated, were very nice and straight and made a good growth, and there was no curl, it heing hard to lind a leaf affected, while groAvth started well and continued thrifty throughout the season. The unsprayed trees on the other hand curled so badly that many were crooked and stunted, not attaining the height of the sprayed trees within a foot, and a good many were worthless. The treated trees were sprayed twice in the month of March, 1897. They note that Bordeaux mixture, to do its work properly, should be on the trees for seven or eight days without rain.
SUMMARY.
(1) Peach leaf curl has a world-wide distribution, occurring in every region in which the peach is grown. In humid localities it is a leading hindrance to peach culture, and in portions of the Pacihc coast States it has greatly limited the extent of the industry.
(2) The orchard losses from peach leaf curl vary from a small amount of fruit to the entire crop, while in many instances young trees are killed. The national losses from this disease will amount to $3,000,000 amuiallj'^.
(3) Curl is caused by a parasitic fungus known as J5IwrttS(3w-s<i!<?/wrw,a7?^, the I'avages of which are largely dependent upon the atmosph(n"i(^ con- ditions prevailing while the trees are leafing out. Rains and cold weather at that time tend to increase the severity of the trouble by favoring t\u\ growth of the parasite and interfering with the proper functions of the host. For these reasons orchards near lai'gc bodies of water and in low or damp situations arc more subject to curl than those in dry regions or in elevated situations.
(4:) Most of the spring infections of peach leaves aro due to the spores of the fungus and not to a perennial mycelium, as formerly held, hence the efficacy of sprays.
(.5) C'url was first successfully treated in Calif ornia during the period from 1880 to 1885, the success depending upon the application of fungicides to the dormant trees. The disease was not successfully ti-eated in Europe for ten years after its prevention in tlio United States.
(ft) The copper sprays are now found to be more effective than the sulphur or other sprays first used. Of the various sprays e\pc>ri- mented with, Bordeaux mixture, in the proportion of 5 poujids copper suli)hate, .5 pounds lime, and 15 gallons of water, gave the best results, tlu! (Mjual weights of the copper sulphate and lime being most effective when the mixture is applied shortly before the opening of the blossom buds. When it is desired to increase the dural)ilit3- of a si)ray by inci'casing tlie ))roi)oi'ti()n of lime, the ai)plication should he made earlier or ('(jual |)roportions of coppci' jind lime should be maintained.
SUMMARY. 203
The total saving of foliage increases with the increase of copper sul- phate when the amount o"f lime remains constant, but the average saving per pound of copper sulphate decreases with the increase of copper used.
(7) In the treatment of peach leaf curl, from 95 to 98 per cent of the spring foliage was saved l)y spraying, A net gain of GOO per cent in foliage over that retained by adjoining unspraj^ed trees resulted in the case of several different sprays. Bordeaux mixture when applied to the dormant tree increased the weight and starch-producing power of the leaves, and the sprayed trees showed a great gain over the tmsprayed in the number and quality of the fruit buds they produced for the following year, the gain in the number of spur buds being over 100 per cent in some cases. The lower limbs of sprayed trees showed a marked gain over those of unsprayed trees as compared with the upper limbs in both the iuiml)cr of fruit l)uds and lateral shoots they produced.
(8) The average value of the fruit per tree in rows treated v/ith the most effective Bordeaux mixture ranged as high as $0.20 aljove that per tree in adjoining untreated rows, or the equivalent of a net gain of ^27.80 per acre where trees are planted 25 by 25 feet. Over 1,000 per cent net gain in the fruit set has resulted in the use of some of the more effective sprays.
(9) The trees should l)e sprayed each season, as the experiments proved that treatment one season will not prevent the disease the following 3^ear. Spraying should also be done even though the trees may not be expected to bear, as the loss of the crop of leaves is shown to result in as great a drain upon the trees as does the maturing of one-half to two-thirds of a crop of fruit.
(10) The work demonstrates that peach leaf curl may be cheaplj" and easily prevented in California, in western Oregon and Washington, and along the east shore of Lake Michigan, where curl causes great loss, as well as in all other peach-growing sections of the United States.
(11) The copper and lime sprays are less injurious to the trees than those composed of sulplnir and lime. The use of lime in winter sprays has proven an advantage in enabling the workmen to see their work and complete it with greater thoroughness than would otherwise be possible. A proportional increase of both lime and copper sulphate is recommended f di* wet regions, and for very wet localities a second winter spraying is advised.
(12) Cyclone nozzles with lateral or diagonal discharge are best adapted to the work.
(13) The proper time for winter spraying and the number of appli- cations depend to some extent on the locality, season, etc., but active sprays arc likely to do most good if applied from one to three weeks before the opening of the blossoms in spring. The proper time to
204 PEACH LEAF CURL: ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT.
apply sprays for the prevention of curl is in dry, calm weather, and during the middle of the day, in order to avoid dew or frost upon the limbs as much as possible.
(14) Of nearly 200 peach and nectarine varieties considered with a view of determining their comparative susceptibility to curl, it was found that very few were wholly free from the disease and that some were very subject to it. Some of the choicest varieties, as the Elberta and Lovell, are seriously affected, but it has been demonstrated that a single winter treatment will prevent the disease upon even these varie- ties. It may be thus fairly claimed that the spraying methods recom- mended will save to the peach industry some of its finest varieties, as well as result in the saving of foliage and crops already indicated,
O
DESCRIPTION OF I'LATK XXVI.
A HuitaJjlc outfit for spraying small orchards. One horse, two men, and a ))oy spray two trees at a time. This scene represents the experimental sjiraying outtit used hv the writer in the Rio Bonito orchard.
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XXVI.
DESCKIITIoX (»K I'l.ATK XXVII.
Spraying 4 tivi's at a time, witli ."> incn and L' hoi^t's. There is here used a 300- gallon spray tank and long-lever (Gould), ))rass-lined i)ist()n pump, which has sufficient capacity to supply 4 nf)zzles, 1 man i)umping. The horses are protected hy means of gunny sack covers. Tlie Chinese hats in use furnish good ]>rotectinn to the eves and neck, hut are too stiff for tlie most convenient work imd«-r lind)s.
Bull. 20, DIv. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XXVII.
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XXVIII.
Regular winter spray work in the Rio Bonito orchard. Eight trees are here being sprayed at one time, with 10 men and 4 horses. The trees being treated are well advanced, the buds being much swollen, although not yet open. If work is thoroughly done at this stage of bud development the results will commonly prove satisfactory; but an active spray should be used, such as the eau celeste, or Bordeaux mixture with a low percentage of lime and high percentage of copper sulphate. Such sprays should not be applied, however, after the opening of the blossoms. P>arlier spraying is better, the chemicals in such cases doing less harm to the tree and having a longer time to reach all spores that endanger the new growth.
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path,, U, S. Dept of Agriculture.
Plate XXVI
^^^^4
..v^,
^*^
^
■ i t .
... /■•
/»7
'«-r«^«».i<C-.
"Vfe^-,'
^-y
/^:--P
7/--\
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XXIX.
A power s])ni\rr in use in a young orchard at Santa Barbara, (!al. This ,si)rayer was l)nilt l)y liu" Fnion ( ias Engine CV)ni])any, San Fram;isco.
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XXIX.
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE XXX.
Views of llie right aiid left sides of the Gunnis power sprayer of San Diego, Cal. This sprayer is one of the lightest, most eompact, and most practical power sprayers in use for general orchard work. It supplies 2 or 4 lines of hose, as may ])e desired. A tender is commonly used to cany the spraying materials to tlie orchard, where an extra rotary pump, worked by the same power as the spray pump, rapidly transfers the spray to the tank of the spray wagon. Such an outfit is adaj)ted to extensive orchard work. Mr. II. R. Gunnis, San Diego, Cal., is the ownerand operator of this machint'.
Bull. 20, Div. Veg. Phys. & Path., U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Plate XXX.
Right and Left Views of Power Sprayer, San Diego, Cal.
s
j
SB 608 P3 P6 1909 University of British Columbia Library DUE DATE |
|
LlC 18 am |
|
' %ff^jS^!!.'~**^it^-> |
|
1 |
|
/ft; |
|
,',:0 i. 'c-;7 |
|
FOHM 3tO |
1j1 \Csf
AGRICULTURE , FORESTRY . UBHARY
Q.
AG^vicJULTURE LIORARY
■ ■ ■ ■ |
« 1 |
■ ■ ■ m m |
|
S^ff
I
■4
m