232 STATE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY 



The dates of the blooming and ripening of strawberries, as has been 

 already stated, have been unusually modified by climatic causes. While 

 occasional varieties struggled into bloom during the unusually cool weather 

 of early May, the sudden advent of very warm weather soon after, forced 

 the delayed varieties into bloom almost in a mass. 



The ripening season also, though dry, continued cool till near the end of 

 June, when, though still dry, it suddenly became very warm, with the 

 effect that much of the yet unripe fruit was dried upon the vines, thus 

 bringing the picking season to a premature close. The estimates of pro- 

 ductiveness, under these conditions, are to be understood as essentially a 

 comparison of results, between the varieties tabulated during the current 

 season. 



Of the varieties betraying lack of vigor, sixteen are pistillate or nearly 

 so, and the remaining twenty-one are bisexual, thus giving a slight pre- 

 ponderance 1o the popular assumption, that the non-production of pollen 

 conserves the vigor, or ultimates in increased productiveness. 



Of the 163 varieties tabulated, 124 rank above medium, so far as pro- 

 ductiveness is concerned, while only 87 equal or exceed the old Wilson in 

 quality, when grown under the same conditions. 



The tabulation includes forty- five varieties graded as high as nine for 

 productiveness, while of these four only rank as high as nine in 

 quality, with five others in the tabulation, of equal quality, but more or 

 less deficient in productiveness — a not very creditable comment upon the 

 greed of buyers and consumers for size and quantity, in disregard of 

 quality, as well as on the strife of growers for present returns, in disregard 

 of ultimate reputation and profit. 



Owing, apparently, to exceptional climatic influences, a considerable 

 number of varieties which have been for a considerable time on trial with- 

 out specially favorable results, have this season been unusually productive. 



The following is an abstract of the grading for quality of those ranking 

 nine to ten for productiveness: 



2 to 3 — Standard. 



3 to 4 — Aroma, Champion (Eng.), Edgar, Greenvillle, Katie, Mystic, 

 Smalley and Wood (Beder). 



4 to 5 — Beecher, Belt 3, Brandy wine, Columbia, Crescent, Parker Earle, 

 Price and Shawnee. 



5 — Kossuth. 



5 to 6 — J. S. 4, Lincoln, Miller, Philip, Robinson, Ruby, Sherman, 

 Springdale and Wilson. 



6 — Isabel. 



6 to 7 — Beverly, Boynton, Dayton, Irene and Warfield. 

 7— Allen. 



7 to 8 — Fairmount, Little 26, Lovett, Muskingum, Richmond and Rio. 

 8— Bisel. 



9— Woolverton. 



9 to JO— Williams. 



10 — Saunders and Van Deman. 



Of the varieties with a favorable record for the past trying season, and 

 which bring a promising record from previous trials, we may name War- 

 field, as still maintaining its previous standing, together with the compara- 

 tively recent varieties — Isabel (No name), sent out by Thompson's Sons^ 



