80 



PEACH LEAF CURL! ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT. 



Table 5. — Estimated percentage of healthy foliage on the sprayed andunsprayed trees May 

 9, 1895, as compared with the amount a healthy tree should have at that date. 



Row N& 



1 



2 

 3 



4 

 5 

 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 

 53 

 54 

 55 

 56 

 57 

 58 



Percentage of healthy foliage compared 

 with the amount the tree should have, 

 estimated May 9, 1895. 



Tree No. — 



93 

 10 

 85 



8 

 12 

 65 

 85 

 IC 

 75 

 80 



8 

 80 

 87 

 IC 

 89 

 65 

 11 

 85 

 85 



94 



15 

 85 

 15 

 18 

 85 

 03 

 12 

 90 

 90 

 11 

 81- 

 65 

 20 

 90 

 8G 



8 



88 

 86 



9 

 92 

 90 



10 

 92 

 85 

 8 

 90 

 16 

 65 

 90 

 16 

 92 

 75 

 15 

 70 

 (c) 

 10 

 85 

 45 

 15 

 65 

 90 

 25 



28 ! 46 

 65 ! 50 

 20 i 16 

 40 ■ 50 



87 

 5 

 86 

 15 

 18 

 65 

 70 

 20 

 78 

 80 

 18 

 75 

 75 

 15 

 80 

 75 

 12 

 68 

 70 

 12 

 98 

 98 

 25 

 14 

 94 

 36 

 90 

 92 

 10 

 96 

 20 

 60 

 95 

 18 

 94 

 92 

 17 

 86 

 78 

 18 

 85 

 40 

 15 

 35 

 87 

 18 

 26 

 50 

 12 

 60 

 65 

 15 

 22 

 70 

 12 

 90 

 88 

 10 



Average 

 per cent 



of 



healthy 



leaves 



per tree 



in 



sprayed 



rows. 



92.3 



84.7 

 a 14. 8 



76.8 

 85.4 



83.1 

 85.4 



81.0 

 79.5 



90.0 

 82.0 



84.7 

 83.2 



96.9 

 94.5 



a 9.' 4' 

 89.8 



91.2 

 89.3 



92.2 



52.5 

 91.9 



91.8 



70.3 

 83.4 



87.0 

 41.6 



58.8 

 85.7 



38.8 

 58.0 



57.0 

 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, 

 jexpressed 



in 

 percent. 



10.1 



14.5 



14.1 



12.8 



14.3 



12.8 



10.7 



12.2 



12.2 

 "'9.'7 



19.3 



14.2 



12.8 



12.5 



14.5 



15.9 



14.1 



"iio' 



11.3 



"io.'-y 



a Trees sprayed in 1894, but unsprayed in 1895. 

 b Gain of control row over row sprayed in 1894. 

 c Tree missing. 



The comparison of some of the general facts brought out in the esti- 

 mates of foliage April 22 and 23 and May 9, 1895, shows the progress 

 of the disease during that time. 



