82 PEACH LEAF CURL". ITS NATURE AND TREATMENT. 



Table 7. — Percentage of healthy foliage on trees differently sprayed — Continued. 



Percentagesof healthv'foliage shown by trees sprayed with 

 different classes of sprays. Estimated April 23 and May 

 9, 1895. 



(a) 



10 trees sprayed with iron sulphate and lime. 

 10 trees sprayed with iron sulphate, sulphur, and 



Average of 30 trees sprayed with copper sulphate, sulphur, 



and lime 

 Average of 

 Average of 



lime. 

 Average of 

 Average of 



lime. 

 Average of 

 Average of 



f 10 trees sprayed with sulphide of potassium 



i 20 trees sprayed with sulphide of potassium and 



10 trees sprayed with milk of lime 



10 trees .sprayed with milk of lime and salt. 



O lO 



o o taoC 

 £* si cS 



76.3 

 59.2 



79.2 

 32.0 



54.3 

 73.5 



54.5 



o .. 



_, .00 



82.0 

 57.0 



75.8 

 38.8 



49.8 

 58.8 

 79.5 



g3 u^ 



^ *-• o 



5.7 



6.8 



25.0 





2.2 

 3.4 



4.5 

 14.7 



a Compare text. 



The table shows the average of healthy foliage on the trees sprayed 

 with the sulphur sprays (sulphur, lime, and salt, 30 trees; sulphur and 

 lime, 70 trees) to have been 82.3 per cent May 9. The average on the 

 trees sprayed with the leading copper sprays (Bordeaux mixture, 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 

 sprayed with a combination of these two leading classes of sprays 

 (Bordeaux mixture added to the sulphur and lime sprays, 30 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 sulphur 

 sprays. This result was a surprise, but by carefully looking into the 

 reason 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 

 average of the sulphur sprays arose from including in the average the 

 results of those 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 for this reason it would be as well to omit 

 thisj-ow in determining the average saving of the combined sprays. 

 The two remaining rows, 18 and 19, sprayed with combined sprays, 

 showed 84. T and 83.2 per cent of healthy foliage, respectively — an 

 average of 83.9 per cent. The formula for each of these experiments 

 contained 5 pounds of sulphur. In the experiments with uncombined 

 sulphur sprays there were four formulae containing 5 pounds of sul- 

 phur each. The average per cent of saving of these four experiments 

 was 75.3. These facts show that when the amount of svilphur was 

 equal there was an average gain of 8.6 per cent in healthy foliage 

 resultmg from the addition of Bordeaux mixture to the sulphur 

 sprays. 



The average percentage of foliage saved by the use of the ammo- 

 niacal copper carbonate (20 trees) was, May 9, 61.4. As the ammoniacal 



