1919] noRTicri/niRB. 835 



The author concludes that the damage cut the hearing acreage of peaches 

 in the State at least 00 per cent, whereas only a small percentage of the apple 

 acreage was completely killed. Elevation and varieties were among the most 

 important factors in Influencing winter injury. A high elevation proved to 

 be a decided protection for both peaches and apples. Baldwin, Stayman, Ben 

 Davis, Northern Spy, York Imperial, and Jonathan were the mosl tender 

 varieties, about in the order named. Grimes Golden, Wlnesap, and Rome 

 Beauty were not damaged Bnffldently to be classed as tender. Northwestern 

 Greening and Delicious appeared to be entirely hardy in Indiana. Since KI 

 berta is the chief commercial peach grown, very few data were secured on 

 peach varieties. 



Of the less important fruits, pears and plums, except the American varieties, 

 suffered somewhat more than apples. Sweet cherries were next in tender- 

 ness to the peach. Sour cherries and American plums were practically unin- 

 jured. 



Winter injury to fruit trees in New Jersey, M. A. Blake (Prop. Aim r. Boo. 

 Hort. Set., 15 (1918), pp. 2! t , 25). — A discussion similar to the above. 



Winter injury in New York State during- 1917-18, YV. II. Chandler (/'roc. 

 Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci,, 15 (1918), pp. 18-2! f ).—A. discussion of the nature and 

 extent of winter injury to fruit trees in various parts of New York State. 



Winter injury to fruits in Wisconsin in 1918, J. G. Moore [Proc Amer. 

 Soc. Hort. Set., 15 (1918), pp. 31, 82). — A brief discussion similar to the above. 



Winter injury in Canada, W. T. Macoun (Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. ScL, 1~> 

 (1918), pp. 13-17). — A discussion of the nature and extent of winter injury to 

 fruit trees at the Experimental Farm, Ottawa, and elsewhere in Canada, with 

 special reference to the winter of 1917-18. 



Winter injury in Indiana, J. Oskamp (Proc. Amer. Soe. Hort. Sri., }.; 

 (1918), pp. 25-30). — A discussion similar to the above, including some data on 

 a limited experiment in pruning frozen peach trees. Although the results arc 

 not conclusive, they indicate that the trees should receive only a moderate 

 pruning while in a dormant condition. Heavy pruning and dehorning was 

 disastrous when performed while the trees were dormant, but was fairly suc- 

 cessful when performed after the trees were in full leaf. Moderate pruning 

 either early or late seemed to be all the trees required. 



Winter injury in Ohio, W. Paddock (Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Set., IS ( / 

 pp. SO, 31). — A discussion similar to the above. The experience of practical 

 growers in Ohio demonstrated that moderate pruning of frozen peach tn 

 gives better results than either severe or very light pruning, or than no 

 pruning at all. 



The pruning of winter-injured peach trees, A. J. Gunderson (Proc. Amer. 

 Soc. Hort. Set., 15 (1918), pp. 32-3S).—A dlSCUSSloo of winter-injury to peach 

 trees in Illinois, including the results of pruning experiments conducted under 

 the direction of the Illinois Experiment Station. 



On three, four, and five-year old Elberta peach trees, moderate pruning in 

 the form of clipping back of last year's growth gave the best results from 

 the standpoint of size, shape, and openness of the trees and in the number of 

 strong fruit buds. Dehorning winter-injured peach trees of these n.-ns proi 

 to be a poor practice, and was entirely unnecessary. No pruning at all gave 

 better results than dehorning. Nitrate of soda at the rate of 1 lb. per tn 

 increased the amount and color of the foliage on moderately pruned 4-year-old 

 Elberta trees, but was of little value on dehorned trt 



Discoloration of the inner wood of peach trees is not an absolute indication 

 of the inability of trees to recover from the effects of winter injury. New 

 sapwood formed in most cases when pronounced discoloration had resulted. 



