Recent Studies on Peach Yellows and Little Peach 53 



instead of 1918 the loss is 8.8 per cent compared with 3.4 per cent in 

 the replants. In 1920 the original trees show a 24.7 per cent infec- 

 tion compared with 10.9 per cent in the replants. 



On the basis of these general comparisons there is nothing to 

 indicate that the replanting of trees following diseased trees favors 

 infection. The claim may be made that this general comparison is 

 not wholly fair since trees do not generally show disease for the 

 first three or four years, which would favor the replants. Table 5 

 is thus arranged to show the losses in original trees and replants at 

 the same age. For example, the losses in orchard no. 1 in the 

 seventh season were 8.9 per cent, while 12 replants in their seventh 



Table 5 



Loss of Replants of Various Ages Compared with Loss from Original 



Plantings 



season of growth show no loss. 

 same orchard was 14.9 per cent 

 healthy. In the ninth season the 

 cent of the original trees in no. 1 

 of interest to note further that 



The loss the eighth season in the 



, while 12 replants still remained 



epidemic caused a loss of 25 per 



and a third of the rqilants. It is 



the two replants set in 1910 are 



