34 THE BACTEKIA OF THE APIARY. 



as foul brood thruout the United States and Canada. In the experi- 

 ence of the author it has not been possible to obtain Bacillus aloei 

 from diseased brood Avhich the inspectors in most of the States and 

 m Canada have been calling foul brood. For the above reasons the 

 author believes that Harrison, too, has made a serious error in the 

 identity of his culture and therefore was not working with Bacillus 

 alvei at all. The author considers himself unfortunate in that he 

 Avas unable to obtain a culture of Bacillus alvei for study and identi- 

 fication from Professor Harrison. 



Dr. William E, Howard, of Fort Worth, Tex., also studied foul 

 brood somewhat, and gave a description of Z>(7r/?Zf/6' aloei as he found 

 it. From his description and from the fact that he, too, worked with 

 a diseased condition which does not contain Bacillus alvei, and ex- 

 prest no difficulty in obtaining his cultures from any samples, the 

 author believes that this investigator made an error in the identifica- 

 tion of the culture with which he was working. 



Some writers — Cowan, Bertrand, and others — have attempted the 

 positive diagnosis of foul brood with the microscope alone from a 

 pre23aration made direct from the dead larvae. If the reader will 

 I'emember that with the microscope alone it would be impossible to 

 distinguish between Bacillus larvoi and Bacillus alvei, the verdict of 

 these men can have no weight. As shown later in this paper under 

 black brood (pp.- 43^4), the Doctor Howard, of Fort Worth, Tex., re- 

 ferred to above, made an error in supposing that the European foul 

 brood was a new disease and naming it " New York bee disease " or 

 " black brood." 



It is very unfortunate for the apiarist that these men should have 

 fallen into error as to the identity of their culture with Bacillus alvei, 

 as it has caused great confusion in the names of bee diseases. This 

 confusion in the identity of cultures may be excused to a certain ex- 

 tent by the fact that European foul brood did not appear in this 

 country, or at least did not attract much attention, until after Mac- 

 kenzie, Harrison, and William R. Howard had done their work on 

 foul brood. 



The Present Investigation. 



'^^'lien the author's investigations w^ere begun in 1902 there were 

 two especially troublesome diseases in this country, which were then 

 know^n to the bee experts as " black brood " and " foul brood." 



The following summary and table shows the results of the exami- 

 nation of a number of samples of diseased brood from different 

 apiaries, sent by the New York State bee inspectors during the sum- 

 mer of the year 1902 : 



