THE PEACH BUD MITE. — 105 
Economic Entomologists at their eleventh annual meeting, Columbus, 
Ohio, in August, 1899, and published in Bulletin No. 20 of the then 
Division of Entomology.t~ The injury to peach nursery stock in 
Ohio was, however, considered to be due to the plant-bug Lygus 
- pratensis L., as no evidence was found of the presence of the mite and 
the extent of injury had been observed to coincide with the abundance 
of the plant-bug in the nurseries. . Also, as stated by nurserymen, 
the Lygus had been frequently observed at work. 
Dr. John B. Smith described a similar injury to peach in New 
Jersey under the caption ‘Peach Thrips,” ? and figures a block of 
trees badly injured, and also a block of trees which had been sprayed 
June 9 with undiluted kerosene. In the peach shoots examined by 
Dr. Smith nothing was found in the dry ones, whereas in every one 
that was yet moist from 3 to 5 minute, immature thripids were 
discovered. Dr. Smith’s evident conclusion was that the thrips 
were responsible for the trouble. Also a letter is quoted by Dr. 
Smith from Prof. W. B. Alwood to the effect that he had worked 
on the peach thrips since 1891. He was certain injury was due to a 
thrips and had determined the insect to be tritict. 
_ In a further note by Prof. Johnson in Entomological News? he 
calls attention to the symptoms of injury by the peach bud mite, 
and states that the characteristic silvering of the leaves noted by 
Rolfs and Fuller had not been noticed by him associated with the 
new mite in Maryland. On the contrary, trees in the nursery rows 
affected with the peach bud mite were easily distinguished by their 
dense green foliage and the bunching of twigs. 
In a report of the Virginia State entomologist * Mr. J. L. Phillips 
treats of this affection at some length under the title ‘Notes on 
Thrips, Disbudding Insect, or Stop-back of Peach, as Observed in 
the Nurseries of Virginia.’””’ The author states that many unsightly 
peach trees growing in nurseries in the State had been noted dur- 
ing the few years previous and that injury appeared to be confined 
almost entirely to nurseries located in the sandy soils of eastern 
Virginia, where the trees grow very rapidly when given proper care. 
Thrips were not observed by Mr. Phillips in sufficient quantity nor 
in position to fix the responsibility for the disease. On the other 
hand, mites were found to be very plentiful in the tips of the,injured 
trees in a number of instances, and the conviction was expressed that 
the trouble was due to them. Experimental evidence on this point 
was obtained by placing around uninjured seedlings in pots the 
tops of seedlings showing the <¥ection, with the result that the 
1 Bul. 20, n. s., Div. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agr., p. 72, 1899. 
2Twelfth Ann. Rept. N. J. Agr. Coll. Exp. Sta., 1899 (1900), p. 427. 
3 Ent. News, vol. 10, May, 1900, p. 471. 
4 Fifth Rept. Va. State Ent. and Path., pp. 50-61, 1904-05. 
