994 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXXIII. No. 861 



some extent in this and other countries for 

 years, and while some pathologists do not 

 favor it, many others do. Moreover, Dr. 

 Orton himself, in a letter,^ v^riting on this 

 point, says, "I vcould even make use of the 

 new terminology in cases where no other suit- 

 able common name is available." 



His mention of " more serious errors " de- 

 serves attention. Here he objects to consid- 

 ering Microsphmra alni as a destructive para- 

 site, saying, " This fungus is one of the least 

 harmful of the pecan parasites." Fawcette^ 

 quotes Mr. W. A. Munsell, of Florida, as say- 

 ing that this fungus " had practically de- 

 stroyed the pecan crop the year before." 



Orton says, " The injury to tomatoes from 

 Phytophthora is overstated." We stated that 

 " It is very injurious, causing complete de- 

 vastation of the crop in some sections and 

 resulting in the loss of many thousands of 

 dollars." 



Authority for this may be found in the 

 statement of R. E. Smith,* a very careful and 

 reliable worker, who says, " During the fall of 

 .1907 the whole acreage of tomatoes was com- 

 pletely ruined in this manner (by P. in- 

 festans) befere active shipment had begun, 

 making the crop a total loss." Also " in the 

 district mentioned the shipments fell off 

 within a very short time, from 2,000 crates a 

 day to practically nothing . . . many thou- 

 sands of dollars were lost." ^ 



Orton himseK" says of this disease, " Quite 

 common in Massachusetts . . . reported also 

 in southern California, where it caused large 

 losses to the winter crop." 



Orton says, " Absurdly large losses are at- 

 tributed to cotton anthracnose in Georgia." 



Our words are: 



The disease is very destructive in some locali- 

 ties and prevails throughout a large portion of 

 the cotton belt. In central Georgia it is said to 



'February 14, 1910. 



^Fawcette, H. S., Fla. Agr. Expt. Sta. Eept., 

 1907, LI. 



•Report Cal. Agr. Expt. Sta., Bull. 203, p. 44. 

 = B. E. Smith, Cal., B. 175, p. 9. 

 "Yearbook, 1905, p. 608. 



destroy about 22 per cent, of the crop yearly, 

 sometimes more; while to the state as a whole the 

 loss is put at 17 per cent, or approximately 

 $14,750,000. 



I may here quote the following:' 



From middle to north Georgia the gradual de- 

 crease in per cent, of the crop destroyed is from 

 22 per cent, to about 12 per cent, and to south 

 Georgia, from 22 per cent, to about 4 per cent. 

 It is conservatively estimated that the anthracnose 

 costs the farmers of the state at least 17 per cent, 

 of the cotton crsp. 1,800,000 bales are gathered 

 in Georgia, which represents then, only 83 per 

 cent, of the crop that should be made, the other 

 368,900 bales representing the actual loss. This 

 valued at $40 a bale would be $14,756,000 loss in 

 money. 



De Loach, the author of this statement, in a 

 recent letter says : 



My statistics carefully taken in sixteen counties 

 of the state of Georgia, in 1906 and 1907, and 

 amounting at the least to 2,000 boUs in a locality, 

 prove clearly to me that for those years my figures 

 were quite conservative. I always selected repre- 

 sentative localities and fields, and was making the 

 survey for no other purpose but to estimate the 

 actual loss to the growers incurred by this disease. 

 In several instances in Spalding and Hart counties 

 there was 80 per cent, of the bolls infected, but 

 of course not this per cent, actual loss, as many 

 of the bolls were half good and half diseased. 



Orton says : " The description of Bordeaux 

 injury is incorrect, as is also the statement 

 that blossoms are killed and the lives of bees 

 endangered." 



As to Bordeaux killing bees it must be 

 recollected that apple spraying is the topic 

 under discussion; that the only time bees 

 would be injured is while the tree is in blos- 

 som; that when the tree is in blossom arsen- 

 icals are almost invariably used in the spray, 

 hence to spray during blossom is, in practise, 

 dangerous to bees. 



The description of Bordeaux injury given 

 in the book is drawn largely from the writings 

 of Hedrick," who wrote his description follow- 



' Ga. Agr. Exp. Sta., Bull. 85, Tech. Ser., 3. 



'Geneva Bull., 287, pp. 107-108, Nos. 7, 10 

 and 11. 



