CRANBERRY STATION. 



165 



Table 11. — Sanding Plots in 1920. Effect of Resanding on Keeping 

 Qiiality of Cranberries. 



Plots and Checks. 



Area 

 (Square 

 Rods). 



Resanded. 



Percentage 

 of Berries 

 showing 

 Decay at 

 End of 

 Storage. 



V, 



V (check 1), 



V (check 2), 



V (check 3), 

 O, 



O (check 1), 

 O (check 2), 

 O (check 3), 



Not since 1909, 



Spring of 1912, fall of 1914, spring of 1917 and 



spring of 1919. 

 Spring of 1912, fall of 1914, spring of 1917 and 



spring of 1919. 

 Spring of 1912, fall of 1914, spring of 1917 and 



spring of 1919. 

 Not since 1909 



Fall of 1911, fall of 1914, spring of 1917 and 



spring of 1919. 

 Fall of 1911, fall of 1914, spring of 1917 and 



spring of 1919. 

 Fall of 1911, fall of 1914, spring of 1917 and 



spring of 1919. 



15.63 

 14.85 

 13.85 

 17.41 

 13.61 

 18.83 

 17.28 

 12.86 



Table 12. — Productiveness of Sanding Plots V and from 1916 to 1920, 



inclusive. 



Relation of Weather to Cranberry Flooding Injury. 



The station bog began the season of 1919 with fair prospects, the vines 

 having a good supply of blossom buds. Partly to check the fireworm and 

 partly as a test treatment of the "rosebloom" disease (Exobosidium 

 oxycocci), it was flooded the night of June 16, the water being held about 

 forty-eight hours. A day or two after the water was let off, most of the 

 buds were found to have been killed by it. This was puzzling, as the bog 

 had been flowed with the vines in the same stage of growth in previous 

 years without material harm. Very hot weather had accompanied some 

 of the former June floodings, the water temperature sometimes reaching 

 86° F. As the first day of this flooding (June 17) was cloudy and the 

 second (the 18th) was not very warm, the injury hardly could have been 

 due to temperature alone. 



The writer tried in every way to find the cause of the disaster. The 



