GEO GRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF AMERICAN FOUL BROOD. 53 



[Note. — Several other papers of importance have been issued <>n 

 this subject which were not discussed at the [nspectors* meeting. 

 They, however, have an important bearing on this subject. Lambotte 

 derided that Bacillus mesentericus vulgatus causes " foul brood," or, 

 in other words, that Bacillus alv< i is hut a variety of Bacillus me8< n 

 t(i '/<iis. His work, however, is far from convincing. The principal 

 point of interest in this regard is that he had great difficulty in get 

 ting a growth from the ropy type of foul brood (American foul 

 brood) on ordinary media. Burn in L904 published an account of 

 In- work and found Bacillus <tlr<J in a few specimen.- from Switzer- 

 land (indicating that European foul brood is found there), hut 

 found another organism which grows with difficulty; the latter is 

 undescribed and unnamed, and it is possible and probable that lie 

 worked with Bacillus larva White. Maassen (1906) found the same 

 difficulty, isolating Bacillus <//r<i in only L3 specimens of diseased 

 brood out of L12 received, lie. too, found an organism which could 

 he made to grow on ordinary media only with difficulty and called hy 

 him Bacillus brandenburgiensis. It is undescribed, so far as is known 

 to the writer. He also claims to have found another organism, Spi- 

 rochete apis Maassen, hut has not established any causal relationship. 



These papers all tend to confirm the work of Doctor White. Bacil- 

 lus alvei is not found in the ordinary ropy type of " foul brood," but 

 another organism is; this is probably the Bacillus larvm of Doctor 

 White. 



In the face of all these facts several prominent bee men of Kn<j:- 

 land are attempting to discredit all this work, the criticism, so far as 

 is known to the writer, being based entirely on comparisons of litera- 

 ture and on an entire lack of investigation. They have, further, mis- 

 read the papers issued by the Department of Agriculture on this sub- 

 ject. It seems entirely unnecessary, therefore, to review the criticism 

 m detail.— E. F. P.] 



EXISTENCE OF BOTH AMERICAN FOUL BROOD AND EUROPEAN F01 L BROOD 



IX THE SAME COLONY. 



Mr. Atchley. Do you think that both diseases, American foul 

 brood and European foul brood, could exist in the same colony '. 



Doctor Phillips. Reports are sometimes received that a colony i- 

 infected with both di>ea>e^ at the same time, hut this is contrary to 

 the experience of those persons most conversant with these condition-. 

 While it may he possible for a colony to have the infection of both 

 diseases at the same time, it i> not by any means the rule, and such 

 cases arc probably not authentically reported. 



Both diseases are found in New York State. The inspectors have 

 to treat both diseases and they treat both in the same way. but they 

 have never found both diseases in the same colony. 



GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIB1 TION OF AMERICAN FOUL BROOD. 



Mr. Dadant. [s not the American foul brood spread more over the 

 world \ 



Doctor Phillips. It would seem so from the literature. It is 

 found in almost every State of the Onion, while European foul brood 



