WHITE, JANUARY 15, 1904. 61 
4. The results reported by others regarding the causal relation 
between Bacillus alve and ‘‘foul brood”’ were questionable. 
5. The spores found in the brood dead of American foul brood 
would not grow on the media commonly used in the laboratory, 
suggesting the possibility of a new and interesting species. 
6. The disease which was being diagnosed as “foul brood” is not 
the foul brood studied by Cheyne, but is another disease now known 
as American foul brood. 
7. Aspergillus pollint was not present in the samples labeled 
(eee brood,” meaning that the condition was not Howard’s 
‘pickled brood,” or that he had made another error in his study of 
the condition. 
8. No colonies of Bacillus alver appeareds on the plates made from 
the brood of two healthy apiaries, but colonies of that species did 
appear in considerable numbers on plates made from brood taken 
from a third apiary which was considered healthy, but located in an 
infected district. 
9. Lastly, much work would have to be done on bee diseases before 
the confusion could be cleared up and the causes demonstrated. 
WHITE, JANUARY 15, 1904. 
In 1904 another paper! appeared giving the results of some 
investigations on bee diseases made during the summer of 1903. 
The work was a continuation of that done the preceding year. 
It was desirable to know whether Bacillus alvet was constantly 
present in the samples of the so-called black brood. If this species 
could be found in large numbers in every sample of this disease and 
not in other conditions, it would be a valuable means of diagnosing 
the disease as well as suggesting a possible etiological relation 
between the organism and the disease. 
Toward establishing the constant presence of Bacillus alvei in the 
foul brood of Cheshire and Cheyne (the so-called black brood) 
26 samples were examined and Bacillus alver was found im all of 
them. Twenty-four of the 26 samples were sent by Mr. West, 
but no species was found in any of them which was suspected as 
being Bacillus milu. These bacteriological findings, therefore, 
corroborated the conclusion of the preceding year that the so-called 
black brood is simply the foul brood of Cheshire and Cheyne. 
Inasmuch as the efforts to produce foul brood with cultures of 
Bacillus alvei failed to give positive results in 1902 (p. 59), further 
attempts were made to determine the pathogenesis of this species for 
1 White, G. F., January 15,1904. The further investigation of the diseases affecting the apiaries.in the 
State of New York. State of New York, Department of Agriculture, Eleventh Annual Report of the 
Commissioner of Agriculture, for the year 1903, pp. 103-114. 
