ERNE, NOVEMBER, 1906. 75 
PHILLIPS, OCTOBER 3, 1906. 
In 1906 a brief circular! was issued by this bureau giving the 
symptoms and treatment of the two brood diseases. This paper is 
of interest at this time only because it was the first occasion for the 
use of the names ‘‘American foul brood”’ and ‘“‘ Kuropean foul brood”’ 
in a publication of the bureau. 
Since the name ‘‘black brood” had been, on account of an 
error, applied (p. 45) to the foul brood which Cheshire and Cheyne 
(p. 25) described, the name “‘black brood” was no longer needed. 
The name ‘‘foul brood,’’ however, was being applied by the bee 
keepers (p. 60) to a disease which was clearly different from the foul 
brood described by Cheshire and Cheyne. This latter disease, there- 
fore, needed a name. The laws that were in existence in some of 
the States at that time provided for the inspection of apiaries in 
which foul brood was found. In order that these laws could be inter- 
preted, in accordance with their intent, to cover the brood diseases 
of an infectious nature, the name ‘‘foul brood”’ was retained in the 
names of these two brood diseases. To distinguish the two diseases 
by name, the adjective ‘““Huropean”’ was selected for the disease 
which had been early creditably studied by a European (p. 29) and 
the adjective ‘‘American’’ was selected for the disease which had 
been studied by an American (p. 62). These names were chosen only 
after consultation with a number of the leading bee keepers in 
America, who agreed that the names were well chosen. 
The words ‘‘American”’ and ‘‘Kuropean’’ were not chosen to sug- 
gest a geographical distribution of the two diseases, as the opinion 
was held that both diseases exist in Europe as well as in America. 
Concerning the selection of these names the facts were emphasized in 
the preface of a paper to be discussed later (p. 76). 
ERNE, NOVEMBER, 1906. 
In 1906 Dr. Erne,? of Freiburg, Germany, reviewed Burri’s work 
on the brood diseases and gave the results of his own investigations. 
Erne, too, obtained negative results in an attempt to produce ‘‘foul 
brood” with a culture of Bacillus alver. This species was not found 
by him in 64 samples of ‘‘foul brood”’ received from different parts 
of Germany. For these reasons he expresses a doubt concerning any 
etiological relation between the species and the disease as found in 
Germany. He found, however, in all samples of the disease a bacte- 
rium which he thought probably was identical with the one which 

1 Phillips, E. F., October 3, 1906. Thebrood diseases of bees. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau 
of Entomology, Circular No. 79. Pp. 5. (Superseded by Farmers’ Bulletin 442, U. 8S. Department of 
Agriculture, ‘“‘The treatment of bee diseases,’’) 
2Erne, Dr. November, 1906. Bakteriologische Untersuchungen tiber die Faulbrut und die Sauer- 
brut der Bienen. Die Europiische Bienenzucht, pp. 148-151. 
