BROWN-ROT OF PRUNES AND CHERRIES. A 
TasLe II.—Spraying for brown-rot of prunes at Felida, Wash., during the season of 
1915. 
" i Brown-rot (per 
Sprayings. ‘ cent). e 
Yield 
Plat. Quimber 
(0) 
After 12 
Ist. | 2d. | 3d. | 4th. | sth. | 6th. | 7th, | Prumes).| At har- | “aay. 
S storage. 
First orchard: 
INO ale ge tee yee Gu Fl Sasser HAS cee ¥4 F4 723 (fad a 
(Op A ts a Rha Ua Fi F3 F3 JO hee F4 F4 1, 410 ~18 2 
INOS ee Ne eee Fl BRS en os ae te | eects F4 F4 1,636 48 6 
ING Aa ee Seed eam ere ae Fl Sua Peeee AS Reel aerseee F4 1,761 1. 08 15 
INO SD Si. See hee an Fl HS yal beers ee 1b oes Sse BA ese 3, 582 19 1 
INGE GES. ee en | pene acer tmeler ce] Pee a [ Oo os obos cue c 1,150 3.39 4] 
INO WTAE eee ene ol ieee 193} loos cae Was asco F4 F4 1,985 15 3 
INOS Sie ee Sere eee ecg s 083 easae Wesessece F3 F3 2,911 28 8 
INO Om Fes oon a 06 alam eR Ob eee aes F3 183} eeeses F3 F3 1,608 12 3 
JuUCOVE3 NU eee Near ee hace SI Se | eee yet LA Pa Maes vs F4 F4 720 DSivan Pees 
Jy (Ose Ue ee Ae Ss Nene Ee emeete | freee en | en ee a pe F4 F4 493 2543 See See 
ING Dette Se ae RU ae F5 BO ega sage F5 F5 2, 582 27 2 
INO ISR i ce eee e Got Bis eee Fl Ba eee F2 F2 ZIG SA ree ep ee ey een 
ING WIA S Si ses ne Ss gO Ly Re Fl Ryall ae Fl Fl 2519 LOS eves ee 
INOS See cere eee Fl WG) eee ee ING leseoas F6 F6 1, 804 28 12 
INS NGS eee ane eer Wie ee F7 1a ie Beer F7 F7 2,392 1.05 9 
Second orchard: 
INO S17 Se see eee VOI Ete Se eee Sesion eae peel, F2 F2. 4,391 4.16 51 
INOS Sheet eee Eps era | epee elt ent es Fs F8 F8 5, 633 4.67 25 
ING Ee OE rere te at. as NER Lesh spe sp ee Aen [ao F4 F4 F4 5, 295 3.29 37 
INOS OM erae Neen enna ABA: | Fe eS SN ox fx: dT Lal as eras es Sacre a 4,673 5.35 95 
eee Sane Sat Set tim erachod a0 
The favorable effect of the early applications on the yield has 
already been discussed. The amount of brown-rot at harvest time 
was not large on any of the plats, but in the first orchard there 
was more than nine times as much on plat 6, which was unsprayed, 
as the average amount on the nine plats which received both early 
and late applications of self-boiled lime-sulphur, the former having 
3.39 per cent of brown-rot, the latter 0.36 per cent. In the second 
orchard, plat 20, which received no late spray, had nearly twice as 
much brown-rot as plat 19, which received late applications with 
the above fungicide. The contrasts on the stored fruit were still 
more striking, because of the larger amounts of the disease. The 
prunes from the unsprayed plat of the first orchard had developed 
41 per cent of brown-rot, while the average from the sprayed trees 
mentioned above was 5 per cent. In the case of the second orchard, 
the unsprayed fruit had 95 per cent of brown-rot, while that which 
received a late spraying with self-boiled lime-sulphur had 37 per 
cent and that sprayed with commercial lime-sulphur 25 per cent. 
In some of the neighboring orchards where no sprayings were 
made, more than three-fourths of the crop was affected with brown- 
rot at harvest time (PI. II). In such cases the fruit that was har- 
vested was handled with great difficulty, as it would scarcely be in 
a usable condition if allowed to stand over night at the drier. 
