146 
Tliis rosette disease resembles yellows very closely, to say the least, 
and there are transition forms in both States, and growths not distin¬ 
guishable from genuine yellows. The absence of the prematurely ri¬ 
pened fruit may be due to the suddenness and severity of the attack. 
The long, dry summer or other climatic peculiarities of these two regions 
may possibly account for this, and also for certain other symptoms at 
variance with the yellows as heretofore known and described. These 
are points to be worked out hereafter. 
The disease in Georgia has been erroneously attributed to the attacks 
of Scolytid beetles. * Scolytus rugulosus is common in Georgia, and rather 
destructive, but in June the mother beetles were only just commencing 
to burrow into the bark preparatory to depositing their eggs, while the 
trees had been affected icith this disease for several months. Moreover, 
in June there were many diseased trees which had not yet been attacked 
by a single beetle or had only a few borings. To satisfy myself I ex¬ 
amined some of these carefully over every square inch of their surface: 
cut the bark open in every direction, and examined each one of several 
thousand rosettes, e. g., the tree figured on Plate ix. In July it was more 
difficult to find such trees, although not impossible, e. g ., on June 30, in 
company with Mr. Rudolph CEtter, I examined -four trees in a middle- 
aged, seedling orchard near Griffin, Ga., with the following results: 
(1) This tree was nearly dead and the rosettes had a droopy look. 
In a section of one limb, which was not over 1J inches in diameter and 
2 feet long, we found 83 excavations made by Scolytus rugulosus. The 
beetles were present and burrowing in most of these holes, but not yet 
buried out of sight. The evidence of recent occupation was strong. 
The tree probably contained a thousand beetles, but most of them 
had been at work only a few days. They had bored into the base of 
many of the rosettes, and this was what gave to the foliage its wilted, 
drooping appearance. This tree died in July, 1890. It was probably 
attacked by the rosette disease in 1889. 
(2) This tree was diseased in all parts, and did not bear a single full 
grown leaf or shoot-axis, but the rosettes were still green and fresh. 
This tree was even more minutely examined than the preceding. In 
the trunk and main branches there were no beetles, no holes, and no 
internal borings or chambers, There were also very few injuries on the 
smaller twigs,t he most careful search bringing to light only half a dozen. 
(3) This tree contained many beetles. The foliage was wilted and 
drying up as in No. 1. 
(4) This tree was like No. 2 in appearance. It was also like it in 
being almost completely free from beetles or borings due to them. 
No larvae or pupae were found in any of the trees. 
It is wholly impossible to account for several thousand diseased 
growths scattered over the whole top of a tree by the slight borings of 
a few dozen beetles, even admitting their constant presence in the 
* Troc . Georgia State JJort . Society , 1889, pp. 10 and 40. 
