VoL. LX. No. 2702. 
NEW YORK, NOVEMBER 9, 1901. 
$1 PER YEAR. 
APPLES INJURED BY SULPHUR FUMES. 
HOW THE DAMAGE IS DONE. 
Results of Practical Experiments. 
Since the season has arrived when the fruit grow¬ 
ers are beginning to consiider the questions of stor¬ 
age, and, more immediately, the preparations of cel¬ 
lars and storehouses, any bit of information relating 
to the subject of storage may not be out of place. 
Here I wish to bring up a point regarding the fumi¬ 
gation of cellars. At the last meeting of the Western 
New York Horticultural Society I had occasion to ob¬ 
serve some Northern Spy apples, which were in¬ 
jured in a peculiar manner. The specimens were sub¬ 
mitted by a fruit grower from Medina, 
who stated that a serious loss had re¬ 
sulted to some stored apples from this In¬ 
jury. The injury consisted of depressed, 
pale, straw-colored areas over the entire 
surface of the skin. Some of the spots 
were small and rounded, but over a large 
part of the surface they had run together, 
forming large sinuous blotches. The ac¬ 
companying picture. Fig. 342, page 754, 
will give a good idea of the character of 
the injury, although it was not possible 
to photograph the specimens until sev¬ 
eral days after they had been received, 
and they had consequently begun to de¬ 
cay. When cut open, the flesh just be¬ 
neath the discolored skin was dead, and 
of a dry, spongy consistency. Otherwise 
the flesh was uninjured, but decay soon 
followed in the spots. 
These apples had been sprayed with 
Bordeaux and Paris-green in the usual 
way, and were in sound condition when 
placed in cold storage. Here some of 
them had begun to decay, and to pre¬ 
vent this the cellar had been fumigated 
with sulphur, after which the injury de¬ 
scribed appeared. Tne spraying with 
Bordeaux is mentioned because an in¬ 
jured Baldwin was submitted which was 
said not to have been sprayed, and the in¬ 
jury in the first case was attributed to the 
faot that the apples had been sprayed 
while on the tree. From the nature of 
tne treatment, it was not difficult to find 
the cause of the injury, but since neither 
the grower nor several fruit men present 
seemed to be acquainted with its cause, 
I will take this opportunity of explaining 
the effect of sulphur fumes on apples. 
To give the matter a fair test, the fol¬ 
lowing little experiment was performed. 
About a dozen apples T>f Northern Spy, 
Baldwin and Mann were placed in a ves¬ 
sel containing a little over a cubic foot of 
space. Some were sprayed with water, 
and a few were covered with Bordeaux 
Mixture, while the others were left dry. 
About 10 grains of sulphur were burned in the ves¬ 
sel, the fruit being subjected to the fumes for nearly 
an hour. At the end of this time the Northern Spies 
were seriously injured, the whole surface being cov¬ 
ered with spots. See Fig. 341, page 754. The Baldwins 
were less severely injured, while the Mann apples 
were practically untouched. These differences in the 
extent of the damage may be due to varietal differ¬ 
ences in the apples, or to variations in the degree of 
ripeness. The presence or absence of water on the 
surface of the apples caused no perceptible difference, 
although the drops showed strong acid reaction 
after the experiment. It is needless to say that the 
Bordeaux had no effect whatever. The skin of the 
apple is generally Impermeable to the fumes of sul¬ 
phur. By an examination of Fig. 341 it will be seen 
that the injured areas appeared around the lenticels 
or “spots” of the apple. These are pores, which ex¬ 
ist for the purpose of permitting gaseous interchange 
between the outer air and the interior of the apple, 
the cuticle generally being impermeable to gases. 
Note the large injured areas at points where the 
skin has been mechanically punctured. 
The probable direct cause of the damage done by 
sulphur is the formation of sulphurous acid. When¬ 
ever fumes of burning sulphur come into contact with 
water or water vapor this acid is produced. To this 
reaction the slight disinfecting power of sulphur is 
ROSE CLOTIIILDE SOUTERT. Fig. 340. See Rubalisms, Page 758 
due. The acid is formed from the moisture in the 
flesh of the apples after the fumes penetrate the 
breathing iiores. From the foregoing, it is clear that 
cellars containing fruit should not be fumigated with 
sulphur. If it is desired to kill molds and other 
fungi, the cellar should be thoroughly cleaned and 
fumigated before the fruit is put in. This will pre¬ 
vent such losses as that occasioned in this instance. 
H. HA88ELBRING. 
Geneva (N. Y.) Experiment Station. 
R. N.-Y.—We are glad to have this clear explana¬ 
tion of the effects of sulphur fumigation. There have 
been many efforts to destroy scab and rot on living 
fruits and vegetables by burning sulphur. Most of 
them have failed. 
APPLE-GROWING ON GRASSY HILLSIDES. 
HOW GRANT HITCHIN68 RAISES FINE FRUIT. 
Sod Orchards and Low Heads for Early Bearing. 
It was in the latter part of September that Prof. 
Beach, of the Geneva Experiment Station, and I went 
to Syracuse, on our way to South Onondaga, to see 
with our own eyes the orchard of Grant Hitchings. 
Ck)l. A. C. Chase, of Syracuse, drove us out behind 
a lively pair of young horses. It was a beautiful 
drive of about 12 miles, south of Syracuse, through 
the Onondaga Indian Reservation, and among the 
hills of Onondaga County. At first glance, one would 
not pick this out as an ideal fruit-growing section, 
for the land is very rough, and the aver¬ 
age Niagara or Orleans County fruit¬ 
grower would be rather at a loss what to 
do with it. As we drove along. Col. 
Chase called attention to the numerous 
apple seedlings along the roadside, some 
of them very old trees, and we found that 
in many places the hillside is spotted 
with them, even competing with the wild 
second growth of the woods. On some of 
the hillsides these natural-growth apples 
are so thick that if top-grafted a fair or¬ 
chard would result, and we noticed as we 
passed by that many of the apples were 
of good size and color. In fact, close ob¬ 
servation would lead one to suspect that 
the soil and conditions ire peculiarly 
adapted for apples. 
Mr. Hitching’s orchard was pointed out 
as we were in sight of the place, and the 
first thing that we noticed was that the 
trees did not appear to have been planted 
regularly in rows. The results that Mr. 
Hitchings obtains from his method of 
apple culture are almost beyond belief, 
and must be seen to be appreciated. We 
saw ll-year-old trees that were yielding 
15 to 18 bushels of fruit, and apple trees 
bearing paying crops at six years from 
setting. Prof. Beach said that he could 
hardly believe the statements made re¬ 
garding this orchard, until he had seen it 
for himself, and found that they had not 
been exaggerated in the least. It is a mis¬ 
taken idea that Mr. Hitchings’s trees 
make little growth. His idea is not to 
force that growth. The young apple trees 
set over one year were making a growth 
of from 18 inches to two feet, equal to 
that of most young cultivated orchard 
trees. course the heavy bearing of the 
olde-. trees will check the growth to 
a great extent. The foliage at the time 
of our visit was very large and green, 
and gave one the impression of luxuriant 
growth. One of the peculiar features 
of Mr. Hitchings’s method of culture 
is setting in sod. His bearing or¬ 
chard is in straight rows one way, and the other 
way at irregular distances, so as to avoid the 
ridges. He stated that the trees did not do well upon 
them, and he had tried to place the trees as much as 
possible in the depression upon the side hill. There 
was no cultivation; the first 10 years the trees are 
mulched with the hay cut between and around the 
trees, after that letting grass lie where cut. 
The trees are headed low, many of their branches 
starting at 18 inches to two feet from the ground. 
No pruning is practiced. Whether it is the local con¬ 
ditions or the result of Mr. Hitchings’s culture 
methods that cause his trees to bear at such a young 
age, I am unable to say, but it seems to me that the 
