76 
FLORIDA STATE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 
time. In many of these trees the fungus 
had made'^good headway, and in one in¬ 
stance Judge Gaines reported that it had 
started at the end of two weeks from the 
time of infection. W. H. Maxwell of 
Titusville, also reports that he has ob¬ 
served the Yellow Aschersonia to start 
in two weeks after “planting” (pinning 
leaves) the same in trees infested with 
whitefly. 
The writer has also succeeded in start¬ 
ing the Red Aschersonia by spraying a 
mixture of spores and water on the under 
surfaces of the leaves in trees infested 
with whitefly. This method of applica¬ 
tion was successful in starting an infec¬ 
tion in two out of three citrus trees, spray¬ 
ed at Lake City (July lo, 1906). In each 
case (leaves pinned or spores sprayed) 
the fungus was observed to have started in 
three to four weeks from the time of 
application of the spores or leaves. Eight 
trees were also sprayed at Leesburg at 
the same time (August 15th) that the 
fungus was started there by pinning on 
leaves, and examination six weeks later, 
showed that the fungus had started in 
each tree. 
These experiments are a complete dem¬ 
onstration that this fungus can readily be 
started either by pinning on leaves or by 
spraying on spores, there being only one 
failure in fifty-two trials made during the 
months of June, July and August, 1906. 
Hitherto, planting into a grove small 
trees with fungus-infested whitefly larvae 
upon them has been considered the only 
sure way of introducing it. This method 
is good and sure, where the trees can be 
kept from dropping their leaves, but is 
rather impracticable on a large scale. The 
infected trees should be planted so that 
their branches and leaves extend among 
the leaves of the tree to be infected. If 
necessary, the infected trees may be plant¬ 
ed in tubs and raised on platforms or oth¬ 
erwise elevated. 
One serious objection is raised in re¬ 
gard to the efficacy of the fungus, namely, 
that when it has practically killed off the 
whitefly and the fly starts to infest the 
grove anew, it takes the fungus so long to 
start that the fly has done considerable 
damage before Ihe fungus gets it under 
control. The situation appears to be about 
as follows. During one year the fungus 
cleans up the fly; the second year the 
grove is generally clean, also the 
fruit; the third year the fly re¬ 
infests the grove, and the trees and 
fruit are ag'ain black with sooty mold; 
then the fungus does its work again; etc. 
Now, in view of the fact, that the fungus 
can be introduced by pinning on leaves 
or by spraying on spores, the fungus 
should he started at the same time that the 
zahitedy Ictrvae are first observed, and 
while the progress and injury of the fly 
may not be wholly offset, yet I believe a 
great deal can be done in this way to les¬ 
sen the injury. It is purely a question 
of helping nature (the fungus) along by 
guiding her at the critical moment. This 
is an important point. A grower should 
not wait for the fungus to start of its own 
accord but should start it himself as soon 
as he discovers the presence of the white¬ 
fly and this should be done whether the 
fungus has previously been present or not. 
The fungus should be introduced and han¬ 
dled with the same rational consideration 
with which spraying or fumigation is car¬ 
ried on. Because the fungus is a natural 
remedy and will of itself (generally) 
spread and reduce the whitefly is no rea¬ 
son why rational means for artificially 
spreading the same should not he used. 
