450 Petch and Gadd .— The Replacement of the Terminal Bud. 
Johnston, also quoted by Sharpies and Lambourne, stated: ‘The 
common name of the disease, Bud-rot, well describes its nature, for in its 
acute or advanced stage the bud of the tree, i. e. the growing-point in the 
centre of the crown, is affected by a vile-smelling soft-rot which destroys 
all the younger tissues.’ 
It will be evident that the term ‘ Bud 5 is employed in both the fore¬ 
going extracts to denote the actual growing-point; and from the third 
quotation from Sharpies and Lambourne’s paper it would appear that the 
latter authors use the term in the same sense. The ‘fallacy’ that growth 
is no longer possible if the ce 7 itral shoot is killed is non-existent. The 
opinion which is generally held is that growth is no longer possible if the 
growing-point is destroyed. Before abandoning the prevailing idea as 
a fallacy, further evidence must be adduced, in view of the Ceylon examples, 
to show that, in the condition caused by artificial inoculations, the bud is 
truly a lateral, and not the further growth of the original terminal after 
a temporary arrest caused by the invading organisms. 
References. 
Johnston, J. R. : The History and Cause of the Coco-nut Bud-rot. U.S. Dept, of Agriculture, 
Bureau of Plant Industry, Bulletin No. 22S (1912). 
Petch, T. : Bud-rot of the Coco-nut Palm. Circulars and Agricultural Journal, Royal Botanic 
Gardens, Ceylon, iii, No. 15 (1906). 
Sharples, A., and Lambourne, J. : Observations in Malaya on Bud-rot of Coco-nuts. Annals 
of Botany, xxxvi, pp. 55-70. 
