• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Report of the state plant board...
 Report of the plant commission...
 Plant inspection department
 Quarantine inspection departme...
 Entomology department
 Pathology department
 Apiary inspection department














Group Title: Report for the period ... of the State Plant Board of Florida
Title: Report for the period ... /
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00098574/00017
 Material Information
Title: Report for the period ... /
Alternate Title: Biennial report
Physical Description: 19 v. : ill. ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: State Plant Board of Florida
Publisher: State Plant Board of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1952/54
Frequency: biennial
regular
 Subjects
Subject: Plants, Protection of -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: State Plant Board of Florida.
Dates or Sequential Designation: 4th (1920/22)- 23rd (1958/60).
Numbering Peculiarities: Vols. for 1950/52-1958/60 also called: Bulletin.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00098574
Volume ID: VID00017
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 10989019
lccn - sn 86033752
 Related Items
Preceded by: Report for the biennial period ending ... and supplemental reports to ...
Succeeded by: Biennial report

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Title Page
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Table of Contents
        Page 3
    Report of the state plant board of Florida
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
    Report of the plant commissioner
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
    Plant inspection department
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
    Quarantine inspection department
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
    Entomology department
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
    Pathology department
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
    Apiary inspection department
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
Full Text


February 1955


STATE PLANT BOARD OF FLORIDA
Ed L. Ayers, Plant Commissioner
GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA




Twentieth Biennial Report
FOR THE PERIOD

July I, 1952 June 30, 1954


New Pathological Laboratory-State Plant Board, Gainesville, Florida


Single copies free to Florida residents on request to
STATE PLANT BOARD OF FLORIDA
John F. Seagle Building
Gainesville, Florida


Bulletin 6









STATE PLANT BOARD
OF FLORIDA

J. Lee Ballard, Chairman, St. Petersburg
W. Glenn Miller, Vice Chairman, Monticello
Hollis Rinehart, Miami
Mrs. Jessie Ball duPont, Jacksonville
Fred H. Kent, Jacksonville
Ralph L. Miller, Plymouth
R. H. Gore, Sr., Fort Lauderdale
J. Broward Culpepper, Secretary, Talla-
hassee


STAFF

Plant Commissioner's Office
Ed L. Ayers, Plant Commissioner
J. W. Knight, Administrative Assistant
Elita Lovejoy, Office Assistant
Naomi P. Bullett, Secretary
Mildred A. Spence, Clerk-Stenographer

Plant Inspection Department
J. N. Busby, Assistant Chief Plant In-
spector (Grove)
P. E. Frierson, Assistant Chief Plant
Inspector (Nursery)
H. L. Jones, Special Inspector
Arthur L. Baker, Plant Inspector
George H. Baker, Plant Inspector
J. C. Bell, Plant Inspector
C. J. Bickner, Plant Inspector
K. P. Bragdon, Plant Inspector
G. F. Burden, Plant Inspector
H. C. Burnett, Plant Inspector
G. W. Campbell, Plant Inspector
J. K. Condo, Plant Inspector
A. C. Crews, Plant Inspector
L. J. Daigle, Plant Inspector
J. C. Denmark, Plant Inspector
C. L. Dickinson, Plant Inspector
C. B. Ellis, Plant Inspector
W. H. Harlan, III, Plant Inspector
C. E. Harper, Plant Inspector
W. P. Henderson, Plant Inspector
L. B. Hill, Plant Inspector
L. W. Holley, Plant Inspector
R. L. King, Jr., Plant Inspector
R. W. Lindner, Plant Inspector
Woodburn Miller, Plant Inspector
R. R. Nixon, Plant Inspector
R. R. Nixon, Jr., Plant Inspector
Paul Pettigrew, Plant Inspector
Charles Poucher, Plant Inspector
C. R. Roberts, Plant Inspector
J. H. Sealey, Plant Inspector
C. E. Shepard, Plant Inspector
J. M. Soowal, Plart Inspector
H. F. Thalgott, Plant Inspector
H. M. Van Pelt, Plant Inspector
H. B. Wesson, Plant Inspector
T. E. Whitmore, Plant Inspector
Lena R. Hunter, Office Assistant
Pauline Bryan, Office Assistant
Thelma M. Steele, Secretary
Alene S. Long, Secretary
Florence P. Stewart, Clerk

Plant Inspection Department
Spreading Decline
Wray Birchfield, Nematologist
R. W. Hanks, Nematologist
B. G. ChiLwood, Nematologist
C. F. Dowling, Jr., Entomologist
K. E. Bragdon, Special Inspector
A. L. Bentley, Plant Inspector
T. A. Brown, Plant Inspector
A. V. Lent, Plant Inspector
L. S. Light, Jr., Plant Inspector
R. R. Snell, Plant Inspector
B. S. Dean, Laboratory Assistant
A. C. Traylor, Field Assistant
J. M. Vickers, Student Assistant


Plant Inspection Department
Citrus Budwood Certification
Gerald G. Norman, Special Inspector
Carla Allen, Clerk-Stenographer
Quarantine Inspection Department
W. H. Merrill, Chief Quarantine Inspector
R. W. Albritton, Quarantine Inspector
Roscoe Baker, Quarantine Inspector
G. D. Barcus, Quarantine Inspector
Philip G. Brill, Quarantine Inspector
Gerald A. Buchanan, Quarantine Inspector
H. A. Carrell, Jr., Quarantine Inspector
Benjamin E. Davis, Quarantine Inspector
G. V. Dillard, Quarantine Inspector
R. L. Flora, Quarantine Inspector
J. B. Guthrie, Jr., Quarantine Inspector
J. R. Hargrave, Quarantine Inspector
George A. Helseth, Quarantine Inspector
J. M. Henderson, Quarantine Inspector
H. C. Jackson, Quarantine Inspector
J. F. Kearney, Quarantine Inspector
G. S. McMullen, Quarantine Inspector
A. S. Mason, Quarantine Inspector
R. G. Milner, Quarantine Inspector
H. R. O'Steen, Quarantine Inspector
C. R. Shepard, Quarantine Inspector
Howard Yde, Quarantine Inspector
Quarantine Inspection Department
Sweet Potato Weevil Control
George P. Lamb, Special Inspector
Daniel Barfield, Special Inspector
R. H. Miller, Special Inspector
Entomology Department
G. B. Merrill, Chief Entomologist
G. W. Dekle, Entomologist
H. A. Denmark, Entomologist
F. W. Mead, Entomologist
R. A. Morse, Entomologist
H. V. Weems, Jr., Entomologist
Eloise Riddick, Secretary
Elma D. Bishop, Stenographer
A. L. Alberty, Student Assistant
Shelby Brothers, Student Assistant
Pathology Department
Mortimer Cohen, Pathologist (Citrus)
James Tammen, Pathologist (Ornamentals)
Jean L. Smith, Technician
J. W. Perry, Field Assistant
A. P. Martinez, Student Assistant
Apiary Inspection Department
H. S. Foster, Chief Apiary Inspector
Charlie Griffin, Apiary Inspector
L. H. Harrell, Apiary Inspector
J. C. Herndon, Apiary Inspector
R. A. Martin, Apiary Inspector
G. E. Tanner, Apiary Inspector
L. C. Waldrep, Apiary Inspector
T. R. Yecmans, Apiary Inspector
Aubrey T. Jones, Secretary
Citrus Tree Research (Census)
W. F. Callander, Supervising Statistician
E. R. Bartley, Plant Inspector
W. W. Beckett, Plant Inspector
J. T. Bolin, Plant Inspector
J. D. Coleman, Jr., Plant Inspector
J. F. Crum, Plant Inspector
R. P. Esser, Plant Inspector
R Griffith, Plant Inspector
J. D. Grinstead, Plant Inspector
E. W. Holder, Jr., Plant Inspector
E. H. Hurebaus, Plant Inspector
J. W. Kelly, Plant Inspector
H. C. Levan, Plant Inspector
V. E. Lowe, Plant Inspector
J. U. M-rtsoli, Jr., Plant Inspector
W. H. Mathews, Plant Inspector
W. J. Poole. Plant Inspector
E. Prange, Plant Inspector
E. E. Butle:b e, Plant Inspector
W. R. Tappnn. Plant Inspector
W. G. Whittaker, Plant Inspector
J. R. Yearrwood, Jr., Plant Inspector
Patricia W. White, Secretary






February 1955


STATE PLANT BOARD OF FLORIDA
Ed L. Ayers, Plant Commissioner
GAINESVIILE, FLORIDA










Twentieth Biennial Report

FOR THE PERIOD


July I, 1952 June 30, 1954















Single copies free to Florida residents on request to
STATE PLANT BOARD OF FLORIDA
John F. Seagle Building
Gainesville, Florida


Bulletin 6











STATE PLANT BOARD


J. LEE BALLARD, Chairman, St. Petersburg
W. GLENN MILLER, Vice Chairman, Monticello
HOLLIS RINEHART, Miami
MRS. JESSIE BALL DUPONT, Jacksonville
DR. RALPH L. MILLER, Plymouth
FRED H. KENT, Jacksonville
R. H. GORE, SR., Fort Lauderdale
J. BROWARD CULPEPPER, Secretary, Tallahassee




STAFF

ED L. AYERS, Plant Commissioner
J. W. KNIGHT, Administrative Assistant
W. H. MERRILL, Chief Quarantine Inspector
G. B. MERRILL, Chief Entomologist
PAUL E. FRIERSON, Assistant Chief Plant Inspector
JOE N. BUSBY, Assistant Chief Plant Inspector
H. S. FOSTER, Chief Apiary Inspector
MORTIMER COHEN, Chief Citrus Pathologist
JAMES TAMMEN, Chief Ornamentals Pathologist
B. G. CHITWOOD, Chief Nematologist











CONTENTS
PAGE
REPORT OF THE STATE PLANT BOARD OF FLORIDA ....................................... 4
REPORT OF THE PLANT COMMISSIONER ..............................-.. ...-......... 8
PLANT INSPECTION DEPARTMENT ................................. .......................... ....- 14
Reorganization of Grove and Nursery Inspection Departments ........... 14
Nursery Inspection ......-.......... .......... ----.... ...-.. ......... 15
Table I- Citrus Stock Movement ................... ... ............................ 16
Table II-Approximate Acreage and Amount of Nursery Stock ...... 18
Table III-Miscellaneous Bulbs and Plants .........................- .......-.... 19
Grove Inspection 1................................... 16
Spreading Decline Survey ..................... ............. .......... 17
Citrus Survey ........................................... ........................................ 22
Citrus Budwood Certification .............. ..................... ................... 23
Tristeza ................ ...... .. .. .... ..................... .............. 24
Fruit Certification 2....... ....... ................ ........ ............- 26
Stellate Scale ................................ ....................... ................. 26
Golden Nem atode Survey ................ ....... ....... .. .......................... ...... 29
Coconut Disease ...................... ................. ...... ............... .... 30
Tomato Plant Inspection ... ....... ............... ...... .................... 31
W hite-fringed Beetle ............ ... .... ................................ 32
Fire Ant Survey and Control .. ........ ............ .................... 32
Pine Bark Beetle Survey ... ............. ...... ...................... 33
Inspection of the Florida Keys .................. ...................... 33
QUARANTINE INSPECTION DEPARTMENT ................................. 34
Table I-Parcels of Plants and Plant Products Handled ..................... 35
Table II-Record of Inspections of Aircraft, Watercraft, Pas-
sengers, and Baggage .................................... --............. 36
Table III-Agricultural Products Certified for Export ................ 36
Table IV-Plant Material Arriving from Puerto Rico ............... .. 36
Table V.-Shipments Diverted to Federal Inspection Houses;
Inspected and Released; Treated and Released .............................. 36
Table VI-California Citrus Fruit Entering Florida .. .......... 37
P personnel ......... ......... ... ......-...........- ... ..... . ..... ...... .... 37
Japanese Beetle ..... ... ................... ..... ..... ... ... ....................... 37
Sw eet Potato W eevil .............. ... .......... ......... .................. 38
ENTOMOLOGY DEPARTMENT ....................... ....... -.-............................ 41
Collection and Identification Record .................................................. 43
Economic Insect Survey ......... ... 4....... ...... ....................... 45
Special Insect Investigations ........ ...................... ....... ...... 45
E exhibits .............. -....... ........ .............................. .......................... 46
M meetings .................. ................ .... -. ... ......... ......... 47
Publications ............................................. --- ...----..........---- -. . .......... 47
PATHOLOGY DEPARTMENT ................... ....---..-....... ..... ....... ...... 49
Table I-Results of Histological Tests .............................--- .........--- 51-52
Table II-Cases in Which Presence of Tristeza Virus Was Estab-
lished by Transmission Test and Not by Schneider Test ............... 54
Table III-Diagnoses of Plant Disease Specimens ............. ............... 56
Tristeza Investigations in South America and in Florida .................... 57
APIARY INSPECTION DEPARTMENT .................................... .................. 61










LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL


Gainesville, Florida
February 25, 1955
To His Excellency
LeRoy Collins
Governor of Florida
SIR: Herewith is submitted the report of the State Plant
Board for the biennum ending June 30, 1954. Please submit
this report to the Legislature.
Respectfully,
STATE PLANT BOARD OF FLORIDA
By: J. LEE BALLARD, Chairman


REPORT OF THE STATE PLANT BOARD
OF FLORIDA
The biennial report of the State Plant Board is submitted
herewith for the information of the executive and legislative
branches of the State, as well as the citizens of Florida.
Several changes were made in the personnel of the Plant
Board during the biennium. The terms of Hon. Frank M.
Harris, St. Petersburg, George J. White, Sr., Mount Dora, and
Eli H. Fink, Jacksonville, expired during this period. Hon. J.
Lee Ballard, of St. Petersburg, was appointed to fill the vacancy
brought about by the expiration of Mr. Harris' term. Hon.
Wm. H. Dial, of Orlando, and Hon. Fred H. Kent, of Jackson-
ville, were appointed to succeed Mr. White and Mr. Fink, re-
spectively. Florida is fortunate in having had the services of
Messrs. Harris, White, and Fink. They gave freely and unsel-
fishly of their time as members of the State Plant Board and
Board of Control, and rendered invaluable service to the State
in their efforts to further and improve agricultural and educa-
tional matters.
The membership of the State Plant Board and Board of Con-
trol at the end of the biennium was: J. Lee Ballard, St. Peters-
burg; W. Glenn Miller, Monticello; Mrs. Jessie Ball duPont,
Jacksonville; George W. English, Jr., Fort Lauderdale; Fred H.
Kent, Jacksonville, Wm. H. Dial, Orlando, Hollis Rinehart,
Miami.







Twentieth Biennial Report


During this biennium, the Board lost the services of its Ex-
ecutive Secretary, Mr. W. F. Powers. He was succeeded by Dr.
J. Broward Culpepper.
One of the most serious developments of the biennium-one
with potentially far-reaching effects-was the relaxation by the
Customs officials in examination of passengers' baggage enter-
ing from foreign countries. In past years there has been ap-
proximately one hundred percent examination of all baggage
coming into the United States from foreign points. From the
plant quarantine standpoint, this relaxation was a most seri-
ous problem, for port quarantine work is conducted in close
cooperation with that of Customs inspectors. The Treasury
Department had made a test, late in 1949, of the effectiveness
and value of foreign baggage examination by instituting at
Boston, New York, and Miami a system of spot examination of
incoming baggage. "Spot examination" meant the careful in-
spection of approximately 10 percent of the baggage. To com-
plete the test, the remaining 90 percent of the baggage was also
inspected as a check. It was conclusively shown that had only
one bag in any particular lot been examined, only 9.6 percent
of the plant material contained therein (possible carriers of in-
sects and diseases) would have been intercepted and that the
remaining 90.4 percent would have been spread to all parts of
the United States.
After the testing of four different systems of baggage ex-
amination, it was recommended by the reviewing committee
that because of the danger of introduction into the country of
agricultural pests and animal diseases, with resultant devasta-
tion and costs for control, as well as illegal introduction of
narcotics and other prohibited articles, the proposal that "the
complete inspection of passengers and their baggage be discon-
tinued and a spot check be instituted" be rejected.
Although the tests made in 1949 had failed to prove the point
at issue, in April 1953 district collectors of Customs were in-
structed to revise the system of foreign baggage examination
then in effect for a six-month period, such change in procedure
to become effective in May 1953.
By June 1, 1953, a modified system of baggage examination
had been instituted at all ports of Florida where Customs inspec-
tors, as well as representatives of other Federal agencies con-
cerned with the handling of foreign traffic, are stationed. This
was a decided departure from the policy long depended upon to







State Plant Board of Florida


aid in preventing imported insects and plant diseases from slip-
ping past quarantine barriers established at the State's gate-
ways. Early in June supplemental instructions were issued
which strengthened the procedure somewhat.
Today, the baggage examination procedure which was ostensi-
bly placed in effect for a six-month trial period only is still in
effect. At Florida ports, the percentage of baggage examina-
tion depends largely upon the country from which the passenger
arrives, varying from one piece to one hundred percent, this
procedure being based upon known plant pest conditions in the
country of origin. No amount of effort has sufficed to bring
about a restoration of the original method of baggage examina-
tion, which has, through the years, consisted of approximately
one hundred percent inspection of all foreign baggage.
It is maintained by the Customs Service that present person-
nel is insufficient to make possible a more complete inspection.
This is true in many instances, particularly at the larger ports.
Although some increases in legislative appropriations were
made for the Board's use during the period 1953-1955, two
emergencies occurred which more than offset these increases:
(1) the necessity for inspection and certification of a very
greatly increased amount of citrus fruit for export to foreign
countries and for shipment to California; (2) increased work
in connection with spreading decline, which has proven to be
one of the most serious-if not the most serious-threats to
citrus trees that has ever become established in Florida. To
aid in handling spreading decline, the Cabinet released amounts
totaling $70,000 from the Emergency Appropriation.
It will be 6f interest to many growers to learn that the State
Plant Board, early in 1954, relaxed its restrictions surrounding
the shipment of citrus fruit from California to this State. These
restrictions had been in effect for many years on account of the
presence in California of brown rot of citrus and, more recently,
tristeza or quick decline. It was found, however, that both dis-
eases were present in Florida, being distributed, in fact, over
practically the entire State. Neither disease is as troublesome
in this State as in California, for a number of reasons. The re-
laxation of Florida's regulations permits the shipment into this
State, under permit and various restrictions, of lemons and
oranges from California throughout the year.
During the biennium, Puerto Rico threatened to place in
effect a quarantine on cut flowers of gladiolus produced in Flor-







Tit, ,,tu tH Biennial Report


ida because of the presence in the plantings of the State of two
diseases, Curvularia lunata and Fusarium oxysporum, which
reportedly did not exist in Puerto Rico. The Plant Commis-
sioner, accompanied by Dr. Robert O. Magie, Plant Pathologist,
of the Gulf Coast Experiment Station, Bradenton, made a trip
to Puerto Rico for conference with plant quarantine officials and
to attend a hearing on the subject which had been called. While
in Puerto Rico, the Board's representatives made examinations
of gladiolus plantings on the Island, which disclosed the pres-
ence of both diseases about which the Puerto Ricans were con-
cerned. The State Plant Board was later informed that the pro-
posed quarantine would not be placed in effect.
Relaxation of inspection of foreign passengers' baggage by
the Customs has created the fear that some major plant pests
may have slipped by the quarantine barriers and become estab-
lished, and the Board has been particularly vigilant in making
inspections in the vicinities of the main ports of entry. Out-
breaks of star or stellate scale, a pest of ornamentals previously
unknown in Florida, have been discovered in two instances,
both of which have apparently been eradicated. Arrangements
are being made for handling other infestations that may come
to light.
The Chairman and other members of the Plant Board take
this opportunity to express their appreciation of the advice,
counsel, and support on the part of growers and governmental
agencies, both State and Federal. The Board is especially grate-
ful for the advice and aid furnished by the Governor and mem-
bers of his Cabinet at Tallahassee; the Director of the Florida
Agricultural Experiment Station and his associates; the Chief
and Associate Chiefs of the Plant Quarantine Branch and the
Plant Pest Control Branch, United States Department of Agri-
culture; the Chairman and members of the Florida Agricultural
Council; and the Collector and Assistant Collector of Customs
of the Florida District.
Respectfully submitted,
STATE PLANT BOARD OF FLORIDA
J. LEE BALLARD, Chairman






State Plant Board of Florida


REPORT OF THE PLANT COMMISSIONER
For Biennium Ending June 30, 1954


LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
Gainesville, Florida
February 25, 1955
Honorable J. Lee Ballard, Chairman
State Plant Board of Florida
SIR: I have the honor to present herewith my report as Plant
Commissioner for the biennium 1952-1954.
Respectfully,
ED L. AYERS, Plant Commissioner


REPORT OF THE PLANT COMMISSIONER

July 1, 1952 to June 30, 1954

At the beginning of the biennium some reorganization of the
work of the State Plant Board was effected, consisting princi-
pally of the combination of the Nursery and Grove Inspection
Departments under the name of Plant Inspection Department.
This integration has helped materially in the stabilization of
the work of the inspectors, since territories to which they are
assigned are smaller in scope and rather less travel is required
in order to cover them thoroughly. The State has been divided
into inspection districts, with an inspector placed in charge of
each. Travel outside of the home districts is usually in con-
nection with emergency work only.
Each inspector is now required to do both nursery and grove
inspection work as well as assume responsibility for many other
duties, such as inspection of fruit for export and inspection of
cut flowers for shipment to other States. Consequently the
intensive training of all field personnel has been stressed dur-
ing the biennium in order that they might become familiar
with all aspects of inspection work and equipped to deal ade-
quately and promptly with any problems likely to arise in their
districts. Various schools and meetings for this purpose have






















'IT- W -V
io VW W




4. 0.
kip


40.r


Fig. 1.-Aerial view of citrus grove showing spreading decline injury






10 State Plant Board of Florida

been held at different times by the technical staff in cooperation
with the personnel of the Florida Agricultural Experiment Sta-
tion and the Florida Agricultural Extension Service. The es-
tablishment of a training district in the Winter Haven area has
contributed much to this project.
The sudden skyrocketing of spreading decline (caused by a
nematode, Radopholus similis (Cobb) Thorne), other maladies
due to nematodes, and virus diseases have made it necessary
to build up a technical staff capable of identifying these various
diseases and directing the application of control measures, as
well as training the men in the field. At the end of the biennium
the technical staff consisted of a citrus pathologist who has
spent much of his time identifying tristeza; two nematologists
working principally on the identification of nematodes, espe-
cially the one which causes spreading decline; five entomologists
who have worked on insect identification, insect surveys, and
various control programs, such as eradication of the stellate
scale; control and containment of the white-fringed beetle, im-
ported fire ant, and sweet potato weevil.
During 1953 a serious condition in the citrus groves of the
State long known as spreading decline was determined by mem-
bers of the Florida Citrus Experiment Station staff to be caused
by the burrowing namatode (Radopholus similis (Cobb)
Thorne). The State Plant Board began immediately a survey
to determine the extent of its spread, and at the end of the bien-
nium this work was well under way. More than 6,000 acres of
citrus groves had been destroyed or rendered valueless by the
pest, and all infected spots were creeping in every direction at
the rate of approximately fifty feet per year.
The treatment now recommended calls for pushing (remov-
ing) and burning all trees infested with the nematode, together
with at least two trees around them, and treating the soil with
a fumigant known as DD at the rate of 600 pounds per acre.
This treatment is expensive, the cost amounting to more than
$300 per acre.
Growers having healthy groves adjoining infested areas pull
two rows of trees immediately adjacent to the infested grove,
thus creating a barrier strip, and treat the soil annually at the
rate of 1,000 pounds of DD per acre as a protection against the
encroaching spread of the disease.
The burrowing nematode appears to be most damaging on
high, well-drained soils and, unless something is done to arrest






Twentieth Biennial Report


its spread or some less drastic method of treatment is found,
the State will be faced with losses running into untold millions
of dollars.
The nursery and cut flower industries of Florida are increas-
ing rapidly, bringing into the State revenue amounting to more
than $40,000,000 annually. The expansion of these industries
is bringing on an ever-increasing load of inspection work, and
the State Plant Board is striving to maintain a high standard
for the products that are constantly going to markets in other
States and countries.
One particular development during the biennium-relaxation
of foreign baggage examination by the Customs Service-has
caused the Plant Commissioner and members of his staff con-
siderable worry and strain. The State Plant Board has taken
a great deal of interest in this problem, and in fact it is rather
fully covered in the report of the Chairman which precedes this
report. The present situation, in the opinion of experts on the
subject, is a very dangerous one, and one that merits considera-
tion by every thinking citizen of the State. In December 1953
a conference was held at Miami, Florida to discuss the baggage
examination procedure as revised, which was participated in by
responsible Treasury Department officials, members of the Plant
Quarantine Branch, United States Department of Agriculture,
Plant Board staff members, Agricultural Experiment Station
staff members, and many people not only from Florida but from
other States who represented the agricultural industry in many
of its ramifications. Explanations and justifications were pre-
sented, statistics quoted, and discussions and arguments en-
gaged in, but largely to no avail. Although it is true that for-
eign baggage examination at Florida ports is now more thorough
than at some other ports, there still remains the fact that over
the nation as a whole much baggage is entering with no inspec-
tion whatever, thus affording opportunity for the entry of many
dangerous plant pests.
A statement with respect to the Board's resources and ex-
penditures for the biennium, with detailed reports on the activi-
ties of the several departments under the Plant Commissioner's
direction, follows:
RESOURCES
A statement with regard to funds available for the Board's
use during 1952-53 and 1953-54 as appropriated by the Legisla-
ture and released by the Budget Commission, follows:







State Plant Board of Florida


General Revenue 1952-53
Salaries
Balance Forward .......................$ 8,182.57
Current Appropriation ......--..... 303,500.00
Total Salaries ................ .....$311,682.57
Expense
Balance Forward .............--- ....$- 21,397.30
Current Appropriation ....-....... 113,500.00
Refunds .. .................... ..... 22,964.65
Total Expense ......-........................$157,861.95
Emergency .............--.. .................- $ 12,000.00
Total Emergency ............................$ 12,000.00
GRAND TOTAL ...................................$481,544.52


Total
1953-54 Biennum


$ .00
435,176.00
$435,176.00

$ .00
143,602.00
13,687.18
$157,289.18
$ 35,000.00
$ 35,000.00
$627,465.18


$ 8,182.57
738,676.00
$ 746,858.57

$ 21,397.30
257,102.00
36,651.83
$ 315,151.13
$ 47,000.00
$ 47,000.00
$1,109,009.70


EXPENDITURES
Expenditures of the Board for each year of the biennium
are shown in the following tables. Table No. 1 shows expendi-
tures by departments and Table No. 2 shows expenditures by
object classifications.
TABLE NO. 1


Department 1952-1953
Office of the Board ..--- ----..........- ----..... -...$ 5,475.42
Plant Commissioner's Office --....... ................. 43,107.41
Plant Inspection --................- -----.........----- 256,347.66
Quarantine Inspection ...................---------. .. 105,851.79
Entomology and Plant Pathology ........-............ 16,717.06
Apiary Inspection ............. .................. 31,459.87
Spreading Decline --......... ................... .. ... .00
Total -- .........- .- ...-...-- .... ..... ........... $458,959.21

TABLE NO. 2


Object Classification
Personal Services
Salaries -------------


1953-1954
$ '5,413.26
41,393.95
314,803.02
114,267.65
40,069.70
55,720.57
9,492.78
$581,160.93


1952-1953 1953-1954

---..........................$316,038.93 $412,810.08


Contractual Services
Communication and Transportation ......--.....$ $
General Printing ..........-.. ----... ......... ......
Repairs and Maintenance .....--..---... ....--.........--
T ravel ............ .............. ........ .............
Utilities - ---...... .........
Other Contractual Services --.........-------.............

Materials and Supplies
Clothing, Textile Products ..........------ ............... $
Building and Construction Materials and
Supplies .................... ........... .-- ....... ..
Educational, Medical, Scientific, and Agricul-
tural Materials and Supplies -........-..........-
Maintenance Materials and Supplies ...........
Motor Fuels and Lubricants .................--
Office Materials and Supplies ...........................
Other Materials and Supplies ...........................
$


2,970.89 $ 5,149.48
4,183.59 15,513.20
1,116.36 1,711.24
89,770.32 100,954.86
358.57 535.53
3,985.81 1,723.08
102,385.54 $125,587.39

41.43 $ 21.20

892.11 960.25

3,705.78 4,017.27
261.32 833.47
1,036.71 1,155.79
3,162.96 2,357.89
1,407.67 725.73
10,507.98 $ 10,071.60







Twentieth Biennial Report


Current Charges
Insurance and Surety Bonds ................................ $
Rental of Buildings and Equipment ................
Other Current Charges .....................................
$
Capital Outlay
B ooks ................ .... ....... ......... ... .... ....-.... .... $
Buildings and Fixed Equipment .........................
Educational, Medical, Scientific, and Agricul-
tural Equipment ............... ...........................
Motor Vehicles ................................ ............
Office Furniture and Equipment .........................
L and ............... ................. ..- ..- .......- .....-
Other Capital Outlay ......................~............-..

$
Non-Operating
Revolving Fund Establishment ..........................

Total, 1952-1953 ..... .. ........ ......................- ..
Total, 1953-1954 .. -.... ....--............... ... .. ...- .
Grand Total .......................................................


1,493.13 $ 2,439.85
660.94 372.24
.00 24.50
2,154.07 $ 2,836.59


410.95
.00

4,042.84
5,243.40
13,088.32
4,509.00
578.18
27,872.69


$ 372.46
9,850.07

10,652.13
989.93
5,488.79
450.00
51.89
$ 27,855.27


2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
.........................$458,959.21
...................-. $581,160.93
.....................$1,040,120.14


ESTIMATES

The Plant Commissioner presents herewith the estimates he
believes to be necessary to carry out the Board's activities in a
satisfactory manner during the two years of the biennium 1955-


Department
Office of the Board .......
Plant Commissioner's
Office ..........- ...
General Expense ........
Plant Inspection .........
Quarantine Inspection .
Entomology _.:....... ...
Plant Pathology .............
Apiary Inspection .........
T otal .........................


Office of the Board .........
Plant Commissioner's
Office .............. ...
General Expense .......
Plant Inspection ...........
Quarantine Inspection -
Entomology ...................
Plant Pathology .............
Apiary Inspection .........
Total ........ .. .....


1955-1956

Salaries Expenses
$ 5,400.00 $ 2,000.00


.31,160.00
.00
.306,660.00
.120,900.00
._ 45,960.00
S43,140.00
.44,760.00


9,300.00
39,000.00
89,000.00
19,500.00
13,000.00
10,800.00
25,600.00


Capital
Outlay
$ .00
3,000.00
.00
18,000.00
600.00
1,500.00
5,500.00
100.00


.$597,980.00 $208,200.00 $ 28,700.00


1956-1957
$ 5,600.00 $ 2,000.00


31,940.00
.00
S315,960.00
122,880.00
. 47,040.00
43,920.00
. 45,720.00
.$613,060.00


8,000.00
37,000.00
89,000.00
19,500.00
13,000.00
10,800.00
25,600.00
$204,900.00


Total
$ 7,400.00

43,460.00
39,000.00
413,660.00
141,000.00
60,460.00
59,440.00
70,460.00
$834,880.00


$ .00 $ 7,600.00


1.200.00
.00
4,500.00
500.00
1,100.00
2,200.00
100.00
$ 9,600.00


41,140.00
37,000.00
409,460.00
142,880.00
61,140.00
56,920.00
71,420 00
$827,560.00


* Current Operating Capital Outlay.






State Plant Board of Florida


PLANT INSPECTION DEPARTMENT
Joe N. Busby and Paul E. Frierson
Assistant Chief Plant Inspectors

REORGANIZATION OF GROVE AND NURSERY
INSPECTION DEPARTMENTS
During the first half of the biennium, the work of this de-
partment was divided between the Grove Inspection Department
and the Nursery Inspection Department. On July 1, 1953, these
two departments were combined into the Plant Inspection De-
partment, the integration being accomplished smoothly in about
six months' time. Growers and shippers continued to receive
all inspection services necessary for the conduct of their busi-
ness.
Under the Plant Inspection Department, the State is divided
into twenty-six districts, the boundaries following county lines,
highways, rivers, etc., where possible. At least one plant in-
spector, with headquarters located in the area, is assigned to
each district and is held responsible for all Plant Board inspec-
tion duties therein. Districts have as nearly equal work-loads
as practical, and those areas where concentrated inspection du-
ties are necessary have been allotted additional inspectors, with
one inspector designated as the supervisor. It is anticipated
that future adjustments will have to be made in district boun-
daries, or in personnel assigned to the districts, in order to
balance the work-load.
Under the plan of organization placed in effect July 1, 1953, the
plant inspector is responsible for all inspection and regulatory
work necessary for the protection of agriculture in his assigned
district. Since most of the districts are small in area, an inspec-
tor can usually return to headquarters at night. This has
greatly reduced the constant in-travel status for the inspector
which was necessary under the previous system. Since plant
inspectors now work alone, charges for mileage are greater
than before but costs to the Plant Board are approximately the
same.
Several advantages have become apparent from the reorgan-
ization. The morale of the field inspector is improved, due
primarily to his chance to lead a normal home life. Since the
inspector is responsible for all inspection in the district, his work
now covers a wide field and constantly presents him with new






Twentieth Biennial Report


problems, which tends to stimulate his interest and keep it high.
He now has an opportunity to become thoroughly familiar with
the district in which he works. He can be easily reached by
growers, shippers, and nurserymen who may require an inspec-
tion, and as a result it is possible for the Plant Board to give
quick, efficient service.
The qualifications for a plant inspector are necessarily rather
high, because of the varied fields included in this work. This
department prefers men with formal training in the fields of
entomology, horticulture, or plant pathology. Even though it
is possible to employ men who have had college training in the
fields mentioned, it is necessary to supplement their formal
education with on-the-job training in order to prepare them for
the responsibility of a district.
In order to provide the necessary supplemental training, a
Plant Inspection Training District was established in the Winter
Haven area, Polk County. All new men are required to spend
a certain amount of time in this district, where they are thor-
oughly trained in all phases of plant inspection. This pool of
trained men and trainees carries out the inspection services
needed in Polk County and provides the Plant Board with a few
men who can be called upon for emergency work in any area
without materially upsetting the system of districts. When an
inspector is needed for a district, it is possible to select the best
qualified man from the training district and move him into the
vacant position without reducing Plant Board services to the
growers and shippers.

NURSERY INSPECTION
From the most reliable sources available, it is estimated that
the annual value of nursery and cut flower industry products
grown in Florida exceeds $40,000,000. This industry is grow-
ing rapidly in the State, and the State Plant Board must pro-
vide an adequate inspection service for these growers. At the
beginning of the biennium, July 1, 1952, there were 3,205 nurs-
eries under inspection, and on June 30, 1954 this number had
increased to 3,998 or 24 percent. During the same period, the
volume of nursery stock under inspection at the time of inven-
tory increased from 115,051,248 plants to 168,416,878 plants.
It is anticipated that the number of nurseries will continue to
increase about 10 percent each year, at least for the next few
years.







State Plant Board of Florida


In addition to the nurseries kept under regular inspection by
the State Plant Board, there is an ever-increasing volume of
plants and cut flowers which must be inspected in order to meet
certification requirements of certain other States and foreign
countries. These include tomato, tobacco, and cabbage plants;
gladiolus and chrysanthemum cut flowers; and a number of
varieties of bulbous plants. During the year 1952-1953, 554
such inspections were made for 178 growers, covering a total
of 484,161,300 miscellaneous bulbs and plants. For the year
ending June 30, 1954, 782 inspections were made for 379 grow-
ers, and covered 471,162,549 bulbs and plants.
The average number of inspections made per nursery per
year dropped from 3.2 to 2.4 during the biennium. This re-
sulted from increased nursery inspection work, necessary in-
sect and disease surveys, increased citrus fruit certifications,
and insect eradication work that required thousands of man-
hours, a large part of which had to be provided for from regular
inspection time.
Nursery inspection activities are summarized in Tables I, II,
and III.
TABLE I
Citrus Stock Movement As Compared with Two Previous Years

Variety 1951-1952 1952-1953 1953-1954

Orange ..... ...........-..... ..... .... 669,216 751,848 1,184,494
Grapefruit .......................... ...... 209,318 211,919 153,278
Tangerine ................................... 18,974 13,529 41,491
Tangelo .-- .......... 25,453 34,752
Satsuma .. ........ -..... 18,346 16,263 12,704
Lemon ......... -.... ............... 7,942 8,521 31,363
Lime ......... .............. ... 22,935 35,235 89,061
Miscellaneous Citrus .............- 39,705 36,712 37,581
Citrus Seedlings ......... ......... .... 1,595,127 1,323,922 609,511
Total ......................... ............. 2,581,563 2,423,402 2,194,235

Tangelos were included in Miscellaneous Citrus for 1951-1952.

GROVE INSPECTION
The State Plant Board made as complete a coverage of the
citrus groves as possible during this biennium. Citrus trees
were inspected carefully for infectious diseases such as citrus
canker and dangerous insect pests such as the Mediterranean
and Oriental fruit flies. In order that the tremendous acreages






Twentieth Biennial Report


of new groves in some areas might be properly mapped and in-
spected with the expenditure of the minimum of time and effort,
inspectors were provided with jeeps, which are ideal for travel
through groves and over rough or unpaved roads. Plant Board
records are reasonably accurate and up to date, thus facilitating
the inauguration of regulatory work in citrus plantings should
it become necessary.


Fig. 2.-A typical, well-kept small Florida nursery


This
nium:


department inspected trees as follows during the bien-


July 1, 1952-June 30, 1953 ..
July 1, 1953-June 30, 1954
T otal .......... ....... ......


........... ....-..- 21,727,102
....-.........- ... 14,496,046
..- -- ----------... 36,223,148


This routine coverage does not include trees inspected in other
surveys or projects described in this report.

SPREADING DECLINE SURVEY

For approximately thirty years there has existed in the citrus
groves of Florida a condition variously known as decline, creep-
ing decline, spreading decline, etc. A great many observations








TABLE II
Approximate Acreage and Amount of Nursery Stock, June 30,
As Compared with the Two Previous Years


Kind of Stock 1951-1952 1952-1953 1953-1954
I Acres Plants Acres Plants Acres Plants

Orange ........................................ 634.91 1,986,388 719.92 2,522,803 932.89 3,951,542
Grapefruit ........................ 160.38 449,680 232.52 874,868 286.17 1,012,045
Tangerine ...............-... ........... 19.66 53,974 36.99 87,068 32.52 128,439
Tangelo ...................................... 17.98 66,638 30.27 109,047
Satuma ............................ 9.46 54,782 22.61 96,709 25.98 151,960
Lemon ......................... .... 5.39 10,216 12.38 21,606 21.46 70,734
Lime ............................. 13.97 97,841 18.15 95,180 28.86 140,006
Miscellaneous Citrus ............. 82.98 180,341 59.65 343,954 42.44 169,859
Citrus Seedlings ................... 387.43 6,373,046 395.09 4,958,651 502.74 6,710,717


Total Citrus ..--.................... ...... 1,314.18 9,206,268 1,515.29 9,067,477 1,903.33 12,444,349
Ornamentals ** ............... ........ ....... 4,040.14 154,591,214
General ** ............................................... 313.41 1,381,315


Total Non-Citrus ........................ 4,418.66 79,914,980 4,928.64 89,125,373 4,353.55 155,972,529


Grand Total ................................. 5,732.84 89,121,248 6,443.93 98,192,850 6,256.88 168,416,878

Tangelos were included with Miscellaneous Citrus until the 1952-1953 Inventory.
** General and ornamental nursery stock figures were combined until 1953-1954. (Ferns, Miscellaneous Bulbs and Plants, etc., are not included in the
above figures.)










TABLE III
Miscellaneous Bulbs and Plants Inspected (Not Classified as Nursery Stock)
July 1, 1952 to June 30, 1954

1952-1953 1953-1954
Variety No. No. Plants No. No. Plants
Farms Acreage or Bulbs Farms Acreage or Bulbs

Am aryllis .............................. .................... 19 101.45 2,058,300 23 163.49 7,671,513
Caladium .................... ... ...................... 29 142.02 9,822,000 47 195.95 10,125,050
Chrysanthemum ............. .......... .... ........ ........ 19 29.30 7,512,000
Gladiolus ........ ...... ..... ................ 29 4,644.00 212,527,000 42 3,217.03 139,799,000
Easter lily .............. ............ -... ...... 8 14.00 246,000 11 15.78 403,986
Ferns ** ............................................... ...... ....... ........ 44 248.32 13,990,100
Hemerocallis ......................................... ... 9 2.41 240,000 24 9.46 114,700
Narcissus ....................................... ... 1 40.00 8,000,000 2 50.00 13,006,000
Miscellaneous Bulbs and Plants ............... 22 17.73 937,000 61 40.32 2,256,200
Cabbage ............... .................................. 1 62.00 30,200,000 2 28.50 19,000,000
Tobacco ................................................... .... 22 137.33 74,400,000 18 150.12 53,180,000
Tomato .............................................. 38 1,647.89 145,731,000 86 4,469.68 204,104,000


Totals .......................................- 178 6,808.83 484,161,300 379 8,617.95 471,162,549

Very few chrysanthemums were inspected in 1952-1953 and they were included in Miscellaneous Bulbs and Plants.
In 1952-1953, ferns were included in Nursery Stock figures.
















-:


I .. ..



4 .. .. 4' N-. .. -^- .


Fig. 3.-Typical injury to grapefruit tree by spreading decline


-t~j~c


;I
_ Ir `iJ
IB~-bL~J h


tO
0








C/3
(-I-
-, a



0

0


S
cc
5'l




a.
S5







Twentieth Biennial Report


have been made and experiments carried on by the Citrus Ex-
periment Station at Lake Alfred, Florida to determine its cause.
The conclusion was finally reached by Dr. R. F. Suit and Dr.
E. P. DuCharme, of the Station staff, that this condition was
caused by a tropical nematode known as the burrowing nema-
tode (Radopholus similis (Cobb) Thorne).
Subsequent to the discovery of the cause of this disease, a
committee of growers, production managers, and industry lead-
ers requested the State Plant Board to start a survey to deter-
mine the dissemination of this nematode. Many growers were
anxious to remove affected trees and fumigate the infested soil
in order to protect healthy portions of the grove or contiguous
properties. The job of establishing a line of demarcation be-
tween trees to be pulled (removed) and those to remain could
not be done by Experiment Station workers without seriously
impairing the research work so essential to the industry. The
Citrus Experiment Station agreed to provide laboratory space,
and the Plant Board assumed the responsibility for the field
survey and all routine identification. The State Budget Com-
mission released $35,000 in emergency funds on January 1,
1954 to augment this work on spreading decline.
Technical personnel and the laboratory for processing root
samples collected by plant inspectors were obtained as soon as
possible. All plant inspectors were trained in the proper methods
of collecting and handling burrowing nematode samples. By
the middle of February 1954 plant inspectors were able to begin
spreading decline survey work and grove mapping for those
growers who planned to pull and treat or establish barriers.
A report of the spreading decline survey for the period Jan-
uary 1, 1954 through June 30, 1954, is listed as follows:
Individual properties inspected ....................... ....... 418
Individual properties mapped ........................................ 126
Groves positive for the burrowing nematode ........... 100
Positive soil samples ................... ....---- ... ......- 320
N negative soil sam ples ....................................... .............. 1,441

Although research workers had some definite theories on
the primary means of dissemination of the burrowing nema-
tode, no definite proof of the manner of spread had been estab-
lished. On April 16, 1954, plant inspectors surveyed a grove
near Sebring that indicated the spread of this pest on nursery
stock. Subsequent investigations proved this to be the case,
and immediate action was taken to obtain samples from citrus






State Plant Board of Florida


nurseries. By June 30, 1954, inspectors had collected samples
from 43 citrus nurseries in Polk and Highlands Counties. Of
this number, 8 nurseries were found to be infested with the
burrowing nematode and immediately placed under quarantine.
It is anticipated that this phase of the survey will be expanded
as rapidly as possible during the coming fiscal year.
Spreading decline appears to be one of the most serious
threats to the Florida citrus industry since the invasion of the
State by citrus canker. Records compiled by Dr. Suit and by
the Plant Board survey show the burrowing nematode to be
present in Polk, Highlands, Orange, Lake, and Hillsborough
Counties. As the survey is extended, the nematode will un-
doubtedly be found widely disseminated. The fact that this
disease was present some twenty-five years prior to the discov-
ery of the causal agent means that the pest is thoroughly en-
trenched in the State's citrus groves. At present, eradication
of the burrowing nematode appears to be an impossible task.
However, it is considered essential that the Plant Board push
this survey in order that as much as possible may be learned
about the nematode and its distribution. If the movement of
the burrowing nematode can be retarded through quarantines
or other measures until research workers can develop a satis-
factory control, a great service to the industry will have been
performed.
CITRUS SURVEY
The State Plant Board carried out a pilot study in Highlands
County, which was designed to determine the feasibility of a
state-wide survey of all citrus groves. This study was done in
close cooperation with Mr. J. C. Townsend, Agricultural Statis-
tician, United States Agricultural Marketing Service, and mem-
bers of his staff. The University of Florida Agricultural Eco-
nomics Department and Statistical Laboratory worked with and
advised the Plant Board on the project.
The information desired on this survey included all major
factors influencing production such as rootstock, age, tree spac-
ing, vacancies, non-bearing resets, tree counts by variety and
condition of the grove with respect to disease. This informa-
tion was obtained by a tree-by-tree inspection made from jeeps,
where possible. Such information obtained in the field was
easily coded and punched on IBM cards. The collected data
were then easily summarized and analyzed, and provided a con-
venient file for reference.






Twentieth Biennial Report


The results of this study indicated that a state-wide survey
giving a complete inventory of the citrus industry would be
possible and entirely practical. Acting on this basis, a com-
mittee appointed by Florida Citrus Mutual proceeded to try to
raise funds to make the survey possible. At the end of the
biennium, $62,500 had been committed by the industry and this
amount was matched by the United States Department of Agri-
culture under the Research and Marketing Act. The Plant In-
spection Department expects to spend on this project that part
of the budget normally used for grove inspection, and it should
begin by September 1954.
A number of benefits should accrue to the industry from this
survey, such as: more accurate crop estimates, particularly
early in the season; accurate long-range forecasts of production
for five-year periods; accurate records on losses from diseases;
aid to growers in the selection of future varieties; an estimate
of trees needed by nurserymen for replacement purposes. The
survey will also point up the research priorities needed. Many
other benefits will undoubtedly come to light after the survey
is available to the industry.
Members of the industry and others advising the Plant Board
on the project were quick to point out the need for an accurate
inventory to keep the basic survey up to date. This would pre-
vent the information obtained from becoming obsolete and
guarantee its continued usefulness to the industry. Present
estimates indicate that the Plant Inspection Department would
need about eight additional inspectors in order to keep the
survey current by a coverage once in two years.

CITRUS BUDWOOD CERTIFICATION
Citrus growers and nurserymen continued to show a keen in-
terest in the Citrus Budwood Certification Program established
in 1952 to enable the growers to obtain a source of budwood free
from several serious virus diseases known to be generally dis-
tributed in Florida. On June 30, 1954, there were forty-one
participants in this Program, having 597 trees under test, and
ninety-five trees yet to be selected for testing. These partici-
pants are located in fourteen counties.
Since this Program was started, twenty-four trees under test
have been dropped because of the development of prohibited dis-
ease symptoms in the trees under test, in adjacent trees, or in the
nursery test trees. If additional trees are not lost because of






State Plant Board of Florida


the appearance of disease symptoms, 302 trees will be eligible
for registration following the spring flush inspection in 1955.
Ten nurseries are now producing 21,926 progeny nursery trees
from parent trees to be registered in 1955. Most of these young
trees being produced for certification will be planted by the pro-
ducers and will not reach commercial channels. It will prob-
ably be several years before certified citrus trees will be available
to all who want them.













R-_

-:Z "j


7




Fig. 4.-The State Plant Board citrus budwood certification nursery
at Winter Haven

A great many man-hours of labor went into the inspection
for the selection of candidate trees entered in this Program.
Often thousands of trees must be carefully examined to find one
tree suitable to enter for registration. These trees must then be
reinspected and budwood selected from them for the nursery
test trees. The trees in the test nursery are inspected regu-
larly by Plant Board inspectors and pathologists.

TRISTEZA

The presence of tristeza in Florida was discovered by Dr. T.
J. Grant, of the United States Department of Agriculture, in







Twentieth Biennial Report


the spring of 1952. By July 1, 1952, the State Plant Board had
organized an intensive survey to determine the extent of this
disease in Florida, its destructiveness, and its rate of spread.
By September 1952, all field inspectors had been trained in the
recognition of tristeza and in sampling techniques, a laboratory
for identification work had been established, and the actual sur-
vey started.
All of the major citrus-producing areas were inspected for
tristeza by June 30, 1953. Inspections were continued through
the remainder of the biennium on a request basis, as a service
to the growers. Many of the areas that suffered extensive
losses were carefully inspected and the groves watched for
signs of rapid spread. Plant inspectors mapped an area in
Orange County where high tree mortality due to tristeza oc-
curred. This area was platted in July 1952 and thereafter at
six-month intervals. The tristeza survey in this biennium lo-
cated the presence of the virus in 29 citrus-producing counties.
Inspectors submitted 2,884 bark samples to the laboratory for
identification, several representative samples from each sus-
pected property being included. Of this number, 1,470 samples
were rated positive and 168 samples possible, for tristeza. A
total of 1,071 properties were definitely determined to be in-
fected with the disease. Dr. Grant cooperated with plant in-
spectors and with Dr. Mortimer Cohen, of the Plant Board
laboratory, in testing trees from each area for transmission of
the virus to Key lime indicator plants. Budwood from suspect
trees transmitted the virus in 71 Key lime-test plants, giving
a double check on the presence of tristeza. Dr. Grant and Dr.
J. F. L. Childs, also of the United States Department of Agri-
culture, observed that the presence of the tristeza virus in
Tahiti lime caused characteristic leaf patterns. Inspections for
such leaf patterns brought to light the presence of the virus on
approximately twenty properties.
An immense number of man-hours were devoted to the com-
pletion of the tristeza survey, as the field inspection required
a close tree-by-tree check and the taking and processing of
bark samples from suspect trees. The Department's field force
did an outstanding job of locating the virus disease in all areas
within such a short period of time.
The results of the survey indicated that a mild strain of virus
causing tristeza had been present in Florida for many years.
The disease was so widely disseminated that quarantines or






State Plant Board of Florida


eradication measures were entirely impractical. Most areas
were apparently infected by nursery stock budded from infected
budwood.
There were some indications of spread by insects, but no
areas of rapid spread and decline, such as have been observed
in South America, were found. Results of this survey aided
research agencies in making practical recommendations to grow-
ers for control of the disease. In addition, information regard-
ing the survey findings was channeled to growers through
county agents.
The State Plant Board will continue to watch this disease
closely for any indications of rapid spread of an epidemic na-
ture. Plant inspectors are continually on the lookout for the
brown citrus aphid (Aphis citricidus (Kirk.)), which has been
the efficient vector of tristeza in many areas of the world where
severe damage occurred. This insect is not known to occur in
Florida, and every effort should be made to prevent its introduc-
tion and establishment.

FRUIT CERTIFICATION
Citrus-producing States within the United States and many
foreign countries have placed in effect regulations governing
the entry of citrus fruit. This means that all fruit processed
for export must be inspected as it is packed and a certificate
issued showing the percentage infested with insect pests and
infected with diseases; and that fruit destined for Arizona and
California must be inspected and fumigated under the super-
vision of a plant inspector. The State Plant Board has been
designated as the certifying agency in Florida. Each year fruit
shippers have continued to expand these markets that require
certification, with the result that this phase of inspection proved
quite a burden during the past fiscal year. Continued expan-
sion of these markets will necessitate the addition of inspectors
to several districts in order to handle efficiently the work in-
volved. During the biennium citrus fruit was certified for in-
terstate shipment and export as shown in the tabulations on
page 27.

STELLATE SCALE
A scale-insect new to Florida was found attacking thin-
leaved varieties of orchids in a large nursery at Naranja, Dade
County, on September 28, 1953, and again on April 20, 1954,







Twentieth Biennial Report


in another large nursery at Miami, by C. E. Shepard, Plant
Inspector of the State Plant Board. This insect was identified
by G. B. Merrill, Chief Entomologist, State Plant Board, as
stellate scale (Vinsonia stellifera (Westw.)), a pest known to
attack a wide range of hosts throughout the tropical and sub-
tropical world.
California Certification


Grapefruit ..................... ...
Oranges ..................................
Tangerines .............................
Tangelos ...................... .........
Temple Oranges .....................
Limes .................... ..... ............
Mixed Citrus .................. .......


Totals


1952-1953 1953-1954
S Standard Boxes Standard Boxes

83,603.6 93,525.8
471 2,246
7,298 11,344
732.5 5,456
6,284 3,576.5
10,201.4 10,315.8
10 ...
J______________


.....- .....- .. ............... 108,600.5 126,464.1


Export Shipments

1 1952-1953 1953-1954
Standard Boxes Standard Boxes


Oranges .............. ................... 107,767 858,506
Grapefruit -.......... ................... 39,930 107,167.5

Totals ................................ 147,697 965,673.5


Investigation of these infestations revealed that the Miami
nursery became infested through orchid plants brought in by
the owner from Puerto Rico in 1953. The plants were inspected
and certified in Puerto Rico but were not fumigated. The nurs-
ery at Naranja had brought in plants from all over the world,
almost all of which had been fumigated, and nothing definite
was learned as to the probable source of the infestation.
Since stellate scale was known to cause considerable damage
to orchids and coconut palms in other areas and had been re-
ported to attack citrus, mango, and several other tropical fruit
and ornamental plants, eradication was deemed advisable before
the insect became widely disseminated. The Plant Commissioner
directed that eradication and survey work be started as promptly
as possible, following the procedure outlined below:







State Plant Board of Florida


1. Quarantining of infested nurseries.
2. A plant-by-plant inspection of all host plants in each infested
nursery; isolation of infested from uninfested plants.
3. All host plants within the infested properties to receive at least
three applications of Parathion by spraying or dipping at about
15-day intervals under the supervision of a Plant Board entomologist.
4. Plant-by-plant reinspections of all host plants in infested properties,
and additional spraying or dipping when necessary; infested proper-
ties remaining under continuous supervision of a Plant Board inspec-
tor until released from quarantine.
5. Tracing and inspection by Plant Board inspectors of host plants
moved within the State from infested properties during the year
immediately preceding quarantine, when there seemed to have been
danger of spread from such movement.
6. Thorough inspection for stellate scale of host plants, particularly
orchids, in all nurseries during regular inspections.


Fig. 5.-State Plant Board inspectors examining orchids in South
Florida for stellate scale

This procedure was followed on the two infested properties
with very good results. The last live stellate scale was found
in the Naranja nursery on February 17, 1954, less than thirty
days following the first application of insecticide. The Miami
nursery was first sprayed on April 27, 1954, and the last live
scale observed on June 25, 1954. The infested plants in this
nursery will receive three additional applications of Parathion






Twentieth Biennial Report


at thirty-day intervals, and regular inspections until free of this
insect.
Although thousands of plants shipped from the Naranja nurs-
ery have been traced and inspected, not a single plant has been
found infested. The infested plants in the Miami nursery were
not mixed with the plants being moved from the property.
It is anticipated that quarantines will be removed from in-
fested properties when repeated inspections for a period of six
months fail to reveal any live stellate scale present. Plant in-
spectors will continue to observe the infested properties for a
year or two, however.
The danger of the importation of this pest is much less today
than before discovery in Florida, due to the cooperation of the
regulatory officials of the United States Department of Agri-
culture and of Puerto Rico. At the request of the Department
of Agriculture, following complaints by the State Plant Board,
Puerto Rican officials ordered all orchids destined for the main-
land fumigated before shipment.

GOLDEN NEMATODE SURVEY
The golden nematode (Heterodera rostochiensis Wollenweber)
has long been one of the most serious potato pests in northern
European countries and in the British Isles. In recent years,
it has been found in Spain, Mexico, and Peru. In 1941 it was
found attacking potatoes in a small area on Long Island, New
York, and in 1951 a very similar species was found attacking
tobacco in Connecticut. The United States Department of Agri-
culture Golden Nematode Project, assisted by the various States,
has been making periodic surveys in the potato, tomato, and to-
bacco growing sections of the country to determine if golden
nematode has become established in any new areas.
Several surveys of potato and tomato fields have been made
in Florida since 1949. Between April 1 and 15, 1953, the first
survey was made of tobacco fields in the State. The State Plant
Board and the United States Department of Agriculture survey
teams collected 836 samples of soil representing 998.5 acres of
tobacco. No golden nematodes were found in the samples taken.
Between February 23 and May 14, 1954, the United States
Department of Agriculture and the State Plant Board made the
most comprehensive golden nematode survey ever attempted in
Florida. A total of 4,700 soil samples were processed repre-
senting 24,418 acres of potatoes collected in the Counties of







State Plant Board of Florida


Alachua, Dade, Flagler, Lee, Putnam, and St. Johns. The State
Plant Board put 980 man-hours into this survey.

Summary of Golden Nematode Survey Activities in 1954
Grader Grader Field Field
County Acreage Samples Acreage Samples

Alachua ................ 400 40 34 23
Dade ...................... 5,225 639 1,551 1,149
Flagler .................. 2,580 258 189 120
Lee ........................ 846 210 464 495
Putnam ................ 2,560 256 403 300
St. Johns .............. 9,830 983 336 227

21,441 2,386 2,977 2,314


Total acreage surveyed .........................................
Total samples collected ............................................
Golden nematodes found in samples ........................


24,418
4,700
O


No golden nematodes were found during this survey. There
are listed below a number of other nematode cysts recovered
from the Florida soil samples:


Group or Species Collection Number Location

schacktii group .................. JAW-5, 6 Fort Myers
Heterodera sp. ................... JAW-5, 6 Fort Myers
cacti-weissi group .............. JAW-14, 21, 24 Goulds
cacti-weissi group .............. JTK-98, 99, 126 Goulds
cacti group .......................... JAW-37; JTK-120 Princeton
cacti-weissi group .............. JAW-50 Homestead
cacti-weissi group .............. JTK-83 Fort Myers
cacti-weissi group .............. JTK-108, 109 West Miami
cacti-weissi group ............ RNG-6 Miami
Heterodera sp. ................. RNG-38 East Palatka
cacti-weissi group .............. RNG-54 Spuds
schachtii group .................... RNG-14 East Palatka
schachtii group .................... JAW-99 Hastings
schachtii group .................... LSW-11 Hastings


COCONUT DISEASE

In September 1952, the Dade County Park Department com-
municated with Dr. Floyd S. Shuttleworth, Assistant Professor
of Botany, University of Miami, Miami, Florida concerning an
unusual number of dead and dying coconut palms in Crandon
Park on Key Biscayne. Dr. Shuttleworth made an examination






Twentieth Biennial Report


of the island and found approximately 2,200 dead palms, some
1,200 in Crandon Park.
The apparent seriousness of the condition resulted in a con-
ference early in October 1952 at Park Headquarters on Key
Biscayne. Representatives of the United States Department of
Agriculture, the State Plant Board, the University of Miami,
the University of Florida, the Park Departments of Dade
County, Miami, Coral Gables, and Miami Beach, and Key
Biscayne property owners were present. It was agreed at
that time that the trouble resembled Phytophthora bud rot, a
disease that had occurred on the island in 1924, although the
symptoms were not always typical. No young trees were found
affected. The 1924 outbreak resulted in an intensive control
campaign by the State Plant Board, the Agricultural Experi-
ment Station, and the United States Department of Agriculture.
The disease had not been identified in the State since that time.
Following the conference referred to above, the Dade County
Park Department cut and destroyed all dead coconut palms on
city property. At the request of the State Plant Board, the
Park Department and all large property owners having coconut
trees or nurseries on Key Biscayne agreed not to move any
coconut plants from the island without approval of the Board.
Dr. Shuttleworth, Dr. G. F. Gravatt, Senior Pathologist,
United States Department of Agriculture, Dr. Robert Conover,
Pathologist, Agricultural Experiment Station, and Dr. L. Carl
Knorr, Pathologist, State Plant Board, tried to determine the
cause of this trouble. Hundreds of isolations were made from
diseased trees. A large number of fungi and bacteria were
isolated from the diseased material but none thought to be the
cause of the trouble. No Phytophthora has been found to be
associated with the trouble by any of the investigators.
By April 1954, the problem seemed no nearer solution. At
this time the investigators indicated that the trouble probably
was not Phytophthora bud rot, as was at first suspected. Conse-
quently, on April 8, 1954 all restrictions on the movement of
coconut trees from Key Biscayne to the mainland were removed.
Observations will be continued on the island with the hope that
the cause of the trouble can be definitely determined.

TOMATO PLANT INSPECTION
Florida produces about one quarter of a billion tomato plants
annually that are inspected by the State Plant Board for ship-







State Plant Board of Florida


ment to other States, principally to Georgia and Virginia. The
majority of these plants are grown in Marion County, although
some inspections are made in Putnam, Lake, Polk, Orange,
Indian River, and other counties.
Most of the tomato regulations promulgated by other States
are designed to prevent the introduction of late blight, a highly
contagious and destructive fungus disease. Since the disease
develops very rapidly under favorable weather conditions,
Georgia, for example, requires that the inspection of tomato
plants destined for that State be made not more than three days
prior to shipment. Consequently, two inspectors must be as-
signed full time and a third inspector part time to the Marion
County area during March and April each year. The inspectors
assigned to the other areas in the State have usually been able
to make the necessary inspections without assistance, but only
by working more than forty hours per week. This industry will
increase in Florida as the tomato acreage increases in other
States now being supplied from the early spring-grown Florida
plants.
WHITE-FRINGED BEETLE
One full-time plant inspector is assigned to the White-Fringed
Beetle Control Project, with headquarters in Florala, Alabama.
The State Plant Board cooperates with the United States De-
partment of Agriculture in enforcing the Federal White-Fringed
Beetle Quarantine in Escambia, Holmes, Santa Rosa, Okaloosa,
Walton, and Jackson Counties. The plant inspector assigned to
this area inspects infested areas and enforces quarantine regula-
tions designed to contain this pest.

FIRE ANT SURVEY AND CONTROL
The imported fire ant, Solenopsis saevissima richteri Forel,
has become established in several nurseries in the St. Augustine,
Jacksonville, and Fernandina areas. Since this pest can be car-
ried in balled nursery stock and spread to other areas, a survey
was made of nurseries and adjacent properties to detect possible
new infestations. The ant nests discovered were treated with
chlordane and the locations of the nests indicated on a map.
This pest is under the observation of the Entomology Depart-
ment, and additional control measures will be taken if neces-
sary.






Twentieth Biennial Report


PINE BARK BEETLE SURVEY
Timber and pulpwood growers in Clay, Duval, Flagler, Put-
nam, St. Johns, and Volusia Counties sustained estimated losses
of 23,000,000 board feet of slash and longleaf pine during the
period 1950-1952. These losses were caused by attacks of the
black turpentine beetle (Dendroctonus terebrans (Oliv.)) and
bark beetles (Ips spp.). The Plant Inspection Department co-
operated with a United States Department of Agriculture For-
est Insect Investigations survey team in May 1953 to determine
the status of this problem.
The State Plant Board assigned two inspectors, provided with
a jeep, to assist in this survey. The survey teams cruised
twenty-six representative plots one hundred percent. The re-
sults indicated that beetle infestations had declined to an en-
demic stage and that no control measures were necessary.

INSPECTION OF THE FLORIDA KEYS
The State Plant Board completed the eradication of the citrus
blackfly from the Island of Key West in 1937. Since that time,
systematic inspections have been made of Key West and the
other Keys to the mainland in order to determine that the pest
has not become re-established.
During the period May 18-June 26, 1953, seven plant inspec-
tors made a thorough check of the islands. The results of the
survey were negative in so far as serious pests, such as the
citrus blackfly and fruit flies, were concerned. The inspectors
collected a huge number of tropical insects to be added to the
Plant Board's collection. This will be of assistance to the En-
tomology Department in its insect identification work.






State Plant Board of Florida


QUARANTINE INSPECTION DEPARTMENT

W. H. Merrill, Chief Quarantine Inspector

Plant quarantine activities for the biennium show an increase
over previous years. This increase is due in part to the interna-
tional movement of passengers and commodities by airplane.
Trade from the West Indies, Central and South America, Eu-
rope, India, and Africa enters and clears Florida ports on regular
schedule. Foreign plant products arrive in baggage, cargo, air
express, mail, stores, and in quarters of vessels and airplanes.
State quarantine inspectors hold appointments as Agents of
the Plant Quarantine Branch, United States Department of
Agriculture, with authority to enforce Federal plant quaran-
tines. The services of the Board's twenty plant quarantine in-
spectors, together with those of six full-time United States De-
partment of Agriculture inspectors, are utilized in port quaran-
tine work. Five Federal inspectors are stationed at Miami and
one at West Palm Beach. Stenographic service is furnished by
the Plant Quarantine Branch for the Board's offices at Jackson-
ville, Miami, and Tampa. The Plant Quarantine Branch oper-
ates at Miami a Federal Inspection House, where imported plants
and some plant products are sent for inspection, or inspection
and treatment, before release to the trade or to the individual
importer.
Inspectors are stationed at Key West, Miami, Port Everglades,
West Palm Beach, Tampa, Jacksonville, and Pensacola. Incom-
ing vessels and planes from foreign countries arrive at eight
ports and seventeen airfields in Florida, all approved ports of
entry. Inspection of plants and plant products arriving is made
possible with the limited personnel available by working in close
cooperation with the Customs Service, Public Health, and other
agencies held responsible for proper clearance of foreign traffic.
During the period covered by this report, hundreds of insect
pests and plant diseases, many of which could become of eco-
nomic importance if once established in this country, were inter-
cepted from fruit, plants, and plant products. Larvae of the
Mediterranean fruit fly and of fruit flies belonging to the genus
Anastrepha were collected forty-eight times in hosts, including
orange and grapefruit, that are produced in abundance in Flor-
ida. The fruit from which the insects were collected originated
in two European, four South American, six Middle American,







Twentieth Biennial Report


and five West Indian countries. Many other insect pests and
plant diseases of equal economic importance were intercepted
in and on plant material coming to Florida from many parts of
the world.
Preventing the entry of fruit fly hosts from all countries
where the insects are known to exist is of paramount importance.
Fifty-three percent of the pests collected was found in plant
materials at the time of examination of baggage and hand par-
cels carried by travelers prior to entering the State. Forty-
seven percent of intercepted pests was collected in materials
in stores and quarters of ships and planes and in cargo and in-
coming mail.
Although many important interceptions of major pests were
made at the ports of entry, this does not represent the true value
of the service rendered. The fact that there is a line of defense
acts as a deterrent. Many travelers and shippers willingly com-
ply with the requirements regarding the bringing in of plants,
fruits, and vegetables from foreign countries. If there had been
no restrictions in effect, it is safe to say that Florida and the
country as a whole would have been flooded with foreign pest
invaders long ago. With the large volume of international traf-
fic, which is increasing yearly, there is danger ahead even with
the vigilance now exercised at the ports of entry.
The several tables following depict in part the volume of work
performed by the Quarantine Department inspectors during the
biennium:
TABLE I
Number of Parcels of Plants and Plant Products Handled
(Arriving by Ship, Airplane, Express, Freight, and Mail)

1952-1953 1953-1954

Passed ....................... .......................... 4,686,795* 5,149,395*
Treated and passed .............................. 483 957
Cleaned and passed ........................... 2,061,389** 2,116,904**
Returned to shipper ........................... 84 22
Returned to stores ............................... .50,418 80,164
Contraband destroyed ........................ 10,422 13,667
Diverted to Inspection Houses ............... 688 532

Total ....................... ... ... ..-- .--- 6,810,279 7,361,641

Includes containers of cucumbers, tomatoes, pineapples, okra, and other vegetables
and fruits from foreign countries.
** Consists mostly of bunches of bananas.







State Plant Board of Florida


TABLE II
Record of Inspections of Aircraft, Watercraft,

STotal Number Aircraft and
Year Watercraft Arriving
SPlanes Vessels

1195-953 .... 23,127 5,418

1953-1954 ...... 25,019 5,676


Passengers, and Baggage

Total
Total Number
Number Pieces of
Passengers Baggage

416,191 1,161,240

429,728 1,172,564


TABLE III
Number Containers Domestic Agricultural Products Certified for Export to
Foreign Countries and United States Possessions


Number 1 Number of Containers Certified
Year of Ship- Fruits I Bulbs,
ments and Vege- Cut Plants Seeds,
tables Flowers Misc.**

1952-1953 3,764 69,407 5,726 1,628 54,856

1953-1954 3,294 401,712 5,056 2,416 21,219
Bag, sack, basket, hamper, box, crate, lug
** Grass cuttings, cotton lint, dry beans


Total
Con-
tainers

131,617

430,403


TABLE IV
Number of Containers and Units of Plant Material from Puerto Rico
Number Number
Year of of
Containers Plant Units *

1952-1953 ............. -------------... ..-- 2,075 598,507

1953-1954 ....... ....... --.. --.. --. --- -- 1,590 629,769
Includes plants, cuttings, canes, and eyes of Aglaonema, Dieffenbachia, Dracaena, Philo-
dendron, Pothos, Sansevieria, miscellaneous foliage plants. Other plants: Aralia, Caladium,
Fieus, crotons, orchids.

TABLE V
Number Shipments and Plant Units Destined to Florida Received or
Diverted to Federal Inspection Houses (Brownsville and Laredo, Texas;
Hoboken, New Jersey; Miami, Florida; San Francisco, California; San
Juan, Puerto Rico; and Washington, D. C.), Inspected and Released,
or Treated and Released
I Number Number
Number of Number of
Year of Shipments of Pounds of
Shipments Treated Plant Units Seeds


1952-1953 ... .. 621 578

1953-1954 --... 617 534


154,685 1,864

62,448 1,483







Twentieth Biennial Report


TABLE VI
California Citrus Fruit Entering Florida under Permit and Inspection
Requirements at Delivery Point
SNumber
Kind Number Number of
Year of of of Cartons
Fruit Shipments Boxes ('/2 Box)

1952-1953 ... Lemons 317 61,474 172,248
*Oranges ...... ---
1953-1954 .... Lemons 313 34,730 310,992
Oranges 2 ..... 350

On March 18, 1954, the State Plant Board amended Rule 30, relating to the entry of
California and Arizona citrus fruits, to admit oranges under permit, inspection, and certain
other conditions throughout the year.

PERSONNEL
Several changes in personnel were made in the department
during the biennium.
Mr. Elmer F. Gebhart, who had been stationed in Miami for
several years, died on July 25, 1952.
Mr. R. W. Albritton, formerly assigned to white-fringed beetle
work at Florala, Alabama, was transferred to the Miami port
quarantine office January 24, 1953.
Mr. Oliver P. Medsger, stationed in Miami, resigned May 15,
1953 and was replaced by Mr. Benjamin E. Davis, who was
transferred from the Grove Inspection Department on May 12,
1953.
Mr. Harry R. O'Steen reported for quarantine training at
Miami October 1, 1953.
Mr. Reginald Hart retired June 30, 1954, after a long career
with the State Plant Board.
Mr. James F. Kearney reported to Miami for training and to
replace Mr. Hart on June 1, 1954.

JAPANESE BEETLE
Under the provisions of Federal Domestic Quarantine No. 48,
certain hosts of the Japanese beetle are regulated only at the
time of the year when the beetles are actively in flight, while
a few are regulated throughout the year, in all States along the
eastern seaboard from North Carolina to Canada and in West
Virginia and Ohio. Such restricted movement of host materials
and some other products is to assist in preventing the spread of
the beetle to other States.






State Plant Board of Florida


Each year a trapping survey for the Japanese beetle is con-
ducted in Florida. This is a cooperative program participated
in by the State Plant Board and the Plant Quarantine Branch,
Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of
Agriculture. During the biennium traps were placed and at-
tended at selected locations in Jacksonville, Tampa, St. Peters-
burg, and West Palm Beach by Plant Board quarantine inspec-
tors; and at Pensacola, Orlando, and Miami by Federal inspectors
stationed in the areas.
In July 1951, one beetle was trapped at the Tampa location
and another was caught in the same area in July 1952. In order
to determine the possibility of an established infestation of the
beetle in the Tampa area, several traps were put out in March
1953 and attended until September 16, with negative results.
Trapping results at other locations in the State were negative
in 1952. Two beetles were caught in the same area in Jack-
sonville on July 27 and August 7, 1953.
It is presumed that single collections of the Japanese beetle
made at intervals around airfields are hitchhikers from the
northern quarantined areas.

SWEET POTATO WEEVIL
The sweet potato weevil (Cylas formicarius elegantulus
(Sum.)), the most important known insect enemy of the sweet
potato, was discovered in southern Florida seventy-six years
ago. Over the years, its dissemination into all counties of
peninsular Florida has taken place, and in more recent years
it has been reported from nearly all counties in west Florida.
The known distribution of the insect includes large parts of
Florida, Louisiana, and Texas, the coastal counties of Missis-
sippi and Alabama, a few counties in southern Georgia, and
two counties in South Carolina.
The majority of new weevil infestations are caused when
plants, seed, and potatoes for food purposes are brought in
from infested areas.
Freezing and wet weather undoubtedly play an important
part in the mortality rate of the sweet potato weevil in north-
western Florida counties, keeping the insect under partial con-
trol. The weather was ideal for the rapid development of the
weevil during the past year. Outbreaks of the pest in new
areas may be expected during the next biennium.







Twentieth Biennial Report


Quarantines are maintained by the Southern States and also
by a few other States in an attempt to prevent further introduc-
tion and spread of the weevil and to assist in its control and
eradication in areas where it is feasible. In Florida the pres-
ent Rule 7 A (1) designates all that portion of the State lying
east and south of Hamilton, Madison, and Jefferson Counties
as infested area, where the weevil is widely and generally dis-
seminated and eradication appears not to be practical. Rule
7A (2) designates all that portion of the State of Florida lying
west of the eastern boundaries of Hamilton, Madison, and Jef-
ferson Counties as the control area. Because the establishment
of the weevil in the control area is of more recent origin, eradi-
cation in many sections is possible; and there is promise that
control of the insect throughout the control area can be ac-
complished through an educational campaign and with limited
personnel.
A cooperative program participated in by State and Federal
Governments was conducted in the control area during the bien-
nium. Eradication and control methods were applied in Madi-
son, Jefferson, Leon, Gadsden, and Jackson Counties, with good
results. The services of six inspectors, three State and three
Federal, were utilized on the project. They are stationed at
Marianna, Quincy, Tallahassee, and Monticello.
A report on the progress of the work in west Florida counties
follows. Table I records the number of inspections and contacts

TABLE I

Period Period
July 1, 1952-June 30, 1953 July 1, 1953-June 30, 1954
County No. In- No. In- No. No. In- No. In- No.
spections festa- Proper- sections festa- Proper-
and tions ties and tions ties Re-
Contacts Found Released! Contacts Found leased
Jefferson ...... 3,665 5 11 3,012 3 6
Leon ...........- 11,090 11 22 12,611 11 8
Gadsden ........ 1 4,802 13 26 7,600 6 13
Jackson ........ 4,166 19 21 1,725 7 17
Santa Rosa .. ...... ... 19 3
Escambia .... ... 1 ... ....
Hamilton ...... 277 5 .... 159 .. 3
Madison ........ 127 ..... 63
Calhoun ........ 5 ..
Washington 2 i

Total ........ 24,134 54 | 80 25,189 30 47







40 State Plant Board of Florida

made, number of infestations found, and number of infestations
or properties released during the two-year period as being
weevil-free. Table II gives an accumulative infestation report
from 1944 to 1954.
TABLE II


County


Jefferson ............
Leon ....................
Gadsden ................
Jackson ................
Liberty ................
Okaloosa ..............
Santa Rosa ..........
Escambia .........
Hamilton ..............
Madison ........
Calhoun .........


Total ...........


Accumulative Infestation Data from 1944-1954
Total Total Infesta- Total Infesta-
Infestations tions Cleaned tions Active
Found and Released June 30, 1954

224 219 5
241 219 22
195 186 9
141 122 19
46 46 0
16 16 0
11 8 3
30 24 6
7 5 2
2 2 0
1 1 0


914 848 66







Twentieth Biennial Report


ENTOMOLOGY DEPARTMENT
G. B. Merrill, Chief Entomologist
The activities of this department have been considerably
broadened in scope, especially during the second year of the
biennium, when three entomologists were added to its personnel.
The personnel for the year 1952-1953 was composed of the
Entomologist; the Assistant Entomologist, Mr. G. W. Dekle;
and the Secretary, Mrs. Eloise Riddick.
The personnel for the year 1953-1954 was composed of the
Chief Entomologist; Entomologists G. W. Dekle, H. A. Den-
mark, F. W. Mead, and Dr. H. V. Weems, Jr.; and the Secre-
tary, Mrs. Eloise Riddick.
As has been customary since the inception of the Board, one
of the principal activities of the Entomology Department is
the identification of insects and other pests that have been col-
lected by inspectors or collaborators of the Board. These collec-
tions are made during inspection of nurseries, groves, and other
plantings or places likely to harbor injurious insects or pests
and during inspection at Florida's gateways of plants and plant
products offered for entry. Many pests are also collected on
plants, fruits, etc., carried in the baggage of passengers from
foreign countries; and some are discovered as accidental stowa-
ways in ships, freight cars, automobiles, express, mail, and air-
planes from many parts of the world. In addition, specimens
are received from laymen, museums, and institutions in Florida
and other States.
A large majority of the insects or pests are determined by the
entomologists of this department. However, there are some
which are, of necessity, referred to specialists of the United
States Department of Agriculture or to other institutions in
this country or abroad for identification, confirmation, or record.
Specimens of plant or insect diseases are referred to patholo-
gists of the Board or to the pathologists of the Florida Agricul-
tural Experiment Station for determination and recommenda-
tions for control, if necessary.
Information is furnished growers and others requesting ad-
vice relative to problems concerning insects or pests.
A reference collection with the insects determined is one of
the working tools of an organization such as the State Plant
Board and facilitates the identification of material that may
come before its entomologists. The quick identification of a







State Plant Board of Florida


specimen in an incipient infestation could spell success in eradi-
cating it should it prove to be an especially injurious one.
In addition to the insect reference collection, the department
has one of the most complete entomological libraries to be found
in the South, especially along taxonomic lines.
The insect reference collection is steadily growing as each
year passes and, at the present time, probably contains the
largest number of pinned specimens to be found within the State.
While the majority of the insects were collected within the
State, there are many others not known to be established in
Florida. These, which originated in foreign countries through-
out the world, were intercepted at one or another of the State's
ports of entry. Also, many thousands of specimens have been
donated to the collection, mention of which will be made later in
this report.
The collection was housed in about two hundred and fifty
Schmitt boxes until the beginning of the biennium. Since that
time, seventy-two Cornell type cabinet drawers and unit pin-
ning trays for them have been added, thirty-six having been
purchased during the previous biennium but not previously
put in use. Representative specimens of insects are being trans-
ferred from the Schmitt boxes to the Cornell drawers, where they
are being arranged alphabetically by family and species. Owing
to a lack of personnel from the beginning, it was necessary to
place pinned specimens in the Schmitt boxes with only the ac-
cession number appended. When the material was transferred to
the permanent Cornell trays, it was necessary to prepare and
place pertinent data on each specimen in a neat and systematic
manner, which entailed a very considerable amount of painstak-
ing toil. The duplicate insects will remain in the Schmitt boxes
for study or exchange purposes.
At the beginning of the biennium the reference collection
consisted of about thirty thousand pinned specimens, including
the Dr. H. T. Fernald Florida insect collection and Dr. Wilmon
Newell's ant collection. In addition, there were about five thou-
sand specimens (mostly scale-insects and aleyrodids or white-
flies) mounted on glass slides.
During the biennium there have been donations to the ref-
erence collection as follows:
American Museum of Natural History, New York City
Courtesy Dr. C. H. Curran
3,607 specimens representing 1,520 species of flies
35 specimens representing 19 species of darkling beetles







Twentieth Biennial Report


United States National Museum, Washington, D. C.
Courtesy Dr. Alan Stone
71 specimens representing 36 species of horse flies
Courtesy Dr. R. H. Foote
116 specimens representing 31 species of fruit flies
Mr. C. A. Frost, Framingham, Massachusetts
Over 1,000 species of beetles
Mr. Calvin M. Jones
34 species horse flies from Florida
Mr. Frank W. Mead
About 2,000 insect specimens, mostly from Ohio
Dr. Howard V. Weems, Jr.
About 20,000 insects from the eastern part of the United States,
those from Florida predominating

Immature stages of moths, butterflies, beetles, and fruit flies,
placed in alcohol, have been identified, in many instances, and
stored for reference.
A number of plastic mounts have also been made for ref-
erence. These will stand rough handling without danger of
breakage.
The record of collections and identifications of insects, dis-
eases, and pests for the biennium, by departments, is given in
the table below:


1952-1953 1953-1954
Department Number Number Number Number
Collected Identified Collected Identified

Quarantine .......... 366 575 372 511
Nursery ............. 528 673 1,578 2,693
Grove .................... 482 906 276 594
Entomology ........ 54 92 140 189
Others ................. 39 45 111 134
Unaccounted for ...... 70 ...... 7

Total ........... 1,469 2,361 2,477 4,128

In addition to the 4,128 routine identifications made by the
department specialists, almost 700 determinations were made
for the Insect Pest Survey during the period February 6-June
30, 1954.
In addition to these two determination totals, about 5,000 de-
terminations were made by specialists at the National Museum,
American Museum of Natural History, and several State uni-
versities; by independent insect specialists; and by Dr. Weems,
on a portion of the insect collection which he donated to the
State Plant Board collection during 1954.







State Plant Board of Florida


Since the inception of the department, nearly one hundred
and nineteen thousand determinations or identifications of in-
sects or pests have been made. A collection may consist of only
one insect or pest; or, again, it may consist of two or more in-
sects or pests on the same host. An identification may consist
of only one insect or it may consist of several hundred or several
thousand insects of the same kind or species in cases of severely
infested branches, leaves, or fruits, especially when certain scale-
insects are considered.
A master report for each collection is made containing data
with respect to the insect or pest and its host, the property
and locality where found, the degree of infestation or affection,
and any remarks thereon. Each identified insect or pest is
given an accession number. Cards are made out in triplicate
for each insect or pest from the master report. The original
card is filed in the host file, the duplicate in the insect file, and
the triplicate in the consecutive number file. The master report
is filed in the locality file under town, state, or country of origin.
This makes for easily accessible information when specific data
are needed.
During the biennium a number of species of mites and scale-
insects have been added to the Florida fauna. These are listed
below. Very little is known about the economic importance of
most of them.

MITES:
Floracarus calonyctionis Keifer
Tenuipalpus anoplus Baker & Pritchard
Tenuipalpus dasples Baker & Pritchard
Tenuipalpus argus Baker & Pritchard
Tenuipalpus bakeri Baker
Tenuipalpus rhysus Baker & Pritchard
SCALE-INSECTS:
Armored Scales
1. Chionaspis lintneri Comst.
2. Clavaspis barbigera Ferris
3. Duplachionaspis asymmetrica Ferris
4. Nelaspis crookiae Ferris
5. Pseudaulacaspis major (Cockerell)
Soft Scales
1. Aclerda marylandica McConnell
2. Vinsonia stellifera (Westwood)
Mealybugs
1. Antonina praetiosa Ferris
2. Eriococcus kemptoni Parrott
3. Ferrisiana floridana Ferris
4. Trionymus merrilli Ferris






Twentieth Biennial Report


ECONOMIC INSECT SURVEY
A cooperative agreement between the State Plant Board and
the United States Department of Agriculture was established dur-
ing the biennium for the purpose of making surveys of economic
insects and mites found infesting plants of economic value, with
the exception of citrus, which is being handled by the Citrus
Experiment Station at Lake Alfred. Summarized reports are
sent weekly to the Department of Agriculture at Washington,
where they are incorporated into a nation-wide weekly report.
For a number of years previous to this agreement the reporting
had been done on a voluntary basis by the Chief Entomologist.
The aim of the survey is to determine the distribution of
economic insect pests and mites and to find out the severity of
the infestations periodically. Another phase of the survey is
the warning of adjacent States in advance when to expect migra-
tory insects to enter their domains.
Institutions collaborating with the Board in sending informa-
tion are: the Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations, the
Florida Agricultural Extension Service, the Department of En-
tomology, University of Florida, and several industrial concerns.
Copies of the summarized reports are sent to all contributors.

SPECIAL INSECT INVESTIGATIONS
Special surveys in Alachua County during 1953 and the spring
of 1954 were conducted for the purpose of ascertaining whether
the grasshopper situation in that county needed attention.
No high populations of the American grasshopper (Schisto-
cerca americana (Drury)) were revealed during this period.
The southern red-legged grasshopper (Melanoplus femur-
rubrum propinquus Scudder) was found to be doing consider-
able damage to tobacco fields in Alachua County.
During the latter part of May 1954, nymphs of a grasshopper
(Schistocerca sp. probably S. obscura (Fab.)) caused severe
defoliation to young lime trees.
The black turpentine beetle (Dendroctonus terebrans (Oliv.))
and one of the scolytid bark beetles (Ips sp.) found in St. Johns
County on pines were investigated during 1953 and 1954. There
was a decline in populations of these two insects during 1953,
but in June 1954 the indications were for their increase.
Investigations were conducted on the imported fire ant (Sole-
nopsis saevissima richteri Forel) and control measures applied,






State Plant Board of Florida


especially in those counties where incipient infestations were
found, namely: Baker, Duval, Leon, Nassau, St. Johns, and
Seminole. Nurseries and other properties were inspected and
the ant colonies found were treated with chlordane. Periodic
inspections have been made and treatments given.
During September 1953, the department cooperated with the
Department of Biological Control, Citrus Experiment Station,
of Riverside, California, in collecting grape leaf skeletonizer
larval material for shipment to that State. Several thousand
larvae were sent, via air mail, and several species of parasites
were recovered and liberated in the grape-growing section of
San Diego County.
Special surveys were made of lychee trees (Litchi chinensis),
since there is increasing interest in their culture in Florida and
very little is known as to what insects and mites affect them.
The list, while not alarming now, will undoubtedly be enlarged
as time goes on and a greater number of trees are planted in
areas favorable to their growth. Two scale-insects, one an
armored scale (Pseudaulacaspis major (Ckll.)), a recent arrival
in the State, and the green shield scale (Pulvinaria psidii Mask.)
seem to be of economic importance. Red-banded thrips (Sele-
nothrips rubrocinctus (Giard)) was serious enough to suggest
that control measures might become necessary. Red spiders
were present in numbers sufficient to justify the application of
control measures in several localities.
The stellate scale (Vinsonia stellifera (West.)) was first found
in Florida during the latter part of September 1953 on orchids
at Naranja. Subsequently, it was found in Miami and Man-
darin. As this scale is widely distributed throughout tropical
countries, with a moderately large host list including coconut
palm, gardenia, guava, mango, and citrus, it was considered
advisable to determine its distribution in Florida and effect its
eradication. Dipping and/or spraying operations have been
carried on under the guidance of Plant Board inspectors and
entomologists.
EXHIBITS
A large colored map of the world (approximately 8 x 12 feet
in size) was constructed of plywood by members of the En-
tomology Department staff, depicting the distribution of many
of the most injurious fruit flies in various countries. Each fruit
fly species was illustrated by a different colored light placed in
the general land area on each continent and on the larger is-






Twentieth Biennial Report


lands where the insects are known to be established. The map
was displayed at the Citrus Exposition held in Winter Haven
early in 1954, where it attracted considerable interest and occa-
sioned much favorable comment from spectators, who readily
grasped and understood the information presented in this graphic
form.
MEETINGS
Several of the Department's personnel attended one or an-
other of the entomological, agricultural, and horticultural meet-
ings held in the State and presented papers of an entomological
nature.
In December 1952, Messrs. Dekle and Merrill attended the
meetings of the American Association of Economic Entomolo-
gists and the Entomological Society of America at Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, and also spent a short time at the United States
National Museum, Washington, D. C., studying the insect collec-
tion and comparing specimens with those in the National col-
lection.
Dr. Howard V. Weems, Jr., spent three weeks during February
1954 studying the collections at the United States National Mu-
seum, Washington, D. C., and at the American Museum of
Natural History, New York City, New York. He also con-
ferred with the various insect taxonomists relative to filling
in gaps that occur in the Plant Board's collection.
The Chief Entomologist attended the annual meeting of the
new Entomological Society of America at Los Angeles, California,
during December 1953. He observed methods of biological con-
trol at the Citrus Experiment Station, Riverside; consulted the
renowned coccidologist, Professor G. F. Ferris, at Stanford
University and the specialists of the California Academy of
Sciences at San Francisco; conferred with entomologists of the
University of California at Berkeley and observed their biologi-
cal control laboratory setup; and consulted the specialists of
the State Department of Agriculture at Sacramento.

PUBLICATIONS
Bulletin No. 1, "A Revision of the Scale-Insects of Florida,"
by G. B. Merrill, was published early in 1953. This bulletin, one
hundred and forty-three pages in length, with illustrations of
many of the scale-insects, gave a generalized description of each
scale, together with the Florida host or hosts, the known distri-






State Plant Board of Florida


bution in Florida and in other States and countries, as well as re-
marks regarding its economic importance. It treated 104 arm-
ored scales, 33 soft scales, and 46 mealybugs.
A "List of Florida Scale-Insects and Their Florida Hosts"
consisting of thirty-six pages was compiled in February 1953
and issued in mimeographed form.
"A List of Florida Plants and the Scale-Insects Which Infest
Them" has been prepared in manuscript form by Mrs. Eloise
Riddick and will soon be ready for printing. Scientific names of
plants are cross-indexed with their common names.
A paper on "The Imported Fire Ant in Florida" by G. W.
Dekle was published in the Proceedings of the Florida State
Horticultural Society for the year 1953.
Dr. Howard V. Weems, Jr., has published two papers on syr-
phid flies, as follows: "Notes on Collecting Syrphid Flies (Dip-
tera: Syrphidae)" in The Florida Entomologist, September
1953; and "Natural Enemies and Insecticides that Are Detri-
mental to Beneficial Syrphidae" in the Ohio Journal of Science,
January 1954.







Twentieth Biennial Report


PATHOLOGY DEPARTMENT
Mortimer Cohen, Chief Citrus Pathologist
The major function of the Plant Pathology Department dur-
ing the biennium 1952-1954 has been to provide technical as-
sistance to the Plant Inspection Department in delimiting the
area affected by tristeza disease and in evaluating the problem
as a threat to the health of the citrus industry. At the same
time, an organization has been established within the Plant
Board which will be able to deal directly with new problems in
the field of plant disease as they arise.
Tristeza disease was found to constitute an insidious prob-
lem to the citrus industry. Although the virus has apparently
been present in the State for many years, it has escaped detec-
tion because it does not kill trees quickly, as in some other parts
of the world. Instead, the effect is slower and trees are often
stunted or decline gradually. Each diseased tree soon becomes
useless commercially, but the effect is not very apparent to the
grower because of its gradual nature. For this reason, the so-
called "mild" strain of tristeza virus is, in one sense, more of a
menace than a more severe strain would be. The saving factor
in this situation has been the relatively slow spread of the dis-
ease in many parts of the State.
The operations of this department were at first carried out
at Lake Alfred, where a laboratory was established through the
cooperation of the Citrus Experiment Station. In September
1953, the laboratory was moved to temporary quarters on the
Experiment Station grounds at the University of Florida, Gaines-
ville. In April 1954, permanent quarters in a new laboratory
building near the Archer road, Gainesville, were occupied.
Tristeza was discovered in Florida in the spring of 1952 by
Dr. T. J. Grant, of the Subtropical Fruit Investigations Horti-
cultural Station, United States Department of Agriculture, at
Orlando, Florida. Following a meeting of State and Federal rep-
resentatives in July 1952, the State Plant Board undertook in-
tensively the problem of determining the extent to which tris-
teza was present in Florida. Grove inspectors were trained in
methods of selecting trees which might be affected by the dis-
ease and a laboratory was quickly set up at Lake Alfred. Bark
samples from the bud union of trees which were suspected of
having tristeza were sent by inspectors to the laboratory for a
histological examination according to the Schneider technique






State Plant Board of Florida


which had been used successfully in California. The Citrus Ex-
periment Station assigned Dr. Robert M. Pratt to assist the
Plant Board by supervising the laboratory until the arrival in
mid-November 1952 of a Plant Board pathologist.
Graft transmission tests were also conducted. These involved
grafting a twig from a tristeza suspect tree into a Key lime
seedling to determine whether the tristeza vein-clearing pat-
tern, a diagnostic symptom of the disease, would appear. A sec-
ond effect, produced by inoculation of the tristeza virus into
Key limes, is the appearance of longitudinal grooves called
"stem-pitting" in the wood of the plants.
Dr. L. Carl Knorr, who had been in charge of the Plant Board
laboratory, studying tristeza in Argentina, returned to Lake
Alfred at the end of 1952 to work with the Plant Pathology De-
partment in a program of investigation of tristeza in Florida.
Late in 1953, Dr. Knorr resumed his connection with the Citrus
Experiment Station, where he is continuing his work.
The aim of the first work on tristeza was to determine as
quickly as possible the areas of the State in which tristeza
disease could be found. To this end, inspectors searched an
area only long enough to find a few definite cases of the disease
before moving on to the next location. No attempt was made,
therefore, to survey any area completely. It was apparent, after
a few months, that no major citrus region was free from tris-
teza and that there was no need for establishment of intrastate
quarantine lines.
Tristeza, as it is found in the field in Florida, is a disease of
citrus trees on sour orange rootstock. Grapefruit and tangerine
trees, as well as trees of the various sweet orange varieties,
can all be attacked when they are on sour orange rootstock.
There are indications that other species, such as kumquat, may
also be affected when they are on sour orange rootstock. This
differs from the situation in California, where only trees with
sweet orange tops have been found affected in the groves.
Another unusual feature of tristeza in Florida is the presence
of many stunted infected trees which have apparently been dis-
eased for many years, yet have not died. These trees have ex-
ceptionally low yields, yet are often not replaced with new stock
because, although stunted, they are not otherwise diseased in
appearance. However, trees of normal size which show their
diseased condition by their thin foliation and general distressed
appearance are also found.









TABLE I

Results of Histological Tests of Bark Samples from Trees Suspected of Having Tristeza Disease; Properties, Ratings, and
Varieties Affected July 1, 1952-June 30, 1954


County


Alachua .............. .....
Brevard ........... .........
Broward ................
Charlotte ...-. ----
Citrus .... ........-
Collier ........ ...--- --------
Dade ....-........-......
D eSoto ...------------ ---------
Duval ...........-..
Flagler ...........-------...---
Hardee ...............-------
Hendry .......-....----- ..--
Hernando ...........
Highlands ...-.......- ----
Hillsboro ................-
Indian River .............
Lake ...........----- --.....--
Lee .................. ----...


Pro


Total

9
54
29
6
15
1
1
43
5
2
54
9
27
7
60
75
319
17


parties

SPosi-
tive

3
7
2
2
4


28
2

44
7
19
2
38
26
205
10


Total

33
86
42
8
28
1
5
61
5
4
83
16
83
12
107
141
478
21


TREE
RATINGS


Posi-
tive


Pos-
sible


S
(a)
I Indeter-I
minate

3
14
8
1

4
9
2

3
6
4
3
8
16
36
2


Other

22
55
28
3
14

1
6
1
4
5
1
6
4
30
72
148
4


wit
Sweet
Orange

7
8
3
2
10


41
1

64
7
53
3
57
14
239
9


Variety of Trees
;h Rating of "Positive"
Grape- Man- Ta
fruit darin g


Ln-
elo %




-



S -t
.... k"1 .










TABLE 1-(Continued)
Results of Histological Tests of Bark Samples from Trees Suspected of Having Tristeza Disease; Properties, Ratings, and
Varieties Affected July 1, 1952-June 30, 1954


County


Manatee .......................
Marion ............-.......
Martin ....................
Monroe .......................
Orange ...... ..... .....
Osceola ....................
Palm Beach ................
Pasco .........................
Pinellas .
Polk .l ........................
P o lk ---------------- -----------.
Putnam ...................
Sarasota .................
Seminole ................
St. Johns ......................
St. Lucie ......................
Sumter ...................--
Volusia ......... .........-

Totals ...................


Properties


Posi-
Total tive

83 47
44 18
4
1
295 202
5 2
3
11 7
32 16
105 43
33 7
10 6
36 19
12 5
124 23
16 3
324 274

1,871 1,071


Total

117
100
5
2
409
12
3
23
60
151
73
15
50
17
169
29
435


S2,884


Posi-
tive

59
27


259
2

13
28
58
14
7
27
8
26
5
309

1,470


TREES
RATINGS (a)


SPos-
sible

3
9


41
1

1
4
6

1
5

6
4
24

168 |


Indeter-
minate

13
8
1

18
3
1
5
9
28
3
3
2
2
29
3
19

266


Other

42
56
4
2
91
6
2
4
19
59
56
4
16
7
108
17
83

980


Variety of Trees
with Rating of "Positive"
Sweet Grape- Man- Tan-
Orange fruit darin gelo

27 31 ... 1
25 1 1


233 20 6
2

13 ...
16 12
42 14 2
12 1 1
4 3
24 3
5 1 2
15 11 ....
5
279 6 24

1,220 186 63 1


(a) The following are brief definitions of the various ratings:
Positive: Definitely tristeza.
Possible: Has some of the histological characteristics of tristeza, but not enough to be considered "Positive."
Indeterminate: Structure is definitely abnormal, but does not suggest Iristeza.
Other: Normal; slightly different from normal; sample imperfect-could not be read.


l






Twentieth Biennial Report


Inspectors were aided in their search for trees with tristeza
disease by the discovery that most such trees showed a symptom
which has been called "honeycombing." This is a pattern of
minute holes in the cambial surface of the bark. It begins just
below the bud union line and may be found, often, for a foot or
more below that line. This symptom provided a quick means of
field identification of many trees with tristeza.
During the biennium July 1, 1952 to June 30, 1954, citrus
bark samples from 1,871 properties in 35 counties were ex-
amined in the histological laboratory of the State Plant Board.
In all, 1,071 properties were found to have at least one tree
positive for tristeza, these trees being located in 29 counties.
Table I provides a detailed breakdown of results obtained from
these histological examinations. This table summarizes the in-
formation for each county by property and by individual speci-
men, since a number of samples were obtained from some prop-
erties. The table also shows that oranges, grapefruit, and
mandarins were susceptible to the disease throughout the citrus-
growing areas.
The histological test reveals the presence of the tristeza virus
only in trees in which the phloem is injured below the bud union,
such as trees on sour orange rootstock. Such trees are diseased
in appearance. Additional trees carrying the virus were identi-
fied by transmission tests in which scions from the trees being
tested were grafted onto Key lime seedlings and the presence of
the virus indicated by vein-clearing in the leaves and pitting of
the stems. By this method it was found that tristeza was pres-
ent in a considerable number of Tahiti lime trees in Florida.
Tristeza virus was found in Tahiti limes in five locations in
Dade County, thus establishing the presence of the disease in
that county and bringing to 30 the total number of counties in
the State known to contain tristeza. In most of the affected Ta-
hiti limes, a pattern of vein-clearing was found, similar to that
seen on tristeza-infected Key limes.
The transmission-test method was also used to determine
whether candidate trees in the budwood certification program
(these are usually not on sour orange rootstock) were carrying
the virus. During the biennium, 260 trees in the budwood cer-
tification program were tested. Of these, six have already
been found to be carrying the tristeza virus, but tests are not com-
plete and it is likely that additional trees will be found in this
group.







54 State Plant Board of Florida

In still other cases, the transmission-test method was used to
locate incipient infections of tristeza in trees adjacent to known
tristeza-infected trees. Table II gives information regarding
cases where tristeza virus was found in trees, with its presence
masked.
TABLE II
Cases in which Presence of Tristeza Virus Was Established by
Transmission Test and Not by Schneider Test *

I VARIETY
County Tahiti Key I Cala- Meyer **SweetlGrape- Lime-
]Lime Lime Imondin Lemon Orangel fruit Iquat |Total

Alachua 3 3
Charlotte 1 1
Dade 5 5
Highlands 6 1 7
Hillsboro 1 1
Lake 1 1
Orange 3 1 4
Polk 6 2 2 1 11
St. Lucie 1 1
Volusia 1 1

Total 18 1 1 1 9 4 1 35

*Transmission tests conducted, in part, by Dr. T. J. Grant.
** In a number of cases, the sweet orange trees were apparently on sour orange root-
stock. These cases will presumably show visible decline later and are being kept under
observation.

The transmission-test method was also used to check results
obtained by the histological test. Certain trees, found in the
laboratory to have tristeza disease, were selected at random
from different areas. Transmission tests were made from these
trees to Key lime seedlings to ascertain the correlation between
the Schneider histological test and the transmission test. Trans-
mission tests confirmed histological findings of tristeza posi-
tive in 71 trees in 22 counties in tests run partly by Dr. T. J.
Grant and partly by the Plant Pathology Department. In only
one case the histological test was not confirmed in a transmis-
sion test. Unfortunately, graftwood for additional transmission
tests could not be obtained because the tree had been removed
by the grove owner.
The susceptibility of the various citrus rootstocks to tristeza in
Florida is of great interest to the citrus industry. In the course
of the survey conducted during the biennium, the apparent root-
stock was recorded for each tree suspected of having tristeza







Twentieth Biennial Report


disease. Judgment as to the nature of the rootstock was based
on information received from growers, on the leaves and fruit
which appeared on root sprouts, and on the appearance of the
bud union, a character which is fairly constant for the major
rootstock types. Frequently, however, the nature of the root-
stock was doubtful and it was necessary to make a chemical test
of the rootstock to aid in the determination. In all, 138 doubt-
ful rootstocks were checked by chemical test. Invariably, trees
in poor condition because of tristeza disease were found to be
on sour orange rootstock.
Three test plots have been established in areas in Polk and
Orange Counties near known tristeza-infected trees. Bark sam-
ples are taken periodically from the trees in these plots so that
early stages of the disease may be detected. Budwood samples
have also been taken from some of the trees so that distribution
of the virus in budwood can also be investigated by transmission
tests. No newly diseased trees have been detected by histologi-
cal methods, but a number of trees which still appear healthy
have been found to have tristeza virus. These trees will be
watched very carefully in the future.
Two years of experience with tristeza in Florida have demon-
strated that this disease in Florida does not act as it has in
other parts of the world. Although it has been in the State for
many years, it has never spread as rapidly here as it has in
most citrus areas of South America and in the badly infected
area of California. Nevertheless, very serious economic dam-
age has been suffered by many groves in certain areas of the
State-notably the five county areas of Orange, Lake, Volusia,
Marion, and Seminole Counties-and new reports of affected
groves are constantly being received. Elsewhere in the State,
there are numerous individual groves in which injury by tris-
teza has been serious.
The failure of tristeza to spread more rapidly is believed to be
tied up with the relative inefficiency of the insect carriers or
"vectors" of the disease. From the condition of some groves
in the State, it is evident that at times the insect vectors have
been quite effective. Unfortunately, the conditions determining
the rate at which tristeza may be expected to spread in a grove
are very incompletely understood. It is known, however, that at
least two species of aphids now prevalent in Florida can trans-
mit the disease, and that the aphid species Aphis citricidus
(Kirk.), which was connected with the rapid spread of tristeza







56 State Plant Board of Florida

in South America, is not yet found in the State. It is feared
that, if Aphis citricidus (Kirk.) were to pass our quarantine
barriers and be brought into this State, tristeza might soon be
found to be spreading rapidly in Florida.
The factors which have been discussed in this report make
it evident that growers who plant citrus on sour orange root-
stock, which forms a top-stock combination susceptible to tris-
teza, are running the risk that their groves will be severely
attacked at sometime in the future. The safest course is to
use a rootstock such as Cleopatra mandarin, rough lemon, or
sweet orange seedling, any of which makes a combination known
to be tolerant to this disease.
Tristeza is a disease of known world-wide distribution, but
new infected areas are still being found. The Plant Board is
cooperating with agencies outside the State in this work. Dur-
ing the biennium, 68 bark samples from citrus regions outside
of Florida were examined: 37 from Texas, 16 from Cuba, and
15 from Peru. Of these, only 4 of the bark samples from Peru
proved to be positive for tristeza.
In November 1953, the Plant Pathology Department under-
took the routine diagnosis of plant disease specimens sent to
Gainesville by Plant Board inspectors and the general public.
During the remainder of the biennium, specimens were received
for diagnosis. These specimens covered the whole field of plant
disease in the State of Florida and also included material from
all parts of the world which had been intercepted by Plant
Board quarantine inspectors at various ports of entry. Table
III gives a list of the diagnoses completed.

TABLE III
Diagnoses of Plant Disease Specimens
Causal Agent Number
Fungus ...- --............ ... ..... ......... ..... -....--- 160
Bacteria --.......... --... ---.......... ................ .. ..--- -....--- -- 12
Virus ................... --..----------------------------------------........ 9
Nematodes ....-- ................-................ ..-...............---- 8
Physiological and Mechanical ...................................... 49
Free from disease .......-- ----............... ................... .... 5
Cause unknown (includes familiar and unfamiliar
conditions) ............................. .... ... ...... .. .........-.... 75
Other causes (slime molds, seed plants, etc.) ................ 14
Total ...............-..-.....-........................... 332






Twentieth Biennial Report


TRISTEZA INVESTIGATIONS IN SOUTH AMERICA AND IN FLORIDA
L. Carl Knorr,* Associate Histologist, Citrus Experiment Station
At the start of the biennium, investigations on tristeza by the
State Plant Board were being concluded in Argentina, where
studies had been under way since 1946. The decision to close the
Tristeza Laboratory at Concordia, Entre Rios, resulted from the
discovery of tristeza in Florida and the consequent need for per-
sonnel to cope with the disease at home. Unfortunately, many
experiments, representing a considerable outlay of time and
money, had to be terminated before yielding information for
which they were designed. Included in field trials left behind
(which are now being cared for temporarily by the Bovino in-
terests) are experiments intended to answer the following ques-
tions:
A. Regarding tristeza:
(1) Whether stem-pitting and tristeza are caused by
one virus, as previously claimed, or whether they
are two diseases caused by separate agents. The
destructive effects of stem-pitting in grapefruit
trees would make this aspect of tristeza more im-
portant to Florida citrus than the bud union effects
on sour-orange rooted trees.
(2) Whether grapefruit trees found resistant to stem-
pitting are a good source of budwood free of this
disease.
(3) Whether stem-pitting and tristeza can be shown to
be separate diseases by use, on the one hand, of
aphid vectors and, on the other, by the use of in-
fected buds. Both agents of dissemination were
applied to sweet orange and to sour orange host
plants.
(4) Whether better indicator plants exist than Key
lime to speed the diagnosis of suspected trees; also
to determine if citrus relatives imported as orna-
mentals might carry strains of the tristeza virus
not present in Florida.
(5) Whether stem-pitting can be detected in nursery
trees and thus be rogued before setting in groves.

Dr. Knorr formerly held a position as Pathologist with the State Plant
Board of Florida.






State Plant Board of Florida


(6) Whether budwood from trees weakly affected by
stem-pitting may be protected from more severe
strains of the causal virus.
B. Regarding xyloporosis:
(1) Whether Aphis citricidus (Kirk.), A. spiraecola
Patch. or Toxoptera aurantii (Fonsc.) are vectors
of xyloporosis. Earlier observational evidence at
the tristeza laboratory 1 indicated that spread of
this disease occurred in the field.
C. Regarding exocortis:
(1) Whether the sweet orange variety Calderon has
escaped infection by the exocortis virus or whether
it is immune to the disease; and if immune,
whether this would make possible a more widespread
use of trifoliate orange rootstocks.
D. Regarding miscellaneous diseases:
(1) Whether "dome-dwarf", a tree-stunting, wood-
pitting condition of sweet orange trees in north-
western Argentina, is due to a bud-transmissible
virus.
(2) Whether "Centinela Mottle Leaf", a virus-like chlo-
rosis of orange trees, is a bud-transmissible dis-
ease.
(3) Whether a bark shelling of Marsh Seedless grape-
fruit trees encountered in the Territory of Misiones
is a bud-transmissible disease.
(4) Whether "Rugosis",2 a wood-pitting and tree-stunt-
ing disease associated with rough lemon rootstocks,
is a bud-transmissible trouble.
(5) Whether "Sweet Orange Rugosis",2 a trunk-distort-
ing disease of sweet orange trees, is bud-transmis-
sible.
A record of accomplishments of the State Plant Board project
in Argentina is partially contained in publications that have
originated from the Tristeza Laboratory. A bibliography of

SDuCharme, E. P., and Knorr, L. C. Vascular pits and pegs associated
with diseases in Citrus. U. S. Dept. Agr. PI. Disease Reptr. 38: 143-146.
1954.
Knorr, L. C. Arrugado del tronco rugosee trunk) del limon rugoso.
IDIA (Argentine Min. Agr. y Gan.) (58):22-25. 1952.








Twentieth Biennial Report


such papers is presented at this time in connection with the clos-
ing of the Laboratory:

1. DuCharme, E. P. The resistance of trifoliate rootstocks to citrus nema-
todes. Citrus Ind. 29(7): 9, 15. 1948.
2. DuCharme, E. P., and Schatz, A. S. Lobre la susceptibilidad delpie
de pomelo a la podredumbre de las raicillas (tristeza). Lilloa 21:
67-76. 1949.
3. Schatz, A., and DuCharme, E. P. Portainjertos citricos. Almanaque
de Ministerio de Agricultura y Gan. Argentina 25: 137-142. 1950.
4. DuCharme, E. P., and Knorr, L. C. Relation between Argentina's lepra
explosive and Florida's scaly bark of citrus. Phytopathology 40:
7, 1950.
5. DuCharme, E. P. La causa de la cancrosis del lim6n. IDIA (Argen-
tine Min. Agr. y Gan.) 3(33-34): 28-29. 1950.
6. Knorr, L. C., and DuCharme, E. P. The relationship between Argen-
tina's lepra explosive and Florida's scaly bark, with implications
for the Florida citrus grower. U. S. Dept. Agr. Pl. Dis. Reporter
35(2): 70-75. 1951.
7. Knorr, L. C. This is tristeza-ravager of Argentina's citrus industry.
Citrus Mag. 13(6): 17-19. 1951.
8. DuCharme, E. P., Knorr, L. C., and Speroni, H. A. Observations on
the spread of tristeza in Argentina. Citrus Mag. 13(9): 10-12, 14.
1951.
9. DuCharme, E. P., Knorr, L. C., and Banfi, A. La presencia del "stem
pitting" en la Argentina. IDIA (Argentine Min. Agr. y Gan.) (37-
39): 15-20. 1951.
10. Knorr, L. C., and DuCharme, E. P. Anotaciones sobre lepra explosive.
IDIA (Argentine Min. Agr. y Gan.) (42-43): 32-38. 1951.
11. Knorr, L. C., DuCharme, E. P., and Banfi, A. The occurrence and
effects of "stem pitting" in Argentine grapefruit groves. Citrus
Mag. 14(2): 32-36. 1951.
12. DuCharme, E. P., Knorr, L. C., and Banfi, A. DanSs causados a los
citrus por el 2,4-D. IDIA (Argentine Min. Agr. y Gan.) (44): 12-14.
1951.
13. Knorr, L. C., DuCharme, E. P., and Banfi, A. La exocortis en los
montes citricos de la Argentina. IDIA (Argentine Min. Agr. y
Gan.) (45): 8-12. 1951.
14. DuCharme, E. P. Cancrosis B of lemons. Citrus Mag. 13(9): 18-20.
1951.
15. DuCharme, E. P. Naturaliza y control de la tristeza de los citrus.
Argentine Rev. Invest. Agric. 5(3): 317-351. 1951.
16. DuCharme, E. P., and Knorr, L. C. The economic aspects of tristeza.
Citrus Mag. 14(8): 29-31. 1952.
17. Knorr, L. C., and DuCharme, E. P. Recognizing tristeza. Citrus
Magazine 14(12): 23-26. 1952.
18. Knorr, L. C., and Befiatena, H. N. Xyloporosis en mandarino comin de
Concordia. IDIA (Argentine Min. Agr. & Gan.) No. 57: 19-20. 1952.







State Plant Board of Florida


19. Knorr, L. C. Arrugado del tronco rugosee trunk) del limon rugoso.
IDIA (Argentine Min. Agr. & Gan.) No. 58: 22-25. 1952.
20. DuCharme, E. P., and Knorr, L. C. Comments on methods of minimizing
tristeza damage. Florida State Hort. Soc. Proceedings 65: 57-62.
1952.
21. Camp, A. F., DuCharme, E. P., and Knorr, L. C. Tristeza information
for Florida citrus growers. Florida State Plant Board Bul. 2: 3-31.
1953.
22. Knorr, L. C., and DuCharme, E. P. Thirty-three Florida rough lemon
seed sources tested for tolerance to tristeza. Citrus Magazine 15(12):
24-25. 1953.
23. Jenkins, A. E., Knorr, L. C., and Bitancourt, A. A. Notes on spot
anthracnoses and related subjects. V. Discovery of Tryon's citrus
scab in Argentina. Revista Argentina de Agronomia 20(4): 230-
232. 1953.
24. DuCharme, E. P., and Knorr, L. C. Vascular pits and pegs associated
with diseases in Citrus. U. S. Dept. Agric. Plant Disease Reporter
38(3): 127-142. 1954.
25. Knorr, L. C. Mancha juvenile de los citrus. IDIA (Argentine Min.
Agr. y Gan.) (In press).

Results of other researches will appear from time to time as
data collected in Argentina are prepared for publication.
With the closing of the laboratory in Argentina, work on tris-
teza was transferred to Florida, where new problems dictated
changes in the direction of research. Projects were set up in
cooperation with Dr. Mortimer Cohen to determine distribution
and rate of spread of tristeza in Florida groves. Since the diag-
nostic work involved in such a survey is considerable, an an-
cillary project was drawn up to find quicker ways of recognizing
infected trees. Out of this search has come the Honeycomb
Test for tristeza 3 which takes diagnosis out of the laboratory
and now enables growers themselves to recognize declining trees
on sour orange rootstocks.
It was soon evident, early in the work with Florida tristeza,
that the disease differed in many respects from tristeza in South
America.4 The need to elucidate these differences and to evaluate
their significance to Florida citrus growers formed the basis of
a project to determine factors affecting development of tristeza
in Florida.

SCohen, M., and Knorr, L. C. Honeycombing-a macroscopic symptom
of tristeza in Florida. Phytopathology 44: 485. 1954.
4 Cohen, M., and Knorr, L. C. Present status of tristeza in Florida.
Florida State Hort. Soc. Proc. 66: 20-22. 1954.







Twentieth Biennial Report


APIARY INSPECTION DEPARTMENT

H. S. Foster, Chief Apiary Inspector

The Bee Disease Law for the control of honeybee diseases
says that the State Plant Board of Florida may deal with Ameri-
can and European foulbrood and all other contagious or infec-
tious diseases of honeybees which, in its opinion, may be pre-
vented, controlled, or eradicated; and may make, promulgate,
and enforce such rules, ordinances, and regulations and do and
perform such acts, through its agents or otherwise, as in its
judgment may be necessary to control, eradicate, or prevent the
introduction, spread, or dissemination of any and all contagious
diseases of honeybees, as far as may be possible, and all such
rules, ordinances, and regulations of said Plant Board shall have
the force and effect of law.
Three important brood diseases are present in the apiaries of
Florida, namely, American foulbrood, European foulbrood, and
sacbrood. In general, these diseases have quite similar charac-
teristics. While European foulbrood and sacbrood are easily
controlled by requeening with disease-resistant stock, there is no
known cure for American foulbrood, the most destructive of
the three. The only safe and sure treatment for American foul-
brood is to burn bees and hive contents and disinfect the hive
body.
During the first year of this biennium, with only four apiary
inspectors working in the field, it was not possible to keep up
with the diseased condition as it developed. However, the in-
creased legislative appropriation which became available July 1,
1953 made it possible to employ seven full-time apiary inspec-
tors, and consequently a much larger percentage of the colonies
of bees in the State was inspected during the second year of
the biennium. This increased inspection brought to light the
presence of American foulbrood in a number of new areas.
In addition to the more than 250,000 colonies of bees owned
by Florida beekeepers, approximately 20,000 colonies of migra-
tory bees from other States are moved into Florida each year,
remaining for periods ranging from three to ten months.
Control of disease can best be effected by giving all colonies
of bees at least one thorough inspection each year. It is most
important that an inspection be made of commercial apiaries
before the main honey flow begins. If even one colony infected






State Plant Board of Florida


with American foulbrood is unnoticed during inspection and one
super of honey is removed from the diseased colony, with re-
sultant mixing of equipment in the process of extracting, the
disease may be spread to any number of additional colonies.
Another important factor in the control of American foulbrood
is the prevention of robbing of dead and weak colonies. Robbing
of a colony that has been weakened or killed by American foul-
brood may cause the disease to be spread over an area of sev-
eral square miles.
It is also the duty of the State Plant Board to enforce the pro-
visions of the Florida Bee Disease Law with regard to move-
ment of bees under permit from point to point within the State
and movement of bees and equipment from other States into
Florida, as set forth under Rules 41A-1, 41A-2, 41A-3, and 41A-4.
In past years, from forty-nine to fifty-one percent of the
American foulbrood found in Florida has been traceable to migra-
tory bees, or bees brought in from other States. Although these
bees are entered under certification of the State of origin, in
some instances disease is found within several days after their
arrival in Florida. When this happens, the bees are removed
from the State as required by Rule 411.
Florida ranks third among the States in the beekeeping in-
dustry, being surpassed only by California and Minnesota in
number of colonies of bees owned and volume of honey and bees-
wax produced.
Bees can be kept profitably in every section of the State of
Florida, which is fortunate in having some nectar-producing
plants in bloom in various areas during practically the entire
year. However, the most important function of the honeybee is
not the production of honey: Bees render a far greater service
to agriculture as pollinating agents in the production of seeds,
fruits, etc.
During the biennium ending June 30, 1954, one out-of-state
beekeeper was arrested for violating the Bee Disease Law. He
brought from Alabama into Walton County, Florida, 165 colonies
of bees in box hives. He was apprehended by an apiary in-
spector and a warrant placed against him. He pleaded guilty
and paid a fine of $100 and costs.
During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1953, 92,267 colony in-
spections were made in 3,259 apiaries in 50 counties. Ameri-
can foulbrood was found in 1,366 colonies, or .0149% of the
colony inspections. Sulfathiazole. was administered to 607 dis-








Twentieth Biennial Report


Inspection Records


Number colonies inspected ................. .... ..........
Num ber apiaries inspected ......................... .............
Number counties in which inspections were made ....
Number apiaries infected with American foulbrood
Percentage infected colonies of total colonies
in sp ected ...................................... .... ............. .... .....
Number infected colonies burned ..................................
Number infected colonies treated with sulfathiazole
Number apiaries in which new infections of Ameri-
can foulbrood were found .................. ........


1952-1953 1953-1954

92,267 1 135,168
3,259 5,102
50 57
449 683


.0149%
759
607


.0015%
1,494
677


220 339


Summary of



Year Ending



June 30, 1920
June 30, 1921
June 30, 1922
June 30, 1923
June 30, 1924
June 30, 1925
June 30, 1926
June 30, 1927
June 30, 1928
June 30, 1929
June 30, 1930
June 30, 1931
June 30, 1932
June 30, 1933
June 30, 1934
June 30, 1935
June 30, 1936
June 30, 1937
June 30, 1938
June 30, 1939
June 30, 1940
June 30, 1941
June 30, 1942
June 30, 1943
June 30, 1944
June 30, 1945
June 30, 1946
June 30, 1947
June 30, 1948
June 30, 1949
June 30, 1950
June 30, 1951
June 30, 1952
June 30, 1953
June 30, 1954


Apiary Inspection Work Since the Department
Was Created in July 1919


Apiaries
Inspected


394
753
837
1,016
803
675
676
796
1,248
1,297
2,273
2,374
2,744
2,219
2,305
2,445
3,344
3,544
3,451
3,371
3,414
3,711
3,671
3,347
2,646
2,371
2,265
2,464
3,266
3,710
3,082
2,872
2,836
3,259
5,102


Apiaries
Infected
Colonies with
Inspected American
I Foulbrood


16,121
18,078
22,522
23,848
22,806
21,378
16,756
23,791
20,115
32,442
44,645
45,238
44,211
42,307
43,877
49,379
73,415
72,795
64,668
70,655
76,851
81,950
83,354
80,823
73,649
69,262
71,161
87,674
98,147
105,678
105,296
95,405
88,206
92,267
135,168


Colonies
Infected
with
American
Foulbrood

104
33
34
30
13
58
22
34
74
85
182
114
74
76
132
167
131
98
173
416
234
371
698
524
456
379
959
683
391
406
369
772
578
1,366
2,158






64 State Plant Board of Florida

eased colonies and 759 were burned. Some colonies that had
been treated were burned when they failed to clean up.
The total cost of the department for the year was $31,459.87,
or an average per colony cost of approximately 34 cents.
During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1954, 135,168 colonies
were inspected in 5,102 apiaries in 57 counties. American foul-
brood infection was found in 2,158 colonies, or .0015%o of colony
inspections. Sulfathiazole was administered to 677 colonies,
while 1,494 were burned. As usual, some colonies failed to clean
up after being treated and were burned.
The total cost of the department for the year was $55,720.57,
or an average per colony cost of approximately 41 cents.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs