Arizona republican., 1913-07-12
MAKING \ STUDY
 OF CITRUS TREES
Mr. C. w. Hartranft Writes of Obser-
 vations of Bud Selection.

MT e. Winfield Hartranft who is in California making study Of citrus bearing trees, recently wrote MT. Dwight B. Heard of the result of his observations, as follows:
 Los Angeles. Cahf. June II, 1913. My dear MT Heard:-
 We have been out on the travelling course in citricuIture given by the Uni versity of California for about three weeks
 At Riverside we spent two days in the field with Mir. Shamel of the bureau of plant industry. Washington He has been working for the past four years on the question of bud selection with reference to the various types of citrus trees
 This appears to be a most interesting problem. 1 think it should have a very practical bearing on the citrus industry of the Salt River Valley since it is now desirable to propagate the stock at home.
 There are nine types of naval oranges all. with the exception of the Standard and Thompson's Improved, being more or less undesira ble One of the most prevalent poor types is called the Aus tralian. This tree is irregular in habit
  coarse In many cases the ratio of pro ductiveness of the Australian to that of the standard is as one is to fifteen. When it is understood that some groves are composed of as much as B per cent off type trees it is a wonder that they are profitable al all. The whole tree is not necessarily off type Different type branches often arise from the same bud and this phen- oninum is known as bud variation; variation within the bud itself. The di- vision of types sometimes comes in the fruit and we find half the orange with the characteristic skin of one type and half with that Of another. While q bud may be taken from perfectly good tree it. like some horses, does not throw true offspring In fact the buds from some trees never do. Apparently about go per cent of the trees are of this na- ture. Therefore a system of tests should be inaugurated. IL will require years to determine what trees are thoroughly suitable for bud cutting because We must wait until their progeny has ma tured fruit. The fruit characteristics are the only reliable means of identify Ing these types. particularly where there is only q branch or two in each tree At present the best that can be done is to cut only those bud stricks which have fruit at the ends. If the buds are taken near the fruit some in dication can be had of the probably results.
 Many nurSerymen secure their buds
 from the Australian trees because they look so thrifty The buds are plump and easier to handle than those of rT-l,z tf,,y, of sucker buds also enters here. MT. Shamel's experience indicates that they like the Australians are undesirable. Tn talking with the growers I have found them to be about equally divided on this point. For the most part they agree that sucker buds produce q poor lv shaped tree but there seems to be great deal of contention concerning the fruiting qualities of growth from such buds.
 Many growers favor MT. Shamel's theories and same are making perform ance records Of their trees. The object being to rebud individuals that are off type and poor yielders with selected buds
 IL is hoped that when these experi- ments by the department of agriculture are completed there will have been clearly demonstrated practical meth cd of increasing the fruitfulness of cit rus trees. After the great lessons
 taught by seed selection it seems reas- onable that bud selection should he fully as valuable for some fruits EX
 periments have already indicated that buds from Australians will produce Australians but it only remains to sub stantiate the fact by further inves- tigation.
 Yours truly