Part 8
Causes of mortality, as reported, were classified in five categories; losses prior to establishment, livestock and destruction, drought, insects and disease, and unknown (Table 1). Cause of mortality was listed as unknown for 42 percent of all trees reported dead. Field experience leads us to believe that most of the trees in this category probably succumbed to improper planting or complete neglect following planting. Many persons do not follow planting instructions; they often substitute their own methods with disastrous results.
Among the reported known causes, drought killed most of the trees--29 percent. We know black walnut is very susceptible to dry weather after transplanting. Weather records for the area show that the early growing season of 1941 was exceptionally dry; 1942 was also drier that average; in 1943 and 1944 near drought and drought conditions prevailed throughout most of the Tennessee Valley. Weather is usually blamed when a tree dies without apparent cause, but in this case the reported mortality due to drought appears reasonable.
Livestock, mowing, fire, and intentional removal were reported to have caused 13 percent of total mortality. Cows are curious animals and newly set trees seem to arouse all the curiosity in their make-up. Horses and cows apparently do not relish the foliage of walnut trees but they do bite at it, and in so doing usually break down the branches to such an extent that the tree dies. Some trees were accidentally destroyed simply because they had been forgotten. The next highest mortality cause reported was pre-establishment loss; this was blamed for 9 percent of the deaths. Losses resulting from delayed planting were placed in this category, also those where the report was "trees failed to leaf out." Insects and diseases were reported as causing 7 percent of the mortality.
=Growth and Bearing.= Those who plant improved black walnut trees naturally want to know how soon they will begin bearing. This survey shows that bearing begins much earlier than most people thought. Trees in 32 percent of the plantings established between 1939 and 1944 were bearing by 1946. Of these 342, 113 began bearing 2 to 4 years after planting; 120 bore their first crop after 5 years; 109 began bearing after 6 to 8 years (Table 2). According to the reports, the earlier plantings were slower to come into bearing than the later plantings. This probably is not a true picture. We suspect that after six or eight years the actual date of first bearing had been forgotten in many cases.
Growth was reported in terms of total height for each tree. These heights were then converted to annual growth rates for trees 3 to 8 years old and placed in arbitrary classes are follows: low (less than 1 foot) medium (1 to 2 feet), and high (over 2 feet). Test plantings in North Carolina had the highest growth rate; those in Mississippi, the lowest. In other states, growth rates fell between these two and were quite similar for the most part (Table 3). Average for all trees was 1.6 feet per year. Trees averaging less than one foot of height growth per year were slow to come into bearing. Only 14 percent of the trees in the low growth rate class were bearing. On the other hand, 71 percent of the trees with a high growth rate had come into bearing. Growth of black walnut, following recovery from transplanting shock, depends on site conditions and tree care. Trees set in fertile soil with an adequate moisture supply and kept free of livestock and other damage make rapid growth. Trees set in poor, thin or droughty soil do not make much growth if they survive at all. Black walnut is very sensitive to any wounds and, if subject to mechanical or livestock damage, growth is retarded.
Cases of exceptional growth and bearing were reported. One in eastern Tennessee is worthy of brief description. There were two trees in this planting set approximately 40 feet apart. One was on the edge of a garden; the other, in a chicken run. In seven years the first tree grew to a height of 32 feet--an average growth of 4.5 feet a year. It began bearing in 1943 and produced a crop of nuts each year up to the time of the survey. The 1946 crop, reported as a light one, yielded 3.5 pounds of kernels. The other tree, shown in Figure 1, was 18 feet tall, having averaged 2.5 feet a year. It also began bearing annual crops in 1943, and in 1946 it had a very heavy crop for its size, yielding 2.5 pounds of kernels. Here are two Thomas trees of the same age planted practically side by side; one is almost twice the size of the other, but they both began bearing annual crops three years after planting.
=Field Survey in Sample Area.= To check on the adequacy of the questionnaire survey, 108 test plantings in eastern Tennessee were visited and inspected. Forty of these had been reported on by mail; 68 had not. In general, the trees had been planted on the best sites available. Some were set out in farm orchards (Figure 2); a large number were planted in yards as combination nut and shade trees (Figure 3).
Field examination of the 40 plantings which had returned questionnaires revealed conditions very similar to those reported (Table 4). Survival was found to be 75 percent compared with a reported 77 percent. Average tree height was reported as 9 feet; actual height averaged 11 feet. There was some hesitancy in reporting tree deaths caused by livestock; 4 percent was reported while 23 percent was found. Such mortality was usually listed as unknown on questionnaires.
Information collected by field examination of 68 plantings which had not returned questionnaires and the 40 plantings which had returned questionnaires is shown in Table 4. Trees were found to be 2 feet taller in the 68 plantings but these trees averaged one year older than trees in the 40 plantings. Trees in the 68 plantings averaged 13 feet in height compared with 11 feet. Average age at first bearing was very similar. And here is a revealing discovery; livestock, mowing, and fire were responsible for 47 percent of the tree mortality in the 68-planting group, compared with 23 percent in the 40 plantings. This is perhaps one reason why the persons involved in these 68 plantings did not return questionnaires; it also explains most of the poorer survival. A large number of trees were planted in pastures and elsewhere without adequate protection from livestock. Even when cattle guards were used they were generally too small or weak for tree protection. Severe livestock damage resulting in poor growth and eventual death of trees was encountered frequently. We are inclined to believe that livestock accounted for a much higher percent of tree mortality than that reported in this survey.
The high percent return of questionnaires in this survey, followed by a field check in a sample area, provides a good picture of Valley-wide plantings. Since survival was found to be lower in plantings which did not return questionnaires, an actual overall survival of 64 percent may be slightly high. Other spot checks in the field will give more information on this point.
Discussion
Interest in improved black walnut is mounting in the Valley. As the test plantings came into bearing farmers were quick to see the superiority of these nuts over the wild ones to which they had been accustomed. Word spread from farm to farm, and as a result there has been an increasingly large number of inquiries about sources of improved varieties and cultural treatments. The interest was reflected in the questionnaire survey. Nineteen percent of the questionnaires returned contained unsolicited comments of one kind or another. A large percentage of them showed evidence of interest such as: "the nuts are large and easy to crack," "where can I get more grafted trees?" Only 7 percent implied disinterest: "the trees are slow growing," "the nuts are faulty."
This test-planting project will be completed in 1948. The plantings have already yielded much valuable information on the Thomas variety; they will yield much more as the trees become older. Further studies are planned on nut yield, nut quality, and tree growth in relation to the varying conditions existing in the Tennessee Valley.
Summary
Farmers in the seven Tennessee Valley states established 3,286 test plantings of Thomas black walnut in cooperation with state extension services and TVA during the period 1939-1946. A questionnaire survey in 1946 showed 81 per cent of the plantings still active and 64 percent of the trees living. Tree growth averaged 1.6 feet per year. Age at first bearing varied from 2 to 8 years, with 5 years most frequently reported.
[Illustration: Figure 1. The Thomas variety appears well adapted to Tennessee conditions. This 7-year-old tree began bearing annual crops 3 years after planting. In 1946 it was 18 feet tall and heavily laden with nuts yielding 2-1/2 pounds of cracked-out kernels. (Hancock County, Tenn.)]
[Illustration: Figure 2. Black walnut makes an ideal combination nut and ornamental tree. This 8-year-old Thomas has been producing nut crops for 3 years. In addition, it has enhanced the beauty of the lawn and provided welcome shade. (Anderson County, Tenn.)]
Table 1.--Number of Questionnaires Sent and Returned, Reported Tree Survival and Cause of Tree Mortality by State.
Questionnaires Trees Reported State Sent Returned Planted Living no. pct. no. pct. Alabama 161 44 274 45 Georgia 50 28 26 62 Kentucky 174 49 241 54 Mississippi 19 58 72 26 North Carolina 586 40 733 71 Tennessee, East 1,386 40 1,516 66 Tennessee, West 720 44 809 61 Virginia 180 48 160 84 All 3,276 42 3,831 64
[Illustration: Figure 3. Thomas tree planted in the farm orchard. This young tree has received excellent care and began bearing at 5 years of age. (Hancock County, Tenn.)]
Reported cause of tree mortality
Pre-estab Livestock, Insects, Total Planted -lishment destruction Drought diseases Unknown Trees Lost pct. pct. pct. pct. pct. no.
Ala. 11 7 51 2 29 150 Ga. 30 10 0 20 40 10 Ky. 2 2 46 4 46 112 Miss. 19 4 49 0 28 53 N. C. 15 16 12 13 44 223 Tenn. (E.) 7 18 20 7 48 515 Tenn. (W.) 8 9 38 7 38 318 Va. 32 12 12 4 40 25 All 9 13 29 7 42 1,406
Table 2. Number of Bearing Thomas Plantings Established 1939-44, by Age of First Bearing and Growth Class.
Plantings Age in years at first bearing Growth rate Year Number 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Low Medium High
1939 27 1 6 10 6 4 1 19 7 1940 112 2 14 39 41 16 9 58 45 1941 89 1 4 17 35 32 1 58 30 1942 71 1 12 18 40 1 34 36 1943 38 1 13 24 1 21 16 1944 5 5 2 3 All 342 3 36 74 120 83 22 4 13 192 137
Table 3. Tree Survival, Growth, and Percent Bearing by State and Year of Planting
Plantings Trees, Growth, Bearing State reported survival annual trees number number feet percent
Alabama 71 124 1.6 65 Georgia 14 16 1.5 18 Kentucky 85 129 1.5 71 Mississippi 11 19 1.0 29 North Carolina 235 518 1.9 25 Tennessee, East 553 1,007 1.5 32 Tennessee, West 318 491 1.6 32 Virginia 86 135 1.6 0
Year of planting
1939, 1940 255 627 1.6 64 1941, 1942 499 693 1.6 44 1943, 1944 326 558 1.6 18 1945, 1946 293 561 1.5 0 All 1,373 2,439 1.6 32
Table 4. Data Obtained from Returned Questionnaires and Actual Field Examination of 40 Plantings and Field Data Only on 68 Plantings.
Data on 40 Plantings Data on 68 Plantings Questionnaire Field Field Tree Survival, percent 77 75 51 Average Height, feet 9 11 13 Cause of Tree Mortality, percent Pre-establishment 33 42 11 Livestock and Other Destruction 4 23 47 Drought 13 0 0 Insects and Diseases 8 4 2 Unknown 42 31 40
West Tennessee Variety, Breeding and Propagation Tests, 1947
AUBREY RICHARDS, M.D., Whiteville, Tennessee
I surely wish I could have made the trip to the Northern Nut Growers Association meeting, but I simply had "too many hens setting" at that time. I've been waiting for you [the Secretary] to show up down here for the big news--at least it is to me--if it holds up. If you have ever tried to propagate heartnuts on Japanese walnut you know what it means.
Here it is: Rhodes, Wright and Fodermaier heartnuts patch-budded on 10 Japanese understocks (all I had) took 100%. The same 3 varieties as a control on black walnut gave a take of only 80%.
These trees give me a chance to check on the performance of black versus Japanese stocks for these varieties. From last year's propagation, Rhodes on black is beating Rhodes on Japanese and Bates (which was not used this year) seems fully as good on black walnut stocks.
An isolated tree of Bates did not set a nut. Its pollen all shed before the pistils were receptive. An isolated tree of Rhodes bore a full crop.
Incidentally, a weak chlorine bleach (Clorox) after these heartnuts are hulled does for them what peroxide does for the ladies and makes them look very inviting.
Stambaugh again led in topworked black walnuts, bearing its second consecutive full crop on a 3-year graft. It seems to be immune to whatever it is that causes the other nuts to turn black, shrivel and drop off from the time they set until near maturity. Thomas was second. Snyder, Sparrow and Myers had no crop. I budded 25 more trees of Stambaugh this year.
The Carpathian Persian walnut that we pollinated this spring with Wright heartnuts [no other walnuts were shedding at the time] matured a nice, large, rather pointed, heavy nut. It also matured another nut higher on the tree than we could reach with the catkins, but I'm sure it's a blank. It is still more pointed than the well-filled nut. The good nut is stored for planting.
Rush hazel that set fruit last year with the help of a bouquet of native [West Tennessee] catkins set only 5 nuts this year "on its own." These I have also stored to plant.
I didn't have enough stocks to utilize all the pollen-sterile Japanese chestnut buds you sent me [in early September]. I put in most of them, even in some cases several to the stock to see what percentage of takes we would get with the twin T. [See 1946 Report of N. N. G. A., pp. 87-88, for a description of the Twin T budding method.--Ed.]
Here are the percentage takes for chestnut propagation this year. Of course I don't know how many of these buds will later drop off.
1. Pollen-sterile Japanese on Japanese stock. Late summer buds 100%
2. Austin Japanese on Japanese Stock. Late summer buds 86%
3. Hobson Chinese on Chinese. Late summer buds 75%
4. Zimmerman Chinese on Chinese. Late summer buds 50%
5. Colossal hybrid on Japanese stock. Spring grafts 60%
I had a nice crop of Chinese chestnuts on my young Hobson and Zimmerman trees. The 1947 nuts were exceptionally large. One 3-year seedling bore 1 bur with 3 nuts fully as large. Connecticut Yankee bore for the first time, 3 nuts to a bur, but very small, scarcely 1/2" in diameter. (You will notice I budded none of this variety!) (Perhaps mislabeled seedling.--Ed.)
I have about 100 nuts from isolated trees that were hand pollinated, as follows: Austin x Hobson, Austin x Zimmerman, Hobson x Austin and Hobson x Zimmerman.
I have altogether 3 quarts of select nuts stored in the refrigerator. So far they are keeping nicely. (I dusted them with Fermate, hope it doesn't affect germination.)
Notes on Some Kansas and Kentucky Pecans in Central Texas
A letter to the Secretary from O. S. Gray, nurseryman at Arlington, Texas, October 28, 1947, has some interesting notes on two standard northern pecans, three new varieties from Kansas, and the Moore variety, one of the earliest maturing among southern pecans:
We are propagating Major and Greenriver from Kentucky; Coy, Tissue Paper and Johnson from southeastern Kansas; and Brake from eastern North Carolina.
Several years ago we used quite a few pecan trees of the Moore variety in planting around Tulsa. We though it would be a dandy because of its early maturity in the fall. I find that early fall maturity is only one important factor. The other is the date of starting growth in the spring. Moore seems to start out a little early in the spring and that disadvantage seems to limit it in the Tulsa, Oklahoma area. I also believe this might be a factor in using this variety in northern locations. [Moore originated in north Florida from Texas seed--Ed.]
I have been considerably impressed with the Johnson variety. It matures two or three weeks ahead of Moore in the fall. The only data that I have was made in 1944 when Moore buds began to put out on March 25, Stuart and Success--April 5, Johnson--April 5, Coy and Major--April 8, Greenriver and Tissue Paper--April 10.
The Johnson matures on our place several weeks ahead of Major and Greenriver although I don't have the exact date on maturity.
Experiences of a Nut Tree Nurseryman
J. F. WILKINSON, Rockport, Indiana
In pioneering a nursery as we did in the early days of propagation of Northern nut trees, especially the pecan, it was necessary to first locate parent trees in this section that were worthy of propagation, in order that the nursery stock produced from them would be hardy in this and more northern territory.
Along the Ohio and Wabash rivers and their tributaries many thousands of large seedling pecan trees grew naturally, and to locate some of the most worthy ones for propagation took the combined efforts of all of us in this section who were interested, as well as the aid of the tree owners and nut gatherers.
In the year 1910 three nut nurseries were established here in Southern Indiana, two of which have long since been discontinued. Before that time a very few propagated pecan trees had been produced in an experimental way by some fruit tree nurserymen.
Little did I realize at that time the trials and headaches that lay in the path I was to travel in this venture, such as locating the parent trees, securing the graft and budwood from them, learning to keep this wood from time of cutting until used, methods of propagation, trying to educate the prospective tree buyer as to the value of these trees, and to believe that pecan trees could be transplanted, and that they would bear if the taproot had been cut, and many other things.
Production of nut trees in nurseries in this northern territory is so different, and more difficult than in the Gulf Coast country, where I spent a part of two seasons hoping to get information that would be of value here. What I learned there was of little or no value here, so it was up to us to solve our own problems in this section by experience, as there was very little in print at that time on Northern nut tree propagation.
One of our first problems was to learn to keep cions from time of cutting until time of use, not knowing when that time was. We tried all times from March until May, having little success at any time. At first we kept the scions in a cold storage plant in Evansville, and at a temperature of around 32 degrees, and in wet moss. Later we found it much better to keep scions at home in a cellar at a higher temperature, and in only slightly dampened sphagnum moss.
In the beginning our efforts were mostly in grafting, then after a year or two of failure, probably largely due to the way we kept our scions, we had some results at the McCoy Nursery, with scions kept at home. The McCoy Nursery was about four miles from my place, and located in a sandy soil with a near quicksand sub-soil. At that location they were later reasonably successful in grafting, using the modified cleft graft.
My nursery is in clay soil with a hard stratum of soil three or four feet below the surface, and because of this I have been unable to graft pecans in the nursery, though I have tried every known method, and under all conditions. I could successfully graft at the McCoy Nursery, then use the same scion wood and the same method at home, but have a complete failure; therefore, I turned to budding entirely on pecans in the nursery.
It is somewhat different with walnut--I can get fair results with walnut grafting at times, though I do very little of this, as more than 95% of my walnut trees are produced by budding.
I do a lot of topworking on native seedling nut trees for others. Mr. Sly, who is with me, and I make one or more of these trips each spring. For this work I use only the slip-bark method, shaping the scion a little differently from any other I have ever seen used. This has given splendid results everywhere I have used it, which has been over the territory from Ohio to Oklahoma.
A certain amount of allowance is made in this work as to safe drainage of the stock, depending on weather and soil conditions, which vary as, to season and location.
I do practically all of my nursery propagating by budding, and one of the most essential things is to have favorable sap conditions in budwood as well as in stocks.
On walnut I use only the current season's growth of wood for budwood, and it must be reasonably well matured. Very often sap in the stock may show signs of leaving before budwood is matured enough for use, and only the riper buds near the base of the bud stick can be used, in which case the rest of the buds on the bud stick are lost. Sometimes sap in the stocks can be held a few days longer by cutting a ring around the stock above the place where the bud is to be placed, which checks the flow of sap to the upper part of the stock. Sap in the stock must be in a favorable condition to hope for good results.
In budding pecan it is different. Either the current or the past season's growth may be used with about equal results, though the current season's buds must be well matured. Very often in a dry season when there is evidence of sap leaving the pecan stocks earlier than usual and the current season's buds are not well matured, I use the past season's growth until the new growth is mature.