PA mo moe ry _ Loe ee 2.78 2. ae Ye BUD SELECTION. 4 ‘4 By oN R. E. Caryl, B.S. Contents. Page. Int roduct i on 6 e e e e e e ® e e e e e e e e 1 Tree Census Records . . ..« «ee ceeeecece 2B Bureka Lemon, Rancho Sespe NO. 24,. « « « 5 Bareka Lemon, Chase Ranch, . . . « «e+ « 37 Lisbon Lemon, Linoneira Ranch . . . 2. 38 Ruby Blood Orange, Block 30,Call Estate . 46 Individual Tree Performance Records ..... 51 Block 24, Rancho Sespe, . . . «s+. 60 Production Records . « «««e«+se«eeecece 97 Correlation of Citrus Characters ...... 101 Conclusion . . « «e«seee ee eo eo ow eo eo L1G menrBe.e Ahr. oe Re meme ne, amy t es ~ ead s } THES!S sie swe Me .- BUD SELECTION. BY R. E. Caryl. For the past twelve years bud selection has been the most interesting, valuable, and generally-accepted horticultural practise that has claimed the attention of the citrus fruit growers of California. The work of bud selection was first started by Mr. A. D. Shamel of the U. S. Department of Agriculture in 1909, with a systematic study of bud variability in the Washington Navel orange and was later extended to include all the leading varieties of citrus fruits, such as the Valencia and Thompson Seedless oranges, the Bareka and Lisbon lemon varieties, and the Marsh Seedless grapefruit. The writer has been associated with Mr. Shamel in the work of securing individual lemon tree performance records of the Eureka and Lisbon varieties since Nowember, 1914, first as lemon=picking foreman and individual tree performance record keeper on the Rancho Sespe, located at Sespe, California, one of the largest lemon groves in that State, and later in the work of the U. S. Department of Agriculture in California for the improvement of citrus fruits through bud selection. free census records have been obtained from nearly all groves in which individual tree records have been kept for the purpose of locating the off-type or “sporting" trees and non-productive type trees, so that they could either be eliminated or re-budded to pro- ductive strains of the variety. In nearly every instance where 94622 ~2- non=-productive trees have been cut back and re-budded with selected buds taken from productive type trees, the result has shown the importance and the success of bud selection. Commercially, bud selection has been in general practise throughout the State, especially in the propagation of citrus trees. | In 1917, a Bud Selection Department was established by the California Fruit Growers Exchange for the purpose of furnish- ing selected buds from superior trees of all the leading citrus varieties. The success of that department has resulted im the use of selected buds by practically all citrus nurserymen, as the growers are no longer willing to buy trees of uncertain parentage. Bud selection is also being applied to the propagation of deciduous nursery trees and in time will doubtless be as well estab- lished as it is in the citrus but as yet not enough experimental work has been done in the old orchards to determine the amount of bud variability in the deciduous varieties nor have sufficient individual tree records been obtained to detemmine reliable sources of bud wood. The tree census records and the individual tree performance records presented in this thesis were seaured by the writer in the course of his investigational work while with the Rancho Sespe and the U. S. Department of Agriculture. From a careful study of these tree census records of the various varieties, it will be seen ~3- that the orchards from which they were taken are made up of a number of different strains which have been proven to have arisen from the propagation of bud variations. The commercial importance of this propagation of bud varia- tions may be clearly seen from the fact that quite a number of them are very unproductive as compared with the best and most productive strain of the variety, so that there is a considerable difference in the profit per acre in any grove where there is even a small percen- tage of trees which were propagated from bud variations. These poor-type trees came to be propagated by nurserymen because they were apparently the best trees in the grove and were selected for bud wood purposes on account of their size and luxuriant foliage and the large size buds which the tree produced, these being thought easier to work with in the budding operations. Since the introduction of the practises of bud selection, all of this has been changed so that now only fruit wood buds are used for propagation. No bud stick is cut from any tree unless it has a typical fruit of the best strain of the variety attached to the stick. This is considered as a sort of trade mark by the bud cutter and the chances of a poor tree being grown from such a bud stick are very small, as the fruit which is attached is a very good indication of the kind of fruit that will be produced by the trees grown from that particular bud stick. As the work of individual progeny tree performance records progresses and the fruit produced by them is compared with that of ao» 4 = the parent tree, it is becoming more and more evident that bud variations in the standard citrus varieties are heritable and that by the careful selection of buds from the best and most pro- ductive strains of the variety the uniformity of future citrus groves will be greatly increased. Tree census records, such as those presented in this thesis, are quite similar to those which have been secured for scientific and commercial purposes and consist of a systematic study of the individual trees in a given citrus orchard. Particu- lar attention in tree census studies is given to such characters &@s the strain of the variety, the general shape and character of growth of the tree, the presence or absence of sporting or off-type fruits, the quality, shape, and size of the leaves, and the general appearance of productivity. A careful tree census study when backed up by two or three consecutive years of individual tree per- formance records is the most reliable method of indicating the pro- ductivity of a grove which has yet been divised. These tree census records were secured in citrus groves of the standard citrus varieties in the two leading citrus producing sections of the State of California - viz., the Corona and the Santa Paula sections, an inland and a coast section, respectively. - §- Tree Census ecords. Block 24 Rancho Sespe The following Tree Census Records were obtained from the Lureka Lemon grove on the Rancho Sespe, located at Sespe California and com- prise the greater portion of the trees in the tract #24. The trees for which no records were obtained are ones Which have been budded over or replanted since the freeze and hence are of a different size and age than the better portion of the grove. The freeze mentioned above was in the winter of 1912-1913,and was the worst in the history of the Citrus industry in California. Kow 16. Tree Number, l. 9 10. ll. 12. Dense Unproductive type, rough fruit, crumpled leaves, a few sports, and & poor type of tree. Eureka strain, »roductive type, dense, good fruit and leaves. sureka strain, peductive type, dense, very good tree. . pureka strain, productive type, rough fruit,leaves medium to large. Open strain, coarse fruit, small leaves,uorignt braches. cureka strain, good fruit, good leaves, upright spreauing. Eureka strain, good fruit,medium size leaves,few sorts. aureka strain, good fruit, glv0d leaves, spreading tjpe tree. sureka strain, good fruit, large leaves, large tree, productive. Dureka strain, vroductive type, good fruit, good leaves. Dense »roductive, rough coarse fruits with a few sports, and good leaves. wureka strain, vood fruit, good leaves, upright spreading. - 6 - ‘ree Census lkecords. iow 17. ee ree iumber. 10. ll. le. 13. Dense Unproductive type, rough coarse fruit, few sports. Small Open type, good fruit, good leaves. Dense Productive type, good fruit, good leaves, large Spreading tree. Hureka strain, very ,-0od tree, good fruit, good leaves. mureka strain, medium size tree,upright,svod fruit. gureka strain, so.reading, good fruit, good leaves,few sports. sureka strain, large spreading tree, gooa fruit and leaves. Dense “roductive, large spreading tree, large leaves, few sports =nd coarse fruit. Small Open, good fruit and small fine leaves, uureka strain, very uniform branching, g00d fruit, good medium size leaves. Dense Productive, rough coarse fruit, crumpled leuves. Small Open, few sporting fruits, fine leaves. hureka strain, upright soreading, large, g,vod fruit. iow. 18. Small Open, rougn fruit, small fine leaves. Dense Prouuctive, large spreading tree, coarse fruit and crumpled leaves. ,urexa strain, very good tree, good fruit. uureka strain, productive tive, good fruit, good leaves. Small Open, coarse fruit with a few sports, fine leaves. Sureka strain, coarse fruit, spreading tree, good leaves. lsureka strain, good productive tree. sureka srain,g §00d productive tree, ow 18, Tree Number. Fe 1G. ll. 12. 13. 1. ae 3-6 13. 14, Hurexa strain, ~ood productive tree, good fruit, good leaves. Eureka strain, Very good tree, upright spreading, good fruit. omall Open, few sports and coarse fruits, small leaves. sureka strain, medium size leaves, good fruit. Eureka strain, upright spreading, very good tree, fruit and leaves. Row 19. Dense Unproductive, shade tree type, small tree, large leaves, coarse fruit. Dense Productive, rough coarse fr.it, crumples leaves. Hureka strain, good fruit, good leaves,s:»reading tree. Dense vroductive, large s:reading tree, coarse fruit, large leaves. Sureka strain, good tree, fruit and leaves, spreading. Dense Productive, somewhat soreadiny, larg. leaves. Sureka strain, fine leaves, .ood rrvit, but tree bears in alternate years. sureka strain, good tree, small leaves, few sports. Sureka strain, large spreading, productive tree, good fruit. uureka strain, rough coarse fruit, fine leaves, spreading. Surek:. strain, very good tree, fine leaves and fruit. uureka strain, very good tree, fine leaves and fruit. bureka strain, spreadin; type, ridged fruit, corse leaves. pinail Open, few sorts, crumples leaves. ow 20. Tree ::umber. 1. 10. li. Lae 13. 14. opmall Jpen, dense and upriznt tree, rough coarse fruit, crumpled leaves. Dense proauctive, dense spreading tree, good fruit and leaves. Sureka strain, .ood tree, fair fruit, small leaves. Dense -roductive, large soreadiny, tree, coarse fruit. ‘ureka strain, well shaped tree, productive, few sports. Dense Productive, large upright spreading tree, coarse fruit, crumpled leaves. uureka strain, spreading, good fruit ana leaves. sureka strain, ¢00d tree, .roductive. Vunse “roauctive, large spreading, coarse fruit. Gureka strain, very good tree, ,ood fruit, ,ood leaves. iureka strain, very good tree, good fruit, .ood leaves. sureka strain, productive, few sports. EurekK:: Strain, productive, coarse fruit, s reading. sureka strain, productive, ood rr.it, good leaves. now el. small Open, fine leaves, cozrse fruit. omall Onen, s reading, fine leaves, ¢ood fruit . SJurek2 strain, spreadiny, coarse fruit, productive. sureka strain, .pright spreading, s00d Truit. sureka strain, proauctive, ,ood fruit, good le=uves. Nureka strain, vroductive, coarse rough fruit. iow el. Tree Number. Te Shade Tree, unproductive, large spreading, coarse fruit with 8. 9. Le ° ll. lie 135. 14. 10. ll. Cf 2 ow @ many sports, crumpled leaves. sureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves. Shade Tree, un»roductive, spreadirng,coarse fruit, large leaves. iureka strain, ¢ood fruit ani leaves, productive. sureka strain, productive, soreadiug, some coarse frit. sureka strain, productive, uvright spreading, good fruit. nureka strain, »roductive, very good tree. Surek2 strain, good fruit and leaves,prodcuctive tyve. Row. 226 vumall Open, some coarse fruit, small leaves. Dense unproductive, spreading, crumvled leaves, coarse fruit. Dense Productive, large tree, svreading, coarse ridged fruit. Sureka strain, oroductive, good fruit and leaves. cmall Jpen, productive, good fruit, small leaves. Small Open, slightly spreading, coarse fruit. omall Onen, productive, ood frit, small leaves, uprig.t. oumall Open, productive, good fruit, small leaves. Small Open, procuctive, sood fruit, few sports,smail leuves. aureka strain, productive, svreading, good fruit. sureka strain, cozrse fruit, one branch crumpled leaves. mureke strain, pwroductive, svreading, good fruit. - 10 - 20W_ eR 13. sureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves. 14. bureka Strain, productive, few crumpled leaves, good fruit. LOW gd-6 Le Dense Productive, large spreading tree, coarse fruit, some crumpled leaves, fair tree. Ee Dense rroductive, large spreading tree, good fruit. 3 vmall Open, good fruit, small fine leaves, productive. 4. nureka Struin, productive, good fruit, ,ood leaves. De aureka strain, good fruit, few sorts, good leaves, productive. 6. sureka strain, productive, spreading, good fruit. e 7. Kureka strain, oroductive, -ood fruit, fev. soorts, one bianch crumpled leaves. 8. ®ureka strain, productive, good tree. 9. sureka strain, productive, spreading, coarse fruit. 10. Sureka strain, productive, very good tree, good fruit. ll. lureka strain, proauctive, very good tree, good fruit. 12. Nureka strain, .,0od fruit, good leaves, »roductive. 13. ureka strain, productive, good fruit, ,ood lexves. 14. aureka strain, productive, fev sports, coarse fruit. OW 2@,. Tree Number. 1. omall Open, spreading, coarse fruit, fine leaves. Re Dense Unproductive, spreading, large crumplea leaves, coarse fruit. t N Je 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. -ll- Row 24. Dense Productive, large spreading tree, large leaves, coarse fruit, few svorts. Shade Tree, spreading, unproductive, large crumpled leaves. coarse fruit, few sports. ureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves, upright. Eureka strain, productive, coarse fruit, large leaves. Dense Unproductive, large spreading, coarse fruit, crumpled leaves, few sports, Dense rroductive, spreading, coarse. fruit, large leaves. Hureka strain, sood fruit, good leaves, spreading, productive. pureka strain, good fruit, good leaves. productive. Sureka strain, good fruit, few sports, productive. imureka, strain, vroductive, very good tree. - ‘Burekz strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves,spreading. now 25.6 Tree out. Small Open. productive, coarse fruit, small leaves. Dense Unproductive, spreading, large lezves, coarse fruit. Kureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves. Hureka strain, productive, coarse fruit, few sports. sureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves. Shade tree, unproductive, large spreading tree, coarse fruit, few svorts, large crumpled leaves. Dense Productive, large leaves,coarse fruit, few sports, -~12- Row. 25. Tree Number. De mureke strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves. 10. sureka strain, productive, few sports, good leaves, spreading. ll. pureka strain, productive, upright spreading, good fruit. 12. bureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves. 13. Dense Productive, soreading, few sports and crumpled leaves. 14. Bureka. strain, productive, spreading, good fruit, good leaves. 15. bureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves. Row 26. Tree N er. l. Bhureka strain, productive, coarse fruit, good leaves. Re Eureka strain, productive, coarse fruit, spreading, few sports. Se sureka strain, productive, very good tree. 4. Sureka strain, productive, good tree, some coarse fruit. 5. Sureka strain, oroductive, good fruit, good leaves. 6. gureka strain, productive, coarse fruit, few sports. 7. Dense Unproductive, large crumpled leaves, coarse fruit. 8. pureke strain,productive, good fruit, ;ood leaves. Ye Young replanted tree, Sureka strain. 10. bureka strain, coarse fruit, large leaves, spreading. ll. Eureka strain, vroductive, good fruit, sood leaves. 12. “urek: strain, oroductive, coarse fruit, good leaves. 13. Bureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves. 14. Eureka strain. »>roductive, some coarse fruit, ,ood leaves. -13- Row 27. Tree Iiwnber. 1. Re De 4. Se 10. li. 12. 15. 14. 15. De 6. le Hmall Open strain, small leaves, coarse fruit, upright. Dense Productive, large crumpled leaves, coarse rough fruit. Hureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves, spreading. omall Open strain, good fruit, small leaves, upright. Bureka strain, productive, very good tree. Kureka strain, productive, coarse fruit, spreading. sureka strain, vroductive, good fruit, one branch crumpled leaves, spreading. uureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves, upright. Hureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves. Eureka strain, productive, coarse fruit, good leaves, upright. mureka strain, prouuctive, spreading, coarse fruit. Bureka strain, very good tree. Hureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves. Sureka strain, coarse fruit, few sports, food leaves. Young replanted tree, some coarse rough fruit, good leaves. Row. 8. Omall Open, productive, coarse fruit, few sports, good leaves. Dense Unproductive, large spreading tree, coarse fruit. Dense Unproductive strain, spreading, crumpled leaves, coarse fruit, few sports. Dense Productive, spreading, lurge leaves, good fruit. Dense Productive, spreading, some crumpled leaves, good fruit. Bureka strain, productive, good fruit, good leaves. Eureka strain, good fruit, few sports, roductive, wori,sit, gooa fruit and leaves. Cpen strain, uorignt, or-cuctive, good fruit and leaves. Oven strain, productive, :ood fruit and leaves, few sorts. Qo9en strain, o.roductive, uprigut, good fruit and leaves. Buil strain, soreadine, large leaves, good fruit, few svorts. uisbon str@in, prouuttive, small leaves, good fruit. ulsbon Str@in, upright, very .ood tree, fruit and leaves. uisbo.: strain, oroductive,vervy -vod tree. wisbon strain, >rouuct:ve, very cood trec, fruit and leaves. Bull strain, -roductive, unri-ht soreedines, larce lezves. voorting strain, unoroductive, entire tree »roduces cor- ru;jatua Fruit, lar;e leaves. Lisbon strain, uodri,nt, alternate bearer, good fruit und leaves. Lisbon strain, »oroductive.. vod tree, Yruit and leaves. Liston stréin, ; roductive, very food tree. tense Unproductive, large leaves, coarse fruit. Open strain, productive, good rruit and l-.aves. Bull strain, «roductive, lar:e leaves, alternate bearer. wisbon strain, wroductive, good fruit and leaves, few sorts, - 43 =~ 2 .OW+s Oe free ‘.unber. a4 Lisbon strain, oroauctive, yoo: fruit @nu leaves, woricut. 256 uisbon strain, productive, .vod fiuit, FeW Sports, smail leaves. } L206 uisbdor strain, productive, ~-ooad fruit and leaves, upright. al. Bull ctraiu, svreadins, good fruit and large l-uves, productive. 2B. Lisbon strain, wori:it, sroductive, ~o0d Truit and leaves. 29 6 Ooi stosin, woright, unproductive, large leaves, coarse fruit. 50. Dense Unproductive, spreaving, coarse fruit, larcse leuves. jl. Q,en strain, uprigit, good fruit and leaves, productive. 326 Oocn strain,uoright, unoroductive, .ood fruit, large leaves. OW 446 el. Open strain, alternate besarer,:o0a fruit and leaves. whe Oren strain, upori: nt, alternate bearer, ood fruit and le:ves. 23. Lisbon strain, upri-ht, »oroductive, very 00d tren. nk e Liston strain, .rouuctive, very , 00a tres. 206 uisbon strain, »rodauctive, very cood tree. nOe Oven struin, usripgut, unoroductive, coarse fruit anu larve leuv-:s. oT e Yoon strain, pright, uriproductive, few sorts. _fiow 49. Ve Lisbon strain, upri-nt, very (ood oro -uctive tree. 21. uisbon strain, very :ood vroductive tree, few corru:ated fruits. az. Lisbon strain, very «ood sroductive tree. oe Liston strain,voriclt, ver ood tree. = 44 « ROV. koe —— Tree liwouber. : 1S. Lisbon vetrain, upright, productive, $090d Truit @nd leaves. 20. Onoen strain, . ri, ht, »diroauective, few sports, good fruit. 21. Lisbon stri:in, uori f.t, »rouucttive, soud fruit anu leives. 22s Quen strain, svoreadiny, »roductive, ood fruit and leaves OW 47 1S. Licbo*. strain, uprisgat, vroductive,:o0a fruit and Leaves. 20. wisson strain, productive, upricht,very good tree. el. Lisbon strain, seortins, brancn of riboed fruit, productive. ~* re “A OW “a 8 e 1&. Licbon ctrain, uorignt, vroductive, very ,ood tree. 19. Lisbon strain, vsright, productive, s.ortin;: branch ridged fruit. 20. Bull etrain, cnoreadin:., larse leaves, meny sports. ~ r row 4S. 16. uicbon strain, productive , worigit, very good trec. Tree vensus lhecords. Block 30 Czll Ustate. Tne following cree Census i:ecords were obtainea from the Ruby Blood Orange grove on the Call Ustate whicn is located at Coroné, valif- ornia. ‘This ,rove was selected on account of the very high percentage of soorting trees producing annual crops of off-tyne fruit. Several absolutely worthless ty»oes were fourd in this grove, especially the Dry Blood tyne which produces fruit that is practically four frifths rind and one fifth dry juiceless pulp. This grove is badly broken up with inter-plantings of the hureka Lemon, Washington Navel Orunse, and the St.Micheals Oranje but for the purposes of this study the Ruby Blood Oranse only has been used in the collection of tne Tree CensSus records. Block 30 Lot 8, Tree Number, lLl-15- 3 Soorting type, Navels and bloodless nxuby Blood oranges. 15 - 4 Productive type, large tree, good leaves. lf = § Productive type, typical oF the variety. li - 7 Productive type. 15 -10 uporting type, navels and ridged fruit 15 -11 Productive tyne. 15 -le Sporting type. navels and bloodless or dry sports. 15 -1J. Productive type. 15 -1LE rroductive type. 15 -16 sroductive tyoe, good leaves, dense, upright. - 46 - Tree Number. l=-=lo- 2 :rouuctive type, lurge tree, dense, upiight. 16 - 4 Productive tyne, medium size tree, uoright. lo - 7 Proauctive tyne, good leaves anu fruit. lo = 8 Sporting type, navel bloods, ridj,ed and collared fruit. lo - 10. Prouuztive, 00d leaves anu typical fruit. lo - ll nporting type, few navels. 16 - 12 Sporting type, few navels and ridges fruits. lo - 18 Sporting: type, branch of bloodless fruit. row 17. 1-17 = 2 Productive type, good fruit and leaves, upright. 17 - 3 Productive tyne, large upright tree, good fruit. 17 - 4 productive tye, large upright tree, good fruit and leaves. 17 = 6 Productive type, dense foliage, ;ood fruit. 17 - 7 Productive iype, good fruit, good leaves. 17 - 11 semi-productive tyne, large leaves, upright spreuuin:. 17 - 12 Sporting type, navels and raised rixzged fruit. 17 - 13 Productive type, very good tree. 1% =~ 17 Productive tye, large tree, upright. 17 - 18 nemi-productive, large upright tree, laege leaves. 17 = £1 Productive type, dense foliase, good fruit. 17 = 22 Productive tyve, large tree ty.ical fruit. ~ 47 - Row 18. Tree lumber. i-18 = ] Productive tyvne,goou fruit and leaves. 1-18 - 3 Productive type, upright, good fruit, very »ood tree. 18 = 4 rroductive type, lar;e uoright tree, good fruit. l&E - 6 pemi-snorting, type, productive, .ew navel sorts. 18 - ll Productive ty e, large uvrighttree, .o0od rruit. 18 -.13 semi-productive, few sports, large upri:ht spreading. 15-14 Sporting type, navels, corrugated and ridged fruit. now 1G: l1-19 = 2 Sporting type, navels, ridged, corrugated fruit. 19 = 6 sporting tyve, uprignt snreading;, many sports. 19 - 7 Productive type, U.ri;nt, gvod tree. 19 - 8 ScOiting type, navels, ridgea and corru,uted fruit. iY - vemieproductive tyve, large upright spre ding. 19 = 10 Productive type, sporting limb of dry fruit. 19 = l2 vProductive tyoe, large uvri, ht tree, very .oud. 1g - 18 Productive tyne, .ood fruit anu leaves, upright. 1g - 19 uporting type, dry fruit on one limb, few navels. 1g = 21 Nemi~-productive, lacrge unorigit tree, few syvorts. OW 206 l1-:0- 1 sporting type, navels, thic. rind and dry fruit. 20 - 3 productive tyve, ;,00d upright tree, good fruit and leaves. Tree ..umber. _ ‘ S | = el - 6 el - 8 2l- 9 él -1l el - 135 el - 14 2l- 16 - 48 « row 20. semi-productive tyne, large upright tree, good fruit. Productive tyoe, good fruit and leaves, upri: nt. Productive type, dense foliage, good fruit, uoright. Productive type, good fruit and leaves, slightly spreadin;. oporting tyne, navels, corrugated and dry fruit. Productive type, good fruit and leaves, uprignt. oporting tyve,large limb having dry fruit only. rroductive type, gvod rruit ana leuves, upright. Sporting type, navels, rid;ed, corrugated fruit, spreading. Semi-productive tyne, sporting limb of dry fruit. Productive type, upright, .ood fruit,good leaves. Productive type, «ood fruit and leaves, upright, dense. DNemi-sportin;: tyne, one branch of drg fruit i.e.,no juice. Oporting type, large dense tree, navels, raised sections. Productive tyve, ,ood fruit and leaves, upright. vemiesporting tyne, many off-type fruits, dense, spreadin;;. oporting type, navels, and dry blood snorts. Productive type, good fruit and leaves, upright. @roductive type, good fruit and leaves, dense, large. OW £2. vemi=-productive type, gooa fruit and leaves, fev svorts. yporting type, navels, ridged, and corrugzeted fruit. = 49 - rOW Coe Treg iumber. L=- 22 - 6 Proauctive type, good fruit, good leaves, upright. 22 =< 10 ~emi-productive type, few svorts, good leaves, upright. 22 - 11 Productive type, one sporting limb of dry fruit. 22-12 Productive type, snorting limb of navels fruit, upright. 22 - 15 Productive type, good fruit and leaves,scnreading. 22 - 16 Productive type, good fruit and leaves, upright, dense. 22 - 17 Productive type, : Tree loOe : — «Ep GD ©) GP om a oe oe ae _—o we am =P l , #> QQ 09 0 M~ IM tn Oo te : el: be? ed : ea; Or, wo a6 : o . ~ e " e ~ e ° ; ~ e 24-58 =3 oO 66—+0 56-41 FRAO Bot 56-37 66-28 5-41 5bd5<29 F6=39 5237 55-58 F6=—C6 con 87 55-56 Ob—37 7 GF ‘ew wo ni 6 4 FR ted poe O - ae em en enon en tn cn cn Gn tn ¢n ©. ON TI Gle toiosestst 4 ek G2 C2 GH CY Oa mmooaa wd al ee rhs ~~ mA S-41 2-39 2-40 53=10 ¢ en ) .@lght of ~ 97 - "CORD. .ounds : fruit 4 G4 tn a ow ‘ES 07 w Ok 1U5 188 187 ee @e oe ee ee ee @e ee ee ee oe ee ee oe @e ee Fruit. Tree 1916 .? ii0e ~ounds rruit ag are om 28 8 © 0 ae 9 OD Oe 8 ee OB Oe So 8 OE eS SO ee Se ; 1 ; oe ar) “IM On H- @ @ : $8 . G ® ow ~~ — t ee te. ~ GA bh Oo en we ee ee he O ~; ww @ eo, es . e e ten » €. : wl: . ON, e bw ows 0 e Ar, e e ow e e - ie e bu do > P5: © Zt : 20: a ° oO” s CQ © wide nD 2: 293 vr : oO: ~4—52=56 56-37 F6-41 b5-39 2-37 55-41 06-40 “| F ee OF e nm n crete Coro 55-56 66-36 06-08 65-28 Hl =-59 ER=-33 63-59 Ck ee o3- =30 Dd—-10 vbn-41 Be =40 B2-41 L7G 4.7 cel ‘myer ‘£0 try 3 EOE 4 NEN > a 1C9(siéil dwarf tree} L172 " o_O ee ee ee a we ee ee ee oe we a aes ae <2 one ee ee 8 oD ee 8 ee ee ee -9 en 8 we 0 ow ew oe oe oe a oe ee -~ 98 - ihe: oF r- rt rr mote $ TNT mWO-Yoar wivore 3 Of Dross in Sict. ‘Trea indurber averare Velgrt Greue : : OUNGS e : 1 2 2-52-36 : VE. 5 : lL 7 : Fowd : ‘rOG : ‘ 3 : Ppa] : “Deo : gt Fred A1L5 s i CA l « ‘4 Oo en ae ee eres tn on ("to Ge eg ens. © I be C1 C i C7 wy | Pad » An: as fs eo ~] i Qe — O eo em en 4 ey -On wn pS Cone h tT? ICInN Coen nowy wt: ll : Er =—O . 21605 ° 1 oO : Ho-G7 O29 > Ls J es me rN oO OS8.5 > 12 ‘ts e os \ _ Kot or * LS : cee 7 , SIO >: 17 16 : Comoe : JO4 > dl 17 : Ox ed > 41S ern i i TC G2) O L& : Seed : Cuwe ae 19 : be bO : O57 Ss : 1g 20 : B=-37 : Creed 5 ok w : b-+-39 : D4000 > 16 ne : F=36 : 275.5 > ke roe : BORO : 271.5 Dok Ook : ANH SS : SOE > gt ~5 : Ege) ; ova 208 WO : Epa 4] : £0 2 8 n : tQecl : LE3 2 3 wa : BL H5S : 288 > 25 io : Be R40 : 122.5 2 OS o0 : 63-10 : wee > 28 amp oF os a OO am ome ED OD GD cee OD ae ED 8 ce 608 Oe OS 8 et 8 eee or ee GE SD gt ee GD Se ces ee — op com GED om GE SR eww ow ow we a ee oe — 99 Guced nevtir three tines as rue! that tue fruit of the oroductive tye wes of a finer yuciity and more even in Size ard snipe tran tee fruit of the ouGde Tree etrein. Td rt muar@ a better ana mor: conercete comouricon of t.sse two str-ins tne sarc lemon wiriegty, the follo.ine fTilures nave been te: en from the o-raduction record of t.ece JO trees to sow tue difference in tus vrofit .er acre; aver. @ ror ©) tress, go3.1lc ibs. L1C0O trees wok e etiere would be OCo1Z Los. per acre Dacned box - CO lbs. fruit Cef Goenedi boxes per acre per yeur eS a0 eer box - ~LilG. 10 er acre ber yeur. averiice best 10 trees = 424.05 lbs. LOO trees = it495 ibs. per ccre. Leo GK og a 70087 DOKOS POEL Your GQ DS yoeOCO = YlilO.71 per acre per yecr. —_ wve averarce 10 poorest trees = 250.65 1bs. 160 trees = £6965 lbs. per acre O°” = nay oD. . \ eer. es mua wO5en? packed bones C: a ~ Oo y~Se00 = y798.71 ber acre ver veur. In the first problem tre first or best 10 trees Were toxren ead tee Gvereve of tucir production obtuineu. Mee@lr averise Was neuriy «ff pounds cer tree, euuivealent to an income of pride 71 per eere -er year, vrovidiny: an secre of productive type trees averaging -100 - » 420 pounds could be found. By takin; the averzve of tne poorest 10 it is found thet eacn tree Would produce 23¢.6: pounds ver vear, or 4n income of only ,798.71 oer acre per veer. The aver- ae for the oO trees, wnicn contuin the trees of botnr types, is 203.13 pounds ser tree »er year, or an income of .1126.10 »er acre per vyeur. Therefore, we find that the productive type produced 86.82 pounds »er tree more tnan the averase ver year , hile the snede Trees produced 98.438 pounds ver tree less tnan the AVE Ta28. Tnere was a difference of 185.60 )ounds per tree per year between the averaje of the best 10 trees and the average of tre poorest 10 trees. “itn sucn &@ larse uifference in yield in pounds per tree per year &s 185.30, the financial loss to the citrus industry from tie presence of sucn non-productive trees is almost beyond belief. In fect, the avera:e grower is unable or else not willing to believe tnat there is sucn u sreat difference in the trees in his grove and, of course, When he stops to ficure up the loss he would have to stand for « few zreurs while his poor trees were beirg tcp-wor:.ed to u better and more productive struin, he is almost sure to decids to let tne old trees ramain ond refus: to fisure chead to the time wnen tne trees would nay him for his trouble by tneir increased “roducticn. - 101 Correlation of Citrus Characters. From daily observation of the different characters of Citrus var- ieties the opinion had been formed by the writer that certain definite correlations existed between several of the most important characters but up to the present time no one has secured any accurate mathematical evidence of these correlations. In presenting the following correlation tables the number of éndiv- iduals in each population is too low to allow very great accuracy but it is felt that the correlation coefficients obtained are sufficiently high to indicate that there is a very definite correlation between the characters considered. In the consideration of the correlation between the weight of fruit and the number of fruits produced by 117 trees of the Eureka lemon var- iety we have found the highest correlation of any of the characters con- sidered to occur. A correlation coe€ficient of .9653,shown in Table 2 clearly indicates that these two characters are dependent upon each other and that there is a very striking choherence between the two characters of weight and number of fruits. The correlations between the percent of variable fruits anu the per cent of green grade fruit for both the Eureka and Lisbon lemon varieties “indicates coherence between these characters as shown by the coefricients of .7755 for the Sureka strain of the Sureka variety, shown i. Table 3, and .6709 for the Open strain of the Lisbon lemon wariety, shown in Table 4. This fact would indicate to the grower that as the number of green fruits on his trees increases the number of off-type or variable fruits also increases. TABLE I Correlation of Chareacters in turek@ and Lisbon Varieties and their Strains. Correlation Coefficients. 7 —r ~ : Characters | ~ercent rercent Total Onsidereu weight Number | Variable Green amount Fruits rruit rruit ~ | ™ weight . 09663 Sy lyumber 00855 3 rercent of e/755 Bi Variable Fruits ,720998 5 oUuUreKn.. se wvemon Percent of .6709 OS mA 02608 3; Varict; Green Grade Fruit pe ~t— 0605S OS] ™-.. total amount 62026 Og cept nee ss “7 e ~ ew 36 dL Lo ~,, of srruit | Lisbon Lemon Vzriety In the above Table of Correlation Coefficients of tne Correlated vharacters considered in the Sureka and Lisbon Lemon varicties and tueir Strains v.e find only one ne ative correlation between chareters while all tre rest are rositive. The uboreviations use. in tne Wreka Lemon var= lety side of te table ure as follows; 0 for tne Surcna strai. S ror tne Snal. Open str..in The abbreviations for the Lisbon Lemon veriety are as follows; OL Tor tre OQnen strain TT. i sor ile Lisoon etrain. - 103 - Notations on Correlation fables. In each of the following correlation tables the abbre- viations used are as follows: f — Class frequencies of the total papulation with re- spect to the correlated characters. V = Value or measurement corresponding to a given fre- quency. M = Mean D = Deviation of correlated character from the Mean (M) for that character. = Standard deviation Yr = The coefficient of correlation. The formula used in the calculation of the correlation co- efficient in the following correlation tables is the one worked out by BE. Davenport of the University of Illinois and used by him in his book "Principles of Breeding". It is not necessary to include in this work all of the mathematical calculations but the method and the formula used in obtaining the figures in the various arrays of the tables is as follows: so D — Deviation of the class value from the Mean. Average Deviations _FD f Oo = Standard Deviation r= £&P the correlation coefficient. Fa ® - 104 = TABLE II Correlation of Weight and Number of Fruit in 117 Bureka Trees. -0-0-0-0-0-0~0-0-0-0-0-0-0- fieRmMisoeerPint Nts wii Number rOrnm1Oriatiorint es $M tp pew ec POPS ST ST RSE 59.40 !29.70! 10.90 | 5.455. 29. | 2 15-14 -<---= ert ent tn = de nn tenn dn nn qn nn te qe np ES nn Te OO 22048 aS 67 Ot ded 107.10 411.90 | 31.05 | 3.45! 112.5 | 9 1 © 113-12 64.00 | 6.00} 22.05 | 2. 451 103.5 1 9 tL telota 112-11 52.50 | 2.10 | 36.25 1145! 262.5 125 4 | Pt tt dde10_ _.2.001 201 4.50 | p_245,_ 95.0 110 fd sO - | 10-92 ~-7:80_| __-50_1-14.30_1_-.551 221.0 426 1 Biwi bt 98 12,00 {2.40 1 -7.75 [-1.55| 37.515 ) t Fat | 8-7 62.00 } 6.50 |-20.40 {-2.55] 52. 8 Lod o | 7-6 o> am om 6 CD 2S © Or ©* On a Oo oD ge? oe of om = @ Pap oo em em mw an ap ae a em om ee oe =: =» == - 83,00 112.60 |-17.75_|-3.55{ 27.5 | 5 tint ce: 165. 60. 120.70_ ~36.40 -4.55 56. 8 re ~“ 7 Lp. 74 92.40 130.80 1-16.65 1-5.55! 10.613 te 1 4-3 85.80 '42.90 1213.10 176-55; _ 5.12 no | —- —— ern eae Penman an an an EP mae aD a em mn ae Fore ereqererrns- a> a woe Pe re “me pTee ewe 852.60 | 1253.55 1069.5 ‘Ai ot SP St bt ot win Bie BEB SL BL ot Mean = 2059-3 = 9.06 © I R oe 1 I< Ave Deviation= 295255 _ 2.16 < | s i ev winx bs 1c 117 b wage 4S A Hapa d iad aos S =] 882260 2.68 Ao & rio tetet | =|"117. += i bs E a priate ir vig i OP OPP ES SES! ote | a) of Ot ore i wl ei rwik is : nl & In 7 or Ss We mt ont aia |S @| B Ye rE Spat at ote ke, sta Min Nl nini ns if _— co © Te) te) © oO Ie tw a \ | TRS & wiopoerarStiei ow e “i, 8 PPI at ai a & on ' OPE wtiwolat rial @ ite G3 > oO ~J © > “I I - - “T--+---4 & Stede eiad et Yr we 1715.02 = .9663 rioloaia Set ore 117(2.69) (5.64) : t ~ | t { { . 4 ' ' ' . I t I § . -~ + - e - -—— -_ — ee eet a ~ —_— = nr - 105 - TaBLE III Correlation of the Per Cent of Variable Fruits to Per Cent of Green Grade Fruit in Hureka Strain. Per Cent of Green Grade Fruit. £ fp Vel 5048.05 381.04 uM = 4721. 68.12 6 76 Ave.Dev. — 981.04 — 5.01 76 = Fy 3048.05 _ 6.33 Be a 76 ® 48 Cg m= _6.35 — 10.19 il 9 62.12 me i rs ~ jr || ; a "NS e © o - A tl ll eS nw bh i | 4% o ll ° S f€ 3 )0o cn © o fe oe fw i} te 1S ca o 6S ~° ° o o “I ™m 3 r= Dade _ 1030.7 — .7755 Na a _-76(6.33)(2.91 - 106 - The correlation between the total amount of fruit and the per cent of wariable fruits in the Open Strain of the Lisbon lemon variety is mich higher than the corresponding correlation in the Sureka and the Small Open Strain of the Sureka lemon variety. The coefficient for the Open Strain of the Lisbon lemon variety is .2025, shown in Table 5, while that for the Bureka strain of the Sureka lemon variety is .08535, shown, in Table 6, This would seem to indicate that the Open strain of the Lisbon lemon wariety produces a higher per cent of variable fruits than the Eureka strain of the Sureka lemon variety. The coefficients are considered high enough to indicate some coherence between these correl- ated characters but in the case of the correlation between the total amount of fruit and the per cent of variable fruits in the Shade Tree strain of the Eureka lemon variety we have a disherence as shown by the negative coefficient of -.0998 as shovn in Table 7. Could the number Of individuals in the populetion of this group have been larger the result would probably been different and in the favor of a coherence as the Shade free strain actually produces a bery high ver cent of var- able fruits. The most important of these correlations between characters of Citrus fruits to the grover, is the correlation between the per cent of green grade fruit and the total amount of fruit produced. As the green fruit is the most valuable it is the grade most highly prized by the grower and fortunately we find that the correlation coefficients between the Characters of per cent of green grade fruit and the total amount of fruit are comparitively high, indicating the dependence of one upon the other TABLE IV - 107 (Open Strain) Correlation of Per Cent of Green Grade Fruit to Variabie Fruits. RHEE EKHKEREKR KK KEKEREK HREKK|EK KER | t { i i ! tot | o:+1io1o1no?1 dO 4 O | : " ? ‘ ! Q 1 Per Cent of Variable fruit. # OH olor ¢ ‘vOD £ Di pe fo =P ~——s ee ee ee ee eee cree QMS 12! 1 ft tet 701-8261) 60.27 72.13] 518.91 | 949.29 2-14 44 bait 2 2 ttt 6 178 15.617 55.66) 52.47 | 188.82 1 213.85 15-174 tb kt et Zt 3 ts 1208 1-2.611 35.95) 6.81} 88.53 | _ 30.33 1e-20 4 Fy 4 [iz f0 f 2 y2e 532 1.391 10.921 0415) 4.20 | 13,82 e1r25) jt at et 2 tg 26 1552 | 5.59) 54.24) 12.49 1185.34 276.89 24-268 boob tt gt 4 1200 1 6.39) 25.56) 40.83) 163.52 1 146.46 _ gr eo thn bb ty 88) 9259] 9259, 8817 88.17 | 89.02 30-35 as Oe yi! 31 _'12,39! 13,39;153.51 | 153.51 | -6.44 33-35 t 14 1 1 1} 34 (15.38; 15.39) 236.85 | 236.85 | -8.00 ie poocbocn bon cbennbowaban nba nob nn nn fon cnn eb mn nnn nat shrsc ass 1 at 114338 1255.75 1 1626.15 11605.22 et tO La a fp ro. en 1433 rigiaiaieigia la meen SO TT aT LS | 255.75 SO pnp AVOCDEVe = ae S608 SIOIiaiaiat a | o P Ales ef ef ©} of © | 4 WQ borer rit ta | 4.59 o g aigislalegisigia : SB ASISIS ISAs is Bo a A Sigidigisigidig go 3 cS lo bo bk iI nw T tt © Im tn inmnininitinr ! 19 “lo Sari st wee Vi Spy ale Bl ia a | e AZISiS: 1Bisi Bye | Is SIs ° it ts v1 1 + USE wie oad rrr --| + “—— cr {| 5 3 in c IN 1 wo } Iota tora a Sgi®l@IQINi Sita gz , eigizsieidigia gs ¢ v S wtigint teiote as M Ay tet 1 nt a) ~~ we ee - 108 - TABLE V Correlation of the Per Cent of VariableFruits to Total Amount of Fruit. Open Strain Total amount of fruit in pounds. f Dé £D D D fV 348855 .57 eS 36082 .50 Mean — 96082.5 _ 468.60 : 77 ty Ave. Dev. a 4391.5 — 59.63 " 77 ¢ a Boe m O =| 348855.57 _ 67.31 \ o Bf “4 77 oy % a < ry —-/: \ t | ati ‘ | i -d | b j A 4 \ 4 4 4 | l :-————eor f 0 - ----4---4---4 8 2 i l — 122 train Mean = 1784 ‘ ‘ | al. | ' ' + f Vv 4 14030 AVG. Deviation= 122228 _ =5 56 - ll2 - Lisbo | i \ 31.82! 4655 17 1.62! 1905 13 61.82! 2780 !4 wwe we nw... 22 L.-J J ee doe 91.82! 725 11 ap = a = --P_____f£.V__f___ Pounds. CS mi196.74 7057 22 68.18 | -58.18 575 i 84.54 | -28,16 1815 13 b ( ‘ i ( 4 4 4 a 7775.71 1176.56 | -88.18 1090 ( ( { to the Total samount of Fruit. wone- 4 + +L 5.46 148 .18 1-148 .18 485 11 Fruit i _f£_D 222-74 | 247 228 rT ' 91.82 1054.56 — 58.03 15 % { i i Correlation of the Per Cent of Green Grade Fruit — 635.18 ___D 794.11 3.31 22 58.03 _ 9 21957 .31 $384.91 1012.51 3821.71 8430 .91 14030 Mean= ——355— Ave. Deviation = 74091 .22 633.18 9.93 ao coo cn we an co ms oe a a nae os ee tee es ae co ectace ce aes ws oa me we as oh a ee we ae ae ceen es a wow oe len ce oe =e me Total «mor f Dé 21957 .31 3384.91 wee we mene ee Lo 23582 0335 7087 .57 weween eb ee 6 = CG 8430.91 on one aan ae an aw con wwe on he ae aces oe ane ae eee ow echelon ce eee ones mbm tae mano mmm 74091.22 | 15551 .42 15286 .84 02004 =» —_——_ eae 22(58.03) (7.37) - 113 - TABLE IX Correlation of the Per Cent of Green Grade Fruit to the Total Amount of Fruit. Eureka Strain. Total Amount in Pounds. p f D* £D 110252.32 As Mean — 17420 _ 229,21 76 Ave.Deve _ £515-68 — 30,44 be A + 76 @ 0252 é =e Pa O wm |110252.32 — 38.19 yl S 76 ay 5 salon] faa . oe) i ale mo vo S| ig : Ij Oo > lt * fe ws 5 i" wg on @ ¢ my @ et ®S az r—__ 4875.17 _s_s . 2608 76(38.19) (6.44) AT°GLOF) 36 ———— SSS = Van GD qt» oa cena ways, aeairmnt a - 114 - TABLE X Correlation of the Per Cent of Green Grade to Total Amount of Fruit trai Total Amount of Fruit. f D* p2 fD 528488 .00 T68% Mean — 36825 — 476.24 77 2 Ave.Dev. — 4253.80 _ 55.24 ql 77 o - B O =) 328488 _ 65.31 Oo & FF = 77 ll e 3 > age y 6210 e > @ ~1]@ ~1] @ ° Il “I]} 0 5 o| jp 2 i 8 a ow @ “i oe ts Xe] ll wn w . s 3 z -" @ co * 3 22120.13 ee ae 77(65.31) (6.92) 26359 ET° OZTeg - 115 = fhe figures from which these correlation coefficients were obtained were taken from the United States Department of Agriculture Bulletins Number 813 entitled " A Study of Bud Variation in the Eureka Lemon ", and Number 815 " A Study of Bud Veriation in the Lisbon Lemon } which are an account of the work of lir.A. D. Shamel and his associates in- cluding the writer, in the work of the improvement of citrus fruits thru bud selection. Isolation of Types thru Bud Selection. In order to prove the theory that citrus fruits could be improved and that the various strains of the various citrus varieties could be isolated thru bud selection two variety orchards have been established, one in Riverside and one in Corona California. The buds from which these trees were propagated were fruit wood buds taken from every dif- ferent strain of each of the citrus varieties which had been studied in the bud selection work. Many of these strains were commercially worthless to the grower, Others produced fruit of undesirable shape, low in acidity or sugar content, coarse in texture, and some were the very best that have so far been discovered in the citrus orchards of California. These two variety orchards were planted in May 1916 and the se- curing of individual tree performance record data was begzun by the writer in May 1920 vhen the trees were just two years old. Only the most productive strains have borne much fruit but all of the trees have borne enough to enable us to have full confidence in the theory that the different strains of the citrus varieties can be and have - 116 - been isolated thru careful bud selection. Conclusion. Bud selection has proven to be of very great value to the Citrus industry of California. It has taught the growers that there are many worthless trees in their groves which lower the average production of the grove and which they can ill afford to care for. Tree performance records as & means of determining the productive and the non-productive trees has become an established part of the work in the largest and most successful of the citrus plantings. The method of selecting buds for the propagation of young trees has been put on &@ reliable and accurate basis. Formerly buds were secured from the best looking and fastest growing trees because the buds were large and easy to handle but tree performance records have proven that tre:s of this type are usually drones or"shade trees” and th:t buds taken from them produce progeny of thy same kind. All this has been changed for the better so that now buds for propagation are taken only from the fruit bearing wood of the most productive trees from which tree performance records have been secured for a period of at least three consecutive years. Nurserymen have been relieved of the responsibility of securing their own buds as this operation has been taken over by the growers themselves thru thvir organization the California Fruit Growers Ex- change, commercial nurserymen now eurnishing the growers with trees - 117 - the parenta;:e of which is a matter of record often in their own groves. It is hoped tht this thesis has presented some of the most val- uable phases of bud selection and that it has made clear that thru careful bud selection the valuable strains of the citrus varieties may be perpetuated and improved and the worthless eliminated. ot mah \ t (St ate A ot