Chapter II: Part 2

The statement of MR. MEEHAN, in the April number of the Farm
Journal, alleging that he has observed the sexual characters
of the Strawberry flowers to be variously modified by
culture, or different methods of treatment—has elicited some
strong asseverations of _opinion_, in contradiction to that
allegation of _fact_. One writer unhesitatingly declares the
alleged change to be “_utterly impossible_:” and I understand
that in the Queen City of the West, they have had a _public
gathering_, to deliberate on the subject, which resulted in a
_Pronunciamento_ adverse to MR. MEEHAN’S statement,—his facts
and observations being _rejected_ by a clear majority of the
voters present! The matter being thus _settled_, by preamble
and resolution after the manner of political difficulties at a
war-meeting, it may seem to be out of order, now, to offer any
remarks on the controverted topic. Nevertheless, as this is
reputed to be a Free Country, I should like to be indulged with
the privilege of submitting a few suggestions,—if not in arrest
of judgement, at least as a plea in mitigation of the sentence,
against my friend MEEHAN. It is the remark of a vigorous and
sagacious modern writer, that “no scientific question was ever
yet settled dogmatically, nor ever will;” and I think the same
may be especially predicated of questions of fact, in Natural
History. I may here observe, that I was favored with the
opportunity of examining one of MR. MEEHAN’S specimens,—in
which there were certainly two scapes from the same root—one
bearing a cyme of _pistillate_ flowers (with minute rudiments
of abortive stamens,) and the other a cyme of _perfect_, or
hermaphrodite flowers: and whether the specimen was the progeny
of a pistillate, a staminate, or a hermaphrodite plant, I
should think the inference plausible, that the flowers on at
least _one_ of these two cymes, must have been a modification,
or altered product, of the parent plant. It is this kind of
change, in the character of the flowers, which I understand
MR. MEEHAN to announce, as having occurred in plants under
his management. Now, in view of the countless modifications
daily observable in the organs of plants—and especially in
the _floral organs_—I can perceive no sufficient ground for
declaring the changes, reported by MR. MEEHAN, to be “_utterly
impossible_.” The modifications here referred to, are a very
different thing from the alleged _transmutation of one kind to
another_,—which is vulgarly supposed to take place in certain
plants, just as the Alchemists formerly pretended was affected
among the metals. They merely alter the texture, distort the
forms, or affect the developements of organs; but do neither
change nor annihilate those _essential characteristics_, by
which the plant is rendered permanently distinct from every
other genus and species. The floral organs of many plants are
remarkably subject to modification, under the long-continued
influences of soil, climate, and culture, or management.
Some flowers are rendered _double_, as it is termed, by the
expansion of stamens into petals; others become imperfect, and
even neutral, by the abortion or blighting of the stamens, or
pistils, or both. The _Strawberry_ appears to be very liable
to this kind of blight; and hence the much talked of sorts,
among cultivators, of _pistillates_, and _staminates_,—though
in all the pistillate flowers, which I have examined, there
were _vestiges_ more or less obvious, of abortive _stamens_,
on the rim of the calyx. It also varies much, under culture,
in some other features,—especially in the developement and
character or quality of the _receptacle_, or what is commonly
regarded as _fruit_: but no one, I believe, has yet seen a
Strawberry plant transmuted into a _Cinquefoil_, though so
nearly allied in habit. The organs of plants may be greatly
disguised by the influences above mentioned; but still the
essential distinguishing traits are preserved,—and there
seems to be no insuperable obstacle to prevent a plant, with
modified or abortive organs, from reverting, under a change
of circumstances, to its original condition, and resuming
its pristine form and character. The normal, or what may be
called the _constitutional_ character of the Strawberry-flower,
is to be _perfect_—_i. e._ furnished with both stamens and
pistils (possibly such may be the true normal structure
of _all_ flowers); and although many other plants, as the
Strawberry, are found with _imperfect_, and even _neutral_
flowers,—every Naturalist and careful observer knows, that
there is often an obvious effort and tendency, in such flowers,
to a more complete development: _i. e._ to become _perfect_
and _regular_. We occasionally see _diandrous_ flowers become
_didynamous_,—and _didynamous_ plants developing _regular
petandrous_ flowers; and it is not at all unusual to find the
_staminate tassel_ of the cultivated Maize (_Zea Mays, L._ a
_monoicous_ plant,) bearing _fertile flowers_, and exhibiting
a very successful attempt at the production of an _Ear_—or
_cluster of Ears_—of _Indian corn_. These instances, I trust
(for it is needless to multiply them,) may suffice to show that
there is nothing irrational, nor incredible, in MR. MEEHAN’S
observations; and that it is rather strong phraseology,
to declare such phenomena to be “_utterly impossible_.”
The polemic writers on this Strawberry question, speak of
the necessity of staminate plants among the pistillate, to
produce, or perfect the _fruit_. No doubt, the pistils must be
fertilized, in order to produce _seeds_ that will vegetate.
But what do those gentlemen understand, by the “_fruit_?” Do
they mean the little single-seeded _akenes_ or _nutlets_, which
are sprinkled over the enlarged pulpy receptacle,—or do they
refer to the _receptacle itself_, which in popular parlance
is intended by the term “_fruit_?” If they have reference to
the _real fruit_—the _nutlets_ which contain the seed,—there
is probably no question (as already intimated) about the
necessity of staminate influence to produce perfect fruit. But
I have a suspicion, that by the term “_fruit_,” they mean the
delicious _receptacle_ which bears the fruit, and if they mean
to allege that the pistils must be fertilized by the stamens,
_in order to produce that enlargement of the receptacle_
which affords an _esculent substitute_ for fruit,—then I have
only to say, it is a _question of fact_ which I have had no
adequate opportunity to determine; and concerning which I,
for one, should be happy to receive reliable information. To
ascertain the point satisfactorily, would require very careful
experiments and observations. Whether such have been made, I am
not informed. I may remark, however, by way of _analogy_, that
there are instances in which _pistils_, and even _receptacles_,
are enlarged, where no staminate influence has been exerted.
The conglomorate coalescent _pistils_ of the Osage Orange
(_Maclura_,) for example, attain to their full natural size
(although the _seeds_ are necessarily imperfect,) where no
staminate plant is in the neighborhood; and, what affords a
closer analogy, the including _receptacle_ of the _pistillate
Fig_ is fully developed; when entirely free from any staminate
influence. Whether the _receptacle_ of the _Strawberry_ ever
enlarges, without the pistils being fertilized, (as already
stated,) is more than I can tell; but I feel well assured, that
any competent authority, who may furnish the information, will
make an acceptable contribution to physiological Botany.

W. D.

_West Chester, June 6, 1853._

THE STRAWBERRY QUESTION.

MR. EDITOR:—Who among horticulturists has not heard of the
“Strawberry Question”—has not wondered at the opposite opinions
held by eminent cultivators, and perhaps like myself has
been surprised that the spirit of inquiry has not been more
generally diffused concerning a subject of so much importance.
Is it because our instructors cannot come to a unanimous
conclusion upon it, that we pupils in horticulture have been
doubtful about expressing our opinions upon it, or have we
never studied the subject for ourselves but left them in their
wisdom to decide it for us? I was in this position waiting for
their decision, but as it was not likely to be forthcoming, I
resolved to study the subject for myself, have done so this
season, and will give you my experience in connection with the
“Strawberry Question.”

The points of difference between a staminate and pistillate
strawberry flower are so marked that a very casual observer
cannot fail to notice them at once, for in staminate varieties
the flowers are lax, the sepals of the calyx appear alternately
with the petals of the corolla, the stamens occupy the most
prominent place in the flower, rising half their length above
the central pistils, are very much swelled at the base, and
very large compared with the other parts of the flower, anthers
broadly heart shaped, large, and producing abundance of pollen.
Pistils, loose, long, and having a barren appearance, which is
soon proved by their withering away, and leaving the stamens
masters of the field. The embryo receptacle when it does
exist at all is very much flattened, and in the most of cases
cannot be said to exist at all, the pistils being inserted in
the thickened cup of the calyx. All flowers that have this
appearance in these varieties, very soon wither away and leave
this impression on the mind of the observer, that they were
surely staminate varieties. But as all staminate varieties do
not thus wither away, but many of them produce fruit, it may be
asked are the flowers all the same in appearance. It is here
where the peculiarities in this class are met with, for there
are few but what produce some fruit, and as real staminate
flowers could not produce this fruit, it would readily be seen
that staminate varieties produce two sorts of flowers; the
one where the organs are unequally balanced which produce no
fruit, the other where the flowers are perfect and are fruit
bearing. The appearance of the flower that will produce fruit
is markedly different from the other—by the shortness of the
stamens, the conical shaped receptacle, the pistils stiff and
thickly set thereon. The flower is altogether more compact, and
is as perfect in its organs as any of the Alpine varieties. The
following sorts have proved staminate with me.

Cuthill’s Black Prince, Boston Pine, Kittley’s Goliath, Alice
Maud, British Queen, Ross’s Phœnix, and Victoria.

Among pistillate varieties, the flowers are cup shaped,
compact, with the sepals of the calyx scarcely perceptible
between the petals of the corolla. Stamens seldom visible,
and when seen at all they are very minute, not longer than
the pistils at the base of receptacle, never showing signs
of having fertilizing powers, as the anthers never expand;
the whole remains perfectly abortive. Pistils very numerous,
uniform, stout, longer than in perfect flowers, and have not
such a feathery appearance as in staminate sorts. Receptacle
large, conical, always coming to perfection, and the instances
where pistillate flowers do not produce berries are very rare,
in fact scarcely ever to be met with; at least my sorts have
proved so; and it is reasonable to conclude that this has been
occasioned by the sorts growing together. The following sorts
have proved pistillate with me.

Bourbon Pine, Hudson, Swanson, Burr’s Pine, Hovey’s Seedling,
Iowa, and Moyamensing.

The varieties enumerated, I have growing together (both
pistillate and staminate) under what might be called the
ordinary mode of cultivation in one place; and in another
completely isolated from them, I have a collection of the same
sorts which have stood some years longer, and are almost worn
out. But this difference of situation, culture, &c. don’t at
all seem to have affected or in the least degree altered the
organs of re-production in any variety; for to me it seems that
the character of pistillate or staminate is as permanent and
unchangeable as in any other deciduous plant.

A writer in one of the periodicals of the day, supposes it
possible that the receptacle of the strawberry might enlarge,
or even come to perfection without staminate influence having
at all been required. That the experiment of planting a
pistillate strawberry in a situation where staminate influence
could not reach it and that plant produce no berry, is the
fact; as was proved by a cultivator in this neighborhood:
but it is to be hoped that the coming season will be taken
advantage of by many of your correspondents, for making
experiments that will place this question in such a clear
and forcible manner before the public, so that all may be
convinced, and those interested in the culture of this fruit
may take advantage of, and turn to good account the information
received.

F.

We hope that those of our friends who have made any observations, or have anything to say on this interesting subject will be kind enough to communicate them to us.—ED.

AMMONIA ON PLANTS.

The subject of the action of Ammonia on plants is exciting considerable attention in England. We copy below from the Gardener’s Chronicle accounts of experiments, the first of which is being tried at the Horticultural Society’s Garden.

M. Ville’s mode of giving Ammonia to plants, with a view to
increase their bulk and vigour, is being tried in the large
stove in which one of his apparatuses has been placed. It
consists of two clear glass bottles with long necks, furnished
with tight-fitting corks, in each of which is inserted a small
bent glass tube. These two tubes are joined together by means
of an India-rubber connection, or small hose, thus forming
a communication between the two bottles. In the cork of one
of the bottles is an escape tube (also of glass), which is
connected (by means of a small India-rubber hose), with other
small glass pipes that are laid all along and across the bed,
and through which the ammonia is intended to pass, in order
that it may be the better diffused among the plants. When the
bottles are put to work, one is charged with chalk, on which
is poured sulphuric acid, and the other with unslacked lime,
over which is poured a solution of ammonia. The result of this
experiment will, of course, be published in due time. Its
conduct has been entrusted to Mr. Spriggs, the young man in
charge of the house, who is to note down its effects daily, and
report the same to the Vice-Secretary. In another column will
be found some further account of furnishing plants with more
ammonia than they can get under ordinary circumstances.

By Mr. Deane, Vice President of the Pharmaceutical Society.
Effects analogous to those produced by M. Ville (see last
year’s volume, p. 755), with ammoniated air on the leaves
of growing plants, have been observed by me, as the results
of applying solutions of ammoniacal salts to the roots.
My attention was first effectively turned to the subject
about eight or ten years since, when an extensive grower of
Pelargoniums, Fuchsias, and Roses, applied to me for some
remedy for the sickly condition of his stock; which, if left
unchecked, would insure a very severe loss to him. On examining
the plants they were found to be in a starving condition,
the roots having filled the pots and exhausted the soil;
consequently, the leaves had lost their healthy green colour,
and become very pale, with a strong tinge of yellow; the lower
leaves were quite yellow, spotted, and falling off. The natural
remedy was obviously fresh potting, but as the plants were
already in pots best adapted to answer the purposes of the
grower, some other remedy had to be devised. I therefore made
a very weak solution of sulphate and carbonate of ammonia, and
therewith watered the roots of the plants once a day, in the
evening; and to insure any observed results as to the effect
of the ammonia, certain rows of the plants on the stage of the
greenhouse were selected for the experiment. In a few days the
effects of the ammonia were most marked and satisfactory. The
leaves began to put on a very remarkable appearance, the course
of the veins, or spiral vessels, becoming perfectly green,
the colour commencing at the basal portion of the midrib, and
thence spreading through all the reticulations, until the
tissues were perfectly restored to their normal and healthy
condition; and, in fact, the plants thus treated looked more
vigorous than they had ever done before, being much darker
colour and firmer in texture. The contrast between these plants
and those which had received no ammonia left no doubt about
the efficiency of the application. I forget the effects upon
the flowering of the Pelargoniums, but there was certainly no
deficiency of flowers on the Fuchsias and Roses; they were,
moreover, finer and better coloured than usual. On a subsequent
occasion a gentleman’s gardener applied to me in a similar
dilemma; he had a house full of fancy Pelargoniums preparing
for a flower-show, at which he expected to take the first
prize. Just as the trusses of flower buds were emerging, and
there was every prospect of a good bloom, the lower leaves of
the plants began to turn yellow and spotted, and then to fall
off, leaving the plants bare, where the foliage was considered
an essential point of beauty. I examined the roots and found
them nearly filling the pots, it was therefore evident there
was not sufficient nutriment left in the pots to meet the
extra demand made by the large number of flower-buds; the
latter were, consequently, deriving their nourishment from the
leaves—the natural storehouse of the food of plants during
the growing season—and of course exhausted the lower leaves
first. They were treated precisely as in the former instance,
and with the same results; the lower leaves became healthy,
and the flower-buds progressed favourably to maturity, being
of good form and colour. The success of these experiments
became known to other gardeners in the neighbourhood, some of
whom were equally successful, while others did not derive that
satisfaction from the use of the ammoniacal solution, either
from not understanding the principle of its application, or
from a desire to accomplish more than they were capable of,
when it frequently happened the plants became too vigorous to
flower well. There is no doubt but that M. Ville is correct
in stating that the flowering is arrested if the application
of ammonia is made at a certain period of the development
of the flower-buds. Few plants if grown too vigorously will
flower well, if at all. A certain check in their growth is
absolutely necessary, and the summer’s sun or winter’s cold,
under ordinary circumstances, effects this perfectly in this
climate—the former by perfecting and condensing the elaborated
sap, and the latter by arresting vegetation altogether.
Too much moisture and shade cause those parts intended for
flower-buds to be developed as leaves. In the Aloe tribe when
the flower stem is thrown up, it is at the expense of the
outer leaves, the elaborated juices of which it appropriates,
the roots at this time not being in action, because it is
towards the close of a long period of dryness. If when the
flower-stem is beginning to rise, the roots are watered, all
further development of the stem is arrested, the leaves only
being developed. The same thing takes place with many bulbs
whose period of flowering is not the same as that for leafing.
Many Cape bulbs follow this law; for example, the Hæmanthus,
the flowering of which is at the expense of some one or more
of the outer coats. If these plants are watered at the wrong
period, or if they have had not that proper rest which Nature
designed they should have under the influence of a roasting
sun, such as their native country affords, no flowers will be
produced, but in their stead a vigorous development of leaves.
It would appear, therefore, that the arrest of development of
the flowers and fruits of the plants treated with ammonia, is
not so much the result of any specific property possessed by
this substance, as by its bringing about artificially those
conditions which may occur naturally, or be produced by other
means. Also, that the application of ammonia to plants may be
attended by results varying according to the conditions under
which it is applied, and the object it is desired to obtain.
The following is the formula for the solution alluded to in
the previous note by Mr. Deane:—Sulphate of ammonia, 7000
grains; sesquicarbonate ditto, 1000 grains; water, 80 fl. oz.
Dissolve. Of this solution one fluid once to a gallon of water
will make a solution, sufficiently strong for all ordinary
purposes.—_Pharmaceutical Journal._

CALENDAR OF OPERATIONS.

DISBUDDING.—This operation does not appear to be sufficiently recognised in its proper sense as distinguished from pruning and pinching. In performing these latter operations we remove a portion of the growing shoot, in the former case the young bud is removed as soon as it can be rubbed off. These operations are therefore quite distinct, and their distinction is of much importance. Most fruit cultivators are aware that trees suffer materially by suddenly depriving them of a large portion of foliage while in active growth, and expedients are resorted to in order to render the operation less injurious. In spring when the buds burst, attention should be directed to the quantity of young shoots desirable either for fruit or uniformity of growth; these being secured all others should immediately be _rubbed_ off. As growth proceeds luxuriant shoots are _stopped_ or their points pinched off, removing more or less of the shoot, according to the object to be attained. If the plant is very luxuriant, more leaves may be removed and if _every_ shoot upon a tree is operated on in this manner it amounts to a severe check on its growth. In the case of young trees, or weakly ones, where a certain form is desired, the young growing point should be bruised without removing any of the elaborating foliage, securing density of habit without any perceptible check of growth. Suppose a shoot that has grown 12 or 14 inches to be pinched back one half of its length, the uppermost bud will burst again and the others remain comparatively dormant; but allowing the same shoot to have been checked in its longitudinal growth, by pinching or bruising its extreme point, it will be found that all the lower buds will be benefitted and several additional shoots produced. We have alluded to this subject more particularly at present as we are aware of having occasionally made use of the term _pinching_ when _disbudding_ would have been the more appropriate expression.

STRAWBERRIES.—Preparations should now be in progress for securing plants for early forcing next spring. Various methods are adopted to get strong plants, such as filling small pots with rich soil and plunging them in the strawberry patch, introducing a young plant on the pot, and removing into larger ones when rooted. Others again prepare full sized pots at once and place them in this manner, securing the young plant in both cases with a small stone laid on the surface. When close attention is paid in watering, these plans are good. An equally successful and less troublesome method is to prepare a few square yards of ground in a somewhat sheltered situation, manuring it well and digging deeply, and filling it thickly with young plants. They should be partially shaded for a few days, and duly watered. In the course of three or four weeks they will lift with good balls of earth and are potted at once in fruiting pots. Pistilo-staminate or hermaphrodite varieties are found to produce better when forced early than pistillate sorts.

Root pruning of fruit trees is sometimes commendable, and the present is the proper season for its more immediate beneficial effects. It is mostly performed on young vigorous trees that show no disposition to fruit. By cutting away some of the strongest roots at this time the supply of sap will be lessened and the wood ripening process accelerated. No fruit need be expected from badly ripened wood. In nine cases out of ten the non-appearance of fruit on healthy trees arises from this cause. Mild autumn weather induces growth to a late period and sudden frosts arrive before the wood is sufficiently matured. This is more particularly noticeable on soils inclined to be wet, and here again we perceive the necessity of underground drains, in order to remove surplus water. It is an exceedingly erroneous idea that drains are worse than useless in localities where long droughts are of frequent occurrence. The truth is that draining enhances humidity during hot weather, since it enables the soil to exercise its absorbing properties to the fullest extent, there being more air in the soil water is retained in its pores, constituting a reservoir holding a lasting supply when other sources fail.

RENOVATING OLD TREES.—Most satisfactory results have been obtained from old and apparently worn out trees by changing the soil about their roots, or applying a top dressing of wood ashes, guano, salt and plaster in equal quantities, allowing about one bushel of the mixture to each tree. If nothing better is convenient, a heavy dressing of well made barn manure forked in about the roots will have a decided effect. The absorbing points of the roots extend a considerable distance from the trunk, therefore, the principal part of the top dressing should embrace a circumference at least equal to that of the branches. It might be considered unnecessary to mention this _very_ apparent fact, were it not usual to observe manure applied to the stem instead of the roots.

GRAPES UNDER GLASS will now be approaching maturity. Dryness both in soil and atmosphere favors this process, still they must not be allowed to suffer for want of moisture should the weather prove dry. The young growth may be stopped more rigidly as the ripening process proceeds. This will concentrate the sap and strengthen the buds for a future crop, if pinched back too severely these buds may start into growth, which must be guarded against.

OUT-DOOR GRAPES will require attention in thinning out lateral shoots and stopping others especially those on bearing shoots. Thinning out the berries is seldom practised on these, nor, indeed is it always necessary. Occasionally, however, the berries are so thickly placed that room is not afforded them to swell out and ripen properly. By thinning out a few of the most central and smallest berries, the fruit will ripen earlier and be much improved both in size and flavor.

S. B.

AUGUST.

FLOWER GARDEN AND PLEASURE GROUND.

This is the month many prefer to plant their evergreens, and it is perhaps as good a time as any. Take advantage of a “wet spell” for the operation. Be particularly careful that as many roots as possible are preserved. If this can be well attended to, _trees of any size_ can be moved successfully. It becomes a question of power—of profit and loss. If any amount of power can be applied, and expense is no object, the largest trees will move as easily as small ones. In moving an evergreen 20 feet high, I commence to open my “trench” 10 feet from the base of the trunk, go down about two feet, and continue to undermine and lay bare the roots their full length, right up to the collar of the tree. I care nothing for “ball of earth.” If I have a good supply of hands at the job, I only care to keep them aside a little to prevent injury by the operations of the workmen. If I have but few men, I roll the long roots, as fast as they are exposed, in mats to keep them moist. For mechanical means and adaptations to take out the tree and convey it to its destination, an intelligent workman is never at a loss. Trees taken up in this manner scarcely miss the change; and besides after they are transplanted they require no staking, as they are capable of withstanding the strongest wind through their long roots.

The broom should be well applied to lawns at this season of the year, even more sedulously than in spring. Many species of weed become so dwarfed by the summer’s drought, that they flower and fruit below the reach of the scythe, and can only be kept down by the hard sweeping. I have seen some lawns almost ruined by these weeds, especially by one of the nettle tribe. (_Pilea pumila._)—Conclusion in next number.

* * * * *

It is a pity that the rules adopted by Florists are so very rigid, that unless a flower equals a certain standard in shape and markings it must be rejected. Last week we had submitted to us by Mr. T. F. Croft, a beautiful seedling Verbena, a lilac with a broad stripe of white down each petal, quite distinct and very handsome, but the petals were too narrow, leaving a large space between each one. This must condemn it as a Florist’s flower, but to all who want a handsome and distinct variety it will be desirable. He calls it his No. 3. It is in style of Iphigenie.

* * * * *

The article on Tile draining in the last number should have been credited to the Ohio Cultivator. We never intentionally copy articles without credit. We wish that Dr. Warder of the Western Horticultural Review were as conscientious.

* * * * *

ERRATA.—In the report of the Maryland Horticultural Society, the Winter Bon Chretien pears were shown by Mr. Fuss, not Mr. Feast as printed. The premium for strawberries was for “the best 4 distinct varieties, 1 quart each”.