The distribution of trees by the U. S. Department of Agriculture in 1935 and 1937 has resulted in a few plantings that have done moderately well. In one planting the trees are growing fairly well without care but are producing few nuts. In another planting the trees are planted on rather heavy soil that is terraced; they are given applications of commercial fertilizers and infrequent cultivations and have been producing fairly good crops of nuts in recent years. Still another planting of a considerable number of trees has been entirely removed through lack of interest of the new owner. The plantings described have all been on private property.
Plantings at various experiment stations have received somewhat more attention in general than those on private property; but because of lack of keeping quality of the nuts have not for the most part been accepted as a promising crop and have been the subject of very little study.
From the foregoing observations it is evident that the Chinese chestnut cannot withstand the effects of crowding either in a solid planting or in competition with native growth. The trees have performed moderately well with a minimum of care, but respond to good care by increased production and nut size. The rotting of the nuts soon after harvest as a result of improper methods of handling and storage has prevented an earlier acceptance of the crop as of potential economic importance in the Southeast.
+Experimental Studies at the U. S. Pecan Field Station, Albany, Georgia+
In 1926, twenty-eight seedling trees of Castanea mollissima were planted in the Champion experimental block at Philema, near Albany, Georgia. These trees grew well and began producing nuts in 1932. In 1935, an additional 16 trees were planted in the same block. The trees in both plantings have shown good vegetative vigor and have been fairly productive. All the variations common to any group of Chinese chestnut seedling trees have been in evidence. One or two trees have lacked vegetative vigor but have produced heavy crops of nuts for their size. Type of bur opening has varied from free dropping of nuts to those burs from which the nuts are removed with difficulty; nut size has varied from about 35 to about 90 nuts per pound; the date of earliest and latest ripening of the nuts varies by about three weeks; nut color has ranged from light browns to dark mahogany and dark chocolate brown; and keeping quality and eating quality have ranged from good to poor. However, nut production, as shown by the data presented in Table I has been good and nut quality has been acceptable, so that with increasing knowledge of the storage requirements of the nuts the trees have paid a good profit in recent years. One of the older trees has consistently produced close to 150 pounds of nuts each year for the past few years.
Some of the trees in this planting have been topworked to selections from other plantings, including the variety Carr which showed up very poorly in comparison with most of the seedlings. Some of the trees have been culled out because of poor yield or nut size; and some have died as a result of poor drainage.
An additional planting at Philema in the Brown tract was made in 1938. The trees were planted in a portion of a five-acre block at some distance from the original plantings, with a spacing of 25 feet apart on the square in soil of rather light and sandy texture with fair subsoil drainage. The fertility was low but has been improved through the use of winter leguminous green manure crops and commercial fertilizers. Some of the trees planted consisted of trees grown from carefully selected Castanea mollissima nuts imported from south China and designated by the initials MBA, MAY, MAZ, and MAX. Others carried the designating letters of "FP." The nuts from which these trees were grown were imported by the Division of Forest Pathology of the U. S. Department of Agriculture which also grew and distributed the trees. Still others were selections of C. crenata, the Japanese chestnut; and C. mollissima selections from an experimental planting in California were also included. In 1940 the remainder of the five-acre block was planted with trees grown from seed produced by the original Philema planting.
Table I. Summary of chestnut yields at Philema, Georgia.
______________________________________________________
| |
| HARVEST DATA |
|______________________________|
| |
| 1926 and 1935 Planting[3] |
Length |______________________________|
Date Harvest | |
Year Harvest Period | Yield No. Trees Av. Yield |
Began in Days | in Lbs. Bearing per Tree |
_______________________|______________________________|
| |
1932 | 14 3 4.7 |
1933 | 7 7 1.0 |
1934 | 80 16 5.0 |
1935 8-29 22 | 222 22 10.1 |
1936 8-26 33 | 379 25 15.1 |
1937 8-26 37 | 278 18 15.4 |
1938 8- 6 42 | 480 21 22.9 |
1939 8-15 42 | 995 26 38.3 |
1940 8-27 38 | 740 34 21.8 |
1941 8-14 51 | 1,467 38 38.6 |
1942 9- 3 41 | 876 32 27.4 |
1943 9- 9 26 | 1,335 38 25.1 |
1944 8-15 44 | 560 29 19.3 |
1945 8-18 34 | 1,450 27 53.7 |
1946 8-20 41 | 1,455 28 52.0 |
1947 8-26 43 | 1,975 27 73.1 |
_______________________|______________________________|
_______________________________________________________________
|
| HARVEST DATA
|_______________________________________
|
| 1938 and 1940 Planting[4]
Length |_______________________________________
Date Harvest |
Year Harvest Period | Yield No. Trees Av. Yield Range in
Began in Days | in Lbs. Bearing per Tree Yields
_______________________|_______________________________________
|
1941 8-14 51 | 44 63 .7 .1-6.9
1942 9- 3 41 | 30 46 .7 .1-5.2
1943 9- 9 26 | 357 108 3.3 .1-29.7
1944 8-15 44 | 716 136 5.3 .1-37.0
1945 8-18 34 | 3,025 208 14.6 .1-50.7
1946 8-20 41 | 1,447 173 8.4 .1-48.3
1947 8-26 43 | 6,615 188 35.2 .1-108.5
_______________________|_______________________________________