Table 1a.

Condition of elmsb injected with MBC-P during the period of chemical effectiveness.

Year treatedInjection methodNo. of elms treatedNo. of elms lost c to DED during period of chemical effectivenessd
HealthyDiseasedTotal no.HealthyDiseased
DI=0DiX50DiX50no. of treatedDi=0DiX50DiX50
1971(a) root1211301
1972(a) root314980018
1973(a) root40802314308e18
(b) flare10107
1974(a) root29813801f1
(b) flare145915404
  • a Table reproduced from Kondo (1977).

  • b Dafa from Central Ontario.

  • c ”Lost” means the elm had little aesthetic value, owing to DED; however, the elm was not necessarily dead.

  • d Period of chemical effectiveness (a) Root injection-2 years (year of injection plus the following year), (b) Flare injection-1 year (the year of injection only)

  • e The eight losses were traced to poor chemical distribution resulting from poor injection techniques employed by one crew during a three-day period.

  • f Loss resulted from little or no chemical uptake because of the site on which the elm was located.