1932

Abstract

The Barberry Eradication Program was an unprecedented federal and state cooperative plant disease control campaign between 1918 and the late 1970s to remove common barberry (), the alternate host of f. sp. , from the major centers of wheat production in the United States. Eradication of barberry has been credited with helping to reduce stem rust of wheat to a minor problem in the United States by the end of the campaign. The Barberry Eradication Program has also been viewed as a model for successful eradication based on its robust leadership, effective publicity and public cooperation, forceful quarantine laws, and adaptive eradication methods and procedures employed in its field operations. The Barberry Eradication Program was particularly successful because of its leaders’ ability to adapt to changing internal and external conditions over time. The program lasted nearly a century, extending through two world wars and the Great Depression, with each period producing unique challenges. Because of its central role, barberry eradication in Minnesota offers an excellent case study to examine how the program developed over time and ultimately achieved success.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-phyto-080417-050133
2018-08-25
2024-06-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/phyto/56/1/annurev-phyto-080417-050133.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-phyto-080417-050133&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1.  Bills RW 1968. One half century of service: the first 50 years of barberry eradication USDA-ARS Rep., US Dep. Agric. Agric. Res. Serv., Cereal Rust Lab. St. Paul, MN:
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2.  Campbell CL, Long DL 2001. The campaign to eradicate the common barberry in the United States. Stem Rust of Wheat: From Ancient Enemy to Modern Foe PD Peterson 16–50 St. Paul, MN: APS Press
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 3.  Campbell CL, Peterson PD, Griffith CS 1998. The war emergency board. Plant Dis 82:121–25
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 4.  Freeman EM 1917. Rust: Is it a scare? Great danger seen. Minnesota Farm Rev 21:2
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 5.  Freeman EM, Johnson EC 1911. The rusts of grains in the United States Bur. Plant Ind. Bull. 216, US Dep. Agric. Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 6.  Freeman EM, Melander LW 1924. Simultaneous surveys for stem rust: a method of locating sources of inoculum. Phytopathology 14:359–62
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 7. Freeman EM to Tighe A. 1918. Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 8.  Galloway BT 1893. Report of the chief of the Division of Vegetable Pathology for 1892. Report of the Secretary of Agriculture, 1892215–46 Washington, DC: US Dep. Agric.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 9.  Hitchcock AS, Carleton MA 1893. Preliminary report on rusts of grain Exp. Stn. Kansas State Agric. Coll. Bull. 38, Kans. State Univ. Manhattan, Kans.:
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 10.  Kellerman WA 1891. Spraying to prevent wheat rust Exp. Stn. Kansas State Agric. Coll. Bull. 22, Kans. State Univ. Manhattan, Kans.:
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 11.  Kempton FF, Thompson NF 1925. The common barberry and how to kill it Dep. Circ. 356, US Dep. Agric. Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 12.  Kolmer JA 2001. Early research on the genetics of Puccinia graminis and stem rust resistance in wheat in Canada and the United States. Stem Rust of Wheat: From Ancient Enemy to Modern Foe PD Peterson 51–82 St. Paul, MN: APS Press
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 13.  Laudon RJ 1980. Guidelines for Barberry Control Report. Minnesota Department of Agriculture St. Paul, MN:
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 14.  Leonard KJ 2001. Stem rust: future enemy. ? In Stem Rust of Wheat: From Ancient Enemy to Modern Foe PD Peterson 119–46 St. Paul, MN: APS Press
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 15.  Mack RN, Foster SK 2004. Eradication or control? Combating plants through a lump sum payment or on the installment plan. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Australian Weeds Conference BM Sindel, SB Johnson 56–61 Sydney: Weed Sci. Soc. N. S. W.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. 16.  Mack RN, Foster SK 2009. Eradication plant invaders: combining ecologically-based tactics and broad-sense strategy. Management of Invasive Weeds Inderjit 35–60 Dordrecht, Neth.: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 17.  Melander LW 1920. Barberry eradication report, resume of the barberry eradication campaign in Minnesota, 1919 Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 18.  Melander LW 1921. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota, 1920–1921 Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 19.  Melander LW 1921. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 20.  Melander LW 1922. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 21.  Melander LW 1923. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 22.  Melander LW 1924. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 23.  Melander LW 1925. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 24.  Melander LW 1928. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 25.  Melander LW 1929. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 26.  Melander LW 1930. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 27.  Melander LW 1932. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 28.  Melander LW 1933. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 29.  Melander LW 1938. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 30.  Melander LW 1939. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 31.  Melander LW 1940. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 32.  Melander LW 1942. The importance, progress, and future needs of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 33.  Melander LW 1942. Report of the progress of the barberry eradication campaign in the state of Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 34.  Melander LW 1943. Status of barberry eradication in Minnesota with a report of progress Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 35.  Melander LW 1945. Barberry eradication in relation to stem rust of wheat, oats, barley, and rye Rep., Univ. Minn. Agric. Ext. Serv., Folder 127 St. Paul:
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 36.  Melander LW 1944. Status of barberry eradication in Minnesota with a report of progress Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 37.  Minn. Comm. Public Saf. Order No. 28. March 19, 1918
  38. 38.  Minn. Dep. Agric. Entomologist's Office. Quarantine Notice No. 3. April 1, 1918
  39. 39. Minn. Gen. Laws. 1919. Chap. 81, S.F 120
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 40.  Olmstead AL, Rhode PW 2002. The red queen and the hard reds: productivity growth in American wheat, 1800–1940. J. Econ. Hist. 62:929–66
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 41.  Pammel LH 1892. Experiments with fungicides: experiments in preventing rust of wheat Iowa Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 16, Iowa State Univ. Ames, Iowa:
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 42.  Peterson PD 2001. E.M. Freeman: early research on cereal diseases and the rise of plant pathology at the University of Minnesota. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 39:13–26
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 43.  Peterson PD 2003. The common barberry: the past and present situation in Minnesota and the risk of wheat stem rust epidemics PhD Thesis, N. C. State Univ. Raleigh:
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 44.  Peterson PD 2013. “The barberry or bread”: the public campaign to eradicate common barberry in the United States in the early 20th century. APSnet Features https://doi.org/10.1094/APSFeature-2013-08
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  45. 45.  Peterson PD, Griffith CS, Campbell CL 1996. Frank Lamson-Scribner and American plant pathology, 1885–1888. Agric. Hist. 70:33–56
    [Google Scholar]
  46. 46.  Peterson PD, Leonard KJ, Miller JD, Laudon RJ, Sutton TB 2205. Prevalence and distribution of common barberry, the alternate host of Puccinia graminis, in Minnesota. Plant Dis 89:159–63
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 47. Reid EW to Freeman EM. 1918. Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
  48. 48.  Roelfs AP 1982. Effects of barberry eradication on stem rust in the United States. Plant Dis 72:177–81
    [Google Scholar]
  49. 49.  Roelfs AP 1985. Wheat and rye stem rust. The Cereal Rusts 2 AP Roelfs, WR Bushnell 3–37 Orlando, FL: Academic
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 50. Rowell JB to Flaskerd R. 1975. Minn. Dep. Agric. St. Paul:
  51. 51. Ruggles AG to County Director of The Minnesota Commission of Public Safety. 1918. Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
  52. 52.  Shepherd DR n.d. The barberry eradication program Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  53. 53.  Stakman EC 1918. Annual report of the barberry eradication campaign Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  54. 54.  Stakman EC 1918. The black stem rust and the barberry US Dep. Agric Yearbook 75–110
    [Google Scholar]
  55. 55.  Stakman EC 1919. Destroy the common barberry Farmers’ Bull. No. 1058, US Dep. Agric. Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  56. 56.  Stakman EC, Harrar JG 1957. Principles of Plant Pathology New York: Ronald Press
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 57.  Stakman EC, Melander LW, Fletcher DG 1927. Barberry eradication pays Minn. State Dep. Agric. Bull. 55, Minn. State Dep. Agric. St. Paul:
    [Google Scholar]
  58. 58.  Stewart TH 1945. Barberry eradication, progress in 1945 with a resume of present status and future requirements, Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  59. 59.  Stewart TH 1947. Barberry eradication, progress in 1947 with a resume of present status and future requirements, Minnesota Rep., Cereal Rust Lab. Rec., Ser. 1, Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  60. 60.  Stewart TH 1954. Annual report, barberry eradication progress report in 1954, Minnesota Barberry Erad. Rec., Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 61.  Stewart TH 1955. Annual report, barberry eradication progress report in 1955, Minnesota Barberry Erad. Rec., Univ. Minn. Arch. Minneapolis:
    [Google Scholar]
  62. 62.  Thompson NF 1924. Chemical eradication of the common barberry USDA Dep. Circular 332, US Dep. Agric. Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  63. 63.  Tindall GB 1984. America: A Narrative History New York: W.W. Norton and Company, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. 64. USDA APHIS PPQ. 1975. Revision of barberry eradication survey manual Memo., June 26, R.J. Laudon Pers. Pap. St. Charles, Minn.:
    [Google Scholar]
  65. 65. USDA APHIS PPQ. 1975. Survey-barberry eradication Memo., Nov. 21, R.J. Laudon Pers. Pap. St. Charles, Minn.:
    [Google Scholar]
  66. 66. USDA ARS Plant Pest Control Div. 1963. Extent of coverage. Barberry eradication survey manual: 803–01.3400 Rep., US Dep. Agric. Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  67. 67. USDA ARS Plant Pest Control Div. 1963. Rework interval. Barberry eradication survey manual: 803–01.3500 Rep. US Dep. Agric. Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  68. 68. USDA ARS Plant Pest Control Div. 1972. Single bushes. Barberry eradication control manual: 807–01.2100 Rep., US Dep. Agric. Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-phyto-080417-050133
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-phyto-080417-050133
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error