CSIRO PUBLISHING Keynote Paper www.publish.csiro.au/journals/app Australasian Plant Pathology, 2010, 39,1–22

Shield the Young Harvest from Devouring Blight – Charles Darwin, Joseph Banks, Thomas Knight and wheat rust: discovery, adventure and ‘Getting Our Message Out’

G. I. Johnson

Horticulture 4 Development, PO Box 412, Jamison, ACT 2614, Australia. Email: [email protected]

The Australasian Plant Pathology Society’s 21st President’s Address.

Abstract. 1969: the year of the first moon landing (20 July), the Woodstock Festival in upstate New York (15–18 August), and, (coinciding with the last day of Woodstock!), the beginning of the Australasian Plant Pathology Society [first annual general meeting at the 41st Australian and New Zealand Association for the Advancement of Science meeting, Adelaide (18 August) (Purss 1994)]. All had a lengthy gestation and challenges along the way. All have changed the world! In the 17th President’s Address to the Australasian Plant Pathology Society, David Guest (2001), noted: ‘I became a plant pathologist because the mechanisms organisms use to communicate fascinate me’. Well, I became a plant pathologist because I am a gardener at heart. But I have learned along the way that communication is a critical issue – not only the communication among and between microorganisms and plants, but also that between plant pathologists, farmers, politicians and communities. And, communication that is timely, inspiring and, (preferably) accurate, often yields the most favourable outcomes. In this paper, I will explore some of the early communication relating to plant disease, particularly wheat rusts. I refer to Erasmus and Charles Darwin, Joseph Banks, Thomas Knight, and some pioneering Australian researchers, and the roles of conferences, publications and newspapers, to highlight how ‘getting our message out’ was as important in the 19th and early 20th centuries as it is now. And, finally, I will consider how a scientific society in the 21st century still has relevance and the potential to change the world.

Additional keywords: AAAS, BAAS, Charles Haly, Daniel McAlpine, Joseph Bancroft, Pan-Pacific, Puccinia.

Information and accuracy ‘quality’ and the citation frequency of publications from fi ‘ ’ While planning and discovery through scientific research, and the scienti c research, can then form a key part of assessing discussion and communication of results, require integrity, research performance and achievement (ERA 2009). precision, and appropriate peer review to validate the accuracy of claims and recommendations (Holland et al. 2005; Dixon Assembling and sourcing knowledge 2007; Government Office for Science 2007), the attention to and sociological dimensions ‘truth’ in the wider community can vary. Two-hundred years In defining the economic, biosecurity and developmental ago, progress in the development of ‘scientific method’ was elements of plant pathology problems, in addition to the rudimentary, and the accounts of plant disease and their technical background, efficient and accurate assessments of control were sometimes ‘hopefully accurate’, but more often current knowledge and the sociological dimensions are biased, fearful and misleading. Regardless of their reliability, the essential. This helps ‘define the case’. It can help justify or early publishing efforts did give farmers, the clergy, and win approval and funds for necessary research and sovereigns and governments, some basis for decision-making, development. It helps define issues that might affect progress and they helped chart the forward path of science. in achieving uptake, and allows better focus on the intervention Progress in research in the 21st century capitalises on sourcing points, so less time is spent ‘reinventing the wheel’, and more the knowledge and opinions of others, and what is already known, time and resources are available for the research and extension to explain the background and clarify the next steps for solving a that is required for the problem to be solved. problem. Scientific publication, and the dissemination of research While internet-based search engines help in this process, they findings at conferences, via the media, and the Worldwide Web, are still underpinned by the abstracting services of international ensures that progress is clearly recorded, and future needs and information repositories related to crop protection, such directions delineated. This enables more efficient use of current as publisher databases, and the ‘Review of Plant Pathology’ of resources, and greater synergy of effort, to ‘climb higher by CAB International (CABI 2009a). And, pathogen- or disease- standing on the shoulders of giants’. And, the ranking of the specific information sourcing can also capitalise on the collated

Australasian Plant Pathology Society 2010 10.1071/AP09068 0815-3191/10/010001 2 Australasian Plant Pathology G. I. Johnson information on pathogens or diseases as contained in the CABI proportion of citations of papers published in the present or ‘Crop ProtectionCompendium’ (CABI 2009b)and review papers previous decade. about specific pathogens or issues. To ensure the veracity of claims of new findings, and to Use of such sources of information leaves more time and adequately survey earlier work for the existing references and resources for subsequent research and development efforts. knowledge base of a problem, publishing scientists need Pearce and Monck (2006) estimated that use of CABI access to both recent and earlier publications. Therefore, Abstracts provided annual median time savings among the investment in information dissemination and publication Australian scientific community of between 3 and 5 days per (peer review, conferences, journals, books), and in information user, and represented a national saving of between AUS$470 000 access (literature reviews, libraries and information specialists, and AUS$790 000 per year. They further suggest that use of the abstracting services, compendia, reviews, online access) are CABI Compendia (crop protection, etc.) resulted in annual both important. median time savings of between 37 and 54 days per user, Compared with today, two centuries ago, information that representing a national saving of between AUS$940 000 and was used for deciding how a plant disease might be controlled AUS$1.38 million per year. These demonstrate the economic was much lessaccurate and reliable(even the ideaof ‘disease’ was benefits of easily accessing knowledge, and inter alia of ensuring unclear). Information was difficult to access, and there were an ongoing supply of new and current information. But, which large gaps between ‘facts’. Credit is shared among curious knowledge is most valuable – recent or older information? And, (independently wealthy) individuals and influential what benefits accrue from the investment by scientific societies in powerbrokers, the development of printing and microscopy, peer review, publication and conferences, to ensure the ongoing the emergence of scientific societies, coffee houses, market supply of accurate and reliable knowledge for future users? days, sheep shearings and other informal forums, during the An insight into the use that plant pathologists make of the ‘Age of Enlightenment’ (Gascoigne 1994; Goddard 2000), for information obtained in literature reviews and the scientific supporting the emergence of many fields of science, the literature was provided by Parbery (2008). In tallying the dates development of the ‘scientific method’, and the reporting and of the ~700 references cited in the papers published respectively dissemination of knowledge. These underpinned and depended in the journals, ‘Transactions of the British Mycological Society’ on the development of strategies for influencing ‘Sovereigns (TBMS) from 1968 and preceding decades, and a selection of half and Governments’, to gradually enable resources, professional of the issues of ‘Mycological Research’, and half the issues of personnel and facilities to be devoted to what emerged in the late ‘Australasian Plant Pathology’ (APP), from 2008, Parbery (2008) 19th century as agricultural and botanical research. found: The power of the individual * ~48 and 45% of cited references, respectively, had been published in the same decade (1960s cf. 2000s), Erasmus Darwin – an inspiration * ~35 and 32% of cited references, respectively, had been At this conference, we are celebrating the 40th anniversary of our published in the preceding decade (1950s–1990s), Society. But we are also fulfilling the primary rationale for a plant * aboutone-fifth of the cited references in bothdatasets (1968 and pathology conference – to review and report, to stimulate and to 2008) dated from the rest of the century back to 1900, and defend plant pathology knowledge, practice and directions, * only ~4 and 2% of cited references, respectively, were from the to consult and extend professional links with colleagues, and 19th century. to honour and applaud achievements by our peers. 2009 is also the bicentenary of the birth of Charles Darwin (1809–1882), While the Parbery (2008) assessment was restricted to three whose theory of natural selection influenced plant pathology and journals (the article content mix of TBMS from 1968 was other fields of science so much. So, it is appropriate to reflect on considered to roughly equate to the mycological papers of half fl ‘ ’ his work, and also the in uence of his late grandfather, Erasmus the yearly issues of Mycological Research and half the applied Darwin (1731–1802), [and here, I am indebted to Ainsworth plant pathology papers of APP from 2008), and submitted to the ’ (1969)]. University of Melbourne s Information Futures Commission It was by Erasmus Darwin, who was also a correspondent of 2008, it provides some insight into the value and frequency of Sir Joseph Banks1 Darwin (1781), that considerable groundwork relevance of near-recent papers, and much earlier work, cited by was laid [in his book, ‘Zoonomia’ (Darwin 1794)], and ideas sent authors of plant pathology/mycology papers in professional ‘whirling and swirling’, to indelibly influence the theory of journals, both now and 40 years ago. The data suggest that in natural selection later articulated by Charles Darwin and the papers being written now, when averaging across a journal Alfred Wallace (King-Hele 1963, 1974). In his poem, ‘The volume, the majority of the citations are likely to come from the Botanic Garden’, Erasmus Darwin (1791) wrote of plant disease: last 20 years, with a minority from earlier work. Of course more data collection in this area is needed to accurately assess citation ‘Shield the youngHarvest from devouring blight, patterns, and it is also likely that publications in more modern The Smut’s dark poison, and the Mildew white; fields, such as molecular plant pathology, would have a greater Deep-rooted Mould, and Ergot’s horn uncouth,

1On 29 September 1781, Dr Erasmus Darwin wrote to Joseph Banks, asking for permission to dedicate a small book of translations to him. The translations were of the botanical writings of Carl von Linné, now better known as Linnaeus (Chambers 2007). Rust Resistance Rocks! Australasian Plant Pathology 3

And break the Canker’s desolating tooth. attention to observation and information are evident in First in one point the festering wound confin’d Henslow’s (1844) account of dealing with the specimen, as is Mines unperceived beneath the shrivel’d rin’d; Henslow’s foresight in publishing what might be seen as an Then climbs the branches with increasing insignificant note, had the author not become so famous. Henslow strength, (1844) quotes Darwin’s specimen note which begins: Spreads as they spread, and lengthens with their length; ‘Northern Bank of the Plata, Nov. 20–30, 1833. Thus the slightwound ingravedon glass unneal’d No. 1593. – Bearded Wheat materially injured by Runs in white lines along the lucid field; a blight, called the ‘Polvillo’. When a field is Crack follows crack, to laws elastic just, attacked, it seems, even at a distance, burnt up, And the frail fabric shivers into dust.’ and of a red appearance. On walking amongst the Corn, the shoes and trowsers (sic.) become How neatly Erasmus Darwin described the evil afflictions! His covered with a fine rust-coloured powder: hence writings were widely read in his time, and his dissertation on the name. The powder is lodged in minute oblong disease in verse would have reached a wide audience. In the patches, beneath theepidermis, which may at first footnotes to the poem, Erasmus Darwin’s (uncorrected) notes say be seen partially raised, and forming a scale. It ‘Linneus (sic.) enumerates but four diseases of plants’: attacks all parts indiscriminately. If the leaves are (1) (Powdery mildew) ‘Erysyche, (sic.) the white mucor or a little infected, the grains of Corn are light and mould, with sessile tawny heads, with which the leaves dry; but if the ear and stalk are attacked, the are sprinkled’, crop is entirely spoilt. The blight is not observed (2) (Rust) ‘Rubigo, the ferrugineous powder sprinkled under the before the grain is pretty full; and its attacks are – fi leaves’, very rapid three or four days being suf cient fi (3) (Ergot) ‘Clavus, when the seeds grow out into larger horns to spoil a whole eld. It is endemic in the whole black without, as in rye. This is called Ergot by the french district, though not equally destructive (sic.) writers’, and throughout. From this cause, last year, when the (4) (Smut) ‘Ustulago, (sic.) when the fruit instead of seed weatherwaswet,nograinwasgathered.Hencean fl produces a black powder’, immense importation of our took place from North America. This year, the weather being fine and suggests that, the ‘honey-dew’ and the ‘canker’ ought to and dry, the blight will destroy or injure the have been added (Darwin 1791). greater part of all the crops. Fields thrown up in In later life, Erasmus Darwin more fully outlined his Buts, clear of weeds, on high ground, are equally (somewhat limited, not-always-accurate and sometimes attacked with those of less favoured aspect. It is completely wrong!) understanding of plant disease, in his here attributed to the sun’s action after heavy monograph, ‘Phytologia’ (Darwin 1800; King-Hele 1968). dews. Crops grown from grain of the country, And, Erasmus Darwin (1783) published another book that has from the Cape of Good Hope, and from Rio been important in botany and mycology – the translation into NegroinPatagonia,wereallmoreorlessaffected. English for the first time of the Linnaeus classification of plants, It is remarkable that the Wheat at Rio Negro ‘A System of Vegetables, according to their classes, orders, itself (which is grown on low diluvial lands) genera, species, with their characters and differences’,in produced, even last year, its immense crop which according to King-Hele (1988), many words used in uninjured. This blight is a prodigious evil to the botanical descriptions (>50) entered English usage for first country, and most mortifying to the agriculturist, time [e.g. aril, auxiliary, bract, cyme, floret, lobed, glume and who does not know that all his labour will be spathe (King-Hele 1988)]. lost, till within a week or fortnight of the time Although Erasmus Darwin died before Charles was born, his whenhewasexpecting to reap the fruits of it.’ influence on Charles was still quite significant. Charles Darwin had access to stories and memories through his father, Robert, as Henslow (1844) goes on to mention that he had the he grew up, and in later life, Charles read many of Erasmus mycologist, M. J. Berkeley (1803–1889), examine one of the Darwin’s books and had access to Erasmus’ papers. Towards the specimens, and it was identified as ‘Uredo linearis’ – now a end of his life, Charles Darwin said that his grandfather’s work synonym of Puccinia graminis. had significantly influenced his thinking about the creative and Then, in 1845, while at work on the second edition of his destructive forces of nature (Darwin 1880). account of the voyage of the Beagle, Charles Darwin raised the (alternate host) barberry-wheat rust question in a letter to Charles Darwin and plant pathology Henslow: ‘I was telling my Father at Shrewsbury (where I Early in his career, Charles Darwin demonstrated some have lately been) that you had gone into the Barberry versus ‘unrealised’ potential in plant pathology, as a collector of corn-question and that you were a disbeliever, on which he told diseased plant specimens. In 1833, during the second survey me he had once had his attention called by a farmer to a very large expedition of HMS Beagle, Darwin (1833) collected a specimen field of corn, in the one of the hedges of which there were at almost of wheat rust in South America, and brought it back to his friend regular intervals Barberry bushes, and my Father declares, that and mentor, John Henslow (1796–1861). Darwin’s careful from each of them a wedge, pointing obliquely into the field, of 4 Australasian Plant Pathology G. I. Johnson discoloured corn, was most conspicuous. Next year the Barberries axonopodis pv. citri. in Central Queensland (Maxwell 2007; were all grubbed up’ (Darwin 1845). Gambley et al. 2009), And although Charles Darwin’s work and publications did not (5) whenpoisoning, chronic illness, or madness inthe population focus on plant diseases, he was passionate about our sibling has been linked to microbial colonisation or contamination – science, entomology, during his Cambridge University days: ‘I ergot in wheat and rye (alkaloids in sclerotia of Claviceps am dying by inches, from not having any body to talk to about purpurea, causing hallucination and death) (Large 1940), insects’ [Charles Darwin to William Darwin Fox (his cousin), and aflatoxin and other mycotoxin contaminants of peanuts 12 June 1828 (Darwin (1828) in Larkum (2009)]. and other commodities affecting market access (Pitt 2000), Also, in the 2nd edition of his magnum opus, ‘The Variation (6) when livestock deaths were linked to toxic fungal products in of Animals and Plants Under Domestication’, in discussing feed [rye grass toxicity, mycotoxins in animal feed (Dubé modification of plants as consequences in changes in condition 2001) and lupinosis in sheep (Allen 1986)]. Darwin (1875) mentioned changes in growth habit observed in (7) when ‘national pride’ and the pursuit of knowledge for its some plants (e.g. Euphorbia sp. and Portulaca oleracea), when own sake (such as exploration in the 18th and 19th century), attacked by an aecial stage of a rust [possibly Uromyces sp. or other lofty objectives, influenced government and agency (Holliday 1995)?]. In the same book, Darwin (1875) discussed agendas (such as during the ‘space race’), and variability and the selection of improved varieties of wheat, and (8) when agricultural research and development are recognised referred to the wheat selection of Shirreff (1873), Le Couteur, and as key areas for development assistance (Pearce et al. 2006). others (Darwin 1875; Olmstead and Rhodes 2007). In the Australasian experience, these points hold true. Darwin’s (1875) ‘The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Historical commitment has fluctuated, but events or efforts, Domestication’, was also said to have influenced the approaches and ‘international obligations’ that strengthen or enshrine that William Farrer, the ‘Father of Wheat Breeding in Australia’, government or industry commitments (such as research adopted in breeding for rust resistance (Campbell 1933; Evans levies), can ‘lock-in commitments’ to provide impetus and 1980; Wrigley and Rathjen 1981; Olmstead and Rhodes 2007). ongoing measures, institutional frameworks and resources, that According to Campbell (1933) there was an added connection, help support plant pathology research, development and William Farrer (whom Campbell first met in 1874) may have been regulation. Darwin’s relative by marriage through the Wedgewood family. ‘ And there was another link: Daniel McAlpine, the Father of Plant Diagnosis and providing advice Pathology’ in Australia. He trained under Darwin’s ‘bull-dog’, T. H. Huxley, at the Royal College of Science in London According to Large (1940) and Fish (1970), the greatest (Ainsworth 1981). undertaking in the history of plant pathology has been the attack on cereal rusts and, the most significant investigations began in Australia. In Australia, three rusts affect wheat – black Lessons from the past stem rust caused by Puccinia graminis f. sp. tritici, leaf rust caused by P. triticina, and stripe rust caused by P. striiformis f. sp. In the short history of plant pathology, and the long history of tritici (Murray and Brown 1987). Of these, stripe rust was not ’ man s battle with the mysterious scourges that destroyed crops, recorded in Australia until 1979 (Murray and Brown 1987). forests and livelihoods, attention by governments in helping Despite the facts that stem rust of wheat was first described in farmers to deal with plant pathogens has been greatest in times 1767 (by Fontana and Tozzetti working independently of each of crisis. But even then, other priorities, high costs, or inadequate other) and named in 1797 (Persoon 1797), and leaf rust of wheat laws or policies, have hampered the timeliness and level of effort, was shown to be caused by a distinct fungus in 1815 (de Candolle for example, 1815; Chester 1946; Singh et al. 2002), the relative significances (1) when sudden, dramatic losses cause crop failure and famine – of the two pathogens (or indeed their difference) as causes of loss the ‘Irish potato famine’, rice blight epidemics (Anonymous in crops around the world was not clear, even late in the 19th 1891; Shirai 1918; Large 1940; Akai 1974; Talbot 2003), century. In the1890s the New South Wales vegetable pathologist, (2) when recurring losses (or hampered access to alternative Nathan Cobb, wrongly suggested that leaf rust was more serious supplies) threaten food security or farm viability – the than stem rust, whereas William Farrer was (rightly) convinced outbreaks of stem rust of wheat in 19th-century Australia that stem rust was the more serious problem and the most (Waterhouse 1936), important to target in breeding efforts (Campbell 1933; Evans (3) when forests and the natural environment are threatened or 1980). In fact, the relative severity of stem rust compared with leaf destroyed – the 19th-century outbreaks of the larch (Larix rust was not properly quantified until 1971, confirming the former decidua) canker caused by Peziza calycina in plantings to be the more serious cause of loss (Keed and White 1971). across Europe (Large 1940), and the recent threat to oaks Compounding the confusion between stem and leaf rust in some in North America from Phytophthora ramorum (Frankel cases, 18th- and 19th-century (authors and) publications also 2008), confused rust damage with losses that may have been caused by (4) when diseases, or the associated pathogens, hamper market powdery mildew, Septoria spp., and other pathogens. access, or threaten our biosecurity – the management of black spot caused by Guignardia citricarpa in Australian citrus Early days in Australia for the Japanese market (Broadbent 1995), and the detection During the first 30 years of European settlement of the Australian and eradication of citrus canker caused by Xanthomonas colonies (1788–1818), drought, flooding rain, pests, and diseases Rust Resistance Rocks! Australasian Plant Pathology 5 hampered efforts to become self-sufficient in wheat production. Fortunately, a report on inspections ordered by the Governor a Waterhouse (1936) gives a thorough account of how ‘smut, few days later provided more information and noted: ‘Every rust or red mildew and blight’ caused serious losses in wheat authentic Information from the best Authors that can be collected crops as early as 1799, with Governor King mentioning in will be published as soon as possible after the Harvest is got in to despatches to Britain the outbreak in 1803 of what was prevent the infectious progress of the Distemper in the next crop’ probably mainly stem rust, although leaf rust would also have (Anonymous 1803b). been prevalent (King 1804; Banks 1805a, 1805b; Crocker 1838). Also, Ainsworth (1969, 1981) and many early authors (Board of Calling Sir Joseph Banks Agriculture 1893; Waterhouse 1936) mention the contemporary The ‘Father of Australia’, Sir Joseph Banks (1743–1820), who interest of Sir Joseph Banks in the problem in Britain, and championed settlement in New South Wales in 1788, and was the controversy that surrounded some of his comments. preeminent in promoting scientific societies in Britain and the And others have discussed the trade/transport/market issues colonies, maintained regular correspondence with the colony, and affecting the global wheat industry in the 19th century, and the with the rich and powerful, until his death in 1820. Banks was a development of resistant varieties (Board of Agriculture 1893; confidante of King George III, and from 1797, a Privy Councillor Wrigley and Rathjen 1981; McIntosh 2007; Olmstead and (Maiden 1909; Gilbert 1981). Banks’ wide range of interests Rhodes 2007). encompassed agriculture, geology, natural history, and even banking and the coins of the realm (Carter 1988). And, when Beginner’s luck early in the 19th century, he ‘stirred the pot’, reviving late-18th- century discussion by the Board of Agriculture (Somerville Perhaps it was just beginner’s luck, the publication of early 1795), putting together a lot of ‘ideas’, a few facts, and some scientific ideas and findings about the nature and cause of rust illustrations of wheat rust (Banks 1805a, 1805b), he played a and other plant diseases in Europe, but also time and pivotal role in promoting attention to the problem by both Britain circumstance, and (later) the coincidence of people in and Australia. Australia at the time (McAlpine, Cobb, Farrer, Schomburgk, In early 19th-century Britain, the annual sheep shearings were Bancroft), which propelled us to the forefront of early a key opportunity for the rural gentry to meet and exchange ideas. international efforts in wheat rust research and resistance This period in British history coincided with: the growth of breeding (Schomburgk 1873; Bancroft 1885, 1888; Board of industry and urbanisation, the renewal of war with France Agriculture 1893; Waterhouse 1936; Wrigley and Rathjen 1981; (18 May 1803), high wheat prices in 1800–01, poor wheat Olmstead and Rhodes 2007). Compounding issues influencing crops in 1803–04, and trade disruptions (1803–14). An cycles of ‘action’ and ‘inaction’ on finding solutions to wheat enquiry into the Corn Laws was convened in May 1804, and rust through the 19th century, included changes in the English revised Laws, aiming to allay concerns of farmers, and reduce Corn Laws, wars and trade blockades in Europe, the expansion hardships arising from poor crops, went into effect on of production areas and railway systems in North America and 15 November 1804 (Barnes 1961; O’Rourke 2006). Also in Australia, the development of telegraph communication, and the November 1804, Arthur Young, the Secretary of the Board of growth of global trade. Also critical to progressing outcomes Agriculture, and publisher of ‘Annals of Agriculture’, sent out a were the pathways for disseminating concern about the rust questionnaire (12 questions) on ‘the mildew’, and received over problem, getting the ‘ear of government’, accessing seed and 50 replies which were published in the ‘Annals of Agriculture’ varieties, and implementing appropriate responses (King 1957; (Gazley 1973). All of these issues would have placed the wheat Barnes 1961; Olmstead and Rhodes 2007). rust problem in English crops among the topics discussed by In New South Wales in 1788–1810, scientific societies had not Banks and other gentry attending the autumn sheep shearings in been formed (Hoare 1969, 1981), and they were in their infancy 1804 (Blagdon 1804; Barnes 1961; Carter 1988). Banks’ in Europe. The New South Wales authorities and citizens concerns about the issues, compounded by the change-over corresponded with British authorities and others, and despite from Prime Minister Henry Addington, back to Prime Minister colonial isolation, the thirst for knowledge and solutions to the William Pitt (the Younger), after 10 May 1804, could have ‘barbarous’ system of agriculture (Hoare 1981), meant that ‘mere galvanised his attention to finding out more about the rust observations’ were widely reported in correspondence and the problem and ways of reducing disease losses. fledgling media (Isaac and Kirkpatrick 2003). A fair degree of ‘picking ourselves up by our own bootstraps’ underpinned efforts to encourage colonial action, and to reduce or Thomas Knight compensate for shortfalls and losses in the wheat harvest. The By 1800, Sir Joseph Banks, in ‘a life already full’, had also reality was that until Tasmania and South Australia began to met and established regular correspondence with ‘the Father of prosper, help was half a world away. But while New South Wales Horticultural Science’, Thomas Andrew Knight, a Herefordshire press reports in 1803 noted losses in some districts, sympathy, and farmer (Mylechreest 1984; Carter 1988). Through Banks, a quest for real solutions were less apparent: ‘The loss sustained and as a consequence of a shared passion for science and the by individuals may be severe, and justly regarded as a subject of exchange of ideas, Knight began to report more on his condolence – it nevertheless furnishes to the contemplative mind experiments in agriculture and horticulture, discussing blights a moral argument against a lavish or improvident application of and mildews (Knight 1804a, 1805b), experimenting on wheat the bounties of NATURE dispensed by PROVIDENCE, whose rust, advocating resistant wheat varieties as a solution (Knight favour CARE alone renders permanent’ (Anonymous 1803a). 1806; Ainsworth 1969), exploring the idea of transmission of 6 Australasian Plant Pathology G. I. Johnson rust from Berberis vulgare (barberry) to wheat (Knight 1805a), (in English), than ‘Description of the blight of wheat Uredo and engaging in sheep breeding (Table 1). Between Banks and frumenti’ by Lambert (1798), and the discussion on ‘Rubigo, rust, the younger Knight was kindled inspiration, exchange, and a a ferruginous powder sprinkled under the leaves’ in the account of ‘synergy of effort’, that resulted in more ‘research’, and the diseases in ‘Phytologia’ (Darwin 1800). presentation and publication of their ideas, than we might otherwise have seen (Carter 1988). Getting the message out Carter (1988) documented what Banks did to get information A short account on wheat rust out to the farming community and ‘people of influence’ ahead of Among concerns about the British wheat crop, rust losses the 1805 English planting season. The paper was first issued in and price, Banks also received specimens of wheat rust from a print run of 500 copies with two plates (Banks 1805a), and the 1803 harvest in New South Wales (presumably in 1804) sent to 249 ‘high ranking’ individuals, and ~50 professionals (Banks 1805a, 1805b). He sought comments from Lord in Britain and elsewhere. In March 1805 it was being Liverpool (British Foreign Secretary 1801–04; Home arranged in ‘Communications to the Board of Agriculture’ Secretary 1804–06, 1807–09), and during the summer of [as Communication XXV. Volume V, 1805 (Banks 1805c)] 1804, he initiated preparation of a short paper on wheat rust (perhaps as a briefing paper for the Board), and in May 1805, (Carter 1988). In a letter to the botanist Robert Brown another printing (with just one plate) (Banks 1805b) was (1773–1858) in Australia on 30 August 1804, Banks refers to prepared. In addition, the paper also reprinted in other the microscopic drawings of the wheat (stem) rust pathogen journals, and as an addendum to Curtis’ 4th edition of (P. graminis) he had commissioned from Francis Bauer for the ‘Practical Observations on the British Grasses’ (Curtis 1805; pamphlet (Banks 1804; Carter 1988). And, by 27 November Carter 1988). Banks estimated that within a short time frame, just 1804, Banks was asking Arthur Young (Gazley 1973; Carter under 5000 copies had been distributed (Carter 1988). 1988) for the best sources of information on ‘blight in wheat’, and The paper was no scientific treatise. It was ‘Government specifically for those that implicated ‘a parasitic plant’ (as a Briefing’ and agricultural extension in its infancy! fungus was then called). Almost certainly some copies of the pamphlet, or its content, In December 1804, Banks sent a prepublication draft to his would have made their way to Australia. The Mitchell Library, friend, Thomas Knight, who quickly endorsed it and asked for Sydney, holds the 19th-century Australian bibliophile, David more information (Knight 1804b) (this may have been the closest Scott Mitchell’s copies of Banks (1805b), and Curtis (1805), Banks got to ‘peer review’!). which includes the Banks (1805b) pamphlet. Banks’ pamphlet, ‘A short account of the Cause of the Disease When Banks published the pamphlet, suggesting that in Corn, called by the farmers the Blight, The Mildew, and the ‘Botanists had long known’ that wheat rust was caused by a Rust’, was dated 30 January 1805 (Banks 1805a, 1805b). It fungus, and giving wider publicity to the idea that Berberis might summarised available information on wheat rust (Table 2), and be an alternate host of wheat rust, he was creating controversy. seemed to imply that the fungoid nature of the cause was widely His paper contained key points and ideas that remained accepted. unproven, or were subsequently disproven, over the next half This was perhaps Joseph Banks’ most ‘scientific’ publishing century and longer (Table 2). It also provided some idea of effort, and contained more detail and accurate information economic impact of rust on yield (Table 3). The tabulation of

Table 1. Summary of selected correspondence between Joseph Banks and Thomas Andrew Knight concerning wheat and wheat rust (Chambers 2007)

* Letter to Sir Joseph Banks 27 September 1804 (Knight 1804a). A rambling letter, in which he refers to the spots that Banks has described on the straws of wheat. Knight proceeds to suggest that mildews (powdery mildews?) may be aggravated by water stress (Knight 1804b). * Letter to Sir Joseph Banks 29 December 1804. In ending the letter, Knight ‘returns a great many thanks’ for the prepublication draft of Banks’ (1805a) pamphlet Knight (1805a). * Letter to Sir Joseph Banks 23 August 1805, written after seeing the publication by Banks (1805a). Thomas Knight discusses the microscopic drawings by Bauer and the question of ‘barberry’ (sic.) as an alternate host (expressing scepticism), and reports on small experiments he tried, to test the theory of spread of rust between wheat and wheat and barberry and wheat. Knight went on to say that he would have sent Banks specimens of the apparent spread from barberry to wheat but ‘a villa(i)nous jack-ass I keep has broke in to the Place where my Plants were growing, and has swallowed Rust, Wheat, and all together’. This was 2 years before Benedict Prevost published first experimental proof that a fungus caused disease (Prevost 1939; Ainsworth 1969). * Letter to Sir Joseph Banks, 16 November 1805, expressed doubts on the findings reported in letter of 23 August 1805 but observes that the rust ‘sheds its seeds (spores) in 10 days at farthest from first taking Root (forming infection) in the Leaf or Stem’ and that if land was ploughed deep and sowed thin, then the crop of wheat would rarely be affected (Knight 1805b). * Letter to Sir Joseph Banks, 20 March 1806 where Knight (1806) thanks Banks for his correspondence and ‘your little pamphlet on the Blight of Wheat’ (Banks 1805a), and recounts an experiment in Autumn 1804 in which he sowed wheat around barberry and away from barberry (check), to test for rust transmission. Results were promising but inconclusive (checks also infected), but he notes that the experience or local wisdom of ‘practical farmers’ regarding avoidance of barberry ‘in this kingdom and the continent should not be discounted’, and that the selection of early varieties of wheat, ‘which by ripening early, would escape the ill effects of the heavy dews of autumn, and in part the drought of summer’. * Letter to Thomas Andrew Knight, 21 August 1808 in which Banks (1808) noted that Mr Bauer had by analogy from the Briar leaf and that of the Coltsfoot traced the mildew in the straw of wheat before it arrives ‘at puberty’– gives description of pre-sporing structure and notes that it would be ready ‘if assisted by moisture to throw forth its Flowers and seeds’. Notes that after rain those straws protected from rain were ‘clean’ while those left uncovered ‘very black’ (with spores). Rust Resistance Rocks! Australasian Plant Pathology 7

Table 2. Points mentioned by Banks (1805a, 1805b, 1806a) with annotations in italics to clarify word use

Topic

Symptoms * Blight (rust) in corn (wheat) ‘occasioned’ by a minute parasitic fungus (or mushroom) on the leaves, stems and glumes of the living and cause plant * Engravings of the fungus by F. Bauer included in the paper * After the straw becomes yellow, the fungus assumes a deep chocolate brown Previous * The fungal nature of the disease was first suggested and illustrated with microscopic figures in 1767 (Fontana 1767) [Young’s knowledge ‘long-winded’ translation (‘A Friend’ 1792), not cited (Carter 1988)] * Cited Persoon (1797) who had given ‘a more correct and elaborate description of the fungus’, and had named it Puccinia, after Puccini, a Florentine Professor * Sowerby (1797–1803) illustrated ‘visible’ symptoms Infection * The proximity of wheat to barberry can aggravate losses from rust and spread * The rust on barberry may be wheat rust ‘in its early stage’ * The barberry fungus is ‘larger but otherwise resembling the rust in corn (wheat)’ * The fungus probably enters the wheat plant via ‘pores’ (= stomata) * Each individual (spore) is so small that every ‘pore’ on the straw will produce 20–40 ‘fungi’ (pustules) with each producing at least 100 seeds (spores) * The seeds (spores) of fungi are not much heavier than air ‘as anyone who has trod upon a ripe puff-ball (possibly Lycoperdon perlatum) must have observed’ * Probably the period of a generation is short, possibly not more than a week in a hot season * Infection may be introduced on a few infected stalks mixed in dung and laid on the ground at sowing * Wheatgrown followingclover leys,on whichno dungwas used,were as much infectedas the manuredcrop, but this may have been due to the ‘immense multiplication of the disease in the last season’ causing the air to be ‘charged with seed for miles together’ * Enough ‘animated dust’ (spore clouds) to infect thousands of acres of corn must be present at the end of summer * If each ‘seed’ (spore) produces several ‘plants’ (new pustules) how incalculably large must increase be? * Believed to begin early in spring, and first appear on leaves in form of ‘rust’ or orange-coloured powder * In early spring, it may require as many ‘weeks’ to begin reproducing as it takes ‘days’ in autumn * A few early infections are enough to spread the damage over an entire field or ‘parish’ * Chocolate-coloured blight little observedtil near ripeningof wheat, occurring in the field in spotswhich increase in size rapidly, and are in calm weather somewhat circular, as if originating from a central place Effect on * The blight causes ‘shrivelling’ of grain in relation to severity and the proportion of flour to bran is reduced crop * Spring crop is less damaged than winter crop – the Lincolnshire spring crop was not in the least shrivelled though the straw was infected. Barley was considerably spotted, but as the whole stem of the grain is naturally enveloped in the ‘hose’ or base of the leaf the fungus cannot ‘gain admittance’ to the straw * Wheat leaves are probably first infected in spring or early summer before the ‘corn shoots up into straw’ and the fungus is then of an orange colour (urediniospores) * Quotes Tull (1762) who says that ‘white cone’ or bearded wheat, which has straw ‘like a rush full of pith’, is less subject to blight than Lammas wheat, which ripens a week later (N.B. The ‘blight’ that Tull (1762) referred to could have been another disease, as it caused most damage at flowering) * A few diseased plants scattered over a field must ‘speedily infect a whole neighbourhood’ * Rye less damaged than wheat probably because it ripens and harvested before the fungus can increase to any degree Data * Shows data for % levels of gluten, starch and insoluble matter in best Sicilian wheat, good English wheat (1803), Spring wheat of 1804, and blighted wheat of 1804. The data suggest that blighting is associated with loss of gluten and starch and increase in insoluble matter c.f. wheat from healthy crops * Shows data of % broad bran in blighted wheat and spring wheat, suggesting a much higher level of bran in blighted wheat * Notes that (compared with primitive ancestors) the increase of ‘flour’ in good wheat has occurred through man’s culture and management * Notes that just 1/10th of the contents of a grain of good wheat is sufficient to enable germination and root development * When sown in the hothouse in 1804, 72 out of 80 grains from most blighted wheat produced healthy seedlings Seasonal * Some of the 1804 crop will not yield a stone (~6.35 kg) of flour from a sack of wheat (two bushels = 54 kg) severity and * Enquiries in autumn 1804 were unsuccessful in finding out ‘importance relative to origin or progress of the blight’ (i.e. when the economic disease appeared or how much it spread) impact * It is noted that Tull (1762) reported 1825 was a year of blight ‘the like of which was never before heard of’, yet the price of wheat from that crop was close to the 5-year price average for the period * By contrast it was noted that the price from another bad blight year, 1797 crop, was lower (49s. 1d.) cf. the 1795–99 average (68s. 5d.) * The scarcity in 1801 was partly due to ‘a mildew’ in the 1800 crop, but mainly due to wet weather and crop losses were very acute * The wheat crop of 1804 was more damaged than that of 1800 and barley a bit less than average but other crops and potatoes are abundant so the price of wheat buffered by good availability of alternative foods * The wheat crop from Sicily in 1804 badly damaged by rust * The wheat crop from New South Wales was badly damaged by rust in 1803 8 Australasian Plant Pathology G. I. Johnson

Table 2. (continued ) Topic

Conclusions * ‘Providence’ or natural balances must somehow constrain excessive development of the blight and comment * Speculates that the parasitic fungi of wheat and barberry are the same species on control * Notes that mistletoe can occur on several hosts, so why not also rust? * Preventing fresh straw to be put on field with dung and searching for and removing early infected wheat plants as well as all grasses may slow development of blight * Speculates that grain from blighted plants is less nutritious (Table 2) * Recommends assessing whether cattle fed on rusted straw thrive better or worse than on healthy straw * Recommends assessing whether small kernels from blighted grain is suitable for use as seed and performs as well as the ‘fairest and plumpest sample’. A bushel of blighted grain will contain at least 1/3 more grains for use as seed and three bushels (for wheat one bushel = 27 kg) of blighted grain will go as far in sowing as four bushels of large grain. Tull (1762) recommended using small seed from blighted grain as less likely to get smut) * It may be unnecessary to save the plumpest grains for use as seed – they could be sold or used to feed the farmer or his poultry, with smaller seed kept as seed – the top three or four grains in an ear (which are often shrivelled) may be suitable for use as seed * ‘It would be presumptive to offer any remedy for a malady so little understood’ * Now that its nature and cause have been explained we should expect in a few years ‘an interesting collection of facts and observations’ and some progress towards a ‘preventative or a cure’ 1806 * Banks comments that the 1804 crop was very reduced with ‘the mildew’ (rust) as a principal cause and in some places ‘smut also postscript prevailed’, lowest land fared the worst except when to sea winds, highest lands were less damaged, counties north of the Tees notes (boundary between Durham and Yorkshire) less affected than the south, and Scotland wholly escaped * Showed data from Bedfordshire comparing 1804 crop with 1802 and 1803. In high blight year, the number of sheaves/bushel was higher under high blight (1804) and the amount of flour from a load was reduced by 30% when 1804 (bad year) and 1802 (good year) crops were compared. Suggests the data is representative of crops ‘south of the Tees’ * Suggests that although the crop production in 1804may have been down1/3 compared with a medium harvest,prices never became exorbitantbecause(i) importsbetween10 October1804 andthe same periodin 1805 were just under 900 000quartersof wheatand 67 000 cwt of flour (N.B. in 1803, the British authorities reversed their ban on imports to allow this to occur), (ii) ‘stock in hand’ helped cover the 1804 shortfall, and (iii) the ‘use of substitutes’ (potatoes) since potatoes were ‘abundant and cheap’ * Banks quotes Arthur Young as estimating prices as follows: 1800 – 14s. 1d. a bushel, 1801 – 14s. 8 1/2d. a bushel (the highest on record) and 1804 at 10s. 10d. a bushel. Notes that prices are higher in ‘wet years’ * Banks notes in an 1806 postscript that his conclusions about seed were severely criticised by some ‘without adducing a single experiment to contradict it’, but Banks (1806a) concedes that selecting the plumpest seed might help select even more superior varieties * The use of small grain should not be attempted if there is ‘the smallest suspicion of a deterioration’ in the quality of a variety. Use of small grains as seed could be favoured in years when the price of wheat is high as this will allow the farmer to source cheaper seed and sell more of his good plump grain * Banks (1806a) notes that as it may require 1-million quarters (one-quarter = 12.7 kg) of seed corn in a normal year for the entire Britishcrop, if insteadsold on the market,it shouldhelpbringdownthe price, but ifpurchasedwouldcostSterling£4million,and at 56 lb a bushel and take 200 000 t to bring it home

Table 3. Analysis of percent gluten, starch and insoluble matter in wheat grain from healthy and blighted crops (analysis of Mr Davy at the Royal Institution) after Banks (1805a)

Gluten Starch Insoluble matter Best Sicilian wheat afforded 20 75 5 Good English wheat of 1803 19 77 4 Spring wheat of 1804 24 70 6 Blighted wheat of 1804 13 52 35 Loss (%) to miller as totally insoluble matter compared with good English wheat of: Spring wheat 2 Blighted wheat 31

the nutritional content of good compared with blighted wheat wheat to meet short-falls in the previous year’s winter crop, and as (Table 3) is perhaps one of the first reports that tries to estimate a means of avoiding damage from ‘blight and mildew’ (Banks true effect of disease on economic return and nutritional value, 1806b). and should have helped alert British authorities to the need to Considerable criticism of Bank’s pamphlet (Banks 1805a, find ways of reducing loss. Banks (1806b) also reproduced part 1805b, 1805c) was aired among the farming community with the of Table 3 again in another report to the Board of Agriculture most critical as early as May 1805, in ‘The Farmers’ Magazine’ (Great Britain) that discussed the merits of cultivating Spring (Smollett 1805; Carter 1988): Rust Resistance Rocks! Australasian Plant Pathology 9

‘The muse of Darwin (Erasmus) himself could Brisbane Courier’) (Johnson 2009). The 1865 newspaper reports not have suggested anything more fantastic! concerned or referred to the ‘Report to the Board of Agriculture When will botanists leave the glittering poetic (Victoria) Committee Appointed to Inquire into the Causes of effusions of the imagination, for the language Rust and Blight in Cereals’ from Government Botanist, of reason and experience? Of the present rage Ferdinand von Mueller, and Alex. Mackenzie, and mentioned for writing works of science in a popular the Banks (1806a) paper. And writing in South Australia, manner we deem it our duty to withhold our Andrews (1862) noted the illustrations of Bauer (from Banks approbation. It has already contributed no little 1805b), and Schomburgk (1873) referred to both Banks to the prevalence of quackery in almost every (1805b, 1806a), and the report of von Mueller and McKenzie department’ (Smollett 1805). (The Argus 1865). By quoting Banks (1805b, 1806a, 1806b) in various articles, Others hesitated to criticise Banks (1805b, 1805c), but offered the authors were capitalising upon his ‘status and authority’ to little as an alternative explanation (Jones 1806). reinforce the importance or validity of the points attributed to But Banks also had supporters (Knight 1806; Windt 1811; him and (by association), any other points that they may have Anonymous 1816). In a letter dated 20 March 1806 Thomas wanted to make as well. Farmers and governments might be Knight acknowledgedreceipt of theBanks (1805b) pamphlet, and more prepared to take note if the ideas or recommendations were indicated that it, along with their correspondence, had prompted something that Sir Joseph Banks had said or endorsed! his ‘follow-up’ experiments during 1805, to test some of the Gilbert (1981) noted that the genesis of botanical science in ideas suggested by the pamphlet (Knight 1806). Perhaps by Australia was aided ‘not only by influential and effective patronage way of rebutting some of his critics, some of Knight’s (Joseph Banks and his connections), but also by a workable system comments and findings were then included in a later edition of oftaxonomy’.Whilethe‘patronageeffect’wasnotasgreatforplant the pamphlet (Banks 1806a). Windt (1811), writing from pathology as it was with botany, when it came to drumming up Germany, also referred to the Banks (1805b) pamphlet, and attention to dealing with plant diseases, patrons still played a part reported observations from the field supporting the argument (e.g. dropping Sir Joseph Banks’ paper/name into reports and that barberry plants helped spread wheat rust. articles), as did growing capabilities and interests in fungal Later, Hayward (1825) dismissed the assertion of Banks taxonomy, not only in Europe, but also in Australia where von (1805b) that rust was caused by a parasitic fungus, and of Mueller, McAlpine, Cobb, Bailey, Tryon and others corresponded Knight’s (1806) idea that by crossing different varieties of regularly with Berkeley, Cooke and colleagues in England. wheat ‘a new sort may be produced which will completely escape being rusted’, suggesting that Knight’s theory was ‘grounded on a superficial view of things, and is merely Reaching out fallacious hypothesis’ (Hayward 1825). As Large (1940) suggested, at the end of the 19th century there was a long way to go in the development of effective disease Pamphlets, newspapers, books control methods: ‘The contribution from pure botanical science was not a plan of attack, but a magnificent piece of reconnaissance, In the 18th and 19th centuries, the ‘Age of Enlightenment’, a chart of the enemy’s positions’ (Large 1940). From 1844, the cheaply sold pamphlets were an important means of publication of the ‘Gardener’s Chronicle and Agricultural Gazette’ circulating opinions and stimulating debate as literacy levels in London began to make information on cropping and pest were also rising. They enabled information to be made management more accessible. The British mycologist, available to an audience that was larger than the small elite M. J. Berkeley, published most of his papers directed at farmers who might be members of a scientific society, attend their and gardeners in the ‘Gardener’s Chronicle’ from 1844 onwards meetings, or receive a journal. The pamphlets were widely (especially 1854–57) (Whetzel 1918; Ainsworth 1969), and produced and incorporated into compilations offered for sale, information relevant to Australia would have been picked up by and the information or issues for debate would also be picked up Australian and New Zealand newspapers. Examples from the by the newspapers (Gascoigne 1994). ‘Gardener’sChronicle’ published in early Australian papers In publishing his pamphlet, Banks succeeded in getting some include an article on hybridising in the ‘Perth Gazette’ on 23 basic information to a reasonably large audience, and stimulated August 1845, an article on ‘potato disease’ in ‘The Maitland thought and efforts to understand better how rust might be caused Mercury’ and ‘Hunter River General Advertiser’ on 2 June 1846 and controlled. The information from Banks (1805b) would have and an article on ‘potato rot’ in ‘The Argus’ on 26 December 1848. been conveyed to Australia, but I have not found any references Articles were also picked up from other foreign publications to the pamphlet in an Australian publication until after Banks’ [e.g. ‘The South Australian Advertiser’ published a review of death in 1820. ‘An Australian farmer’, in further discussing ‘Outlines of British Fungiology’ (sic.) by M. J. Berkeley from wheat rust, in ‘An Essay on the culture of wheat adapted to ‘The Atheneum’, on11 January 1861(SouthAustralianAdvertiser New South Wales’ (NSW Calendar 1835), noted ‘...but the 1861)], and newspapers across the country also recycled each fungus being once established, it will prey upon the vitals of the other’s copy. plant. The English berberry (sic.) bush has been thought by Sir J. Banks, to communicate the rust, but this cannot be a cause in this colony.’ The Banks (1805b, 1805c) pamphlet was also Rust in Australia quoted by newspaper articles in 1850 (‘Maitland Mercury’), Waterhouse (1936) carefully documented wheat rust occurrence 1864 (‘The Mercury’, Hobart), and 1865 (‘The Argus’; ‘The and responses to the problem from the time of the New South 10 Australasian Plant Pathology G. I. Johnson

Wales Colony foundation in 1788, through to the 1930s, Attention to plant diseases under the initiative was an and these, and later developments, were further covered by afterthought, because in removing a tax on salt to benefit Watson (1981), White (1981) and McIntosh (2007), among sheep, it was suggested that salt was also useful for controlling others. Spennemann (2001) complements these records by rust on wheat and oats (Haly 1872, 1876) – plant pathology was documenting the wheat varieties grown in 19th-century ‘catching the tail of Haly’s comment’! Australia, and comprehensively collating early references to wheat and disease. Table 4 lists milestones that illustrate the Board of Enquiry (Queensland) parallel development of rust research in Europe and wheat Under the Queensland Board activities, some funds (most) were breeding, scientific appointments and rust epidemics/research used for the evaluation of grasses for fodder and grain varieties, as in Australia up to 1909 (a century ago). well as (a small amount) for plant disease investigations After an initial flurry of concern early in the 19th century, (Tryon 1889). The first report to the Board (1876) noted that official comment on rust becomes less frequent – perhaps because wheat became rusted in the Moreton and Darling Downs districts. officialdom and the wealthier landholders were preoccupied with The second report (Staiger 1877) confirmed the conclusions of other enterprises, including sheep and cattle and (later) gold. Dr Schomburgk in Adelaide, as to the identity of the rust fungus However, outbreaks were serious enough to attract Government in Australia being the same as that in Europe, and that similar attention in the 1860s [problems in Queensland, The Courier control measures would apply. The fourth report (1879) (1863), not listed by Waterhouse (1936)]. Outbreaks in southern announced the importation of wheat varieties to Queensland Australia led to official enquiries in South Australia in 1864, and from Mexico and Southern Europe (by Angus Mackay). But, in Victoria in 1865 (Waterhouse 1936) (Table 4), with useful Tryon (1889) implied that the progress on plant diseases under findings and efforts to devise improvements, including the the Board enquiries had been ‘less than expected’,areflection selection of improved varieties, which preceded by 3 years the perhaps of lack of appropriate expertise, as well as a wide range of efforts of Farrer (Olmstead and Rhodes 2007). Guthrie (1914b) demands on the funds. also noted that in addition to Farrer, ‘Mr James Ward and Richard Tryon (1889) also detailed activities undertaken by private Marshall, of South Australia, Dr Bancroft, of Queensland, Messrs individuals, particularly those by Joseph Bancroft (1874), a local McAlpine and Pye, of Victoria, Mr Maddox, of Tasmania, and medical expert, who ‘dabbled’ in diagnosis of plant diseases. Mr Berthoud, of New South Wales and West Australia, were Bancroft ‘experimented for many years’ to find a ‘rust-proof prominent among those who either by the creation of new wheat, suitable for growth inthecolony’,and reported his workon varieties or the study of the rust fungi, had done excellent Indian wheats in 1879 (Bancroft 1879, 1885, 1888; Tryon 1889). service in the matter of wheat improvement before 1890’ The Queensland Acclimatisation Society (established 1862), (Guthrie 1914b). fostered by Lewis Bernays (Bernays 1863; Johnson 2000; Osborne 2008), official activities implemented through the The tale of Haly’s comment Government Botanic Gardens in Brisbane (Walter Hill) and Following separation from New South Wales in 1859, interest in regional centres, and Board Enquiries (on plant disease), also improving agriculture had also been aroused in Queensland, for contributed to early documentation of plant diseases in example in the ‘The Brisbane Courier’ (The Courier 1863, 1865). Queensland. Enquiries on plant disease were first headed by In 1866, Charles Haly, a pioneer of the Burnett District of F. M. Bailey (1879), who later became Queensland Colonial Queensland, and foundation member of the Queensland Botanist, and then by Henry Tryon (1886 survey), who Legislative Assembly (who had ‘never been remarkable for subsequently became (Queensland) Government Entomologist cormorant propensities’), first raised, and in 1872 initiated, and Vegetable Pathologist (1894–1929) (Staiger 1877; Bancroft approval of a ‘grant in aid of investigations into diseases of 1879; Tryon 1888, 1889; Simmonds 1964). animals and plants’ (Haly 1876; The Courier 1876). By 1879, most of the funds (for the Board of Enquiry) had been used up on broader issues of livestock and crop improvement, and ‘I am convinced that if a Scientific and Practical only £300 remained. It had been thought that the residual funds Board were at once assembled to enquire into the could be used for experiments with wheat from various sources diseases affecting our farm produce and stock, it in soil known to contain rust spores (or to be free of them) at would be the means of an immense pecuniary Toowoomba (and Brisbane), but the initiative was not progressed saving to the colony yearly, and I trust, that because as Bancroft (1879) noted ‘our legislators are in ill should a measure to such an end be brought humour, and nothing can please them’. before the House, you will give it the full benefit ’ ‘ of your support (Letter to The Brisbane Rewards and continuing publicity, but no solutions Courier’ from C. R. Haly, MLA, 4 June 1872). The efforts by individuals were further ‘encouraged’ by the The Assembly initially provided £500 and appointed a ‘Board Queensland Government offering in 1879, a reward for the to enquire into the causes of diseases affecting livestock and ‘discovery of an effective remedy for rust in wheat’ (initially plants’ in 1875, and then allocated another £2000 in 1876, £500, but on 20 March 1880 it was increased to £1000) considerable sums of money at the time (Gregory 1876; Haly (The Courier 1879, 1880). The prize attracted the interest of 1876; The Courier 1876; Tryon 1889; Clements 1999). William Farrer among others. Clements (1999) noted that the Curiously, Haly (1876) was most interested in improving reward generated a voluminous correspondence (contained sheep disease management and introducing improved pastures. in ‘Queensland Votes and Proceedings 1880’ 2nd Session 2, Rust Resistance Rocks! Australasian Plant Pathology 11

Table 4. Milestones in wheat cultivation in Australia (in italics) and early research on wheat rust to 1909 (McAlpine 1891a; Board of Agriculture 1893; Campbell 1933; Waterhouse 1936; Wrigley and Rathjen 1981)

Early The ‘baneful’ influence of rust in Greek and Roman writings. 1767 First published account suggesting fungal cause of wheat rust by Felice Fontana. 1788 European settlement in Port Jackson (Sydney), New South Wales (NSW); first wheat grown (one bushel from six acres). 1789 First wheat harvested at Rose Hill (now Paramatta) by James Ruse. 1792 200 acres wheat grown in NSW. 1793 Self-sufficiency in wheat achieved in NSW (Wrigley and Rathjen 1981). 1795 271 acres under wheat in NSW. The ‘Cape’ wheat failed. 1797 More correct description and naming of the fungus by Persoon – Puccinia after a Florentine Professor. 1797 3361 acres of wheat grown in NSW. 1799 Wheat rust epidemic in NSW (Waterhouse 1936). 1803 Rust destroyed a wheat crop at Dundas, NSW and crop failed. Specimen sent to Sir Joseph Banks (Banks 1805a; Crocker 1838; Wrigley and Rathjen 1981). ~1804 Thomas Andrew Knight attempts wheat hybridisation in Herefordshire (Knight 1806; Percival 1921; Wrigley and Rathjen 1981). 1804 8245 acres wheat grown in NSW. 1805 First magnified drawings of stem rust by Franz Bauer for Sir Joseph Banks. 1805 Detailed account of wheat stem rust, its cause, and possible association with barberry rust by Sir Joseph Banks (Table 2). 1805 Wheat rust epidemic NSW (Waterhouse 1936; Wrigley and Rathjen 1981). 1811 James Ruse in NSW obtained his first plough (he made it himself). 1814 NSW harvest failed due to drought and low acreage due to ‘price fixing’. Shortages met by imports from India and Van Diemen’s Land (Tasmania). 1822 Agriculture Society of NSW established a systematic scheme of introduction and testing for rust resistance but none of those tested were satisfactory (Wrigley and Rathjen 1981). 1825–55 Wheat acreage failed to keep pace with population (due to lack of labour) and wheat growing shifted first to Tasmania, then South Australia (SA). Labour pressure forced introduction of machinery.1829 Wheat rust epidemic NSW (Waterhouse 1936). 1832 Wheat rust epidemic NSW (Waterhouse 1936). 1841 Henslow proposed link between uredinial and telial, stages and agreed about possible link to Barberry rust. 1850 Cultivar White Essex introduced to Australia and became popular like White Lammas, but matured earlier). 1851 Board of Agriculture, Victoria established. 1854 Uredial and telial stages link proven for Phragmidium by Tulasne. 1860–90 SA was ‘the granary’ of Australia. An export trade to the UK and other states developed ‘before the construction of railways’. The dry summers meant less stem rust cf. coastal NSW. 1860 Selection of cv. ‘Purple Straw’ in SA (by Mr John Fraine), possibly first instance of single ear selection (Wrigley and Rathjen 1981). 1860 Wheat rust epidemic Australia (Waterhouse 1936). 1863 Wheat rust epidemic Australia (esp. Victoria) (Waterhouse 1936). 1864 Wheat rust epidemic Australia (Waterhouse 1936); Board to enquire into the causes and prevention of rust, Ferdinand von Mueller, Government Botanist, was chairman. 1865 Victorian Commission reported favourably on the resistance of ‘Red Straw’ and ‘Tuscan’ varieties to rust, and recommended early sowing to help control. 1865de Bary provedthat the aecial stageon barberry andthe uredial stageof wheat werefromthe samefungusbut could notproduceteliosporesfrom uredospores. 1867 Rust epidemic in SA – SA established Commission to investigate. 1868 The SA Legislative Council Commission of Diseases in Cereals (in SA) concluded that ‘Tuscan’ and ‘Purple Straw’ varieties performed best in SA. Detailed survey of ~SA 600 farmers. Decline in phosphorus status of soils noted leading to problems in next decades. 1868 Dr Richard Stromburgk, Director of Adelaide Botanic Gardens emerges as key authority on wheat rust problem. 1868 William Farrer took a First in the MathematicalTripos as 29thWrangler at Cambridge, and because he had tuberculosis, he migratedto Australia for his health in 1870. 1872 Edward Mason Shelton (b. England 1846) MS from Michigan University, 1874, agriculturist to the Japanese Government 1872–73 (Schwantes 1953). 1880 Queensland Government offers a reward for a remedy for rust on wheat (at the instigation of Joseph Bancroft, who also introduced William Farrer to his overseas contacts). 1880 J. E. Tenison-Woods and F. M. Bailey in Linnaean Society NSW paper emphasise the importance of studying fungi in agriculture (Tenison-Woods and Bailey 1880). 1882–83 William Farrer outlined his ideas about wheat selection in ‘The Queenslander’ and ‘The Australasian’ (Campbell 1933). 1880s SA farmers select rust resistant varieties (‘Ward’s Prolific’ etc). 1884 Daniel McAlpine (trained under Huxley and Thistleton Dyer) arrives in Australia. Appointed lecturer in biology at Ormond College, University of Melbourne. 1886 Albert Molineux, as editor of ‘The Garden and Field’ in SA, encouraged farmers to select three or four of the earliest, longest most prolific ears of wheat and to sow and select. 1889 Professor Edward Mason Shelton, formerly of Kansas State Agricultural College, appointed as instructor in agriculture at Queensland Agricultural College. 1889 Farrer commences first attempts at cross breeding at Lambrigg station near Tharwa in the Australian Capital Territory. 1889 Nathan Cobb arrives Australia (PhD in Nematology from University of Jena). 1889 Severe rust epidemic in Australia (losses estimated at £2.5 million). 1889 Plowright (1889) publishes first monograph on rusts – descriptions of stem rust and leaf rust, the standard account of British rusts until 1913. 1889 Board of Agriculture Great Britain became the concern of a Government Department in England and Wales. 1890 First Intercolonial Rust in Wheat Conference in Melbourne attended by Agriculture Departments, Victoria, Queensland, SA and NSW. Farrer contributed a letter. 1890 Daniel McAlpine appointed Vegetable Pathologist to Department of Agriculture Victoria. 1890 Mr R. Marshall selected Marshall’s No. 3 from ‘Ward’s Prolific’ and it later replaced ‘Purple Straw’ in SA. 1890 NSW Department of Agriculture established, Nathan Cobb appointed Vegetable Pathologist. 12 Australasian Plant Pathology G. I. Johnson

Table 4. (continued )

1891 Netherlands Society of Plant Pathology founded – the first in the world. 1892 Board of Agriculture (London) report on rust or mildew of wheat plants uses the terms ‘plant pathologist’ and ‘obligate parasite’. 1894 ‘Gluyas Early’ selected in SA from ‘Ward’s Prolific’, and remained main SA cv. until 1930. 1896 British Mycology Society founded. 1898 Farrer appointed wheat experimentalist to NSW Department of Agriculture. 1898 Farrer (rightly) concluded that stem rust (P. graminis) was more harmful than leaf rust (P. triticina formerly rubigo-vera) (Farrer 1898), a view opposed by Nathaniel Cobb, Government Vegetable Pathologist for NSW (Wrigley and Rathjen 1981). Keed and White (1971) later found P. graminis tritici caused 55% yield loss cf. 26% from P. triticina). Cobb’s view sets Farrer back by a season (Campbell 1933). 1906 William Farrer died. 1909 B. M. Duggar published ‘Fungous Diseases of Plants’ in the USA.

1253–84 (Clements 1999)), but no cure was found and the reward Agriculture, with the latter benefiting from the arrival of Nathan was not paid. Cobb in Australia in 1889 (Watson and Butler 1984). Optimistically, Australian publications and newspapers The intercolonial rust conferences were of international continued to offer advice on how best to avoid losses, and also significance. The importance of the wheat rust problem to the offered some of the history of the problem. ‘The Australasian Australian colonies, the level of support by governments, and the Farmer’ (perhaps in desperation) noted that the ancient Romans availability of people with the necessary skills ensured that the held a feast called ‘Rubigalia’, ‘at which prayers and sacrifices findings and recommendations attracted global attention (Board were offered up to induce the gods to spare the wheat crops and of Agriculture 1893; McAlpine 1894; Sorauer 1894). Perhaps avert the attack of rust’. It was noted that ‘the black-bearded inspired by the 1890 and 1891 meetings, the Board of Agriculture Russian wheats introduced by Signor Marteli’ before 1865 Great Britain also commissioned an investigation into wheat rust remained free from rust for a considerable time, but were now during the summer of 1892, at the same time as investigations affected by rust, and devoted two pages to discussing the were being undertaken in the United States of America and problem, but offering little in the way of practical advice to Germany. reduce losses (Anonymous 1885). As production expanded and the range of growing environments increased, rust became more Globalisation of effort of a problem. The detailed British report drew extensively on the reports of the intercolonial rust conferences of 1890 and 1891 (Board of Intercolonial rust conferences Agriculture 1893). And perhaps as a consequence of Australia’s With no solution, and rust losses serious in the 1889 crop, an reputation for progress in rust research, the Queensland ‘ ’ ‘Intercolonial Conference on Red Rust in Wheat’ was proposed to Department of Agriculture sent 32 varieties of rust-resistant the Victorian Government. New South Wales, Queensland, wheat to the United States Department of Agriculture in 1894. Victoria and South Australia participated in the first The link may have also been due to Professor Shelton from conference in March 1890 (Farrer sent a letter), and the Queensland Agricultural College being American (The Courier recommendations were widely reported. Further conferences 1894b,1894c). Sourcing varieties from Australia had actually – followed – Sydney in June 1891, Adelaide in March 1892, commenced earlier Hallett (1861) used Australian-sourced Brisbane in March 1894 and Melbourne in May 1896 wheat in his wheat breeding in England in the 1860s (Olmstead (Anonymous 1891, 1892a, 1892b; The Courier 1890b, 1890c, and Rhodes 2007). And, William Farrer, Nathan Cobb, Joseph 1891, 1892, 1894a, 1896; Waterhouse 1936; Watson and Bancroft, M. R. Schonbergk and Daniel McAlpine were also Butler 1984). The 1894 conference also led to somewhat exchanging germplasm and corresponding with experts in ‘acrimonious’ exchanges in ‘The Brisbane Courier’ over France, Germany, Canada, India, the United States and Britain Farrer’s recommendation of hard wheats and objections about (Bancroft 1888; McAlpine 1894; Olmstead and Rhodes 2007). their use from local millers (Farrer 1894). According to Olmstead and Rhodes (2007) by the end of the 19th ‘ Watson and Butler (1984) noted that the intercolonial century, wheat breeding became a global enterprise with the conferences (1890–96) concluded that no ‘rust-proof’ cereal had exchange of ideas, scientists and germ-stock between every fi fi yet been discovered, but some types escaped the worst effects, continent. The scienti c community functioned more ef ciently achieved by importing varieties, and by selecting and crossing because personal contacts, informal networks, and professional them locally. All that could be done was to recommend rust- journals united researchers into a closely knit community. And fl resistant varieties, or those that were prolific and moderately importantly, germplasm and knowledge ows were not only from resistant, or those that could escape rust if sown early. The the centre to the periphery, but within the periphery, and from the conferences also reinforced the need for more work on rust- periphery to the centre (Olmstead and Rhodes 2007). resistant and rust-escaping wheats. And, there were important indirect effects of the 1890 conference – greater focus by Rural consultation and improving focus and expertise government, and the appointment of vegetable pathologist, for disease management Daniel McAlpine (McAlpine 1891b), in Victoria, and the In the same year as the first intercolonial wheat conference establishment of the New South Wales Department of in Melbourne, another significant meeting was convened Rust Resistance Rocks! Australasian Plant Pathology 13 inMelbourne,‘TheConferenceRespectingaMeansofSuppression (6) Preparation of illustrated handbooks, describing the nature of of Insect Pests Injurious to Vegetation’ It was held on 6 August the various diseases and the remedies to be employed where 1890, and chaired by the Victorian Government’sActingMinister possible. of Agriculture, Hon. Alfred Deakin (who was later Australia’s (7) Testing various fungicides and the best methods of applying second Prime Minister). It followed on from a Convention of Fruit them (McAlpine 1891d). Growers in 1889, in which the importance of quarantine as a means This is probably one of the earliest clear descriptions of the of protecting industries from exotic pests and diseases had been roles that plant pathologists undertake. And a few months earlier, highlighted (Clarson 1890; Parkinson 1890). The 1890 conference in his first report on vegetable pathology, McAlpine (1891b) involved the Board of Viticulture, the Council of Agricultural noted that efforts would not only ‘be directed to remedying and Education, the horticultural societies of different districts, and removing, as far as possible, the diseases already prevalent, but to the Wine and Fruit Growers Associations, as well as government preventing the introduction of any new fungus or vegetable officers, C. French, entomologist, E. Hopton, Inspector of parasites by means of seed, cuttings, or otherwise.’ He noted Vineyards, J. Knight, fruit expert, and D. McAlpine, ‘Consulting that the introduction of dodder on clover seed into the Cape of Vegetable Pathologist’ (Department of Agriculture 1890). Good Hope (now in South Africa) was an example of the The driving force for the conference was the concern about introduction of a flowering plant parasite with seed. ‘Fungi at pests that threatened the horticultural industries, and the focus was least, do not recognise the artificial barriers created by statesmen, on involving industry in consideration of ‘The Noxious Insects and they have the means of spreading with such fearful rapidity, Act’ 1888, (which had failed to be approved ~2 years earlier). through the agency of their innumerable spores, that federation for What was significant, was that industry were involved in review purposes of defence is absolutely necessary here’ (McAlpine of the act ‘line-by-line’, and that the act gave powers to proclaim 1891b). and destroy insects, plants and diseases. ‘Disease’ was defined as ‘any of the diseases affecting tree plants or vegetables Sorting out the blights from the rusts (whether caused by or consisting of insects), which the Governor in Council from time to time by proclamation in the In this paper, authors’ distinctions between ‘rusts, blights and ‘Government Gazette’ declares to be a disease within the meaning mildews’ has not always seemed clear. This is partly because the of the act. ‘Insect’ shall mean the insects known as ‘codlin moth’, actual causes of the problems were unknown, or were due to more ‘round orange scale insect’, ‘hessian fly’, ‘locust, ‘Colorado than one pathogen (leaf rust and stem rust fungi). Or the problem Beetle’ (and) any other insect or any kind of ‘fungi’, which was some other fungal disease that was not identified until later in the Governor in Council from time to time by Proclamation in the the 19th or 20th centuries, through the efforts of Berkeley, Cooke, Government Gazette declares to be an insect within the meaning McAlpine, Cobb and others. of this act’ (Department of Agriculture 1890). McAlpine (1891c) refers to earlier Department of Agriculture In the 19th century, they may have got their ‘insects’ and (Victoria) reports that referred to ‘blight’ problems in wheat, and ‘diseases’ mixed up, but importantly, ‘diseases caused by fungi’ makes the point that ‘whenever the cause or accompaniment of a were included in the legislation! Daniel McAlpine would soon get disease affecting wheat crops is accurately determined it ought to them sorted out! be clearly and somewhat fully described’. He then proceeds to discuss the ‘so-called’ wheat blight and dying off in patches like ‘Take-all’. He notes that while work to determine the cause of Daniel McAlpine ‘Take-all’ was continuing, he had determined that Septoria tritici After his appointment as Consulting Vegetable Pathologist was associated with some of the leaf symptoms, and that the (12 May 1891), McAlpine proposed that the section of fungus was ‘well known’ on wheat in Italy (McAlpine 1891c). vegetable pathology in dealing with fungus pests would focus on: The Government, the farming communities of Australia, and (1) Special investigations concerning rust of wheat, oats, barley, future generations of plant pathologists had been blessed with and other cereals, and, connected to that, the question of the the arrival of Daniel McAlpine! rust on various grasses- native and imported. (2) Investigations of the life histories of the various fungus pests, Reaching out: Australasian Association and a knowledge of the best time to cope with them. for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (3) Reports upon diseased specimens sent in from various parts The intercolonial rust conferences had their origins in a proposal of the colony, and the best known remedies for the to theVictorian Premier from theAAAS overtheir concerns about pallination2 or prevention of such diseases. the 1889–90 rust outbreak (Sutherland 2001). ‘The Courier’ (4) Collection of specimens of the various diseases due to fungi, (1890a) noted that the Minister for Agriculture (Victoria) had and the subsequent formation of a museum for educational asked the AAAS to ‘nominate a scientific expert and a practical purposes. farmer from New South Wales and South Australia as members of (5) Delivery of lectures in different centres on the fungus pests the intercolonial conference which is to be held under the auspices most prevalent there. of the department to consider the causes of rust in wheat and the

2Similar usage in palliative care (from Latin palliare, to cloak) is ‘any form of medical care or treatment that concentrates on reducing the severity of disease symptoms’. 14 Australasian Plant Pathology G. I. Johnson best means of preventing it’ (they forgot to include Tasmania) Government’s Advisory Council of Science and Industry. (Sutherland 2001). Emphasis was mainly on agricultural productivity, especially As they evolved, the AAAS meetings provided useful forums breeding, but discussion also covered funding: wheat breeding for reporting of plant pathology and a broad range of other was considered, McAlpine gave a paper on immunity and sciences to a more generalist audience. At the first meeting in inheritance, and national coordination and Commonwealth Sydney in August and September 1888, a paper on the role of endowment of funding of agricultural research were discussed silica in resistance of wheat to rust was presented by Henry (Anonymous 1918), setting the scene for post-war efforts to Tryon (1888). At the second meeting in Melbourne in 1891, revitalise agriculture. the Committee appointed to investigate rust in wheat noted the recent appointment of Government Vegetarian (sic) Pathologists Pan-Pacific linkages in New South Wales and Victoria, and that wheat rustexperiments As global interests in the advancement of science began to recover were in progress in Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria after World War 1, and perhaps inspired by the ‘global thinking’ and South Australia (Pearson 1891). At the fourth meeting in espoused by US President, Woodrow Wilson, and the League of Hobart in January 1892, F. M. Bailey (1892) presented a review Nations, opportunities for scientific forums were revived, and the of the ‘fungus-blights which have been observed to injure living US began to reach out more, to internationalise meetings. From an vegetation in the colony of Queensland’. In his discussion of Australasian science perspective, among the most significant to ‘red rust’ (with P. graminis and P. rubigo-vera grouped), he emerge in that era were the Pan-Pacific Science Conferences. commented that the Queensland farmer ‘must select only those Their origins lay in discussions at the 1914 BAAS meeting in varieties of various grains upon which the rust does not thrive. He Australia, after which one delegate, Professor Davis of Harvard must not look to Europe or America. But rather to parts of India University, arranged a symposium on Pacific Exploration for the where the climate in most respects resembles that of Queensland.’ annual meeting of the American National Academy of Scientists At the fifth meeting in Adelaide in September 1893, McAlpine in 1916. This in turn led to the inauguration by representatives of (1893) gave a paper on ‘botanical nomenclature with special seven countries (including Australia and New Zealand) of the first reference to fungi’, proposing the principles to be followed in Scientific Conference under the Committee on the Pacific of the any census of Australian fungi, suggesting use of Saccardo’s National Research Council of America in Honolulu in 1920, and ‘Sylloge Fungorum’, which had ‘generally been followed’ by subsequently, the organisation of the second Pan-Pacific Science M. C. C. Cooke in his ‘Handbook of Australian Fungi’. McAlpine Congress in Australia in 1923, followed by the third in Japan in (1893) also criticised the ‘wanton way in which specific names are 1926 (MacLeod and Rehbock 2000). given in honor of individuals’. By the twelfth meeting in 1909, the The second Congress was held in both Sydney and Melbourne agitation for increasing the number of sections increased, with during August 1923. It provided a significant opportunity Maiden (1910) arguing the case for a separate section for Botany, for Australasian plant pathologists, as papers were presented rather than being combined with Zoology. And by 1969, this by E. C. Stakman of the University of Minnesota, and led to the initiation at the 41st Australian and New Zealand E. J. Butler, Director of the Imperial Bureau of Mycology, as Association for the Advancement of Science conference of the well as several Australasian plant pathologists. Three plant Australian Plant Pathology Society, which from then on would pathology papers were presented in the Melbourne sessions hold its own conferences (Purss 1994; Magarey 2007). (including one by Stakman), and 10 were presented in the Sydney sessions. The Sydney papers included a second paper Australasian hosting of international conferences by Stakman, and two papers by Butler, one on the effect of climate on cereal diseases, and a second on virus diseases of plants, as well AAAS was a scion of the British Association for the as papers by Waterhouse on rust, North on sugarcane diseases, Advancement of Science (BAAS), which held its 84th meeting Darnell Smith on banana diseases and Harrison on brown rot of in Australia, 28 July–31 August 1914 (a few days after the fruit (Pan-Pacific Science Congress 1923). declaration of World War 1). The BAAS meeting was In addition, there was a session on plant quarantine probably the largest scientific meeting held in the southern regulations, with papers by Stakman and Butler and a paper on hemisphere at that time. Over 300 British scientists, and ~5000 fire-blight by Tillyard of New Zealand, and a session on plant Australians participated, and the meeting was by far the most breeding and genetics that included papers by Waterhouse on successful the British Association had ever held (Robertson disease resistance in wheat, and a paper by J. P. Shelton on the 1980). While no specific papers on plant pathology were methods and results of William Farrer (Pan-Pacific Science presented, disease problems in wheat were mentioned in the Congress 1923). paper on Australian agriculture by Hall (1914), and papers on wheat improvement (Guthrie 1914a), Farrer’s wheat breeding – methods (Pridham 1914), and wheat breeding in Australia Australia Japan science links (Richardson 1914) were presented. Also, a paper by Osborn Another notable feature of the 1923 meeting was the significant (1914) on plant pathology in South Australia was in the participation of Japanese scientists. At the Pan-PacificMeeting handbook for South Australia prepared for the meeting. in Australia, Dr Joji Sakurai (1858–1939), Vice President of the With the descent into World War 1, conferences among National Research Council of Japan, said that ‘never before’ had scientists became lower priority. However, late in the war Japan sent such a large delegation of scientists to any country (9–16 November 1917), an agricultural conference was (not even to Europe or America). He noted that the quest for convened in Melbourne under the auspices of the Australian knowledge establishes a bond between scientists of all nations Rust Resistance Rocks! Australasian Plant Pathology 15 and when the nature of the problem requires ‘harmonious We face new challenges. But also amazing opportunities, from coordination without which success is impossible, that bond bioengineering disease-resistant plants and gaining public becomes infinitely stronger’ (Pan-Pacific Science Congress 1923). acceptance (MacDiarmid 2007), to improving mapping of Of course, awareness of plant diseases has a long history in disease occurrence by for example using geotagged photos Asia. Over the millennia, rice blight has caused recurring famines (Crandall et al. 2009), to the global tracking of ‘hot topic’ (Shirai 1918; Akai 1974), and it is thought that the first written media stories about research (http://memetracker.org) observation of a plant virus disease was in a poem, attributed (Leskovec et al. 2009) and use of ‘Google Trends’ (see http:// to the Japanese Empress Koken, and written in 752 CE. The www.google.com/trends and search with ‘UG99, wheat rust’), all Empress referred to the striking yellow pattern seen in Japan underpinned by the swirling of ideas and the quest for solutions. during autumn on Eupatorium plants, and now known to be caused by a gemini-virus, Eupatorium Yellow-Vein Virus (Inouye and Osaki 1980; Saunders et al. 2003). Realisation of an idea While participation of the Japanese delegates in the 1923 This paper has focussed on wheat rust and the search for solutions. Congress in Australia, and of delegates from Australia, New Two centuries ago, ideas suggested that, wheat rust was caused by Zealand, China and Dutch East Indies, among others, in the 1926 a fungus, and that varieties resistant to it might be selected (Banks Congress in Japan was significant, Australia–Japan science links 1805a; Knight 1806). As the industrial revolution began, had begun more indirectly in the 19th century. Edward urbanisation and the demand for food increased. At that time M. Shelton, an American, who came to Queensland in 1889 as in Britain, the solution for crop failure had been to import Instructor in Agriculture, and from 1897, was the foundation wheat from abroad, to let people starve, or have them eat more Principal of the Queensland Agricultural College, had been potatoes. In New South Wales, it was (initially) to ask the British posted to Japan for 2 years starting in 1872, as one of the US Government for help, to ‘bleat in the press’, and to import supplies team providing technical assistance to the Japanese Government (first) from India, (and later) Tasmania and South Australia. for the modernisation of agriculture (Schwantes 1953). Also, in In Britain in 1804–05, war with France and a trade blockade the 1890s Japanese and Australian researchers had each forced attention to the problem. The war ended. Trade became independently discovered that the pathogen causing loose smut easier, the US began to export, and the urgency for solving the of barley-infected plants through the flowers [Akai 1974; citing problem eased, until the 1840s, when late blight destroyed the Sato and Yamada (1896) and Maddox (1896, 1897)]. There were potato crops. In Australia wheat self-sufficiency was reached, and no specific papers by Japanese scientists on plant diseases at the production extended into drier areas. Gradually, the wheat trade 1923 Congress, but an overview of progress in agriculture in increased between states and exports began. So, pressure for a Japan, and papers on rice culture, ‘investigations in rice’, and solution to the wheat rust problem also fluctuated. Later, railways testing of agricultural seeds, were presented by Dr M. Kondo of expanded, telegraph lines were extended and opportunities for the Ohara Experiment Station, Japan. trade expanded further, increasing opportunities for, and the The Australian delegation to the 1926 Congress in Tokyo potential value of, the crops that were being lost to rust. included Professor Theodore Osborn, first Professor of Botany, Meanwhile in Europe, scientists worked away to discover Vegetable Pathology and Parasitology at the University of more about the cause of rust. Ruminations about the problem Adelaide, who later specialised in ecological botany. Eight of and farmer observations, coupled with guidance from pioneering the Japanese delegates were listed as phytopathologists or ‘scientists’ edged towards more understanding of the pathogens, mycologists in the 1926 Congress Proceedings, and four of of the advantages of early planting, and of selecting resistant them made presentations on plant pathology (Pan-Pacific varieties. In Europe, crops were based on traditional varieties. In Science Congress 1926). In addition, an American, Professor Australia wheat had been sourced from a variety of places, and our R. H. Porter from the University of Nanjing, gave papers on plant colonial botanists were in contact with botanic gardens and pathological problems in China (Pan-Pacific Science Congress collectors all over the world, all wanting some of our native 1926). Porter (1926) had estimated that wheat diseases in east and plants. In exchange, wheat seed (and other germplasms) was northern China caused 20% crop loss, and that seed treatments sourced from near and far, providing more variation in resistance and resistant varieties offered hope for reducing losses. and earliness traits for crops in the colonies than those of Europe. Experts began to arrive in Australia, and the great wheat breeding Getting the message out era began. Behind this gradual progress toward solutions were the The millennium of the microorganism: saving the young people, the politics, the publicity and the development of plant harvest from the devouring blight pathology principles. Erasmus Darwin was a medical doctor, and In the last 200 years, we have come a long way in understanding a foundation member of the Lunar Society – ‘the Lunatics’, who plant diseases and their control. But we know from Darwin debated and nurtured progress in a variety of scientific fields. and the theory of natural selection, as well as from modern Joseph Banks, Charles Darwin and William Farrer all went to understandings of genetic recombination and molecular Cambridge, Thomas Knight to Oxford. Charles Haly had been biology, that ‘the battle’ will never be over. Agents that attack a colonist in Newfoundland before coming to Australia – his plants to cause disease, mainly microorganisms and their vectors, education was ‘the school of hard-knocks’, and the Queensland but also flowering plants (e.g. Orobanche spp.) are continually Legislative Assembly! Joseph Bancroft trained as a doctor in changing, and new biosecurity threats emerge through mutation Manchester, and Daniel McAlpine trained under Huxley in and introduction from elsewhere. London. All contributed in various ways to the ‘crucible of 16 Australasian Plant Pathology G. I. Johnson change’, in which ideas about wheat rust were debated and tried, with the ‘rust gods’, and the interconnectedness of politics, trade, and melded into solutions. The roles and style of approach of income, and funding, and of assuring food supplies. The work these pioneers varied, but they helped in the drive from ‘idea’ to that started two centuries ago to addressing plant pathology ‘solution’ for the problem. The alchemists were right! Ideas can challenges has been affected by, and contributed to, the be turned into gold! development of some of the following issues. It is these that This paper has also discussed Australia’s emergence onto the are often foremost in the minds of politicians and global wider global stage through the Inter-colonial Wheat Conferences, powerbrokers, and therefore need to be addressed: the AAAS and BAAS Meetings, the Pan-Pacific Science (1) Globalisation, resource depletion, climate change, natural Congresses, and newspapers, pamphlets and periodicals. They disasters and security concerns – people feeling uncertain provided opportunities for exchanging ideas, relaying progress about the outcomes and implications for their, health, family, and kindling the next moves. These days, the same variables food and shelter and livelihood, and expect governments and apply (personalities, politics and plant pathology principles), planners to ensure ‘least inconvenient’ outcomes – (Potato but our approaches often have to adapt and shift direction, to late-blight famine); accommodate responses to new strains, species, environmental (2) Market development – people expecting quality and safety in challenges, or evolving trade or policy imperatives. And, the their food, fibre and forest products, wanting to exclude means of transmission of scientific findings, disease reports and unwanted pests, diseases and vermin, and wanting information are also evolving – from the traditional journals, industries and communities to grow and prosper; media and professional societies to the Worldwide Web, to (3) Value and competitiveness – people wanting choice, value, ‘Facebook’,to‘YouTube’ and to ‘Twitter’. convenience and reliable supply, and some independent monitoring of standards compliance and equity of cost Encompassing an holistic view sharing; In considering the future needs and priorities for our profession (4) Modernisation and efficiency – people expecting quick and and the Australasian Plant Pathology Society, a central tenet must reliable transport, marketing and supply and service be to listen: to the industries and communities that we serve, to our industries, and fast, cost-effective and efficient access to professional peers and associates, and to the planet that we live on. media and electronic communication; While it is easy for governments to commit to aspirational targets (5) Professionalism in service and delivery – people wanting such as the Millennium Development Goals (MDG Report 2009), pleasant, well adjusted and efficient communities, reliable Carbon Emission Reduction Targets, and the L’Aquila Statement employment, equity of opportunity and access to education, on Food Security (L’Aquila Statement 2009), and for us to link and expect effective planning and timely inputs for skills and plant pathology research to such ideals, actually making progress knowledge development; and requires commitment and effort. (6) Health and happiness – people like to be assured of a Governments and donors try to satisfy international norms reasonable life expectancy, to improve their understanding and community expectations in relation to these important of science, technology and the natural world, and to enjoy, to global goals, but at a more immediate level, there are the explore and tolearn through personal experience and the lives Australian farmers’ concerns to address: the high cost of of others. chemicals, fertilisers, fuel, compliance with health and safety, quality management guidelines and labour laws, market access, In considering future challenges for the vegetable industry fi in tropical Asia, (Johnson et al. 2008, 2009) framed low pro ts and the threats from exotic diseases. As well, there are ‘ ’ economic questions and environmental agendas that affect recommendations in a 5-point Action Agenda that broadly priorities and actions. The latter can vary from week to week, encompassed the above issues. An Action Agenda for plant and depend on what ‘makes the news’, and who is in the chain of pathology R&D could also be presented in such a framework, publicity, priority setting and support. to describe the priorities for science and know-how, to assess the political and sociological gaps and to list potential actions and benefits accruing. But, some ‘nimbleness’ of planning by How do we make ourselves heard? scientists and administrators is always needed, to ‘recast’ R&D Rural industries generally have clear priorities and goals for and highlight how it responds to, or capitalises on geopolitical research and development (R&D), and share common agendas or ‘the topics of the moment’. understanding with plant pathologists about what needs to be done. If we use the ‘language’ of plant pathology to engage support from politicians, the wider community, and global Charting the way forward powerbrokers, few will listen. To ‘get under the skin’ of Today, as we celebrate the 40th anniversary of our Society – they policy makers, and to fire up public interest, we have to say that ‘life begins at 40’ – what might the future hold – a world ‘translate’ plant pathology into the context and language of the where people have safe and healthy food, renewable supplies of issues that are topmost in their minds. wood and fibre, and natural environments conserved for the use Although the current ‘global’ priorities or concerns seem to and enjoyment of current and future generations? differ from those of the time of Joseph Banks, of Charles Darwin, We have knowledge that is online and accessible, skills for and even of Charles Haly, at their essence they are not different. improving disease management, biosecurity and environmental Witness the current concern about the UG99 strain of the stem rust conservation, and policy and planning strategies, and laws. This pathogen (Smith et al. 2009), the modern face of the age-old tussle paper has focussed on how information about the nature and cause Rust Resistance Rocks! Australasian Plant Pathology 17 of disease and the possibilities for control were disseminated in pathology to move in the same direction. This is a challenge I the 19th and early 20th century. Looking back like this can be leave with you. useful, to refresh our perspectives or highlight ideas missed. And as Heath (2009) advises, following the ‘visual clues’ provided by the plants and fungi that we study is also critical. But Acknowledgements unfortunately, having the freedom to follow clues and ideas ‘is As Presidentof the AustralasianPlant PathologySociety2007–09, I have been not as great as it once was’. And in any case, will there be the grateful for the support and cooperation of my colleagues in the APPS people to train for the workforce that is needed (Guest 2009)? Management Committee and Council, the Editor-in-Chief of Australasian Plant Pathology, Keith Harrower, the Business Manager, Peter Williamson, and the local organising committees for APPS conferences, particularly David Finally Guest, Rose Daniel and Lucy Tran Nguyen. I also thank colleagues who ‘ ’ have been mentors in my career, and APPS members who have helped Whatever the problem or issue , the key contributions of the with information and documents during the preparation of this paper. This science of plant pathology are essentially constant. Plant paper would not have been as easy without help from the staff of the National pathology R&D can help target groups and communities to Library of Australia and access to their collections, and the foresight of understand, respond to, or manipulate: those who acquired the papers of Sir Joseph Banks held in Australian libraries. – ( Access to Australian Historic Newspapers (1805 1954) online (http:// 1) the composition and nature of plant-pathogen-biota newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/home), the State Library of New South relationships, Wales collection of the papers of Sir Joseph Banks (http://www2.sl.nsw. (2) the effects and use of natural and man-made environments, gov.au/banks/), Picture-Australia, Darwin Online (http://darwin-online.org. pest and beneficial organisms, and production and supply uk/), and early books and journals at http://www.archives.org, has also chain components, and been invaluable. (3) the impacts and implications of institutional, policy and regulatory frameworks, social expectations and natural and References human-influenced trends and crises. ‘A Friend’ (1792) (A. Young) Observations on the mildew affecting corn. Role of the Society? Translated from the Italian of Fontana (1767). Annals of Agriculture and Other Useful Arts XVII, 232–279. In the modern world, maybe the Australasian Plant Pathology Ainsworth GC (1969) History of plant pathology in Great Britain. Annual Society is an ‘old-fashioned’ modality? Well, it can still play an review of Phytopathology 7,13–30. doi: 10.1146/annurev.py.07.090169. important role in assuring that plant pathology knowledge and 000305 capabilities will remain and evolve. It does this by contributing to Ainsworth GC (1981) ‘Introduction to the history of plant pathology. the peer review and presentation of research, by fostering Vol. XII.’ 315 pp. (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge) and contributing to planning and policy, and by articulating Akai S (1974) History of plant pathology in Japan. Annual Review of Phytopathology 12,13–26. doi: 10.1146/annurev.py.12.090174.000305 and upholding professional skills and standards, to deliver ‘ what communities expect and need from a 21st-century plant Allen JG (1986) Lupinosis. A review. In Proceedings of the fourth international lupin conference, Geraldton, Western Australia, 15–22 pathologist. August 1986’. pp. 173–187. (Department of Agriculture for the At the 9th International Congress of Plant Pathology in 2008, International Lupin Association: South Perth) one of the keynote speakers apologised, saying that they ‘used to Andrews EW (Ed.) (1862) Diseases of wheat. The Farm and Garden IV, be a plant pathologist’. I thought: if they had been a medical 129–130. doctor, a dentist, or a veterinarian, they probably would not even Anonymous (1803a) Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser. be able to hold their position unless they maintained a current Sunday 23 October 1803. p. 3. registration to practice, let alone consider themselves an ‘ex’ Anonymous (1803b) General orders. Sydney Gazette and New South Wales doctor, dentist or vet! And probably, if this person visited a farm Advertiser. Sunday 13 November 1803. p. 1. or forest, or walked into a garden, they would still recognise Anonymous (1816) Some remarks on the mildew of wheat, and the choice of powdery mildew or virus diseases, or if called upon, could seed corn, particularly in reference to an hypothesis of Sir Joseph Banks. The Pamphleteer XV IV, 108–126. VIII. passably undertake the basic diagnostic or molecular biology Anonymous (1885) ‘The Australasian farmer. A practical handbook for the procedures that they had been trained to do. Once a plant farm and station.’ 351 pp. (Agricultural, Horticultural, and Pastoral Staff pathologist, always a plant pathologist! So why can some be of ‘The Australasian’ Melbourne. Wilson and Mackinnon) in such a hurry to abandon our profession? Anonymous (1891) Rust in wheat conference. Agricultural Gazette of At present, ‘plant pathology’ is not even listed as a subject New South Wales 2, 403–406. category in the Australian Research Council (ARC) funding Anonymous (1892a) Rust in wheat. Recommendations of the third system. Perhaps if instead of being the ‘Australasian Plant conference. Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales 3, 221–226. Patholgy Society’,wewerethe‘Australasian Institute of Plant Anonymous (1892b) Rust in wheat. Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales – Pathologists’ or the‘Australasian PlantPathologists’ Association’, 3, 481 484. we, and our sibling professions, the ARC, Biosecurity Agencies Anonymous (1918) Interstate conference of agricultural scientists. Agricultural Gazette of NSW 28, 59. and Governments, might take ‘our profession’ more seriously? ‘ ’ fi Bailey FM (1892) A review of the fungus-blights which have been observed In the biosecurity world , professional certi cation as a to injure living vegetation in the colony of Queensland. In ‘Report of veterinarian or a doctor can be prerequisite to ‘certifying’ the fourth meeting of the Australasian Association for the Advancement diagnoses, undertaking procedures, or issuing prescriptions and of Science, Hobart, January 1893’. (Ed. A Morton) pp. 388–401. proclamations. It may be time for the profession of plant (AAAS: Sydney) 18 Australasian Plant Pathology G. I. Johnson

Bancroft J (1879) Diseases of animals and plants. Divinity Hall Record 1, Chester KS (1946) The nature and prevention of the cereal rusts as exemplified 1–14. in the leaf rust of wheat. In ‘Annales Cryptogamici et Phytopathologici’. Bancroft J (1885) Experiments with Indian wheats in Queensland. (Ed. F Verdoorn) 269 pp. (Chronica Botanica: Waltham, MA) Proceedings of the Royal Society of Queensland 1, 176–180. Clarson W (1890) Blights and their teachings, with a suggestion as to the Bancroft J (1888) Wheat growing. In ‘The Queensland illustrated guide for the isolation or quarantining of orchards in a state of disease. In ‘Proceedings use of farmers, fruit-growers, vigerons and others’. (Ed. A Midgley) of a convention of fruit growers, 19–21 September 1889’. Department pp. 156–158. (J. Beale Government Printer: Brisbane) of Agriculture Bulletin No. 5. pp. 85–88. (Brain Government Printer: Banks J (1804) Letter from Sir Joseph Banks to Robert Brown (in Australia) Melbourne) 30 August 1804. In ‘Historical records of New South Wales. Vol. 5’. Clements HG (1999) Science and colonial culture: scientific interests and (Ed. FM Bladen) pp. 461–462. (Lansdown Slattery: Mona Vale, NSW) institutions in Brisbane, 1859–1900. PhD Thesis, Griffith University. Banks J (1805a) ‘A short account of the cause of the disease in corn, called by Available at http://www4.gu.edu.au:8080/adt-root/public/adt-QGU2005 farmers the blight, the mildew, and the rust.’ 14 pp. (Bulmer: London) 0914.155807/index.html (Accessed 1 July 2009) Banks J (1805b) ‘A short account of the cause of the disease in corn, called by Crandall D, Backstrom L, Huttenlocher D, Kleinberg J (2009) Mapping the farmers the blight, the mildew, and the rust.’ 28 pp. (J. Harding: London) world’s photos. In ‘Proceedings of the 18th International World Banks J (1805c) Communication XXV. A short account of the cause of the Wide Web Conference 2009’. Madrid 20–24 April, 2009, WWW 2009 disease in corn, called by farmers the blight, the mildew, and the rust. Proceedings pp. 761–770. http://www2009.org/proceedings/table.html Communications to the Board of Agriculture on subjects relative to the (Accessed 29 October 2009) husbandry and internal improvement of the country Volume IV. Crocker TC (1838) ‘Memoirs of Joseph Holt, General of the Irish Rebels, in pp. 399–406. (Published by W. Bulmer for G. and W. Nicol: London) 1798. Vol. II.’ (Henry Colburn: London) Available at http://www.archive. Banks J (1806a) ‘Short account of the cause of the disease in corn, called by org/details/memoirsofjosephh02holt (Accessed 10/8/2009) farmers the blight, the mildew, and the rust, 2nd edition with additions Curtis W (1805) ‘Practical observations on the British grasses: especially such and a letter to Sir J. Banks on the origin of the blight, and on the means of as are best adapted to the laying down or improving of meadows and raising late crops of garden pease (sic.) by T. A. Knight.’ 59 pp. (Harding: pastures: likewise, an enumeration of the British grasses’ 4th edition, to London) which is now added, ‘A short account of the causes of the diseases in corn Banks J (1806b) ‘VIII Communications on spring wheat. Communications called by farmers the blight, the mildew and the rust’ by Sir Joseph Banks, to the Board of Agriculture on subjects relative to the husbandry and Bart. 58, 14 pp. (Printed for HD Symonds and Curtis: London) internal improvement of the country. Volume 5.’ (Printed by W. Bulmer Darwin CR (1828) Letter from Charles Darwin to William Darwin Fox Friday for G. Nicol, London) Available at http://www.archive.org/details/ 12 June 1828. pp. 49–50. In (Ed. AWD Larkum) (2009) ‘A natural calling communicationsto05grea (Accessed 16 August 2009) – life, letters and diaries of Charles Darwin and William Darwin Fox’. Banks J (1808) Letter to Thomas Andrew Knight from Joseph Banks. In ‘The 576 pp. (Springer) late period. Scientific correspondence of Sir Joseph Banks, 1765–1820. Darwin CR (1833) Mr. Darwin’s Memorandum. Northern Banks of the Plata, Vol. 5’. (Ed. N Chambers) 2007. pp. 494–495. (Pickering and Chatto: November 20–30 1833. In (Ed. JS Henslow) (1844) Rust in wheat. ‘The London) Gardeners’ Chronicle and Agricultural Gazette’. (28 September): 659. Barnes DG (1961) The Corn Laws and the wars, 1791–1813. In ‘A history of In ‘The Complete Works of Charles Darwin’ (CR Darwin) (2002–2009) the English corn laws from 1660–1846’. pp. 68–98. (Kelley: New York) On Line Accessed 10/8/2009, Text Image PDF F1668a. Bernays LA (1863) ‘The first annual report of the Queensland Acclimatisation Darwin CR (1845) Letter to J. S. Henslow, Down Bromley, Kent, Society.’ (Courier General Printing Office: Brisbane) 16 May 1845. Letter 868 Darwin Correspondence Project. Available at Blagdon Sir C (1804) Letter to Sir Joseph Banks, 29 August, 1804. Volume 5, http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/darwinletters/calendar/entry-868.html The late period. ‘..the crops of wheat are good, without rust, everywhere (Accessed 10/8/2009) that I have passed westward of the Severn. In Herefordshire (rust) Darwin CR (1875) ‘The variation of animals and plants under domestication.’ very abundant.’ In ‘Scientific Correspondence of Sir Joseph Banks, 2nd edn. (John Murray: London) 1765–1820’. (Ed. N Chambers) pp. 370–371. (Pickering and Chatto: Darwin C (1880) Preface and ‘a preliminary notice’. In Krause E ‘Erasmus London) Darwin’ (translated from German by WS Dallas). (Appleton: New York) Board of Agriculture (1893) ‘Report on rust or mildew on wheat plants 1892.’ Darwin E (1781) Letter to Sir Joseph Banks, 29 September 1781. In (H.M. Stationery Office: London) Available at http://www.archive. ‘The collected letters of Erasmus Darwin’. (Ed. DG King-Hele 2006) org/stream/reportonrustormi00greaiala#page/n55/mode/2up (Accessed xxxiii. 630 pp. (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge) doi: 10.2277/ 16 August 2009) 0521821568 Broadbent P (1995) Quarantine in relation to Australian citrus imports Darwin E (1783) (Translator) ‘A system of vegetables, according to their and exports. Australasian Plant Pathology 24, 145–156. doi: 10.1071/ classes, orders, genera, species, with their characters and differences’.by APP9950145 C. von Linné (Linneus) (Printed by J. Jackson for Leigh and Sotheby: CABI (2009a) ‘Review of plant pathology.’ (CABI: Wallingford, UK) Lichfield) 424 pp. http://www.archive.org/details/systemofvegeta01linn Available at http://www.cabi.org/Default.aspx?site=170&page=1016& (Accessed 29/8/2009) pid=2194# (Accessed 19 August 2009) Darwin E (1791) ‘The Botanic Garden (Part 1. The economy of vegetation).’ CABI (2009b) ‘Crop protection compendium.’ (CAB International: 218 pp. 2nd edn. (J. Johnson: London) Wallingford, UK) Available at http://www.cabi.org/compendia/cpc/ Darwin E (1794) ‘Zoonomia; or the laws of organic life. Vol. I.’ 646 pp. (Accessed 19 September 2009) (J. Johnson: London) Campbell WS (1933) William James Farrer. Royal Australian Historical Darwin E (1800) Diseases of plants. Section XIV. Phytologia 285–300. Society Journal and Proceedings 19, 269–285. Department of Agriculture (1890) ‘Conference respecting a means for de Candolle A (1815) Uredo rouille des cereales. In ‘Flora francaise, famille suppression of insect pests injurious to vegetation.’ Department of des champignons’. p. 83. Cited from Chester (1946). Agriculture Victoria Bulletin No. 10. 33 pp. (Brain Government Carter HB (1988) ‘Sir Joseph Banks, 1743–1820.’ 671 pp. (British Museum: Printer: Melbourne) London) Dixon GR (2007) ‘Report on a skills audit undertaken for The British Chambers N (Ed.) (2007) ‘Scientific correspondence of Sir Joseph Banks, Society for Plant Pathology.’ 35 pp. (British Society for Plant 1765–1820. Vol. 5. The late period.’ (Pickering and Chatto: London) Pathology: Reading, UK) Rust Resistance Rocks! Australasian Plant Pathology 19

Dubé A (2001) Daniel McAlpine Memorial Lecture. Long-term careers Haly CR (1876) Paper by Mr Haly. In ‘Report of the Board appointed to in plant pathology. Australasian Plant Pathology 30, 295–300. enquire into the causes of diseases affecting livestock and plants. Votes doi: 10.1071/AP01066 and Proceedings of the Queensland Legislative Assembly. Vol. 2’. ERA (2009) Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) initiative September p. 1017. 2009 consultation paper. Available at http://www.arc.gov.au/pdf/ Hayward J (1825) ‘On the black rust in wheat. In ‘On the science of ERA_indicators_consult.pdf (Accessed 9/9/2009) agriculture: comprising commentary and comparative investigations of Evans LT (1980) Responses to challenge: William Farrer and the making of the agricultural chemistry of Mr Kirwan and Sir Humphrey Davy, the wheats. Farrer memorial oration, 1979. Journal of the Australian Institute Code of Agriculture of Sir John Sinclair, Sir Joseph Banks and other of Agricultural Science 46,3–13. authors on the subject.’ (Longman: London) Available at http://www. Farrer W (1894) The millers and rust-resistant wheat. Letter to the Editor. archive.org/details/onscienceofagric00haywrich (Accessed 29/8/2009) The Brisbane Courier Wednesday 11 April 1894. Available at http:// Heath MC (2009) Look before you leap: memoirs of a ‘cell biological’ plant newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/3577663?searchTerm=wheat pathologist. Annual Review of Phytopathology 47,1–13. doi: 10.1146/ +farrer (Accessed 19/9/2009) annurev-phyto-080508-081857 Farrer W (1898) The making and improvement of wheats for Australian Henslow JS (1844) On the registration of facts tending to illustrate questions conditions. Agricultural Gazette N.S.W. 9, 131–168; 241–260. of scientific interest. Rust in wheat. The Agricultural Gazette, p. 659. Fish S (1970) The history of plant pathology in Australia. Annual Review of Available at http://darwin-online.org.uk/pdf/1844_rust_F1668a_001.pdf Phytopathology 8,13–36. doi: 10.1146/annurev.py.08.090170.000305 (Accessed 14/8/2009) Fontana F (1767) ‘Observations on the rust of grain.’ Translated by Hoare M (1981) Botany and society in Eastern Australia. In ‘People and P. P. Pirone 1932, 40 p. (APS Press:) plants in Australia’. (Eds DJ, SM Carr) pp. 183–219. (Academic Press: Frankel SJ (2008) Sudden death and Phytophthora ramorum in the USA: Sydney) a management challenge. Australasian Plant Pathology 37,19–25. Hoare ME (1969) ‘All things are queer and opposite’: scientific societies in doi: 10.1071/AP07088 Tasmania in the 1840s. Isis 60, 198–209. doi: 10.1086/350469 Gambley CF, Miles AK, Ramsden M, Doogan V, Thomas JE, Parmenter K, Holland S, Hamilton J, Fisher B, Cole A (2005) Review of plant health. Whittle PJL (2009) The distribution and spread of citrus canker in Evaluation Report 9. 32 pp. (Department of Natural Resources & Emerald, Australia. Australasian Plant Pathology 38, 547–557. Environment: Melbourne) doi: 10.1071/AP09043 Holliday P (1995) ‘Fungus diseases of tropical crops.’ 607 pp. (Dover Gascoigne J (1994) ‘Joseph Banks and the English Enlightenment: useful Publications: New York) knowledge and polite culture.’ 324 pp. (Cambridge University Press: Inouye T, Osaki T (1980) The first record in the literature of the possible plant Cambridge) virus disease that appeared in ‘Manyoshu’, a Japanese classic anthology, Gazley JG (1973) ‘The life of Arthur Young 1741–1820.’ 727 pp. (American as far back as the time of the 8th century. Annals of the Phytopathology Philosophical Society: Philadelphia, PA) Society Japan 46,49–50. (In Japanese, cited by Saunders et al. 2003) Gilbert LA (1981) Plants, politics and personalities in Colonial New South Isaac V, Kirkpatrick R (2003) ‘Two hundred years of Sydney newspapers: a Wales. In ‘People and plants in Australia’. (Eds DJ, SM Carr) short history.’ (Rural Press Ltd: Richmond, NSW) Available at http:// pp. 220–258. (Academic Press: Sydney) eprint.uq.edu.au/archive/00000391/01/sydnews.pdf(Accessed1/9/2009) Goddard N (2000) Agricultural institutions: societies, associations and the Johnson GI (2000) The introduction of the mango to Australia. Proceedings press. In ‘The Agrarian history of England and Wales. Vol. 7. Part 1’. of the Royal Society of Queensland 109,83–90. (Ed. EJT Collins) pp. 650–690. (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge) Johnson GI (2009) Information from 19th century newspapers gleaned Government Office for Science (2007) ‘Rigour respect responsibility – a from a search of digitised Australian newspapers (1803–). Available at universal ethical code for scientists.’ 2 pp. (Department for Innovation, http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/home (Accessed 29 October 2009) Universities and Skills: London) Johnson GI, Weinberger K, Wu MH (2008) ‘The vegetableindustry in tropical GregoryAC (1876) Reportof the Board appointedto enquire into the causesof Asia. Explorations No. 1: an overview of production and trade, with a diseases affecting livestock and plants. In ‘Votes and Proceedings of the focus on India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam.’ Queensland Legislative Assembly’. pp. 1011–1041. (T.P. Pugh’s Printing (AVRDC – The World Vegetable Center: Shanhua, Taiwan). 56 pp. Office: Brisbane) Available at http://www.avrdc.org/publications/socio/veg_industry/ Guest D (2001) 2001: an Australasian science odyssey. Presidential address to index.html (Accessed 19 September 2009) the Australasian Plant Pathology Society,Cairns 2001.Australasian Plant Johnson GI, Weinberger K, Wu MH (2009) The vegetable sector in tropical Pathology 30, 291–294. doi: 10.1071/AP01064 Asia. Importance, issues, and a way ahead. Acta Horticulturae 809, Guest D (2009) Plant pathology in 2009: the sequel. Australasian Plant 15–34. Pathology 38, 315–317. doi: 10.1071/AP09022 Jones W (1806) Communication No. IX. On the Mildew. Communications Guthrie FB (1914a) Wheat improvement in Australia. In ‘Transactions of from the Board of Agriculture 5, 200–208. Section M. Report of the 84th meeting of the British Association for the Keed BR, White NH (1971) Quantitative effects of leaf and stem rusts on yield Advancement of Science Australia 1914’. pp. 661–662. (Murray: and quality of wheat. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and London) Animal Husbandry 11, 550–555. doi: 10.1071/EA9710550 Guthrie FB (1914b) Wheat improvement in Australia. Department of King CJ(1957) Anoutline of closer settlement in New SouthWales 5. The turn Agriculture New South Wales Science Bulletin 11. Gullick of the century: 1885–1895. Review of Marketing and Agricultural Government Printer, Sydney. 31 pp. Economics 25, 108–129. Hall AD (1914) Agriculture – President of the Section. In ‘Transactions of King PG (1804) Letter from Governor King to Lord Hobart, 1 March 1804. In Section M. Report of the 84th meeting of the British Association for the ‘Historical records of New South Wales. Vol. 5: King, 1803, 1804, 1805. Advancement of Science Australia 1914’. pp. 636–659. (Murray: lxviii, (Ed. FM Bladen) pp. 328– 337. (Lansdown Slattery: Mona Vale, London) NSW, 1979) Hallett FF (1861) On ‘pedigree’ in wheat as a means of increasing the crop. King-Hele DG (1963) Dr Erasmus Darwin and the Theory of Evolution. Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England 22, 371–381. Nature 200, 304–306. doi: 10.1038/200304a0 Haly CR(1872)ABoardof Enquiryinto sheepandcattlediseases.Lettertothe King-Hele DG (1968) ‘The essential writings of Erasmus Darwin.’ 223 pp. Editor, The Brisbane Courier Tuesday 4 June 1872. p. 3. (MacGibbon and Kee: London) 20 Australasian Plant Pathology G. I. Johnson

King-Hele D (1974) Erasmus Darwin, master of many crafts. Nature 247, Maiden JH (1910) Quoted in Report of the Meeting of the Council of the 87–91. doi: 10.1038/247087a0 Australasian Association for the Advancement of Science. In ‘Report of King-Hele DG (1988) Erasmus Darwin, man of ideas and inventor of words. the Twelfth Meeting of the Australasian Association for the Advancement Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 42, 149–180. of Science’ (Ed. J Shirley)821 pp. (James Cummings Government Printer: doi: 10.1098/rsnr.1988.0013 Brisbane) Knight TA (1804a) Letter to Sir Joseph Banks, 27 September 1804. In, Maxwell A (2007) Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. citri (Hasse) Vaut. APPS Volume 5. The late period. ‘Scientific correspondence of Sir Joseph pathogen of the month. Available at http://www.australasianplant Banks, 1765–1820’ (Ed. N Chambers) 2007. pp. 380–383. (Pickering pathologysociety.org.au/Regions/POTM/aug07%20POTM.pdf and Chatto: London) (Accessed 18/9/2009) Knight TA (1804b) Letter to Sir Joseph Banks 29 December, 1804. ‘Papers of McAlpine D (1891a) The life-history of the rust of wheat. Department of Sir Joseph Banks’ Section 15 - General Correspondence and memoranda. Agriculture Bulletin 12, pp. 22–34. (Brain Government Printer: Letter received by Banks from Thomas Andrew Knight, 29 December Melbourne) 1804 (Series 72.104) Online (State Library of New South Wales: Sydney). McAlpine D (1891b) Vegetable pathology. Department of Agriculture http://www2.sl.nsw.gov.au/banks/series_72/72_104.cfm (Accessed Bulletin 12, p. 21. (Brain Government Printer: Melbourne) 20/8/2009) McAlpine D (1891c) Report on wheat blight. Department of Agriculture Knight TA (1805a) Letter to Sir Joseph Banks 23 August 1805. In, Volume 5. Bulletin 12, pp. 34–36. (Brain Government Printer: Melbourne) The late period. ‘Scientific correspondence of Sir Joseph Banks, McAlpine D (1891d) Report of the vegetable pathologist. Department of 1765–1820’ (Ed. N Chambers) 2007. pp. 447–450. (Pickering and Agriculture Bulletin 14, p. 59. (Brain Government Printer: Melbourne) Chatto: London) McAlpine D (1893) Botanical nomenclature with special reference to fungi. Knight TA (1805b) Letter to Sir Joseph Banks, 16 November, 1805. In, Proceedings of Section D. In ‘Report of the fifth meeting of the Volume 5. The late period. ‘Scientific correspondence of Sir Joseph Australasian Association for the Advancement of Science, Adelaide, Banks, 1765–1820’ (Ed. N Chambers) 2007. pp. 454–457 (Pickering September 1893’. pp. 414–420. (AAAS: Sydney) and Chatto: London). McAlpine D (1894) Report on rust in wheat experiments 1892–1893. Knight TA (1806) Letter to Sir Joseph Banks, 20 March, 1806. Volume 5. The Department of Agriculture, Victoria. 66 pp. (RS Brain Government late period. ‘Scientific correspondence of Sir Joseph Banks, 1765–1820’ Printer: Melbourne) (Ed. N Chambers) 2007. pp. 465–468. (Pickering and Chatto: London) McIntosh RA (2007) From Farrer to the Australian cereal rust program. Lambert AB (1798) Description of the blight of wheat Uredo frumenti. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 58, 550–577. doi: 10.1071/ Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 4, 193–198. AR07148 L’Aquila Statement (2009) L’Aquila joint statement on global food security. MDG Report (2009) ‘The Millennium Development Goals Report 2009.’ L’Aquila Food Security Initiative (AFSI) Food Security, 1, 235–237. (United Nations: New York) Available at http://www.un.org/ Available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/04p7376654p 20300/ millenniumgoals/pdf/MDG_Report 2009 ENG.pdf (Accessed 1 July fulltext.pdf (Accessed 19 September 2009). doi: 10.1007/s12571-009- 2009) 0035-x Murray GM, Brown JF (1987) The incidence and relative importance of Larkum AWD (2009) ‘A natural calling – life, letters and diaries of Charles wheat diseases in Australia. Australasian Plant Pathology 16,34–37. Darwin and William Darwin Fox.’ 576 pp. (Springer: New York) doi: 10.1071/APP9870034 Large EC (1940) ‘The advance of the fungi.’ (Jonathan Cape: London) Mylechreest M (1984) Thomas Andrew Knight and the founding of the Available at http://www.archive.org/stream/advanceofthefung031917 Royal Horticultural Society. Garden History 12, 132–137. doi: 10.2307/ mbp/advanceofthefung031917mbp_djvu.txt (Accessed 1/6/2009) 1586803 Leskovec J, Backstrom L, Kleinberg J (2009) Meme-tracking and the NSW Calendar (1835) An essay on the culture of wheat adapted to dynamics of the news cycle. In ‘Proceedings of the 15th ACM NSW. In ‘The New South Wales Calendar and General Post Office SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data Directory 1835’. pp. 54–118. (Stephens and Stokes at ‘The Herald mining, 2009’. 28 June–1 July 2009, Paris, France. (Association for Office’: Sydney) Computing Machinery: New York) Available at http://www.cs.cornell. Olmstead AL, Rhodes PW (2007) Biological globalisation: the other grain edu/home/kleinber/kdd09-quotes.pdf (Accessed 28 August 2009) invasion. In ‘The new comparative economic history: essays in honor of MacDiarmid R (2007) Genetically modified crop plants: science versus Jeffrey G. Williamson’. (Eds TJ Hatton, KH O’Rourke, AM Taylor) society? – a perspective. Australasian Plant Pathology 36, 516–519. pp. 115–140. (MIT Press: Cambridge, MA) doi: 10.1071/AP07064 O’Rourke KH (2006) The worldwide economic impact of the French MacLeod R, Rehbock PF (2000) The 1923 Pan-Pacific Science Congress in Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, 1793–1815. Journal of Global Australia Pacific Science 54, 209–225. Available at http://scholarspace. History 1, 123–149. doi: 10.1017/S1740022806000076 manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/523/1/v54n3-209-225.pdf Osborn TGB (1914) Plant Pathology. In ‘Handbook for South Australia: the (Accessed 23/8/2009) British Association for the Advancement of Science, Australian meeting, Maddox F (1896) Eastfield experiments, smut and punt. Agricultural Gazette 1914’. (Government Printer: Adelaide) Available at http://www.archive. and Journal Council Agriculture Tasmania 4, 92–95. (Cited from Akai org/details/handbookofsoutha00sout (Accessed 19/9/2009) 1974) Osborne P (2008) The Queensland Acclimatisation Society: challenging the Maddox F (1897) ‘Notes and results on agricultural experiments carried stereotype. Royal Society of Queensland Journal 20, 337–350. on under the auspices of the council of Agriculture of Tasmania at Pan-Pacific Science Congress (1923) ‘Proceedings of the 2nd Pan-Pacific Eastfield, Newnham, Launceston, Tasmania’. pp. 72–84. (Cited from Science Congress, Australia’. (HJ Green: Melbourne) Akai, 1974) Pan-Pacific Science Congress (1926) ‘Proceedings of the 3rd Pan-Pacific Magarey RC (2007) APPS: stepping into the future – how far can we go? Science Congress.’ (National Research Council of Japan: Tokyo Australasian Plant Pathology 36, 503–509. doi: 10.1071/AP07070 1927–1928) Maiden JH (1909) ‘Sir Joseph Banks: the ‘Father of Australia.’ (Government Parbery DG (2008) A submission to the University of Melbourne Printer: Sydney) Information Futures Commission, 24 April 2008. Rust Resistance Rocks! Australasian Plant Pathology 21

Parkinson H (1890) Legislative and other means for keeping in subjection Singh RP, Huerta-Espino J, Roelfs AP (2002) ‘The wheat rusts in pests and insect pests. Department of Agriculture Bulletin 5, September 1889, diseases, bread wheat improvement and production.’ FAO Plant Proceedings of a Convention of Fruit Growers September 19–21, 1889 Production and Protection Series No. 30. (Food and Agriculture pp. 88–103. (Brain Government Printer: Melbourne) Organization of The United Nations: Rome) Available at http://www. Pearce D, Monck M (2006) ‘Benefits to Australia of selected CABI products.’ fao.org/docrep/006/y4011e/y4011e0g.htm#bm16 (Accessed 2/9/2009) Impact Assessment Series Report 42. (ACIAR: Canberra) Available at Smith K, Draper M, Simmons K, Bennett R, Hebbar P, Royer M, Murray T http://www.aciar.gov.au/system/files/sites/aciar/files/node/742/IAS42_ (2009) US preparations for potential introduction of Ug99 strains of wheat web.pdf (Accessed 14/9/2009) stem rust. Outlooks on Pest Management 20, 148–152. doi: 10.1564/ Pearce D, Monck M, Chadwick K, Corbishley J (2006) ‘Benefits to Australia 20aug02 from ACIAR-funded research.’ Impact Assessment Series Report No. 39, Smollett TG (1805) Article III. Review of Banks (1805a) The Critical Review, September 2006. (ACIAR: Canberra) Available at http://www.aciar.gov. or. Annals of Literature V,19–26. [Mawman: London] au/publication/IAS39 (Accessed 15/8/2009) Somerville R (1795) ‘An enquiry into the cause of the blight in wheat, which Pearson AN (1891) Report of the Committee appointed to investigate the occasioned the failure of the crop in the summer of 1795; with question of rust in wheat. In ‘Report of the second meeting of the observations, and a mode of preventing a repetition of the same evil. Australasian Association for the Advancement of Science’. pp. 547–550. Also an account of the origin and increase of smut balls, vermin etc. Percival J (1921) ‘The wheat plant.’ (Duckworth: London) Available at Communications to the Board of Agriculture on subjects relative to the http://www.archive.org/details/wheatplantmonogr00percuoft (Accessed husbandryandinternalimprovementof thecountry.II.’(Bulmer:London) 7/9/2009) Sorauer P (1894) ‘Remarks on Australian rust in wheat experiments by Persoon (1797) Crittogamia agraria, pel Dr Comes; Synopsis Methodica Dr Sorauer, of the experimental farm, Proskau, Germany’. Appendix F. Fungorum. Gottingen, 1797 (Cited from Board of Agriculture (1893)). In McAlpine (1894) op. cit. pp. 63–65. Plowright CB (1889) ‘A monograph of the British Uredineae and South Australian Advertiser (1861) Review (from ‘The Athenaeum’). Ustilagineae, with an account of their biology including the methods Outlines of British Fungiology: containing Characters of above a of observing the germination of their spores and of their experimental Thousand Species of Fungi, and a Complete List of all that have been culture.’ 347 pp. (Kegan Paul, Trench and Co: London) described as natives of the British Isles’ by the Rev. M. J. Berkeley. Pitt J (2000) Toxigenic fungi and mycotoxins. British Medical Bulletin 56, Available at http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/829005? 184–192. doi: 10.1258/0007142001902888 searchTerm=outlines+fungiology (Accessed 14/9/2009) Porter RH (1926) Some plant pathological problems of China. China Journal SpennemannDHR (2001)‘Wheatvarietiesgrownin19thcenturyAustralia. A of Science and Arts 4,35–40. handlist of varieties.’ (The Farrer Centre, Faculty of Science and Prevost B (1939) ‘Memoir on the immediate cause of Bunt or smut of wheat, Agriculture, Charles Sturt University: Wagga Wagga, NSW) Available and of several other diseases of plants, and on the preventatives of Bunt, at http://life.csu.edu.au/~dspennem/BookStore/WheatVarieties.pdf 1807.’ 95 pp. (American Phytopathological Society: Menasha, WI) (Accessed 1/8/2009) Pridham JT (1914) William Farrer’s work, methods and success: a short Staiger KT (1877) On rust in wheat. A paper read before the Board of Enquiry sketch. In ‘Transactions of Section M. Report of the 84th Meeting of the into diseases of stock and plants, on 13 February 1877. Appendix L. British Association for the Advancement of Science, Australia 1914’. In ‘Second annual report of the Board appointed to enquire into the causes p. 662. (Murray: London) of diseases affecting livestock and plants. Votes and Proceedings of the Purss GS (1994) History of the Australasian Plant Pathology Society. Queensland Legislative Assembly’. pp. 1049–1051. Australasian Plant Pathology 23, 122–128. doi: 10.1071/APP9940122 Sutherland J (2001) ‘Grist to the mill. Adventures in wheat breeding: William Richardson AEV (1914) Wheat breeding in Australia. In ‘Transactions Farrer, Nathan A. Cobb, F. B. Gutherie (sic) and George Sutton.’ 220 pp. of Section M. Report of the 84th Meeting of the British Association (June Sutherland: Wagga Wagga, NSW) for the Advancement of Science, Australia 1914’. p. 663 (Murray: Talbot NJ (2003) On the trail of a cereal killer: exploring the biology of London) Magnaporthe grisea. Annual Review of Microbiology 57, 177–202. Robertson P (1980) Coming of Age – The British Association in Australia, doi: 10.1146/annurev.micro.57.030502.090957 1914. The Australian Physicist March,23–27. Tenison-Woods JE, Bailey FM (1880) On some fungi of NSW and Sato D, Yamada K (1896) Studies on the loose smut of barley. Kyoto-Fu Nokai Queensland. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales Ho 49,1–9 (In Japanese). (Not sighted, cited after Akai 1974) 5,50–105. Saunders K, Bedford ID, Yahara T, Stanley S (2003) The earliest recorded The Argus (1865) Board of Agriculture. Rust and blight. The Argus Friday plant virus disease – pathogenic DNA paints summer foliage gold, and 17 February 1865. Available at http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/ inspired a poet over a millennium ago. Nature 422, 831. doi: 10.1038/ article/5743215?searchTerm=%22sir+joseph+banks%22+blight#pstart 422831a 211064 (Accessed 6/10/2009) Schomburgk R (1873) ‘Papers read before the Philosophical Society and the The Courier (1863) Editorial. The Brisbane Courier Wednesday Chamber of Manufactures.’ 120 pp. (W. C. Cox, Government Printer: 25 November 1863. Available at http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/ Adelaide) printArticlePdf/3167066/3?print=n (Accessed 22/8/2009) Schwantes RS (1953) Perspective on Point IV. The case of Japan. Far Eastern The Courier (1865) Agriculture in the Colony. The Brisbane Courier Survey 22, 126–130. doi: 10.1525/as.1953.22.10.01p0848k Friday 17 March 1865. Available at http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/ Shirai M (1918) On the development of plant pathology in Japan. A brief del/printArticlePdf/1269722/3?print=n (Accessed 14/9/2009) historical sketch. Annals of the Phytopathology Society Japan 1,1–4. The Courier (1876) Legislative Assembly, Thursday September 21. Diseases Available at http://nels.nii.ac.jp/els/110002756030.pdf?id=ART00030 of livestock and plants. The Brisbane Courier Friday 22 September 49306&type=pdf&lang=en&host=cinii&order_no=&ppv_type=0&lang 1876. Available at http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/ _sw=&no=1251184530&cp= (Accessed 2/7/2009) 1390534?searchTerm=haly+queensland+disease (Accessed 26/8/2009) Shirreff P (1873) ‘Improvements of the cereals and an essay on the wheat-fly.’ The Courier (1879) Parliament. Legislative Council. Thursday June 19. The 122 pp. (Blackwood: London) Brisbane Courier Friday 20 June 1879. Available at http://newspapers. Simmonds JH (1964) Diseases of plants in Queensland. CT While Memorial nla.gov.au/ndp/del/printArticlePdf/900444/3?print=n (Accessed 24/08/ Lecture for 1964–65. Queensland Naturalist 18,4–8. 2009) 22 Australasian Plant Pathology G. I. Johnson

The Courier (1880) Our Maryborough Correspondent writes. The Brisbane Tryon H (1888) On the role of silica in the wheat plant, in determining a Courier Monday 12 April 1880. Available at http://newspapers.nla.gov. comparativeimmunityfrom the attacks of the rust fungus. In ‘Reportof the au/ndp/del/printArticlePdf/893556/3?print=n (Accessed 24/08/2009) First Meeting of the Australasian Association for the Advancement of The Courier (1890a) Intercolonial Victoria. Melbourne, January 20. Science, Sydney, August and September 1888’. (Eds A Liversidge, R The Brisbane Courier Tuesday 21 January 1890. Available at Etheridge) pp. 343–347. (Australasian Association for the Advancement http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/printArticlePdf/3510669/3?print=n of Science: Sydney) (Accessed 24/08/2009) Tryon H (1889) ‘Report on insect and fungus pests. Vol. 1. Department of The Courier (1890b) Intercolonial. Adelaide, February 11. The Brisbane Agriculture, Queensland.’ 237 pp. (JC Beal: Brisbane) Courier Wednesday 12 February 1890. Available at http://newspapers. Tull J (1762) ‘Horse-hoeing husbandry: an essay on the principles of nla.gov.au/ndp/del/printArticlePdf/3507998/3?print=n (Accessed 24/08/ vegetation and tillage.’ 4th edn. (Miller: London) Available at http:// 2009) www.archive.org/details/horsehoeinghusba00tull (Accessed 24/8/2009) The Courier (1890c) Red rust in wheat. Instruction by Department of Waterhouse WL (1936) Some observations on the cereal rust problem in Agriculture. The Brisbane Courier Monday 14 April 1890. Available Australia. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 61, at http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/printArticlePdf/3516139/3? v–xxxviii. print=n (Accessed 24/8/2009) WatsonIA(1981)Wheatanditsrust parasitesin Australia. In ‘Wheatscience– The Courier (1891) Rust in wheat conference. The Brisbane Courier Monday today and tomorrow’. (Eds LT Evans, WJ Peacock) pp. 129–147. 15 June 1891. Available at http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/ (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge) printArticlePdf/3527364/3?print=n (Accessed 24/8/2009) Watson IA, Butler FC (1984) ‘Wheat rust control in Australia: national The Courier (1892) Rust in wheat conference. The Brisbane Courier conferences and other initiatives.’ 80 pp. (University of Sydney: Wednesday 9 March 1892. Available at http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ Sydney) ISBN-O-949269–17–4. ndp/del/printArticlePdf/3538637/3?print=n (Accessed 24/8/2009) Whetzel HR (1918) ‘An outline of the history of phytopathology.’ 130 pp. The Courier (1894a) Rust in wheat conference. The Brisbane Courier (JB Saunders Co: Philadelphia, PA) Thursday 29 March 1894. Available at http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ White NH (1981) A history of plant pathology in Australia. In ‘Plants and ndp/del/article/3576918?searchTerm=intercolonial+conference+% Man in Australia’. (Eds DJ, SM Carr) pp. 42–95. (Academic Press: 22rust+in+wheat%22 (Accessed 24/8/2009) Sydney) The Courier (1894b) Supplement to the Government Gazette. The Brisbane Windt LE (1811) The barberry-bush (sic.) an enemy to winter corn, proved Courier Saturday 7 July 1894. Available at http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ by observations and testimonies. (Translated for the Right Hon. Sir ndp/del/printArticlePdf/3583148/3?print=n (Accessed 25/8/2009) Joseph Banks, by the Secretary of the Board (Arthur Young) The Courier (1894c) Agriculture in Queensland. The Brisbane Courier In ‘Communications to the Board of Agriculture’. 7, pp. 118–126. Thursday 23 August 1894. Available at http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ Wrigley CW, Rathjen A (1981) Wheat breeding in Australia. In ‘Plants and ndp/del/printArticlePdf/3585936/3?print=n (Accessed 25/8/2009) Man in Australia’. (Eds DJ, SM Carr) pp. 96–135. (Academic Press: The Courier (1896) Rust in wheat conference. Report and recommendations. Sydney) The Brisbane Courier 2 June 1896. Available at http://newspapers.nla. gov.au/ndp/del/article/3626957?searchTerm=intercolonial+conference+ %22rust+in+wheat%22 (Accessed 24/8/2009) Manuscript received 27 September 2009, accepted 7 October 2009

http://www.publish.csiro.au/journals/app