HICKORY THE KING
The acknowledged autocrat of all the native nuts is the hickory. Perhaps
not all the experts admit this leadership but it is certainly the
opinion held by most people. Of course, when I speak of the hickory nut
in this high regard, I refer to the shagbark hickory which, as a wild
tree, is native as far north as the 43rd parallel in Minnesota and
Wisconsin, and somewhat farther in the eastern states.
Wild hickory nuts have been commercialized only to a slight extent. Its
crops are almost entirely consumed in the locality in which they are
grown by those people who find great pleasure in spending fine autumn
days gathering them. The obvious reason why hickory nuts have not been
made a product of commerce lies in the nut itself, which is usually very
small and which has a shell so strong and thick that the kernel can be
taken out only in small pieces. The toughness of the shell makes
cracking difficult, too, and since only rarely is one found that can be
broken by a hand cracker, it is necessary to use the flatiron-and-hammer
method. It is quite possible, though, that some day the hickory will
rival or exceed its near relative, the wild pecan, in commercial favor.
The wild pecans which formerly came on the market at Christmastime in
mixtures of nuts were just as difficult to extract from their shells as
the wild shagbark hickory nuts are now. By means of selection and
cultivation, the pecan was changed from a small, hard-to-crack nut to
that of a large thin-shelled nut whose kernel was extractable in whole
halves. Among many thousands of wild pecan trees were a few which bore
exceptionally fine nuts, nuts similar to those now found at every
grocery store and called "papershell" pecans. These unusual nuts were
propagated by grafting twigs from their parent trees on ordinary wild
pecan trees whose own nuts were of less value. These grafted trees were
set out in orchards where they produce the millions of pounds of
high-grade pecans now on the market.
The question which naturally occurs is, "Why hasn't this been done with
hickory nuts?" Hundreds of attempts have been made to do so, by the
greatest nut propagators in the United States. They have been successful
in grafting outstanding varieties of hickory to wild root stocks but the
time involved has prevented any practical or commercial success, since
most grafted hickories require a period of growth from ten to twenty
years before bearing any nuts. This length of time contrasts very
unfavorably with that required by grafted pecans which produce nuts on
quite young trees, frequently within three to five years after grafting.
This factor of slow growth has set the pecan far ahead of the tasty
shagbark hickory. Experimenters have long thought to reduce the time
required by the hickory to reach maturity by grafting it to fast-growing
hickory roots such as the bitternut or the closely related pecan. Both
of these grow rapidly and the bitternut has the additional advantage of
growing farther north and of being transplanted more easily. It has
always been thought that when a good variety of shagbark hickory had
been successfully grafted to bitternut root stocks, orchards of hickory
trees would soon appear. This takes me to my discovery of the variety
now known as the Weschcke hickory, which I have found fulfills the
necessary conditions.
[Illustration: _Shows exceptionally thin shell of Weschcke hickory
variety. Drawing by Wm. Kuehn_]
One fall day in 1926, when I was at the home of a neighboring farmer, he
offered me some mixed hickory nuts he had received from an uncle in
Iowa. As he knew of my interest in nuts, he wanted my opinion of them. I
looked them over and explained that they were no better than little
nutmegs, having very hard shells and a small proportion of inaccessible
meat. To demonstrate this, I cracked some between hammer and flatiron.
My demonstration was conclusive until I hit one nut which almost melted
under the force I was applying. The shape of this nut was enough
different from the others to enable me to pick out a handful like it
from the mixture. I was amazed to see how very thin-shelled and full of
meat they were. Upon my request, this neighbor wrote to his uncle, John
Bailey, of Fayette, Iowa, asking if he knew from which tree such fine
nuts had come. Unfortunately he did not, because the nuts had been
gathered from quite a large area. After corresponding with Mr. Bailey
myself, I decided that I would go there and help him locate the tree,
although it was nearly Christmas and heavy snowfalls which already
covered the ground would make our search more difficult.
[Illustration: _Carl Weschcke, Jr., hand holding Weschcke hickory in
hull. 9/15/42 Photo by C. Weschcke_]
On my arrival in Fayette, I called on Mr. Bailey, who was glad to help
me hunt out the tree in which I had so much interest. We called A. C.
Fobes, the owner of the farm from which the nuts were believed to have
come, and arranged to go out there with him by bob sleigh. A rough ride
of six or seven miles brought us to the farm and we began our quest.
Once there, Mr. Bailey had a more definite idea of where to look for the
tree from which these particular nuts came than he had had before and we
had not been at our task for more than an hour before it was located.
There were still quite a few nuts on the ground beneath it, which
identified it accurately. It was a large shagbark whose first living
branch was fully sixteen feet off the ground and, since we had no ladder
with us, I had to shin up the tree to cut off some of the smaller
branches. This shagbark, true to its name, had rough bark which tore not
only my clothes but some of the skin on my legs as well and whereas the
climbing up was difficult, the coming down was equally so. Having
contracted verbally with Mr. Fobes to buy the tree, I packed the
branches I had cut in cardboard boxes with straw packing and carefully
brought them home to St. Paul.
I wrote at once to my friend, J. F. Jones, of my expedition, telling him
of my plans to propagate this hickory. I also sent him some of the nuts
from the parent tree and samples of extra-good nuts from other trees
growing near it so that he could give me his opinion of them. Mr. Jones
responded by advising me about the kind of a contract to make with Mr.
Fobes in regard to both the purchasing and propagation of the original
hickory tree and he urged the latter enthusiastically. Of the Weschcke
hickory nuts themselves, he wrote: "This is practically identical with
the Glover. The Glover is usually a little larger but this varies in all
nuts from year to year. This is a fine nut and if it comes from Iowa, it
ought to be propagated. I suggest you keep the stock of it and propagate
the tree for northern planting, that is for Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin,
etc., where most nuts grown here would not mature." A few years ago, I
saw the Glover hickory nut for the first time and I also thought it much
the same as the Weschcke in shape, as is also the Brill.
Because I did not know how to preserve the scions I had cut, they dried
out during the winter to such an extent that they were worthless for
spring grafting. This meant losing a whole season. The next fall I
obtained more scionwood from Mr. Fobes and having kept it in good
condition during the winter by storing it in a Harrington graft box
shown by illustration, I was able to graft it in the spring. However,
these grafts did not take hold well, only two or three branches
resulting from all of it and these did not bear nor even grow as they
should have. I was disappointed and discouraged, writing to Mr. Fobes
that I did not believe the tree could be propagated.
[Illustration: _This drawing illustrates how to build a Harrington graft
storage box_]
In the fall of 1932, Mr. Fobes sent me a large box of scions and
branches, explaining that he had sold his farm and, as the tree might be
cut down, this was my last opportunity to propagate it. Without much
enthusiasm, I grafted the material he had sent me on about a dozen
trees, some of them very large hickories and I was most agreeably
surprised to find the grafting successful and more than one branch
bearing nutlets. These nuts dropped off during the summer until only one
remained to mature, which it did in the latter part of October. But I
waited too long to pick that nut and some smart squirrel, which had
probably been watching it ripen as diligently as I had, secured it
first. I made a very thorough search of the ground nearby to find the
remains of it, for while I knew I would not get a taste of the
kernel--the squirrel would take care of that--I was interested in
finding out whether it followed the exact shape and thinness of shell of
the first nuts I had examined. I finally did find part of it, enough to
see that it was similar to the nuts from the parent tree.
The grafts I made in 1932 have been bearing nuts every year since that
time. The Weschcke hickory makes a tremendous growth grafted on
bitternut hickory (Carya Cordiformis). The wood and buds are hardy to a
temperature of 47 deg. below zero Fahrenheit, so that wherever the wild
bitternut hickory grow, this grafted tree will survive to bear its
thin-shelled nuts. The nuts have a fine flavor and the unusual quality
of retaining this flavor without becoming rancid, for three years. The
only fault to find with them is the commercial one of being only medium
in size, so that compared to English walnuts, for example, they become
unimpressive. I have noticed time and again that the average person will
pass over a small, sweet nut to choose a larger one even though the
latter may not have as attractive a flavor. This is noticeably true in
regard to pecans, when the large paper-shell types, which have a rather
dry, sweet kernel, are almost invariably preferred to the smaller ones
of finer flavor, which are plump and have slightly thicker shells.
Previous to finding the Weschcke hickory, I experimented with several
varieties of hickory hybrids. In March 1924, I purchased twelve Beaver
and twelve Fairbanks hybrid hickories from J. F. Jones. I planted these
trees in April of that year but of the lot, only two Beaver trees lived
to bear nuts. One of these is still growing on my farm, in thin, clay
soil underlaid with limestone, and it bears nuts annually. It is only a
fair-sized tree but I think its slow growth has protected it from the
usual amount of winter damage. I also ordered from Mr. Jones, in July
1924, 12 Marquardt hiccans, 12 Laney, 12 Siers, 34 Beaver and 30
Fairbanks. The last four are hybrids between species of hickories. Out
of the whole order, amounting to one hundred trees, none remains alive
now.
The Marquardt hiccan mentioned above was the subject of dispute among
nut culturists for a time but it has been definitely agreed now, that
the Marquardt was never actually propagated, the tree having been lost
or cut down before scions were taken from it. Substitutes were taken
from the Burlington, a hybrid whose nut is similar to the Marquardt and
whose foliage and other attributes are thought to be like it. The name
of Marquardt persisted for several years, however, and it has been
entirely discarded only recently. The Burlington is now known to be the
representative of that part of Iowa. However, I grafted some of the tops
of the Marquardt trees from Jones to bitternut trees at the time that I
transplanted them; several of the grafts made successful growth and
resulted in several trees growing deep in the woods. After 28 years
these grafts are still alive and certainly have established their right
to be called compatible with bitternut hickory stocks. Close examination
of the branches, leaves and buds, particularly the leaf-scars, indicate
that this hiccan is enough different and more hardy than the Burlington,
which also grows well on the bitternut, to discredit the story that the
Marquardt is lost. It will not be determined, however, that this is the
genuine Marquardt until it has fruited.
Altogether I have grafted about 70 varieties of hickory and its hybrids
on bitternut stocks in my attempts to increase the number of varieties
of cultured hickory trees in the North. Most of those I worked with were
compatible with the bitternut stock, but a few, perhaps a dozen, have
indicated that they would rather not live on the bitternut and have
died, either from incompatibility or winter-killing. Yet as a root
system, the bitternut is the hardiest and easiest to transplant of any
of the hickories and for these reasons it makes an ideal stock for the
amateur nut-grower to use. I did try, in 1926, to grow some shagbark
hickory stocks, which would be more compatible with those varieties I
could not get started on bitternut. I planted half a bushel of shagbark
hickory nuts from Iowa, but although they sprouted nicely, they were not
sufficiently hardy and were winter-killed so severely that, after twelve
years, the largest was not more than a foot high, nor thicker than a
lead pencil. Some of these, about 50, were transplanted into the orchard
and in other favorable locations. The largest of these, in 1952, is
about 4 inches in diameter, 1-foot off the ground, and about 15 feet
high. I have not grafted any yet and only one has borne any seedling
nuts so far. I am now reconciled to using my native bitternut trees for
most of my stock in spite of some disadvantages. A list of successfully
grafted varieties is appended, and indicates to what extent this stock
is a universal root stock for most of the hickories and their hybrids. A
successful union, however, and long life, does not mean that good
bearing habits will be established, since most of these trees grow in
the woods in dense shade and poor surroundings. Some varieties have not
borne many nuts, and some not at all. The following scions were cut this
fall (in 1952) from successfully grafted trees deep in the woods:
Bixby hiccan (pecan by shellbark) grafted in 1938
Burlington hiccan (pecan by shellbark) grafted in 1938
Green Bay hiccan (pecan by shellbark) grafted in 1938
Des Moines hiccan (pecan by shellbark) grafted in 1938
Burton hiccan (pecan by shellbark) grafted in 1939
McAlester hiccan (pecan by shellbark) grafted in 1938
Anthony Shagbark hickory grafted in 1938
Barnes Shagbark by mocker nut grafted in 1938
Brill Shagbark hickory grafted in 1936
Brooks Shagbark hickory grafted in 1938
Camp No. 2 Shagbark hickory grafted in 1938 (?)
Deveaux Shagbark hickory grafted in 1936
Fox Shagbark hickory grafted in 1939
Glover Shagbark hickory grafted in 1936
Gobble Shagbark hickory grafted in 1940
Hand Shagbark hickory grafted in 1939
Harman Shagbark hickory grafted in 1939
Leonard Shagbark hickory grafted in 1939
Lingenfelter Shagbark hickory grafted in 1942
Manahan Shagbark hickory grafted in 1939
Milford Shagbark hickory grafted in 1939
Murdock Shagbark hickory grafted in 1941
Netking Shagbark hickory grafted in 1938
Platman Shagbark hickory grafted in 1938
Pleas Pecan by bitternut grafted in 1938
Schinnerling Shagbark hickory grafted in 1942
Stanley Shellbark hickory grafted in 1939
Swaim Shagbark hickory grafted in 1941
Taylor Shagbark hickory grafted in 1939
Triplett Shagbark hickory grafted in 1939
Woods grafted in 1939
The varieties below are growing in orchard or random locations out of
the woods:
Beaver Hybrid hickory grafted in 1924
Cedar Rapids Shagbark hickory grafted in 1926
Clark Shagbark hickory grafted in 1938
Fairbanks hybrid Shagbark by bitternut grafted in 1924
Herman Last Hybrid grafted in 1948
Hope pecan Pure pecan grafted to bitternut grafted in 1938
Kirtland Shagbark hickory grafted in 1936
Laney Pecan by shellbark grafted in 1936
Marquardt Hiccan grafted in 1924
Norton Hiccan grafted in 1938
River hickory Undetermined hybrid grafted in 1948
Rockville hiccan Pecan by shellbark grafted in 1926
Siers Mockernut by bitternut grafted in 1936
Stratford Shagbark by bitternut grafted in 1938
Weiker hybrid Shagbark by shellbark grafted in 1936
In addition to the above, several large and small trees of the Weschcke
variety are located in orchard and random locations, some having been
grafted in 1926 and later. Also, there is a sprinkling of Bridgewater
variety, grafted in 1936 and later, all bearing each year.
For many years, I observed hickories and walnuts in bloom and
hand-pollinated them, yet I overlooked many things I should have
discovered earlier in study. It was only after ten years of observing
the Weschcke hickory, for example, that I realized the importance of
proper pollinization of it. In years when it produced only a few nuts, I
had blamed seasonal factors, rains and soil conditions, but I now
realize that it was due to lack of the right pollen. In the spring of
1941, I decided to make special pollen combinations with all the
hickories then in bloom. The information I acquired in return was great
reward for the work I did.
I selected branches of the Weschcke hickory trees bearing a profuse
amount of pistillate (female) blossoms. I hand-pollinated these with a
special apparatus (the hand-pollen gun described later in this book),
using a magnifying glass so that both pollen and blossom could be
plainly seen. In doing this, I found it most practical to wear what
jewelers call a "double loupe," a light, fiber head-gear carrying lenses
well-suited to such work. I treated the marked branches with pollen
gathered from the Bridgewater, the Kirtland and the Beaver, all very
good pollen-bearers. I also pollinated branches of the Cedar Rapids
variety, which bears little pollen in this locality, with Kirtland
pollen. However, the pollinization of the Cedar Rapids, which involved
treating from 35 to 50 pistillate blossoms, resulted in only two mature
nuts.
The Weschcke hickory has an abortive staminate bloom so that it must
depend on some other variety for pollen. At the Northern Nut Growers'
Convention, held at Hershey, Pa. in 1941, (where I had the honor of
being elected president of that venerable organization and succeeded
myself thereafter for the next five years) I mentioned this abortive
staminate bloom of my hickory to my friend, Dr. J. W. McKay, Associate
Cytologist of the U. S. Department of Agriculture at that time. He was
very interested in this phenomenon and wanted specimens of the abortive
catkins for examination. These were sent to him in the spring of 1942. I
quote from Dr. McKay's report on his primary findings:
"I have just made a preliminary examination of the catkins from
your hickory tree received last May, and it seems that the
individual staminate flower of the catkin produces 4-5 undersized
stamens, the anthers of which are devoid of either pollen or
pollen-mother-cells. So far I have made only temporary preparations
of the crushed anthers in stain but careful study of these mounts
discloses no sign of pollen grains or mother cells, so we may
tentatively conclude that no pollen is produced by the tree; in
other words it is male-sterile. The stage at which degeneration of
the pollen-forming tissue occurs in the anthers and its nature will
have to be determined by means of a longer and more elaborate
technique and I will let you know what we find as soon as the
results are available. It may be that pollen-mother-cells are not
even formed in the anthers; the small size of these structures and
their more or less shriveled appearance lead me to believe that
this may be the case.
"So far as I know there is no instance among nut species comparable
to that outlined above. We have two or three cases of male
sterility in chestnut but in these no stamens are formed in the
individual staminate flower. In one of the hybrid walnuts that I
reported on at the Hershey convention, imperfect pollen grains are
formed in the anthers but the latter structures never open, so no
pollen is shed.
"Bear in mind that the above report is preliminary and other
angles may turn up when permanent mounts are available for study."
On December 14, 1943 I received a second, and final report from Dr.
McKay from which I quote, as follows:
"Dear Mr. Weschcke:
The enclosed pencil sketches will give you an idea of the results
obtained from sectioning four lots of material from the two samples
of catkins that you sent, two lots from each sample. Since the
sample collected May 25 at the time of catkin fall was old enough
to contain mature pollen and showed only anthers of the two types
described herewith I think we may safely conclude that the tree is
male sterile because of the failure of the mother cells to
function. It is odd that in some anthers the pollen-mother-cells
develop (type 2) while in others they do not (type 1). For this we
have no explanation; nor can we explain why the tree is male
sterile. I am afraid these phenomena will remain a matter of
conjecture for some time to come. Since sterilities of this and
other sorts in most other plants are largely genetic, that is,
controlled by one or more genes that are inherited in Mendelian
fashion, it is likely that such is the case here. You and I will
not live long enough, however, to grow the necessary number of
generations of trees to clear up these matters.
"In the course of routine preparation of other material I plan to
run up other lots from your samples, and I will let you know if
anything different turns up. I believe we may safely conclude,
however, that the results reported herewith are representative."
In further explanation, Dr. McKay submitted the drawings shown on page
57, and says:
"Four lots of material were sectioned, two from the collection of
May 6 and two from that of May 25. Of these, two gave anthers of
type one, and two of type two. More material will have to be
sectioned before we know which type is predominant.
"The anthers of type one are greatly shriveled, and a band of
deeply-staining collapsed cells apparently represents the remains
of archesporial or pollen-forming tissue.
"The anthers of type two are normal in appearance, but the
pollen-mother-cells degenerate before pollen grains are formed. A
comparison of the degenerate pollen-mother-cells of this plant with
normal pollen-mother-cells is given below:"
[Illustration: Sections of anthers of the Weschcke Hickory Carya ovata
_Illustrations by Dr. McKay showing pollen degeneration in Weschcke
hickory._]
This substantiates the conclusion that I had arrived at previous to this
report, that this hickory is able to mature its nuts early in the fall
by reason of not having to waste its energy in the production of pollen.
(There is only one other variety of hickory which I have grafted on
bitternut which has proved unable to mature pollen and it is the Creager
from Iowa.) I was immensely pleased to find that it responded very well
to Bridgewater pollen, a high percentage of the blooms treated with it
developing mature nuts. The results with the Kirtland pollen were almost
equally good, the poorest showing coming from those branches treated
with Beaver pollen on which only three mature nuts developed. (The
Beaver is presumed to be a hybrid between bitternut and shagbark
hickories.) Sixty-two nuts from these pollinizations were planted in the
fall of 1941 in rodent-proof seed beds. In the spring, counting
germination, I found 100% of these nuts had sprouted and grown into
small trees during the season.
After finding the most suitable pollen for the Weschcke hickory, I
realized the necessity for including more than one variety of hickory in
a planting, just as there should be more than one variety of apple or
plum tree in an orchard. I think that it would always be well to have
three or more varieties of known compatibility within reasonable
distances, probably not more than 100 feet apart, nor less than 40 to 50
feet for large hickories.
Of the many varieties of hickory and hickory hybrids I have tested,
about twenty have, by now, proved to be sufficiently hardy to recommend
for this latitude. These include:
*Beaver hybrid hickory
*Fairbanks hybrid hickory
*Laney hybrid hickory
Burlington hybrid between pecan and shellbark hickory
Rockville hybrid between pecan and shellbark hickory
Hope pecan pure pecan grafted on to bitternut roots
Hand pure shagbark
*Bridgewater pure shagbark
Barnes hybrid hickory
*Cedar Rapids pure shagbark
*Weschcke pure shagbark
*Deveaux pure shagbark
*Brill pure shagbark
*Glover pure shagbark
*Kirtland pure shagbark
*Siers thought to be a hybrid between
the mocker nut and bitternut
*Stratford hybrid (bitternut by shagbark)
*Creager
*Have produced mature nuts
There are three or four others that are hardy but all means of
identification having been lost, it will be necessary to wait until they
come into bearing before their varieties will be known. As experiments
continue, more varieties of worthy, hardy hickories and hiccans will be
found which will justify completely the opinion of those of us who
always hail as king of all our native nuts, the hickory.
[Illustration: _1930--Weschcke Hickory as borne by parent tree at
Fayette, Iowa._
_1939--After several years of bearing grafted on Northern Bitternut
hickory at River Falls, Wis._
_1940--Still further change in shape and size from graft on Bitternut._
_1941--Change and increase in size now is so pronounced as to almost
extinguish its original identity._]
[Illustration: _Weschcke hickory nut natural size shows free splitting
hull. Photo by C. Weschcke._]