ie SS AES NE SE Sh
heat tn in Seh- SKelis halen ota fh Potente
- *

vl feet ea hohr nmin
Aan mada!

=
ahahaha - lege le to
ataeterthetimt tenet tien

SY

ie i
SS

=
=

==
eS
ss
=

y

sn ili
Ml
WRI
H

i

AN

uN)
4!

St
Uy wi
iy

| i
te

7
%

Fé
a in Op
| y"
it

eS

ui, Fe
| : | \i or Re
ED eee te
ny

West, Newman photo

TUR Nee

(about a quarter of life-size) affected by disease known as
ANBURY; FINGER-and-TOE; or CLUB;
caused by SLIME FUNGUS (Plasmodiophora brassice),

[All rights reserved, ]

LY
BX CA

bee 44)

evt REPORT OF OBSERVATIONS

OF

—

INJURIOUS INSECTS

AND

COMMON FARM PESTS,
DURING THE YEAR 1892,

WITH METHODS OF

PREVENTION AND REMEDY.

SIXTEENTH REPORT.

BY

HLEANOR A. ORMEROD, F.R. Mert. Soc., &c.

LATE CONSULTING ENTOMOLOGIST OF THE ROYAL AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY OF ENGLAND ;
HON. MEM. OF FARMERS’ CLUB; HON. AND CORR. MEM. OF ROYAL AG. AND HORT. SOC.,
8, AUSTRALIA; HON. MEM, OF ENT, SOC. OF ONTARIO, AND CORR. MEMBER OF
FIELD NAT. CLUB OF OTTAWA, CANADA; MEMBER OF EASTERN PROVINCE
NATURALISTS’ SOC., CAPE COLONY;

ALSO
MEMBER OF THE ASSOCIATION OF OFFICIAL ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS,
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.) &O.

LONDON:
SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT & CO., Limitep.

1898.

ley

ee : ; ‘' ; fit) 18
te. ' } - > ‘ an: #2 & i t

’ LONDON:
WEST, NEWMAN AND CO., PRINTERS,

a 54, HATTON GARDEN, B.C,
ats < mi’,
rig re f 4 ’ AE Se, >
* . ie Ror a, a ‘ att “ I % ‘ ; In
.
ae sy " { {Ne 5 é
(es: R % fi %y
J vATt
= nicmemiet im
Da
- 7 = »
$
OG AGE
: Puss

wav t |W, ae Peek ARSE) CURBS amen

| to TORI Sma

PREFACE.

Tue year 1892 was remarkable for most of the insect infesta-
tions commonly injurious to field crops and fruit, being present
to such an extent as to cause enquiry as to their nature and
methods of prevention, but, for the most part, as not affecting
large districts to a serious extent.

Amongst such crop attacks as were more especially prevalent
and injurious, were those of the leaf-eating Pea Weevils, of
which the detailed reports show amount of damage up to the
sweeping off of successive sowings; and, over areas of various
extent, up to serious mischief over a district of 1000 acres. The
caterpillars of the very common Silver-Y Moth caused unusual
damage in various places to Clover; and the Hop Strig Maggot
was again mischievous. Mangold crops in many places had (as
has been repeatedly the case of late years) again to bear the
brunt of sharp attack of Leaf Maggot. Corn Aphis (so far as
information sent in showed) was the most injurious corn insect
attack of the season. Diamond-back Moth presence was widely
noticed, and in some localities (perhaps most of all on the north-
easterly parts of Norfolk, and near St. Andrew’s, in Scotland) as
being observable in creat numbers ; but compared to the outbreak
of 1891 little caterpillar attack followed, so that serious damage
only occurred locally, not as a widespread scourge. Various
kinds of root attacks to Turnips and Cabbage (duly entered on)
also caused trouble.

Some kinds of crop infestation were brought under notice
which have hitherto been little, if at all, observed as injurious in
this country. Amongst these is a species of moth caterpillar, *
which, where present at all, entirely destroys the infested stems
of Potato by tunnelling up the centre. Also the maggots of a
weevil beetle, hitherto not reported as a crop pest in this country,
which was found in large numbers within Cabbage stems in one
district in Ireland. The Yellow-legged or Dutch Clover Weevil

* The scientific names of the insects are given with the notices of their
attacks,

1V PREFACE.

occurred as doing mischief to Clover leafage which is worth
record, as the damage caused to the leaves by these minute “‘ Pear-
shaped ” Weevils is not so often noticed as that to the seed.

In the case of the Frit Fly, of which the maggots sometimes
cause serious loss by feeding in young Oat plants in the spring,
we secured specimens of the late brood in the Oat-heads in har-
vest time, thus completing the year’s history of the infestation,
which is always desirable. Amongst Mangolds we traced a root
attack on the young plants, to presence of a minute, but
exceedingly numerous beetle and its maggot, which it would be
very useful to have further observations of in the coming season.

Mustard Beetle attack being now taken into consideration for
observation and experiment by growers well acquainted with all
the requirements of the subject, will probably be put on a much
better footing.

In connection with Turnip and Cabbage-root insect attack, I
have so often received enquiries as to the nature of the diseased
enlarged growths, commonly known as “‘Anbury,” ‘‘ Finger-and-
Toe,” or “Club,” that, as I have personally studied this infes-
tation and its cure for years, it seemed desirable to give some
notes on this “Slime Fungus” attack, together with those on
insect attack, often coincident with it, though of quite a different
nature. ‘To this paper three Plates are added, after photographs
from life, to afford investigators the opportunity of observing the
minute alterations which take place in external structure as well
as in form of the diseased roots.

Under the head of Tomato will be found an account of the
appearance in this country of the attack of the Heterodera radi-
cicola, the ‘‘ Root-knot”’ Kelworm, so-called from the galls to
which its presence gives rise. It is to be hoped that in this
country it will not spread to the roots of many kinds of out-
of-doors fruit and vegetable crops, as is the case in America.
Still the infestation is so destructive, also so very infectious, and
so exceedingly difficult to extirpate when once established, that
it is a serious matter for consideration by growers of fruit crops
under glass.

Amongst ordinary fruit attacks, of which the histories have
been serviceably added to, are the Currant-shoot Moth, observed
by Dr. Chapman, of Hereford; and further information on Apple
Sawfly, through co-operation of Mr. Coleman, of Cranfield, New-
port Pagnell. The large amount of enquiry regarding common

PREFACE. Vv

fruit and forestry attacks it is unnecessary to particularize, but
‘amongst the latter there was a serious instance of attack of the
Alder Clearwing Moth caterpillars in one locality (see first paper
in following report), which, as far as I am aware, is the first
recorded instance of serious damage from this infestation in this
country.

Besides enquiry as to home crop infestations, there has also
been an unusual amount of application from British residents in
the Colonies regarding infestations on Colonial crop produce, as
Sugar and Cocoa in the West Indies, Tea in the Hast Indies,
Oranges in various places; and also regarding English or Euro-
pean attacks, of which the presence has spread, or been specially
noticeable elsewhere, amongst which the destructive Flour Mill
Moth, Ephestia kihniella, has unfortunately a foremost place ;
and other infestations of various kinds, especially to Vines, have
been brought under notice. To these, in some cases, I was able
to attend from personal knowledge, in others (where requisite), I
availed myself of skilled assistance.

From the observations sent in from agriculturists and fruit-
growers, it will be seen that serviceable and well-founded
attention to measures for prevention of insect ravage are steadily
increasing. The observations from the Toddington Fruit
Grounds are an excellent example of this advance. In some
cases, doubtless, serviceable information is being also afforded by
the new system of rural lecturing on ‘‘ Economic Entomology ” ;
but in some, I think, | am almost bound to say, as I am so
frequently honoured by being referred to by our agriculturists,
that I think they would do wisely to weigh the advice given
before acting on it.

We have amongst our lecturers men skilled in the various
branches required, good entomologists, and also possessed of the
requisite agricultural knowledge and experience to apply this
serviceably ; but, in some cases, the two latter items are so
totally wanting that 1 have the evidence in my hands that to
follow the advice given would have been ruinous or impossible.
Probably in these cases a year’s study ona farm, so as to allow a
knowledge to be acquired of action of manures, effects of different
methods of ploughing, and of different kinds of implements, of
various actions of chemical dressings in various circumstances,
and of the ordinary treatment and rotation of crops, as well as
the important consideration that details of cultivation which

al PREFACE.

may act well as insect preventives in some circumstances, may
be totally inapplicable in others, and many other points well -
known to an agriculturist, would make an enormous change in
the views of the young teacher. Any (correct) information as to
habits of insect life is serviceable, and would be gladly welcomed
by us all. But crude theories of treatment pressed on us by
those who have no experience of how far they are applicable, need
correction from those whose losses might otherwise be counted
by hundreds of pounds.

Reverting now to the present subject, I have once again to
offer my cordial thanks to the many friends, both British and
foreign, who have aided and co-operated with me in the past
year. To myself, as well as to us all, the skilled assistance of
leading entomologists has been very valuable, and on the co-
operation of our agriculturists, and on their kindness (which I
always gratefully acknowledge) in placing in my hands reports
of insect presence, and details of treatment which they find ser-
viceable and practicable at a paying rate, depends the chief use
of my yearly Reports. To our agricultural, and often to our
general, press 1 am also greatly indebted for their encouragement
and courteous help.

A few words should be ean on the loss which we all have
suffered in the recent decease of Prof. J. O. Westwood, Life-
President of the Entomological Society, who has lately been
taken from us full of years, honoured for his goodness and
uprightness, as well as for his vast and sound learning, and
regretted by all who knew him. As Hope Professor of Zoology
in the University of Oxford, he continued the course of his
instructions until within the last few months of his life, and as
an entomologist he stood perhaps unrivalled. But few at the
present day are fully aware of the great services he rendered to
agriculturists and fruit growers by his careful observations of
injurious insects and measures of prevention and remedy, and
his sound working out of the principles of insect classification
and rules of life. As the colleague and pupil, which he honoured
me by calling me, I add my tribute of respect to the memory of
my good leader, and always kind helper in my work.

Once again, in placing the results of the past year’s work in
the hands of my contributors, with thanks for their co-operation,
I ask their co-operation also for the future. Although my
health, and especially the long and severe suffering consequent

PREFACE. Vii

on an accident to one knee, made it desirable for me to resign
my official post of Entomologist to the Royal Agricultural Society
of England, I trust in no way to lessen amount of careful
attention to any enquiries sent me regarding insect pests
injurious to farm crops or fruit growing. It would be a pleasure
to me to attend to the best of my power.

In the following Report, I beg to acknowledge with thanks
that of the 87 wood engravings given:—13 are used by kind
permission of Messrs. Blackie & Co., Glasgow; 3 (namely, figures
of moths at pp. 104, 116, and 118) by permission of Messrs.
Allen & Co.; and 1, p. 67 (of the Magpie Moth), is from figures
of which use was granted at commencement of these Reports by
the Editor of the ‘Gardeners’ Chronicle.’ In all other instances
I trust that, save where the figures are drawn especially for my own
publications, the source will be found to be acknowledged accom-
panying. The four Plates are after photos from life, taken for
this Report.

EKLEANOR A. ORMEROD,

Late Consulting Entomologist of the Royal Agricultural
Society of England.

Torrincton Hovussr, Str. ALBANS,
February, 1893.

LIST OF

ATTACKS or INJURIOUS INSECTS, EHELWORMS, &c.

NOTICED IN THE FOLLOWING REPORT.

ALDER.
Alder Clearwing Moth
APPLE.
Garden Chafer .
Apple Sawfly
ASPARAGUS.
Asparagus Beetle .
CaBBAGE.
Cabbage Aphis. . .
Cabbage-stem Weevil.
CLOVER.
Clouded Yellow Butterfly
Silver-Ya Wotnece «cies ae
Dutch Clover Weevil. .
Corn AND GRASS.
Corn Aphis. .
Daddy Longlegs
Frit Fly eas
Hay Mites
Gout Fly. .
Hessian Fly .
CuRRANT.
Gall Mite. . sh ae
Magpie Moth .. .
Shoot and Fruit Moth
Hop.
Strig Maggot.
MANGOLD.
Pigmy Mangold Beetle .
Leaf-blister Maggot
MustTAarD.
Mustard Beetle .
ONION.
Onion Fly.
ORCHARD CATERPILLARS.
Winter Moth
Pras.
Pea Weevil
Potato.

Death’s-head Moth.
Frosted Orange Moth
Various Crops anpD TREES.

Red Spider
STRAWBERRY.

Strawberry-leaf Beetle
Tomato.

Root-knot Eelworm
TURNIP.

Diamond-back Moth .

TuRNIP AND CABBAGE-ROOT INFESTATIONS.

——————

Trochilium sphegiforme.

Phyllopertha horticola .
Hoplocampa testudinea,. . . .

Crioceris asparagi .

Aphis brassice.
2 Baridius sp. .

Colias edusa

Plusia gamma .

Apion flavipes .

Siphonophora granaria.

Tipula oleracea

Oscinis frit . oe
Tyroglyphus longior .

Chlorops teniopus A So
Cecidomyia destructor . . . .
Phytoptus ribis :

Abraxas grossulariata .
Incurvaria capitella .
Cecidomyia ? sp. .

Atomaria linearis
Anthomyia bete

Phedon betule . .
Anthomyia ceparum .
Cheimatobia brumata
Sitones lineatus .

Acherontia atropos .
Gortyna flavago .

100

. 104

. 107
. 116

Tetranychus telarius = C. tiliarum.

> aGaleruca tenella. = |. © seme

Heterodera radicicola . .

Plutella cruciferarum . .

118
121

. 124

. 127

. 138

TuRNIP AND CABBAGE-GALL WEEVILS, Ceutorhynchus sulcicollis; Turnip
AND CaBBAGE-ROoT Fuy-maccors, Anthomyia brassice, and other

species; Winter Turnip Guat, Trichocera hiemalis, &c.

Also the

diseased growth known as Fincer-anp-Tor, ANBURY, OR CuLuB,

caused by Suime Funevs, Plasmodiophora brassice .
ApPpENpIx.—Notes on Mangolds . 4

143—159
160

Nore.—-In the above list of papers, that on Red Spider is not placed under
the heading of any special crop, on account of it being such a very general in-

festation.

for convenience of parallel consideration of conditions,

The various Turnip and Cabbage-root attacks are noticed together

NOTES OF OBSERVATIONS

OF

Pet URTOUS INSECTS

AND

COMMON CROP PESTS.
Dourinae 1892.

ALDER.

Alder or “White-barred” Clearwing Moth. Tvrochilium sphea-
giforme, Westwood.

TROCHILIUM SPHGIFORME.

1, Clearwing Moth; 2, infested Alder-stem ; 3, chrysalis: all from life; 4, cater-
pillar (caterpillar copied from fig. 1, plate xxvrrt. of vol. ii. of ‘Larve of British
Butterflies and Moths,’ by W. Buckler, published by the Ray Society).

B

2 ALDER.

Tue attack of the Alder Clearwing has long been known on the
Continent as injurious both to Alder and Birch; but with us the
appearance even of the moth has been recorded, in our standard works,
as seldom being observed ; and (so far as I am aware) until the past
season no observations of the method of attack have been taken here,
nor has it previously been noticed as occurring to an injurious extent.

In Stephens’ ‘ British Entomology,’ this Clearwing is mentioned
as an insect so decidedly rare that the writer had only seen five indi-
genous specimens; and Prof. J. 0. Westwood notes that ‘“ it is very
rare in this country.”* In Stainton’s ‘ Manual,’ vol. i, p. 100, it is
observed that this species (7. sphegiforme) is at large towards the
middle or end of May, and in June; but that “ being so great a rarity,”
he cannot give directions where it may be found; and with regard to
the habitat, he merely mentions (p. 105), ‘‘ Lives in stems of Alder.”

When, however, it does effect a settlement, the instance of last
season shows that it has such a power of causing mischief here, as
well as on the Continent, by means of its caterpillars boring up young
Alder stems, that it is quite qualified to hold a place amongst our
seriously injurious insects.

I had not myself ever received any observations regarding this
‘« Alder,” or ‘* White-barred’”’ Clearwing Moth, until the beginning of
May in the past season, when I was favoured with the first of a series
of communications by Lieut.-Gen. Sir J. Hills-Johnes, V.C., K.C.B.,
of Dolaeothy, Llanwrda, 8. Wales, regarding mischief caused by this
attack in one of his Alder plantations, together with specimens of the
infested stems containing the chrysalis, from which I was able to rear
the moth (as figured at heading).

In the first observation, received about the 2nd of May, it was
mentioned, ‘“‘The young Alders were planted two years ago, and
looked very healthy last year till close to the end of the season, when
they began to droop, and my woodman found this grub just where the
tree issued from the ground” (J. H.-J.); and on the 6th of May further
specimens of the young Alder, then being destroyed by the attack,
were forwarded, the grub being then alive within.

In such of the points as were then observable, the method of injury
agreed with that described by Dr. Bernard Altum + as occurring in the
case of Continental attack, as follows.—‘‘ This Sesia lives by prefer-
ence, whilst in larval state, in young Alder stems; but it infests the
Birch also. It is to be found in June (the time of flight) near these
trees, hovering low down, or on the foliage. They appear not to be
rare anywhere in our country.” . . . . The life-history is thus
described :—‘‘ They lay a single egg, deep down, at the root-knots of

- * See Humphrey and Westwood’s ‘ British Moths,’ vol. i. p. 140.
t ‘Forst Zoologie von Dr. Bernard Altum, Insecten,’ ii. p. 41.

ALDER CLEARWING MOTH. 3

little Alder stems of only about three centimetres in diameter. In the
first summer the caterpillar ravages* these beneath the bark; it
hybernates; and in the second summer gradually makes its way
upwards by a straight feeding-gallery.”—(B. A.)

The above account gives an excellent description of the condition
of the Alder stems sent me. These were upwards of half-an-inch
across, and where the attack had run its course for two seasons, the
stem was deeply gnawed at the base beneath the bark so as to ring it,
or destroy it still more deeply. From this injured base the grub-
channel started straight up the stem. This tunnel was from three to
four inches in length, and from an eighth to a quarter of an inch in
breadth, and took a straight, or only slightly deviating, direction
upwards, until at the highest extremity it curved to one side and
opened out in the side of the Alder stem (see fig. p. 1), giving the exit-
hole for the future moth.

In some cases a disaster appears to occur to the growing caterpillar,
for, in one specimen stem, the tunnel had been successfully worked out
up to the commencement of the curve for the opening aperture, but there
operations had stopped, and the deceased tenant, now dried up, though
still showing a strong, horny, chestnut-coloured head, and darker jaws
and front of face, was lying shrivelled within.

The large quantity of ‘‘ frass” (that is, of brownish powdery matter
resulting from the caterpillar feeding in the wood) was very noticeable.
This filled up much of the lower part of the upright tunnel figured (p.
1), and was observable amongst the ravages at the base of the stem.
It was also observable at the base of one stem, where, presumably, as
yet only one summer’s injuries had been carried on, as the wood just
beneath the bark had been channelled and gnawed round; but the
upright tunnel had not yet been started.

The method of infestation was described shortly, but with all
requisite clearness, from his own local observations, by Sir J. Hills-
Johnes. The attack is started by egg-laying at the root, at the
junction of the stem and ground; and the caterpillar in due time
turning into the chrysalis condition, appears as a fly, emerging from a
hole up in the stem. The observer noted that occasionally two tunnels
were to be found in one stem.

The first specimen seen in the act of emergence by Sir J. Hills-
Johnes was observed on the 8rd of June; the specimen figured at p. 1
was observed by myself on the 6th of the same month as recently
emerged from the chrysalis sent from Dolacothy.

* The German word “platz’’ expresses vehement action, as, to crush, crack,
burst, or, in popular application, ‘‘ to observe no medium’”’; therefore I have
thought that the word ‘‘ ravage’’ would convey the absolute destruction wrought by
the caterpillar, and well shown by the specimens sent to me.—E. A. O.

B 2

4 ALDER.

This emergence is stated by Dr. Bernard Altum to take place in
the second (not the following) year after the egg is laid. After
having eaten its way up to the top of the tunnel, the caterpillar hyber-
nates for the second time, then turns to the pupal or chrysalis state ;
and at the beginning of the summer the pupa is stated to push itself
out of the ‘ flight-hole,” and the moth escapes. The transverse rows
of prickles or points on the abdominal segments, by means of which
the pupe are able to push themselves through the opening of the
larval tunnel, were clearly observable in the specimen sent with the
help of a moderately strong magnifier. The colour of the pupa was
a medium shade of brown.

The moth (see figure, p. 1) is only about an inch in spread of the
fore wings, which are transparent, at least towards the base, and the
hinder wings are also transparent, whence the name of ‘‘Clearwing.”’
The moth is generally of a blue-black colour; the horns, or antenne,
have a whitish or yellowish ring or bar on the upper side; the thorax
(or body between the wings) has a lateral yellow line, and the breast
has a yellow patch; the abdomen has one white or yellow ring, and
possibly a spot or bar at the base. The tuft at the end of the tail is
fan-shaped and black. ‘‘ The fore wings have the margins and trans-
verse mark and tip, blue or brown-black” (J. O. W.). Hind wings,
with fringes purplish black. On the first examination of the specimen
figured, when it was presumably only recently developed from the
chrysalis, the full lemon-yellow, rather than white, tint of the markings
was very observable; in about a day or so, however, this colour had
become much paler in some of the markings, and the point may be
worth noting in reference to identification.

The following description of the larva or caterpillar is taken from
‘The Larve of British Butterflies and Moths,’ by the late William
Buckler (London, published by the Ray Society, vol. ii. p. 49).

As there were no caterpillars, in a condition for description, present
in the Alder stem when received, I give the following note, by Mr.
Buckler,* of ‘‘a full-grown larva of this species, which he had found
burrowing in the stem of the Alder tree.” ‘The larva was about an
inch in length ; its flattened head was of a purplish red-brown colour;
the second segment, which was very much larger than any other, bore
a shining plate outlined with brown; there was also a shining ochre-
ous plate on the anal segment. The body was of a pale yellowish
flesh-colour, with the dorsal vessel indistinctly seen through the semi-
transparent skin. The spiracles were brown, but not very distinctly
visible, and there were a few short fine hairs in the usual situations.’’
—(W. B.)

* See vol. previously quoted, p. 49.

ALDER CLEARWING MOTH. 5

Prevention anp Remepies.——The failing appearance of the infested
Alder stems is one sign that mischief is going forward. The attacked
stems are stated by Dr. Altum (in paper previously quoted) gradually
to fail, wither at the top, grow water shoots, and at last perish. In
the case of the infestation at Dolacothy, it was by the drooping of the
young Alders that attention was called to the injury that was going
forward, and the grub was found working at ground level. By these
workings, and the starting of the bark that covers them, the attack may
be known in its early stage ; and afterwards by the aperture for escape
of the moth, or by the chrysalis sticking out of this aperture, being
observable a few inches up the stem.

Timely felling of the infested Alders, and also destruction of the
undergrowth of stems, are measures specially recommended; but pro-
bably, to be effective, an overlooker’s superintendence would be needed.
To make sure work, the Alders should be cut below the ground level,
where the caterpillar works in its early stage. If the stem is merely
cut carelessly through, it is a chance, but sufficient length may be left
above the ground level for the caterpillar to carry out the rest of its
life in. Also, as soon as the Alder stems are cut they should be sawed
through, just above the flight hole, or about six or eight inches above
the ground level, and the short sawed-off pieces thrown at once into a
box, or tub, or some vessel, and presently burnt. Thus all risk is done
away with of the development of the moth from the infested stems,
which would be exceedingly likely to happen if the Alder stems were
simply laid aside as cut.

Where leisure does not serve to clear an infested plantation, it
might be worth while, whilst the attack is still only at ground level, to
try the effect of some dressing. Even if the mischief was so far
advanced that the stem was past saving, still killing the caterpillar
would save spread of attack, and, where taken in good time, the grub
might be killed and the stem saved. For this purpose a solution of
soft-soap with paraffin, or some Paris-green mixed in it, might very
likely answer well.

As a preventive of attack (where there was reason to fear infesta-
tion), it would probably answer to throw some ashes, or sand, or dry
earth sprinkled with paraffin, round each Alder stem, at ground level,
in June, or when the moths are about. This application, at a strength
of one quart of paraffin oil to one bushel of ashes or dry material, has
been found, when used as a dressing on Hop-hills, not to cause any
injury to the tender shoots pushing up through it, and would probably
act well as a deterrent to egg-laying of the Clearwing at the base of
the Alder stem.

6

APPLE.

Garden Chafer; May-bug; Rose Beetle. Phyllopertha horticola,
Linn. ; Anisoplia horticola, Curtis.

PHYLLOPERTHA HORTICOLA.

Beetle, nat. size (walking), magnified (flying); grub, also magnified.

The attack of the Garden Chafer, so far as is shown by comparison
of reports of recent and of long by-gone days, appears to be one of the
few crop infestations which are less observable now than formerly.

In 1844 John Curtis drew attention to these Chafers being ‘ so
great a plague ”’ in two of their stages, that it was desirable to give an
account of their life-history, and in various papers he gave dates of
great appearances.* The earliest noted was in 1814, ‘‘in immense
numbers,” near Swansea. In 1832 Apple and Nectarine trees were
very seriously injured; in 1888 Roses were especially noticed as
attacked; young Apple trees are noticed as being occasionally defoli-
ated by them, and at another time (of which I have not the date; but
prior to 1844) the Chafers are noted by Curtis as being ‘‘ so abundant
on the Acacias, near Petersfield, as to consume the foliage, and when
the trees were shaken, they fell down like a shower of hail.”’

In his ‘Farm Insects’ (dition of 1860), Curtis mentions the
beetles as abundant every year, and well known in every part of the
kingdom, and to be found in May and June on hedge-rows, &c.; but
that it is in maggot state in which the infestation is most destructive,
and ‘‘although they are mischievous in gardens, it is in pasture-lands
and lawns that they commit the greatest ravages,” by consuming the
roots. 1889 and 1840 are mentioned as years in which the maggots
were especially abundant in autumn in Hants and Gloucestershire, and
this great presence of maggots happened also in 1844 in different
localities; but since 1877, the date of commencement of this series

* See ‘ Gardeners’ Chronicle,’ vol. iv, p. 700; Curtis, ‘Farm Insects,’ pp. 219—
222, and p. 509; also Curtis, ‘ Brit. Ent.,’ fol. 526.

GARDEN CHAFER; MAY-BUG; ROSE BEETLE. 7

of reports, I am only aware of one note of the appearance of this
Chafer to any remarkable amount having been sent me. This was at
a locality near Northwich in Cheshire, where it was noted on the 18th
of June, 1885, that the beetles were flying in thousands over the fields,
and were also on the ground in great numbers; also that they appeared
‘“‘to be emerging from holes in the soil”: a few days later the beetles
had so far disappeared that they were not to be seen in any great
numbers together. It was specially remarked that grubs ‘resembling
Cockchafer grubs had been observed in the same field in the previous
year ‘when ploughing up the grass-sod for corn, so no doubt ‘they
had then been feeding at the Grass roots.” *

Since then I have heard little about this infestation until the past
season, when the beetles were noticed in large numbers on various kinds
of orchard fruit trees in the neighbourhood of Haslemere in Surrey,
and the following note of damage at Grass roots caused by the Chafer
maggot, in a locality where infestation of the Apple trees by the parent
Chafer beetles had been noticed in the preceding June, was sent me
on the 19th of September, by Mr. Wm. Jenkins, from The Willows,
Abergavenny, Mon. :—

‘IT send herewith a few specimens of grubs which are doing much
damage to the Grass in my orchard, and in a meadow which is near.
The parts that are attacked are quite yellow, and the surface of the
turf comes off easily, revealing the grubs in great abundance.”

«They seem to me toresemble the grub of the Field or Garden Chafer,
which you depict at p. 881 of your ‘ Manual.’

‘‘T would mention that on the 15th of June, the Apple trees in the
orchard referred to were much infested by a small Chafer, called here
the ‘Button Fly.’ Great numbers were caught by shaking them down
on to a sheet spread under the trees, but many escaped by flying
away.” . . . ‘I find that the pest exists in some fields adjoining
my own farm, and the starlings are very busy at work there at present.
I hope they will visit my farm soon; meantime the fowls are doing
what they can to find out the grubs, though it is a difficult task for
them. Ido not remember such a visitation before.”

On examination of the specimens forwarded, I found blir to be
the maggots of the Garden Chafer (figured at p. 6). These are very
like Cockchafer grubs in appearance, but much smaller; whitish and
fleshy, with a chestnut or ochreous-coloured head, furnished with rusty-
coloured jaws, darker at the tips, and the hinder extremity of the body
somewhat swelled, and appearing to be of a lead colour from the con-
tained food showing through the skin. The grubs, for the most part,
lie curved head and tail together, but they are furnished with a longish

* See ‘ Report on Injurious Insects for 1885’ (Ninth Report), by Ed., p. 28.

8 APPLE.

pair of legs on each of the three segments next to the head, and can
walk or drag themselves along at pleasure. The specimens sent me
moved fairly rapidly.

The method of life is for the eggs to be laid in the ground, where
the maggots hatch, and feed on the roots of (apparently) any kind of
plant. Their favourite working-ground is at the roots of Grass in
pastures; but they also attack roots of various kinds of corn, and
Clover ; amongst garden crops they do not except various kinds of Cab-
bage; and amongst harder rooted plants they are injurious to Rose
roots, and have even been found at Pine roots. Formerly it was
thought that they lived (or might live) for three years in maggot state,
but from more recent observations it is considered that they do not
live thus for quite a whole year. They are stated to lie usually about
an inch below the surface, but when autumn cold comes on, or when
they are about to change to pupal condition, to go deeper. The pupa
or chrysalis is pale colour, and formed in an earth-cell.

The beetles are of the size of that figured in act of walking at page
6. The head and fore body are of a glossy bright or dark green, ‘‘ some-
times with a violet tinge’’; under side and legs greenish black, and wing-
cases bright chestnut; the horns rusty or chestnut coloured, termi-
nating in a three-leaved club or fan of a pitchy colour. These Chafers
live on many kinds of leafage, and are especially injurious to Apple and
other kinds of orchard trees, where they are not only (in bad infesta-
tions) ruinous to leafage, but attack the fruit itself whilst it is still very
young. They are especially injurious to Rose blossoms,—in fact when
they come in the vast numbers, in which they occasionally appear, are
a severe visitation. In their outbreak at Haslemere last season, it was
noted that this ‘‘ Rose Chafer”’ badly attacked Apples, Cherries, and
Plums. The Apples were especially injured, the remnants of leaves
left on looking as though they were scorched; many of the young
Apples were also destroyed. The whole Cherry crop was consumed.
The air seemed full of Chafers, but the attack soon passed.

PREVENTION AND Remepies.—The simplest and best remedy turns
on the flight time of these Garden or Rose Chafers being in the sun-
shine, or heat of the day. This is noticed in German preventive
observation. Dr. Taschenburg observes, with regard to beating them
down, that in this operation it is to be borne in mind that these little
Garden Chafers are more active than the Cockchafers, and fly about
freely in the sunshine.

In a note with which I was favoured on the 22nd of June, by Mr.
Allen Chandler, from Bunch Lane, Haslemere, Surrey, regarding the
great appearance of these Chafers in that neighbourhood last season,
he mentioned that he noticed ‘‘ that these beetles never fly when the

GARDEN CHAFER; MAY-BUG; ROSE BEETLE. 9

temperature is low, or in the evening. When the sun goes down you
can shake them off the trees easily.” ‘ But,” Mr. Chandler also noted,
‘‘unless you put a sheet underneath the trees, you would never find
them, as they seem to disappear the moment they touch the ground.”

The German method of collecting is to beat or shake them down at
whatever time they are found to be most torpid (whether in the evening,
or in the cool early morning hours) on to cloths, or sheets, or anything
spread below the boughs which will allow of shaking the beetles
together and destroying them. An inverted umbrella is particularly
mentioned as a convenient receptacle. This would be useful on a small
scale of working, as for Roses or the like; probably in orchard work the
attendance of the pigs, which are invaluable in similar operations with
Cockchafers, would be also useful here, and might save the trouble of
spreading anything beneath the trees to collect into. But whatever
method is followed in the detail of beating down, the important point
is that it should be done when the beetles are torpid. If they are in
active state, some of them will be sure to escape, as noticed by Mr.
Jenkins (see p. 7). Each female is considered to lay about a hundred
eggs, so that the escape of even a moderate amount of the Chafers
may set on foot a great deal of mischief.

For destruction of the maggots in the ground the remedy recom-
mended by John Ourtis is to water the infested land in autumn with
diluted gas liquor. This in the proportion of one-tenth of gas liquor
to nine-tenths of water is stated to kill the grubs without doing
mischief to the Grass. But it would be well to experiment on a small
scale, as to both these points, before giving a general application. Salt
and water is also mentioned as serviceable, but it is very difficult to
give fluid dressings at a strength which will do no harm to the surface
growths and yet be strong enough to kill the grubs when the application
has filtered down through an inch or two of soil.

Dry dressings, such as lime, gas-lime, ashes, or dry earth sprinkled
with paraftin, or similar application, might be of service as a protection
from attack to lawns, but would hardly be applicable on a large scale.
Where the maggots are known to be lying near the surface in land
which can be disturbed, it is well to open the surface with scufflers,
and let birds or pigs clear the maggots, and in case of birds resorting
to infested Grass-land, they should not on any account be molested.

But in the case of this infestation, the best preventive course
appears to be when the beetles are observable, to beat them down from
the bushes, but taking care that this shall be so done, either by
choosing a time when they are torpid, or using precautions before
mentioned, that the Chafers shall have no chance of flying away to
start new infestation.

10 APPLE.

Apple Sawfly. Hoplocampa testudinea, Cameron; Tenthredo testu-
dinea, Klug.

HopLocaMPA TESTUDINEA,

Female Sawfly and caterpillar, magnified, with lines showing nat. size, after
Prof. J. O. Westwood (see ‘ Gardeners’ Chron.,’ vol. for 1847, p. 852). Caterpillars,
nat. size; and infested Apple.

In my Report for 1891, I gave observations from various contribu-
tors, noticing the serious injury caused by the caterpillars of the Apple
Sawfly feeding within the growing Apples; and at the same time I
drew attention to the likelihood of this infestation not having received
the attention it needed, consequently on the method of attack, and also
the appearance of the caterpillars, bearing a general resemblance to
those of the Codlin Moth. The infestation was described by Prof. J.
O. Westwood from his own observations, so far back as 1847, but since
then (so far as I am aware) has not been specially brought forward in
this country until last year.

Then, with the help of the observers whose names are given with
their notes in Report mentioned above, we traced out the attack,
almost completely, through its various stages, as a very definite orchard
pest, but we were not able to complete the observations by identification
of the caterpillars as those of the Hoplocampa testudinea, by réason of
the proper time not having arrived for the emergence of the Sawfly
from its cocoons.

During the past season this point has been added. The Sawflies,
which developed in May from the cocoons formed by the caterpillars
of which observations had been taken, show the infestation to be (as
we then supposed) that of the species formerly known as the Tenthredo
testudinea, Klug, now more precisely defined as the Hoplocampa testu-
dinea. Other points, both of life-history, and also bearing on practi-
cable measures of prevention of attack (including the possibility of
removal of cocoons from the surface soil beneath the infested trees

APPLE SAWFLY. 11

depending on difference in methods of cultivation and nature of
ground) have been added, which are reported, together with the
description of the perfect Sawfly, in the following pages.

The general history of the attack, given in a few words, is, that
consequently on the insertion of the egg of the Sawfly (during the
blossoming time of the Apple) the Sawfly caterpillars hatch in the
young embryo Apple, and feeding therein grow with its growth, until
they cause much damage to the fruits thus infested, and sometimes to
others near, to which they have the power of straying at pleasure.
Presently they go down into the ground, form cocoons, turn within
them to the chrysalis condition, and thence to the perfect fly, which
comes out at the blossoming season of the Apples in the following
year.

During the past season much fuller information than we possessed
before as to details of the above points (which we require for dealing
practically with the attack) were forwarded, especially in a series of
careful observations taken by Mr. W. Coleman, of Cranfield, Newport
Pagnell, Beds, which are given in the following pages. In this will be
found many serviceable notes as,—the depth at which cocoons were
found beneath the surface; also that though half-grown caterpillars
will bury themselves, they do not form cocoons; that the appearance
of the Sawflies from the cocoons took place about the middle of May ;
that the method of attack as observed was for the egg to be inserted
into the calyx, or rather just below the calyx-leaves into the swelling
forming the future Apple, and the sign of attack having taken place
was a small orange-coloured mark. Also specimens of the perfect
Sawfly were forwarded, showing it to be the H. testudinea, and further
observation was sent of differences in marking of the caterpillar at
different stages of its life.

Mr. Coleman’s communications during the past season commenced
by a report sent me on Feb. 24th of the depth at which he found the
cocoons under special observation :—

‘“A ten-inch pot was filled with earth from the soil surrounding
the Apple trees. A number of infested fruits were placed on the sur-
face of the soil, and allowed to remain until the caterpillars had fed
themselves to maturity, left the fruit, and burrowed down into the
earth in the pot. This was carefully turned out about a month after-
wards. ‘The first cocoon lay at a depth of two inches, more at three
inches, and thickly at four inches, and in one instance the caterpillar
had gone down seven inches before laying up; but this might be on
account of the soil being more friable and hollow than would naturally
occur in open ground in its natural state. For practical purposes the
depth may be taken as similar to that of other Sawflies of similar
habits,—Gooseberry, &c.

12 APPLE,

«‘These cocoons are restored to the soil for future observations; at
the present time the caterpillar is unchanged inside as it left the fruit
in July,—alive and perfect.

‘‘There is no evidence of the caterpillars either crawling down
the trees to bury themselves, or of crawling up the trees from a fruit
that has fallen before they (the caterpillars) have matured, but there is
almost no doubt of their dropping to the earth independently of the
Apples, as they appear to drop when released from the fruit from an in-
definite height without injury. This was repeated again and again to
account for the fact that a great many infected (recently) Apples re-
mained on the trees after the caterpillar had disappeared; but as single
specimens, so far removed from any other fruits that they would not be
reached by the caterpillar in the fattened sluggish state of nearly full ma-
twrity. Also i an instance or two where only three or four fruits
remained all infested,—the caterpillars being present,—subsequent ex-
amination showed that the caterpillars had gone, whilst the fruits
remained. Query—Where did they go unless they dropped to the
earth ?

‘‘ The evidence would tend to prove also that the caterpillars in
their immature state do not fall so generally with the fruits as might
be supposed. They appear to leave a fruit before it has lost its vitality
enough to fall, and if a violent wind or shaking brings them down by
other than a natural falling, the caterpillars are immature, and cannot
perfect their changes, consequently perish.

“‘T may state here that a caterpillar half-grown will take the
ground as the full-grown specimen; some of various sizes were so
allowed to burrow in the pot, but only cocoons representing the
number of matured caterpillars are found after a month.’—-(W. C.,
Feb. 24th).

On May 19th, I was further favoured by the following notes of ob-
servations made by Mr. Coleman, of the date of appearance and method
of attack, dc., of the fly, and other points of very practical, as well as
scientific, interest in the life-history of the Apple Sawfly.

May 19th. The cocoons.—‘ The flies are now hatching from
these simultaneously, both from the earth in the pot, and from open
ground beneath the Apple trees; the first in captivity showing itself
on the 14th May; on the 16th two or three more made their appear-
ance.

«From the 14th, the earliest of the Apple trees, and those most
profusely blossomed, were carefully watched (bush or pyramid trees),
and on the 16th the fly was observed amongst the blossoms. Since
that time the number is indefinite, as about fifty have been captured
and killed in a search through as many trees.

“The flies hatched out in captivity were immediately placed in a

APPLE SAWFLY. 13

glass jar with Apple blossoms full-blown (a twig of same) and tied over -
with coarse muslin, a fresh bunch of blossom being introduced as the
first withered, and the flies left to work their natural course. The
trees most gay with blossom and setting their fruit, were then carefully
examined, and the work of the Sawfly was then clearly shown. The
deep orange-coloured mark on the embryo Apple, about the size of a
small needle’s eye, underneath the blossom, or rather the calyx, was its
mark left.

«‘ Returning to the captive’s flies, the same work was plainly to be
seen; but they having only blossom stalks to operate upon, the embryo
Apple being yet unformed, with the same unerring instinct guiding
them, had stabbed the stalk just below the calyx. The same day this
was actually observed on the tree,—the fly head downwards on the
stalk, curling its body, and driving its apparatus into the swelling
Apple.

‘‘In all instances the same point was selected, whether on
blossom stalk, or embryo Apple from which the petals of the bloom
had fallen, a point underneath the calyx, and what would represent
on the upper section of the Apple, about its centre. The flies enter
the blossoms for feeding purposes undoubtedly, as with ordinary
dexterity they may be captured by pinching up the ‘petals sideways
and from underneath, when the head is down in the cap of the
blossom.

‘© The pupa-state—As some of the caterpillars were unchanged,
though alive and perfectly healthy at the time of the first hatching, it
follows as a matter of course that the pupa-state must be a short one,
and also that these will hatch after the time of the Apple blossom, and
when the young Apple will have swelled considerably, so this will con-
firm the foregoing as to operations on the frwit, and not the blossom.”
—(W. C.)

With the above notes (sent me on May 19th), Mr. Coleman also
forwarded me for examination several live specimens of the Apple
Sawflies; and on the 7th of June he forwarded four more (dead) speci-
mens of the flies, or (to speak more technically) of the imago of what
proves, on careful examination, to be (as we conjectured would prove
to be the case) the Hoplocampa testudinea.

This species has the body yellow, or reddish-yellow, on the under-
side ; a large patch on the top of the head, also the top of the body
between the wings, black, shining and very minutely punctured; the
back of the abdomen also black. The shoulders, legs, front and sides
of head, and the antenne (or horns), yellowish, some of the middle or
lower joints of the antenne being partially marked with brown above,
The wings transparent, with veins dark, or darker towards the base,
and the stigma (or patch on the front edge of the fore wings), dark, but

14 APPLE,

paler or yellowish at the end nearest the tip of the wing. Length of
the body about one-quarter of an inch.*

The caterpillars of these Sawflies, of which many specimens were
sent me of which detailed account was given in my Report of Observa-
tions of 1891, + were, when apparently full-grown about July 14th, in
length between three-eighths and half-an-inch; whitish or creamy in
colour; head pale chestnut, eyes black, jaws dark brown in front, and
the plate above the tail, and the cross-band immediately preceding,
mottled with grey. The three first segments each furnished with a
pair of jointed legs; fourth segment legless; the fifth to the tenth
segments each furnished with a pair of sucker-feet, somewhat like
blunt tubercles, and the tail segment also furnished with a similar
pair, the caterpillar or larva thus possessing twenty feet in all.

In the early stage (that is in the case of specimens a little more
than one-eighth of an inch in length), these differed by the markings
being somewhat deeper in colour. The head, and also the plate above
the tail, were in each case shining pitchy or black, and the tail plate
was immediately preceded by one cross-band of similar colour, and this
again by two narrower and shorter streaks also black or pitchy. The
black tail plate and the preceding band sometimes formed one
mass. The claw legs were also darker than in the preceding speci-
mens.

Still tracing the changes of appearance backwards { up to the com-
mencement of life out of the egg, I have the following observation from
Mr. Coleman :—‘‘ The caterpillars when first hatched are scarcely
visible to the naked eye—.,-inch or less in iength—head and body
transparent, or nearly so; the eyes black, and a faint shade of chest-
nut on the helmet and tail piece; in a very short time the shining
black head and tail makes its appearance, when the caterpillar is about
one-eighth inch in length. There may be a moult, but have not been
able to notice this, as the specimens are so small at that stage. They
are very ravenous, and soon leave the first Apple unless it happens to

* The above description is taken from careful comparison of the specimens sent
me by Mr. Coleman, with the description of the Hoplocampa testudinea given in
‘Mon. of Brit. Phytophagous Hymenoptera,’ Cameron, vol. i., p. 258; and also the
description by Prof. J. O. Westwood in the ‘Gardeners’ Chronicle’ for 1847, pp.
851, 852, of the same species of Sawfly under its synonyms of Tenthredo testudinea,
of Klug and Stephens. The species having been described under such various
synonyms by various writers, I have thought it perhaps best to add the name of
‘Cameron’ at heading, as the authority quoted, Mr. Cameron’s valuable work
being our British Text-book of Phytophagous Hymenoptera.—Eb.

+ See ‘ Report of Observations of Injurious Insects during the year 1891,’ p. 3,
by Ed.

t I have given the different varieties of appearance in this order, as it is in its
developed condition that the caterpillar is best known.

APPLE SAWFLY. 15

be one more developed and fleshy, and commence another. Hence the
rapid destruction of the young fruit in proximity.’’--(W. C.)

When full-fed the caterpillars go down into the ground, where they
form cocoons in which they go through their change to the pupal state,
and thence to the perfect insect. In the instances which came under
my own observation the caterpillars buried themselves about the middle
of July or rather earlier. Dates of change of condition of caterpillar
within the cocoon, and various depths at which the cocoon was formed,
will be found in the foregoing pages.

Returning now to Mr. Coleman’s notes of observation of this Apple
Sawfly attack during the past season. On June 3rd, he forwarded me
specimens of young fruit containing the recently hatched caterpillar of
the Sawfly, and additional notes of his observation regarding firstly —
dates of appearance of the Sawflies, and subsequently of the cater-
pillars :—‘‘ The flies appeared on or about the 14th of May, and dis-
appeared on or about the 28th. The caterpillars are now fast hatching
out; first noticed on the 28th May. They are certainly appearing
earlier by ten days or more this year;” . . . ‘‘ the eggs must have
lain dormant last year until the middle of June.

‘‘The fly itself appears somewhat delicate, and will not bear rough
handling at all; the slightest interference too, in the intermediate
state of its being, causing its death. This makes me think that affected
Apples which fall early and in great numbers from the tree, seldom
contain a caterpillar; but, if they do, are in such a withered state that
they cannot sustain the life of the caterpillar to maturity ; it will leave,
and take the ground only to perish. I do not think they return to the
tree.”

Mr. R. Murray, writing from Walton House, Walton, Ipswich (on
Dec. 28th, 1891), similarly noted benefit from killing the pest in fly
condition, as follows:—‘ I think I did good service in killing the Saw-
fly in the act of laying the eggs in the bloom. As mine were mostly
espaliers, I was able to look over them with the help of a small piece
of stick and a light long nail, and killed the fly on the bloom.”

Writing further on July 22nd of this year (1892), Mr. R. Murray
added :—‘‘ I have been very busy this year again with the Sawflies, as
the first one appeared on May 17th, when I began killing them as fast
as I could on the Apple bloom, and before my blooms were over there
was not one to be found. There was not one to be seen during a late
blossoming (tree called ‘ Pendu Platt’), and consequently I thought by
killing them I had prevented any eggs being laid, but this was not so,
as later on I found a great number of Apples in which the grub was
found, especially in the pyramid and standard trees, where I could not
overlook their movements so easily as on espalier trees. I had a daily
survey and inspection made of the Apples on each tree, and all those

16— - APPLE.

with the matter oozing out taken off and burnt, so I think all the
erubs in this way have been destroyed; and the Apples, a large
number left, are perfectly sound.”’—(R. M.)

PrevENTION AND Remepies.—On the 19th of May, Mr. Coleman
wrote regarding the first step in the preventive operations, namely,
preventing egglaying :—‘‘ There is nothing that can be done at the pre-
sent moment but to go for the fly in the blossoms. Amongst bush
trees the task would not be so great as at first apparent. They are
not in such vast numbers as some other insects, but one fly will pierce
many Apples.

«Ag the flies in captivity died in a week or so, though supplied
with trusses of blossom, and they could not be found in the open after
fourteen days, it would appear that the life of the fly is contemporary
with the period of the blossom only. This is quite enough, however, for
a destruction of fruit out of all proportion to their numbers.”

«©The destruction of a single fly is worth the trouble.

«« After the blossom has fallen, the best thing to do would appear
to pick out the spot-marked fruits where within reach, and spray the
trees and young fruits with some poisonous substance, as Paris-green,
which would probably kill many on attacking the second fruit. The
removal of the earth beneath the trees and burning it, may avail in the
case of large orchard trees, but would cause some chagrin to the
gardener whose trees (bushes) should have a mass of fibrous fruiting-
roots close to the surface, or at least above where the cocoons would
be or amongst them, it would be a very destructive remedy. For my
orchard, the soil being clay, the trees are moulded like large anthills
round the base. These little mounds where the cocoons lie are full of
fibres, on which rest the hopes of fruit production versus wood
growth.

«There is no doubt it is the cultivated grounds that are most
affected ; grass orchards do not suffer much.”--(W. C.)

With regard to the treatment of disturbing the ground as a means
of destroying the cocoons, it will be seen that as at Walton, from the
nature of soil, the breaking up the surface was a requisite operation,
the remedy could be carried out satisfactorily, Mr. Murray noted :—
‘«‘T have found much benefit in continually stirring the ground, keeping
it very friable. As our soil is light and sandy it cakes, and becomes
like brick in very hot weather which prevents the small roots obtain-
ing any nourishment, and so formerly our Apples have failed in that
way as well.’—(R. M.)

Where trees are grown under the circumstances above mentioned
(or under any circumstances by which the root fibres lie so near the
surface, that disturbing the surface soil is injurious to them), it would

ASPARAGUS BEETLE. aly

obviously be very hurtful to search amongst them for the Sawfly
cocoons. But where the operation can be safely performed, it would
appear, both from recorded experience and what might be expected to
happen, that such treatment, or removal, or replacements of surface
soil, as would destroy, or remove, or bury down the cocoons, is a good
measure of prevention.

Observations from various quarters in the last year have shown
that, where the Apple blossoms are in reach, it is very practicable, and
also very serviceable, to destroy by hand the Sawflies in the act of
seeking a place for egg deposit on the blooms. If to these preventive
measures is added that of keeping watch on the young fruit, and
destroying all that shows the mark of infestation mentioned at p. 18,
also gathering up what may be fallen, and destroying it on the chance
of the caterpillar being within, it will probably be found that little
more is needed in order to keep the attack in check.

ASPARAGUS.

Asparagus Beetle. Crioceris asparagi, Linn.

CRIOCERIS ASPARAGI.

Asparagus Beetle, larva, and eggs; all magnified. Nat. length of egg and beetle
given by the lines.

The Asparagus Beetle, or ‘‘ Cross-bearer ”’ (as it is sometimes called,
from the peculiar cross-like marking on its wing-cases), is an infestation
of which the history has been well known here for more than forty
years, and its existence as an occasional trouble to Asparagus growers,
both here and on the Continent of Europe, has been recorded for a
much longer period. At a comparatively recent date, this species has
made its appearance in America, and at the present time is noted as

0

18 ASPARAGUS.

having advanced as far north as New Hampshire.* This is one of the
most northerly of the United States on the eastern coast, having about
eighteen miles of somewhat marshy sea-shore ; and the migration of
the beetle is of some practical interest as another example of the capa-
bility of our insect infestations for spread in America; whilst (probably
on account of our island climate being unsuitable for their propagation)
the American insect pests have hitherto not gained the same amount
of footing here.

This ‘‘ Asparagus Beetle” sometimes appears (as noted by John
Curtis +) in great numbers over a large area,—as in 1836, when every
plant examined on many acres of Asparagus beds from Battersea to
Kew, and also at Hammersmith, was infested during summer and
autumn,-—and then it may totally disappear. But so far as my own
experience goes, I should say that, on the scale of common garden culti-
vation, it is just one of the attacks that may be very much lessened, or
even stamped out, by remedial measures being taken on its first obser-
vation. Ina garden which I occupied for awhile near Isleworth, the
Asparagus was so exceedingly infested that I had full opportunity of
observation ; and as, from the occasional enquiries still forwarded, the
attack and very simple remedial treatment requisite do not seem as
generally known as could be wished, it may be of service to notice
them now.

The beetles are about a quarter of an inch long; of a blue-black or
deep blue-green colour; the horns black; fore body (thorax) reddish,
with two black spots above ; the wing-cases ochreous-yellow with dark
bluish, or greenish, ground colour, so arranged in a stripe down the
centre, a transverse band, and a patch or spot at the base and tip, as
to form a kind of cross-shaped marking, whence the occasional name
of ‘‘Cross-bearer.”” The wings are ample, and the six legs somewhat
long.

The eggs are somewhat spindle-shaped, dark coloured, and are
fastened singly by one end along the shoots, or on the unopened flower
buds. The grubs are fleshy, of a dirty olive or slate colour, cylindrical,
somewhat lessened in size towards the head, which is small and black.
The three segments next to the head are each furnished with a pair of
black claw-feet, and the tail extremity, which can be curved partly
round the supporting stalk, is furnished with a fleshy foot, these
together giving the grubs such a firm hold that it is not easy to pick
them off. Also the power which the grub possesses of exuding a fluid
of a dark colour from its mouth, on any alarm, is probably a great
protection against natural enemies. The grubs are stated to be full-fed

* See ‘Insect Life’; Periodical Bulletin of U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, No. for
August, 1892, pp. 395 and 401.
t See ‘ Gardener’s Chron.,’ vol. for 1845, p. 592.

ASPARAGUS BEETLE. 19

in a fortnight, and then to go down into the ground, where they form
a cocoon, and change within it to the pupa, from which, in about two
or three weeks, the beetle comes up to start new attack.

The insects may be found in all stages from June, or earlier in the
summer, until the end of September, and the light brown condition of
shoots, or even of whole plants of Asparagus which have been killed
by the attack, are a plain sign of the presence of the infestation.

PREVENTION AND Remepres.—When attack is found present, the
measures most needed are any treatment which will make the grubs
fall, and either by destroying them, or making the shoots disagreeable
to them, preventing their return. Syringing with water, as warm as
can be used without injuring the leafage, acts very well in making the
grubs loose hold (especially if a smart tap is given to the shoot directly
afterwards) ; and dry soot thrown over them at once, while on the
ground, has been found very satisfactory in preventing their return to
the plants. Dipping the infested shoots in a mixture of half a pound of
soft-soap, a quarter of a pound of flour of sulphur, and about the same
quantity of soot, mixed in a pail of warm water, is a remedy which I
have previously noticed as answering well by clearing the grubs off
thoroughly ; and with a syringing on the following day to clean the
plants, they soon regain their healthy appearance.

The above methods are of old standing as being successful, but
probably some of the regular trade mixtures, which have become pur-
chasable in this country in the last few years, would answer as well or
better, and save a deal of time and trouble. Such are the mixture of
soft-soap and sulphur, sold under the name of the ‘‘ Chiswick Com-
pound,” in which the sulphur becomes perfectly dissolved after being
mixed for about sixteen hours with water; or the mixture sold under
the name of Little’s ‘‘ Anti-pest,’”’ composed of soft-soap with additions,
making itin some degree similar in action to the mineral oil emulsions,
so much relied on as insecticides in American use.* With the help of
these, and the (also) recently introduced ‘‘ Knapsack”’ sprayer, pro-
bably the Asparagus Beetle infestation could be promptly cleared from
Asparagus grounds, even where it is cultivated by the acre.

Beetles may, to a certain extent, be got rid of by having careful
workers, who will not shake the plants until the right minute, to jar
the stems so that the beetles may fall into a pail of any sticky material
held below to receive them ; and sometimes it is worth while to sacrifice
some of the shoots in order to destroy the eggs before hatching, taking
care to burn these infested pieces ; also hand-picking of the grubs is of
some service if salt or soot, or something unpleasant to the creature,

* For addresses where these mixtures are purchasable, see Index.

c 2

20 CABBAGE.

is held in the hand, so as to induce it to loosen hold; but the surest
way to reduce the pest without damage to the foliage is to destroy it,
whilst still in larval or grub state, by some of the various measures
suggested.

CABBAGE.

Cabbage Aphis; Turnip-blossom Plant-louse. Aphis brassicae,
Linn.; Aphis floris-rape, Curtis.

APHIS BRASSICE.

1 and 2, male Aphis; 3 and 4, wingless female (nat. size and mag.).

About the 9th of August specimens of an infestation which was
then doing much harm to his Kale seed plants, was forwarded to me
for identification by Mr. John Moss, of Feering, Kelvedon, Essex.
This proved to be of the kind of Aphis, or Plant-louse, commonly
known as the Cabbage Aphis, which is not only to be found in summer
in great quantities on the leafage of Cabbage, or plants of the Cabbage
kind, but also amongst the flowers.

Under the name of the ‘‘ Turnip-flower Plant-louse,” it was de-
scribed by Curtis as being noticed by him in multitudes “‘ amongst the
short flower-stalks of the early white Turnip when a few only of the
flowers are open. They were of various sizes, but all apterous ” (wing-
less) ‘‘at that period; by the middle of August, however, they had
increased to very large companies, with a few winged specimens. This
species is readily distinguished by its white dusty appearance with
which both sexes are thinly coated, as well as by the short, conical,
and black tubes.”

At the present day (vide Buckton’s ‘ Brit. Aphides,’ vol. ii., p. 33)
this species is considered to be the same as the Aphis brassicae, or
Cabbage Plant-louse. Like most other kinds of Aphides, these are to

CABBAGE APHIS. 21

be found as males, winged and wingless females, and in young state
resembling the fully developed insects in shape, excepting in the
absence of wings; these being known commonly as larve during the
first stages after being produced alive or hatched ; and afterwards, when
they have developed wing-cases, but not as yet wings, as pupe.

When first hatched the larve are stated to be shining and bright
yellow; with advance of age to be of a dirty grey much corrugated,
and the wing-cases of a dark or grey black. The wingless female pro-
ducing living young is given by Buckton (when without the powder) as
of a greyish green, with eight black spots down each side of the back,
those nearest the tail being the largest; horns green with black tips ;
eyes, legs, cornicles (honey-tubes), and tail, black. The winged egg-
laying female is given as having the head, neck, lobes of the thorax
black, and the rest of the body yellowish green; horns and cornicles
dark brown; tail dark brown or green; legs dusky brown.

There is much difficulty in certain identification of the different
kinds of Aphis infesting Cabbage and Turnip, but their method of life
is so far alike as to make them all fall under the same kinds of treat-
ment. The general rule is that the male Aphis does not appear
until autumn, a little before the appearance of the wingless egg-laying
female. Between these pairing takes place, and the wingless females
lay the eggs from which proceed the infestation of the following year.
The appearance of the male only occurs in autumn.

If we could get at the eggs, or find that the Aphides passed the
winter in any accessible shelters, then we could work satisfactorily
towards lessening the infestation ; but as the case stands, no method of
destroying them, on the scale of open garden or field work, appears to
be known excepting the use of washes.

Soft-soap washes, or soap suds with various additions to make them
more poisonous or deterrent, have long been used with greater or less
success for garden service; but until lately there has been great
difficulty as to any reasonably practical method of applying wash in
field cultivation of root crops. In the last few years, however, much
improved soft-soap mixtures have been introduced, as soft-soap and
sulphur, soft soap and mineral oil, or other mixtures which must as
surely do good in lessening amount of these Aphides, or Plant-lice, on
Turnips or Cabbage, as the various and long-used soft-soap washes do
yearly as a preventive of Hop Aphis. But there is the very great
difficulty still to be met of how to get at the infested plants.

In very many cases the action of the large implements cannot be
brought to bear, from the method of arrangement of the crops, as Tur-
nip, Mustard, &c., which do not usually allow room for the washing-
machines, however much good they might do; and the fine and gradual
work of the implements which can be carried on a man’s back runs up
quickly in cost at the rate of field work.

99, CABBAGE.

The proof, however, of destruction of the infestation, together with
no harm, but rather good to the plants, is a great step onwards to
arrangements for gaining this at a lesser cost; and (at my request) I
have permission from Mr. J. Moss, of Feering, Kelvedon, Essex, to
give the following observations of the satisfactory effects of the use of
a mixture of soft-soap and sulphur applied by the ‘‘ Kclair” knapsack
sprayer in getting rid of presence of Aphides from the Kale seed plants,
but at the same time noting the costliness of the application over the
large acreage infested.

Mr. John Moss wrote to me as follows from Kelvedon, Essex, on
the 16th of August :—‘‘I have tried the soap and sulphur compound with
the knapsack sprayer for two years. The application is certainly very
effective and satisfactory as far as efficiency is concerned, but the appli-
cation is difficult at this season, and is also too costly. To thoroughly
dress the Kale seed so as to kill all the Aphis is a very slow process,
and costs nearly £2 per acre; we have, however, dressed some acres
this year, very greatly improving the seed, or rather saving it. But to
get over all our crops which were blighted would require from twenty
to forty men, each with a sprayer, and just at the busiest season of the
year, when they can least be spared.

‘“T find the total cost of dressing with the soap and sulphur com-
pound to be about five shillmgs per day, and one man is able to dress
about one-eighth of an acre. ‘The cost, and also the acreage, would,
of course, vary according to the extent of the blight and thickness of
the crop.

«The seed crop would be dressed with but little damage to the
seed. I find the soap and sulphur to answer better than anything
else. The Chiswick Soap Co. made me up some with Paris-green, or
London-purple, added, so as to make it a general-purpose compound,
useful for either Turnip Fly caterpillar or Aphis; but for the latter I
think the poisonous addition to be of no advantage.

“The bent tube that you suggested answers very well. I find
holding the jet under the plants and directing the spray upwards to be
the better plan. It thus has to pass the plant twice before it falls to
the ground.”—(J. Moss.)

One great recommendation of the compound mentioned, is that
the sulphur in it is soluble without further trouble than mixing with
hot water. When I have used it myself I have found that sixteen
hours after mixing with hot water the sulphur was completely dis-
solved. The soft-soap used is of very strong quality, so that care is
requisite to ascertain to what strength the mixture must be diluted
before use.*

* For particulars, prices, &c., application should be made to the Chiswick Soap
Co., Chiswick, Middlesex.

CABBAGE APHIS. 23

The soft-soap mixture previously mentioned at p. 19,* would pro-
bably also act very well for the same purpose as the above.

In reference to the observation of Mr. Moss in regard to mixture of
Paris-green with the soft-soap, that he did not think this poisonous
addition was of any advantage in treatment for Aphides, it may be
remarked that mere poisons (as Paris-green for instance) which act by
their internal effects only, and require consequently to be swallowed into
the system to act on the insects to be got rid of, are of little or no use
generally against Aphides. These feed by piercing into their food-
plants with their suckers, consequently are very little affected by what
may be lying outside. With them what we want is a sticky substance
which will stifle them, choke up their breathing-pores, and be exter-
nally hurtful to them, and any additions such as those above
mentioned, of sulphur, or mineral oil, or anything else which is
obnoxious or hurtful to insect life, or of a nature to make the plants
non-attractive, will do good.

Where the nature of the crop allows of good showers of water being
thrown at it, this is beneficial even by itself, by means of washing off
much of the infestation ; and also, in dry weather, the mere fact of thus
stimulating the growth of the crop and giving a freer flow of sap, is a
deterrent in itself to the abnormally rapid increase of Aphides which
takes place where the plant growth is stunted by drought, or made
sickly by over-infestation.

But at present, for use in field cultivation, whether of Turnips, or
Cabbage, or Mustard, the difficulty appears to me not to be either iu
want of knowledge of serviceable applications, or want of implements
by which to distribute them, but that as yet (unlike the arrangements
in our Hop grounds) we are unable (customarily at least) to get at our
crops with the requisite implements to distribute the washes needed at
a paying rate.

Cabbage-stem Weevil. ? baridius, sp.

Banipius CHLORIS.

Beetle and maggot of B. chloris, after Dr. Taschenberg ; pupa of B. picinus, after
Dr. Ritzema Bos: all nat. size and mag.

* A mixture in some degree resembling the kerosene emulsions so much used
in the United States and Canada, and sold under the trade name of ‘“ Anti-pest,”’
by Messrs. Morris, Little & Co., Doncaster.

94 GABBAGE.

On the 26th of June specimens were forwarded to me, by desire of
Mr. C. Mervyn Doyne, of Wells, Gorey, Co. Wexford, Ireland, of a
maggot infestation which was then doing much harm within the stems
of Cabbage in that district. On examination of these very small mag-
gots, and their method of working, it appeared to me that the infesta-
tion was in all probability that of a species of Baridius, a small long-
snouted weevil, of which the attacks are well known on the Continent,
although I am not aware of it being known as a crop pest here.

At the time of receipt of the specimens I was not, however (conse-
quently on my own severe illness), able to attend to developing the
larve sent up to beetle state, and on my subsequent application failed
to procure beetles, so I cannot be absolutely certain of the nature of the
attack; but as it differed from any other Cabbage-stem attack with
which I am acquainted, I give the information in my hands, as far as
it goes, for future reference. The note accompanying the specimens
sent was as follows :—

‘‘T am desired by my father to send you the enclosed young
Cabbage plant, which has been attacked by a small grub which you
will find more than half way up the stem. Nearly all the Cabbage
plants in this district have been attacked in the same way by this
insect, and when the grub works its way up nearly as far as the leaves
the whole plant withers and dies.

«The grub seems to get into the stalk somewhere very low down
near the root, and has destroyed plants where lime was put into the
ground quite as much as in places where nothing was done.” —(K. D.)

The maggots sent were small and white, and obviously weevil
maggots, and in appearance and method of attack (so far as material
sent allowed me to see) the infestation resembled that of Baridius.

The following is the description given by Dr. EH. L. Taschenberg of
the habits of the maggots of the genus Baridius.—‘‘ The larve with
which we are acquainted live by boring into various kinds of Cruciferae,
and consequently are very injurious to the different kinds of Cabbage
of our kitchen-gardens, where they penetrate into even the smallest
ends of the roots, eating them all out, and filling them with the dust
from their workings. They develop, also, in the stems, to the pupal
state, and in the latter part of the summer to beetles, which leave their
cradle by means of a round boring, but where this does not take place
these serve in some cases for winter quarters.”’

This is the account of the general habits of the genus of Baridius
given by Dr. Taschenberg. Of the B. chloris (figured in beetle and
maggot state at p. 23), he gives the colour as shining green, some-
times with a bluish glisten; the length, without the proboscis, just
under the sixth of an inch. The maggot is described as white, and
somewhat glassy in appearance, and with yellow brown head.

CABBAGE-STEM WEEVIL. 25

The method of life of this kind (taken from various writers) is for
the beetles which have lived through the winter and come out in spring
to lay their eggs in the axils of the leaves, or even in the stems, of the
plants of the Cabbage kind on which they may prey, if the outer rind
is not too hard to gnaw through. The maggots, which soon hatch,
enaw their way into the stem and side branches, which are for the
most part entirely eaten out, and filled with crumbly matter. In July
the greater part of the maggots turn in acavity to the pupal state, from
which development to beetles takes place in about a fortnight. The
beetles appear customarily to remain in their shelter; still not unfre-
quently they come out and hide themselves up for the winter. It is
further mentioned by Dr. Taschenberg that he has found nearly full-
grown maggots in Rape so early in the year, that he considers that
many of the autumn beetles take the opportunity afforded by presence
of winter Cabbage for egg-laying, and that the maggots from these eggs
live through the winter.

Another species of Baridius, the B. picinus, differs in the beetle
being of a shining black colour, and also differs from the above in fre-
quenting Cabbage and Cauliflower, whereas the B. chloris more
especially attacks Rape and Turnip.* The habits in other respects,
and also the general appearance in larval and pupal stages of both the
species above named, appear to be almost similar.

PREVENTION AND Remepies.—The chief measure of prevention is
carefully drawing and burning all infested plants. It would be useless
throwing these aside or burying them, unless very deeply down, as the
beetles would come out much as if nothing had been done to them.
At present we know very little of the attack in this country, excepting
that much mischief was done in the district mentioned at p. 24 by an
infestation agreeing in such points as were noticeable with Baridius
attack; and information was also sent from a locality in Essex of
damage to Cabbages, which were found to have the stems hollow.
Under these circumstances it seems desirable to note the possible
presence of an infestation, which may be much kept in check by a very
little care.

Observations were also sent regarding a good deal of damage caused
by the maggots of the Cabbage and Turnip Flies (Anthomyia of various
species) to Cabbage roots, and also of severe mischief caused by the
fungoid disease, and distorted growth, commonly known as “Club”
when affecting Cabbage, and as Anbury, or Finger and Toe, in

* The words in the German are “ Riibsen und Raps’’; several varieties may be
included under these names.

26 CLOVER.

Turnips. ‘To save repetition, these will be specially noticed under the
heading of Turnies.

CLOVER.
Clouded Yellow Butterfly. Colias edusa, Stephens.

COLIAS EDUSA.

1, butterfly ; 2, egg, magnified ;* 2a, leaf with eggs; 3, chrysalis suspended ;
3a, upper side; 4, caterpillar.

The Colias edusa, or Clouded Yellow Butterfly, appears from time
to time in great numbers in many parts of the country, sometimes
scattered over a large district, sometimes almost as a flock over a
Clover field. The caterpillars do not appear to be injurious to any
notable extent; still, as they do feed on various kinds of cultivated
trefoil (that is to say, both on the red Clover and the white Dutch
Clover, as well as on Lucerne, and other kinds of Leguminose, wild or
cultivated), the widespread appearance of the species again in the past
season is worth record.

The bright yellow tints, and considerable size of the butterflies
fluttering in large numbers on a sunny day over some Clover field
which a flock may have selected for their presence, are an exceedingly
pretty sight. My own first observation of such an appearance was at
a date not long before 1860 (but of which I have not now a note of the
year), when the butterflies were observed in such great numbers on a
hot afternoon on a field of purple Clover in the west of Gloucestershire,
just above the Wye, near Chepstow, that I was called to look at them.

* Caterpillar after W. Buckler, plate I., ‘Larve of British Butterflies,’ vol. i.
Chrysalis and eggs from fig., p. 49, of No. of ‘ Entomologist’ for March, 1878.

CLOUDED YELLOW BUTTERFLY. oF

The butterflies vary much both in size and colouring. ‘The spread
of the fore wings may be given generally as from one and a half to two
inches, but it may be less, or may run to as much as two and a quarter
inches, or even more. The colouring of the wings cannot be better
described shortly than in the words of Mr. Stainton : —‘‘ Deep rich
yellow, with a broad black margin, which is spotted in the female,
veined in the male. There is a constant variety of the female, which
has the ground colour of the wings dull greenish yellow.” There is a
black spot in the centre of the fore wings, and in the centre of the hind
wings an orange spot of variable size and depth of colour.

There is, however, much variety in tint and depth of colour
between the full deep yellow and the above-mentioned pale greenish
variety, sometimes distinguished as helice. Also there are differences
in depth of tint of the black border, and amount to which this may be
spotted in the fore wings of the female. The figure at p. 26 is from a
male taken near Haslemere, Surrey, during the past season.

Notes are given by various observers of deposit of the egg, and sub-
sequent growth of the caterpillar, being watched on various of the
Leguminosae, as Trifolium repens, ‘‘ Dutch Clover” ; Lotus corniculatus,
Birdsfoot Trefoil; and Medicago sativa, Lucerne. The eggs are
described as oval, pointed at each end, and placed upright, that is,
fixed by one end on the surface of the leaf; the colour, at first
yellowish white, changing through various shades of yellow, orange,
red, or other tints variously reported by various observers. The time
elapsing between egg deposit and hatching out of the larve varied in
duration from about six to as much, in one instance, as twelve days;
the eggs were noted in the observations of Mr. Buckler as being laid
in successive batches, chiefly on fine sunny days, and the whole
number amounting, in the instance where they were counted, to over
150, even before the butterfly had ceased laying.

The young caterpillars are usually described as green, but are
stated by Mr. Buckler to be pale brown, or pinkish brown, on first
emergence, which variation would account for the different tints noted
as assumed by the egg before hatching. The colour afterwards remains
green, dark, or dotted with very minute black points, each bearing a
hair, the caterpillar, as it advances to maturity, having a white or
yellow stripe along the line of the spiracles on each side. The cater-
pillars turned to the pupal state after a feeding time noted, in one
instance, as from June 14th to July 7th, in another from June 24th to
July 16th; but in a series of observations taken later in the year by
Miss Sotheby, the larvee which hatched on the 24th of August did not
go through their final moult until after a longer period, not till Oct.
7th, this giving a duration of 43 days, instead of the 22 or 28 days of
the summer duration of feeding time ; and to this must be added that

28 CLOVER.

tlhe autumn brood, after their prolonged feeding time, all died before
turning to chrysalis.

Possibly this fact, jomed to the previous observation of egg deposit
specially taking place on sunny days, may give a suggestion as to the
requirements of the insect.

The figure at p. 26 shows the chrysalis suspended, like others of the
same family, by a silken thread, or girdle, which helps to sling it to the
stem on which it changed from the caterpillar state. The colour of
the chrysalis is pale green, varied with yellow tints, black spots, and a
stripe of dull dark red beneath.

The shortest time taken for development from the egg to the perfect
butterfly is given by Mr. E. A. Fitch in 1877,—the year known, from
the great prevalence of this insect, as the ‘‘ colias year,”—from his own
observations, as forty-three days, the longest as sixty-eight days; he
also noted that it might now be considered that the Colias edusa was
normally double-brooded, and occasionally triple-brooded.

The widespread occasional appearances of the Clouded Yellow
Butterflies are visits that cannot fail to attract attention even from the
unobservant; but as the butterflies vanish, and, from the similarity of
colouring between the caterpillars and their food-plants, their presence
is not very observable in the Clover, little record has been made practi-
cally ; and the scientific record from daily observation is so inaccessible
to a large proportion of the readers who would like to know the
history of the occasional visitors, that in the above page or two I have
endeavoured to give the main general points, from collation of the
accounts of the authorities duly acknowleged below.*

In the paper by Mr. Fitch (referred to), notes are given of great
appearances of the C. edusa, and also of the C. hyale, from 1821
onwards; but the first great appearance of which I had general obser-
vations myself was that noted in 1877 in my first Annual Report.
Without going again into details, I may note that the edusa was
recorded in that year as observed across the South of England from
June to October, and in the Exeter and South Devon district it was
recorded by Mr. Edw. Parfitt as literally swarming in the fields from
June till September. The most south-westerly locality of observation
of which notes were sent to myself in that year was the neighbourhood
of Chagford on Dartmoor, but it was reported as common at Penzance
and near the Land’s End. In the eastern counties it was recorded as

* « Colias edusa,” by K. A. Fitch (then Hon. Sec. of Ent. Soc.), ‘Entomologist’
for March, 1878, with coloured plate. Notes by Miss Sotheby (same No. pp. 61, 62).
‘Larvx of British Butterflies or Moths,’ by W. Buckler, printed for the Ray Society,
vol. i., pp. J—15, and plate I. Observations of appearances of C. edusa in ‘ Report
of Injurious Insects for 1877,’ by Ed. Also paper on “ Colias edusa, C. hyale, &c.,
in England in 1892,” in No. of ‘Entomologist’ for Sept., 1892.

CLOUDED YELLOW BUTTERFLY. 29

numerous in Kent, and pregent in Essex, numerous in various places
in Suffolk, Norfolk, and some seen in Lines. and Yorks., and also near
Durham; and if to these a note is added of its observation near Car-
narvon, by Mr. Bairstow, and presence in fourteen or more English
counties, where it is also recorded either in my own report or in the
report of Mr. E. A. Fitch, a very widespread presence will be shown
in England.

In Scotland it was reported to me as early as June near Dumfries,
after an absence of sixteen years, but was confined to Clover fields
sown out in the previous year; and its absence also was recorded
near Banff by the late Thomas Edward, and at the not distant
locality of Inverurie, Aberdeenshire, by Mr. Tait, also one of my
correspondents; but one specimen was recorded by him as seen in
Orkney, on the 19th of June, in the same year, 1877.

The geographical area of this appearance of the Clouded Yellow
Butterfly in 1877 may therefore be given as extending over a large part
of England, from the extreme east and west of the southerly coast, and
from Carnarvon at the north-westerly extremity of N. Wales, up to
Dumfries in Scotland, and exceptionally to the Orkneys.

Looking over the records of appearance of the edusa in the past
summer or autumn, as given in our entomological serials, and especi-
ally in the numbers of the ‘Hntomologist’ for Sept. and Dec., it will
be seen that the area, or range of appearance, in South Britain, has
to a great extent been similar to that of 1877; but besides being again
observed in Carnarvonshire, N. Wales, the records, given with name
and locality of observer, show the presence of edusa to have extended
from Monmouthshire, where it was common at Usk at the end of
August, as far as Pembrokeshire, appearances being noted in the
intervening counties of Brecknock, Glamorgan, and Carmarthen; and
the C. edusa is recorded as having been ‘‘ literally swarming in Jersey,
as likewise in the other Channel Islands.”

At St. Albans I had a note of the C. edusa being seen in the town
by Mr. A. Ernest Gibbs, and I also saw a single specimen in my own
garden, but much too wild for capture.—(Ep.)

Further north the area of presence has been extended, by obser-
vations of specimens seen at dates ranging from the 19th or 20th of
Aug. to the 23rd of Sept., at localities near Perth; ona hill a few
hundred feet above Loch Long, Dumbartonshire ; on a mountain near
Row, .not very far from Glasgow; and at New Abbey, Kirkeudbright-
shire.

In Ireland the appearance at Howth, Co. Dublin, is recorded as
observed on Aug. 28th.*

* The above notes are taken from the ‘ Entomologist’ for Dec., 1892, where the
names of observers and localities will be found in full, as also (in the same paper)
further records of localities of English observations.—Ep.

80 CLOVER.

In each of the above Scotch and Irish observations (with one
exception, where two specimens were seen), only one of the butterflies
was noticed, and though in all reasonable probability there were more
existent, still this paucity of presence, both in number and locality,
contrasts stronely with the south-country observations, where it is
recorded as literally swarming, or seen for twenty miles, along a rail-
way, or, as I have myself seen it, in flocks on a field of Clover.

Prevention AND Remepies.—At present the amount of injury
known to be caused is too slight to call for attention. Should mischief,
however, be found to arise, one point to be looked to would be the
food-plants. These are recorded as various species of Clover, of which
the two commonly cultivated kinds, the ‘‘ Purple Clover,” Trifolium
pratense, and the ‘‘ White Dutch Clover,” 7’. repens, are especially
mentioned; two kinds of Medicago, the M. sativa, or ‘‘ Lucerne,” a
regular crop plant, and the I. lupulina, often known as “ Trefoil,” or
‘¢ Black Medick,” a plant with small dense spikes of small yellow pea-
shaped flowers, which grows ina wild state on waste ground, but which
is sometimes sown on poor soil, or used for sowing in mixtures of
Clover seed. The Ornobrychis, or ‘‘ Sainfoin,” is another crop plant
which also serves as food for the caterpillars of the C. edusa, and the
common Lotus corniculatus, the well-known “ Birdsfoot Trefoil,” is
another food-plant named, besides such as may be included under the
more general term of various leguminous plants.

In the notes sent to myself in 1877, such few observations of
ovipositing or of feeding of caterpillars as were forwarded were in con-
nection with ‘‘ Clover,’ ‘* White Clover,’ and ‘‘ Trefoil’”’; and in the
notes of Mr. EK. A. Fitch of his observations made in that year he
records deposit of upwards of two hundred eggs by one female on the
8th of June, on ‘ Trefoil,’’ M. lupulina.

With regard to the capacity of the caterpillar for appropriating
their food-plants to their own service, it is mentioned by Mr. W.
Buckler that young larve were hatched under his observation on
Dutch Clover, and these, after their first change of tint, assimilated well
in colour with the Clover, ‘‘of which they ate voraciously.” Mr.
Buckler also notes :—‘* The young larva remains on the leaf on which
it was hatched, and on which it begins to feed, only wandering to
another leaf when too many larve happen to be together. It is very
quiet, and sits still and eats white transparent blotches on the leaf.”
Again, in the same paper, to which reference is previously given at p.
28, Mr. Buckler says of C. edusa caterpillars, which he watched as to
their feeding habits on ‘“ two fine plants’’ of Lotus corniculatus, that
‘‘they continued to feed and grow, consuming a great deal of food,
stripping bare the stems of plant after plant, appearing to be very
hardy.”

SILVER-Y MOTH. bl

Though the Colias edusa does not rank amongst ‘injurious insects,”’
still it certainly appears that a butterfly of which the caterpillars, when
under supervision, are found “to eat voraciously,” to ‘‘ eat white trans-
parent blotches on the leaf,” or again, to “‘ consume a deal of food,”
may prove to be an infestation requiring attention.

Silver-Y Moth. Plusia gamma, Linn.

PLUSIA GAMMA.
1, eggs; 2, caterpillar; 3, chrysalis in cocoon; 4, moth.

The Plusia gamma, or Silver-Y Moth, is an exceedingly common
kind, and on the Continent of Europe, where its occasional great out-
breaks are more frequent than with us, it is sometimes almost over-
whelming in its ravages to various crops. Amongst those particularly
liable to attack, cruciferous plants, as Turnips and Cabbage; legu-
minous plants, as Peas, Beans, and Clover (but not Lentils); and
Sugar Beet, are especially noted. Flax also is such a favourite food,
that the ‘‘ Flax Moth ”’ is one of its Continental names, as well as that
of Sugar-Pea Moth, and the name of Beet Moth is also sometimes
given to it. The Hop is another crop plant sometimes attacked by the
Gamma caterpillar. The moth may be found by day and night, in the
bright sunshine as well as in the dusk, and frequents all kinds of low-
growing plants.

With us, except in 1879, the year when we shared in some degree
in the extraordinary and widespread infestation of this moth, which
spread from the north-west of Africa, across Europe to our own
southern shores, I believe that we have rarely suffered seriously from
this attack. The course and rate of advance of this most unusual
migration was duly recorded at the time, from its first observation in
the north of Africa in the neighbourhood of Algiers, about the 15th to
the 20th of April onwards, to its appearance vid Strasburg, Paris, and
Ostend, on our own coasts, or in our southerly and easterly counties,
at dates from June 10th to 13th.

32, CLOVER.

The amount of infestation was enormous, and it is of some practical
interest to refer again to the attack, just to note that though the most
serious destruction (of which we have record) which was caused on
their way by the caterpillars of the migrating hordes was to Sugar
Beet in Saxony, yet of the ‘‘ hundreds of thousands” of the moths
reported at Ostend, these were mentioned as being principally on some
Clover; and in this country, although the caterpillars were exceedingly
injurious (as at Exeter, where they were noted by Mr. Edw. Parfitt as
literally swarming on every garden plant, and defoliating the plants as
well as riddling the leaves), yet, so far as I can find, the only crops
which suffered were Peas, as for instance near Chichester, where it was
observed ‘ whole fields of Peas’ were well-nigh stripped bare by the
caterpillars.

In the past season some observations were again forwarded to me
regarding severe injury from the Gamma caterpillars to Clover in
different localities, the caterpillars in two instances (when they had
devoured all that suited them of the Clover) being noted as migrating
onwards, in one place to Potatoes; in another, some to Potatoes and
some to neighbouring Hops; and in another locality they were noted
as passing on from Clover to Rape, Swedes, and Mangolds. The eggs
are generally laid beneath the leafage.

The caterpillars are in part recognizable by being ‘ half-loopers,”
what are technically called ‘‘semi-geometrical larve,”’ that is, they have
two pairs of sucker-feet beneath the body, whereas the true loopers
have only one pair, in addition, in both cases, to the pair at the end of
the tail. Consequently, though they form an arch in walking, as
shown in the figure at p. 31, they do not make a complete loop. The
colours vary with age; at first they are stated to be very dark deep
green with a mixture of brown, and when they are older they are con-
sidered to vary in tint with the colour of the leafage on which they
feed, this presumably from the consumed leafage showing through the
transparent skin. In this country it was considered by Curtis that
after moulting several times, they became of a green colour, with a
greenish-brown head. They have six fine whitish lines along the back,
and a yellow line along each side, and are covered with short hairs.
The sucker-feet are green, the claw-feet green or reddish-brown.
When full-fed they spin a light woolly cocoon on a stem, or attached
to a leaf. The latest brood winters, or may winter, in caterpillar state,
and comes out again in spring to complete its growth, and, with us,
the moth is present during summer and autumn.

The moth is about an inch and a half, or rather more, in the
spread of the fore wings, which are of a satiny shine, variegated with
coppery, grey, and brown, and marked in the centre with a bright
silvery mark something like the letter ““Y,” whence the moth takes

SILVER-Y MOTH, 33

its name. The hind wings are smoky, the body between the wings of
a purplish-brown and crested,

Some of the specimens of caterpillars sent me varied much in
colour, but looking at the differences that occur in this species, both
according to age and according to what the grub may be feeding on, I
see no reason to doubt that they were all ‘“‘ Gamma ”’ caterpillars.

On the 1st of July the following note was sent me from Teynham,
Sittingbourne, Kent, by Mr. Jas. F. Honeyball :—‘ I herewith forward
you specimens of, to us, a new pest. I have two fields of Red Clover,
the first cut from which has just been carted; we had lately
experienced splendid rains, and the second growth should be already
making good progress, but instead one piece is as bare as if it had been
closely grazed by sheep, and the other nearly as bad; on close inspection
I find innumerable caterpillars of the kind enclosed, which are
evidently causing the mischief. I am proceeding to dress both fields,
one with lime, and the other with soot.”

On the 4th of July, Mr. Honeyball wrote further regarding these
caterpillars, which he noted ‘‘are destroying our second growth of
Clover in this locality.’’ It will be seen the caterpillars were, at date
of writing, in course of migration, which would be particularly unde-
sirable in the case of Hops, this being a permanent crop, and in some
notes by the late Edw. Newman, on this moth, I find he mentions
recurrence of the infestation every year on a Hop in his own garden.
Also it will be seen that in this case, heavy rainfall (in the shape of
thunderstorms) does not appear to have been of any service in clearing
the grubs :—

‘* Having cleared the Clover fields, the caterpillars, which I sent you
specimens of, appear to migrate in search of fresh food; in one case
they are now attacking Potatoes, and in another Hops.” . . . ‘As
to remedies I am trying fresh slaked lime and soot. A heavy
thunderstorm experienced here last Wednesday, 0°67 rain, in about 14
hours, after the first cut of Clover had been carted from the fields, can-
not have been very fatal to the larvee, as you point out was the case in
1879.”—(J. F. H.)

On July 7th another note (also from a Kentish locality) of great
appearance of Gamma caterpillars, was sent me by Miss Frances Pye,
from Knights Place, Rochester. In this case the looper caterpillars
were still young, but I found one was acquiring the paler adult tints,
and, as in the previous case, having finished the weeds and Clover, so
far as suitable to their tastes, were then migrating to another crop.
Miss F. Pye wrote me :-—‘‘ My father has asked me to send you these
caterpillars. We have an immense number of them in our Clover
field: they have eaten the Thistles, and all the young shoots of Clover,
and are now marching across a road into a Potato field, where they

D

84 CLOVER.

are very busy! The Starlings have found them out to-day, and will,
we hope, clear them off.”—(F. P.)

Later on (on the 1st of Nov.), at my request for further information,
Mr. James Pye, of Knights Place, Rochester, favoured me with the
following notes :—‘“ The ‘ looper’ caterpillars totally destroyed the first
shoot of my Clover, after it was cut the first time (it came again, but
was very late). They then marched across a road 10 feet wide; but a
very great shoal of Starlings found them, and ate them all up ina
week, and stopped further damage.

“Mr. Hope, at Moldash, East Kent, had his Clover destroyed; they
then devoured his Rape, and did great injury to his Swedes and Wur-
zels. There were several large fields of Clover destroyed in this
district, but I did not hear of their doing other damage.’”’—(J. P.)

On the 13th of July, Mr. Geo. Simpson, of The Watering, Creeting,
St. Mary, Needham Market, Suffolk, wrote, that, in common with
many of his neighbours, he was suffering from the depredations of a
ereen caterpillar on a,second crop of Clover, and was desirous of
learning the best remedy for the present attack, and how to prevent it
recurring. ‘The specimen sent showed the infestation also in this case
to be of the Plusia gamma, and the caterpillar to be about half-grown.

On Novy. 8rd, at my request, Mr. Simpson furnished me with the
following further particulars regarding the attack of the caterpillars to
his Clover last summer, which it will be seen involve some very ser-
viceable points. Firstly, the powers of the caterpillars as to making a
complete clearance of all that was not too hard to eat; next, the
important point that although the plants were thus eaten back that,
with favourable weather, such fields as were left undisturbed made a
good new growth; and, thirdly, the fact of the Rooks and Starlings
flocking to the infested fields and doing good service. Mr. Simpson
wrote as follows :—

‘In my own ease, I had two adjoining fields attacked ; one where
the first crop was cut late, they appeared on first, and cleared it com-
pletely, leaving the stubble brown and bare. This I immediately
ploughed, and planted with Coleworts, but think from my neighbours’
experience that if I had had more patience I might have had a good
second cut of Clover rather later. I have seen pieces which were quite
bare, and which, owing to the showery weather, recovered, and came
to a good swathe.

‘‘ My other field, which was six inches high when attacked, seemed
to be too strong for the caterpillars to master, and after eating some of
the bottom leaves, they disappeared, whither I cannot say, but I am
inclined to give the Rooks and Starlings the credit of most of them.
This piece of Clover eventually came to a very good crop.

‘“‘ With regard to your question respecting the caterpillar spinning

SILVER-Y MOTH. 35

a web? I did not notice any. They disappeared as suddenly as they
came, but I know that thousands of Rooks and Starlings frequented
the fields, and must have cleared off an immense number. I believe
they are two of the best friends farmers have.’’—(G. H. §.)

The following second report with which I was favoured on the 8th
of Noy., by Mr. J. Honeyball, from Teynham, Sittingbourne, Kent, is
of serviceable interest regarding migration of the caterpillars from the
Clover ; treatment, especially by rolling, which killed a good many on
the Clover; also an estimate of damage on a part of the Clover crop;
and also observation of the Rooks and Starlings in this case not
volunteering as helpers. Mr. Honeyball reported :—

‘“‘Wirstly as to the migration to Hops and Potatoes from the
Clover: in each case they penetrated but a short distance, about two
or three rods, but as far as they went the foliage was completely
destroyed, leaving only the skeleton leaves of both Hops and Potatoes ;
if this sort of thing occurred on a large scale it would simply be fatal
to Hop plants, and effectually prevent growth of Potato tubers; but I
think it was necessity, and not choice, which led these caterpillars to
seek what, I hope, was an unnatural food, it was not till almost every
ereen leaf had disappeared from the Clover, that the migration in one
case across a dusty road commenced. Possibly the reason they pro-
eressed no further into these crops was the arrival of the time for
change into the pupa stage; on this point perhaps you will express an
opinion ?”

So far as I can find by search in all the works that I have at hand
for reference, the precise time taken by the caterpillar from date of
hatching to date of spinning a cocoon for change to the chrysalis, is
not recorded. But it is stated by Dr. Taschenberg, that in the warm
season of the year, the changes may be completely carried through all
the four states (that is, egg, caterpillar, and chrysalis up to appearance
of the moth) in six weeks. And as he also says that the time from
the laying of the egg to the hatching of the caterpillar out of it is ten
or fourteen days, this gives some amount of information of the rate of
development.—Ep.

‘‘ Secondly as to remedial measures: I rolled the two Clover fields
one way with a ‘ring’ roll, and the other with a heavy plain iron roll,
this crushed a good many, but not nearly all; I then dressed the land
with a mixture of soap and fresh slaked lime. We also tried, on a
small scale, the application of a decoction of quassia chips, which
appeared very effective ; the Strawsonizer would be a capital machine
for distributing this liquid dressing.

“Tt strikes me that the reason my Clover suffered so much was
owing to the time of cutting coinciding with the period of greatest
activity (so to speak) in the lives of the caterpillars; for instance, one

D2

86 CLOVER.

of my neighbours had a Clover field adjoining one of mine, not even a
hedge intervening. This he cut a few days later than I did mine; his
second cut was certainly damaged considerably, but to nothing like the
extent that mine was. Again, about an acre was left in one corner of
my other field to be cut as ‘ green meat’ for the horses, and was not
touched until ten or fourteen days later than the other part of the field.
On the plot so left but little mischief apparently was caused by the
caterpillars. A fair second growth took place, in great contrast to the
rest of the field, where the second crop absolutely failed (I suppose 80
to 90 per cent. of the plants were killed, and the remainder so enfeebled
as to produce only a little autumn sheep keep). The reason I suggest
is that when the mowing machine cut the Clover, the stems and leaves,
unknown to us, were infested with caterpillars, which would be shaken
to the ground, or would crawl off the stems, they were on, as they
became withered, and naturally seek the young fresh leaves which
almost at once begin to be thrown up by the plant, and preying on
these soon destroyed its vitality; while, in the case of the crop cut
later, the insects had changed, or were rapidly changing, to the chry-
salis state, and consequently the fresh young shoots escaped.

‘‘T heard of another field in this locality which was freed of the
pest by Rooks, but neither they nor Starlings came to my assistance.”
—(J. F. H.)

PREVENTION AND RemepiEs.—For the most part these would depend
very much on the nature of the attacked crop, and local circumstances,
but where infestation has been noticed on beds of Nettles, Thistles,
or other weeds often to be found growing round fields, where there
would be no difficulty in rough mowing them, and burning them after-
wards, this would help to get rid of many chrysalids in their cocoons,
which presently would have sent out a new supply of infestation.
Similarly if the caterpillars were seen at work where the food-plants
could be destroyed at a little cost, it would answer to do so, taking care
of course that the caterpillars were not allowed to migrate during the
operation.

The oceasional migration (noticed by Mr. Pye) of the caterpillars
from one crop to another, puts them to some extent in our power.
Where their course is across a fairly smooth road, a boy, or a couple of
boys, with thick soled boots would for a very small sum so trample out
the migrating pests that probably few would escape. Or if the advance
of the caterpillars was too rapid to be wholly met in this way, pro-
bably the German method of digging a ditch across the line of advance,
so that the grubs would be collected at the bottom of it for long enough
for a boy running along the bottom to trample on them, would do all
that was needed.

CLOVER WEEVILS. 37

In large leaved crops, such as Turnips and Rape, the methods
customarily employed for clearing caterpillars, such as brushing with
boughs fixed on scufflers, would seem the best to be employed.

In Clover attack the only direct remedy which is mentioned as
having been tried was rolling. This killed a good many of the eater-
pillars, though it was not wholly successful. For Hops or tall-growing
plants or bushes where infestation was so severe as to make some
special treatment necessary, probably soft-soap wash and the washing-
engines would do all that was requisite, or in some cases shaking
down, or hand-picking, could be carried out at a paying rate.

With some low-growing crops like Clover just started into second
shoot, a good liming, or other manurial application of a nature to be
good for the crop, and prejudicial to the grubs, could hardly fail to be
of service.

But although the Plusia gamma is such a regular yearly presence,
still we have so very few notes of it occurring as a serious crop pest in
this country, that it may well be hoped it will continue to give us only
occasional trouble, and that the inexpensive treatment of being careful
that starlings, thrushes, and other birds which may congregate, to
clear off the caterpillars or moths when they appear in unusual
numbers, will be all that is required.

“Yellow-legged,” or ‘‘ Dutch Clover Weevil. Apion flavipes, Fab.

wa ER
= SS

CLovER PEAR-SHAPED WEEVILS.

1, maggot, feeding, magnified ; 2—7, maggot, pupa, and beetle of Apion apricans ;
8, 9, Apion assimile: all nat. size and magnified.

The following observation refers, firstly, to damage by the ‘‘ Pear-
shaped’? Weevils to Clover leafage, a branch of the mischief caused by
them, which, though known of, does not seem to occur, or at least not
to be observed, so often as that to the Clover seed, and of which I have
not previously had any note. In this case the damage was caused to

88 CLOVER.

leafage of the white Dutch Clover, by the Apion flavipes, the “ Yellow-
legged,” or ‘“‘ Dutch Clover Weeyil.’”’ The above figures are of two
species of Clover-infesting “‘ Pear-shaped Weevils”” so nearly resem-—
bling the A. flavipes that they serve to show the minute life size, and
‘also the general characteristics when magnified, especially the very
long snout or proboscis, giving somewhat of a ‘‘ pear-shaped ’’ appear-
ance to the Weevils, from which they take their common name. In
each of these species the general colour of the Weevils is black, but the
- A. flavipes, or Yellow-legged Weevil, differs in being somewhat more
slender in form; in the antenne (or horns) being set somewhat nearer
the base of the snout; and in the colour of the legs, which are bright
ochreous, with black feet and tips of shanks. ‘The species is very
common, and was found by Curtis ‘in profusion in the month of May
on the Dutch Clover.”

On the 10th of August I received a packet of specimens of the
injured Clover leaves from Mr. Geo. John Paine, of Risby, Bury St.
Edmunds, Suffolk, with the following remarks :—‘‘I have just har-
vested 18 acres of white Clover seed, and on going over the field last
Friday I was much struck by the way it was breaking out from the
roots, and the probability of its producing feed; but on going to the
field this morning, I find the whole of the young leaves in the state of
those I enclose for your inspection. As I have never had a similar
experience before, and the white Clover growing in an adjoining field,
and that growing in a pasture close by not being so affected, I should
be very glad if you would tell me what is the cause of all this
mischief.”—(G. J. P.)

The specimens sent showed absolute destruction of the young
leafage. These leaves were eaten away until little remained but the
veins, forming a fine net-work, with here and there a little of the green
tissue still remaining on one side of the mid-rib, or near the base of
the leaflet. From the nature of the injuries it was presumable that
these were caused by the ‘‘ Pear-shaped’’ Clover Weevils, and on the
following day the specimens sent me from the Clover stack from the
infested field showed that the species at work was the Apion flavipes.

On the 11th of August, Mr. Geo. J. Paine wrote again as follows :
—‘‘ Since writing you yesterday respecting my white Clover, I have
discovered that the stack of seed is completely covered on the outside
with a little black insect, a sample of which I am sending you by this
post. These insects (which I think are a species of beetle) are no
doubt the cause of the mischief, but I have never had the experience
before.”

The injury caused to the seed crops by various kinds of Apions is
that most commonly observed. In 1886 notes were sent me of great
harm being done to seeding Clover at various localities in Somerset-

GLOVER WEEVILS. 39

shire by the Weevil maggots feeding in the seed-heads. In one case
specimens were sent from a fifty-acre field of Clover, of maggots which
were feeding at the base of the florets, and it was stated that every
Clover field in the neighbourhood was similarly attacked.

The common method of attack, as noted in the case of the ‘“ Purple
Clover Weevil” (the Apion apricans), is that it lives through the
winter, and in due season the female Weevils lay their eggs in the
blossoming Clover heads. The maggots from these feed on the
forming seed, and turn to chrysalids (to some extent at least) in the
dying flowers. From these clrysalids Weevils develop in a fortnight,
but with the late brood some may remain in chrysalis state until
spring. In regular course of life the first brood of beetles develops in
time to start a second brood to infest the second crop of Clover. ‘They
may be seen swarming out in numbers from the Clover stacks where
they have been stored in chrysalis state, and are ready to do mischief,
firstly, by devouring the leafage themselves; next, by laying eggs in
the Clover heads.

So far as I know, we have not any notes of the change from chrysalis
to beetle taking place amongst the root leafage, or on the ground, but I
have myself found the maggots straying about in the flowering heads,
and there does not appear to be any reason why these, if they fell to
the ground, should not develop in any shelter there as well as in the
heads. And in the case of the injury to Mr. Paine’s young Dutch
Clover, as this was noticeable as severe before the beetles were noticed
to be escaping from the stack, this appears to point to the enemy being
on the field.

On the 17th of August, Mr. Paine wrote further respecting the
infestation of his Dutch Clover :—‘‘ As regards the field I cannot now
perceive any there;” . . . ‘* but my stack and stackyard are still
infested, indeed quite alive with them.’”—(G. J. P.)

Prevention anD Remepres.—So far as I am aware all the recorded
measures refer to prevention, and mostly for the purpose of preventing
injury to the seed-heads. I do not find any notes of treatment as a
remedy to beetle presence on the leafage, although the injury was
described as long ago as 1844, by Mr. W. Trenchard, of Sherborne :—
«‘T have a field of Clover which has been twice mown, and there is now
a fine aftermath. The part of the field near the stack has been lately
attacked by a small black Weevil, which advances in a semi-circle,
totally destroying every leaf, leaving only the fibre. I should think
there are on some of the leaves as many as 100 or 150. Since last
night they have eaten nearly as much as would have kept a sheep.” —
(ove: *

* Curtis’ ‘Farm Insects,’ p. 477.

40 CLOVER.

One means of stopping spread of mischief would be destroying
these enormous numbers of beetles spreading from the stacks as men-
tioned above. The beetles develop from the chrysalids which have been
carried in the Clover seed-heads to the stacks (or from the maggots
which are nearly full-grown, and on the point of changing to chrysalis),
and so the Clover seed stacks become centres of infestation. The
‘Purple Clover Weevil,’’ A. apricans, is known to have ‘‘two ample
membranous”? wings folded beneath the hard wing-cases. The
‘“Dutch Clover Weevil,” the 4. flavipes, I have myself found has also
wings, and by means of these wings the Weevils (that possess them)
can easily transport themselves at pleasure back to the Clover fields
where their early life was passed in the seed-heads. But after exami-
nation of a good many specimens sent me (all of which had presumably
developed within the Clover stack before mentioned), I could not
satisfy myself that the wings were in all cases sufficiently formed to
be serviceable for flying purposes. This condition may have been
incidental, or may have been some crumpling of the membranes, from
the difficulty of spreading specimens, which were so much dried as to
require relaxing for examination. Still, the point may be worth
mention.

Where the pests are appearing in the great quantities described, it
would probably answer in all ways to have some quick-lime, or if pro-
curable, some gas-lime in caustic state, shovelled on them from time
to time, and so prevent their spreading abroad.

But with regard to general measures of ‘‘ prevention’’; these turn
on preventing formation of the seed-heads in which the maggots feed,
and are shortly, as laid down by M. Herpin many years ago:—
«« Avoid allowing the Clover which is much infested by the Weevil to
ripen and run to seed.

«‘Cut early, and feed off while green, the Clover crops which are
known, or supposed to be, much infested by the Apion.

‘«‘ Carefully avoid allowimg the Clover crops to remain more than
two years in succession on the same ground.

‘« Alternate and vary the culture.”’

The dA. flavipes may be found on the purple as well as on the
Dutch Clover.

41

CORN AND GRASS.

Corn Aphis or Plant Louse. Siphonophora granaria, Kirby ;
Aphis avene (Fab. ?).

a aa

SIPHONOPHORA GRANARIA.

Winged female; young Aphis, magnified; and infested Wheat ear; after Buckton.

Corn Aphis is only an occasionally serious infestation in this
country; but in 1885 it was exceedingly prevalent, and in last season
it was to this attack (and to that of the mildew or rust, often known as
blight) that much of the loss on Corn was apparently to be attributed.

The winged female figured above, magnified, is somewhat more than
a quarter of an inch in the spread of the wings ; of a pale brown or rusty
yellow, but the thorax brown, with darker lobes above, and the abdomen
shining green, with four well-marked black spots on the back, and some
black spots on the sides, and the honey-tubes (cornicles) black ; legs yel-
low, with black knees and feet. In the early stages the colour is given as
(typically) green of some shade. The wingless female, producing living
young, is also given as green or brownish green. But though this 8. gra-
naria, typically considered, has much green in its colouring, a very large
proportion of the ‘‘ Wheat Plant Lice” are often of some shade of brown,
and much correspond with the Oat Aphis, Aphis avene, of Fabricius.*

* For description, with colours of ‘ Lice,” or early condition; pups, that is,
when showing wing-cases; and winged specimens, see my ‘ Report on Injurious
Insects for 1885,’ p. 16, where I give a special note of specimens sent me from Tabley
Grange, Cheshire.

42, CORN AND GRASS.

It is necessary to mention this to save confusion, as sometimes the
quantity of brown Aphides is so great, as to give the appearance (as
noted by one observer) of the ears having the ‘smut,’ but from the
mixture of colours, and other circumstances, there seems no reason to
doubt that these variously coloured Aphides are of one species, and
that the difierent names are to be accepted as synonyms, or at most as
indicating slight varieties.

These brown or fawn tints, of course, are totally distinct from the
brown or black tints of the Aphides which have been destroyed by the
feeding within them of the maggots of the Ichneumon Fly, the
Aphidius avena, figured in previous numbers of these Reports.

The Plant Lice may be found early in the summer on the leaves
and stems of the young Corn, and later on they attack the ears. They
are of the same shape throughout all their stages, from the time they
are hatched, or produced alive, up to maturity, excepting that (at
maturity) a portion are winged, and these in their immediately pre-
ceding state have wing-cases. But in the important point practically,
that they all live by suction throughout their whole life, and also have
power of walking (up to the date of also flying), they are alike in all
their stages.

These Aphides infest Wheat, Oats, and Rye, and, to a lesser degree,
Barley, as well as many of our commonest Grasses. How far propa-
gation and feeding may take place in this country during winter under
ground near the food-plants, or above ground in their shelter, does not
appear to be at present known.

As last year’s attack was so prejudicial, it seems desirable to record
it, and to give afew notes received; but except showing the great
prevalence at various localities, and likewise that the infestation was
noticeably in most instane.s of the brown-tinted Aphides, and also that
some of the notes confirm previous observations of the attack being
most severe to the late Wheats, little special information has been
contributed beyond what we previously possessed.

On the 19th of July, Mr. Alfred Blomfield, writing from Orange
Hall, Gosfield, near Halstead, Essex, forwarded me some ears of
Wheat badly infested with Corn Aphides, in this instance mostly brown
in colour, with the following note showing the prevalence of attack in
that neighbourhood :—‘I am sending you by same post two or three
ears of Wheat, and should be glad if you would let me know your
opinion of them. I find that most of the Wheats in this neighbourhood
are similarly affected.”

A little later on the following communication was forwarded to me
from Mr. E. J. Bishop, of Budnall Thame, by the Editor of the
‘Farmer and Stockbreeder ’ (see No. for Aug. 1st, from which, by per-
mission, I reprint the inquiry, together with my reply). It will be

CORN APHIS OR PLANT LOUSE. 43

seen that Mr. Bishop alludes to the brown fly being more numerous
than the green kind, and also that the infestation was chiefly in the
most backward ears :—

«<The Grain Fly.—For many years I have carefully watched the
Wheat crop at this important period, but yesterday (July 21st) I
discovered what I have never noticed before, namely, large numbers of
the green fly which usually attacks Roses, and still larger numbers of
a brownish fly somewhat similar, but rather larger, which I found in
between the meshes of the Wheat ear. I find the same thing more or
less in all my Wheat fields, but chiefly in most backward ears, where
the Wheat has tilthed. I should be glad to know if any of your corre-
spondents have noticed anything of the kind, and what effect it is
likely to have on the yield? Certainly not a good one.’’—(K. J. B.)

To this I forwarded the following reply :—The insects observed by
your correspondent as infesting his Wheat, and of which you send me
specimens, are the ‘‘Grain Aphis,’ sometimes known as the ‘‘ Dol-
phin,” or ‘ Plant Louse.’ The green kind is Siphonophora (Aphis)
granaria; the brown kind has been named Aphis avene, or *‘ Oat
Aphis,’’ but it is very doubtful whether it is not only a variety of the
Wheat Aphis. The infestation is rather prevalent this year. The
Aphides do mischief by piercing into the tender parts of the ear with
their suckers, and withdrawing the juices, and they cause injury at the
same time, by the innumerable small punctures of their suckers into
the tender tissues. They multiply with very great rapidity, and
(excepting in the full-grown Aphides, being in some conditions fur-
nished with wings) they are nearly alike in all their stages.

The amount of damage depends on the number of the Aphides
present, or the stage at which the ear is attacked. Sometimes the ear
is almost black with them; but, generally, if attack does not come in
great quantity until the ear is just turning, little harm is done. Then
the tissues harden so rapidly that the Aphis, or ‘‘ Plant Louse,” cannot
drive its sucker in, and so does no harm.

The only year in which I have had notes of this attack being
remarkably prevalent was in 1885, when I had reports of presence
from various localities—from Fife, in Scotland, down to Kent, but
chiefly from the district across England, from Cheshire to Lincoln-
shire.

Various kinds of dressings have been suggested as being possibly of
service, and in the early stage, whilst the plant lice are still only on
the leaves, they might perhaps be of use. But when the Wheat ears
are formed, and infested, I should greatly fear, myself, that any
attempt to apply insecticides would only risk further loss by injury in
passing amongst the plants, and be of no practical service.” —H. A. O.

Specimens of Wheat ears severely infested by Aphides, mostly

44 CORN AND GRASS.

brown in colour, were sent me on the part of Mr. George Eve, of Fox
Hall, Corbet’s Tay, near Romford, Essex, on July 25th, with the
statement :—‘‘ Mr. George Eve has wished me to send you some ears
of Wheat grown on a farm he holds in the parish of Rainham, Hssex,
about a mile and a half from above address. You will see they are
covered with what seem to us Aphides; the whole field, and another
near it, are in the same condition. Will you kindly say if the Wheat
will be injured by them, and also if such a blight is usual, as it is a
quite unknown condition to the farmers in this neighbourhood.”—(F.
A. Eve).

On the 26th of July, the following note regarding appearance of
Corn Aphides, together with specimens of Wheat Aphis, was sent me
from Henley-on-Thames, by Mr. Charles Simmons, of the firm of
Messrs. Simmons, Land Agents, &c., which well describes the method
of attack and its effects :-—‘‘I have observed within the last few days
that some of the late crops of Wheat on my own, and other farms in
the locality, are infested with a kind of green and brown lice. The
little vermin stick in the ear between the grains of Corn, and appear
to be sucking all the juices which should go to nourish the grain, as
the ear soon begins to look withered.’’—(C. 8.)

The following observation regarding Aphides from Oats, as well as
Wheat, was sent me, on the 29th of July, from Sunnyfield, near
Braintree, Essex, by Mr. D. Radford Sharpe. The specimens of
Aphides accompanying were all more or less of different shades of
brown or red-brown, thus agreeing (in absence of green colouring) with
the kind known by the name of Aphis avena, Fab. Mr. Radford Sharpe
observed :—

‘‘T send you herewith some specimens of what I believe to be the
‘Corn Aphis.’ They are taken from Oats, as well as from Wheat.
The pest is pretty general in this neighbourhood, and it is feared will
do considerable damage to the crop. I have noticed that in the Oats
the weakest plants are most attacked, and I am told that the autumn-
sown Wheats do not show the pest so frequently as the spring-sown
samples, thus confirming your remark.”—(D. R. 8.)

Mr. R. Sharpe’s observation refers to notes in my ‘ Manual,’ p. 64,
regarding Wheats that have been well advanced escaping effects of
Aphis attack better than those of which the ears were still in a con-
dition to allow of being pierced by the sucker of the insects.

In a note sent me in 1879 regarding extremely bad attack of Aphis
on 110 acres of Wheat in Cheshire, which was March sown, and later
in growth than in average seasons, it was mentioned that in September
every green head in the field was blasted by these Plant Lice and
other observations are given (‘ Manual,’ pp. 63 and 64) regarding early
Wheats escaping best, consequently on the self-protection of the drier
tissues.

CORN APHIS OR PLANT LOUSE. 45

PREVENTION AND Remepies.—As the Aphides must exist somewhere
or other during the winter, either alive or in egg condition, and it is
presumable that a large proportion of the presence would be on or
about their food-plants, it could hardly fail to be beneficial to destroy
these lurking-places, as far as possible. Thus, clearing wild Grasses
round the borders of fields, and also gathering and burning lumps of
Corn stubble, might be expected to lessen recurrence of the infesta-
tion.

It certainly does not seem reasonably possible to do anything by
way of remedy when the attack is established on the ears of Corn,
which is the first time when it is usually noticed. The only helpers
then are to be found in the truly insectivorous birds. The Swallows
and the Martins, floating to and fro, may be expected to do good
service in this way; but where their nests have been harried in spring
by the Sparrows, and where these birds (Passer domesticus) are taking
their autumn trip into the Corn fields, and, so far as in them lies
driving away our feathered helpers, helping themselves as the Corn
suits them to it, but not to the Plant Lice, all is certainly not well.

It is very unlikely, also, that with an infestation of this kind, which
only comes so rarely to a serious extent, that, as will be seen in the
above notes, it is in some places almost unknown, that anything will
be done in the way of prevention by date of sowing. There is, however,
a possibility that with the recent introduction of serviceable insecticide
washes and sprayers, something might be done in the earlier stages of
the attack by those who were on the alert.

The Aphis is to be found early in the summer sucking the juices
away from the stems or leaves of the young plants. It may be, of
Wheat, or Oats, or Barley, or Rye, and it is large enough to be found
by moderately careful search. Later on it infests the ears. But
whilst the plant is still so low as to permit the passage of horse
sprayers over it, or the carriage of Knapsack sprayers through it, there
does not seem to be any reason why the application of soft-soap washes
should not be as useful for clearing Corn Aphis, as for Hop Aphis, or
Aphis on Cabbage and Turnip crops running up for seed.

Observations on these applications and implements will be found
by reference to Index, and of course it is only where infestation
threatens to be serious that it is worth while to go to such an expense.
But still with an attack of this kind which cannot be remedied when it
is established in the ear, and which (as it so rarely occurs) it would be
unreasonable to make agricultural preparation for beforehand, there
seems absolutely no way of meeting the difficulty, except for those
personally interested in the success of the crop to keep watch on it at
the stage at which remedies can be serviceably applied, and then do as
circumstances require,

46 CORN AND GRASS.

Daddy Longlegs or Crane Fly. Tipula oleracea, Linn.

TIPULA OLERACEA.

1, grub; 2, chrysalis-case standing up in the ground; 3, fly; 4, eggs.

Daddy Longlegs grubs are one of our commonest and most injuri-
ous crop attacks. They recur more or less every year, and the history
of the infestation has been so thoroughly brought forward that it
seems almost a waste of space to enter on it again in detail.

Still, as with the Corn Aphis, mentioned in preceding paper, and
the Garden Chafer, see pp. 6—9, there has not been an amount of
attack which seemed to call for special notice since record of presence
in the year 1885. Therefore I give a few of the observations or main
points sent me as shortly as possible, as, though the Daddy Longlegs,
or Crane Fly, can hardly fail to be familiar to all country residents, it
appears that the grub from which it develops is by no means so well
known as it ought to be. The points chosen refer mainly to the attack
being sometimes very injurious, even immediately after very severe
weather, as early in the year as February; also to the great amount
in which the grubs were found at Mangolds after pasture land, even
though this had been dressed with salt, and well cultivated so as to
stir the soil to a depth of fourteen inches; and also at Oats after
Clover and ley; and to grubs being found in numbers of six to a square
yard, to five or six in a foot. Also notes of the grubs lying two, four,
or six inches beneath the surface; and one observation of their lying
just below the surface by day, and coming on the surface by night :
and likewise of the attacked plants being cut through a little beneath
the surface, in some instances the portion of the field attacked being
laid completely bare.

The first observation was sent me from Stafford, on Feb. 19th (this

DADDY LONGLEGS OR CRANE FLY. 47

being only three days after the remarkably cold night of Tuesday, the
16th), and was accompanied by specimens of Daddy Longlegs grubs,
and of the ‘‘ Surface” caterpillar of the Great Yellow Underwing
Moth, of which also large numbers were destroying a Wheat field in
the neighbourhood.

The next observation was sent me on the 5th of May, from The
Meadows, Battle, Sussex, by Mr. H. T. Simmons, and this I give in
detail, as it shows the difficulty, even by deep and careful cultivation,
of so clearing infested pasture land as to make the ground safe for the
following crop.

Mr. Simmons wrote:—‘‘I am enclosing you some black grubs
which I find in large quantities (six in a square yard) in a field drilled
with Mangolds. The field was an old pasture field.

‘‘ Before ploughing I broadcasted 5 cwt. salt per acre, it was then
ploughed with an American digger, with the skim-coulter on, a sub-
soil ran behind, making 14 inches soil moved, 8 in the plough, and 6
in the sub-soil. With the Mangold seed I drilled 3 ewt. Rape dust and
8 cwt. superphosphate per acre; a good tilth was made, and rolled
down firmly.

“‘T found this morning the seed just starting, and these grubs in
great numbers, mostly in the drill, where I imagine they are attracted
by the Rape dust.”—(H. T. 8.)

Various other communications noted some special point of habits,
or amount of attack, amongst the enquiries sent.

From Craven Arms, Shropshire, June 2nd, the grubs were noted as
doing considerable damage to a field of Turnips, the grubs being
observed to burrow lightly under the soil during the day, but at night
to come up and crawl on the surface. (Where this is observed to
happen it may be utilized well by rolling, before the grubs go down
again.__Hd.) In this case soot, at the rate of 3} cwt. per acre, was
applied without appreciable results.

From Northallerton, Yorks, on June 6th, the Daddy Longlegs flies
were reported as being ‘‘in myriads,” and the larve as causing great
havoe in two large fields of Oats on the farm of the writer, and also in
the surrounding country. Such of the larve as had been seen were
apparently full-grown.

From Abergele, N. Wales, on June 8th, grubs destroying a young
Oat crop were noted at a depth of about two inches below the surface.

From Matlock, Derbyshire, on June 11th, specimens were sent from
an Oat field belonging to the reporter, which had been laid down to Clover
for four or five years, and had been ploughed up about the 10th or
12th of March. ‘In this field these grubs have taken off the Oats to
the extent of 4 or 5 acres, and made the ground as bare as a fallow
field.” The same observer notes the Daddy Longlegs grubs as having

48 CORN AND GRASS.

been also very destructive in his large kitchen garden, especially to
Peas and Strawberry plants.

From Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, on June 15th, in bad
attack on Barley ; the stems were eaten through about an inch below
the surface of the ground; as many as five or six grubs were to be
found in a foot space; and about half the field was eaten as completely
bare as it was before the Barley was put in.

From near Rathnew, Co. Wicklow, Ireland, on June 16th and 20th,
notes were sent of such bad infestation (and consequent injury) in
some Oats, that on stirring the surface, ‘‘ any amount of the worms”
might be found. In this case, on special examination, the grubs were
found from 4 to 6 inches below the surface.

The fly (figured at p. 46) is too well known to need description.

The grub may be familiarly described as in shape not at all unlike
a short length of slate pencil, which has been rounded by use toa
blunt point at one end, and at the other is still cut or broken fairly
straight across. More precisely described, they are cylindrical, legless,
about an inch, to an inch and a half in length, when full-grown ;
wrinkled across, and with four tubercles above, and two below at the
truncate end of the tail. They have little black horny heads, furnished
with a pair of jaws. The colour varies much according to the land in
which they feed, but may usually be some shade of brown or grey, and
they may be found at work below the surface of the ground all through
the warm part of the year; and according to weather as late in the
year as December, or as early as February.

The grubs change to chrysalis state under some protection, as earth
or weeds, and when the time is near for emergence of the fly, they may
be found (as figured) set upright, about half out of the ground.

The great time for the appearance of flies, and also for egg-laying,
is towards autumn. The eggs are small, black, and shiny, almost like
grains of gunpowder, and very numerous; one female may lay as many
as three hundred. They are deposited on, or in the ground, or on, or
under damp Grass and leafage on the surface of the ground.

The favourite resorts of the flies are damp or neglected Grass,
marshy ground, Clover leas, meadows, and like localities, and conse-
quently it is to crops put in, after breaking up Grass and Clover, that
the grubs (which have remained alive in the soil) are the most
destructive. There would have been as many grubs at work if the
meadow or Clover had not been broken up, but there would have been
a much larger supply of plants for them to feed on, and the important
destruction would, in most cases, have been much less.

There are several kinds of Tipula flies, but the 7. oleracea, com-
monly known as the ‘‘ Daddy Longlegs,” and the 7. maculosa, or

DADDY LONGLEGS OR CRANE FLY. 49

“‘ Spotted Crane Fly,” a smaller fly of a yellow colour, spotted with
black, are the two commonest kinds.

PREVENTION AND Remepies.—It may not be out of place to suggest
that one most excellent way of lessening the amount of this infestation,
of which the history, and circumstances which lead to its presence are
thoroughly well known by all who have anything to call a sound
acquaintance with the habits of our crop pests, would be for the local
teachers under the present arrangements for agricultural instruction to
make this information plainly and demonstrably known to their farm
pupils.

Probably (under whatever name he may know it) every boy ina
village school, and every man or lad on the farms, knows the Daddy
Longlegs fly perfectly well by sight; but the enquiries that occur
yearly show that its destructive grubs are much less known than is
desirable, and to impart information intelligibly, in any district,
showing how the presence of the fly and the grubs are connected, and
how, though the attack is very difficult to remedy, yet it is open to
preventive measures beforehand, would be a very practically useful
work.

The points of prevention turn firstly, on making ground unsuitable
for egg-laying, or destroying the eggs, or young grubs, before the land
is broken up. Such measures as rough mowing and burning the
rubbish ; brush harrowing; hand-feeding sheep on the land to be
broken up (an especially good preventive if done early enough in the
autumn) ; or again, strong dressings of chemicals, as salt, or gas-lime,
which would kill not only the grubs near the surface, but would also
so poison the Grass, that it would destroy this both as food and shelter,
are examples of various kinds of serviceable preventive treatment.

In the case of the heavy chemical manuring, the land must of
course lie a few weeks untouched, that the applications may wash
down and become diluted to a safe strength, or, in the case of gas-lime,
may have gone through the requisite changes to form a serviceable
manure, before breaking up. Farm manure, on the contrary, would
be anything but a deterrent autumn dressing. ‘The flies would in no
way object to its moist shelter above their eggs.

Where labour can be spared, paring the lea lightly early in autumn,
and collecting and burning the parings is a great preventive of
infestation. This presents a bare surface, instead of the requisite
grassy shelters for egg-laying, and also if the surface is already infested
the eggs and young grubs are thus collected and destroyed. In
dealing with this attack, bad as it is, still we have not the trouble to
meet that there is in the case of Wireworms, or of Cockchafer grubs,
which live for several years in the infested ground, and which may in

E

50 CORN AND GRASS.

some cases probably, in some certainly, lie quite below the mere sur-
face position of the autumn eggs or newly-hatched grubs of the Daddy
Longlegs. When the grubs are near full growth they can go down to
a considerable depth, as noted at p. 48, where they are mentioned as
lying from four to six inches below the surface, and it is the power of
boring in the land which this shows, that makes it so desirable to be on
the alert to check attack at the very beginning, and so difficult to deal
with it afterwards.

In ploughing, such working as presses the furrows together, and
turns the sod over smaller and lighter for the harrows to break over,
is much better than where the furrows are turned so as to afford a
shelter to the grub.

Observations on this head are, however, given in my Ninth Report;
and in the two preceding Reports many details are given of Daddy
Longlegs attack, and methods of treatment, which it is unnecessary to
repeat here, as the main points up to date have also been given in my
‘Manual,’ 2nd Edition, and recently in my ‘Text-book of Agriculture.’

But the results of all the observations (stated shortly) show the
great importance of prevention; of forestalling attack by all the means
in our power, which will prevent egg-laying; or give no food for the
erubs; or destroy them when still near the surface. Also such pre-
paration of the land as will give a good seed-bed, and encourage a rapid
and healthy growth, but bearing in mind (so far as attention can be
given to the fact) that Daddy Longlegs grubs can make themselves
perfectly at home in farm manure beneath the plants, and have been
recorded as carried out in it to the field.

All measures of remedy when the attack is set up, such as hand-
and horse-hoeing, rolling, hand-picking, and the lke, are a quite
certain addition to expense, and not all certain cures, though often
palliatives; and the most hopeful applications in an infested growing
crop appear to be chemical manures, which will be obnoxious to the
grub, and push on such a hearty growth, that so much of the crop as
is not killed may fairly make up for the loss of the rest.

Of these, nitrate of soda is very obnoxious to the grub (where it
reaches it), and is good for the plant; guano and salt mixed, at the
rate of 4 cwt. the acre, have been found exceedingly useful in bringing
a failing Corn crop well over attack. Also a mixture of guano 14 ewt.,
kainite and superphosphate each 1 cwt., and salt 2 cwt. per acre,
applied to a twenty-acre field of Oats after Clover did well,—in the
words of the owner, ‘‘ We have the crop restored, minus the cost of
manures.” In this case manures, labour, &e., of which details were
sent, amounted to £31; and these additional outlays (especially where
they are simply money thrown away) are a most objectionable
nerease of cost of production of the crop, where circumstances

FRIT FLY. 51

would have allowed of its safety, by use of autumn measures of
prevention.

Frit Fly. Oscinis frit, L.; ? Oscinis vastator, Curtis.

OSCINIS VASTATOR.

Frit Fly, nat. size and mag.; maggot and chrysalis, magnified, nat. length
respectively an eighth and somewhat over the eighth of an inch.

The injury which the Frit Fly causes in this country is usually by
means of its small whitish, legless maggot living in the heart of the
young Oat plants in spring, or early summer, and thus destroying the
shoot in which it feeds, by eating out the centre. It is an attack that
is very rarely reported at all, and it has been only once (namely, in the
year 1888) that observations have been sent in of the infestation doing
really serious and widespread mischief. In that year the attack was
especially bad in the south-west of England in various districts, from
Taunton, in Somerset, to the extreme west of Cornwall, and was
reported also from various other localities, ranging across England, as
Cirencester, Reading, Tetsworth, and other places. But the matter of
special interest regarding this attack, which we have only been able to
complete the investigation of in this past summer, is to learn how
many broods the insect has, or can haye, in this country, and where
they are to be found.

In the samples of spring or early summer form of attack sent me,
the maggots which had ruined the plants might be found turning to
little brown oval chrysalids towards the end of June, and the fly was
appearing, also from attacked Oat plants, about the 17th of July.
But it was not to be supposed that these little bright black, shining, two-
winged flies, hardly the eighth of an inch in length, lived on to infest
the spring Oats of the following year, more especially as we know that

EQ

52 CORN AND GRASS.

on the Continent of Europe the summer brood was to be found feeding
in Barley ears, and amongst grain in the Oat heads.

It has not been, however, until this year that I was able to trace
the matter clearly home to development of specimens of the Frit Fly
in the summer or autumn Oat heads from information placed in my
hands, with samples accompanying, by the Editor of the ‘ London
Corn Circular’ (see p. 1 of No. for Aug. 29th, 1892). During August,
the Mid-Surrey correspondent of the above-named paper had com-
plained much of blight and rust in the Wheats, and also of damage to
the Oat crop in his district, and a bundle of samples of injured Corn
was sent to me for examination, and report to the ‘Corn Circular.’

Of these specimens, forwarded to me on the part of Mr. Main, of
Madox Farm, Bookham, I found the Wheat to be most seriously
attacked by what is commonly known as rust, or mildew, and as I did
not find insect presence, or sign of insect presence, having been in the
ears of Wheat, it appeared this part of the crop mischief was attri-
butable to the fungoid attack, on which, however, it was not my place
to speak.

With regard to the Oat plants, I did not find any fungus present
on the stems, but many of the Oat grains were small or distorted, and
in the packet I found a few small, but excessively active, two-winged
black flies. These I gave such information about as could be gathered
(without delay) from the specimens sent, also mentioning that the
name of “ Frit’? Fly (mentioned in former days by Linnezus) was given
to the infestation, from the number of worthless grains, known as
‘«frits,”’ which are caused by the gnawing and feeding of the maggots.
This was on the 20th of August.

I was, however, somewhat in difficulties as to absolutely certain
knowledge of the feeding ground of this infestation (i. e., whether it
had been certainly on the Oats), all the Corn having come in one
bundle; therefore as the matter was of much interest, being, I believe,
a new observation in this country, I separated the Oat heads from the
rest of the Corn, secured them carefully, and after watching a few days,
forwarded, on the 24th of August, the following report to the Editor of
the ‘ Corn Circular’ :—

‘« Since writing to you on the 20th inst. reearding specimens of
infested Oats placed by you in my hands, I have been continuing my
observations carefully, and now give you the results somewhat in
detail, as I think the presence of ‘Frit Fly’ in Oat heads, though
probably not a serious matter in this country, still is of some practical
importance. ‘To make sure of the flies being out of the Oat heads, and
from nowhere else, I placed a good number of the heads in a large
glass bottle (carefully secured), with the result that on the following
day and since the flies haye continued to appear. These agree in all

FRIT FLY. 53

points which I see with the description of the ‘Frit Fly’ (Oscinis frit),
and I have also found the very peculiar chrysalis. The flies are very
small, less than the eighth of an inch in length, but are observable
from their habit of dancing or skipping about, as if taking short jumps.
They are of a very shiny black, lighter beneath the abdomen, and the
head has a very shiny black patch on the crown, the feet are more or
less yellowish or brownish, the two wings are whitish, the club-shaped
‘poisers’ (placed behind the wings) yellow whilst the insect is still
alive. The chestnut-brown chrysalis is (like the fly) very minute,
cylindrical in shape, diminishing to the two extremities; at the tail
end it is furnished with two spiracles, projecting so much as to give
the appearance of the tail being cleft. Just behind the head are a
pair of stalked and branched spiracles, and at this extremity there are
some spots of somewhat starlike markings formed of minute dark lines
radiating from centres. We are rarely (so far as we know) troubled by
this attack in its summer form in our Oat heads or Barley ears, but it
is, as I mentioned in my previous letter, sometimes exceedingly
injurious on the Continent of Europe. In 1888 the infestation did
great harm here in the young Oat plants, at localities mainly in Corn-
wall and N. and §. Devon, of which I gave a detailed account in my 12th
Annual Report. This was by the small maggot feeding (in the same
manner as the Wheat-bulb Maggot) in the centre of the young growing
plant, but I have heard little of the infestation before or since. So
much of the Oat crop being sown either in spring or late winter is a
great safety against this attack, as where this date of sowing occurs,
the young plant is safe from attack of the flies which are about in the
autumn. With regard to spring sown Oats, the earlier these can be
put in the more likely they will be either to escape attack from flies
(developing from chrysalids in which they have passed the winter), or
(in case the plants are attacked) their more established growth will
help them to bear it better. But though well to be on the watch, this
is not an infestation which appears likely to be of frequent occurrence
here.”’— (Hi. A. O.)*

On examining the Oat specimens from Bookham again on the 14th
of November whilst preparing this paper, I found a good many more
of the little black flies had developed, and were lying dead amongst
the dried Oat heads.

On the 6th of June the following communication as to damage by
“Frit” maggots was sent me by Mr. D. D. Gibb, from the Ossemsley
Manor Farm, Lymington, Hants, but excepting this, which will be
seen to mention great amount of infestation, I received very little
communication as to presence of this attack.

* See ‘The London Corn Circular,’ Aug. 29th, 1892, p. 1,

54 CORN AND GRASS.

Mr. Gibb wrote :-—‘‘ A great many of the common farm pests have
shown themselves again this spring, but (except in the case of Frit
Fly, which did great hurt during the dry spell about six weeks ago,
when I counted in different places from 20 to 40 plants of Oats
destroyed per square yard) recent rains have now greatly effaced this
damage.”

The figures at p. 51 give a good idea of the appearance of the
maggot and chrysalis-case when moderately magnified. When much
magnified it can be seen that the maggot has a branched spiracle on
each side near the head, and at the tail it has two projecting wart-like
spiracles. When the pupariwm, or chrysalis-case is still newly formed,
the branched spiracle near the head end is still very observable when
magnified. The two wart-like spiracles at the tail extremity are
slightly indicated in the figures, both of maggot and chrysalis.

In this country we have now found that the three successive
generations of the fly, namely, early summer, late summer (in the Oat
heads), and autumn or winter again (like the first attack of the year
in the young plants), are, or may be, present, though the two latter
appear practically, as Corn pests, of little account. But what this
attack is in favourable circumstances is excellently given by Dr. J.
Ritzema Bos, Prof. at the Royal Agricultural College, Wageningen,
Netherlands,* in great detail in his observations, published in the
course of last year (1891), and from them I extract some points which
may help us both in our investigation, and in practical treatment.

“‘The Frit Fly has commonly three generations in the course of
the year, and the maggots live according to the time of year in the
lower or higher part of the stem, or in the not yet entirely developed
ears of graminaceous plants,—in wild or pasture grasses, as well as in
cultivated kinds of Corn.” . . . ‘The Frit Flies pass the winter
in pupal state.’ . . . ‘From the hybernated pup the Frit Flies
usually develop at the end of April. They then infest, in their skipping
or dance-like flight, both various kinds of grasses, and the summer
Corn (summer Rye, summer Wheat, Barley, and Oats). Itis necessary,
however, that the Corn should not be far advanced in its growth; the
stem must still be entirely hidden in the leaf sheaths, and also must
still be exceedingly small.”—(J. R. B.)

The above extracts carry us forward to the conditions of which we
know the history only too well here. We find (when attack is troubling
us) that the Oat plants during June show signs of mischief within, and
on examination the white Frit maggot is found to have destroyed the
centre of the shoot. According to date it may be lying there as a

* See ‘ Tierische Schadlinge und Nutzlinge,’ von Dr. J. Ritzema Bos, p. 29,
Berlin, 1891. 1 give the quotations in translation.— Eb.

FRIT FLY; 55

maggot, or lying asa little brown chrysalis, often in the outside leaves,
and during July the Frit Fly comes out from the chrysalids. So far
as I find from the reports sent me in 1888, the year of really serious
Frit infestation, the dates run thus,—attack observed towards the
latter part of June (though maggots were still to be found in July) ;
chrysalids to be found at the end of June and in July, and the flies
first recorded as beginning to appear about July 9th.*

Now, bearing in mind that dates of infestation vary much according
to circumstances, of climate, &c., if we turn to the minute details of
Dr. Ritzema Bos, we find this passage : —‘‘ In the spring attacked Oat
or other Corn plants, we find the maggots in May, in the last days of
this month, or in the beginning of June the pupe; in the middle of
June we find the complete insect.”—J.R. B. Thus our first infes-
tation ranging from June to the middle of July, runs about a month
later than the Continental attack, dating from May to the middle of
June, a matter which may tell materially on prevention of a second
brood where the Corn has passed the early blossoming stage, or state
of ear preceding the development of the blossom, before the chief amount of
the summer brood of Frit Flies have come out to lay on it in the soft
condition in which alone it is suitable for their use.

Quoting again from Dr. Ritzema Bos :—‘ These flies skipping
about in June lay their eggs afresh, either on the leaves of grasses, or
on the still very young blossoming, or as yet not blossoming ears of
various kinds of Corn, never in ears which are quite out of blossom.”’

“The maggots develop quickly (in three weeks), and after
short duration of the chrysalis state the flies appear in August,
September, or October, and lay their eggs in the winter Corn or
Grasses. The damage caused by the maggots to the winter Corn is
scarcely distinguishable from that which their progeny gives rise to in
the summer Corn.’”’—J. RB. B.

Here we have the records of three generations, as a regular thing,
and, with us, by careful observation, we have secured record that we
can have this amount, namely, spring, summer, and autumn brood,
here; but, so far as we see, the spring attack is rarely serious, and the
others quite exceptional.

Last season has given us an observation of Frit attack being found
in the growing Oat heads in August; and that we are not wholly with-
out the autumn or winter attack is shown by the observation with
specimens accompanying, sent me in Nov., 1889 (and noted in my
‘Annual Report’ for that year). These plants were sent me from
Wylie, near Bath ; they were about two to three inches high, with the

* See paper on ‘Frit Fly,” pp. 34—43, of my ‘Twelfth Report on Injurious
Insects,.’—Eb.

56 CORN AND GRASS.

maggot lying within. The specimens were received on the 12th of
November.

Looking now over the whole history of this Frit infestation, it
appears to me that our customary agricultural treatment is a great safe-
guard against anything like customary attack.

The fly can infest common Grasses and Corn crops, but as a matter
of preference it takes Oats and Barley, and with us (although in the
year of bad attack (1888), I had the opportunity of examining many
samples of infested plants), I have no personal knowledge of it having
been found infesting other crops than Oats; and also had detailed
information from two careful observers (one in Cornwall, and one near
Tetsworth) of the marked preference of the Frit Fly for Oats over
Barley, even when the two crops were sown together, as with ‘“‘ dredge
Corn’’ (in this case Barley and Oats mixed); or, in another case,
where part of the field was in Oats, and the other part in Barley.

Going on now to cultivation,—with regard to time of Oat sowing.
In the ‘Elements of Agriculture’ (the Royal Agricultural Society’s
Text-book on this subject, prepared by Dr. W. Fream), p. 241, we find,
‘“‘Qats as a Corn crop are almost always sown in the spring, but in a
few light land districts they are popular as an autumn sown crop.”
Also in the table at p. 256, the time of sowing is given as ‘“ February
to April; occasionally in autumn, when the winter variety is sown.”

It is obvious that where winter Oats are not sown, the Frit Flies
that may be about in autumn do not find their favourite egg-laying
plant. They may deposit on wild Grasses or cereals sufficiently to
keep the breed from dying out, and they probably do, but there are not
great nurseries of infestation in which chrysalids can spend the winter
to give us out flies in April.

Injury, however, from this third brood of the year appears to be
very little noticed any more than that of the second, or summer brood,
in the Oat heads; and so long as (from whatever cause) there is no
appreciable amount of this second attack to supply flies for autumn
laying, and as a general thing the special crop for the use of such as
may come is not sown until February or later, there does not seem to
me to be reason to fear any really general attack. Still, as when from
some unknown cause the infestation appeared in Devon and Cornwall,
and some other scattered localities in 1888 and 1889, it showed a
power for mishief which called for care and thorough knowledge of its
habits ; it has seemed worth while to keep careful watch till we could
make out and record its full history.

For preventive measures against an uncertain attack it is hardly
possible to give up time and trouble for special arrangements which
very likely may never be needed. But where there is reasonable cause
for expecting it in the spring Oats, it is well to remember that those

MITES, 57

which have been sown the earliest have been found to do best. On the
contrary, those in the same locality, sown as late as April, have
suffered greatly. Being young and tender at the time of attack of the
fly, they were much more open to injury.

Also if attack is noticed at a very early stage, there may be some
benefit frdm giving fertilizing dressings, but there is a great risk at
best, of the young shoots pushed on by these giving a crop of uneven
date of ripening. For notes on these points, see my 12th and 138th
Reports before referred to.

Mites (in Hay). Tyroglyphus longior, Gervais.

TYROGLYPHUS LONGIOR.

T. longior, from figure by Fumoze and Robin; claw with sucker of Tyroglyphus ;
right-hand side, from Murray’s ‘Aptera’; left-hand side, figured by Ed. from life:
all magnified. ‘

The minute ‘ Hay Mites,” of which each Mite is so small in itself
that they are scarcely observable, excepting in the great masses in
which they may be found round infested stacks, or where they have
fallen from infested haylofts, have again been enquired about, from a
few new localities, in the past season.

These Acari differ very little from the common Cheese Mites, in
nature as well as appearance, but under a powerful magnifying-glass
they are distinguishable, as shown in the above figure, by the much
greater length of the hairs.

For several years back they have been reported occasionally as
being found in great quantities, dropping ‘“ by shovelfuls” from
infested stacks or lofts, or lying an inch or more deep round stacks, or
the hay itself being alive with them. Also (and naturally) those not
acquainted with the infestation are apt to feel not a little anxious as to
what the effect of these living dust-like masses, or the same creatures
pervading the whole of a hay or cloverstack, may be on the stock fed

58 CORN AND GRASS.

with the fodder. And though in this respect the infestation has been
found not to be injurious, still it is troublesome and undesirable; and
such amount of information as the observations which have been sent
furnish towards the history of the objectionable presence is of some
interest.

The Mites have been sent from one or two localities in Ireland; a
few in England; but, for the most part, the observations have been
sent from Scotland ; and it is observable that these localities are often
at or near the sea coast. This may of course be only a coincidence ;
still we have notes of them from a locality in Berwickshire; from
Skene, in Aberdeenshire ; Garve, not far from Cromarty Firth, on the
east of Ross-shire ; and the infestation is specially noted from the Isle
of Jura, and as having been observed there more than twenty-five
years ago; and in England notes have been sent, besides other
localities, of presence near Swaffham, Norfolk, and Bury St. Edmunds,
Suffolk.

The earliest date of observation of Mite presence appears to be
when the large ‘‘ cocks,” or ‘‘ tramps” (in which it is customary to
collect the hay on the field, as soon after cutting as possible, in
the West Highlands of Scotland), are moved for carrying. Then,—as
reported to me by Mr. Thos. Fraser, Ardfin, Isle of Jura, N.B.,*—
«‘ The first appearances of the Mites (to an ordinary observer) are when
removing the said cocks, or tramps, from the field. While forking the
hay from the bottom or lower part of the cock on to a cart, at a much
higher elevation, it is necessary to raise the hay overhead, and in
minute particles, like dust, the Mites fall, and from the backward
position of the worker’s head at the time, they stick and adhere to the
face in a very short time, causing itchiness or irritation on the skin. At
this stage, I think, they are less in size than they are when found a
fortnight or so later on emerging from the recently made stacks.”—-
(LiF)

This stage of emergence is that in which the Mites are usually
reported, and they have become so exceedingly noticeable that informa-
tion as to their nature is desired. I have had them sent on the 15th
of Sept., as dropping from the haystack observed ; at the beginning of
October as dropping in vast numbers from hay in a loft, and as late as
the middle of November, specimens, both Scotch and Ivish, have been
sent me from infested haystacks.

In the past season the first communication of observation of these
Mites escaping in great quantities from an infested haystack was sent
me on the 25th of August from Westacre, Swaffham, Norfolk, by Mr.
Thomas Fryer :—

‘«‘T beg to send for your inspection a sample of ‘ Mites,’ which, for

* See my ‘ Fifteenth Report,’ p. 29.

MITES. 59

some days past, have been dropping on the ground in vast quantities
from a haystack of this year’s hay, got up under unfavourable condi-
tions in wet weather. The Mites lie in masses of many quarts heaped
up upon the ground.”

Mr. Fryer particularly desired information as to whether this
infestation was injurious to stock, or crops, or otherwise hurtful.

At the above date, a communication was also sent me from Risby,
Bury St. Edmunds, by Mr. G. J. Paine, regarding enormous presence
of these creatures which were then making their appearance from the
stack of Clover saved for seed, of which observations have been given in
the foregoing notes, pp. 8388—40.

Mr. Paine observed :—‘‘ My stack is now covered with the small
insects which I have sent you by this post.” . . . “I could have
no difficulty in sending you a peck of them. Will they be detrimental
to anything else than the Clover ?”’

On the 16th of November the following observation, which is of
considerable value as confirming the view of the Mites being especially
found in hay which had lain in large masses, but was little heated, was
sent me from Inverbroom House, near Garve, Ross-shire, N.B., by Mr.
J. A. Fowler :—

‘‘ By this post I send a small box containing some minute insects.
I have never seen them before. They came from a haystack; owing
to a very wet autumn, I could not get the stack made till late in
September. The hay was saved in large rucks in the stackyard,
waiting for fine weather to put into a stack, consequently the hay hardly
heated at all.

‘‘About a month after the stack was made, we had very severe
frosts, 15° Fahr. The following day, on each side of the stack, there
was a layer, about 2 in. deep and 6 in. to 8 in. wide, of what was
apparently pink sand.” . . . ‘There are still considerable
quantities remaining, though it is a month since they first appeared.”

Why the Mites come out in these vast quantities towards, or during
autumn, we do not know at present. The very important point that
no harm is caused to stock, feeding on the Mite-infested hay (excepting
sometimes the irritation of the Mites in being swallowed giving rise to
cough), has been carefully watched and clearly reported. The
following note on the subject was sent me by Mr. Colin Campbell, of
Jura, N.B.:—‘* For the information of your readers I may state that
this hay” (i. e., Mite-infested hay) ‘‘ was fed to a large fold of in-calf
Highland cows, young cattle, horses, and dairy stock, without doing
them the slightest harm, or producing any ill effects.”

Still if we could get rid ofthe infestation, it would be much better,
and any information tending to its prevention, especially as to whether
any dressings, such as a good liming of grass-land, had been found

60 CORN AND GRASS.

effective, would be a most acceptable contribution. But meanwhile
where the pests are found by inches
thick round stacks it certainly would be
desirable to shovel them up from time to
time, and destroy them in whichever of
the many ways which might occur at the
time to be most convenient.

Of the four following Corn attacks,
namely, Hessian Fiy, Gour Fry, Wurat-
BULB Fy, and Corn Sawety infestations,
which, excepting the first named, are
often prevalent locally, and sometimes in
many districts to a serious extent, very
little was reported.

Of the Corn Sawfly, Cephus pymaus,
which injures the Corn stalk by feeding
within it, ending by so biting it through
in a ring at ground level, that presently
the severed stem falls: no injuries were
reported.

Of “Gout Fly,” Chlorops taniopus,
mention of severe presence of this infesta-
tion in some Barley at Holkham, Norfolk,
was made by Mr. Davey, on the part of
the Earl of Leicester; and also injury to
Barley which, from the specimens sent,
had been attacked at different stages of
srowth, was reported from Woodhall,
Hertford, by Mr. Noble, on the part of
Mr. Abel Smith. This attack is distin-
euishable when it takes the plant in the
early stages by the growth being checked,
but at the same time the sheathing-leaves
round the attacked embryo ear and its
stem being so swelled, as shown in the
figure, as to give a swollen or “ gouty ”
appearance to the plant (see fig.). When
the attack occurs later on, the ear is
damaged in amount according to the date
of attack. The plant may then gain

nearly its full growth, and the ear may
~ possibly free itself wholly from the swollen

WHEAT-BULB FLY} HESSIAN FLY. 61

sheathing, and be only moderately injured by the maggot workings.
In these conditions the attack is recognizable by the lower part of the
ear being injured, and by the blackened furrow which has been gnawed
by the maggot down one side of the stalk, from the ear to the first
joint. This attack is one of our common and serious Barley
infestations.

Of ‘*Wheat-bulb maggot,’ of Hylemyia coarctata, a small two-
winged fly, an infestation which has been doing a very serious amount
of mischief for some years back, very little also was reported. This
infestation is hurtful by the maggots feeding in the heart of the young
Wheat (in the same manner as the maggot of the Frit Fly in young
Oats, see pp. 51 to 57), the attacks being hardly distinguishable with-
out the help of a good magnifier. This attack of the Wheat-bulb
maggot especially occurs on land which has either been fallowed in
the previous summer, or where the land has been cleared of crop, or
the crop so thin as to expose the land.

Of «Hessian Fly,” Cecidomyia destructor, very little indeed was
said, and nothing of any importance. This attack is distinguishable
by the infested Corn stalk, commonly Barley, but sometimes Wheat,

1, Barley stem elbowed down by Hessian Fly attack; 2, showing position of
“flax-seeds.’’ Also flax-seeds, or puparia, nat. size and magnified, showing the
early and smooth, and the later, or striated, condition.

being what is called ‘‘elbowed’’ down. The white legless maggot, or
maggots, of the Hessian Fly feed by sucking the juices from the stem

62 CORN AND GRASS,

a little above a knot of the stalk. This is often the second from the
eround, and the stem being weakened at the point of suction, gives
way and bends sharply down at an acute angle, thus allowing the ear
of Wheat, or Barley, to be injured by lying on the ground, and further
damage and difficulty in gathering the crop is caused by the confused
state of the straw.

From the experience of the six years since this attack was first
known amongst us asa crop pest, there appears every reason to believe
that (unless possibly from passing circumstances, such as the unusually
high temperature of the summer of 1887), we need not fear it as a
generally prevalent and serious infestation, so long as our present
methods of autumn cultivation, or rather date of autumn sowing, of
Wheat are continued. By this we are spared the mass of attack on
the young winter Wheat, by which not only the plant itself is killed,
but a winter generation established to set up flies for the summer
attack, for which otherwise there would have been an infinitely lesser
amount of fly parentage to supply the eggs.

Another point of prevention, so important that I would most
earnestly beg the attention of all farmers who wish to save recurrence
of attack in case of infestation, to be directed to it, 1s that on no
account whatever should they allow themselves to be induced to save infested
screenings.

We have found from the beginning of observation of attack, that
the little flat brown chrysalids, so like “ flax-seeds ” (see fig. at p. 61),
that they go by this name, are thrown in threshing amongst the sift-
ings, also amongst the light Corn, or, as it is sometimes called, “‘shag.”’

In one case the flax-seeds are easily destroyed with the rubbish, in
the other are easily so consumed as to be got rid of; but on the
destruction of these germs of coming attack rests very greatly our hope
of safety in cases of bad infestation.

This matter is one that ought to be carefully attended to, as it is
from time to time brought forward, especially by those who have not
practical knowledge of the agricultural bearing of the case, that, as
many of the flax-seeds either are, or very likely are, infested by the
maggot of a Parasite Fly, we ought to save all the flax-seeds! in order
that the parasites which may be in them may hatch out, and go to the
fields and infest Hessian Fly maggots.

But it is never mentioned, in this calculation, that before the para-
site can do this, the Hessian Fly must have been beforehand; the
brood out of the saved Hessian Fly chrysalids (which we could easily
have killed) must have caused another attack to our Corn, their
maggots done all the usual mischief, and ourselves got no benefit at
all, except that we have nursed up a new supply of Hessian Fly chry-
salids of which a portion may be infested by parasites.

HESSIAN FLY. 68

It appears to me that this is how the matter stands, and that it is
the most desirable course by far when we have the germs of a future
attack in our power (that is to say, find we have enough flax-seeds to
trouble ourselves about one way or other in our hands), just quietly to
destroy them, and so with absolute certainty prevent them being the
cause of another attack, which would not be prevented by the presence
of the parasites, whatever these might do when the mischief was
complete.

For those who desire the highest entomological opinion on the
subject, it may be useful to remark that on this point we have the
clearly expressed opinion of Prof. C. V. Riley, Entomologist of the
Department of Agriculture of the United States :—* At present, and
with general entomological knowledge in its present state, there can
be no doubt that it will be advisable to burn, or otherwise destroy
screenings, which examination shows to contain puparia. Itis a great
bother for anyone to breed parasites, and for a practical man it is.out
of the question.’’—(See ‘ Insect Life,’ Periodical Bulletin of the U.S.A.
Dept. of Agriculture, March, 1889, p. 294.)

The Corn attacks of last season have been peculiar, both as to
presence and absence, and it may be conjectured that this latter point,
and especially the much lesser amount of inquiry as to infestation in
young Corn early in the season, arose from the difficulties in getting
the land into cultivation in the preceding autumn.

CURRANT.

Black Currant Gall Mite. Phytoptus ribis, Westwood.
(Also Chalcidide, genus E’ntedon, in Galls).

PHYTOPTUS? sp.

Phytoptus-infested buds; Phytoptus, enormously magnified (life size invisible
to the naked eye).

64 CURRANT.

It is now many years since the attacks of the Gall Mites (figured
at p. 63), which cause the Black Currant buds to become mere swollen
knobs, abortive for all useful purposes, have been a great trouble to
Currant growers.

These knobs may be found scattered at distances along an other-
wise healthy shoot, or they may occur numerously near together on a
shoot of which the regular growth has been checked; they may be
merely round swelled growths, or some slight attempt at development
of leaf or flower, may have taken place ; but even where this is so the
diseased buds represent a total loss on them to the grower. The
attack is caused by the Phytoptus, or Gall Mite, which is as figured
(greatly magnified), at p. 63, cylindrical, and furnished throughout its
life with two pairs only of legs, placed at the head extremity, which
narrows into a bluntly pointed proboscis.

This Mite is to be found in vast numbers within the galls, or
knobbed growths, and for this reason breaking off these galls and
destroying them as early as possible in the season, so as to get rid of
the Mites, and also of their eggs (which I have found with the Mite
formed within as early as the 4th of April), is a sure method of
lessening amount of coming attack.

Various measures have been tried, such as syringing with soft-soap
and sulphur washes, to destroy the Mites that might be straying about
the bushes, or sheltered in forks or crannies where the wash would
run down and stifle them ; also all applications to, or treatment of, the
ground which would remove shelters, or destroy Mites harbouring
during winter at the surface; and (where attack is noticeable for the
first time) the promptest possible measures in totally destroying the
attacked boughs, or, if reasonably possible, the attacked bushes, should
be carried out at once.

These measures have all been repeatedly entered on, but in the past
season the use of Paris-green has been reported to me by Mr. John
Biggs, of Laxton, Howden, Hast Yorkshire, as an application which
was of some amount of service joined to dressings of caustic lime on
the ground.

Mr. Biggs observed, writing on the 20th of April:—‘ You will, I
am sure, be interested in knowing that I have, to a certain extent,
prevented the Phytoptus utterly ruining my Black Currant trees. As
you suggested in a letter of last March, we syringed the bushes twice
with the solution of Paris-green, which I procured from Messrs. Blun-
dell,* and gave the soil all under the bushes a good coating of caustic
lime. I also gave the bushes another dressing of the Paris-green.
Just when the buds appeared this spring I had a boy gathering all the

* Address of the firm is, Messrs. Blundell and Spence, Hull.

BLACK CURRANT GALL MITE. 65

little knobs of the trees. The result has proved as satisfactory as I
could expect, considering the condition of the trees last year, and I
have every prospect of securing a good half crop. Our neighbour’s
trees, in this village, are utterly ruined, scarcely a leaf to be seen this
year, and the trees completely covered with the infected knobs.”—
(J. B.)

This note may be of some service, as also the observation of Mr. C.
D. Wise, sent to me on June 8rd, from the Toddington Fruit Grounds,
Winchcomb, Glos., that they had ‘certainly decreased the trouble ”’
by picking off the buds; but I enter on the Phytoptus attack again this
year more particularly with regard to identification of two distinct
kinds of ‘‘ co-lodgers”’ with the Phytopti in the galls caused by these
Gall Mites.

These are of two orders. We find a dipterous larva, that is, the
maggot of a two-winged fly (of which we have as yet not reared the
perfect insect) ; and also we find numbers of small hymenopterous flies
(that is, little four-winged flies), which, on investigation by a specialist,
have proved to be of the parasite family of the Chalcidide, genus
Entedon, but of these we have not yet secured the maggot and
chrysalis.

With regard to the two-winged fly maggot, a specimen was sent to
myself last year, by Mr. Gibbon, of Seaford Grange, Pershore, which
from the disappearance of the Phytopti, so carefully secured with it
that they could not escape, and other circumstances (given in detail at
pages 42 and 43 of my Report for 1891), there appears to me no reason
to doubt was feeding on the Phytopti. We could not be absolutely
certain, as we did not see the fly maggot feeding on the Gall Mites;
still all circumstances appeared to point to it, and in the past season,
so early as the 14th of March, Mr. Gibbon again found the same kind
of maggot in a galled bud.

Being very desirous to secure specimens of the perfect insect, I
requested Mr. Gibbon to secure some galls, and let me see what might
appear. The result of this was a numerous supply of minute four-
winged flies, which last year we advanced so far as to find were Chal-
cids, and knowing this family to be chiefly parasitic, I ventured to hope
that we had secured good allies. On more minute investigation, how-
ever, in the course of the present year, it appears that their parasitic
habits would be in all probability (or almost certainly directed) not
against the Phytopti, but against their fellow dwellers, and apparent
Phytoptus destroyers, the fly-maggots, which is somewhat disap-
pointing.

This point being very important, on receipt of a good supply of
specimens early in the past summer from Mr. Gibbon, of Seaford
Grange, Pershore, I endeavoured to gain further information, and on

F

66 CURRANT.

application to Mr. E. A. Fitch, of Maldon, Essex (late Hon. Sec. of
the Entomological Society), who I was aware had given especial
attention to the subject of parasitic Hymenoptera, he wrote me that
the little Chalcids were a species of E'ntedon, of which about 165 species
were noted as English in the British Museum Catalogues. Under these
circumstances Mr. Fitch remarked :—‘‘ All I can say is that they are
species of Entedon, or Fntedonide. These are known parasites of
dipterous leaf-miners especially. They are doubtless attached
to the dipterous maggots in the Currant buds, in Mr. Gibbon’s
case, and I think hardly could have been parasitic on the Phy-
topti.””

With regard to which division of the Diptera the specimens sub-
mitted to me in larval state belonged, I cannot state with certainty,
excepting that there was neither distinct head nor any anchor-process
visible, and consequently the statement in the elaborate treatise by
Mr. L. O. Howard on the Chalcidida, that Entedon has been found to
be parasitic on Musca, may bear on the question.* With regard to
possibility of the maggots of these Chalcids feeding within the gall,
that is, being phytophagous, or vegetable feeders, which is a very impor-
tant consideration, I find in Mr. L. O. Howard’s work above quoted (at
p. 586, 20th page of pamphlet), the following sentence concluding some
elaborate detailed considerations of the subject :-—‘‘ Phytophagic Chal-
cididé are therefore confined to Jsosoma, and Isosoma-like forms among
the Hurytomine.”’? And if we turn now to the ‘‘ Generic Synopsis ”’ of
the ‘Classification of Insects’ by our own great authority, Prof.
Westwood, we find Isosoma and Eurytoma placed in the Sub-family of
Eurytomides. Entedonis in another Sub-family, that of the Hulophides,
and consequently it appears clear that these four-winged flies do not
add to our troubles by feeding in maggot state on the Currant growths,
but are probably feeding on the fly-maggots.

Thus, as far as we see at present, it appears that we should get no
good by endeavouring to rear these Chalcid flies. We have no reason
to suppose they feed in maggot state on the Phytopti, and every reason
to suppose they feed on the fly-maggots. The point of their usefulness
turns upon what the fly-maggots may be doing. If these fly-maggots
are feeding on the Phytopti, these numerous Chalcids which destroy
our benefactors had certainly best not be allowed to develop ; that is,
when the galls are broken from the Currant shoots, these galls ought
to be destroyed. If, on the contrary, the fly-maggots prove to be adding
to the mischief by feeding in the galls, and not on the Phytopti, the
Chalcids would to a certain extent be doing good by destroying them.

* See ‘ Biology of the Hymenopterous insects of the family Chalcidide,’ by L.
O. Howard. From Proceedings of United States National Museum, vol. XIV,
Washington: Government Printing Office, 1892.

MAGPIE MOTH. 67

But not so very much, for a bud once galled is very little use, whether
or not the mischief caused by a fly-maggot is superadded.

Therefore it would appear desirable to destroy the buds as we are
doing now, and also it would be of very serviceable interest if those who
have the opportunity would endeavour to rear the fly, and take any
other observation with the aid of a strong hand magnifier, such as the
excellent glasses of two-inch focus, now easily procurable, and so far as
is possible clear up the uncertainty of the matter.

Currant and Gooseberry Moth; Magpie Moth. Abrazas
grossulariata, Stephens.

ABRAXAS GROSSULARIATA.
Magpie Moth and caterpillar.

On the 20th of May a packet of much gnawed Currant leaves,
together with some two dozen to thirty caterpillars of the Magpie
Moth, at various stages of growth, from a little over half an inch in
length, were forwarded to me by Mr. Edward Tate, from Balcarres
Gardens, Colinsburgh, Co. Fife, N.B., with the mention that these
were specimens of an attack supposed by the sender to he of
the Magpie Moth, Abraxas grossulariata, which was then causing
great destruction in the cottage gardens in that district, completely
stripping the leaves of black, red, and white Currants and Goose-
berries.

These larve proved characteristic specimens of this handsome
looper moth caterpillar. The ground colour yellowish, with a row of
transverse squarish dark grey or blackish marks along the back; a row
of little black spots along each side, and beneath these a row of larger
black markings, beneath these an orange red, or reddish stripe, with
again a stripe of black marks lower still along the sides of the cater-
pillar. Beneath the caterpillars there were also two narrow continuous

F 2

68 CURRANT,

black lines. Head and claw-feet black; the single pair of sucker-feet
beneath the abdomen, and the caudal pair of sucker-feet blackish
outside.

Besides the orange or reddish stripe along each side, the segment
next the head, and the under side of the third and fourth, and also of
the four segments at the tail extremity, are of the same reddish colour.

The perfect insect, which in its lightness of make and gay colouring
more agrees with the general idea of a butterfly than of a moth, is
(typically) marked on both wings with black spots, scattered, or forming
interrupted stripes, as figured at p. 67; the fore wings with white
ground colour, with a yellow or orange blotch at the base, and a band
of the same colour across the middle. Ground colour of the hind
wings white. Head black, body between the wings and abdomen yellow,
the former with one or two black spots, the latter with five rows of
black spots, one running along the back, one on each side, and two
beneath. It may, however, vary in colouring from being merely marked
with a few spots and breaks, or clouds, to both wings being almost
entirely clouded with black.

The moths are about from midsummer during the summer months,
and the life-history of the insect makes measures of prevention very
practicable and simple. The moth eggs soon hatch, and the young
caterpillars feed for a few weeks, but the leafage being then strong and
plentiful, and the caterpillars small, they do not appear to do much
damage, and presently they either spin themselves up for winter in a
folded leaf, hung to the bough by spun threads, or winter in the fallen
leaves beneath the bushes. When spring and young leafage return,
the caterpillars come out again, and feed until towards May or later,
when they spin a light cocoon in any convenient place, as on the
twigs or palings, or in crevices, and within this they turn to a
chrysalis, which is at first yellow, afterwards black with golden coloured
rings.

From the above life-history it will be obvious that where attack has
been noticed a very little care in winter cultivation will prevent
its recurrence. Pruning, and dressing under the bushes should not
take place until the time for fall of the leaves is quite past. Then if the
bushes are carefully gone over, so as to ascertain that no caterpillar
leaf-cradles are left attached to the boughs, and the surface beneath
the bushes is lightly skimmed so as to remove the leaves and rubbish
lying on the earth, and this collected carefully as the work goes on (not
piled in heaps or scattered, but so placed as to insure complete
removal), and then destroyed, not merely thrown aside, there will be
little fear of attack recurring. After this plan has been carried out,
then forking, manuring, and all other customary measures of bush-
fruit treatment will lessen the likelihood of any caterpillars escaping
destruction, : .

MAGPIE MOTH. 69

Where bushes grow with several stems so placed as to make lodging
nooks for leaves to drift into, or insect vermin to shelter in, it is
particularly desirable to clear such hiding places well out.

Should attack, however, occur on the spring leafage, all the usua]
measures of syringing, shaking down and trampling, dusting, &c.,
would be available, and as the caterpillars are very noticeable, both
from colour and size, hand-picking is also serviceable.

It is somewhat curious, looking at the presence of this Magpie (or
Harlequin Moth, as it is sometimes called) being recorded by some of
our best writers as ‘‘Common everywhere; generally abundant” ;
«Only too common in all our gardens, both in England and Ireland,”
that its presence as a seriously injurious attack should so rarely be
reported.

The infestation occurs on Gooseberry and Currant leafage, but the
caterpillars are especially fond of that of Sloe or Blackthorn; and in
1880, when the attack was widely distributed, I had notes from Spar-
ham, Norfolk; of the caterpillars being common there from the 6th to
the 18th of June, but not being injurious, the attack being almost
confined to Blackthorn. In the same year, Mr. H. A. Fitch mentioned
that at Maldon, Essex, the caterpillars were numerous on Blackthorn
at the end of May, and throughout June, and that by the middle of
July the moths were very abundant, but though the caterpillars were
still plentiful, not a single specimen was to be found on Gooseberry or
Currant. In my own observations I have no recollection during a course
of many years’ residence in W. Gloucestershire, and some time near
Isleworth, of seeing the caterpillar attack in the garden, and in both
localities there was a great deal of Sloe in the neighbourhood. In case
of the infestation being troublesome, the point of whether the Sloe
bushes were really the most favourite food would be worth investigation.
On these we might use whatever application we preferred without fear
of injuring the crop; and the notes sent in from time to time show
that thoroughly clearing out the infestation in one year, acts ex-
ceedingly in preventing its recurrence.

70 CURRANT.

Currant-shoot and Fruit Moth. Jncurvaria capitella, Fab.

INCURVARIA CAPITELLA.

Moth, magnified and nat. size from life; caterpillar, magnified, after Stainton.

In 1891, attention was drawn to the mischief caused by this infes-
tation to the young shoots of the Currant. In the past season the
careful observations of Dr. Chapman, of Hereford, have sltown that the
attack is also injurious to the Currant fruit, consequent on the Moth
(figured above) depositing her eggs in the Currants whilst still very
young. Therefore joining the observations of the two past seasons
together, we find that the chief points of the history of the attack may
be shortly given as follows.

The moth lays her eggs within the young fruit, and there the larve
or caterpillars feed awhile, their presence being indicated by a prema-
ture appearance of ripening. After a time they creep out of the fruit,
and each larva spins a cocoon on the twigs, in which it passes the
winter. In the following spring the caterpillar (as yet only partly
grown) comes out, and boring into the shoots of the Red Currant in
the way previously described (in 1891), destroys the shoot. It then
goes into the chrysalis state, from which, in Dr. Chapman’s obser-
vations, he found moths emerge in time to insert their eggs in the
young fruit at dates of from the 17th to the 20th of May.

From these characteristics the name of Currant-shoot and Fruit
Moth, might be proposed as being at least descriptive, until a more
convenient form may be thought of.

The first appearance in the year of this pest (and the only one in
which up to the past season we have known this Jncurvaria caterpillar
as the cause of mischief) is to the young buds, or rather shoots, early
in the season. It has been thus noted by various writers :—‘‘ The
larva is very injurious, eating the pith of the young shoots, and betrays
its presence by the withering of the young leaves; when quite young
it is dark red, but when full-fed it is greenish white.”’* Also, ‘‘ The

* Stainton’s ‘ Tineina,’ p. 42.

CURRANT-SHOOT AND FRUIT MOTH. {Al

larve (according to Stainton and A. Hartmann, of Munich) live early
in May in the young shoots and buds of the Ribes rubrum. These they
devour even to the pith of the twig.” *

In observations sent me in 1891 from the Toddington Fruit
Grounds, Winchcombe, Glos., by Mr. C. D. Wise, he mentioned that
‘about the 20th of April, we noticed numbers of the young shoots of
the Red Currant bushes had withered up and drooped. On examination
we found in each a small grub which had bored its way up the stem.”
Specimens of the moth reared from these caterpillars, from one of
which the illustration at p. 70 was figured, proved the attack to be of
Incurvaria capttella. Of this Mr. Wise further remarked, ‘‘ The moth
hatches the end of May and early in June.”’ +

In the present year, that is, 1892, Mr. Wise, writing to me again
on the same subject from Toddington, on the 9th of April (that is,
eleven days earlier than the date of the observations of the previous
year), remarked :—‘‘ We have to-day found Incurvaria capitella in the
shoots of our Red Currants. You will remember last year we did not
notice the attack till the 20th of this month. The shoots of the Cur-
rants are very small, and I must say I was surprised to find the little
caterpillar already there. I suppose the warm weather has hastened
the attack. I have started the men to-day syringing with Paris-green,
1 oz. to 10 gallons, and will let you know the result. The caterpillars
being so very far in the shoots of the bushes, the difficulty is to get
anything to them.”—(C. D. W.)

These various notes show the manner in which the attack of the
hybernated caterpillars (that is, of the partly grown caterpillars which
have passed the winter each in its cocoon on the bushes) is hurtful to
the young Currant shoots. And this, excepting the date of appearance
of the moths, and the fact of their presence being observable round
bushes, which they might be infesting, was, I believe, as far as we had
advanced until Dr. Chapman’s observations in the course of the past
season showed where to look for the eggs, and for the caterpillars
hatching from them, by which the infestation of the next generation
of this Incurvaria attack is commenced in the young Currant fruit.

With this guidance, Mr. Wise followed the matter up for practical
use at Toddington, and on the 8rd of June he wrote me :—‘‘ The moths
have been hatched with us some little time, and are now laying their
eggs on the fruit of the Currant. We have also found some of what
we believe to be the larve feeding on the Currants.”—(0. D. W.)

Dr. Chapman’s paper includes besides a very clear account of the
method of infestation to the Currant fruit, descriptions of the larva and

* « Pflanzenfeinde,’ of Kaltenbach, p. 260.
+ ‘Fifteenth Report on Injurious Insects,’ by Ed., pp. 44, 45.

72 CURRANT.

pupa, and also the reasons (based on some peculiarities of habits and
structure) for which he thinks it would be desirable to change the
generic name from Incurvaria, to Lampronia. As, however, this change
has only at present been suggested, not adopted, I have retained the
name of Jncurvaria, and refer the reader for full information to Dr.
Chapman’s paper entitled Lampronia capitella, at pp. 297—800, of the
No. of the ‘ Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine’ for Dec., 1892.

From this, by kind permission of the writer, and also of the Editors
of the Magazine, I give the following extracts from the excellently
clear account of the method of infestation of the young Currant fruit,
and a portion of the description of the larva and pupa. Dr. Chapman
commenced the record of his own observations as follows :—

‘Certain moths which I reared from the larve sent me, paired
readily in captivity, and supplying these with a spray of Red Currant,
with berries rather more than half-grown, I had the pleasure of seeing
the moth lay eggs in such Currants on several occasions. The moths
were then sleeved out on growing Currants, and here also they laid
eggs, though I did not see it done.” Here Dr. Chapman notes that
the apparatus of the moth for penetrating the Currant is a very strong
and powerful instrument, and then describes the operation of egg-
laying.

«The moth sits upon the Currant, and penetrates it in the lateral
region ; on one occasion the process occupied three or four minutes,
on another only about thirty seconds. ‘The dates were from 17th to
20th May. On examining one of these Currants, which was rather
more than half-grown, and with seeds still very soft, but about 1-75
mm. in diameter, two eggs of capitella were found lying free in the
ovarian cavity, in another the cavity contained two such pairs of
eggs.” . . . ‘I have little doubt, however, that two eggs are laid
at each penetration.” The eggs were nearly colourless, and somewhat
lemon-shaped, about 0°67 of a millimetre * in length, and 0°37 in
breadth.

Continuing Dr. Chapman’s account in abstract: no change was
noticeable in the Currants under observation until the last week in
June, when most of the Currants being still green, some among them
had the appearance of being nearly ripe, and these proved to be
infested by capitella. In some the caterpillar was still present, in
others it had escaped, and in two instances Dr. Chapman saw the
caterpillar in the act of escaping by boring through the juicy substance
of the Currant, and emerging a short way from the summit. ‘The
food of the larva whilst in the Currant is the interior of one seed.’’

“The buds and fruit spurs of the Currant have at their bases

* A millimetre is one 25th part of an inch.—Ep.

CURRANT-SHOOT AND FRUIT MOTH. 78

many dead scales that persist from earlier buds, and amongst these the
young larva buries and hides itself, spinning a small firm white
cocoon, in which to pass the winter.’’-—(T. A. C.)

Detailed description of the caterpillar and chrysalis are given in
Dr. Chapman’s paper, but for ordinary purposes the knowledge of this
being a minute reddish grub, much like other moth caterpillars in
shape, that is, furnished with head, claw-feet, and sucker-feet, to be
found in the shoots of the Currants in spring, and (noticeably) in the
prematurely ripening fruit in summer, appears sufficient. The portion
of life-history recorded by Dr. Chapman is so very valuable practically,
that I feel greatly obliged, and beg to express my thanks for being
allowed to extract so largely from his minute observations.*

The moths (as described in my own Fifteenth Report) are about
five-eighths of an inch across in spread of the fore wings; head with
a thick tuft of ochrey hair above. Fore wings dark brownish or
fuscous, sometimes with a purplish satiny gloss, a pale yellow band
across the wing at about one-third of its length from the root, and two
patches, also pale yellow, about half-way between the yellow band and
the tip of the wing; these two patches are respectively on the fore and
hinder edges of the wing, and the hinder patch is somewhat triangular
in shape. The hinder wings are pale grey.

PREVENTION AND RemeEpriEs.-—-One remedy is obviously to pick off
and destroy the infested shoots which have been bored by the little
caterpillars which came out from the little white cocoons in which they
passed the winter. Thus we get rid of a great quantity of infestation
which would very shortly have supplied anew brood of moths to infest
the Currant fruit with their eggs, and caterpillars hatched from them.
As Mr. Wise remarked, relatively to the infestation at Toddington in
1891 :—** The remedy we adopted for this pest was to pick off the
infested shoots and burn them, which of course means a lot of labour;
but what else were we to do?”

' Dr. Chapman’s observations of the young caterpillars which come
out from the fruit, hiding themselves amongst the dead scales to be found
at the bases of buds and fruit spurs, and there spinning a white firm
cocoor in which to pass the winter, opens out another method of pre-
vention. We could not very well do anything towards clearing out
individually cocoons spun for the accommodation of a caterpillar only
about one-twelfth of an inch long (‘‘ the young larva on retiring for
hybernation is only 2 mm. in length.”—T. A. C.); but looking over
the bushes, and if little white spots were seen, clearing out the old

* See “ Lampronia capitella,”’ by Dr. T. A. Chapman, ‘Ent. Monthly Mag.,’

No. 36, December, 1892. Price 6d. Gurney and Jackson, 1, Paternoster Row,
London.

74 HOP.

rubbish in which the cocoons are sheltered, would be to some degree
practicable. Or an application of strong soap and sulphur would do
good.

Whether anything could be done with regard to shaking off the
infested and prematurely ripening Currants does not yet appear. In
some other kinds of attacks in which, as in this instance, the infesting
maggot destroys the seed, the fruit consequently drops, and if this
should be the case also with our Incurvaria attack, we might get rid of
much of the pest by shaking the bushes, so that the fruit should drop
on to cloths, and, destroying this before the maggots had time to
escape, and re-establish themselves on the Currant bushes to form winter
quarters.

gh oe

Hop catkins, showing effect of infestation ; ‘‘ Strig Maggot,’ magnified, nat. length
given by line.

The Hop Strig was again troublesome in various places, and its
presence was reported in Kent, from the neighbourhood of Canterbury,
Maidstone, and Gravesend, and in Worcestershire, from near Tenbury.

The mischief is caused by the little white maggot tunnelling in the
central stem of the Hop-cone, so that this is destroyed for all useful
purposes. It may only wither and turn brown, or the damage may be
so great that the attacked part, and the little side stalks by which the
separate flowers forming the “ cone ”’ are attached, may decay, and on

‘¢ STRIG MAGGOT.” 75

splitting up the decayed mass the maggot tunnels and cells will be
easily seen.

The various observations of attack were sent in September; the
first (on the 5th of September) was sent from Upper Ensinge, Crilham,
near Canterbury, by Mr. Edw. Leney, who mentioned :—‘ I have for-
warded a quantity of small maggots which are found embedded in the
core of the Hop, and doing considerable damage; in fact, in a very few
days the Hops go quite brown, and become useless. I shall be much
obliged if you will let me know the cause of same, and if anything
another year can be done to prevent it; I think perhaps getting an
abundance of sap in the bine, to an extent increases it.”

A little later (on the 10th of September), Mr. Edward Goodwin,
writing from Canon Court, Wateringbury, near Maidstone, sent the
following observations, which will be seen to be of considerable
interest. Mr. Goodwin notices the great number of ‘‘ cones,’ which,
on careful examination, he found were infested; also the great number
of maggots (up to 40 or 50) which were to be found in a single head ;
and the fact of the maggots, at the time of observation, leaving
the cones to bury themselves in the ground, which is very important
relatively to preventive measures, is also noticed.

Mr. Goodwin, alluding to a previous letter on the ‘‘ Strig maggot,”
remarked :—‘‘ Since writing you, I have looked more closely for the
above, and regret to find that the attack is more general and severe
than I thought.

‘In two gardens I went into yesterday, I failed to find a single
cone not attacked, and some contained 40 or 50 maggots. They are
leaving the cones rapidly, and I found large numbers on the ground
about to bury and pupate. I have been keeping some branches of
Hops in my larval cages, and I find that the maggots bury themselves
in the earth within a very few minutes after they fall. I notice that
they can spring an inch or two, apparently by a sudden contraction of
the body.

‘“‘T intend to try one or more of the methods for killing the pupe
you suggested last year in the letter you wrote me then.” ... “I
believe that the damage done by this insect is enormous this year,
although not so apparent as sometimes on account of the comparatively
cool weather which has kept the Hops green, even where strigs were
eaten out. Two or three hot days’ sun would show the mischief.”

On the 19th Sept., Mr. Hartridge, writing from [field Place, Thong,
Gravesend, requested information as to what would be the best remedy
for destroying the maggots that were in the strigs of the Hops sent
accompanying, without injury to the plant, at what time of the year to
use it, and when was it likely the attack was commenced ?

Another application was also sent me by Mr. Wallace, from Kar-

76 HOP.

diston, Tenbury, Worcestershire, requesting information as to any
practicable way of extirpating this infestation ‘‘which during the last
two seasons had increased very rapidly.”’

The only methods of prevention of this attack would appear to be
(as previously suggested) destroying the pest in the ground. We know
that the maggots fall down from the Hop-cones, and they have been
seen to bury themselves, and we know nothing more about the infes-
tation until we find the Hop-cones being ruined by the Strig Maggot
in the following year. It is quite plain that this attack must necessarily
originate from the Strig Maggots, having in due course developed to
the little Gnat-Midges, minute Gnat-like flies, scientifically, Cecidomyie
very much in appearance like the well-known Wheat ‘‘ Gnat-Midge,”
which produces the ‘“‘Red Maggot” of the Wheat; and the only
available treatment appears to be so treating the Hop hills as to get
rid of the pests lying at the surface before they develop to flying state.

How best to do this is a matter for consideration of the Hop
growers. No one else can be certain to give right advice, consequent
on not knowing with certainty when, or how, in course of regular
cultivation, the requisite treatment can be given.

Any disturbance of the surface of the Hop hills which will throw
just the surface open to weather, or distribute just the uppermost film
with its maggot contents on the land round, would certainly do good.
Thus the minute maggots would be exposed to the alternate wet and
cold of winter, which is a known means of maggot destruction, although
maggots will stand severe cold in their own shelters.

P.S.—Whilst the above observations were going through press, I
gathered, from an incidental remark in a communication from Miss
Frances Pye, of Knights Place, Rochester, that some form of treatment
had been found to be of service in clearing Strig Maggot attack, and
on inquiry she wrote me as follows :—

‘“« My father thinks he got great good from letting the sheep be on
the ground where we were most troubled with Strig Maggot. He had
Wurtzel, Turnips, and Swedes carried out to them, and let them tread
the ground well.”

I have let the previous observations stand, as (if practicable)
exposing the grubs to weather influences would be likely to be of use.
But where sheep could be put on the land, so as to press the ground
firm over the grubs, and also poison the surface (to the grubs) with
their fluid as well as solid droppings, the effect might be expected to
be very serviceable.

77

MANGOLD.
The Pigmy Mangold Beetle.* Atomaria linearis, Stephens.

ATOMARIA LINEARIS.

Beetle, much magnified, after Taschenberg. Nat. length one twenty-fourth of
an inch.

For some years back enquiries have been sent me from time to
time, regarding the nature of an attack which was very injurious to
young Mangolds. The serious nature of the mischief was obvious,
from the condition of the plants received, and so far as appeared
from examination or description, sent accompanying, the damage was
caused by the roots being gnawed, or in some eases, the top of the
plant being eaten into at the ground level, the plants being thus
destroyed. But still, although I examined the specimens sent me
most carefully, I was not able to discover the cause of the mischief.

Now, however, we have gained a clue from receipt of identification
of a bad attack to young Mangolds at the Royal Agricultural College,
Cirencester, being caused by infestation of a kind of exceedingly
minute beetles, known scientifically as Atomaria, and this attack was
noted as agreeing exactly with that of the Atomaria linearis, well
known on the Continent for its ravages to Beet or Mangolds. From
this, and from the specimens of injured plants sent me (though
without the cause of evil accompanying), agreeing so nearly with
different forms of this infestation, it seems to me to be scarcely open
to doubt that the attacks to the young plants in all the instances
reported were of this Atomaria linearis.

_ This is an exceedingly small beetle, only about half a line, that is
(one twenty-fourth of an inch), in length, narrow and long in shape,
and somewhat flattened or depressed; slightly downy; in colour
varying from rusty red to black. Horns slender, terminated by a

* As this beetle does not appear to have as yet any English name, the above
appellation referring to its exceedingly minute size, and its crop food-plant, seems
to distinguish it fairly. In German it is described as the ‘‘ Runkel-ruben Kaferchen,”’
or ‘‘ The Beet (or Mangold) little beetle.’? But as this form is cumbrous, and also at
one time Pygmea was one of its scientific names, the prefix of ‘‘ Pigmy ” appears to
be allowable and appropriate.

78 MANGOLD,

three-jointed club, and chestnut coloured, as are also the six short
legs; wings ample.

This beetle is well known on the Continent as seriously injurious
to Beet or Mangolds, but I am not aware that it has been brought for-
ward as similarly hurtful here, although John Curtis in a short notice*
of this A. linearis, mentions that ‘it is abundant in England, and no
doubt affects the crops of Mangel-Wurzel in this country.”

The first Continental notice of it appears to have been by Mons.
Bazin, who observed this insect in 1839 at Mesnil, St. Firmin, but I
believe that the observations by Prof. Allen Harker in 1891 of an
Atomaria, as being seriously injurious to the Mangold crops at the
Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, are the first record of an insect
of this genus as a regular Mangold pest in England.

On the 27th of February in the present year, Prof. Harker wrote
me :—‘‘I think I mentioned to you that I found myriads of a small
Atomaria at our Mangolds last spring, when we lost about half the
crop.’ At the same time Prof. Harker forwarded me some extracts
from the publication mentioned below, of which he remarked :—‘ This
most accurately describes the appearance of our Mangolds, and I could
have collected hundreds of the Atomarias at each plant’’; and he also
remarked that he had not thought previously that they were such
serious pests.

The extract is as follows :—‘ Injurious insects: Beet is attacked
during its growth by the larva of the ‘ Cockchafer,’ called the ‘ White
grub,’ and by a very small insect of the order Coleoptera, observed for
the first time in 1839, by Armand Bazin. This insect, to which the
name of Atomaria linearis has been given, belongs to the family of the
Clavicornes ; it is narrow, and hardly a millimetre and a half long; its
colour variable, from rusty red to black-brown. ‘This little insect
appears in May and June. Then it attacks the young Beets, gnaws
their tap-root (le pivot de lewr racines), and eats their leaves. It is
during dry weather that the ravages are the most severe.” +

In most instances the plants sent me were, as far as I saw, dying
from injury to the root, but in the following note which accompanied
samples of injured plants sent me on the 26th of June, from Haughton
Hall, Shifnal, Shropshire, by Mr. J. T. Brooke, it will be seen that
another of the forms of mischief caused by the 4. linearis is described.

Mr. Brooke observed :—‘‘ My Mangold crop is being decimated by
some pest which nibbles round the neck of the plant just at the
ground level. Hitherto I have been unable to detect any creature at,
or near, them.” The soil was described as ‘light and dry,” and

* See ‘Farm Insects,’ pp. 395, 396.
+ From ‘Cours d’Agricultuie Pratique: Les Plantes Fourragéres,’ par Gustave
Henze. Paris: Hachette, 1861. Betterave, pp. 33, 34.

PIGMY MANGOLD BEETLE. 79

(after some observations as to methods of counteracting the ordinary
Mangold-leaf Maggot attack) Mr. Brooke added, ‘‘This new enemy,
however, leaves no hope, as each plant attacked is killed outright.”

On the 8th of June, specimens of two kinds of attack to young
Mangolds were sent me by Mr. W. A. Bewes, of the Tile House
Denham, Bucks, with the observation :—‘“ All the fields about here are
afflicted with what looks like adouble scourge. The leaf has a maggot,
which is preceded by a tiny white spot, which I suppose is an egg ;
and the root withers from the bottom, looking as if the bark were
eaten off.”

The plants injured by the maggot in the leaf were obviously
suffering from attack of larve of Anthomyia bete, what may be called
the regular Mangold maggot attack ; but there was nothing to show
what might be the cause of the root injury. It was clearly a separate
form of attack, but no insects were to be found attached. A further
supply of young Mangolds, all attacked at the root, was sent me at my
request, but still no insect cause accompanied. Mr. Bewes noted :—
«The disease was discovered by Mr. Wm. Davis, who is a tenant of
Mosses Farm, Chalfont St. Peter, and I have gathered these specimens
from him. He observes that the disease is the worst on the hottest
land, such as gravel.” —(W. A. B.)

Nothing further occurred until towards the end of the year, when,
on my request for any further information which might have come to
hand, Mr. Bewes was good enough to procure me the following obser-
vation from Mr. Richard Davis, son of Mr. W. Davis, of Mosses Farm,
which (excepting that the astonishing amount of these minute insects
was conjectured to be a visitation of ants) agrees well with description
of Atomaria attack. Mr. R. Davis reported as follows :—‘ With refer-
ence to the Mangold roots you inquired about, the damage was done to
the roots about an inch in the ground, the rind being taken off, and,
in most eases, the plants so eaten withered away.”

Here it was remarked that the damage was conjectured to have
been caused by young ants when in winged state; but, as is needless
to observe, without special knowledge of the habits of insects, and also
without a strong magnifying-glass, it is next to impossible for a flight
of insects only about a twenty-fourth part of an inch in length to be
accurately identified, more especially as the ‘“‘ Pigmy ”’ beetles are very
much ant-like in colour,—‘‘ rusty-red to black.”

Mr. Davis noted that “ the light gravelly or sandy part of the field
seemed to be smothered with these ‘insects’; it was on this sort of
soil that the greater part of the damage was done to the roots. There
were a lot of holes bored round the roots of those plants that did not
die, and later on the leaves seemed to be eaten so that they*turned
black, and withered away. After this more young leaves came, but

80 MANGOLD.

always small, a complete mass of them all over the crown of the Man-
gold, and (at the time of lifting) the top was short and bushy, and the
bulb very small. On the loamy part of the field little damage was
done, and the Mangolds were four times as large.

“The land was a Wheat stubble, ploughed in the autumn, the
manuring and other cultivations being done in the spring. There was
no second sowing. The sort was Golden Tankard.’—(R. D.)

The above clear description agrees well with the main points laid
down by technical observers of Atomaria attack. We have the bad
enawing at the roots of the young plants, also the lesser injury of holes
being bitten into them, and also the damage to the leaves.

The enormous amonnt of the crsatures to be found in the ground,
which is a point especially drawn attention to in M.Bazin’s account, is
also noted in the following further notes with which I was favoured
from Mr. James Girdwood, Estate Agent, after further inquiry :—

‘Karly in October I observed large patches on which the roots
were evidently dying off, and none of us could account for it, but
believe the cause has been revealed by Miss Ormerod’s letter, as I saw
Davis the other day, who informed me that he had observed the cause
in taking up the crop, when they found at the roots ‘ hundreds of
millions of ants which had gnawed the fibres of the roots’’’; and now
Mr. Girdwood notes that he believes, from the information in my letter,
that these supposed ants were really the Atomaria beetles. The result
of the attack was ‘‘ something like half a crop of seedy-looking roots.”
—(J. G.)

At present the only case in which we have secured identification of
the Atomaria beetle in connection with its attack, is that furnished by
Prof. Harker, of Cirencester ; but to show the similarity of our attacks
with the authorized descriptions, I append notes on these points; and
first as to the serious amount of destruction to the young crop, the
injury at the ground level, and also to the roots, thus well-described in
the account of this infestation given with great minuteness by Dr. J.
Ritzema Bos, Professor at the Royal Agricultural College, Wageningen,
Netherlands :-—

“Tt is often observable in the spring that the young plants of
Sugar Beet are very irregularly distributed on the land. On many
parts of the field absolutely none of the young plants are to be found ;
on other parts a couple of seed patches may be found still bearing
young Beet plants, but these already withering, and of a yellow
colour, it is impossible to take them from the ground without tearing
them to pieces. The lower part of the stalks are badly eaten below
the surface of the ground, and the damage extends even to the middle
of the underground parts of the stem. The root is often similarly
gnawed in places, and the wounded parts become black. If one of

PIGMY MANGOLD BEETLE. 81

these little Beet plants has the earth partly removed, and the roots
laid bare, then these minute beetles may be observed at their
destructive work. They perpetrate their devastation still under-
ground; often the stalks of the young plants, before these have as yet
reached the surface, are destroyed beneath the seed-beds, so that the
plants come to nothing.” *

Later on it appears that if the weather is favourable these minute
beetles come above ground, and extend their attacks to the leaves,
sometimes causing total destruction; but in case this attack has not
taken place until the plants are fairly advanced in growth they may
get over it.

The description quoted by John Curtis (see ‘ Farm Insects,’ p. 895)
gives in short compass a good description of the infestation :—‘* We
learn from M. Bazin that this minute beetle is generated in great
numbers, destroying the buds as they appear, and, on removing the
clods of earth, one often sees enormous quantities. It does not
content itself at a later period by attacking the root, but when it is
fine weather it comes out of the ground, ascends the stem, and devours
the leaves. These little creatures often appear in families on a plant
of which in a few hours nothing remains but a leafless stalk, which
presently withers and dies.” —(J. C.)

On warm evenings the beetles come out of the earth, and rising in
the air they pair. (See ‘ Praktische Insekten-Kunde,’ by Dr. E. L.
Taschenberg.)

The maggots are believed to feed at the roots like the beetles, but
excepting that they originate the coming more severe and general
attack they are not recorded as doing much harm.

The above descriptions of injuries agree so well with what had
happened to the samples that, joined to Prof. Harker’s observations of
the beetles in connection with their destructive work, it appears to me
that we have now found the cause of the severe injury to the young
Mangolds which has been reported of late years. The excessive
minuteness of the beetles, and likewise their subterranean habits,
have doubtless been the reason for their escaping field observation, and
consequently none of them reaching me, together with the plants
when drawn from the ground. But the above observations will be
enough for identification of the attack should it again occur, and if in
this case I could have some specimens of the little beetles forwarded
in a piece of quill, together with the samples of the injured young
Mangold, we should be able to trace out the matter fully, and guard
against recurrence.

* *Die Tierische schadlinge, und Nutzlinge, &c., Praktische hand-buch’ (p. 259),
yon Dr. J. Ritzema Bos. Berlin, 1891.

82 MANGOLD.

PREVENTION AND RemEpIES.—Liberal sowing, so that a portion of
the plants may escape anything but excessively severe infestation,
and thus enough to give a crop may survive, is one of the measures
recommended.

Liberal manuring is another. By this means the attacked plants
may be helped over the time of the duration of infestation, in case the
number of the ‘‘ Pigmy Beetles ’”’ is not overwhelming, and such of the
plants as may be slightly, or not at all attacked are pushed on toa
hearty growth. But looking at the circumstance of Atomaria beetles
being recorded as occurring in vegetable refuse, and “often harbouring |
in dry dung’’; this may throw light on the way in which, in some
instances, the ‘“‘ Pigmies” (to give them a more convenient name)
have come on the land, and also suggests that chemical manure might
be a serviceable application. We know how well nitrate of soda often
assists Mangolds through leaf maggot attack, and in case of the root
attack now under consideration, the fact of the solution running down
close to the little plants, and thus presenting the maggots with the
choice of starvation, or chemically impregnated food, and the little
beetles with what presumably would be distasteful to them, could
hardly fail to be helpful to us.

Rolling is said to be a good remedy, but looking at the beetles being
for the most part under-ground workers, and also at their exceedingly
minute size (hardly as long as the ordinary letters in these lines
without the tops), it would appear difficult to do anything in this way
towards keeping them from feeding or moving about, which would not
at the same time injure the plants.

Where Sugar-Beet is very largely grown, as at various localities on
the Continent, these small beetles are apt to be most seriously injurious,
and rotation of crop such as will clear the infestation out of the land,
is the best remedial measure. This, however, is not always easy to
carry out. Sugar-Beet growing is a great industry, and all the land
available is needed by the growers. On this account the plan has been
recommended of planting instead of sowing the Beet where attack is
prevalent.

The Beet seed is sown on a piece of ground which (compared to
the Beet fields) is of small size, so that the locality of this can be
changed year by year, and seed ground thus secured clean of infestation,
on which the plants can be started. ‘‘Then the Beet is planted out
in the fields, where Beet was grown even in the previous year. In
this way the plants are not exposed to the danger till they are in a
condition to resist it.”—(J. R. B.) In this country the attack is
not the scourge that it is on the Continent, for the reason that Beet
growing is not a special industry, but (as it is characteristic of the
workings of these little beetles that they attack the germinating

MANGOLD ‘‘LEAF-BLISTER’’ MAGGOT. 83

plants even before they are well through the ground) the above prin-
ciple might be usefully applied with us in ‘‘ patching.”

In the coming season it would be very desirable to have more observations,
to enable us to identify what attack, or attacks, are prevalent at young
Mangold roots. We know that Atomaria attack was found at Cirencester,
and attack resembling it elsewhere, but other infestations may be present.
If observers would kindly send specimens to myself, 1 would do my best to
investigate thoroughly.

Mangold “Leaf-blister” Maggot. dAnthomyia (Chortophila) beta,
Curtis.

ANTHOMYIA BETA.

Mangold Fly, and eggs (after Farsky), magnified, with lines showing nat. length,
and expanse of wing; chrysalis nat. size and magnified. (For explanation of blistered
leaf, see p. 84).

The attack of the Mangold-leaf Maggot was again prevalent to a
serious extent in various districts, ranging, for the most part, across
the more southerly and midland parts of England.

The most northerly localities reported from were in Yorkshire and
Lincolnshire ; some injury was reported from Glamorganshire, in
S. Wales, but otherwise the attacks noted were mostly at places, or
affecting districts, in Cornwall, Devon, and Hants; more inland, in
Warwickshire, Berks, Bucks, Herts, and Surrey ; in Bedfordshire and
in Essex, there was also presence of the infestation, and enquiry
regarding it was also sent from Norfolk. It may be presumed that the
infestation was present at many other localities besides those from
which enquiries were sent, but still these give some idea of its
prevalence.

The date of the first series of enquiries ranged from May 31st to
June 20th. From the specimens sent, and observations accompanying,

the attack appears to have begun in some cases as soon as the young
G2

84 MANGOLD.

Mangold leaves were large enough to accommodate a fair sized blister,
and during the period named, enquiries were sent on most days, and
sometimes several in the course of one day. From the 20th of June
onwards, there was little if any further enquiry about this infestation
until nearly the end of July, and again towards the end of August,
when some amount of further communication occurred regarding its
appearance in the large leafage of the plants, then well advanced in
growth.

Looking at the amount of attack running so far west as Devon, and
the neighbourhood of Truro, in Cornwall, it is of some interest to notice
its absence in Tresco, Isles of Scilly. Early in August, Mr. Winfield,
writing on the part of Mr. Smith, consulted me as to another kind of
injury then occurring to Mangolds, and I took the opportunity to make
special inquiry as to presence of the Leaf Maggot, the larva of the
Anthomyia bete.

On the 8rd of September, Mr. Winfield replied that he had noticed
the accounts in the papers, and was on the look-out for it, but he was
glad to say that it had not made its appearance there.

Although this Mangold-leaf Maggot occurs more or less every year,
and sometimes very badly, it is still so often not recognised, that I
have now added (page 83) a figure which shows the method of injury
to the leaf. Not being able at present to give a figure of the Mangold
leaf itself in its infested state, I have substituted one of a Celery leaf,
which, though injured by another kind of fly-maggot, yet gives an
excellent idea of the way in which the Mangold leaves are blistered, so
that the upper and under skin are separated in patches, and the films
to which they are reduced at times become so transparent that the
shape of the maggots feeding within can be seen. For the most part,
however, the patches merely show as white blisters a little raised in
places where the maggots are lying within, or (further on in the
attack) these destroyed parts turn brown or discoloured, as if bitten by
frost, to which not unfrequently the injury (till investigated), is
attributed.

The maggots of the Mangold Fly (which at life size are almost or
wholly indistinguishable from that figured in the leaf) are whitish or
greenish, fleshy, cylindrical, legless, truncate or blunt at the tail, and
pointed towards the head end, which contains two black hooks within
it, wherewith the maggot scrapes away the soft substance between the
two sides of the leaf on which it feeds. According to its age it may be
smaller, or a little larger than the larva of the Parsnip and Celery
Leaf-miner Fly figured.

The maggot usually quits the leaf-blister when full-fed, and turns
to a chestnut-brown chrysalis in the ground. Sometimes, however,
the change takes place in the leaf-blisters. It is of the shape figured,

MANGOLD ‘‘ LEAF-BLISTER’’ MAGGOT. 85

magnified, with the life size given beneath it, and also life size in the
leaf.

In summer the small two-winged ashy-grey Mangold Flies (figured,
magnified, at p. 83, showing the darker markings, and black bristly
hairs) come out in about a fortnight, so that there may be a succession
of broods throughout all the warm weather. The white, oval, or
somewhat spindle-shaped eggs of the fly are laid in patches beneath
the leaves.

Though this attack has often been entered on before, some few of
the notes sent in regarding it during the past season may be of interest
in showing the serious nature of the attack, and how much a better
knowledge of its characteristics is in some districts still needed, in
order that remedial measures might at once be brought to bear.

On the 6th of June, Mr. J. H. Hine, writing from Pamphlett Farm,
Plymstock, Devon, remarked :—‘‘ I am sending you a sample of my
young Mangold plants with a maggot in them doing serious damage,
destroying many plants altogether. Would you be kind enough to
send me a remedy (if any) at once.

‘“‘T find from most farmers in this neighbourhood that they are
suffering the same as myself.”’

On the following day (June 7th), Mr. R. Templeton, writing from
Blackweir Home Farm, Cardiff, S. Wales, observed :-—‘‘I find that
our Mangold is infested with the grub in the leaves, which is doing
very great damage to them; I am afraid they are going to destroy the
crops altogether. Ihave heard several farmers in this district com-
plaining about their crops, and saying they were like as if they were
frost-bitten ; but] expect that if they look carefully, they will find that
it is the grub that is doing all the mischief. I would feel very much
obliged if you could give any information how to destroy the pest.”’

On June 8th, Mr. W. Campin, writing from Lanes Farm, Woolley,
Reading, also noticed the attack, being at first mistaken for frost-bite.
He mentioned :—‘*‘ My Mangolds are eaten off by some grub. We at
first thought it was the effects of frost; on closer examination I find
a small grub inside the leaf, and have enclosed two leaves for your
inspection. Can you kindly inform me the cause of this destructive
pest?”

On the 9th of June, Mr. Thos. Olver, wrote to me from Truro,
Cornwall, as follows :—‘‘I happened to be on a farm near this place
to-day, when the occupier told me that he had a disease of some kind
among his Mangold plants, so I went with him into the field, and had
no difficulty in finding a large number of plants affected similar to the
enclosed.” . . . ‘If you would kindly give me some information
as to the cause and prevention, I should deem it a favour.”

Stull taking one of the reports received on successive days, the

86 MANGOLD.

following note of enquiry was sent me on the 10th of June, by Mr. W.
J. Harris, of Halwill Manor, Beaworthy, N. Devon :—‘‘ The Mangolds
here are coming up splendidly this season, but all the earliest plants
have been attacked by the Beet Fly, and we are wondering how it will
turn out. Some farmers fear that they will lose the crop. Can you
throw any more light on the subject ?”’

On the 11th and 16th of June, specimens and communications sent
by one of our leading firms of seed-growers, noted presence of this
attack in Essex and Bedfordshire; and on the 18th of June the
following remarks sent me by Mr. Geo. Drewitt, from Guildford,
showed the very early age at which the Mangold plants were liable to
be struck by the fly.

Mr. Drewitt observed :—‘‘I enclose the leaves of some Mangold
plants showing different stages of mischief caused by a maggot living
between the skins of the leaves; apparently the eggs are laid when the
plants are just putting out the second pair of leaves, and the evil shows
when the plants have a leaf about the size of this rough sketch” (here
a sketch was inserted of a young Mangold leaf, half an inch wide by
about an inch and a quarter long.—Ep.)

‘“‘ Hvidently the attack is not to be despised, for about 35 per cent.
of the plants have two or three leaves infested, and although they will
probably survive the present attack, I am anxious to know what will
occur a little later on.”

That the attack was not confined to the westerly or southerly dis-
tricts, is shown by the two following notes. The first sent by Mr. W.
Meesom, Doggetts, Rochford, Essex, on June 13th. In this, after
alluding to some other specimens sent, he added further :—‘‘I have
also enclosed some leaves from young Mangold plants taken from a
field I have at Battlesbridge, Essex. These you will find have a white
maggot, sometimes two, in between the tissues of the leaves. There
is a good plant of the Mangold, but from the leaves being so much
injured they do not make any progress, and the weight of roots per
acre will be much diminished.

“‘T have another field of Mangold which has lost plant, I think,
entirely from the attack of these maggots at an earlier stage, as the
leaves and plants withered quite away. Shall be glad to receive any
remarks or suggestions you may be so good as to send me with respect
to them.”

The following east country observation was sent me on the 14th of
June, from Hunton Hall, Norwich, by Mr. Chas. N. Douglas, in
which, after noting the method of injury of the Mangold maggots sent,
he remarked :—‘‘ This maggot is doing great havoc round about here.
Can you give me any information about it, and how to stop its

MANGOLD ‘‘LEAF-BLISTER’’ MAGGOT. 87

ravages? If it were on the leaf instead of inside, we might have a
better chance of getting rid of them.”

Still the attack, so far as letters sent to myself indicated, was worst
in the west, and amongst communications sent, one from Mr. Geo.
Ross Divett, sent from Bovey Tracey, Devon, on the 16th of June,
noted the infestation as having recently appeared in that neighbour-
hood, although it was not doing so much harm as in the parishes of
Manaton and North Bovey, which lie high, and in which presumably
the plants are small. ‘‘ With us on lower ground the mischief is not
so great. The maggot apparently eats its way out of the blister with-
out reaching the more vital parts of the stronger plant, which is not
seriously injured.” On the 20th of June, another letter from the
neighbourhood of Truro, mentioned the attack as being ‘“ very rife in
this neighbourhood this season,’’ and begged for information thereon.

The preceding notes are given just to show the serious amount of
damage occurring from the maggot, also how early in the growth of
the young plants (even when the ieaves are only about an inch long)
it is possible for the pest to strike them, and also how, from the
withering and destruction of the leafage, the early attacks are at times
attributed to effect of late frosts, and consequently no remedial
measures adopted. I have also (though I usually remove anything of
a personal nature from communications before publication) in these
instances left the requests for information appended, as these show the
general need (and also the desire) for more information regarding this
attack.

Also as there is nothing objectionable in slightly altering a popular
name in order to make it more clearly descriptive, I have added the
word ‘‘ blister ’’ (see heading at p. 83) to the name ‘‘ Leaf Maggot,”’ as
thus under the name of “‘ Leaf-blister’”’ Maggot attention will be drawn
to the characteristic of the maggots being found not simply within the
leaves, but within the blisters, or patches, which their destructive
operations give rise to. These may easily be distinguished by the
altered colour of the skin of the leaf. At first the patch is small and
hardly altered in colour, gradually it increases in size, and the dead
skin becomes whitish or variously discoloured, till in bad attacks the
destroyed portions of the leaves, whether the blistered parts, or the
parts destroyed by these injuries cutting off passage of the sap, become
dead and brown.

The maggots do not by any means always show through the blister-
skin to general inspection, but if the leaves are held up against the
light they will probably be very easily observed, or the gentle appli-
cation of a finger and thumb, so as to feel where the slight lump of the
maggot presence may occur, will soon show their whereabouts

From the 20th of June no further communications were sent as to

88 MANGOLD.

outbreaks of attack of the ‘ Leaf-blister” Maggot, until the 26th of
July, when enquiries were sent me by Mr. A. G. Lucas regarding
attack to a large acreage of Mangolds near Berkhamsted, within
the last few days preceding, and which was stated to have ‘ played
sad havoe with them,’ as indeed appeared from the state of the
specimens sent. The leaves were grown to a good size, but they
were much injured by the maggots, which were then leaving them in
numbers.

The latest date of attack of which information was sent, was Aug.
18th, when notes were forwarded me from Cadwell Highfield, Louth,
Lincolnshire, by Mr. G. A. Browne, of ‘‘a most serious outbreak of
the Mangold Fly and maggot,” and requesting early information as to
what could be done, as the crop looked as if it would be quite destroyed.
In this case the Mangold maggot was present, but the mischief was
increased by an accompanying visitation of Mangold Aphis, sometimes
known as Dolphin, Black Fly, or Plant Louse, which I found in great
numbers on the leaves sent me.

PREVENTION AND Remepres.—As in previous years, such small
amount of remedial treatment as was reported turned for its success on
pushing on the growth of attacked plants, so as to replace the destroyed
leafage as soon as possible. For this nitrate of soda appears to act
better than anything else, and in one case of early attack (in the
middle of June) the application of two dressings of nitrate of soda and
salt had a good effect. The plants were reported to be growing so well
that it did not appear to be necessary to put in more seed.

The natural remedy of the rain was also reported as being very
beneficial. From Romsey, Hants, on the 20th of June, it was noted:
—‘‘ Since the rain the Mangold plants first attacked by the maggot
are recovering nicely, and in our case I don’t think the injury done
will be so very serious after all.”

From Louth, Lincolnshire, also it was noted after the attack
reported on the 18th of Aug., that there had been very nice rain, and
the writer’s plants which had been dressed carefully with nitrate of
soda, and also had lime applied, were starting into vigorous growth.
In this case, as mentioned above, the attack was two-fold, both of the
blister maggot and of Mangold Plant Lice, and the lime was not used
as a stimulant, but to get rid of the Plant Lice.

No new information has been sent in this season as to remedial
measures, only confirmation of the use of all treatment, whether of
previous good cultivation and manuring; special dressings when the
attack is prevalent, in case there is sufficient rain to dissolve the
applications, and also the great serviceableness of rainy weather in
checking the infestation. Though we cannot command this remedy,

MANGOLD ‘‘ LEAF-BLISTER’’ MAGGOT. 89

yet the knowledge that it lessens the absolute amount of Mangold Fly
infestation, and very greatly helps the plants to bear up under it, might
sometimes save unnecessary ploughing up of a crop just on the verge
of recovery.

The points of treatment have already been so frequently noted in
detail, that I only add the following extract from my own leaflet on
this attack giving the principles of prevention and remedy.

The only direct measures of remedy which appear to have been
noted are,—Istly, the use of such fertilisers to the attacked crops as
may push on vigorous growth, and so carry the plant through the time
of injury; and 2ndly, endeavouring to get rid of the maggots by
pinching them in the blisters; nipping out the infested bit of leaf; or
by drawing the infested plants when the maggot attack comes so early
that the crop will bear thinning. This last plan answers if the workers
are well overlooked to make sure of the infested plants being drawn
and destroyed, before the maggots can get away from the leaves to go
through their changes in the ground.

Any fertilising application will do good, which will act at once in
furnishing nourishment to the plant, and thus keep it continually
replacing by new growth the leafage which is destroyed by the maggots ;
nitrate of soda appears to do best, but, as the action of all these
fertilisers depends on having rain at the time to wash them down to
the roots, it is better to have previous good treatment of the land to
trust to.

For this (where it can be done) autumn cultivation has been found
to answer, and ‘the use of a mixture of farm manure, applied in the
autumn as soon after harvest as possible, and a fair dressing of super-
phosphate, &c., put on with the seed,” has been found to do well.

Dustings of various kinds have been tried, but, as these do not
reach the under side of the leaves where the eggs are laid, nor the
inside where the maggots feed, it seems likely that they only act by
fertilising the land, or (as with paraffin in ashes) by causing a smell
different to that which attracts attack.—(See ‘Leaflet on Mangold
Maggot,’ pp. 2 and 8, by Ep. Printed for gratuitous distribution).

Norr.—As it may be of some interest to refer to what must be
amongst the first regular agricultural notices of Mangolds as a newly
introduced crop in this country, and the attention this excited, I add
a few extracts on the subject in the Appendix, taken from numbers of
the ‘ Farmer’s Journal and Agricultural Advertiser’ for May 8th, 1815,
and April 8th, 1816.--Eb.

90

MUSTARD.
Mustard Beetle. Phedon betule, Linn.

PHAEDON BETULE.

Mustard Beetle, nat. size and magnified; maggot, magnified, and nat. size on leaf.

Mustard Beetle attack is one of the regular yearly crop troubles.
The first time in which it was brought forward for thorough investi-
gation was, I believe, when (in the year 1886) circulars were issued by
the Council of the Royal Agricultural Society to Mustard growers,
requesting information as to the history and habits of the beetle
(scientifically known as the Phadon betula, more popularly as Black
Jack), and also what measures for prevention of attack, and for remedy
of it when present, were reasonably practicable at a paying rate.

As Consulting Entomologist of the R. A. 8. H., the work was
placed in my hands; I went down into Cambridgeshire, to the neigh-
bourhood of Wisbech, and with the able assistance of the late Prof.
Herbert Little, of Coldham Hall, and that of Mr. Wm. Little, of Stags
Holt, March, had the opportunity of examining the Mustard crops in
the fields, and also I undertook the necessary correspondence with the
contributors of information, and the subsequent arrangement of the
main points of this information, for a special report published in the
Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society in 1887.

The contributions of information were given (as far as could be) at
length in my own Annual Report on Injurious Insects for 1886, pp.
58—76, with names of contributors appended to their observations.

The investigations showed that all or almost all available means of
lessening amount of injury from this infestation were based either on
the careful measures of preparation, or treatment of land, or (generally)
of cultivation ; or in some degree on prevention by forestalling attack.
But of available remedial measures at that date, there appeared to be
next to none. Such dustings, or washings, as were then tried did
little or no good, and there were then no implements reasonably ser-
viceable for distributing them. Now these points have been altered.

MUSTARD BEETLE. 91

Many kinds of dressings, or washes, have been brought forward, some
of which we know are beneficial in getting rid of similar attack in
similar circumstances, and also much greater variety of implements
for distribution of the sprays, or washes, are now available.

Under these circumstances much increased attention has been
given to possibility of checking attack, whether of the grubs or beetles
when present, and it is proposed in various localities to experiment,
both as to effects of applications which there is reason to suppose may
be of use, and also with regard to possibility of giving access amongst
the crop to the requisite implements, or to bearers of implements for
their distribution.

Much inquiry has been sent to myself as to what could be done for
destruction of the infestation, and (as desired) I have endeavoured in
the following pages to give the main points up to date of what is known
as to the history of the insects, and available methods of prevention (to
some degree), if not of remedy of its ravages. Also the measures
which, from result of parallel experiment, that is, on the same nature
of insects and of crops, appear likely to be of service.

There are several kinds of beetles which infest the Mustard crop,
but the one especially known as ‘‘ The Mustard Beetle,” is of a deep
full blue or greenish colour above (so shiny as to be almost of a glassy
lustre), and black beneath. The legs and horns are also black. It is
oblong oval in shape, about the sixth of an inch long, slightly punctured
on the back, and has two wings.

The grubs, which are of the shape figured at p. 90, are about a
quarter of an inch in length when full-grown, slightly hairy, of a
smoky colour, spotted with black, with black head, and stout black
conical horns, lighter at the base. They have three pairs of claw-feet.
and a sucker-foot at the end of the tail, andalong the sides of the body
are a row of tubercles, from which the grubs have the power of pro-
truding a yellow gland.*

The method of life is for the beetles to winter in any convenient
shelter, in the most various kinds of localities. It may be in the ends
of Mustard stocks, or in the roots of old Mustard plants left on the
land, or in rough shelters made of Mustard straw. In ditch or hedge-
banks, in the earth or in the rough grass, or at the bottom of hedge-
rows. Also they are to be found in crannies of walls, gateposts, old

* A good description of these grubs will be found in Curtis’ ‘ Farm Insects,’ p.
72, with the observation that he considered it far from improbable that they were
the larve of the Phedon betule, but (as the point did not appear to haye been
further gone into) in the course of my own observations I reared some of the grubs
up to beetle state, and found that these larve (precisely corresponding with Curtis’
description) turned, as he surmised, in due season to the Phedon betule, or
Mustard Beetle.

92 MUSTARD.

wood or bark, and are especially noted as fond of sheltering amongst
the reeds and rushes, by ditches and drains, in fact, in any available
shelter.

And to places of winter shelter from which the beetles are brought
into connection with the comiug crop in the spring must be added,
what amount of Mustard Beetles may be in the Mustard seed; a
matter to which attention has been more directed within the last few
years than was formerly considered necessary.

From these winter quarters the beetles come out in spring and
spread to any food-plant near, especially those (like Mustard) of the
cruciferous flowered kind, as the Water Cress, the Common Bitter
Cress, Charlock, Turnip, Cabbage, &c., and though of a different order,
the Brook Lime, is also one of their food-plants.

These various plants serve the beetles for a place for their egg-
laying until the Mustard is ready, consequently to clear what may be
called the nurseries of the year’s attack, as well as to prevent, so far as
may be reasonably possible winter shelters being left for the parent
beetles, are respectively methods of lessening coming attack.

On these food-plants, wild or cultivated, the beetles which have
lived through the winter lay their small eggs, and then they die. The
erubs feed voraciously, until they are full-grown, when they go down
into the ground to turn to chrysalids. From these the summer brood
of beetles come out, it may be in about a fortnight, more or less, and
these start new attack, and thus the infestation goes on. It may con-
tinue till quite late in the autumn, as noted in the following observation
sent me on Oct. 5th, from Preston, Hull, by Mr. H. L. Leonard, with
specimens of the Phedon betule accompanying :—

“IT stated in my letter that a very heavy rain had apparently
destroyed the Mustard Beetle, as none could be found a fortnight after
it. Iam sorry to say they have reappeared on some of the farms in
large numbers during the past ten days. I enclose specimens.” —(H.
Tiers)

Where this appearance of successive generations of the insects
thus alternating in grub and beetle state, is not well known, it is very
important practically that it should be thoroughly understood. It is
often thought that when the grubs disappear the danger is past, but
this is not at all the case. The disappearance of the grubs is (in
natural course) only the forerunner of their reappearance in beetle ~
form to over-run the plants once more, or migrate in legions (if they
do not find sufficient food) to other pasturage.

PREVENTION AND RemEpIEs.—When the beetles are on the young
plants, rolling has been tried, but even rolling with the ‘‘ Crosskill,”
so far as reported, has been of little use. Hoeing has been considered

MUSTARD BEETLE, 93

(in some slight amount of notice) possibly to have done good when the
grubs had lately gone down to turn to chrysalids. It was thought that
_ turning these out, or throwing them open to the birds in this condition
had helped to prevent as much of the next brood of beetles coming out,
as would otherwise have been the case. Besides this, which is hardly
worth notice, the sole remedy which was reported in 1886 (and even
this has been exceedingly little noted in this country) is the expensive
and troublesome method of collecting the beetles into bottles or mugs.

In 1886, Mr. W. M. Meesom, writing from Battlesbridge, Essex,
reported :—‘‘I have been on the look-out for the beetle for three
weeks past, and on Wednesday last, two or three made their appear-
ance. I have now two men doing nothing else but collecting the
beetles, which we put into bottles, and scald every night. They collect
on an average between 300 and 500 each per day, and, I believe, we
shall be able to save the crop. My Mustard is now from 38 to 4 feet
high.” —(W. M. M.)

The great difficulty in carrying out this plan, or rather the broad-
scale adaptations of it which suggest themselves, is the difficulty of
workers moving through the Mustard without really doing more harm
(by their crushing and breaking down the crop) than the infestation
itself. If the crop was so sown that there was passage amongst it, the
beetles might be shaken down in the morning or evening, or when
weather influences made them torpid, into bags, or pails, or baskets,
held below.

In the case of the small Raspberry Beetle, the Byturus tomentosus,
so destructive and difficult to get rid of in Raspberry plantations, Mr.
C. D. Wise, the Superintendent of the Fruit Grounds at Toddington,
Gloucestershire, wrote me in June of last year (1891) :—‘* We have
been shaking the bushes over bags soaked in paraffin with excellent
effect.”

If in Mustard growing we could get at the plants, so that the
beetles could be knocked down on anything held beneath, where they
would be killed, and thus cleared in a sort of wholesale method of
operation, this would get rid of so much, both of present and coming
mischief, that the outlay would probably be well returned.

The only other method of destruction that I know of for the pest in
beetle state, is by burning damp straw before the advancing hordes
when, as is sometimes the case, they are migrating in great numbers
from a ravaged field to fresh ground. By arranging a cart-load or two
of damped straw across the line of march and firing it, the advance may
sometimes be stopped, but not always, for they are known sometimes
to escape mischief to themselves by going down into the earth.

At p. 95, a few lines will be found of a method of ‘ trapping” the

94 MUSTARD.

beetles by placing Mustard straw round the field where harvesting is
going on, and so being able to collect and destroy large numbers.

Amongst preventive measures, removal of all kinds of shelters is sure
to be of use, and so far as getting rid of old Mustard rubbish, such as
roots, old stocks, or old straw, or not allowing this to be used for rough
sheltering of various kinds, this might be fairly easily done. And
giving such attention to rough growths at the bottom of hedges, or the
reeds and rushes by ditches, and other localities, as could be managed,
would be of use. But examination of seed for what amount of beetles
might be in it, would be a very simple measure.

In the replies to inquiries sent in 1886, it was mentioned that the
beetles were frequently to be found in the Mustard seed when freshly
threshed, and also that the beetles had been found alive in sacks of the
seed for two years after it had been threshed.

Tn last autumn, notes were sent me of appearance of the beetle to
a serious extent on two farms having followed purchase of seed from
elsewhere, and the infestation was believed to have been thus imported.
At any rate this may so easily occur that it is a point which it would
be well to look to. Writing regarding this during December to Mr.
H. L. Leonard, of Preston, Hull, he replied on the 14th :—‘ There
would not be the slightest difficulty in screening the beetles out of the
seed after threshing ; by altering the riddle in the winnowing machine
(through which all seed passes, or should pass, before delivery) it
would be done. Should a stray beetle or two get back to the screened
heap, they could easily be killed by a lad standing by.”

In 1886, Mr. Ernest Smith, of Southminster, Maldon, Essex,
noted :—‘‘ I should think careful sifting in a close sieve would prevent
their being sown with the seed, or I should think that the ordinary
solution of vitriol which is used for dressing seed Wheat would kill
them.” This operation might be expected to do all that was needed,
if due attention was given to not using the chemical in amount that
would hurt the seed, and also to taking care that the beetles did not
escape.

In ordinary course (unless torpid) they might be expected to expand
their wings and fly away as soon as they felt the effect of the chemical,
therefore the seed would probably need to be secured so that this could
not happen. But where there were only a few beetles in the seed,
these might be hand-picked without any great trouble.

Transportation of the beetles with seed in sacks is a really impor-
tant matter, and where they are known to be present, baking the
emptied sacks to destroy any lurking infestation as well as all other
requisite treatment, is highly desirable.

With regard to inquiry sent as to danger from eggs being mixed with the
seed? This would not be likely to do harm. The natural place for

MUSTARD BEETLE. 95

ege deposit is on the food-plant, where the grubs soon hatch and find
their food ready, and it has been observed that even where the eggs
are laid on the leafage in due course, that if the infested crop is
ploughed up, the eggs perish on the withered plants. Consequently it
would not be at all likely that, in case of unhatched eges remaining
in the seed and being sown, these would produce grubs which could
make their way to the leafage of the Mustard plants presently coming
up from the seed.

All measures of cultivation, such as treatment of the soil before-
hand, date of sowing, and plentiful and rich manuring, suited to push
on a growth which would not go down on moderate attack, were, as
matter of course, found serviceable. Details of these in different dis-
tricts were given.

Application of dressings to destroy the beetle were reported as, for
the most part, very useless. These included trials of quick-lime, dry
lime, soot, salt, and sulphur, and amongst fluid applications trials of
‘rock oil” (petroleum), ‘‘ Jey’s fluid,” and ‘‘ Condy’s fluid.”” Carbolic
acid at a strength that killed the Mustard plants, only killed about 10
per cent. of the beetles !

In a case where gas-lime was mixed with fine dry ashes to make it
powdery, and scattered over the leafage early in the morning (so that
it might adhere), it appeared that some amount of good was done, and
passing on to notes or suggestions recently received, there appears to
be hope that there might be benefit from dry dustings with lime as a
main ingredient.

On Dec. 14th, Messrs. Gilbert & Son, writing from Billinghay,
Lincoln, in reply to some of my inquiries, mentioned that various
kinds of applications had not proved of service, but added, ‘‘The only
thing we think likely to be useful was a mixture of quick-lime and
other ingredients, and this we intend carefully experimenting with
next season.”

On Dec. 21st, Mr. H. L. Leonard, writing from Preston, Hull,
remarked :—‘‘ In a letter received this morning in reference to the
Mustard Beetle, the writer states, ‘So far as experiments have gone,
there has been no marked success with the preventitives. The very
strong liquid acids, or poisons, seemed to retard the growth of the
plant, even if it did not end it. The most efficacious result was from
several dressings of a mixture of quick-lime and sulphur, in the pro-
portion of 2 bushels of quicklime, and 10 lbs. of sulphur per acre, well
mixed together, and put on while the dew is on the plant.’ The same
correspondent also advises the farmers to place Mustard straw all
round the field when cutting for the beetles to run into, which must
then be burnt.”’

The above remarks as to damage done by strong acids, &c., confirm

96 MUSTARD.

previous observations, but the ingredients, and proportions, and
method of use of the lime and sulphur mixture, joined to a previous
note of gas-lime having been considered serviceable, suggest that the
well known mixture of the late Mr. Fisher Hobbs, which he found (and
which since his time has been found) so serviceable an application for
getting rid of Turnip Flea Beetle, might be found of similar use here.

This consists of quick-lime one bushel, gas-lime, in caustic state,
one bushel, soot ten pounds, sulphur six pounds, all mixed well
together, pounded very-fine, and distributed by hand, or machine, on
the infested plants in the morning or evening when the dew is on, or
when weather is damp, so that the powder may adhere.

The above amount is enough to dress an acre of quite young Tur-
nips, and as Turnip Flea Beetle, as well as some other kinds of small
beetles falling under somewhat the same class of remedies, are amongst
Mustard infestation, the application might prove very well worth
trying.

Amongst fluid applications to be distributed by sprayers, a mixture
of soft-soap and sulphur has been tried in the past season on Kale
grown for seed with little if any injury at all to the plants. See paper
headed Cabbage, pp. 20—28, of this Report. The mixture in this ease
was used against Aphides, but it may not unlikely be useful, both as a
deterrent of attack, and as very bad for the young grubs, as neither
soft-soap nor sulphur are suitable for their food.*

The details regarding composition, application, &c., will be found
as referred to above, with address of manufacturers of the compound,
and also observations as to possibility of getting it made up with an
addition of Paris-green, which would be well worth trying.

There are objections to the use of Paris-green in powder form, but
in the excessively minute amount in which it not only acts sufficiently,
but which also must not be eaceeded without destruction to the plants,
the Paris-green can be safely used in fluid form. This may be in
suspension in water, or given in dilute mixture with soft-soap.

The proportions requisite would have to be tried. On leafage of
orchard trees we have found a proportion of not more than about two
to four ounces of the arsenite in forty gallons of water was what might
be recommended. But where the powder is applied in water, it should
always be remembered that it must be kept thoroughly mixed. It does
not dissolve, it is held in suspension. Therefore (where it is allowed)
it settles to the bottom of the spraying machine, and the fluid at the

* A mixture of which soft-soap is a main ingredient, and which, so far as I am
aware, somewhat resembles the mineral oil emulsions so much used in the United
States, is sold by Messrs. Morris & Little, of Doncaster, under the trade name of
‘“‘ Anti-pest.’”? I know it to have been very serviceable against some attacks, and
think it might very likely be worth trial.—Eb.

MUSTARD BEETLE. 97

top is weak and does no good, and that at the bottom is too strong and
burns the leaves.

In application of Paris-green sprayings, it must always be borne in
mind that, whatever kind of engine or spraying machine is used, the mixture
must be kept an even strength throughout, and no sediment allowed to form
at the bottom, or damage to leafage is sure to happen.

Unless (as ought to be the case) the sprayers have an automatic
arrangement for the purpose of keeping the fluid in motion, the Paris-
green should be kept well stirred; and even then in the case of (say)
a barrel, this should be well. washed out after it has been filled ten or
twelve times.

The “ Knapsack”’ sprayer * is a very convenient form, as it can be
easily carried by a man amongst the crops (where there is room for a
man to pass), and at the pleasure of the bearer he can direct the spray
where needed. But even with this form it is desirable between each
filling to well stir round at the bottom of the can, so as to disturb the
sediment.

The spray should be thrown so finely as to reach all parts of the plants
and both sides of the leaves, and coat the leaves as with a fine dew,
but it should not be allowed to run down and drip. As soon as dripping
begins spraying should cease.

Tt should on no account whatever be thrown so as to ‘ swill” or
‘‘souse’”’ the plants, and run off the leaves in drops or streams ; this
is bad practice in every way. It uses a great deal more of the chemical
than is needed; the leaves get little but pure water at their highest
part, and much too strong application where the fluid has settled at
the tips; and also a drip is caused on to the ground beneath, which
in spraying in orchards over grass, may possibly, if the arsenite has
been used in great excess, render it temporarily poisonous. t+

* The English agents for this sprayer are Messrs. Charles Clark & Co., Windsor
Chambers, Gt. Saint Helen’s, London, E.C., price 35/-, or possibly somewhat less.

+ Full directions, both as to method of application, and precautions in use of
Paris-green, are given in a short pamphlet arranged by myself, which I shall be
happy to forward gratuitously to any applicant. But although with the most
moderate care it may be used with perfect safety, yet as it is poisonous some
caution is requisite. I give appended the observations on this head from my
pamphlet :—

“ Paris-green”’ is an aceto-arsenite of copper, and of a poisonous nature, and there-
fore should be used with care in mixing, and should never be applied to frwit or to
vegetables that are used for food. But, as is shown above, the quantity to which, in
order to be beneficial, it is requisite to limit application in spraying is excessively small,
and our English experiences of the past season, as well as those on the Continent of
America where Paris-green has been used regularly in farm and orchard prevention
for many years, show that with proper care it may be used with perfect safety.

The cautions to be observed in the use of Paris-green are :—The bags should be

H

98 MUSTARD,

It saves a great deal of trouble in mixing, and also risk of careless
workers breathing in the powder, to use it in the damped form, which
can be procured as well as the dry powder from Messrs. Blundell,
Spence & Co., of Hull, and 9, Upper Thames Street, London.

The Paris-green spraying should of course never be used on plants
when in flower, or it would injure the blossom; but with regard to
any probable injury to animals, though we certainly always most
scrupulously advise none should have access where there is a chance
of Paris-green having fallen, still it is to be observed that where
this has occurred, we cannot find that, in the small quantity in
which only it can be serviceably used to the plants, any evil
consequences at all happen to animals pasturing, or feedine where
drip might fall.

One observer fed his mares and foals beneath the Paris-greened
trees with no ill effects ; another allowed his fowls free run under trees
repeatedly sprayed; and in a very specially watched experiment,
reported to our Hvesham Fruit Growers Committee (during our first
trials of effects of Paris-green), regarding the condition of arabbit kept
so as to have full injury (if any was caused) by ‘‘ green” falling from
the sprayed trees, it appeared on enquiry that the animal continued in
excellent health, and, as it was further remarked, brought up a large
family with great success !

The circumstance of Paris-green having now been regularly used
over an enormous area of country in North America, as the effectual
means of keeping down the Potato scourge, commonly known as the
Colorado Beetle, is a strong reason for hoping that we might find it
very serviceable for use against Mustard Beetle. The two kinds are
very nearly allied, and both feed on the plants in grub as well as
beetle state, and are consequently both open to similar remedial
measures.

labelled Porson and kept locked up, and especially kept safely out of the way of
children, who might be attracted by the beautiful green colour of the powder.

Workers with the powder should not allow it to settle in any sore or crack in the
skin of the hands, nor stir it about unnecessarily with the hands; and they should
be very careful not to breathe in the powder through mouth or nose whilst measuring
or mixing it.

For this reason it is most desirable that purchasers of Paris-green should have
it sent not in bulk, to be divided for use on receipt, but wrapped in single pound (or
small) packages by the senders, or, what is better still, have it in form mentioned
above as ‘‘ Paris-green paste,” that is, the powder just damped so that it cannot
fly about. If swallowed in any quantity by being drawn in with the breath it would
certainly be harmful. An instance is on record in which a man employed to weigh
out and wrap 5 ewt. in 1 lb. papers lost his life therefrom. But with the most
ordinary care the application may be mixed and used, as well as hellebore and other
poisons often applied in orchard and other farming work, with perfect safety.

MUSTARD BEETLE. 99

Some consideration is, I understand, to be given to trial with the
Potato-spraying mixture known as Bouillie Bordelaise, but I should
myself be afraid that it might so injure the outside of the Mus-
tard leaves (by slightly hardening the skin) as to be prejudicial to
growth.

The above notes are merely an endeavour to bring forward some of
the points useful for consideration in dealing with Mustard Beetles,
whether the Phedon, or other kinds which infest the plants ; and in any
of the details which I happen to have knowledge of myself, it would
only be a pleasure to me to give any information in my power.
Amongst these are observations kindly made for me by Dr. J. A.
Voelcker, Consulting Chemist of our Royal Agricultural Society,
regarding mixture of Paris-green with soft-soap ; and also observations
given me by Prof. F. Shutt, Chemist to the Dominion Experimental
Farms of Canada, relatively to mixture of Paris-green with various
kinds of soap, and also the extremely important observation relatively
to non-absorption of Paris-green, that in a large quantity of sprayed
Apples, subjected to analysis which would show the presence of even
as small an amount as one jifty-thousandth part of a grain of arsenic, it
was proved that they were free.

The main matter, however, in the preventive work appears to me
to be how to grow the Mustard crop so that preventive measures may be
brought to bear on it when it is past its first young condition. If we
could but do this, I believe the clearance of the infestation would be
easily practicable.

100

ONION.

Onion Fly. Anthomyia ceparum, Bouché = Phorbia cepetorum, Meade.
Shallot Fly. <Anthomyia platura, Meigen.

ANTHOMYIA CEPARUM.

Onion Fly, maggot and pupa, magnified ; lines showing nat. size; pupa in stored
Onion. :

On the 20th of June the following communication as to Onion
maggot attack was sent me from Acle Villa, Cheltenham, by Mr. James
Ricketts, with specimens of the infestation accompanying :—‘‘ The
Onion crop in this neighbourhood is being devastated by a pest which
appeared two or three years ago, and seems to be getting worse every
year. One or more grubs enter and destroy the bulbs of the plants
affected. The leaves droop, and the Onion shortly dies. In some
places not more than one in a hundred of the plants survive, and so
serious has the plague become, that many market gardeners have given
up their culture.

‘‘T have tried salt, lime, and soot as a top dressing, but without
success ; in fact I am inclined to think the application of the latter en-
courages the development of the grub.” . . . ‘Iam sending you
herewith a few samples of the affected bulbs with the grub, in situ.”—
(J. B.)

. (Soot is one of the applications which has been reported as some-
times of use in checking attack ; still in my own experiments I found
that where I had only a few minutes before dusted soot on the Onion
bed, this did not appear to deter the Onion Fly from settling, even on
the soot itself.—Eb.)

On June 27th, the following letter was sent me by Mr. Wm.
George (Hon. Sec. of the Greasley, Selston, and Eastwood Hort. Soc.),
from Moorgreen, Nottingham :—“ Several of the members of the Com-

ONION FLY; SHALLOT FLY. 101

mittee of our Society are suffering much loss in beds of young Onions.
They first appear to be attacked by being blown in the points of the
plant, from four to five eggs being observable, and soon a maggot
begins to form, and grows to about half an inch in length; these soon
attack the plant, and eat various holes in the bulb, which eventually
destroy the plant.” Enquiry accompanied as to the nature of the
attack, and what could be done in the way of prevention of the
ravage.

The above notes are merely given as observations showing the
inconvenience and loss which still arise year by year, and in many
places from want of information being made known generally, as to
simple and practicable preventive treatment, and as the crop is one of
ereat importance to all classes of growers it may be of some use to

enter further on the subject.
There are various kinds of Onion Flies, of which the two species

which we know best here are very like in appearance, but differ (or
occasionally as circumstances require may differ) in their locality for
egg-laying, which makes a difference as to method of prevention of
attack.

The two kinds are the Onion Fly, the Anthomyia ceparum of Curtis
(which is the same as the Phorbia cepetorum, of Meade), and another
kind known as the Shallot Fly, which scientifically is the Anthomyia
platura of Meigen.

As the attack of Onion maggot becomes constantly of more import-
ance with the increase of farm-garden growing, and the infestation has
been described now by many writers for many years, these descriptions
being largely based on the original observations of John Curtis, I give
the main points of these below (than which nothing can be better as
far as they go), and which thus may be properly acknowledged to their
original observer.

Writing of the A. ceparum, John Curtis remarks :—‘‘ Of this insect
there are many generations during the summer, keeping up a constant
succession of the maggots, which are yellowish white, with a pointed
head and blunt tail (see figure at p. 100), and by eating into the bulb
it decays, and the slimy matter that is secreted by these creatures
causes the Onion to become eventually putrid and most offensive.”’

“The eggs are stated to be deposited upon the leaves of the
Onions, close to the surface of the earth, and as soon as the little mag-
gots emerge from their shells they penetrate the outer leaf, and make
their way between the leaves down to the base of the bulb, where
they sometimes congregate in families, varying greatly in size and
number.”’ ;

(The above noted method of injury is the point in which the 4.
ceparum appears to me to differ from the A. platura, the so-called

102 ONION.

Shallot Fly. Where I have had the opportunity of watching method
of attack of which the flies (the A. platura) proved to be of this species,
I have found the injury was begun for the most part at the base of the
bulb, or at the lowest part of the side.—Ep.)

Continuing the observations of John Curtis with regard to time of
duration of attack during the year, and also of duration of the condition
of the insect in its successive stages, he remarks as follows :-—‘‘ These
maggots have been observed as early as May, and I have found them
alive even in December, but June and July are the months in which
they are in full force. In about fourteen days they attain their full
size, when they generally leave the Onion, and descend into the earth,
to become pupe within their indurated skins, which form an elliptical
chestnut-coloured shell; thus” . . . ‘‘they remain from ten to
twenty days in the summer, before the fly is perfected and makes its
appearance; but the autumnal pupe rest through the winter in that
torpid state, and the flies are not developed until the end of April or
the beginning of May.”

The male of the A. ceparum ‘is of an ash-colour, roughish, with
black bristles and hairs ; the eyes are contiguous and reddish; the face
silvery white ; horns black; there are three obscure lines down the
back, and a line of long blackish spots down the centre of the body ;”

‘the wings are transparent, slightly iridescent, tinged with
ochre at the base, the nervures pale brown; poisers ochreous; legs
ashy brown.

“The female is ochreous or ashy grey, dotted with black bristles
and hairs; the eyes are reddish, and remote with a light chestnut
stripe between them, bifid and darkest at the base; face yellowish
white.” *

The flies of the A. platura are in general appearance very similar
to the above, but there are minute differences, as some brown
longitudinal stripes on the back, and some brown markings on the
abdomen of the male; the legs black; the poisers whitish, with the
stalk brown, and there are other slight points of variation requiring a
good magnifier to make out. +

PREVENTION AND Remepies.——Attention is usually first directed to
something amiss, and needing looking to, amongst the young Onions, by
the leaves fading and turning yellow, and the bulb, or the base of the
stem, even before the base can be said to be formed, decaying conse-
quently on the ravage of the fly-maggots within. Under these

* See paper on the Onion and Cabbage Flies, by ‘ Ruricola’’ (John Curtis),
‘Gardeners’ Chronicle,’ 1841, p. 296 (by error for p. 396).

+ For description see Schiner’s ‘Fliegen,’ vol. i, p. 645, and ‘ Praktische
Insekten Kunde,’ of Dr. E. L. Taschenberg, Pt. iv., p. 130.

s

ONION FLY; SHALLOT FLY. 103

circumstances the best course is to raise all the injured Onions with
the maggots within, and to destroy them at once. It is little or no
use (or perhaps less than no use) only drawing the maggoty plants,
for in this case a portion of the infested bulb is most likely to remain
in the ground, and the maggots finding their food removed will stray
through the soil to infest the nearest bulbs. The plants should
therefore be carefully raised entire, and also not thrown aside, nor
thrown to a rubbish heap, or the maggots will go on feeding as long
as they need, or as long as the material lasts, and after turning to little
brown chrysalids, they will develop in due course into Onion Flies, which
will start new attack.

In looking over reports as to beneficial remedial applications, it
appears as if all the usual insecticide washes, or dry dressings, might
be of service; but amongst these, various washes of soap, or of which
soft-soap forms a part, appear most likely to be of use.

Looking also at the different forms (whether in wash, or mixed with
sand as a sprinkling amongst the Onions to be washed in afterwards)
in which paraffin oil has been found serviceable, it is probable that a
watering of soft-soap with a little paraffin mixed in it would be as good
a remedial wash as could be found.

The difficulty in use of this, is from there being much trouble, to
those who are not accustomed to the work, in making the ingredients
unite permanently, and unless this is done a portion of the soft-soap
is applied unscented by paraffin, and a portion of the paraffin oil being
undiluted may very likely destroy the plants to which it is applied.
Therefore the mixture sold by Messrs. Morris, Little & Son, of Don-
caster, under the trade name of ‘“ Anti-pest,”” would in many cases
save both time and expense from failures. It has been reported on
trustworthy authority as having been found serviceable against various
attacks, and I believe would do well with this infestation. Of course
experiment would be needed as to strength admissible, both with
regard to the age of the infested plants, how deep down they were in
the ground, and all other practical considerations.

One thoroughly excellent method of prevention of attack is earthing
up the bulbs so that the fly cannot get at them. In my own garden,
I have found that sowing the Onions in trenches answered very well.
All who have noticed Onions when growing, will have observed how
often the bulbs, as they grow, become exposed on the surface of the
soil, and open to fly attack. Where the plan is followed of the Onions
being in shallow trenches, the earth can be sent down on them, instead
of loosened away from them, by the successive hoeings, and the bulb is
thus thoroughly protected. The effect on the growth of the bulb itself
was also very good. The bulbs were both good sized and well formed.
Liquid drainings from pigsties have been found very useful appli-
cations, and also house-slops.

104 ORCHARD CATERPILLARS.

Where amount of ground is limited it is very desirable to trench
wherever Onion beds have been much infested, in order to put the
chrysalids of the autumn brood down to a depth from which the flies
cannot come up in the following spring to infest the new crop.

ORCHARD CATERPILLARS.

Winter Moth, Evesham Moth. Cheimatobia brumata, Linn. ;
and various other species.

CHEIMATOBIA BRUMATA.

Winter Moth. Winged male and wingless female; moth figured in act of walking,
after Taschenberg.

On the 25th of November, the following observations were sent me
by Mr. C. D. Wise, Superintendent of the Fruit Grounds of the
Toddington Orchard Co., Winchcomb, Glos., which I have much
pleasure in inserting, as they show the success which has followed on
the measures for prevention of attack of orchard moth caterpillars.
Also, as there are probably very few orchards of such extent as these,
which, when last I heard enumeration of different kinds grown,
required attention to 120,000 trees, the success of methods of treat-
ment tried on this large scale is good in itself, and also a great
encouragement for application of the same methods elsewhere.

Mr. Wise wrote :—‘‘ You will be interested to hear that we have
decided not to grease-band our trees this year, having caught so few
of the females of the Winter Moth during the past two or three years.
It is of course no child’s play here with our large number of trees, and
we must rely on Paris-green in the spring should we find many
caterpillars on our trees. I do not expect that we shall give up
grease-banding altogether, but I look forward to doing it, say, once in
three years. I should not for a moment recommend people who have
only grease-banded their trees for the past two or three years to give

WINTER MOTH. 105

it up, but we have been grease-banding for six years, and I really

think we have got the upper hand of the pest.” —(C. D. W.)
Those who have attended of late years to the prevention and

remedy of attack of orchard moth caterpillars, will know well of what
an immense amount of careful thought, and experiments, and adapta-
tions of measures to meet each weak point in practical working, and
also of steadiness in adhering to new methods of treatment, this
success, both at Toddington and elsewhere, is the outcome.

So far as I am aware, from reports to myself, it was in the winter
of 1883-84 that experiment in sticky banding was first tried with us
on a somewhat large scale to stop the ascent of Winter Moths. This
was done by painting the stems for the breadth of a foot or two with
Gishurst’s compound, by Mr. W. Charman, gardener to J. G.
Strachan, Esq., of Farm Hill Park, Stroud, Glos.

This answered very well, but (as I said before), as far as I am
aware, it was not until the great outbreak of destructive orchard cater-
pillars in the spring and early summer of 1888, that attention was
drawn forcibly, and in many localities, to the need of more thorough
measures of prevention. Care and preventive measures were taken
previously, but an advance was seen to be needed. ;

On June 11th, 1888, Capt. Corbett (then Superintendent) wrote
me from the Toddington grounds :—‘‘ The Winter Moth has indeed
been bad here. We caught the moth by thousands with the band of
tar and grease put on in October, and by renewing it lately we have
caught numbers of the caterpillars ; but for all this, the destruction is
terrible.”

Successively it was shown that however well tar, or common
erease, might do for occasional applications, or on the bark of old
trees, yet that in modern arrangements of fruit farming, much less
rough and haphazard treatment was required for the tender bark
which was still alive and subject to injury from applications melting
into it, which were liable to choke the cells.

To meet this difficulty experiments as to effects of different kinds of

sticky or greasy smears were tried to find which were least injurious
to the bark. These experiments being promptly followed by the
improvement of application of the smear, not on the bark itself, but on
a band of grease-proof paper, fastened round the tree on which the
smear could be spread with little risk of touching the bark beneath.
By this means vast quantities of wingless moths were caught, but
still the matter was anything but wholly met. Grease dried so that
the banding ceased to be sticky; moths (where numerous) so choked up
the sticky surface, that their companions passed in safety over their
bodies, and, besides, many eggs were laid on portions of the sticky
banding, or on dead moths, where these eggs could hatch in spring,

106 OROHARD CATERPILLARS.

and eggs were also laid beneath protecting edges of the paper. Adding
to this the difficulties arising from transport of the wingless females in
connection with the winged males, and also from successive broods of
Winter Moths, or other allied kinds occurring at variable dates from
the middle of October until April, it was plain that even to meet this
one matter of prevention of egg-laying of wingless female moths,
something more was needed.

Unfortunately this, however, was not the only matter. Besides the
caterpillars from these eggs, with the early summer there came hordes
of other kinds, of which the egg-laying of the parents could not be even
so well guarded against, and for which a sweeping remedy, such as could
be applied when occasion required, was needed.

For this the use of spraying with Paris-green, which had long been
serviceably adopted in the United States and Canada, was introduced ;
and with the help of a Committee of Experiment, formed of leading
fruit-growers round Evesham, or in the neighbouring districts, the first
difficulties regarding the introduction of this new application were got
over, and its adoption secured.

Now, the various preventive or remedial measures are showing
their effects in making their repetition to be much less called for, and
it may be hoped that with these to fall back upon (and also with the
continual increase of useful knowledge regarding different kinds of
washes and implements for applying them), the orchard caterpillars
will not again (where duly looked to) become such a devastating
scourge.*

* Reports of methods of treatment found serviceable in prevention of orchard
insect attack will be found in my 12th, 13th, 14th, and 15th Annual Reports of
Observations of Injurious Insects. These orchard notes include, beside many reports
from practical observers, notes of treatment based on the habits of the insects,
recipes for bark smears, and methods of application, and, especially in the 14th and
15th Reports, notes from experimenters, and directions regarding use of Paris-
green.—Ep.

107

Par AS

Pea Weevils. Sitones lineatus, Linn. (and other species).

SITONES,

1, 2, Spotted Pea Weevil; 3, 4, Striped Pea Weevil, nat. size and magnified ;
5, gnawed leaf.

These Pea Weevils also attack Clover and Beans, and their work
may be known by the leaves being eaten away from the outside. If
the attack is not very bad, the leaves may be only scooped away, as if
segments of circles were taken from the edge; but where it is severe,
the mischief is carried on until only the mid-rib, or possibly only the
footstalk of the leaf, is left. The beetles thus destroy the plants above
ground, and underground the maggots feed at the plant roots.

These weevils may be sometimes found in vast quantities when
Peas are being harvested towards the end of summer, and the attack
is very common in gardens, but in the early part of the past season it
was prevalent to an unusually destructive extent on the young field
Pea crops.

Enquiries as to the nature of the infestation, with specimens of the
weevils, and reports of the damage going forward, mostly to Peas, but
in some instances also to Beans, were sent me frequently, and some-
times daily from April 7th to June 4th.

The attacks (as was to be expected) were mainly from the market-
gardening, or especially Pea-growing districts, as from Sandy, in
Bedfordshire, where the damage was very great.

Round Chelmsford, Essex, where Peas are largely grown for the
London market, ‘‘ scores of acres destroyed,” and ‘‘ great destruction
in the neighbourhood,”’ were respectively reported by different corres-
pondents. In the district round Romford (in the same county) Peas
were mentioned as having suffered terribly; destruction was reported
from near Rochford, and near Southminster the attack was also bad.
The infestation was also reported from Ipswich, in Suffolk.

108 PRAS.

Amongst other localities, severe injury was especially reported from
the Pea-growing districts near Severn Stoke, in Worcestershire, and
Alcester, on the edge of Worcestershire and Warwickshire, and in the
latter case Beans were mentioned as being also attacked. The
following are some of the details received.

The first notes sent commenced with information sent me on April
7th, by Mr. Edw. A. Cabberley, of Moor Hall, Alcester, Redditch, as
follows :—‘* My Peas are much injured by beetles, specimens of which
I send you. There has been no rain here for weeks, and the land is
very dry. I rolled and harrowed the Peas a few days since, which I
think has checked the mischief slightly, but the ground seems to be
teeming with the insects. I intend rolling the field down firmly
to-morrow. JI may add that the attack appears to be general in this
district, Beans suffering as well as Peas.”

On the 8th of April the following account was sent me, also from
the same neighbourhood, and also with specimens of the Sitones, or
Pea Weeyils, accompanying. In this instance most of them appeared
to be of the species known, from the ‘“‘ stripes,’’ or “lines,” running
along the wing-cases, as the ‘Striped Pea Weevil,” scientifically as
the S. lineatus.

Mr. John M. Moubray wrote from Broom Court, Alcester, on April
8th :—‘ I have five acres of Hclipse Peas, and they are being destroyed
by an insect, and I send you some by same post. Could you kindly
let me know how I can get rid of this pest? In a short time the Peas
will be quite destroyed by them. I thought of rolling, but the Peas
are very tender and would break.”

In the following letter, written on April 14th, it will be seen that
Mr. Moubray notices, besides the attack he observed on these Peas,
that he knows of it on six other farms near :—‘“I note that the weevils
are on the Peas, and in the ground close to them, but I cannot
discover any in my other fields. I know six other farmers in the
immediate neighbourhood whose Peas are attacked in the same way,
and some of them have already ploughed up the crop.”

On the 19th of April, Mr. H. E. Thornley, writing from Radford
Hall, near Leamington (about 164 miles E.N.E. of Alcester), reported
the destruction going forward. In this case the specimens sent
appeared more to resemble the Spotted Pea Weevil, the S. crinitus,
whichs rather smaller than the “ Striped” kind, and has the wing-
cases spotted with black. Mr. Thornley wrote :—‘‘I am a grower of
large quantities of Peas; at this season they are being entirely spoilt
by these beetles, so much so that I have decided to plough one field
uipaa

From Croome Court, Severn Stoke, Worcestershire, I was favoured
with the following note on April 21st. (This locality les about 7

PEA WEEVILS. 109

miles south of Worcester, and is also a Pea-growing neighbourhood) :—
‘A most destructive insect, hitherto little known here, has made its
appearance in large numbers in this district, and attacks the Peas,
which are just coming up. It bites the leaf first; afterwards the
stem. Early Peas are much grown in this neighbourhood, and I am
informed that many acres have been destroyed by the ravages of this
pest.” And on the 28rd the following additional notes were sent to
me :—‘‘ From what I can gather the beetle is not unknown in the
neighbourhood, but its ravages have never been so serious before. It
appears to attack the white Peas in preference to the grey variety, and
it has destroyed many acres.”

The greatest extent of damage reported was, however, from Essex,
and the first note of the infestation being severe there was forwarded
to me on the 26th of April, by Mr. James C. Smith, from Sandford
Mill, Chelmsford. The specimens in this case were of the ‘‘ Spotted”
Pea Weevil, with perhaps some of the ‘‘Striped’’ species amongst
them. Mr. James Smith wrote as follows :—‘‘ In this neighbourhood
there are large quantities of Peas grown for the London market. This
year they are attacked, and scores of acres quite destroyed by a small
brown insect, three-sixteenths of an inch long. They are extremely
difficult to find, as when you approach near they drop off the Peas,
and then are so exactly like little pieces of earth that they quite escape
notice, unless very carefully searched for. Will you kindly say
anything you can suggest for a cure? I have not yet ploughed up my
Peas, as the stumps are still alive, eaten off to the ground, but several
of my neighbours have done so.”

On the 80th of April, Mr. J. Smith wrote further :—‘‘ We are
trying soot, &c.,in a small way in the garden, but the crop has so nearly
disappeared in the field, that it is not worth the heavy expense the
’ dressing there would entail. The infestation is very bad about here
this year; nothing like it known before, of late years at any rate. I
presume it is chiefly due to the excessive cold checking the growth,
and enabling the little creatures to devour the plant bodily.”

From Stubbers, near Romford, Mr. Champion B. Russell wrote on
the 2nd of May :—<“‘ Just one line about the Sitones. The Peas in my
garden are quite free, but the farmers around have suffered heavily.
Most of them have imagined it was ‘slug,’ and have limed vigorously,
but not always when the leaf was wet.” . . . ‘I think that all I
saw were S.crinita.” . . . ‘Many of my neighbours have ploughed
in their Peas.”

Two. days afterwards (on the 4th of May) very characteristic speci-
mens of injured Peas, together with Sitones weevils, apparently crinitus,
were sent me from Maylands, Hornchurch (also near Romford), by
Mr. Collinson Hall, with the observation that they were specimens of

110 PEAS.

‘some beetles which have caused sad havoc with the early Pea crop
in this market garden district.” Somewhat later, on the 13th of May,
Mr. Collinson Hall further mentioned :—‘‘In this district a large
quantity of the earliest Peas have been nearly destroyed. I have had
to plough up eight acres, and I find another piece which is heavily
manured is looking better, and now getting the better of this pest,
for they seem to have left this piece, and are now on the early Broad
Beans, and it looks as if they like this crop best, for all the leaves, as
well as the stock, are perforated and turning black. I have tried soot
and also lime, but they are as numerous as ever.”

From Doggetts, Rochford, also in Essex, the following communi-
cation as to unusual amount of prevalence of this attack was sent me
at the beginning of May, by Mr. W. Meesom. The weevils, of which
specimens were sent, were mentioned as ‘‘ causing great injury to our
blue Pea plants ‘just coming up.’ Some of the earlier sown fields are
apparently quite destroyed by them, eaten quite off. Have been a
large grower of Peas for many years, but have never lost the plant
from this cause before. No doubt you will be able to inform me if this
insect is a fresh importation that we have to contend with.” This
note was sent on the 2nd of May.

Various communications were sent during the month of May by
Mr. W. Dannatt, of Margaret’s Woods, Great Waltham, Chelmsford,
relatively to this attack, and to some serviceable notice of its unusual
prevalence, in the local press.

Mr. Dannatt’s first observations, sent on May 4th, were as follows:
—‘‘T gend some specimens of a weevil which are causing great
destruction to the Peas in this neighbourhood. I have twenty-five
acres of early sown Telegraphs, some plants of which I also send,
which you will observe are well rooted and perfectly healthy, but com-
pletely mastered by this pest. And if I am not troubling you too
much I shall be very much obliged if you will give me some infor-
mation respecting them, viz., whether the Peas are likely to overcome
them should warm growing weather set in? Are they likely to
continue to attack them up to the time of picking? If left are they
likely to increase and become a pest in future years?”—(W. D.)
(These questions, which are all important practically, I attended to
to the best of my power at the time, and they will be found noticed a
few pages further on, under the head of ‘‘ prevention and remedies.’’—
Ep.)

On the 10th of May, amongst other points, Mr. Dannatt noted,
with regard to possibilities of difficulties of cultivation in the previous
autumn having left much of the winter shelter of the weevils
untouched, that this ‘‘ would not apply in this case, as the land was
steam cultivated in September 8 inches deep, followed by steam

I

PEA WEEVILS. 114

harrows twice in a place, which left a fine deep tilth of about 10 inches.
Farmyard manure was carted on, and the land horse-ploughed during
very sharp frosts.”’

The enquiry of Mr. Wm. Sewell, in the following note sent from
Tillingham Hall, Southminster, Essex, as to whether the weevils (of
which he forwarded specimens) were the same kind of which many
were seen in harvest time, touches on a point which I have endeavoured
always to keep forward as a certain means of lessening amount of
recurrence of attack, and which is now noted a little further on. Mr.
Sewell observed :—‘‘ I enclose you some insects to look at; they are
eating the Peas this year very much, in many cases nearly destroying
them, particularly the early ones. Are they the same we get a good
many of in harvest time with the Peas? They have never attacked
them at this time of year.”

Other notes were sent, as from the district of Sandy, in Bedford-
shire, from which, amongst other observations, I had, on the 10th of
April, a note from an observer desiring information regarding these
beetles, which he mentioned, had attacked his winter Beans, just
coming up, sown in February, and threatening to ruin the crop; and
the forecast was confirmed by reference of another contributor (on the
10th of June) to this district as ‘‘the scene of the havoc of the Pea
Weevil.”

Two of the kinds of these weevils which are commonly found doing
mischief are figured, both natural size and magnified, at p. 107.
These are the Sitones lineatus and S. crinitus, and are often quite
indistinguishable from each other by reason of the markings being
rubbed off the wing-cases, so that they only look of a kind of patchy
black.

When fresh and in good order the S. lineatus is of an ochrey or light
clay colour, with three lighter stripes along the back, and ten stripes,
alternately lighter and darker, along the wing-cases. The S. crinitus
is rather smaller, more of a grey or rosy tint, and the wing-cases are
spotted with black.

Another kind, of which the whole life-history has been more
especially worked out with us on Clover, is the Sitones puncticollis ; this
is a little larger than the “ spotted’ kind, greyish or fuscous (until the
scales are rubbed off), and distinguishable by having a few light dots
on each side of the central light line which runs from the head to the
Wing-cases in this as well as in the two above-named species.

The method of life is for many of these weevils to live through the
winter, and wake up from their winter torpidity to come out and attack
_ the crops in spring. But it is not only these hybernated weevils that
do the mischief. They are joined in it by the weevils which develop
at the beginning of June (earlier or later as the case may be) from the

112 PEAS.

maggots which have been feeding during spring at the roots of the
Peas or Clover.

The maggots, of which I have received specimens, were about a
quarter of an inch long when full-grown; whitish, plump, and much
wrinkled; without legs; the head brownish or ochrey in colour, with
strong jaws. Fig. 3, p. 387, gives a very good idea of the appearance
of the maggot (much magnified) of the Dutch Clover Weevil when
lying at rest, but at pleasure they can extend themselves, so as to
appear narrower and straighter.

The mischief caused by the maggots is often not suspected, but
nevertheless this maggot gnawing below ground is at times so severe
as totally to ruin the plant, even to the extent of necessitating
ploughing in.

Towards autumn, when the Peas are being harvested, great quan-
tities of the weevils may be seen, and these lay the foundation for the
next year’s attack. By the end of November, maggots are noticeable
in all stages of growth at the infested roots, and they may be found in
December and January still in larval state. Karly in April some
of the larvee cease to feed, and early in May may be observed to have
formed hollow earth chambers, in which, towards the end of that
month, they turn to chrysalids, from which the summer brood of
weevils begins to appear in June.

PrevENTION AND RemeEpines.—Judging by the replies which have
been kindly sent me in reply to special enquiries, and also by search
into reports of previous years, very little indeed can be done by the
common methods of remedial treatment, as rolling, hoeing, dressing
with soot, and the like. But still some of the observations of what did
not do good may be of service in saving expense in experiment; and
also, if the partial success of some of the experiments are joined to con-
sideration of the habits and nature respectively of the insect pests,
and the attacked plants, some leading points may be worked out.

The first attack appears to be from the wintered beetles, and if the
ground is merely re-sown, after the crop has been swept off, these
same beetles will, I believe, go on eating up each successive crop till it
is time for them to die off.

The new brood of beetles, as far as we know, does not come out till
June. Therefore, if when one crop is destroyed the ploughing could be
so arranged, as will be found fully detailed in the following obser-
vations, there would appear good hope that the pests might be buried
down, and the loss (bad as it is) not be extended beyond the first
destruction.

In the following note with which I was favoured on the 19th of
November, in reply to my enquiries, by Mr, Edw. A. Cabberley, of

PEA WEEVILS. 113

Moor Hall, Alcester, near Redditch, it will be seen that he first
notices various measures not found of service, and then it will be
observed how thoroughly the surface was turned to the bottom, and
the piece after sowing heavily rolled down.

Mr. Cabberley wrote :—‘‘I regret that I found no remedy myself,
neither did I hear of any that proved effectual. I planted 16 acres of
Peas, 11 of which were early, and 5 a later kind. The 11 acres were
totally destroyed. I found no benefit from harrowing and rolling, nor
yet from applying soot. It is true, however, that in this case there
was little or no leafage for the soot to adhere to, the weevils having
eaten off the Peas, stems as well as leaves, level with the ground.
These Peas throw up a second and a third shoot, only to be grazed off
in a similar manner. By this time the end of April had arrived, so I
ploughed up the 11 acres, carefully turning the surface into the
bottom; drilled the whole piece again with ‘Prince of Wales’ and
‘ Duke of Albany’ Peas, and heavily rolled it down. The Peas were
through the ground in ten days, and I do not think a leaf was touched
by the weevils, although at the same time they were working at the
adjoming 5 acres of late Peas, which had then been up three weeks.
The attack upon the 5 acres was not so severe, the Peas getting well
into leaf before it commenced. These were drilled in rows a yard
apart, and I sowed soot thickly along them in the dew; yet the weevils
were upon the leaves in the afternoon, though the soot was adhering
thickly to them at the time. I do not think the dressing had any
effect.

‘*«T had a piece of Vetches in another field which appeared above
ground at the same time as the early Peas, and these too were
devoured, yet the adjoming lands coming up a little later were not
touched.

‘**T noticed that a heavily laden cart which passed over scores of
the weevils did not appear to injure one of them. When the attack
was at its worst the ground was very dry, at the same time the days
were hot and sunny, and the nights frosty.

‘“‘T believe nearly all the Peas (in this district) which were then
above ground were totally destroyed, whereas those that came up a
little later were less seriously injured, or escaped altogether.’—
(BH. A.C.)

The following letter sent me by Mr. James C. Smith, from Sand-
ford Hall, Chelmsford, giving on the 26th of November an account of
the completed observation of the infestation, also shows the general
uselessness of the remedies tried, and the non-benefit of rolling. Also
the destruction of one sowing after another, and the great area of
serious damage, namely, 1000 acres. But there is the important
point noticed that the Peas sown on the 16th of May overgrew the

I

114 PEAS.

attack. This point is well worth notice, whether it might be from the
brunt of the attack being past, or circumstances of plant-vigour pushing
the plant-growth into safety. Mr. J.C. Smith wrote as follows :—‘ In
reply to yours as to the Pea Beetles, I am sorry to find that I cannot
hear of any of the various remedies that were tried last spring being of
any practical use.

‘«Wherever they appeared thickly on a field, this was almost always
completely spoilt. In my own case I did not plough the remains of
the crop up until about the 12th of May, thinking that, as the Peas
were a late variety, and a very strong growing sort (Telegraph), when
the beetles left them, the stumps, which looked very green, would
shoot again; but it was no use whatever. On May 16th I re-sowed
the same ground with Peas, and these also the beetles began, but they
grew so vigorously, that with the last crop the conditions were reversed,
and the Peas gained the day. The beetles are so hard that rolling the
land is of no use.

‘«‘ In this neighbourhood I might safely say 1000 acres were seriously
damaged, if not utterly spoiled. One field close by was sown three times,
and every time eaten up.” —(J. A. 8.)

The following observation, by Mr. Thornley, from Radford Hall,
Leamington, of the beneficial effect of dressing with nitrate of soda
and soot, is almost the only note of successful remedial application, and
here (conjecturally) a good deal of the benefit would be from driving
on a good growth, besides what protection might be given by the soot
to the leafage. Mr. Thornley, in reply to my enquiry, wrote me :—
‘The most effectual remedy I found for the Pea Weevils last spring
was small and repeated dressings of soot and nitrate of soda, applied
in the early mornings when the dew was on the leaf. One piece of
five acres of Prince of Wales Pea I dressed just as the Pea was making
its appearance; then repeated the dressing in a week’s time when well
through in rows. That was my best crop by far. My opinion is the
remedy should be applied before the weevils make their appearance.”

In another communication (sent me from Sandy, Beds.), the writer
also mentioned that he ‘did not find any benefit from dressing with
soot the piece of winter Beans which was infested with Sitones lineatus.
The plot was sown in late autumn, and was much more seriously
damaged than one adjoining, which was sown in the spring.”

Looking now over the reports of the past season and previous
years, they all appear to point to any ‘‘ remedies ’’—that is, any mea-
sures specially directed to getting rid of the weevils when once they
are on the plants—being of little or no good. Dressings of soot, or soot
and lime, applied when the dew is on, may be expected to be of use in
garden service, where they can be given with minute care and in very
liberal amount. But this is very different to a paying field application
where the material is costly, and also it would disturb farm service to

PEA WEEVILS. 115

put a sufficient number of men on a good acreage to get the plants
dressed whilst the dew remained on.

Rolling does not injure the beetles, and unless there is a good
thickness of soil rolled hard down above them (as mentioned in the
note of Mr. Cabberley at p. 118) they will in all probability soon make
their way up again.

The only available methods of checking the attack seem to be fore-
stalling it. The weevils are in some years to be found in enormous
numbers where they can be swept together and destroyed during
harvesting operations, as on the ‘‘reapers,’’ and in the Pea waggons.
Sweeping these up and destroying them would get rid of a definite
quantity of future mischief. If left, some live through the winter in
various shelters, but notably in stubble. We have observations of the
total loss of Trifolium incarnatum from this cause where the T'rifoliwm
was drilled in stubble. On examination the beetles were found
sheltered in the top joint of the stubble, and on this observation being
followed up, and the stubble skimmed, so as to get rid of it as a beetle
shelter, it was believed the trouble was lessened.

The beetles have also been found in January, where they had
apparently come out from their shelters in Barley stubble. These and
similarly sheltered hybernating beetles start the attack; but a portion
of those which might be really got rid of in harvest time do mischief
in another way: they lay their eggs at the roots of Clover, or other
crops suitable, and, firstly, from the maggots from these eggs working
at the clover-roots, and, next, by the beetles to which these maggots
turn, furnishing the summer brood, attack is set up, of which the origin
might with little difficulty have been destroyed in the previous year,

In most insect attacks, keeping up the strength of the plant is a
great preventive of loss, if not of insect injury; but in this case the
little Pea plants are so small, and with so few resources in themselves,
that this principle is not always to be relied on. With root crops, as
Turnips or Mangolds, there is a store of food to draw on, which often
restores a crop even when eaten back to an almost hopeless state. But
with the Pea crop there are only the stringy fibrous roots to draw on,
and so far as experiments show, if the crop becomes leafless, it cannot
be trusted to, to recover.

So long as there is some amount of leaf (as in the experiment
noted at p. 114, where nitrate of soda and soot were used), strong
stimulant may push on leafage faster than the beetles gnaw it off, but
otherwise the dressings seem of very little use. But so far as can be
managed, it appears to be the hearty growth of the Pea which is the
mainstay in attack, joined in some cases to date of growth being when
the first outburst of beetle has taken place, and before the second set
come towards June.

12

116 POTATO.

In looking over notes, recent and previous, it appears that some-
times a strong hearty Pea will carry well through attack when a
weaker one fails, and every detail of cultivation which will tend to
cause rapid replacement of leafage will necessarily be of use, but at
present we seem to have no “remedy.” Whether this state of
things needs still to continue remains to be seen. There would not be
(so far at least as I am aware) the difficulty with the young Pea crop that
there is in many cases of taking a horse implement like the Strawson-
izer over the ground; and, if so, it would probably very soon be found
that some of the applications, so frequently enumerated in these
pages that it is unnecessary to go over them again here, would act both
effectively and at a paying rate.

POTATO.

Death’s-head Moth. Acherontia atropos, Linn.

ACHERONTIA ATROPOS. Death’s-head Moth.

The great caterpillars of the Death’s-head Moth are not very
unfrequently met with, although they are not common,’ and’ rarely
occur to a really injurious extent. When full-grown they are_four or
five inches in length, and as thick as a man’s finger; usually of a

DEATH’S-HEAD MOTH. Ti7

yellow or yellowish colour, green towards the head, and granulated
and speckled with black on the back. On the sides are seven oblique
lateral stripes, meeting on the back, the lowest end pointing foremost,
the colours being blue, with some white and lilac. At the tail isa
horn-like process bent down, and turned up again at the tip, and
tubercled on the surface. The figure at p. 118 shows a specimen not yet
fully grown.

There is a variety of a brownish olive colour mentioned by Stainton
as occurring ‘‘ sometimes, but very rarely,” which I have once had a
specimen of.

The caterpillars usually feed by night on Potato leafage, and last
year, as in others (when sent at all), the attack has been so little
represented that it would not be worth mentioning again but for the
splendid size of one moth sent me.

This was forwarded to me at the beginning of October, per favour
of the Editor of the ‘ North British Agriculturist,’ from a Wigtonshire
correspondent,* as a rare insect, with remarkable powers of emitting
sound, or, as it was phrased, ‘in full voice.’ On examination I
found the specimen was a Death’s-head Moth in most beautiful con-
dition, and the very largest of the species that I have ever seen. This
moth is our largest British kind, and is given by various writers as
from four to five, or even over five, inches in the spread of the wings.
The fine specimen figured at p. 116 is just under five inches, but the
one sent to myself being larger still, by measurement fully or upwards
of 54 inches in the spread of the fore wings, it seems worth while to
record the observation of such a very fine specimen.

The Death’s-head Moth is very richly coloured. ‘The fore wings
dark brown, with various black and rusty, and also some ochrey bands,
wavy lines and other markings. The hind wings orange, with a broad
black band near the outside, and a narrower one within. The
abdomen is also orange, with black cross stripes, and a row of bluish
spots, or rather perhaps a kind of lead-coloured band, down the middle.
The head, and body between the wings, brownish black, and on the
back is a pale skull-like marking. Altogether it is a magnificent
insect, and from the so-called ‘‘ Death’s-head”’ on the back, and also
its power of emitting a very audible noise like a low squeak, or cry, on
annoyance, has at times caused a good deal of superstitious alarm.

Another name of this moth is the ‘‘ Bee Tiger,” from the propensity
ascribed to it of entering bee-hives, and robbing the Bees of their
honey, which certainly stands recorded on trustworthy authority, but
I have never met with an instance of it myself. Possibly the great
alteration in the method of Bee-keeping at the present date, in boxes

* For account see number of ‘ North British Agriculturist’ for Oct. 5th, 1892,

{18 POTATO.

and various apparatus often taking the place of the straw hive of
former days, makes the outside of the hive less attractive, and the
opening much less commodious for entrance of the moth.

If the moth should be found troublesome in this way, reducing the
size of the Bees’ entrance doorway is the obvious and regular remedy.
If the great caterpillars are found to be doing mischief to Potato

Lik =>. SESS ERAer

Death’s-head Moth, also caterpillar not yet full sized.

leafage, they should be looked for under the surface earth, or sheltered
from light by day, and from their great size would be easily distin-
guishable, even in the moonlight of August or September, when at their
night feed.

But excepting as matter of curiosity or interest from their great
size, the Death’s-head Moth and its caterpillars are rarely noticed in
this country.

Frosted Orange Moth. Gortyna flavago, Newman.

Gortyna FLAvAGO. Frosted Orange Moth.

The caterpillars of the Gortyna flavago, or ‘‘ Frosted Orange ”
Moth, feed within the stems of various strong growing plants, as the

FROSTED ORANGE MOTH. 119

Burdock, Mullein, Thistles, Foxglove, and sometimes within Potato-
stems. In these last, which are the only places in which I have
myself had the opportunity of observing the attack, it causes the com-
plete destruction of the infested stem. The caterpillar eats away a
considerable length of the soft inside tissues, so that presently the stem
breaks, or drops down above the injured part, and all this portion is
killed,

As yet we have not been able to rear the moths from these Potato
stem caterpillars, but as they agree in points of appearance and
locality, and method and date of feeding, with those of the G. flavago,
it seems scarcely open to doubt that they are the grubs of this some-
time troublesome kind.

One of the samples of infested Potato haulm was sent me from
Melton Mowbray on June 15th; this was merely accompanied by
enquiry as to the nature of the attack.*

A much more detailed observation was sent me on the same day
by Mr. D. Taylor, junr., of Daleally, Errol, N.B., with specimens
accompanying. In this instance the Potato stem was badly eaten
away within. Mr. Taylor wrote as follows:—‘ After writing last
night, I happened to go past the garden of my foreman, and observed
a number of his Potato shaws drooping as if they had been cut or
broken. We cut them over below the drooping part, opened one or
two of the stalks up, and found the cause of the sickness to be a worm
of some sort, which had entered by eating a small hole, and feeding its
way up or down the inside of the stalk; and in one case, as you will
see, the leaf stalk is affected.” . . . ‘This is surely anew Potato
pest? I have never seen Potatoes fallen in this manner, and it is only
one side of the garden that is as yet affected.”

The caterpillar is soft, cylindrical, and may be generally described
as of a kind of putty colour, varied with a good deal of pinkish on the
back, and the segment behind the head and the tail segment black, or
with the horny plate on the upper part of each black or dingy brown.
The body is rather attenuated at each extremity, with a number of
brown or black dots, each bearing a bristle. The head yellowish
brown, and rather smaller than the next segment.

These caterpillars are stated by the late Edward Newman (who
gives in his ‘ British Moths,’ pp. 279 and 280, the best account of this
infestation with which I am acquainted) to be found full-fed in the
stems of the tall Marsh Thistles, in which he specially observed them,
early in July. ‘When about to change it prepares a means of escape
by gnawing away the substance of the Thistle stem, leaving only the

* See reply to enquiry in ‘ Agricultural Gazette,’ number for June 20th, 1892,
p. 577.

120 POTATO.

most slender and delicate epidermis, which always remains intact,
and then changes to an elongate, cylindrical, smooth, dark brown
chrysalis.”—(H. N.)

The moth measures about an inch and a half in the spread of the
fore wings, which are of an orange yellow, variously marked with rich
brown or purplish. Near the base of the wing is a reddish brown bar,
and succeeding this are three markings, known as the stigmata, thus
described :—‘‘ The inner one small, round, and pale yellowish buff; the
outer one larger and ear-shaped, mottled with red scales within; the
supplemental one semi-oval, all being surrounded with slender reddish
brown lines.”’—(J. O. W.) Nearer the tip of the wing is a purplish
bar, followed by a much waved narrow stripe formed of small fulvous
arch-like markings. The great variety of marking on the wings makes
it almost impossible to describe them intelligibly, but the figure gives
a fair idea, with the explanation that the lighter colours are mainly
yellow, and the darker markings of some shade of reddish brown or
purple. ‘The hind wings are pale brown or somewhat ochrey, with a
stripe across near the middle.

This infestation, though the moth is now a very common one in
this country, is very rarely reported as injurious to Potatoes, and in
the attack last year at Daleally it was only to a small quantity of the
stems (or ‘‘shaws” to use the local word) on one side of one garden.
Still the caterpillar, if it does get possession, is so certain to ruin the
attacked stem that it is as well not to let its workings pass unnoticed.

The presence of the grub may be known by the fading of the
tunnelled stem, and then without delay each of the stems should be
cleared, and the caterpillar, if the attack is only on a small scale,
looked for and destroyed. This is desirable, as the grub may very
likely be low down in the stem, or may, as found by Mr. Taylor in his
examinations, have gone down from the stem tunnel into a tuber. But
if the destroyed stems and their contents are got rid of before the time
of appearance of the moth from the chrysalids, there will be little fear
of recurrence of the trouble.

121

RED SPIDER.

Red Spider. Tetranychus tiliarum, Mull.; 1’. telarius, Claparede.

TETRANYCHUS TILIARUM.

Red Spider of Lime trees (nat. size, microscopic) ; web with eggs in dried state,
and after being moistened; all enormously magnified.

The Mites, or Acari, commonly known as “Red Spider,” are an
infestation which is prevalent on so many kinds of plants, notably on
Hops, leafage of wall fruit trees, besides many others, as leafage of
French Beans, &c., that it is perhaps most convenient to notice them
under their own popular name. In the present instance I only allude
to them as having been again noticed asa seriously injurious attack to
Lime trees, and also on account of a soft-soap and sulphur compound
having been found to answer in getting rid of them.

These Mites belong to the division known as the ‘ Spinning
Mites,’ from their power of spinning a web over the surface of the
leaves, or even the trunks of trees, which may be infested by them.
This web is woven of such exceedingly fine threads, that it either does not
show at all (unless examined through a magnifying-glass), or else only
shows as a kind of silky lustre, or glazy appearance on the leaves or
trunks of infested plants or trees. But it is the web (figured from life
at heading) which makes the great difficulty in dealing with ‘‘ Red
Spider.”’

The threads are so interlaced that they form a very protecting
shelter, to which the eggs can be attached as figured, and which helps
also to secure the Mites from injury. When fully developed these
Mites have four pairs of legs, and are of an oval shape, with head,
body, and abdomen forming one solid mass. The head is furnished
with an apparatus of beak or sucker, and minute nippers, by means of
which it draws away the juices from the attacked plants, and causes
the mischief which we know only too well. Near the end of the tail is
a minute protuberance from which it produces its threads, and at the

122 RED SPIDER.

tips of the feet are a few processes, like excessively fine pin-headed
bristles, which help these “‘ Spinning Mites” in arranging their webs,
and in holding firmly to them.

Whether the “ Red Spider,” best known as seriously injurious to
Hops, and scientifically named Tetranychus telarius, is precisely the
same as that of the Lime tree, and which also infests French Beans,
and is named (from the first-named habitat) Tetranychus tiliarum, is a
point on which there is some difference of opinion amongst specialists,
but does not appear to be of importance for practical service. The main
characteristics of the Lime tree attack are the quantity of fine web spun
over the trunks and branches of the trees, and also on the under side of
the infested leaves (thus giving the shiny appearance mentioned above
to the large area of webbed surface), and also the enormous numbers of
the Mites which are sometimes to be found heaped up in yellowish
masses round the base of the trunks of the trees.

One instance of very severe attack to Lime trees was reported to
me some years ago, but otherwise I do not remember hearing of it as
a serious matter until the two following observations were sent me in
the autumn of last year (1892).

On the 22nd of September, a note was sent me from Springfield
Place, near Chelmsford, by Mr. Thomas Jackson, in which it will be
seen that the above characteristics, that is, the masses of Mites round
the bases of the trees, and also the shiny, or slimy, appearance of the
trees, are especially mentioned. Also the injury to the leaves is noticed,
which is sometimes very great, or total ruin, for the Mites are known
to congregate so thickly (chiefly) on the lower side of the leaves that
the leafage is yellow over with them, and the mischief caused by the
great quantities of the punctures, and also consequent loss of sap,
causes the destruction of the leaves.

Mr. Jackson wrote, on September 22nd, that he was sending ‘some
specimens of a blight which has attacked some young Lime trees here.
At present the old trees, of which there are some very fine ones, are
not affected ; those that are, being about ten inches in diameter, a foot
from the ground.

‘‘He cannot be quite certain if the blight begins from the stem
nearest the ground, or from the foliage, but the form it takes is as
follows : there is a band of yellow colour on the ground round the stem
of the tree, about an inch broad, resembling somewhat a piece of gold-
lace ; this is a mass of living creatures, very minute, which spread all
over the bark and branches, which are covered with a kind of cob-
webby slime, like the trail of a snail, and the insects cover the leaves,
which soon wither away.”

Mr. Jackson further noticed that his gardener had tried Gishurst
soap and water, mixed with petroleum and quassia chips, with other
remedies, but all seemed of no avail.

RED SPIDER. 123

About three weeks later, that is, on the 11th of October, enquiry
was sent to me by Mr. Samuel Berger, of Bragbury, Stevenage,
regarding the nature of an attack of which specimens were sent
accompanying, which proved to be of ‘‘ Red Spider,” clustered in great
numbers on leafage and other material, in the sample package sent.

Of these Mr. Berger remarked, ‘‘ They have attacked three Lime
trees in an avenue of about thirty trees. The trees in question are all
affected on the same side facing east, and only on that one side. The
appearance of the trees on the side affected is as if they had been var-
nished, quite smooth and glistening.”’

Here again it will be noticed the peculiar shining or glistening
appearance of the attacked surface is mentioned. There is much
variety in colour, or shade of colour, of the so-called ‘‘ Red” Spider,
which may run from yellowish white to orange, or different shades of
red; but in the case of the Lime ‘“ Red”’ Spiders which have come
under my own notice, the colour has appeared to me to be of some
tint of yellow. The specimens sent me by Mr. Berger were of a good
orange or yellow colour.

Looking at the point of sulphur being one of the regular applications
used by Hop growers for destruction of ‘‘ Red Spider,” and also of the
serviceableness of soft-soap wash in adhering, and so choking up the
fine webs, together with the contained eggs and Mites, I suggested
trial of the ‘‘ Chiswick Compound ” (noted at various places in this
Report) ; and in a note from Mr. Berger, sent on the 18th of October,
he mentioned that he was, that day, having the trees sprayed with a
solution of soft-soap, but that as soon as he could get some of the
compound named, he would have them dressed with this, and would
let me know result of the treatment.

On the 16th of Nov., Mr. Berger favoured me with the following
satisfactory report :—‘‘ We have found the ‘ washing’ of our Lime
trees with the Chiswick Compound you recommended, has got rid of
the Acari. The soft-soap wash sprayed from a garden engine was not
nearly so effective.”

From the above observation the soap and sulphur compound seems
to meet the difficulty as well as could be wished, but if instead of pur-
chase, it should be wished to prepare a somewhat similar mixture on
the premises, the difficulty of dissolving the sulphur may be got over
by using sulphuret of lime.

The following is a serviceable recipe :—Take four ounces of
sulphuret of lime, and two ounces of soft-soap, to each gallon of
hot water, the soap and sulphuret to be well mixed, and the hot
water then gradually poured on, the mixture being well stirred whilst
this is done, and used when cool. ‘This may be used for spraying, or
well rubbed on to bark; but I believe the ‘‘compound”’ mentioned

124 STRAWBERRY.

above is both cheaper and better. References will be found to it in the
Index, under the name of ‘* Chiswick Compound.”’

Where the Mites are observable, as in the case of this attack, and
also in that of Hay Mite, collected in great masses on the ground, all
common sense measures (which will suggest themselves) will be
desirable for shovelling them up, or otherwise collecting them, and
destroying them.

STRAWBERRY.

Strawberry-leaf Beetle. Galeruca tenella, Linn.

The Galeruca (or as it has recently been called, the Galerucella)
tenella, is a very little beetle, only an eighth of an inch, or slightly
more, in length, which was observed last year doing much harm in one
district to Strawberry leaves. The beetle may be easily identified
from description with the help of a fairly strong magnifier. It is
oblong-ovate, and convex in shape, and the general colour is of some
shade of dull yellow, or brownish. Looked at more minutely, the
head is yellow, with a broad black stripe or band across the top. The
thorax or fore body also of some yellowish tint, with, in some instances,
a dark line along the central furrow, and on each side of the furrow is
a small round depression. ‘The wing-cases pitted, so as to be slightly
granulated, on the surface, and rather shiny, and in the specimens
sent somewhat variable in colour, sometimes yellowish, sometimes of
a brown tint, with the margin and the suture yellow, and occasionally
a spot on the shoulders of a dark brown. ‘The body black beneath,
with the tip of the abdomen pale; legs pale ; and the horns long, palest
at the base, black towards the end.

This kind is recorded as being found “in this country in July,
frequenting Willows, Alders, &c.”; and in Germany it is mentioned
by Kaltenbach, as being repeatedly noticed by himself on young plants
of Spirea ulmaria (Meadow Sweet), and ‘‘once in greater numbers ”’ on
the Potentilla anserina (‘ Silver Weed” with us), of which it greatly
damaged the leaves by its gnawings.

The Spirea, and still more the Potentilla, are nearly allied to the
Strawberry, so that it is not surprising that it should be found on this
plant; but still, until the observation of it was sent from Hants, I
was not aware of it having been noted as a Strawberry pest. Plentiful
samples, both of the beetles and of the injured leaves, were sent; and

STRAWBERRY-LEAF BEETLE. 125

as the attack was new to me, I availed myself of the skilled assistance
of Mr. Oliver E. Janson, F.E.8., of Perth Road, London, N., in iden-
tification, in order that we might be absolutely certain of the species.

The specimens were sent me on the 27th of July, by Mr. G.
Messem, from Hundred Acres, Wickham, Hants, with the observation
that they were insects which were destroying the Strawberry plants in
that neighbourhood. It was considered to be a new pest in the
locality, and any information as to how to destroy it was greatly
desired.

So far as had been observed, the beetles were believed to lay their
eggs on the under side of the Strawberry leaves, from which presently
the grubs hatched out, followed in due time by a second brood of
beetles, but the progress of development had not been worked out
with precision.

The following short note given by Dr. Ritzema Bos, conveys the
general life-history of the genus :—‘‘ The beetles and the larvee feed on
the leaves of the same plants ; the pupe are to be found sheltered in
cocoons in the ground.” *

In Rye’s ‘ British Beetles’ (p. 212, edition of 1890), it is observed
of the Galeruce :—‘“ Their larve, which are sluggish, rather elongate,
wrinkled, and with lateral tubercles, and an anal projection, serving as
an extra leg, live in company, and commit great ravages, often
stripping every leaf off the trees, &c., on which they feed.”

The injured Strawberry leaves sent clearly showed the great
mischief caused by the attack. These were perforated in some cases
with irregular shaped holes right through the leaves, and still more
injury was done by little patches of the outer skin of the leaves being
eaten away, leaving the veins, but quite destroying the attacked parts.

The harm done (as shown by the specimens sent) was quite serious
enough to make it worth while to give attention to keeping the attack
under. So long as the fruit is on the plants, it does not seem possible
to use any measures to get rid of the pests on the leafage; but so late
in the season as the 27th of July, in warm localities, this would probably
not be a difficulty. In such case picking off as much of the grub
infested leafage as was much injured would be a very desirable course.
Also strong dressings, as of “‘ Fisher Hobb’s” mixture (see Index), or
hellebore, which, in this case, might be used without fear of poisoning
eaters of the fruit (a difficulty occurring in careless use in connection
with green Gooseberries), would be likely to be very useful. Also, as
it is the habit of the grubs of the Galeruce to go down into the ground
to turn to chrysalids in cocoons, it could not fail to do good to treat
the surface soil beneath the Strawberry leafage in summer in such a

* *Tierische Schadlinge und Niitzlinge,’ von Dr. J. Ritzema Bos, p. 363,

126 STRAWBERRY.

way as would get rid of the infestation, and so forestall the develop-
ment of a second brood of beetles. Where date of gathering the fruit
crop allows, and it is the custom to clear the leafage of the plants after
the fruit is picked, this would afford great facilities for dealing with the
infestation, whether on the leaves or in the ground.

Judging from the notes sent, though the fact is not clearly stated
in form with date of appearance, &c., there is a second brood, and if so
this should be looked for, and got rid of in hybernating state from
beneath the Strawberry plants during winter. The beetles would in
all probability be found, as is the case with a nearly allied species,
harbouring in the leaves and rubbish on the surface, and if this was
scraped together and burnt, before disturbing the surface soil for the
customary winter treatment, a deal of infestation would most likely be
got rid of. Clearing the surface is needed as a preliminary operation
in a case of this sort, as otherwise many of the beetles, whether of this
or of other kinds which are only lightly buried in the rubbish in which
they were sheltering, are in no way injured, and in due time come up
again strong, and ready again to do mischief.

Observations of whether the common food-plants of this Galeruca,
namely, Willows and Alders, were in the neighbourhood, and also the
Meadow Sweet, which is a very common plant by ditches in many
localities, and taking any measures available to get rid of them if
infested, would also be desirable in the case of large Strawberry
grounds.*

* In this case I have not given a figure, for, though the greatly injured state of
the Strawberry leafage would have been of very useful interest for illustration of the
attack, the notes and specimens came to hand when I was suffering so severely from
illness that it was with difficulty I could attend even to the daily requirements of
correspondents.

Those who have the opportunity of referring to the figure of leafage injured by
the allied insect, the Galeruca (or Agelastica) alni, given at p. 364 of the work of
Dr. Ritzema Bos, before referred to, and at p. 291 of Part II. of the ‘ Practische
Insekten Kunde’ of Dr. E. L. Taschenberg, would find this showed the kind of
injury to the Strawberry leafage very fairly, though not to the full and severe
extent of that sent me.

127

TOMATO.

Root-knot Eelworm. dAnguillula radicola; Heterodera radicola,
Greef.; Heterodera radicicola, Miller.

HETERODERA RADICICOLA.

1, larva; 2 and 3, females; 4 and 5, eggs in different stages of development:
all enormously magnified. (2% from sketch by Ep.; the other figures after Prof.
Geo. Atkinson).

The Heterodera radicicola is a small Eelworm which causes the
growth of knots, or galls, on the roots of many kinds of plants, as
those of the Tomato, Cucumber, Potato, Parsnip, Peach, Vine, Lettuce,
and many others. These knobs are known as the root-knot disease,
and according to the kind of plant, or the circumstances in which it
grows, may be of the most various shapes and sizes, from a little knob
perhaps not the twelfth of an inch across on Clover root, to large
irregular masses of diseased growth, within which the ‘ Root-knot”’
Kelworms are to be found, of both sexes, and in all stages, together
with the eggs.

This infestation is to be found on the Continent of Europe, and in
America, where it has been made the subject of careful investigation ;
but it was not until December in last year (1892) that observations of
its presence in this country were sent me. In this case it was doing
serious mischief by its gall formations on the roots of Tomatoes and
Cucumbers; and though these cannot be classed amongst ‘‘ Farm
crops,’’—and also it is to be hoped that our climate will not suit the
EKelworm as a field infestation,—still it has manifestly a power of
causing so much loss to growers on a large scale under glass, that the
attack appears to need bringing forward.

In the present case I do not give the name, or the locality, of the

128 TOMATO.

erounds of my applicant, for the obvious reason that it might be
injurious to him in a business point of view, but I may mention him
as a grower on such an exceedingly large scale, that the presence of
such an infestation is a very serious matter.

The first communication was sent me on the 12th of December,
and was as follows :-—‘‘I am a nurseryman, and grow a great quantity
of Cucumbers and Tomatoes under glass. My houses are, and have
been for the past three years, infested with Kelworms, which makes it
difficult to get more than three parts of a crop.” The writer added
details of the treatment, as change of soil, &c., which had been carried
out, but which had failed in clearing out the pest, and desired further
information.

On my request for specimens for examination, my correspondent
forwarded me, on the 19th of December, a most ample supply, being
the lower part of the stem of six good sized Tomato plants with the
roots attached. These roots were absolutely loaded with galls, as
shown in the figure photographed from a few of them separated from
the stem, and tied together for convenience of representation. Infor-
mation was sent accompanying that the infesting Eelworms had been
identified by Mr. Marshall Ward, Prof. of Botany at the Royal Indian
Engineering College, as being Heterodera radicicola, and from my own
microscopic examination also of the contents of the galls, I found this
to be the case. In the specimens sent I found the peculiar pear- or
gourd-shaped females, as well as the ordinary Kelworm-shaped or
thread-like males, and young wormlets, and also vast numbers of eggs.

As, however, in a newly observed infestation of this importance, it
was desirable to have every possible information, I forwarded a packet
of the infested galls to Dr. J. Ritzema Bos, of the State Agricultural
College, Wageningen, as being most especially versed in the charac-
teristics and history of the Nematodes, and requested his opinion.
Without delay Dr. Ritzema Bos favoured me with the information that
he found in the galls a very great number of the pear-shaped females,
of which he added sketches (corresponding in form with those at
p. 127), also Tylenchus-like males, and larve, and also noted, ‘‘ There
is no doubt at all that they belong to the species Heterodera radicicola” ;
and in some further information relative to the nature of this infes-
tation, which he was good enough to send me a few days later, he
mentioned that he found “‘an immense number of females, males,
larvee, and eggs,’ and again noted that indeed it was doubtless the
Heterodera radicicola.

The following notes of some of the main characteristics in appearance of
the Root-knot Eelworms are taken from the pamphlet on this subject, pre-
pared from personal investigation by Prof. Geo, I. Atkinson, Prof. of

ROOT-KNOT EELWORM. 129

Biology at the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama.* This
work contains the most fully recorded and carefully detailed microscopic
observations of the Heterodera radicicola with which I am acquainted,
accompanied by a series of plates giving highly magnified representations of
structure.—Ep.

The male is eel-shaped, slender, and exceedingly minute, being
only about one twenty-fifth of an inch, or sometimes a little more, in
length, and only seventeen thousandths of an inch in diameter at
the middle ; slightly less at the end of the tail; and in the anterior
half the wormlet tapers from the middle to about half the central
diameter at the head end. At this extremity is the wsophagus, or
gullet, which is furnished at the foremost end with a minute needle-
like point, capable of being thrust out and withdrawn, and technically

TYLENCHUS DEVASTATRIX.

Stem Eelworms, anterior portion of female showing mouth spear ; and embryo
in egg; all greatly magnified: anterior portion magnified 440 times. From figures
by Dr. J. Ritzema Bos.

known as the “ exsertile spear.” This spear, which rests on a trilobed
base, is so very similar to that of the Tylenchus devastatrix, the ‘‘ Stem
Eelworm,” which causes Tulip-root in Oat plants, and which has
often been referred to in these Reports, that the accompanying figure
of this Tylenchus will give a very good general idea of the form of the
males and of the young larva of the ‘“ Root-knot’”’ Helworm, the H.
radicicola, and also of the position of the spear at the head end.

*¢A Preliminary Report upon the Life-history and Metamorphoses of a Root-
gall Nematode, Heterodera radicicola (Greef.), Mull., and the Injuries caused by it
upon the roots of various plants,’ by Geo. F. Atkinson.—Science Contributions from

the Agricultural Experiment Station, Alabama, U.S. A., Dec., 1889.
K

130 TOMATO,

The eggs of the Root-knot Eelworm (the H. radicicola) when
mature are about three to four thousandth of an inch in length, and
from their transparency the changes in appearance accompanying the
growth of the contained wormlet may be observed within. ‘Two forms
of these are given in figures at p. 127, copied (and here acknowledged
with thanks to the skilled observer) from Prof. Geo. F. Atkinson’s
plates.

The young root-knot wormlet (the larva, technically) is stated,
when it comes out of the egg, to be from twelve to sixteen thousandth
part of an inch in length, and (like the adult male) thread-like in
shape, and like it has an ‘‘exsertile spear’’ with a trilobed base. These
larve, having wandered about for a time, come to rest in the plant
tissues, and undergo a change. The body of the wormlet is stated to
enlarge, excepting at the two ends, and become rigid, so as to form a
kind of chamber, or ‘“‘cyst,’’ in which the final change of the wormlet
takes place to the perfect condition of male or female as the case may be.
In fact this condition may be compared (in the case of the male) to the
chrysalis state of some insects in which the maggot skin hardens, and
the moth or fly forms within.

But in the case of the Root-knot EKelworm a very remarkable form
of transformation takes place. In due time the male (after continuing
to lengthen, and become more slender and thread-like until it is
curled round several times within the ‘‘ cyst” formed of its larval skin)
completes its moult, and breaks forth from the cyst, and roams in the
tissues until it finds its mate, when it pairs and dies. But in the case
of the female the transformations accompanying development are very
different. The male, as noticed, moults and comes forth from the
“cyst,” or old skin in which it has advanced to maturity; but (still
abridging from Prof. Atkinson’s observations) it is noted :—‘ The
female does not moult again, but continues to enlarge enormously
until it is gourd-shaped”’ (see figures at p. 127). ‘* About the time
the ‘cysts’ have reached the stage when the male begins its transfor-
mations, it is easy to distinguish the female cyst. This continues to
enlarge or ‘ swell’ until the tail part is cast and thrust aside, and the
body is sometimes so much swelled at the posterior end as to cause a
noticeable depression at the opening of the vulva.

‘« Fertilization is stated to take place long before this gourd- or
pear-shaped cyst has ceased enlarging, this (that is, the female) con-
tinues to distend until in age its body is filled with eggs and young
larve.” And, ‘‘As the embryos are developing, the body of the cyst
breaks up into an amorphic gelatinous mass, in which the young
larve and eggs are found floating within the cyst cavity. Length of
life cycle, one month.” —(G. F. A.)

From the above notes it will be seen that amongst the main

Fiat ui h
oe Ay

TR Vat
j ee Y

1, Are
A

Wi Ad
. i 5
Agr v 7

West, Newman photo.

TOMATO-ROOTS.

Galled by attack of HETERODERA RADICICOLA,
about two-thirds natural size.

[All rights reserved, |

ROOT-KNOT EELWORM. 131

characteristics of this ‘‘ Root-knot” Eelworm that are moderately
easily observable, are the differences in shape of the male and female.
The female it should be carefully borne in mind is pear-shaped, or
gourd-shaped, that is, short, small at the neck, and much swelled
towards the base; the base itself being either flat below, or with a
central depression. The males and young larve are thread-like (or,
speaking more technically, Tylenchus-like) in general shape. These
points are very important practically. For want of due observation of
these characteristics, the attacks are apt to be wrongly identified, and
consequently serious mistakes to arise in treatment.

Appearance of the galled roots.—The roots sent me were excellent
examples of extent of infestation. These specimens were from good
sized plants of Tomato, as the stems averaged quite an inch and a half
or more in circumference a little above ground level, with a good mass
of roots, averaging when held up as sent free from earth, about four or
five to six inches in length, with some longer still, and about five
inches in breadth. A great number of the root fibres were scattered
more or less thickly throughout their whole length with the root-knot
galls, even to the extremity, at a distance of six or eight inches from
the collar of the plant.

Taking a mass of roots on one Tomato plant for special examination
as a specimen of amount of gall presence, I found about twenty of the
main roots were galled. These main roots as they branched and
branched again, and even on the small side fibres, were infested with
multitudes of irregularly shaped gall growths. Size as well as shape
was quite irregular. Sometimes the ‘“ knots’’ were mere roundish
fleshy lumps, about a quarter of an inch in diameter, but for the most
part they ran wider, sometimes to half an inch or more in diameter,
and very often ran to much greater length (see Plate), consequent
on the galls having joined, and thus forming a confluent mass along
the root fibre. These formed diseased swollen growths of from one
inch to two or three and a half inches along the root fibres, but rarely
averaged more than half an inch, or a little more, in diameter. The
form was so wholly irregular that it can hardly be described, but is
conveyed in the photograph.

When I first received the galled roots (sent me on the 19th of
December), which had then been lying on a rubbish heap for about a
month, the galls appeared to be firm and healthy, but soon many of
them altered, in fact, fell to pieces, the bark peeling off, sometimes,
according to circumstance, by drying, sometimes by wet decay, leaving
(as noted at p. 182) merely the remains of the cells of which the gall
had been composed, the harder parts of the tissue of the cells forming
a little rough mass, a sort of miniature ‘‘rose comb-like”’ lump on the

root from which the outer coat had peeled away.
K 2

182 TOMATO.

The enormous amount of Kelworm presence in the galls was
enough to spread infestation in the earth, and to all plants near
capable of receiving it ; but before giving further detail of this, and of
the attempted measures for checking it, the following information,
taken from the careful observations by J. C. Neal* on the commence-
ment of the attack by the “‘ invasion” of the wormlets from the earth,
and its effect, deserves careful study.

Method of spread of infestation.—This may be in various ways.
The Kelworm, when it comes into active life, may find its way through
a crack out of the gall, or it may make its way into the surrounding
tissues ; or (it is stated) it can use its head end, aided by the spear, to
pierce a way, firstly, owt of the part of the gall in which it has
developed ; and, secondly, into the part of the root where it purposes
to establish itself.

These operations I have not yet had the opportunity of observing in
our British specimens, but one method of spread of infestation on a
large scale was shown by the vast quantity of galls sent to me in De-
cember last. In these the contents of the infested gall were set free by
the peeling off of the outer coat or bark of the so-called Root-knot.

Reference to the Plate will show the different conditions of the
galls. Many of these were still perfect, but some, and notably one
(fourth from the outside of the lower part of the figure, right-hand
side of the Plate) will be seen to show the edges of the harder and
more durable parts of the altered cells, of which the gall is composed,
now free from the protecting bark. As in the galls which I opened, of
the large numbers of which the bunch figured are samples, I found
quantities of the infestation, with the Kelworm-shaped part of it
showing its live condition by its power of movement, it is presumable
that the eggs, and the egg-laden females (although from their shape
their live condition was not similarly noticeable), yet were also alive,
and well capable of continuing infestation.

In regard to the very important point of attack to rootlets taking
place from ‘‘ Root-knot’’ Helworms wandering free in the soil, it is
thus recorded from his own observations, by Dr. Neal.t <‘‘I have
found mature worms, males and non-pregnant females, in rootlets
but a few days old, and under circumstances which involved the
necessity of invasion from without the root.”

These Anguillule, Dr. Neal notes, were small enough to enter the
stomata of epidermal tissues, and he thinks it ‘‘ not unreasonable to

* See ‘The Root-knot Disease of the Peach, Orange, and other plants, in
Florida,’ by J. C. Neal, Ph.D., M.D. Washington: Government Printing Office,
1889.

+ See Report by Dr. Neal, previously referred to, p. 12,

ROOT-KNOT EELWORM. 133

infer that, in this manner, they obtain entrance in young rootlets.”
Once within they can make their way about in the tissues of the root,
and the result of their presence is the unnatural development of cells,
producing the irregular growth known as the gall or root-knot.

The variety both in form and locality of the galls on the roots, and
in effect of the infestation to different kinds or classes of plants,
especially to field vegetables, and to fruit trees, are clearly and service-
ably detailed by Dr. Neal. Of these I quote the following paragraph
as most applicable to our own circumstances :—‘‘ The roots of the
Okra, Radish, Turnip, Cabbage, Cucumber, Melon, Cow-Pea, Peanut,
Tomato, and Egg-plant enlarge enormously, soon becoming little else
than masses of decaying tissues. The plant stops growth, the fruit
either becomes distorted, or drops prematurely, the leaves change
colour and fall off, and the plants die so rapidly as to justify the usual
expression ‘struck by lightning,’ applied to the fields of Melons,
Cucumbers, Tomatoes, and Cow-Peas, so often badly affected by the
root-knot ”’ (J. C. N.). This rapid and sweeping effect, it should be
observed, is an account of damage in U.§.A.; circumstances, where
climate permits Melons and Tomatoes to be grown in the open air
in fields, put this Kelworm attack on a very different footing to what it
is here. In some other attacks the enlargements caused by the root-
knot are chiefly on the main stem, near the surface of the ground; in
others, as in nurseries of young Peach, Orange, or English Walnut
sown for stocks, when the trees have failed from infestation, the cause
is found ‘in the knotty decaying roots, without rootlets, or fibrille ”’ ;
and as observed by Dr. Neal in a few words of summary of this part of
his report :—‘‘ In all of these cases the effect is to deprive the stems
and leaves of the food and moisture ; the knots grow, the branches do
not.” —(J. C. N.)

The kinds of soil favourable for growth of Root-knot, appear to be
those which unite lightness and dampness. Thus the wormlets can
travel with the most convenience to themselves when on their way
through the earth to a new settlement, and they have also the
moisture which is favourable to their vigorous growth. It is stated
that ‘localities highly fertilized with composts, stable manure, or
leaf-mould, show the root-knot quicker in plants, than in compact or
virgin soils, and the worst results are found in gardens planted in long
cultivated, fully fertilized, and thoroughly pulverized areas.” . . .
‘A dry soil with solid growth is”—‘ unfavourable, hence, in many
locations, drainage has entirely changed the character of the land, so
that Peaches and Figs grow where they would not before.”

Infestation spreads rapidly from galled roots. Amongst various
instances showing this is a case where, ‘‘In a spot of new and non-
infested ground, several trees, Peach and Fig, were planted. The

134 TOMATO.

central tree was ‘ knotty-rooted,’ and died in a few months; next year
the roots of the nearest trees, 15 feet away, became knotty nearest the
dead tree, and in four years the disease extended to the tips of the
roots of all the Fig and Peach trees in a circle 120 feet distant each
way from the original infested tree.”—(J. C. N.)

The point of even temporary presence of infested plants starting
presence of the pest is illustrated by a case where, in a nursery free
from disease, some Peach trees with ‘knotted’ roots brought from a
distance were ‘“‘heeled”’-in for a week, the disease spread in all
directions from this nucleus.

From his various records of observation Dr. Neal gives the summary
that the disease can be easily introduced into areas not infested, ‘‘ (1),
by planting infested trees; (2), by the use of composts of muck and
weeds from infested soils; (8), by the distributive action of water and
air, the water carrying particles of soil and worms downward from an
infested elevation, or by dry soil, fragments of dry roots”; ... andhe
also notes, ‘‘ (4) soil containing these worms, I have no doubt, has been
carried on the feet of men and animals, and deposited in healthy
fields, forming the nucleus of a destructive agency, months afterwards
made visible by its effects.’—(J. C. N.)

To the above notes, taken from Dr. Neal’s very useful observations,
should probably be added, in regard to the last item as to methods of
transportation,—carriage in soil adhering to agricultural or garden
implements, as ploughs, spades, forks, or trowels, or on wheels of carts
or wheelbarrows. Also (most especially) care should be given in
infested nurseries, or rather (in our country) in hothouses, or in
growing of crops, such as Cucumbers, Melons, or Tomatoes under
glass, that all earth in pots, or boxes, where infested plants have
grown should be burnt, and the pots, or boxes, well scalded. If the
earth, or the galled roots, are merely thrown to the rubbish heap, there
is no limit to the mischief that may be done; even by the carriage of
the wormlets about the place on the feet or feathers of birds, cats, dogs, or
other creatures.

In the excessively bad attack (in which the losses may be reckoned
by tons), of which the appearance here is the reason for drawing atten-
tion forcibly to what might be a most severe trouble, we do not yet know
with certainty from whence it came, but evidence points towards it
having been imported several years ago from Germany. ‘This H.
radicicola is a Kuropean as well as an American pest, and amongst
plants infested by it is Dracena rosea. In our case Dracenas were
noticed as unaccountably failing, so much so that the cultivation of
them was given up, and this trouble was followed (about four years
ago) by attack on the Cucumbers and Tomatoes, gradually increasing

ROOT-KNOT EELWORM. 135

until it has reached the destructive point which has brought it under
consideration.

We do not as yet know of this Kelworm as a field crop pest here,
but to growers under glass, the extreme difficulty of getting rid of the
infestation, when once established, makes the presence of such a pest
serious in the extreme.

In the paper on this Nematode by Dr. J. Ritzema Bos,* he
mentions that ‘‘ The ground in which the Root Kelworms have once
been found, commonly remains infested agriculturally, and will only
produce diseased plants,” and in the case on which Iam writing the
expense of removal of infested soil, and carting in what it was hoped
would remain clean, and also applications which it was hoped might
poison the pest, have met with very far from the success which could
be desired.—Ep.

Amongst the details of experiment made under the direction of the
Entomologist of the United States Agricultural Department, and
recorded by Dr. Neal, I do not find that any of the applications were
thoroughly remedial. It is stated, however, that alkaline mixtures,
20 to 40 lbs. to each tree, or caustic lime, kainite, muriate and sulphate
of potash, or wood ashes, used several years in succession, have come
nearest a cure, destroying no doubt many free worms, and inducing a
vigorous tough growth of roots more difficult of penetration. It is
especially mentioned that a liberal application of the fertilizer is
requisite, ‘‘ Not less than 3000 pounds to the acre should be used to
produce the required effect, one-half in December, the remainder in
May” (J. C. N.). This of course must be taken with consideration of
nature of fertilizers, also of cost.

A method which appears really to act serviceably (where circumstances
allow of its adoption) is the use of ‘‘ trap plants.’ In field cultivation,
as, for instance, in Continental infestation, where the Eelworm may
be at Clover roots, it may very likely not answer thoroughly, because
(as pointed out by Dr. Ritzema Bos), this kind of Kelworm infests such
a variety of kinds of plants, that the ‘“ trap” or ‘catch ’”’ plants may
not be a special attraction. But in growing under glass the plan
might be thoroughly utilized.

The points to attend to, are to choose some plant which the Kel-
worms are known to be partial to, and when this has grown, to keep
careful watch by examination of some of the plants as to how the plan
is working. Firstly, whether the galls are forming; and, secondly,
their condition, so that the ‘‘trap plant’ crop may be cleared out, and
destroyed before the wormlets are sufficiently mature to make their
way out from the galls, and thus simply add to wormlet presence

* «Tierische Schadlinge und Niitzlinge,’ von Dr. J. Ritzema Bos, p. 781.

136 TOMATO.

instead of lessening. In examination of the plants, and also in
clearing them, it should be most carefully seen to that they are not
raised by being drawn out of the soil. They should be raised so that the
earth comes with them, otherwise the little knobs on the root are just
as likely as not, from the obstruction they cause in drawing, to cause
the young rootlets to break off, and thus the examiner be unaware of
the presence of galls. And in clearing the ‘‘ trap plant,” neglect of
this precaution would leave the ground full of infested “ knots.” <A
glance over the list of common plants subject to infestation would
suggest what might be serviceable; very possibly Radishes might be
of use, but one plant particularly recommended for the purpose is
Lettuce, sometimes known as ‘ Salad.”’

In my recent correspondence with Dr. Ritzema Bos on this subject,
he favoured me with the following remark, embodying the opinion of
the well-known observer of these EKelworms, Herr Frank, on this
subject :—‘‘ Frank says that Lactuca sativa (the common Lettuce) can
be used with success as a trap plant; but as the larve leave the galls
principally in the winter and the spring, the Lactuca should be sown
as early as possible in the spring or the winter.” —(J. R. B., Dee. 31st,
1892).

As yet we do not know to what extent the Heterodera radicicola is
present here, but with the knowledge of the characteristics of the
attack, it is very likely more information may be received on this head,
as being a trouble to growers of garden crops under glass, as Cucum-
bers, Tomatoes, &c. Whether the pest is present in out-of-door crops
here, we are (as far as I am aware) without any reliable proof at
present.

In 1886, a paper was published in the ‘ Gardeners’ Chronicle’
(p. 172, vol. xxvi.), in which a very good account was given of the.
characteristics of the Oat-plant attack, which has since been most
minutely observed, and which is well known under the name of Tulip-
root, or Segging. In this the writer guardedly suggests that this
disease is caused by the H. radicicola ; he does not say that it is so, but
merely, ‘I take the worm to be Heterodera radicicola”; and after
carefully studying a copy made for me of the paper, and of the figures
of the Kelworms accompanying (the original being out of print), I do
not find any mention of the pear- or gourd-shaped females which are
an essential condition of the Heterodera radicicola now under considera-
tion. The long thread-like forms of all the Helworms figured quite
correspond with those of the Z'ylenchus devastatrix, which has now been
shown by successive years of investigation to be the cause of Tulip-root.*

* See also note, p. 6, of ‘L’Anguillule de la Tige (Tylenchus devastatriz, Kuhn),’
par Dr. J. Ritzema Bos; ‘Annotations Deuxiéme Serie,’ Haarlem, 1891, in which
the above points are entered on at length.

ROOT-KNOT EELWORM. 137

Although there are some points of great similarity between Hel-
worms of the genus Heterodera and Tylenchus, they are clearly distin-
guishable with the help of good microscopic powers, if the females are
present, for whilst both males and females, and also the larve of the
Tylenchus devastatriv, are thread-like, or like long and narrow eels in
miniature; in the case of the Heterodera radicicola it is only the males
and the larve in their early stage which have this thread-like or eel-
like form ; the females are of the peculiar form, like a gourd, swelled
at the lower part, and contracted at the top, which is figured at p. 127.

This is a matter of considerable practical importance, for the treat-
ment of the two kinds of Kelworms by no means rests on the same
basis. The Tylenchus may be destroyed, and the plants brought over
attack, by cheap and easily applied chemical dressings, which so far as
we see at present are useless for extirpation of Heterodera radicicola.

Careful experiments, on what is, unfortunately, necessarily a large
scale, are now in progress, of which any satisfactory results will be
recorded.*

* For those who wish to study the subject at length, I may mention that of the
papers which I have quoted from, that by Prof. Geo. F. Atkinson deals at minute
length, and very serviceably for scientific observers, with the structural charac-
teristics and life-history of the Nematodes. It also gives many excellent and enor-
mously magnified figures of them in both sexes and various stages, with anatomical
detail; and, in addition to collateral considerations, most copious references are
given to publications on this and other allied Nematode attacks, and somewhat
analogous gall formations, by many European, and also some American writers.

The paper by Dr. Neal deals chiefly with the subject practically, from the horti-
cultural point of view, as the ‘‘ Root-knot Disease” of Florida, by an Anguillula,
which, in the absence of the literature of the subject, was named by the writer the
Anguillula arenaria. This paper also has many plates, including some very useful
coloured figures of galls.

138

PCr Nre?:

Diamond-back Moth. Plutella cruciferarum, Zeller.

PLUTELLA CRUCIFERARUM.

1, caterpillar; 2, eggs; 3, Diamond-back Moth (all natural size); 4, 5, Diamond-
back Moth, at rest and flying (magnified).

The first reports of appearance of Diamond-back Moth infestation
were much earlier in 1892 than in the notable attack of the preceding
year. Then, so far as appears, no notices were received pointing to the
coming trouble until when early in July the caterpillars were reported
as doing much harm ata locality on the Yorkshire coast, and later (on
the 17th and 20th of the same month) the first observations of severe
injury on the Scottish coast heralded the long train of notices of
serious mischief. Subsequent enquiry showed the moths to have been
observed, and duly identified, some weeks earlier, the first record
given being on the 24th of June.

In the year now past (1892), the infestation was recognised on its
first appearance in moth state, so that we were prepared for what was
coming. Myr. Edw. A. Atmore, F.E.S., writing from King’s Lynn,
Norfolk, informed me:—‘ This year I first noticed Plutella cruciferarum,
the Diamond-back Moth, in the neighbourhood of Lynn, on the 17th
of May, and from that time their numbers seemed to be on the
increase; so much so that on the 29th of May when at Westwick,
near this town, they seemed to be everywhere.”

On the 28th of May, Diamond-backs were sent me as samples of
the species of moths then flying in large numbers over fields near
Pocklington, in Yorkshire ; and on the 81st of the same month, Mr.
Andrew Balsillie, who had paid careful attention to this attack in
1891, reported the recent appearance of the moths in considerable
numbers on St. Andrew’s Links, and also that it was present on the
neighbouring fields. On the same day reports were also sent me of
the appearance of the Diamond-back Moths in considerable numbers
near Crail, also in Fife, and also near Errol, Co. Perth, N.B.

DIAMOND-BACK MOTH. 139

Other communications rapidly followed, including notes sent on
the 2nd of June of appearance of the moths at the much more
northerly locality of Orbliston, Fochabers, Co. Moray, and various
other localities, as Acklington, Northumberland, and a note from
Mr. J. E. Reeve, of North Walsham, Norfolk, who, as well as Mr.
Atmore (p. 188), reported the remarkable amount of Diamond-back
Moths. He observed in a communication bearing date June 2nd :—
«The Diamond-back Moth has made its reappearance on the north-
east coast of Norfolk in clouds, and swarming particularly where there
happen to be Cabbage plants.’’ On the following day presence of the
moth was reported (specimens also accompanying) as occurring on
Cress, near Kelvedon, Essex.

Notes of observation of the moths were sent from various localities
till the middle of June, and to some degree the first brood was obsery-
able later, some stragglers being still reported, together with advanced
caterpillar mischief.

On the 20th of June the first reports of caterpillar presence began, and
after some slight notice of the larve being spinning up, an observation
was sent me on the 5th of July, from Kelvedon, Essex, with completely
characteristic specimens of Diamond-back cocoons containing the
chrysalids, and the information that in some places there the cater-
pillars of the Diamond-back Moths had quite destroyed the crop, and
thus, in this we have secured some amount of record of rate of advance
. of the infestation, through its different stages.

The first notes of appearance of the Diamond-back caterpillar, and
also of it being spinning up to go into chrysalis state, were sent me
respectively on the 20th and 80th of June, by Mr. D. D. Gibb, from
Ossemsley Manor Farm, Lymington, Hants. On the 20th Mr. Gibb
wrote me as follows, enclosing specimens :—‘‘ About ten days ago, in
crossing afield of Oats, following Turnips and Swedes which I believed
to have suffered from Diamond-back Moth last year, I found moths
flying in thousands, and some of these, so far as I could see in the
dusk, very closely resembling the Diamond-back Moths.” (The
specimens of moths sent me by Mr. Gibb were quite certainly of this
species.—Ep.) ‘I did not find time to again visit this field until to-
day, when I found small caterpillars resembling those of Diamond-back
Moth in great numbers on leaves of Charlock plants growing among
the Oats.”’

On the 80th of June, Mr. Gibb forwarded various caterpillars for
examination, of which those he distinguished in his notes as ‘ the
small caterpillars” proved to be of the Diamond-back Moth, and one of
them was then spinning its cocoon. Of these it was observed that
they ‘“‘ entirely swarm on young Cabbage, &c., plants.’’—(D. D. G.)

The next date of appearance of caterpillars reported was on the

140 TURNIP.

22nd of June, sent me from Boughton Grange, Northampton, by Mr.
Wm. Jermyns Brooks, with the following observation :—‘‘I enclose
you some leaves of Kohl Rabi with small caterpillars on, which are
injuring the crop a good deal.”

On the 28th of June, specimens of Rape leaves so much eaten as to
show that the attack was thoroughly commenced in this locality, also
were sent me by Mr. James B. Harding, from Wolf Hall Farm, Marl-
borough, Wilts. Mr. Harding wrote :—‘‘I am instructed by Lord F.
Bruce to forward you specimens of insects found eating Rape on his
farm.” . . . ‘The moth I found on the leaves with them, and
thought it better to send it, as I found two or three more.

‘The insects attack the plant on the under side of the leaves, and
leave them like the two enclosed; the field, where attacked, presents
quite a white appearance.”—(J. B. H.)

The specimens of leaves sent were so eaten away that they were in
the condition like lace-work, often noticed in severe amount of this
attack, and it will be observed that in coincidence with the caterpillar
attack being so fully established, that there were now only stragglers
noticeably remaining of the moths.

The following observations, with which I was favoured by Mr. J.
P. Stuart, of Orbliston, Fochabers, Co. Moray, N.B., respectively on
the 10th of June and the 20th of July, as taken in connection with the
note of moth appearance at Fochabers (see p. 189), put in our hands a
valuable record of observation in this northerly part of Scotland of the
duration of the moth presence; the date of their complete disappear-
ance, and then the date of (what was only too surely to be expected)
the appearance of the caterpillars from the eggs which had been laid
by the moths before they perished.

The following letter was sent me on the 10th of June :—‘‘ Since
writing you a few days ago, I have been observing the progress of the
Diamond-backs ; but strange to say they seem to have almost disap-
peared for the present. I yesterday, when examining my Swedes,
could only find a few moths where they were in large numbers only a
few days before. The conditions of the weather were great heat and
scorching sun, and no wind. I commenced to top-dress to-day, to
prevent a return of the pest.”

The next report with which I was favoured by Mr. Stuart was on
the 20th of July, when he mentioned first appearance of the Diamond-
back caterpillars having been observed early in the preceding week, or
probably ‘‘ in the first week of July,” amongst his Swedes, which thus
gives the date of attack just at the time of first reports of it in the
preceding year (1891), namely, the beginning of July, and the 17th of
the same month. Mr. Stuart wrote as follows :—

‘In continuation of our correspondence of last month on the sub-

DIAMOND-BACK MOTH. 141

ject of Diamond-backs, I have now to inform you that the caterpillar
was observed early last week, or probably, say, the first week of July,
amongst my Swedes. So far the weather has not been favourable for
their development, and I myself could find very few. They were there,
but nothing can be done at the moment on account of heavy cold rain,
which will probably save a lot of trouble in getting rid of them.”—
GeeP.:S.)

The reports sent in during July were not numerous, but showed
caterpillar ravage to be going on at various places widely apart, and in
some cases to be serious. Also they showed the irregular progress of
the stages of the attack, as though in some localities the caterpillars
were spinning up to pass into the chrysalis condition early in the
month; in others, even in localities as widely separated geographically
as Kintore, in Aberdeenshire, N.B., and Swindon, Wiltshire, the
caterpillars were still at work, respectively, on the 28th and 29th of
the month.

On the 4th of July the following notes were sent to me from High
Blaithwaite, Wigton, Carlisle, together with samples of the attack :—
‘*T beg to enclose for your information specimens of the caterpillar of
the Diamond-back Moth, which I find infesting my Turnips. I also
enclose one plant to show the average size of the Turnips so infested.
I observed the moths in large numbers frequenting the edges of the
Turnip fields about a month ago, and I suppose these are from the
eggs then deposited. I do not think the caterpillar exists in such
numbers as to destroy the crop, but I suppose these will soon go into
cocoon, from which will emerge moths, which will breed a sufficient
number of a later brood which will be quite in time, under favourable
circumstances, to cause serious loss to the crop.”

On the 6th of July cocoons were sent me from Billinghay, Lincoln,
by Mr. Frank Gilbert, with the note, ‘‘When looking over our
Mustard this morning we found a large number of cocoons on the
plants.”

On the 11th of July, Mr. J. W. Moss, of Kelvedon, Essex (who
had communicated on the 5th regarding cocoons of the Diamond-backs,
of which the caterpillars had been doing much damage on two kinds
of Cress), wrote me further, ‘‘That the infestation was increasing
enormously, and totally destroying some portions of different crops,—
Cress, Cabbage, Broccoli, &c.; and about an acre of Crimson Candy-
tuft (flower seed) is suffering terribly, and may perhaps be worthless.”

Amongst various specimens sent me from Kintore, Aberdeenshire,
on July 28th, as being then found on Turnip plants in the district, the
Diamond-back caterpillar was present; and on July 29th, a packet of
large Swede leaves badly eaten by caterpillars of the Diamond-back
Moth (the caterpillars being very numerous on them) were sent me

142 TURNIP,

from Lambourn, near Swindon, Wilts, as samples of an infestation
which had not been observed before in the neighbourhood.

After this date no further reports of this infestation were sent me,
which gives the time over which presence of Diamond-backs in some
one or other of their different stages extended in 1892, as being from
the 17th of May to the 29th of July, and, so far as can be judged by
reports sent to myself, the attack was far less prevalent than in 1891.
The localities from which it was reported were very much fewer, the
attacks mostly were much less severe, and whilst in 1891 the damage
continued to be a serious matter during much of July, and even in
some cases up to the middle of August, it is satisfactory to note that
in 1892 I had no reports of serious mischief after the 11th of July.

The methods of prevention and remedy require no further comment,
as these were entered on fully in my preceding report, and in the past
season it has again been noticed that any treatment to keep up the
strength of the crop under attack is especially desirable.

The Diamond-back Moths are only about two-thirds of an inch
across in the spread of the fore wings, and as usually seen in a some-
what rubbed condition look like brownish grey moths, paler or darker
according to the amount to which the powdery plumage forming the
pattern on the wings has been rubbed away. When in perfect order
they are easily recognisable by the diamond-shaped pattern formed as
figured at p. 188 by the light marking down the edges of the fore
wings as they lie together when at rest. The caterpillars are usually
of a delicate green ; sometimes in young state yellowish or greyish,
with black head. When near full growth the head is usually grey or
yellowish, and the next ring is without the two black patches often
found in caterpillars of this nature. The segments have some black
dots, and the caterpillar tapers slightly towards each end, and at full
growth is about half an inch long.

When full fed the caterpillars spin cocoons in any convenient spot
on or near their food plants. These may be a mere open net-work of
threads, or thicker, and of a sort of boat-shape, and within these the
caterpillar changes to a chrysalis, which, when mature, is (character-
istically) whitish, with some black streaks. In their early stage they
may be grey or brownish.

The above note is only given as a general guide to the appearance
of the infestation, the details of this and other points of the attack
having been so very fully entered on in my ‘ Report of Observations of
Injurious Insects for 1891,’ pp. 105 to 164.

ee ih wi

We
FAM At |

Pine hat an, pei

n

» Ans

3 \
i} F Ws
A itt ,
i d Fi q ob i
i ‘ i
' 4 \ eto
i i , ver oh - |
i ri! 1
v is }
3 i* ff
; , he i
if ‘2 J
‘ te 1 ,
1 ' fe } '
i" VAR, ty
p mall i ow * t d
/ 1 J ' t
ke ly anee f aw
vor ub, "2s : ; :) F
, + t rans
' | Vi
h a
A . iy)
iM ft y 1
ft y +e i
ty t ‘
hi! ‘l ee fu f }
it Poa, .
& i 4 U f
Me 7)
tual , yr. t
Nees! rf \ ‘ }
i i f i {
i
A ui i
( ; - | 7 Shahi
' i '
' ‘ 1" 1 i 4, ay
PAR URE IL: s f \e ¢ Le
ay f t : 1 ' rts
iy, ead uh,
Met fi q i)@
Py 4 ‘
if
vt i
1 i H
, ow
j /
1

West, Newman photo.

CABBAGE-ROOT

affected by disease known as
FINGER-and-TOE; CLUB; or ANBURY; caused by
SLIME FUNGUS (Plasmodiophora brassice).

[All rights reserved.|

148

TURNIP AND CABBAGE-ROOT ATTACKS.

Turnip and Cabbage Root-gall Weevil. Ceutorhynchus sulcicollis,
Gyll. Turnip and Cabbage-root Flies. dAnthomyia radicum,
Linn.; A. brassicea, Bouché; A. floralis, Fallen, &. Also the
disease caused by Slime Fungus, Plasmodiophora brassica,
Woronin, commonly known as Finger-and-Toe, Anbury, or
Club.

Amongst the yearly enquiries sent regarding damage supposed to
be caused by various kinds of insects to Turnips and to Cabbage-roots,
a large proportion of the attacks referred to prove, on examination of
specimens sent, to be due, not to insect infestation, but to the diseased
growths commonly known as “‘ Anbury,”’ or “ Fingers-and-Toes,”’ when
they occur in Turnips, or as Club when it is the roots of Cabbages
that are affected, which is caused by a “ Slime Fungus.”

Various kinds of insect infestations may very possibly be present,
but as there is often difficulty in distinguishing the mischief caused by
these from the mischief shown in the diseased growth caused by the
Slime Fungus, it may be of some service to give the accompanying
figures taken from life of «« Finger-and-Toe,” and allied forms of these
distorted growths, which, by comparison with the figures of insect
attack and descriptions, will show the differences in the nature of the
attacks.

The few paragraphs immediately followiny are given as a short
preliminary notice of the main points of observation.

Of the two most injurious kinds of insect infestation to the roots
which are commonly met with, one is that of the maggots of Cabbage
and Turnip-root Flies, which bore into the roots and cause mischief,
sometimes to a very serious extent, by the decay thus originated, as
well as by their destructive gnawings; but they do not cause gall
growths, nor do they cause the diseased, enlarged growths which we
see in cases of ‘‘ Finger-and-Toe,” or ‘‘ Club.”

Another common insect attack is that of the Turnip and Cabbage
Root-gall Weevil. This causes the smooth roundish knobs, or groups
of knobs, that are very often to be found on Turnips and Swedes, and
also on Cabbage-roots ; these lumps, or galls, being from about the
size of half a pea to that of half a hazel nut, and when somewhat
advanced in growth they have usually a hollow central chamber in
which lies a legless, wrinkled maggot, with a chestnut-coloured head.
But this attack (as well as that of the root fly maggots) does not cause
malformations of whole roots.

Other kinds of insect attacks may also be present, as, for instance,

144 TURNIP AND CABBAGE-ROOT ATTACKS,

of the Turnip Winter Gnat, also of the Rove Beetles, popularly known
as ‘* Devil’s Coach Horses,’’ and there may very likely be presence of
Acari, or Mites, in great numbers. But none of these, nor yet the
presence of any other insect, or Mite, or worm infestation of any kind
whatsoever, causes the growth commonly known as Finger-and-Toe,
Anbury, or Club. This is caused by a Fungus, a “ Slime Fungus,”
the Plasmodiophora brassica, scientifically, which infesting the roots, by
passing into them from infested soil or surroundings, gives rise to the
swelled and misshapen, and, in bad cases, ultimately putrid condition
of the diseased roots, which causes yearly widespread loss in field and
garden crops in many parts of the country.

CEUTORHYNCHUS SULCICOLLIS.

1—5, galls with maggots, nat. size and magnified ; 6, 7, weevil, nat. size and
magnified ; 8, leg of weevil, magnified.

It is very possible—in all probability it may often be the case—that
Turnip and Cabbage-roots infested by Gall Weevils, or by Root Fly-
maggots, or other insect attacks, may also be Finger-and-Toed, or
Clubbed, for there is nothing in the nature of the insect attack to act
as a preservative against the fungoid infestation. Also it is exceedingly
likely that Clubbed or Finger-and-Toed roots should be infested in
addition by insect presence. I know these attacks to occur coincidently
from my own personal observations, and in the words of Messrs.
Sutton, ‘‘ When we cut open a large offensive Club, it is no unusual
thing to find it packed full of strange creatures, like a travelling
menagerie!’’* Butall the same, each several kind of attack gives rise
only to its own special kind of mischief, of which the origin, the
history, and the effects are clearly distinguishable the one from the
others, and though Clubbed or Finger-and-Toed, roots may (as above
mentioned) be often found with insect infestation present, I am also
aware, from personal examination, that they may often be found
without it. Taking now, firstly, and in sufficient detail to make them
clearly recognisable, such of the insect infestations as are most

* «Culture of Vegetables and Flowers from Seeds and Roots,’ by Messrs. Sutton
& Son, p. 285,

TURNIP AND CABBAGE ROOT-GALL WEEVIL, 145

commonly confused with the malformations known as ‘ Finger-and-
Toe,” &c.; that of the Turnip and Cabbage Root-gall Weevil, with the
knobs and lumps that it causes on the roots, is perhaps the attack
least easily distinguishable from the lumpy deformities caused by the
Slime Fungus.

This attack is caused by a small blackish weevil beetle, of shape
and size figured at p. 144, furnished with a long curved snout, to the
sides of which are affixed a pair of ‘‘ elbowed’ horns or antenne ; the
thorax, or fore body, has a channel running lengthwise along the
centre, and the wing-cases have very fine furrows running along them.
The beetles have a slight sprinkling of whitish or grey scales above,
and beneath are light coloured from the greater amount of these scales.

The female lays her eggs either on the sur-
face of the attacked roots, or in a little hole
which she forms for their reception, and the
maggots which hatch from these establish
themselves in the outer part of the Turnip
bulb, and in the case of Cabbage plants for
the most part in the main root, or rather
underground stem. There the presence of
these maggots causes the growth of the galls,
within which they may soon be found, even
without the help of a magnifying-glass. They
are (when seen magnified) whitish grubs, very
much wrinkled across, fat and fleshy, and with
a yellowish or chestnut head, armed with strong,
toothed jaws, these also chestnut-coloured, and
darker at the tips. These maggots are legless,
commonly lie curled on one side, as figured at
p. 144, and I have noticed that they varied in
colour with their food, being of an orange
colour when feeding on Swedes. When full-fed
they leave the galls, and make little earth
cocoons in which they turn to chrysalids, and
thence to weevil beetles. But the main point
here is to give the distinctions by which the
insect-galled roots may be known from those
that are fungous-diseased. One point is the
regularity of the formations, as shown in the
figure. The galls are commonly rounded
smooth knobs, single or in groups, as shown, and on cutting them
open, we do not find, as in Finger-and-Toe, or Club, a mere mass of
disorganised tissue progressing to general rottenness, but we find, as
figured at p. 144, a central chamber bearing signs of having been

L

Young Rape plant with
galls of C. sulcicollis, after
Dr. Ritzema Bos.

146 TURNIP AND CABBAGE-ROOT ATTACKS,

gnawed out by the maggot lying in it. Or, in case we come to our
examination after the maggot has made its way out, still we have the
exit hole, the regularly eaten out cavity, and the dirt, or “‘ frass” as it
is called, consequent on the feeding of the maggot, to prove exactly
what has been going on. There will very likely be decay also, for
injured Turnip and Cabbage-roots soon decay ; but this will be local at,
or starting from, the rotting remains of the galls, and very easily dis-
tinguishable from the masses of mere shapeless rottenness produced
by an old club.*

Another of the insect attacks often prevalent to a serious extent,
and not always distinguishable from ‘ Finger-and-Toe,” is that of the
Turnip and Cabbage-root Flies.

ANTHOMYIA RADICUM.

1, maggot of A. brassice; 2, 8, pupa-cases, nat. size and magnified; 4,5, A. radicum,
magnified, and lines showing nat. size.

There are several kinds of these root flies, of which three species,
scientifically known respectively as the Anthomyia brassice, A. radicum,
and A. floralis, are so much alike in their various stages, and their
method of life, that it is difficult to distinguish them without very
minute examination. The figure of the kind more particularly known
as the Root Fly, given at ‘“‘4” above, conveys a good general idea of
the appearance of these flies when much magnified. The length and
extent of spread of the wings are given at ‘‘5.”’ The general colouring
is of black and grey, differently disposed in stripes, dots, &c., and there
is a little difference in size. The maggots are also very similar in
appearance, and are legless, cylindrical, and tapering to the head end,
which contains the hooks that serve as a feeding apparatus, and they
are blunt at the tail. When full-fed they turn (commonly in the
earth) to chrysalis condition in cases of about the shape and size
figured above of those of the Cabbage-root Fly; these are of some

* The methods of prevention are given further on, in order not to interrupt the
description of the appearance of the infestation,

WINTER TURNIP GNAT. 147

shade of brown, or reddish brown, or in the case of the A. radicum,
sometimes of an ochreous tint.

It is generally considered that the A. brassice and the A. radicum
are the commonest kinds, but in 1883, when Cabbage-root attack was
unusually prevalent, the kind known as 4A. floralis (sometimes as the
Radish Fly) proved to be most present.*

Returning now to the points which cause confusion between this
fly-maggot attack and Finger-and-Toes. The maggots eat passages in
Cabbage and Turnip-roots, and possibly there may be no external
swelling ; but also there may be. The Cabbage-stalks may be swelled,
and they usually become putrid, and Turnips also are subject to the
same changes. In the larger proportion of enquiries sent to me in the
past season regarding the fungoid disease described, as the case might
be, as “ Anbury,”’ “‘ Finger-and-Toe,”’ or ‘‘ Club,’’ the senders connected

TRICHOCERA HIEMALIS.

Winter Turnip Gnat, maggot and pupa, nat. size, and magnified.

it with the presence of grubs or maggots, sometimes specified as ‘* fly-
maggots’’; but still these maggots, though coincident with the
disease, as I could see for myself, in no way caused it. The
characteristics of the fungoid growth, as will be shown further on, are
distinct and well marked, and (though insects are often present) these
growths are often to be found wnaccompanied by any insect galleries, or
insect workings.

Another insect attack sometimes, like those above mentioned,
incorrectly connected with Finger-and-Toe presence, is that of the
Winter Turnip Guat, the Trichocera hiemalis.

* Those who wish to go into the subject in detail will find observations on the
Cabbage and root flies in Curtis’s ‘ Farm Insects,’ and on these and the Radish Fly
in the ‘ Praktische Insekten-kunde’ of Dr. Taschenberg, and in the ‘ Tierische
Schadlinge und Niitzlinge’ of Dr. Ritzema Bos. References to this infestation are
given in various of my own Annual Reports, and especially at pp. 10—17 of that for
1883, when I had the advantage of specimens being identified for me by Mr. R. H.
Meade; and consequently became aware of the extent of the injuries of the “Radish
Fly.”

L 2

148 TURNIP AND CABBAGE-ROOT ATTACKS.

These little gnats may often be seen in swarms, or parties, of vast
numbers hovering at some one spot during the winter, and their
maggots feed especially in rotten Turnip bulbs.

Passing now from malformations caused by insect presence, and
also from insect presence occurring in rotten Turnips or Cabbage, it
is necessary to give afew words to the spindly and much divided growth
(figure below) to which formerly the name of Finger-and-Toe was
sometimes given.

\
\

wit
\\

ei

\

ANIM

This is in no way a diseased growth, rather the reverse. It isa
movement backwards towards the original condition of the roots,
whether of Turnip, or Carrot, or Parsnip, in their wild state, free
from the fleshy developments brought about by high cultivation. In
the words of John Wilson, Prof. of Agriculture in the University of
Edinburgh, it is ‘‘ well known to the vegetable pathologist as ‘dactylo-
rhiza’”’ (from two Greek words signifying, respectively, a finger or toe
and a root.—Ep.), ‘‘ the intermediate condition between the natural
(wild) and the artificial state.” *

The experiments at Rothamsted (1843-45) showed that by planting
on unmanured land several years in succession, at the fourth year
the Turnip-bulb had disappeared, and the root resumed its former wild
state. The experiments and observations of Prof. J. B. Buckman at
the Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, show that this split and
spindly-rooted state may be induced by a variety of causes, as weak-
ness of seed, poorness of ground, and other circumstances ; and in the
concluding lines of his elaborate paper on this subject, Prof. Buckman

* «Our Farm Crops,’ by Prof. Wilson, vol. i., p. 316.

rey vin
«) ert his Phuc!
i‘ Fi ry

$

West, Newman photo.

CABBAGE-ROOT

affected by disease known as
GLUB; FINGER-and-TOE; or ANBURY; caused by
SLIME FUNGUS (Plasmodiophora brassice),

[All rights reserved. ]

FINGER-AND-TOE, ANBURY, OR CLUB. 149

notes of this form that he considers ‘“‘The enumerated experiments
seem to show that Finger-and-Toe is the midway from wildness to
cultivation; and our observations upon the circumstances connected
with cultivated root crops, that the malformation in them, is the result
of degeneration from cultivation to wildness.” —(J. B. B.) *

Finger-and-Toe being a name applicable to any much divided root
growth, has unfortunately been applied to very different conditions;
but, so far as I am aware, the other common names applied to the
swollen tumour-like masses of the fungoid disease known also as Club
and Anbury, have never been given to this state of ‘ calling back ”’ to
the original form of root above noticed. Its spindly, or Radish-shaped,
and regular and sound, though much divided development, is the very
opposite of that of the swollen masses which now cause so much loss
in the country, and I have only alluded to it because an occasional
enquiry shows that confusion sometimes still exists, solely in conse-
quence of one name having been applied to two or more distinct kinds
of attacks, of all of which we now are well acquainted with the
respective histories.

Fincer-anp-Tor, ANBuRY, OR CLUB.

The diseased swellings and malformations of roots which are known
in this country by the above names, and on the Continent as Hernia,
or rupture, and which especially affect the roots of Turnips and
Cabbage, are caused by infestation of a ‘‘ Slime Fungus,” scientifically
the Plasmodiophora brassice of Woronin.

The accompanying Plates showing three characteristic forms of
this diseased growth are from photographs of specimens kindly sent
me at my request from Balderton Hall, Myddle, near Shrewsbury, by
Mr. G. G. Blantern, and to save any confusion as to the nature of the
attack, it has seemed best to give all three popular names on each
Plate, with the name commonly applied to the form figured placed
first. (See Frontispiece, and Plates to face pp. 143 and 149).

Now that the information has been placed in our hands, of the pre-
cise nature of the infestation, with full details of its history, it is easy
for any qualified observer, with the help of a sufficiently powerful
microscope, to trace out all the minutie of this ‘‘ Slime Fungus” attack,
and its effects on the infested tissues for himself; but it was not until
the year 1876, when, after long research, the precise nature of the
attack was discovered by M. Woronin, a Russian botanist, that its
true history was known. For many years I have myself been obliged,
in the course of my regular work, to study it practically, and to some

* «Finger-and-Toe in Root Crops,’ by James B. Buckman, F.G.S., F.L.S., Prof.
of Geology and Botany, Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, published in Journal
of Royal Agricultural Society of England, vol. xv., 1st series,

150 TURNIP AND CABBAGE-ROOT ATTACKS.

extent microscopically ; but not being a regular fungologist, I give the
following abstract of the main points of life-history of this Slime Fun-
gus from the digests of Prof. Marshall Ward and Mr. Worthington
G. Smith.*

It appears that if a section of a diseased root is examined micro-
scopically, a portion of the greatly enlarged cells will be found filled
with what may be called spores, or spherules, or (generally) a formation
from which a young ‘“‘ Slime Fungus”’ will presently emerge. These
are stated to be packed so closely in the containing, much enlarged,
plant cells, that (to use the words of Prof. Marshall Ward) these ‘look
like bags of small shot,” but they need strong microscopic powers to
distinguish them clearly, each spore being only about one six-hundredth
part of a millimetre in diameter, that is, about one six-hundredth part
of a twenty-fifth part of an inch.

Spores and embryos of “ Slime Fungus,” Plasmodiophora brassice, after Woronin.
Nat. size of spores about one six-hundredth of a twenty-fifth part of an inch.

Each of these minute colourless spores, or spherules, is composed
of a little speck of what is called ‘‘ protoplasm ”’ (or formative material)
surrounded by a cell wall of delicate membrane, as figured at “1.” In
this condition the spores are stated to pass the winter in the rotten
roots, or in the earth where they may have been dispersed by the
decaying of the roots in which they were formed. After the ‘“ rest”
season has passed the spore splits on one side, and the contents
gradually make their way out, as figured at ‘*2” and “3’’; and at
“4” the irregularly shaped growing mass is shown as completely
escaped. ‘These masses soon become furnished with a long tail-like
process “5,’’ and with the help of these tails, hairs, or cilia, these

* A plain and serviceable account of the life-history of the Plasmodiophora
brassice, with some good suggestions as to prevention of recurrence of attack, will
be found in ‘ Diseases of Field and Garden crops,’ by Worthington G. Smith (Mac-
millan & Co.) ; and in ‘ Diseases of Plants,’ by Prof. Marshall Ward (a small volume
published by the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge), at pp. 47—58, a more
especially technical account is given of the history and action of the infestation.
For general information these two works are perhaps more serviceable than very
elaborate treatises.

SLIME FUNGUS, 151

minute bodies have the power of moving about. These rudimentary
little fungi (‘6’), so to call them, can multiply by division, or, on the
other hand, several may join together into an irregularly shaped mass
called a plasmodium. From this the attack takes its name Plasmodio-
phora, signifying Plasmodium-bearer. This plasmodium, it is found,
can now further extend by joining other bodies (plasmodia, that is) of
the same nature, or by absorbing contents of the spores. It can creep
along by the extension of arm-like processes along its sides into which
the contents of the body of the mass press forward. ‘The plasmodium
is enclosed by a dense hyaline layer, and this in turn is surrounded by
a thin coat of mucilage, which mucilage is sometimes left behind by
the progressing plasmodium, like a trail of slime from a Slug.” * From
this slimy deposit the name of ‘‘ Slime Fungus”’ is derived. Without
pursuing the subject in full detail, it may be enough for practical use
to add that presently these plasmodia divide into minute specks, each
of these becomes covered with a fine membrane, and thus once again
the infestation is started, as figured at the opposite page.

The method of infestation is for the embryo Slime Fungi to be
absorbed by the rootlets, and, when there, cause a distension of the
infested cells, and a drag on the juices of the plant to support the
fungoid infestation which cause respectively the well-known swellings,
and also the loss of growing power in the plant by reason of the
abstracted sap, independently of the too frequent total loss of the plant
from the subsequent decay.

The gradually advancing progress of the disease in its effects on
the form and condition of the affected roots is much more easily
observable. At first it may be shown merely by variously shaped
swellings of the main or side roots. ‘This is caused by the distension
of the cells of which the roots are composed. These enlargements
increase until sometimes, as with the form known as Club (see figure
at p. 149, after photograph from life), the main root or underground
stock is enormously enlarged into a mere shapeless mass ; or the long
irregular lobes, or finger-like growths, may be found, which, in their
swelled and lengthened form, bear the fancied resemblance to Fingers-
and-Toes, which have given this name to the lobed form of the disease.
This may be found affecting the solid main root, or what would in
a healthy state have been the ordinary side roots, until they become
irregular tuber or spindle-shaped masses attached by a short length of
fairly healthy little swelled root to the main root itself.

The name of Anbury appears to be more especially given to the
form (see Frontispiece) in which the root is greatly diseased, swelled,
and variously misshapen; but there is not much tendency to the

* « Diseases of Field and Garden Crops,’ by Worthington G. Smith, pp, 95, 96.

152 TURNIP AND CABBAGE-ROOT ATTACKS.

Finger-and-Toe-like divisions. Besides the alterations to the general
form of the root, the outer skin, or outside of the infested parts, also
changes in appearance, and even in a single specimen may show
various conditions, which will be seen on examination of the figures,
with the help of a moderately strong magnifying-glass.

Besides the large swelled protuberances there will be roughnesses
of surface, deep cracks, or burstings open, and patches or spots, even
where the skin remains, and in a more advanced state (as shown in
the Plate more especially figured as Anbury) the diseased masses in
their enlargement may be found to have burst forward from under the
skin leaving this forming a hard curving back border over the tumour,
the next step to the perishing condition in which all structural dis-
tinctions of surface are lost in putrid and loathsomely offensive decay.

Within the affected roots the progress of the disease (that is to say,
the gradual spread in the tissues of the presence of the ‘‘ Slime Fun-
gus”) may be traced even in a comparatively early stage by such a
marked alteration, both in texture and colour, that I have found it
quite possible by my own process of modelling from life to give a pre-
cise facsimile copy of the altered condition. Gradually, as the Plasmo-
diophora infestation advances, the attacked parts will be distinguishable
by the yellow slimy appearance, and a much enlarged or distended
state of the cells of the infested part, until this increases to the general
destruction of the root, ending in the putrescence which sets free the
spores by millions on millions in autumn, to lie in their resting state
ready to germinate next year (as shown at p. 150) and infest whatever
suitable cultivated crop or wild plant may be at hand.

Turnips and Cabbage of different kinds are the crops in which the
infestation are most observed; but Charlock is a great means of
supplying the Slime Fungus with suitable food during the years (when
in ordinary rotation of crop) the pest might be dying out, and others
of the Crucifere (or allied plants of the Cabbage nature) are liable to
attack.

This attack has long been known as one both very prevalent, and
causing much loss, but of late years, and especially during last
season, much enquiry has been sent, and from some of these notes I
give a few observations.

The following communications sent me by Mr. G. G. Blantern,
from Balderton Hall, Myddle, near Shrewsbury, refer to the attack,
from specimens of which the figures on the accompanying Plates
showing the conditions commonly known as Anbury, Finger-and-Toe,
and Club, were afterwards, at my request, forwarded to me in order
that we might have thoroughly characteristic representations.

On Oct. 6th, Mr. Blantern first wrote to me on the subject, men-
tioning :—‘‘ I send you by parcel post a Turnip and a Cabbage plant,

FINGER-AND-TOE. 153

and should be glad to know what you think of them. The Cabbage
plant we consider a true case of Finger-and-Toe.” It was also
mentioned that no similar disease had previously been observed in the
neighbourhood. The specimens sent were quite certainly of the
diseased growth known as Finger-and-Toe, and in the case of the
Turnip much putrified at the lower part of the root.

Somewhat later, at my request, Mr. Blantern favoured me with the
following details :—‘* My Turnips were sown from the 20th to 24th of
May on a 20-acre field of ‘red loam,’ which has been farmed on the
four-course system for 380 years! No Charlock has been grown. The
manure used was the following: raw bone meal 4 cwt., mineral super-
phosphate 8 ewt., salt 1 ewt., per acre. The Turnips looked remarkably
well until the first week in July, when they suddenly dropped their
leaves, and upon examining the roots a disease was visible; since then
they have gone from bad to worse: about 10 acres have entirely dis-
appeared ; 5 acres have lingered on, and are similar to the specimens
Isent you. The remaining 5 acres, though partially attacked, I esti-
mate at about 15 tons to the acre.

“‘The Turnip crop generally in this neighbourhood is very heavy
this year, and had my crop finished as they promised to do in July
last, I should think my weight per acre would have been from 25 to
30 tons at the least. From this you will understand that the loss to
me is most serious, as well as being especially disappointing.’’—
(G..G., .B.)

The following communication was sent me on August 8rd from
near Collumpton, Devon, with specimens of ‘‘ Anburied”’ roots accom-
panying, by Mr, T. Pitt:—‘*I am sending you by the same post some
specimens of Swedes attacked by ‘ Fingers-and-Toes,’ or ‘ Anbury,’ in
an early stage.” . . . ‘I have the plants, sown about June 24th,
attacked both in heavy and light land (gravel); the former, after ley,
Wheat, the latter, after ley, Barley, both ploughed last autumn, but
worked out this spring, owing to the very unfavourable autumn of
1891 ; both manured with farmyard manure this spring, and 1 cwt. of
guano, and 8 cwt. of dissolved bones per acre, and 4 ewt. of kainit per
acre sown broadcast in spots for trial.” . . . ‘* Charlock is also
badly affected. I believe it is rather general in this neighbourhood :
last year we had little or none.’’—(T. P.)

From near Rotherham, Yorks, enquiries were sent with the obser-
vation :-—‘‘ The farmers in this neighbourhood have for some years
suffered loss by their Turnips ‘ Finger-and-Toeing’’’; and from Mr.
Leonard, of Preston, Hull, I had a note that he was informed by
several growers that in the Selby district (also in Yorkshire), where a
little brown Mustard seed is grown, that for a year or two after it, if
the land is sown with Turnips, they almost invariably “ Finger-and-
Toe.”

154 TURNIP AND CABBAGE-ROOT ATTACKS.

From near Burton-on-Trent, in Staffordshire, a correspondent
reported about twelve acres of Turnips having gone like the specimens
sent, which were decided examples of Anbury.

From Penrith, in Cumberland, on the 28rd of August, badly
‘*Anburied,”’ or ‘‘ Finger-and-Toed,’’ Turnips were sent me with
enquiries as to the cause of that disastrous scourge to Turnip crops
known as Finger-and-Toe. I had also a communication from another
correspondent relative to the serious loss caused by prevalence of this
attack in Cumberland generally.

To these I may add a note from a locality near Shortlands, Kent,
sent with badly Clubbed roots of plants of Brussels Sprouts accom-
panying as samples of an attack, of which the sender remarked :—‘ I
find the whole of my plants of the Cabbage tribe are all affected, and
are all dying off.’’

The above notes are given partly to show (with the addition of
some others to be referred to further on) the widespread presence of
this destructive infestation, whether in the northern or midland
counties, or in the westerly or easterly extremities of the island.
Partly also to show that even in these few notes the presence of the
disease on Turnips after a preceding growth of some weed like Char-
lock, or cultivated crop as Mustard, is observable practically. Also it
is, I think, an important point to observe that perhaps hardly an
enquiry was sent me regarding Finger-and-Toe, without a suggestion
on the part of the sender that the disease was due to insect infestation,
and of these samples of diseased roots, I did not find one in which
(though insects might also be there) the condition was not clearly and
demonstrably due to the Finger-and-Toe disease caused by ‘“ Slime
Fungus,” Plasmodiophora brassice.

This point, that is, the fact of Finger-and-Toe disease having a
known history of its own, and known methods of prevention, indepen-
dently of insect attacks which may occur with it, is very important to
be kept in mind, and want of this knowledge may reasonably be
supposed to be one cause why the infestation is so often allowed to
establish itself.

PREVENTION AND Remepies.—As the amount of presence of the
Finger-and-Toe disease has been found to turn in part on the nature
of the soil, so preventive measures turn also in part on applications
which will supply what is needful for the plant, and also be obnoxious
to the Fungus. Also attention is needed to such treatment as, by
chemical dressings, measures in cultivating the infested land, and
removal of infested remains, also in non-use of manure to which
infested roots have been thrown, may respectively destroy the Fungus
in the ground; give clean, or comparatively clean, land for the next

FINGER-AND-TOE. 155

‘‘infestable’’ crop, and prevent manure full of Fungus spores in
rotted matter from Turnips being brought back to it. Also a rotation
of crop, and a freedom from weeds liable to infestation, so as to give
time for the Fungus to perish for want of food after germination, are
very important matters.

With regard to nature of soil.-—In the paper on ‘ Anbury, and the
analysis of Diseased Turnips,’ by the late Dr. Augustus Voelcker,
Chemist to our Royal Agricultural Society,* he observes as follows :—
‘Tt is well known that Turnips grown upon light sandy soils are much
more frequently affected by ‘“‘Anbury,” or “‘ Fingers-and-Toes,” than
roots grown on stiffer land, containing a fair proportion of the four
chief components of all soils—clay, lime, sand, and vegetable matter.”

Dr. Voelcker, after further remarking on presence of this attack
being influenced by ‘absence or insufficiency of lime in light sandy
soils—hence the manifest benefit with which lime, chalk, marl, shell-
sand, and other calcareous manures are used as preventives of this and
similar diseases in Turnips ’—further notes :—-‘‘ But at the same time
it must not be supposed that the absence or deficiency of lime in land
is always the cause of Fingers-and-Toes in Turnips, and that liming is
a universal preventive of this disease.’’—(A. V.)

In the year 1859, when Dr. Voelcker’s paper was published, the
clue was still wanting to the reasons why a state of soil which some-
times was highly beneficial, sometimes also was no preservative. It
was not until the year 1876 that the true nature of the fungoid disease
which causes Anbury was known; and the following observations, with
which, at my request, I was kindly favoured by Mr. Gilbert Murray,
from the Estate Office, Elvaston, gives a very good sketch of how the
matter stood :—

‘* Anbury, or Finger-and-Toe.—This is a troublesome disease, which
affects the Lrassica tribe ; it has long been imperfectly understood, and
its origin attributed to various causes. J have known farms where
roots could not be successfully cultivated owing to the certainty of
the appearance of the disease ; it is more common in wet than in dry
seasons in soils rich in humus. There is little doubt a too frequent
repetition of the root crop on the same land is a contributive cause by
the abstraction of a large quantity of potash and lime from the soil.
Recent researches have traced the source of the disease to living
organisms in the soil, the germs of which may, under favourable con-
ditions, remain dormant in the soil. For several years I have known
cases in which lime has been successfully used. Lime is not a manure,
and hence its use is not desirable on tillage land, as it liberates the

* See Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England, 1st series, vol. xx.,
p- 101.

156 TURNIP AND CABBAGE-ROOT ATTACKS.

fixed nitrogen in the soil, which then takes the form of ammonia, one
of the most volatile gases known to chemists. A mixture of gas-lime
and salt has been tried with varying success.” . . . ‘A mixture
of superphosphate and kainit, and an extended system of cropping,
will in general prove effective.”’—(G. M.)

Some further very serviceable suggestions of Mr. Gilbert Murray’s
are given further on.

But returning now to the observations of Dr. Voelcker, at pp. 102
—104, in the paper previously quoted, some notes will be found of the
excellent effect of gas-lime as a preventive of the disease, which are
well worth consideration. Dr. Voelcker notices that in a field of
considerable extent at Ashton Keynes, near Cirencester, the Turnips
were affected by Anbury to an extent such as he had never seen
before. ‘‘ There was hardly a sound root to be seen, except on two
isolated patches.”’ The rest were all more or less attacked, exhibiting
‘the characters of Anbury in its most malignant form.”

On examination of one of the two isolated spots, not many yards
square, it was found that the Turnips, though not large, were nearly all
sound, and on investigation as to the nature of a whitish looking sub-
stance resembling gas-lime which Dr. Voelcker found on examination
of the soil, he learned that on this spot a cart-load of gas-lime had been
unloaded the year before.

In my own experiments as to effect of this application as a remedy
for presence of Club in Cabbage on badly infested ground, I have found
it to act perfectly, clearing the disease absolutely out, so that where the
roots had been perfect masses of malformation and rottenness, the
succeeding crops were free. This was whilst I was for some years
resident near Isleworth, and it may perhaps bear practically on the
subject, and be of interest to notice, that from the attention drawn
during those years in that great Cabbage growing district to the ser-
viceableness of gas-lime as an application, that the price rose from
being procurable for cost of carting, to 7/- or 7/6 a load. On speaking
of the matter to Mr. Wilmot, one of the chief growers of the neigh-
bourhood, he simply remarked, ‘‘ We could not do without it.”

In the analysis taken by Dr. Voelcker of soil in different parts of
the field near Cirencester, he found that on the Anburied parts the
amount of lime was very trifling, and in the surface soil especially
‘totally inadequate to meet the requirements of a crop of Turnips,
whilst in the case of tle two patches which almost entirely escaped
attack, in one instance there was much lime in the shape of gas-lime,
and in the other much more lime than in the parts of the field where
the root crop had failed through Anbury.”

From what we have learnt of late years of the cause of the Anbury
disease there appears every reason to suppose that lime or gas-lime, if

~

FINGER-AND-TOE. 157

applied in caustic state, would be beneficial not only by its subsequent
effects on the crop plant, but by its immediately destructive effects
on the Fungus spores, or the exceedingly minute Slime Fungi, when
germinating, but in whatever way it may be brought about, the good
effect of the application is definitely recorded by Dr. Voelcker.

In his leaflet on the use of gas-lime in agriculture,* Dr. Voelcker
notes (p. 4), with regard to the attack on the Turnip field above
alluded to:—‘‘ At my recommendation the occupier applied a heavy
dose of gas-lime, which completely cured the evil.” Also in the same
publication it is noted :—‘‘A large dose of gas-lime applied to the
stubble land in the autumn before it has been turned up by the
plough, in many instances, is an effectual cure for this disease.’””—
(A. V.)

The strength of the dose of course varies with circumstances, but
if put on at above date, when the land can be left untouched for six
weeks or so, to allow the gas-lime to oxidise, two tons per acre might
be used. The gas-lime should be put on in fresh caustic state, and as
in this condition it poisons or destroys plant, and also insect life, thus
being a most effectual remedy for many field troubles, time must be
given for the changes in its chemical nature to be carried out, by which,
when lying exposed to the action of the air, it changes to a manure
of the nature of gypsum, a safe and beneficial dressing for many crops.

In some instances lime and soot have been found to answer in
checking Club presence, as noted in the following observation from
Mr. Kyden, the head gardener to S. Berger, Esq., of Bragbury,
Stevenage, Herts. In this case the Club was extirpated, and as Mr.
Hyden’s experience extends over 22 years, his observation is valuable,
but it would be of interest to have special further observations to
ascertain clearly whether this would not equally be the case if the lime
only was used, without the admixture of soot.

Mr. Eyden wrote as follows :—‘‘ When I first came here I had
whole breadths spoilt of Broccoli and Cauliflowers, which have been
more subject to attack here than any other green. The first year I
was here I found I had got a bed of plants attacked; I pulled all up
and burnt them. I simply sowed some lime on the ground and
replanted it, dipping the roots of each plant in sooty water before
planting it, and when taken up not one root was in the least affected.
Since then I have always treated them in the same way, and have had
very few Clubs.”——(W. E.)

* See four-page leaflet ‘On the Composition and use of Gas-lime,’ by Dr.
Augustus Voelcker, Prof. of Chemistry to the Royal Agricultural Society of England.
Printed by King, Sell, and Railton, Gough Square, E.C. Procurable by any book-
seller. This is a most useful leaflet, full of practical as well as scientific infor-
mation,

158 TURNIP AND CABBAGE-ROOT ATTACKS.

One of the most important measures, however, for keeping the
attack in check is securing clean ground for the crops.

Where infested roots are left about, all the spores of the ‘* Slime
Fungus ”’ (see p. 150 for description) will be ready to start new attack.
In the words of Prof. Marshall Ward, p. 55 of work previously quoted,
«« All the hundreds of thousands of them contained in the malformed
roots above described will be set free in the soil as the roots decay, or
into the manure heaps on which they may be cast to rot.”

This very important consideration is strongly urged in the following
note, with which I was favoured by Mr. Gilbert Murray :—‘‘ Care
should be taken not to use the roots affected by the disease for the
feeding of stock, or in any way where they can become mixed with
the farmyard manure, otherwise the germs of the disease are again
conveyed to the land, and thus perpetuates the disease you wish to
eradicate.”

Care also should be given to gathering up all remains of infested
roots on a field that has been attacked, and burning them. If they are
merely ploughed in, the spores will germinate, just as weed seeds might
germinate in similar circumstances; and though a crop liable to injury
will not in common farm practice be on the land for several years,
there are various common weeds, and most especially Charlock, which
may keep the Fungus supplied with food for its successive generations
until the time for a crop liable to infestation, as Turnips, Swedes, or
Cabbage, comes round again.

As yet we do not know on what the young Slime Fungi feed if the
plants which we know of as their regular food are absent from the soil.
In a dried state the spores will live for years. This does not apply
most certainly to the state of our fields, but yet from the recurrence of
attack there appears to be no doubt that the infestation has had some
congenial nourishment, even when what we recognise as such was not

noticed.
To give one more quotation from Prof. Marshall Ward, which well

describes the progress of the affair :—‘‘ The spores lie, as we have seen,
in the cells of the root, like shot in a bag, and remain quiescent during
the winter, becoming set free into the soil as the root rots, and lying
there ready to germinate as before in the following spring, when their
progeny will have good times once more if fortune favours them in the
shape of new crops of plants of the Cabbage tribe.

‘What they will do if no such plants are put into the ground no
man knows, though it is certain many millions of them die every year.
It is not improbable that they can support themselves to some extent
as saprophytes, but this is not yet demonstrated.”

But with the knowledge that the spores (that is, the minute live
specks, which in plants of this nature answer to a certain extent to the

FINGER-AND-TOE. 159

seeds of flowering plants in being a point from which a new plant
springs) we have definite knowledge to act on.

Such measures as clearing away infested roots from the fields
instead of ploughing in the remains; on no account allowing manure
to be infested by letting roots rotting from this disease to be thrown to
it; ploughing to a depth which may bury down the spores so deeply
that they will not be brought up again, and such rotation of crop (and
eradicating of weeds liable to infestation) which will give time for the
brunt of the Slime Fungi to have died out before new sowings of
Turnip or Cabbage are submitted to them, are measures which will all
tend to lessen presence of the pest. So also are dressings of the land,
which may destroy the pest outright in the surface soil, and which
may supply the food needed for the crop growth.

All these measures are quite sure to do good; but also (indirectly),
I think, we should much benefit by it being generally known that this
attack of Anbury, Finger-and-Toe, or Club is entirely and absolutely
distinct in its nature from any insect attack.

Applications of lime and gas-lime, and also destroying infested
roots, are good measures for checking various of the Turnip and
Cabbage-root insect attacks which are most frequently confused with
Finger-and-Toe ; but there are points in which the treatment for these
and for the Fungus disease run on quite different lines, and from the
specimens and enquiries sent to myself, I should say that both valuable
crops, and cost of labour and applications, were being wasted year by
year for want of just a very little knowledge, which would immediately
give the key to open out to each grower, from his own consideration of
the subject, the course of treatment needed.

160

APPENDIX.

—

MANGOLDS.

In the course of recent examinations as to the nature of stores long
left undisturbed in the upper story of an old house, near Naseby in
Northamptonshire, the researches brought to light many numbers of
an agricultural journal, published weekly early in the present century.
Some numbers of this paper, Evans and Ruffey’s ‘ Farmer's Journal
and Agricultural Advertiser,’ were placed in my hands by the kindness
of a friend, and proved of much interest from the mass of agricultural
record, including weekly returns of market prices, and good corre-
spondence on agricultural topics. But amongst the notices of root
crops, the observations on method of cultivation of Mangolds, then
recently introduced into this country, suggest one or two points
which, in the gradual change to the more correct principles of growing
of the present day, may coincidently bear on the increase of leaf
maggot during the last twenty years.

The first introduction of Mangolds as a field crop into this country
is variously ascribed by different writers to Thos. Boothby Parkins in
1786, and to Dr. Lettsom in the year 1790, or thereabouts; but from
the correspondence and advertisements, &c., given in the number for
April 8th, 1816, it is evident that the growing of Mangolds was then
being pushed forward into notice, under leading agricultural influence,
against much opposition.

In the number above quoted we have an advertisement of Mangel
Wurzel seed at 2s. 6d. the lb., being procurable from Messrs. Gibbs,
«‘ Seedsmen to the Honourable Board of Agriculture.’’ Seed was also
procurable at 3s. the lb., or 2s. 6d. the lb. in large quantities, from
Mr. Geo. Lindley, of the Catton Nurseries near Norwich, another
important centre; and a specially carefully saved kind was procurable
from Leonard Phillips, proprietor of a large Nursery and Agricultural
Experimental Establishment, Portsmouth Road, near Vauxhall,
‘adjoining the two-mile stone from Westminster Bridge.”

This seed was 5s. the lb., but Mr. Leonard Phillips appears to have
been the leading man in working forward acceptance of the new crop,
as we find that the Society of London for the Encouragement of Arts,

MANGOLDS. 161

Manufactures, and Commerce, awarded him a gold medal for his
successful exertions in extending the culture of this root, ‘‘ called in
German, Mangel Wurzel,” and for ‘‘removing the prejudices against
this valuable vegetable.” With the seeds a pamphlet was in some
cases sent out, with directions as to cultivation, and from such points
as are accessible of these it appears, that (in this country), at the date
of 1816, the value of the Mangolds, as supplying green food by
successive removal of a portion of their leafage, was much more
looked to than at the present day.

Full details are given by Mr. Phillips of his disleafing operations
and their results, which given shortly show that from his plants,
grown at two feet distance, he took six successive cuttings of leaves,
proving of much service for feeding to milch cattle in a season of
drought, and the roots, when raised in November, run from 20 lbs.
each, upwards, to a few lbs. more.

Ina report, published in the same number of the ‘ Farmers’ Journal’
(April 8th, 1816, p. 127), we have detailed observations on the ‘‘ Culture
of Beet-root,’—‘‘ Abridged from the Instructions of the Agricultural
Society of the Department of the Seine (1812),’’ and published by the
Editor of the ‘Farmers’ Journal’ in translation, that his readers
‘‘may compare the practice in France with their own, in the culture
of Mangel Wurzel or Lettsom Root, now spreading so fast, and so
deservedly, in this country.” Here, under the head ‘“ Stripping,” it
is observed: ‘‘ When the leaves are a foot long they may be taken
off.” This may be repeated several times, taking care to leave those
in the middle. To avoid hurting the root, they must be stripped from
the inside downwards. ‘Cattle, and particularly cows, eat the leaves
with avidity. This stripping, it is true, diminishes the size of the
root, but it affords good forage in dry summers.’

So far as I find, from much search, this plan of removal of the
leaves (that is of some portion of them) was much more followed
formerly than at the present day. ‘This was certainly to be expected,
as, with increase of knowledge of the reasons and principles of plant-
growth, no one was likely to remove what are equivalent to the lungs
and digestive powers of the plant without good reason. Still the
application of the rule may be open to exceptions.

It is noticed by Prof. Wilson, regarding this point, of the advantage
asserted by some cultivators of Mangold, to occur in the plant*
furnishing leafage for food as well as roots, that ‘This practice,
which is quite opposed to our knowledge of vegetable physiology, was
far more general a few years back than it is now”’ (this was published

* «Our Farm Crops.’ By John Wilson, Prof. of Agriculture in the University
of Edinburgh. Vol. I., p. 429.

162 APPENDIX.

in 1859). ‘As there are many, however, who still adhere to it”....
Prof. Wilson proceeds to discuss the subject at length. Looking over
observations of experiments in various places the record is, as might
be expected, quite in favour generally of largest weight of root occurring
where leafage was left. Still this result is not invariable ; in the records
of the trial at the Model Farm, Glasnevin (see ‘ Agricultural Gazette,’
January 7th, 1860, for full details), it was shown that of two lots of
a similar kind of Mangold, each sown on the same day, treated in the
same manner, and each raised on the 27th of October, those from
which 5 tons of leaves per acre had been stripped gave a return of 45
tons 1 cwt. of roots per acre, whilst of those from which no leafage
had been taken, the return of roots per acre was 40 tons 8 cwt. 6 qrs.
Turning now to possible preventive benefit by some leaf-stripping.

Without venturing to express an opinion myself on the agricultural
bearing of the case, I should conjecture that so far as growth of good
roots was concerned it was much the safest course to follow the usual |
principles of growing, and let all useful leaves remain. But in fighting
this increasingly troublesome prevalence of Mangold leaf-blister maggot, it
appears to me, from the above observations of treatment, that the plan
of removal of a part of the leafage might be much more adopted, both
as a remedy and preventive, than has hitherto been the case. Itisa
curious coincidence that the first notices of the maggot mischief began
not long after the plan of removal of outer leafage was observed as
being much less than formerly. This last was about 1860. I have
notes from Mr. Watson Hornsby, of Holme Cultram, Cumberland, that
though the first really severe attack of the Mangold leaf-maggot, that
he noticed, was in 1876, yet for some years before, similar attack, on a
lesser scale, had been noticeable.

It is unnecessary to go into details of application to any of my
agricultural readers. It has long been known to be one way
of checking further increase of attack, to pinch the maggots in
the leaf-blisters, or to nip these pieces out. But independently
of all evident drawbacks to this plan (even whilst the plant is
still young), after a while, when the leafage becomes of a fair
size, the pinching out plan becomes impossible. At this date, and
afterwards, it would probably save a great amount of continuance
of attack in infested fields to have the leafage much more removed
than (as far as I know), we generally have ventured to do. Of course
it should be done under exact instruction of a superintendent as to how
many of the outer leaves might be safely removed; and the removal
should be carefully done, so as not to bruise or injure the crown of the
root. Where the leaves are maggot-infested we have obviously the
gain of this much nucleus of future infestation being removed, and
there are very many cases in which the removal of the partially

MANGOLDS. 1638

destroyed outer leaves, or even the healthy ones, would do good to the
crop by giving enough space for air and light and sunshine-warmth to
come round the plants and on the earth.

Setting the loss, certainly caused by recurrence of attack, against
what might happen by lessening weight of root by removal of some
leafage, it may perhaps be thought desirable in the coming season to
experiment in this matter, taking care if the leaves are so infested as
to be useless that they shall be destroyed at once, not merely thrown
aside. Where there is little maggot presence precaution may not be
needed, as rapid consumption by the cattle, use of salt, scalding the
troughs, or throwing quicklime where any heap of leaves might have
lain, would probably get rid of any risk of infestation, or at least
of infestation to a serious extent, recurring from the transported
maggots.

xin
4

i 4 3
ayy

INDEX.

Abraxas grossulariata, 67
Acherontia atropos, 116
Alder, 1—5
Alder Clearwing Moth, 1—5; methods
of prevention of, 5
Anbury, 143, 149—159 (see also Finger-
and-Toe
Anguillula radicicola, 127 (see Hetero-
dera radicicola)
Anisoplia horticola, 6
Anthomyia bet, 83
“A brassice, 146
3 ceparum, 100
“5 floralis, 146
< platura, 100
PY radicum, 146
* Anti-pest,’’ Little’s, 19;
manufacturers of, 23
Aphis avene, 41
» brassice, 21
» floris-rapx, 21
Apion apricans, 39
», flavipes, 37
Apple, 6—17
Apple Sawfly, 10—17; history of, 11;
habits of, 11—-13; description of, 13,
14; dates of appearance of, 15; pre-
vention and remedies for infestation
of, 15, 17
Asparagus, 17

address of

Asparagus Beetle, 17—20; description |

of, 18; remedies for attack of, 19)
Atomaria linearis, 77

? Baridius sp., 23

Beet (see Mangold)

Beetles, to shake down into pails, &c.,
T9593

Black Currant Gall-Mite, 63—67

Cabbage, 20—26
Cabbage Aphis, 20—23; description of,

21; soft-soap and sulphur mixture |

serviceable to destroy, 22
Cabbage-root Flies, 146, 147
Cabbage-stem Weevil, 23—25; history

of, 24; prevention of recurrence of

infestation of, 25
Cabbage and Turnip Root-gall Weevils,

143, 144; history of, 145

Cecidomyia destructor,61; Hop(?sp.),74 |

Ceutorhynchus sulcicollis, 144
Chalcid Flies, in galls of Phytoptus ribis,
66

Cheimatobia brumata, 104

Chiswick Compound, 19; address of
manufacturers of, 22

Chlorops teniopus, 60

Chortophila (Anthomyia) bete, 83

Clouded Yellow Buttertly, 26—31; de-
scription of, 27 ; life-history of, 27, 28;
localities of appearances of, 28, 29;
food-plants of, 30

Clover, 26—40

Clover Weevil (Yellow-legged or Dutch
Clover), 37—40; injuries of to Clover
leafage, 38, 39; powers of flying of,
40; means of prevention of, 40

‘** Club,’’ 143, 149—159

Colias edusa, 26—31

Corn and Grass, 41—63

Corn Aphis, 41—45; description of, 41;
differences in colour, 43

Crioceris asparagi, 17

Currant, 63—74

Currant Gall-Mite of Black Currant, 63
—67; attempted remedies for attack
of, 64; dipterous larva in galls of, 65;
Chalecid Flies of genus Entedon, or
Entedonide in galls of, 66

Currant-shoot and Fruit Moth, 70—74;
habits of caterpillars of, 70, 71; life-
history of, 72, 73; methods of preven-
tion and remedy, 73

Daddy Longlegs, 46—51; details of
attacks of, 47; history of, 48; pre-
vention and remedies, 49, 50; nitrate
of soda obnoxious to grub of, 50

Death’s-head Moth, 116—118; descrip-
tion of caterpillars of, and method of
injury to Potatoes, 117; unusually
large specimen of moth, 117; attacks
of moths to beehives, 117

| Diamond-back Moth, 138—142; dates of

first observation of moths in 1892, 138,

139; of caterpillars, 139; latest report
of observation of serious mischief,
142

| Eelworm, Root-knot, 127-—137; Stem,

129

‘Farmers’ Journal,’ and ‘ Agricultural
Advertiser’ for 1815 and 1816, 89, 160
Finger-and-Toe, Anbury, and Club, 143,
149—159; produced by Plasmodio-
phora brassicae, or Slime Fungus, 149 ;

166

history of Slime Fungus, 150; effects
of the Fungus on growth of roots, 151,

152; notes of observation of “‘ Finger- -

and-Toe” attack, 152—154; means
of prevention and remedy for attack
of, 154—-159; by use of gas-lime, 156,
157; by lime and soot for Club in
Cabbage, 157; by measures of culti-
vation, 158, 159

Fisher-Hobbs’ mixture, 96

Frit Fly, 51—57; in Oat-heads in Aug.,
52; description of maggot of, 54;
dates of successive broods of, 54, 56 ;
preventive measures, 57

Frosted Orange Moth, 118—120; me-
thod of attack of caterpillars to Potato
and other stems, 119, 120; description
of moth, 120

Galeruca tenella, 124

Gamma Moth (see Silver-Y Moth), 31

Garden Chafer, 6—9; recorded rava-
ges of, 6; methods of destruction
of, 9

Gas-lime, 95, 156, 157

Gortyna flavago, 118

Gout Fly, 60

Hay Mites, 57

Hessian Fly, 61—63; screenings con-
taining flax-seeds (puparia) of, always
to be destroyed, 62

Heterodera radicicola, 127

Hop, 74—76

Hop Strig Maggot, 74—76 ; localities of
attacks of, 75; method of prevention
for, 76

Hoplocampa testudinea, 10

Hylemyia coarctata, 61

Tneurvaria capitella, 70
Injurious Insects specially observed in
1892, iii, iv

Knapsack sprayer, usefulness of, 22;
address of importer of, 97

Lampronia capitella (see Incurvaria
capitella), 70

Leaf-stripping of Mangolds, 161, 162

Lime, 155; and soot, 157; and sulphur,
95

‘“‘Lettsom-root ’’ (Mangolds), 161

Magpie Moth, 67—69; description of
caterpillars of, 67,—of moth, 68; pre-
vention of attack of, 68; frequent Sloe
leafage, 69

Mangold, 77—89; first introduction of
into England, custom of removing
leaves of, &c., 160—163

Mangold Beetle (Pigmy), 77—83; de-
scription of, 77, 78; of method of
attack of, 78, 80, 81 ; prevention and
remedies, 82

INDEX.

Mangold-leaf Maggot, localities and date
of attacks of, 83, 84; life-history of,
84; notes of attacks of, 85—88; pre-
vention and remedies, 89

May-bug (see Garden Chafer), 6

Mites (in Hay), 57—60; enormous
amount of, 57, 59; not injurious when
eaten in Hay, 59

Mites (on Lime trees), see Red Spider,
122

Mustard, 90—99

Mustard Beetle, 90—99; description of,
91; life-history of, 91, 92; attempted
means of prevention, 92—94; to clean
seed from, 94; transported in sacks,
94; dressings that were unserviceable,
95; quick-lime and sulphur found ser-
viceable, 95; considerations as to use of
soft-soap, Paris-green, and other ap-
plications, 96—99

Nitrate of soda, obnoxious to grubs of
Daddy Longlegs, 50; with soot as
remedy for Pea Weevil attack, 114

Onion Fly, 100—106; life-history of, 101,
102; variation in, 102; prevention
and remedies, 102—104,—by covering
bulbs, 103

Orchard Caterpillars, 104—106; success-
ful results of treatment of, 104

Oscinis frit, 51

Paris-green, 64; nature of and directions
for use of, 96—98; procurable from
Messrs. Blundell, Spence & Co., Hull,
98; sprayer for distributing, procur-
able from Messrs. C. Clark & Co.,
Windsor Chambers, Gt. St. Helen’s,
London, E.C., 97

Peas, 107—116

Pea Weevils, 107—116 ; reports of injury
caused by, 107—111; descriptions of
various kinds, 111; habits of, 111,
112; to bury down before resowing,
114; nitrate of soda and soot as pre-
ventive dressing for, 114; clearing
beetles from waggons, &c., in harvest-
ing advisable, 115

Pheedon betulex, 90

Phorbia cepetorum, 100

Phyllopertha horticola, 6

Phytoptus ribis, 63

Pigmy Mangold Beetle, 77

Plasmodiophora brassice, 150

Plusia gamma, 31

Plutella cruciferarum, 138

Potato, 116—120

Red Spider, 121—124; on Lime trees,
122, 123; soft-soap and sulphur com-
pound useful to destroy, 124

Root-knot Eelworm, 127—137; plants
infested by, 127, 133; countries
where present, 127; observation of in

INDEX. 167

England, 128; identifications of, 128;
description and life-history of, 129—
131; appearance of galled roots, 131;
method of spread of infestation, 132;
soil favourable to, 133; methods of
transportation of, 134; attempted
methods of remedy, 135; trap-plants,
135; clear distinctions between this
infestation and that of the Tylenchus
devastatrix, or Stem Kelworm, produ-
cing Tulip-root in Oats, likewise great

importance practically of correct
identification of the attack, 136,
137

Shallot Fly, 100 (see Onion Fly)

Silver-Y Moth, 31—37; food-plants of,
31; great migration of in 1879, 31;
crops attacked by caterpillars of, 32;
attacks to Clover, 33, 34; rolling par-
tially serviceable to destroy, 37

Siphonophora granaria, 41

Sitones lineatus, 107; descriptions of S.
lineatus, S. crinitus, and S. puncti-
collis, 111

‘Slime Fungus,” 150—152

Soft-soap mixtures (see references to
** Anti-pest,” and ‘‘ Chiswick Com-
pound”’), also 19, 21, 103, 123

Spinning Mites, 122

Strawberry, 124—126

Strawberry-leaf Beetle, 124—126; de-
scription of, 124; plants subject to
attack of, 124; habits of, 125

Sulphur and soft-soap mixture, 19; to
destroy Aphides, 22; to destroy Red
Spider, 123

Sulphuret of lime, to mix with soft-soap,

(123

Tipula oleracea, 46

Tenthredo testudinea, 10

Tetranychus telarius, 121 ; tiliarum, 121

Tomato, 127—137

Tomato, Root-knot disease in, caused
by Heterodera radicicola, or Root-knot
Eelworm, 127—137

Trichocera hiemalis, 147

Trochilium sphegiforme, 1

Turnip-blossom Plant Louse, 20—23

Turnip and Cabbage-root attacks, 143—
159; Anbury, Finger-and-Toe, or Club.
143, 149—154 ; prevention of, 154
159 (see also ‘‘ Finger-and-Toe ’’)

Turnip and Cabbage-root Flies, 143,
146, 147

Turnip Root-gall Weevil, 143, 144, 145

Tyroglyphus longior, 57

Weevils, ‘‘ Cabbage-stem,’’ 23—26
43 Cabbage and Turnip-gall, 143,

144, 145

Weevils, Pear-shaped, 37—40

Westwood, Prof. J. O., Life-President of
the Entomological Society, decease
of, vi

Wheat-bulb Fly, 61

Winter Moth, 104

Winter Turnip Gnat, 147

WEST, NEWMAN AND CO., PRINTERS, HATTON GARDEN, LONDON, E.C,

it

uf ae y ‘ 3 ae i . t-

0,

West, Newman photo.

TOMATO-ROOTS q

Galled by attack of HETERODERA RADICICOLA,
about two-thirds natural size.

[All rights reserved.]

REPORT OF OBSERVATIONS

OF

INJURIOUS INSECTS

AND

COMMON FARM PESTS,

WITH METHODS OF

SEVENTEENTH REPORT.

BY

ELEANOR A. ORMEROD, F. R. Met. Soc.

FELLOW OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY; MEMBER OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON
ALSO
MEMBER OF THE ASSOCIATION OF OFFICIAL ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS,
WASHINGTON, U.S.A., &C. 3
HON. MEM. OF FARMERS’ CLUB; HON. AND CORR. MEM. OF ROYAL AG. AND HORT. SOC.,
8S. AUSTRALIA; HON. MEM. OF ENT. SOC. OF ONTARIO, AND CORR. MEMBER OF
FIELD NAT, CLUB OF OTTAWA, CANADA; MEMBER OF EASTERN PROVINCE
NATURALISTS’ SOC., CAPE COLONY.

LONDON:
SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT & CO., Limtep.

1894.

»
a @ oy 7
? oe
. a el
- a ae
(ae
ye. es
- ’ ® - 7
? > ; 7 - PF ‘i ?: } f b rf
Wei tats baler
“ 4
id ‘
7 e me ;
'
@
“=... a
‘
is ‘

LONDON:
WEST, NEWMAN AND CO., PRINTERS,
54, HATTON GARDEN, E.C.

- a.
_
~~ a he —-—=-—s
>
t <3 yh
. ECyst
re Pe
hf 67 ft eas Lae hs
5. Ape ee -ahee

PREFACE.

THE past season of 1893, looked at from the point of agricul-
tural entomology, has been remarkable for the effects of the
unusual meteorological conditions (notably the long-continued
drought) on the amount of various kinds of insects, and of other
crop and fruit and forest infestations, and also the effects of this
presence on the infested crops.

For those who wish to study the records of the ‘ Spring
Drought of 1893,’ much excellent information is given in the
paper by Mr. G. J. Symons, F.R.8., published in Part II. of the
fourth volume of the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society * ;
but for just a short statement as a general guide to date, locality,
and amount of deficiency of rainfall, the following few lines,
extracted from the paper by Mr. Fred. J. Brodie, F.R.Met. Soc.,
entitled ‘The Great Drought of 1893,’ + may be serviceable in
connection with some of the observations in the following Report
on variation in amount of insect infestation.

Mr. Brodie observes :—‘‘ Enquiry showed that although an
unusual amount of fine weather was experienced over England
during the greater part of 1893, the drought itself was confined
to the spring and early summer months. The finest and driest
weather of all occurred in the ten weeks commencing with the
beginning of March, and ending with the middle of May, but a
great deficiency of rain continued in most districts until the end
of June, and the period selected for investigation therefore
included the whole of the four months, March, April, May, and
June.”

Further on in the same paper Mr. Brodie notes :—‘‘ Taking
the period of four months as a whole, the aggregate rainfall
amounted to less than half the average over the entire southern
and eastern half of England, as well as in certain portions of
Durham and Northumberland. Over a considerable portion of
our southern counties, as well as in Cornwall and South Wales,
the fall amounted to less than one-third of the average; the only
southern localities in which this proportion was exceeded being
some of the more central parts of Devonshire.” —(F’. J. B.)

In the following Report it will be found that the severity in

* The Spring Drought of 1893’ (with Tables and Maps), by G. J.
Symons, F.R.S. Journal of the R. A. 8S. E., Third Series, Vol. 4, Pt. IL.,
pp. 889—354.

+ See ‘The Great Drought of 18938,’ by F, J. Brodie, F.R.Met. Soc.
Pt. LV. of Vol. quoted above, pp. 849—856.

1V PREFACE.

amount, or peculiar development, of some kinds of crop injury as
of that caused by Gout Fly Maggot, pp. 6—11, is clearly refer-
able to unfavourable circumstance for plant growth, laying the
plants more than ordinarily under the power of the maggot; in
others, as with the Gooseberry Red Spider, pp. 32—88, the
amount of progagation was favoured by weather which left the
myriads of pests unharmed by soaking or clearing rains; and
the great prevalence of Wasps was another entomological visita-
tion obviously in great part due to the absence of unfavourable
weather at the time of commencement of their settlements; pre-
valence of Aphides was also favoured by the same conditions.

In the course of the year, I received enquiries regarding about
(or upwards of) 145 distinct species of infestation ; these for the
most part asking information regarding field and orchard insect
pests, but including among them what are often known as
insect allies, as the ‘“‘ False Wireworms,” or Millepedes; Gall
Mites, and Red Spider, belonging to the Acarina; ‘‘ Stem” and
‘*Root-knot”’ Kelworms (scientifically, Nematodes); and also the
excessively minute six-legged creatures belonging to the division
of the ‘‘Springtails”’ (scientifically, Collembola), which do
mischief to roots underground, and in various other ways,
and of which both the leaping and non-leaping species were
sent me.

Amongst crop attacks, the points regarding Mangolds which
were sent me included Leaf-maggot, Surface Caterpillars, Aphides,
and the ‘‘Pigmy” Mangold Beetle noticed in my Report for 1892,
which was again reported to me by Prof. Harker, from the
Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester; Mustard was infested in
various localities by its different beetle enemies, from the sprouting
of the seed in the ground to its final flowering and seed stages ;
Peas, Beans, and Vetches had their respective attacks, mostly of
beetle infestation in the seed for sowing, or of another kind of
weevil, the Sitones, on the leafage, or of Aphides smothering the
plants,—this latter damage to the Beans being in some instances
little lessened, and that to the reapers very much increased, by
the numbers of Wasps attracted to the ‘‘ Plant Lice.”

Corn, taken generally, did not appear to be seriously attacked,
although Barley suffered greatly in some places from Gout.
Frit Fly Maggot was also present; and Hessian Fly was a little
reported to me, the first record being sent by Mr. D. D. Gibb,
from Ossemsley Manor Farm, Lymington, Hants, received June
27th. Attack of maggot of Corn Sawfly was not once reported ;
but it certainly did occur to me whether if one or two instances,
where serious damage to crop by Hessian Fly was reported, it
might not have turned out (as sometimes in 1887), if more
critically examined, to be in part due to the falling of the straw
from Sawfly Maggot presence. Aphis attack was little reported
on any kind of corn. Various moth and weevil attacks to corn
stacked, or in granaries, were more noticed than is commonly
the case.

PREFACE. Vv

Grass suffered very severely (see pp. 22—81) in various
places, especially in the south-east of England, from the maggots
of Rose Chafer, an attack liable to be confused with that of the
Cockchafer ; and a little moth, without any very descriptive
popular name (scientifically, the Pyralis glaucinalis), was found
in one locality infesting the outer portions of hay, and other
kinds of fodder, stacks, to an inconvenient extent.

The infestation of Diamond-back Moths, which in 1891 caused
so much mischief to Turnip and Cabbage leafage, especially
along our eastern coasts, and which were to some extent present
in 1892, was hardly reported last year; and where careful
examination was made, by request, in the districts round Hartle-
pool and King’s Lynn, where it had been especially prevalent, the
infestation was last year notably absent. Other common pests
were present, as Surface Caterpillars of different kinds, Cabbage-
root grubs, Aphides, &c.; these last in one instance to such a
great amount as to attract such vast numbers of Ladybirds
(Coccinellide), that measures were being set on foot to destroy
these helpers as being the cause of the mischief! On Hops also
(which suffered so severely in some places from Red Spider that
the cutting had to be hastened), a verysmall kind of Black Lady-
bird, the Scymnus minimus, was found to be very serviceably at
work as a ‘‘ Red Spider ”’ eater.

The ‘“ Root-knot”’ EKelworm, Heterodera radicicola, affecting
Cucumber and Tomato roots, has been made the subject of very
careful experiment regarding effects of chemical applications to
infested soil or plants (see pp. 103—108).

Onions (which were much attacked by maggot last year),
Carrots, Potatoes, and other ordinary field and garden crop infes-
tations, were enquired about in their season, as well as forest
injuries, amongst which Aphis attack in various forms, and
notably the troublesome Larch Chermes, were present. These
were all duly replied to as they occurred, and entered, with date
and name of sender, in my books, which now have been daily
kept for many years, so as to form a kind of index of reference.
But as the main points of the history and methods of prevention
(so far as known) of our common attacks which have been
entrusted to my care for publication have been in many cases
embodied in my Annual Reports, of which the present is the
seventeenth of the series, it has seemed unnecessary to repeat
the observations.

Therefore in this year’s Report I have endeavoured, so far as
I could, to omit notice of the well-known attacks, excepting
where some additional point of information, or some peculiar
development coincident with the peculiar weather conditions of
the year, appeared worth noting.

Amongst attacks injurious to the fruit industry which now
holds such an important position, it might be said that almost
each kind of orchard tree, or bush, or ground-growing fruit, had

Vi PREFACE.

its customary infestations, with some not usually present.
Amongst the latter was the appearance of the magnificent cater-
pillars of the Lappet Moth, four inches or more in length, on
Apple; and the great prevalence of the kind of Red Spider, usually
infesting Ivy, on Gooseberry; and, also on Gooseberry, some
observations of the so-called Currant Scale Insect.

Locusts, as an import in hay, or fodder, have come more
under notice than usual; and under the heading of Phytoptide
will be found notes on the Gall Mites, with quotations and
references to the exceedingly valuable series of publications now
being issued by Dr. Nalepa on this difficult class of plant pests.
Wasps also being a visitation which involves very universal
trouble to everything they think fit to bestow their irritable or
appropriative attentions on, are placed under the heading of
their own name.

Warble prevention gains steady attention, and the distribution
of leaflets (amongst other centres from the Irish Cattle Traders’
Association) cannot fail to be doing good.

Besides home work, colonial applications were sent regarding
insect infestations to tropical produce, as Sugar Canes, Oranges,
Coffee, Tea, &c., these being sent through the hands of London
correspondents of the infested districts in the West and Hast
Indies, &c., or from owners, or societies, as the case might be.

In regard to such usefulness as my work may .possess, I
sreatly wish to point out that this rests in great part primarily
on the observations with which I am favoured by agriculturists,
and other observers, of what they notice as to presence, and
effects of infestations, and the treatment which demonstrably
answers for getting rid of these ; and I earnestly wish that our
farmers and fruit-growers would bear more in mind that very
often much of the treatment which they are advised to adopt is
in reality the recorded result of their own practical experience.

To the agricultural press I am constantly indebted for their
steady and encouraging support and assistance in my work; and
also I beg to offer my grateful thanks for co-operation to the
leading entomologists at home, whose assistance I have acknow-
ledged in the papers connected with the insects which they have
been good enough to aid me in identifying. Iam also much
indebted similarly to Dr. A. Nalepa, Professor at the Imperial
Academy of Vienna, for his great assistance to me, and instruction
bestowed on me, in connection with the difficult study of Phytop-
tide; also to Dr. Schoyen, State Entomologist, Christiania, for
much useful entomological information kindly given, including
information of the first recorded appearance of the Hessian Fly
in Norway. To Dr. Ritzema Bos, Professor at the State Agri-
cultural College, Wageningen, Netherlands, I am again (as each
year) indebted for unfailing assistance in identification of
Nematodes, commonly known as Eelworms, as well as kind
co-operation; and to Senor Don Ignacio Bolivar, Professor of

PREFACE. Vil

Entomology at Madrid, I offer my sincere thanks for being good
enough to identify for me the specimens of Locusts which I
transmitted for benefit of his skilled opinion. With Mons. J.
Danysz, Director of the Laboratory of Parasitology (Bourse de
Commerce), Paris, I had the advantage of a little communication
early in the year regarding the serious mill scourge, the Mediterra-
nean Flour Moth (Hphestia kuhniella); and on his favouring me
with a copy of his valuable pamphlet on the subject, it appeared
to me that I could best co-operate in spreading information by
requesting my booksellers to import (at my own risk) a certain
number of copies, so that those concerned might see the subject
in extenso, and the copies meeting with circulation, I have thought
it unnecessary to enter on his information fragmentarily in my
Report.

To Mr. J. Fletcher, Entomologist and Botanist of the Depart-
ment of Agriculture, Experimental Farms, Canada, I am indebted
for constant kind co-operation; and to the many other good
friends who help me, who are too numerous to mention, I beg to
offer my hearty thanks for their aid and encouragement. I
should fail in courtesy if I did not also offer my best acknowledg-
ments for the valuable and helpful gifts of entomological books
(of which I am frequently in receipt), including amongst these
the liberal gifts for which I am indebted to the courtesy of our
own Canadian.Government, and to the Department of Agricul-
ture and Experimental Stations of the United States.

Of the 83 figures given in the following Report, those on
pages 5, 6, 11, 22, 46, 54, 59, 60, 61, 62, and 95, are by -kind
permission of Messrs. Blackie & Son, Glasgow; the beautiful
figure of the Acridiwm americanum at p. 51 is after a drawing by
Prof.. Riley; the Pear-leaf Phytoptus, and the feather-claws,
p- 108, by kind permission of Dr. Nalepa; and the Pear Sawfly,
p- 79, from one of the blocks I have been permitted to use by the
proprietors of the ‘Gardeners’ Chronicle.’ Of the remainder, the
figures at pages 1, 15, 82, 39, 47, 74, and 84, are drawn (chiefly
from life) during the past year for this Report.

It is a great gratification to me to find that the amount of
insect enquiry sent to my hand, and which I think it a great
honour to be entrusted with, mereases rather than lessens in
scope and in interest of points sent for examination; and it shail
be my earnest attempt, by every attention that I can bestow on
enquiries sent, to endeavour honestly and soundly to be of service.

ELEANOR A. ORMEROD,
FP. R. Met. Soc., and F.E.S.

Torrineton House, St. Ansans,
February, 1894.

LIST OF

ATTACKS OF INJURIOUS INSECTS, &e.

NOTICED IN THE FOLLOWING REPORT.

>>

APPLE.
Lappet Moth

Bran.
Bean Aphis .

Corn AND Grass.

Gout Fly; Ribbon-footed Corn Fly.

Little Grain or Wolf Moth .
Haystack Moth. :
Hessian Fly .

Rose Chafer .

Common Cockchafer .

GOOSEBERRY.

Gooseberry and Ivy Red Spider .
Gooseberry and Currant Scale.

Hop.*
Minute Black Ladybird. .

Locusts.

Locust (S. European species) .
South American Migratory Locust

Mancotps.
Surface Caterpillars. .

MustTARD.
Mustard Beetle . é
Charlock Weevil .. .

PEaR.
Pear and Cherry Slugworm.

PHYTOPTIDR.
Pear-leaf Blister Mite. .
Plum-leaf Gall Mite .

Black Currant-bud Gall Mite .

STRAWBERRY.
Daddy Longlegs .

Tomato (and CucumBER).
Root-knot Helworm .

TURNIP.
Diamond-back Moth .

Wasps.
Common Ground Wasp .
Hornet

WILLow.
Small Chocolate-tip Moth .
Pebble Prominent Moth .
Willow Sawfly. ..»..

Gastropacha quercifolia.
Aphis rumicis .

Chlorops teniopus
Tinea granella.

Pyralis glaucinalis .
Cecidomyia destructor .
Phyllopertha horticola .
Melolontha vulgaris .

Bryobia pretiosa .
Lecanium ribis .

Scymnus minimus.

Acridium egyptium .

Acridium (Schistocerca) par anense

Agrotis segetum, é&c.

Phedon betule at 2
Ceutorhynchus contractus .

Selandria atra. . .

Phytoptus pyri
Phytoptus similis .
Phytoptus ribis

Tipula oleracea
Heterodera radicicola
Plutella cruciferarum

Vespa vulgaris.
Vespa crabro .

Clostera reclusa
Notodonta ziczac .
Nematus salicis

PAGE

. 108

elit!
. 114

. 141
. 145

147

* The Minute Black Ladybird Beetle, the Scymnus minimus, is beneficial by
destroying Red Spider. In the above list only the names of the chief infesta-
tions entered on in the following Report are specified,

NOTES OF OBSERVATIONS

INJURIOUS INSECTS

AND

COMMON CROP PESTS
Dorina 1893,

APP doe
Lappet Moth. (Gastropacha Quercifolia, Linn,

GAsTROPACHA QuERCcIFoLIA.—Lappet Moths, male and female, and caterpillar, also
~- . + ~ Apple twig with leaves eaten away ; all from life.

B

2 APPLE.

THE very conspicuous presence of the caterpillars of the Lappet
Moth, which when full-grown reach a length of four inches or more,
has long been known of in this country as occurring on Willow, also
on Sloe or Blackthorn, and sometimes on Pear, and on Whitethorn ;
but it was not until last season that I had an observation of the infes-
tation as seriously injurious to orchard leafage. In this case the attack
was reported early in May to me by Messrs. Cranston, of King’s Acre,
near Hereford, as occurring here and there on their Apple trees, and
that where they were found, every leaf had been devoured.

The little bundle of Apple twigs sent accompanying as samples of
the ravage, showed this to have been total, as all was cleared excepting
just the remains of the leaf-stem. The above sketch of part of one of
the twigs sent me shows the extent of the injury, and the figure of the
caterpillar, taken from a specimen which was the counterpart of the
sample forwarded to me, shows its great size, and also shows the row
of fleshy appendages along the side (fancifully compared to lappets),
from which the perfect insect takes its popular name of ‘ Lappet
Moth.”

The caterpillars of this ‘‘ Lappet Moth”’ grow to a length of from
four to five inches (the specimen before me is somewhat over four
inches long), and are cylindrical, slightly hairy, and grey or brownish
in colour, but the tint is variable, and so also is the pattern of the
markings down the middle of the back. These may be almost absent,
or may occur as a row of somewhat V-shaped dark marks; but across
the back, on the segments next the head, are two beautifully lustrous,
deep blue or purple, velvety bands. These are characteristic markings,
and are especially observable when the caterpillar is in movement ;
when at rest they may be hardly noticeable. The caterpillars have
three pairs of claw-feet, and four pairs of sucker-feet beneath the body,
besides the pair at the end of the tail; and just above the feet, and all
along each side is a row of fleshy warts or appendages with long grey
hairs, to which the name of ‘“‘lappets”’ has been given. These peculiar
excrescences have been carefully figured from a specimen in my
possession (by Mr. HE. K. Knight), so that their position and form
should be clearly distinguishable from that of the claw and sucker-feet,
with which they are sometimes confused.

When full-grown, which may be in the late spring or early
summer, the caterpillar spins a dark coloured oval cocoon, apparently
in any convenient shelter, as the localities are variously recorded as
being in clefts of bark, or between boards under eaves, or amongst the
lower twigs of the plant on which the caterpillar fed, or close to the
ground amongst grass. From these cocoons the moths appear at
variable dates from June (or even as early as May) to July and August.
These moths, scientifically the Gastropacha Quercifolia, are very fine

LAPPET MOTH. 3

insects, the females being sometimes as much as three inches and a
quarter in the spread of the fore wings; of the two specimens before
me, the female is just above three inches, the male just above two
inches in expanse. The colours are rich brown, marked transversely
on the fore wings with three irregularly disposed dark scalloped lines ;
the hinder wings are somewhat similarly marked, and the hinder
margins of both wings scalloved or indented at the edge. When at
rest, the fore edge of the hind wings, which is somewhat dilated, pro-
jects, so as to be very noticeable, beyond and from under the fore edge
of the fore wing, thus giving an appearance much like a dead brown
leaf to the moth, which probably often secures it from observation, and
from which it takes its specific name of Quercifolia, or ‘‘ Oak-leaf.”

The early life-history of the caterpillars is stated to be for them to
hatch in September, and to moult once, and to spend the winter
extended on a twig of their food-plant, and in the following season to
complete their growth. This autumn appearance of the young grub it
will be seen agrees with what was considered to be the case in the
course of the observations made at Messrs. Cranston’s nurseries.

The first notes were sent me on the 8th of May, by Messrs.
Cranston & Co., from King’s Acre, Hereford, accompanying a fine
nearly full-grown specimen of the grey variety of the caterpillar, sent
as a sample of an infestation on their Apple trees. On the 15th of
May they wrote further, and mentioned :—

‘¢ We have not discovered it upon our Apple trees until this season,
nor has it been found in any considerable quantity, and only here and
there have they attacked our young trees. Where they have been
found every leaf has been devoured. I send you a few specimen
branches which they attacked, and every vestige of leaf eaten. Our
fruit-foreman thinks that the grubs are hatched in the autumn, for
young caterpillars were found on the bark very early in the spring.
We have not applied any remedy for getting rid of them, but simply
hand-picked them where found.”—(J. C.)

The shoots sent were as described, absolutely cleared of leaves,
excepting that in a few instances some small remains of young leafage,
in very miserable condition, were still existing, these being almost
entirely at the ends of the twigs. For the most part, all had been
thoroughly cleared down to a mere stump of even the leaf-stalk. The
Apple shoots sent me were from about twelve to seventeen inches
long, and of various ages up to young boughs of from three-eighths to
half an inch in diameter.

Later on, on the 20th of July, Mr. Cranston further informed me
that up to that date they had only discovered two of the moths, which
had been observed about the end of June.

BQ

4 APPLE.

PREVENTION AND Remepres.—On the Continent of Europe the attack
of the Lappet caterpillars is much more destructive than with us, and
is recorded as being often injurious there to young Plum trees, also to
Pear, Apple, and Peach trees. But even there the mischief is stated
to be less from their numbers than from their great size.

In this country probably no treatment is needed beyond what
common prudence would suggest. When once attention is directed to
the caterpillars being found on twigs of their food-trees in winter, we
have the clue towards getting rid of them before they grow to the
devastating powers to which they attain in spring. And when they are
at work (if by unusual mishap they established themselves) their com-
plete clearance of leafage, if the attack at all resembled in destructive-
ness that of which I had samples, would draw attention even in its
early stages to the locality from which the great grubs could easily be
removed.

In most insect attacks the best course is simply to destroy the
so-called ‘ pest’? in whatever may be the simplest manner; but with
such rare and exceptionally large specimens, it may be well to suggest
that probably any neighbouring entomologist, or naturalist, might be
willing to give some small sum for them, which would (if permitted by
the owner) make it worth the while of one of the nursery workmen to
collect the caterpillars and dispose of them alive.

Note.—Enquiries or observations were also sent regarding almost
all the common Apple attacks, as American blight, Winter Moth, and
other moths, Apple-blossom Sawfly, and Apple-blossom Weevil, Red
Spider, &c. These were all duly attended to as occasion required,
but having been so frequently referred to in previous Reports, it is
unnecessary to repeat the details.—H. A. O.

BEANS.

Collier; Bean Aphis. dphis rumicis, Linn.; 4. faba,
Kirby & Spence.

APHIS RuMIcIS.—1, Bean shoot with Aphides; 2, male Bean Aphis, magnified ;
3, nat. size; 4, wingless female, magnified.

Amongst the various kinds of Aphides which were unusually preva-
lent during the hot and dry season of 1898, the ‘‘ Black Louse,” or
Aphis, of the Beans played its part in various places.

The first note of observation of its presence was sent me on the
6th of June from near Malmesbury, in Wilts, and the last on the 15th
of July from the Carse of Stirling, N.B. In this case three stalks of
Beans were forwarded to me* for examination as samples of a Bean
attack which was then very prevalent where crops of this kind were
grown on heavy land.

This kind of Aphis infestation has been so often entered on that it
is scarcely worth while to allude to it again, excepting just to record it
being present to a troublesome amount in some places. The appearance
of Bean plants infested at the upper part, at first with a few black
Aphides, as figured above, afterwards with gradually increasing
numbers, until the upper part of the stalk is almost one blackened
mass of the “Colliers,” their exudations, and the injured pods and
leafage, is generally well known, and so also should be the simple
remedy.

By cutting off the tops early in the attack so far down as the
infestation reaches, and carefully destroying these, the further spread
of the mischief may be either quite stopped, or greatly checked. ‘This
cutting back does no harm as regards lessening the amount or quality
of the crop; in fact, rather the other way, if it is done in good time. In
such case it only removes just a short length of the upper part of the
stem which is of very little use, whether with regard to the leafage on
it, or to the pods on it, which are usually too small to be of service,

* See my reply in ‘ Scottish Farmer’ for July 22nd, p. 567.

6 CORN AND GRASS.

and it throws the sap to the lower pods, which are benefited. If,
however, the infestation has been allowed to establish itself, the above
treatment would very likely be impossible. In the case of the plants
(mentioned p. 5) sent me from the Carse of Stirling, it would only
have saved one. The others were too far gone, from the black Aphides
having spread down the stem, and also from consequent damage, both
to the health and the vigour of the plant.

If the infested part is removed, this and the Aphides on it must be
carefully destroyed, or many of these ‘‘ Colliers ”’ will almost certainly
get back to the plants, so that new attack will be started.

In field growth there does not appear to be any remedy excepting
nipping off the tops of the shoots; but in garden cultivation, good
washings with soft-soap mixtures (or even with water alone), sent as
hard at the infested shoots as is safely possible, so as to knock some of
the plant lice off, and to clean down the leafage from the stickiness and
filth, are sure to do good in this way. Also the watering helps on
growth, a very important matter, as Aphides multiply most rapidly on
plants which are stunted by drought or other causes.

CORN AND GRASS.

Gout Fly; Ribbon-footed Corn Fly. Chlorops teniopus Meigen.
1/8

CuLorors TxNropus.*—Gout Fly, grub and pupa; nat. size and magnified ; with
infested stem. 7, 8, 9 and 10, Parasite Flies; nat. size and magnified.

* The attack is caused (as mentioned in previous Reports) by the small black
and yellow fly, figured above. She lays an egg on the Barley sheath, the maggot
from this attacks the ear, and then eats a channel down one side of the stem to the
first knot, and then turns to chrysalis state within the leaves.

GOUT FLY; RIBBON-FOOTED CORN FLY. 7

‘Gout ’’ in Barley is now so thoroughly established as one of the
attacks which recur regularly to a greater or less extent every year,
that it would not be worth while to notice it again save just to record
some peculiarities of the infestation in coincidence with the peculiarly
dry season of 18938.

The first observation of the attack was at an unusually early date ;
and afterwards, during the summer, an unusually large proportion of
the injured Barley was struck at such an early stage of growth that it
failed to grow beyond the condition figured at p.8. With regard to
times of first appearance. Some of the earliest dates of this, of which
I have had reports in previous years, were on July 9th, in 1891; on
July 6th, 1889; and in the hot summer of 1887, on July 8rd. In the
past summer of 1893, the first note of observation of which I am aware
was on the 16th of June.

So far as has been shown by the reports sent me in previous
seasons, Chlorops injury is a trouble of which the amount may certainly
be influenced by date of sowing, and last year’s observations have con-
firmed those previously given, that a good state of ground helps to
carry infested crop over attack; and have also shown that the amount
of damage may be much increased by drought and heat, which act
above ground by the air being unfavourable for growth, and below
ground by preventing the plant nourishment at the surface of the soil
being available to the extent needed.

When under unfavourable circumstances the young Barley is
attacked whilst the ear is still only slightly developed within the
sheathing-leaves, the effect is most disastrous. The growth of the ear
is ruined, and the Barley stalk, instead of running on into straw, is
stopped short at a length that may be measured by inches, rather than
by feet, with the sheathing-leaves in a swelled and deformed condition,
of which the first figure (p. 8), taken from life by myself (see my
Thirteenth Report, p. 28), gives a fair idea.

Last season, judging by the specimens sent to myself, there was a
very marked presence, at least early in the summer, of this form of
attack ; and judging also by the observations made in the government
leaflet on Chlorops teniopus (the Ribbon-footed Corn Fly), published
August, 18938, this peculiar form of injury was that which was mainly
sent to the Board of Agriculture, as scarcely any notice is taken of
what, in most years, is the most observable form of damage, in which
the straw reaches a length moderately useful for farm purposes,
and the ear, though injured, still produces enough good corn to make
some amount of return.

The second figure (p. 8) of diseased growth shows a specimen of this
most commonly observed form of injury, in which, notwithstanding the
channel worked-out by the Gout Fly maggot down one side of the stalk as

CORN AND GRASS.

HK.—=O. WA]

Stem of Barley showing
Gout Fly attack. blackened maggot-channel.

GOUT FLY; RIBBON-FOOTED CORN FLY. 9

far as the highest knot, yet the ear has freed itself, and is only materially
injured at the lower part. Sometimes the injury from maggot feeding
may extend a third or half-way up one side of the fairly grown ear,
but if the attack comes whilst the ear is still in embryo, it may extend
the whole length.

In the past season the first intimation of bad attack being present
that I am aware of, was given in the latter part of June by a short
paragraph in several of the agricultural journals to the effect that a
serious insect attack of a kind not previously observed was doing much
harm to Barley in the crops of Mr. Herbert Dowsett, Park Farm,
Pleshey, Essex. The first note of this, bearing date June 16th, was
kindly placed in my hands by Mr. E. A. Fitch, of Brick House, near
Maldon, to whom it was sent, and was conveyed in the following few
words :—‘‘ Fifty acres Barley; about one-fourth is affected with
maggot (as samples), which eat young ear out. Soil,—clay bottom.
Neighbouring farms also affected.”"—(J. H. M.) The specimen of
injured Barley was entirely stunted as figured, and the ear within
eaten out nearly throughout its length.

On begging information from Mr. Dowsett as to details, he for-
warded me ears of infested Barley, and also ears of sound Barley,
standing side by side, for comparison. The injured plants showed
very bad attack still in early stage. Some of the plants were stunted as
figured opposite, some older, and the chrysalis stage of the maggot was
already to some degree reached, for in one instance I found it lying in
the upper part of the bristles or awns of the embryo ear. Mr. Dowsett
mentioned that he had farmed the same land over thirty years, and had
never seen any attack like it before. The Barley was all grown after
fallow Mangolds and Swedes, all his own seed corn, which produced
last year (1892) over nine quarters, excepting two acres after Swedes,
which was sown thin with a sack of Barley bought of — *, at 10/- per
bushel. Mr. Dowsett considered that a quarter of his whole crop was
spoilt, and that from the bought seed was worse than the crop from his
own seed corn.

Specimens of an equally bad, or even worse, attack were sent me
on the 11th of July, from the Estate Office, Wendover, Tring, by Mr.
Charles T. Adams, with the observation that the Barley affected was
taken from a chalky soil. In this case the deformed Indian-corn-like
plants, with the still sheathed ears, were sometimes hardly more than
three and a half inches in length, from the ground, in the solid part,
and only about six to seven inches when the leaves were laid out at
full length. One of the attacked ears, when freed from the sheath,
measured, when taken together with the stalk down to the uppermost

* Name omitted for obvious reasons.—E. A. O.

10 CORN AND GRASS.

knot, only just under an inch and a half in length. In this instance
the attack was traceable from the top of the Barley ear down to the
first knot; and the little maggot which had caused the mischief dropped
from the stem on opening the sheath.

One other report it may be worth while to give as it is accompanied
by notes of date of sowing, and of fresh growth from the root after rain.
This was sent me on the 17th of August from The Lodge, Massington,
Wansford, by Mr. H. Stokes, with the observation :—‘‘I am sending
you a few ears of Barley; . . . you will find they have been eaten by
an insect from the top down to the knot below the ear, and since the
showery weather it has started to grow again from the root.” . .
‘«The Barley is taken from a 24-acre field, and appears to be affected
all over; it is after a root crop fed off by sheep, and drilled with the
Barley on the 18th, 19th, and 20th of April.”” These specimens also
showed Chlorops injury.

In the case of a Chlorops attack on Barley, of which specimens were
sent me at the end of July, by Mr. Thomas Bunker, of Goole, Yorks,
the loss by the attack in the field, from which the insect-blasted ears
were sent, was estimated by the farmer to be one-third of the crop.

The following communication with which I was favoured by Mr. J.
J. Willis, on the 16th of September, from Harpenden, Herts, is of such
important interest relatively to good effect of properly selected manure
in lessening effect of infestation, that I offer it with many thanks for
the reliable observations :—‘‘ You may be interested in the following
particulars. During the present season much injury was done in this
neighbourhood to the growing crops of Barley by the Gout Fly
(Chlorops teniopus). The Barley experiments of Sir J. B. Lawes, at
Rothamsted, also suffered greatly from the same cause; but it is a fact
of much interest that the infestation was considerably worse on those
plots which were defiviently manured, while on those plots which were
fully manured, that is, received all the necessary constituents for
healthy and vigorous plant growth, the injury done was insignificant.”

PREVENTION AND Remepres.—One very special point of information
to be learnt from the past season’s observations, is the great degree to
which the effect of this kind of attack is influenced by age or condition
of the plant, or state of its surroundings. In most kinds of insect
attacks it is leaf, or root, or flower, or seed, or it may be attack to the
outside of the stem, or inside of the timber; and though infestation
may in any of these cases be fatal to hopes of a crop, still there is a
good chance of some return. With Chlorops attack it is different.
This comes on the very centre of growth, andif the plant is still young,
it ruins both the ear and the straw. Later on, as the point of deposit
of egg is the sheath of the ear, we may save a fair amount of straw,

LITTLE GRAIN MOTH OR WOLF MOTH. 11

and this and the embryo ear being then grown to a fair size, the
infestation cannot do so much harm. ‘The work of a single maggot
towards the base of a half developed, or nearly developed ear, and a
channel down one side of a fairly grown stem below it, is then very
different in effect to that when the length of the whole portion (ear and
upper joint together) are scarcely six times as long as the destroying
erub. If the reader will note the measure of one of the specimens
(one and a half inch) sent me by Mr. Adams, when the ear was freed
from the sheath, and compare this length with that of the grub
(three-eighths of an inch) figured at p. 6, he will see that this is no
exaggeration.

It is of very practical use to bear this in mind, for here we have
the key to the benefit of early sowing so well brought forward by Prof.
McCracken, at Cirencester, where the March sown Barley was practically
free from attack, whilst that sown in May suffered to an extent of not
less than twenty per cent. (see my ‘Manual,’ p. 78), and the same
point has been noted by various other observers.

Good growth and a good early start are two things specially wanted
to carry on the plant successfully, and though it may be said we
cannot command the seasons, still Mr. Willis’s note, p. 10, shows that
even in the past bad season, and in parallel circumstances of fly being
about, the deficiently manured plots were those that suffered most.

This is one of our very worst and most regularly recurring corn
crop attacks, and so far as we see at present, agricultural measures are
the only reasonable means we have of dealing with it. The winter
brood may very likely be in various grasses, &c., and the flies may
hybernate here or there; but at present we have not been able to
utilize these more theoretical points.

Little Grain Moth or Wolf Moth. Tinea granella, Linn.

TINEA GRANELLA.—Little Grain Moth, flying, magnified, lines showing nat. size ;
moth at rest; caterpillar and chrysalis, nat. size and magnified; infested corn-
grains spun together,

12 CORN AND GRASS.

In the course of the autumn, Mr. Edward A. Atmore, F.E.S.,
writing to me from King’s Lynn, Norfolk, mentioned the enormous
numbers of the Tinea granella (popularly known as the Little Grain
Moth or Wolf Moth) which had appeared there in the course of the
summer. ‘This infestation has long been known as seriously hurtful
to stored corn; and its history, and preventive measures regarding this
part of the mischief it causes, have been most fully written on by some
of our best British and European economic entomologists, from nearly
the beginning of the present century up to within two or three years of
the present time. In the later of these observations, however,
attention has been more fully directed to the extent to which this
infestation may be found in natural circumstances in out-of-doors
localities, as well as in its artificial and chief head-quarters of stored
corn; and in the past season, enquiry was sent to myself as to the
nature of attack to the inside of ripe corn-grains still in the ear, which
might, I think (if further followed up), prove to be due to the larve or
caterpillars of this Little Grain Moth.

The note sent me on the 4th of October by Mr. E. A. Atmore,
from King’s Lynn, was as follows :—‘' Tinea granella simply appeared.
in swarms in granaries about the town. I have never before seen,
anything like such numbers of any one species of moth in my
experience. When these swarms emerged it was almost impossible
for the men to work in the granaries. The stored grain must have
suffered from the attack.”

Mr. Atmore being an experienced entomological observer, his note
of this unexampled appearance is of very practical value, and it may
be of use to give some of the main points of this grain infestation for
reference, in case it should be remarkably present again in the coming
year, and also as a help for observation of maggot attack within grain,
before carrying the sheaves.

The Tinea granella, or Little Grain Moth, is about half to two-thirds
of an inch in spread of the fore wings; these are somewhat narrow,
white, and marked with many brown spots, of which characteristically
six or seven lie along the fore edge of the wing, three of the largest of
these being respectively one at the base of the wing, and two others
before and beyond the middle. The fringes are brown varied with
white. The hinder wings are also narrow, and are of a mouse or
greyish colour with pale grey fringes. The moths may be found from
April to August.

In granaries or corn-stores the method of attack is for the moth to
lay one or two of her very small yellowish white eggs on a grain of
corn. How many she has a capacity for laying is still uncertain. In
the words of Dr. Ritzema Bos, ‘‘ Whilst according to Nordlinger the
number only amounts to thirty, Taschenberg speaks of it as being

LITTLE GRAIN MOTH OR WOLF MOTH. 13

more than one hundred.”’ After about fourteen days (it may be more
or less) the maggots hatch. These make their way into the corn-
grains, and there they feed, till, provision falling short, each grub
makes its way out again, spins another grain to the one from which it
came, and when the contents of this second grain have been devoured it
proceeds in like manner to another, so continuing until as many as
twenty or thirty grains have been emptied and spun together into a
mass, mixed with web and maggot-dirt, as shown at ‘‘2”’ in figure
at p. 11.

The caterpillars are sixteen-footed; that is, have three pairs of
claw-feet, four pairs of sucker-feet beneath the body, and another pair
at the tail; when full-grown they are rather under half an inch in
length ; the general colour pale ochrey ; the head horny and brownish
red, and on the back of the next segment there are dark transverse
marks interrupted in the middle.

When these larvee or maggots are nearly full-grown, they have the
habit of not remaining in their feeding quarters, but, leaving the
inside of the grains, they pass to and fro, ‘‘ run about in numbers,” as
it is expressed, on the surface of the corn, spinning their threads until
the whole surface is covered with a thick whitish grey web. When
full-grown, which commonly is in August or September, they leave the
corn, and betake themselves to any convenient shelter in crannies in
the floor, or roof of the granaries, or chinks in the wall. There each
caterpillar spins a cocoon of web, or, if circumstances permit, of web
mixed with little bits of wood gnawed from its surroundings. Here
the larva remains unchanged during the cold weather; it then assumes
the chrysalis state, from which the moth may come out, according to
circumstances, in March, April, or May.

The above gives just a general sketch of the ordinarily recorded
life of this infestation in granaries, without reference to possibilities of
second broods, or of effects of variations of temperature; and the
recorded remedies turn, to a great degree, on the obvious points of
preventing, as far as possible, presence of sheltering places for the
larval winter rest, by plastering or filling up all nooks in walls and
floors, &e., where cocoons could be spun, and similar measures. Algo
on careful cleaning, whitewashing, scalding, &c., where granaries are,
or may be, infested, before putting in new corn. And to these I would
add a note, from my own observation, of the effectiveness, in cases of
this kind, where steam power is at hand, of turning on a jet of scalding
steam or scalding water by a hose from the engine. Where this can
be done the effect in destroying maggot or insect presence is excellent.
More elaborate operations, as destroying maggots in the corn itself by
applying heat which will not injure the corn for use, though destroying
its power of germination,—or, on the other hand, of checking maggot

14 CORN AND GRASS.

erowth by currents of cold air through the heaps of corn,—are detailed
at length by various writers, and can be referred to if needed.

But beyond the well-known damage to stored corn, there is what
may be happening to ripe corn in the fields, which hitherto has not
been investigated as much as might be desirable. Dr. Taschenberg
notes of this species, that all kinds of corn are similarly acceptable to
it, and that it will on occasion attack other material, as dry fruits or
woody fungi. And again, in another passage he notes, after observa-
tions on the habits of this 7. yranella in corn stores, that outside, in
the open air (or rather in free circumstances), the eggs are in other
conditions ; they may be laid in the previously mentioned fungi; like-
wise in grass-seeds, which are always present. It is also noted by
Curtis, in ‘Farm Insects,’ and by Hammerschmidt in Kollar’s
‘Insects,’ that this species of moth deposits its eggs on corn in the
field, or in corn in sheaves in the field.*

For lessening danger of this occurring, the obvious plan is suggested
of not letting the ripe corn stand uncut longer than is necessary, and
also similarly treating the sheaves. It would be of interest to find
whether in the coming season, with attention drawn to the subject, it
will be observed that damage, in the form of hollowing out contents of
ripe corn-grains in the field, occurs to an important extent.

“Hay-stack Moth.” Pyralis glaucinalis, Linn.

PYRALIS GLAUCINALIS.—Stack Moth, nat. size and magnified; cluster of chrysalis
cocoons, giving side and edge view; cocoon opened, showing chrysalis within,
magnified. -

* Information on this attack will be found in the old standard authorities of
Curtis’ ‘ Farm Insects’ and Kollar’s ‘ Injurious Insects,’ revised by Prof. Westwood ;
and more recently in the ‘ Praktische Insekten Kunde’ of Dr. EH. L. Taschenberg
also (bringing the subject up to the recent date of 1891) in the ‘ Tierische Schad- .
linge und Nutzlinge’ of Dr, J. Ritzema Bos,

HAY-STACK MOTH. 15

The following note of presence of infestation of the little Pyralis
moth (figured p. 14) in the outer part of some fodder stacks, especially
Clover and Saintfoin, near Canterbury, is given, because, though it
has not been reported as doing much mischief, yet where the white
cocoons of the chrysalis occur to any noticeable amount, a scare
sometimes arises as to the quality of the hay being injured.

Whether there is reason for this does not appear, but, in Canada
and also in many of the United States,* much harm is at times caused
to Clover-hay, which has stood for some years, by infestation of the
caterpillar of a very nearly-allied species of Pyralis moth, which is
sometimes taken here (that is, in England) round stacks, and which is
scientifically known as the Pyralis or Asopia costalis, more popularly as
the “‘ Gold-fringe.” In America it is popularly known as the Clover-
hay Moth or Worm; therefore, as our P. glaucinalis appears to be at
present without a convenient appellation for common use, I have
ventured to suggest the above term of ‘‘ Hay-stack Moth,” as indicating
one of its most important localities.

On the 7th of June, Mr. W. Gardner, writing from Bekesbourne,
near Canterbury, forwarded me some bunches of the white, flattish-oval
cocoons of these moths, spun up with rubbish of the dry material
amongst which the caterpillars had fed, and the observation :—‘‘I took
them from the outsides of a Saintfoin-stack that has been standing
here three years. I never remember to have seen anything of the
kind before, and when we cut the stack out, which will I hope be
shortly, I shall look and see if it is only on the outside they are very
numerous.”’

The cocoons, of. which a good many were successively sent me by
Mr. Gardner, were pure white, of a filmy material, like rather flocculent
silver paper, and transparent enough to show the shape of the contents
when held against the light. The individual cocoons were in shape
much like a melon or gourd-seed (see figure), about half an inch in
length, rather less than a quarter of an inch in breadth, and rather
more than an eighth of an inch in thickness, The two convex sides
met, like a melon-seed, at an obtuse edge, and at the extremities were
bluntly rounded; one end remained unaltered, the other split open
from side to side (to allow the exit of the moth), with such a perfectly
straight separation that it seemed doubtful whether this part had been
more than just lightly closed. At first the cocoons were very perfect
in form, and pure in whitness; with the escape of the moth they sunk
in irregularly.

The contained chrysalids were of a chestnut-brown colour and

* See paper on ‘Insects Injurious to Clover,’’ by Prof. William Saunders, in
Annual Report of the Entomological Society of Ontario, for 1881, p. 45.

16 CORN AND GRASS.

about half the width of the cocoon, and one-sixteenth of an inch less in
length, and, as far as I saw, lay with the tail extremity either fastened
to the inside of one end of the cocoon or quite close to it, the spare
space being at the head end. Some of the cocoons lay separately, but
for the most part they were spun into clusters by admixture of much
caterpillar-web, together with caterpillar-dirt, bits of stick, or leaf, or
flower of the material of the stack, and small rubbish generally.

The first moth appeared (out of cocoons sent me) on or about June
7th, and other specimens appeared from small consignments of cocoons
sent me by Mr. Gardner for several weeks. ‘These moths (the Pyralis
glaucinalis) are from a little under to a little over an inch in the
spread of the fore wings, which are shiny, and pale grey or grey brown,
somewhat browner towards the fore edge (the costa), which has a dis-
tinctly reddish tinge. Two yellowish lines or slender bands cross the
wings transversely from back to front, so as to divide them into three
nearly equal portions; and between the extremities of these, at the
fore edge of the wing, the reddish colour of the costa is very prettily
alternated with a few buff spots. The hind wings are also greyish,
with two pale cross lines; and round the extremity of each of the four
wings, just inside the fringes, there is a faint line, sometimes scarcely
observable.

On the 20th of July, that is, about six weeks after Mr. Gardner
forwarded me the first specimens, he wrote again concerning this stack
infestation :—‘‘ I enclose a few more of the odd-looking cases, which
appear to me to have some chrysalids in them, which I found around
a stack of second-cut Clover growth of 1891. The other stack is now
being cut out, and the old ‘trusser’ says he has seen them before, and
they do not go in far from the outside, and (although one hay-merchant
who saw them said they would eat the Saintfoin, and he would not
have the stack at any price), this old man, who has bought the stack,
has made no fuss about it.” On the 28th July Mr. Gardner, sending
me at my request a further supply of the cocoons, wrote accom-
panying :—‘‘I have to-day collected the enclosed, which I hope you
will find useful. I found them in every one of the stacks, excepting
this year’s, and even in this year’s I started a moth, but they seemed
to have preferred the Clover and Saintfoin, as there were very few in
the old haystack; they seem to prefer it where it is looser ; I suppose
it is easier to get further in, and they were apparently more on the
N.E. and N.W. sides of the stack.”

A little later (on the 10th of August) Mr. Gardner wrote :—‘‘I
have been to the stack two or three times since, and find the moths
are still coming out, but they do not seem nearly so numerous. They
frequent the upper part of the stack more than below I suppose
because they find penetration easier; in the old haystack, which is very

HAY-STACK MOTH. 17

close, there are very few indeed, I might almost say nil. They put me
very much in mind of the clothes’ moths, as they seem to run into the
stack again as soon as they settle after flying out. They do not appear
to go in to any great distance, I should say from six to nine inches,
according to the closeness of the stack.’’—(W. G.)

The above observations of Mr. Gardner show this moth infestation
to occur in the outside of various kinds of fodder stacks, as of Clover,
Saintfoin, and hay, but to be most prevalent in the material which is
most open to ingress, and also in the upper part of the stack, which is
the least closely pressed together. The date of successive appearances
of the moths ranged over at least nine weeks, probably more, as in the
first little packet of cocoons sent me on June 7th there were some con-
taining only empty chrysalids, besides one moth which appeared to
have developed during transit; and up to August 10th moths were still
observed by Mr. Gardner to be continuing to appear.

As when first the infestation was sent me I was unacquainted with
it, I forwarded specimens to Mr. 8. L. Mosley, Huddersfield, who gave
me the name; and I am also indebted to Mr. Porritt, of Huddersfield,
for the observation that ‘‘the larva feeds on all kinds of dried vegetable
matter, and that he has frequently beaten the moth out of thatch.”

In some communication on the subject with Mr. Edward A. Atmore,
F.E.S., of King’s Lynn, Norfolk, he wrote :—‘‘ With regard to the
Pyralis, it breeds here in accumulated rubbish formed on Birches from
the adventitious buds, which produce those peculiar bird’s-nest-like
formations. I have bred moths from them, but the insect does not
seem to be common here.”

In an early number of ‘The Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine,’ *
there is some very good information by the late William Buckler
regarding the appearance of the larve of this moth; and also some
interesting detailed observations by the Hon. T. de Grey (now Lord
Walsingham) on this infestation being found in the masses of deformed
twigs often found on Birch trees. t

The larva of the Pyralis glaucinalis is thus described by Mr. Wm.
Buckler | (see previous reference to Ent. Mo. Mag.) :—‘‘ At this date”
(the 18th of April, 1869) ‘the youngest larva was about half an inch
long, of a dull pale brownish olive green; others were larger and

* See ‘Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine,’ vol. vi (1869—1870), p. 111.

+ These masses are sometimes known as Witch-knots, or Witches’-brooms, and
are caused by a Gall Mite, or four-legged Acarus, one of the Phytoptide, nearly-
allied to the Black Currant Gall Mite, the Phytoptus ribis, which causes the swollen
erowth of buds only too well known to bush fruit-growers.

+ Mr. W. Buckler’s description of the larve is given in order to complete the
life-history, as I had not the opportunity of observing the insects before they had
spun up, and were beginning to emerge in moth condition.

Cc

18 CORN AND GRASS.

darker, the colour darkening with the growth, until the full-grown
larva was almost black.

‘When full-grown the length is from 14, to 14 inch; the form
moderately slender, cylindrical, nearly uniform in bulk throughout, the
hinder segments tapering a little at the sides; the region of the
spiracles puffed and wrinkled; the segmental divisions deeply cut. The
colour of the back is a blackish bronzy green, becoming paler, of an
olive or ochreous green tint along the spiracles, and on the belly and
legs, the head, and the second and thirteenth segments; the plate on
the second segment is margined in front with blackish olive; a fine
blackish undulating line, apparently caused by a deep wrinkle, runs
along below the spiracles which are inconspicuous, being of the
surrounding colour, and merely outlined with blackish ; the tubercular
dots are a little raised, each bearing a fine hair, the whole surface is
shining and bronzy-looking. ‘The first mature larva spun its cocoon
on the 23rd of April.” —(W. Buckler.)

The descriptions of the cocoons (so far as given by both the above- -
named observers) exactly agreed with those from the various kinds of
hay or fodder stacks from out of which I developed specimens of the
Pyralis glaucinalis, and the surroundings of the infestation, whether in
stacks, or thatch, or Birch-knots, is much of one kind. That is, dead
vegetable matter, passed on in some cases to the next stage of decay,
and a point noticed by Mr. Buckler, in his paper above quoted, ‘of the
larve being found in the Birch-knots amongst many old cocoons and
pupa-cases”’; and the observation of Mr. Gardner of the moths
hastening back into the shelter of the stack when disturbed, point to
the colony when once established remaining continuously, if allowed,
in the same spot.

PREVENTION AND RemepiEs.—No complaint of loss from this infes-
tation has been made, though certainly it cannot be desirable to have
any appreciable quantity of the hay mixed up with cocoons and old
insect rubbish and caterpillar-dirt. But in the case of our nearly-allied
British moth the ‘‘ Gold-fringe’’ Pyralis, which is now widely distri-
buted in North America, the very similar but greater damage caused
there is well established, and has to be guarded against, and the same
method would be serviceable here.

As there it is towards the lower part of the stack that the greatest
damage is done, and sometimes ‘‘ two feet or more of the lower portion
has been so full of worms as to be rendered worthless,” it is pointed
out that ‘where Clover is stacked for several years on the same
foundation, the bottom layers coming in contact with the infested
leavings of the previous year, will be sure to suffer. It is also recom-

HESSIAN FLY. 19

mended to put a good log or rail foundation under the stack so as to
raise it above the surface.’”—(W. 8.)

From the various observations of our own Pyralis, Stack Moth, it
is shown that attack may continue when once established in a suitable
locality of dead fodder, sticks, or rubbish; and if the infestation occurs
to a troublesome amount it would be desirable, besides clearing out all
head-quarters such as may be furnished by rubbish beneath the stack, to
give attention to similar neighbouring surroundings. Caterpillars that
feed amongst masses of old Birch twigs, or in thatch, as well as in old
stacks of Clover, hay, or Saintfoin, cannot be very exclusive in their
diet, and by care in search, and also in destroying all spoilt outside of
the stacks which might prove to be infested when opened, we might
save all further attack.

Hessian Fly. Cecidomyia destructor, Say.

_CECIDOMYIA DESTRUCTOR.—1, Barley stem elbowed down by Hessian Fly attack ;
2, showing position of ‘flax-seeds.’’ Also flax-seeds, or puparia, nat. size and
magnified, showing the early and smooth, and the later, or striated, condition.

Hessian Fly attack appeared in some localities in the past year ;
but, personally, I had so very few applications on the subject, that
altogether these can hardly have amounted to a dozen notices at the
very outside. Also a few apparently reliable accounts of presence of this
infestation in various districts appeared in various of our agricultural

c2

20 CORN AND GRASS.

journals; but I cannot myself see any cause for great anxiety on this
matter any more than with regard to others of our ordinary corn
insect pests. Last year being a hot season, especially favourable to its
prevalence, it was to be presumed it would be present; but so far as I
am aware, this was not to anything like the extent to which it was
reported in the hot season of 1887. In that year, the second of its
recorded presence as a Wheat and Barley stem pest with us, it was
reported (with specimens accompanying, or by contributors well con-
versant with the attack) from more than seventy-two localities in
England, and about twenty in Scotland, these centres often repre-
senting districts, and sometimes many miles of area of attack; as for
instance, in the north of Scotland, whence on the 29th of August, Mr.
John Milne, of Inverurie, Aberdeenshire, wrote me (with specimens
accompanying) that traces of the insect could be found in every field
along the coast from Aberdeen to Cromarty, and inland for twenty-five
to thirty miles.

Yet, notwithstanding this widespread prevalence in 1887, in the
following year I only received about six reports of presence, and of
these only one mentioned the attack as being prevalent in that district;
and last year attack generally seemed hardly worth alluding to.

The infestation may commonly be known by the attacked Barley
or Wheat straw elbowing down (as figured at p. 19) just above one of
the lower knots in the stem, consequently on this part being weakened
by the continuous feeding of the little maggot of the brown gnat midge,
known as the Hessian Fly. Attack may be higher, or it may be lower,
even at ground-level. Where it is may be known on examination by
the presence of the little flat brown chrysalids known as flax-seeds,
figured p. 19 at “2.”

It is a most unlikely thing that this infestation will ever take hold
here with our insular and changeable climate, as it does in Continental
countries, where a recurrence of weather suitable to its propagation
may come more or less yearly as a matter of course; and it is to be
regretted that from some cause or other a popular and exaggerated
interest has become attached to the very mention of ‘ Hessian Fly’’!
I fully believe that, excepting Corn Sawfly, we have no corn attack
which it so fully lies in our power to check increase of; or I should
better say, no corn attack which can be so demonstrably, and even
arithmetically, proved to lie so fully in our power to check much of the
increase of.

On each farm where there has been Hessian Fly attack, we find at
thrashing time the chrysalids gathered up, without extra cost or trouble,
in the light screenings. If these are destroyed in any convenient way
there is an end of all increase from these.

If, on the other hand, these flax-seeds are only flung aside from

HESSIAN FLY. 21

neglect, or saved for any reason whatsoever, it is a certain thing that,
weather and circumstances permitting, the Hessian Flies from them
will attack next year’s crop; if destroyed there will be no further
trouble from them.

Where circumstances do not allow the winter crop (as after infested
Barley) to be ploughed in, or otherwise treated, so as to destroy the
flax-seeds fallen from the stem, we have no apparent remedy, and we
must in this case hope that the ‘parasites,’ which are so frequently
brought under our notice, and which really do good in destroying the
pest when we are not able to do it (as above mentioned) much more
surely ourselves, will play their part rightly.

Where flax-seeds have fallen, as many must, amongst the stubble
of the reaped cornfields where the plough is to be put in, the matter,
if requiring attention at all, can be met to some extent by treatment.
Deep ploughing, or ploughing with skim-coulter, so as to turn the
flax-seeds thoroughly down where they will not be brought up
again by subsequent agricultural arrangements, will quite certainly be
useful.

Also burning the stubble is a well proved remedy, and would get
rid of many kinds of insect pests besides the one under consideration,
In most seasons this operation is neither very easily practicable nor
much needed, but last season (1893), when the exceptional heat and
drought would have allowed the firing, it would have cleared out the
ground remains of attack excellently. The right method of operation
is first to burn a narrow band of stubble all round the field, this
effectually keeps the fire in the circumscribed area, and ensures safety
to hedges. In the opportunity of observation given by railway journey,
I have noticed fields and strips of fields safely fired, and the benefit in
clearing pests that we can get at no other way is great.

But in our island we have great security from prevalence of serious
widespread attack, in our climate, and so far as Wheat is concerned
in our customary date of sowing, bringing up the autumn Wheat after
the time of the autumn brood of Hessian Flies having died off; and if
in the coming season we have ordinary climatal conditions, it may
reasonably be hoped that widespread mischief will be as little present
with us from this pest as in the years after the hot season of 1887 to
the hot season of 1893, when though bad in some localities, it could
not be described as a general trouble.

Whilst the above note on Hessian Fly was passing through the press,
I was favoured by Mr. W. M. Schoyen, Conservator and Government
Entomologist at the Zoological Museum, University, Christiania, with
the following observation of the first recorded appearance of this pest, the
Cecidomyia destructor, in Norway. With the notes of locality, &c., given
below, Mr. Schéyen also placed in my hands a few specimens of Barley

99, CORN AND GRASS.

stems with the puparia of the Hessian Fly, commonly known in this
country as flax-seeds, still adhering to the stem beneath the sheathing-
leaves.

Mr. Schéyen’s communication, sent from the Zool. Mus., Univ.,
Christiania, on the 19th of Oct., was as follows :—‘“ I hope that it will
be of some interest for you to know that the ‘Hessian Fly’ (Cecidomyia
destructor) is now, for the first time, observed here in Norway doing
damage upon Barley. I send you herewith some small bits of Barley
stems with the ‘ flax-seeds,’ or puparia, of this insect that you may
ascertain the fact. As Iam told, the damage on the concerned locality,
Ringerike, was last year much greater than this summer, at least one-
quarter of all the Barley stems having then been ‘elbowed’ down by
the insect; but then I knew nothing of the matter. Having been
informed this summer of the presence of some noxious insect in the
Barley stems on the named locality, I visited the place in the middle
of August, and found some of the maggots and puparia of the Hessian
Fly between the sheaths and stems of the damaged Barley plants. It
is thus made evident that this noxious insect is now introduced even
to our country, probably with foreign seed corn; though I hope this
insect will not prove so fatal to us as in more southern countries.
Preliminarily I have recommended the burning of the infested screen-
ings and fall-ploughing of the land instantly after harvesting.” —(W.
Moas8:)

Under the careful attention which is being given, there is good
hope of the recurrence of the infestation to a severe extent being well
held in check.

Rose Chafer; May-bug. Phyllopertha horticola, Linn.; Anisoplia horti-
cola, Curtis. Common Cockchafer, Melolontha vulgaris, Fab.*

PHYLLOPERTHA HORtICOLA.—Rose Chafer, nat. size (walking), magnified (flying) ;
grub, also magnified.

* A few notes having been sent of presence of Cockchafer grubs at a locality also
infested by those of Rose Chafer, the observation is added in the following paper.

ROSE CHAFER; MAY-BUG. 23

Rose Chafers have caused serious mischief in a good many
localities during the past season. As a common thing (that is, in
ordinary seasons and excepting under very special circumstances, or
just here and there) no great attention is paid to the pretty brown and
green beetles which, however destructive to Roses for a while, pass
away presently, and unless they have extended their ravages to leafage,
or much more widely than is customary, are little more thought of.
Also they are known, but by few, to be the parents of the grubs, like
little Cockchafer grubs, that presently ruin the adjacent lawns and
meadows by preying on the roots of the Grass. Last season, however,
Rose Chafer presence, both in beetle and maggot state, was too great,
and too marked, to escape observation, and the notes contributed may
help to a better understanding of the nature of the attack.

Amongst points which have been especially noticed in the following
observations are,—firstly, the continuance of this Rose Chafer infes-
tation for year after year in one locality when thoroughly established.
Secondly, that when the swarms of these pretty brown and green
Chafers appear at their work of destruction, whether on Roses or
elsewhere, unless means are taken to destroy them, their disap-
pearance in the natural course of things will be followed by an autumn
appearance of grubs (see figure, p. 22) in Grass-fields, lawns, and the
like places, which may prove possibly only disfiguring from the patchy
condition of the field where Grass has died from attack at the root, or
possibly may be on a scale making new laying down of the field
requisite. Where grubs are in the numbers named at page 25, of
twenty-one grubs or somewhat more to a foot square of ground, this
would be somewhere about one grub to every two and a half inches
of Grass roots, and the results are necessarily serious. Thirdly, that
whilst the beetles are on Roses or leafage from which they can be
shaken down, a great deal may be done to get rid of the infestation
surely, cheaply, and easily; but when the grubs are at work at the
roots of the Grass, I should certainly say myself, judging by what
information I can gather, that to destroy them without greatly injuring
or destroying the Grass is a matter well nigh impossible, even with the
assistance of the flocks of different kinds of birds, which do their best
to aid us in clearing the pests.

One of the first notices which I received during the past season of
the Rose Chafers being observable in great numbers, was sent me on
the 23rd of May, from Foxbury, near Sevenoaks, Kent, with specimens
accompanying, by Miss Matthews, who wrote as follows:—‘*I am
desired by my brother to forward to you a few specimens of an insect
which has been found here in immense numbers during the summer
months of the last two years, and is now on the lawns, meadows, and
fruit plantations of his property in greater numbers than before. The

94 CORN AND GRASS.

insects devour Roses, but so far we have not noticed that they eat other
leaves. They swarm out in the sunshine, but disappear within the
cups of flowers, or holes in the Grass, directly the sun is obscured, or
the weather becomes dull and cool. My brother is a grower of Hops,
Nuts, Plums, and Currants; and the soil being very sandy and poor, a
very liberal use of manures is necessary for their successful culti-
vation.”

The specimens sent me were of the little bright brown and green
Rose Chafers, the Phyllopertha horticola. These I found to be wonder-
fully active in the earlier part of the day. In the evening they were
quiet and torpid, but when set on the window-sill, they roused up and
walked to the edge, and then (with one exception) spread their wings
and flew strongly away.

The infestation was exceedingly prevalent near Haslemere, in
Surrey ; and the following note, with which I was favoured by Mr.
Charles Pratt, of Marley, near Shottermill, Haslemere, gives a very
good observation of it in that locality :—*‘ The Chafer which has been
so destructive in my pastures and lawns, and other crops, is the bright
copper-coloured creature, with blue-green head, called (Mr. Buckton
tells me) Phyllopertha horticola. It did not attack the corn crops, but
infested Roses and many garden things. The grubs have eaten the
roots of the Grass which has decayed, and on being pulled comes off in
large patches. Thousands of starlings are at work in the pasture fields
pulling up the dead Grass, and turning it off to get at the fat succulent
grubs, and the thrushes are doing the same good work upon the
lawns.” . . . “ What I propose to do is this: to harrow up with a
long spiked implement all the decayed turf, and leave the Grass exposed
to the further attention of the birds for a week or two. Then sow
renovating seeds over the bare places, covered with freshly dug sand
(my natural soil), and well roll it. The autumn rains will, I hope,
bring up the seeds before the frost sets in. Then I shall apply a heavy
dressing of lime-all over, and leave it till the spring, at which season,
if it looks promising, I shall give a top-dressing of artificial manure (of
a sort to be decided upon), and trust to getting a little Grass for next
year’s hay and pasturage.”

In a second letter on the subject, written by Mr. Chas. Pratt, on
Sept. 22nd, he mentioned:—‘‘ For the thirty years during which I
have had experience with land, I have had no knowledge of any insect
pest so destructive as this Phyllopertha Chafer. But I live on a sandy
hill, and I never knew such a drought before!” .. . ‘‘I stated that
it had not infested my cornfields; but the result of more complete
investigation to-day convinces me that my statement was premature.
The grubs are found in a lively condition about eight inches below the
surface in the corn stubbles. I doubt now whether any remedy will

ROSE CHAFER } MAY-BUG. 25

extirpate them that can be economically applied.” ... “I have a
number of chickens and guinea fowls feasting on the grubs, and I shall
turn out a few pigs, as you suggest, and see what they willdo. But I
find that these grubs can go down very deep in my light soil. Iam
sending you a box containing some of the grubs, packed in a small
piece of the destroyed pasture in which they were found, and it will
give you some idea of the number of them when I state that all that
are contained in this little box were found near the surface on a space
one foot square.” (These amounted to upwards of twenty-one grubs.
—KH. A. 0.)

For the following note of great presence of the Rose Chafers having
occurred for a few days, and of the simple method used to get rid of
them, I am indebted to Mr. T. P. Newman, of Hazelhurst, Haslemere.
Writing on the 20th of September, Mr. Newman mentioned :—‘‘ They
swarmed with me for two or three days only; we did nothing by day,
but acted on your hint at dusk; put sheets under the fruit trees, shook
the latter, and picked up hundreds of the beetles, which made no
attempt to escape, and destroyed them in hot water. They attack the
Scotch and Austrian briers much more than any other Roses.”’

Specimens of the same kind of Chafer grub, and at the same stage
of growth as those which were then being forwarded from various
localities as doing great mischief to Grass where the Rose Chafers had
appeared earlier in the season, were sent me on the 28th of September
by Mr. C. R. Longbourne, of Ripsley, Liphook, Hants. Amongst
various points of interest it will be seen that date is given of the first
observation of damage being established to an amount sufficient to
attract birds to the grubs in the injured turf.

Mr. Longbourne mentioned :—‘“ At the suggestion of my neighbour,
Mr. Newman, I am forwarding in a small box some specimens of
grubs taken from the meadow near my house; it is suggested that they
are the product of the small brown beetle which appears yearly on our
lawns and fields in the month of June, and which this summer swarmed
in unusual quantities. The grubs this season have done considerable
damage to some fields and lawns in this neighbourhood. They eat the
roots of the Grass, which therefore withers and comes away in patches
when touched. Large flocks of starlings, numbering several hundreds
in a flock, frequent the fields where these grubs abound, and the soil
is perforated by the birds’ beaks. In the field in front of my house my
fowls are constantly hunting after the grubs, and, by their scratching,
they have made large patches of it look like a ploughed field, the Grass
plant coming away in tufts, as before mentioned. I should state that
our soil is a poor sand, and that, in the fields in question, the plant of
Grass is very inferior. P.§.—Judging from the work of my fowls, I
should say the grubs first appeared near the surface about the middle

26 CORN AND GRASS.

of August, but it was not until the 2nd of September that my gardener
brought me some specimens to show me the cause of the havoc wrought
by the fowls, and of which I had been complaining.”

On Oct. 12th. Mr. Longbourne further wrote :—‘‘ I have seen less
of the grubs since the recent rains, and they have probably gone down
deeper into the soil.”’

Maresfield Park, near Uclifield, in Sussex, was another of the
localities at which the presence of the beetle in great numbers early in
the season was followed by presence of the grubs beneath the turf in
autumn. On May 25th, Mr. Mark Sandford, writing from the Estate
Office, Maresfield Park, remarked :—‘ This year we have a plague of
beetles, some enclosed herewith ’”’ (these proved to be specimens of the
Rose Chafer, the Phyllopertha horticola); ‘‘ they eat wp our Roses, and
are in shoals on the Grass of the Park here.”

On Oct. 2nd, Mr. Sandford, in reply to my enquiry whether the
beetle larva were to be found in the ground on which the Rose Chafers
had been noticeable, further mentioned :—‘‘ We have just been searching
in the turf in the park at places where the turf is dug up by the rooks,
and find grubs which I think you want. I have often wondered what
the rooks were searching for, and now I suppose we know; I send you
some by this post. For years we have found the rooks doing this,
generally in one portion of the park. The bailiff searched other places
not touched by the rooks, and could find no grubs.”’

Another communication, also showing the prevalence of the infes-
tation in the neighbourhood of Haslemere, was sent me on the 19th of
September, from Longdene, by Mr. Wm. Jackson, as just a short note
pending possible fuller observations :—‘‘ At present we only suffer from
a slight disfigurement of our lawns, and from an uneasy feeling that
the worst is yet to follow, and is unknown. ‘The birds are doing good
service in removing the grubs, but they do not do so very tidily.”’

Near Rickmansworth (through favour of a friend), I heard of severe
presence of this same infestation at Grass roots in one locality, the
ground being exceedingly infested with the grubs, of which samples were
sent me, notwithstanding crowds of birds of all kinds which were to be
seen greedily feeding all day.

Other observations, which were of unusual interest, inasmuch as
they referred to presence of the same kind of grubs as those previously
mentioned a little below the surface, and the grubs of the Cockchafer
(the Melolontha vulgaris) deeper down, were sent me from Detmore,
near Cheltenham, by Miss Dobell.

The first of these was sent me on the 4th of September, and noted
that on the previous day, September 8rd, one of their fields of six
acres was observed to be infested in large patches by Cockchafer grubs.
These were in colonies under the Grass, which was dying off, and in

ROSE CHAFER; MAY-BUG. 27

places had been much torn up by the fowls during the previous day or
two, and thus attention was called to the state of things. The fowls
were stated to be doing their best, but their plan of operation to be so
destructive, that a remedy was desired which might be equally effectual
without ruining the pasture.

A few days later, Miss Dobell further wrote :—‘‘ Before your letter
came I had set some men and boys to work to gather them, and we
have had thousands, and still have more to do. You can put your
hand under the Grass and lft the Grass off, and wherever you can do
this there are the grubs. We are burning the Grass as we take it off,
as even in this short time (since haymaking) the Grass has died too
much to be worth planting.”

Specimens of the grubs which were forwarded to me showed that
some which were dug up about a spade depth were certainly Cockchafer
grubs (scientifically, larve of the Melolontha vulgaris); others taken
from immediately below the Grass appeared in no way to differ from
the grubs of the Rose Chafer.

MELOLONTHA VULGARIS.—Common Cockchafer, larva, and chrysalis.

On the 27th of September, Miss Dobell further mentioned :—* In
all the places where we have not picked the grubs, they still remain
just below the Grass. I thought the three frosts we have had might
kill them, or send them deeper, but it has not. We have left off taking
them, and left the birds and chickens to do what they can ; but though
they have been hard at it, I am sorry to find they leave many behind
where they have been.” And two days after, on the 29th, the grubs
were as active as ever, or more so. The length of the Rose Chafer
grubs when extended, which I had not previously measured, was now

28 CORN AND GRASS.

a little under three-quarters of an inch; and Miss Dobell noted,—‘‘ Now
the rain has come they seem very active, and the birds too; our field
is at times black with starlings and missel thrushes.”’

The mischief caused by the feeding of the Rose Chafer grubs
beneath the turf continued certainly up to the middle, and on as late
as the 17th of October, and presumably, weather permitting, much
later.

On the 14th of October, Mr. T. P. Newman, who was good enough
at my request to make special search as to whether the grubs were
still to be found, wrote me from Hazelhurst, Haslemere, Surrey, as
follows :—‘‘I am sending you the result of two diggings, one a space
of about 24 x 12 inches, the other about 14 x 12 inches. The top
three inches contains no grubs at all. Between three inches and six
there are few. Below six inches and down to nine inches they are
plentiful. Below nine inches down to twelve there are few. Below
twelve inches there is little but stone and shale, and there are no
grubs.’—(T. P. N.) These notes of depth of chief amount of grub
presence seem to me of very practical interest regarding remedial
measures noticed further on.

On the 17th of October, Mr. Mark Sandford, writing from the
Estate Office, Maresfield Park, Uckfield, added the following note of
destruction then going on to his previous observations :—‘‘ The rooks
are very busy in the park each early morning, almost ploughing up the
turf for the grubs of the Rose Beetles; no doubt they seem to be
damaging the turf very much, but I presume it is the best way to get
rid of the beetles, is it not? They seem to know exactly where to find
them, as they do not go all over the park, only at certain places, and
at those places we can find the grubs, and not elsewhere.”

The beetles are easily recognizable by being of the shape and size
figured at p. 22, the colour of the head and fore body bright deep green,
the wing-cases bright brown. The wings are ample, the under side of
the body and legs black. The life-time of this Rose Chafer (Phyllo-
pertha horticola) is now known to extend in all its conditions only over
twelve months. The beetles, as we know, appear in May, or early in
the summer, and feed very especially on Roses, but also on many kinds
of leafage. The female beetles then deposit their eggs (up, it is stated,
to the number of a hundred) in the earth, and then they die; the
grubs from these ravage, as we know, at plant roots, especially Grass
roots, and by November are full-sized. During winter they he in the
ground, and presently change to the pupal state, from which the
beetles may be expected to develop in May.

The life-history of the Cockchafer, the Melolontha vulgaris, is very
similar to the above in the main points,—with the exception that the
Cockchafer (as shown at page 27) is upwards of four times as large

ROSE CHAFER AND COMMON COCKCHAFER. 29

as the P. horticola ; also it is much longer lived, as it passes four years
before it reaches beetle state; and also its flight time is in the evening,
not in the sunny hours of the day.

The grubs in both cases are very fleshy, yellowish in general colour,
excepting at the extremity of the abdomen, which is more or less
swelled out by the contained food into what is called the “ sack,”
which, from this food showing through the transparent skin, has a dark
bluish colour. Both kinds have horny brownish or ochrey heads,
armed with strong jaws, and also both kinds have six long legs at the
fore part of the body. There is no difficulty at all in distinguishing
between the kind of the grubs after the Cockchafer grub has passed the
full-grown size of the Rose Chafer grub; but previously to that, it
appears to me there may be difficulties in technical identification.

For those, however, who wish to be able to identify the two kinds
of larve with certainty for scientific purposes, the fullest descriptions
are available in the work ‘De Metamorphosi Eleutheratorum Obser-
vationes,’ by I. Schiodte, which extend over two or three pages each of
Latin descriptions. Not being able myself fully to master the details
of the entomological Latin, I most gladly availed myself of the kind
assistance of Mr. W. Hatchett Jackson, M.A., of Keble College, Oxford,
who was good enough to translate and tabulate the distinctive points
forme. The attack was passing away when I became aware of these
full descriptions being in existence, and specimens in spirit were not
serviceable for certain identification of many of the minute details; but
so far as I could judge from the more obvious characteristics besides
those which I had observed during the summer; and also that of the
power of the grubs of moving about with very fair activity, also their
decided difference in appearance from that of a half-grown Cockchafer
grub, which I had the opportunity of examining, it appears to me that
all the different collections of grubs sent from under the turf (save
where otherwise specified) might be safely considered to be those of the
Rose Chafer, the Phyllopertha horticola.

The following notes of some of the characteristic differences between
the two species of larvee (taken from the work above mentioned), which
do not require either high microscopic powers, or minute dissection for
their observation, may perhaps be of service.

Larva of Phyllopertha horticola.—Vertical suture of head a very fine
line. pistoma broader by half than it is long. Third joint of
antenne of same length as the first joint. Tibie of legs twice as short
as femora. Claws of legs increasing in size in the successive pairs.
Abdomen cylindrical though somewhat clavate. Anal valves obscurely
marked off; lunate in shape. Spiracles orbicular.

Larva of Melolontha vulgaris.—Vertical suture of head deeply
countersunk for a short space behind the epistoma, its margins some-

30 CORN AND GRASS.

what raised. Epistoma three times as broad as long. Third joint of
antenne nearly one-third shorter than first joint. Tibie of legs one-
fourth shorter than femora. Claws of legs diminishing very greatly in
size in successive pairs, most markedly and abruptly in those of third
pair. Abdomen clavate. Anal valves sharply marked off; upper valve
triangular, lower valve trilobed. Anterior spiracles short ovate,
posterior orbicular.

PreEvENTION AND Remepies.—So far as appears at present the only
really reliable remedy for Rose Chafer attack is shaking or beating
down the beetles (see p. 25) in the evening, or early morning, when
they are torpid from weather effects, or other causes. If they are
shaken down when they are not disposed to fly (as at dusk, in the
evening, or in the cool morning hours), they may be destroyed in great
numbers. This may be done by hand-picking the fallen Chafers, and
scalding them, or they may be gathered off cloths, or sheets of any
kind, which have been laid beneath the infested trees before shaking
the beetles down, and these collections thrown into scalding water, or
into any mixture which will kill them. Where they have to be
destroyed on a large scale (similarly to Cockchafer beetles), it may
answer to have pigs ready to devour them. But it is important in both
cases to be sure to take the time when the beetle is quiet, for with the
Cockchafer the dusk hours are its special flight time. Clearing the beetles
in this way necessarily lessens the amount which would otherwise lay
eggs in the Grass fields, or lawns, or other localities suitable for the
purpose.

When the second stage of the attack is doing damage in the form
of the maggots feeding at the roots of Grass, then the chief practicable
remedy appears to be to take care that the flocks of birds, which tear
up the surface of the lawns or Grass lands to get at the grubs, should
not be disturbed at their work. It will be seen in the preceding pages
that the starlings are particularly useful in clearing the grubs; they
are mentioned as coming “in large flocks’; ‘‘in thousands”’; and
also the ground being “black with starlings and missel thrushes.”’
Rooks also are noticed as doing good service in digging up the grubs;
and in another observation, a note is given of “birds of all kinds
feeding greedily all day.” Poultry also of various kinds aided in
clearing. Whether turning pigs (not too much rung in the nose) on to
the infested ground might not be a still better way of getting the
maggots destroyed, is open to doubt; but the more complete ruin of the
turf by the ploughing up of their noses than even what is caused by the
tearing of the birds, makes the plan objected to.

The depth at which the grubs lie beneath the ground makes it
exceedingly difficult to deal with them by applications of surface

ROSE CHAFER AND COMMON COCKCHAFER. 81

dressings; but where they lie sufficiently in reach, the following
suggestions by John Curtis, or a modification of them, may be of use.*
‘¢To kill these larve, water the Grass in the autumn with one-tenth
gas liquor to two-tenths water; it will do no mischief to the Grass, but
will extirpate the miners. Where the gas liquor cannot be employed,
employ strong salt and water.’’ These prescriptions would need some
care in carrying out, and experiment as to strength of application safe
to use, or they might only complete the mischief. There is, however,
very likely to be this benefit gained by their careful application, that
even if they did not kill the grubs, they would make the earth so dis-
agreeable to them, that the grubs would go lower down, and do less
mischief whilst the effect lasted.

Potash, unslaked lime, and other alkalis, are stated to be useful to
strew over infested land before or after the winter season, and gypsum
also is mentioned as desirable ; but looking at the depth at which they
have been recorded as at work in the previous observations, and that
to which they can or do go down in winter, which is given, even in
November when frost has set in, as much as a spade’s depth, it may be
doubted whether these applications would do more than help to restore
the Grass growth. There is also the point to be considered that the
strong smelling or tasted applications, like gas water, might drive
off bird help.

After examination of the various kinds of treatment advised for the
last fifty years or more for the extirpation of these pests, it still does
not appear to me that anything can be surely relied on, excepting
shaking down the beetles and destroying them.

* See ‘ Gardeners’ Chronicle’ for Oct. 19th, 1844, p. 700.

32

GOOSEBERRY.
Gooseberry and Ivy Red Spider. Bryobia pretiosa, C. Li. Koch.

Bryopia pra ri0sa, from life; B. speciosa (outline figure after Koch): both magnified.
Leaf infested by ‘‘ Red Spider,”’ nat. size.

During the past spring and early summer, Gooseberry leafage was
infested to a very unusual extent by a small Acarus, or ‘“ Mite,”
commonly known as ‘‘Red Spider.’”’ This Mite is of a different species
to the well-known “ Red Spider’’ of the Hop, and is very commonly to
be found on Ivy leaves; but in the past season, without apparently
being less present on Ivy, it extended its infestation to Gooseberry
leafage to an amount causing serious loss to growers in many
localities.

The first report of the mischief that was going forward was sent
me on the 15th of March from Great Eversden, near Cambridge, by
Mr. Francis Nixon, and from that time until the 21st of June enquiries
were sent as to the best means for checking the evil. Letters regarding
this prevalence of Red Spider were sent from localities over a large
area of country; it was reported from near Rochester and Brighton,
and other places in Kent, and Sussex, and near Lymington, in Hants.
In Hertfordshire I had it in my own garden, and it was also present
at Watford. Special observations of the presence of the Mite as a
most destructive pest were sent from various places in Cambridgeshire ;
notably from near Wisbech, Histon, Meldreath, and Great Kversden,
near Cambridge, and from grounds of growers up to an extent of three
hundred acres. More westerly, it was noticed as troublesome at
Pershore, and also at Hvesham, in Worcestershire; it was also reported

GOOSEBERRY AND IVY RED SPIDER. 33

to me as present in great quantities near Cirencester, by Prof. Allen
Harker, of the Royal Agricultural College; and, passing on to the
most northerly locality reported from, it was present to a very notice-
able amount up to the early days of June in the neighbourhood of
Perth.

Not being sufficiently well acquainted with the Acarina to be able
to identify these Mites trustworthily myself, I applied for help in the
matter to the well-skilled determination of Mr. Albert Michael, F.L.S.,
who kindly examined the specimens for me, and sent me, on the 11th
of May, the following reply :—‘‘ They belong to the genus Bryobia, and
are the Bryobia pretiosa of C. L. Koch, but I very much doubt this
species being different from the Bryobia speciosa of the same author ;
you might really call them by either name; but this variety is Koch’s
‘pretiosa.’ The creature swarms in millions on Ivy in gardens at this
time of the year. Ido not think that it usually does very much harm
to garden produce, as it prefers the Ivy, but sometimes it does a good
deal of damage. If there be Ivy in the garden it comes from, the
owner may probably get rid of the Mites at the expense of the Ivy ; if
he does not do this, the evil is likely to be recurring. You will find
that Andrew Murray and Koch class Bryobia among the Trombidiide,
but this is an error; clearly its nearest ally is Tetranychus, the common
Red Spider.” —(A. D. M.)*

At the heading of this paper a magnified figure is given of B.
pretiosa (taken from life last season), together with a copy of Koch’s
outline figure of the B. speciosa. These give the general form, and
especially the great length of the front pair of legs, which is a charac-
teristic of the Bryobia (Koch). The size is difficult to state for general
purposes, but amongst the specimens I examined, the thirty-second of
an inch, that is, the quarter of the eighth of an inch, would give a fair
idea of the average length. With regard to colour,—amongst the first
specimens which were sent me on the 17th of March, from Great
Eversden, by Mr. Francis Nixon, the larger number were brick-red of
various shades from bright to ordinary brick colour, and some much
deeper and duller in tint. These were in some instances moving about

* In Murray’s ‘ Aptera’ a short description of the main characteristics of the
genus Bryobia will be found at p. 117, followed by a figure of B. speciosa, after Koch,
in which one peculiarly distinguishing point of the margin of the abdomen being
set round with short papille is indicated. In a paper on ‘‘The Clover Mite”
(another species of Bryobia, namely, B. pratensis), by Prof. C. V. Riley and C. L.
Marriatt, given in No. 2 of Vol. iii. of ‘Insect Life’ (Washington), observations will
also be found regarding this belonging to the family of vegetable-feeding Mites, the
Tetranychide. These points are desirable to bear in mind now that they have been
clearly defined, to prevent the errors on the one hand of placing this little Mite in a
separate division from its nearest allies, and on the other of mistaking it for the
only too prevalent Red Spider of the Hop and of other plants.—Eb.

D

84 GOOSEBERRY.

quite actively on the leafage of the Gooseberry twigs sent, which were
about four or five inches long, with the leafage well forward, and a
little of the blossom bud showing.

About a month later (amongst specimens sent me from Pitfour Castle,
Perth, N.B., by Sir J. Stewart Richardson, Bart.), I found the same kind
of ‘‘ Red Spiders’ in great numbers, some bright red and active, and
others congregated in the axils of the veins of the leaves close to the
origin of the leaf from the leafstalk. This appeared to be a favourite
position, and these little parties of Mites were mostly of a darker, or
partially of a darker, tint, being in some cases vermilion along the
centre of the back of the abdomen, and dark towards the sides (see
magnified figure, p. 82). This figure also shows the full number, that
is to say, eight legs of the adult Mite; when hatched it has only six.*
The web, which is so noticeable under a fair magnifying power in the
case of the Hop Red Spider, was very little observable in the early
stages of infestation, even where I made special examination with a
quarter-inch power; I think I made out that there was a little, but I
could not feel certain.

The following are some of the reports of observation sent in the
past season. On the 15th of March, Mr. F. Nixon, writing from Great
Eversden, near Cambridge, remarked, ‘‘It might interest you to know
that at this early stage the Gooseberry bushes in this neighbourhood
are already covered with ‘Red Spider’”’; ... ‘all have it more or
less.”

On the 23rd of May, Mr. Nixon, who had been frequently communi-
cating on the subject of the Gooseberry Red Spider presence since his
first observation of March 15th, wrote that he had seen hundreds of
acres looking ruined by this troublesome pest, and remarked :—‘ I
have been into every fruit-growing district in Cambridgeshire, and
everywhere it is the same. Not a single plantation have I found
entirely free from it, whilst the ravages in most have been terrible.”

Reverting to order of date of appearance: on the 27th of March,
Mr. Chas. Whitaker, of Caldewell, Pershore, Worcestershire, applied
for information as to remedy for Red Spider on Gooseberry bushes.

On the 27th of April, Prof. Harker, of the Royal Agricultural
College, Cirencester, wrote me from Oakley Villas, Cirencester, as
follows :—‘‘I dare say this long dry season has put you on the alert for

* In the paper by Prof. Riley, previously quoted at p. 33, will be found first-
rate and very highly magnified figures of Bryobia pratensis in adult, and also in
young condition, which may be serviceably consulted for differences of structure at
different ages. In the case of this ‘‘ Clover Red Spider” it is noted (pp. 47, &c.)
that the eggs are blood-red, and have been found in great numbers during winter on
the bark, or under loose bark, of various trees, together with some amount of
hybernating Mites,

EEE LD

GOOSEBERRY AND IVY RED SPIDER. 35

some special developments of insect and other pest life. To-day my
boy and I found an amazing phenomenon on the leaves of the wall
Ivy, on all the roads and gardens around here. Thousands, millions,
of Spinning Mites! One leaf, not very big, had over one hundred
specimens, and every leaf for almost acres had some.” . . . “I think
I never saw such an army of living things.”’

Later on, Prof. Harker kindly sent me the following additional
note relatively to observation of web spun on the infested leafage,
which, whilst the attack was only just beginning, I had scarcely been
able to find, even doubtfully, and usually not at all, on the sample
leaves forwarded to me.

Prof. Harker wrote me :—‘‘ After some weeks the enormous numbers
of Mites gradually diminished; but they left behind them what had
not at first been visible, their common webs, covering the whole of the
Ivy for quite one or two hundred yards, from the ground to the top of
the six feet wall, and as these webs caught the dust and wind-borne
débris of the roadsides they became thick and matted, and quite dis-
figured the whole Ivy. Up to middle of August a few of the Mites
were still occasionally found.” —(A. H.)

About the same date as the first of Prof. Harker’s observations,
given above, that is, on the 17th and on the 29th of April, Sir J.
Stewart Richardson wrote to me from Pitfour Castle, Perth, N.B.,
regarding the appearance of this infestation on Gooseberry bushes, and
afterwards also in great numbers on Ivy. On the 17th of April, Sir J.
Stewart Richardson wrote :—‘‘I send you some specimens of what in
this district is an entirely new Gooseberry pest.” ... ‘‘ Last year
they were very severe on the bushes in a garden about three miles
from here, but this year they are destroying my bushes, particularly
the Warrington kind, but are not nearly so bad on the Sulphur
Gooseberry.” The ‘Red Spider’? was very numerous on the leafage
sent. On the 29th of April, Sir J. Stewart Richardson wrote further :
—‘‘ Since writing to you, I find that the same Spider is very bad on
the Ivy, both near the garden and on the house (more than a quarter
of a mile distant), so that it cannot be called peculiarily a Gooseberry
pest.”

On the 1st of May, Miss F. Pye, writing from Knight’s Place,
Rochester, observed :—‘‘ We are sending you some specimens of Red
Spider. My father says it has been a nuisance on a piece vf Goose-
berries for the last two years’’; and, a few days after, on the 5th of
May, Mr. F. Padwick, writing from 101, Buckingham Road, Brighton,
requested ‘information respecting a minute Red Spider which is
committing havoc among the Gooseberry trees in the south of
Sussex.”

On the 6th of May, Mr. D. D. Gibb, of Ossemsley Manor Farm,
D 2

86 GOOSEBERRY.

Lymington, Hants, wrote:—‘‘ About a week ago Red Spider appeared
in great numbers, and still swarms everywhere, the Ivy on this and
other houses being covered.”

Various other localities were written from regarding presence of the
infestation, as at Meldreth, Cambs, on the 16th of May, where it was
noted as ‘‘more numerous and harder to kill than ever before.’’ Also
from Rossett Holt, Harrogate, Yorks, where a correspondent reported
a kind of Red Spider, of which specimens were sent, as being in
millions on the south and west sides of the house. Without, however,
enumerating all localities reported from, the infestation continued past
the middle of June, the latest report of presence being sent on the 21st
of June, by Mrs. Manning, from Watford, Herts, as follows :—‘‘ One
tree was slightly attacked last year. This year it appeared in the
same branch, but spread over a great number of trees, and I am very
anxious to know what means to use to save the bushes from another
year’s attack.”

PREVENTION AND Remepirs.—One important point is to take the attack
in time,—firstly, thatif even a single bush is infested it should be cleared
so as not to make a centre of infestation for the following season; and
secondly, when Red Spider is found to be in possession, remedies
should be applied without delay.

This point, it will be seen, is strongly noted in the following
valuable communication with which I was favoured by Mr. Malcolm
Dunn, writing to me on the 28th of September regarding the injurious
insect appearances of the year from the Palace Gardens, Dalkeith, N.B.
Mr. Dunn remarked :—

‘Our worst ‘insect attack’ this season was in June, just before
the hot weather gave way to rain, on the 22nd of that month. The
dry weather and great heat brought on a rather severe attack of Aphis
and Red Spider on fruit trees ; and especially on Currants and Goose-
berries fully exposed to the sun. In gardens where means were not
taken at once to stop the attacks, the ‘Fly’ and ‘Spider’ quickly
overcame the bushes, and many hundreds were so badly injured in the
market gardens around here, as well as in private gardens, that they
have had to be pulled up and burnt. Spraying with soap-suds, or a
weak solution of paraffin, at once cleared off the insects, if care was
taken to apply the spray to every part, especially the under side of the
leaves.”

Amongst some observations sent me by Mr. J. Masters, of Evesham,
Chairman of the Fruit-growers’ Experimental Committee of that
district, he drew attention to the serious nature of the infestation
where it was not attended to. Mr. Masters remarked, ‘‘ We have had
some very serious ravages in our Gooseberry plantations by the ‘ Red

GOOSEBERRY AND IVY RED SPIDER. 37

Spider,’ especially where growers took no precautions.” Also in one
of Mr. Nixon’s earliest communications, he wrote :—‘‘I am sending
you to-day some Gooseberry cuttings of my neighbours. I do not send
my own, because they are not nearly so bad.” .. . ‘I dressed fre-
quently and heavily last year with soft-soap, treacle, and quassia.”
Mrs. Manning’s communication from Watford also points to infes-
tation spreading from even one neglected bush.

For attacks of this nature, probably there are no better applications
than spraying with soft-soap wash, or mixtures of soft-soap with
mineral oil, or with sulphur. Where these can be successfully mixed
at home it saves much trouble, but sometimes purchase of a ready-

‘made mixture saves both trouble and much risk, for if the mineral oil
and soap wash are not permanently united, they presently separate,
and whilst the soft-soap does not do all the good that was intended,
the paraffin does much harm.

So far as reports sent me show, one of the most generally service-
able washes for syringing with, when attack is fairly established, is the
mixture sold by Messrs. Morris, Little & Son, of Doncaster, under the
trade name of ‘‘ Anti-pest.”” On enquiry by myself of Messrs. Morris
& Co. as to the general nature of the mixture, they replied :—‘‘ We
have no objection whatever to your stating ‘that the Anti-pest is not
distantly allied to the Kerosine Emulsion of the U. S. A., but has the
great advantage of being easily miscible with water, &.,’ as no doubt
this would be somewhat in its favour.”

With regard to special observation of the effect of the dressing,—
on March 22nd, Mr. Nixon wrote me, after a deal of experimenting,
that he was then able to speak confidently regarding Messrs. Morris,
Little & Son’s Anti-pest, and considered it undoubtedly the best
dressing he had tried, and at the same time he forwarded two boxes of
specimens of Gooseberry twigs for my examination. On those that
had been dressed there were hardly any ‘“ Red Spiders’’ remaining,
and such as there were appeared to be all dead; whilst on the twigs
that had not been dressed the ‘‘ Red Spiders’’ were mostly quite active;
and later on, on May 8rd, Mr. Nixon further reported that he considered
he had mastered the ‘‘ Spider,’ and did not expect to have much
difficulty with it in the future. |

Amongst other correspondents much troubled with this Gooseberry
leaf pest, I suggested to Sir J. Stewart Richardson, of Pitfour Castle,
near Perth (see p. 35), that a trial of the so-called ‘‘ Anti-pest,” applied
by the Vermorel Spraying Pump, might prove beneficial, and shortly
after he favoured me with a note of results as follows :—‘‘I at once
sent for Little’s Anti-pest and a Vermorel Spraying Pump; .. . the
result of the two things is most satisfactory. This afternoon I
inspected some of the bushes most affected, which had only been ©

38 GOOSEBERRY.

sprayed once yesterday morning, and I could not find a live Spider.”
... “I think the Vermorel Spraying Pump the most wonderful thing
for the money I ever came across; it should be in every garden.” *
The good results remained, for in reply to a request of mine for some
more specimens of the Spider, I received a reply, sent on the 8rd of
June :—‘“I shall send you on Monday some infested sprigs of Ivy and
Gooseberry. My Gooseberries are cleared by the treatment, but I can
get plenty of specimens within a mile.”

Very likely many other of the numberless mixtures now purchasable
might have cleared out the Red Spider pest equally well, but as this
remedy acted satisfactorily in all cases reported to me, and also at no
great cost, I usually suggested it, and, as noted, had good reports of
its success.

Some applications were noted as doing little good, as for instance,
a mixture of soft-soap, quassia, and tobacco; and Mr. J. Masters,
writing from Evesham, observed, ‘‘ Where growers used Paris-green,
the bushes are most of them dead.”

For general methods of prevention, all cleaning and dressing of
Gooseberry bushes during winter, which would remove possible shelters
for the Mites, or their eggs, under loose bark, would be desirable; and
also (and very especially) all treatment which might destroy the
infestation in the ground, or prevent it creeping up the bushes from
the ground. One of my correspondents, who bestowed particular
attention on this point, observed the ‘* Red Spiders swarming up the
stems of bushes”’ in the early spring; also a report was given me by
Mr. Nixon that where the stems of bushes, in his own orchards and in
about a dozen other orchards, were greased, there was, in all cases, the
same result, namely, the portion between the grease and ground was
very quickly covered with Spiders on their way up. And further,
during summer, a handful of mould taken up and examined through a
hand-glass would show as many as ‘fifty to one hundred Spiders
ina.”

* The Vermorel Knapsack Pump, or No. 1 Eclair Sprayer, is procurable from
the English agents, Messrs. Chas. Clark & Co., Windsor Chambers, Great St. Helen’s,
London, E.C. The price, I believe, is 35/-, or thereabouts. This sprayer, or pump,
being easily portable on a man’s back, is well adapted for use amongst fruit bushes.

CURRANT AND GOOSEBERRY SCALE. 39

Currant and Gooseberry Scale. Lecanium ribis, Fitch.

BG

Lecantum ripis.—Currant Scale, female, showing side and upper surface; larval
Scales, with legs still visible: all magnified. Infested Gooseberry twig.

For several years back notes have been sent from time to time
with specimens accompanying, of a brown Scale insect found to infest
branches of Gooseberry bushes to an injurious extent. It was not,
however, until the past season (1898) that, through the kind and
skilled assistance of Mr. J. W. Douglas, F.E.S., I was able to ascertain
the precise species of this Lecanium.

On the 7th of March, Mr. Douglas wrote me as follows regarding
specimens I had forwarded to him for examination :—‘ The Scales on
the Gooseberry are certainly Lecanium ribis, Fitch. They are familiar
to me, for when I lived at Beaufort Gardens they were gregarious on
the Red Currant bushes, and sometimes on the White Currant; but I
never found they did much appreciable harm. Yet in some places they
are very injurious. I have known bushes to be quite exhausted by
them, and once I saw an entire bush of Ribes sanguineum (the red
flowering kind) entirely killed by them. I never saw or heard of them
on Black Currant. The male of the species is unknown.” . . . ‘I
sent examples to Signoret, and he agreed that they were the L. ribis,
Fitch. I doubt, however, if the species has ever been fully described ;
i. e., only the external characters have been given.’’—(J. W. D.)

The following is the short original note of observation given by
Dr. Asa Fitch, of Albany, U.S.A. :—‘‘ Currant-bark Louse, Lecaniwn
ribis, nu. sp., Homoptera, Coccide. A hemispherical Seale of a brownish
yellow colour, about 0°30 in diameter, adhering to the bark of the
garden Currant; its margin finely wrinkled transversely; often per-
forated with one, two, or three holes, from which have issued minute
brilliant green, four-winged flies, which in their larva state have fed

40 GOOSEBERRY.

upon and consumed the minute eggs which originally existed under
the Scales.

‘This is quite common in some gardens, and I suspect has been
introduced into this country with the Currant, although European
authors have made no mention of a Scale insect as belonging either to
this shrub or the Gooseberry. It will be most readily found before
the leaves put forth in the spring.” *

The method of life of the Scale insect may be described generally,
but sufficiently for remedial purposes, as follows. When the soft
whitish lobed female, which lies without power of moving within the
thin brown Seale, is matured, she produces a multitude of minute
eggs, as small as fine dust, which may easily be observed by detaching
the sheltering Scale. From these eggs there hatch little flattish oval
maggots, which at first have six legs. These spread themselves
actively abroad on the boughs, and feed by sucking away the juices,
until presently they lose the power of locomotion, turn to the pupal
state, and to common observation change in external appearance to the
chestnut coloured hemispherical lumps, which are commonly known
as ‘“‘Scale Insects.’ This thin flexible brown covering shelters the
female within; and the sequence of life-history is well given in the
following note of observations sent me, on the 15th of July, from Sea-
ford Grange, Pershore, by Mr. Wm. F. Gibbon :—

‘‘T have closely watched the habits of the ‘ Red Seale’ this season,
and have verified my observations of last year. The young Scale
emerges from the egg early in the spring; I found them hatched out
early in February, at first almost transparent, and walking with free-
dom on six legs; but they soon became of a chestnut colour, and
assumed the shape of a small wood louse, flat and oval, and then
secured a position by inserting their beak into the bark, and speedily
increasing in size. When about three-fourths grown their covering
appeared very shiny and sticky, and, later on, dry and harsh. In May
I found the Scale matured, and eggs deposited; and on the 18th of
June the eggs hatched, and the young are now on the move, and it is
at this stage of their existence to apply washes for their destruction.
The young now wandering about will soon affix themselves to the bark,
assume a hard covering, and mature; by autumn deposit eggs, which
will hatch next spring. ‘'here are consequently two generations in a
year. —(W. F. G.)

* See ‘Third Report of Noxious and Beneficial Insects of the State of New
York,’ by Asa Fitch, M.D., Albany, 1859. This account is also quoted by Dr.
Signoret in his ‘Essai sur les Cochenilles’ (collective edition), vol. 2, p. 624 (462) ;
and this Scale insect is just alluded to by Prof. J. H. Comstock in his ‘2nd Report
of the Department of Entomology of Cornell University Experiment Station, 1883,’

in which, at page 135, he refers his readers to the Trans. N. Y. State Agricultural
Society, 1856, 427.

CURRANT AND GOOSEBERRY SCALE. 41

Mr. Gibbon also mentioned that this species of Scale insect is very
destructive to Gooseberry and Red and Black Currant bushes. I was
not then aware of it having been observed on the Black Currant, but
on examination of Black Currants in my own, and in an adjacent
garden, I found it very definitely present on the boughs, though not
to any great extent. On Red and White Currants it was only too
noticeable.

The first observations which were forwarded during the past season
of infestation of this Scale insect, were sent me on the 8th of February,
from Caldewell, Pershore, by Mr. Charles Whitaker, with samples of
Gooseberry twigs accompanying, infested by numbers of the female
Scales, and also of the little flat dull reddish larve, already on the move.

On March 10th, I found the same kind (both females and larve)
were very prevalent on Gooseberry bushes in my own garden at
Torrington House, St. Albans. The female Scales were numerous on
the old wood, and mainly beneath the branches where they~ were
sheltered from weather, and where the bark was often split or peeled
away so as to expose the under surface; but the infestation was not
noticeable (up to this date) on shoots of last year’s growth, although
the larvee, and necessarily the female Scales, had for some time pre-
viously been observable on the bushes.

The larve, or maggots, were so small as to be almost invisible to the
naked eye, narrowly oval in shape, with six legs, and a pair of horns
(see much magnified figure, p. 39). The colour various, of some shade
of puce or reddish, or ochrey tint, and the body somewhat raised along
the middle so as to form a slight keel, and the abdomen of the larve,
as well as the female Scales, showing a more or less noticeable caudal
cleft.

The female Scales were hemispherical in shape, sometimes curved
slightly outwards at the lowest edge; the colour some shade of nut
brown or rich brown; the size variable, ranging from an eighth of an
inch to rather more; the width about equal to the length; the height
about one-twelfth of an inch, or rather more in the middle. In the
best defined specimens the border was finely ribbed transversely ; the
rest of the surface was so irregularly varied, according to age or condi-
tion of Scale, as to make it impossible to give a precise description.

Later in the season (on the 6th of June) the female Scales were
plentiful on the old wood of some Gooseberry bushes which had not
been particularly attended to, and in most instances were full of eggs.
Sometimes the old skin of the mother Scale was almost empty, but in
others the quantity was beyond counting, the exceedingly small oval-
shaped bodies falling like a shower of white dust, which might be said
to cover a space of half an inch square, and well sprinkle about an
inch. The Scales which frequently contained the lobed, fleshy, greyish

42, GOOSEBERRY.

female Lecanium within them, were now of different sizes, and of
various colour and condition, some being shrunken, so as to show
transverse corrugations, and some plump and rounded.

About a month after (on the 11th of July) a few females were
scattered on the old branches, some long dead, and flattened against
the boughs with the colour faded, others still bright brown and shiny.
Beneath them, in some instances, eggs were still noticeable, but com-
monly empty eggshells were the most observable presence, together
with some eggs still unhatched, and some recently hatched or hatching
larve. And towards the end of July, though I found little larval pre-
sence on the Gooseberry bushes, I found, at the same date, a piece of
Gooseberry branch, which had been cut and kept under cover for some
time, was sprinkled over with multitudes of the young larval Scales.
These were scattered in scores, or rather in hundreds, over every part
of the branch excepting the withered leaves, but were then dead from
the branch having ceased to supply requisite sap. The marked
difference in amount was presumably from the young Scales being
washed off in out-of-door circumstances, or destroyed by rain, and also
being preyed on by small insect feeding beetles, &c., as there were
plentiful remains of egg pellicles.

PrevENTION AND Remepirs.—Looking at the manner in which the
Scales shelter themselves where ragged bark is peeling back on old
wood, it is obvious that robbing them of these head-quarters so far as
could be managed could not fail to be of service; and next to this, such
treatment of the bushes as would allow of not only spraying the
infested boughs, but of wash being run down them to lodge amongst
rough bark, and would also allow of the oldest of the infested parts,
where there was no fear of rubbing off buds, being well brushed with
soap mixtures.

Much might thus be done by well considered pruning; but at the
same time the pruned off branches should be most carefully removed
and burnt. The little larval Scales, though hardly discernible without a
magnifier, are actively on foot as early as February, and may perfectly
easily wander back from the removed branches if these are left beneath
the bushes.

Where Currants are trained in long rods on walls, these require an
eye being given, and perhaps a rod occasionally taken out, down to the
root. In my own garden I have found the Scales in patches at
intervals on a length of several feet of White Currant.

On the 20th of February, Mr. Chas. Whitaker, writing from
Caldewell, Pershore, told me that he had had his infested Gooseberry
bushes sprayed with ‘‘ Chiswick Compound,” and found it effectual; and
in a further communication, a little more than a month later, he added,

CURRANT AND GOOSEBERRY SCALE. 43

‘“‘T found the Chiswick Compound very effective in destroying Scale.”
Probably this would be as serviceable an application as could be found,
as it is a mixture of soft-soap and sulphur, which act well against these
kinds of bark infestations, and it has the advantage of the sulphur
becoming soluble (so as to be completely mixed with the wash) in from
sixteen to twenty-four hours after the requisite amount of hot water to
dilute the mixture to a safe strength has been added. _

The mixture is procurable from the Chiswick Soap Company, Chis-
wick, Middlesex, and is very similar in composition to a mixture used
with success in South Australia (under the name of “ Burford’s Soft-
soap and Sulphur Compound”) against several kinds of bark attack, as
Aphides, Red Spider, &c. Probably any of the common soft-soap
washes, especially those that are mixed with sulphur and mineral oil,
would be of use, and if a stronger application was needed, the following
recipe for ‘‘ Burford’s No. 1 Kerosine Soap”’ might be of use.

“Take equal weights of kerosine and soft-soap and stir together in
a convenient vessel, which should be placed in the sun in summer, or
in a bucket containing hot water in the winter time. In from ten to
twenty minutes’ time the two ingredients will coalesce, when it can be
diluted as required’? ;* probably in this country the hot water would
be more to be trusted to than the heat of the sun at any time of year.

To the above suggestions of preventive or remedial treatment may
be added, with regard to date of clearing infested boughs in winter
pruning, that it is desirable this should be done, and the Scale-infested
boughs cleared from the ground and burnt before the time when the
larval Scales will be hatching and dispersing themselves about bushes.
It should be done quite by the commencement of February. Also it is
desirable, after the prunings have been gathered up, to stir + the surface
of the soil under the bushes, and to throw a little quick-lime, or any
preventive mixture preferred, on the soil just round the stems to pre-
vent the little Scales making their way back to the branches.

* The above, and other useful recipes, will be found in the ‘ Report on the Fusi-
cladiums (Black-spot, Scab, and Mildew Diseases), Codlin Moth, &c.,’ by the late
Frazer 8. Crawford, Inspector under the Vine, &c., Protection Act, South Australia.
K. Spiller, Government Printer, Adelaide.

+ In mentioning that stirring the surface soil and throwing on quick-lime is
useful, I most particularly wish to observe that I do not advise ‘‘ deep digging”
under the bushes as a preventive measure for this or any other Gooseberry attack,
As far as I am able to form an opinion, such a measure would be injurious in the
extreme to the roots of the Gooseberry bushes, and as a remedial measure for infes-
tation of Gooseberry Sawfly, as I have recently seen recommended, it would (as is
well known to practical workers) fail in beneficial effect, as it would merely disperse
a large proportion of the cocoons. In this case the surface should be skimmed off
no deeper than is necessary, and destroyed with the contained cocoons.—(E. A. O.)

44

FOP:

Minute Black Lady-bird. Scymnus minimus, Rossi.*
(Beneficial insect ; feeding on ‘‘ Red Spider.’’)

Amongst injurious infestations of Hops, that of Red Spider was
especially troublesome at Hop harvest time in the past season, and
about the end of August, when in many of the south-eastern Hop
growing districts picking was being hurried on, or crops severely
suffering from presence of Red Spider,+ I received information of
observation of a small black Lady-bird Beetle, of which the maggots
preyed greedily on this pest.

The first communication regarding these little Lady-birds was sent
me on the 5th of August, from Canon Court, Wateringbury, near
Maidstone, by Mr. Edward Goodwin, with the remark that he was for-
warding to me some larve which he had found that day feeding on the
Red Spider of the Hop. ‘This first consignment, however, had escaped
in transit, or what was more likely, judging by subsequent observation
of habits of the maggots, had destroyed each other past recognition
during the journey !

From various causes, the second consignment was not sent me
until near the end of the month, on the 25th of August, when Mr.
Goodwin wrote :—‘‘ I regret the delay in sending you more specimens.
Unfortunately the wash we used was more successful in killing the
larvee which prey on Red Spider than the Spiders themselves. I am
sending you a very few of the larve and pupe. I could not find any
of the beetles; they are very small, black, and evidently allied to the
‘Fly Golding.’”’

On the 5th of September, Mr. Goodwin added further :—‘ The
larvee and pupe are usually found in groups of four or five, and their
habits appear to resemble those of the Lady-bird. I can find plenty
of them now.”

The beetles, which I reared from the pupe (and in one instance
from the larve sent me), proved just like miniature black ‘‘ Lady-
birds’ in general appearance. The shape hemispheric, or rather oval;
length rather less than one line; colour shining black; legs testaceous,
with darker thighs; antenne clubbed, testaceous, lowest joint darker ;

* This beetle is not figured, as from its very minute size, a black dot, a twelfth
of an inch across, would be the only way of representing it as seen in life. The
figure of various Lady-bird Beetles, in different stages, given at p. 46, show in much
larger form, the shape of the small Scymnus in beetle, chrysalis, and grub condition.

+ See ‘The London Corn Circular’ for August 28th, with ‘‘ Crop Prospects ”’ of
Hops, p. 6.

MINUTE BLACK LADY-BIRD. 45

elytra pubescent and finely punctured. They do not appear to have
any popular name; scientifically, they are the Scymnus minimus. As
T had not met with the species before (though I believe it is not
uncommon), I submitted my identification for verification to Mr. O. E,
Jansen, who pronounced it correct, and that the beetles were the
Seymnus minimus of Rossi.

The larve (maggots) sent me, which were then on August 26th
fully grown, were about an eighth, or rather less than ’an eighth of an
inch in length, and about a third of that width, furnished with six
claw-feet, and with a sucker-foot at the end of the tail; remarkably
nimble in their movements, and with such power of holding by the
tail sucker, that the grub could turn over nearly on its back. Shape
narrowly oval. Colour, to the naked eye, smoky grey; on examination
with a two-inch object-glass, of a smoky yellowish colour with black
markings. The head with some small black marks; 1st segment with
two square black patches above; 2nd with two longer black patches ;
8rd with two long, but narrower black patches. The rest of the body
marked lengthwise, with six rows of black tubercular spots with
bristles. On examining the black patches and tubercle-like warts
with a higher magnifying power, these proved not to be each a single
spot, but composed of a number of little black dots, each aggregation
bearing two, three, or, on the larger patches, many white hairs, with
here and there a few black hairs also.

On placing the maggots on some Plum leaves infested by Red
Spider, I found them shortly after busily feeding. The operation
seemed to be going on uninterruptedly and greedily, like sheep browsing
on a new pasture. Failing other food, the maggots appeared to prey
on each other, for of a few which I had (for convenience of examination)
in a corked glass tube, I only found first two or three, and, later on,
one live maggot remaining, besides a contorted skin and possible
fragments, from which I conjectured the missing specimens had been
eaten or destroyed by their companions.

The remaining maggot went through its changes rapidly. On
August 28th it was still in larval state; it soon changed in the usual
manner of the Coccinellidex, or ‘‘ Lady-birds,” to a shiny black pupa,
suspended to a leaf, and on the 6th of September the beetle had
developed, and was walking about actively.

From the good number of specimens sent me, I was enabled to
watch the development from larval condition onward to that of the
perfect beetle, and I have given notes as above of the chief points ob-
servable, as I am not aware of the history having been noted before.
The only special reference which I find to this Scymnus minimus, as a
destroyer of Red Spider, is given by Dr. E. L. Taschenberg in his
‘ Praktische Insekten Kunde,’ pt. v., p. 154,

46 HOP.

The figure appended of some of our better known, and very much
larger Lady-birds, conveys equally well the shape (much magnified) of
the little black Scymnus and its larva, and also the manner in which
it suspends itself for its pupal change. With these larger species of
Coccinellidx, the attempt has, I believe, been sometimes made, with

CocctneLiip®.—l1, cluster of eggs; 2,eg2,magnified; 3, grub, magnified; 4, line
showing nat. length; 5 and 6, pupe; 7 and 8, 2-spotted Lady-bird, and dark variety,
sometimes known as Coccinella dispar ; 9, 7-spotted Lady-bird.

tolerable success, to preserve the beetles during the winter, and to turn
them loose afterwards to prey on the Hop Aphides. How far such a
plan could be carried out, excepting just as a matter of fancy, might
be doubted, but in the case of the little Scymnus, through the courtesy
of Mr. Goodwin, I have been supplied with a sufficient number of
specimens to found (if they prosper) a colony in my garden. As far as
I see, the flight of the beetle is very short, and if established in a spot
where they may hybernate undisturbed, their services may just possibly
(without any attention having to be bestowed on them) be secured for
next season.

47

hOCUSTS.

Locust (a species of Southern Europe). Acridiwn egyptium, L.
South American Migratory Locust. <Acridiwm (Schistocerca) para-
nense, Burm.

ACRIDIUM #GYPTIUM.

In the early part of the past year (1893), some specimens of Locusts
which had certainly, in some cases, and presumably in all, been
imported into this country, were forwarded to me by correspondents.
Of these, two very fine specimens, sent from two different localities,
were still alive, and one in active condition ; others which were dead,
and obviously had been so for some time, were found in such great
numbers in Lucerne (Alfalfa), imported as fodder from Buenos Ayres,
in South America, that it was estimated there was one Locust to each
pound of hay in the fodder examined.

Later on in the year, at the beginning of September, another
application was sent me on the part of a farmer in the neighbourhood
of Caversham, in Oxfordshire, who had just purchased some ‘foreign
hay,’’ and found quantities of Locusts in it to the amount of “not less
than two, hundred specimens in one truss.” These Locusts (with one
possible exception) appeared to be of precisely the same species as those
imported from Buenos Ayres, and like them were all dead.

The figure at the head of this paper, which was sketched from one
of the live specimens sent me, gives also a good idea of the general
appearance of the fine insects, commonly known as Locusts, when at
rest, or preparing for one of their long leaps.

For common purposes, Locusts may perhaps be best described as a
very large kind of what, in this country, we call ‘“‘ Grasshoppers,” and
the family to which they belong (Locustide, Leach) is distinguishable
from others of ‘‘ Saltatorial Orthoptera,”’ such as our English House
Crickets, Field Crickets, and the like, by the horns, or antennae, being
thread-like, or cylindric, and short, not exceeding the body in length ;
by the wing-covers, and the folded wings beneath them, being deflexed,
that is, not placed horizontally, but sloping like the roof of a house ;

48 LOCUSTS.

and also by the ovipositor not being exserted, the extremity of the tail
not being prolonged into a long egg-laying apparatus. The size is very
variable, from that of the little Grasshoppers, which we are well
acquainted with here, to from two to about three inches in length from
head to tip of wings when at rest in the case of some of the larger
Locusts of the western and eastern world.

The first specimen I received in the past season was sent me on
the 81st of January, from Harlington, Middlesex, by Mr. Robert
Newman, with the remarks :—‘ I have just had handed to me a species of
Grasshopper, which I send to you by this post. The same was found
in a white Brocoli bought in the London market, and which was sent
there from some foreign district. I shall be glad if you will tell me
what it is, and whether there is any reason to fear danger from the
importation of the same.”’

On examination of the specimen, it seemed to me that it was most
likely it had been imported from the south of Hurope, and on enquiry I
found many Brocoli had then been lately imported from Spain.

A few days after receipt of the above specimen, another Locust of
the same species, though rather larger and somewhat differing in
marking, was forwarded to me by favour of Messrs. West, Newman &
Co., 54, Hatton Garden, London, E.C., with the following note :—
‘‘This morning alad named Fursdon, kitchen-boy at Spiers and Pond’s
Aldersgate Street Hotel, brought the Locust sent herewith, which he
had found among some ‘greens’ sent in from market. I could not
extract any information as to the origin of the greens. It struck me
that here might be the importation of a serious injurious insect attack,
and so send it off to you.”—(T. P. N.)

Both of the above specimens were alive, and apparently in good
health. The length of the specimen figured (p. 47) was two inches or
slightly less in the body ; two and three-eighth inches from head to tip
of upper wings when at rest; general colour reddish mottled with
greyish, yellowish red mark at the hinder part of the head, and eyes
with alternate fine longitudinal lines of black and yellowish, these
upwards of fourteen in number. The narrow parchment-like, and
somewhat transparent, upper wings dark grey, mottled with many
darker grey spots, these smaller along the fore edge. The posterior
legs with three dark blotches along the upper part of the thigh
(femur), and the shanks (tibie) with white spines black at the tip.
The above short description of the general appearance of these
Locusts, together with the figure at p. 47, will perhaps be sufficient
for agricultural use; those who desire full technical details will find
them excellently given in the work noted below.*

* «Sinopsis de los Ortépteros de Espana y Portugal,’ par Ignacio Bolivar,
Madrid, pp. 88, 89.

LOCUSTS. 49

As I have not a type collection for reference, it was impossible for
me to identify the specimens trustworthily, and I therefore forwarded
them to Senor Don Ignacio Bolivar, Professor of Entomology in the
University of Madrid, well known for his long and also widely extended
observations on the Orthoptera, who was good enough to identify
them for me as the Acridium egyptiwm,* L., and to write as follows
regarding them :—

‘Nos. 1 and 2 certainly correspond to the Acridium egyptium, L.
They may easily have been imported into England with field produce
from the whole of Southern Europe, where the species is common. In
the neighbourhood of Madrid this kind may be found in fully developed
condition during nearly the whole year. It does not cause ravage, as
it is not found in great numbers, but always as isolated specimens, and
scattered at considerable distances.” —J. B. (Trans. H. A. O.)

Besides the above specimens, which arrived in living condition, I
received, on the 8rd of February, a packet of large dead Locusts, which
proved on investigation to be the Acridiwm paranense, of Burmeister,
and which were then being sent over from Buenos Ayres, in fodder, in
such numbers as to cause enquiry whether the great quantity might
prove injurious to cattle or stock consuming the Locusts with their
food.

On this point the following communication was sent me on the
2nd of February, by Messrs. Porter & Wilson, from Jamaica Street,
Liverpool :-—‘‘I beg to hand you sample of insects taken from Alfalfa
grass or hay, which is being landed at this port from Buenos Ayres.
In two samples I have examined, the quantity averages about one
insect to each pound of hay. The specimens are not quite perfect ;
they have some long legs, which got broken off through being entangled
amongst the leaves of the herbage, which is very full towards the top,
something like the Vetches of our country. I shall esteem it a great
favour if you will kindly tell me the name of the insect, and if it is
injurious to horses or cattle.”

It may be just noted in passing, that ‘Alfalfa’? is the Spanish
word for Lucerne. With regard to possible damage, as a presence of
infestation at the above-named proportion would be calculable as at

* Synonyms of Acridium egyptium, L. :—

“ Gryllus (Locusta) egyptius, Linneo. Mus. L. Ulr. pagina 138 (1764).

‘¢ G. cristatus, Asso., 1784. Introduct. in Or. et Zool. Arag., page 111.

“« G, lineola, Fabricius, Ent. Syst. 11, p. 54.

“« Acridium lineola, Serville, Hist. Nat. des Orth., p. 656.

“4. tartaricum, Serville, id., pag. 657 nota. Fischer, Fr. Orth. Eur., p. 388
t. xv., fig. 27, 27a.

“A, egyptium, Staal, Recens., 1a part, p. 63.”

See page 88 of the work above quoted.

50 LOCUSTS.

2240 dead Locusts to the ton of fodder, the point of whether or not
they might be prejudicial to the health of stock certainly appears of
some importance. So far as the bodies of the Locusts are concerned,
these might be considered perfectly harmless, from the knowledge we
have of the manner in which various animals feed on them, when they
can get a chance; also when cooked, and the legs removed, they have
long been known to be in some localities an article of human food.
But when the insects are consumed entire in a dried state, and in great
numbers, it appeared to me open to doubt what effect the hard legs,
and especially the hinder legs, with the shanks about an inch in length
beset with sharp spines, might have by causing internal irritation, or
in the case of cattle, forming balls. Therefore, as I was unable to give
a trustworthy opinion on the subject, I suggested it would be well to
apply to a veterinary adviser.*

This species of Locust is one of the migratory kinds of South
America, of which the native home is stated to be in the higher barren
plateaux of the Argentine Republic, and which are recorded as abound-
ing in the provinces of the La Platariver. Itis of this kind that Darwin,
in hig journey across South America from Buenos Ayres to Mendoza
and Chile, fell in with a vast swarm just alighting from their migratory
flight in the neighbourhood of Luxan,+ about a hundred miles from
the first-named city.

With regard to the large Locusts mentioned above, as forwarded to
me in “Alfalfa hay’’ imported from Buenos Ayres, they appeared to
me to be the Acridium paranense ; but as I could not feel certain I
forwarded specimens, together with those of the A. egyptium, to Senor

Don Ignacio Bolivar at Madrid, who kindly confirmed my view as

follows :—‘‘ No. 3 is, without doubt, the Acridiwm (or rather the
Schistocerca) paranense, Burm., which causes much ravage in the
southern parts of America.’’—(J. B.)

The specimens in the flattened damaged state in which they

reached me were of a general brownish colour. The head mottled

with various tints, including reddish pink; the body between the

* In the course of further search on Locust life, I noticed the following com-
munication to the editor in the ‘ Agricultural Journal,’ published by the Dep. of
Agriculture for Cape Colony, No. 16, Vol. vi. (August, 1893, p. 311) :—‘‘ The sheep
have been living on live Locusts for the last three months, which has (as we
think) caused abortion in a large number of the ewes. Mr. Jim Miles informed me
that all his ewes had cast their lambs prematurely, and therefore the sheep do not
seem to recover as they should,”—(J. K.) The consumption of Locusts to such an
amount as to be considered the sole article of diet of the sheep, is of course very
different. to even the large numbers above mentioned as mixed with the hay; still
the observation may be worth notice.

+ See 1st Report of U.S.A. Ent. Com., p. 466; and for list of publications on
S. American Locusts, see App. xxvii. to same vol., pp. [278] and [279].

Ee

LOCUSTS. ol

wings striped lengthwise above with various shades of yellowish
brown, and deeper brown, or with deep brown striped with a still
deeper shade; the hind shanks coral-red, with white spines, black at
the tips. The narrow parchment-like upper wings with a pale narrow
stripe at the fore edge, and also for rather more than half the length
at the hinder edge, with an area between the two stripes, narrow at
the base and gradually widening, marked with angular brown blotches,
these dark near the base, and fainter towards the tip of the wing.
Beneath these elytra or upper wings is folded a pair of delicately
transparent wings of ample size.

The colours of the body were necessarily to some degree altered
by the conditions of transit, but the accompanying figure of the
‘‘American Acridium,”’ the Acridium (or Schistocerca) americana, Drury,
gives a very good idea of the appearance of the specimens sent me from
Buenos Ayres, and especially of the quadrate fuscous markings on the
upper wings.

AmERIcAN Acripium.—dAcridium (Schistocerca) americanum, after Riley.

This Locust is one of the migratory kinds of North America, but
appears almost to require mention here on account of its great
resemblance (or, as some consider, its probable identity) with the
A. peregrinum, the migratory Locust of North Africa and S. Western
Asia, which species is also so exceedingly similar to the A. paranense,
entered on in the preceding pages, as to make it doubtful whether these
also may not be mere varieties of one species.

In the ‘ First Report of the U.S.A. Entomological Commission,’
p. 87, it is noted, in observations of this North American Acridiwn,
“that one of the most destructive migratory species of South-Western
Asia and Northern Africa (Acridium peregrinum) is not only congeneric
with this species, but so closely resembles it that ordinary observation
would scarcely detect the differences between the two.’’ And (con-
tinuing the records of similarity) various writers are of opinion that
this Acridium peregrinum does not really differ from the A. paranense of
the Argentine Republic. Thus we have before us the very interesting

E 2

52 LOCUSTS.

fact of these migratory hordes of the genus Acridium, which devastate
respectively part of North America, part of South America, and also
the South-West of Asia and the North of Africa, being so exceedingly
similar to each other in appearance, that although they are specifically
distinguished as americanum, paranense, and peregrinum, it is at least
open to doubt whether they are not all of one species.

Under the name of Acridium peregrinum, this large Locust of India
and Africa occasionally visits our shores, but there does not seem to
be any reason to apprehend that either this kind or any other of the
Locust family (as distinguished from the small form, known in this
country as Grasshoppers) will make good an establishment in this
island.

From collation of information, and also of quotations given in the
U.S.A. Department of Agriculture reports, and also Entomological
records of this country, it appears that the first trustworthy return of
noticeable Locust migration reaching us was when the migratory
Locust, Pachytylus migratorius, after multiplying in Southern Russia
in 1844, passed westward and northward in the following years; and
in 1846 numerous flocks of Locusts were recorded as observed in the
South and North of England, in Scotland about Aberdeen, and in the
Shetlands. Since that date Locusts of various species have been not
unfrequently recorded scientifically, as present in various parts of the
country, usually as single specimens, or just a few, and now and then
(or at least once) in numbers, described as an erratic flock. But so far,
as I find these Locusts were all fully-developed specimens ; I cannot
find any notice of appearance of the insects being in any case followed
by observation of them in their early conditions.

The Locust is one of the insects which does not alter in general
shape from the time that it hatches out of the egg to its maturity, save
that at first it is totally wingless. The little infant Locust (as I had
once an opportunity of seeing myself) is hearty and brisk as can be,
just after coming out of the egg; and as soon as food supply is
exhausted in localities where a great hatch has taken place, the young
destroyers move on devouring (in the words of the U.S.A. official
report before me) ‘‘all the grass, grain, and garden-truck in their
path.” In due time, after successive moults, as the creature grows to
full development it acquires wings, the upper pair narrow and some-
what parchment-like, the lower transparent, and of such great size as
to require many folds to pack them away beneath the upper pair; and
if the pasturage is not sufficient, and it is one of the gregarious and
migratory species, the Locust and its millions of brethren set forth on
their wanderings in the vast armies in which its presence has been
recorded as one of the scourges of the earth for thousands of years.

The eggs are laid in the ground, and the average time of develop-

LUCUSTS. 53

ment, from date of hatching to maturity, is given in the cases recorded
regarding Acridium americanum as being seventy days.

With regard to this country, it is probable that from climatal, as
well as other considerations, there is not the least cause to fear
establishment of this infestation; still as the observation of these
great insects necessarily attracts much attention, and sometimes not
unnatural apprehension, and as with the increasing amount of im-
portations of human food and cattle fodder it is probable their
presence will be more frequently observed, it has seemed perhaps
desirable to give a few notes in connection with the insect observations
of 1893.

Note.—Those who wish to follow up the subject will find enormous
masses of information on almost every point connected with Locust life-
history, whether Entomological, Geographical, Meteorological, or
Historical, with methods of prevention and remedy, in the large
volumes entitled respectively ‘ First, and Second, Annual Reports of
the U.S.A. Entomological Commission, Washington’; also in Appendix
XXvu., pp. 273-279, of 1st Report above named, will be found biblio-
graphical references. Much information will also be found in successive
reports of the State Entomologists of the U.S.A. Information on the
‘Locusts of Bengal, Madras, Assam, and Bombay,” will be found in
the ‘Indian Museum Notes,’ Calcutta, prepared by Mr. E. C. Cotes, of
the Indian Museum ; and many short notices of observation of appear-
ance of Locusts in Great Britain will be found by reference to indexes
of the ‘ Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine.’

54

MANGOLDS.

SURFACE CATERPILLARS.—Caterpillars of the Turnip or Dart
Moth, Ayrotis segetum, Ochsenheimer; also of the Heart and
Dart Moth, Ayrotis exclamationis, Linn.

So surely as the year comes round, damage, more or less severe, is
caused to root crops by the large grubs, known as ‘‘ Surface Cater-
pillars,” of which one of the two commonest kinds is figured above,
and the other at p. 59, together with the moths, to which they respec-
tively turn. In some years these caterpillars are so constant in their
presence that they have been reported as observable during almost
every month. ‘This was the case in 1884, when observation of the
grubs as lively and active began in February, and still on the 18th of
December the same kind was reported (due details and specimens
accompanying) as ravaging in the neighbourhood of Selby, Yorks, to a
serious extent.

Commonly, however, though their life in regular course extends
through the winter, they are so much acted on by ordinary amount of
cold, as to rest quietly without doing much harm at a depth beneath
the surface, where they are safe from weather influence. Commonly
also, although these caterpillars are destructive below ground to almost
any of our root crops on which they may chance to have established
themselves, they are so very especially injurious to Turnip bulbs, that
the names of Turnip grub and Turnip Moth are given to the infes-
tation. It is in connection with this crop, and under this name, that
this infestation has chiefly been noticed in the preceding numbers of
these Reports; but in the past season, although the grubs did not fail to
make their customary appearance at the roots of Turnips, Potatoes, &c.,
yet it was to Mangold roots that they were so especially and unusually
injurious, that the attack was in many places not recognised as being
of the old established kinds of ‘Surface Caterpillars,” and enquiry

TURNIP OR DART MOTH. 55

regarding its nature was forwarded from many localities, chiefly in
the south of England.

The first communication was sent me on the 19th of June, by Mr.
W. H. Hunt, from Outmarsh, Trowbridge, Wilts, with specimens of
grubs which were destroying his Mangolds by ‘eating them off just
under the ground,” and an enquiry as to what was the best remedy.
All of the specimens, that arrived in fair condition, were apparently
caterpillars of the Turnip or Dart Moth, Agrotis segetum, but they
differed much in age, and also in colour, from a pale tint to such a
deep colour that the spots on the back were hardly distinguishable.
Amongst the difficulties of certain identification of the very similar
common kinds of ‘‘ Surface Caterpillars ’”’ from each other, it should
not be overlooked that whilst some of a consignment may be shrunken,
and altogether out of typical condition of colour and skin, from starva-
tion and knocking about in transit ; that others may be glossy, and as
full as they can hold, apparently simply from consumption of their
fellow-travellers.

On the 8rd of July, Mr. Edw. R. Berry Torr, wrote me regarding
prevalence of grub in Mangolds as follows, from Westleigh House,
Bideford, N. Devon :—‘“ The grub is in the Mangold nearly throughout
the county; . . . many farmers have no Mangolds left; ... my
neighbour has all his men and their children picking them from round
the plants.’’ In this case specimens were not sent, but a little more
than a month later, on the 10th of August, Mr. Berry Torr, continuing
the subject, added :—‘‘ Re Surface Caterpillars,—they have been most
troublesome here this season, though I have got on far better than
many of my neighbours. They have devoured Cabbages, Mangolds, or
anything else they could get at, and nothing seems to stop them.”

On the 6th of July, the Rev. W. F. Newman, of Hockworthy
Vicarage, Wellington, Somerset, who was then having the Aphides *

* In a communication sent me by the Rev. W. F. Newman, on the Ist of July,
he mentioned that his Mangolds had been attacked by what I found on examination
were Aphides, commonly known as Plant Lice. These being on the under side of
the leaf, the measure tried of dragging a bag over the leafage did little good.
Therefore Mr. Newman put on a body of workers to remove the Aphides by rubbing
them off with their hands; but for the sake of himself and his neighbours, he was
desirous to know whether there was any more expeditious remedy. Later in the
year, on September 13th, he further mentioned, ‘‘ My crop of Mangolds that was
hand-rubbed for Black Aphis promises to be a very fair one.”—(W. F. N.)

On the same day, that is, on the 1st of July, Mr. G. A. Winder wrote to me,
from Fairmile, Ottery St. Mary, regarding ‘‘a terrible pest on the Mangolds” in the
shape of fly. This also infested a weed growing among them, locally known as
Calf-tongue, on which there were likewise some beetle grubs observable. On exami-
nation the insects proved to be Mangold Aphis, with the grubs of Lady-birds, which
are amongst our best natural helpers against Aphis attack, already in attendance.

This attack, like that near Wellington, Somerset, was during the continuance

56 MANGOLDS.

on a three-acre field of Mangolds carefully attended to, wrote me that
some sort of grub was found at the roots, of which he was going to send
a specimen, as it had been pretty general there in its depredations, and
two days later he forwarded me samples with the following note :—
‘* According to promise I am forwarding three specimens of Mangold
grub just sent down to me by a farmer in this parish.” . . . “ They
attack the root of the plant, and I hear that several farmers in the
neighbourhood have ploughed up their Mangolds because of the depre-
dations of these active little gentlemen.” The sample was much
shrunken on receipt, but was of ‘“‘Surface Caterpillars,” and so far as
could be made out by markings still noticeable was of the Agrotis
segetum.

On July 7th, Mr. Wm. Hooper (Editor of the ‘ Farmer’s Gazette,’
Dublin) favoured me with the following note of damage to Mangold
plants then going on in the neighbourhood of Thorne, Yeovil, Somerset,
where he was then staying; samples of the infestation, which proved
to be of Surface Caterpillars, were sent accompanying :—‘‘ Many Man-
gold plants here are bitten off at the root, like, and by the enclosed
specimens.” . . . ‘* These specimens are from a farm at Thorne in the
occupation of Mr. John Marsh, and similar damage has been done on
contiguous farms.’’—(W. H.)

Specimens of Surface Caterpillars were also sent to me on the 30th
of July, from Dare Field, Chudleigh Knighton, Newton Abbot (South
Devon), by the Rev. F. G. Riley, as samples of a grub which was
causing the greatest destruction amongst Turnips and Mangolds, and
was also (in his own garden) eating off Cabbage plants. Mr. Riley
urgently begged for information which might help them in dealing
with the infestation, adding the remark, ‘‘ We seem to be helpless and
without remedy against the enemy, so numerous are they this year, as
many as fifty round a single Mangold.”

Numerous specimens of Surface Caterpillars were again sent me
somewhat later on by the Rey. W. F. Newman with the observation,
‘‘T have now procured some more of the Mangold grub from a farm of
mine up the Dart.” Some of the specimens sent were apparently
fully grown.

From Kent, and, later on in the season, from some other southerly

of the general drought, and appears worth mention just to show the prevalence of
insect attack under the circumstances. In 1885, during a time of drought, Man-
golds, as well as Turnips, were infested by Aphides. These are sometimes taken for
the so-called “Collier,” the black Bean Aphis, but are more probably the Aphis
papaveris, which is known to infest Mangolds, or the A. atriplicis, which is found
on Orache and other plants nearly allied to Mangolds. From the many points of
resemblance between these three kinds, specimens are needed for certain identifi-
cation.—Ep.

TURNIP OR DART MOTH. 57

localities, notes were sent of damage to Mangolds from Surface
Caterpillar attack.

During July, an enquiry was sent me on the part of Mr. John Pye,
of Ranscombe, Cuxton (near Rochester, Kent), regarding caterpillars,
apparently of the A. segetum, which were doing great damage in a field
of Mangolds.

Early in September, Mr. F. O. Solomon (Lecturer on Agriculture in
connection with the Durham College of Science) forwarded specimens
of Surface Caterpillars from Southfield, near Dartford, as samples of
grubs which were doing great damage on farms in the neighbourhood
of Cobham (Kent), but which were, so far as observed, not attacking
any but the Mangold crop.

At a locality in Essex (Greenhills, Earl’s Colne), damage to various
root crops was reported to me on September 22nd, by Mr. J. A. Tawell,
as being caused by these “surface” grubs. Mr. Tawell mentioned it
as ‘a recent trouble that has come to the Mangold, Potato, and Turnip
roots,’ of which he enclosed specimens, adding, ‘“‘ the Mangold is
seriously attacked; the Potato as you will see.” Thesample of Potato
attack showed the damage to be very great, the caterpillars, of which
samples were forwarded, having eaten great holes into the tuber.

I was also kindly favoured by Mr. Thos. Collins, of Birtley, Witley,
Surrey, with some interesting notes of observation as to presence, &c.,
of Surface Caterpillars on the Earl of Derby’s estates in that neigh-
bourhood. On the 28rd of September, Mr. Collins wrote, amongst
some other observations on field insect pests:—‘‘There is a dark
coloured grub which has done a lot of damage in the Mangolds this
year. It began when the plants were very small, and may still be
found amongst them in large numbers. It seems to abound on almost
every farm in this district this year. The men have looked carefully
for them when hoeing, and killed great numbers of them.”

A few days after, in a communication regarding some differences in
colour of the grubs, and some details of other attack, Mr. Collins men-
tioned: ‘I know of two or three instances in which the Mangold seed was
put in very late, and which were comparatively free from grub, whilst
those drilled about the second week in May were rather worse than the
earlier ones.”

This difference in amount of attack appeared to me to be very
likely attributable to the Mangolds not having come up and been ready
for attack, before the moths laying the eggs, which produce the surface
grubs, had passed away. Commonly weather is variable, and also
locally different, and there is very likely to be difference in dates of
insect presence, which, if early hatches of the moths had died out,
might supply us with plenty for later attacks. But last season the long
steady drought gave us a widespread similarity of weather, which, con-

58 MANGOLDS.

jecturally at least, might give great similarity of date to these caterpillar
pests.

On suggesting this to Mr. Collins, he considered that this was very
likely the explanation, and wrote me :—‘‘ No doubt your suggestion is
correct about the moths being hatched and laying their eggs before the
late sown Mangolds were up, and this would also account for the little
damage the caterpillars have done to the Swedes and White Turnips
compared with the Mangolds, which were sown earlier. The very first
sown Mangolds did not suffer quite so much as those sown about a
fortnight later, but perhaps they were larger plants, and better able to
withstand the attack of the grub. In some places they are producing
half a crop where the second sowing had to be ploughed up again.” —
(Oa)

Other communications were sent me regarding damage from Surface
Caterpillars then going forward to various crops, especially Turnips ;
but also to roots of Cabbage and Strawberry plants, and to Maize.
From Wickham Market, Suffolk, the grub was reported, on July 24th,
as doing immense mischief to the Turnip crop in the neighbourhood
by biting the root of the young plant in two. From near Cheam,
Surrey, at nearly the same date, a correspondent mentioned he had
several fields of Brussel Sprouts, and Cabbage, which were being eaten
off by the pests, and that they had also attacked a field of Straw-
berries.

On the 24th of July, Mr. G. 8. Mitchell, writing from Adhurst
St. Mary, Petersfield, Hants, mentioned attack, which proved like the
others previously noticed to be of Surface Caterpillars, having ‘ first
appeared in a field of White Turnips, and have quickly cleared off about
four acres quite clean.”” At date of writing, Mr. Mitchell noted, they
seem now to be firmly established in the next field, which is Maize,
sown for ensilage purposes; and a few days later he added :—‘‘The
number of caterpillars seems now to be very materially reduced, owing
to a heavy night’s rain we have had, but I fear it looks very doubtful for
second drilling of Turnips, which are now just coming up.” He also
mentioned in the same letter: ‘‘I have just heard from one of our
neighbours, who farms upon the chalk, that he has lost all his Man-
gold and Rape by apparently this same pest.”

A note of enquiry was also sent me from Peterborough, on the 80th
of August, by Mr. Sidney T. Smith (Proprietor of the ‘ Peterborough
Express’), requesting information and advice as to best method of
extirpation of the grub which was then destroying the White Turnips.
in the surrounding district. The specimens sent were nearly full-
grown, and were more characteristically Turnip grub,-that is, larve of
the Agrotis segetum, than can be certainly said of many Surface Cater-
pillars sent me, in the condition to which, without careful packing, they.

HEART AND DART MOTH. 59

are almost sure to be reduced by a journey in unnatural surroundings,
and possibly without vegetable food.

The figure at p. 54 represents the very common kind popularly
known as the Turnip or Dart Moth, and its caterpillar, and, so far as
could be judged, most of the specimens sent were of this species,
scientifically, the Agrotis segetum. The kind figured below is often
almost indistinguishable from the above in larval, that is, caterpillar
state. It has the popular name of the Heart and Dart Moth, and, as

AGROTIS EXCLAMATIONIS.—1, Heart and Dart Moth; 2, caterpillar; 3 and 4, chrysalis
in earth-cell.

often mentioned before, the two kinds closely resemble each other in
their habits. The common method of life is for the caterpillars to
feed at the roots of almost any kind of crop, though by preference at
succulent roots, as Turnip, or at Potatoes, or Mangolds. During
winter weather, and their conditions permitting, they may continue
feeding, or may pass it in cells in the earth. On the return of mild
weather, such caterpillars as have survived come out again to feed, and
presently turn to chrysalids at or near the surface of the soil, from
which the moths appear in due course, and lay their eggs during the
summer, as early as June, or towards autumn.

We are still apparently no further advanced towards finding a
remedy for this destruction, but in the above observations we have one
note of the plan of hand-picking, which appears to be the only really
practicable method of clearing out this pest, being adopted. We have
also a note, on the good authority of Mr. Thos. Collins, of adoption of
tlie plan of hoeing as a means of getting rid of a proportion of the
pests. The notes of failure of various dressing to do good, I have not
thought it necessary to go mto again; but the observation at p. 58 of
the caterpillars seeming to be very materially reduced after a heavy
night’s rain, is worth notice.

It has been a well-observed fact that sometimes caterpillar preva-
lence has been checked by sudden rain in hot weather, the result being
that the contents of the caterpillar are voided, and the creatures perish,

60 MUSTARD.

It is not apparently feasible to apply this treatment for field use, but
in garden cultivation, where there is a plentiful supply of water, and a
hose, something might be done to carry out the principle. But with
regard to ‘‘Surface Caterpillars,” their history, and the need of more
practicable methods of getting rid of their destructive presence, is so
well before agriculturists, both here and in America, that I have only
alluded to the subject again this year in connection with the unusual
extent of observation of prevalence of their attack to Mangolds.

Surface Caterpillars at roots of young Conifers.—The following
note, sent me on November 9th, by Mr. F. O. Solomon, Lecturer in
Agriculture at the Durham College of Science, Newcastle-on-Tyne,
gives an interesting observation of the omnivorous propensities of the
‘Surface Caterpillars,” which, in the absence of such food as they
may especially prefer, appear, as has been occasionally remarked of
them, to attack any kind of root that their jaws can bite into.

Mr. Solomon observed :—‘‘ What pests the Turnip grubs have been
this year! We have at the College a small plot (thirty-three square
yards) planted with Conifer seedlings. The little plants have been
eaten off close to the ground. We could not imagine what was doing
the damage for some time, but when we scraped about for grubs, we
collected sixty-six on the thirty-three square yards in a very short time.
They are most omnivorous feeders certainly.”

MUSTARD.
Mustard Beetle. Phedon betula, Linn.

3 AN
PH=DON BETULZ.—Mustard Beetle, nat. size and magnified; maggot, magnified,
and nat. size on leaf,

For some years back, injury by insect attack to the Mustard crop
has become so manifestly a matter requiring attention, that early in

MUSTARD BEETLE. 61

the past season much consideration was devoted, and consultation took
place, as to what could be done, not only amongst Mustard growers,
but amongst those also cognizant of the needs of the case from being,
in various ways, interested in results of the Mustard crop.

As one obviously important point was circulating all available
information, a four-page leaflet was issued by Messrs. J. and J. Colman,
of The Carrow Works, Norwich, embodying useful, straightforward
observations on the appearance and habits of the ‘‘ Mustard Beetle,’’
and of the ‘‘Turnip-flower Beetle” (Meligethes eneus), which sometimes
is not far behind the Mustard Beetle in the damage it causes, these

showing nat. size of beetle, after Dr. Taschenberg.

notes being accompanied by figures of the insects, and suggestions as
to measures of prevention and remedy.

PHYLLOTRETA NEMORUM.—Beetle flying, and at rest; maggot and chrysalis; all
magnified, and with nat. size.

Much about the same time, as I found that there was a good deal
of uncertainty abroad as to distinguishing various kinds of Mustard
attack, I also issued a leaflet for distribution, with figures of four of
the most destructive of the common kinds of infestation, namely, the
Mustard Beetle, figured at p. 60; the Turnip ‘Fly,’ or Flea Beetle
(figured above), which is sometimes a bad Mustard pest; also the
Turnip “‘ Flower Beetle” (figured above), a most serious infestation ;
and the Turnip-seed Weevil (figured at p. 62), a very minute beetle,

62 MUSTARD.

easily distinguishable (with the help of a magnifying-glass) from the
above-mentioned kinds, both by its shape and colour. This very little
beetle is greyish in colour, and furnished with a long curved snout, or
proboscis, and is very nearly allied to the little weevil which did a good
deal of harm last season to Mustard plants just when they were first
sprouting. Of this, the Ceutorhynchus contractus, some notes are given
separately under the heading of its special name further on.

CEUTORHYNCHUS ASSIMILIS.—1 and 2, beetle; 3and 4, maggot; 7 and 8, pupa; all nat.
size and magnified; 5, infested Turnip pod.

The history of the Mustard Beetle has been so often given that it
seems almost unnecessary to repeat it. Still to save reference I note
it again as condensed into as short space as possible in my leaflet
above mentioned.

The Mustard Beetle is of a deep full blue or greenish colour above
(so shiny as to be almost of a glassy lustre), and black beneath. The
legs and horns are also black. It is oblong-oval in shape, about the
sixth of an inch long, slightly punctured on the back, and has two
wings.

The grubs, which are of the shape figured at p. 60, are about a
quarter of an inch in length when, full-grown, slightly hairy, of a
smoky colour, spotted with black, with black head, and stout black
conical horns, lighter at the base. They have three pairs of claw-feet,
and a sucker-foot at the end of the tail, and along the sides of the body
are a row of tubercles, from which the grubs have the power of pro-
truding a yellow gland.

The method of life is for the beetles to winter in any convenient
shelter, in the most various kinds of localities. It may be in the ends
of Mustard stocks, or in the roots of old Mustard plants left on the
land, or in rough shelters made of Mustard straw; in ditch or hedge-
banks, in the earth or in the rough grass, or at the bottom of hedge-
rows. Also they are to be found in crannies of walls, gateposts, old
wood or bark, and are especially noted as fond of sheltering amongst

MUSTARD BEETLE. 68

the reeds and rushes, by ditches and drains ; in fact, in any available
shelter.

From these winter quarters the beetles come out in spring, and
spread to any food-plant near, and especially amongst wild plants, to
Cresses or Charlock, or to others which, like Cabbage, Turnip, or
Mustard, are of the cruciferous kind. These various plants serve
the beetles for a place for their egg-laying until the Mustard is
ready, consequently to clear what may be called the nurseries of the
year’s attack, as well as to prevent, so far as may be reasonably
possible, winter shelters being left for the parent beetles, are
respectively methods of lessening coming attack.

On these food-plants the beetles which have lived through the
winter lay their small eggs, and then they die. The grubs feed
voraciously until they are full-grown, when they go down into the
earth to turn to chrysalids. From these the summer brood of beetles
come out in about a fortnight (it may be more or less), and these start
new attack, and thus the infestation goes on, which may continue
until quite late in the autumn.

With the history of the Turnip Flea Beetle we are all fairly
acquainted.

The Seed Weevil destroys the seeds in the pods of various plants

of the Cabbage tribe, and is sometimes found in flowering heads of
Mustard.
_ But of these infestations the worst, excepting the ‘ Mustard
Beetle ”’ itself, is that of the Meligethes, the Turnip-blossom Beetle.
This I had the opportunity of studying the life-history of, on Rape or
Cabbage, some years ago, in full detail day by day, and in all
conditions, from deposit of the egg by a great infestation of beetles,
to the descent of the grubs into the ground for change to the chrysalis
state, and in the course of observation the destructiveness of their
operations to the buds and flowers, and, as the grubs grew larger, to
the neighbouring stems was exceedingly noticeable.

Its life-history may be shortly given thus:—When the Mustard
plant is knotting for flower, the opening buds and blossoms are very
often attacked by the ‘‘ Turnip-blossom Beetle,” the Meligethes eneus.
This is of much the same shape as the ‘“‘ Mustard Beetle,” but rather
smaller, and of a duller or more brassy green. The eggs are inserted
by the beetles in the buds; the grubs which hatch from these are
whitish, with broad purple head, and some purplish markings, and
when full-grown are yellowish white. They feed on various parts of
the flower, especially at the base, and further on do harm by feeding
on the upper part of the flower-stalk, and the outside of the seed-pods.
Soon afterwards the grubs fall to the ground, bury themselves, and
turn to chrysalids in the ground. This attack appears to me to rank

64 MUSTARD.

in destructive power next after the true Mustard Beetles, and to be
very often not distinguished from it.*

With regard to these, the Phedon betula, as I am not aware of
the method of deposit of the eggs, and hatching out of the larve, being
generally known, I add the following details from my own observations.

On the 2nd of June, a very good supply of Mustard leaves, on
which eggs of the Mustard Beetle, Phedon betule, had been deposited,
were sent me by request of Messrs. J. and J. Colman, of Carrow Works,
Norwich, from Littleport Bridge, near Ely, per favour of Mr. Smith
Flanders, for examination as to possible effects on the eggs of a
dressing which had been applied five days before. The leaves were
sent me tied up in two bunches, one bunch consisting of the leaves
which had been dressed, the other bunch (duly distinguished and sent
for comparison of condition of the eggs) of leaves to which no dressing
had been applied.

These leaves I placed with the tips of their stalks in water, in a
room of ordinary temperature, but two days later (on June 5th), as the
egos were unaltered in appearance, I moved the leaves to a room with
a south aspect, where a window was open close to them during most
of the day.

The eggs were smooth, cylindrical, and blunt at the ends, and
yellow in colour; and for the most part were placed longitudinally by
the side of the mid-vein, or one of the side veins, on the back of the
leaf. They were very rarely indeed not placed by a vein, and (as far
as I saw) never on the upper side of the leaves. They were placed in
a little hollowed-out space, so that the egg rested in the substance of
the leaf, against the inside of the upper skin of the leaf, and they were
usually (although not invariably) covered by what appeared to be dead
and discoloured remains of the skin of the little patch of hollowed-out
leafage in which they rested, but, any way, by some adherent and
protective rubbish.

The eggs appeared to be in healthy condition, that is, bright, shiny,
and plump (not shrivelled or discoloured) when I examined them
shortly after receipt, but I could not find as yet any formation of the
larva, or grub, then taking place within, excepting perhaps in a few
instances, and on pricking them a yellow fluid ran out; it was not
until the 7th of June that they began to hatch, and on the following
day I was able to watch the emergence of the larva, and its changes of
colour, in detail.

The shape and colour of the egg could now often be seen through

* The above note on the *‘ Turnip-flower Beetle,” as well as that on the ‘“‘ Mus-
tard Beetle,’’ I have given nearly verbatim from my leaflet above mentioned, of
which I should be happy to offer copies to any applicant.—(E. A. O.)

MUSTARD BEETLE. 65

the thin film of the upper coat of the leaf, which had been left
remaining untouched when the egg was inserted from the other side
in the little cavity formed for it, and this upper film was now in some
instances beginning to split away.

The operation of hatching, or emergence of the grub from the egg,
was very slowly performed. In the case of a larva which I observed in
the act of coming out of the egg, and which was then about three-
quarters emerged, it was precisely nineteen minutes before the operation
was completed, and the little grub stood beside the empty egg. During
hatching the grub was not of the smoky colour which it presently
acquires, but of a bright orange-yellow, with the four black spots on
the back of the second and third segments from the head showing very
noticeably on the yellow ground colour. The colour gradually became
duller, changing to dusky or smoky tints of orange or yellow, and
about forty minutes after the time of its first appearance from the egg,
the little black horns were observable, and the head and claw-feet were
turning grey, and the larva was now able to move about readily, making
use of its caudal sucker-foot to help it in progression. ‘The other
larvee, which I was able to watch during or immediately after hatching,
were similarly of an orange colour, and changed gradually to the first
shades of the smoky grey colour, under which we know them only too
well on the Mustard leafage.

The above-mentioned method of egg deposit, and then of covering
over of the eggs by the Mustard Beetle, is worth notice, as in the first
part we see how early in the attack (even before the maggots have
hatched out of the egg) the health of the leafage is damaged by the
preparations for their presence; and next that the covering placed
over their eggs acts as a protection to them from the effects of the
remedial dressings which we might otherwise have hoped would help
to check the attack in embryo.

The plentiful supply of grubs which hatched from the eggs enabled
me to experiment on the effect of ‘‘ Paris-green’’ applied to them as a
dry dusting, with the result that nearly all so dusted were dead on the
following morning.

On June 9th, I chose a Mustard leaf infested by a large number of
the Mustard Beetle larve, which had begun to hatch on it two or three
days before. This I dusted as lightly as I could with Paris-green by
holding the leaf upright, and throwing a little of the powder taken up
between my fingers and thumb at it, so that the under side of the leaf,
on which the maggots were dispersed, was for the most part just faintly
or hardly perceptibly tinted by it. In a few parts only there was a
little patch where the powder was noticeable. This was a little before
6 p.m., and on the following morning, on examination of what had
resulted at 9 a,m., I found that, with the exception of three of the

F

66 MUSTARD.

grubs, all that had been hatched when the Paris-green was powdered
on the leaf were dead. Of these, fourteen were still adhering to the
leaf, others had fallen on to the saucer, and some into the film of
water in which the tip of the stem of the Mustard leaf had been placed
to keep it fresh so that there might be no question as to the larve not
dying from want of food, rather than poisoning. Altogether the
quantity killed as above was about eight and forty.

As the foregoing notes refer to specimens placed in my hand
relatively to the early stages of attack, and also to experiment, which
the liberal supply of material enabled me to carry out, I have placed
these together before entering on the reports or correspondence of the
season.

Much correspondence took place in January; and on the 1st of
February, Mr. H. L. Leonard, of Preston, Hull, forwarded me the
following report of discussion of the subject at a meeting which he had
recently attended, and which embodies many points useful for con-
sideration or amplification, and therefore (with permission) I give it
in ewxtenso, excepting a few sentences not especially bearing on the
business points of the matter :—

‘“‘T last week went to Peterboro’ to a conference of the Cambridge-
shire farmers re Mustard Beetle.” . . . ‘ Phey agree that the
beetle comes out of its winter retreat as soon as the sun gets well out,
that it goes to the young Mustard plant, and lives on the leaves; it
lays its eggs under the leaf, the grub is then hatched and falls to the
ground,* where it buries itself, and goes into the chrysalis state. The
beetle then emerges, and attacks the plant again.

‘“‘ They all agree that the seed must be drilled further apart i in the
rows, and constantly worked amongst by the horse hoe, which will turn
up the chrysalids, and which the birds would eat. One grower has
always drilled the rows two feet apart; he pays great attention, and is
confident that when the beetle is knocked off the plant it will remain
on the ground for days ifitis sunny. The first dull day, however, they
return to the plant. If this is really so, it is a very important matter.
As a dressing with the Strawsonizer he has used paraffin and water in
equal parts, which was very effective, and which did not injure the
plant. I did not agree with this being my opinion on syringing my
plants, but he assured me that he was correct, and said there was great
difference between a syringe which would leave the liquid in drops,
and a Strawsonizer which would leave simply a dew on the leaf. +

* Mention is omitted here of the feeding of the grub intermediately between the
date of hatching and when full-fed going down for the change to chrysalis state ;
this being known to all present, would obviously not need entering on.

+ This is a very important difference, but does not necessarily need a “ Straw-
sonizer”’ to carry it out. There are other different kinds of sprayers which will give
the dew-like deposit. = ; :

MUSTARD BEETLE. 67

‘‘Mr. Young said he strongly supported Miss Ormerod in all her
theories on the beetle. Said he top-dressed his Mustard with fish-bone
manure, which drove off all the beetles, and they did not return till
after rain came, which washed off the strong smell. This year the
same gentleman is going to lay ridging tiles all round a field which he
will sow with Mustard, and cover them with tar continuously. He
knows the field is clear of beetle at present.

‘* Another grower said he had always found it better to sow Mustard
seed where the beetle had been very numerous in the previous Mus-
tard crop, than on a field which had not been previously infested. He
had tried an experiment which he thought might be very advantageous
if taken up by an experienced machinist. As I understood his idea, it
was something like a large well-hollowed shovel on wheels, exactly the
width between the rows, just touching the plant at either side; it is
pushed on by a man, and the beetles drop into the shovel alive, and
can then be burnt. This is very simple, and I think the idea could be
worked out to great advantage.*

‘« All growers are agreed that tar is very much objected to by the
beetle. One farmer noticed myriads of beetles crossing the road, and
through the gateway into his Mustard field. He divided about an acre
against the gate from the rest of the field with a broad streak of tar ;
every night he renewed the application, and saved all his crop,
excepting where the beetles were, which of course was completely
destroyed.

“Another large grower thinks the Mustard Beetle in the early
growth of the plant is blamed for more thanitdoes. He thinks that the
ordinary Turnip Fly does an immense amount of damage.’’—(H. L. L.)

This is a very important point, to which i seems to me sufficient
consideration is not generally given. Whilst forming my Report on Mustard
Beetle for the Royal Agricultural Society in 1886, I received notes from
various correspondents of the injury done to Mustard in the first growth by
Turnip Fly, or Flea Beetle. Specimens were sent of the beetles, and of
injured leafage, and the infestation was described as ‘a great trouble by
eating the plant when it first comes up.” Also, ‘‘ scarcely a plant remains
of the original sowing” ; and again, another correspondent, who forwarded
three different kinds of Flea Beetles, mentioned them as destroying the
Mustard on that part of the field where the seed-bed was not properly pre-
pared ; but that they were not to be found elsewhere.

For this kind of attack probably Fisher Hobb’s mixture, which is so
serviceable as a remedy for Turnip Flea Beetle on young Turnips, would be

* If no more efficient plan is made public before requirements of protection
come round again, or if brought forward the implement should be too expensive for-
ordinary private purchase, it is to be hoped that the suggester of the above will have
it worked into serviceable form.—Ep.

F2

65 MUSTARD.

equally useful. This consists of one bushel of quick-lime, and one of gas-
lime, siv pounds of sulphur, and ten pounds of soot, well powdered and
miaed together, and applied WHEN THE DEW Is oN. The above amount is
sufficient to dress about two acres of young Turnips,—the precise quantity
needed would depend on size of plant, and distance between the rows.—Ed.

Mr. Leonard continued his report of the discussion as follows :—

‘‘Tt was generally agreed that the most damage is done the fort-
night before cutting the crop, when it is not possible to get amongst
it. It is therefore of the greatest importance that the first lot of
beetles in the spring be destroyed as much as possible.

“Tt was also agreed that the beetle prefers white Mustard to
brown, and then Rape after the brown. One grower says that the
beetle will lay its eggs on Mustard, and a few on Rape; but that
though it may feed on Swede Turnips, it will not breed there. If ©
there is no Mustard or Rape in a district, the beetle will die out,
because no eggs will be laid. Most growers were agreed that the best
thing to do would be to cease growing Mustard seed in badly infested
districts ; but it was found to be impossible to get the farmers all of
one mind. One grower suggested that Messrs. Colman & Keen should
refuse to buy seed from an infested district for five years, but it was
pointed out that there was nothing to prevent speculators from
buying it.

‘‘Tt was not thought that many beetles remained in the straw.
From the evidence, it strikes me that the most important thing to do
is to gather up and burn the stubble, into which nearly all the beetles
collect after the crop is cleared. As the stubble is green for some time
after cutting, it would not break off by being rolled, and I cannot see
how it could be done otherwise; it would not burn as it stands in the
ground. A grass reaper might probably cut up a good lot, but not
all.”—(Signed H. L. Leonarp.)

Some other observations bearing more generally on prevention of
attack were added, and also a few enquiries, to which I replied at the
time; but it will be seen that the above notes give many points of
serviceable interest, both for present information, and as leading to
further enquiry.

Consultations were held, and suggestions and leaflets issued, and
arrangements made in various quarters for field experiment as to
practicable means of getting rid of the Mustard Beetle; but so far as
appears from reports received, weather or other circumstances so
influenced amount of this special pest, that though it (the Phedon
betule), and its ally in causing damage, the Flower Beetle, did mischief
in various places, there was not the sweeping devastation which in
some years makes those interested willing to try any reasonable plan
of remedy.

MUSTARD BEETLE. 69

Later on the beetles appeared in vast numbers in one district. On
the 23rd of September, Mr. Leonard wrote me again as follows :—‘‘I
am able to say now that there are an immense quantity of beetles in
the Holderness district, and yet with the exception of about half an
acre in one field, and the headland in another, which are completely
destroyed, I cannot find any damage is done.’’ Very possibly there
may be opportunity in this greatly infested district for experiment
next year; but at present, that is, in the past season, we do not seem
to have made advance, at least to any notable and publicly announced
extent, in knowledge of benefit from dressings, washes, and the like.
Some of the soft-soap mixtures, which, from their success on very
similar attacks, I had hoped might be of use, turned out, though tried
with much care, a total failure.

With regard to preventive treatment, or to treatment calculated to
push the crop on, and support it when attack is not absolutely over-
whelming, it seems to me but a due respect to our Mustard growers to
point out that a very large proportion of the really sound and valuable
information now dispersed in leaflets, pamphlets, &c., was originally,
and not long ago, contributed by themselves. In 1886, when attention
was especially directed to the losses occurring from attack of Mustard
Beetle, information was requested by the Council of the Royal Agri-
cultural Society, and, as being then entomologist of the Society, I
received much communication, which I formed into a Report printed
in abstract in the ‘ Journal’ of the Royal Agricultural Society, 1887,
and in full in my own ‘Annual Report of Observations of Injurious
Insects’ for 1886.

In these Reports will be found the first-rate information given by
our leading Mustard growers themselves, as the result of their long
experience, on such points as winter-locality of the pests, also the
treatment of ground to start and keep up good growth, manures found
especially effective, and many other points bearing both on the habits
of the beetles, and agricultural points to be attended to, and also the
very little benefit that was found to be derived from dressings was
entered on.

For those who have not access to the information in extenso, the
very excellent four-page leaflet, or circular, issued by Messrs. Colman,
of the Carrow Works, Norwich, may be strongly recommended as em-
bodying, in condensed form, an enormous amount of sound information,
and also much useful suggestion, amongst which are some serviceable
observations on drilling Mustard twelve to twenty-four inches wide, so
that the ground can be horse-hoed so long as the hoe can be taken
through the crop without damage. Thus besides other good effects,
many of the beetles can be knocked off, and the chrysalids thrown
open in the disturbed ground to be preyed on by birds. Also dressings

70 MUSTARD,

which otherwise could not be applied, may thus be thrown on the crop
without injury to it by breaking it down.

This is such a very important consideration that it deserves special
notice, for in 1886, when through the courtesy of the late Prof. Herbert
Little, of Coldham Hall, Wisbech, and Mr. William Little, of Stag’s
Holt, March, I had the opportunity of personally examining some of
the Cambridgeshire Mustard crops relatively to feasible methods of
clearing the beetle, the closeness of the Mustard plants was considered
to make such measures impracticable.

The circular of Messrs. Colman includes also some serviceable
observations on the ‘‘ Flower Beetle” (the Meligethes eneus), together
with figures of this and the common Mustard Beetle. The circular
was largely distributed gratuitously last spring, and probably would be
obtainable still through the courtesy of Messrs. Colman on application
to themselves.*

During the past season, a really surprising number of mixtures, or
powders for dressings, and sprayings to be applied by various forms of
implements, were suggested for experiment, but of most of these (if
tried) we still need to know results. Some, as mentioned above, were
tried and failed. One class of application, however, I should myself
have great hope would be successful, namely, Paris-green. In such
limited and mere laboratory experiment as I was able to try myself
(see p. 65), it answered excellently in poisoning the Mustard Beetle
grubs, and from the very near relationship of our Mustard Beetle to
the Colorado Beetle of America (both being Chrysomelids), there would
appear to be every reason to hope that Paris-green, which has so long
been a general accepted method in America of clearing the Colorado
Potato Beetle, should be equally serviceable here.

But whatever might or might not occur as to possibility of clearing
the Mustard Beetles by application of dressings, a very important
advance towards a method of keeping them in check was made last
season in the invention, by Mr. Cole Ambrose, of Stuntney Hall, near
Ely, of a machine suitable for field use, which proved on trial excel-
lently successful.

Of this, Mr. H. L. Leonard, of Hull, who, with other gentlemen per-
sonally interested in Mustard growing, or connected with our chief Mus-
tard manufacturing firms, were present at a field trial of the machine,

* «The Mustard Beetle,’ a four-page circular issued by Messrs. J. and J. Colman,
108, Cannon Street, London, H.C.; and Carrow Works, Norwich. Ooincidently with
Messrs. Colman’s circular, I also issued a four-page leaflet, of which I should be
happy to send copies gratuitously to any applicant. But this was on a much
smaller scale, being more especially intended to place figures of the four common
Mustard pests (given above at pp. 60—62) in the hands of those who might have
difficulty in distinguishing the different kinds of insects.

BEETLE CLEARING MACHINE. Tha

wrote me as follows regarding the apparatus as it then was. Since then
gradual alterations and improvements have been made, especially in
the arrangements for brushing the plant, which I can say from my own
personal examination of the details of the machine must add much to
its efficiency.

Mr. H. L. Leonard wrote me on the 17th of August :—‘“ Through
the kindness of the inventor, Mr. Cole Ambrose, Stuntney Hall, Ely,
I was permitted to witness the working of a machine for catching the
Mustard Beetles. I should describe the framework as similar to that
of a horse-rake without the teeth; from the top bar hang five shallow
pans about two feet six inches long, two inches deep, and made the
same width as the Mustard seed rows are drilledapart. The pans just
clear the ground, and in each is placed about an inch of common tar.
Some light pieces of wood are so placed that they lightly brush the
plant as the machine moves along, and almost every beetle drops into
the tar and perishes.

‘‘ Nothing could be more successful in its work than this beetle-
catcher; it is so very simple that it cannot get out of order, a pony
pulls it, a man and a boy are sufficient to go with it; it goes over
about twenty acres a day, and it does not injure the plant in any way,
even when it is coming into flower.

‘“‘ Tt has not been in the hands of the general public yet; but Mr.
Cole Ambrose has two hundred acres of beautiful Mustard seed, whilst
his neighbours have had their crop destroyed. The machine catches
the Phedon betule and the Meligethes eneus equally well.’’—(H. L. L.)

The following report of his views as to the serviceableness of this
beetle clearing machine was also sent me by Mr. James Egar, of
The Rookery, Guyhirn, Wisbech, on the 8th of August :—‘‘ Mustarp
Brrerte.—A machine has been invented, and very successful for
collecting them, by Mr. Cole Ambrose, Ely. I was invited by Messrs.
Keen & Co., Mustard crushers, to inspect it at work on Mr. Ambrose’s
farm, and found it work admirably. Very efficient in its collection of
the pest; it proved itself so in two ways,—leaving no beetles on the
Mustard, and almost an innumerable lot on the emptying places at end
of field.”

About a week later, Mr. Egar wrote further :—‘‘ The invention I
mentioned for taking the Mustard Beetle, I am confident is a very
valuable machine”; and Mr. Egar further noted, amongst observation
of the examiners of the trial operations :—‘ Firstly, of the presence of
the beetles on the Mustard; then of the thorough clearance of the
beetles from the crop; and thirdly, the ‘immense number’ found in
the composition for catching them.”’

On the 22nd of November, Mr. Ambrose, as I was not able con-
veniently to go over to Ely to examine the machine, was good enough

72 MUSTARD.

to bring over a sample of an improved form in pieces, and have it put
together for my inspection here.

This operation only occupied about an hour anda quarter. The
moving power and framework of the machine consists of a single pair
of wheels (on which the machine rests), with what may be described
as two small pairs of shafts, or large handles, one pair pointing
forwards, and another backwards, joined in the middle by a frame,
across which are fixed two long bars.

It is difficult to convey an idea of machinery by simple description,
but if the reader will imagine a frame made on the general plan of a
garden hand carrying barrow, with its handles behind and before, and
instead of the carrying boards in the middle, the centre crossed by two
light bars about seven feet long, and this frame supported on a pair of
wheels; this will give (excepting in the machine being much larger
than the barrow) a general idea of the frame from which the beetle
clearing apparatus is suspended.

This part consists of five flat metal troughs, twelve inches wide,
four feet long, and about two inches deep, slung from the cross-bars,
so as to hang about six, or rather more, inches from the ground, and
of course ranging from back to front (7. ¢., not cross-wise). When in
use, a layer of tar is placed in these troughs. On either side of each
trough, and hanging from above, so that the lower edge is rather above
it, a piece of canvas, somewhat longer than the trough, and a yard
deep, is lightly slung (by a wand run in its upper edge) to the
cross-bars.

The method of action is for the machine, which is very light, to be
drawn or pushed along the rows of infested Mustard. One long trough
passes between two rows, and the canvas on each side passes along
with it outside the two rows, the apparatus being so contrived that the
light touch of the canvas does not injure the plants, but very gently
bends them a little over the trough below, into which the beetles fall
in legions, and are caught by the tar. The machine is made for the
suspending horizontal frame to range about four feet from the ground,
but it is furnished with upright screw standards, by which it can be
raised to allow acrop at ordinary full growth to be cleared. One im-
portant part of the arrangement is the slinging of the apparatus,
which is 80 managed by short chains that no force is used; the strips
of hanging canvas are in constant vibration, thus very lightly shaking
the plants, but not weighting them, as their own light weight is slung
from the bars. Each trough, with its shaking-off canvases, takes two
rows of Mustard, consequently the machine with five parallel troughs
would clear ten rows of Mustard simultaneously, and it will clear from
sixteen to twenty acres in the course of the day.

The main alterations of the machine since the inspection in August,

BEETLE CLEARING MACHINE. (3:

consist in it being so arranged that it is not necessary for it to be
drawn by a pony, which might probably cause a good many beetles to
be knocked off before the sweeping and catching apparatus reached
them, and also, I believe, the shaking-down arrangements were not
then as complete. On flat ground, without obstructions, the machine
was very readily pushed along rapidly by one man, and where greater
power is needed (with the double shafts), it can be arranged for
accordingly. On reaching the ends of the Mustard rows, the machine
being very light can (as I saw) easily be lifted by two men, moved on
to the next width of rows to be dressed, and work recommenced, with-
out any need to turn it, as it works similarly either way forward.

In thus drawing attention in long detail to this new invention, I
should perhaps add that I am doing it by desire of some of our leading
Mustard growers, and also with the full permission of Mr. Ambrose ;
but I should also mention that though giving the principle of action,
and enough description to show its usefulness, I have (or at least I
hope I have) in no way entered on details which would make this a
means of copying the machine to the injury of its inventor and proprietor.
Its effectiveness and its safe action on the crop depend on minute adap-
tations, causing special movements which I have purposely omitted
entering on.

In this machine I think we have the broadscale application of the
plan long ago brought forward in Germany of clearing the beetles by
manual labour, which has been acted on here to some degree, but
as far as I am aware very rarely, on account of the great expense, and
also the tedious delay of the operation. The only difficulty that occurs
to me in the general application of the machine, is the necessity that
the Mustard should be a drilled, not a broad-casted, crop. But this
would be only an occasional difficulty.

Also in its working application it is to be remembered that its use
is to get rid of the beetles. It will equally well clear the Mustard
Beetles, or the Flower Beetles (which are not far behind them in the
mischief which they cause), and if this is done in time, the damage
going forward by the beetle action will be puta stop to, and also we
shall be saved from the next attack, which would have originated from
the grubs hatched from the eggs these beetles would have laid. But
if the attack should not be taken in time, though we should get rid of
beetles, very likely much of their supply of eggs would have been laid,
and their results would in due season ravage as usual.

In this machine I believe, partly from my own inspection of it,
partly from the reports sent me by known Mustard growers, and also
partly from it working forward on a field-scale-treatment which we
knew was good, but could not work forward by hand labour on account
of its great expense, that we have a good working remedy.

74 MUSTARD,

Doubtless amount of attack might be lessened by preventive
measures, but everybody who is really acquainted with farming will
know how little likely it is that money will be spent, and farm service
taken up in preparations for an infestation which it is just as likely as
not might not be going to occur in the next season.

What we want here (as in many other attacks) is something on the
farm, or at hand for a neighbourhood, which may be put in working
order in a few hours or less when the pest is really seen to be on the
crop, and which may be trusted to clear it at once, without damage to
the plant, and, as far as I can form an opinion on the matter, in this
machine we have it.

Charlock Weevil.* Ceutorhynchus contractus, Marsh.
y

CEUTORHYNCHUS CONTRACTUS.—In usual position, and also with wings expanded,
magnified ; also nat. size.

The little weevil figured above did a great deal of harm early in
last season to the young sprouting Mustard plants by preying on the
germinating seed, or on the young plant just below the surface of the
ground.

This Ceutorhynchus contractus is very like the well-known Turnip-
gall Weevil, also the Seed Weevil figured at p. 62; like them it is of a
hard rounded general figure, blunt behind, and tapering before into a
long curved proboscis, or snout, on the sides of which the elbowed

*T am not aware of this little beetle being known under any generally accepted
English name, but in the Index to Curtis’ ‘Farm Insects,’ at p. 519, there is a single
reference to it as the ‘‘ Charlock-seed Weevil.’’ Therefore, as the name of ‘“ Char:
lock Weevil” would include the root-galls (from which we have scientific record of
this weevil being bred) as well as other parts of the plants, I have thought ba
name conveniently admissible.

CHARLOCK WEEVIL. 75

antenne, or horns, are placed. It may, however, be to some degree
distinguished from these by its smaller size, this being only about halt
to three-quarters of a line in length, whilst the stated length of the
Turnip-gall Weevil is one line and a third, and that of the Seed Weevil
from one line to a line and a quarter. The general tint is shiny black ;
the wing-cases sometimes (and in some of the specimens before me)
having a very slight greenish glance, and the fore body, or thorax, which
is narrowed (and crossed by a deep groove) at the end nearest the head,
is strongly punctured above. The wings are so finely nerved that even
with a two-inch objective, I could only distinguish those figured.

On the 10th of May, Mr. H. L. Leonard, of Preston, Hull, with
whom I had been in correspondence for some months previously on the
subject of Mustard attacks, was good enough to forward me the
following report of his personal observations of the mischief then being
caused by the ravages of this little beetle :—‘‘I have just finished my
round amongst the Holderness growers of white Mustard seed. I find
a great amount of damage has been done by a small weevil, which is
present in immense numbers, and of which I send you specimens.
Owing to the heavy rain on March Ist, and the subsequent long
drought, the soil is in small clods, instead of being, as should be the
case, well pulverised, yet firm.

“Just before the plant shows itself above ground, the weevil (which
through the unusual state of the soil is enabled to run under the sur-
face easily) eats the seed, and in doing so of course destroys the young
plant itself, nothing being left but the thin sprout, which quickly dies.
Virtually, every seed is destroyed in some fields, and they have had to
be sown over again. As a proof that the weevil would probably be
innocuous but for the exceptional condition of the soil, I notice that
in the worst infested fields, when a piece of land is in fine condition,
you find the plant upon it quite healthy, and growing well.

‘‘On some fields the plant has been eaten off after it appears above
ground, but in all these cases the plant was delicate and growing badly,
and both the weevil and the Turnip Ely were present in large numbers.
The farmers generally think the weevil the most destructive of the
two.” Later on (Mr. Leonard mentioned), ‘‘The weevil completely
disappeared in about three weeks or a month.”

On June 7th, Mr. Leonard again alluded to the great extent to
which he found amount of attack was influenced by condition of the
land, and consequent condition of the plants ‘‘ wherever the land had
worked more freely, and the Mustard was growing more vigorously,
there you scarcely find any of the weevil. The more delicate the
plant, the greater the number of insects.

‘‘ Several of the farmers are quite certain that where.the plant was
eaten off above ground, the damage was done by this same weevil. I

76 MUSTARD.

enclose you some live specimens of the weevil, and also some sprouts
which have been eaten in the ground; I am afraid the latter will be
too shrivelled to be of any service to you.”

The little seedling plants were too shrivelled to be useful for
figuring, but they well confirmed Mr. Leonard’s account of the damage
caused to the very young plants by being gnawed by the weevils, and
the plentiful supply of the weevils, sent accompanying, gave me
material for the figures at the head of this paper.

In the course of his communications, Mr. Leonard mentioned that
a large quantity of seed had passed through his hands in the spring,
but he had not seen one weevil amongst it; and, after the great ravage
alluded to above, this C. contractus, sometimes known formerly as the
‘‘ Charlock-seed Weevil,’’ appears to have entirely vanished. On the
5th of August, Mr. Leonard, in continuation of his observations,
noted :—‘‘ The weevil, as I reported, did a great deal of damage where
the plant was checked in its growth by drought, and in several fields,
where the same insect had eaten off the young plant just under the
surface, the crop had to be sown over again; butin no case have I had
it reported to me that the weevil appeared a second time; in fact, the
second sowing of Mustard seed looks very well.

‘‘The weevil seemed entirely to disappear in a few es during
which we had no rain. I was asked to examine a field which was
very badly infested; ten days afterwards I could not find a single
specimen.”’

On the 11th of November, Mr. Leonard further noted :—‘‘ Our
second sowing of Mustard seed has done fairly well, and in no case has
any perceptible damage been done to it by the weevil, in fact I have
never noticed one since the first attack.”’

Some notes sent me on the 26th of May, by Mr. Edmund Riley, of
The Weir, Hessle, Hull, obviously refer to this Ceuwtorhynchus contractus
presence :—‘‘I was in Hull on Tuesday; several of the Sunk Island
farmers complain bitterly about something eating their Mustard just
before it comes up, that is, as soon as it has burst through the skin;
the two delicate leaves are eaten, and the seedling dies.”’

The only previous occasion recorded (so far as Iam aware of) of
this weevil doing serious damage was in 1881, the year memorable for
the great Turnip Flea Beetle attack, which was little less than a
scourge over a great part of England and Scotland. In that year this
Ceutorhynchus contractus (the Charlock or Charlock-seed Weevil) was
reported as doing much damage to young Turnips in their first growth,
and also (which may be an important point in its habits for preventive
service) when the Turnips were cleared, going on to Charlock, some-
times known in Scotland as ‘‘ Runches,” or ‘‘Skellocks,” and scientifi-
cally as the Sinapis arvensis, Linn. The method of injury was of much

CHARLOCK WEEVIL. 77

the same kind which has been observed in the past season on the
Mustard, the plant being in some cases “destroyed by the weevil
nipping the stem through just below the seed leaves as they were
pushing up out of the earth.’ In another instance (where the first
sowing of young Turnips, and then the Charlock, had been cleared by
the weevils) resowing ‘‘ was begun on the 17th of June by passing the
Turnip sower over the drills, the ground being clean and mellow; the
plants came up rapidly, and just as they were coming through they
were again attacked by the weevils, the leaves being literally blackened
by the numbers of the insects, the parts of the field where the Charlock
was most abundant during the preceding season being the first to
fail before the attack, and being soon cleared; and from these spots
the weevils gradually extended their ravages, and again ruined the
crop.’’*

The weevils in these attacks did not limit their ravages to damage
to the sprouting plant, but if it survived (or chanced to escape) infes-
tation up to production of seed-leaves, these were severely injured or
destroyed, ‘‘ the weevil puncturing the leaves partly through, both
from above and below, so badly, that on one seed-leaf, taken as an ex-
ample of the many,” I found, on examination, ‘there were twenty-two
punctures (not perforations) on the upper side, and about sixteen on
the lower.’’ In the ten days preceding the 8th of June it was more
injurious even than the Turnip Fly, and hundreds of acres are reported
as having been destroyed by it; dry weather occurring at the time in
the district round Harlston (Berwickshire). These were resown with
a double quantity of seed, and the insects reappearing, a second
clearance was feared; but a good rain set in, and the plants came
away well.t

The above attacks took place in coincidence with circumstances to
check the growth of the young plants, as drought and heat, in one case
noted as ‘intense heat’’ from the 22nd of May to the 4th of June,
this heat being followed by frosty nights, accompanied by cold winds,
which checked the plants to a serious extent, and in some instances
completely destroyed them.

The above observations of the injury caused to leafage corresponds
with the note given in ‘ Introduction to Entomology,’ by Kirby and
Spence, p. 188 of vol. 1. of 8rd edition, as to ‘‘almost as much damage
being sometimes occasioned by a little weevil, Curculio”’ (= Ceutorhyn-
chus) ‘‘contractus, which in the same manner pierces a hole in the
cuticle,’’ as by the Turnip Flea Beetle.

* ‘Report of Observations of Injurious Insects for 1881,’ by Eleanor A. Ormerod
pp. 103—105.

t+ See Report previously quoted,

78 MUSTARD.

This Curtis confirms in his ‘Farm Insects,’ p. 106, on the authority
also of other observers named, noting, ‘‘This little weevil in the
perfect or beetle state destroys the young Turnips by puncturing the
leaves.”’

But though we have plenty of evidence, dating as far back of the
damage caused from time to time by these little weevils, the Curculio,
now Ceutorhynchus, of Marsham, both to the sprouting shoot and
young leafage of Turnips, and in the past season have seen only too
much of the harm caused to the sprouting Mustard plants, yet I have
been unable, after careful search through all the works to which I have
access on entomology, or agricultural insects attacks, to find any
observations on its locality of life in its maggot stage excepting the
very valuable record by Kirby and Spence of breeding it from galls on
Charlock roots.

At p. 189 of ‘Introduction to Entomology,’ vol. i., previously
quoted, Kirby and Spence speak definitely of knobs on the roots of
Sinapis arvensis (that is, Charlock, as we commonly call it in England),
from which knobs they bred this weevil, now known as Ceutorhynchus
contractus. Curtis, in ‘Farm Insects,’ p. 106, draws attention to this
observation; and in the north British communications sent me in 1881, I
have a note in the observations of Mr. Geo. Brown, of Watten Mains,
Caithness, of ‘‘the crop of Oats preceding the root crop” (which was
severely injured by the C. contractus weevil) being ‘‘ badly infested
with Charlock, the field at one time being completely yellow with its
flowers.”’

Here it appears as if we might have the origin of the attack. At
any rate it would be well worth while in the coming season to make
sure how many different species of weevils live in the knobs or galls of
Charlock roots. I would be happy to endeavour to identify any
specimens.

At present (so far as recorded observations at hand show) the pre-
valence of this special weevil infestation appears to depend very much
on how previous state of the weather may have influenced preparation
of the ground for the seed bed, and weather at the time of sprouting
of the crop be favourable to its growth. Where the state of the
land allows this minute beetle with its sharp hard snout to make
its way-wherever it pleases, and the weather at the same time keeps
back the young plants from pushing on to the age and condition in
which they would be past its power to harm them, the consequences
are necessarily bad.

Presence of Charlock has also preceded bad attack of this weevil,
and the size of its wings (see fig., p. 74) shows the beetle would have
no difficulty in coming from any moderate distance to a good feeding-
ground,

PEAR AND CHERRY SAWFLY; ‘‘ SLUGWORM.”’ 79

So far, however, as remedial measures have been tried, the result
has been very unsatisfactory. Quick-lime strewed on four infested
drills by way of experiment drove away some of the weevils, but “the
remedy could not be said to be successful.” Soot did little or no good,
and hellebore was not reported as of service when used alone, but
mixed with lime did the most good of the above applications. It was,
however, noticed that where gas-lime had been used in the previous
autumn the Turnip plants appeared less infested, and in a few instances
got into the rough leaf.

PEAR.

Pear and Cherry Sawfly; “Slugworm.” Selandria atra, Westwood ;
Tenthredo cerasi, Linn. (of Curtis); Hriocampa limacina, André.

TENTHREDO CERASI.—‘‘ Slugworm ”’ and Sawfly, magnified, with lines showing nat.
length; cocoon.

Amongst the various kinds of Sawfly attack which appeared in the
past season, that of the larva of the Pear and Cherry Sawfly, commonly
known from its very peculiar appearance as the Pear ‘“ Slugworm,”’
was perhaps more noticed than usual, and some very characteristic
specimens of the grub, both in its commonly observed slimy black
condition, and in the subsequent clean yellow caterpillar state, were
sent me. Some infested leaves gave me also the opportunity of
noticing the earlier part of the attack, when the larva is still within
the egg, and thus tracing the changes of appearance on from its first
white colour to the pale yellowish tints of the young grubs in their
early condition, before they assume the black slimy coating, from
which they take their name of ‘‘ Slugworm.”’

This infestation is sometimes exceedingly hurtful by the grubs
eating away the whole of the upper surface of the leafage on which they
feed with the exception of the veins, and sometimes they are very
numerous, Often, however, where I haye had the opportunity of

80 _ PEAR.

observing them, the numbers have been small. This difference in
amount is noticed by Mr. Cameron,* who (besides reference to their
occasional appearance in great numbers, ‘‘as they unfortunately too
often do’’) writes of their more ordinary infestation as follows :—‘‘ The
larvee feed on the upper side of the leaf, usually to the number of three
or four. They eat only the upper epidermis; at first the leaf gets
eaten in patches, but ultimately every particle of green is devoured, so
that it has the appearance of having been scorched, and ultimately it
falls to the ground.” . . . ‘*The damage done by these ugly
brutes to fruit trees is very often immense; especially is this the case
during very dry seasons. They are found on most species of Pyrus,
Prunus, Cerasus, Rubus, and Amygdalus, as well as Crategus, Quercus,
and Betula.”’—(P. C.)

Of the above list, the three first, the Pear, Plum, and Cherry, are
the most important for garden consideration, and it has never chanced
to me to meet with them on the three last named, the Hawthorn, Oak,
and Birch.

The grubs are, in the greater part of their lives, of the shape
figured at p. 79, that is, both broader and thicker at the fore part of
the body, and altogether somewhat pear-shaped, but covered with a
shiny blackish slime, or exudation, which gives a strong resemblance
to a little black Slug, or perhaps still more to a bit of wet black dirt
fallen on the leaf. At the last moult the grubs throw off the black
slimy coat, and appear as yellowish caterpillars transversely wrinkled.
After this change they soon go down into the ground, where they spin
small black or brown cocoons, from which (in ordinary course) the
Sawflies come out early in the following summer.

The flies are of the shape figured at p. 79, black, shining, the
female sometimes tinged with violet; the ‘‘ wings hyaline, with a
broad smoky band in the middle.”’

The first communication of last season regarding Slugworms was
sent me on the 14th of June, from Neasham Hill, Darlington, by Mr.
R. Cresswell Ward, with some Pear leaves accompanying, which gave
me the opportunity of observing the young Sawfly maggot whilst still
in the egg. Mr. Ward wrote :—‘‘ Can you tell me what is the insect
enclosed? It appears to me to be a kind of black Slug. For the past
three years it has come on my Pear trees about this time of year. It
eats all the upper skin off the leaf, which turns brown and drops off;
all the strength appears to go from the trees, which have hardly
fruited since it began. I tried syringing with paraffin, water, also
soap-suds, last year, and this year my gardener painted the stems and

* See ‘Mon. of the Brit. Phytophagous Hymenoptera,’ by Peter Cameron, vol.i.,
p- 225. (Ray Society),

PEAR AND CHERRY SAWFLY; ‘‘ SLUGWORM.”’ 81

boughs with a mixture of sulphur, paraffin, soot, and gishurstine ; but
it has done no good. Can you suggest any way to stop the attack,
both now, and in the future ?”’

In reply I mentioned the benefit of use of caustic dressings (noted
at p. 82), applied twice, or possibly three times, at short intervals, and
on June 19th, Mr. Cresswell Ward wrote further regarding effect of
the application on the Sawfly larvee :—‘‘ My gardener has used the
quick-lime, and it is killing them rapidly; and your other instructions
will of course be carried out, and another year I have no doubt the
trees will bear fruit.” . . . ‘The heat is very intense; we all hope
for rain.”

Mr, Ward’s note of the heat and drought is of special interest in
connection with the information recorded by Mr. P. Cameron (loc. cit.,
p. 80) of damage being especially great from these larve ‘‘ during very
dry seasons.”

In this case the active stage of the attack to some of the leaves sent
me was only just beginning, the upper surface of the leaf not being as
yet stripped of the cuticle in patches, but dotted with little irregularly
circular patches, some less than half a line in diameter.

The places of egg deposit were very observable. These were
noticeable on the upper side of the leaf as little spots roundish in
shape, and whitish in colour (from the upper coat of skin being dead),
slightly raised in the middle, and of a somewhat transparent tint just
over the contained egg, which was a soft mass, compressible, thick,
and somewhat circular in outline.

Most of the larve had hatched out, leaving only the white skin
cracked where the maggot had effected its escape, but two eggs still
remained unhatched. One of these eggs contained the white Sawfly
larva curled on itself within, and sufficiently developed to be of char-
acteristic shape, that is, with the large segments behind the head, and
the hinder portion of the maggot with the segments much narrower,
In the other egg the contents were not yet sufficiently developed to be
defined in shape. I did not see any larve in the act of coming out of
the egg, but the smallest of them were as a general thing of a
yellowish colour.

The little white blisters, or patches, of white dead skin covering
the eggs were about one-sixteenth of an inch across, and one leaf,
where I counted them, over thirty in number; on another there were
about twenty-five; all these (with possibly one exception) showing on
the upper surface of the leaf.

The latest observation sent me of this Pear leaf pest, was sent on
the 28th of August, from Htchowe, Lansdown Road, Cheltenham, by
Mr. Edward Cornford, and is of special interest as showing the long
continuance of the attack,

G

82 . PEAR.

Mr. Cornford wrote as follows, with specimens also forwarded :—
‘*My Pear trees have been infested this year by larve of I know not
what.” . . . ‘They are shiny black, except when they are about
to change into the chrysalis state, when they become a dirty yellow.”

‘‘The second brood is now en evidence about six weeks after
the first; I think I have one pupa, but am not sure.”

On the 31st of August, Mr. Cornford wrote further :—‘‘ I have not
succeeded to any extent in getting many chrysalids, but have one or
two which I think have made a sort of cocoon with fine saw-dust. But
out of about twenty which I put to burrow. when they seemed ripe, I
have not as yet found more than two or three in the chrysalid form.”
Mr. Cornford further remarked of the grubs, ‘ they are still appearing
on the trees, from the smallest to the full-grown size, but the imago I
have failed to find.”

This (apparently) second appearance of brood is attributable to
irregular date of pupation (i. e., going into chrysalis state of the larvae)
in the preceding year, or to irregular development from this or other
cause, of the Sawfly parents during the summer of attack. As a rule,
there is only one brood in the year, though the appearance of the
grubs, from various causes, may range over a period of three or four
months. » al

A few days later, Mr. Cornford added the further note showing the
great amount of the infestation :—‘“I did not want you to trouble
yourself to return the box, &c. I have only too many specimens even
now, though my gardener has spent no end of time in clearing, or
trying to clear, the trees of the pests. Yesterday I found one
specimen on a Plum tree.”

PREVENTION AND Remepies.—These are based on two special points
in the habits of the larve. These grubs, or ‘‘ Slugworms,’’ have a
power of exuding a coat of slime when annoyed by lime, or other dry
dressings, being thrown on them, but they can only repeat this process
a few times, therefore if anything like lime, or powdered gas-lime, or a
mixture of these is thrown on them, the grub can moult it off once,
but a second application of it so soon after that the grub has freed
itself of the coating, and yet has not had time to re-form the internal
supply-of slime to protect itself with, will probably completely clear
the pests. If more than a few hours are allowed to elapse between the
dressings, it is very likely that the second may fail; but if properly
managed, two dressings are usually successful. ;

Syringings of the usual insecticides, as soap-suds, soft-soap mixtures,
tobacco-water, lime-water, &c., have all been found useful in getting
rid of the grubs; so also has shaking down the Sawflies. They have
been found to remain for a short time motionless after-being shaken off

PEAR AND CHERRY SAWFLY}; ‘‘ SLUGWORM.”’ 83

the tree, and if a time was chosen, as at morning or evening, when the

flies were torpid, or collected on the leafage, and they were shaken
down on tarred boards, something might thus be- done to check
mischief.

But besides dusting the grub with caustic powders mentioned above,
the surest preventive measure is during winter to skim the surface off:
the soil beneath trees that have been infested in the summer, and to
burn or otherwise destroy it. When the caterpillars are full-fed, they
go down into the ground, and there form a little dark coloured cocoon
(see fig., p. 79) at a depth of from one to four inches, according to the
nature of the soil. With a very little attention, anyone (interested in
preserving the crops of Pears) will soon detect the little earthy coloured
cocoons containing the caterpillar, or later on, the chrysalis to which
it has turned, and from which, if undisturbed, the Sawflies would come
out next year. The ground must not be dug so as to risk injury to
surface rootage, but if lightly forked, or turned in any way which may
just disturb the surface only, the cocoons might be hand-picked, or if
found to lie close to the surface, this might be skimmed off, and in
either way, if the cocoons are destroyed, much good will be done.

All of the above methods of prevention have been entered on in my
previous observations of this attack, but as the infestation of the past
year gave some amount of additional information beyond what is
usually brought forward as to the early life-history of the insect, &c.,
the whole account would be incomplete if remedial measures were
only referred to.

G2

84 PEAR.

PHYTOPTIDA, commonly known as GALL MITES.— Pear Leaf-
blister Mites. Phytoptus pyri, Nalepa; (? Typhlodromus pyri,
Scheuten ; ? Phytoptus pyri, Pagenstecker) ; and other species.

Puyrortus pyri, female, nat. length circa 0:2 mm.; left leg of the first pair of
P. tristriatus, and (smaller figure) of P. tristriatus var. carinea, magnified 550 times,
all after Dr. Nalepa. Infested Pear leaf.

During the past year the presence of Mite Galls, that is, of the
deformed growth caused by the minute cylindrical four-legged Mites,
scientifically known as Phytopti, has been more than usually observable.
Almost as soon as growth was sufficiently advanced for their formation,
we had the red or green nail-like galls on the Maple and Sycamore
leaves, and the swelled and stunted leaf-buds, caused by the Mites, on
Nut bushes. The Black Currant bud-gall was a bad trouble; and we
had besides the blister-like form which injures the substance of Pear
leaves, the infestation which raises a kind of wall of little funnel-
shaped knobs round the edge of Plum leaves, and the less observable
bud-gall of the common Yew.

For many years, the life-history of the minute Mites, which give

PEAR LEAF-BLISTER MITES, 85

rise to the above and to many other forms of gall-growth, and still
more their specific description has been (with regard to most of the
attacks) a subject of exceeding difficulty. And, further, beyond a very
preliminary diagnosis of characteristics, often equally applicable to
a large proportion of our most common British PhAytopti, we were for
the most part without any work to turn to, from which (even with the
help of the highest microscopic powers) we might trustworthily identify
each species in full. .

We were in the condition described by Dr. Low, the eminent
Austrian writer on this subject, when he remarked that even if he
were to thoroughly examine the mites out of great numbers of the
deformed plant-growths which he had described, still he would not be
able to give such sufficient and trustworthy characteristics as would
supply the power of specific distinction.

In fact (to put it shortly), what even the most scientific ‘‘ Mite-
gall’? observers needed was something equivalent to a ‘ Manual,’ con-
taining fully detailed descriptions of the different species of the ‘‘ Gall-
mites,’’ with measurements, magnified figures, and everything requisite
for correct and demonstrably certain identification.

These now we have in the publications of Dr. Alfred Nalepa, which
have been successively issued in the ‘Reports of the Proceedings of
the Imperial Academy of Science of Vienna.’ During the past summer,
Dr. Friedrich Thomas, of Ohrdruf, Gotha, himself a well-known phyto-
pathologist, and observer and writer on Gall-growths, did me the
favour to introduce me by letter, relatively to study of Phytopti, to
Dr. Nalepa, then Professor in the Royal Imperial College, Linz-on-
the-Danube, now of the Royal and Imperial Government College,
Vienna.* Dr. Nalepa was good enough to identify for me all the
specimens which I sent over, and also to give me valuable instruction
as to the anatomical and structural formation of Phytopti.

In the works of which I give some of the titles appended to this
paper, will be found a clear and convenient classification of the family
Phytoptide into subfamilies and genera; the main distinctions turning
on such points as the body being cylindrical, as is commonly the case
with the genus Phytoptus, with which we are best acquainted here; or
the abdomen being largest immediately behind the thoracic shield, or
other variations of form; also on the abdomen being similarly ringed
throughout, or with the rings broader on the back and narrower below,
or other variations.

With the kind permission of Dr. Nalepa, I have given a copy of
one of his very numerous and clearly drawn illustrations at the heading

* Prof. an der K. K. Lehrer-Bildungsanstalt, Linz-u-Donau, Austria; now of
K. K. Staats-gymnasium, Vienna.

86 PHAR.

of this paper, by which the observer will see the cylindrical form, also
the position of the bristles and the clearly-defined form of the legs,
showing the distinct joints, and the characteristic subterminal feather-
formed holding-claw (Haftklaue, Landois).*

For distinction of species, such characteristics as the form, and
comparative length and breadth of body; form of thoracic shield;
form, direction, and length of proboscis; characteristics of legs, and
number of branches of the feather-claw; length, &c., of bristles, and
length and breadth of developed males and females; are some of the
points given. Very much more besides is clearly entered on, as for
instance the change in form of the male of the Nut Phytoptus (P. avel-
lane) at the time of sexual development, and the apparatus of repro-
duction is especially entered on, with measures and descriptions; the
form of the egg is also given where known. Synonyms, or what
might be synonyms if the names referred to had been accompanied by
full description, are given; but as it is pointed out, names without
full descriptions accompanying are unserviceable. In fact, “ bare
words” are, as was well said by Dr. Amerling, ‘of only temporary
use as a means of reference, pending fuller description.”’

In the following pages I give (with permission) some abridged
‘technical descriptions; but as it is hardly just and fair to the author
of a work of such depth of research to place mere fragments of it before
scientific readers, in translation and in abridged form, I append to the
account of the Plum-leaf Phytoptus a copy in full of Dr. Nalepa’s descrip-
tion, as an example of his careful and thorough method of dealing with
his subject. Also I should be to blame if I did not tender my especial
and hearty thanks for the kindness with which he aided me by his
clear instructions in this difficult study.

Pear-Lear Buister-Gauus (Phytoptus pyri, Nalepa).—‘‘ Body eylin-
drical, about 5-6 times as long as broad. ‘Thoracic shield very small,
semicircular.” ... ‘‘ The proboscis is strong, slightly curved, directed
forward, and 0:025 mm. long. The legs are rather weak and short,
but distinctly jomted. The bristles are very fine and short. The
holding-claw (‘ Haftklaue’) is very small, exceedingly slender, and
four-branched.’”’ (This is sometimes described as a ‘‘ feather-bristle ” ;
see figs. of terminal four-branched claw, p. 84.—E. A. O.).... ‘The
abdomen is uniformly ringed (about eighty rings), and rather finely
punctate. carcchans ‘‘ The above-named species produces on the leaves
of the Pirus communis, L., numerous pustule-formed swellings, some-
-what raised on both sides of the leaf, smooth, at first green, afterwards

* For full description of Phytoptii—male, female, and eggs,—see ‘ Beitrage z.
Syst. d. Phyt., in: Sitzgsb. d Kais. Akad. d Wiss. in Wien,’ 1889. Bd. 981 (separate
impression), pp. 8—10.

PEAR LEAF-BLISTER MITES, 87

turning browner.”’..... (2 Typhlodromus pyri, Scheuten ; ? Phytoptus
pyri, Pagenstecker.)*

This Pear-leaf infestation is not often enquired about, but per-
sonally, for at least about sixteen years or more, I have never needed
specimens without being able to find them in my own garden, and
probably if attention was directed to the nature of the attack, a good
deal of damage, of which the cause is not suspected, might be spared.

In the course of last year I had enquiries about this attack from
various correspondents, but as these did not add to our information on
the subject it is unnecessary to give them here.

Under various synonyms the infestation is widespread, both in
the Old and New World; and the following notes, from the very
trustworthy hand of Mr. James Fletcher, Dominion Entomologist,
Ottawa, Canada, recently published, appear to me to embody in
serviceable form almost all that we need to know of its history.

“ Prar-Lear Buster Mirs, Phytoptus pyri. An insect which is
giving a considerable amount of trouble in Canada at the present time
is the Pear-leaf Blister Mite.” ....‘*The mites, which are hardly
visible with the naked eye, emerge from the scales of the leaf-buds
early in spring, and attack the tissues of the unfolding leaves. The
blisters soon begin to show as small red spots, each of which has a
small central hole on the lower side of the leaf. The eggs are laid
inside these blisters, and the young, escaping through the central
opening, at once form new galls, until sometimes the greater part of
most of the leaves is rendered unfit to perform its functions.

‘‘When mature the galls are brown and spongy in texture, and
are raised perceptibly above the surface of the leaf. Before the
leaves fall the mites leave the galls, and secrete themselves beneath
the scales of the winter buds, where they remain throughout the
winter,
‘¢As a remedy, kerosine emulsion seems to be the only substance
which, up to the present time, has given any promising results.”’—
From. ‘Report of the Ontario Fruit. Grower’s Association,” p. 113,
published in the ‘ Annual Report of the Department of Agriculture of
Ontario for 1892.’

For those who do not care to be at the trouble of mixing the
emulsion themselves, the very similar mixture sold in this country,
under the name of ‘“antipest,” and especially. referred to in the
preceding paper on Gooseberry Red Spider, p. 37, would be found to
have very nearly (or precisely) the same effects.

* Nalepa, ‘Zur system der Gallmilben,’ Sitzgsbers, 1890, pp. [50, 51] 11, 12;
plate iv., figs. 1, 2. See also references in ‘Katalog. der bisher beschrieben Gall-
milben,’ by Dr. Nalepa, pp. 275 and 296.

88 PEAR.

Something, however, towards checking resettlement of the infesta-
tion might be done by syringing the leafage when the Gall-mites are
wandering about. During last summer, Mr. W. Gibbon, of Seaford
Grange, near Pershore, in a few remarks which he sent me on this
Pear-leaf attack, mentioned that under microscopic investigation he
found that these Mites were very similar in appearance to those of the
Black Currant, ‘‘ but more active.”

Dr. E. L. Taschenberg says of them that the ‘ sexually developed
Mites move about fairly nimbly on the under side of the leaves. They
are found throughout the whole year, from May onwards, of various
ages, and have many broods, so that multiplication continues uninter-
ruptedly until the winterly season. They disperse themselves, both as
larvee and developed Mites, in the leaf and flower-buds of the one-year
old twigs, embedded in the felt-like layer of hairs on the inside of the
outer bud-scales.”** Dr. Taschenberg draws attention to the infesta-
tion having been found to begin its yearly course on the lower leaves
of the twigs, whilst the upper are still free, and therefore points out
that if these infested leaves are cleared it will greatly help to check
attack, especially in nursery grounds.

In my own observations I have thought that syringing with soft-
soap compounds on the leafage in summer was useful; and (in my
own observations) I have thought I found all the colours of Mite-gall
which are mentioned separately by different writers; sometimes bright
rose-colour, sometimes green, as well as brown in the advanced stage.
The following notes on the Phytoptus similis are abridged from the full
description, by Dr. Nalepa, on page 89 :—

Pium-LeaAF FUNNEL-SHAPED Gatus. —Phytoptus similis, Nalepa.
‘Body cylindrical; female five times as long as broad. Thoracic
shield three-cornered, with somewhat angularly curved out margin.”

. “ The proboscis is short (0°015 mm.), strong, and directed down-
wards and forwards. The legs are strong and distinctly jointed; the
last joint is inconsiderable, shorter than the preceding. ‘The bristles
are very fine and moderately long. The claw is short; the holding-claw
(‘Haftklaue’) is very slender, feather-like and five-branched. The
abdomen is uniformly ringed (about 60 rings), and rather coarsely
punctate. The egg round, 0:036 mm.”

P. similis produces the galls on the leaves of Prunus domestica, L.,
shown at Plate VI., fig. 6. They are known under the names of
Cephaloneon hypocrateriforme and confluens, Bremi, and are pouch- or
funnel-shaped. They are mostly found on the edge of the leaves, but
rarely on the leaf-stalk, or at all on the twigs or fruit? They are
always few, with stiff hairs, and form one with another a surrounding

* «Praktische Insecten Kunde,’ by Dr. E. L. Taschenberg, Part V., pp. 159, 160.

PLUM-LEAF FUNNEL-SHAPED GALLS. 89

boundary fence, commonly to the upper side of the leaf, less frequently
to the under side. ? Volvulifew Pruni, Am.*

On the 7th of June, some Damson leaves, infested to an unusual
amount round the edges by the above-named little lumpy galls, were
sent me by Mr. C. D. Wise from Toddington. They also infest the
leaves of the Sloe (Prunus spinosa, L.), but I have never found them

myself in large numbers, nor had them reported as the cause of serious
mischief. +

* (Loc. cit., p. 87) pp. [53, 54] 14, 15, Plate VI., Figs. 2, 3. Also see reference
in ‘ Katalog’ there cited, p. 299.

t+ The following technical description of P. similis is given as a single example
of the clear and thorough method of description of very many Phytoptal infesta-
tions in the successive publications of Dr. Nalepa.—H. A. O.

Phytoptus similis, Nalepa.—‘ Korper walzenformig, ? funfmal so lang als breit.
Thoracal-schild dreieckig, nach hinten scharf abgesetzt, mit etwas winkelig ausge-
bogenen Seiternriindern. Die Zeichnung des Schildes ist sehr deutlich und besteht
aus einer Anzahl unregelmiissig wellig verlaufender Linien, zwischen welchen in
den Seitentheilen noch strichformige Hocker sichtbar sind. Die Hocker der
Riickenborsten stehen vom Hinterrande ziemlich entfernt und tragen die steifen,
kurzen, nach aufarts gerichteten Riickenborsten.

“ Der Riissel ist kurz (0015 mm.), kriiftig und nach abwirts und vorne gerichtet.

‘‘Die Beine sind stark und deutlich gegliedert, das Endglied ist unbedeutend
kiirzer als das vorhergehende. Die Borsten sind sehr fein und ziemlich lang. Die
kralle ist stumpf, die Haftklaue sehr zart, federférmig, funfstrahlig. Sternalleiste
ziemlich lang, Epimeren ziemlich kurz. Zweites Brustborstenpaar tiber den
Epimerenwinkel und der Sternalleiste sehr geniihert.

‘‘Das Abdomen ist gleichmissig geringelt (circa 60 ringe) und ziemlich grob
puncktirt. Der Schwanzlappen ist deutlich und schmal, die Analborsten sehr lang
und wie die Abdominalborsten ungemein zart. Nebenborsten fehlen. Jrstes
Bauchborstenpaar sehr lang und fein, zweites Paar sehr kurz, kaum sichtbar.

‘“« Die aussere weibliche Geschlectsapparat sitzt unmittelbar unter den Epimeren.
Die untere Klappe ist halbkugelig, beckenformig, die obere gewolbt und glatt.
Genitalborsten noch seitenstindig.

‘Hier rund, 0:036 mm,

‘Lange des Weibchens circa 0:23 mm., Breite circa 0045 mm., Breite der 9
Geschlechtséffnung 0-026 mm.

‘‘Lange des Mannchens cirea 0:15 mm., Breite 0:04 mm. Phytoptus similis hat
eine auffallende Ahnlichkeit mit Ph. goniothora aus den Blattrandrollungen von
Crategus oxyacantha, L., doch interscheidet er sich leicht von diesem durch die
bedentendere Grésse, die Zeichnung des Schildes, die Haftklauen und das schmaler
geringelte Abdomen.

“ Ph. similis erzeugt die Taf. VI., Fig. 6, abgebildeten Gallen auf den Blattern
yon Prunus domestica, L. Sie sind unter dem Namen Cephaloneon hypocrateriforme
und confluens Bremi bekannt und sind taschen-oder trichterformig. Man trifft sie
meist am Rande des Blattes, nur selten am Blattstiel oder gar an den Zweigen oder
Fruchten (?), Sie sind immer sparsam, steif behaart und besitzen einen von einem
ringformigen Wall umgebenen Ausgang in der Regel an der Blattoberfliiche, seltener
auf der Unterseite. ? Volvulifex Pruni, Am.”

‘Zur Systematik der Gall-Milben, in Sitzungsber d Kais Akad. d. Wiss, in Wein,’
1890. Separate impression, pp. 14, 15 [53, 54].

90 PEAR.

Brack Currant-Bpup Gaui, Phytoptus ribis, Westwood and Nalepa.—
This is the species which is the most hurtful to us of any of the
Phytopti, and we know it generally as a cylindrical Gall Mite, with the
abdomen uniformly ringed, with four legs, and multiplying by eggs,
and otherwise coming under the description of the genus Phytoptus,
of the sub-family Phytoptina, one of the two great divisions of the
family of the Phytoptide.

The description of this Gall Mite, and the plate in which it is
figured, are in course of preparation by Dr. Nalepa.

The galls we know only too well, as buds swelled into round or.
irregularly shaped growths, sometimes hardly advancing beyond mere
small balls of deformed embryo growth, sometimes advancing so far as
a slight development of the leaves, or possibly of the flower-buds.
Accompanying this gall formation, both within its scales, and more
generally dispersed, there are very commonly to be found minute gold
coloured round bodies or drops, which would not be worth alluding to
excepting for these having been recently brought forward and figured
(in this country) as a form of gall caused by the same Gall Mite that
forms the distorted bud gall. This I believe to be wholly inaccurate.
From the time of my first observation of this Black Currant attack, I
have noticed these yellow globules, and never found them to be other.
than little globules of moisture, neither have I been able on enquiry to-
find that they had been, on the investigation of other observers, to be
anything but little round gold coloured fluid drops.

One of the earliest of the communications sent me last season was
forwarded, with specimens accompanying, on the 7th of April, from
Bekesbourne, near Canterbury, by Mr. W. Gardner. In this instance,
the fourteen twigs, or lengths of twigs, of Black Currant were severely
beset with the roundish swollen gall growths, caused by the Phytoptus
ribis. On one of the shoots which was slightly branched into six short
side-twigs, I counted as many as twenty galls in a length altogether of
less than twenty inches. The galls were of different sizes, but in a.
large proportion they were of three-fifths, or more than three-fifths, of
an inch in diameter. The Phytopti, or Gall Mites, within were of
various stages of growth.

This attack proved very destructive to the hopes ofa fruit crop. On
the 2nd of October, Mr. Gardner again sent me specimens (in this
instance a large packet), showing what might be certainly described as
an overwhelming amount of infested and malformed buds, and the
shoots on which these were placed were themselves so stunted and
distorted in growth by effects of previous infestation, as to some
degree to resemble the condition of Birch twigs, before the Phytoptus
growth, known as ‘‘ Birch-knots,” has developed beyond its first stages.

Mr. Gardner remarked :—‘‘ I think I told you that I only gathered:

BLACK CURRANT-BUD GALL. 91

half a bushel off nearly five actes. You will see the dead branches
that should have borne fruit dried up. When I first discovered it (or
soon after), I heard that people were washing; . . . but I could not
see, nor can I now see, how washing them could do any good, they
seem so completely in the bud, indeed many of the bushes look like
dying. I saw a neighbour some time since who said they had had
them more or legs for five or six years, particularly on the ‘ Baldwins.’ ”

The following notes refer to the effect of cutting-back infested
bushes as a means of checking the attack, and also to removal of the
infested buds and destroying them asa measure of preventing increase,
if not of getting rid of the infestation.

On the 29th of September, Mr. John Speir, of Newton Farm,
Newton, near Glasgow, was good enough to favour me with the
following observations :—‘‘ In further reference to yours of 26th ult.,
re Black Currant Mite (Phytoptus ribis), I have pleasure in saying that
from an examination of the bushes to-day, I am inclined to believe
that the treatment adopted has been entirely successful. I had only
two affected bushes to experiment on, and of course owing to the small
number experimented with, it would be rash to be over confident until
other more extended trials are made.

“The details are as follows :—The two bushes (about ten years old),
and both with single stems, were affected all over, and during the
autumn of 1891 they were cut down to within two or three inches of
the ground, the branches being carefully gathered together and burned.
A mixture of soft-soap, half a pound, dissolved in one gallon of hot
water, to which two gallons of paraffin oil had been added, and well
stirred, and afterwards mixed with an equal quantity of cold water, was
syringed on to the stumps of the old bushes, the bushes round the
affected ones, and all the ground round about.

‘One of the bushes came away healthy and strong the following
spring, but the other looked very delicate for a considerable time;
ultimately, however, it seemed as healthy as the other. During the
spring of 1898, no affected buds were noticed, neither on the bushes
which were cut back, nor on the others surrounding them, and this
year, although very much deprived of light and air by the higher
bushes around them, both seem in a very favourable way of making
good growth and healthy wood in the future.

*T am inclined to believe that these bushes were cut back a little
too far, but I had had so many failures in attempting to eradicate this
pest in the past, that I wanted to be as sure this time as possible, well
knowing that if the treatment was successful other attempts could be
made later on with longer stems. If the stems were a few inches
longer, more stronger growth would come away, and the plant would
sooner be a bush again. As my stock of affected plants is now all.

92 PEAR:

used up, I cannot make another experiment until I get hold of one or
more diseased plants, but I think the treatment might be equally
successful by cutting off the branches, say, six inches above the
ground.

‘«Two parts of paraffin easily combine with one part of water when
soft-soap has been dissolved in it, the combination forming a white
thick fluid like butter-milk. This forms the stock, and may be diluted
to any extent, according to the purpose for which it is used. These
few particulars I hope will serve your purpose.”

On the 5th of October, Mr. Speir wrote me further regarding the
benefit, but still only partial benefit, which he had found to result
from removing the infested buds :—‘‘ Prior to 1890, I had several
bushes affected with the Gall Mite, and could experiment freely with
them without running the risk of killing off my stock of diseased
bushes, and for several years previous to that, I went over each of
several bushes once every week with the most extreme care, and
plucked out every affected bud as it showed itself during the spring and
early summer months. These buds I carefully kept, and at once
carried them to the fire, where they were destroyed. In this way I
succeeded in preventing the disease from increasing, or from very
much disfiguring the bushes, but on no plant did I succeed in
eradicating the mischief. The most I succeeded in doing, was to
prevent the disease from becoming worse, and that was at an expendi-
ture of time and patience altogether out of proportion to the value of
the crop. It therefore seems probable to me that in spring you will
find your efforts in a similar direction have not met with a due reward.
It will, however, be interesting to note how your experience compares
with mine.”’—(J. 8.)

In the course of the summer I had had the advantage of examina-
tion of my Black Currant bushes together with Mr. Speir, and though
nothing I can do in any way can rank with the vast scale of observation
carried on either at Toddington or Newton, it seems to me that for
moderate garden growing, where a great extent of land has not to be
dealt with, that disbudding and destroying the buds is one of the best
preventives that we know of as yet. For on a moderate or small scale
every bush may be thoroughly gone over, and every bud removed
without great cost, and we get rid of much infestation which would
have presently spread.

In reply to some remarks on this treatment which I wrote to Mr.
C. D. Wise, Superintendent of the Toddington Fruit Ground, Winch-
comb, Gloucestershire, he remarked :—‘ I am inclined to think that this
is a more sure remedy than spraying with any mixture; at all events
we have found the pests greatly decreased by adopting this remedy.”
—(C. D. W.)

PEAR LEAF-BLISTER MITES. 93

The treatment of destroying the galled buds taken in connection
with syringing of Paris-green on the bushes, and dressing with caustic
lime below them, has been found so serviceable on two years’ experi-
ence of its effects by Mr. John Biggs, of Laxton, Howden, East
Yorkshire, that I repeat his note of experiment of 1892, together with
his observation contributed this year (1893) of the continued success.

Mr. Biggs observed, writing on the 20th of April (1892) :—“ You
will, I am sure, be interested in knowing that I have, to a certain ex-
tent, prevented the Phytoptus utterly ruining my Black Currant trees.
As you suggested in a letter of last March, we syringed the bushes
twice with the solution of Paris-green, which I procured from Messrs.
Blundell,* and gave the soil all under the bushes a good coating of
caustic lime. I also gave the bushes another dressing of the Paris-green.
Just when the buds appeared this spring I had a boy gathering all the
little knobs off the trees. The result has proved as satisfactory as I
could expect, considering the condition of the trees last year, and I
have every prospect of securing a good half crop. Our neighbour’s
trees, in this village, are utterly ruined, scarcely a leaf to be seen this
year, and the trees completely covered with the affected knobs.”—
(J. B.)

On the 7th of March of the past season (1893), Mr. Biggs wrote as
follows:—‘I may say with reference to the Phytoptus, that I have very
few infested Currant trees this spring, and I am confident the treat-
ment of Paris-green and caustic lime is a valuable remedy. As soon
as the buds open out slightly, I intend syringing the trees, and hope to
completely eradicate the pest without injuring the trees otherwise than
by cutting off some of the worst infected branches.”—(J. B.)

This treatment, it will be seen, comprehends method of cure, or
prevention for the Mite presence, in all the three localities in which we
have to do with them. There is the mechanical measure of breaking
off the infested buds and destroying them, by which we get rid quite
safely and surely of all the Mites and eggs on which we can lay our
hand. Then secondly, the syringing with Paris-green poisons the
surfaces of the stems, or other parts of the bush on which the Mites
are wandering free, so that those which are straying about are killed;
and thirdly, the good dressing under the bushes with caustic lime gets
rid of such of the pests as are harbouring about fallen leaves, or in any
shelter on the surface of the ground. On the face of the thing the plan
seems to meet the various needs of the case. The applications might
be varied experimentally, where there was objection to use of Paris-
green, by trying good washings with soft-soap and paraffin, or soft-soap
and sulphur, or a mixture of some gas-lime with the caustic lime.

* Address of the firm is, Messrs. Blundell & Spence, Hull,

94 PEAR.

In the earlier part of this paper, I have particularly drawn attention
to the subject of the facilities now given for scientific identification of
the Gall Mites, or Phytoptide, as I believe that this meets a great
need for all who have to teach or who are consulted on the nature of
these ‘‘ Mites,’ or the injuries they cause. For common use in garden
or field work, the nature of the diseased growth must necessarily be
the distinguishing mark of the kind of attack; but we have greatly
needed some work of reference from which those who wished to know
all concerning these Mites (as classification of sub-families and dis-
tinctions of genera, and also complete details regarding distinctions of
species so far as at present published, in addition to life-history of the
family) could tell, or be told, all that can be needed.

There are many works embodying much useful information on the
Mites, and on the results and means of prevention of some of the
infestations, and amongst those easily accessible to all here, and very
serviceable, both in its short descriptions of gall, or diseased growth,
caused by Phytoptide, and also in its masterly sketch of the rise and
progress of Phytoptal discovery and observation up to date of publica-
tion, about seventeen years ago, is the paper compiled by Andrew
Murray, F.L.S., given at pp. 8831—374 of the octavo volume entitled
‘Aptera’ (Chapman & Hall, Piccadilly, London). In this, at p. 846,
will be found a magnified figure of a Phytoptus, and still more greatly
magnified figure of the anterior extremity, with its two pairs of legs,
and ‘ feather-bristle’”’ claw. These, after figures- by Dr. Franz Low,
the well-known observer of many Mite-galls and their Mite originators.
These so far as they go would be a great assistance to many who have
not the opportunity of studying the elaborate publications of technical
observers; and so far as representation of the legs as definitely jointed
into coxa, femur, tibia, and two-jointed tarsus, bearing a feathered claw,
are valuable aids to students. With regard to the side claw, it appears
to me very likely that that would now be differently represented with
the improved microscopic powers of the present day, but the feather-
claw is an important point.

Those who wish to study the most recent publications on Phytoptal
observation in Austria, Italy, or France, will find a list of these in the
‘Katalog der bisher beschrieben Gall-Milben ihrer Gallen und Nahr-
pflanzen, nebst angabe der einschligigen Literatur und kritischen
Zusatzen. Zusammengestalt von Prof. Dr. Alfred Nalepa, in Linz-u-
Donau. Abdruck aus der Zoologischen Jahrbuchern (Gustav Fischer,
in Jena).

The publications by Dr. Nalepa, from which I have quoted in the
preceding paper, are the ‘ Beitrage z. Syst. d. Phyt., Sitzsb.,’ 1889,
98.=‘ Beitrage zur Systematik der Phytopten, in: Sitzungsber. d. Kais
Akad. d. Wiss. in Wien,’ 1889. Bd. 98, 1, 1889; also, ‘Zur Syst. d.

DADDY LONGLEGS; CRANE FLY. 95

Phyt., Sitzgsb.,’ 1890, 99.=‘ Zur Systematik der Phytopten, in: Sitz-
ungsber, d. Kais Akad. d. Wiss. in Wien,’ 1890. Bd. 99, 1.

The first mentioned in the two above paragraphs are separate im-
pressions from the Reports of the Imperial Nat. Hist. Society of
Vienna, to which the reference follows each title, and I give both
references, as the cost of the pamphlets, 3/6, or thereabouts, is very
considerably less than that of the volumes of the Reports or Transac-
tions of the Imperial Society.

For those who might perhaps be in doubt as to how to procure
them, I may mention that Messrs. W. Wesley & Son, Essex Street,
Strand, London, W.C., have made arrangements to procure them on
application.

STRAWBERRY.

Daddy Longlegs; Crane Fly. Tipula oleracea, Linn.; and other
species,

TIPULA oLErAcra.—Daddy Longlegs: 1, larva; 2, pupa-case standing up in the
ground; 3, fly; 4, eggs.

Amongst the communications sent in during the past season
regarding the very well-known field pests, the grubs of the Daddy Long-
legs, there were two which may perhaps be worth noting, as referring
respectively to presence of the grubs ina garden crop not often reported
as infested by them ; and in the other to effect of rape-cake (? mixed

96 STRAWBERRY.

with Mustard) in poisoning the grubs, which point may be worth
further experimental enquiry. |

About the Strawberry bed infestation. On the 1st of June, an
enquiry was sent me from Newmains, Scone, Perth, N.B., by Mr. J.
G. Bryden, accompanied by specimens of Daddy Longlegs grubs,
nearly or quite full-grown, and as nice healthy specimens as one could
have wished to see if beneficial insects.

Mr. Bryden noted :—‘‘I enclose specimens of grub, or caterpillar,
found among my recently planted Strawberry runners. They are
found about the roots of the plants, and seem to commence their work
of destruction by severing the leaf-stems from the roots immediately
below the ground, thus killing off large numbers of otherwise healthy
plants.

‘The land is of very moderate quality, and variable, from stiff
loam to fine free soil; the grub, or caterpillar, is over all alike; it was
manured with ordinary farmyard manure, with four cwt. bone meal
additional.

‘‘ What treatment do you think would be successful in eradicating
the pest, and save my plants? I will be planting again next spring,
and should much like to know if by any application I could save my
Strawberries from such an attack in future.’”’—(J. G. B.)

It will be noted in the above communication that the Strawberry
ground was manured (besides the bone meal) ‘‘ with ordinary farmyard
manure.” It is very likely that the grubs might be conveyed in this
to the Strawberry beds. This kind of grub is to be found at times in
farm manure; and in 1883, one of the years in which damage by these
Tipula larve was being especially reported, 1 had a good note from
Mr. David Byrd, Tarporley, Cheshire, a very careful observer, men-
tioning, with regard to some Turnips, that “ the Daddy Longlegs grub
was there in numbers, carried into the field with the foldyard manure,
and spread in the ridges.”

In the previous year (1882), I received information from Felhamp-
ton Court, Church-Stretton, of ‘‘ great injury being caused to a bed of
Strawberries by means of a grub,’’ which turned out to be of one of the
smaller kinds of Tipula, apparently the JT. maculosa, or ‘ Spotted
Crane Fly,” which appears to be just as injurious as the 7’. oleracea,
more especially observed as the Daddy Longlegs. In this instance
‘the plants had been top-dressed in the autumn with nearly rotten
horse manure, and at the time of writing were coming through nicely,
but about twenty per cent. failed, going off after they first started.
The grub was to be found with its head well into the heart of the
young plant, and the leaves all bitten through at the bud.” *

* ‘Report of Observations of Injurious Insects for 1882,’ by E, A. Ormerod,
p. 16,

DADDY LONGLEGS } CRANE FLY. 97

To get rid of the attack, scooping away the earth round each plant
was tried, and proved perfectly successful. About half the plants were
found to be infested, often with four or five grubs round one plant, but
some (nearly or quite destroyed) with only one. The single clearance
was quite effectual, not another plant being lost afterwards.

Where the Strawberry grounds are on too large a scale for the
above treatment to be considered applicable, it would be well worth
while to try the effect of trapping. The grubs will sometimes collect
in great numbers under sods. In 1883, in some information placed in
my hands by the Hon. Cecil Parker, writing from the Katon Estate
Office, Eccleston, Ches., he mentioned: ‘‘ Dozens of grubs are found
under a sod”; and later on, from another correspondent, I had a note
of no less than ninety-four grubs having been counted beneath a single
sod ‘‘ which had been brought to the surface by the harrow, and then
pressed down by the roller, so as still to retain a little moisture.”
Following up these observations, I have suggested placing damp turfs
at infested spots, and clearing them from time to time, and the plan
has been found to some extent successful.

In a limited space such as Strawberry beds in garden growing, the
plan might very likely be serviceable; or clods, bits of slate, or flat
stones, which would afford a cool, damp, and dark shelter for the grubs,
would very likely also answer, at least they would be worth trying, as
with this crop, at the time of year when the grubs are most mis-
chievous, it is nearly impossible, or quite impossible in some cases,
to bring the regular remedies to bear which are commonly tried in
field service.

A further point, however, might be tried as to effect of rape-cake
for drawing away the grubs. They have been known to remain in it
long enough in field treatment for the roller to be taken over them, and
thus many may be killed, and in garden culture the beds might be
hand-picked; but, beyond this, a note I received last season points to
possibility of killing them by the application of rape-cake.

On the 5th of August, Mr. R. Scot Skirving, writing from Foreland
House, Island of Islay, N.B., regarding methods of destroying the
grubs of the Tipula oleracea, of which he observed: ‘ I have had only
too much experience,” remarked that the measures I suggested were
good, but that he had found that crushed rape-cuke sown over the sur-
face of the field answered much better. ‘‘The grubs were seen in
hundreds dead on the surface.” . . . ‘I then followed it up by
lightly dressing the field with nitrate of soda to stimulate the growth
of the plants.”—(R. 8. 8.)

On making further enquiry of Mr. Scot Skirving, he told me that
he could not now give me precise details as to the kind of rape-cake
used, but that at the time he wrote of, the use of the cake was general

H

98 STRAWBERRY.

in East Lothian. It was the common rape-cake that was used for the
cattle.

‘Tt tasted of Nastatd cata Cattle did not like it at first, and. had
to be coaxed by mixing it with linseed-cake. It was used because it
was cheap.” i Sy

On turning to Youatt’s ‘Complete Grazier’ (13th Edition, 1893,
rewritten and enlarged by Dr. Fream), at p. 206, I find the following
statement, which confirms Mr. Scot. Skirving’s views as to the nature
of the rape-cake, and may bear serviceably on the subject of its possible
effects :—‘‘ Rape-cake is less relished by cattle than linseed-cake, and
they require to be coaxed into partaking of it; once habituated to it,
they consume it freely. Dr. Voelcker says he believes ‘the pungent
principle in rape-cake arises from the presence of Mustard seed, which
is often contained in considerable quantities in foreign rape-cake.’
Mustard and Rape seed belong to the same family of plants; and in
Germany at least, I am sorry to say, our Rape fields are often pi
foul with Mustard.”’

The above quotation explains the taste of Mustard being present
in the cheap cake alluded to by Mr. Scot Skirving, and if in the coming
season any correspondent should be disposed to kindly let me have a
supply of a few dozen Daddy Longlegs grubs,* I should be glad of the
opportunity of making some experiments, such as I tried in 1882,+
with regard to effect of rape-cake, and also of Indian, or Kurrachee
rape-cake, that is, cake formed of Mustard seed, on Wireworms.

These were undertaken to ascertain whether there was any founda-
tion for the popular idea that Wireworms feed on rape-cake to such a
state of repletion that they burst. Such, however, did not prove to be
the case. The Wireworms that were fed solely on true rape-cake for
several weeks (broken up and moistened) went into it at once, and con-
tinued to thrive until there appeared no reason to continue observation
any longer.

Those fed on the Kurrachee, or Mustard-cake, on the contrary,
refused to enter the cake for about three days, and remained in a bit
of turf which I had placed as a temporary and optional shelter for
them. About the fourth day, when a putrescent smell had succeeded
the first stinging scent of the moistened Mustard-cake, the Wireworm
went into it, and did apparently well for more than a week; but at the
end of a fortnight I found many dead or dying, and though I supplied
them with fresh turf, also pieces.of Potato and Turnip, as well as the
cake, they all died.

* If a letter or card was sent beforehand, this would enable me to have all
ready.

t See ‘Report on Injurious Insects for 1882,’ p. 47,

ROOT-KNOT EELWORM., 99

Looking at the apparently much greater susceptibility of Daddy
Longlegs grubs, that is, of the larve of the Tipula flies, than those of
the larvee of the Elater beetles, commonly known as Wireworms, to the
action of food, it would be well worth while to experiment a little on
the above subject, as in case such broadscale application of Mustard-
cake as is practicable in field service turned out customarily to be pre-
judicial. to the Tipula grubs, it would be an exceedingly convenient
addition to our knowledge.

TOMATO.

Also Cucumprer Puants, &c., infested by the Root-knot Eelworm.
Anguillula radicicola; Heterodera radicicola, Greef.; Heterodera
radicicola, Miller,

HETERODERA RADICICOLA.—1, larva; 2 and 3, females; 4 and 5, eggs in different
stages of development: all enormously magnified. (2 from sketch by Ep.; the
other figures after Prof. Geo. Atkinson).

In my Report for 1892, at pages 127-—187, notes are given of the
observation of what I believe to be the first definitely recorded, and
specifically identified, appearance in this country of the destructive
Eelworm infestation, known by reason of the galls, or knots, to which
it gives rise on the roots of many different kinds of plants, as the Root-
knot Eelworm, and scientifically as the Heterodera radicicola.

Full details (or at least sufficiently full details for identification of
the attack) were then given, partly from the English specimens placed

H 2

100 TOMATO.

in my hands, but also from the scientific details and correspondence on
the subject, with which I was favoured by Dr. J. Ritzema Bos, Professor
at the Royal Agricultural College, Wageningen, Netherlands, and also
from the published information given by Dr. Neal, now Director of the
Agricultural Experiment Station, Oklahoma, Ind. Territory, U.S.A.,
and more especially (duly acknowledged, as in the other cases) from
the minute and carefully recorded observations of Prof. Geo. F. Atkin-
son, Professor of Biology at the Agricultural Experiment Station,
Auburn, Alabama, U.S.A.*; but a few lines of the latter are repeated
now to save trouble in reference, regarding some of the main charac-
teristics, and especially those by which this ‘‘ Root-knot” Helworm
is clearly distinguishable from the ‘‘ Stem Kelworm,” the Tylenchus
devastatrix, known as causing Tulip-root, or Segging, in Oat plants, and
Stem-sickness in Clover.

The eggs of the Root-knot Kelworm (see magnified figures, p. 99)
are stated to be, when mature, about three- to four-thousandth of an
inch in length, and the young wormlet, or larva, when it comes out of
the egg, to be from twelve- to sixteen-thousandth part of an inch in
length, and, like the adult male, it is thread-like in shape, and also, like
it, has at the anterior extremity, in the opening of the gullet, a fine
point on a trilobed base, known as the “ exsertile spear.”

The life-history is, that the young wormlets wander about for a
time, then presently come to rest in the plant tissues, and undergo a
change. The body of the larva, or wormlet, is stated to enlarge,
excepting at the two ends, and forms a kind of “ cyst,’’ or chamber, in
which the change of the Kelworm to the adult state takes place. If
this is to the male condition, the wormlet in its chamber is stated to
lengthen and become more slender and thread-like, until it is curled
round several times within the chamber formed of its old larval skin ;
and when the change is complete, it breaks forth, roams in search of
its very differently shaped mate, pairs, and dies. Its measure when
full-grown is stated to be about one millimetre (the twenty-fifth of an
inch) in length, and only the seventeen-thousandth of an inch at the
middle, tapering to about half this width at the extremity at the head
end, in which the cesophagus, or gullet, is placed, which is furnished
at the foremost end with a minute needle-like point, which can be
thrust out and retracted, and rests on a trilobed base. It will thus be
observed that these male Root-knot Helworms, from the time they quit
the egg up to the perfectly developed condition, preserve the same
thread-like, or fine eel-like, shape.

* *A Preliminary Report upon the Life-history and Metamorphoses of a Root-
gall Nematode, Heterodera radicicola (Greef.), Mull., and the Injuries caused by it
upon the roots of various plants,’ by Geo. F. Atkinson. Science Contributions from
the Agricultural Experiment Station, Alabama, U.S.A., Dec., 1889.

ROOT-KNOT EELWORM. 101

With the females, however, this is quite different (still continuing to
abridge from Prof. Atkinson’s observations, it is noted); ‘the female
does not moult again, but continues to enlarge enormously until it is
gourd-shaped,” see figures of this gourd- or pear-shape, p. 99; this
female gradually becomes filled with eggs and young larve; and the
length of the life cycle is given by Prof. Atkinson as one month.

In the very large amount of specimens of galled Tomato roots sent
me in the winter of 1892-98, I had good opportunity of observing these
peculiarly shaped Eelworms, and their contents, so far as could be
done with moderate microscopic powers, and their description, and
that of the galls on the roots, is given in my Report; and later on,
towards the end of March, I was able also to examine the nature of the
root-knot galls, and the condition of the Eelworm tenants in galled
Cucumber roots, sent me by Mr. Hamilton H. Hurnard, from Gurney’s
Manor, Hingham, Attleborough, Norfolk.

Mr. Hurnard first wrote as follows :—‘‘ Last year I was very much
perplexed at the condition of my Cucumber roots; no plant died, but
they were not a success. This year I have lost plant after plant.” On
March 28rd, Mr. Hurnard forwarded me, for examination, two roots
of Cucumbers taken from a large pot at seven o’clock that same
morning, with the very just remark: ‘It is really heartrending to go
into my Cucumber house and see a plant or two dead every morning,
with Cucumbers of all ages on it.”

On examining the specimens sent, I found the galls on the roots were
very similar, both in position and appearance, to those described, on
Tomato roots, in my 16th Report, p. 131, and figured on the accom-
panying plate about two-thirds natural size; but the Kelworms within
them appeared to be not so far advanced as those in my winter
specimens.

In these Cucumber galls there were many of the thread-like forms
of this Root-knot Helworm, of different sizes, some exceedingly minute;
but I did not observe more than one instance of what might be a
developed female. In this case the pear- or gourd-shape was observ-
able, but the wormlet was rounded out at the base, that is, more of a
tulip-bulb shape, without the central depression being noticeable.
There were also one or two going through pupal changes.

With regard to specimens of this Cucumber root infestation, which
I submitted to Dr. J. Ritzema Bos, Wageningen, Netherlands, for his
skilled examination, he was good enough to report tome on March 27th
as follows:—‘‘In the galls I find different Nematoid worms; Heterodera
radicicola, in different stadia of development, and some other Nema-
todes, which live in the decayed matter of the galls (Diplogaster and
Rhabditis species). Of the Heterodera radicicola, I found one completely
developed female, some males, and different stadia of the larve, like

102 TOMATO.

those in Plate IV., Figs. 9, 17, 18, 21, of Atkinson's ‘ Report,’ and
ova.’—(J. R. B.)

The Cucumber infestation which we have here, was thus found to
correspond both in the kind of Kelworms, and in the galls to which
they gave rise, to that of the H. radicicola, and its effects, already
studied on Tomato roots; and it was of some interest to contrast the
condition of the Eelworms, in the one case (in the spring) being to a
great extent growing up to maturity; and in the other, in the old
matured galls towards the close of the year being so much more
observably represented by adult specimens, especially the gourd-
shaped females with their larval or egg contents.

The galls on the various kinds of plant roots on which I have seen
them, that is, on roots of Tomato, Cucumber, and on roots of one young
Lettuce plant sent me for examination from Belgium, were small
knobs, or irregularly shaped lumps, varying in size from an eighth of
an inch or less in diameter to (in the case of the Tomato) fleshy lumps
a quarter of an inch to half an inch or more in width, and much more
in length; even to as much as one, two, or over three inches of
irregular swollen gall growth along the root fibres where the galls
were confluent.

The method of infestation may be in various ways. The Kelworms
may escape into the earth through cracks in the gall, or may make
their way out by use of their mouth-spear; or again, as I found in the
case of the Tomato galls sent me late in the year, may be freed in
myriads by the peeling off of the outer part of the coat of the ‘ root-
knot.’ But in whatever way the Nematode may have conveyed itself
into the ground, the next step, that of its entrance into the plant to be
attacked, is thus described by Prof. Atkinson,—p. 16 of pamphlet
cited.* ‘*Having escaped from its confinement,” . . . ‘it imme-
diately selects another part of the root, or a fresh young rootlet, for
attack, and places itself in position for the siege. Bringing into play
its exsertile ram, it forcibly gains entrance to the healthy tissues of the
root,’ &c. There the parasitic action sets up the diseased swelled
growths, which, as we now know in England to our sorrow and loss,
carry off the plant juices to supply the growth of these vegetable
tumours, and ruin the hopes of the expected crop.

A further word should be added as to the need of great care in all
investigations as to the nature of the tenants of the root-knots; those
who are not well accustomed to the identification of Nematodes, can-
not be too strongly warned against the error of mistaking these Hete-
rodera radicicola, or Root-knot Helworms, for the 7ylenchus devastatria,
or Stem Helworm. ‘The exceedingly minute resemblance of the first-

* See footnote, p. 100,

ROOT-KNOT EELWORM. 103

mentioned in Jarval and male condition to the second in every state,
that is, larval, male, or female, has led to repeated and grave error ;
and the gourd- or pear-shaped females should always be searched for
carefully, though, even in the absence of these, it is entirely presumable
that the formers of the ‘“‘ root-knot”’ galls will be the H. radicicola.

PREVENTION AND Remepres.—These at present appear, as a certainty,
and at a paying (or indeed practicable) rate of outlay, to have eluded
the most careful research. Some good it is considered may be done in
special growing (as where one kind of crop can be kept thoroughly in
hand, in limited space, or under glass, or in pots), by use of what are
called trap-plants. That is, by sowing some small crop which is an
object of attraction to the Helworms, such especially as Lettuce, some-
times known as Salad, and keeping watch on these until it is found
that galls are forming on the roots, then removing them, and destroy-
ing them with the contained pests. But in this treatment the utmost
care must be taken in removal of the ‘“ trap-plants,” for if they are
drawn from the soil, however carefully, some of the galls, and with
them the Eelworm tenants, will be likely to remain behind.

Such matters of precaution as carefully destroying all infested
roots, and on no account letting them be thrown to rubbish heaps ;
also avoiding use of soil in which infested plants have grown; and also
taking care that such infested soil is not carried about on garden tools,
or on boots of garden labourers, or wheels of barrows, are all measures
of at least lessening spread of the infestation. Also it has been found
that the ‘ root-knot”’ is worse in long cultivated and fully fertilized
and thoroughly pulverized areas, than in compact and virgin soils.
Such of these points, however, as seemed serviceable for general use,
have been alluded to, with authorities given, in my preceding Report,
and those who wish to study the subject in minute detail will find
excellent information, both with regard to the Kelworms, their habits,
and such means of counteracting their ravages as are known, in the
works mentioned below.*

The following observations refer entirely to a long and careful
series of experiments tried by the observer, from whom I received the
infested Tomato roots mentioned in my Sixteenth Report. From the
losses sustained by him, both in Tomato and Cucumber growing on the
very large scale carried on in his houses, extending over many acres,

* ¢A Preliminary Report upon the Life-history and Metamorphoses of a Root-
gall Nematode, Heterodera radicicola, &c.,’ by Geo. F. Atkinson.—A Science Con-
tribution from the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama, U.S.A.,
December, 1889.

‘The Root-knot Disease, &c.,’ by J. C. Neal, Ph.D., M.D., U. S. Department of
Agriculture. Washington: Government Printing Office, 188).

104 TOMATO.

he considered it would be worth while for him to try the effect of a
large variety of chemical applications, carefully observing and noting
effects of each, both on the Kelworms, and on the plants.

The first series of observations was conducted on Tomato plants in |
pots. In every case pots were used that held four and a half pounds
of soil when fairly dry, and soil that was known to be infested with the
‘‘Root-knot” Eelworms. About twenty-four different kinds of chemical
applications were experimented with, the precise amount applied in
each case being noted and stated in ‘‘ grammes.” * The observations
were made in almost every case with different amounts of the
chemical application, these amounts, together with the effect (or
absence of effect) on the plants, and on the Helworms, being carefully
noted.

Thus in these first observations before me, we have a tabulated
record, as correct as the most scrupulous care can make it, of about
one hundred and twenty experiments; these in most cases giving the
effects of at least two, and often three, amounts of chemical application,
sometimes of many more, and thus forming an interesting record of
their effects on plant life; also of the instances where neither plant
nor Kelworm suffered ; of some where the plant was injured, but the
Eelworms were still to be found; and of some where the desired end
was reached, of the plant continuing in good health, but no Kelworms
being observable.

The result of this first series of experiments appears to show that
there are a fair proportion of chemical applications which kill the
Kelworm, but the expense of the applications would in almost every
instance be far too great for remunerative broadscale use. The
chemical applications made use of being with a few exceptions the
same combinations which were used in the later series of experi-
ments, of which the account is appended, it is unnecessary to give the
list.

The detailed tabulated notes of the foregoing experiments were
placed in my hands in June, but the observer being anxious to secure
absolute certainty in his results, then (with the experience gained by
these first experiments) commenced a second similar series, of which,
with his permission, I subjoin his own condensed report.

I cannot help regretting that I am not permitted to publish the
first set, as they give precise details, observed with scrupulous care, of
effects on the plant and Eelworm life which are valuable in this rarely
obtainable minute detail, and if given with the preliminary note that
they were tentative preliminary experiments, would have freed the

* A “ oramme’’ is, as nearly as possible, equivalent to fifteen and a half grains
English,

ROOT-KNOT EELWORM. 105

observer from the fear of either misleading, or of over-criticism of his
long and careful work.

Such, however, being the case, I now append only the later
series of observation, which were sent me in October. These were
made on both Tomatoes and Cucumbers, and the effect was much the
same in each case. In the various returns, the most hopeful appears
to be that of carbolic acid, but of this my observer remarks :—‘ As I
expressed to you before, although carbolic acid will be effective in a
field if properly mixed, I have very strong doubts about people
succeeding in greenhouses, on account of the very many crevices in
which the Eelworm will be able to harbour, and if I gave out this as a
cure, people would be disappointed.” *

The report of my observer’s later series of experiments, sent to me
during October, is as follows :—‘‘I have now completed my experi-
ments for killing the Eelworm, Heterodera radicicola, and, as promised,
now send you an account of them. In my first experiment, I used
pots that held four and a half pounds of infested soil, and to each pot
I used the following chemicals, at the rate of one, two, three, and four
grammes to each pot :—Magnesium sulphate, iron sulphate, tartaric
acid, lead acetate, citric acid, sodium sulphite, sodium hyposulphite,
sodium caustic, potassium sulphite, potassium permanganate, potas-
sium chloride, potassium ferrocyanide, potassium sulphide, potassium
sulphate, potassium caustic, potassium acetate, carbolic acid, and
potassium cyanide. Gas-lime (fresh) up to twenty grammes; fresh
caustic lime up to twenty grammes; tobacco powder up to eight
grammes.

“‘The plants in the potassium ferrocyanide were all killed, even the
plant to which I only used one gramme to the four and a half pounds.
The plants in the gas-lime were sickly at twelve grammes; but the
Eelworm was not even checked with twenty grammes. All the other
plants did well, and were not injured in the least. The only things
effectual in checking the Eelworm were carbolic acid and potassium

* My observer requests me, for obvious reasons of business considerations and
also inconvenience in time taken up in reply to applications regarding treatment,
not to insert his name and address; but for scientific communication, he has
allowed me to put him in communication with Dr. J. Ritzema Bos, Professor at the
State Agricultural College, Wageningen, Netherlands, who aided us in identification
of the Eelworms; and also with Prof. Atkinson, of the Agricultural Experiment
Station, Auburn, Alabama, U.S.A.; and with Dr. J. C. Neal, Director of the Agricul-
tural Experiment Station, Oklahoma, Ind. Territory, U.S.A., to whose published
researches on the Heterodera radicicola, or Root-knot Eelworm, all who study the
subject are infinitely indebted. Iam therefore not without hope that the patience
and care with which the observations have been conducted over months of experi-
ments may. produce more fruit than the observer is aware of, and (at least in
scientific quarters) will be credited to the right owner.—Eb.

106 TOMATO.

cyanide when four grammes to the four and a half pounds of soil were
used. In these pots only the smallest trace of Helworm could be
found, whereas the pots in which the other chemicals were used were
a mass of knotted roots.

“JT then tried a second batch, using eight and twelve grammes to
the pot, of all the chemicals I had tried previously, except gas-lime,
caustic lime, and potassium ferrocyanide, which I abandoned; and
earbolic acid and potassium cyanide, which I tried from six grammes
upwards. I now found quite a number of the chemicals seemed to kill
the Kelworm. Also that five per cent. of powdered charcoal seemed
to kill it.

‘«My third batch of experiments were tried in beds of soil in which
Cucumbers had been growing (and failed) through the roots being
covered with the root-knots. The beds were divided into pieces con-
taining fifteen cubic feet of soil, the weight of which would be about
twelve cwt. Some of the chemicals previously used were now aban-
doned on account of their cost; and Paris-green and bichloride of
mercury were tried for the first time. Up to one and a half cubic feet
of powdered charcoal was used, and found of no use whatever ; plants
grew well. Up to eighty-two ounces of sulphate of iron did not affect
worm or plants. Up to twenty-seven ounces of sulphate of copper did
not affect either plant or worm. Up to sixty-six ounces of sulphate of
potash did not affect either plant or worm. Two ounces of Paris-green
made plants sickly, but five and a half ounces did not kill Helworm.
Three ounces of bichloride of mercury injured the plant, but six ounces.
did not kill Kelworm. Up to sixty-six ounces of sulphate of potash
did not affect either plant or Kelworm; neither did sulphate of
magnesia. Sixty-six ounces of sodium hyposulphite checked Helworm
only. But with thirty-three ounces of carbolic acid, hardly a trace of
Kelworm could be found. The little that was found had. probably
come from the other soil after the effects of the carbolic acid had
passed away. I cannot say that the plants were not affected by this
quantity, but it was not much, and perhaps not at all. The plants
might get a little check from other causes.

‘You will now notice that my second and third batch of experi-
ments do not agree with each other. Many things that appeared to
kill in the second batch, quite failed in the third. I can only account
for it in this way: the second batch were grown in pots on a stage in
a greenhouse during June, July, and August. The sun was fearfully
hot, and I had to complain to my man who had charge of the waterimg
these plants for allowing them frequently to get very dry; and I think
it probable that the continual watering and drying, with the hot sun
shining on and almost baking the pots, acted injuriously on the
Telworm.

ROOT-KNOT EELWORM. 107

'“ Therefore the only thing I can recommend is carbolic acid.
Potassium cyanide is much too costly; and sodium hyposulphite would
be more costly if used strong enough to kill the Eelworm. And I am
afraid carbolic acid, although the cheapest remedy I have found, will
be far too expensive for the Americans to use. Thirty-three ounces to
fifteen cubic feet is equal to 6000 lbs. to the acre, and would cost, for
acid alone, about £75. Then, to be effectual, it should be thoroughly
mixed with the soil with a fork: I am quite sure ploughing alone would
not be sufficient. Then I think it should be used when the soil is
moist, and not too cold; for the object should be to use the acid at
the time when the Kelworm is most active. Ido not think the strength
I mention would kill eggs; and unless the eggs are quickly brought to
life, the strength of the acid would pass away. I have seen Tomato
plants nearly die when planted in soil directly after the acid was used
and only moderately mixed, but after a week they began to recover,
and soon made new roots, and grew as well ag the other plants that
were in soil where no acid at all was used.

‘‘T am also very doubtful whether I shall succeed in getting rid of
the EKelworm entirely myself. For, four years ago, my Cucumbers
having what we called clubbed (and failed, and which I now know was
caused by the Kelworm), we drenched the walls and surface of a house
with carbolic acid. After, the soil the plants had been grown in was
wheeled out. And we used the acid very much stronger than now
seems to be necessary. And yet the Cucumbers clubbed and failed in
the same way in the following year.

‘«In May of this year, I used carbolic acid in various strengths in

a house where Cucumbers had grown. ‘The greatest strength being
nearly twice as much as the thirty-three ounces to fifteen cubic feet.
But we did not plant Tomatoes in the soil until five weeks after using
the acid. Fora time it seemed as though most of the Kelworm was
killed. But now, four months after planting, the Tomatoes are getting
quite badly affected. It seems to me that in a greenhouse there are
‘sO many places in which they can harbour, that it is impossible to get
‘at all. Ina field it would be different; and I have not’ the slightest
doubt but that a dressing of 6000 lbs. of carbolic acid to the acre, used
properly, would completely clear the Kelworm.
«Tf you care to mention anything I have written in your Report,
you are quite at liberty to do so, but, please, do not mention my name
in it. Ifyou are writing to Dr. Ritzema Bos, Dr. Neal, or Professor
Atkinson, you may give them my name and address; and if they wish
to write me for anything, I shall be quite willing to give them any
further information I can.

“TI may add, in using the carbolie acid, I always mixed it with

108 TURNIP.

about twenty times its bulk of water, and then used a water-pot, with
a fine rose, to sprinkle the soil, thoroughly mixing the soil afterwards.”

TURNIP.

Diamond-back Moth. Plutella cruciferarum, Zeller.

PLUTELLA CRUCIFERARUM.—1, caterpillar; 2, eggs; 3, Diamond-back Moth (all
natural size); 4, 5, Diamond-back Moth, at rest and flying (magnified).

During the past season of 1898, so very little mention has been
made of damage caused by the caterpillars of the Diamond-back Moth,
that it seems worth while to notice this non-observation in sequence
with the sudden and great amount of presence in 1891, and a good
deal of injury in 1892.

It will be remembered that in 1891, a vast amount of mischief was
caused by the small delicate green caterpillars of this moth (figured
above at 1), to the leafage of Turnips, mainly along the coastland near
the eastern seaboard of the island, and more or less in every one of the
eastern counties, from Dover in Kent up to Aberdeenshire in Scotland.
This was first reported about the beginning of July, and enormous
flocks of the moths were also observed at various places along the
eastern coasts.*

In 1892, the infestation was again present, but not to such a severe
extent; also it was observed earlier in the season; the reports of
damage ceased also earlier. The first notices of moth presence,

* The fullest possible account of all details of this infestation, given from special
reports of observations in the area of injury, will be found in my paper on “ Dia-
mond-back Moth,” given in the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society, Vol. II.,
Third Series, Part IIL, pp. 596—630; and at pp. 105—164 of my own ‘Annual
Report of Observations of Injurious Insects,’ for 1891.

DIAMOND-BACK MOTH. 109

respectively in Norfolk, Yorkshire, and in the county of Fife, N.B., and
some other localities, were sent me in the latter part of May. Notes
of caterpillar damage of these larva being spun up for the chrysalis
state were sent on the 20th of June, and no reports of serious mis-
chief were forwarded me after the 11th of July, and none at all after
the 29th.

During the summer of 1893, I did not receive any observations of
ravage, and scarcely any of the appearance of this attack; nor was
there any report given by the agricultural press of continued visitation
of the pests; and on communicating with Mr. E. A. Atmore, F.E.S.,
of King’s Lynn, Norfolk, in which district the Diamond-backs had
been very observable in 1891 and 1892, he wrote me as follows :—
‘¢ Plutella cruciferarum, Z., the Diamond-back Moth, has been con-
spicuous by its absence (so to speak), for I have only seen two
specimens, imagines’ (t. e., in moth condition—K. A. O.), ‘‘during the
whole year, and no traces of the larve on Turnips, &c.”—(E. A. A.)

It has seemed worth while to allude again to this infestation, which
excited so much attention on its great outbreak in 1891, relatively to
the possibility or great probability of it having been wind-borne from
Norway, where, as we now know from the list of the ‘ Norwegian
Lepidoptera,’ * published by the State Entomologist, Dr. W. M.
Schéyen during the past year, this species, the P. cruciferarum, is very
widely distributed.

In this revised Catalogue, bringing the list of Norwegian Lepidop-
tera up to present date, Dr. Schéyen has tabulated the distribution of
species in parallel columns, with the names of the provinces (or main
districts, as Christiansand, Tromso, Finmark, &¢.) in which their
presence has been recorded, and the latitude of their most southerly °
and northerly observation.

From this it appears that the Plutella cruciferarum, known by us
as the ‘‘ Diamond-back Moth,” has been recorded as present in all the
eighteen main divisions of Norway, except Biratsberg and Bergenhus
(N. and §.). Its distribution is from latitude 58° N. (that is, from the
southernmost extremity of Norway), to 70° 42’ N., that is, further north
than Hammerfest, and only a few miles short of the extreme north of
the mainland of Norway, or, one might say, to the extreme north, as
the few miles left are so indented with fiords, or arms of the sea, as
really to leave very little land at all.

The above notes, taken from a work of authority and careful com-
pilation, appear to me well worth observation in connection with
insect appearances coincidently with easterly or north-easterly winds.

* «Fortegnelse over Norges Lepidoptera,’ af W. M. Schéyen. (Christiania
Videnskabs-Selskabs Forhandlinger for 1893, No. 13).

110 ; TURNIP...

In the great appearances of Diamond-backs in 1891, we had
record, in such data as were procurable, of the ‘‘ cloud of moths” that
arrived at the Farne Islands, being driven by the N. EK. wind; and at
Leith, in Scotland, the direction of the wind at 8 a.m. on the twenty
of the thirty days of June.(as given in the daily weather report issued
by the Meteorological Office) was E., E.N.E., or N.E., points very
notable in connection with the very great amount of attack which
occurred in Fifeshire, a seaboard county especially exposed to the
action of easterly and north-easterly winds.

At present, and in regard to this special infestation which gave so
much sudden trouble in 1891, and, being established, set on foot mis-
chief to trouble us, though ceasing earlier, and altogether not so
severe in 1892; it is enough for us to be thankful that it did not recur
over the infested districts (so far as appears) for a third time.

But for those who may need to trace the origin of future attacks,
Dr. Schéyen’s plainly arranged entomological and geographical columns
may be of service; and it may be well to mention that these being
given in the ordinary scientific wording there is no difficulty, excepting
in the short introduction and title-page, to be overcome by those who
(like myself) may find trustworthily translating what they may require
from the. Norse language an anxiously laborious task.

Lat

WASPS.
Common Ground-building Wasp. Vespa vulgaris, Linn.
Hornet. Vespa crabro, Linn.; and five other species.

Nest of Tree Wasp, after sketch from original specimen by Ed. Dimensions, 8 in.
across by 74 deep. *

The most remarkable insect appearance of the past season was that
popularly known as the “ Wasp plague.” The very unusual prevalence
of Wasp presence was reported from almost every one of the many
localities in England, from which replies to my enquiries were for-
warded to me, and though the infestation was not so general in
Scotland, it was exceedingly troublesome over some large districts,
notably by the Moray Firth; in the Lothians, and in some of the
islands on the west of Scotland.

. * As the tenants of the nest were not identified at the time, I cannot say with
certainty whether it is that of Vespa sylvestris or V. norvegica.

112 WASPS.

The enormous excess of Wasp presence above the average was in
many places nothing short of a calamity, inflicting pain, and to some
degree danger to ourselves, and to horses exposed to sudden attack,
and great loss to fruit growers.

Within our houses, in many cases, the Wasps swarmed to such a
degree, and especially at meal times, as to make their presence on the
food a real trouble; the agricultural or garden labourers were severely
stung where working on crops to which the Wasps had been attracted
by presence of Aphides, as in Bean fields, or on fruit stocks, where
budding was going forward. Also pain, risk, and delay in farm work,
were caused by fierce onslaughts of Wasps from nests turned up in
ploughing. Great losses were caused by the quantity of fruit entirely
ruined up to almost wholesale destruction in the grounds of large fruit
growers, and to this must be added losses to shop-owners dealing in
such commodities as find favour in the eyes of the Wasps for their own
consumption, or thievish abstraction for food of the coming on
generation still in maggot condition, to be counted by hundreds, in
each of the vast number of nests which were the head-quarters of the
marauding and troublesome pests.

The question was frequently asked,—What was the cause of such
an unusual visitation ? and there appears no reason to doubt that the
exceptional numbers were a consequence of the exceptionally favourable
circumstances for Wasp life which was supplied by the early and long
continued dry weather of the spring. Thus there were not the usually
returning intervals of cold and wet to catch and destroy the queen
Wasps when warmed into active life, and drawn out from their winter
shelters by what, in most years, is an alternation of sunshine, with
weather that leaves the houseless queens between whiles (and much to
our benefit) exposed to just the conditions unfavourable to their own
existence, and likewise to that of their embryo nests. Where these
most fragile structures of just a cap of paper-like material, perhaps
not an inch across, with a few eggs or maggots, as yet not sheltered
around from inclement weather influences, are exposed to all the
varieties of temperature and circumstances customary in March and
April, we have a most serviceable preventive condition, which was not
the case in the long settled drought of last spring, and of which we
saw the consequences.

Before going on to the reports of the year, it may be of service to
give as shortly as possible an account of the ordinary method of Wasp
life in this country. That is, the history of the Wasp colonies from
their rise, by the work of a single female in early spring, through the
- increase of tenants during the summer, up to many hundreds, or a few
thousands, and the coincident enlargement of the paper nests, on to
the decay and desertion of these nests in the autumn, when all that

SPECIES OF WASPS. 113

remains of the great summer family are a comparatively few females,
commonly known as queens, which have left the nest and stored
themselves away for their winter quietude in sheltering nooks to wait
the spring sunshine for active life and labour.

Species of British Wasps.—In Britain we have seven species of
social Wasps, that is, of Wasps living together in societies formed of

VESPA VULGARIS.—Largest specimen, queen, or female ; specimen to left-hand, with
long horns, drone, or male; right-hand specimen, neuter, or worker.

males, females, and neuters, or abortive females, commonly known,
respectively, as drones, queens, and workers.

The seven kinds of Wasps are divided into two sections of Ground
Wasps and Tree Wasps, according to whether their nests are customarily
formed in a hollow in the ground, or suspended in the air from a
bough, or in a hedge, or, as with our largest species, the Vespa crabro,
the splendid insect known as the ‘‘ Hornet,” the nests may be found
in decayed trees, in roots, under eaves, or, as I have myself found it,
down in the ground by a small post of a field paling.

The species of the Ground-building Wasps are the Vespa vulgaris,
Linn. (see figure); the V. germanica, Fabr.; and the V. rufa, Linn.,
which is somewhat smaller, as regards the queens and workers, than
the two preceding kinds, but variously marked, especially on the two
first segments of the abdomen, with a red tinge. As I have seen it
(especially on one occasion when, by mishap, I had to hold the entire
colony of a disturbed nest down on the ground within my ring-net to
enable my unwasp-protected colleague to escape), the difference in tint
is a very fair general distinction.

Of the four species of ‘‘ Tree Wasps,” the most common are the
Vespa sylvestris, Scop., and the V. norvegica, Fab. (the V. britannica, of
Leach); of these the first is widely distributed, the second is not so
common in England, but said to be abundant in Scotland. The
V. arborea is so very rare that it hardly needs mention. I was, how-
ever, fortunate enough to find two specimens at Sedbury Park in the

I

114 WASPS,

west part of Gloucestershire whilst observing and collecting to help
my late brother, Dr. Ormerod, in the formation of his volume on
‘British Social Wasps,’ * which, on being submitted to the late Mr.
Fred. Smith, of the British Museum, were identified by him as being
queens of the V. arborea.

The V. crabro, or Hornet, is easily distinguishable from the other
species of Wasps by its greater size, and its large proportion of rusty
or reddish colouring. Inthe part of Gloucestershire mentioned above,

VESPA CRABRO.—Hornet (queen).

where there was much woodland, it was not at all uncommon, but its
range of habitat is given as not extending, as far as known, so far
north as Yorkshire.t+

In general habits it resembles the smaller Vespide, commonly
known as Wasps, but by preference appears neither to build under
ground, nor where exposed to weather in trees or hedges, but to select
the inside of hollow trees, or logs, or roofs of lofts or sheds; the
individual colonies are less in number than those of the Wasps,
and the paper of which the nests are composed is much coarser. The
nests sometimes run to a great size, the largest which I have seen, and
assisted in securing when deserted in the winter, was taken from a
cottage roof in Gloucestershire, and measured fifteen inches across,
and nineteen inches in height, although some of the lower part had
been removed. }

The main points of Wasp life during the year, and the method of
formation of the paper-like nests, are given shortly in the following pages
as a guide to the customary life-history. For exceptional cases, or
minute structural or anatomical details, the reader is referred to the
many British and Continental publications on the Vespide.

* «British Social Wasps,’ illustrated, by Edw. Latham Ormerod, M.D., p. 42,
plate 3. Longmans, Green & Co., London.

+ ‘Brit. Mus. Catalogue of British Aculeate Hymenoptera,’ by Fred. Smith,
p. 222.

t See ‘Social Wasps,’ by Dr. Ormerod, p. 211.

LIFE-HISTORY, 115

The Wasp colonies of the year are begun by the large females,
commonly known as queens, which have survived the winter, safely
stored away in the sheltered localities which they chose for themselves
when the nests to which they belonged were perishing in the previous
autumn. ‘Then the females select such places for their winter rest as
dark nooks in sheds, or amongst wood, or rubbish, or dead leaves, or
even amongst stones, or in a dry bank; indoors (if they can manage
to escape observation) they will harbour in folds of curtains, toes of
slippers, anywhere in fact that is snug and quiet, until they are turned
out in the latter instances, or in the former, the return of warmth and
sunshine wakes them from their winter sleep or torpor.

Then comes the point at which (as before mentioned) the state of
the weather affects their powers of increase to a very important degree.
Wasps are very sensitive to cold and exposure, and where weather
varies, as is so commonly the case in early spring, from short bright
sunshine to hard frost, or sleet and snow, many of the queens who are
caught by the unfavourable weather perish, and the embryo nests, with
their few eggs, or lately hatched grubs, are also destroyed.

This embryo nest, when the tiny structure has advanced so far as
to have any definite form, may be described as much resembling a
miniature open umbrella, made of thin grey paper-like material, from
half an inch to an inch in diameter of the cap, and hung by the little
stout peg above it to whatever support the queen Wasp may have
chosen. Continuing the comparison to a miniature umbrella to give
an idea of the entire shape, the stem above the circular cap forms the
suspending point, the part below (somewhat like a short club-shaped
handle) is enlarged at the bottom, and here a very few cells will be
found containing each an egg or young maggot. Above these is the
circular thin hood, or cap, which slightly protects the young family
below from weather or chills.

This embryo nest is formed of a kind of grey paper made from
morsels of wood, or of bark, or material of a similar kind, worked by
the Wasp into a kind of paste, or papier maché, and spread into the
required form by her jaws, and it is obvious that where this minutely
delicate structure of perishable material is exposed to bad weather, it
is most likely to perish.

Under ground, if it has been suspended in a hole, or under a clod,
where wet could reach it, the paper is likely to be ruined, and the eggs
destroyed; and similarly with the bush nest-building Wasps, the little
nest is likely in wet and cold weather to come to nothing, independently
of the chances of the mother Wasp coming to trouble, and thus the
progeny being lost. In the exceptionally dry March of 1898, in which
the returns show a rainfall of approximately one-third of the average,
circumstances were exceptionally favourable both to the queens and to

12

116 WASPS,

the safety of their families, and here it seems to me we have the
reason for the correspondingly exceptionally vast numbers of these
troublesome pests with which we were subsequently visited.

At first the queen has to carry on all the work of the commencing
colony; to lay the eggs, feed the grubs, gather material for house-
building, and use it herself for enlarging the roof of the family shelter,
or for deepening the cells (which at first were little more than cups) so
as to suit the needs of the growing grubs. Thus the first hood is

] Wasps’ nests in early stages, after photos by Dr, Ormerod,

enlarged, additional layers of paper are added, until the little nest
begins to take its characteristic spherical form, and the few cells with
which work began are increased in depth and numbers until they
become a regular layer of paper Wasp-comb. ‘The accompanying
figures show this condition before the nest has been closed below, so
as only to leave the requisite aperture for Wasp passage.

From this time, if all goes well with the colony, the work goes on
regularly, The queen continues to lay eggs, and the egg condition is
stated to last eight days, the larva state thirteen or fourteen, and that
of the pupa about ten; thus (speaking generally) in about a month
from the time of the first eggs being laid, the first Wasps of the season
begin to make their appearance. These are all abortive females, known
as workers, and as they keep on developing in steady succession, from
the succession of eggs laid by the queen, they carry on the labours of
the rapidly increasing community. Successive tiers of horizontal
comb, with cells on the lower sides, have to be built to receive the eggs
and accommodate the grubs, and the outside of the nest has to be
enlarged correspondingly, until, in the case of the common Wasps, it
may be of a somewhat spherical shape of any size from two or three to
eight or more inches in diameter. The Hornets’ nest, as mentioned at
p. 114, may be much larger, and also very likely not entirely spherical,
but built against the side of a panel in an old tree; also the paper is
of a coarser kind.

The building of the outside of ite nest is carried on by the WARES

METHOD OF NEST-BUILDING. 117

stripping or rasping up small quantities of wood or vegetable material,
and working these with moisture from their mouths into little pellets,
which each worker carries home, as it is commonly described, in her
jaws, but (from my own observation of the process) I should rather say
under them, tucked, as it were, under her chin. Thus her jaws are
free for work, and when she gets to her nest (in the case of a kind like
that figured at the heading), then placing herself firmly in an inverted
position, with three legs on each side of the edge of paper to be
enlarged, she walks backward, spreading out her soft paper pellet with
her jaws until it forms a little stripe securely joined to the former
paper, but differing in colour according to the tint of the wood, or
vegetable material, of which it has been made. In urgent need, as
when removal of a turf had laid bare the top of a ground nest, I have
known well worked up clay from some holes close at hand used to
supply the much needed roof as quickly as possible.

The horizontal layers of comb within the nest are formed of the
same kind of paper as the outside casing of the nest, each comb being
suspended from the layer above it by short strong pillars of the Wasp-
paper material, thus giving convenient room for traffic of the workers
on the flat top of each comb whilst attending to the needs of the young
family in the cells of the comb immediately above them. All the
labours (excepting egg-laying), whether building, or repairing, fetching
materials and food, clearing out rubbish, &c., have to be carried out by
the workers, and in the case of ground-builders, the mere enlargement
of the cavity to give room for the necessary enlargements of the family
establishment is no small labour, and for those who can watch quietly
it is a very pretty sight to observe the workers coming up from below
laden, each one, with the little morsel of earth or pebble which was
required to be excavated,

Towards autumn, the economy of the nest changes, males and
females are produced, and shortly after the Wasp colony, as a social
establishment, comes toanend. The drones, or males, having fulfilled
their allotted work by pairing with the females, die, so also do the
workers; the nest decays, and all that remains of the summer colonies
and their quarters (excepting where nests may have been built in
some dry locality where they are as safe as in a cabinet) are the
females, which will leave the nest, and, hybernating in their selected
shelters until spring comes round again, thus complete the year’s circle
of Wasp life.

Two points in the Wasp economy most important to us are their
stings, and the nature of their food. It may be remarked that the
females and workers are furnished with stings, but not the drones, or
males, these are stingless. With regard to the food; taking it in the
sense of what is carried off by the Wasps, partly for their own food,

118 WASPS.

but to a large extent prepared in the inside of the workers before
restoring it for the nourishment of the grubs, almost anything sweet or
nutritious, and soft enough for abstraction, may be considered as ser-
viceable. Animal food, as meat, fish, insects, in winged or maggot
state, all are acceptable for the family larder; honey is a great
attraction; jam, sugar, fruit, to any amount, are also all acceptable,
in fact it is difficult to say what may not be laid under contribution for
carriage home to feed the grubs, in prepared or unprepared condition.
But irrespective of this point of what they may select to supply what,
when under observation, appear the insatiable appetites of the larve,
the workers on their own account (apparently) are greatly attracted by,
and stand in need of, moisture. Here we have a point on which we
may constantly base most successful measures for trapping and
destroying them by myriads, and with regard to their wholesale depre-
dations, and the dexterity and apparent powers of memory with which
they carry on their minor thieveries, notes will be found in the
succeeding observations.*

These in many cases contain reports of amount of presence, extent
of damage caused, measures of prevention and remedy, besides other
details of interest ; but as in Wasp attack these are much affected by
local circumstances, I have not divided the information for classing
under different headings, but given each report entire, with, in some
instances, a heading noting the chief point alluded, and have appended
a general summary of the results to be gathered from the notes.

I have also added two or three short observations of amount of
Wasp presence at a few Continental localities, for which I am indebted
to the courtesy of entomological correspondents, duly acknowledged
together with their kind contributions.

* In my account of the general points of Wasp life and habits, I have written
mainly from my own observations, taken some years ago, when collecting and
observing to help my late brother, Dr. Edward L. Ormerod, whilst preparing his
volume entitled ‘Social Wasps,’ regardirg such points as required local attention
in their own habitats; and also whilst collecting and preparing specimens of Wasps’
nests for museum use at the South Kensington collection, then at Bethnal Green,
under the curatorship of the late Andrew Murray, F.L.S. Under the circumstances,
I was able to make a large amount of observations as to ordinary Wasp habits, and
also experimentally, on such matters as applied to instincts under special emer-
gences (arranged for them), rebuilding of abstracted nests, memory in regaining
former localities, and also with regard to food. These, however, are unnecessary to
be entered on here, but amongst the great number of publications on Wasp life, I
may mention as a trustworthy work for consultation as to the number and distine-
tion of our British species, the ‘Brit. Museum Catalogue of British Aculeate
Hymenoptera,’ by the late Fred. Smith. Also that in Dr. Ormerod’s work on ‘Social
Wasps,’ a great amount of information is given from his personal researches

regarding their external structure, and the internal development, both in larval and .
imago condition.—Ep,

OBSERVATIONS IN SCOTLAND. 119
Observations of contributors, arranged under headings of localities.

SCOTLAND.

I have preceded the other observations by the following com-
munication with which I was favoured by my valued contributor for
many years, Mr. Malcolm Dunn, The Gardens, Dalkeith Palace,
Dalkeith, N.B., because, besides the record of special appearances,
they draw attention in some degree to the reasons influencing amount
of Wasp attack. Mr. Malcolm Dunn notes, from his own personal
observations during a long course of years, and at localities respectively
in England, Scotland, and Ireland, the preference of Wasps for dry
situations, and dry soils; also mentions the special districts of attack
during the past season in Scotland, and of the enormous amount of
Wasp presence observed by himself during a part of August in various
of the southerly and easterly counties of England; and also notes
some applications serviceable for destroying the nests, including cyanide
of potassium as the most effective remedy known, but requiring great
care in use, it being a rank poison.

Mr. M. Dunn wrote me on the 28th of September as follows :—
‘‘Wasps.—They have been an unmitigated nuisance in many parts
of the country this season, but as a rule they prevail most in the drier
parts of the country, and on warm and well-drained soils; hence in
my six years’ experience in Ireland, I never knew of them being nearly
so plentiful as in the drier parts of England and Scotland.

«‘T was in the Co. Wicklow in the hot and dry seasons of 1869,
1870, and 1871, and although it is about the driest part of Ireland,
and on a limestone gravel sub-soil, the Wasps were never half the
trouble to us that they were in the Teme Valley, in Worcestershire,
where I lived for nearly four years before going to Ireland. Coming
to Dalkeith in the warm summer of 1871, I found the Wasps literally
swarming here, although, as mentioned above, they were not trouble-
some in Co. Wicklow.

“We had enough of them here this season; but still I have seen
them very much worse in previous years ; and speaking generally for
the Lothians, we have had no great cause for complaint, and escaped
with comparatively little damage to our fruit.

‘In some parts of Scotland they were undoubtedly bad, particularly
round the shores of the Moray Firth, a district that shares with the
Lothians in being the driest parts of Scotland. I heard more com-
plaints from that district than from all the rest of Scotland, andI think
Mr. Charles Webster, The Gardens, Gordon Castle, Fochabers, N.B.,
would be able to furnish you with some notes on the severe attack the
Wasps made on the fruit in that district.

‘TJ was in the south of England for a fortnight last month, and in

120 WASPS.

some parts of Surrey, Hants, Sussex, Kent, Essex, Middlesex, Herts,
and Bucks, the country appeared to be a perfect Wasps’ nest.

‘A solution of cyanide of potassium is our most effective remedy; but
being a rank poison, it must be carefully handled. Brimstone, gun-
powder, gas-tar, paraffin, Stockholm tar, and other ‘ remedies,’ are all
more or less effective ; but none are equal to the cyanide of potassium
in its deadly effects on the Wasps, and with careful handling it is
perfectly safe, and not costly.”

Moray, N.B.—The following notes, with which I was favoured on
October 4th, by Mr. Charles Webster, Horticultural Superintendent
for the Duke of Richmond and Gordon, from The Gardens, Gordon
Castle, Fochabers, N.B., contain much useful information. The points
particularly noted are, that no especially large number of Wasps had been
observed in the spring; the enormous number, and great amount of
damage to fruit, ranging in date from the end of July until the second
week in September, when the first frost occurred ; also some remarks
on the unusually large number of tree nests, observed chiefly on Larch
and Silver Fir; and also number of nests in a given length of dry
stone dyke; likewise some notes on measures taken to trap the Wasps.
Mr. C. Webster wrote as follows :—

“So far as my own observation goes, there was not an unusual
number of queen Wasps in the spring, nor did the past winter seem
more favourable to preserve insect life than many former ones. It
was about the last days of July that my attention was first called to
the plague of Wasps, by their attack on the wall Cherries. We could
find no protection from their attack upon this fruit, a large proportion
being consumed by them. Some of the trees, when the nets were shaken,
had the appearance, for'a few seconds, as if a swarm of Bees had come off.

“Ag the different sorts of wall fruit ripened, such as Apricots,
Peaches, and especially Plums and Jargonelle Pears, it was attacked
by swarms of them. Even hard Apples and Pears (which had been
picked by birds), and quite devoid of saccharine matter, were fixed on
as greedily as some of the softer fruits. The plague continued from
the end of July to the second week in September, at which time we had
our first frost, cutting up Dahlas, Begonias, and other tender plants,
and also putting a check to the quantity of Wasps.

‘“‘ During the height of the attack, many thousands were caught by
means of glass traps and bottles containing some beer, which we had
hung on to the branches. It was also necessary to cover the
ventilators of the vineries to prevent their ingress, otherwise they
would soon have destroyed a house of fruit.

‘There is a dry stone dyke or wall which partly surrounds our
kitchen garden, and in it a great many nests were found. In a space
of ninety-six yards, twenty-three nests were destroyed, but no suitable
place seemed to be unoccupied by them. More nests were found this

OBSERVATIONS IN SCOTLAND. 121

year than usual in trees, chiefly Larch and Silver Fir, and many of
the nests of large size, and should you desire a specimen, I do not
think there would be much difficulty in procuring one.”’

Dumpartonsuire, N.B.—The following short note from Helens-
burgh, Dumbartonshire, N.B., sent me by Mr. Robert Howie, on the
15th September, connects (like those of various other observers) a
somewhat greater amount of Wasp presence than usual in that neigh-
bourhood with the greater heat :—‘‘ As to Wasps, they are not at any
time plentiful here. I think, however, we have had more of them than
usual, although not by any means ‘a plague.’ I consider this quite
accounted for by the greater heat we have enjoyed this season.”

AreytusHirE, N.B.—More westerly, that is, in the Island of Islay,
the Wasp presence was noticed as being much in excess of the usual
amount of appearance, though not in the vast numbers in which the
infestation occurred in many places.

In reply to my enquiries, Mr. R. Scot Skirving, of Foreland House,
Island of Islay, Argyllshire, writing on the 14th of September, men-
tioned :—‘*‘ We have had no such plagues as I have read of in the
south of England’; . . . ‘but we have had our plague too. We
have had twenty or thirty Wasps at least for one we have had in
previous years. They invaded the house, and stung the ladies”;...
‘they jump up and fight the Wasps with a pocket-handkerchief, and
so get stung.”

Mr. Scot Skirving further noticed:—‘‘ During July, the Oban
papers frequently referred to what they called the ‘plague of Wasps all
over.’ They mentioned Mull as swarming with them.” . .. “I
think there is no difficulty in accounting for the great increase of
insect life in Britain, it is the great heat we have had.”

Relatively to his own observation of Tree-building Wasps, Mr,
Skirving wrote me that in Kast Lothian he thought they nested in
equal numbers in holes in the ground, and in trees; but that ‘at this
place” (7. e., the part of Islay under observation) he did not know of
Wasps having been observed to build on a tree or bush. Later on, he
kindly forwarded me the following letter on the subject, sent to him by
Mr. P. R. Ballingal, of Hallabus, also in the Island of Islay, N.B.,
with the remark, that with him there were more woods and plantations
to draw observation from, as well as shrubs and bushes.

Mr. Ballingal wrote as follows :—‘‘ Wasps.—This year they have
been much more numerous than I have ever seen them, yet with you I
would not say they have been a plague. The foresters told me early in the
season they never saw so many nests before; and as to the garden
fruit, they helped themselves to the most of it. Iam surprised to hear
you say you never saw a Wasps’ byke in Islay; here they are very
common, both in trees and ground”; . . . “about the size of a man’s

122 WASPS.

head is the largest I have seen, and commonly more of the size of a
yellow Turnip.”

Orxney.—My other north British observation was very satisfactory
as to absence of Wasp presence, and was sent me in the following short
note, on October 18th, by Mr. Thos. McDonald, from The Gardens,
Balfour Castle, Isle of Orkney, in reply to my enquiries :—‘‘1 am
happy to say that I have not seen a dozen Wasps during my sixteen
years in Orkney.’

ENGLAND.

Yorks.—Beaumont Park Museum, Huddersfield. From Mr. 8S.
L. Mosley, F.E.8., as a practical collector, as well as scientific ento-
mologist, I had hoped just possibly to get a note of observation of the
very rare Vespa arborea; but, as will be seen below, this was not the
case, so that the only note of observation of this species in live condi-
tion which I can give in these pages, is from the specimens taken
accidentally (not in connexion with their nest) by myself some years
ago in Gloucestershire, and then identified by the late Fred. Smith, of
the British Museum (see ante, p. 114).

Mr. Mosley wrote me :—‘‘ As to the Wasps, we have had a great
many about during the summer, but not, I think, so bad as in the south.
The great majority are V. vulgaris, but V. sylvestris is not uncommon.
V. crabro does not occur here, though it has often been reported to me,
but always turned out large female vu/yaris, or nests of some of the
tree species. I have never noticed V. arborea, not to know it.”

Writing from Preston, Hull, Yorks, Mr. H. L. Leonard mentioned
(as below) the great prevalence of Wasps in that neighbourhood, and
also a method found serviceable for destroying the nests:—‘‘ Wasps.—
We have had a most unusual quantity this year. A few years ago, I
particularly noticed a very large number of ‘pioneer’ Wasps in the
spring; these appeared to make for the kitchen, and were destroyed :
during the summer following, I don’t suppose I saw a score of Wasps
in all. This spring, on the contrary, I only saw one ‘ pioneer’ Wasp,
and in the summer the ordinary Wasps were a positive pest, they
were everywhere.

‘‘Remedy.—I always fill an empty cartridge-case with about one
part flour of sulphur to four parts of gunpowder, damp slightly, attach
a lighted fuse, and place in the hole leading to where the swarm is
located, in ten minutes every one will be suffocated.”

Norrotx.—The following notes with which I was favoured by Mr.
Kidw. A. Atmore, F.E.§8., of King’s Lynn, Norfolk, contain some very
interesting observations on various points of the Wasp infestation.
One of these is the trouble caused by them to men and horses in the

OBSERVATIONS IN ENGLAND. 123

fields; another the species of Wasps mainly noticed, and large
proportion amongst these of the V. vulgaris; also the observations of
the method of Wasps in dealing with flies and other insects; and the
serviceableness of Hornets in destroying the common Wasps.

On the 4th of October, Mr. Atmore wrote me as follows:—‘* Wasps
have been very abundant in this district, particularly in the fen or
marshland districts, where their ravages amongst the fruit have been,
I believe, unexampled. In the marshland districts of Lincolnshire, I
am told, on good authority, that they have been even more abundant
large numbers of nests frequently occurring within a very small area,
Cyanide of potassium has been largely used here for the destruction of
nests. I can only report the occurrence of four species here (of course
excepting Vespa crabro, the Hornet), viz., V. vulgaris, V. germanica,
V. rufa, and V. sylvestris. Banks of streams and ditches have of course
been more generally used by the ground species for nests; but many
nests have occurred in old rockery of gardens, and beneath fences, and
instances of nests in ground of open fields have also come to my notice.
Nests in the latter situation have caused much trouble and annoyance
to horses and men engaged in ploughing. Old roofs of houses have
also been freely patronised for nests, especially by V. germanica. The
nests of V. vulgaris have been most frequent: probably at least 80 per
cent. of the nests here have been those of that species. V. germanica
has been commoner than JV. rufa, but nests of V. sylvestris, upon fruit
trees and Currant bushes, have been fairly common. J. sylvestris
generally is a rarity here, although I am aware it is generally common
in the south.

‘‘ Wasps being so much to the fore this year, I have had oppor-
tunities now and again of making observations as to their insect-killing
propensities. I have often seen them seize flies on the window with
their mandibles, and retain them in the mouth for a long time as they
fly round the room, or run up and down windows. I do not think that
they generally kill flies as food for themselves, but I have watched
them entering nests with flies and other insects, which seems to indi-
cate that they are intended for consumption by their larve, or grubs.*
Once I witnessed a Wasp seize a small white butterfly (Pieris rape) and
carry it off, I suppose to its nest. Larve of Lepidoptera have also
been destroyed by them here in large numbers; and certainly larve
of Macro-Lepidoptera have not occurred this autumn in such numbers
as I had expected to find them.

* This view is entirely in accordance with the peculiarities of the internal
structure of the Wasps in imago condition, and with what is shown as to the nature
of a part of the food of the larve, by the undigested remains to be found in the
blind pouch when moulted off. See observations under the heading of food, at
the latter part of this paper.

124 WASPS.

‘“‘ Hornets (V. crabro) have also been unusually plentiful here, the
nests, as usual, occurring generally. in hollow trees. These powerful
insects seem to be as fond of destroying Wasps, as Wasps themselves
are of destroying flies. I have several times witnessed this habit of
theirs.”

WorcEstTERSHIRE.—On applying to Mr. J. Hiam, The Wren’s Nest,
Astwood Bank, near Redditch, with regard to what he might have
observed of Hornet presence in the past season, he informed me that
‘« Hornets,” Vespa crabro, had been more numerous than ever remem-
bered in that locality, and also for a few milesround. Hight nests had
come under his own observation, and he had heard of others being
taken at a short distance beyond the extent of his own walks.

Later on, on November 9th, Mr. Hiam favoured me with the results
of his further enquiries as to amount of Hornets’ nests observed, and
damage done by the insects, as follows :—‘‘I find there were about a
score of nests within a few miles that were known of, and doubtless
others in woods and lonely places would escape observation. Con-
siderable damage was done in gentlemen’s gardens to wall fruits of the
best sorts, and also to fruit in orchards, and in the fields, to cider fruit;
but the latter has been so plentiful and cheap, that it is hardly worth
taking into account.

‘‘T have taken a large quantity of queen Hornets from various
nests, some of which I have alive now (November 9th). This will
materially lessen the number of nests next season, but from what I
know of several colonies in inaccessible positions, in roofs of houses
and otherwise, a large increase may be expected.”

Mr. Hiam further remarked with regard to the habit of the Hornets
of stripping young bark:—‘‘ Near one Hornets’ nest I noticed the
young Ash sticks had been stripped in pieces of the bark all round, or
in other cases in patches, which is not unusual, but for the exact pur-
pose I am not quite certain, because the combs, and paper covering on
the outside of nests, appear to be composed entirely of dead rotten
wood, nicely blended in coloured layers. Hornets also take the sap
oozing from wounds, whether caused by Hornets or otherwise, of the
Elm, and also tap Dahlia stems, and suck the flowing sap.”

Some very good figures of shoots of Ash, and also of Birch, injured
by removal of bark by the Hornets, will be found at p. 405 of the
valuable volume by Dr. J. Ritzema Bos on animals injurious and
useful in agriculture, horticulture, &.* Dr. Ritzema Bos, speaking
on the following page of the damage done by Wasps (including in this
of course Hornets) in this way, notes that although the building

* «Tierische Schadlinge und Niitzlinge fur Ackerbau,’ &e., von Dr, J. Ritzema
Bos. Paul Parey, Berlin.

OBSERVATIONS IN ENGLAND, 125

material is chiefly of rotten wood, they will gnaw down to the sap wood
of young branches or stems for the purpose, apparently, not only of
using the torn off pieces of the bark for building purposes, but that
they may suck the sap that flows from the wound. Ash is mentioned
as preferred; after this Willow, Alder, Birch, Beech, Lime, and Elder.
(In an instance where I had myself, together with my sister, the
opportunity of watching Hornets at their operations in removing
patches of bark from some Ash saplings by a pool in Gloucestershire,
we were able to see them definitely sucking in the sap from the torn
edge of the bark.—Ep.) Necessarily, where much bark is taken, or
the young bough, or sapling, completely ringed, much damage is
done.

Mr. J. Masters, Hon. Sec. of the Evesham Fruit-growers Experi-
mental Committee, writing to me from Evesham on the 11th of Sept.,
in reply to my enquiries, observed :—‘‘ It is singular, but here in our
immediate locality we have hadno more Wasps than in ordinary years.
This, my opinion, is confirmed by that of others.

‘The men have taken the Hornets’ nests this year in my orchard.
The nests were built in the cavities of two old trees. The powder-ball,
that is, the paste made of wetted gunpowder, was applied to the hole;
this ignited the filth or decayed wood, which gradually burned the
interior of the tree, and destroyed the nests. Of course it killed the
tree. The usual method employed here in taking Wasps’ nests, is by
the fizzy, or powder-ball.”

GuLoucEsTERSHIRE.—The following note refers chiefly to removal of
already disturbed Chafer grubs by Wasps. During the latter part of
the summer, I received a good deal of communication from Miss
Dobell, of Detmore, near Cheltenham, regarding Chafer grubs (see
ante, pp. 26, 27), which were injuring the grass roots on her land to
such an extent that she was employing some men and boys to collect
the grubs, which they were doing in great numbers; and about the
10th of September, Miss Dobell wrote me as follows regarding the
attacks of Wasps on the Chafer grubs when collected from under the
grass :—‘‘ I have been much interested to see that Wasps are wild for
the grubs, and seem to bite them in half just below the head, and carry
off something out of them to their nests. The men said they killed
lots in the tins in this way.

‘Last night, at seven o’clock, I went into the field to see if there
were more places to do, and pulled out three or four grubs, and put
them on the open space ; a Wasp came at once and killed the grub in
the way I mention, flew away, and came back for more.”

With regard to Wasps’ nests, Miss Dobell mentioned that up to the
date of writing (10th September) none but ground nests had been
noticed this year; but of the ground nests numbers had been taken,

126 WASPS.

and it was obvious many more nests must still be remaining, from the
great number of Wasps that were still observable.

Mr. C. D. Wise, writing from the Toddington Orchard Company’s
Grounds, Winchcomb, mentioned :—‘‘ Wasps were a terrible nuisance
to us in our vineries, and did an enormous amount of damage. I hope
you will be able to give us some remedy.”

CornwaLu.—F rom Coosenwartha, Scorrier, Mr. Geo. Thomas wrote
me, on the 7th of September, regarding Wasps :—‘‘ They never were
so plentiful in this county as at present, indeed they are a nuisance.”

. “TIT used to destroy them by screwing paper thus’”’ (here a sketch
was given of a piece of paper twisted into a funnel-shape.—Ep.),
‘‘tarring the outside, and thrusting it in their holes, and in the night,
pouring paraffin, and setting fire to it.

‘But there are several kinds. The kind Iam writing of we call
the ‘ Apple-bee,’ the abdomen is striped with yellow and black.” Not
being aware of this peculiar name for Wasps, I enquired of the daughter
of a Cornish farmer resident here whether she had ever heard it, and
she told me that until about four years ago (i. e., until she came out of
Cornwall), she never heard them called anything else. ‘‘ There were
Honey-bees and Apple-bees, and the Apple-bees built paper nests in
hedges.”’—Ep.

Gurrnsey.—The following notes, with which I was favoured by
Mr. F. Hutchesson, 1, Queen’s Road, Guernsey, notice prevalence -of
Wasps beyond the usual amount in the island, but still not in numbers
sufficient to do serious damage :—‘‘I think we are singularly free of
Wasps here; this year they have certainly plagued us more than usual,
with the result of spoiling fruit, especially Figs and Plums. They
have been more numerous than I ever remember, but their numbers
would not, I think, have been considered out of the way in an ordinary
season in England.

«T have never heard of a Wasps’ nest in Guernsey in a bush; here
they appear to prefer old banks, and as the fields are nearly always
fenced by a bank, they do not make their nests where they could be
disturbed by horses ploughing. In fact, I think I may say that
although Wasps have been more plentiful than usual, they have done
no material harm.”

Kent.—The following notes refer to number of nests observed, and
also to methods found to answer for destroying them, and were kindly
sent me on the 2nd of October, in reply to my enquiries, by Mr. W.
Gardner, of Bekesbourne, Kent :—‘‘I have deferred writing to you re
Wasps until I could get some fairly reliable information, and I may say
the pests have been destroyed or taken (I cannot quite vouch for every
one of them being destroyed) to the extent of nearly two hundred nests

OBSERVATIONS IN ENGLAND, 127

or, to speak more assuredly, between one hundred and eighty and one
hundred and ninety.

‘‘T think about half were taken, or supposed to be completely
destroyed, by cyanide of potassium, mixed in the proportion of two
ounces of cyanide to a pint of water; the others were destroyed by
pouring in gas-tar, or a sulphur mixture, as they used to do formerly.
My old gardener always used pieces of Elder tree, from which he had
abstracted the pith, and they were filled with a proper admixture of
brimstone, &c., but I have forgotten the proportion. They went off
like a squib.

‘‘My man who used the cyanide said it was wonderful to see the
instantaneous effect it had on the Wasps, and we found that the best
way was to give them some; the next day to catch the stragglers that
had stayed out during the warm nights, and then dig them out, and
crush all the hatching and unhatched larve. Indeed, even when using
the tar, digging out is requisite to make sure of destroying them.

‘‘T remember one case I had where the hole ran upwards, so I
stopped the entrance, and then got a pointed iron rod, six or seven
feet long, on which I put a piece of gas-pipe, about half the length or
less, and then running the rod carefully into the ground, I soon found
when I had come upon the nest. I then drew out the rod, and poured
in a quantity of gas-tar, which effectively did its work.

‘‘The cyanide process is very simple. We dip a piece of cotton
wool in the mixture, and put it upon a pointed stick, and push it pretty
well into the hole; of course it needs to be in the hands of a trust-
worthy person, being such a violent poison. Hornets, I am happy to
say, I know nothing about, never having seen a Hornets’ nest since
quite a boy.”

The above observations of numbers and treatment of Wasps’ nests,
were taken from an area of somewhat less than six hundred acres of
ground, thus giving an average of somewhere about one Wasps’ nest to
every three acres.

From Canon Court, Wateringbury, Mr. Edward Goodwin gave me
the following observations, which note, amongst other points of interest
(more especially as coming from a Wasp and Bee observer), that queen
Wasps were not, so far as noticed, more observed than usual in the
spring; also the greater strength of the nests, both in size and number
of tenants, and that the autumn disappearance commenced earlier
than usual in the season.

Mr. Goodwin wrote :—‘‘ With regard to the so-called Wasp plague,
I send you the following notes as the result of my own observations.
I believe there were not more queen Wasps in the spring than usual,
but the fine warm weather enabled a very large proportion of them to
establish nests before being destroyed by their various enemies, But

128 WASPS.

a far more noticeable feature than the number of nests, was the great
strength (in number of Wasps) of each, the average size being larger
than I have ever known before.

‘‘We made a great onslaught on them in June; most people using
cyanide of potassium, which I have myself used successfully for years.
At one time they were certainly quite a plague. A large quantity of fruit
of all sorts was destroyed by them, and few people escaped being stung.

‘‘Undoubtedly Wasps do a certain amount of good in killing flies
and other insects, but in my opinion it bears a very small proportion
to the amount of harm. The autumn dwindling commenced unusually
early,—at the beginning of August, or even sooner.”’

In the neighbourhood of Farningham, a little village near South-
field, Dartford, Kent, three dozen nests were found within a radius of
a quarter of a mile, and taken with turpentine and paraffin. (Contri-
buted by Mr. F. O. Solomon, Lecturer in Agriculture of Durham
College of Science.)

Surrey.—Birtley, Witley. The following note refers to one of the
worst accidents from Wasp attack to horses of which I heard, and of
this such exaggerated accounts were circulated, that on application to
him as to what really had occurred, Mr. Thomas Collins, the Agent
for the Earl of Derby, at the above address, kindly contributed the
following information :—‘‘ The only way in which the Wasps have
interferred with our agricultural operations, so far as I know, is by
driving the horses and men from their work.

‘‘We have ploughed through a great many nests; but on one
occasion the horses were so stung that they tried to get away,
and one of them fell into a narrow ditch just close to a tree, and
the men had to cut the tree down to get the horse out, and even
then, as he was on his back and could not turn, he had to be pulled
out by main force. We found he had been stung in more than twenty
places.. His partner fared a little better, as we could find only about
a dozen bumps on him. The man who was with the horses, and
another who ran to his assistance, both got severely stung about the
head and neck.”’

(Observations as to the inconvenience caused by attacks of the
Wasps to horses and men, will be found in the report of Mr. Charles
Robinson, of Beeding (p. 129), and mentioned by other contributors.
—Ep.)

The Gardens, Lythe Hill, Haslemere, Surrey. Mr. Evans, a very
careful and experienced observer, writing on September 9th, mentions
the enormous prevalence of the pests, their early appearance, the
damage caused there, the great number of nests, and effectiveness of
cyanide of potassium for getting rid of them :—‘‘In answer to your
enquiry respecting damage, &c., of Wasps, I beg to inform you that

OBSERVATIONS IN ENGLAND. 129

never in my experience in various parts of the kingdom have they done
so much damage. The early dry hot spring brought out the queens at
such an unusually early date, that the development of brood was
strengthened. I may note that on March 27th, I took a nest from a
Thuja tree, two inches by one and three-quarter inches, since that
time one hundred and twenty-seven nests have been taken within the
gardens. I have not found anything so effectual and easy as cyanide
of potassium. The Gooseberry crop was completely cleared when
approaching ripeness; quite two-thirds of the Pears have been
damaged and destroyed ; Apples about one-third ; Plums about half.” *

Sussex.—The following notes, kindly contributed by Mr. Charles
Robinson, of Truleigh, Beeding, refer especially to farm damage, and
inconvenience caused by Wasps, in respect of attacks on horses, and
also in stings to labourers in the field; and likewise to benefit from
Wasps destroying flies in cattle sheds, points on which Mr. Robinson’s
large occupancy of ground, amounting to two thousand acres, on the
Sussex downs, near Brighton, gave him full opportunity of observation.
Mr. Robinson wrote as follows :—“ It is a fact that we have had a full
share of the ‘Wasp plague’ in this part of Sussex, but except
incidentally, I do not think that agriculture (as the term is generally
understood) has suffered thereby.

“There have been several instances hereabouts of teams having
been driven from the field when they have trod on, or ploughed up,
Wasps’ nests; and our Bean cutters got sadly stung at their work, it
being almost impossible to handle the crop without also handling the
Wasps that settled in vast numbers upon the Bean plants. Their
object was evidently the pursuit of the Aphides with which the Beans
were this year infested, and in preying upon these they were helping
to rid the farmer of a most destructive enemy, though apparently they
made but a small impression on the vast number of Aphides.

‘The Wasps unquestionably destroy a great number of flies about
the cattle-stalls, &e. I believe they prefer the blood-sucking variety,
and often get these when they are gorged with freshly drawn blood
from the beasts. The clumsiness of the Wasp in pursuit of active
flies is sometimes curiously apparent, and if a door in the bright sun-
shine happens to be studded with nail-heads, about the size of flies,
Wasps may often be seen trying to seize them.

“The ‘real damage’ they have done, and are doing, is to fruit,
particularly Pears, and the higher qualities of Apples. Many of these

* Mr. T. P. Newman, of Hazelhurst, Haslemere, to whose kind co-operation I
am indebted for procuring me most of the foregoing and following reports on Wasp
presence in Surrey and Sussex, mentioned to me that the above Wasp damage was
notwithstanding Mr. Evans having many thousand bags placed on the fruit.

K

1380 WASPS.

latter are decaying and falling from being pierced by the insects.” . .
. ‘Since the Blackberry crop has ripened, I think the damage in
orchards has somewhat decreased.’’—(C. R.) )
Lowfield Nurseries, Crawley, Sussex. The following notes, contri-
buted by Mr. J. Cheal, from the above address, give details of the
severe damage caused by Wasps to fruit, as well as some observations
as to their method of carrying on the ravages, and also (as in the two
preceding reports) inconvenience from attack out of ploughed-up nests,
and to men working on Aphis infested plants from Wasps attracted by
them. Mr. Cheal noted :—‘ In the first place as to damage done by
Wasps, we have had unusual opportunities of observing their habits
this season, as we never before knew them so numerous.

‘‘We have destroyed within the nursery over two hundred nests.
There is no denying but that they have done a large amount of damage
to the fruit, and we have now lying upon the ground underneath some
of the Apple trees, large quantities of Apple skins, which have been
completely hollowed out by the Wasps, scores of bushels having been
destroyed. We have observed them very closely, but we have come to
the conclusion that in no case could we positively say that the Wasps
commenced the fruit unless the rind had been punctured in some way
before.

‘“We have here a large number of birds, and the Wasps generally
attack an Apple that has been previously pecked by them. This year
we have also noticed that the Apples have been attacked by a large
number of small birds, such as tits, and this has given the Wasps. a
greater opportunity of penetrating the fruit, but they have been by no
means slow in taking advantage of previous depredations. They also
appear to have a decided preference for certain varieties of Apples, and
we were somewhat struck this year with the way in which, for a few
days, they would swarm upon one variety, and then suddenly leave
this for some other variety, which appeared to be more to their taste ;
so much for Apples.

‘*As to Plums they did a considerable amount of damage to these,
and there is no doubt that they punctured these without assistance from
birds, &e. We had, in consequence, to gather many of our Plums
before they were fully ripe. Grapes they have also very much
damaged, and it has been needful to cover all openings in the houses
with fine net, in order to exclude them.

‘We think we should, in fairness to the Wasps, mention one
instance in which we think their presence has been beneficial. The
fruit stocks, especially Apples, have been very heavily attacked by
Green Fly, and the growth of the plants being somewhat slow owing
to the drought, these Aphides have also severely checked their growth,
and we noticed during the prevalence of the Wasps, that they swarmed

OBSERVATIONS IN ENGLAND. 181

upon these plants, and fed upon the Aphides. So thickly have they
swarmed upon these fruit stocks, that our men in budding them have
been frequently stung. We do not know of any operations having to
be suspended in consequence of Wasps, and the only other serious
interruption that we have heard of has been by the occasional plough-
ing up of anest. Our own men did this once or twice, and in one
case, the nest being a strong one, caused the horses to bolt, in conse-
quence of the stings.

«The only remedy that we have tried, has been the destroying of
the nests by either tar or cyanide of potassium.

‘While upon the subject of Wasps, I may mention that we found
in our nursery a fine specimen of the Tree Wasp (Vespa norvegica),
which had built their nest upon a branch of Norway Spruce. I
enclose a photograph of the nest.”—(J. C.)

Kstate Office, Maresfield Park, near Uckfield, Sussex. Mr. Mark
Sandford, with whom I was also in communication regarding attack
of Rose Chafer grubs (see p. 26), contributed notes of great numbers
of nests being observed, and very serious damage to fruit, as follows:
—‘‘Tn reply to your enquiry as to Wasps, I should think three hundred
nests have probably been taken near us, say on three hundred acres of
land. I have heard of no hanging nests. Heavy losses have been
sustained, as some best fruits have been utterly eaten up; all our
Peaches were eaten before they were ripe, we could not ripen a single
one. All our out-door Grapes were eaten, and many of our best eating
Apples cleared out, leaving only the peeling.

‘Our men have taken many nests with torches made of gunpowder
and tar, put in the holes, and set alight.”—(M. 8.)

At Hollycombe, Sussex (post town, Liphook), the severity of the
attack was still greater. Iam indebted for the following contribution
of information regarding this, which I think was about the worst of
all the cases reported in presence of nests, besides damage to men and
horses, to Mr. T. P. Newman, of Hazelhurst, Haslemere, who procured
it for me, and wrote :—‘‘ Mr. J. Clark Hawkshaw, of Hollycombe,
Sussex, reports that his bailiff has paid sixpence each for three hundred
and seventy-six Wasps’ nests taken within half a mile of his kitchen
garden: an additional payment was made afterwards for ninety-four
more, some within the half-mile, and the remainder a little further
away: four hundred and seventy in all. The damage to fruit, and
especially to Grapes in the houses, was very great.

‘“‘Ploughing was stopped on one occasion, twenty nests being
ploughed up in one field, and both horses and men were badly stung.”
—(T. P. N.)

OxrorpsHirE.—Kidmore Grange, Caversham. The following few
lines, with which I was favoured by Mr, Martin J. Sutton, from the

K 2

132 WASPS.

above address, arein reply to an enquiry of my own, whether the great
complaints regarding Wasp presence were over-stated, and show the
prevalence of the pest in that as in many other localities. Mr. Sutton
wrote me :—‘ There is no doubt whatever as to the ‘ Wasp plague’
having been most serious, fruit having been destroyed wholesale, and
people being in fear of their lives from the invasions of their houses by
these pests. So numerous have they been at our own table, that it
was difficult to take food on our fork without putting a Wasp in the
mouth.”

Herts.—St Albans, Torrington House. Although in my own
house I believe we were much less plagued than in many other places,
I can bear witness to the Wasps being exceedingly troublesome, and
at mealtimes a dextrous well-aimed pat with the back of a spoon,
which would send the pest down without escape into the syrup, or
whatever it might be, on which it was trying to maraud, was much too
often required. Thus the Wasp is incapacitated for a minute, and
may be picked out and destroyed. A neighbour, however, was in
some danger from a sting of a Wasp, given inside the throat whilst
being swallowed in some beer.

In the town, the Wasps were excessively troublesome. At the
Misses Randall’s, one of the chief stationer’s shops, the Wasps flocked
in in such numbers, that for comfort of the customers the doors were
obliged to be kept as much shut as could be managed.

Mr. Strofton, of Chequer Street, St. Albans, one of the leading
grocers of the town, informed me that he had not known the Wasps so
troublesome for many years as they had been in the past season. They
swarmed in at the door in vast numbers, and got into the sugar
drawers, and carried it off in quantities, amounting altogether to some
pounds. The jam-pots also were ravaged at where open to attack, and
often cleared out some inches down. By way of trying an experiment
as to extent of plundering, Mr. Strofton took the cover off a 2 lb. pot
of jam, and left it exposed, and by the following night the whole con-
tents had been removed. The Wasps had not given much annoyance
by stinging, neither had they done any observable amount of good as
to clearing away flies.

They appeared to have as good knowledge and memory in finding
their way to the sugar drawer as in finding their way back to the nest,
for whilst I was enquiring as to their habits, a Wasp flew in at the
door, went behind the counter, and, before I could move a few steps to
watch operations, had made its way into a sugar drawer.

Mr. Strofton informed me that the method of trapping he found
answer best, was to partly fill rather small bottles, such as soda water
bottles, with a mixture of beer and sugar boiled together, thus he had
caught quarts of the plunderers.—Ep.

OBSERVATIONS IN IRELAND. 183

At the butcher’s with whom I deal (Mr. Steabbens of the Market
Cross), who has a large shop, the Wasps were unusually plentiful.
They were said especially to come to the newly cut meat as, for
instance, to the freshly cut end of a leg of mutton. They had not
been observed to show any particular preference for liver, but sheeps’
hearts especially attracted them. In reply to my enquiry whether
they merely sucked the juices, or carried off pieces of the meat, the
reply was, ‘‘ Oh, pieces.’ They were not considered to have lessened
amount of flies, certainly not of blow-flies.—Eb.

IRELAND.

Kylemore Castle Gardens, Kylemore, Co. Galway.—On the 5th of
October, Mr. W. Farmer, writing from the above address regarding
the presence of Wasps in the above district during the past summer,
mentioned :—‘‘ Wasps have been unusually plentiful here this year,
but as a rule they are very scarce, causing but little damage to fruit
crops, and although they have been unusually plentiful this year, they
cannot be called a pest, attacking only damaged Plums, over-ripe
Gooseberries, &c. I know of only two nests, but as they have been in
ne way troublesome, I have not looked particularly for them.

“The wet bogey nature of this district, and the heavy average
rainfall we have here, no doubt keep the Wasps very scarce here.”

From the Connemara Basket Industry, Letterfrack, Co. Galway, a
locality very near the above mentioned, Miss Sturge replied to my
enquiries as to Wasp appearances, on the 22nd of September, as
follows :—‘ With regard to the question of Wasps, we have had very
few this summer here, for there is no fruit in Connemara, and the
winds do not suit the Wasps very well.’ Miss Sturge also mentioned
that about two miles off, where there was a large garden, and more
shelter and cover for the Wasps, and also more trees, she had seen a
number of Wasps’ nests in the ground. ‘Here,’ Miss Sturge
remarked, ‘“‘I am on the bog-land, unsurrounded by trees, and without
anything for Wasps to feed on.”

A few Continental observations of Wasp presence.

NETHERLANDS.

State Agricultural College, Wageningen. On the 20th of October,
Dr. J. Ritzema Bos, Professor at the State Agricultural College, was
good enough to tell me, in reply to my enquiries, that:—‘‘ Wasps
were also very inconveniently prevalent in the Netherlands, and also
in Germany, at least in the Harz, where we were in August.

134 WASPS.

“ Vespa vulgaris, V. germanica, and V. media, were very prevalent
here, indeed the Grapes were eaten by them on a large scale’’; also,
in one place, a little boy died in consequence of being stung by a great
number of Vespa crabro (our English Hornet).

NORWAY.

CuristrantA.—Dr. Schoyen, State Entomologist, Christiania, was
also good enough (on the 81st of October) to send me the following
information, to which he added a most interesting account of such
unusual prevalence of Wasps some few years back so far north in the
Arctic circle, that I have great pleasure in inserting it, with many
thanks also for Dr. Schéyen’s spirited translation. Later on, Dr.
Schoyen favoured me with some further observation of Wasp presence
in a more southerly part of Norway during 1893.

Dr. Schéyen wrote me first on October 31st :—‘‘ As to the Wasps,
they have not, so far as I know, been troublesome this year in our
country. Last year they were more numerous than in this year, at
least here in the south-eastern districts of Norway, indeed more than
usual abundant, though not in such excessive numbers as sometimes
may happen even in more northern localities.

‘In the years 1883—1884, there was quite an unusual prevalence
of them in the Arctic Norway, especially at Troms6 and other islands
in the vicinity. Mr. J.§. Schneider, Conservator at Troms6 Museum,
writes in the Swedish ‘ Kntomologiste Tidskrift,’ 1885, pp. 148, 149,
about this matter as follows:—‘ Who can tell all the tears which these
wicked animals have squeezed from the poor children, or the swearings
which the mowers have thrown out, the half-shut eyes, and the swollen
hands and cheeks, which have shown forth in the autumn months of
these two years? Perhaps this may appear as an exaggeration, but
it comes, however, pretty near the truth. They built thew nests
everywhere, in the earth, in stone walls, behind the wainscottings of
the houses, under garden benches, on the trees; it swarmed with
Wasps on all the flowers and bushes, the windows were filled with
them, they crawled on the plates of the dining-tables, licked of the
dishes with preserves, crawled under the clothings, and in the hair,
and did not at all spare the ladies! When one was going in the woods,
a humming warbling was heard, which is still sounding in my ears;
Wasps everywhere, it was almost a despair,’ &.

‘“‘T have not in the southern districts of our country anywhere seen
the Wasps so exceedingly numerous as they must have been in Troms6
in the said years. ‘lhe species occurring here are: Vespa crabro, media,
sawonica, and var. norvegica, holsatica, vulgaris, germanica, rufa, and
Pseudovespa austriaca.”—(W. M. 8.)

GENERAL SUMMARY, 185

V. holsatica, of Fab.,is one of the synonyms for our own J. sylvestris,
Scop.; our V. norvegica, Fab., is also the V. britannica, of Leach.

At the beginning of December, Dr. Schéyen kindly sent me the
results of some subsequent information received as to the unusual pre-
valence of Wasps in the past season, and the damage done by them,
especially to Cherries in the neighbourhood of Laurvik, a town about
sixty-five miles §.S. W. of Christiania, as follows:—‘* . . . I have
also a short communication to give you about the Wasps. As I told
you before they have not this year been unusually abundant here in
the neighbourhood of Christiania, but now I have been informed that
they have been so in the neighbourhood of the town Laurvik (more
southwards), where they have done considerable damage upon the
Morel trees, eating away all the fruits, and leaving only the stones.
Such damage has not been observed in the place since many years, but
the Wasps were this summer flying most plentifully in the trees.” —
(W. M. 8.)

GENERAL SUMMARY.

The foregoing British observations show presence of all of our
seven kinds of Vespide, commonly known as ‘‘ Wasps”’ (excepting of
the rare V. arborea). Of these, the V. vulgaris, or Common Ground Wasp,
appears to have been the most observed, although both the other kinds
of Ground Wasps, V. germanica, and V. rufa, were present. Of the
Tree Wasps, the V. sylvestris, was noted by two entomological observers,
respectively, as not uncommon, and as fairly common, and a nest of
the V. norvegica was also reported. The V. crabro, the Hornet (a true
Wasp, although not popularly considered as such), was ‘ plentiful”’ in
some localities, but only reported from a few.

The Wasps’ nests, besides being much more numerous than in
ordinary years, were noticed in some instances as being of greater than
the customary size, and more numerously tenanted. From contributors
who especially attended to the numbers of nests destroyed, or kindly
obtained information for me, I had notes of destruction of over one
hundred and eighty nests on somewhat less than six hundred acres of
land; two hundred nests taken in one nursery garden ; an estimate of
about three hundred nests taken on three hundred acres; and in one
instance, where a bonus of sixpence per nest was given, three hundred
and seventy-six nests were taken within halfa mile of the kitchen
garden, which was the centre of operations, and later on payment was
made for ninety-four more, within the same area, or a little further
away,—four hundred and seventy in all. Other notes gave twenty
nests ploughed up in one field; three dozen observed, or taken, in the
radius of a quarter of a mile; twenty-three nests in ninety-six yards of
_ dry stone wall, or dyke, &e. Of Hornets, in one loeality, nine nests were

136 WASPS.

known of within the limits of ‘‘a ramble,” and twenty in the more
extended area of a few miles.

It is worth noting, that from two well qualified observers respec-
tively almost at the north and almost at the south of the area reported
from, namely, localities in Co. Moray, N.B., and Kent, and also from
a station midway, namely, Hull, I had information that no unusual
amount of appearance of queens in spring preceded the very unusual
amount of Wasp infestation afterwards.

Where the observers expressed an opinion as to the cause of the
very unusual prevalence, it was referred, as indeed seemed clearly
demonstrated, to the unusual weather in the spring being so entirely
suitable for satisfactory settlement of the queens.

In some places the attack was noticed as passing away before the
customary time of Wasp disappearance in ordinary years. In regard
to benefit or wyuries received from the Wasp presence, the evidence
shows unquestionably preponderance of the latter.

We have some benefit from the Vespide destroying other insects,
thus Hornets kill Wasps, Wasps kill flies and other insects, and insects
in the maggot stage, if of kinds acceptable to them, or like the Chafer
grubs, mentioned at p. 125, if exposed so that the grubs are accessible.
Two notes are given of service in attacking Aphides, but in one of these
it is mentioned that the Wasp attack apparently made but a small
impression on the amount of the Aphides; and that the labourers
amongst the Bean crop got “sadly stung’’; and in the other, stinging
of the workmen is mentioned as “ frequently ”’ taking place.

Taking flies round the cattle stalls is mentioned by one observer,
but though doubtless they may do good by clearing flies in butchers’
shops, I have no observations sent in of the Wasps giving themselves
the trouble to collect food of this kind where juicy fresh cut surfaces of
meat, or where (as in grocers’ shops) sugar and jam, or other acceptable
provisions, were more easily attainable, and (where I had opportunity
of enquiring) no good service of the Wasps in this way had been
noticed.

The great amount of injury inflicted by them in serious losses to
fruit-growers, and pain, risk, and inconvenience, by their extraordinary
amount of infestation in houses, and their attacks (or onslaughts,
rather) on men and horses when disturbed in the fields, are matters of
very demonstrable evil. Notes of these being given in the foregoing
pages, it is unnecessary to repeat them; but where good fruit, and it
will be noticed how, in some instances, the best sorts and choicest
kinds are selected, is destroyed in bushels; bags used by thousands to
protect it, and possible entrances into fruit-houses, or vineries, secured
by netting, &c., that there is very demonstrable loss and trouble.

The applications named as useful in destroying nests are brimstone,

GENERAL SUMMARY. 137

gunpowder, gunpowder and sulphur damped, and fired so as to
suffocate the swarm if in the ground, gas-tar, Stockholm tar, paraffin,
and cyanide of potassium. Obviously any kind of application which
will destroy the Wasps without allowing exit of the irritated legions to
sting the operator, will serve the purpose, in case this is not accom-
panied by danger, as from use of gunpowder in careless hands, or what
is a still more serious danger, the risk from use of deadly poison with-
out proper precaution. Cyanide of potassium is certainly reported as
the most approved remedy, but its deadly nature as a poison requires
most careful consideration. The store of it should always be kept
under lock and key, and whether used dry or in solution, the packet or
bottle should always have a large and legible label POISON, and the
application should be always entrusted to known careful hands.

Very often destroying Wasps’ nests is a bit of amusement at odd
times to any boys that may be about, and the more smell, and fire, and
noise that can be made, the greater the pleasure. But for quiet, safe
work that is effective in destroying the nest, I have found sending a
man round with a pot of tar, and having a ladle of it poured down the
holes, answer very well. If properly applied, no Wasps can get up to
sting the applier, and the Wasps within die of starvation. In ease, as
sometimes happens, there are two roads down to the nest, this matter
must be looked to, but I have generally found it answer well.

No method of taking hanging Wasps’ nests has been given in the
preceding notes, and the rough practice of burning the nest, and a
portion of the hedge with it, is entirely objectionable. I have often
taken them with perfect safety myself by simply having strong tan
leather gauntlet-topped gloves, with linen tops sewed on to them, down
which I could pass my hands, and then had these tops safely tied
round over my sleeves between the elbow and wrist. Thus no Wasps
could hurt my hands, and my head was defended by a large strong
piece of muslin thrown over the top of a broad-brimmed hat, so that it
hung well down all round, and the lower edge was securely fastened
by pins round the shoulders and across the chest.

It is necessary to have a broad-brimmed hat to keep the sort of
veil well off the face and nose, and for material, I preferred the
patterned muslin, or net, or lace, as it is called, of an old window-
curtain, for the differences in material, and different thickness, pre-
vented the first rush of all the Wasps striking so directly and audibly
at my hat. It may be that some people would not mind it, but the
first minute of work with hundreds of Wasps endeavouring to sting
was always a time of intense nervousness. I would not advise anyone
to try the experiment unless they can be thoroughly trustworthily
pinned up, or the results may be serious. But for common purposes,
the plan often saves a deal of trouble if a nest is wanted out of the

138 WASPS.

way at once, and the convenience of people who may possess bee-
dresses, and will lend their services, are not at hand.

If, as may very likely be the case, the disestablished Wasps start a
new house, as near as possible to the site of the former one, this will
require destroying. In the course of experimental observation, I have
known the Wasps of a removed nest rebuild from the very beginning
four times, but never more than this, and these re-establishments are
not of the importance of the original home.*

For catching Wasps, no plan seems to succeed better than hanging
bottles (as noted by observers) partly filled with a mixture of beer and
sugar. But where there are long ranges of Peach walls, or walls with
fruit such as the Wasps delight in, I have seen glass-traps also answer
very well indeed. ‘These were made by taking a common square hand-
glass with a pointed top, and a finger-hole just at the highest part.
This glass was set on four bricks, one beneath each corner, so as to
raise the glass by the depth of the brick from the ground, not by the
width, which would allow too much space. On this lowest glass
another is placed, taking care that any opening round the edge, where
the upper glass rests on the lower one, is well closed with moss, and
the finger-hole at the top of the upper one (not of the lower one) also
carefully closed.

All that is further needed is to throw some fruit, such as the Wasps
like, beneath the trap. The Wasps will go to it readily through the
opening between the glass and the ground, but coming away is a very
different matter. Then they usually fly upwards, and, passing through
the open finger-hole into the upper glass, they are trapped, and perish.
I have seen a deep layer of flies and Wasps thus trapped, to the great
saving of the fruit on the adjacent trees.

For prevention of entry of Wasps into vineries, though the necessity
of the matter is alluded to in the foregoing observations, no precise
details have been given, I have known it answer quite well to fasten
muslin, such as old window-curtains, to the edges of the lights and the
framework to which they fitted when the lights were closed. If this

* No observations have been sent in on one point which touches us all very
nearly,—how best to lessen pain and injury from stings; therefore the following
extract-from the work of my brother, Dr. Ormerod, on Wasps, may be of interest :—
‘*‘ Ammonia or soda will sometimes relieve the pain, and chloroform more certainly
and speedily should it be at hand. Ipecacuanha is a favourite Indian remedy. But
the best way is gently to withdraw the sting, and suck the wound if we can get at
it, and then to leave it alone. Some persons swell very much after a sting, and for
these rest, and a good dose of purgative medicine, are the best remedies.” Some
few words are added on the importance of leaving the wound itself alone, that is,
not teasing or squeezing the part. See ‘British Social Wasps,’ by Edw: L.
Ormerod, M.D., p. 14.

FOOD OF THE WASPS. 139

is done carefully, there is little damage from the tacks (used to fasten
the muslin) to either the paint or wood-work, but care must be taken
to allow plenty of muslin, or the lights will necessarily not open as
wide as is needed. Also the muslin must be so arranged as not to get
in the way of the lights being closed, or to allow apertures which the
Wasps will almost certainly discover.

The food of the Wasps, taken in the straightforward common sense
view of what they swallow, or carry off, we all know well. For this,
insects in perfect or maggot state, whole or chopped up for convenience
of carriage, are a regular article of consumption; meat also is used,
and I have myself watched a Wasp carefully detach a filament of
herring, and pack the long piece away into a small parcel beneath
what may be called its chin, for transportation. Fruit, sugar, sweets,
and other edible materials, and for definite drink, a sip of beer, or beer
and sugar, are all notable articles of dietary, and so also, to the sorrow
of our bee-keepers, is honey. Also in the case of the large species,
known as Hornets, the juice flowing from young bark, which they have
gnawed down to the quick, forms an additional article of diet, given by
an additional department of mischief.

But though the distinction is fine between an article of food
swallowed for the creature’s own use, and an article of food swallowed
and wholly or partially restored for use of the young which require
victuals {and also victuals more or less prepared) to be brought to
them, still this point has to be considered in regard to Wasp food.

Researches have shown that in the larva of the Wasp, the food
canal, or bowel, has not an external vent, but opens into a blind
pouch, and it is stated that when this, with its black contents, are
thrown off, as at the second moult of the grub, this mass will be found
to be composed of various substances, amongst which scales, hairs, and
other fragments of insects, and hairs of vegetables, are recognizable.*

I have not myself seen the operation (said to take place) of the
nurse Wasps, or workers, restoring drops of their collected prey from
their own insides, and administering the proceeds in small drops to the
maggots; but from my own experience in Wasp larva feeding, they
seemed quite ready to swallow anything pleasant and available.

Those who wish to follow these matters up, will find them, and
almost everything that can be thought of in Wasp economy, in the
various special papers that have been issued for a great length of time,
successively filling in the wanting points of the previous observations.
In such of the preceding notes as refer especially to life-history, I wish
it to be particularly to be borne in mind by my readers that I have
only given a bare outline of the Wasp economy. To enter on details

* See ‘ Social Wasps,’ by Dr. Ormerod (previously quoted), p. 227.

140 WASPS.

of lesser females, under what circumstances the young of a nest
replacing a destroyed one may produce only drones, and really count-
less details besides, would be out of place here. Neither has it seemed
desirable to enter on the Wasp parasites, which play a helpful part in
keeping them in check, and especially the ‘* Wasp-nest Beetle,” as it
is sometimes called, the Rhipiphorus paradoxus, of which the larva
feeds on the young Wasp larva in its cell, and changes to beetle condi-
tion there, so that when in due course the Wasp should be expected to
come forth, instead there appears this singularly shaped beetle, with
its long compressed body, wing-cases shorter than the body, and
separated from each other at their pointed tips, and also not covering
the wings up to their extremities. These are, or were, formerly con-
sidered to be of rare occurrence, but where a Ground Wasps’ nest had
from some cause or other passed the ordinary bounds of size, I found
them once in great numbers, and a few elsewhere.

To some who are not called on to suffer in person or in pocket,—who
have leisure to sit quietly, so as not to ‘‘molest’” the Wasps, and whose
daily bread does not depend on working, hot in person and hurried,
and irrespective of Wasp presence and convenience, or whose property
is made off with, and their staff of men and horses perilled,—it may
appear a proof of fine feeling to talk, or write, of the tender affection
of the Wasps for their young, and their wnpaid labours. But to those
who are otherwise situated the case appears materially different, and I
should certainly say that where other means fail (in cases of great
infestation like that of last year, namely 1898) it is well worth while
to offer a bounty of a few pence per nest destroyed, which is a method
of prevention and remedy which often answers very much more
effectually than more elaborate arrangements.

P.S.—In the course of conversation with Mr. G. H. Carpenter,
Consulting Entomologist of the Department of Agriculture of the
Royal Dublin Society, Kildare Street, Dublin, whilst the above pages
were going through press, he drew my attention to two females of the
rare Vespa arborea, of which species the presence had not been
previously recorded in Ireland, having been sent to him in the past
season, 1898. The specimens were amongst a number of female
Wasps captured in April and May by Mr. R. M. Barrington, near
Bray, Co. Wicklow, and forwarded by him to Mr. Carpenter. The
specimens were subsequently examined by Mr. E. Saunders, and con-
sidered by him to be “certainly” V. arborea. For the above information,
with notes by Mr. Saunders, see also Ent. Mo. Mag. for July, 1898,
pp. 166, 167.

141

WILLOW.

Small Chocolate-tip Moth. Clostera reclusa, Fbr.; Clostera
pigra, Hufn.

CLosTERA RECLUSA.—Moth; caterpillar (after W. Buckler); cocoon of spun-up
leaves from life.

On the 8th of June, Miss Sturge, of the Connemara Basket Industry,
Letterfrack, Co. Galway, Ireland, wrote to consult me regarding insect
injury that had appeared amongst her Osiers. Miss Sturge mentioned :
—‘* J have been advised to ask you if you could tell me how to deal
with a small grub that has attacked, and is, I fear, destroying, my fine
Osier crop. I am living in Connemara for the purpose of starting a
basket industry amongst the people.

‘‘T have been trying the experiment of planting some of the finer
varieties of Osiers on my land in order to avoid having to import them.
The dry weather does not suit them, and lately they are covered with
this soft white sticky stuff like soap-suds. I am afraid they will all
get destroyed.” —(S. 8.)

On examining the specimens sent, I found that two attacks were
present. One was that of the ‘‘Cuckoo-spit’’ insect; but it was
obvious, from the condition of the leaves, that something which was
devouring these was also present, and I begged for further specimens.
These Miss Sturge sent me on June 20th, and left no doubt as to pre-
sence of ‘‘ Cuckoo-spit.”” The other attack was of a small black, grey
and yellow moth caterpillar, which seemed to have been damaging the

142 WILLOW.

leaves considerably, and proved on examination to be larve of the
Clostera reclusa. Only one of these was observable on receipt, for the ©
others were spinning, or had spun, the Osier leaves together as shelters
temporarily, or for pupation. In one instance, the head of the little
caterpillar was observable moving from side to side almost as fast as
it could stir in forming its web and leaf shelter.

A few days later, Miss Sturge forwarded some Osier shoots for
examination. On these the leaves were in some instances almost
eaten away by the caterpillars, so that only about a quarter, or less
than that, of the lowest part of the leaf might be still remaining. In
other cases the side of the leaf was so eaten away as to leave only the
mid-rib, with remains of leaf at distances. So far as appeared by the
specimens sent, the damage was chiefly to the leafage towards the end
of the shoot, and the terminal leaves were especially chosen for
spinning together.

In her letter accompanying the specimens, Miss Sturge expressed
fear lest her Osiers should be destroyed by the attack, and enquired
whether, if she was to cut off the tops of the Osiers with the grubs in,
this would save the lower part, and I replied that if at any reasonable
cost the little bunches of spun-up leaves with the contained caterpillars
could be nipped off and destroyed, that this might certainly be expected
to make a deal of difference in danger of recurrence of attack.

The caterpillars, until they were changing colour for the chrysalis
stage, corresponded fairly well with the description given in Newman’s
‘ British Moths,’ p. 228, as having a broad grey stripe down the
middle of the back, this stripe being varied with yellow markings,*
and also having a central velvety spot on the fifth, and another on the
twelfth, segment. On each side of the grey stripe is a broad smoke-
coloured stripe running along each side and the under part of the
caterpillar; legs and sucker-feet are also smoke-coloured; but between
these and the side smoky stripe is a broad line, or narrow stripe, of
black and yellow spots. The head is black or dark; the body hairy.

The first few specimens which I had at the end of June being just
about full growth, I had little opportunity of watching them through
their changes from the characteristic colouring; but later on, beginning
about the 11th of September, I was able to observe the gradual change
of the attumn brood from the commencement of alteration of tint up
to pupation.

The caterpillars were then about an inch in length, and the change
began by the stripe along the back becoming of a more uniform tint,

* My specimens were more marked along the back with black spots, or small
lines, see figure, p. 141, copied from figure 1, plate xxxvii, of ‘Larve of British
Butterflies and Moths,’ by W. Buckler, Vol. III. Ray Society.

SMALL CHOCOLATE-TIP MOTH. 148

the grey becoming yellower, and the black markings, intermixed with
the paler tints, fainter. In a day or two, the side stripe beneath the
black stripe became orange colour, and (above) the segments in front
of the most forward black spot on the back became orange yellowish,
those behind it with orange yellow bands across, so as to give a general
yellowish appearance to the back. On the 15th, the only larva
remaining unspun-up had further changed to the stripe above being
reddish brown, with orange or yellow marks, the side stripes orange
and reddish brown, and the colour beneath of the same shade of brown
as the ground of the long back stripe.

At this date all the larve I had were either on the point of
spinning, or had spun leaves together for pupation. The open space
between the leaves being filled with web, or rather a kind of gummy
film, with some thicker threads dispersed irregularly on the surface.

On examining the spun-up leaves at date of writing (January 12th,
1894), I found the pupa of a rather dark red brown colour, with much
darker wing-cases and head end, lying within the web. The first
brood is stated (see Newman’s ‘ British Moths’) to be full-fed about
the 5th of July; the second at the end of September; ‘‘then spinning
a web amongst the leaves of its food-plant, and turning to a chrysalis
in the retreat thus fabricated, it remains in that state throughout the
winter.”

The moth appears in May and August, and is popularly known as
the ‘‘ Small Chocolate-tip’”’; scientifically the name is Clostera pigra
(Hufn.), or C. reclusa (Fb.). The latter name is given in South’s list,
p- 5, only as a synonym. ‘The shape and markings of the moth are
given at figure, p. 141. The colour of the fore wings is purple grey,
browner grey, and darker towards the hind margin, with various
markings and transverse pale lines; the hind wings dark brown-grey.

The eggs were given by Dr. Ernst Hofmann as flat, hemispherical,
and of a red flesh colour. The food of the caterpillars is given by
various writers, respectively, as the Dwarf Sallows, Salix caprea, and
S. cinerea; as Willows and Aspen; and also by Dr. Kaltenbach, as
found by himself in late summer, as on low growths of the Abele, or
White Poplar, and the Grey Poplar, 7. e., Populus alba and P, canescens ;
and I have myself found that, when other food was not accessible,
specimens in confinement would feed on leaves of Weeping Willow.

The species is considered to be widely distributed, both in England
and Ireland, and it is also a Continental kind.

PREVENTION AND RemEpires.—F or prevention of recurrence of attack,
it cannot fail to be of use, when the first brood of caterpillars are
spinning up their leaf shelters in which to turn to chrysalids about the
beginning of July, to have these little bunches of leaves-picked off and

144 WILLOW.

destroyed. To do it effectively, some one interested in the success of
prevention would do well to examine about the middle of July, and see
whether the caterpillars had gone through the change to the chrysalis
condition. It is important to be sure of this, for at first, if disturbed,
the caterpillars would be very likely to come out of their shelters, and
little good might be done by the gathering of their spun-up leaves.
But as soon as the change has taken place the bunches may be
collected and burnt. This would greatly lessen the amount of the
moths to be expected in August to start the second attack, and in case
of this occurring, any leaf-nests should be again picked off that are
observable on the Osiers about the end of September, or later; or if it
is found they have fallen at the time of fall of the leaf, any measures
that are available should certainly be taken to get rid of these.

What is really practicable for the purpose, probably only practical
Willow growers can say. Any chemical dressing, such as lime or gas-
lime, in quantity to injure the chrysalids might hurt the Willow roots,
or the chemical effect might alter the pliancy of the shoots. If the
state of the ground allowed the surface rubbish to be scraped together
and burnt before the ground was cultivated in whatever method is
requisite, this would get rid of a great many; and it would be well also
to search on the Willow stools, at the bottom of the cut-back shoots,
for what may have lodged there.

With regard to remedy when the caterpillars are ravaging on the
shoots, the matter is very difficult. Miss Sturge, in her letters to
myself, mentioned, in reference to hand-picking, that the attack was
really terrible, so that hand-picking only cleared some amount of the
many thousands.

Probably the only effective way to treat them would be to spray
with Paris-green, from a Knapsack Sprayer, which could be carried on
a man’s back, and worked by him by means of a hose.* Where there
are objections to the use of Paris-green, it would be worth while to try
washes of a mixture of soft-soap and mineral oil, which could be pre-
pared at home or purchased. The mixture sold under the trade name
of ‘‘Anti-pest,’’ by Messrs. Morris, Little & Son, Doncaster (see ante,
p- 87), would save much trouble in mixing.

Water alone, if cold, sometimes does good in clearing caterpillars
in hot weather, and this would also be beneficial in clearing the
Cuckoo-spits mentioned at p. 141. These insects are so generally
known that they do not seem to require a special notice. Most of us
know them in their fully developed state as little greyish or brownish

* All requisite details are given in my pamphlet on ‘ Paris-green,’ procurable,
price 2d., from my publishers, Messrs. Simpkin & Co., Stationer’s Hall Court,
London, E.C.; or I would have pleasure in giving it myself to any applicant,

‘¢ PEBBLE PROMINENT’”’ MOTH. 145

insects, with lighter markings on the upper wings, which are deflexed,
a quarter of an inch in length, or thereabouts, and with the power
of taking tremendous leaps. From this habit, and their somewhat
frog-like shape (in miniature) they gain their common name of ‘ Frog-
hoppers.”” The not pleasing name of ‘‘ Spittle Insects ” is given from
their habit of living in their early stages in a little mass of frothy-like
moisture, an excrementitious shelter for themselves, supplied by the
great quantity of fluid which they draw from the shoots (sometimes
exceedingly to the injury of the growth) with their suckers. In their
early stages they are of the same shape as when they become perfect
** Froghoppers,” but without wings, and also of a pale whitish or
greenish colour. Scientifically they are Cercopide ; specifically the
Aphrophora spumaria, Germ., the Cercopis spumaria, L. They are
especially injurious to Willows. In garden treatment, I have found
heartily applied drenchings of water very useful for getting rid of
them.

“Pebble Prominent” Moth. Notodonta ziczac, L.

Noroponta ziczAc.—Moth and caterpillar, life size.

In the course of the communications sent me by Miss Sturge, from
the Connemara Basket Industry, Letterfrack, Co. Galway, I found,
early in September, that, in addition to the moth infestation mentioned
in the preceding pages, and various other Willow pests that were doing
damage, the curiously shaped caterpillar of the Notodonta ziczac moth
(figured above), so-called from the peculiar zigzag position which it
sometimes assumes, was also present.

The slight descriptions which are commonly given of the colours
of the larva are very little help, and I had no opportunity of observa-
tion until the larva was an inch and a halflong, therefore I give a few
notes, more particularly of the early stages, from the observations of
the late Rev. John Hellins, published in ‘ Larve of British Butterflies
and Moths,’ by the late W. Buckler, Vol. II., pp. 152, 153 (Ray Society).

The egg is stated there to be what is called button-shaped, flat
below; one twenty-fifth of an inch across; shell finely granulated ,
colour greenish white, afterwards white. Larva at first with a large
black head, yellow body, and small hump on twelfth segment, otherwise

L

146 WILLOW.

smooth. After the first moult, the two sharp humps on the back also
appear, accompanied by variety of marking, as a whitish grey colour
along the back, with darker stripe, dark streaks on the side, and the
belly dusky, &c. At the third moult several caterpillars under
observation were found to show a pink tinge.

Of the subsequent change, Mr. Hellins mentions :—‘‘ The full-
grown larva is generally handsome, but varies a good deal in colouring;
I have short notes of one which was lilac above, dark brown below, the
hump on twelve, orange red with yellow streaks, a yellowish line along
the spiracles.’’ Another variety very fully described had ‘‘ the colour
mostly a mixture of pale delicate grey and pink,”’ varied with orange
patches, pale yellowish streaks, &c.; anda third variety was paler still.

In my own specimen from Connemara, which appeared to be fully
grown, the colouring most resembled the first of Mr. Hellins’ three
varieties, mentioned above, in the general colour, which was pinkish
or purplish, but brown or lurid below. The dorsal humps, or bluntly
pointed tubercles, were brown before, edged with a pale line, and a
dark stripe ran along the back, from the brownish head to the humps,
paler on the segment next these tubercles.

The segments beyond the fourth sucker-foot were mottled with
bright rusty and yellow colours, disposed in two short broad curved
bands pointing upwards, the upper slant of the caudal segment pinkish;
a white line down outside of fourth proleg, faint white transverse lines
on sides, and two faint white lines along back, from second dorsal
hump to the hump near the caudal extremity. Altogether this full-
grown larva was certainly, as Mr. Hellins remarks of some of his
specimens, a very handsome creature.

The autumn brood of caterpillars are stated by Edw. Newman to
‘‘spin their slight cocoons on the surface of the earth, and to remain
in the chrysalis state all winter.”

The moth is double-brooded; but as from comparison of observa-
tions of different writers, British and Continental, it appears that the
moth may be found from April to July, and the caterpillars from June
to September, it appears as if for all practical purposes, the presence of
the infestation might be considered as pretty constant during the warm
season.

The moth is of the shape and pattern figured at heading, with a
tooth at the hinder margin of the fore wings, which are chiefly
ochreous brown, with a large pale grey blotch occupying about a third
of the middle part of the fore edge, and various markings forming an
eye-like spot at the tip of the wing; the hinder wings have a dingy
brown ground colour.

Amongst the various kinds of injury to leafage sent me, or described
to me, by Miss Sturge as going on amongst her Osiers toa very serious

‘¢ PEBBLE PROMINENT” MOTH. 147

extent, I cannot tell how much might be owing to this special kind, the
‘“‘ zigzag” caterpillar. I should think, however, that part of the great
mischief reported to me on June 13th, might very likely indeed be
caused by the larve of this Notodonta ziczac whilst still in the very
young state which they would almost certainly be in early in this
month.

Some of this mischief was caused beyond doubt by caterpillars of
the C. reclusa moth, and the ‘‘ Cuckoo-spit” insects, as mentioned in
the preceding paper; but on turning to my reply to Miss Sturge’s
letter, I find I mentioned, ‘‘From the manner in which the skin
of the leaf has been gnawed, I should think that very likely you
had the ‘Willow Beetle’ present.” In the case of this beetle
infestation the larve feed on the under side of the leafage, working
right through to the upper films until it is so thin that it cracks,
or may crack, and dry away. Although I was in communication
with Miss Sturge until autumn or early winter, no observation was
made of Willow Beetle being seen; but finding later on that N. ziczac
was present, I turned to the account of it by Mr. Hellins (previously
quoted), and there I find the following passage :—‘‘ After the larva
begins to feed, a greenish tinge comes over the body; at first the larva
gnawed only one side of a Willow leaf, leaving the opposite skin and
all the ribs untouched.”

With advance of growth, presumably, this habit is left off; so far
as I saw, the leaves of Weeping Willow, which I used as food, were
consumed from the edge. But in future instances of infestation it
would be well worth while to investigate this matter fully.

The methods of prevention and remedy would be similar to those
for destroying the C. reclusa, noticed at pp. 1483—145.

SAWFLIES.—Willow Sawfly. Nematus salicis, L.

Amongst the various kinds of Willow infestations of which samples
were sent, were those of several species of Sawflies, of which the
following is, I believe, not very common, and possibly the local out-
break to such a serious extent may have been influenced by the peculiar
weather conditions of the spring and early summer.

On July 6th, I was favoured with the following note of observation
from Mr. J. Brooke, of Haughton Hall, Shifnal, Salop :—‘‘ The cater-
pillars, of which I enclose a specimen, I found in such numbers on a
row of Pollard Willows, at Sutton Maddock in this county (Salop), as
to completely strip them of leaves. I presume it is the larva of some
Sawfly, but I am not able to identify it, nor did I ever see it in such
quantities before.”’

148 WILLOW.

The specimen sent agreed even to almost (if not quite) the minutest
particulars with the description of the larva of the Nematus salicis given
by Mr. Cameron, and the coloured figure after Brischke.* The peculiar
colouring of the caterpillar makes it very noticeable; the head being
black; the first three segments, and also the last of some tint of
orange, and the intermediate segments bluish green. Along the body
are seven rows of black points or spots, which are sometimes counted
as nine where the two black spots on each segment, between the dorsal
and first side row, are also counted as forming a row on each side.
The spots, or points, are fewer on the orange segments, and over the
tail is a large black spot. ‘‘ The thoracic legs are marked with black,
the claws being of the same colour.’’ It may perhaps be of some ser-
vice to remark in passing that ‘“‘Sawfly”’ caterpillars are commonly
distinguishable from caterpillars of butterflies and moths by the much
greater number of their prolegs, or sucker-feet, so that altogether,
counting claw-feet and sucker-feet, there are commonly from eighteen
to twenty-two legs. In the genus Nematus the larve have twenty or
eighteen legs; in the case of the N. salicis I am not perfectly sure of
which number it is possessed, but I think it is twenty.

Where the larve are numerous, as occurs on the Continent, they
are described by Kaltenbach as feeding voraciously on the leafage of
various kinds of Willows; and it is mentioned by Dr. Ritzema Bos
that there are two to three broods in the year. ‘The cocoon is formed
in the ground, so that where attack has been troublesome, lightly
disturbing the surface of the soil so as to skim off the top down to
where the cocoons lie and destroying them in the infested earth, would
much lessen coming attack.

As this N. salicis does not appear to be very common in this
country, it has seemed worth while just to allude to its presence; but
so far as I am aware it was only seriously destructive in the one
locality named.

Other kinds of Sawfly attack were also present on Willow, of which
specimens were forwarded to me, but which I have not entered on at
length, as they were not of special importance. In practical work
these infestations are generally observed in larval state, or are drawn
attention to by the peculiar method of injury, or by the growths some-
times caused, as for instance, the green or rosy galls sometimes found
in great numbers on Willow leaves.

The special kind of Sawfly causing each kind of attack is often not
noticeable without much watching; amongst other reasons, because
when the grubs are large enough, or the galls large enough, to be

* See ‘Mon. of Brit. Phytophagous Hymenoptera,’ by P. Cameron (Ray Society),
Vol. II., pp. 168, 164; and Plate VIL., fig. 9, in Vol. I.

WILLOW SAWFLY. 149

noticeable, the Sawflies which laid the eggs may very likely have
passed away. But I add a figure of the Gooseberry Sawfly, Nematus
ribesti, magnified, belonging to the same sub-group as N. salicis, as an
example of the general appearance of the imagos of this genus. The
imago of the N. salicis is to some degree distinguishable by its large

NEMATUS RIBESII, Magnified ; length of body from a quarter to a third of an inch.

inflated yellow abdomen, and the nerves, blotch, and line below it
(stigma and costa) on the front edge of fore wings being black; the
wings are hyaline and yellowish ; length of body half an inch or rather
less. For full description see Mr. P. Cameron’s work cited p. 148.

INDEX.

Acridium americanum, 51
95 sgyptium, 48
3 paranense, 47, 49—51
5 peregrinum, 51
Agrotis exclamationis, 59
7 segetum, 54
Anti-pest, a serviceable application for
destroying Gooseberry Red Spider, 37
Aphis, Bean, 5; Wasps attracted by,
129
Aphis, Mangold, 55
Aphrophora spumaria, 145
Apple, 1-—4; unusual appearance of
Lappet Moth infestation on, 1—4;
names of Apple attacks reported
(note), 4
‘“‘ Apple-bee,’”’ Cornish name for Wasp,
126
Asopia costalis, 15

Beans, 5, 6

Bean Aphis, 5,6; Wasps at, 129

Black Currant Mite Galls, 90—93; treat-
ment for by Mr. Speir, 91, 92; by Mr.
C. D. Wise, 92; by Mr. J. Biggs, 93

Bryobia pretiosa, 32

Cecidomyia destructor, 19
Ceutorhynchus assimilis, 62
35 contractus, 74

Charlock Weevil, 74—79; attacks of to
sprouting Mustard, 74—76; attacks
of to Turnips and Charlock, 76, 77;
to be found in galls in Charlock roots,
78; description of weevil, 74

‘‘Chiswick Compound,” a serviceable
soft-soap and sulphur mixture, 43

Chlorops teniopus, 6

Clostera pigra, 141

3 reclusa, 141

Cockchafer, 27; distinctions between
larvee of, and larvee of Rose Chafer,
29

Corn and Grass, 6—29

‘‘Cuckoo-spit,”’ on Osiers, 141, 144, 145

Cucumber, infested by Root-knot Eel-
worm, 101, 102

Currant and Gooseberry Scale, 39—43 ;
kinds of Currant attacked by, 39;
life-history of, 40—42; remedial treat-
ment for, 42, 43; applications to
destroy, especially Chiswick Com-
pound, 43

Daddy Longlegs, 95—-99; grubs amongst
Strawberry runners, 96; method of
trapping under sods, 97; and of de-
stroying by use of rape-cake presum-
ably mixed with Mustard, 96, 97

Danysz, Mons. J., observations by on
Ephestia kuhniella, vii

Diamond-back Moth, 108—110 ; referen-
ces to appearance of in 1891 and 1892,
108; littleif any record of appearance
of in 1893, 109; notes of distribution
of from south to north of Norway,
109,—facility with which the infesta-
tion might be borne to us from
thence, 110

Ephestia kuhniella (see Mediterranean
Flour Moth), vii

Fisher Hobbs’ mixture, recipe for, 68
Fitch, Dr. Asa, notes on Currant Scale
by, 39

Gall Mites, 84—95; classification of,
85, 86; Pear-leaf Blister Gall Mites,
description of, 86,—habits of, 87, 88 ;
Plum-leaf Gall Mite, description of,
and of galls of, 88,89; Black Currant-
bud Gall, description of, 90; treat-
ment for, 91—93; publications re-
garding by Dr. Alfred Nalepa, 94, 95

Gastropacha quercifolia, 1

Gold-fringe Moth, 15

Gooseberry, 32—43

Gooseberry and Ivy Red Spider, 32—38;
localities of attack, 32; notes of ob-
servation of, 33—36; remarks on
species of, 33; remedial applications
for, 36, 37

Gout Fly, 6—11; unusually early attack
of last year, 7; attack worst on
plants in poor circumstances, 10;
reason why early sowing serviceable
against, 11

‘Haystack ’’ Moth, 14—19; cocoons of,
15; locality of in stacks, 16; amongst
‘¢ Birch-knots ” and rubbish, 17 ;
larve of, 18

Hessian Fly, 19—22; some report of
appearance of, 19; appearance of in
Norway, 21, 22

Heterodera radicicola, 99

INDEX.

Hop, 44, 45

Hornets, localities preferred by, 114;
amount of nests observed near Red-
ditch, 124; method of taking nests
of in trees, 125; child killed by stings
of, 134

Horses, risk to from Wasps’ nests
turned up in ploughing, 128, 129, 131

Knapsack pump or sprayer, 38

Ladybird, ‘‘ Minute Black,” 44—46; a
‘Red Spider’ eater, 44, 45; life-
history of, 45

Lappet Moth, 1—4; unusual appear-
ance of on Apple, 2; life-history and
peculiarities of caterpillar, 2, 3; pre-
vention, 4 ;

Lecanium ribis, 39

Little Grain Moth, 11—14; great ap-
pearance of at King’s Lynn, 12

Locusts, 47—53; in Alfalfa from Buenos
Ayres, 47, 49; South European non-
migratory species imported and de-
scription of, 48; South American
migratory species and description of,
50, 51; North American migratory
kind, 51; migratory kind of S. W.
Asia and N. Africa, and note of great
similarity of this and the two pre-
ceding species, 51,52; bibliographical
references, 53

Mangolds, 54—60; severe attacks of
Aphides on (note), 55, 56; unusual
prevalence of Surface Caterpillars at,
54, 59

Mediterranean Flour Moth, report on by
Mons. J. Danysz, vii

Meligethes eneus, 61, 63

Melolontha vulgaris, 22

Mustard, 60—79

# Beetle, 61—74; life-history
of, 62, 63; observations on the method
of protection of eggs, emergence of
grubs, and effect of Paris-green on
newly hatched grubs, 64—66; obser-
vations on habits of at Peterborough
conference, 66—68; information by
Mustard-growers, where published,
69 ; serviceable leaflet issued by Messrs.
Coleman, 70; machine invented by
Mr. Cole Ambrose for clearing beetles,
70—73

Mustard (and Turnip) Flower Beetle,
61, 63

Nalepa, Dr. Alfred, quotations from, 86,
88, 89; list of some publications of, 94

Nematus salicis, 147

Notodonta ziezac, 145

Ormerod, Dr. Edward L., work on
‘British Social Wasps’ by, quoted,
138, 139, &e.

Osiers, insect attacks on, 141—147

151

Pear, 79—83
», and Cherry Sawfly, 79—83; de-
scription of grubs of, 80; egg with
hatching larva, 81; remedial mea-
sures, 82, 83
Pebble Prominent Moth, 145—147; zig-
zag caterpillar of, 145; different
methods of feeding of, 146, 147
Phyllopertha horticola, 22
Phyllotreta nemorum, 61, 67; applica-
tion to destroy, 68
Phytoptidw, 84—95 (see ‘Gall Mites ”’)
Phytoptus pyri, 84, 86—88
a similis, 88, 89
a ribis, 90—93
Plutella cruciferarum, 108
Potassium, cyanide of, to destroy Wasps,
120, 127, 129; a deadly poison, 120,
137
Pyralis costalis, 15, 18
» glaucinalis, 14—19

Red Spider (Gooseberry), 32—38
‘5 (Hop), ‘‘ Minute Black ”’

Ladybird destructive to, 44—46

Ribbon-footed Corn Fly (see Gout Fly), 6

Root-knot Eelworm, 99—108; life-
history of, 100, 101; galls of on
Cucumber roots, 101, 102; method of
infestation, 102; how to distinguish
from “ Stem Eelworm,’’ 100; series
of experiments for destroying by
chemical applications, 103—108; list
of chemicals used, 105; effects of
stated amounts of various chemicals
on EKelworms and on plants, 106;
further observations on effects in
different circumstances and localities,
107

Rose Chafer, 22—31; notes of observa-
tion of, 23—27; method of collecting
beetles, 25; injury of grubs to turf,
24—27; grubs searched for by birds,
24—28; depth of grubs beneath the
surface, 26; distinctions between
larve of, and larve of Common Cock-
chafer, 29, 30

Sawfly, Pear and Cherry, 79—83
», Willow, 147—149

Schiodte, J., on distinctions between
larve of MW. vulgaris and P. horticola,
29

Schistocerea (see Acridium)

Schoéyen, Dr. W. M., references to his
tabulated list of Norwegian Lepidop-
tera with their distribution, 109, 110

Scymnus minimus, 44

‘‘Slugworms’’ (see Pear and Cherry
Sawfly)

Small Chocolate-tip Moth, 141—145;
caterpillars of on Osier leaves, 142;
description of caterpillars of, 142,—as
changing colour for pupation, 143,—
turning to chrysalis in spun-up leaves,
143; prevention and remedy, 143—145

152 INDEX,

Soft-soap and sulphur mixtures, Chis-
wick Compound, 43; Burford’s No. 1
kerosine soap, recipe for, 43

Starlings at Chafer grubs, 24, 25

Stings of Wasps, to lessen pain from, 138

Strawberry, 95—99

Surface Caterpillars, at Mangolds, also
at Turnip and other crops, and young
Conifers, 54—60; notes of attack
chiefly to Mangolds, 55—58 ; to some
other crops and to Turnips, 57—58 ;
possible effect of the drought, 57;
hand-picking, 59; at young Conifers,
60

Tar, to check advance of Mustard Bee-
tles, 67; to destroy Wasps’ nests, 127,
137

Tinea granella, 11

Tipula oleracea, 95

Tomato, 99—108

Tromsé (in Arctic Norway), great pre-
valence of Wasps at in 1883—1884, 134

Turnip, 108—110

» Flea Beetle, on Mustard, 61, 67

Vespa arborea, 113; first record of pre-
sence of in Ireland, 140
» erabro, 114, 124, 125, 134
», norvegica(=britannica), 113,131,
134

, germanica, 113, 123, 134

»» rufa, 113, 123, 134

, sylvestris (= holsatica), 113, 122,
123, 134

_

Vespa vulgaris, 113, 122, 123, 134

Wasps, 111—140; great prevalence of
and probable reason for unusual
amount, 112; species of British
Wasps, 113; Vespa arborea, recorded
presence of in Gloucestershire, 114;
V. crabro, 114; life-history of Wasps
and method of nest making, 115—117;
food, 118; notes of observation of
during 1893 in Scotland, 119—122;
in England, 122—133; in Ireland,
133; in the Netherlands, 133, 134;
in Norway in 1893 and in 1883—1884,
134—135; general summary, 135—
140,—including numbers of nests in
given areas, 135; views as to some
amount of benefit and great certain
loss from Wasp presence, 136, 137;
methods of destruction of nests, 137;
dress for taking tree nests, 137; traps
and mixtures to attract, 138; to pre-
vent ingress of into vineries, 138;
food of in connection with collection
of for use of maggots, &c., 139; Para-
site Beetle, Rhipiphorus paradoxus,
found in Wasps’ nests, 140; Vespa
arborea, first recorded presence of in
Treland, 140

Willow, 141—149
3 Sawfly, 147—149

Wolf Moth (see Little Grain Moth), 11

Ziezac caterpillar, 145

WEST, NEWMAN AND CO., PRINTERS, HATTON GARDEN, LONDON, E,C,

DV aiadite Hoe HRS Ue etre AN) SF wk
= CN ae my +; Td , i j ’
i ¢ ry
a ‘
;
i of z siy
a aie Bis
ha | . wine si r Vine r PN , wm) ‘
iy i ara ieee ARTS, ra ¥ ‘
hii bk’ eh Meh Cae y mace ae MT ahs Pep
; AN Ot ah :
¥ “ ‘ \ sh ’ Prat ' *
F ‘

] ; 7 i
eo veoh! Bs d Vy,
Hite ae TAR Ae tga aN
; Re eT ie uae

Ae} ( 2 r fe V4 i wh
Nai Gd Wy Ae Mish Fok And eh a f i j Fund ’

DRT TRINA Ra RI TMOR ALAN GO oN a Ceiek Uriah a ite AMEE | ah
i. i ’ 74 . } . Sl de’ Na re ie et 707 a) titi

Y pe) : .

thi ie

ag aig phe eo

Cc Aia eA RA NAR re tht Oh ee Mera rte Saree Sr des ie
Bibione. ! 9 A eat fe Ng yes Ai ah at gal (Gy
Bb Ae be th PUBL Re ea aR Wea! Mantle Ln h Mt Tae 1 a \
at me CATA YOM Te tate clench WS tt OY Cay a eA A Loa Fe AT ot Sh a a }
eat tarel ie Rie tC AQAA UN aap Por Pehl mn Ve een at bh woes 1A |
Ot ee NL a PAT® CUE Renee ; Oi ro? Pat Ji)! ‘
is i MAM dA eS San S| eek oe bit
. UEC aMRERN eae OM ROR Nh yi 7 | i
A ; ; PP hate Rvp aN ii
. i ‘ ‘ is)
t ] ' . , ) j i /
% 4 ‘ t » y
rE " f i
e Res ee MAAS Bef SP ak Pete: nike any rane
( Ivette w Paha Pay | ae

fs eit se Dy CaP oa

Por Died 4
4 Tod
tn ube
. , ;!
o
i ¢ (ae : ies
; 4 f - % ey wi
y ‘ ine : 27
ia) Debate MeO cae !
¢ \ ot
1 i
¢
a \ > :
= = A f
a At ee, Vndite
r
* . Ls ry ,
}
y he
i
*
Po
‘
-
‘
F f { iow FOL Prater Ale Pe segs

vi

See Tee at

“rE

REPORT OF OBSERVATIONS

OF

INJURIOUS INSECTS

AND

COMMON FARM PESTS,
DURING THE YEAR 1894,

WITH METHODS OF

PREVENTION AND REMEDY.

EIGHTEENTH REPORT.

BY

ELEANOR A. ORMEROD, F.R. Mer. Soc.

FELLOW OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY ; MEMBER OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON }
ALSO
MEMBER OF THE ASSOCIATION OF OFFICIAL ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS,
WASHINGTON, U.S.A. 3
HON. MEM. OF FARMERS’ CLUB; HON. AND CORR. MEM. OF ROYAL AG. AND HORT. SOC.,
S. AUSTRALIA; HON. MEM. OF ENT. SOC. OF ONTARIO, AND CORR, MEMBER OF
FIELD NAT. CLUB OF OTTAWA, CANADA; MEMBER OF EASTERN PROVINCE
NATURALISTS’ SOC., CAPE COLONY, &C.

LON DON:
SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT & CO., Lintrep.

1895.

=>

re as

eAOTT Ae VO

-

JEGA Laas OV GT F

LONDON;
WEST, NEWMAN AND CO., PRINTERS,
54, HATTON GARDEN, E.C.

PREFACE.

Durine the past season of 1894 nearly all our common kinds
of crop and orchard insect pests were present, but no attacks
were reported as being prevalent generally over the country to a
serious extent, or (excepting in the case of the Antler Moth)
over large districts.

Amongst the infestations regarding which enquiries were
sent, there were a few of which the presence in this country had
not previously been recorded; and a few also of kinds which,
though well known, are very rarely injurious to farm or fruit
crops; and, early in the season, there was (temporarily) a
threatening of repetition of some of the preceding year’s chief
infestations, consequent on the unusual numbers which had
survived from these through the winter.

In the following observations I have, as far as possible, not
entered again on such of our common infestations as have been
repeatedly noticed in my preceding Reports, excepting where
there was some new information given, or (sometimes) needed.

Amongst these was the presence of Grain Aphis, differing a
little in colouring from the common kind, on grass near Neweastle-
on-Tyne; noticeable benefit to corn crops attacked by Hessian
Fly from the occurrence of good growing weather; the attack of
the so-called ‘‘ Charlock Weevil” to Mustard being injurious to
plants in much more advanced stage of growth than had previously
been observed ; and, with regard to Diamond-back Moth infesta-
tion on Turnips, we had further confirmation of the serviceable-
ness of some of the very simple applications and methods of
treatment previously recommended.

In regard to Wireworm, the Special Report of information
contributed to myself by leading agriculturists of Great Britain
and Ireland in 1882, and given at pp. 22—63 of my own Annual
Report for that year, as well as officially in the Journal of the
Royal Agricultural Society, appears to convey most of the infor-
mation commonly needed; therefore I have only now added
(p. 42) a few observations showing power of endurance of paraffin
oil by Wireworms.

Millepedes, or False Wireworms, are again mentioned in the
following pages, as practicable methods for their destruction as
field pests are still very much needed.

The attacks not previously recorded as present are all of

iv PREFACE.

importance. These are the small moth caterpillars at young
Wheat (pp. 837—40) ; the discovery of the grubs of the Turnip
Mud-beetle feeding in the uppermost part of the bulb, and
within the base of the leafage (pp. 104—110); but probably the
most important discovery of the year is that which we owe to the
skilled researches of Prof. John Percival, of the South-Eastern
Agricultural College, Wye, near Ashford, Kent, of the presence
of two kinds of Eelworms at the roots of Hops (pp. 52—60), of
which one kind, which is seriously destructive to various kinds of
crops on the Continent, had not previously come under notice in
this country, and neither had been previously observed at Hops.

The most widespread infestation of the past year was that of
the Antler or Grass Moth (pp. 12—23), which extended over
areas In seven or more Scottish counties, and has given oppor-
tunity of study of some at least of its parasitic destroyers, to
which should be added one more (of which the observation was
more recently contributed), that of the two-winged fly, the
H«xorista lota, of which specimens were bred by Mr. Service, and
kindly identified for me by Mr. R. H. Meade, of Bradford.

The great pomt of attention, however, of the year has been
Ox Warble; we (that is, those concerned) have been working on
constantly, steadily, and with good results, and especial advance
has been made in attention to the subject in Ireland. So long
as the simple directions, which we have kept well before cattle-
owners for the last seven years,* are followed, we do well. But
I am bound, though with much regret, to lay before all concerned
that there is great cause for being on the alert against advice
claiming to be authoritative, yet in which well-proved, easily
practicable, and almost costless treatment is left unnoticed, and
inefficient application advised.

During the past season enquiries or observations regarding
about or ‘upwards of 140 distinct species of infestations have
been sent to me, mainly regarding insect attacks, but also
including several other kinds of injurious attacks, as of Eelworms,
Red Spider, Millepedes, &c.

Of these I subjoin a list of the more important kinds,
arranged, as this is merely intended for popular reference,
alphabetically by their English names under the heading of
their respective orders :—

Beetles (Coleoptera).

Apple-blossom Weevil, Anthonomus pomorum . . . . Apple-flower buds.

Asparagus Beetle, Crioceris asparagi. . . . . . . Asparagus.

Bean-seed Weevils, Bruchus rufimanus . . Bean-seed.

Cabbage & Turnip-g -gall W eevils, Ceutorhynchus sulcicollis Cabbage- & Turnip-roots.

Chafers, Cockchater, Melolontha vulgaris . . . . . Leafage and Grass-roots.
96 Rose Chafer, Phyllopertha horticola. . . . 4

Charlock Weevil, Ceutorhynchus contractus. . . . . Young Mustard plants.

Death-watch Beetles, Anobium striatum. . . . . . Furniture and timber.

* See Appendix, page hx.

PREFACK.

Elm-bark Beetles, Scolytus destructor. :
Flea Beetles, Turnip, Phyllotreta of various species :
Ground Beetle, Pterostichus madidus .
5 Harpalus ruficornis
Calathus cisteloides
Ladybird, Eyed, Coccinella ocellata
5 Minute Black, Scymnus minimus .
Mustard Beetle, Phadon betule . sane
Pea-leaf Weevil, Sitones of various species .
Raspberry Beetle, Byturus tomentosus.
Shot-borer, Xyleborus dispar. :
Turnip Mud-beetle, Helophorus rugosus 5
Turnip-seed Weevil, Ceutorhynchus assimilis.
Weevil, Black Vine, Otiorhynchus sulcatus .
», Ciay-coloured, Otiorhynchus picipes.
Wireworms, Llaters of various species

Elm.-bark.
Turnip-leafage.
Strawberry fruit.

”

: Fir; exceptionally on Hop.

Red Spider.

Mustard.

Pea-leafage.

Raspberry.

Growing wood.
Turnip-leaves and bulb.
Turnip-seed.

Vines, &e.

Raspberry, &c.

Grass and crop roots.

Butterflies and Moths ee

Alder Clearwing Moth, Sesia sphegiformis

Antler Moth, Chareas g graminis. :

Cabbage Small White Butterfly, Pieris rape

Codlin Moth, Carpocapsa pomonella

Currant Clearwing Moth, Sesia tipuliformis.
Diamond-back Moth, Plutella cruciferarum.

Goat Moth, Cossus ligniperda ;

Grain Moth, Tinea granella . aaete :
Lackey Moth, Bombyx (Gastropacha) neustria .
Lappet Moth, Gastropacha quercifolia :

Surtace Caterpillars of Agrotis segetum and other species.
Tortoise-shell (Large) Butterfly, Vanessa Benen os
Wheat Caterpillars, ? Miana expolita.

Winter Moth, Cheimatobia brumata

Alder-stems.

Grass.

Cabbage-leaves.
Apples.
Currant-stems.
Turnip-leaves.

Live timber borer.
Stored corn.
Apple-leaves.
Apple-leaves.

Turnip and Mangolds.
Cherry- and Elm-leaves.
Young Wheat.
Tree-leafage.

Two-winged Flies (Diptera).

Cabbage-root Fly, Anthomyia of various species .
Carrot Fly, Psila rose . ;
Celery-leaf Maggots, Tephritis onopor dinis .
Daddy Longlegs, Lipula oleracea
Brit Fly, Oscinis frit . . . -
Gout Fly, Chlorops teniopus . :
Hessian Fly, Cecidomyia destructor
Hop Strig Maggot, Cecidomyia ? sp. separa Mey ies
Horse Warble, ? Hypoderma Loiseti . . og
Mangold Maggot, Anthomyia Ce bete .
Onion Fly, Anthomyia ceparum. . . .
OxGad Bly, Lavanusbovurmnus . 9. = . « « «
Ox Warble Fly, Hypoderma bovis . . ... .
Parasiere ly 8H aortsta, Lol lees) wl ee ee

Rachinailanyiets ven ta es 6) ia) oon 2
Sheep’ a Nostril Fly, (strus ovis . . ge
Turnip Winter Gnat, Vrichocera hiemalis

Thaw Gnat, Trichocera regelationis .

Wheat- bulb Maggot, Hylemyia coarctata

Cabbage-roots.
Carrot-roots.
Celery-leaves.

Grass and crop roots.

Young plants and ears of Oats.

Upper joint of Barley.
Corn-stems.
Hop-cones.
Horse-hide.
Mangold-leaves.
Onion-bulbs.
Blood-sucker.
Cattle-hides.

‘In larve of Chareas graminis.

Nostrils of Sheep.
In decayed Turnips.

In young Wheat.

Wasps, Sawflies, &c. (Hymenoptera).

Apple Sawfly, Hoplocampa (Tenthredo) testudinea.

Gooseberry Sawfly, Nematus ribesti ;

Pear Slugworms, Tenthredo cerasi. . .

Sirex gigas . . :

Wasps and Hornets, V espide of various species as vul-
garis, rufa, germanica, cralro, &¢.

Apple-blossom and fruit.
Leafage.

Pear-leafage.

In Fir timber.

} In ground and tree

V1 PREFACE.

Aphides, Scale Insects, &c. (Homoptera).

American Blight, Schizonewra lanigera . . . . . . Apple-bark.

Beech Aphis, Phyllaphis fagi . .. . . . . . . Under Beech-leaves.
Cherry Aphis, Myzus cerasi . . . . . = - Cherry-leaves and shoots.
Currant Green Fly, Rhopalosiphum ribis. . . . . . Currant-leaves.

Currant and Gooseberry Seale, Lecaniwn rivis. . Currant- and Gooseberry-shoots.
Currant White Woolly Scale, Pulvinaria ribesic. . . Currant-shoots.

Grain Aphis, Siphonophora granaria . . . . . . . Corn and Grass.

Mealy Bug, Coccus adonidum. . . . . .. «| Vines, &e.

Snowy Fly, Cabbage, dlegrodes proletella . . . . . Cabbage-leayes.

Of Thysanoptera, we had the Corn Thrips, known with us as
the Thrips (Limothrips) cerealium of Haliday, and the ‘‘ Black”
Thrips, the Thrips (Heliothrips) hemorrhoidalis, on Vine-leaves.

Of other serious plant infestations not of insect kind, we had
the Stem, Beet, and Root-knot Kelworms, respectively the Tylen-
chus devastatrix, Heterodera Schachtii, and H. radicicola. Spring-
tail, Smynthurus luteus, on Turnip-leaves. Of Acari, Red Spider,
Tetranychus telarius, on Hops; and Bryobia pretiosa, on Goose-
berry; also Hay Mites, T'yroglyphus longior ; and the Gall Mites,
Phytoptus ribis, in Black Currant-buds; and P. pyri in Pear-
shoots.

Very many other infestations were enquired about, of which
the enumeration would be too tedious; but it may be just
mentioned that this included various tropical attacks, as to
Sugar Cane, Tea, Orange, &c., in various parts of the world ;
and notably an infestation of Chafer or Lamellicorne Beetles at
grass-roots over the vast area of 40,000 acres of pasturage on
land in the Argentine Territories of South America.*

These various matters I attended to, to the best of my power,
and preserve the record of, with date, and name of sender of
enquiries, in the daily entries in my letter-books; and where
the subject is of importance (and in many other cases), my con-
tributors’ letters are also preserved.

In my work I am greatly indebted for assistance in difficult
points of identification to the kind help of skilled colleagues, and
amongst these, during the past year, I desire particularly to
thank Mr. R. H. Meade, of Bradford, for help in identification of
Diptera; Dr. J. Ritzema Bos, Professor at the State Agricultural
College, Wageningen, Netherlands, for assistance in the difficult
study of Nematodes, or Kelworms; and to Prof. J. Jablonowski, of
the entomological staff of the Government Entomological Station
at Budapest, Austria-Hungary, I am much indebted for colleague-
ship in economic entomological work and technical information
regarding the plant pests known with us as Thrips. To these
friends, and other friendly helpers amongst the economic and

** From specimens sent me, which were kindly identified for me by Mr.
O. E. Janson, F.E.S., these proved to be of the Diloboderus abderus, and of
the Hucranium arachnoides and Megathopa violacea, on which I have
given a short paper, with figures, in the ‘ Entomologist’ for August, 1894,
pp. 229—232.

PREFACE. Vil

official entomologists both on the Continent of Europe and the
U. 8. A. and our Colonies, I am greatly indebted, not only for
the assistance of their colleagueship, but for the liberal supply
of valuable publications, for all which I trust they will accept
my hearty thanks.

To our own agricultural press, and to many of the more
general journals, [ am at a loss to express my thanks for their
powerful assistance to the cause of prevention of insect injury,
and their courteous encouragement to myself.

Of the illustrations to the present Report, the full-page Plate
of Tylenchus devastatrix is given by his kind permission from
figures by Dr. J. Ritzema Bos; of the forty wood engravings,
those of the Golden Eye, Millepedes, Diamond-back Moth, and
Winter Gnat, I am permitted the use of by Messrs. Blackie, of
Glasgow; Corn Aphides (p. 24) are after figures by Mr. G. B.
Buckton, F.R.S.; and the caterpillar of the Large Tortoise-shell
Butterfly (p. 6) after figure by the late W. Buckler. The moths
in the figures of Antler Moth (p. 12), and Currant Clearwing
(p. 43), are from figures of which I am permitted the use by
Messrs. Allen & Co., London. The other figures, where not
acknowledged accompanying, have been drawn for this series of
Reports.

For myself, I may say that I hope to continue to answer any
enquiries on insect matters with which I may be entrusted to the
very best of my power, whether from our farmers and fruit-
growers, the editors of our agricultural papers (for whom it is
always a pleasure to me to identify insects of which the names
may not chance to be known to them), or others where such
information as I could give might be of service.

HLEANOR A. ORMEROD.

Torrmneton Houssr, St. ALBANs,
February, 1895,

LIST OF

ATTACKS OF INJURIOUS INSECTS, &e.

NOTICED IN THE FOLLOWING REPORT.

>
APPLE, PAGE
Eyed Hawk Moth. . . . . . Smerinthus ocellatu. . .... I
Lappet Moth . . . . . . . Gastropacha quercifolia. . . . . 4
CHERRY.
Large Tortoise-shell Butterfly. . Vanessa polychloros. . . . .. 6
Corn anv Grass.
Antler or Grass Moth . . . . Chareas graminis . ..... 12
Corn and Grass noes HO fo SURO MNNNORA GTM 6 6 a o wt
Hay Mites . . Poe a 5 SLOP CS UO NOPS 6 8 5 4 oo BI
Hessian Fly. . - Cecidomyia destructor . . . . . 33
Young Wheat Moth Caterpillars . 2 Miana expolita. ». »« «© « » = of
Currant.
Currant Clearwing Moth . . . Sesiatipuliformis. . . . . . . 48
EELWorms,
Corn Ear-cockle Kelworm . . . Tylenchus tritici. . . . .. . 48

Stem EKelworm* . .. . . . Tylenchus devastatric . .. . =. 50

Beet-root Eelworm*. . . . . Heterodera schachtii. . . . . . 56

Root-knot Eelworm . . . . . MHeteroderaradicicola . . . . . 60
GOOSEBERRY.

Gooseberry Red Spider . . . . Bryobiapretiosa. . .... . 62
Hop (beneficial insects).

Golden Eye. . Bo on CRG MROORIO 5 6 5 6 0 6 5 TU

Tyed Ladybird Beetle >. = Coceinellaocellata™ i cm eaten Cnet =
Horse.

Horse Warble Fly... . . . : ? HypodermaLoiseti. . « : « atp
MAncGo.ps.

Millepedes . . . .. =. . . Julide (of various species) . . . 78
Musrarp.
Charlock Weevil . . . . . . Ceutorhynchus contractus. . . . 88

PuHytoprip™, on Gatu Mirzs.
Pear-leaf Blister Mites . . . . Phytoptus pyri . ... =.=. » 86
Black Currant Gall Mites . . . Phytoptusribis . 1... ... 92

STRAWBERRY.

Pterostichus madidus
Calathus cisteloides

Harpalus ruficornis
Ground Beetles. . . . |
TourRNIP.
Diamond-back Moth. . . . . Plutellacruciferarum . . . . . 98
Turnip Mud-beetle . . . . . Helophorusrugosus. .... . 104
Springtaills .. 9: . « » « = Smynthurustuteus . . = <n

ioe Seat ai Trichocera hiemalis — \
Turnip Winter Gnats. laa regelationis ) PR
WASPSE faa -tercme RO OIA oe Gb oO 6 0 6 oo Lil’

APPENDIX.—Ox Warble Fly. - » » ypoderma bovis... « = = sneies

* For presence of Stem Helworm and ‘“ Beet-root’’ Eelworm at Hop-roots
(first observed by Prof. Percival in 1894), see pp. 52—60.

In the above list only the infestations which are more especially mentioned
in the following Report are named, and of these Eelworms and Phytoptide, or
Gall Mites, are placed under headings of these names, as their attacks are not
limited to one kind of crop. Carrot-root Fly is inserted out of place, at p. 117,
for reasons there given.

NOTES OF OBSERVATIONS

OF

PME RLOUS INSECTS

AND

COMMON CROP PESTS
Durine 1894.

APPLE.
Eyed Hawk Moth. Smerinthus ocellatus, L,

SMERINTHUS OCELLATUS.—1, Eyed Hawk Moth; 2, caterpillar.

Tur Eyed Hawk Moth is to be found at many places in England,
and its very large and handsome pale-green caterpillars are recorded
entomologically as being ‘‘ very common in the autumn, feeding on
Apple trees in gardens, and on Willow bushes in hedges.’’ Complaints
of the attack, however, are not often sent me, presumably because,

though the caterpillars are of such a great size, reaching as much as
B

Y, APPLE.

three inches in length when full-grown, their various tints of green so
much resemble those of the Apple leafage, that they are not readily
observable. Even in the case of specimens sent for examination
amongst twigs of Apple leaves, I found it required a little care to be
sure that some did not escape notice.

Fig. 2, at heading, is drawn from a full-grown specimen. The
general colour of the caterpillars is what is known as apple-green, but
varies in tint, being sometimes of a yellower, sometimes of a bluer
colour; the skin rough or ‘‘ shagreened,” and dotted with white; on
each side are seven white stripes slanting backwards at the top, each
stripe (at least when the larva is nearly full-grown) having along its
front edge a line of green of darker colour than the ground. The
seventh stripe is longer than the others, and is continued up into the
horn-like process at the tail. This horn is rough, pale or sky-blue in
colour, and greenish or black towards the tip. The head (after the
first moult) is somewhat triangular in front, with the point at the top;
the three pairs of claw-feet are pinkish or brownish, the sucker-feet
beneath the body, and the pair at the tail, green; but this caterpillar
varies much in detail of colouring with the successive moults.* Those
which I examined were almost or quite full-grown.

Last year (1894) I had only two notices of presence of this cater-
pillar besides what might be noticed casually in my own garden. The
first observation was sent me on the 27th of August, by Mr. Thos.
Harley, from St. John’s Cottage, Bewdley, with the remark:—‘‘I
send herewith a caterpillar which I find stripping the leaves of Apple
trees.” . . . ‘Last year, in August, I found one specimen of it,
apparently the only one, but this year I have found half a dozen, all
in the course of the past two or three days. In each case Apple trees
only were attacked.” ... ‘‘ The caterpillar is very destructive ; from
its colour it is scarcely discernible, and attention is only drawn to it
by seeing the young shoot, which it seems to prefer, entirely stripped
of its leaves.”’

On the 18th of September, Mr. Andrew Howard, writing from
Meldruth, Cambs, remarked :—‘‘I am sending to you by this post a
box containing three caterpillars; they are quite strange to me. I
have found seven or eight each on a separate tree (Apple trees planted
one or two years). ‘They entirely denude the tree of all its leaves, but
as they are few, and the leaves will soon naturally fall, I do not
intend to poison them with London-purple, which I have no doubt
would soon settle them.”

Accompanying Mr. Howard's letter were two very good specimens
of the Eyed Hawk Moth caterpillars, one specimen upwards of two and

* For description of the changes, see ‘ Larve of British Butterflies and Moths’
(Ray Society), by the late W. Buckler, vol. ii. pp. 99—103.

EYED HAWK MOTH. 3

a half inches in length, and the other more than twoinches. These were
very characteristic examples, and had arrived at the fourth moult, in
which the tips of the lobes of the head above the face become shortened
above, and lose the red tint (see description by W. Buckler previously
referred to). The leafage of one of the Apple shoots, sent accompany-
ing, had been eaten away right down to the footstalks; but whether
this was entirely the work of the Hawk Moth caterpillars, or the other
moth caterpillar accompanying had helped at the mischief, was un-
certain.* This, however, was immaterial, the Hawk Moth caterpillars
being known to be very destructive. The chrysalis is red-brown, and
from this the moth comes out in the following summer. The size and
shape of this is given at fig. 1, p.1. It varies from about two and a
quarter to three inches in the spread of the fore wings, which are rosy
brown or ash, with olive-brown markings; the hinder wings are rosy,
shading to brown or grey at the margin, each wing bearing a large
eye-like spot, grey in the centre, with a blue ring outside, and this
again surrounded by a black ring. From this eye-like spot the
‘« Hyed” Hawk Moth takes its name.

The moth appears about midsummer, earlier or later as the case
may be; but the caterpillars are rarely sent me until they are full-
grown, or nearly so, and attention is drawn to their presence by the
mischief they are causing amongst the leafage.

When this is observable, the best remedy would certainly be to
pick off all the caterpillars in reach, and (to remove those not in reach
of mere hand-picking) a deal might probably be done by knocking
them off individually with a long light pole. Jarring the boughs, or
spraying, would be eminently objectionable treatment to trees with
maturing crop; but with great grubs like these, even if they could not
be loosened from their hold by the end of a pole, many might be
cleared by having a spud fixed at the end of it,—thus a sharp blow
could be given to the grub on an infested leaf, or by running the edge
of the spud upward beneath a grub on a shoot it could be scraped off.
Or again, with the help of a long-handled pair of small nippers any
leaves on which these great caterpillars were seen at work could easily
be cut off so as to fall with the grub.

* This caterpillar was a larva of the Notodonta (Lophopteryx) camelina, L.,
popularly the ‘‘Coxcomb Prominent” Moth. This is a pretty caterpillar, which is
said to vary much in colour. The specimen sent was of the variety which is whitish
green along the back. Along the side is a pale spiracular line; the spiracles are
black, with a pink spot behind each; and above the tail are two tubercles tipped
with pink. The length when full-grown is about an inch and a third, and the
caterpillar feeds on many kinds of leafage. ‘The autumn caterpillars have been
recorded as spinning up in a cocoon of fine silk mixed with earth during October.
Descriptions and figures of moth and larve will be found in Newman’s ‘British
Moths,’ and others of our publications on British Lepidoptera.

B2

4 APPLE.

But with these, as with other occasional infestations of large and
handsome caterpillars, sometimes of rare species, and usually not very
numerous, it would often be the best way towards getting rid of them
to let some neighbouring collector of entomological specimens know of
their presence. In some instances their rarity would make permission
to clear them an acceptable boon to the scientific entomologist; in
others they would be a welcome addition to the stock of the professional
naturalist; and during the last few years, when such rare attacks as
those of the Alder Clearwing Moth, or the great Lappet Moth, have
required extermination for obvious economic reasons, it has been so
urgently mentioned to me by entomological friends that they regretted
not to have been told of the chance of securing specimens, that I just
allude to their wishes as often helping to a serviceable remedial

measure,

Lappet Moth. Gastropacha Quercifolia, Linn.

E.C.K.
ar, also

Apple twig with leaves eaten away ; all from life,

LAPPET MOTH. 5

Early in the month of May in 1893, information was sent me from
Hereford, by Messrs. Cranston, of the enormous caterpillars of the
Lappet Moth (one of which is figured life size at p. 4) having been
found present on some of the Apple trees on their grounds at King’s
Acre, and though not found in any considerable quantity, yet where
they were present every leaf had been devoured. Some specimens of
the attacked branches were sent accompanying (one of which is figured
at p. 4) to show the manner in which a complete clearance of the
leaves down to the very stumps of the footstalks had been effected.

The grubs being so large, it was hoped that the attention devoted
to the attack might have prevented any recurrence of the trouble ;
this, however, has not proved to be the case, and on May 10th of the
past season I was again favoured by a communication on the subject
from Mr. John Cranston as follows :—‘‘...Iam sending you by this
post some of the Lappet Moth caterpillars; the grubs vary much in
size, but there are none so large as those I sent you last year, and
which you have illustrated in your publication. We find the cater-
pillars feeding upon the young maiden Apple trees, and very few upon
the older trees. As they are found only in small quantities here and
there, the simplest and least expensive mode of destroying them is by
hand-picking them. I have no doubt that spraying the trees with Paris-
green would cause them to fall off, but it is doubtful if this would kill
them.” —(J. C.)

Accompanying the letter, more than a dozen of the ‘‘ Lappet”
caterpillars were sent, ranging from an inch and a quarter to two
inches and a quarter in length, but mostly of the larger size, and of a
greyish ground colour. Two or three were of the smaller size, and
these of a rich brown ground colour. These caterpillars, when full-
grown, are as much as four or even five inches in length (the specimen
sent me last year was more than four inches long), and are of a
variable tint, sometimes of a grey, or sometimes of a brownish, ground
colour, and the markings also variable, sometimes occurring as a row
of somewhat V-shaped marks, sometimes almost wholly absent. But
amongst the characteristic markings are two deep blue or purple,
lustrous, velvety, transverse bands, so shiny that, in German, they
are known as “‘the mirrors” (Spiegel). These are placed across the
back, on the segments next the head, and are very noticeable when the
caterpillar is moving, but scarcely at all when it is at rest. Another
very remarkable characteristic of the caterpillar is that along each
side, and just above the feet, is a row of fleshy warts or appendages
with long grey hairs. To these the name of “lappets’’ has been
given, whence the name of Lappet Moth. These ‘‘lappets’’ show
clearly on the segments not furnished with feet, or sucker-feet; but
they are so often not clearly represented (especially above the sucker-

6 CHERRY.

feet) that much care has been taken to give them distinctly in the
figure at p. 4; and the two transverse, velvety patches are also
clearly shown.

When full-grown, which may be early in the summer, the cater-
pillars turn to chrysalis condition in dark coloured oval cocoons, which
are spun apparently in any convenient shelter, as possibly under
eaves, &c., but also in crevices of bark, or on the lower twigs of the
plant on which the caterpillar fed, or amongst the grass near to the
ground. From these cocoons the moths appear, according to circum-
stances, from May to August. The figure at p. 4, from life, shows
shape, size and markings of a male and female Lappet Moth. The
colours are of a rich brown with darker markings.

In my 17th Report, I have given a detailed account of this infesta-
tion, with suggestions as to prevention and remedy, but it has seemed
desirable just to mention its reappearance, as this attack is very rarely
observed with us as an orchard pest.

CHERRY.

Large Tortoise-shell Butterfly. Vanessa polychloros, Linn.

AF

VANESSA POLYCHLOROS.—Large Tortoise-shell Butterfly ; caterpillar and chrysalis,
nat. size; branched spine from caterpillar, magnified.

The Great Tortoise-shell Butterfly was recorded some fifty years
ago as being occasionally very abundant, but very uncertain in its
appearance, and in 1857 it was noted in Stainton’s ‘Manual’ as

LARGE TORTOISE-SHELL BUTTERFLY. 7

occurring in the south, but not generally common, and it is a coinci-
dence perhaps worth notice that whilst the only locality given where
it was then ‘‘abundant’’ was Lyndhurst, in Hampshire, in the centre
of the New Forest, that in the past season the notes of injury caused
by this rare infestation were from Lymington, on the southern border
of the New Forest, not many miles from the above locality of its
former abundance.

The Vanessa polychloros, or Large Tortoise-shell Butterfly, is a
remarkably handsome insect about two and a half inches across in the
spread of the fore wings, which are marked (as figured at p. 6) with
black blotches or spots on a tawny or orange-red ground. It will be
seen that there are two large squarish blotches, and a smaller one,
along the fore edge of the wing, four about the size of the smaller
costal blotch disposed in the centre, and towards the hinder part of
the wing; the outer margin is dark, with an irregular pale line in it.
The hind wings are also tawny or orange-red, but with only one black
blotch, and the dark border is varied by blue crescent-shaped markings,
as well as by pale colouring forming a kind of irregular line outside
them. The under sides of the wings are marked transversely with
wavy lines, the basal half being thus of a mottled and of a brownish
tint, succeeded by a broad greyish band, and this by a dark border at
the edge of the wing, with a wavy blue band, or line of blue crescents, at
the inner margin; in the centre of the hind wings is a little white spot.
Along rather more than a third of the basal part of the costa (fore
edge) of the fore wings is a row of long strong bristles, which were
considered by the Dutch entomologist, Mons. P. C. T. Snellen, to be
the structural characteristic by which the V. polychloros, or Great
Tortoise-shell, might be distinguished from the V. urtice, the Small
Tortoise-shell Butterfly, which sometimes is exceedingly similar in
colouring to the larger and nearly allied species.*

In this country, the caterpillars are given by Prof. Westwood and
Mr. H. T. Stainton as especially feeding on Elm; and the caterpillars
from which the late W. Buckler’s descriptions were taken,t were
received by him on Elm twigs; and in Edw. Newman’s ‘ British
Butterflies,’ the English food trees are given by the author as the
Aspen, the White Beam, Sallow, Osiers, more commonly the different
species or varieties of Elm; and in gardens it is also found on Cherry
and Pear trees. Mr. Newman also observes :—‘‘ The wild and culti-
vated Cherry (Prunus cerasus), the Cerisier and Griothier of the French,
seems the tree chiefly selected in France, and whole rows of these

* See ‘ Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine,’ No. for September, 1883, p. 82.
+ See ‘British Butterflies and Moths,’ by the late W. Buckler (Ray Society),
vol, i, p. 54,

8 CHERRY.

trees may occasionally be seen in July entirely stripped of their leaves
by the caterpillars of this species.” *

In the observations sent me from near Lymington last year, the
caterpillars were noticed as injurious to the Elms, but the progress of
the attack was especially watched on a Cherry tree; and in the Ger-
man observations of Dr. Taschenberg and Kaltenbach they are men-
tioned as feeding on leafage of Cherry, Pear, Apple and Quince, besides
Elm, Willow, &e.

The first observation of attack was sent me on the 19th of June,
from Ossemsley Manor Farm, Lymington, Hants, by Mr. D. D. Gibb,
who mentioned that on the preceding day he had observed that a
Cherry tree on his lawn was being stripped of its leaves in a very rapid
manner, and on close inspection he found a few beetles, which he
believed to be Cockchafers (they were so, Ep.), but on several branches
which were almost entirely stripped of leaves, some large caterpillars
(of which specimens were also sent) turned out to be the destroyers ;
and, as Mr. Gibb remarked, ‘‘ Aided by a high wind, with heavy
showers of rain, and hand-picking from all the branches within reach,
I trust to make short work of this pest. Otherwise the tree would
evidently have been speedily stripped of all the leaves.”

On June 25th, Mr. Gibb wrote further, with date of when the
commencement of the mischief was noticed :—‘‘ On the 16th of June
I first observed something amiss with a Cherry tree on my lawn; when
examined on the 18th, the caterpillars which I sent you were found to
be causing the mischief. Iam not surprised to find they are those of
a Vanessa butterfly,—several ‘Large Tortoise-shell’ Butterflies were
seen in the spring, and one or two were brought in by my children, but
their lives were spared.

“T now send herewith tips of branches where first observed, and
showing the mischief caused. You will observe on the tip of one
branch a cellular formation of a honey-comb nature. Can this be
where the eggs were deposited and hatched?”’ (This was so, see
description following, Ep.). ‘The young caterpillars certainly seemed
to come from near this spot. By hand-picking the largest caterpillars
(about two inches in length) were picked off and destroyed, others
shaken and brushed off, while severe storms of wind and rain, with a
low temperature about this time, destroyed the remainder. You will
see adhering to the twig the remains of a great number of small cater-
pillars, which were destroyed by the storms before they had spread

* See ‘British Butterflies,’ by the late Edw. Newman, p. 55. In the same
paper on the V. polychloros will be found a special report of a good deal of interest
of English localities from which observations of its presence, and for the most part
the small amount of insects seen, were sent to Mr. Newman.

LARGE TORTOISE-SHELL BUTTERFLY. 9

over the tree to any distance; the larger ones either dropping or
descending to lower branches by their gossamer threads.

‘«« So far as I can see, the tree is now entirely cleared of the pest,
and I send two more caterpillars which I picked some days ago, when
I sent the others to you. These seem rather sleepy, but whether this
dormant state be the natural transition, or brought about by confine-
ment, I cannot say, at any rate they have lost their appetites.”—
CDs1).,.G;)

The above sketch agrees very correctly with the recorded life-history
of the Great Tortoise-shell Butterfly as given by various writers. The
eggs are fastened or gummed in patches, often of from one to two
hundred eggs on twigs of their food trees. The caterpillars, which
hatch during spring from these eggs, live till their last moult in
companies, and spin a web-covering for their common use. Their
first food consists of the buds and young leaves; and by day they go
out to feed, and in the evening return to their web. ‘Their head-
quarters are noticeable by the condition of the twigs, which are nearly
or quite stripped of leaves, and also by the dirt which, falling down,
accumulates in a patch beneath the tree. The caterpillars are at first
blackish grey, and strongly haired, and presently moult to an ochreous
brown colour, mixed with black, and beset with numerous branched
spines of a yellow or ochre-brown colour, each spine tipped with
black.. When full-fed, they are about two inches in length, and they
then disperse, and suspend themselves by the tail in any convenient
place for their change to the chrysalis state, from which the butterfly
may be expected to appear in two or three weeks.*

From the specimens sent me by Mr. D. D. Gibb on the 26th of
June, I was able to make some notes of the precise nature of the
injury which was in progress. Two shoots from the infested Cherry
tree were sent me, these, respectively, of about five inches, and seven
and a half inches in length, with the leaves in most instances eaten
away down to the central rib. Of seventeen or more leaves on the
longer twig, there were only four with a fair supply of green remaining.
Most of the others were little more than the central rib, now drying up
and curled.

Towards the end of the longest twig amongst the stripped and
curled mid-ribs were many cast caterpillar-skins with some web, the
collection giving a good example of the habit recorded of this kind of
caterpillar living in companies in a common web until near full
growth. The cast skins showed successive moults of the larve; and

* For more detailed information, from which the above abstract is chiefly taken,
see ‘Praktische Insektenkunde,’ by Dr. E. L. Taschenberg, pt. iii. p. 2; and also
‘ Die Pflanzenfeinde (Insekten),’ by J. H. Kaltenbach, p. 183.

10 CHERRY.

I found a difference in the colour with advance of age. The small cast
skins were black or blackish, and most of these had the branched
spines of a black tint; but in some cases the spine was tawny, or of an
ochre colour tipped with black, as in the adult larva. In all the
specimens which I examined, tle heads were set with short, black,
blunt points.

On the shorter twig there was a stripe or patch an inch in length,
by about a quarter of an inch in breadth, of empty egg-shells, occupying
about half the circumference of the twig. These eggs in their present
state were very pretty objects. The contents being hatched out, the
egg-shells were a mere whitish film, globular below, open above, so as
much to resemble the shape of a common gold-fish bowl, and with
about six ribs, of which the upper ends were well defined, running
some way from the open top down the sides of the miniature bowl.
These ribs were obviously the remains of what, whilst the egg was
unhatched, would have been the star-shaped marking on the top
noticed by Dr. Taschenberg (see previous reference). The eggs were
firmly glued to the twig in about eleven longitudinal rows, the greatest
number in one row being about thirty-three eggs.

The caterpillars, which [ received alive from Mr. Gibb, were quite
characteristic, and agreed almost to the minutest particular with Mr.
Buckler’s detailed description.* Speaking generally, they were of a
black ground colour, but sprinkled with ochrey freckles along the
back, so as to form two longitudinal stripes separated by a black line
down the middle of the back; on the sides the tints are greyer. A
‘* puffed ridge’ of ochrey brown along the region of the black ochrey
brown ringed spiracles. Lower part of the sides darker below; abdomen
black below. Head black, studded with black points, and the claw-
legs black ; with the exception of the second segment, all the others
are spiny, the third and fourth segments have four spines each, the
fifth to the twelfth, inclusive, seven spines each, all branched (see fig.,
p. 6); the spines are yellowish, or ochrey brown, tipped with black.

Some of the caterpillars sent me turned to chrysalids on the
journey, and another suspended itself by the tail, and went through the
transformation, and at first the tints were very beautiful. The figure
(p. 6) shows the angular shape with the centre of the thorax raised to
a kind of obtuse poimt; also the notched ridge running along the
centre of the back; on each side of the back, excepting near the
thorax, was a row of tubercles, yellow at the extremity, and ringed
with black. At the thoracic end of this row of tubercles, they are
replaced by three spots on each side, which at first are very conspicuous

* See ‘ Larve of British Butterflies and Moths’ (Ray Society), by the late W,.
Buckler, vol. i. p. 54.

LARGE TORTOISE-SHELL BUTTERFLY. GL

from their white mother-of-pearl-like lustre, contrasting with the
reddish surrounding colouring. ‘These six bright spots (three on each
side of the chrysalis) gradually changed in tint, until on the 29th of
June they were altering to a golden, and thence to a reddish tint. In
the first colouring, the abdomen was mainly of an ochrey tint, grizzled
with black above; the thorax much redder, as also the elevations
above the wings.

My own specimens of chrysalids being probably injured during
transmission, or in larval stage, did not develop; but on the 28th of
July, Mr. Gibb forwarded me a perfect specimen, developed from his
own chrysalids of this Vanessa polychloros, or Great Tortoise-shell
Butterfly, about two and a half inches in expanse of the wings.

Thus from Mr. Gibb’s specimens and observations during the spring
and summer of 1894, we have a complete account of the attack at
Ossemsley Manor Farm, near Lymington,—this ranging through the
various successive stages of observation of the butterflies early in the
year ; the presence of eggs on twigs; the webbed head-quarters of the
caterpillars containing cast coats of the successive moults; the obser-
vation of the handsome striped caterpillar, with their branched spines
as seen at full growth, together with observation of the devastation
which they had been making to leafage ; the change to chrysalis state
going on, in some cases, on or about the 25th of June; and to complete
and prove the observation as specified of the Vanessa polychloros, the
development of the butterfly. Also, on the 30th of June, Mr. Gibb
mentioned that he heard that the attacks of the Tortoise-shell Butterfly
caterpillars had been very great this season on Elm and other trees,
but were then past.

Prevention anp Remepies.—This attack occurs so very seldom to
any seriously hurtful extent that remedial or preventive measures are
rarely called for.

In cases (like that of the 1894 infestation) where the large butter-
flies were observed in the spring, it certainly would be desirable, so
far as the safety of the leafage of fruit-trees and of some kinds of
timber-trees was concerned, to kill all that could be captured. Pro-
bably, as this species is rare as well as beautiful, a hint given to any
neighbouring entomologist would secure very efficient help in this
matter.

If patches of eggs are noticeable, these should be cut off, and a
good watch kept for the webby or spun nest which makes a head-
quarters for the caterpillars in their early stages. The gnawed leafage
and the fallen dirt would be a guide to the whereabouts of these. On
timber-trees it would be hard to get at these nests, but on Cherry or
other orchard trees something might be done by sending a boy up the

12 CORN AND GRASS.

tree to nip these off when the caterpillars were found to be within, or
strong jarring of the branches to make them fall, and then destroying
the larve, would do good. Spraying with Paris-green would be an
obviously useful treatment, and hand-picking still more so, where the
great spiny caterpillars were in reach, as thus, when they were full-
grown and seeking convenient place for turning to chrysalis-state,
much might be done towards preventing recurrence of attack; but
generally speaking the large and beautiful insects are so scarce that
they might be left uninjured with little fear of consequences.

CORN AND GRASS.

“Antler,” or “Grass” Moth. Chareas graminis, Stephens ;
Cerapteryx graminis, Curtis; and parasites of caterpillars.

CHARHAS GRAMINIS.—Antler Moth and caterpillars.

One of the most remarkable insect appearances of the past year
has been the widespread outbreak of vast numbers of the caterpillars
of the Antler or Grass Moth (well described locally as’ the ‘ hill-grub’’)
in the §.W. of Scotland ; these attacks, as will be seen by the following
observations, and also as specially reported by Mr. Robert Service, of
Maxwelltown, Dumfries, ‘‘ being more or less general over the hill
country of Kirkeudbrightshire, and over the adjacent sheep-farms in
Ayrshire, the Dumfriesshire hills, and the contiguous sheep-farm
districts in Lanarkshire, Peebles, Selkirk, and Roxburgh. Seven
counties were affected to my knowledge, and there may be more.”’—
(R. §.).

So far as the presence of the moth is concerned, this species has
been recorded as widely distributed in England. It has been noticed
as occurring at many places from various south-coast localities north-
wards, and also over the Scotch border, and in some of these places as
being commonly found.* In Ireland the species is recorded as being

* See Stainton’s ‘Manual of British Butterflies and Moths,’ vol, is p. 204,

ANTLER MOTH. 13

‘universally common.”* But though the presence of the species is
thus widespread, the remarkable point about it is the enormous
numbers in which for no (apparently) known reason the infestation
appears from time to time, especially in mountainous districts, or on
upland pastures; so that the vast numbers of caterpillars appearing
suddenly after their winter rest, and attacking everything suitable for
their food over an area of several miles, is not only a serious scourge,
but an exceeding astonishment popularly.

Numbers of these attacks, both on the Continent of Europe and in
this country, are on record, from the time of Linneus onward; but
previously to this great outbreak of 1894 only two special appearances
have come under my own notice. These were the attack of the cater-
pillars in June of 1884, extending over an area of about ten miles of
Glamorganshire, lying west of the Rhonda Valley; and that of the
summer of 1885, in Selkirkshire, when the caterpillars did much mis-
chief on the hill-pastures of Ettrick and Yarrow. The Scottish attack
of the past season extended over a far greater area of ground than the
two above mentioned.

Generally speaking, the sudden and unaccountable (or at least un-
accounted for) appearance of these devastating hordes, and presently
their disappearance without notable recurrence of the widespread
mischief on the same area in the following season, have been remark-
able features of the attacks. But in that of the past season it will be
seen from the observations that presence of the Antler Moths had been
remarked in most unusual numbers—‘“ extraordinary swarms ’’——over
a part at least of the subsequently attacked district, and also, towards
the end of the feeding-time of the caterpillars, various kinds of internal
diseases or parasitic attacks, as of “ flacherie,” threadworms, dipterous
maggots, &c., were found present; and of the caterpillars kept in large
numbers under observation many did not turn to chrysalids, and of
such as did many did not produce moths,

The Antler Moth is of the size figured on p. 12, and takes its name
from the pale, somewhat antler-like, markings on the brown colour of
the fore wings; the hinder wings are of a brown or greyish brown.
They appear in July or the latter part of the summer, or in the
autumn, and each moth lays a large number of eggs; these, it is
stated, are as many as two hundred, and are laid in little heaps in the
ground, or at the base of the grass leaves and stems, on which the
caterpillars feed. These eggs soon hatch, and the regular course + of

* “Catalogue of the Lepidoptera of Ireland,” by W. F. de Vismes Kane,
_‘Entomologist,’ Sept. 1894, p. 264.

t+ In Kollar’s Insects the larva is mentioned as in existence in autumn, and
hybernating in winter. Dr. Taschenberg, in his ‘ Praktische Insektenkunde,’
notes that before the caterpillars fall into their winter sleep they change their skins

14 CORN AND GRASS.

life is for the caterpillars to feed for awhile on the soft parts of the
grass-shoots, to hybernate during the cold season, and with the
following spring to wake up and again feed, carrying devastation
before them, not only by the quantity of the softer parts of the grasses
consumed, but by the destruction of what, though not eaten, is killed
by being severed through.

Their habit, however, of feeding at the lowest part of the haulms
or leaves does not in any way militate against their appearance above
ground, at times in such myriads as to cause the utmost local astonish-
ment or alarm to those not acquainted with the nature of the attack,
this gregarious migration, whether to undestroyed pasturage or for any
other cause, being one of the habits which causes the destruction of
many of the larve, and also helps us to bring remedial measures to
bear. In some of the earliest observations on them, about eighty

twice. Dr. Ritzema Bos also mentions, in his ‘ Tierische schadlinge und nutzlinge,’
that the moths fly in July and August, that they lay as many as 200 eggs, and in
about three weeks the caterpillars hatch; and in his recently published report on
Plant Diseases and Injuries in the Netherlands in 1892—938, he mentions, in hig
observations on Chareas graminis, the fact of the caterpillars wintering in larval
state being well known.

To the above notes, from entomologists of the highest standing, may be added
the important observation by the well-practised Scottish naturalist, Mr. Robert
Service, of Dumfries (see the ‘ Entomologist’ for October, 1894, No. 377, p. 279),
where, in his paper on Chareas graminis in Southern Scotland, he mentions that
in a lot of eight Snow Buntings shot some years ago on Crawfordmuir, he found
an average of eight or nine undigested skins of Chareas graminis in each of their
stomachs.

We have thus a complete chain of evidence of the winter existence of the
caterpillar traced onward, from appearance of the moths to quantity of eggs laid ;
time elapsing before hatching; number of moults before the caterpillars fall into
their winter torpor; and also observation of their being found in January in the
crops of insectivorous birds who had searched them out of their winter shelters. _

I have specially drawn attention to this, as it is important to be rightly
acquainted with the early history of the grubs, and what would apparently be a
great misconception might arise from unconsidered reading of the notes by the
late W. Buckler, given in his ‘ Larve of British Butterflies and Moths’ (Ray Soc.),
vol. iv. p. 67), and reprinted from his observations given in Ent. Mo. Mag. for
February, 1869. Here Mr. Buckler mentions larve of Chareas graminis, Helio-
phobus popularis, and Luperina cespitis, which he deals with together, as haying
great similarity, hatching ‘‘ some time in spring, the exact date varying according
to the character of the season.”” But taking the whole of the passage, it certainly
appears to me that this statement may be supposed to refer to the history of the
larvee which he is describing from eggs sent him up to hatching-time, for he men-
tions the changes of colour in the egg before hatching out of the larve; and this
must have been in artificial circumstances, as he mentions the eggs being sent him,
and that he reared each species twice over to make sure of the distinctive markings.
This is a very important point for consideration, and Gan hardly in any way be
considered to militate against the correctness of the long-recorded observations in
natural circumstances.

ANTLER MOTH, 1155

years ago, this habit was noticed, and in the great Glamorganshire
attack of 1884 it was observed, ‘‘ The mountain brook running from
the Fforch Mountains was thick with the myriads of these caterpillars
which had been drowned by falling into it during their march across
the side of the mountains.” The Ystrad side of the Bwleh-y-Clawdd
Mountains above Cwm Park were brown, as the result of recent fires
ignited with a view to destroy the pests. Near the summit the insects
were observed, which moved down the mountain path from the burnt
herbage with extraordinary rapidity.*

The caterpillars, when full-grown, are about an inch or rather
more long, with brown head, and the body of a deep bronzy colour,
exceedingly shiny on the back and on the upper part of the sides.
The bronzy colour is divided lengthwise by three pale lines (see fig.,
p. 12), the back and side stripes meeting, or almost meeting, above
the tail, and another narrower pale stripe or line runs lower down
along each side.t| During the summer the caterpillars turn in the
ground to reddish or dark brown chrysalids, from which the moths
presently come out, as previously mentioned; and it seems worth
while to draw attention to the important fact that in some instances
at least observation of the autumn appearance of the moth in unusual
numbers might save us from the hordes of caterpillars of the following
year finding us quite unprepared.

The first note of appearance of the Antler Moth caterpillars was
sent me on June 22nd, from Milsington, Hawick, Roxburghshire, by
Mr. Charles Scott, with the observation, ‘‘ 1 herewith send for your
inspection specimen of caterpillars which are making considerable
havoc to the grasses on the hill-pastures in the western part of Rox-
burghshire ; also the adjoining counties of Dumfries and Selkirk.’’
The enclosure proved to be without doubt the larve of Chareas
graminis, or ‘* Antler” or ‘‘Grass’’ Moth; and a few days later, on
June 28th, Mr. Scott further added that, after receipt of my reply, he
had been looking more particularly at the caterpillars, and found some
still quite young ones.

At the beginning of July I received information from Prof. Wallace
(Professor of Agriculture in the University of Edinburgh) of the
appearance in immense numbers of grubs in the highlands of the
South of Scotland, more especially in the districts where the Voles
did so much mischief not long ago, with the remark, ‘‘ They are said
to be worse than the Voles in some places.” The consignment of

* «Highth Report on Injurious Insects,’ by E. A. Ormerod, p. 18.

t For full description and details of distinction in markings between the larve
of the Chareas graminis and those of two other very similarly coloured grass-
feeding moth-caterpillars, see ‘Larve of British Butterflies and Moths,’ by the late
W. Buckler (Ray Soc.), vol. iv. p. 69.

16 CORN AND GRASS.

grubs sent accompanying showed them to be without doubt those of
the Antler Moth.

In a letter to the ‘ Scottish Farmer,’ Glasgow, written on July 4th,
Prof. Wallace begins with the following remark, which is of interest
geographically, as showing by the altitude that in this case certainly
the attack might very correctly be described as affecting the ‘ up-
lands” :—-“ The Dumfriesshire Antiquarian Society had an excursion
to Leadhills and the neighbourhood last Saturday, and amongst the
trophies collected by the enthusiastic naturalists were a number of
grubs of the Antler Moth, or Grass Moth, the Chareas graminis, Linn.”
On turning to Keith Johnston’s ‘ General Gazetteer,’ I find the following
information :——‘‘ Leadhills, a mining village, and the highest in Scot-
land ; county of and 18 miles south of Lanark, parish of Crawford, in a
bleak district. Elevation, 1823 ft. above the sea. Mean temp. of
year, 44:1°; winter, 32°1°; summer, 55°7° Fahr.’’*

The next communication was sent me from the more southerly
locality of Tanlawhill, Langholm, in the south-east of Dumfriesshire,
on July 2nd, by Mr. W. Gray ; and this, together with the other short
letters with which I was favoured by Mr. Gray will be found to be of
much interest, in opening up the subject of parasitic infestation of
various kinds being present to such a degree in the Antler Moth cater-
pillars as in all reasonable probability greatly to lessen amount of
recurrence of this (the Antler Moth) attack.

From specimens forwarded in illustration of Mr. Gray’s notes, we
have observation of presence of a great deal of Nematoid, or Thread-
worm, internal infestation. This, so far as shown by specimens sent of
a species of Mermis ; also presence of the severely infectious disease well
known in Silkworm caterpillars as ‘flacherie,” and (in the chrysalids) of
bacteria, not yet identified; also, partly from Mr. Gray’s specimens
and partly from another source, we find the presence of maggots of the
parasitic Tachinid flies. Other kinds of disease or parasitic infestation
were present, which I notice, together with the above, further on in
such detail as we have, under the heading “parasites”; but I first give
Mr. Gray’s communication, beginning on July 2nd, as follows :——

‘“‘Tsend you by same post as this some grubs which are doing
great damage to grass in this district. On cutting them open I found
three or four Hair-worms in them, and in two cases maggots.” .. .
‘‘Out of a hundred grubs I had, I only got three chrysalids.” On the
13th of July Mr. Gray sent me some more specimens, with the obser-
vation, ‘‘I have only got a few of the grubs, which I send you, also two
maggots. Iam sorry that I did not get your address sooner, as the
shepherds say that they ” (the caterpillars of the C. graminis) ‘‘seemed

* In the above quotation I have given words signified by contractions or single
letters in the original at length for the sake of clearness,

ANTLER MOTH PARASITES. 17

all, when they first came, to have these hairworms within them ; now
there is only an odd one.”

On the 16th of July Mr. Gray forwarded me more specimens of
these Hair- or Thread-worms, which proved to be Nematoid worms of
‘the genus Mermis, with the remark, “I send you some more cater-
pillars, also two of the Hairworms and one maggot’’; and on the 12th
of August Mr. Gray wrote further, still noticing the perishing of the
chrysalids, and also presence of a disease which turned the caterpillars
black, hard, and brittle. ‘‘I am sorry to say that the chrysalids I had,
which I was watching, have all been spoilt. I have been wondering if
the caterpillars and the Voles were in any way connected, as in 1891
and 1892 the Voles were very bad in this district, and sometimes these
pests lead up one to another.” . . . ‘‘Some of the caterpillars I found
were the full length, and black and quite hard, and on breaking them
I found them full of a reddish liquid.” .. .

Parasites.—— The very long filiform worms, of which specimens
were sent me by Mr. Gray, and which I also found alive in the Antler
Moth caterpillars, proved to be Nematoid, or ‘‘ Threadworms,”’ of the
genus Mermis. They were transparent and whitish, and, unless highly
magnified, appeared only like a long white thread, but with great
power of contorting themselves into an elaborate knot. The longest
Threadworm which I managed to extract (so far as I could ascertain
unbroken) was about eight inches in length, and from the same cater-
pillar I extracted a piece of Threadworm six and a quarter inches, and
another about four inches long. As I could not trust to my own
identification of Nematode worms, I forwarded several specimens to Dr.
J. Ritzema Bos, Professor at the Royal Agricultural College, Wageningen,
Netherlands, who was good enough to inform me that the Threadworms
were certainly of the genus Mermis, and apparently Mermis albicans,
yv. Sieb., but this (i.¢., the species) he would not state positively, the
part v. of the ‘ Zeitschrift fur wissenschaftliche Zoologie,’ in which
this species is described, not being then at hand.

These Mermis live in the body-cavity of insects, and escape into the
damp earth, where they come to sexual maturity and pair ;* and in
this same paragraph (see reference below) it is stated that v. Siebold
established by experiment the fact of the migration of the embryos of
the Mermis albicans, v. Sieb., into the caterpillars of the small moth,
the Tinea evonymella, a small yellowish-grey caterpillar, with black
spots, which lives on the Spindle-tree, which is of interest, as giving a
precise record of their presence in one kind of lepidopterous larva.

“ Fuacueriz,’”’ — Of the few Chareas graminis caterpillars which I
wab able to forward to Dr. Ritzema Bos, he further remarked, ‘‘ One
was attacked by ‘ flacherie’—‘ flaccidezza’—a disease which is also

* See ‘ Text-book of Zoology,’ Clans & Sedgwick, vol. i., 2nd Edition, p. 356.
C

18 CORN AND GRASS.

known to attack Bombyw mori and Liparis (Ocneria) monacha.” In
reply to my enquiries as to the characteristics of this disease, which I
had never had the opportunity of studying, Dr. Ritzema Bos was good
enough to give me the following introductory explanation :— ‘‘ The
phenomena of the ‘flacherie’ are—Ist, the larve have no more
appetite ; 2nd, they do not eat more; 8rd, they become weak (‘schlaff’
in German), and when they walk on a leaf or a branch they attach
themselves with one or two pairs of feet; and so the weak body hangs.
Soon it shrivels, and only in the lowest part of the hanging body a
brown liquid is found, so that this lowest part is thick, the other part
of the body thin. The larve which are attacked by the ‘flacherie’
become totally disorganised, and the disorganised parts of the body
change into a brown liquid, which contains a very great number of
little oil bulbs, and also different species of Bacteria.’”’—J. R. B.

The method of action of the disease is stated to be the beating of
the dorsal vessel becoming slower, then a green drop appearing at the
mouth of the caterpillar, and the worm secreting a dirty liquid, which
soils the anal orifice and closes it.. The skin shortly begins to shrivel
and draw in round the part of the body between the claw-legs and the
sucker-legs, and at this point the body begins to turn brown and then
black, and the whole worm is soon in an advanced state of putrefaction.
Masses of undigested food will be found in the intestines, and amongst
the parasites usually attending putrefaction are a special bacillus, and
what is called a chain-ferment, scientifically the Streptococcus bombycis
of Bechamp.* .

The precise cause of the death of the caterpillar is stated to be from
the gases evolved by the fermentation of the food, followed by diarrhea,
and the closing of the anal orifice bursting the walls of the intestines.
In an account of bad attack to Eri silkworms, considered at the time
to be undoubtedly of ‘ flacherie,” + it is stated that when just about
the age for spinning their cocoons they stretched back their heads and
necks, ‘“‘reached”’ several times, and with a good deal of difficulty
yomited a thick shiny fluid (of a dirty white colour), and soon died.

* The above short notice of some of the main characteristics of the disease
such as are noticeable by ordinary observers without the help of high microscopi¢
powers are mainly taken from the ‘ Ninth Bulletin of the U.S.A. Department of
Agriculture’ (sixth edition), 1886, and also ‘ Indian Museum Notes,’ vol. i. No. 3,
Calcutta, 1890, pp. 144, 145. In these will be found much useful information on
the subject; and in the U.S.A. Report, by Prof. C. V. Riley, quotations from, and
references to, the work of Pasteur, ‘Etudes sur les maladies des vers a soie,’
and that of Maillot, ‘Legons sur les vers 4 soie du murier,’ and other writers. The
‘Indian Museum Notes’ at pages referred to are mainly, as mentioned by Mr. E. A.
Cotes, the compiler, a digest of the U.S.A. Report, and, it may be added, in very
useful form.

+ See ‘Indian Museum Notes,’ vol. i. No. 4, p. 200.

ANTLER MOTH PARASITES. 19

Whether the “ flacherie”’ was general in the C. graminis larve,
which came to hand last year for observation, we have not definite
proof from specimens reported on in this country, for few of us con-
cerned, and unfortunately myself amongst the number, were then fully
qualified to identify, but certainly many of the symptoms pointed to
this being the case. On the 17th of August, Mr. Robert Service wrote
me from Maxwelltown, Dumfries, N.B.:—‘‘ I had many hundreds”’
(of the caterpillars of C. graminis, Kp.) “in confinement, and of these
scarcely 5 per cent. reached pupahood, and the few pup nearly all
died off also. The larve reached their last stage, then died off of a
disease that converted their bodies almost into fluid.”

In the case of ‘‘a large supply of the larvee of Chareas graminis,”
which were sent by Mr. Service to Mr. Richard South, F.E.5.,
Macclesfield, Cheshire, Mr. South kindly let me know that these were
nearly full-grown, and appeared to be quite healthy when they came to
hand; they were supplied with a growing sod, and in a few days dis-
appeared, and, it was hoped, had pupated. However, with the excep-
tion of about a dozen which attained the pupa-stage, the entire batch
were found dead under the sod. ‘These were almost black in colour,
and greatly contorted.

Amongst the specimens under my own observation (not one of
which developed beyond the pupa-stage), I found some of the dead
caterpillars stiff and dark brown or black, with the head thrown back,
and the body burst into a hole below about the fourth segment. The
exceedingly bad smell was a point that was only too obvious.

We did not get ‘‘flaccid’”’ specimens from the caterpillars at large,
perhaps because this was not looked for, but the conditions of carriage of
large numbers would be precisely those suited to develop the ‘‘ flacherie,”’
if present ; and from the circumstances of the case, joined to the cer-
tainty of the disease being found present in one instance by Dr. Ritzema
Bos, it seems to me that we have ground for hoping that this disease,
so fatally infectious, was present, and may be ruuning its recorded
course in so weakening the next generation as to free us for a while from
recurrence of the pest. é

Of the maggot-parasites, one kind was proved, by a few specimens
reared to the imago-state by Mr. Service, to be of larve of the Tachina
flies, which are known to infest lepidopterous caterpillars ; another
appeared to me, from the formation of the cocoon, to be an Ichneumon
infestation, but as I had not the good fortune to develop the insect,
I cannot speak with certainty. From the definite record, however,
which we have secured of at least three distinct kinds of parasites, or
disease being present, we have found that there are powerful natural
helpers at work in lessening amount of recurrence of the Charaa
graminis.

c2

20 GORN AND GRASS.

The following notes by Mr. Robert Service, of Maxwelltown, Dum-
fries, a very well-qualified local observer, appeared in the ‘ Dumfries
Courier and Herald’ July 7th, 1894, and will be found to contain much
information, useful practically, as well as of entomological interest :—*

‘‘Tur ‘Hinu-crus.’-—Sheep-farmers are threatened with another
plague, which will in all probability come upon them in full force next
summer, should certain conditions prevail till then. For this year the
danger seems to be almost past. The ‘hill-grub’ has often done
considerable damage to the upland grass-lands, notably in the years
from 1830 to 1835. Just now complaints are rife from farms in many
parts of the wide district lately ravaged by the Voles. As usual, the
farmers look on these ‘ hill-grubs’ as very sudden arrivals, but this is
not the case, for last autumn the moths which these larve produce
were in extraordinary swarms, and far in advance of their normal
numbers. I remember noting how unusually abundant these Antler
Moths were flying at the end of last September when coming down
from the neighbourhood of Loch Dungeon one evening in the twilight.
The grubs form a regular pabulum for the Rooks at this season, when
these birds betake themselves and young broods to the hills. That
they are finding this food in great quantities is evident from the way
the Rooks are concentrated at particular spots, where the grass-tufts
are being torn up in all directions. The other day I received a boxful
of these ‘hill-grubs,’ that had been sent for identification from Ben-
inner, in Carsphairn, where they are doing much damage. A party of
gentlemen fishing from near the Holm of Dalquhairn for some five or
six miles down the Ken found all the trout they caught perfectly
crammed with these caterpillars. Old shepherds will tell of times
when the ‘hill-grubs’ were so numerous that after sudden thunder-
showers the sheep-drains have been completely dammed up with their
bodies. It should be noted that the perfect insect is known as the
Antler Moth (Chareas graminis), and it flies during August and
September. It then deposits its eggs, which produce larve that
descend to and feed mostly about the roots of grasses during the
autumn and early winter. After hybernation they commence in
March and April to feed again with redoubled energy, and they turn
to pupe at end of June and during July, producing the moths again
in a few weeks. Thus their cycle of existence in these various stages
extends the whole year round. Their worst natural enemy is the
Common Rook, and I have reason to believe that Curlews and Plovers

* These observations form part of a series published by the writer under the
geographical nom de plume of “ Mabie Moss,” this (sometime) moss district having
been long under the observation of Mr. R. Service; but in giving these, with some
other contribution that Mr. Service was good enough to send me, I believe Tam
permitted to give the full name,

ANTLER MOTH. 21

take a few. Cuckoos also feed upon them, and I have found the
stomachs of Snow Buntings shot on the hills at midwinter filled with
these grubs.”—(R. 8.).

In the above notes it will be seen that the Antler Moths were
observed in extraordinary numbers in the autumn of 1898, preceding
the (also) extraordinary amount of grubs which appeared in the past
season of 1894, a coincidence which I believe is not often recorded. It
may be remarked in passing that the Ken is a river in the shire or
stewartry of Kirkeudbright, N.B., and Carsphairn a district in the
northern part of the same county.

In a further communication sent me by Mr. Robert Service, on
the 17th of August, he remarked, relatively to the local name of the
caterpillars, ‘‘ that the larvee of the C. graminis have been known here
from time immemorial,—or at least since the beginning of the century,
when sheep were substituted on the uplands for black cattle,--as the
‘hill-grubs.’ They are easily and quite correctly distinguished by
the shepherds, in their ravages, from the ‘Jenny-spinner’ (T7ipula
oleracea), which sometimes devastate the pastures.’’ After some
remarks, which I have quoted at p. 19, on a disease affecting the
caterpillars whereby they were turned almost into fluid, Mr. Service
continued :—‘ So far as I noted this disease did not affect those at
large, but bird-foes, thunder-rains, and other causes killed the wild
larvee off in vast myriads.”

«The moths are out now” (Aug. 17th, Ep.) “ in fearful abundance,
and will continue, I expect, for another couple of months.” ... “I
did not notice any Threadworms amongst my larve, and only one
or two Tachinid pupw were seen. The flies duly hatched, and to
my great disappointment escaped when I opened the glass rather
incautiously. They looked like small specimens of Hchinomyia

292k

grossa.

* The Tachinids are a division of Diptera, or two-winged flies, of which the
larve or maggots are parasitic in other insects, and those of the genus Echinomyia
especially infest caterpillars. ‘They are noted by Macaquart (‘ Histoire des Diptéres,’
vol. ii. p. 71) as remarkable amongst the Tachinids for the size and thickness of
their bodies ; and the H. grossa is especially noticed by Schiner (‘Fauna Austriaca,’
vol. i. p. 425, for its size and beauty. The main colours are shining black with
some yellow; the dimensions given by Walker (‘ Insecta Britannica,’ Diptera, vol. ii.
p. 19) are 8 lines in length and 18 lines in spread of the wings.

The larve or grubs of the Tachinids are described by Dr. F. Brauer as thick,
cylindrical, flattened at the under surface, with the segments furnished with
distinct transverse swellings, which are either naked or girdled with fine short
teeth or prickles, &c. They appear to have no head, but have two spiracles on the
hinder end, &c. The above is from the third part (published in 1883) of Dr.
Brauer’s Diptera of the Royal Museum of Vienna; andI am greatly indebted to
the kindness of Mr. R. H. Meade, of Bradford, in letting me have this extract, as
T had not the opportunity myself of referring to the above.—ED,

22 CORN AND GRASS.

In the further remarks of Mr. Service on coincidence having been
noticed between locality of attack of the Voles, his notes of the change
in the state of pasturage or herbage consequent on Vole-workings,
from rough coarse conditions to succulent fresh growths, precisely
agree with the description given by Kollar, and also by Curtis, that
the food of the caterpillars consists of ‘‘all kinds of tender grass,”’ or
‘¢ of all the soft sorts of grasses.”” Mr. Service observed :—‘‘ I see you
refer, in the August Ent. Monthly Mag., to the ‘hill-grubs’ being
found in the same places as the Voles. As the latter were found to a
most destructive extent in practically all of the sheep farms of the
southern uplands, the ‘hill-grubs’ could hardly increase to a visible
extent on any of the sheep grazing lands without getting into grass
that had been so lately eaten down to the roots by the Voles. But the
point is this, although Prof. Wallace leaves it to be inferred; after the
sudden disappearance of the Voles the grass sprung up with great
luxuriance. The Voles had eaten off all the great tussocks of perennial
herbage, rushes, sedges, &c., some of it the growth of years, and the
new verdure was of the greenest, freshest, and most succulent nature ;
and some of the herds and sheep-farmers state that in all their lives
they had never seen anything like it on their hill-sides. And the
question thus arises, did this fine, luxuriant, new crop furnish the
pabulum required by the ‘hill-grubs’ before they could multiply to
plague numbers ?”’

On the 81st of August Mr. Service wrote me that ‘‘ On Thursday
(yesterday) I saw a wonderful sight on a hill-side in Upper Nithsdale,
on a farm where the ‘hill-grubs’ had not been conspicuously present.
About 10 a.m., when I arrived at a place where Juncus squarrosus was
the prevailing plant, the Antler Moths were in full flight,—in thousands
and thousands in all directions. This flight continued till well after
midday, when it in a great measure ceased, although the moths were
to be seen here and there the whole afternoon. Just before the
sloaming they again began to fly very numerously.”

Summary anp Mrans or Prevention anp Remepy. — The special
points noticeable in last year’s attack were the large area over which
the infestation extended, also that in a portion of the area, presence of
the Antler Moth had been noticed in great numbers in the preceding
autumn (that of 1893), and that again, after the great caterpillar
infestation, in due time there was another enormous appearance of
moths in the autumn of 1894; these preceding and following appear-
ances, so far as I know, have been little recorded, nor has the great
amount of parasitism which we found existed in 1894 been previously
recorded. ‘This point is well worth further investigation.

In regard to remedial measures, the chief hope seems to be in

ANTLER MOTH. 23

taking advantage of their habit of migration. They are found to
object greatly to burnt surfaces, and to move off rapidly where the
travelling parties come on fired ground. This plan therefore might
apparently be serviceable in checking advance where their presence
was likely to be especially injurious ; also it might be used for directing
the moving caterpillars to where by natural or artificial means they
may be destroyed. A mountain stream is a most convenient place for
their course to be directed to (see p. 20), or a pool, or a pit with water
at the bottom, or deep ditches may be made. If full of water they
will destroy great numbers, but a dry hollowed-out space or kind of
broad ditch may also be made to serve well; it is said that by driving
sheep to and fro where the grubs are thus collected in a narrow space
whilst on their travels great numbers may be destroyed. The same
treatment, or any kind of treatment which would crush them, would
be equally applicable in cases where (see p. 15) they were seen in great
bodies going down the hill-paths, or where, as in the great infestations
of 1816 and 1817, the roads, and more especially the ruts in the roads,
in the Hartz district were so filled with the caterpillars that their
crushed bodies made the way dirty and slippery.

Driving pigs on the infested ground is a measure particularly
advised for clearing the caterpillars, and doubtless would do well
where it was practicable, but this would by no means be so in all cases.
Probably where weather and the various circumstances allowed, the
best preventive of recurrence would be well-directed firing of whatever
infested land the treatment could properly be applied to, as in the case
of the Glamorganshire attack of 1884 (before alluded to), in which
special mention was made of the localities of attack being noticeable,
when standing on the ridge of the Ogmore Valley, by the smoke of
the mountain fires which were seen to the west, where attempts were
being made to destroy the pests; in this case presumably effectual, as
no further reports were sent of presence.

24 CORN AND GRASS,

Corn and Grass Aphis, Siphonophora granaria, Kirby.

SIPHONOPHORA GRANARIA.—Winged female and young Aphis, magnified (after
Buckton) ; infested Wheat ear.

Corn Aphis is more or less present every season on Wheat and
Oats, and sometimes to a seriously injurious amount; but if present
as a Grass pest, it is so rarely reported to the mischievous extent to
which it was noticed last year in the neighbourhood of Newcastle-on-
Tyne, that a note of the observation seems worth record.

On the 80th of May, Messrs. 8. Finney & Co. wrote me from
Neweastle-on-Tyne as follows, with specimens accompanying :—‘‘ We
beg to enclose you some Grass and Clover that have been attacked by
the Green Fly, which are doing an enormous amount of damage in
this district; the specimens are taken from a 15-acre field, which is
almost totally destroyed, and they are beginning to spread to other
fields in the neighbourhood. They appear to be most troublesome on
land that has been laid away for two or three years Grass, and so far
they have not touched the one-year Grass and Clover.”

The large packet of specimens sent accompanying showed this to be
the worst case of Aphis infestation on Grass that I had ever met with ;
and“on June 2nd, Messrs. Finney further wrote me that the Green
Fly appeared to be spreading rapidly to other fields in the neigh-
bourhood.

On very careful examination of the Aphides sent, there did not
appear to me to be any reason to doubt that they were the Corn Aphis
or Plant Louse, scientifically the Siphonophora granaria of Kirby, also
known as the 8. cerealis, and also as the Aphis avene. Still, although

CORN AND GRASS APHIS, 25

this feeds on many kinds of Grass, from the unusual virulence of the
infestation, and also from there being a slight difference in the
disposition of the black markings on the green abdomen of the
winged females from what is considered the typical colouring, I
thought it possible a variety might be present, and therefore sub-
mitted my doubts and also specimens to Mr. G. B. Buckton, F.R.5.,
our great authority on Aphides, who kindly replied as follows :—

‘‘An examination of the Aphides you sent to me leads me to the
conclusion that the pest is the Siphonophora granaria of Kirby, that is,
S. cerealis of Koch and Passerini, and A. avene of Schr. The only
hesitation would seem to depend on the more or less distinct barring
on the abdomen of the winged females. The spots are named by
authors, but not the bands.

‘‘ S, granaria feeds on many kinds of grasses, as well as the true
cereals. I think it not improbable that the description of food modifies
colour (I find it so in Indian Aphides); and again, some of your speci-
mens had only traces of these transverse bands. Hot weather gives
redder tinges to the later broods. This may be noticed also in Aphis
rape. The presence of several parasitic Hymenoptera (Hphedrus of my
plate) confirms me in my opinion, and they show the farmer that these
flies are still looking after his interest.’’—(G. B. B.)

These various points I entered on at the time in my reply to
Messrs. Finney’s enquiries ; but as this early form of attack, whether
to corn crops still in the blade, or to fields of growing Grass, necessarily
differs so much in locality from the damage caused later on to corn
ears, or to seed-heads, as possibly to admit of some remedial application,
I give below a part of my letter of May 31st with some additions :—

‘“‘T have carefully examined your ‘Green Fly’ specimens in winged,
pupal, and also in larval state from very first production, and I do not
see that there is any reason to doubt that they are the Aphis (Siphono-
phora) granaria, sometimes known as cerealis. I should not like to
speak quite positively, because this Aphis varies at times so very much
in colour that it may be red, green, brown, or yellow, and it is known
under several names; but, taking a common-sense view, I think it is
the common Corn and Grass Aphis.

‘« Besides, what may be distinguished as corn, such as Wheat, Oats,
Barley and Rye, this kind of Aphis is known to infest many kinds of
grasses, some of these of the customarily cultivated kinds, as some of
the Poas or ‘ Meadow Grasses,’ Rough Cocksfoot, and other kinds of
less agricultural value, or none at all, as various kinds of Holeus, or
‘Soft Grasses,’ the Soft ‘ Brome Grass,’ the very common field-path
and roadside growing Wall Barley Grass, the Hordewn murinum, the
Avena fatua, or Wild Oat, and others. We do not, so far as I am
aware, know certainly in this country where the Corn and Grass

26 CORN AND GRASS.

Aphides have their winter habitat, but from the fact of these Aphides
being found in other countries sheltering at the roots of Grass or corn
during the winter, it is very probable that they do the same here,
whether in egg or active state, although (so far as I am aware) we have
not yet had any definite observation of this happening. But this
would, I think, agree with your own remark that ‘they appear most
troublesome on land that has been laid away for two or three years
Grass, and so far they have not touched the one-year Grass and
Clover.’

‘‘ At this time of year the infestation is to be found on the blade or
stem of the corn, or, in your case, of the Grass, where (as your speci-
mens show) they can do enormous mischief, This is not only by
drawing away the juices by means of their suckers, but also by the
great damage caused to the tissues from the Green Fly (from their
first production) driving their suckers into the soft parts.

‘‘T never yet saw such a severe Grass attack, and I am sorry to say
that they may be expected to multiply rapidly. At this time of year
and till autumn, they multiply by being produced alive, all ready fur-
nished, like the fully developed specimens, with six legs adapted to
active movement, and a sucker for piercing into their food-plants; and
such of the females as pass to the winged condition carry the infestation
far and wide. Presently (in ordinary course) it may be feared that
where corn is in the neighbourhood the infestation will appear on the
leaves, and then do infinite mischief by extending to the ears.

‘«‘This is the stage of attack in which (later in the year) I usually
receive specimens. Then these ‘ Plant Lice’ lodge in the ears, and
by piercing into the main stem and the side stems of the ear, they
prevent the grains swelling properly, and yield a shrivelled, more or
less injured return. In this condition (that is on the ears) the
Aphides are very often in great part brown ; but, as above mentioned,
there is no reason to doubt that they are of the same species as those
now under consideration.”

PREVENTION AND Remepy.—lIn the above, or any similar case where
there might be a definite centre of attack in a large Grass field from
which the infestation was spreading, the best treatment for the safety
of the neighbourhood would apparently be to mow the infested Grass
as soon as possible, and then so to treat the short hay that it might
remain also for as short a time as possible, in a state for the Aphides
to continue to live on it. Thus all the wingless Plant Lice on the cut
Grass would be killed, and excepting from such of the others as might
fly away, infestation from this source quite stopped.

A dressing of any kind preferred, which would both be bad for any
Aphides remaining on the ground, and also push on a good growth of

HAY MITES. 27

Grass, would be serviceable, and any wash or dressing which would
run on growth would be beneficial, independent of all other considera-
tions, as Aphides multiply most rapidly on sickly plants.

All the ordinary applications that would be suitable are too well
known to need mention; but where there may chance to be any mill
in the neighbourhood from which soft-soap wash has to be removed,
this would be an excellent preventive and restorative also.

Whether any remedial measures could be serviceably used to such
an infestation as the above whilst the Grass was still growing, or on a
young growing corn crop before it had shot into stem, would much
depend on whether sprayers could be brought to bear. If a horse
spraying-machine could be used without damage by crushing or
trampling, there appears to be no reason why the various kinds of
soft-soap washes that are known to be serviceable for getting rid of
Aphides on other crops, as Hops, or on orchard trees, &¢., should not
answer just as well here. The species are different, but they are so
similar in nature, that remedies which act on one kind would answer
also for another, and the common soft-soap wash, or soft-soap and
paraffin, or soft-soap and sulphur, or again, soft-soap and quassia,
might any of them be expected to do good, if, as above observed, the
method of application could be so managed as not to trample down or
bruise and waste the growing crop.

Hay Mites. Tyroglyphus longior, Gervais.

TyroGLyPHus LonctIor.—T. longior, from figure by Fumoze and Robin; claw
with sucker of Tyroglyphus; right-hand side, from Murray’s ‘ Aptera’; left-hand
side, figured by Ed. from life: all magnified.

During the past few years the occurrence of Mites in hay, or rather
as appearing from haystacks, and from hay stored in lofts, in such
yast numbers as to lie in masses round the stacks, or beneath the loft

28 CORN AND GRASS.

windows, has often been reported, in a few instances from English and
Trish localities, but chiefly from Scotland. As the infestation had
been carefully identified, and the presence of these, literally, ‘‘ heaps”
of Mites, though very unsightly, is really almost or quite harmless, it
would have seemed unnecessary to bring the matter forward again, had
it not been that amongst this autumn’s observations there has been
one on such a large scale, that the enquirer had been seriously advised
to burn his infested stacks.

This enquiry was forwarded on to me per favour of the Editor of
the ‘ Scottish Farmer,’ and will be found in the number for Oct. 18th
(1894) of that Journal, p. 813, in the following words :—‘‘ My hay is
all covered with Mites, and on application to local experts, I am
advised that the only remedy is to burn the stacks. Can you suggest
anything less summary ?’’ To this, of course, I replied that on no
account would I advise such destruction ; but as it appears the nature
of this infestation is not sufficiently known for such a course to be
possible, it may be useful to give a digest of what is known about it
up to the present time.

These Mites (which in the absence of any popular name it is
convenient to describe as Hay Mites) are scientifically the T'yroglyphus
longior. They are exceedingly like the ‘‘ Common Cheese Mite,” the
Tyroglyphus siro, and, like it, are at times to be found in cheese ; but
they are larger than the Cheese Mite, longer in proportion, have much
longer hairs, and are more active. The rapidity of movement, and
the length of the hairs of the adult specimens, I have found very
noticeable in microscopic observation. ‘The figure (p. 27) gives a very
good idea of the appearance, much magnified, and also shows the
single claw which (with the sucker also), at the end of the leg, is
characteristic of the sub-genus Tyroglyphus.

Like most of the order of Acarina, or ‘“ Mites,” to which they
belong, they are hatched from eggs, and (also like most of this order)
in their early stage have three pairs of legs, and, when mature, four
pairs. When seen in small numbers, and without magnifying powers,
they are indistinguishable from the common Cheese Mite; but when
fallen down in the vast numbers in which they are from time to time
observed in autumn, they are like masses of live, slightly moving,
greyish dust. They occur as dropping from haystacks, or from lofts
where hay is stored, in quantities described as shovelfuls, or as lying
an inch or more deep round stacks, or the hay itself being alive with
them. In one report sent me from Swaffham, Norfolk, on the 25th of
August, 1892, the Mites were described as having been dropping on
the ground in vast quantities for several days from a stack of that
year’s hay, and that they lay in masses of many quarts heaped up
upon the ground, A report from another correspondent from near

HAY MITES. 29

Bury St. Edmunds in the same year and at the same date, mentioned
the Mites as then making their appearance from a stack of Clover
saved for seed; that the stack was covered with them, and (the
observer wrote) ‘I could have no difficulty in sending you a peck
of them.”’

Yet another observation sent much later, namely, on the 16th of
November, in the same year, from near Garve, Ross-shire, N.B.,
mentioned that from weather circumstances the haystack from which the
Mites were sent me was not made up from the large rucks in which the
hay had remained until late in September. About a month after there
were severe frosts (15° Fahr.), and the following day, on each side of
the stack, there was a layer, about two inches deep and six to eight
inches wide, of these Mites, and at date of writing (16th November)
considerable quantities still remained.

The above notes show the extraordinary quantities in which these
Mites occur from time to time in autumn. Ido not remember their
presence being reported in these great quantities later than the above
date, that is in the first half of November, but I have had a note of
Mites being found in April with seed taken from the floor of a hayloft
near Skene, Aberdeenshire.

Where the Mites feed and breed during summer is the point which
we especially want to know with certainty. The hay in which they
are found is in most cases reported to be good hay, or well-saved hay,
or some term used to show its good condition; and in a note by Mr.
John Speir, of Newton, near Glasgow (a well-known authority on
farming matters), he remarked, in reply to some of my enquiries :—
“No one need annoy himself about having Mites in his hay, as it is
only well-saved hay which produces Mites.” The point which suggests
itself on comparison of the different reports is that in all probability the
Mites are very generally present in hayfields, but that the amount of
their presence in the stacks is very much influenced by what may be
the treatment of the grass between the time of cutting and of stacking,
and also by the amount of heating, or absence of heating, of the stack.

I have had two reports of Mite presence from Ireland, a few from
England, but most of the returns have been from Scotland; and
amongst these I find special allusion to hay being collected in large
cocks or tramps in the field, and these being carried at convenience,
or when weather permits. In one of my two Ivish reports, I find the
same kind of treatment noticed. This was at Knockreven, Clonmel, in

1886, and it was mentioned :—‘‘ It is second crop hay, which was cut
about the 20th of August, and saved without rain; but it remained
some time in cocks on the field.” . . . ‘* The rick heated a little for

about ten days after it was made, but only slightly, as the hay is now
coming out good.””—(T. R.)

30 CORN AND GRASS.

A note with which I was favoured by Mr. Colin Campbell, of Jura,
points also to preparation of the hay affecting the amount of Mite
presence. In reply to some of my observations, Mr. Campbell wrote :
—‘ There is no doubt that it is more of a northern infestation; and in
Scotland it is not the practice to allow hay to heat, which may account
for their being present. It is generally the case that good well-saved
hay is most infested.”

Mr. Campbell further remarked in some observations which he sent
to the ‘ Agricultural Gazette’ after reading my Report for 1890:—
‘‘ Mites in hay.—Some five and twenty years ago, when a lad going
about the home farm at Jura, N.B., I often used to wonder at the
quantity of light-coloured dusty-looking material that used to drop on
the window-sills of a large haybarn (stone and slated)”; . . . this—
Mr. Campbell mentions amongst other details—he further investigated,
and found it was a mass of living creatures corresponding with
descriptions given of the Hay Mite, and he notes :—‘‘ The hay stored
in this barn was always first and second years’ Rye-grass hay, which
never heated, as it was allowed to stand a considerable time in tramp
ricks in the field to season, as it had to go into this built barn.”

These notes, amongst other information sent, point to the special
presence of the Mites being in stacks little heated, as the stacks have
been built of hay which has for some time been cut and standing in
large cocks or tramps in the field or yard before being stacked.

The following observation gives a good record of the Mites being
found present to a very unpleasantly noticeable extent in these cocks.
The notes were sent me on Novy. 6th, 1891, by Mr. Thos. Fraser, from
Ardfin, Isle of Jura, N.B., as follows :—‘‘ It is the general practice in
haymaking in the West of Scotland (West Highlands), as soon as
possible after cutting or mowing (which ranges from the end of June
to the end of August), to have the hay collected in large tramps or
cocks on the field, where it is allowed to remain some time. The first
appearance of the Mites (to an ordinary observer) is when removing
the said cocks, or tramps, from the field.

‘«‘ While forking the hay from the bottom or lower part of the cock
on toa cart, at a much higher elevation, it is necessary to raise the
hay overhead, and in minute particles, like dust, the Mites fall, and
from the backward position of the worker’s head at the time, they stick
or adhere to the face ina very short time, causing itchiness or irritation
on the skin. At this stage, I think, they are less in size than when
they are found a fortnight or so later on emerging from the recently
made stacks.” (This observation points to the Mites which have to
go through various moultings before arriving at complete development,
being still young when thrown in the hay from the cocks to the stack,
In the samples sent me, I have found the Mites of different ages, as

HAY MITES. 81

clearly shown by some having three pairs and gome four pairs of
legs.—Ep.)

Reverting again to Mr. Fraser’s observations, he remarked :—
‘* They have been in Rye-grass and in meadow-grass this season, but
more abundant in the former. During the month of September and
early part of October they showed, or appeared to be, at their greatest
strength and activity; after the middle of October they gradually
showed less vitality fo move or extend, until now (the beginning of
November) all life is apparently gone, and the mass of the once living
organism has shrunk into less than one-half its original size.”

Looking at the history of this infestation in the light of the infor-
mation sent in up to date, it appears to me that the origin of the Mite
attack must be in the grassfields. There does not appear to be any
other way from which it could get into the cocks, for this reason—that
the cocks are made of the hay grass, and whether the Mites are thrown
and raked into the cocks in the hay, or come to the cocks from the
mowed grass, these Mites equally come from the grass, or from some-
thing amongst it.

In the information given regarding this infestation by Mr. A. D.
Michael, the eminent Acarinologist, to whom we were indebted for
identification of this species (see ‘Farmers’ Gazette,’ Dublin, Dec.
25th, 1886), he mentioned regarding this Mite that it and many of its
allies would attack an immense variety of dead and dried animal and
vegetable substances, but they did not, so far as his own experience
showed, attack either in living condition, except that they appear
sometimes to eat small fungoid growths; neither do they, as a rule,
like substances in a state of decomposition.—(A. D. M.)

There appear to be numbers of things on which the Mites might
live, including pollen of the grass-flowers ; but how to ascertain what
it is that they do live on is a matter of no small difficulty under the
circumstances, and with creatures which, except in masses, are hardly
discernible by the naked eye.

The absence of heating of the hay which is so customarily mentioned
in observations of this infestation might very likely affect amount of
the Mite presence. In my own experiences in Gloucestershire where,
on my late father’s property at Sedbury Park, there was much hay
stacked both at the home farm and those of the tenants, it was the
custom to get the hay up as soon as possible after cutting, and also
heating was carried not unusually to the verge, or sometimes over the
verge of safety, I never, in the many years that I observed what was
going forward, saw or heard anything of Hay Mite infestation. Why
the Mites leave the stacks in these legions, we have no evidence as yet
to show. One correspondent suggests that it may be in case of a
sweating or slight fermentation of the hay; from another we have
definite notes of this extraordinary Mite exit coinciding with occurrence

82 CORN AND GRASS.

of sharp frost. It appears to me worth investigation whether it may
not be from time for egg-laying having come in connection with the
full growth of the Acari, and that they simply instinctively leave the
stored hay in search of the proper places for egg-laying. This point I
have not yet had opportunity for investigating, but it would be well
worth going into by those who have the immense numbers at hand for
investigation ; or if half a handful or so were sent to myself for
examination, I should hope to have no great difficulty in ascertaining
to what extent eggs might be present.

In regard to any prejudicial effect to stock feeding on the Mite-
infested hay, a point which is often enquired about, it is satisfactory
that, so far as has been reported at present from careful observation,
no harm whatsoever has been found to arise from this cause, excepting
the sometimes temporary inconvenience of coughing being caused from
the tickling of the Mites in the throat. Mr. Colin Campbell, in his
communications previously referred to, especially observed, in reply to
enquiries on this point, that the Mite-infested hay, regarding which he
wrote, ‘‘ was fed to a large fold of in-calf Highland cows, young cattle,
horses, and dairy stock, without doing them the slightest harm, or
producing any ill effects.”’

Mr. J. England Wilson, whilst still resident near Skene, Aberdeen-
shire, wrote me on this point, with specimens accompanying of Mites

from hay “ well seasoned, but not heated in stack ’’ :—‘‘ Horses eat it,
but cough very much, owing no doubt to the Mites irritating the
windpipe.”

Not having opportunity of observing the details of this hay infesta-
tion myself, I cannot say whether this coughing, which is certainly
undesirable, often occurs, but I do not think that any other observation
of it occurring has been forwarded. If it happens to an extent worth
consideration, might not the annoyance be abated or entirely put an
end to by moistening the hay before use? It might be expected that
this would make a great deal of difference in the active powers of the
infesting Mites, so that they might be swallowed, together with the
food, in a condition that would effectually prevent the tickling. I
would not venture myself on suggesting any special method of treating
cattle or food; but in Youatt’s ‘Complete Grazier,’ 13th edition, 1893,
re-written by Dr. Fream, is the following observation :—‘“‘ It is the
writer’s opinion that if farmers can make good hay, and will moisten
some of it—not soak it—for a few hours before feeding it to the cows,
they will feel no need of silage.”—(W. F.) If experiment showed that
this treatment would keep the Mites quiet, so as not to give trouble by
tickling the nostrils, face, or throat of the stock, this would be a
point gained.

How far salt, sprinkled on the hay, or any other dressing known to
the farmer not to be hurtful to the animals, might sueceed in driving

HESSIAN FLY. 83

away Mites from the fodder about to be used would also be worth con-
sideration; for this Mite infestation has now been before the public
since at least 1886, and we do not seem to have made the least advance
by way of experiment towards lessening what amount of annoyance
stock may find in consumption of ‘ mity’’ hay.

Where the great masses of Mites are found congregated together
during their exit from stacks or lofts, one of the simplest ways of
getting rid of them would seem to be to shovel them up and destroy them,
To dig a hole and throw them in, and put a little tar on from time to
time during the operation, and a band of tar round the inside of the
hole, to keep them from crawling up the sides before the work was
completed, with some tar on the top, would be a very effectual measure,
Burning all rubbish in which the Mites congregated (after removal to
a safe distance from the stack), would also help, And in lofts where
infested hay has been stored, scalding down the floor with a good soft-
soap wash, and whitewashing the walls and all accessible parts, taking
care to get the applications into every cranny that can possibly be
reached, would do good. Where steam-power is at hand, throwing
jets with the help of a hose is a most excellent method for clearing
vermin, whether Mites, maggots, or others, from lofts or granaries
after presence of infested stores.

Hessian Fly. Cecidomyia destructor, Say.

Crcipomy1A pEsTRucTOR.—1, Barley stem elbowed down by Hessian Fly attack;
2, showing position of ‘flax-seeds.”” Also flax-seeds, or puparia, nat. size and
magnified, showing the early and smooth, and the later, or striated, condition.
D

84 CORN AND GRASS.

During the past season scarcely any observations as to presence of
Hessian Fly were sent me, certainly not more than two reports of it having
been seen in addition to the following remarks from Mr. D. D. Gibb.
It would not be worth while to allude to this attack again save for the
weather returns which Mr. Gibb furnished me with along with his
insect observations. These show the coincidence of much rain with a
erowth of plant which prevented the injury being noticeable to the
extent that occurs where drought throws the plant much under the
power of the maggot sucking away the juices from the stem, and it
seems well worth while to give the record, for it is not often we can
secure reliable weather notes, coincidently with those of crop attack in
one special locality.

It seems almost unnecessary to mention that with this crop attack
the mischief is caused by the Hessian Fly maggot, or sometimes
several of them, remaining stationary under the sheathing-leaf a little
above a knot in the stem (probably one of the lower knots) and sucking
away the juices. If the stem is weak, either from influences of
drought, or of bad cultivation, or any other cause lessening its
strength, it presently does what is called ‘elbows down’”’; that is, it
gives way at the weakened part and falls (see figure) at a sharp angle
or elbow. ‘Thus, in addition to what damage may have been done by
lessening the supply of food to the ear, there is the damage to be con-
sidered from the ear lying either on the ground or near it, and also the
difficulties in reaping from the entangled state of the crop, and further
loss from the amount of ears which may be left behind on their fallen
stems.

The figures at p. 83 show an “elbowed” stem, and the flat brown
cases, commonly known as ‘‘flax-seeds,” these being the chrysalis
cases, or puparia, to which the maggots turn at their feeding-places,—
beneath the sheathing-leaves. The ‘‘ Hessian Fly,” scientifically the
Cecidomyta destructor, is a stout made little brown gnat-like fly, about
one-eighth of an inch in length, with one pair of smoky-grey wings,
and with long antenne, or horns.*

The following observations were sent me on the 80th of June by
Mr. D. D. Gibb, from Ossemsley Manor Farm, near Lymington,
Hants, with specimens of Hessian Fly puparia, commonly known as
‘« flax-seeds,”” on Wheat stems accompanying. Mr. Gibb reported :—
‘‘ When in one of our Wheat-fields this evening, I came across traces
of Hessian Fly attack. As the crop is a good level one of stiff-
strawed Red Wheat in full bloom standing about five and a half feet
in height, the damage cannot be said to be great, yet puparia can be
found, and the damage will be more apparent at a later stage. I send

* The figure and description have been so often given in these Reports, that it
seems unnecessary to repeat them,

HESSIAN FLY 35

specimens herewith, from which you will see the flax-seeds are for the
most part to be found at ground level. There are also some stems
(apparently slender or deliéate ones) entirely shrivelled up; inside one
of these I found a brown pupa bearing a close resemblance to those of
the Hessian Fly, except that it seemed longer and not so flat. The
next found I put into a quill and send for your inspection herewith,
without removing from its abode.”—(D. D. G.)

The specimens sent I carefully examined, and could not find any
reason for considering them other than ‘ flax-seeds,” that is, Hessian
Fly puparia; and the shrivelling of the stem seemed to me quite
attributable to the attack acting on an already weak growth.

Mr. Gibb further noted that,—‘‘ This crop of Wheat was sown late
in November, and was kept in check by rabbits during the winter and
spring that few blades were to be found three inches in length until
well on in April, when, after harrowing and rolling (but no dressing
of manure), it grew very rapidly, and now looks like yielding 5 qrs.
per acre.”

On the 26th of July Mr. Gibb wrote that he had little to add
further regarding the Hessian Fly infestation, of which he had, as
above mentioned, sent specimens, but that ‘‘ the presence of the pest
can be traced in most local crops of Wheat and Barley, but the
damage cannot be termed serious. The season having been so favour-
able for plants tillering or shooting afresh where injured by this or
stem maggot pests, crops of cereals are very much over the average.”
In another part of the same letter, Mr. Gibb (referring to attack of
Diamond-back Moth) mentioned, regarding influence of weather on
growth of crops :—‘‘The constant showers which have been very
trying to those engaged in haymaking operations, have caused a very
rapid growth of Swedes and other root crops.” And two days later,
he noted that ‘‘ yesterday and to-day we have had a change for the
better in the weather,” thus showing the unfavourable weather had
lasted up to date.

In the following letter, accompanying specimens of Hessian Fly
flax-seeds which I had asked for if still observable, it will be seen that
Mr. Gibb notices the large amount of presence of the pest, but that
this was less noticeable than it would otherwise have been on account
of the moist season having kept up the vigour of the plant. This was
written on the 25th of August, and, like the preceding observations,
from Ossemsley Manor Farm, Lymington, Hants:—‘‘I have much
pleasure in being able to supply you with a few stems of Wheat and
Barley containing some specimens of Hessian Fly puparia in situ. In
some of these I believe you will find several ‘flax-seeds’ clustering
around one stem. Unfortunately there is very little difficulty in
finding specimens, the pest having been severe, although the moist

v2

36 CORN AND GRASS,

season has made it less apparent by keeping up the vigour of the
plants. The Wheat is all cut in this locality, and the greater part
carried in the beginning of last week; there are many indifferent
samples among those threshed, and the price for the best varies from
23s. to 24s. per quarter. The stems sent showing infestation were
picked from among the stubbles; from having elbowed down they had
escaped cutting. The Barley stems were taken from the growing
crop of a tenant on this property, and I did not require to go off the
headland to find what I wanted.” To this Mr. Gibb added the
following note as to heavy rains, which may prove of some interest to
record relatively as to what may be the amount of presence or absence
of Hessian Fly in 1895 amongst Wheat or Barley growing where, pre-
sumably, very many of the flax-seeds must have been destroyed by
lying in the wet. Mr. Gibb observed :—‘‘ Should you require a further
supply, please let me know soon; it may be more difficult to send a
supply later on. Since Monday, the 20th inst., we have not had a dry
day, while on Friday and Saturday there have been terrific thunder-
storms with such abundant downpours of rain as to cause flooding,
damage to bridges, &¢., and some low-lying ground is still under
water.”

Measures of prevention and remedy have been too often entered on
to need further reference ; but it may be remarked that the great point
to prevent recurrence of the attack is to destroy the ‘‘ flax-seeds” ;
that is, the flat brown chrysalids from which a new brood of the
Hessian Fly might be expected in due time to appear. For what
remain on the field, where stubble is not mixed with other crop, deep
ploughing of a kind to bury the flax-seeds thoroughly down, and leave
them buried, is one of the best modes of treatment. If the furrows
are only turned so that the position of the slice does not fairly bury
down the chrysalids, the fly will be very likely to develop uninjured,
and make its way out.

For what are carried from the field on the reaped corn, the simplest
treatment is to burn or destroy them in the light rubbish thrown out
by the threshing-machine. This is of no value, and as these light
screenings lie together with the flax-seeds in them, it is little trouble
or expense to have them gathered up and destroyed in whatever may
be the most convenient manner. It is now eight years since the
Hessian Fly was first. observed in this country as certainly present as
an agricultural pest, and the experience of those years give reason to
hope that it will never be the scourge here that it is in some of the
other countries to which its presence has spread in recent years.
Nevertheless it does quite enough harm here, and needs watching,

YOUNG WHEAT MOTH CATERPILLARS. 37

Young Wheat Moth Caterpillars. Miana (? expolita, Dbl.).*

Caterpillars, upper and side views, and head, all much magnified; line showing
nat. length; Wheat plant with caterpillar in centre.

The following observations refer to a species of small moth cater-
pillar which was observed early in the year doing serious injury to a
field of young Wheat near Lymington, Hants, by feeding within the
centre of the plant, and also to some degree eating the young leaves
round the centre. The first note of its presence was sent me on the
21st of February, by Mr. H. Renyard, of Carter’s Farm, Norley Wood,
Lymington, Hants, with the remark:—‘‘I have sent the enclosed
maggots to you, which I find my Wheat full of. They are destroying
the whole crop.”

A few days later (on February 26th) Mr. Renyard forwarded me
some more specimens of the caterpillars, with the further observations:
—‘T only find them in the lay ground. Where I ploughed it in fallow
in the same field the Wheat looks well, but where these maggots are
they are destroying the whole crop. They eat the heart clean out of
the corn.” . . . ‘I have enclosed several maggots in the heart of
the corn.”

The young Wheat plants sent showed the serious nature of the
damage. This was in various stages,—as the whole of the centre of
the little plant being cleared out; or the central shoot being bitten off;
or the mischief being then in progress. In most instances the little
brownish backed caterpillar was set head uppermost, either in the
middle of the plant, with moist morsels of material in the cavity,
apparently composed of ‘‘ frass”’ (or the rejected results of feeding), or
sometimes supported along the back by one of the sheathing-leaves, so

* For considerations of species see following pages,

388 CORN AND GRASS.

that it could gnaw away the more central part at convenience. The
caterpillar, however, appeared to have an especial preference for so
arranging itself in the central shoot, or emptied sheathing-leaf of this
part of the young plant, that it formed a cylindrical shelter for each
larva.

It may be of some interest to notice in passing with regard to this
little moth caterpillar attack, which so much resembles that of the
Wheat-bulb Maggot (the larva of the two-winged fly, the Hylemyia
coarctata) in the method of injury, that whereas the H. coarctata
infestation is especially prevalent after fallow, it was just the contrary
with the moth caterpillar. Mr. Renyard notes that the Wheat after
fallow looked well in the same field, where that after ley was seriously
injured. In case of recurrence of this kind of infestation this point
may be worth observation practically.

The caterpillars proved to be larve of one of the smaller kinds of
Noctua moths, and exceedingly resembled the description and also the
figure of those of the Miana eapolita given in Buckler’s ‘ British
Butterflies and Moths.’* After much consultation there appeared
little (if any) doubt that it was of the genus Miana, but none of us
were fortunate enough to rear the moth, so as to make sure of the
species. Therefore as this kind of atlack to young Wheat does not
appear to have been previously observed, and is certainly very
mischievous, I have given as clear a description of the characteristics
of the caterpillar as I was able, and also a much magnified figure of
the upper and side view, in order to preserve at least a record of so
much as we were able to observe.

The caterpillars sent me were up to five-eighths of an inch in
length; sixteen-footed (that is, with three pairs of claw-feet, four pairs
of sucker-feet beneath the body, and one caudal pair). The shape
slender, cylindrical, or rather larger towards the third segment. Head
reddish-brown, darker in the fore part, and in the most characteristic
specimens somewhat wedge-shaped, narrower than the next segment,
—this especially noticeable when the larva was at rest, with the head
slightly contracted into, or drawn close up to, the following segment
(see figure, p. 87). General colour yellowish; segment next the head
with a horny or shiny patch above, slightly marked across with
yellowish red or yellowish brown; next two segments with a small
blotch of the same colour; the rest of the segments so marked
similarly on the upper part and side, as to have customarily only a
narrow line of the ground colour showing down the centre of the back,
with two transverse stripes of the same across the top of each segment.

* See Buckler’s ‘ British Butterflies and Moths’ (Ray Society), vol. iv. pp. 103—
106 ; plate lxviii. fig, 5.

YOUNG WHEAT MOTH CATERPILLARS. 39

Beneath these cross markings is a light longitudinal band, and lower
yet, on each segment, three light cross markings on the brown tint.
The brown marking only reaches as far down on the side as the little
black spiracles. The claw-feet were brown; the sucker-feet of the
light general tint of the body, tipped with darker colour. The much
magnified figures of the caterpillars at p. 87 give a fair idea of the
disposition and shape of the markings.

Being very desirous to rear the caterpillars up to fully developed
state, I put some of those which I first received towards the end of
February, or early in March, on very young shoots of ribbon-grass,
and attended to them carefully, and also watched some of those in the
Wheat plants, but without satisfactory results, as they died successively
by about the end of March.

Some little information, however, was attainable. So far as
appeared from watching the small number of specimens, the reddish-
brown markings of the caterpillars deepened in tint with advance of
age. It could not be said with advance of growth, for on this point there
was very little difference, as from date of first observation to finding the
last remaining of the specimens sent they had been dead a short time, on
the 4th of April. Whether this was wholly from unfavourable circum-
stances, or partly from completion of growth, appeared uncertain.
The ribbon-grass was to some degree acceptable as food, for in one
instance a larva ate out the central part of a ribbon-grass shoot,
reducing it to an empty cylinder, slightly spun together with a little
web. Some of the caterpillars concealed themselves temporarily in
the earth, but none passed on to the chrysalis stage.

In my great difficulties as to anything like certain identification of
the species of the larve, I submitted specimens, or the figure at
heading, together with descriptions, to various lepidopterists, who were
good enough to go into the matter, and I think I may say that they
mostly agreed in considering the larve were of the genus Miana, but
of which species of this genus they were remained uncertain. I am
particularly obliged to Mr. John Robson, and also to Mr. J. Gardner,
both of Hartlepool, for kindly taking a deal of trouble in going into
the matter, and Iam bound to say that neither of these skilled lepi-
dopterists, who are well acquainted with the larve of M. expolita (for
various reasons unnecessary to go into fully here), considered it likely
the caterpillars should be of this species, but rather one of the other
species of the genus Miana. Of course in naming merely from larve,
and still more from description, there are difficulties in specific
identification, but from the considerations most obligingly sent me,
I just give the remark by Mr. J. Gardner,—‘‘ From date and size
of larve, most probably that of Miana strigilis or fasciuncula” ; and
that by Mr. John Robson,—* Leaving all other considerations, and

40 CORN AND GRASS.

taking date, size of larva, and habit, I would be inclined to say
M. strigilis.”’

One great difficulty is—how came the caterpillars to be in young
Wheat in February ? Supposing the eggs to be laid in the preceding
year in due course before the autumn Wheat was even sown, there
was no likelihood of egg-deposit on the Wheat. But turning to Mr.
Renyard’s observation of the attack not being at all found on ground
sowed after fallow, only ‘‘on the lay ground,” and this difference being
in the same field, the idea occurs whether the Miana eggs might not
have been deposited on some food grass, and the caterpillars afterwards
transferred themselves when food was needed in the spring to the
young Wheat. I find on reference to the observations given in Mr,
W. Buckler’s work on ‘Larve of British Butterflies and Moths,’ vol.
v. p. 104, previously referred to, that the larva of M. eapolita has been
recorded as being about five-sixteenths of an inch long about the end of
October, and (after hybernation), about the end of April, as being
nearly half an inch long; and it was noticed by Mr. Gardner that in
the case of the Carew, one of its food-plants, ‘‘ the habit of the larva is
to eat out the very heart of the plant, working its way down to the
white portion close to the root’’; also that ‘‘ when one plant has
yielded its nourishment, the larva migrates to another.”

So far as I could judge from the young Wheat plants sent me, the
caterpillar left the centre when the food supply had been exhausted,
and it might thus have transferred itself previously. But the destruc-
tion was so complete that the Wheat crop failed, and the ground was
occupied by another crop, so that 1 was unable to procure chrysalids
or moths.

It seems, however, worth while to give as much information as
could be made out of this attack which proved locally so very injurious,
and I have given the above notes in the hope that if the attack should
recur, or lepidopterists conversant with the appearance of the moths of
the genus Miana should be working in the coming year in the neigh-
bourhood of Lymington, we might gain observations which, with those
above noted, would make a complete record. And meanwhile I have
merely given the specific name ewpolita at heading, bracketed and
with note of interrogation, just to show that this was the species which
the specimens sent me appeared to resemble.

OxssERvatIon.—During the past season nearly all of the insect pests
commonly infesting corn crops were more or less reported, as well as
some of those more especially infesting grass-land. These I attended
to at the time by careful reply to the enquiries regarding nature and
treatment ; but as all these various infestations have been fully gone

VARIOUS GORN AND GRASS ATTACKS. 41

into in many of my previous Reports, with description and figure, and
life-history, and habits of the insects, and also information up to date
of the best known means of prevention and remedy, it does not seem
desirable to enter on these attacks again here, excepting where some
new point of serviceableness in some way or other has been brought
forward.

Therefore I only give the following short notes of some of our
common corn and grass attacks to preserve the record of their
presence, referring the reader to my previous Reports for figures
and descriptions, and in the case of Daddy Longlegs and Wireworm
also to my leaflets, which I shall be happy to forward gratuitously to
any applicant.

Amongst the regular corn pests recorded during the past season,
we had, as usual, the Chlorops or Gout Fly attack in Barley; the
Wheat-bulb Maggot of the Hylemyia coarctata was also present, and so
was Frit Fly (Oscinis frit), of which respectively one observer noted
that ‘the Wheat-bulb Fly has not done so much mischief here as in
former years, nor has Frit Fly been guilty of any real mischief, the
frequent rains causing Oats to spread or tiller so as to fill up all vacant
spots.”"—(D. D. Gibb.) Tulip-root in Oats, of which some well-marked
specimens were sent me, will be found noticed under observations of
Tylenchus devastatrix, the HKelworm which causes the malformation,
and of Heterodera Schachtii, another kind of Kelworm which, though
we have not yet found it at Oat roots, is in England, and has now
been recorded as found at Oat as near us as Holland.

No reports at all were sent me of damage from maggot of the
Corn Sawfly, the Cephus pygmaeus, which in some years does great
mischief by feeding within corn stems, so as to injure the yield, and
finally gnawing them nearly through in a ring about ground-level, so
that at the first wind the stems fall. It does not seem too much to
hope that the preventive measures for recurrence of this attack
being very practicable, and having been repeatedly given, they
may have been the means of lessening amount of presence of this
infestation.

Of insect attacks affecting the ears of corn crops, alluding more
especially to the corn Aphides, or Plant Lice, and Red Maggot, there
did not appear to be any, noticeably destructive, over large areas; but
in the case of the little Corn Thrips, the Thrips cerealium of Haliday,
which has a great capacity for injuring grain in the ear, though it was
not reported, I had reason to think, from my own observations, and
some made at my request, that it was more present than was
generally known of.*

* With regard to this attack, as I have the advantage of being in communi-
cation with Prof. J. Jablonowski, Assistant Entomologist at the Experimental

42, CORN AND GRASS.

Of pests more especially infesting grass-land, Daddy Longlegs
were very troublesome in some districts ; the (so-called) Rose Chafer,
which does mischief in beetle state to leafage, but is at times ex-
ceedingly destructive in maggot state at the roots of grass in park or
meadow land, reappeared injuriously in some of the localities in the
S.E. of England where its ravages had been serious in 1893.

Amongst communications from various quarters on the subject of
Wireworm, some correspondence passed between Mr. B. H. Gosselin-
Lefebure, of Blanchelande, Guernsey, and myself as to the effect of
paraffin oil on the ‘worms.’ From Mr. Lefebure’s observations it
will be seen that though all the Wireworms experimented on eventually
died, yet, to use his own words, they ‘‘ were very hard to kill”; and
it may certainly be conjectured that if Wireworm can stand soaking
in paraffin oil for four and forty hours with only some proportion of
these larvee being killed in the time named, and others surviving
for some days, paraffin mixtures cannot be wholly trusted to as
remedial agents in field use, though they may act well sometimes as
deterrents.

Mr. Gosselin-Lefebure sent me the tabulated details of his experi-
ments, of which the following is a short statement of results. On the
6th of August he took about two and twenty, Wireworms, some of
which he put in pure paraffin oil, in which they sank to the bottom ;
others he placed in paraffin oil and water (20 parts to 1), in which the
‘*worms”’ floated on the water beneath the paraffin; and five small
specimens he placed in a shallow layer of paraffin, so that the air
might have some access to them. Lach of the collections of Wire-
worms were left, placed as above mentioned, for forty-four hours, and
were then taken out, passed through water, and then put in boxes with
fine sifted soil, but with no (apparent) food in it, and their condition
examined at intervals.

The five small Wireworms were found in a few hours to be dead ;
but of the others a few were moving on the 8th, the day on which they
were taken out of the paraffin, and on the following day; hardly any
showed motion on the next day; only one of each of the two. collections
moved on the 11th, and on the 12th all were dead. In an experiment
tried by Mr. Lefebure a short time previously, the Wireworms were
put in shallow paraffin, and some were alive after several days.

These experiments appear to me to be worth recording as showing

Station of the Department of Agriculture of the Hungarian Government at Buda-
pest, who is especially investigating the order of Thrips (scientifically known as
Thysanoptera), and has been good enough to promise to allow me to make use of
some of his information when his investigations are complete, I have postponed
any remarks of my own for the present.

CURRANT CLEARWING MOTH. 43

the possibility of Wireworms being wholly immersed in paraffin for
many hours without being cither poisoned by the internal action, or
stifled by their air-pores being closed during the period, and thus
pointing to the success of paraffin applications in field work being
merely as deterrents to Wireworm presence.

CURRANT.

Currant Clearwing Moth. Sesia tipuliformis,* Linn.

SEsIA TIPULIFoRMIs; chrysalis, nat. size and magnified; and section of portion of
tunnelled shoot.

One of the earliest enquiries regarding insect attacks which was
sent me during the past year, was forwarded on the 9th of January
from a large nursery gardening firm+ in the south of Scotland,
relatively to what turned out to be a bad attack of caterpillars of the
Currant Clearwing Moth, in the pith of shoots of the Black Currant,
an infestation which is ruinous to the shoots above the point of attack,
as the caterpillars clear out the centre of the shoot completely for
many inches.

This Currant borer has long been known as a trouble to fruit-
growers, both in this country and on the Continent of Europe, and is
amongst the injurious insects which have been carried to America, but
I have rarely had it reported as seriously destructive.

* Synonyms—Zgeria tipuliformis, also Trochilium tipuliforme.

+ My correspondents were proceeding to have all the lot of infested bushes,
which they had received from one gardener, cleared out and got rid of, but never-
theless, for obvious reasons, I do not give their names.—ED,

44 CURRANT,

The best account that I know of for practical purposes is given
by Prof. W. Saunders in his most serviceable volume on American
fruit attacks.* In this he states that ‘‘the female lays her eggs singly
near the buds, where in a few days they hatch into small larve, which
eat their way to the centre of the stem, where they burrow up and
down, feeding on the pith all through the summer, enlarging the
channel as they grow older, until at last they have formed a hollow
several inches in length.” . . . ‘Before changing to a chrysalis, a
passage is eaten nearly through the stem, leaving merely the thin
outer skin unbroken, thus preparing the way for the escape of the
moth. Within this cavity the larva changes to a chrysalis.” .. .
“ Harly in June the chrysalis wriggles itself forward, and, pushing
against the thin skin covering its place of retreat, ruptures it, and -
then partly thrusts itself out of the opening, when in a short time the
moth bursts its prison-house and escapes, soon depositing eggs, from
which larvee are hatched which carry on the work of destruction.””—
(Wass)

The above extract gives the life-history as shortly and plainly as it
can be put,t and my own observations from the specimens sent me
agreed well with it.

On the 9th of January my correspondents, writing from the south
of Scotland, mentioned :—‘‘ When some of our men last week were
taking cuttings of Black Currants, they found many of the stems
completely eaten out by a certain larva, a specimen of which we
enclose.” The writers further mentioned that, as they were un-
acquainted with the pest, they much desired information on this head,
and means of prevention and remedy. With this letter, specimens of
caterpillars and injured shoots were sent showing the attack to be of
the Sesia tipuliformis, variously known as the Currant Clearwing,
Currant Hawk Moth, or Currant Borer, and a few days later a large
supply of infested shoots were sent for examination.

On slitting these longitudinally, I found the pith or centre eaten
away for as much as five or over five and a quarter inches in length,
from where it had been cut across, this consequently only giving a
portion of the length of the larval burrow. As in some cases the

* See ‘Insects Injurious to Fruits,’ pp. 336, 337, by W. Saunders, F.R.S.C., &.
Philadelphia, U.S. A.; and 16, Southampton Street, Strand, London, W.C.

+ The only point of difference between the habits of the larve in the description
above given and those recorded in Europe, is continuance of feeding. Taschenberg,
in his ‘ Praktische Insektenkunde,’ notes the larva as feeding from ‘“‘ July or August
until March of the following year.’’ This probably depends much on difference of
weather and climate, and I could not have said with any certainty that, though
some of my larve were partially webbed round, they had ceased feeding, more
especially as they were not all full-grown:

CURRANT CLEARWING MOTH. 45

upper, and in some the lower part of the severed shoot was missing, I
could not tell precisely how long the entire tunnel might have been,
but it was very neatly and thoroughly cleared out, stopping abruptly
at either end, as figured from life, p. 43. In this tunnel I found
the larva lying, apparently hybernating, in several instances enve-
loped in a more or less perfectly spun covering. In one instance it
was lying in a fairly firm opaque coating of dirty coloured web, with a
deal of dark-brown frass at one end where the grub was lying, and
some at the other end. In another instance it was lying in what had
been its roughly spun opaque covering, until it was torn open in
slitting the shoot; and in another I found the grub lying with some
rubbish or frass on one side, and a little web and frass at the
other end.

The larva or grub was hardly half an inch long, pale or yellowish,
sixteen-footed (that is, with three pairs of claw-feet, four pairs of
sucker-feet beneath the body, and another pair beneath the tail), the
head palish chestnut, the jaws darker, and some chestnut marking on
the segment next the head, and also above the tail. These larve
were presumably not quite full-grown, as the full length is given by
Buckler at three-quarters of an inch, and either from this, or from the
conditions of hybernation, the colour of my specimens, examined in
January, was rather lighter in the head and back of the following
segment than the brownish tint mentioned both by Saunders and
Buckton.

As some writers have expressed doubt as to the method of entrance
of the caterpillar into the Currant-shoot, I examined very carefully,
and found no reason to doubt that the entrance was made at a bud,
and that the maggot worked its tunnel above and below this point.
The ends of the tunnel appeared (as a regular thing) to stop abruptly
without any entrance hole, and without difference in width of tunnelling,
which might be expected to be the case if the larva entered when
recently hatched and worked its way onward from one end. In regard
to this point my correspondents wrote, ‘‘ We have examined the shoots
again, and the hole seems in every case to have been in the bud.”
My specimens developed by the chrysalis pushing through the aperture
left for its egress, as on June 20th I found two pupa-cases fallen down,
and another still attached to the Currant-stem. Figures of one of
these are given, life size and magnified, at p. 43.

The little moth is scarcely more than an inch in the spread of the
front wings; the body and fore body black with some narrow yellow
lines ; the wings are transparent, whence the name of ‘ Clearwing,”’
and bordered with black, the fore wings having also a black bar across,
and the tip yellowish with black veins (see figure, p. 48). The moths
appear in June.

46 CURRANT,

This infestation is to be found in Red and White Currant-shoots,
as well as those of Black Currant, in which last all the specimens sent
me in the past season were found. It is also said to be found in
Gooseberry-shoots ; and Kaltenbach, in his ‘ Pflanzenfeinde,’ notes
that, according to O. Wilde, the attack is likewise to be found in the
long shoots of Nut (“ Corylus-ruthen”’).

Besides the Scottish specimens, samples were also sent me on the
part of Mr. Pye, of Knight’s Place, Rochester, who mentioned that ‘‘Our
men have found a great many large maggots this year when cutting
the Black Currants....’’ It was mentioned also that they had not
observed the attack in Black Currants before.

Judging by the appearance of the shoots sent me most of them
were growths of the previous year, but in some instances they were
older.

Prevention AND Remepres.—In one of the letters regarding the
infested Black Currants from my Scottish correspondents, they made
the following observation as to origin of the attack in their grounds :—
«They are a lot bought from a market gardener as rooted cuttings two
years ago, and they must have been in his bushes before he struck
them. We have decided to clear them all off and be done with them,
as we would not keep such about the place.’ Where this treatment
can be carried out, it is the best plan. But where old-standing bushes
are attacked it is not so clear what is to be done, as there is difficulty
in knowing from mere outside examination whether the infestation is
present. It is said by some that the tunnelled shoots are so much
weakened that they are liable to break off, but though this may very
likely happen after they are dead, and toughness and pliability have
dried out of them, it may be doubted whether it would be so until the
maggot had gone from them. The unhealthiness of the leafage would
be a surer guide, as the caterpillar, or rather the chrysalis, not
developing as a regular thing until June, there would be good oppor-
tunity to look into the matter at leisure, and cut off and burn all
shoots that were found to be infested.

My Scotch correspondents mentioned: ‘‘The maggot is almost
always found in strong stems, and cannot be detected without cutting
the stem, as to all outward appearance at present the bush looks
healthy.”

On the large scale of nursery gardening the operation of taking
cuttings would show fairly where attack was present, and in every case
where a severed stem was found to be perforated, the lower part of the
shoot should also be cleared off to beneath the bottom of the grub-
tunnel and burnt (as well as the upper part). The grub might be in
either bit, and if left and merely thrown aside in the shoots, might

‘* RAR*COCKLE ’’ EELWORM. 47

very likely go through its changes to moth state and cause new
mischief. It has been advised to cut off all ends of old shoots which
show a perforation, but in the light of later observations it does not
seem likely that these stumps should be used for egg-laying, as the
larva would not be supplied with soft pith for food, nor would it be
able to form its tunnel up and down in the customary manner. It has
also been suggested (where the moths are numerous) that they may be
captured and destroyed in the cool of the morning when sluggish; but
for ordinary purposes the most practicable method of prevention
appears to be (so far as is possible) destroying the tunnelled shoots,
and where attack was very prevalent, it might be found that a manager,
or some one interested, would learn by glancing along the shoots to
distinguish by the condition of the bud, near which the entrance hole
had been made, or possibly by the perforation itself being observable,
which were the maggot -infested shoots.

KELWORMS.

“Kar-cockle” Eelworm. Tylenchus tritici, Bastian; Vibrio tritici,
Bauer. Stem Eelworm. Tylenchus devastatrix, Kuhn. Root-
knot Eelworm. Anguillula radicicola ;= Heterodera radicicola,
Greef.; Heterodera radicicola, Miller. Beet Kelworm. Hete-
rodera schachtii, Schmidt.

Stem Eelworm (Tylenchus devastatrix); anterior portion of female showing
mouth-spear; and embryo in egg; all greatly magnified (anterior portion mag.
440 times). From figures by Dr. J. Ritzema Bos.*

* The above wood engraving is merely given to save reference as to general
appearance. For highly magnified figures of male and female Tylenchus devastatriz,
together with figure of eggs and other details, the reader is referred to plate accom-
panying of highly magnified figures given by permission of Dr, J. Ritzema Bos,

48 EELWORMS,

Kelworm attack of various kinds has long been present here, as
shown by the various forms of distorted growth, of which the cause
is now known, and on the Continent the kinds which are ordinarily
most hurtful to crop growth have been thoroughly studied to our great
benefit; but in this country, I believe that it is only during the last
eight or ten years that anything has been worked out of reliable and
practicable use regarding the infestations of the Nematode, or Thread-
worms, commonly known as Kelworms, which seriously infest some
of our field and garden crops,—excepting in the case of the Wheat-ear
attack, variously known as ‘ Har-cockles,” Purples, or False Ergot,
scientifically as Vibrio tritici of Bauer, Tylenchus tritici of Bastian.

In this case, as the injury is in full sight in the ears, consequently
on the diseased growth showing as if small purple or dark-coloured
peppercorns had taken the place of the wanting Wheat-grains, there is
no fear of its presence being overlooked. Also, as the Helworms are
of such a size that they can be distinguished without very powerful
magnifiers, and are massed together in such quantity in the purplish
galls, or distorted growth, that on cutting one of these through in a
drop of water on a microscope slide they may be seen flowing over
in vast numbers, this attack has been a favourite one for popular
investigation.

As has been often reported, and the plan most advised for prevention
is using the common sulphate of copper steep to seed corn which may
have the ‘‘ Cockle”’ galls mixed up with it; the method of application
being to let the liquid.rise above the surface of the corn, and the corn
to be stirred gently, so that the ‘“‘Cockles’”’ may float to the top, and
be skimmed off and destroyed. In this double way the infested seed
may be expected to be very fairly purified. The above figure is merely
given just for comparison of the diseased corn grain growth with those
caused to stem and root growth by Eelworm presence,

STEM EZELWORM}; ROOT-KNOT KELWORM; BEET EELWORM, 49

These Cockle-galls are easily observable; but with regard to the
EKelworms which have to be searched for scattered in infested stems or
roots, or in the earth round the rootlets, the case is different, and a
very large proportion of us have to judge whether they are at work by
the peculiar distortions of growth or formation of galls given rise to by
the infestation. Also when we have captured the Nematodes and got
them fairly on to the microscope slide, there are similarities which
make certain identification sometimes so very difficult, that possibly it
may be of more use to give notes of the Kelworm infestations mentioned
at the heading with their distinguishing characteristics together (for
convenience of comparison), rather than to disperse them under the
headings of the names of the crops which they may have been more
especially attacking.

Firstly, just to note the main distinctions of the three most important
kinds of Eelworm noted at heading, the Stem Kelworm, 1’ylenchus
devastatrix, which we know best as causing ‘‘T'ulip-root”’ in Oat plants,
and ‘‘Stem-sickness” in Clover, is always eel-shaped ; reference to the
ficures at p. 47, and in the plate, will show that the little eel-like form
is to be seen in the egg, and in the young or larval state it is also eel-
hike, and so are the males and females.

With the “ Root-knot”? Eelworm, “ Heterodera radicicola,” which
does injury most especially by causing gall-growths at the roots of
various plants, the development is different. The young Kelworm may
be seen (see fig., p. 61) in eel-like shape in the egg, and it hatches out
like a little eel, and after wandering for a time forms a kind of cyst,
from which the male comes out in eel-like shape. But it is not so with
the female. In her case the body swells up into a gourd-like or pear-
shape, and gradually becomes filled with eggs and young larve. As
yet this species of Eelworm, though present on the Continent, and
very injurious in America, is little known in this country, excepting as
damaging some kinds of crops under glass, and especially Tomatoes
and Cucumbers, by causing gall-growth at the roots.

The Beet Kelworm, /eterodera schachtii, is very like the Root-knot
Kelworm; itis eel-shaped both in larval and developed male condition,
and the female is not eel-shaped but swelled, but it differs from the
female of H. radicicola (the Root-knot Eelworm) in being citron- or
lemon-shaped (see fig., p. 56); the habits of these two species differ in this
respect, that though both of the kinds are to be found in the roots, and
in the earth round the roots of the plants which they infest, yet the Beet
Eelworm does not apparently cause gall-growth. This kind of Kelworm
is especiaily injurious to Beet on the Continent of Europe, and, as will
be seen further on, has been observed in the past season at one locality
in England at the roots of Hops.

The distinctions above mentioned, namely, that the females of the

E

50 EELWORMS.

two species of Heterodera are not cel-shaped, are very important to be
borne in mind, and those who have to depend on others for identifi-
cation would do well to ask to have this point well examined into,
otherwise mistakes, which are very important practically, sometimes
occur, and loss and disappointinent is likely to arise from want of the
proper treatment.

The Tylenchus devastatrix, or ‘‘ Stem Eelworm,” is the kind which
as yet has been most commonly observed in this country; but as the
observations of the past few years have shown that the Heterodera
radicicola is also present in the country, and the observations of 1894
have brought to light some degree of presence of H. schachtii, I give
accompanying a Plate with magnified figures of the 7’. devastatria,
drawn from life by Dr. J. Ritzema Bos * (which he is good enough to
permit me to make use of). ‘This gives, with the accompanying
explanation from same work (see note), all requisite details for micro-
scopic identification, and will be of service in showing what are the
distinctions between this species of Tylenchus in all its stages, and the
two species of Heterodera above-named, which, in their larval and male
conditions, bear some resemblance to it.

EXPLANATION OF PLATE.

Fie. 1. Tylenchus devastatrix, female, taken from an Onion-plant; magnified
200 times.

a, spear; J, first muscular swelling of the w@sophagus; c, second csophageal
ring; d, e, intestine properly so called; e, f, rectum; f, anal opening; g, excretory
pore (orifice of the lateral vessel); h, commencement of the ovary; 7, ovule, with
nuclei (or germs), not fertilized; k, first half of the oviduct (tube), with sperma-
tozoids; 1, second half of the oviduct, with glands in the wall; m, anterior portion
of the uterus, containing a fertilized egg; m, sac, with closed extremity, second
portion of uterus; 0, vulva.

Fic. 2. Tylenchus devastatrix, male, taken from an Onion-plant; magnified
200 times.

For a, b, ¢, d, e, and g, see explanation of preceding figure; f, cloacal opening ;
h, commencement of the testis; i, mother-cells of the spermatozoids (Spermato-
blastes); k, cells further divided, forming spermatozoids; Jl, vas deferens; m,
spicule ; , accessory piece; 0, purse.

- Fie. 3. Anterior portion of a Tylenchus devastatrix, not fully developed, taken
from an Onion-plant; magnified 440 times.

For a, b, c, and d, see explanation of fig. 1. In front of the spear (a) is shown
the labial region, and lower, at the base of the spear, the musculi protractorit leading
forwards, and the musculi retractorii leading backwards. The half of the esophagus
in advance of the first bulb, or muscular swelling (b), has a straight direction ; the

* See Plates I. and II. in ‘L’Anguillule de la tige (T'ylenchus devastatrix, Kuhn),’
par Dr. J, Ritzema Bos, Prof. 4 Institut de Etat 4 Wageningen. Haarlem, 1888.

West Newman hth,

D'J.Ritzema Bos ad nat del.

{uhn.

t

Tylenchus devastatrix

-

a? i ‘ ' .
mae Da ee 4
AGRA dy ere tee dee es

DETAILS OF STEM EELWORMS. 51

half which extends from the first to the second muscular swelling is waved. In the
second bulb nuclei are visible. Near (d) the intestine begins; in the wall of this
the separate cells are not distinguishable, because of the presence of the numerous
drops, which refract the light strongly.

Fic. 4. Anterior portion of a Tylenchus devastatrix, taken from a Wheat-plant ;
magnified 440 times.

Fie. 5. Eelworms from Hyacinth, dried and rolled together.

Fras. 6 & 7. Eggs of T. devastatrix, showing an early and late state of forma-
tion of the embryo.

Fie. 8. The young wormlet (7. devastatrix) newly emerged from the egg.
Fic. 9. Egg of 7. devastatrix before segmentation of protoplasm.

The above figures are all enormously magnified; exact amount is given above
of enlargement of figs. 1, 2, 3, and 4, and amount of enlargement of figs. 6, 7, and
9 may be estimated by comparison of size of fertilized egg shown at m within
female Tylenchus, fig. 1.

With regard to dimensions of this species of Eelworm,—these have
previously been given; but during the autumn of last year (1894), in
the course of some investigations regarding a curious observation of
this species found in a locality in Kent (see p. 52), Dr. Ritzema Bos
was good enough to place in my hands a list (from his own personal
researches) of maximum and minimum length of males and females of
Tylenchus devastatrix in various of the plants which they ordinarily
infest, together with the following note of result of measurement :—

“Upon an average, the Tylenchus devastatrix was—in Secale, 1:19
mill. (males), and 1°26 (females); in Hyacinthus, 1:48 mill. (males),
and 1:26 (females) ; in Allium, 1:57 mill. (males), and 1:54 (females).
Those in Oats, Clover, and other plants also varied between 1:18 and

1:60 mill. in length.” *

Turning now to the practical side of ‘‘Stem Kelworm” infestation.
Besides its presence in Rye, Hyacinth, and Onion-bulbs, as above-
mentioned, in which it occurs especially on the Continent of Europe,
we have it here only too commonly in various kinds of plants, and
causing various forms of diseased growth, as that like miniature Pine-
apple tops in Carnation-shoots, thence called the ‘‘ Pine-apple ”’
disease, and the stunting and distortion of the plant and pods of
field Beans which is occasionally met with.t But the best known

* As trustworthy identification of this and other species of Eelworms depends
on the correctness of excessively minute microscopic powers, and not only much
knowledge, but much experience of the observer, I have never yet myself given any
definite opinion for publication as to species of Nematoid worms without submitting
my identification to the verification of an expert, and almost always to the excellent
knowledge of Dr. J. Ritzema Bos.—Ep.

+ For figure of this from life, with description of attack, see my ‘14th Annual
Report on Injurious Insects,’ pp. 17—21.

EQ

52 EELWORMS.

forms of attack, unfortunately never failing to be reported yearly, are
those causing the diseased growths known as Tulip-root, or as Segging
in Oat-plants, and Stem-sickness in Clover.

During the past season of 1894, I have had various applications
regarding the above infestations, and in the case of Tulip-root, or
Segging, some exceedingly well-marked specimens were sent me ; but
as quite full descriptions of these attacks, with well-proved means of
prevention and remedy, have previously been given in these Reports,
I have only entered on the subject again as possibly useful in con-
nection with a very curious observation made last summer at one
locality in Kent of the presence of this Kelworm (or as far as appears
at present this Helworm), being found as well as the Beet Kelworm,
Heterodera schachtii, at Hop-roots in coincidence with the diseased
growth of top and leafage known as being ‘‘ nettle-headed.”’

That the H. schachtii, the so-called Beet Eelworm, should be found
at Hop-roots is not surprising, for it infests various plants, and from
observations made in Holland during the last few years evidently it
is either spreading more widely, or its presence is more observed. But
the presence of the Tylenchus devastatrix in the root or root-like
underground part of the Hops is a very remarkable and curious cir-
cumstance, as previously it does not appear to have been observed
save in stems or portion of stem-growth.

The first notice which I observed of this investigation was in a
paragraph (subjoined in the accompanying note) which was given in
the number of ‘ The London Corn Circular’ for September 8rd (1894),
as a quotation from ‘ Natural Science’ for that month. It is perhaps
desirable to give this verbatim and in eatenso, as showing the locality
and basis of the observations.*

* « Hop DisEAsk IN Krent.—We learn from Professor J. Percival, of the South-
Eastern Agricultural College, Wye, Kent, that he is at present engaged investigating
the disease which causes Hops to become what is known as ‘‘ nettle-headed.’’ The
disease is met with in many districts in the county, and has rapidly increased
during the last few years—in some cases leading to a complete destruction of con-
siderable areas of Hop-gardens. The early delicate varieties are most attacked,
and especially those which have been growing for a considerable time. It is rarely
until five years after planting that the disease is seen, and usually not until a much
later period. In a typically affected plant the leaves are smaller than is generally
the case, and are transformed in such a manner as to become strikingly like those
of the Stinging-nettle. The edges of the leaves turn upwards; the fibro-vascular
bundles in them are increased slightly in thickness, and stand out well from the
under surface of the leaf. , Closer examination shows destruction of the soft tissue
in immediate contact with the fibro-vascular bundles; the parts become thin and
yellow, and much resemble the thin spots produced by the action of sulphur dioxide
gas on the leaf. The internodes of the plant are short and the main stem and
branches taper more rapidly than in healthy plants. In practically all cases the -
bine or stem, after climbing a short distance up the pole, loses its power of twining

OBSERVATIONS IN KENT. 53

Being desirous to know more on the subject, I applied to Mr. E.
A. White (mentioned below), with whom I had previously been in
correspondence on other subjects connected with Hops, who put me in
communication with Prof. Percival, with the remark added, ‘‘ He was
the first through myself to discover the troubles, of which there are
two in the roots.” —(H. A. W.)

On Sept. 9th, Prof. Percival was good enough to write to me
that, in reference to the disease known as ‘ nettle-headed ”’ Hops, he
had been paying attention to it for some time, and found it was
caused by a Heterodera, which he considered to be H. schachtii, and
that along with this Nematode there was almost always to be met
with in the thick parts of the roots Tylenchus devastatrix. With
regard to this species, Prof. Percival mentioned he thought there
could be no doubt, also that it had been carefully examined by Dr. De
Man, who had also verified his identification of H. schachtii. (Dr. De
Man being a well-known observer and writer on Nematode-worms, his
Opinion is very valuable in this interesting investigation.—Ep.)

A little later on, Prof. Percival was good enough to send me a
little box of Hop-rootlets in earth, which gave me a good supply of
the H. schachtii in various stages for microscopic examination, some of
the citron-shaped females of which I give a figure of magnified (as I
observed them, outside the Hop-rootlets) at 4 and 5, p. 56.

With regard to the other kind of Eelworm found present, which appears
in all essential points not to differ from our only too common ‘ Stem
Kelworm,” found in ‘“ Tulip-root”’ disease and ‘‘ Stem-sick ’”’ Clover,
namely, the Tylenchus devastatrix, Prof. Percival wrote me on Sept.
16th :—‘‘ Some Hop-roots were sent to me a day or two ago, and
some this morning; the thick parts I am sending herewith contain

and topples over; when not tied up the whole stem becomes slack, slides down its
support, and the plant lies in a heap on the ground. So far the experiments which
are being carried out on the Beltring estate of Messrs. E. A. White and Co.,
Paddock Wood, point to the circulation within the plant of a poison which brings
about curling of the leaf, stoppage of growth of the fibro-vascular tissue, and loss
of turgo of the cells in the leaf near the ribs, with resulting yellow patches there.
The leaves on the main stem nearest the ground are affected first, and then follow
those at the nodes above in regular succession. The branches in the axils of these
show the same regular sequence of diseased leaves, the lower branches being
affected first. The cause is undoubtedly connected with the root, and Professor
Percival finds in the cortex of many diseased specimens, close up to the bast, con-
siderable numbers of the Nematode Tylenchus devastatrix, Kuhn, usually known as
an Eelworm. Before any completely satisfactory cause can be established or
remedy suggested much work is necessary. Ata later date we hope to be able to
give an extensive communication from Professor Percival dealing with this inter-
esting and important investigation Natural Science’ for Sept.’”’? From ‘London
Corn Circular,’ No. 71, p. 14, 1894,

54 EELWORMS.

large numbers of what, I think, is 7'ylenchus devastatriv. This species
I find nearly always present in the diseased plants (as well as Hetero-
dera in the finer rootlets), but is, so far as I have yet made out,
confined to the thicker parts of the root, and in the cortew close up to
the bast in many instances. Where they were present the root does
not grow much in thickness, except very irregularly. I hope you will
be able to get a glimpse of this Tylenchus. I have forwarded another
piece to Dr. Ritzema Bos for identification. This morning I casually
found larve, eggs, and adults in the root, but this was a chance.”’—J. P.

In regard to the effect on growth, Prof. Percival remarked that the
most characteristic symptoms of the disease were to be found in the
leafage, and as I had not the opportunity myself of securing specimens,
and he was not at the time in Kent, he was good enough to forward
me a few dried leaves showing the peculiar conditions he noted as
accompanying attack; with the mention that he had investigated the
anatomy of the leaf carefully, and found some interesting points, which
he would explain later.

These points, and an account of his observations, are, I believe, to be
given by Prof. Percival in the neat part of the Journal of the Royal
Agricultural Society, to be published on January Ist, 1895; but I was so
desirous to include some reference to this interesting observation in my own
report of the observations of 1894, that I requested and obtained permission
from Prof. Percival to include what he had himself communicated to me in
my notes now (November, 1894) preparing for my neat Annual Meport.
For this I feel greatly obliged,

In my own examination of the thick roots placed in my hands by
Prof. Percival, I found narrow anguilli-form HEelworms in the white
part below the external bast, which certainly greatly resembled the
Tylenchus devastatria, but I could not by any means feel certain whether
they were of this species, or of the H. schachtii in larval or male state,
therefore I laid my difficulties and specimens before Dr. Ritzema Bos,
and append, with many thanks, a part of his valuable replies, as (with
the reference to the figures also given) they may be of great service to
other enquirers.

Dr. Ritzema Bos observed :—‘‘I found in the larger parts of the
roots which Prof. Percival sent me, in the cortex close to the bast,
Nematoid-worms closely allied to, if not identical with, Tylenchus
devastatrix. I never found 7’. devastatrix in roots, always in stems and
leaves (also in subterranean caulomata and phyllomata). ... The
Tylenchus in Humulus roots is somewhat smaller than 7’. devastatria,
but as this species varies much in length, that would be no cause why
it should not be devastatrix.”

Precise maximum and minimum measures of length of male and

ADDENDUM.

On receipt of Part IV. of the fifth vol. of the Journal of the Royal
Agricultural Society for 1894 (published Dec. 81st), I found, to my
great regret, that the paper on Hop Eelworms by Prof. Percival was
not included, the valuable information contained in it thus not reaching
Hop-growers at the earliest possible time.

Therefore, lest I should appear to be playing such a despicable
part as without authorization to appropriate skilled discovery, I wrote
to Prof. Percival, offering to cancel the sheet on Kelworm in my
Report, which thus unfortunately (from unexpected circumstances) pre-
cedes his detailed and illustrated paper, of which he has permitted me
a sight in the revised proof in the form in which we were looking
forward to its publication.

To this Prof. Percival replied to me on Jan. 9th :—‘ With regard
to your own paper on Kelworm in your Report (18th), please do not
think of cancelling it. You have my full consent to publish just
whatever and whenever you please.”’

For this I thank him much ; it is a great favour; but I think that.

under the circumstances I owe it to Prof. Percival, to my scientific
and many colleagues, and to myself, to point out that, though from
the change above mentioned my short notes unfortunately precede the
detailed observations of the discoverer,* yet that I have in my present
paper fully acknowledged them to the author; and I desire to add still
a little more. Not only that the observations which I give are from
specimens placed in my hands by Prof. Percival, but that it is to him-
self wholly that we owe this record of the presence of Kelworms at
Hop roots; a discovery of great interest and value, both scientifically
and practically, and involving points of such skilled and minute in-
vestigation as place the observer in the highest ranks of our own
Nematologists, and claim that the credit of his discoveries should be
carefully preserved to their author.

K. A. Ormerop.
February, 1895.

* To be published in ‘Natural Science’ for March. Macmillan & Co., Bedford
Street, Strand, W.C.

IDENTIFICATION OF EELWORMS. 55

female specimens of 7’. devastatrivx found by himself in various kinds of
plants were placed in my hands by Dr. Ritzema Bos, but as these
would not be of service to general investigators, I have not transcribed
them in detail, but refer the reader to his averages of these given at
p-51. Proceeding further with his notes of measurement, Dr. Ritzema
Bos added :—‘‘ Kuhn found in Dipsacus fullonum”’ (the Fuller’s Teazle)
“T’. devastatriv varying between 0:94 and 1:162 mill.; in Clover
between 1:21 and 1:56 mill. The V'wlenchi in the Hop-roots had a
length of 0°76, 0°74, 0:94, 1:02, and 0°66 mill.

‘The T'ylenchi in the Hop-roots are smaller than the 7. devastatriv
in other plants, but the maximal length of those of Hop-roots surpasses
the minimum length of Dipsacus (according to Kuhn, I myself never
found so small ones), and as I cannot find any other constant difference
between the Hop-root Tylenchus and 7’. devastatrix, we may say that
the Hop-root T'ylenchus must indeed belong to this species.

“‘TIt is the first time that I find 7. devastatriz in the roots; I
always found it in the stems and the leaves only. It is curious that I
found in the Hop roots a very large number of males, also larve, but
only a very small number of females.

‘“‘Tt is also very curious that in the diseased Hop-plants should
exist both species,—7’. devastatriv and H, schachtti. Though I agree
with you that probably the latter will prove to be the real cause of the
disease, only infection experiments can decide whether the first or the
second Nematode is the real cause. Perhaps one is the cause, and the
other increases the effect of the disease.””—(J. R. B.)

In regard to identification of the long and narrow (in fact, eel-
shaped) Kelworms which I found in the white part of the bark beneath
the bast, and which I found difficulty in differentiating as to whether
they could certainly be described as of 7’. devastatrivx, or larve and
males of H. schachtii, Dr. Ritzema Bos replied :—‘‘I found also male
and larval Heterodera schachtii in the roots of the Hop, but more in the
little rootlets than in the thicker roots; but there is a clear difference
between a Jylenchus and a larva or a male of FH. schachtii, as you can
see by comparing the figure,” &c., ‘‘ of my ‘ Tierische Schidlinge und
Nitzlinge.’”’

For these figures, given in present Report by kind permission of
Dr. Ritzema Bos, the reader is referred to the plate of Tylenchus
devastatria, and to the figures of H. schachtii at p. 56.

There it will be seen that the tail of the T'ylenchus ends, as figured
on plate at 1 and 2; the tail of the male of H. schachtii (see figure of
male Eelworm, still encased, p. 56) is rounded at the end, and the
spicula are placed near the end of the body; the termination of the
tail of larva of H. schachtii is also given accompanying in same figure.
Further (and see figures), Tylenchus has a sucking-stomach and a

56 KELWORMS.
digesting-stomach; H. schachtii, also in its larval form, only a
sucking-stomach.

The above distinctions, which are very clear when placed thus by
an expert before only partially qualified observers like myself, may
probably assist others in the intricacies of identification of this very
involved Nematoid presence.

The above considerations, it will be seen, refer to the presence in
the Hop-roots of the Stem Eelworm, the 7. devastatrix, aud distinctions

HertrrropEers scuacuti.—Newly-hatched larva; male in case; citron-shaped
female: all greatly magnified from figures, p. 769 of ‘ Tierische Schidlinge und

Niitzlinge,’ by Dr. Ritzema Bos. Females at Hop-roots, and eggs, magnified from
life by Ed.

between this and the ‘‘ Beet-root’’ Helworm, the H. schachtii, in some
of the stages in which this last much resembles the former; the
following notes refer to the H. schachtii, which (though much more
likely than not long present here) has not, as far as | am aware, ever
been previously recorded as found in England, until observed in the
past season by Prof. Percival.

The Eelworm which we now know as the Heterodera schachtii was
discovered by Schacht at the roots of young Beet-plants in 1859, and
later on (in 1871) this species was described and named by Schmidt
after its original observer. From being first observed (and also from
its prevalence) at Beet-roots, it has received the name of Beet Kel-
worm; but it is to be found at the roots of many other kinds of
plants, as of Cabbage, Mustard, and some other cruciferous plants,
including the Wild Charlock; Mangolds as well as the Sugar Beet;

BEET EELWORM. 57

Oats as well as Couch-grass, and various other plants wild and
cultivated.

The female is citron-shaped (see figures), and may vary from 0:8
to 1:3 millemetres, that is, may be slightly more than one-twenty-fifth
of an inch in length; at one of the projecting, or somewhat pointed,
ends is the mouth-opening containing the ‘‘mouth-spear,”’ near the
other is the reproductive opening, and after breaking out from beneath
the slight swelling of the bark where her larval life has been passed,
the female is to be found attached to the roots and rootlets.

The colour varies with age from yellowish-white to a much deeper
tint; the fully-developed specimens I have seen at the Hop-rootlets
were of a medium chestnut. The female contains up to as many as
350 eggs, about 0:08 mill. long by 0:04 mill. broad, and somewhat
bean- or kidney-shaped. These contain an eel-shaped embryo, and
most of them remain in the swelled body of the mother until the
wormlets have developed from them. The intestines meanwhile, and
other internal organs of the female, degenerate, she becomes a mere
husk and dies, and the larve, after quitting their eggs, leave the body
of the dead mother through the generative opening.

The larva in this early stage is in eel-like form, and it moves
through the earth until it finds a root suitable for its attack. This
it pierces into with the help of its mouth-spear, and establishes itself,
and feeds within; and as it has been observed that many of these
wormlets commonly attack the same root, they set on foot corre-
sponding amount of mischief.

Here the larva goes through its changes: it sheds its old skin,
assumes a thicker form, ceases to move, and gradually from its presence
beneath the outer skin of the root causes this to bulge out like a small
swelling. The distinction between the sexes now soon makes its
appearance.

A thick motionless larva destined to become a male temporarily
ceases to feed, shrinks within its old skin, develops a thin new one,
and becomes a long eel-like worm, which gradually grows into an adult
male. The figure (p. 56) shows the male still cased in the thin skin
and as it lies under the outer coat of the root in the little swelling
above-mentioned (in the Beet-roots, or rootlets, from which the obser-
vations now quoted were taken). When developed, it bores its way
out of its old skin, and out through the coat of the root into the soil,
and finds and fertilizes the female.

The development of the female is by gradually growing and
distending until she entirely loses all worm-like or eel-like shape, and
becomes successively flask-shaped, then of an elongated oval form,
then lemon- or citron-shaped without,—and within develops the female
organs,—and then rupturing the swelled root coat, remains, in regular

58 EELWORMS.

course of things, attached where she burst through the root. The
entire development from egg to sexual maturity is stated to take four
or five weeks, and there may be six or seven successive generations.

The above abstract is mainly taken from the account by Dr.
Ritzema Bos referred to below.*

Continuing now from such few observations as I was myself able to
make. The specimens which Prof. Percival was good enough to
forward enabled me to have a good view of the females of H. schachtii
in situ on the Hop-rootlets, as well as of the young larve and eggs in
different stages of development.

On September 18th, he favoured me with specimens of fibrous
Hop-roots with ‘smaller and finer side-rootlets, together with the
earth in which the roots were growing. Amongst these I found the
citron-shaped female adhering. With a two-inch focus magnifier, the
Nematode was distinguishable as a minute globular body, much the
same colour as the Hop-roots. With a higher (an inch) power, the
characteristic shape of the fully-developed female was observable, that
is, the somewhat spherical or globular shape prolonged at each end,
and on pressing this, it cracked, and great numbers of eggs burst out;
about a hundred could be counted with a quarter-inch glass, and
probably there were many more. Other females of various size
besides the fully-developed chestnut-coloured specimens were present,
some of them still young and white and smaller, and in one instance,
where the creature was still flask-shaped, the contents were only
partially advanced to egg-form.

In the case of one specimen, for which I secured a very good light,
the bright chestnut surface appeared to be pitted with very minute
punctures, and in this instance I had the opportunity of watching the
exit or expulsion of the young wormlets, with some eggs accompanying,
almost in the natural manner from the reproductive opening of what
had been the female, but now little more than the protecting husk.
This was a somewhat circular orifice, situated on one side of the

* Those who desire to go into the life-history of this Eelworm practically con-
sidered for agricultural purposes, as well as for technical scientific study, will find
it very serviceably given, with quotations and references to the works of Strubell,
Kuhn, and other special observers, in the ‘ Tierische Schidlinge und Niitzlinge ’ of
Dr. J. Ritzema Bos, pp. 765—777, Berlin, 1891. For popular English use, a short
abstract of the above will be found in ‘ Agricultural Zoology,’ an abridged form of
the above work translated by J. R. Ainsworth Davis, Prof. of Biology, &c., in the
University College of Wales, pp. 226—230: Chapman & Hall, London, 1894. I
haye not given a list in full of the many and valuable publications on this subject,
or bearing on this subject, by such distinguished writers as Drs. Kuhn, Strubell,
Voigt, &c., as these publications would not be very serviceable for the practical
home agricultural w ork for which these Reports are chiefly intended; but to those
who wish it, I believe I may say I could give the requisite titles,

BEET EELWORM. 59

Nematode just above the lower extremity, and was slightly more in the
transverse length,—that is, across the wormlet,—than in the vertical
measurement. The edge of the opening was not at all torn, but very
finely corrugated, and on very gently pressing the Nematode in glyce-
rine beneath a thin glass covering, a number of minute eel-shaped
wormlets at once began to appear, with eggs mixed with them. These
at first merely pressed forward, or were expelled from the orifice, but
presently the female (or perhaps at this stage what might be known
by the name sometimes used of the egg-sack) cracked, so that the rest
of the contents merely dispersed irregularly.

The eggs, which were plentiful in various of the females, were of
the shape figured (magnified) from life (see p. 56), that is, somewhat
bean-shaped, though the convex and concave curve was very slight;
the gradual development of the larva within was easily observable. It
will be noticed that the eggs figured (which at first were single cells
enclosed within the egg membrane) show at 6 the beginning of seg-
mentation, on the progress of which such profound considerations of
methods of growth were laid down by Strubell, that it may be of
interest just to allude to them.*

In the course of my examination, I noticed many cases of injury
to the outer skin of the Hop-rootlet, which presumably showed that a
deal of mischief had been going on, first by the wormlets feeding
within, and then by damage to the cuticle in the course of their boring
or bursting out; but 1 only saw two instances of what appeared to be
the swelling of the outer root-bark remaining still unbroken by the
developing Nematode within.

Itis quite plain that damage to the health of a plant attacked in this
manner is likely to occur. We have examples of this in the effect of
this Helworm root-infestation to Beet, which is thus described :—‘‘ The
leaves get weak and limp, and the outer ones especially get yellow,
spotted, and die off. Later on the inner leaves die as well, after which
the top of the Beet becomes black, and the whole root gradually
decays. In less severe cases the Beet may recover towards autumn,
and develop new heart-leaves, but the crop remains small,” &c.t We
know of it also as injurious at roots of other plants.

But how far this infestation as a regular thing may be connected
with ‘‘nettle-top”’ in Hops, is a matter we need more information about.

Looking over the letters of various Hop-growers who have been
good enough to write in answer to my enquiries, such various conditions

* See Strubell’s ‘Untersuchungen tber den Bau und der Entwickelung des
Ruben-nematoden Heterodera schachtii, Schmidt.’ ‘ Biblioteca Zoologica,’ Heft 2,
1888.

+ Sée ‘Apricultural Zoology,’ by Dr. Ritzema Bos; translated by Prof. J. R.
Ainsworth Davis, p. 227. Chapman & Hall, London, 1894.

60 EELWORMS.

are mentioned, as neglect, checked flow of sap, grubs working in the
hill, &c., as possibly causing nettle-headed growth, that it occurs
whether (besides cases where the disease, as observed by Prof. Percival,

exists coincidently with Kelworm presence) this same, or a very similar
kind of diseased growth, may be caused by various other attacks or

diseases.

Where it is caused, or partially caused, by presence of the ‘‘ Stem
Kelworm”’ (7. devastatriv), it might be hoped that the same kind of
applications which prevent or remedy this infestation in, or its effects
on growth of, Oats or Clover, might do good. Sulphate of potash, or,
better still, sulphate of potash and sulphate of ammonia, which is one
of the mixtures that answered well, rapidly, and with well-continued
action at Rothamsted * as a remedy for ‘‘Stem-sickness”’ in Clover,
might easily be tried. The remedies of employing ‘‘lure-plants” to
attract the wormlets, and a large number of the applications or treat-
ment used in field cultivation of such crops as Beet or Oats when
infested with either of the above-named Kelworms would not be
practicable with Hops. But nothing could be more sensible than the
plan mentioned by one of my correspondents, namely, where single or
a few plants are found infested, to dig them up and destroy them. If
these were burnt, there would be an end of the matter so far.

For myself, in placing the subject before my readers, I do it under
submission to them, that it seems right just to mention so much as I
know as certain, for we may find, now attention is directed to the
‘‘ Beet Kelworm”’ being in the country, that it is more present here
both at the roots of Mangolds and of Oats than is known of, and also
(with thanks to Prof. Percival for placing specimens in my hands) I
wish to draw attention to his forthcoming account of his interesting
observations, which may be hoped will throw some light on the attack
as studied by him in its Kentish locality.

Foot-knot Helworm. — Just a few words should be added. with
regard to the ‘ Root-knot’’ Kelworm, the Heterodera radicicola, figured
at p. 61. This Nematode greatly resembles the H. schachtit. It is
eel-shaped in larval and male condition, and the females are very like
those of the schachtii in becoming inflated in figure, but when fully
developed they appear (sce figure) to be pear-, or gourd-, or tulip-bulb-
shape, that is, somewhat pointed above, and flattish or slightly concave
below, rather than like the schachtti—lemon- or citron-shaped, that is,
somewhat spherical, with a prolongation at each end.

Their method of injury is similar in many respects, but also
partially differs in the ‘‘ Root-knot’’ Kelworm (as its name imports)
characteristically causing gall-growths on the roots of the infested
plants until, in the case of the Tomato and Cucumber roots (on which

* ‘Manual of Injurious Insects,’ by E, A. Ormerod, p. 54.

ROOT-KNOT EELWORM. 61

it troubles us most in this country), the infested gall-erowths may be
found from a quarter of an inch over, to masses of confluent galls from
one to two, or three and a half inches in length, and about half an
inch in breadth. On a single plant as many as twenty of the main
roots may be found galled, and these as they branched and branched

HETERODERA RADICICOLA.—1, larva; 2 and 3, females; 4 and 5, eggs in different
stages of development: all enormously magnified. (2) from sketch by Ed.; the
other figures after Prof. Geo. Atkinson.

again, and even the small side-fibres, were to be found loaded with the
irregularly formed soft lumpy galls.

This attack has been entered on in such great detail in my two
preceding Reports that it is unnecessary to repeat the observations
here, more especially as we seem still in ignorance of any application
which can be brought to bear satisfactorily on it as a distinct remedy.
As yet we do not know it in this country as a field attack.

Any really practicable measures of prevention and remedy which
might be trusted to, to answer at a paying rate are greatly needed, for
the reports sent during the past season show this infestation to be very
firmly established in various localities as an attack to Tomatoes and
Cucumbers under glass, and is a serious cause of loss. This, like the
H. schachtii, also attacks various out-of-door crops, but we do not as
yet appear to have it on them here.

Those who wish to study the history of this Kelworm both practi-
cally and with profound scientific detail, and full illustration, will find
these, and also very many titles of publications on Nematode life and
history, in the works noted below. *

* «Preliminary Report upon the Life-history and Metamorphoses of a Root-gall
Nematode Heterodera radicicola (Greef.), Mull.’ Science Contribution from the
Agricultural Experimental Station, Auburn, Alabama, U.S.A., 1889. Useful infor-

mation is also given in ‘The Root-knot Disease,’ by Dr. J, C. Neal, Government
Printing Office, Washington, U.S.A., 1889,

62

GOOSEBERRY.

Gooseberry and Ivy Red Spider. Bryobia pretiosa, C. Li. Koch.

BrYOBIA PR&TIOSA, from life; B. specrosa (outline figure after Koch): both mag-
nified. Leaf infested by ‘“‘ Red Spider,” nat. size.

The Gooseberry Red Spider was one of the infestations of 1893, of
which the prevalence was in marked coincidence with the heat and
drought which occurred in England from the beginning of March to
the end of June, and very especially from the beginning of March
until the middle of May in that year. The first dates of appearance
reported were March 15th and 17th.

In the past season, that of 1894, this ‘“‘ Red Spider” attack
reappeared like some others to an unusual amount, as relics of the
unusual prevalence in the previous year supplying an unusual amount
of survivors through the winter, and (like them) after raising some
anxiety lest a second visitation was at hand, quietly dropping down
into average amount of presence.

In 1894, the first note of observation of Red Spider on Gooseberry-
bushes was sent me by Mr. J. Hiam, from Astwood Bank, near Red-
ditch, on Feb. 24th, with the mention that he had already found a
considerable quantity hatched out, the first having been found on
Feb. 4th. .

On the 2nd of March Mr. Francis Nixon, of Great Eversden, near
Cambridge, to whom I was indebted in the previous season for careful
and useful observations of this Gooseberry pest, wrote me as follows:

GOOSEBERRY AND IVY RED SPIDER. 63

—‘‘ Replying to yours of Feb. 26th, I examined my Gooseberry-bushes
at about the same date as your correspondent from the west country,
but at that time I was only able to find one or two ‘ Red Spiders,’ and
I therefore thought the matter scarcely worth mention.

‘To-day being fine and bright, I have made a further examination,
and I find a few Spiders on the trees which are the most forward (the
buds of these are just bursting); they are very small indeed, scarcely
discernible by the naked eye, and of a bright red colour, I find them
on the stems and branches right up from the ground, and I have at
once greased the stems of the worst bush I could find, in order that I
may prove whether they come up from the ground at this early period.
I do not think this can be the case, as the Spiders appear to me to be
only just hatched. I may say that there are only a few bushes on
which I can find any at present.”

A few days later, that is, on the 5th of March, I received the
following communication from Messrs. T. R. Skinner & Son, Covent
Garden Market, London, E.C., relatively to the great loss caused by
the Red Spider infestation, especially in the preceding year, and the
likelihood from the numbers already observable of a serious repetition
of the attack. Messrs. Skinner enquired whether I could ‘‘ suggest any
remedy for a serious attack of Red Spider with which both our own
and several of our clients’ Gooseberry plantations this year seemed to
be threatened. The leaf is just coming out, and already seems to be
covered with this great pest. Last year, in consequence of the dry
weather, the ravages from this cause were most serious, and nothing
seemed to do any good. We tried washing with parafin (of course, a
weak solution) and soot, as well as slaked lime, but all to very little
purpose, and this year the evil seems to promise an increase. If you
could point out a remedy, it would be a great boon to market growers
of Gooseberries, to whom this Red Spider the last few years seems to
spell almost ruin.”

On the 8th of March, Mr. Nixon, reporting further to me on
appearance of Red Spider, mentioned that he had information of bad
infestation being already observed although so early in the season, and
that if want of rain occurred he apprehended recurrence of bad attack.
He remarked :—‘‘If this turns out to be a moderately dry season, it
is my opinion we shall have the worst attack that has ever been
known. . . . JIexamined my bushes daily, and it appears to me
the number of Spiders gradually increase, and it is evident that they
must proceed from the eggs which were laid in the twigs and branches
last autumn; .. . they are very small, too small to be seen by the
naked eye. I cannot find one old or full-grown Spider, or anything
approaching one, and I have noticed this before at this time of
the year,”

64 GOOSEBERRY.

Mr. Nixon made some remarks, which are well worth attention, on
the importance of taking the spring appearance of Red Spiders in
time, so as to destroy them before their season of egg-laying had
arrived, and mentioned that if ‘once egg-laying commences, the
Spiders continue to hatch throughout the season, and the infestation
is indefinitely maintained, therefore it is absolutely necessary and
most important that an early application should be given before egg-
laying begins. I am persuaded the great secret of the whole thing
lies in this one point. Once the eggs are there, I do not believe it
possible to be rid of the pest for that season. You may kill the
Spiders by thousands, as I did last year, but still there remain some
eggs to hatch and continue the infestation.

‘‘T intend to give my bushes a dressing of ‘ Anti-pest’ as soon as
possible, and I have found a much more economical way of doing it
than last year, by which, I believe, three-fourths of the stuff will be
saved. I shall use two Eclair sprayers on a specially constructed
garden-engine made long and narrow, so that it will easily pass up the
rows of bushes. The sprayers will both be in use at the same time,
doing bushes on each side.”’

During the season of attack in 1898, Mr. Nixon devoted great care
and attention to getting the Red Spider under on his own Gooseberry-
grounds at Great Hversden, and the good results of this treatment are
showing now as well as then, for he concluded the long letter, of
which I have given some part, with the remark, ‘I may say that in a
large proportion of my bushes no Spider has as yet appeared. I find
some of my neighbours have it badly.””—(F. Nixon.)

With regard to locality of the ‘‘ Red Spiders”’ at different times of
the day on various parts of the Gooseberry-bushes (which is important
relatively to bringing sprays or washes to bear on them), Messrs.
Skinner, of Covent Garden, who had previously written to me (see
p. 63), remarked on March 19th:—*‘ We notice the Spider congregates
in the crevices of the bark, and when the sun is out seems to get on
the leaves; towards nightfall, again going back to the wood. Some
pieces of the wood are literally painted with them. This is on a plot
of about fifteen acres, which has been heavily manured every year.
The curious point is that on another piece of about forty acres a very
short distance away one of our neighbours has none.”

On the 28rd of March, Sir J. Stewart Richardson, who had had
great attention bestowed on destruction of Red Spider during 1893,
wrote me :—‘‘I have not heard of any reappearance of ‘ Red Spider’
on my Gooseberry-bushes, but shall have a thorough investigation
this afternoon.”

Sir J. Stewart Richardson then added with regard to the mixture
which he had used beneficially for spraying with :—‘ It is indeed most

WASHES TO DESTROY RED SPIDER, 65

satisfactory to find that our useful Anti-pest is so nearly related to
Professor Riley’s ‘ Kerosine Emulsion.’ ”

This ‘‘ Kerosine Emulsion” has been found in the United States
to be a thoroughly effective remedy for a very similar kind of ‘“ Red
Spider”’ infestation, especially ‘‘ when a small quantity of flowers of
sulphur has been added.”’

One of the recipes given by the Department of Agriculture of the
U.S.A. for the preparation of Kerosine Emulsion is as follows :—Add
one gallon of water, in which a quarter of a pound of soft-soap (or
other coarse soap if preferred) has been dissolved, boiling or hot, to
two gallons of mineral oil, then churn the mixture by action of a
syringe, or pump, for about ten minutes to the consistency of cream,
and if this is properly done, the ingredients will not separate after
standing. For use as a wash or syringing, the ‘‘Emulsion” must be
diluted with at least nine gallons of water to each gallon of Emulsion.

This mixture of soft-soap and kerosine, or paraffin, or other
mineral oil, is exceedingly useful for insect destruction ; possibly, or
probably, no other insecticide ranks with it as a generally serviceable
application, if it can but be got to remain as a miature. This, however,
is the difficulty. If the soap-wash and oil are not so thoroughly
blended in mixing that they remain permanently incorporated, the
application may do more harm than good. The soap-washes may or
may not answer the purposes for which they were applied, but the
paraffin oil, running by itself on the leafage, is almost sure to do
mischief. Even in the U.S.A., where this Emulsion is so valued, the
difficulty of mixing it properly is an acknowledged drawback, and it is
still more so in this country. It can be learnt by a lesson, but for
those who have not this opportunity, or (like myself) have not acquired
the proper knack without being shown, I believe that the ‘ Anti-pest”
referred to by Sir J. Stewart Richardson is a safer application. This
is very nearly indeed allied to the Kerosine Emulsion in nature of its
ingredients, and is sold by Messrs. Morris, Little & Son, Doncaster, in
form only needing diluting with water to be at once fit for use.

The following note as to serviceableness of the ‘“‘ Emulsion,” and
especially of it when used hot, was sent me on the 25th of March by
Mr. J. Masters, of Evesham, from whom observations on details of
fruit-growing are of much value. After remarking on the serious
nature of the ‘“‘ Red Spider”’ infestation, Mr. Masters observed :—‘* We
have found here that nothing has proved more effective than the
‘Kerosine Emulsion,’ as recommended in your ‘ Manual’ of 1890,
pages 8348—349. We have found that it is best to apply the prepara-
tion to the bushes hot, say 80 to 100 degrees Fahrenheit. We boil
the water, in which we put the Emulsion in the proportion recom-
mended ; in this state we cart it away to our gardens in a barrel, and

F

66 GOOSEBERRY.

apply it to the bushes by the Knapsack Pump as soon as possible. The
test is for the preparation to be as hot as the men can endure it to
their backs. The results have been very satisfactory,—death to the
Spiders without injury to the foliage. It should be done on a sunny
day, as the Spider is then on the upper surface of the foliage, so that
the spray comes immediately in contact with them.”

Knapsack Sprayer.

This point of the Spiders collecting on the leafage, and the desirable-
ness of spraying whilst the sun is on, was noted by various contributors,
and amongst other observations in a leaflet of directions for treatment
written by Mr. Nixon, before mentioned, and distributed largely by
Messrs. Morris & Little, of Doncaster. In this it is mentioned, at
p. 8:—‘* Bushes should always be syringed when the leaves are dry,
after 9 a.m., and preferably when the sun is shining, as then most
Spiders are on the surface of leaves, where they can be the most easily
got at, taking care to wet all the foliage. If it is likely to be a frost,
the syringing should cease about 4 or 5 p.m. in order to allow the
foliage to dry before the frost comes on.”

It is obvious that, to get rid of the Spiders, it is desirable to
destroy them in all their lurking-places, whether on leaves or stems,
and that if they are only to be found on the leaves during some hours
of the day, that then is the time to give the applications; but under
submission to those who certainly understand thorough practical
treatment more fully than myself, I should say that as soon as the
sunlight became warm and powerful with the advancing year some
care would have to be exercised lest the leaves moistened in the hot
sunlight should become what is called ‘‘scalded.’’—Hp.

WEATHER INFLUENCES ON RED SPIDER, 67

Information of complaints being general as to Red Spider presence
on Gooseberries, and also of some of his own trees being badly infested,
was sent me on the 10th of April by Mr. Edw. Goodwin, from Canon
Court, Wateringbury, Kent, with the remark accompanying :—‘ We
are again having a phenomenally dry and warm spring, and its effect
on insect life is already apparent.”’

From various other localities (though not, so far as I find in the
past season, further north than Yorkshire); from Beaford, N. Devon;
Toddington Fruit-grounds ; and from Holt Castle, near Worcester,
observations or enquiries were also sent me about Red Spider. In
writing from the latter place on the 29th of March, Mr. J. H. Wake-
man Best observed :—‘ Red Spider is very bad in this district on the
Gooseberry-trees, particularly on the light soils. Iam spraying with
Stott’s ‘Kill’mright.’”

It is worth noting relatively to influence of heat and drought on
this attack that, whilst in the dry months of 1893 (see p. 62) the pre-
sence of the pest was reported from the 15th of March to the 21st of
June, in the past season, though the attack was observed in a few
localities much earlier, namely, about the 4th of February (presumably
from the unusual numbers which had survived from the great preva-
lence of the previous year), that it also ended much earlier; only a few
notices of its presence were sent me after March, and none after the
later part of April.

In connection with the appearance of this mite to an unusual
extent on Gooseberry-bushes in this country, as above mentioned, it is
of interest to note that another species, the Bryobia nobilis, C. L. Koch,
was observed by Dr. Fr. Thomas, of Ohrdruf, in Germany, as very
prevalent on Gooseberry-bushes (where it had not previously been
observed as an infestation) in 1893 and 1894. Of this he remarks,
after some preliminary observations on weather influences :—‘‘ I am of
opinion that the increased amount of appearance of the small red Mite
of the Gooseberry-bushes, which was observed in the course of the
year 1893, and especially in the spring, was a result of the abnormal
dryness of that year, a condition which was repeated in April and May
of the present year” * (1894, Ep.). Dr. Fr. Thomas remarks that
these insects are not new in Germany, as he had himself seen them
for some years in his own garden, but that he was not aware of them
haying been spoken of in German publications on garden or orchard
cultivation, or on plant diseases.

This is such a very similar case of appearance to that of the Red
Spider in this country—inasmuch as both of the species of Bryobia
were known of as respectively present in the respective countries, but

* «Die rote Stachelbeer Milbe, Bryobia nobilis, C. L. Koch (?),’ von Prof. Dr.

Fr. Thomas, in Ohrdruf (aus Wittmack’s ‘ Gartenflora,’ 43 Jahrgang, 1894).
F 2

68 GOOSEBERRY.

yet not as being injurious to the Gooseberry-bushes, until, in both
countries, similar conditions of drought occurred in 1898, which were
repeated in the spring of 1894—that it seems desirable to record the
parallel observation.

The kind of Red Spider which has been troubling us in Gooseberry-
ground during the past two seasons, is of the shape figured, magnified,
at p. 62, and is distinguishable from the Red Spider of the Hop by
the great length of the front pair of legs. Where there are several of
the Acari together, their presence may be observed by the little patch
of reddish colour; otherwise they are hardly distinguishable by the
naked eye, as each ‘‘ Spider,” or Mite, is only about the thirty-second
of an inch (that is, the quarter of an eighth of an inch) in length. The
colour of the Mites was of some shade of brick-red, varying from bright
to ordinary brick colour, and sometimes much darker and duller in
tint.* ”

PREVENTION AND REemMEpIES.—The preventive measures lie to a con-
siderable extent in being on the alert, and taking the attack in good
time. Where one or two bushes only are found to be infested, it is
best to sacrifice them. If they are cut down and burnt directly, this
will save a deal of trouble, especially if some treatment is applied to
the spot where the bushes stood. If the surface soil is turned well
under (not merely dug, which often is more a dispersion than a cure
of insect presence), and a good soaking with water given, probably the
mischief would be got rid of.

In Dr. Friedrich Thomas’s publication, previously quoted, he men-
tions that the continued application of moisture partially stupefies the
Mites—that it causes a lethargic condition, from which they recover on
being dried by surrounding circumstances, but in which, if continued
for some days, they waste. From this it would appear that if infested
surface of the ground was turned down and thoroughly well wetted,
especially if some soft-soap mixture was added which would still
further choke their breathing-apparatus, it would do a deal of good as
to what might be in the earth.

From the past season’s observations, it is obvious that well washing
down the bushes with whatever mixture may be preferred as soon as
ever the first beginnings of Red Mite presence are noticeable is very
important. Thus we clear off, whilst still numbering only scores or
hundreds, what before long would have multiplied to countless numbers.

* For details of this attack, with determination by Mr. Albert Michael of the
species as Bryobia pretiosa of C. L. Koch, and its possible similarity with B.
speciosa (figured also at p. 62) of the same observer, and other points unnecessary
to repeat again this year, the reader is referred to my paper in my ‘ Seventeenth
Report on Injurious Insects,’ pp. 32—38.—Ep.

GOOSEBERRY AND IVY RED SPIDER. 69

With regard to washes, the Kerosine Emulsion appears to stand
first of all on the widespread evidence of its success in the United
States for this kind of infestation. We have also observation of it
being useful in this country for clearing off this Spider, or Mite,
especially when the spray or wash is applied warm (see pp. 65, 66).

The Anti-pest of Messrs. Morris & Little, Doncaster, and Mr.
Stott’s application sold under the name of Kill’mright, are both ser-
viceable, but I incline most to the former, as its composition much
resembles that of the Kerosine Emulsion, only (as observed at p. 65)
there is not the same difficulty in mixing it. But probably many soft-
soap mixtures are useful, and, amongst others, the ‘‘Soap and Sulphur
Compound ”’ of the Chiswick Soap Co., Chiswick, Middlesex.

For distribution of sprays, the Knapsack Punp, or ‘“ Eclair”’
Sprayer,* appears to answer very well, excepting that I had complaint
in some cases of the oily matter of the soap mixture dissolving the
material of the collars, so that they got out of order. Relatively to
this point, Sir J. Stewart Richardson, who had reported tne excellent
success of the Anti-pest applied by means of the Knapsack Sprayer,
remarked :—‘‘ My gardener found that after using the spray pump for
some time that it lost its power, so he took it to pieces, and found the
india-rubber collar and valves in a sort of consistency like putty; so
he got a sheet of rubber and made new ones, whereupon the pump
worked as well as ever.”’

This rearrangement would probably make all right for home use
on a moderate scale of work. For more severe work, I believe that
collars and washers, which were originated by Mr. Nixon, of Great
Eversden, near Cambridge, and sold by him at threepence apiece,
answer quite well. These are not made of india-rubber, but of a
material which is not acted on by either oils or acids.

These rearrangements would keep all in order, even if the difficulty
still exists; but as I was informed that negotiations were in progress
some time ago with Mons. Vermorel, whose Knapsack Sprayers are
imported into this country by Messrs. Clark & Son (see previous note),
relatively to altering this point, very possibly there is now no difficulty
on this head, and certainly all information would be given by Messrs.
Clark.

Other means of lessening the amount of the Gooseberry Red Spider
lie in cleaning and scraping rough bark (especially during winter), so
as to remove shelters for these Mites or their eggs, also in pruning off
as much rough wood as could be spared; and running soft-soap into
angles between the branches would also be of use. But though the

* Procurable from Messrs. Chas. Clark & Co., Windsor Chambers, Great St.
Helen’s, London, E.C,

70 HOP.

attack was very serious in 1898, and also for a while in the past
season, it seems to me that looking at the proof we have of its
appearance haying been greatly connected with the prevalence of
unusually dry weather, there is great reason to hope that with care for
a while to get rid of the remains of this extra presence we may not
have much more trouble about it.

EEO:

Golden Eye. Chrysopa perla, Linn. (Beneficial insect).

Curysopa prrtA.—Fly, magnified, and stalked eggs; larva, mag. and nat. size,
cased with rubbish; also cocoon, mag. and nat. size.

During the past season, the two most important kinds of Hop
infestations, those of Hop Aphis or Fly, and of Red Spider, have as
usual been present; but the history of these, and what may be called
the artificial remedies, are so perfectly well known that there is no
occasion to enter on them again. But with our natural remedies the
case is different, and the insect foes, such as the Golden Eyes, or
Lace-winged Flies, and the Lady-bird Beetles, of which the variety of
kinds is not sufficiently known (nor in all cases their entirely beneficial
character), may be usefully mentioned.

In the past season the Chrysopa perla, one of our very common
species of ‘‘ Golden Eye,” was found hybernating in two localities in
the south-east of England, early in the year, in such unusual numbers
as to make it appear at least likely that this quantity of indoor
shelterers were, like the unusual numbers of Wasps and some other
infestations of the early part of 1894, remains of the specially great
numbers of these that were present in the preceding year.

An enquiry sent me on the 10th of February from a correspondent
writing from Frogholt, Hythe, Kent, mentioned the remarkably large

GOLDEN EYE. 71

numbers in which the flies were found sheltering indoors, and also
their delicate appearance, as follows:—‘‘ The house of a friend of mine
has been infested this winter with great numbers of (to all appearance)
Trout Flies! An unoccupied room has been principally troubled, but
the flies have been found all over the house, which is large and old-
fashioned”’; and enquiries were sent as to the nature of the visitors,
and the probable reason for their appearance.

A little earlier (in the latter part of January), a number of Chrysopas
were sent me from a locality near Hastings, with mention that the
flies were very numerous in the house, and the just remark relatively
to their remarkable fragile and delicate appearance, that the creature
looked much more fitted to make its appearance in the summer than
in the winter.

A good supply of these Chrysopas, or ‘‘ Golden Hyes,’’ were sent
me, almost all apparently of the very common kind, the C. perla
(figured somewhat larger than life at p. 70); but as they were dead,
and had previously been in a state of hybernation, and the colours
consequently not in their proper brightness, it was possible some of
the others of the dozen or so of English kinds might be present. This
especially in the case of one specimen variously marked with rosy or
pink, which might very possibly be the C. carnea, a kind just a little
larger than the C. perla.

This kind (the C. perla) is from about a third to half an inch in
the length of the body, and from a little more than one inch to an
inch and three-quarters in the spread of the four beautifully iridescent
gauzy wings. The Chrysopas are generally green; this kind is of a
palish or yellowish green, the horns long and thread-like, the eyes
globose, and during life of a rich golden tint, from which these insects
take their name of ‘‘ Golden Hyes.”’ ‘The name of Lace-wings, also
sometimes given, well describes the light wing-texture with its many
cross nervures.

The grubs are carnivorous,—in the words of John Curtis, ‘‘ ferocious
little animals,’—some of which (see figure, p. 70) clothe themselves
with the skins of the insects which they have swallowed the available
portions of, others cover themselves with lichens, and thus, hidden
from their own bird enemies, watch for their own insect food. They
have been observed to seize an Aphis with their long and strong jaws,
and devour the largest in half a minute, or, failing more acceptable
food, would eat each other, or even suck the contents of a caterpillar
much larger than themselves. The colours of these grubs are various,
but appear to be whitish or fuscous, with brown or orange spots, and
at the sides of the body are fleshy tubercles, with a spreading tuft of
hairs attached to each (see figure 4, magnified, p. 70); they have
strong jaws, six feet, and ‘the apex of the abdomen is prehensile,

72, HOP.

forming as it were a seventh foot, which has the power of adhering to
very smooth substances.” This power it may be remarked is of
especial use in steadying the grub in its struggles with the insects of
which it is devouring the contents. The grubs feed for rather more
than a fortnight, then form a silken whitish cocoon, in which the
change to pupa takes place, and from which the flies come out in
about three weeks in summer. These are not long-lived; and the
female lays her eggs in the curious form figured: applying the tip of
her abdomen to the place where the egg is to be attached, she exudes
a gummy matter, and drawing it out, leaves it as a fine transparent
thread, with the egg fixed at the apex or free end, looking altogether
not unlike a pin with the head on an exceedingly fine stem.

I have extracted the above notes of the life-history of the ‘‘ Golden
Eye” mainly from the long and good account given by John Curtis,*
as I have never had more than occasional opportunities of observing
this beautiful and very beneficial insect and its stalked eggs myself,
and it is not so well known as it ought to be. Also it is noted by
Curtis that the flies which come forth in summer are not long-lived,
but the autumnal ones remain through the winter in cocoon, therefore
it appears that the observations of the ‘‘Golden Eyes’’ in the numbers
found in mid-winter of this year is an unusual circumstance and
worth recording.

‘ Lady-birds” (beneficial insects)—Eyed Lady-bird Beetle. Cocci-
nella ocellata, Linn. Minute Black Lady-bird. Scymnus
minimus, Rossi.

CoccINELLA OCELLATA, nat. size and magnified.

On the 1st of October, a specimen of the very fine kind of Lady-
bird Beetle figured above was forwarded me by the Editor of the ‘ Hop
Grower,’ Wolverhampton, with the remark accompanying: ‘One of
my correspondents, a Hop-grower in Kent, has sent me the Lady-bird
enclosed, asking me to name its species,”’ &c.

The specimen proved to be the Eyed Lady-bird, the Coccinella
ocellata, mentioned by Rye as the largest of our species, and ‘“ conspi-

* See ‘Farm Insects,’ by John Curtis, pp. 77, 78.

EYED LADY-BIRD BEETLE. 13

cuous for the yellow rim surrounding each of its spots during life.”’ *
The beetle sent was rather over three-eighths of an inch in length
(that is, not quite the full size at which they are semetimes found),
and, being alive and uninjured when it reached me, the colouring was
in full perfection. The specimen had the head black, with two frontal
spots, and the front and side margins white; the thorax (or fore body)
also black, with a narrow white margin in front, and a broad one on
each side, these broad margins bearing on each (towards the base) one
black spot with two white spots in its centre. The wing-cases were
rufous, or reddish, in colour, with eight black spots ringed with pale
yellowish colour on each. These spots were arranged as one at the
base of the wing-case, then three arranged across, then three again,
and a longer shaped spot near the tip of the wing-case. These eye-like
spots with the black centres and light rings give the scientific name
of ocellata to this species, of which the term Hyed Lady-bird is a
convenient alteration.

There are several varieties,+ of which one has the elytra, or wing-
cases, unspotted; one has ‘one or other of the spots on the elytra
deficient’; and another has the spot on the shoulder only partly
ringed, and has also a small spot quite at the base of each wing-case
in the centre (the two spots close together), the other spots only
indicated by pale marks.

In the specimen sent me, the shoulder spot was only partially
ringed, and the marking on the suture near the scutellum was very
clearly defined.

This species is said by Rye to be one of those peculiar to Fir-trees ;
Stephens notes that it affects Pines and Firs, as well as the Beech;
and the specimen figured was found on a Hop-leaf belonging to a
Golding growing in an old Hop-yard in the parish of Yalding, Kent.
On enquiry of Mr. R. H. White, 9, Bentinck Terrace, Regent’s Park,
who had captured the insect, whether he could favour me with further
details, he could only tell me as above, that ‘“ the Lady-bird was
obtained from a white bine (or old Golding) Hop-leaf,” adding the
remark, ‘which Hop, as possibly you may be aware, is one of the
hardest to grow, being peculiarly liable to suffer so much from the
attack of Green Fly.”—(R. H. W.)

As this Eyed Lady-bird, although in regular course found on Pine
or Fir, has certainly previously been found on Beech, and now this
specimen was found on Hop, there seems at least a chance that if
attention was directed to the subject it might be found more present
than is supposed, and with such an observable and good-sized insect,
something might really be practicable towards propagating or preserving

* «British Beetles,’ by E. C. Rye, p. 229.
+ See Stephen’s ‘ British Entomology: Coleoptera,’ vol, iv. p. 379.

74 HOP.

it during winter in the way suggested sometimes, though by no means
easy to carry out with the smaller sorts.

All the Coccinelide, or Lady-birds, whether large or small, are
carnivorous both in grub and beetle state, and if by transference from
elsewhere, or protection if found on the spot, we could manage to
gain the help of this large kind on our Hops, it certainly would be
desirable.

“Minute Brack Lapy-pirp,’’ Scymnus minimus, Rossi.— This ex-
ceedingly small beetle, it will be remembered, was observed early in
August, 1893, by Mr. Edw. Goodwin, of Canon Court, Wateringbury,
near Maidstone, doing much service in grub state by feeding on Red
Spider on Hops, and in the past season it has reappeared to some
slight extent.

This little beetle is similar to the common Lady-birds in shape,
but is only about, or rather less than, a twelfth of an inch in length,
black, with the wing-cases slightly downy. The maggots appear, as
seen with the naked eye, to be of a general smoky-grey colour; seen
through a magnifier, they are of a smoky-yellowish colour, with black
patches. These, as also the chrysalids, are similar in shape to the
maggots and chrysalids of the common Lady-birds.

In 1898, I had the opportunity of rearing the insect through its
various stages, and so observing its life-history, which I am not aware
of having been recorded before, and from this, and the notes sent, they
were obviously voracious in maggot state. They did not limit them-
selves to Red Spider of the Hop, for I found they worked steadily on-
wards at the Red Spider on Plum-leaves greedily and uninterruptedly,
and in confinement, failing other nourishment, would feed on their
brethren, in one case even until only one survivor remained. The
different diet did not seem at all injurious, for in this instance the
larva went through its changes rapidly. On August 28th it was still
in larval state, and after changing in the usual manner of the Lady-
birds to a pupa (in this case shiny and black) hung up by the tip of
the tail, I found, on the 6th of September, the little black Lady-bird
walking briskly about.

My own attempts to rear a succession of this minute Scymnus from
specimens I freed in my own garden quite failed; but where they may
chance to be noticed, it would be well to remark that the small black
beetles, hardly as big as the letter ‘‘o” in these lines of print, are
beneficial, and are doing good service, and I repeat just a few of last
year’s observations in the hope of drawing attention to them.

Note.—Some observations regarding Eelworm presence noticed at
Hop-roots at one locality in Kent have been placed under the heading

HORSE WARBLE FLY. 75

of ‘‘ Helworms” (and more especially at pp. 52—60 of the paper), in
order to give considerations of the main characteristics of the different
kinds of Nematode worms mentioned, with the figures of them in
different stages, together for convenience of comparison.

HORSE.

Horse Warble Fly. ?” Hypoderma Loiseti, Loiset=? Gvdemagena equi
=? Hypoderma equi.

The following note, with which I was favoured on Dec. 17th, by
Mr. Samuel Hall, of 8, St. Andrew’s Place, Cardiff, is of especial
interest as an observation of warble-maggots being found at one time
(in the Jatter part of February) to the amount of at least forty on a
mare in his possession. So far as I am aware from observations sent
me, or from record, it is very unusual in case of Horse Warble attack
to find more than a very few maggots on one animal; for the most
part there appears to be only one, and I have never had notes of more
than three maggots at one time being observed.

In 1886, the only year in which I have had more than a few cases
reported of this attack, Mr. Stratton, of The Duffryn, Newport, Mon.,
mentioned, ‘‘ You seldom find more than one on a horse, and that one
is sometimes not on the back”; and Mr. Hy. Thompson, M.R.C.YV.S.,
of Aspatria, Cumberland, writing about the extensive diffused swelling
caused at the neck of a horse then under his care for presence of
warble-maggot, observed regarding the specimen he sent me, ‘‘ This is
the third from the same animal, which is very peculiar, as you seldom
see them.”

During the past season a very few notes of Horse Warble were
sent me, but none adding to our previous amount of information,
until Mr. Hall favoured me with the following remarks :—

‘‘T thought it might be of interest to you to know that I had a
mare this year with a great number of warbles on her shoulders, back,
and quarters. I bought her at Cardigan last January; she had been
kept out of doors till about a fortnight before I bought her, and was
very low in condition; at that time there were none observable, but
about the middle or end of February she had at least forty, so that it
was difficult to put a saddle or harness on her. Many of them my
man squeezed out; but on those not so advanced, I applied a small

76 HORSE.

bit of biniodide of mercury ointment, which destroyed them all in
about a week or ten days. The mare had a very fine coat, and was
five years old.”’—(S. H.)

Whether the Horse Warble Fly is of the same species as the Ox
Warble Fly,—that is, whether it is the Hypoderma bovis,—does not
appear yet to be fully known. Various names have been provisionally
given to it in the larval stage in which it has been recorded, but up to
dates of published information in my hands, the fly had not been
reared, neither had the maggot been secured for description in its
full-grown state. Dr. Brauer (a translation of whose description of
the partly-grown grub* I gave in my ‘ Tenth Report on Injurious
Insects,’ pp. 90, 91) observed:—‘* To distinguish whether it is the
larva of the H. bovis or of another kind, we must know the third stage.
It is very likely it belongs to another kind, possibly the H. silenus.”

The maggots which were seen in our English observations were
not sufficiently minutely noted as to show which species of Hypoderma
they might belong to. They had prickles, and also mouth-forks, like
those noticed in the young Ox Warble-maggot, see figs., pp. 5, 9 of
Appendix. Amongst all the observations, only two instances occurred
of the fly being reared, and in both of these the flies died, and
shrivelled or putrefied so very soon that I had not the satisfaction of
seeing them for purposes of identification.

One peculiarity of this Horse Warble attack is that the locality of
the warbles is not so specially along the back as with cattle, but also
on the neck, flank, and quarter. Also that, though very likely only
one warble may be present, the mischief,—that is, the swelling, pain,
&c.,—caused by this one may possibly be far more than is caused by
any one warble on cattle. The amount of suffering probably depends
on position; in one of the worst cases mentioned to me by Mr.
Thompson, in which he removed the maggot from the neck of a
thoroughbred horse, the swelling was diffused and extensive along
nearly all the length of the shoulder-blade, and these parts were very
painful.

The larve {+ have been chiefly observed in the more northerly parts
of Europe, as the North of France, Belgium, Holland, and on the
coasts of the North Sea; also we find it distributed generally in
England ; and it is stated that such horses especially suffer as were
exposed in July and August of the previous year to possibility of the
Warble Fly attack.

The following notes, for which I was indebted in the course of my

* See ‘ Monographie der Gistriden,’ pp. 137, 138, von Friedrich Brauer: Wien.

+ See Dr. Brauer’s work previously referred to; also my own translation of his
observations on this attack in note pp. 90, 91, of my ‘ Tenth Report of Observations
of Injurious Insects,

HORSE WARBLE FLY. Ta
investigations on Ox Warble to Mr. John Dalton, Wigton, Cumber-
land, may be of interest as explaining (in connection with the above
observations) why traces of warble-presence are so little noticed on
horse hides :—

‘“‘ With regard to your question about warbles in horses, I can give
you but little information. Of the horse-hides I get, I should say not
one in fifty is warbled, and the appearance of the hides when tanned
shows that warbles are of rare occurrence; there is no cicatrix as in
cattle, and when a warble does exist, it is a single one, and never, so
far as I have seen, in numbers. As horses are not used for food, the
hides are comparatively scarce, and only a few—and those mostly old
ones—come under the observation of the tanner. I never remember
seeing more than one warble-hole in a horse-hide; I mean in any
single hide. Whether it is the same species of warble as in the ox, I
cannot give an opinion; I am inclined to think it is the same, .. . but
this is of course mere supposition.”

In regard to presence of warble in imported hides, Mr. Dalton
wrote :—‘‘ Horse-hides are imported in large numbers from South
America; the Spaniards rear horses in immense quantities, and kill
them for the hides and feet. They are slaughtered at two or three
years old, and these hides are quite free from warbles.”

The great number of warble-maggots found by Mr. 8. Hall on his
mare seems to open up still more than before the question whether
the attack may not be at least sometimes of our common Ox Warble
Fly. Any way, it would be very desirable to have more certain know-
ledge on the subject, and if any of those into whose hands this paper
may come would favour me with specimens of the maggot which they
may have squeezed out when near maturity, I should be very glad of
the opportunity of investigating the characteristics, describing, and, if
possible, figuring it.

If circumstance allowed of the maggot not being removed, so that it
might drop out when ready for its change, I would most gladly on
application describe the very easy way in which it might be secured so
as to give us a chance of rearing the fly.

78

MANGOLDS.

Snake Millepedes. Julide of various species.
Flattened Millepede. Polydesmus complanatus, Linn.

1, Julus londinensis; 3, J. guttatus (pulchellus, Leach); 4, J. terrestris; 5, horn;
7, Polydesmus complanatus ; all magnified. 2 and 6, nat. size of 3 and 7.

Julus-worms, or Millepedes, of various kinds, sometimes also known
as False Wireworms, are one of the kinds of infestation which are
much requiring fuller observation, and I place them here under the
heading of Mangolds as being one of the field crops especially infested
by them.

They are well-known kitchen-garden pests, especially the small
pale grey kind, with crimson spots along the sides, which we only too
often find fairly luxuriating in numbers in our best and ripest Straw-
berries. This kind, the Julus guttatus, or Spotted Millepede, figured
at 2 and 8 (nat. size and magnified), often changes to a deep crimson
or purplish tint after death. Of the other common species figured, the
Julus terrestris (4) is upwards of an inch in length, of a pitchy colour,
with ochrey legs; and the J. londinensis, the London Millepede, so called
from having been first observed near London, and also at one time
found infesting Wheat in Surrey, is of a dark leaden colour, with
whiter legs than the J. terrestris, or Earth Millepede. The Polydesmus
complanatus, or Flattened Millepede, a term well describing its appear-
ance (figured above at 6 and 7), is of a greyish or somewhat purplish
colour above, and lighter below, and, as far as my own observations
go, I should say more especially frequent in collections of dead leaves.

All these kinds are considered to have the same methods of life.
Their egg-laying season is stated to be from about the end of December
until May, and the young Millepedes when hatched have three pairs
of legs. With successive moults, additional rings or segments bearing
additional pairs of legs are developed, until, in some instances, there

SNAKE MILLEPEDES; FLATTENED MILLEPEDE. 79

may be upwards of eighty pairs.* They are stated to live two years
before they arrive at full growth and power of reproduction, and also
to propagate most freely in undisturbed ground.

The Snake Millepedes have been found to feed on roots of many
vegetables, as Corn, Potatoes, Turnips, Onion, Cabbage, &c.; the
Spotted Millepede is excessively partial to Mangolds; and the Flattened
Millepede is recorded as especially injuring Carrot crops.

That both these kinds attack roots of Peas in the field, is shown by
the following communication, which was sent me on the 19th of May,
by Mr. Wm. Luton, from Brooklyn Farm, Hambrook, near Bristol :—
“‘T have a piece of Peas that are dying away, and cannot tell the
cause; but I find the roots are covered with a small insect, and I think
that must be the evil.’’

Specimens of the infested Peas, and of the infestation itself, were
sent accompanying, and on examination this proved to be of both the
Spotted and the Flattened Millepede.

But what we need most particularly to know is,—where do these
Millepedes come from to the attacked crops? They are not true insects,
and cannot fly in any stage of their lives, so that they must either
have been bred on the spot, or been carried to it in manure or soil, or
have migrated to it ; no other way seems open, for it is hardly in the
compass of possibility that the eggs could have been carried in seed.

From such notes as have occasionally been given in past years,
transmission in manure seems the most likely cause of infestation.
Millepedes are general feeders, and consume both decaying and living
animal and vegetable substances; their habit of preying on Slugs,
Snails, insects, Earth-worms, and the like, would not bear on the present
subject; but in kitchen-garden work they are found especially to be
present in refuse or rubbish heaps, and also in manure.

On May 31st, Mr. A. E. Palmer, writing to me from Goldthorn
Hill, Wolverhampton, forwarded specimens of what turned out to be
the Spotted Millepede, asking information how to get rid of them, as
his Vine-borders were infested with them.

Where manure from standing heaps, often in very much the condi-
tion in which it is found in thoroughly-dressed Vine-borders, is carried
out to fields, it might very likely take the Julus-worms, just as the
soil above-mentioned would have done.

In the course of communication in 1883 with Mr. W. Glenny, of

* John Curtis in his ‘Farm Insects,’ which contains the most serviceable
account of the common British Millepedes, and from which I quote above, mentions
having himself counted, as well as he could ascertain, 156 feet on the Julus pilosus ;
also that there were 160 on the J. londinensis; and, speaking of the Snake Mille-
pedes generally, that the number of legs which they possess amounts sometimes
to 240.—Ep.

80 MANGOLDS.

Barking (whose opinion on these matters is of much value), he men-
tioned the damage caused by Julus-worms (in this case the ‘ Karth”’
and the ‘‘ Flattened’ Millepede) to sprouting Kidney Beans, and
added :—‘‘ Your suggestions to move the ground frequently before
planting, to eradicate all rubbish and garbage, and to sow not too early,
are what I can endorse entirely.’ Of the dispersion of the pests from
heaps of rotting or rotten vegetable matter we have plenty of proof, but
we want more attention to the “‘ animal remains ’”’ part of the question ;
that is, animal manure, rotting bones, or bone not fully crushed in
bone manure, and also what may be called “‘ garbage,” as attractions
to Millepede presence. In notes sent at different times, I have infor-
mation of the Millepedes as found in bunches at times round a bit of
bone or refuse left in the manure; and also, in some notes sent me by
Mr. J. A. Smith, Rise Hall, Akenham, of a remarkably large presence
of Earth Millepedes in connection with land which was annually
treated with town manure containing slaughter-house refuse, and what
may be generally described by the word garbage.

The fact of the Millepedes living two years before they reach
maturity causes difficulty in the investigation, but taking for leading
points that they may be in old refuse heaps, and that they may be
found in great quantities in decayed vegetable matter, and also may be
found in animal refuse, or at bones used as manure or flung to manure
heaps, we might in the coming year make some advance in information.

In the course of the past season, Mr. Winder, writing me on the
21st of June regarding the condition of a crop of Mangolds on land
under his superintendence at Fairmile, Ottery St. Mary, Devon, men-
tioned that the seed had been sown about six weeks, and as it did not
appear to prosper,—in: fact, many of the plants were dying,—they
began to look for the reason, and found grey worm-like creatures, of
which he enclosed samples, showing them to be the spotted Millepede,
‘‘which were apparently eating the Mangold, or whether they were
after the manure I cannot tell. It was what is called bone compound,
8 cwt. per acre, 14 cwt. guano, and 4 cwt. salt. Salt sown broadcast
before sowing.” —(E. A. W.) '

Mr. Winder forwarded me some of the bone compound for
examination, and I could not find any signs of infestation in it, so
in that case we got no nearer the cause.

Nitrate of soda applied as a dry dressing had very little effect; but
in this and another case the best application was rain setting in, which
brought the enrichments in the soil to bear, and saved a moderate
crop.

Looking at the observations which have been sent in now from
time to time for eleven or more years, we do not find that any remedy
has yet been noted for these Millepede attacks when on the broad

SNAKE MILLEPEDES, MIGRATION OF. 81

seale of field cultivation. Where a strong solution of nitrate of soda,
or of salt, can be run down to. them so as to touch them, it will kill
them very rapidly; but this is hardly possible in field culture, and
merely strewing the nitrate or salt will not answer.

In Mr. Glenny’s notes of the damage to germinating Beans caused
by these Millepedes, he suggested poisoning the seed, and perhaps
something of the nature of “pickling”? might be managed in the case
of Mangolds, as it is just at the time of germination that the mischief
is specially done.

Cotton-cake is a great attraction to some kinds of Millepedes, and
may be very serviceably used to draw them away from a crop; but
whether it may not also to some extent be a means of drawing them
to where manure is used in which Cotton-cake was one of the
ingredients of the cattle-food is open to doubt.

In a detailed note sent me in 1885 from Audley’s Wood, Basing-
stoke, of one of the worst attacks on germinating Mangold plants that
was ever reported to me, Mangold had been grown on the sround
very successfully for four years, and in the previous year the land had
been treated at the rate of ten tons to the acre with manure from pigs
fatted on Barley-meal, cows fed on decorticated Cotton-cake, Maize,
and Bean-meal or dari crushed with Mangolds; and also manure from
cart stables. The land was ploughed after the Mangold crop was
lifted; deeply ploughed and left in fallow all winter. The seed was
drilled with ground Rape-cake, and a Mangold manure,* in which bits
‘‘of bone or refuse used in the manufacture of the manure” were
present.

In this quite exceptionally bad attack, besides the numbers of
Millepedes found at the germinating seed, they were also sometimes
found in bunches round bits of bone and refuse in the manure. _

But again, we do not know how the infestation came to be in such
vast numbers on the field where it had not previously been observed,
and it seems to me we need special investigation as to possibilities of
migration.

In a note sent me in the course of observations by Mr. J. A. Smith,
of Rise Hall, Akenham, he mentioned having one morning seen such
numbers of Millepedes crossing a turnpike road, apparently travelling
from a field of Oats towards a piece of pasture-land, that the road was
covered with them. The specimens sent agreed with the common
pitchy-coloured Julus terrestris, the Harth Millepede.

If we could have some detailed observations regarding habits of
these destructive pests, they would certainly be very useful, and I

* Name of this manure given with the observation in my Report for 1885, but
unnecessary to repeat.

82 MANGOLDS.

should be very glad to give any information in my power, for this is
one of the attacks about which we do not seem to be making any
advance.

Note.—Two other attacks, which respectively are, or may very
likely be, at Mangold-roots, require a few words. The first of these
was of a species of surface caterpillar which I have not before had
notes of, and which was sent from two localities as doing much harm
to Mangold-roots. This was very like the common “ Turnip Grub,”
the larva of the Agrotis segetum, in shape, and obviously very nearly
allied, but was entirely different in colour, being of a decided red or
reddish-brown tint along the upper part. As the caterpillars were
only partly grown, I could not name them with certainty, but they
appeared very possibly to be caterpillars of the Agrotis suffusa, some-
times found in June at Mangolds.

The other attack, which may very likely indeed be present at the
roots of Mangold, is of serious importance. This is the Beet Kelworm
figured and described at pp. 56—58 preceding. We know this kind is
in the country, but as yet we have not had report of it as at Mangolds,
though from the condition in which young plants have occasionally
been sent me for several years back, this Helworm presence may very
likely be the cause of the unexplained failures.

A few lines of description of the appearance of attacked Beet
(equally applicable to Mangolds) will be found at p. 59. If any such
‘‘sickness’’ should be noticed in the coming season, I should be
particularly obliged by a few specimens being sent me, taken up with the
earth adhering to the rootlets, so that the small lemon- or citron-
shaped female Helworms (see figures 4 and 5, p. 56) might be still
present for identification.

83

MUSTARD.

Charlock (or Charlock-seed) Weevil. Ceutorhynchus contractus,
Marsh.

CrUTORHYNCHUS conTRACTUS.—Natural size and magnified.

The exceedingly minute weevils figured above, which in 1893 did
much damage to germinating seed and young plants of White Mustard
on the grounds of Holderness Mustard-growers, reappeared similarly
in the past season in the Holderness district in vast numbers during
April on the young Mustard, and later on were reported by hundreds
on the Mustard in the neighbourhood of Hull.

On the 2nd of May, Mr. H. L. Leonard, writing from Preston,
Hull, mentioned :—‘‘I regret to inform you that the small weevil
(Ceutorhynchus contractus) is again present on our Holderness Mustard
crops, and is doing a large amount of damage. Some crops were sown
very early, and were bitten by a sharp frost on April 21st; this
checked the growth of the plants, and the weevils completely destroyed
them in three or four days. They have not worked under the surface
this year, but have eaten the leaves, and also through the stem.

‘‘ Later-sown crops are being checked in their growth a good deal
by these insects, but I hope with fine weather the plant will grow
away from them.”

On the 12th of June, Mr. Leonard reported again on the condition
of the crop relatively to weevil presence up to date of writing, giving
the earlier part somewhat more in detail, and also drawing attention
to the importance of conditions calculated to press on a strong healthy
srowth as a means of lessening the effect of insect ravage.

G 2

84 MUSTARD.

Mr. Leonard wrote:—‘‘The weevil appeared in the Holderness
district in April in immense numbers on our young Mustard-seed crops.
They ate the leaves a good deal, but, owing to the favourable season,
the plants grew away without any serious injury being done, excepting
in three cases where the farmers sowed their seed during the last week
in March or the first week in April, which is much earlier than usual.
In these cases, just at the time the plant was breaking into the broad
leaf, we had a very sharp frost, which so checked the growth, that the
weevil attack completely destroyed it. The land in each case was sown
over again, and no further damage has been done by this insect.”

Mr. Leonard also observed with regard to kind of manure used :—
‘‘ Of three large farmers who have had to sow again, one used foldyard
manure only, another a compound manure, and another simply ground
bones, so that the kind of manure used cannot have any effect on the
prevalence or otherwise of the weevil.” —(H. L. L.)

The exact method of injury, that is, the exact part attacked by the
weevil, varies a little, but apparently this is according to what the
then state of the plant may afford to be preyed on. At first damage is
reported to be by the weevils eating the germinating seed, which
necessarily destroys the small young sprouting plant; later on they
will eat off the first leaves just after they have sprouted below the
ground ; or, when it is a little more advanced, will nip them off just
above ground; or will attack the developed seed-leaves, including
Turnip or Charlock leafage in their ravages; and in the course of last
season’s observations (though I am not aware of this being noticed
before) the beetles were observed in great numbers on what must have
been a much more advanced growth, as on shaking the plants the
weevils could be heard falling to the ground.

The note regarding this was sent me on the 19th of ral by Mr.
Alfred C, Cully, from the Carrow Works, Norwich, as follows :-—‘‘1
have this day found on some White Mustard-seed in the neighbourhood
of Hull some kind of weevil. There are many hundreds of them on
the plants, and with the slightest shake you can hear them drop on
the ground like so much shot. wii

‘“The farmers in the neighbourhood say that have same insects
ate off the young plants almost before they showed above ground in
the early spring, and consequently several fields were resown.

‘“‘T rather questioned this, and suggested that-it was probably the
Turnip Flea, but my informant is positive that. these were the
ageressors, and that he saw hundreds on the ground then. .-.-. I
may say that in the same field were some Mustard Beetles proper, and
their grubs, but where there was one of the latter, there seemed to be
a score of the former.”’—(A. C. C.)

In this instance, the leaves, of which specimens were sent, were

CHARLOCK-SEED WEEVIL. 85

advanced to some size, and on examination there was no reason to
doubt the Ceuiorhynchus beetles sent accompanying being of the species
contractus from their agreement with type specimens.

This beetle is to some degree distinguishable from the two other
common kinds of weevil which may be found on Turnip and Mustard
(namely, the Ceutorhynchus sulcicollis, or *‘ Gall Weevil,” and the C.
assimilis, or ‘‘ Seed Weevil ’’) by its smaller size, which is only about
half to three-quarters of a line in length. The general tint is shiny
black, the wing-cases sometimes having a greenish glance; the fore
body is narrowed, and crossed by a deep groove in front, and strongly
punctured above. The proboscis is long and slender and arched. The
wings are ample, but so finely nerved, that with a magnifier of two-
inch power I was only able to distinguish the larger veins figured
at p. 83.

The last season’s observations have given a point of what may
prove of very practical interest, in the note of the contractus weevils
being found in great numbers as late as July 19th on the growing
Mustard (not merely at the young sprouting plant). As yet, so far as
I am aware, we have no knowledge at all of where the early stages of
this weevil are passed, excepting that it has been reared from galls on
Charlock-roots.

This, however, can hardly be the place from which such legions
come, which sometimes occur when weather is favourable for them and
bad for growth of the Turnip or Mustard crop. Those that appear in
April may very likely have hybernated; but this can hardly be the
case with those that are found in June, still less those that were found
last season dropping in such quantities from the Mustard plants that
their fall could be heard as late in the season as the 19th of July.

One way of gaining some advance in information would be dissect-
ing specimens from the time of the first observation onward, until we
found presence of eggs within the females. With sufficiently powerful
maguifiers this would give us a clue, and once found, the experiment
might be followed up by confining specimens with their food-plants
still growing, and watching for results. It would be worth some
trouble to make out the history of this (occasionally) very destructive
young Mustard and Turnip pest, and I should be glad to do what I
could in the matter.

Last season’s observations have somewhat helped by showing that
in unfavourable circumstances, as where a crop is held back in growth
by frost, it may very likely be completely cleared by the weevil, whilst
the resowing on the same ground, but under more favourable circum-
stances for growth, will do well.

We have also amongst notes sent in at various times an observation
of bad infestation of this C. contractus weevil occurring on ground

86 PHYTOPTIDA.

where the crop of Oats preceding had been so full of Charlock that
the field was yellow with the flowers. In the index to Curtis’s ‘ Farm
Insects,’ there is a reference at p. 519 to this Ceutorhynchus contractus
as the ‘‘ Charlock seed Weevil’’; and though nothing further appears
to be said on this head, still in the great want of information some
search into what Charlock-pods might show would be worth while.

So far as remedial applications go, we have no notes of what have
been tried being of much service.

PHY TOP. DAL.

Pear Leaf-blister Mites. Phytoptus pyri, Nalepa.
Black Currant Gall Mites. Phytoptus ribis, Westwood and Nalepa.

Puyrortus pyri, female, nat. length circa 0°2 mm. ; left leg of the first pair of
P. rRistRIATUS, and (smaller figure) of P. rrisrRIaTus var. CARINEA, magnified 550
times; all after Dr. Nalepa. Infested Pear-leaf.

PEAR LEAF-BLISTER MITES. 87

The Pear-leaf disease known as “ blister,’ caused by a very minute
Mite (figured at p. 86 enormously magnified), is an infestation which
does much harm in some places, and appears to be steadily increasing,
partly by reason of the damage noticeable on the Pear-leaves not
being so well understood as it ought to be, and partly because hitherto
in this country little has been known as to reliable measures, easily
carried out, for keeping the mischief in check.

In the United States and Canada, however, the ‘“ leaf-blister’”’
disease increased of late years to such a serious extent that special
attention has been bestowed on the subject, and some very good
information on its life-history and practicable remedial measures were
given by Mr. J. Fletcher, Entomologist of the Dominion Experimental
Farms of Canada, for which see ‘‘ Report of the Ontario Fruit-growers’
Association,’ p. 118, published in the ‘ Annual Report of the Depart-
ment of Agriculture of Ontario for 1892.’

Experiments were also set on foot in 1892, and repeated (to
ensure correct observation) in 1893, at the Agricultural Experiment
Station, Cornell University, New York State, U.S.A., and the main
points regarding the treatment which proved very successful, and the
life-history of the pest, were embodied in a pamphlet of about ten
pages in length, by Mr. M. V. Slingerland (Assistant Entomologist,
Cornell University), which may be strongly recommended to all
needing information on the subject.*

In my Report for 1893, I gave as much of the minute technical
characteristics of this Pear Leaf-blister Mite as can be needed for
most practical observers, from the description by Dr. Alfred Nalepa in
the part mentioned below t of his long series of elaborate works on
the Gall Mites published in ‘ Reports of the Proceedings of the Imperial
Society of Vienna’; but for common use, the following short note of
the appearance of the diseased leaves, and of the Gall Mites, which
cause the blisters, may be of service.

The disease shows itself in the form of blister-like spots, somewhat
raised on each side of the leaf, and in the middle of each little blister
beneath the leaf is a little hole, which gives access to the central
cavity, and also gives passage out at pleasure to the Mites. The spots
or blisters may be found on the Pear-leaves whilst they are still quite
young, but later on, when they are expanded, is the period at which

* Bulletin 61, Dec., 1893. Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station.
By Mark Vernon Slingerland. Published by the University, Ithaca, New York,
U.S.A. Procurable through Messrs. W. Wesley & Son, Essex Street, Strand,
London, W.C.

+t Nalepa, ‘Zur System der Gallmilben,’ Sitzsber. 1890, pp. [50, 51) 11, 12,
plate iv., figs. 1,2. See also references in ‘Katalog der bisher beschrieben Gall-
milben,’ by Dr. Nalepa, pp. 275 and 296.

88 PHYTOPTID A.

they are most noticed. They may be red or green, or red on one side
of the leaf and green on the other, and later on, presumably from
death of the diseased tissues, the blisters turn blackish or brown in
colour.

Though it is only within the last few years that anything to call
enquiry worth speaking of has been sent me about these leaf-blisters,
I have myself had them more or less under observation since about
the year 1876, and have found that confusion is apt to arise between
these blisters and the small discoloured patches of mere vegetable
disease often found on Pear-leaves, and sometimes known as Pear
Scab; but a little examination with a hand-magnifier, so as to distin-
guish the swelling of the blister on both sides of the leaf, and the
central hole below, and if a section is cut, the disorganized tissue
with something of a cavity between the two sides of the blister, with
very possibly the long cylindrical Gall Mites within, will show the
difference.

The above are well-marked points, and, as will be seen by some of
the following communications sent me in the past season, catch the
eye at once.

On the 30th of April, Mr. W. H. Burbidge, writing from Marlyns,
Guildford, forwarded me specimens of bad attack of Pear Leaf-blister
Mite, with the observation :—‘‘ Hnclosed I send you a few leaves from
a Pear that appears to be attacked by some insect. I see a small hole
in the centre of the swellings (under side of the leaf) with the micro-
scope, but I cannot discover any insect in the blister-like places.

‘‘ Last week, in Somersetshire, I saw two Pear trees similarly
attacked; there the very young leaves that had not even uncurled
seemed affected.’’—(W. H. B.)

A few days later, Mr. Sidney Lee, writing from Crocken Hill,
Swanley, Kent, forwarded me some Pear-leaves suffering from the
‘blister,’ with the observation that he had a number of trees with
leaves in a similar condition. The specimens sent were like most of
the others forwarded at that time, with the blister-diseased parts of a
reddish or reddish purple colour; and, in the U.§.A. Report above
referred to, it is noted (on the first page) that ‘‘ the disease appears on
the Pear-leaves before they are fully expanded from the bud in the
spring in the form of red blister-like spots, an eighth of an inch or
more in diameter.”’—(M. V. 8.)

Some other observations were sent giving the opportunity of
experiment as to remedial treatment noticed at p. 91 under this head.

With regard to the Phytoptus pyri, the Leaf-blister Mite, or Gall Mite,
which causes this attack, it is almost or quite invisible to the naked
eye, being very much less than one millimetre in length,* and its

* One millimetre is the 25th part of an inch.

PEAR LEAF-BLISTER MITES, HABITS OF. 89

breadth only about one-fifth or sixth part of its length. The greatly
magnified figure at p. 86, copied by kind permission of Dr. Nalepa
from one of his excellent figures, shows the shape perfectly. It is
cylindrical, tapering at the tail, with a strong slightly-curved proboscis,
and four legs, which are distinctly jointed; the terminal claw, variously
known as a “‘holding-claw’”’ or ‘feather bristle,’ is four-branched.
The abdomen is uniformly ringed, and rather finely punctate. Without
very strong microscopic power, far beyond what most of us possess,
it is impossible to identify one from the other the different species of
Phytoptide ; but with this Pear ‘‘ Leaf-blister,”’ the attack may for all
practical purposes be identified by the existence of the blister; and
with moderately strong magnifiers, the Mites may be distinguished as
Gall Mites, or as of the sub-family of Phytoptide, from others of the
order of Acarina—to which they belong—by their narrow cylindrical
shape, and by having throughout their lives only two pairs of legs.
They are hatched from the egg with two pairs, placed as shown in the
figure at the fore part of the body, and they never have more. This
is a most important point to be attended to, as, for want of knowledge
of this fact, observations are at times hopelessly confused as to
what kind of infestation is present, and consequently what treatment
needed.

The history of the attack, taken shortly from Mr. Fletcher’s report
quoted above, is as follows:—‘‘The Mites, which are hardly visible
to the naked eye, emerge from the scales of the leaf-buds early in
spring, and attack the tissues of the unfolding leaves. The blisters
soon begin to show as small red spots, each of which has a small
central hole on the lower side of the leaf. The eggs are laid inside
these blisters, and the young, escaping through the central opening,
at once form new galls, until sometimes the greater part of most of the
leaves is rendered unfit to perform its functions.” —(J. F.)

Thus, as may be seen by all who are troubled by these blisters on
their Pear-leaves, the attack may go on spreading during the summer.
With regard to migration of the Leaf-blister Mites to their winter
lodgings, it is stated by different observers that when the leaves dry,
and the time of their fall draws near, the Mites leave the blister-galls
through the opening, and move to the winter buds, and especially to
those at or near the ends of the shoots.

With regard to their condition during winter, Dr. Taschenberg
mentions :—‘‘ This they pass as larve, or as sexed individuals mixed
together in the leaf and flower-buds of the one-year-old shoots,
embedded in the layer of hair or downy felt inside the outer bud-
scales, commonly many together; Herr Sorauer has found as many
as seventeen.”’ *

* «Praktische Insekten-Kunde,’ von BE. L. Taschenberg, pt. v., pp. 159, 160,

90 PHYTOPTIDAS.

Thus, save what may possibly hybernate in rough bark or accidental
sheltering-places, they spend the winter, and are ready to recommence
mischief in spring.

Mertnops or Prevention anp Remepy.—Where there are only a
few leaves infested, or the trees are small, it is well to pick these
leaves off and burn them. Where attack is bad, spraying the leaves
is the best remedy, and for this purpose the mixture of soft-soap and
mineral oil, known as Kerosine Emulsion, is especially recommended.
In Mr. Fletcher's paper, quoted above, it is stated:—‘‘ As a remedy,
Kerosine Emulsion seems to be the only substance which, up to the
present time, has given any promising results.” *

I do not feel sure from my own experiments whether, so far as
syringing leafage to check spring and summer attack is concerned,
other soap mixtures besides those mixed with mineral oil (as Kerosine
Emulsion, and what may be called its British counterpart the Anti-
pest, previously mentioned) would not do very well. In the working
of these applications a great deal depends on the tenacity of the soft-
soap choking the breathing-apparatus of the pests, and causing their
minute and soft bodies to adhere to wherever they may be affixed until
they are dead. But however this may be, I was favoured with a very
good note of success in use of Kerosine Emulsion in checking bad
attack of this Pear J.eaf-blister damage. This was sent me early in May
from ‘‘ The Limes,’ Sarisbury Green, Southampton, by Mr. F. Keller.
Referring to my recommendations as to treatment, he replied :—‘‘I
have lost no time, pending the arrival of a supply of the ‘ Anti-pest’
remedy, to apply some Kerosine Emulsion to the injured trees by
means of a Knapsack Strawsonizer. This has certainly arrested the
damage on those trees that were only slightly affected as yet, and I am
in hopes it may yet save the four horizontally-trained Pear-trees,
which, on receipt of your letter, had hardly a sound leaf left, the
tender young leaves being all rolled up; for the new leaves that have
formed since the application of the Emulsion are so far looking
healthy.” —(F. K.)

In 18938, I had good success with Anti-pest syringed on to the
leafage of a wall Pear-tree much injured by blister in my own garden,
so that in the past season it did not require any treatment.

But (quoting from Mr. Slingerland’s pamphlet before mentioned)
‘the most vulnerable point at which the disease can be attacked on a
large scale, is when the Mite is in its winter-quarters in the terminal
winter-buds’’; and trial of effect of Kerosine Emulsion proved very
satisfactory.

* For recipe for this Emulsion, difficulties as to thoroughly blending the ingre-

dients so that they may remain permanently incorporated, and remarks thereon,
pee ante, p. 65,

PEAR LEAF-BLISTER MITES, REMEDIES FOR. 91

After various experiments at Cornell University Agricultural
Station, two trees were chosen, of which one was treated with
Kerosine Emulsion diluted with two and one-third parts of water, the
other tree left untreated as a check. ‘In the spring the Mites
appeared in force on the check tree, but upon the treated trees * not
more than a dozen galls appeared during the season, the pest having
thus been nearly exterminated!”

This was looked on only as a guiding experiment, and carried on
in the following year on a larger scale, as follows :—‘‘ In September”
(of the first year of observation, 1892) ‘‘ we found sixteen quite badly
infested trees in the Horticultural Orchard here at the Station. These
were then labelled, and on March 10th, 1898, all but two (which were
left for a check) were sprayed with Kerosine Emulsion diluted with
from three to ten parts of water. The trees were standards varying
from six to fifteen feet in height; but it was found that it required
only about one and a half quarts of the diluted Emulsion, and about
two minutes of time, to spray a tree thoroughly from all sides with a
Knapsack Sprayer.

‘July 10th, 1893, the trees were examined, and it was found that
the four sprayed with the Emulsion diluted with three parts of water
were practically free from the disease.

«The four trees sprayed with the Emulsion diluted five times, and
the four on which the Emulsion diluted with eight parts of water was
used, showed a very few galls,—not one per cent. of the number on
the trees the preceding year.

«Two trees which had been sprayed with the Emulsion diluted
with ten parts of water showed nearly as many galls as before.

«The two check trees were as badly infested as they were the
year before.” +

From these experiments it appears, as summarized by Mr. Slinger.
land, that the Pear Leaf-blister Mite can be nearly exterminated by
one spraying of the Pear-trees (at any time after the leaves have
fallen off in autumn, and before the buds have begun to swell in the
spring) with Kerosine Emulsion diluted with not more than five to
seven parts of water,—the tree being sprayed thoroughly from every
side, taking especial care to hit every terminal bud, for this is where
most of the Mites congregate.—(M. V. 8.)

* « Trees,’—two trees were dressed with undiluted Kerosine, and nearly
killed, thus showing the necessity of being very careful in the use of Kerosine; but
as the dozen leaf-galls mentioned above were all to be found on the three trees, the
modified strength given in the Emulsion answered well. ‘The only apparent effect
upon the trees treated with the Emulsion was a slight retardation in the unfolding
of the leaves in the spring.” —(M. V. 8.)

+ See Bulletin of Cornell University, before referred to,

92 PHYTOPTIDA.

This information appears to me very valuable, as it has been well
tested ; is in agreement with what we have from the highest U.S.A.
and Canadian advisers, though not in such detail; and also on a lesser
scale we have proved its usefulness here. It would appear to be well
worth attention of all Pear-growers troubled by the Pear Leaf-blister
Mite.

Brack Currant-sup Gatu Mirn, Phytoptus ribis, Westwood and
Nalepa.—This Black Currant infestation, only too well known to
Currant growers all over the country, continues to exist, or even to be
increasingly troublesome, and I mention it together with the Pear Mite
under the heading of Phytoptida@, as the nature and habits of these two
species of Phytopti, or Gall Mites, are in many respects so much alike
that possibly the treatment mentioned above as an almost certain
method of eradicating the Pear Mite whilst sheltering in the Pear-
buds during winter, might in all probability be equally applicable for
destruction of the Black Currant Mites when also in winter-quarters
in the buds; at least it would be well worth trying.

During the past year, communications regarding this destructive
pest were sent at intervals beginning in February up to the 26th of
December, but very little advance, if any, was made in method of
treatment, excepting a note from Mr. John Speir, of Newton Farm,
Glasgow, whose ol servations are always valuable, to the effect that
‘the Currant-bushes treated for Mite in 1891 and 1898 still keep
quite free.” The details of the treatment were given at pp. 91 and 92
of my ‘Report on Injurious Insects for 1893.’ Put shortly, it con-
sisted in cutting back the stems of the bushes which were very badly
attacked to within two or three inches of the ground (the branches
being carefully gathered together and burned). A mixture of soft-soap
dissolved in hot water, to which paraffin oil was added, and stirred so
as to make it combine, was diluted to a safe strength with cold water,
and syringed on to the stumps of the old bushes, and on the ground
about, and on the neighbouring bushes. The bushes pushed up new
shoots, and at the date 29th September, 1898, Mr. Speir reported that
during the spring no affected buds were noticed, either on the bushes
that were cut back or on the others surrounding them, and during the
year the bushes appeared in a very favourable way of making good
growth -and healthy wood in the future. This good promise has (as
shown by Mr. Speir’s short note given above) been kept up during the
past year, and as in this case, besides what was done to the cut-down
bushes, ‘‘ the bushes round the affected ones were syringed with the
soft-soap and paraffin mixture,’ this point appears well worthy of
attention as an instance of success in treating the bushes at the fall
of the year, almost precisely as recommended (also at the fall of the
year) in the case of the Pear Leaf-blister Mite.

‘¢ GROUND BEETLES.” 93

It appears to me thoroughly worth while to try whether we cannot
destroy the Black Currant Mite in the winter buds with soft-soap and
mineral oil syringings, just as we find the Pear Leaf-blister Mite has
been satisfactorily destroyed.

The infestation has been so often entered on, that it is not necessary
_to describe it-again further than that it is caused by a very minute,
cylindrical, four-legged Mite very much like the Phytoptus figured at
p. 86, both in appearance and habits, save that it gives rise to a
swollen growth of the buds until they form mere distorted irregularly-
shaped balls of aborted embryo growth of variable size up to half an
inch across or more.

Breaking these off and destroying them does something towards
checking increase of attack; but we much need a more effective
remedy, and where these observations may reach growers whilst the
bushes may still be in a condition for the syringing to be tried
experimentally, I think it would be well worth while to try how
the application might act.

STRAWBERRY.

“Ground Beetles.” Pterostichus madidus, Fab.; Harpalus ruj-
cornis, Fab.; Calathus cisteloides, Panz.

PrEROSTICHUS MADIDUS, magnified, and line showing nat. length.

The following observations of destruction of Strawberry fruit by
beetles belonging to a carnivorous division, of which the occasional
variations to a vegetable diet have as yet been only partially worked
out, are of much serviceable interest. They were sent to me on
Sept. 28th from Nottingham by Mr. M. J. R. Dunstan, M.A., Director
of Technical Instruction for the County Council of Nottinghamshire ;
and I may mention that the specimens were identified by a competent

94 STRAWBERRY.

entomologist, and the damage caused by the beetles to the fruit
properly observed.

Mr. Dunstan’s communication to me was as follows:—‘I am
venturing to ask your advice with regard to an attack on Strawberries
by beetles made last season at Woodborough in this county. The
beetles have been identified as of a carnivorous type,—Pterostichus
madidus, Harpalus ruficornis, Calathus cisteloides.

“The actual berries were attacked and devoured by the beetles at
night, who swarmed on the plants, and the crop was of course ruined.
The attack was watched by the farmer, who had three roods devoted
to Strawberries, and the beetles themselves seen to be the actual
culprits feeding on the berries; no other animals were observed after
which the beetles might have come,—in fact, the total destruction of all
the berries seems to point to the berries being the object of the beetles’
visit. The farmer is naturaily anxious to know how to prevent such
an attack next year, and, if the attack should occur, how to get rid of
the beetles. I should be sincerely obliged if you can give me any
information or suggestion that can enable him to deal with the
case.”

Without going into minute scientific distinctions, it may be just
mentioned that the three kinds of beetles mentioned above belong to
three different genera of the Carabide, a family of the predacious
‘‘Ground Beetles,” of which it was said by the late Mr. Rye :—
‘‘Superficially, the Geodephaga may be known by their active habits,
slaughtering propensities, thin legs and antenne, and hard outer
covering.” *

But though feeding on insects or animal matter, as earthworms,
mollusks, &c., is their general characteristic, this is by no means
wholly the case. The grubs of the Corn Ground Beetle, the Zabrus
gibbus, are injurious at the roots of corn, and the beetles to the milky
grain of Barley in the ear. The capacity of some of the Ground
Beetles for causing injury to crops has long been known, and the
precise amount to which many of them feed on vegetable matter
given in the microscopic investigations of Prof. S. A. Forbes, State
Entomologist of Illinois, U.8.A.; and the present well-authenticated
observation of injury to fruit, it may be hoped, will give a clue leading
to cause of devastations to Strawberry fruit which occur from time
to time, but which I have not before been able to trace to the de-
predators.

These three species of beetles are so much alike in general appear-
ance, that the figure of the Pterostichus (= Steropus) madidus, given at
p. 93, may be taken as conveying a fair idea of the shape of each
of them; when placed side by side, the differences show plainly.

* «British Beetles,’ by E. C. Rye, p. 46,

‘6 GROUND BEETLES.” 95

The P. madidus is the largest,—this is from half an inch to two-
thirds in length,—of a shining black, with strong jaws, and no wings, a
very important point. This differs from the two other kinds in the
thorax (or body between the wings) being so much rounded behind as to
be a good deal narrower than the base of the wing-cases.

Harpalus ruficornis is not so large as the above, but variable, the
length being from rather over one-third of an inch to rather under
two-thirds; colour pitchy black, and thorax as broad at the base as
the wing-cases. This kind is especially noticed by Joln Curtis as
provided with ‘‘ample wings.’

Calathus cisteloides is decidedly smaller, being only from a third of
an inch to just over half an inch in length; colour dead black; thorax
broad behind, with acute angles; wings none.

The antenne and legs of the above-named Harpalus and Calathus
are red, fuscous, or black; of the Pterostichus the legs are black with
red thighs.

Iam not aware of there being any popular English name for either
of these three beetles beyond the general name of Ground Beetles;
nor of their larve or grubs having been specially described; but the
following remarks might probably help in recognizing them :—‘‘A
Geodephagous larva is usually flat, elongate, parallel-sided, fleshy,
with the head and first segment hard; . . . the legs are horny,
six in number, and situated on the first three segments; . . . there
are powerful sickle-shaped jaws, and the apex of the body has usually
two horny or fleshy appendages on its upper surface, the lower part
being lengthened into a membranous supplemental leg.”’ *

With regard to attack of Harpalus ruficornis on ripe Strawberries, &%
parallel observation will be found recorded by Dr. Ritzema Bos as
occurring in the Netherlands in 1892. In his ‘Short Notes’ (referred
to below), he mentions that Harpalus rwficornis, F., was sent him ‘in
the summer of 1892 from the neighbourhood of Goes, in Zeeland, as
injurious to ripe Strawberries. It was found there in very great
numbers on the Strawberry-beds, and was very hurtful. See my
observations in ‘ Biologisches Centralblatt,’ Bd. xiii., p. 255.”’—(J.
R. B.)

In this, Dr. Ritzema Bos,—after some observations of the H. ruji-
cornis being, as well as the Ground Beetles in general, an insect-eating
kind, and some other remarks bearing on the subject,—notes somewhat
more at length that in the summer of the preceding year twenty-six
specimens of Ground Beetles were sent to him from Kapelle, near
Goes (in the Province of Zeeland in the Netherlands); they appeared
there in a large kitchen-garden in exceedingly large numbers, and ate

* «British Beetles,’ by H. C. Rye, p. 46,

96 STRAWBERRY.

the ripe Strawberry fruit. On investigation, Dr. Ritzema Bos found
that twenty-five of the specimens were of the species Harpalus rufi-
cornis, F'., and one of the species Harpalus eneus, F.*

In Curtis’s ‘Farm Insects,’ pp. 217, 218, he gives an account of
his own observation of this same species of beetle about sunset on a
hot day in July, 1848, on ears of Wheat in a field at Hayes, Middlesex;
he describes them as ‘‘running up the stalks, and their great delight
was to get to the tip of the ear, where they moved their heads as if
about to feed.”

In the notes by Prof. §. A. Forbes, U.S.A., of the result of his
examinations of food of predacious beetles from dissection and study
of contents,+ he notes :—‘‘ It appears that so far as the specimens of
the three species of Harpalus examined showed, only about one-eighth
of it consisted of animal matter; pollen of flowers, tissue of grasses,
and fungi being amongst the component parts of the vegetable food.”

The first two items of the vegetable food are presumably what
were being sought for by John Curtis’s H. ruficornis.

The vegetable-eating powers of the Pterostichus (or Steropus) madidus
were brought under my own notice in 1885 (see my ‘ Ninth Report on
Injurious Insects,’ pp. 51—58). In this case the attack was to the
upper part of young Mangold-roots, about an inch to an inch and a
half across at the top,

Specimens of both roots and beetles were sent me by Mr. T. J.
Mann, of The Grange, Bishops Stortford, Herts, the roots being
enawed off near ground-level, and the workings being in patches and
channellings of very distinctive marking. The first beetles sent were
captured at 8 a.m. at work—in the act, that is, of eating the roots,—and
a second supply was sent me shortly after, also caught early in the
morning in the act of eating Mangolds. The damage was great, for
the beetles were numerous, and was estimated as one plant in ten,
sometimes one in five.

This attack is of serviceable interest as showing that this kind
of beetle figured at heading, is demonstrably at times a vegetable
feeder, as well as preying on insects; this latter point there was also no
doubt about, as of two sent me alive, one killed its companion, and
cleared out its contents.

The point of their being caught in the very early morning is also
of importance, as this agrees with the recorded nocturnal habits of

* See ‘Kurze Mitteilungen iiber Pflanzenkrankheiten und Beschadigungen
in den Niederlanden in den Jahren 1892 und 1893,’ von Dr. J. Ritzema Bos.
Separate impression from ‘ Zeitschrift fiir Pflanzenkrankheiten,’ iv. Band, 3 und 4
Heft.; also ‘ Biologisches Centralblatt,’ xiii. Band, Nr. 7 und 8, pp. 255, 256.

+ See ‘Twelfth Report of the State Entomologist of Illinois, U.8.A., for the
year 1882,’ p. 112,

‘6 GROUND BEETLES.” 97

these beetles, and also points to a good reason for the cause of the
mischief they do in all probability remaining unknown.

Of the Calathus I have no personal knowledge, but the larve of
the C. latus have been recorded as doing great mischief at Wheat-
roots, and in the beetles of C. gregarius examined by Professor S. A.
Forbes, one-third of the food consisted of vegetable matter.*

Prevention AND Remepius.—In Mr. Dunstan’s further communi-
cation on the subject, he mentioned :—‘‘ I thought of spreading sheep-
skins, or portions of them, between the rows, and so collecting the
beetles with a view to subsequent destruction”; also:—‘‘I was pro-
posing to spread this autumn or early spring between the rows a
mixture of lime, salt, and soot, with a view to preventing attack.”’

Any convenient adaptation of these principles would do good. For
trapping, anything that might be conveniently used, such as bits of
mat, slates, pieces of board, might very desirably be tried, and also
sinking some broad-necked bottles in the ground with a few Straw-
berries at the bottom.

As the Pterostichus and Calathus beetles are given as wingless, it is
presumable that these breed on the spot, and some search would be
worth while as to whether their grubs could be found.

In the case of the Corn Ground Beetle, the grubs form ‘‘ perpendi-
cular burrows which often commence in a curve, and extend from a
few inches to two feet in depth” (John Curtis); it would be worth
while to investigate whether anything of this sort could be found, and
(if it could be done without hurting the Strawberry-roots) it might
answer, before applying the winter dressing, to stir the soil along the
centre between the rows, so as to disturb or kill what maggots might
be there.

* See page 109 of Report quoted ante.

98

LUA NEP.

Diamond-back Moth. Plutella cruciferarum, Zeller.

av UK

PLUTELLA CRUCIFERARUM.—1, caterpillar; 2, eggs; 3, Diamond-back Moth (all
natural size); 4, 5, Diamond-back Moth, at rest and flying (magnified).

Diamond-back Moth, which was scarcely noticed in 1893, appeared
again in the past season, not as a widespread pest, as far as appeared
by reports received, but once again mainly at localities on the eastern
sea-coast.

The record of its appearances of late years stands thus: the
memorable outburst in 1891, causing almost a panic; a lesser but
still injurious appearance in 1892; and in 1893 no reports, or reports
of no presence; whilst 1894 has brought a repetition of some slight
amount of attack, apparently much checked by weather influences
favourable for growth, but at the same time (as will be seen by the
following observations) to some degree helping us by confirming the
benefit to be received from stimulating treatment and dressings,
mechanical measures for knocking the caterpillars off the leafage, &c.

The first note regarding appearance of the Diamond-back Moth
was sent me by Mr. Edward A. Atmore, F.E.S., from King’s Lynn,
Norfolk, on the 9th of June, as follows :—‘‘ I thought you might like
to know a little about Plutella cruciferarum, viz., the Diamond-back
Moth, this season.

‘On the 1st of June I saw one specimen on the wing in a garden
in the town, but last evening (the 8th), whilst collecting Lepidoptera
and Coleoptera at Westwinch near this town, I found the pest flying
about in abundance on the edge of a field of late-sown Turnips. As the
Turnips have not been long up, I shall expect these moths to deposit
their eggs upon such cruciferous plants as exist on the weedy border,
and I noticed some little Charlock there; but no doubt other plants
of the order Crucifere exist there.

“Last year P. cruciferarum was quite a scarcity here, and I confess

DIAMOND-BACK MOTH, 99

my astonishment at finding the species so abundantly last night.
Where do they come from? I ean scarcely think they would lie over
from 1892 in the egg or other state until this year.”

Somewhat later in June, I heard from Mr. S. B. Burroughes, of
Winton Hall Farm, Clay-next-the-Sea, Norfolk, mentioning that he
had seen the Diamond-back Moth on his marshes close to the sea early
in April, which, as he observed, appeared to him to favour the idea
that they came over the sea from some other country. Mr. Burroughes
was then having his Turnips dressed with soot and nitrate of soda to
push on growth, and particularly requested information as to any
better remedies, as the Diamond-back infestation had nearly ruined
his Turnip crop in 1892.

On the 25th of June Mr. Burroughes, who was watching the
Turnip leafage most carefully for commencement of caterpillar attack,
further wrote me:—‘‘I had one field of Turnips which were full of the
Diamond-back Moth, which I dressed with nitrate of soda and soot;
and that and the unfavourable weather which prevailed a few days
back, has completely routed the enemy, and at present I cannot see
any.” Mr. Burroughes added further in the same letter :—‘‘I have
examined the under part of the Turnip-leaf very closely, but could
not, up to last Saturday, find any harm done; the Turnips dressed
with nitrate of soda and soot are doing extremely well.’’—(S. B. B.)

This report and the preceding one, it will be observed, relate to
appearance of the moths on the Norfolk coast.

On the 11th of June Mr. 8. L. Mosley, F.E.S., wrote me from
Huddersfield, Yorks :—‘‘I see the Diamond-back is very abundant
here just now in the imago” (7. e., moth, Ep.) “‘ state’’; and on the
27th of June the following note, sent to me by Mr. James Cooper, of
Killerby Hall, Scarborough, showed presence of the attack (like those
reported in Norfolk on the coast) to an amount calculated to cause
serious apprehension, which in this case was amply justified.

Mr. Cooper wrote :—‘‘ We are having another attack of the
Diamond-back Moth on the Turnips, and most farmers about here
have had to resow their crops. I am one of such, and write to you to
ask if you have any leaflets on the subject, as I wish to save my second
sowing if possible.’”’ On July 10th Mr. Cooper further wrote that the
infestation was on the increase, ‘‘ and is clearing whole fields in these
parts of the young Turnips.”’

On the following day (July 11th), Mr. Edmund Riley, writing from
The Weir, Hessle, Hull, remarked :—‘‘'The Diamond-back Moth has
also been very prevalent, especially along the coast near the sea.” *

* Great damage was also reported by Mr. Riley from the Turnip Flea Beetle ;
but this is independent of the Diamond-back mischief, Mr. Riley being well

acquainted with both attacks,
H2

100 TURNIP,

Going further north, and still at the coast, Mr. Andrew Balsillie,
who had given great attention in the previous outbreaks to this infes-
tation, reported on the 7th of June from St. Andrew’s, Fifeshire, N..Bs
the presence of both moth and caterpillar as follows :—

“‘T regret to inform you that the Diamond-back Moth and cater-
pillar have made their appearance in this quarter. During the present
week I was told that the moth had been observed in a field of Swedes
on the estate of Strathtyrum, and on making an examination to-day,
I found a number of the caterpillars, specimens of which are sent. In
another field, about a mile distant, the moth was very plentiful, but
certainly not so numerous as it was during the infestation of 1891. It
has been fine growing weather for some weeks,—considerable warmth
alternating with showers of rain, which is in marked contrast to the
climatic conditions of three years ago, when the caterpillar was so
destructive. It may therefore be hoped the more severe aspect of the
plague will not be experienced this year; but farmers should not
neglect the precautions which you previously advised as the result of
your enquiry on this subject.’’

Rather later on (per favour of the Editor of ‘The Farming World,’
Edinburgh), specimens were sent me of the infestation from near
Anstruther, Co. Fife, N.B., by Mr. A. Gillchrist, with the observation :
—‘‘T enclose a few specimens of an insect which is very plentiful in
my Turnip-fields at present. Can you tell me if they are the
Diamond-back Moth ?”

The localities of the above observations, it will be seen, are all on
the eastern sea-coast, with the exception of Huddersfield, which is
about sixteen miles south-west of Leeds in Yorkshire.

Almost the only other observations referring to anything like a
district attack were from Ossemsley Farm, Lymington, Hants, a
locality very near the southern coast. The first of these was sent me
on the 11th of June by Mr. D. D. Gibb, as follows :—‘‘ Ten days ago I
found a few Diamond-back Moths in my garden; on inspecting a
Mangold- and Swede-field, I found the moths fairly numerous.” On
June 22nd, Mr. Gibb reported :—‘‘ The continuous showers keep the
Swede-plants in vigorous growth, and so they have not suffered from
Diamond-back caterpillars; the moths are not now so plentiful either.

‘‘The ground has been horse-hoed, then hand-hoed close to the
plants, and I am only proceeding with singling where the plant is
very thick, and would not do to stand much longer. ‘The plants
where thin have received a dressing of nitrate of soda, also, where
singled, by a man going along each row sprinkling a little over the
plants as he goes. In this way the action will be quicker than by
sowing broadcast ; in fact, where singling took place on Saturday, the
plants left have already gained their feet, and have been but little

DIAMOND-BACK MOTH. 101

checked in growth. Singling alternate rows would, in the event of
severe attack, probably be beneficial.”

On the 30th of June Mr. Gibb noted as follows with regard to little
harm being caused by the Diamond-backs, and also favoured me with
a few more observations as to treatment which he found answered :—
** Diamond-back Moth has been very merciful so far as we are con-
cerned, very little damage being observable so far as I can see to
Swede crops here. The crop of Charlock in the spring corn is un-
usually plentiful, so there is no lack of food for this pest this season.

‘* Where Swedes are badly attacked before singling takes place,
and the crop sown on the flat, as is usual in the south of England, I
have found great advantage from harrowing across the rows with
common harrows, which will be found to brush a great number of the
caterpillars off, then horse-hoeing can follow as soon as the plants
have gained their feet. Constant hoeing, harrowing, and dressing
with a forcing fertiliser, such as nitrate of soda or sulphate of
ammonia, will destroy the pest if anything will, and the increased
crop following this treatment will pay for the labour and expenditure
in manure.”

On July 26th, Mr. Gibb reported :—‘* The Diamond-back Moths,
although still to be seen in great numbers, have been kept in check.
Our Swedes show traces of attack, but seeing they are completely
covering the ground with green,—the rows being twenty-four inches
apart, and the bulbs the size of tea-cups,—the hurt cannot have been
great. With a dry time, I believe we would have suffered considerable
loss, judging by the number of moths visible and the damage caused
by caterpillars during ten days of dry warm weather.”’

The following note, with which I was favoured in continuation of
his previous communication (p. 99) by Mr. 8. B. Burroughes, of
Weston Hall Farm (Hast Dereham), Norfolk, shows, like the preceding
communication, the continued presence of the moths; the beneficial
effect of moist growing weather ; also the beneficial effect of nitrate of
soda and soot as a dressing; and also the beneficial effect of ‘‘sweeping”’
by means of light boughs fixed to horse-hoes and scuftlers.

Mr. Burroughes wrote as follows:—‘‘I have had the moth in
every Turnip-field, but not to any great extent. As soon as I
discovered them in one field of very early Turnips, I at once gathered
a quantity of green broom off a heath close by, and made it into
bunches, and made fast to horsge-hoes and scufflers, which did much
good; in fact, 1 did every field in that way, especially so when the
caterpillars were small. One field had them rather worse; this one I
dressed with nitrate of soda and soot, which had a wonderful effect, as
the Turnips grew so fast that the leaves soon met across the ridges,
which were twenty-four inches apart. I hope for this year we have

102 TURNIP.

done with them, as the wet weather has had a disastrous effect on the
moth, and stimulated the growth of the Turnip; thus, practically
speaking, I think the danger is over with us.’”’—(S. B. B.)

A useful observation of the benefit of bird presence in keeping down
Diamond-back infestation was contributed to me by Mr. Robert Iron-
side, of Auchlossan, Lumphanan, Aberdeenshire, on the 24th of July,
when his Turnips were, to some degree, suffering from the Diamond-
back caterpillars :—‘‘ As to the Diamond-back Moth, I think I have a
good friend in the lapwing. A few years ago, when my Turnips were
much infested with the moth, I was struck forcibly by the great
numbers among them, and I have no doubt they feed on the green
caterpillar ; at least the infestation did not do me much harm, although
I was strongly attacked. This year they have again come.”—(R. I.)

The following note, referring to attack of Diamond-back Moth (of
which I had identified a specimen) as late as August in Argyleshire,
and also giving a serviceably interesting note regarding kinds of sea-
gulls noticed on infested land, was sent me on December 26th by
Mr. W. Anderson, of Ardsheal, Ballachulish, Argyleshire :—‘‘ You
were kind enough to identify a Diamond-back Moth caterpillar that I
sent to you through the Editor of the ‘Farming World’ in August of
this year. I omitted to mention a fact that may be of some im-
portance. My attention was first drawn to the Turnip-field where
the caterpillar was discovered by a large flock of sea-gulls (herring
gull, common gull, and kittiwake) that had settled on one half of it,
and seemed to remain there day and night. I never actually detected
them eating anything; on the contrary, they seemed to be wandering
about in rather an aimless way. On examining the crop, I found the
caterpillar was very plentiful on that half of the field occupied by the
gulls, and I was only able to find one or two specimens on that portion
of the field which was neglected by them. About eight miles south of
this there was a similar occurrence, with a blighted crop, the farmer
attributing destruction of his Turnips to the ravages of the gulls.”—
(We Aa)

The above notes would be well worth recording if only as a means
of preventing one of our best natural (and also gratuitous!) forms of
protection being intentionally driven away.

Successive observations have been given very fully on this infesta-
tion in my ‘ Report on Injurious Insects for 1891 and 1892’; but on
the threatening of another outburst in June of the past year, I issued
a leaflet with a detailed description of the infestation, and of the
remedies which were most approved, amongst which that of nitrate of
soda and soot, it will be seen by the above observations, answered
well. The leaflet will be sent with pleasure gratuitously to any
applicant; but I give here, to save trouble of reference, a short

DIAMOND-BACK MOTH, DESCRIPTION OF. 103

description of the appearance of the moth, and also its life-history,
and a few of the easily applicable and approved remedies :—

Diamonp-zack Motu.— The size of these moths is only about, or
rather under, two-thirds of an inch in the spread of the wings, and to
ordinary observation when at rest they appear as brownish-grey moths,
about the size of furniture moths, but long and narrow in shape.
When at rest, and the upper wings laid along the back, with the edges
meeting, the pale patterns along these edges form diamond-shaped
marks, whence the English name ‘‘ Diamond-back Moth’’; if seen
sideways, the curved-up extremity of the wings, as shown at 3 and 4
in the figure, is very striking.

The moths lay their eggs for the most part on the under side of the
leafage of their food-plants, and we see plainly that this is the usual
ravaging ground of the caterpillars; still, they may be present some-
times on other parts of the plants.

The caterpillars, when full-grown, are about half an inch long, and
peculiar in shape, as they taper slightly towards each extremity; this
is a marked characteristic. The colour is usually a delicate green or
apple-green, but this is variable; in younger state the larva is often
yellowish or greyish, with black head. When near full growth, the
head is usually grey or yellowish, marked with small black dots.
Each of the first three segments bears a pair of claw-feet; there are
four pairs of sucker-feet beneath the body, and another pair at the end
of the tail extremity. When alarmed, the caterpillar lets itself down
by a thread, and swings in the air until it cares to return by the thread
to where it came from.

When full-fed, which may be in about four weeks, or possibly less,
the caterpillars spin their cocoons, for the most part on the under
surface of the leafage of their food-plants, or on stems, or amongst
seeds, or any convenient place on or near the plants on which they
fed. These cocoons are sometimes a mere open net-work of white
threads, sometimes thicker and of a somewhat boat-shaped form. In
the former case the colouring of the chrysalis can be distinctly seen
through the net; the characteristic colouring, when mature, is whitish
with some black streaks.

The time spent in chrysalis state may vary (as given by various
writers); it may occupy from rather over one to about three weeks,
but there may certainly be two broods during summer or autumn, and
the chrysalids from the last brood of the year remain in this state
through the winter.

Of remedies, one excellent recipe sent me is that found to answer
at Edenthorpe during the bad attack of 1891, namely, a mixture of
10 cwt. soot, 8 cwt. nitrate of soda, and 1 cwt. ammonia, mixed well,
and sown broadcast by hand, whilst the dew was on the leaves, at the
rate of 1 cwt. per acre,

104 TURNIP.

The serviceableness of nitrate of soda and soot is noticed above,
together with some observations as to using this application at time
of singling; and Mr. Burroughes’ mechanical arrangement of boughs
of broom on the scufflers is excellent,—any light leafage that would
remove the infestation without bruising the Turnip-leaves, of course,
answering equally well.

The great point, however, is by all possible means to secure such
a hearty growth as may carry the crop on past anything but over-
whelming attack.

Turnip Mud-beetle. Helophorus rugosus, Oliv.=H. fennicus,
Stephens.

E.C.Ks

HeLopnorus ruGosus, flying, and on leaf, nat. size; also magnified (after
Rye); larva, and one of pair of caudal bristles, magnified. ‘Turnip-leaves gnawed
by beetle.

The following notes refer to a recently observed attack injurious
both to Turnip-builbs and leafage, and of somewhat serious importance
in districts where this special pest is to be found.

I believe the infestation had never been recorded as injurious to
crops until the summer of 1889, when Mr. John Milne, of Inverurie,
Aberdeenshire, favoured me with specimens of the beetles, together
with the information that they were injurious to the Turnip crop in
its early stages. ‘This was very evidently the case from the condition
of the Turnip-leafage sent accompanying, a specimen of which I have
figured above, so as to show the damage caused by the beetle gnawing,
life size, and a little magnified; and since then, specimens of the
same attack have been sent from much the same district, but always
in connection with damage caused by the beetles (the perfect insects),
never with any reference to what might be caused by this Helophorus
rugosus in its maggot-state, although I was on the watch for any clue
that might lead to where it was to be found, until, on the 28th of

TURNIP MUD-BEETLE. 105

September of the past season, I received specimens, forwarded by Mr.
Robert Turnbull, Inspector of Technical Education under the Aberdeen
County Council, which show the presence of Helophorus larve as
feeders in the upper part of Turnip-bulbs, and in the leaf-stalks,
coincidently with presence of this H. rugosus (=fennicus) on the
leafage.

At present we have only notes of this ‘‘ Turnip Mud-beetle” as a
crop pest from localities in Aberdeenshire or its neighbourhood; but
as under its synonym of fennicus this kind is recorded as found at
various places in Kent, also as having been found in Hertfordshire,
Norfolk, near Carlisle,* &c., though ‘‘ not common,”’ we might find, if
attention was directed to the subject, that these maggots are the cause
of some of the tunnellings in tops of Turnip-bulbs, of which the reason
has not yet been made out.

The history of the infestation, with description of the beetle and
maggot, and habits, so far as we know them at present, stand as
follows :—

The beetles are about a quarter of an inch long (see figure, natural
size, at p. 104); when magnified (and carefully cleaned from the mud
or dirt, with which it is one of their characteristics to be often
covered), they will be found to be of various tints of a rusty or rusty-
reddish colour ; the wing-cases greyish or ochrey, with scattered dark
spots; the legs and horns (which are somewhat clubbed at the end)
pale. The thorax (body behind the head) is slightly waved at the
sides, and has five grooves, more or less forked and interrupted,
running along it, and the wing-cases are punctate-striated, the spaces
between being raised in a smooth clean narrow ridge. By the presence
of this line running along the wing-cases, this kind may be especially
distinguished from the H. aquaticus, which is noted by Stephens (see
reference below to ‘British Entomology’) as being ‘‘ common in
every stagnant pond and ditch throughout the Metropolitan district,
and, I believe, in most parts of the country.”

In the notes given me in 1889, by Mr. Milne, of the habits of these
beetles, he mentioned amongst other points that he had ‘ observed
Turnip-fields attacked at the side next a former Turnip-field here and
there throughout this part of the country ” (Inverurie, Kp.) ‘ for over
thirty years. It is most seen in crofts (small farms) where the lots
are in narrow stripes; in some cases I have seen the portion of a lot
next the last year’s Turnip lot quite half-eaten. The mischief is done
when the plants are small.”’

Some slight amount of observation of presence of the beetles was
sent in following years from one or two localities in the neighbourhood

* See Stephen’s ‘Illustrations of British Entomology: Mandibulata,’ vol. ii,
p: 111; also, by the same author, ‘ Manual of British Coleoptera,’ p. 84.

106 TURNIP.

of the above, but it was not until the 28th of September in the past
season (1894) that I had information of maggots, which turned out to
be Helophorus larvee, being found working in the top of Turnip-bulbs,
and in the leaf-stalks. These were forwarded to me by Mr. Robert
Turnbull, Inspector of Technical Education under the Aberdeen
County Council, amongst other specimens taken from Turnips, with
the remark:—‘‘ The smaller grey larve, with four rows of black spots
along the back and sides, are evidently of a beetle. . . . They eat the
surfaces of the Turnips and leaf-stalks into holes, and also burrow
into the leaf-stalks. During the past two years, this mode of attack
has been very common, and the farmers complain that rain gets into
the holes thus made in the tubers, causing decay to set in.”

Some delay occurred in procuring the further supply of specimens;
but early in November, examples of the injured Turnips, together with
specimens of the maggots from them, or still within at the top of the
bulb, and also some of the beetles, that is, the Helophorus rugosus, or
Turnip Mud-beetle, were forwarded to me (per favour of Mr. Turnbull)
by Mr. Peter 8. Cowie, of Netherton of Delgaty, by Turriff, Aberdeen-
shire, the observer from whom the previous samples had been sent.

On examining the bulbs sent (on the 12th of November), I found
the maggot-burrow at the top of the Turnip running (not as a clean
even gallery, but roughly gnawed and uneven) mainly round the base
of the central growth of leaves. As far as I saw from samples sent,
the injury was just under the bark, but it sometimes went a little
lower down, and was sometimes a burrow little more than the width
of the maggot, sometimes two or three times its width from the Turnip
being more eaten away. ‘This, of course, was causing brown decay,
running down to some degree into the substance of the Turnip, and
likewise a sickly growth of the crown.

By comparison of the different supplies of specimens sent me in
November, I found the larva, or maggot, then, when in movement,
measured up to three-eighths of an inch in length; in shape it was
rather narrow, cylindrical, but largest from about the eighth to the
tenth segment, and narrowing thence gradually to the head, more
rapidly to the obtusely-pointed tail, which bears a pair of three-jointed
appendages (cerci), each with a delicate seta or thread-like termination
(see figure, much magnified, p. 104).

To the naked eye, the little grubs appear merely as pale and shiny,
with a dark head, and dark markings above. When magnified (see
figure), the head appears of a somewhat chestnut-grey colour, and
furnished with strong chestnut-coloured jaws; narrower than the
succeeding segment, which is broadly marked above by a transverse
grey band, darkest at fore and hinder edge; the two succeeding
segments have each a much narrower transverse band, divided along

TURNIP MUD-BEETLE. 107

the centre by a light line, the division hardly showing on the foremost
of these two segments.

Along the rest of the abdominal segments is a double row of
squarish grey spots, or rather a short transverse band across the back
of each, divided along the middle by a pale line, and below, on each
side, a row of smaller grey spots.

On submitting some of the larve for the benefit of trustworthy
identification to the Rey. Canon W. W. Fowler, of Lincoln, he was
good enough to write me in reply :—‘“ The larva is without doubt that
of the Helophorus”’; and he also sent me the description of the H.
aquaticus * (a species allied to H. rugosus, but of more aquatic habits),
and Schiodte’s figure, that I might see from them that the larva was
evidently that of a Helophorus, and from the accompanying circum-
stances clearly that of H. rugosus.

What we want now to complete the life-history, is where the grub
changes to the pupal state. Presumably this takes place either in its
food-plant, or in the earth by it. Also it would be of serviceable
interest to know how the beetles contrive to make themselves so
exceedingly muddy. In the description given by Prof. Westwood of
the habits of the family of the Helophoride,t he says:—‘‘ They inhabit
ponds and ditches, creeping slowly about the roots of aquatic plants,
or occasionally coming out of the water, and walking upon the muddy
banks, covered with dirt, whence the name of the typical genus; they
also often fly about in the hot sunshine.’ Conjecturally, the Turnip
Mud-beetles, though partly infesting Turnips, also spend a part of
their time in mud, or muddy water; but this kind is obviously not of
so aquatic a nature as some others of the family, and for the sake of
the Turnip crops more information is very desirable.

The following notes, taken from carefully detailed observation, for
which Iam obliged to Mr. Peter 5. Cowie, of Netherton of Delgaty,
by Turriff, Aberdeenshire, show how much mischief is done by the
grubs; also the method and position of the attack, and the appearance
of the infested crop. With the observations, Mr. Cowie forwarded
specimens of the beetles and of the maggots, and some examples of
attacked Turnips, with the remark :—‘‘ I have also sent a few cuttings
from Turnips, one showing the perforated skin healed up again, and
another with a cavity right under the shaw; I find a great many with
this, having the skin all green like the outer skin. The other shows
the leaves all gone, being eaten away by the maggot.”—(P. 5S. C.)

Mr. Cowie’s observations, which are given in careful detail, begin
with mention of circumstances of maggot-attack in 1893. In that

* «British Coleoptera ’ (Fowler), vol. i. p. 334.

+ See ‘Introduction to Modern Classification of Insects,’ by J, O. Westwood,
ol. i. p. 121.

108 TURNIP.

year (he mentions) he sowed his Swedes and Early Yellows in the third
week of May, ‘‘ which would be considered early even in this early
district. ‘The season was dry. The soil light and dry.”

The second portion (the lesser half of the crop) was sown in the
second week of June, there being thus about three weeks between the
sowings. ‘Both sowings came well to the hoe (thinning out), and
nothing unusual was to be seen at that time. But at the second
hoeing, when the tubers, or bulbs, were about the size of a man’s
thumb, the shaws became spotted,—pale yellow spots all over the
leaves from the size of a sixpence to the size of a penny. ‘The leaves
also grew in a kind of confined cluster, rising straight up from the
bulb thus (sketch given), having a hard and unhealthy appearance,
and also curled in over the edges.”’

This, Mr. Cowie mentions, only happened to the Yellows of the
first sowing ; the Swedes of the first sowing, and the Yellows of the
later sowing, remaining healthy throughout.

On examining the unhealthy Turnips, Mr. Cowie found maggots
like those reported on after in 1894; these had bored the bulbs of the
Turnips all round close at the surface of the soil; the bored holes in
some of the Turnips were so near together that not a particle of
healthy skin remained. Mr. Cowie noted:—‘‘I did not think of
looking among the leaves, and at that time I thought the maggots
were hatched on or in the soil; many of the Turnips died out, leaving
the ground with large empty spaces, and the Turnips that remained
were small ‘ cryned’ things.

“The spotted leaves were all off them by the end of July, and a
tuft of young tender leaves had come on by the middle of September,
when I commenced to use them; they were not half a crop. Manured
per acre with six cwt. of J. Milne & Co.’s slag Turnip-manure, with
half cwt. sulphate of ammonia, sown separately of course, with a good
dunging.

«This is all I can say of 1898. In 1894 the weather broke, and
it became wet and rainy before I got the soil cleaned of weeds (the
soil is a sandy loam, with gravel subsoil), consequently it was into the
month of June before I got any Turnips sown. I sowed Beck’s Early
Yellow on the 5th of June, also twenty drills of Golden Yellow; on
the 7th of June I had twenty drills of Swedes between them. The
Beck’s Yellow came very slowly to the hoe, or thinning out, and they
had a pale-green, hard, ragged, unhealthy appearance even at that
time. They came away slowly, but at the second hoeing I observed
that the leaves had the same confined upright appearance, with the
edges curled in over, but no appearance of the spots on then, which
they had the previous year. The leaves at a distance had the appear-
ance of Swedes, dark bluish green; I examined the bulbs, and was

TURNIP MUD-BEETLE. 109

surprised to find scarcely any boring in those which had an unhealthy
shaw; I pulled up a few of them to see the roots, they were all right,
no finger-and-toe to be seen; I then broke away the leaves, and found
the enemy under cover close down at the roots of the leaves (or rather
where they leave the bulb), and a great many of them in the centre of
the shaw, eating up the young growing leaves. In fact, the young
leaves never got grown, they were eaten as fast as they grew. I found
the maggots of different sizes, I suppose being of different ages, young
and old. I found sometimes as many as a dozen in one shaw, some
shaws fewer; but I did not find a single Turnip without them among
the Beck’s Karly Yellows. The summer was wet, but they seemed to
thrive either in rain or sunshine.

“This year’’ (1894, Ep.) ‘‘ they have remained more in the shaw
than the bulb, and the crop is better than last year’s crop; it is grown
on heavier soil. No second growth of young tender leaves this year;
the first leaves are almost gone, and the bulbs nearly bare; what are
left come away in your hand when pulling.

‘The twenty drills of Aberdeenshire Golden Yellow sown on the
7th, two days later, is the best crop on the field; I would say they are
a full crop. The whole of the field, with the exception of the Beck’s
Early Yellow, are a good crop, and free from the pest.’’—(P. 8. C.)

Mr. Cowie also observed, in the above letter of November, that they
are observable much earlier in the season than at the date of writing,
and that he thinks they have the infestation more or less every year.

Looking at the above observations, it does not appear as if moderate
difference in date of the first sowings made a difference in attack, as
in 1893 those early in June escaped, and in 1894 some of them were
infested. Nor does weather appear to have influence, as in 1893 the
*¢ season was dry,” and in 1894 it is noted that the weather broke, and
became wet and rainy to a degree to cause sowing to be delayed. I do
not see that anything can be considered proved as to one kind being
more subject than another to attack, excepting that both in Mr. Cowie’s
observations, and in those sent me by Mr. Milne in 1889, I do not
find mention of Swedes being injured.

But with regard to prevention of recurrence of attack, something
may, I think, be very usefully gathered from some of Mr. Milne’s
repeated notes, with which he favoured me in the year above referred
to. He mentioned :—‘* When a field is sown in Turnips alongside
one that produced Turnips the year before, not unfrequently a few of
the drills nearest to the field which grew Turnips the year before are
destroyed by this insect.

‘“«T have observed Turnips attacked at the side neat a former Turnip-
field here and there throughout this part of the country for over
thirty years.

110 TURNIP.

‘“‘Tt is most seen in ‘crofts’ (small farms) where the lots are in
narrow stripes; in some cases I have seen the half of a lot neat the
last year’s Turnip lot half eaten.

««They do not seem to fly much.” *

This species is obviously much less of a water-frequenting kind
than others of its family or genus, and it seems very likely that the
grubs may turn to chrysalids in the earth, and winter there, ready to
change to beetles in spring.

For remedial measures, probably the usual dressings for Turnip
Flea-beetle would do good; as, for instance, the well-known mixture
in proportions of lime and gas-lime, each one bushel, thoroughly
mixed and powdered up with soot, ten pounds, and sulphur, six
pounds. This applied early in the morning, if the beetles are then
on. Nitrate of soda applied, as noted at p. 100, by hand on each
Turnip would also help to push on growth, and very likely help to
poison the little maggots before they got down into the leaf-stalks
and bulb.

How far this attack may be found in southern Britain we do not
as yet know, but the beetles certainly are to be found, and where
Turnips may be noticed in the coming season with yellow-patched
leaves, with edges turned in, and the central growth stunted, and
forming an upright compressed mass, I should be very glad of speci-
mens for examination. From a few Turnips sent me last year, I
think the infestation might very likely be found doing harm in the
neighbourhood of Norwich.

Springtails. Smynthurus luteus, Lubbock, and S. niger, Lubbock.

SMYNTHURUS NIGER, magnified, nat. length one-twenty-third of an inch.t

* See ‘Thirteenth Report of Observations of Injurious Insects,’ by E. A.
Ormerod, p. 100.

+ Figure copied, with thanks, from Plate VI. of ‘Monograph of Collembola and
Thysanura’ (Ray Society), by Sir John Lubbock,

SPRINGTAILS. nih

The following notes refer to observation of a minute insect-like
infestation, rarely noticed with us, as hurtful to the leafage of field
crops, although one or more kinds do much harm at times in Cucumber-
frames to the young plants by gnawing the surface of the leaf, and
they are mischievous also out of doors to ‘‘ succulent roots and plants,
especially where anything has happened to diminish the vitality of the
plant.””-—(Andrew Murray.)

Samples of the infestation were sent me in July of the past season
from Lumphanan, in Aberdeenshire, as being then doing much harm
to Turnip crops in the neighbourhood, and on examination the speci-
mens proved to be (scientifically speaking) of the genus Smynthurus,
of the order Collembola, more popularly known, by reason of their
remarkable jumping powers, as ‘“‘ Springtails.”

Until the past season this kind has never been brought (as a field-
crop attack) under my own notice; still they may need looking after,
as very similar species were drawn attention to many years ago by
John Curtis in his ‘ Farm Insects’ as injurious by eating the cellular
tissue of green leaves. His description (just taking the main points)
of the species he noticed—as being not bigger than a small grain of
sand, with a large head attached by a slender neck, and furnished with
slender four-joimted antenne; the trunk and body united so as to
form a globose mass, with a forked tail (or process) doubled under it
for leaping, and six rather short legs for walking—gives a fairly
intelligible idea to begin with of the general appearance of these
leaping Springtails under a powerful magnifier.

The figure at p. 110 shows one of the Smynthuri enormously larger
than life, and at rest, so that the leaping-fork, being doubled away
beneath it, is out of sight.

The first note regarding this infestation was sent me on the 5th of
July by Mr. Robert Ironside, from Auchlossan, Lumphanan, Aberdeen-
shire, N.B., as follows :—‘‘ My Turnips and others in this neighbour-
hood are being a good deal damaged, not only by the Turnip Flea, but
by something else, which I never observed before ; I enclose specimens
of plants as attacked. There is also enclosed an insect which I fear
has something to do with it. It is very active in its movements.”

On these plant specimens I failed to find any infestation excepting
caterpillar of Diamond-back Moth still in very young state, and on
writing about it to Mr. Ironside he replied that this caterpillar was
present, but remarked further :—‘‘ That was not the pest I wished to
bring under your notice. This season, and on certain fields in this
neighbourhood, the young plants were eaten; not only the first two
leaves were eaten, but the rough leaf was also attacked, by small
(perhaps) beetles, at least ten times less than the ordinary Turnip
Beetle ; these mostly being a dirty yellow colour, but there were also

112 TURNIP.

black ones. . . . They jump on being approached, and so are difficult
to get, or I might have sent you a specimen.

‘So numerous were they on some fields, that as one approached
them they rose before one like a little cloud. They have all but
disappeared now” (July 24th.—H. A.0O.). ‘They may have been
here in former years, but I never observed them, and they could not
have done so much harm without being noticed.”

Still (from the difficulty of capturing these minute leaping creatures)
I had no specimens; but on the 30th of July, Mr. Ironside forwarded
me a good supply, captured by placing the open mouth of a phial over
the Springtail, and with these he wrote further :—‘“I send by this
post a few specimens of the pest we were concerned about among the
Turnip plants. I got them all below the leaf, but I saw a few on the
upper side, which suddenly jumped away on my approach. ‘They are
not nearly so numerous as they were, and not quite so keen, as I had
no difficulty in approaching them. I put the mouth of the phial over
the insect, and touched the top side of the leaf, and they jumped right
into the bottle. . . . Ihave sent you leaves of the Swedish and of
the common Turnip to show you the dishealth existing.”

Later on, that is, on the 20th of August, Mr. Ironside wrote me
that he had been making several examinations of the Turnip-leaves in
order to feel certain that it was the Springtails that were nibbling the
under side of the leaf, and now considered that it was these creatures
that were nearly the whole cause of the mischief.

My. Ironside remarked :—‘‘ It is not always one can catch them at
their work, as one cannot see them without taking the leaf up, and
they are thereby apprised of your presence, and the forked tail promptly
used. I am also strongly of opinion they thrive in moisture (and
quite unlike the Turnip Beetle in that respect). I said to you in a
former note that the Springtails were disappearing; I now find they
are not, but are present in all sizes; this makes me think that the
extremely wet weather we are having is conducive to their existence.”

The specimens sent me were quite certainly of the genus Smyn-
thurus. This genus is distinguishable by the globular form of the
creatures, also by the antenne (or horns) being four-jointed, with the
terminal segment longer than the others.

With regard to the precise species, the specimens sent me agreed
so well in colour, shape, structure, and measurement (so far as I could
follow up the points with a quarter-inch microscopic power) with the
description given by Sir John Lubbock * of the Smynthurus luteus,
Lubbock, that I do not see any reason to doubt their being of this
kind.

* See ‘Monograph of Collembola and Thysanura,’ by Sir John Lubbock, Bart.,
p. 108,

YELLOW, AND BLACK, SPRINGTAILS. 118

The colour was pale yellow, or sometimes inclining to a more
orange tint. Length variable, but about (or commonly less than) the
thirty-second of an inch. Head with eyes on a black pateh. Antenne
four-jointed, each segment being (as mentioned by Sir J. Lubbock)
nearly twice as long as the preceding. The terminal segment, when
it had lain for some time in glycerine, and was examined by a high
power, appeared to be composed of twelve rings, the four lowest
soldered together, but slightly segmented, especially between the second
and third; the following five rings distinctly segmented, smallest at
the base, and enlarged at the top of each with a few very noticeable
somewhat aborted hairs, and the terminal beads, which might be
considered either as three, or as two with a cross marking, more or
less soldered together, and lessening to the apex. In some specimens
the open beading scarcely showed at all. This appeared to depend
very much on the condition of the specimen and the fluid used for
examination. The terminal lamelle of the branches of the springing-
fork were elliptical, in a moulted-off skin almost oblong.*

Specimens of the black kind of Springtail, mentioned by Mr. Iron-
side as being observed together with the yellow kind, might be
conjectured to be the Smynthurus niger figured at p. 110, but of these
I did not receive specimens, and therefore cannot be sure.

The genus of Smynthurus, with about twenty-one other genera
included in the division of ‘ Springtails’’ by Linnzeus, and now
divided into Collembola and Thysanura, are doubtfully classed as true
insects. They resemble insects in being possessed of a distinct head
furnished with antenne, or horns, commonly with mouth-parts much
like those of biting insects; of a thorax with three pairs of legs,
and of an abdomen, globular or linear as the case may be. But
besides many other points unnecessary to enter on, they differ from
typical insects in never possessing wings, and also in often (not always)
possessing an apparatus known as the leaping-fork, which may be
generally described as much resembling a pair of compasses, with an
enlarged longish top, and with the legs sometimes fine and straight,
and tapering gradually to the minute lamella or appendage at the tip,
sometimes variously thick and curved. This apparatus, when at rest,
is doubled forward beneath the abdomen, but can be suddenly unloosed

* The only other of the eight British species of Smynthurus to which the speci-
mens sent might appear on slight examination possibly to belong was the S. aureus,
Lubbock. But on careful examination, I did not find that the samples sent me
were pale below, nor did I detect a double black spot in front of the antenn, nor
was the terminal joint of the antenne with no distinct evidence of segmentation,
which is the case with aureus, nor did the form of the two branches of the leaping-
fork, and of the lamellew at the end of each branch, correspond with the figures
given by Sir J, Lubbock of those of S. aureus.

114 TURNIP.

with a power which sends its owner flying through the air with the
springing-tail extended behind it.

This attack is so rarely observed in field cultivation with us, that
it would hardly be worth noticing, excepting that possibly from its
minuteness it may be overlooked as connected with the real mischief
which it can cause; therefore it seems desirable to give enough of the
microscopic details to recognise it by.

The Springtails propagate by laying eggs, and the young, when
first hatched, are stated to have the six legs well developed, and to
‘present a general resemblance to their parents, differing, however,
in proportions, colouring, and, in some genera, in the form of the
antennee.’”’—(Lubbock.)

Some, or others, of the different kinds frequent the most different
kinds of localities ; some float by preference on water, or on drainings
from hot-beds, and some are found in dry rooms. Some are common
amongst grass; some, as I have seen them, collected in myriads on
kitchen-garden paths, as if patches of gunpowder had been spilt there;
and rich soil, or decaying vegetable matter lying near the surface, is
considered to have special attractions for some kinds.

If they were found to be seriously injurious in field cultivation, the
ordinary dry mixture of lime with sulphur and soot, or other Turnip
dressings, thrown as well as could be managed upwards at the under
side of the leaves, or wherever the Springtails might be found to
collect, would be almost sure to do good, and so would soft-soap
syringings or washes. But at present there does not seem any reason
to fear crop trouble from this cause, and the above note is given to
preserve the record of occasional presence.

Winter Turnip Gnat. Trichocera hiemalis, DeGeer.
Thaw Gnat. 7’. regelationis, L.

TRICHOCERA HIEMALIS.—1 and 2, grub; 3 and 4, pupa, natural size and magnified.

The little gnats, or Trichocere, of which one kind is figured above,
are bred from small maggots to be found in different kinds of decaying

TURNIP GNATS. 115

vegetables, and those of the 7’. hiemalis, or Winter Turnip Gnat, are
more especially to be found in decaying Turnips. The gnats are very
often to be seen in winter (or from October onwards) floating or dancing
up and down in the air, in great numbers at one spot, in fields or gar-
dens; and appearances of tle Winter Gnat are supposed to be so much
influenced by weather that this insect was one of the kinds selected by
the Meteorological Society for report in their yearly observations of
natural history phenomena. I have often watched the numerous
parties of what appeared, without special examination, to be the
common Winter Turnip Gnat; but the 7’. reyelationis (the Thaw Gnat,
as the scientific name may be rendered) is so exceedingly like the
hiemalis, that I think it very likely both kinds might be present.

So far as is shown by the regularly recorded habits of the Winter
Gnats, the infestation cannot be called injurious; rather the reverse,
for the maggots, living in putrid and moist parts of the Turnip-bulb,
help to get rid of foul useless matter. But though their history was
made out many years ago, it may be worth while to give a few obser-
vations, as their presence is apt to be confused with several common
Turnip attacks, or fungoid diseases, which they have nothing to do with.

The maggots are of the shape figured at p. 114, legless, cylindrical,
tapering gradually to the head end, which is very pointed, and largest
towards the tail, which is blunt and rounded, not pointed. ‘The colour
yellowish, and the length not quite half an inch. ‘These are to be
found in small numbers, or rather parties, in rotten parts of the bulb.

The chrysalids (see figures) show the shape of the wings, and to
some degree other parts of the insect maturing, within the thin outer
film. ‘The little gnats are brownish-grey, the thorax (body between
the wings) with four brown or fuscous stripes ; the two wings iridescent
and glassy, of a yellowish tint, and spotless, longer than the body of
the gnat, and lying flat when at rest. The legs long and slender;
head small and globular, with mouth forming a litle beak, slender
neck, and two lateral black eyes, and antenne, or horns, long and
thread-like.

The “Thaw Gnat”’ is almost precisely like the above, excepting in
haying a brown spot on each wing; but I am not aware of this kind
haying been definitely noticed as bred from rotten Turnips, until in
the course of October of 1893, the attention of Mr. W. Sims, of
Gourdas, Fyvie, N.B., was attracted by the large number of decayed
roots in the Turnips which he was gathering, and on examination
found these to be much infested by small maggots. Without entering
at length into Mr. Sims’ observation,* I may mention that of these
larve some still remained unchanged to gnat condition at the end of

* See ‘Banffshire Journal’ for Tuesday, May 1st, 1894.

116 . TURNIP.

April of the past season, and as the species was not known to the
Observers, specimens were sent to myself for identification, which
proved to be of the 7. regelationis, and, as the matter is of some
interest, I give a part of my reply to the Editor of the ‘ Banffshire
Journal’ (see number for May 8th) :—

‘With regard to the species, this on the first glance appeared to
be the very common Trichocera hiemalis, well known as frequenting
rotten Turnips, of which an excellent description and figure is given in
Curtis’s ‘Farm Insects,’ p. 187.

‘‘On turning, however, to the long and minute descriptions of
different species of T'richocera given in the ‘Fauna Austriaca’ (Diptera)
of J. R. Schiner, vol. ii. pp. 547, 548, I found it noted that the
7’. hiemalis is like another species of Trichocera, namely, 7’. regelationis,
in colouring, but is distinguishable from it by the wings of the hiemalis
being quite clear and transparent, whereas the wings of the regelationis
have a slight darkish spot on the little cross-veins.

‘This small greyish spot I found was present; but as mere
matters of colouring are sometimes varialle, I submitted my doubt
(together with your specimens) to Mr. R. H. Meade, of Bradford, one
of our chief authorities on the Diptera, and I have heard from him in
reply, as follows :—

‘“«« The flies that you sent me are the T'richocera regelationis; the
wings of 7’. hiemalis are quite clear without any spot. These species
are sometimes very difficult to determine, for the nebulous patch upon
the vein is sometimes much more distinct than at others.’ ”’

In regard to method of life of these gnats, it has so long been
recorded on trustworthy authority that they are an infestation of
rotten vegetables, that there does not appear any opening for doubt,
and I believe that the matter could not be better put than in the
following few words of Prof. M. C. Potter, of the Durham College of
Science, when consulted regarding this infestation :—‘‘ There can be
no doubt that its grubs merely live in the rotten Turnips, acting as
scavengers, and are in no way responsible for the rottenness; but that
they may aid in the work of destruction is probable, for flies in various
ways disseminate the spores and reproductive bodies of fungi.”’

And the following sentence from the same letter by Prof. Potter is
well worth attention:—‘ The best way to combat the insect and
fungus infestations is to thoroughly destroy all rotten and diseased
plants. ‘To leave them lying about, or to throw them to manure-heaps,
is merely to extend their ravages; and farmers will find it more
economical to destroy the germs of disease in this manner, than to
have a large part of their crops destroyed, or to spend money in
remedies which have a very uncertain effect.’’ *

* From ‘ Banffshire Journal’ for May 22nd, 1894.

CARROT FLY ATTACK. ply

Note on Prevention of Carrot Fly attack received after the early
part of this Report was in type.

In the course of various communications with which I was favoured
on matters of insect prevention by Mr. Robert Turnbull (Inspector of
Technical Education under the Aberdeen County Council), he was
good enough to give me the following observations of success in pre-
venting loss from Carrot Fly Root-maggot by use of waterings of soft-
soap and paraffin oil mixtures, largely diluted with water. These I
was not able to introduce in proper alphabetical order of crops, but
still do not like to omit what may be very useful, and therefore insert
them here as a note with this explanation.

Carrot-maggot, as is well known, is the small legless yellowish
grub, about a quarter of an inch long, of the Psila rose, or Carrot Fly,
a greenish-black two-winged fly, with a rusty- or ochre-coloured head,
and ochre-coloured legs; and the attack is started by the Carrot Fly
getting down through the earth by means of cracks, or otherwise, close
to the Carrot-roots, and there laying their eggs, from which the
maggots hatch, and gnaw galleries into the Carrot, thus causing the
damage commonly known as ‘“‘ rust” from the peculiar colour. With
quite young Carrots the attack is chiefly at the lowest end of the root.

Measures of cultivation, manuring, dressing, &c., calculated to
keep the soil in such condition as will not admit the fly, and manage-
ment at time of thinning, which is the most hazardous of all periods
to the crop, have been given in previous Reports on the authority of
good Carrot-growers ; but in the past season I received the following
communication from Mr. Robert Turnbull, Inspector of Technical
Education under the Aberdeen County Council, 7, Chanonry, Old
Aberdeen, N.B., on the subject of an application which had been so
generally found useful as a preventive of “rust,” that I give it as sent
me. I may mention that I have been indebted for other good com-
munication and colleagueship in work to Mr. Turnbull, and it will be
seen that in this case we are also indebted for consideration of the
subject to Mr. Malcolm Dunn, Horticultural Superintendent, Dalkeith
Palace, the value of whose advice can hardly be over-estimated. Mr.
Turnbull wrote me on the 25th of October as follows :—

‘In your ‘ Text-Book’ I just learned of the efficacy of paraffin
against certain insect-attacks, and as you mentioned Mr. M. Dunn, of
Dalkeith, who is one of my fellow-councillors of the Edin. Bot. Soce.,
I took occasion to consult Mr. Dunn in person about the use of paraftin ;
and after advising many people in Aberdeenshire to use it for the
Carrot crop, I find that good crops of Carrots can now be got, where
formerly they always succumbed to the maggot-attack,

118 CARROT.

“The following is the recipe I give:—Pour two tea-cupfuls of
water into a pan, and add a heaped table-spoonful of soft-soap, then
boil; remove the pan, and pour in a tea-cupful of paraffin; let the
mixture simmer for five minutes, and keep stirring all the time; cool
and bot le. This quantity is sufficient to water a bed of Carrots in a
cottage garden. ‘T’o use the mixture :—Add the above quantity to two
gallons of water in a watering-can which is fitted with a rose. Water
Ist after sowing, 2nd after germination, 8rd after thinning. If wet
weather should prevail, then water a few more times.

‘The following gentlemen have used the emulsion on my recom-
mendation, and with uniform success :—

“1. Rev. J. Rae, Congregational Manse, New Deer, by Aberdeen.

«2. Rev. M. C. Thorburn, H.C. Manse, Lumphanan, Aberdeen.

“3. Rey. R. McLean, School-house, Lumphanan, Aberdeen. This
gentleman has tried Carrot-growing but without success for twenty-
three years, and this is the first year he has got a healthy crop. He
used the emulsion as I directed.

“4, W.A. Clark, Ksq., M.A., School-house, Slains, Aberdeenshire.
Also the first healthy crop he has grown.

‘‘ Those gentlemen have reported to me many similar examples in
their parishes and neighbouring districts.” —(R. T.)

I would certainly suggest to those who are troubled with “ rust-
maggot,” that they should try the above recipe, and I should be glad
to have information of results. From the nature of the mixture it
might reasonably be expected to do much good, and where such is the
case, knowledge of an application which can be given when the need
for it arises, is a general benefit.

119

WASPS.

Ground-building and Tree Wasps. Vespide@ of various species.

AS

Nest of Tree Wasp, after sketch from original specimen by Editor. Dimensions
eight inches across by seven and a half deep.

The year 1898, it will be remembered, was remarkable for a preva-
lence of Wasp presence iii: many parts of England, and some parts of
Scotland, amounting to a very serious trouble, from losses to fruit-
growers by consumption of their crops; inconvenience and sometimes
dangerous accident both to men and horses in field work from
onslaughts of enraged Wasps out of ploughed-up or disturbed nests ;
also, indoors, unbounded inconvenience from intrusion of the pests,
even into the food in the act of passing from the plate to the lips, and
in shops where available materials for their use was procurable,
unceasing depredations during the day for their own benefit, or
transportation to the home nurseries.

The details of the ‘“‘ Wasp-plague,” as it was truly described,

120 WASPS.

together with requisite information as to habits, and means of preven-
tion of the pests by trapping, &c., or wholesale destruction of their
colonies, was given in my ‘ Seventeenth Report,’ at pp. 111—140.

Following on the “ plague,’ as matter of course, was much popular
alarm as to a repetition of the trouble, notwithstanding the exceptionally
great Wasp presence being obviously accounted for by the exceptionally
suitable condition of weather in the early part of the year for propa-
gation, and with return of spring much appeared in the papers as to
numbers of Wasps captured here or there under influence of payments
at so much per Wasp or the quantity named.

So far as first observations of Queens in natural circumstances
which were sent to me showed, they could not be said to be particularly
early or unusually numerous. About the first observation I received
was from Mr. H. L. Leonard, of Preston, Hull, who noted on the 2nd
of April :—‘‘I saw a Queen Wasp to-day for the first time this year.
Considering the lovely weather which we have had throughout March,
I wonder I have not seen one earlier.”’

Mr. J. Chambers writing from Toy’s Hill, Brasted, Kent, on the
8rd of April, mentioned that a labourer in loading peat that had been
stacked last summer found four Queens (and killed them) in loading
one cartload from this stack on Brasted Chart, and also that the vicar
had given him one of three Queens caught on the previous Sunday in
the ‘‘iron-room.’”’ This specimen, which was sent to me, was a
Queen of the widely-distributed species V. germanica.

On the 10th of April, Mr. Edw. Goodwin, of Canon Court, Water-
ingbury, near Maidstone, remarked:—‘“ Queen Wasps are about as
numerous as usual, and with the present favourable weather will
probably establish nests.”’

In this house (Torrington House, St. Albans) a few Queens were
seen or killed from April 10th to 17th, but not more than four noted ;
the three of these which I examined were (respectively) V. vulgaris
and V. germanica.

From Quinton House, Stratford-on-Avon, Mr. T. C. Hiatt’s notes
of the 2nd of May showed a troublesome amount of Hornets, but no
great number of Wasps :—‘‘I put my dressed bottles (fowr in number)
out in April, and have caught twelve Queens in two already. Also a
lot of Hornets are about.”—(T. C. H.)

As the season advanced, a few notes were sent me of collection of
Queen Wasps being made; but without information accompanying of
the extent of the area in which these were captured, or any data to
help towards comparison with amount of presence of Queens in
previous years, we learn little from the captures excepting that a
certain number of dead specimens of the pests have been submitted
for payment, and from the condition of some scores or hundreds which

GROUND-BUILDING AND TREE WASPS. 121

have passed through my hands, I am not by any means sure that
many of these had not been searched out of holes and corners in dead
condition.

A Queen Wasp on the wing in April, or hybernating preparatory
to flight, is glossy and bright, and would last for some time without
becoming faded and discoloured, so much shrunk as by no means to
convey the impression she was a Queen at all, and also so putrid as
for the abdomen to break in on touching. It may be worth while to

VESPA VULGARIS.—Largest specimen, Queen, or female ; specimen to left-hand with
long horns, drone, or male; right-hand specimen, neuter, or worker.

draw attention of those who are not accustomed to examination of
insects to these points, and also to note that the mere number of
Queens paid for is not a sure guide as to the number got rid of.
Therefore, amongst the various observations received, the only one
which seems of special interest is the collection made by Mr. H. Foard
Harris, of Brooke House, Fleet, Hants, which suggests that, where
wished, and where there could be some confidence that the Wasps
brought in were from that special neighbourhood, identification of
species would give some interesting information as to coincidence of
occurrence of special kinds with special kinds of soil and surroundings.
The exceedingly liberal reward offered by Mr. Foard Harris brought in
a very large reply in the shape of dead Queens; in the words of my
contributor, in agreeing with me that the sum was large, he remarked:
‘‘ But the plague here last year was so ‘ awful’ that we would do any-
thing to avoid another.” As, however, he did not feel certain that all
brought in were Queens, he forwarded a large number to me for
examination. They proved to be right in this respect; but in turning
them over, I was so much struck by the preponderance of specimens
of ‘‘V. rufa,” which had never been a common kind 1n localities where
I studied Wasp life, that I ventured to submit some of the specimens
to Mr. Edw. Saunders, F.E.S., of St. Ann’s, Woking, for benefit of
his skilled identification. Myr. Saunders kindly replied :—‘‘ All the

examples of Wasps you sent are Queens. JV. rufa is always common
K

122 WASPS.

round us, and I am not surprised at the proportion you mention. I
think, however, it is probably commoner in our sandy districts than
elsewhere.” Three other species were present in the few specimens
I forwarded.

It is of some interest to note that of the Queens sent me, some
were more or less coated with white. This, it was explained, was
from the lime under the Gooseberry-bushes, amongst which they had
fallen. Is it possible that in these instances the Queens might be
doing us good by searching out Red Spider? On the 28th of April,
Mr. Foard Harris noted:—‘‘ My gardener tells me that during the last
few days, most of the catches have been on the Lilac-flowers.”’

So far as I can judge from reports of 1894 regarding Wasp-attack,
there was early in the year much popular fear of a new attack, and
attention was widely directed to destruction of the Queens; and then
(as a widespread grievance at least) the matter appears to have died
away. Ag usual, there was some amount of Wasp-presence, but in
contrast to the widespread mischief and trouble of 1898, the absence
of reports in 1894 is worth record to show that the outbreak of one
year is by no means necessarily followed by a similar one in the year
following.

Pee ee ka ee ert a
Ste BPA oe Ne dae fastest)?
AA Neh ae

kon

bipeata, yin

re
‘Dauner

t
2 ee ete Ws Sb KP Mas roy fain fi of

. Reel
’ ‘4

om}
Viv ga! ¢
we

Stead eae

pamin

+ ’ li o ?
, aoe
X ae ore ion WR
- ¥’ a a : a Ls
. mid be 7
, es MP i
tle S ar fears
4
cm

PN DEX.

In the course of last autumn, circumstances arose which made it
desirable to give in connected form such an abstract of the main points
of information regarding Warble Fly, contributed to me by British
observers, as would place all that is requisite regarding the history of
the infestation as it has been observed in this country, together with
proved means of prevention and remedy, in a conveniently available
form before those practically interested.

In ordinary course, this would have been published in my present
Report, but the issue being required at once, this same account is now
inserted in the form of an Appendix, in order that the results of the
long series of observations, beginning in 1884, may not be absent
from the series of my Annual Reports.

OBSERVATIONS

ON

WARBLE FLY ok OX BOT FLY

Gistrus bovis, Clark; Hypoderma bovis, DeGeer.

Fic. 1.—Hypoderma bovis. 1, egg; 2, maggot; 3 and 4, chrysalis-case; 5 and
6, fly; 3 and 5, nat. size, after Bracy Clark; the other figures after Brauer, and all
magnified.

Neary two hundred years have elapsed since the first noticeably
recorded observations were made on what we now know as the Warble
Fly, scientifically the Hypoderma bovis of DeGeer. Those who wish to
work up the early notes on this infestation, which, though often
uncertain in identification, and dealing partially and incompletely with
the subject, still lead on towards what we now have advanced to, will
find a list of the chief writers, beginning with Vallisnieri in the year
1710, in Friedrich Brauer’s invaluable book on the Gstride.* Passing
onwards down the list,—by the names of Reaumur, Linneus, Geoffroy,
DeGeer, Fabricius, and other well-known writers,—we arrive (at the
date of 1797) at Bracy Clark, the eminent Veterinary Surgeon, of
whom Prof, Westwood, the late Life-President of our own Ento-

* «Monographie der (Mstriden,’ von Friedrich Brauer, pp. 124—126; Wien, 1863,
(t

il WARBLE FLY.

mological Society, wrote that to him “we are indebted for a history
of many species of this family which leaves nothing to be desired”’ ;
and Prof. Riley (late Entomologist of the U.S. A. Department of
Agriculture) remarked,—-relatively to information given by him on
Warble Fly,——‘‘ One of the best accounts appeared nearly one hundred
years ago in the Transactions of the Linnean Society of London, 1797,
vol. iii. p. 289, in a paper read by Mr. Bracy Clark entitled ‘ Observa-
tions on the genus (Mstrus,’ in which the habits and means against the
Ox Bot were detailed practically as they are known to-day.”

This is not to be quite literally taken now, for in recent years infor-
mation has been gained, and advance has been made in kinds of
applications serviceable for dressings ; but still, Bracy Clark’s obser-
vations-—whether known, and acknowledged as his, or not—stand as
our centre of serviceable knowledge for practical farm use.

Since his day, as well as before it, much has been given by such
eminent writers as Latreille, Meigen, Westwood, and others enumerated
in the list before mentioned, including many papers by Dr. Brauer.
But these are not easily accessible, and in many cases are simply
technically entomological, and as it was very desirable to place before
those practically interested in the subject some amount of information
in a form easy of access, regarding the history of Ox Warble attack,
and means found practicable and serviceable for its prevention in
this country, at the present time, by our own agriculturists and cattle
owners, I undertook in 1884, whilst Consulting Entomologist of the
Royal Agricultural Society, to endeavour to gain trustworthy informa-
tion on these points. My applications were most courteously and
widely responded to by leading cattle owners, farmers, and also by
heads of hide and tanning firms, and cattle and butchers’ associations,
and for special points of investigation I was greatly helped by co-
operation of some of our leading veterinary surgeons. Specimens
were forwarded, and arrangements made, enabling me to examine the
infested hides in fresh state, and, when necessary, the newly flayed
carcase,—in fact, nothing was left undone to forward the research. I
invariably met with the most cordial co-operation, and the results of
the year’s investigations were published yearly, each item of informa-
tion being carefully acknowledged to its sender, and a copy of the
report sent to each contributor, so as to give opportunity of correction
of any error in statement.

So the work, our joint national work, has continued, and its
published results have spread over a large part of the world. It has
long been well known in various of our colonies, and in the United
States of America; it has been translated for Continental use; and at
home about 150,000 leaflets—some on Warble attack, some on Licked
Beef, one of the results of Warble attack,—have been circulated,

FIRST OBSERVATION OF WARBLE. iii

besides translations of the Warble Fly leaflet into North and South
Welsh dialects.

All this has been done by ourselves ; no ‘ Board”’ has helped us; we
have had no grant for expenses, and now it appears desirable to bring
forward in a condensed form,—-amongst other reasons that those
interested may be able to recognize and point to the results of their
own labours,—a history of the results of owr ten years’ labours.

To begin with a description of the attack. JWarble attack is commonly
known as consisting of swollen lumps--few or many—to be found from
February to September, chiefly during the months of April and May,
though sometimes badly later in the summer, on the back or loins of
the attacked animals, each swelling or warble containing a maggot or
“bot,” which lies with its black-tipped tail (often taken for its head)
at a small opening in the swelling, and the other end (which contains
the orifice which serves for a mouth) in a sore on which it is feeding
in the under tissues of the hide.

The great injury, however, which is caused year after year by this
attack is not only from the perforations of the maggots lessening the
value of the hides, but the loss in flesh and milk and health in summer,
when the animals are started by their terror of the fly to gallop as
fast as they can go, and later on the suffering and drag on the system
of supporting may be six, ten, twenty, or a hundred, sometimes even
more than four hundred, of these strong maggots growing up to an
inch in length and feeding on the sore, which they keep up from before
the warble-swelling is observable in January or February until they
are full-grown.

First observation of young Warble beneath the flesh side of the Hide.

On November 12th, 1884, a cutting from a yearling skin brought
in that day was forwarded to me by Messrs. C. and H. Hatton, Barton
Tannery, Hereford, with the note that they considered it showed first
symptoms of warble-maggot. This piece of hide was about 12 in. by
4 in., and on the flesh side there were upwards of seven slight swellings
about a quarter of an inch across, of a livid or bluish colour. each
forming a raised centre to greatly-inflamed patches. Within the blue
centre I found a small warble-maggot, just large enough to be dis-
tinguished by the naked eye when removed, but not plainly so whilst
in the swelling, as the inside of this was of blood-red tissue, and the
small magyot was blood-red also. Under the microscope it was easily
distinguishable by its patches of minute prickles. From the red mass or
maggot-cell I found that a fine channel, no wider than a hair, passed
up through the hide to the surface. The course of this channel was
easily traced by the blood which in handling the specimen was pressed
from below along this gallery till it came out in a little drop on the

a2

iv WARBLE FLY.

outside of the hide. These channels (of course examined microscopi-
ally) had no lining membrane as is the case further on; they were
merely a passage (see fig. 2) apparently
enawed or torn by the mouth-forks of the
young maggot, and they varied in direc-
tion, being sometimes slanting, or taking
a straight course, or so completely curved
at the upper part, that it was quite im-
possible that this channel could have
been caused by the perforation of the
ovipositor (the egg-laying apparatus of the female fly), and in one
instance in which the maggot-tunnel had only gone about half the
way through the hide I found a small soft body lying at the bottom,
which, though crushed in taking the section, appeared without doubt
to be the maggot.

The egg is of the shape figured at p. 1, and is thus described by
Prof. Riley, late Entomologist of the U.S.A. Department of Agricul-
ture, from his own personal observations of warbled cattle in Illinois
from 1860-1863, when interested directly in stock-raising, and having
the charge of some three hundred head of cattle *: . The eggs
of this Ox Bot are elliptic ovoid, slightly compressed, and have at the
base a five-ribbed cap on a stout stalk with which to strongly attach
them to the skin of the animal.” Prof. Riley remarks that the grooved
and slightly pedicelled enlargement of the end which is attached is
admirably adapted for being strongly fastened to the skin, and to the
base of the hairs, and all observations that have been recorded point
to the fact that the young larva works its way directly from the egg
under the skin. ‘... The structure of the ovipositor clearly excludes
the possibility of aucines for though horny, it has a blunt trifid tip,
and is beset at the end with certain minute hairs.”

The point of where the egg is deposited is very important relatively
to effect of dressings, and there has been a great deal of what cannot
but be considered vague speculation on the subject, as few of
authority, excepting Prof. Riley, speak from observation. But we
know that the ovipositor is not suited for purposes of boring; also
I can speak personally to the borings through the hide not being
such as could be formed by the passage of an ovipositor, and in
the absence of any evidence from observation of the eggs being
passed down through the hide, I believe that all the different points
which we know from observation prove that the deposit takes place on
the outside.

Fic. 2.—Section, magnified.
t=)

* See ‘Insect Life.’ Periodical Bulletin of U.S. A. Department of Agriculture,
Vol. ii., No. 6, pp. 173,174; Washington, U.S. A., 1889,

FIRST OBSERVATION OF OPEN WARBLE. ¥

First observations of open Warble-swelling.

Careful watch was kept both on living cattle and newly-flayed hides
in various localities throughout the winter of 1885-1886, in order to
secure the date of the first appearance of the warble in its open condi-
tion, which took place (generally) from about the 14th to the 25th of
February. The first advance on the condition of a mere hair-like
streak through the hide was found in specimens cut from the hide of a
young bull, and sent me by Mr. Jon Dalton, of Wigton,on Jan. 27th.

Ge re. Fic. 4.

Fig. 3.—Maggots, club-shaped and worm-like, magnified. F1c. 4.—Mouth-forks
of young maggot, much magnified.

Following this I had observations from various places in England
and Ireland during February of the progressive enlargement of the
warble-lumps,—as of lumps increasing in number and size; some
“appearing like a gathering coming to a head.” On February
18th Messrs. Hatton, of Hereford, mentioned that they had received
an ox-hide with many warbles in it, specimens of the maggots from
which were forwarded ; * and on the previous day they had informed
me that notice had already been given that hides on Birmingham
Market would be sorted for warbles, and those having more than
three would be out-classed; and from various quarters, especially from
Mr. Hy. Thompson, M.R.C.V.S., Aspatria, Cumberland, to whom I
haye been greatly indebted for assistance in our researches, I received
specimens of infested hide, or of young warble-maggots.

In the earliest of these there was the first appearance of the warble
as a perforated swelling, with the maggot of a clearly distinguishable
size within. The channel through the hide was still very small, the
opening on the outside being about as large as the prick of a common
darning-needle, and below, though larger, scarcely the sixteenth of an
inch across. The smallest of the maggots from these warbles were
about a quarter of an inch long by a third of that measure in width,
not as yet oval, but straightish, and somewhat worm-like in shape;
when older they become rather enlarged towards the mouth-end, so as

* The cost of this hide was 29s., whereas the value of the same weight of hide
free from warbles would have been 35s. 5d,

vi WARBLE FLY.

to be of a pear- or club-shape, white, and partially transparent, and
marked across what may be called the back with sixteen short bands
of very minute black or dark grey prickles, placed, for the most part,
in alternate very narrow and broader stripes (see fig. 8, p. 5). The
young maggot possesses (apparently as an instrument for tearing out
food) a pair of crescent-shaped forks or diggers (see fig. 4, p. 5). These
are of such excessive minuteness that they are only to be found with
difficulty, and I have not as yet found them in any but very young
maggots. The apparatus may be described as consisting of a pair of
crescent-shaped forks, placed nearly side by side at the extremity of
processes somewhat bent apart at the ends by which they are attached
to the crescents, and attached by the other ends to the membranes or
tissues forming the gullet or internal sac of the maggot. The material
is chitinous or horny, and the possession by the embryo (still worm-
like) maggot of this apparatus for cutting or tearing is of considerable
interest in connection with the first minute track (which shows as
being cut or torn) down through the hide to the embryo maggot lying
below.

The power of pressure possessed by the maggots at this period of
their life is enormous, from their capacity of inflating themselves with
fluid until they are so hard that it is scarcely possible to compress
them with the fingers, and likewise from their having (apparently) no
power of discharging any of their contents. Thus they form lving
and growing plugs, quite capable of pressing back the tissues from
around them, or from before the small hard tip; but not subject (so
long as they continue inflated) to being themselves compressed. I
had opportunities of watching this process of inflation both in the
worm-shaped maggots and when they were slightly more advanced in
growth to a club or lengthened pear-shape. On placing them in fluid
suitable for absorption (as in glycerine and water, in which they would
live for as long as eighty hours, or until the spiracles sank completely
beneath the surface) they became hard and shiny, and with little trace
of the segments which are so clearly marked when the maggots are
fully developed; in fact, they were almost of a glassy smoothness,
save for the short bands of minute prickles placed along a portion of
the back.

This power of inflation of the maggot appears to be an important
agent in forming what is presently the open passage or warble-hole
down to the cell beneath. The various stages of maggot life consist
of the passage of the worm-like larva to the under side of the hide,
where, at this stage, in the small inflamed patches or swellings (see
p. 8) it lies free, that is to say, not enclosed in a cell or thickened
tissue, merely in a small bloody sore, in which by the colour of its
contents it may be seen to be feeding on the bloody matter. This

DESCRIPTION OF THE MAGGOT. Wi

changes, as above mentioned, to a more pear-shaped form, placed
with the smallest end (containing the minute horny spiracles at its tip)
uppermost, and thus with the compact hard-tipped apparatus above,
and the growing body behind, is well calculated to force open and
enlarge the passage down which it came.

The size and shape of the perforation through the hide altered
progressively with the growth of the maggot. At first this passage
was very little larger at the lower than at the upper opening; and,
though the walls of the perforation had now become smooth and
shiny, I could not distinguish the presence of any distinct lining
membrane. With the enlargement of the passage its shape became
more cone-like (corresponding with the altering form of its tenant) ;
and, on March 5th, I found for the first time a distinct pellicle or skin-
like membrane covering the walls of the perforation, or passage, and
continuous with the lining of the maggot-cell below.

The great change, both in the appearance and the internal structure
of the maggot, took place when it was grown to about a third of its
full size, when it assumed its well-known
shape. Previously to this, whilst the work
of forming its passage was still in progress,
its chief characteristics externally were the
absence of everything that could obstruct
its power of pressing onwards; and inter-
nally it was little more than a bag of fluid,
with a large proportion of the space occupied
by breathing-tubes,—a very important con-
sideration relatively to available methods
of destroying the creature. At the period,
however, of its moult to its final stage a
change takes place respectively in the nature, Fis. 5.—Breathing-tubes of

i maggot, maguified.
or in the amount, of development of nearly
the whole of both the internal and external structure of the maggot.
The hard tips necessary, or at least serviceable, for forcing a passage
up the hide, are no longer needed, and they are exchanged for a broad
form of spiracle (fig. 8, p. 8), and the internal organs become suited
to provide material for the development of the fly, which will pre-
sently form in the dry husk of the maggot which serves as the
chrysalis-case.

In methods of destruction of warble-maggot a large proportion turn on
choking up their breathing-apparatus. This consists mainly of two
large breathing-tubes, or trachee, which draw in air at the tip of the
tail by two perforated bodies known as spiracles (see fig. 5).

From the earliest stages which I had opportunity of observing up
to date of change mentioned in preceding paragraph the general form

Vili WARBLE FLY.

continued (see fig. 5, p. 7) to be that of a pair of short horny, some-
what bent cylindrical, or partially cylindrical, tubes, covered at the
end (fig. 6) with round or oval discs, which appear to have a definite
narrow border, and across the centre of the disc to be of a sieve-like or
‘spotted appearance. Fig. 7 precisely represents the appearance when

Fie. 6. 1aseeh, Te

Fic. 6.—Spiracle-tube (one of the pair), much magnified. Fic. 7.—Dises at
extremity of spiracle, as seen with quarter-inch object-glass.

much magnified. These discs may amount to as many as about six-
and-twenty on each spiracle, and appear to me to be placed each at
the extremity of short cylinders. Whether the spotted or sieve-like
appearance is caused by minute hairs placed so to preserve the delicate
tubes from the entrance of foreign bodies, I had not sufficiently high
microscopic powers to ascertain. Up to the time when the moult takes
place to the final form, these spiracles were in all the specimens I
examined buried up to their disc-covered tips in the tail-end of the

Fic. 8.—Spiracles fully developed, magnified.

maggot; then they are cast entirely with the moulted skin, and in the
newly exposed surfaces beneath we find the first appearance of the well-
known kidney-shaped spiracles (see fig. 8), but (in the specimens I
examined) with the surface somewhat more radiated, and the colour of
a paler chestnut than in their later condition.

The changes of condition appeared to be rapidly gone through,
and it was when the maggot has gained about a quarter or third of

MOULTS OF THE MAGGOT. 1X

its growth that the spiracles were developed to their angularly kidney-
shaped form, and the maggot assumed the compressed oval shape in
which it is best known. It was still white, but opaque, and with the
segments well-marked; and the early part of its work being done, and
the warble-passage open, tt has no occasion now to bore its way, and ceases
to be furnished with a form fitted for perforation.

Other alterations of a very practical bearing also take place at this
time, or follow on this most important of the moults.. The skin of

Fie. 9. Fie. 10. Fie. 11.

Fic. 9.—Muscles within skin of maggot, much magnified. Fie. 10 —Prickles of
maggots, much magnified. Fic. 11—Full-grown maggot, magnified.

the maggot becomes furnished within with a powerful coat of muscles,
extending over it like basket-work, which give it a power of contraction
and expansion. Externally in this stage the skin of the maggot is
furnished with a much larger amount of prickles arranged in more
numerous bands, than are noticeable in the previous stages. The
prickles are now strong enough to cause an unpleasant sensation
when the maggot crosses the hand, and to play an important part in
its locomotive powers in its cell, and in the effect on the tissues caused
thereby. ‘The visceral contents are now thick, and obviously formed
of the filthy matter which is caused by the perpetual irritation of the
suction of the mouth-end of the maggot at the bottom of the sac. It
is also now furnished with a small curved caudal aperture, placed
nearly between the spiracles (see fig. 8, p. 8) from which some slight
amount of discharge of contents can take place.

_ Fig. 11 shows the maggot about four times the natural size, in its
fully developed state, with the tips of the pair of spiracles indicated in
the centre of the tail-end. It is, as is well-known, when full-fed, and
for much of its previous life, of a bluntly oval somewhat compressed
shape, of various shades of colour, from whitish to deep grey or
brownish, and marked with cross-bands, which, under the magnifier,
are seen to be formed (as figured above) of minute prickles,

x WARBLE FLY.

The above are the main differences connected with the moult to the
final form of the maggot, and, following on these alterations in its
structure, and especially on the power of keeping up a constant irrita-
tion by means of the muscular expansion and contraction of its
prickly skin, we find the lining membrane of the cell increasing in
thickness, until it becomes well defined as a tough wall round the
perforation, continuous with the upper part of the cell. Fig. 12
shows a cell drawn in section, and slightly magnified after maceration -
in water. The lowest end of the maggot-chamber appears full of foul
matter, caused by the irritation of the friction and suction of the

fives AD die 115}

Fic. 12.—Warble-cell, slightly larger than life. Fic. 13.—Chrysalis of Ox Warble
Fly, side view, and showing contained fly.

maggot; and, after the creature has crawled from its hole, a pressure
on the empty warble is followed by a discharge of some amount of
purulent matter.

When the warble-maggot is full-fed it presses itself gradually out
of the opening at the top of the warble, which at first sight looks much
too small for the exit, but the opening can be squeezed somewhat
larger, the soft maggot is compressible, and is further helped in
dragging itself out by the ringed shape and roughened skin, which
prevent its slipping back again into its former hole. When it has
fallen to the ground it creeps to some shelter, under a stone, a clod,
or where may be convenient, and there the skin hardens into a chrysalis
coat much like the grub, excepting in being dark brown or blackish in
colour, and somewhat flattened on one side (see fig. 138). From these
chrysalids the Warble Flies come out, in favourable weather, in about
four weeks from the dropping of the maggot from the back of the
cattle ; in cold weather the time required for the change is longer.*

When the maggot has gained the condition mentioned above it
undergoes no further great change until it turns to the chrysalis-state.
The spiracles become less radiated and darker, the maggot also
becomes darker as it increases in size; but the main points of its life
now are to form, at the expense of the animal in which it lives, the
material from which the fly will presently be developed.

* For details see ‘Essay on Bots,’ by Bracy Clark; ‘ Monographie der Gistriden,’
by Friedrich Brauer and other writers.

OX WARBLE FLY OR BOT FLY. x1

In some observations taken by Mr. A. C. C. Martyn, Agricultural
College, Aspatria, Cumberland, in 1885, of which he sent me notes, he
found that the full-grown maggot squeezed itself out of the warble in
the morning, or at some time between six o'clock in the evening and
8 a.m. the following day. This point he ascertained in the course of
his experiments in rearing the chrysalis; in these he found the
maggots leaving the warble stuck fast, or trapped, as the case might
be, on bird-lime, or in the little bags fixed for them to drop into, in
the morning, but never in the middle of the day.

In the case of eighteen specimens watched by Mr. Martyn, the
chrysalis stage lasted about twenty-five days; but, to ascertain the
effect of cold on rate of development, four chrysalids were put by them-
selves at a much lower temperature.. These developed into flies
(scientifically speaking, the pupz developed into the imago-state) in
an average of thirty-six days (that is, took ten days longer in develop-
ment than the others), and the flies were not such fine specimens, not
so large or well marked as the others.

The Ox Warble Fly, or Bot Fly (scientifically, the Hypoderma
bovis), is a two-winged fly, upwards of half-an-inch in length, so
banded and marked with differently-coloured hair
as to be not unlike a Humble Bee. The face is
yellowish ; the body between the wings yellowish
before and black behind ; and the abdomen usually
whitish at the base, black in the middle, and é &
orange at the tip. The head is large; the wings Fie. 14.—Ox Warble
brown; and the legs black or pitchy, with lighter Fly.
feet. There are, however, some slight differences in colouring, and
amongst those reared by Mr. Martyn, in the case of five out of the
twenty-five, the portion of the abdomen beyond the transverse black
band was grey instead of yellow or orange.

The female fly has an ovipositor, or egg-laying tube, formed of
telescope-like joints, and ending not in a point for piercing with, but
a trifid extremity beset with small hairs (see p. 4). The egg-laying
season is mostly in the warm part of the year, but as the time of
presence of the maggots extends (as shown by trade reports of con-
dition of hides) from February to September, so also must the exist-
ence of Warble Flies, to which these warble-maggots turn, extend
to some degree over many months, and the date of egg-laying vary
conformably.

Process of formation of the Warble.

The early part of this operation, including the minute maggot no
thicker than a hair going down to the under part of the hide, and there
lying feeding in the little bloody sore which it has caused, has been
described, so also has its growth, until (tail uppermost) it lies in the

Xi WARBLE FLY.

central hole of the swelling, with its feeding end, which cannot be
called a head, in the foul matter of the cell, and the black spots, which
are the ends of its breathing-pores, in the tip of the tail above. At
this full-grown, or nearly full-grown, condition, removal of a maggot
from the cell, and careful watching of it for a little while in the hand
will show the powers with which it is furnished for its own safety, and
great disservice to ourselves.

A maggot at this stage, besides the power given by its strong coat
of muscles (see fig. 9) of contraction and expansion, which may be
observed in protruding and withdrawing the mouth-end with the regu-
larity of pulsation, has a power of movement so definite that it can
drag itself along at the rate of three times its own length in two
minutes, and with a definite method of progression. The mouth-end
I observed to be somewhat raised, and the creature appeared to move
with as settled a purpose as other grubs and caterpillars. Whilst still
inside the warble, of course this power is unimportant, so far as
‘‘travelling”’ far is concerned; but it is very important as to giving it
power to move up and down at pleasure in the warble-hole, causing
constantly recurring discomfort. Externally at this stage the skin of
the maggot is furnished with a much larger amount of prickles,
arranged in more numerous bands than are noticeable in the previous
stages. These prickles are now, I found, strong enough to cause an
unpleasant sensation when the maggot crosses the hand, and, as well
as the muscles, play an important part in its power of movement in its
cell, and in its powers of irritation.

With regard to what the sensation might be caused by just one or
afew Uistrus (that is, Bot or Warble) maggots working below the skin,
taking the subject quite independently of the graver considerations
involved, as the animals could not explain this, and I was aware that
a somewhat similar attack occurs not unfrequently to the human
subject in the more central parts of America, I wrote on the subject to
Mr. Everard im Thurn, then resident in British Gutana, and well
known for his scientific attainments, and also as the scaler of the
(previously supposed inaccessible) mountain of Roraima, in those
regions. Mr. im Thurn replied that he had himself suffered from the
attack of warble-maggot a little below the knee, and he described the
pain as not being constant, but from time to time quite sharp, as if
the maggot was screwing itself round in its hole. This gives an idea
of one kind of pain connected with attack of Gvstrus larva. Further,
in communication with Mr. J. S. Macadam, Army Surgeon, British
Guiana, he mentioned one case of a black soldier of the 1st West
Indian Regiment, who presented himself, complaining of a sort of
large boil with hard edges on the front of the throat, which had broken
and would not heal up, and that the itching round it at times was intense.

FORMATION OF MEMBRANE. Xlil

Mr. Macadam gave me details of appearance of the maggots reminding
‘him of cattle-bots’’; these he destroyed in boil or warble-like
swellings, simply as we often do here, by excluding air, and drew up
the description of the pain as being that of ‘“‘an ordinary sore plus the
intense itching.”

Independently of effects on the constitution of inflammation, and
ulceration (when cattle-attack is on a large scale), it certainly cannot be
desirable, if their sensations are like those described, that even on a
small scale they should be troubled by the pain of sores plus the intense
itching, and also plus (what our warble-maggots have quite structural
appliances to cause) pain, at times ‘‘ quite sharp, as if the maggot was
screwing itself round in its hole.”

Formation of membrane or false-skin over surface of warble-hole or cell.

Coincidently with the alteration in size, position, and condition of
the maggot, and especially on the power of keeping up a constant
irritation by means of the muscular contraction and expansion of its
prickly skin, there are changes in the state of the surface of the cell in
the lower part of the hide, and also of the surface of the passage up
the warble swelling, which are of the greatest importance to tanners,
and all connected with sale of hides. Ata certain stage, instead of
the surfaces being torn and raw, or presently, in part, of a glass-like
smoothness, a distinct pellicle or skin-like membrane begins to form,
covering the walls of the perforation or warble-hole, and also, and
continuously with it, the greater part of the surface of the maggot-cell.
The beginning of March is the earliest date at which I have myself
found the lining pellicle observably forming, but the date must
obviously vary with circumstances.

On the 8rd of March, 1884, Messrs. Hatton, of Hereford, favoured
me with a piece of heifer hide, less than six inches square, containing
twelve or more warbles, which had now
advanced in growth, so as to show on the
flesh side of the hide ag well-defined
lumps, ranging from three- to five-eighths
of an inch across, and up to as much as

three-eighths of an inch in height of the A
swelling. Fie. 15.—Section of warble-cell,
= after soaking in water.*

All that I examined had openings on
the upper side of the hide, and internally were now coated with a
distinct formation of some kind of lining membrane, like thickened
yellowish skin, continuous with the coat of the cell below.

At first the channel down through the hide, and the spot where the
maggot lies below are merely sores or openings caused by the sharp
mouth cutters of this then almost microscopic grub. These injuries

* Figure is repeated from p. 10 to save trouble in reference.

Xiv WARBLE FLY,

then heal up readily, and early in the year also they will heal fairly
well; but where the maggot has been allowed to remain for several
months, working itself about in the hole, which, by its growth, it keeps
pressing larger, then the kind of false skin or film mentioned above
forms over the surface of the cell (see fig.); and as this is not got
rid of when the maggot is killed or removed, it is very apt to make a
kind of plug in the hole, which prevents it drawing completely together
for a long time, and thus causes much depreciation of the value of the
hide, though not always noticeable by the buyer.

On July 9th, 1884, Mr. John Dalton wrote me from his tannery at
Wigton :—“ In two or three weeks after the escape of the worm the
hole quite closes up, and the only trace remaining is the cicatrix where
the wound has been. In some of the pieces of leather sent you might
notice both holes and marks ; the later were the healed wounds of the
previous year. A warble-hole, like any ordinary injury to the skin,
though healed, can always be traced, and no matter how long the
animal may live, the scar remains.’”’ And Messrs. Thomas and Sons,
of Llandillo, in the course of commuuication on warble injuries, men-
tioned that in one old cow-hide they found 500 scabs, these showing
the traces of warble-attack in previous seasons.

I was also obliged, in 1889, by the following note on this subject
from Mr. W. H. Hill, Vice-President of the Sheffield Butchers’ Asso-
ciation :— ‘“‘In one of my letters you may possibly remember my
reference to the loss to the tanner on finding the tanned hide to be
spoiled for the purpose intended, by the ravages of warbles, and to my
explaining that traces of the warble-holes are left on the hide when
tanned, even after the holes are closed up by suppuration. I have no
doubt it will interest you to know that a few weeks ago a local tanner
brought for my inspection a tanned hide of as good quality as can be
found, and for which, being off a polled Scotch beast, and weighing
58 lbs. in the raw state, he had paid us an extra price over ordinary
hides of a similar weight. When purchased in the raw state no distinct
traces of warbles could be seen, but on being tanned the grain-side in
the best part of the hide was speckled, ragged, and blistered, where
formerly warbles had been. The tanner, who is reliable, stated the
difference in value and loss on this one hide would be at least 25s., and
probably 80s.”

The following observations, of which the four first were sent me in 1885,
give examples of the severity to which warble-attack runs.

Such specimens as were sent accompanying were in a shocking
condition, and, if not the cause of the death of the animals, must have
severely aggravated the effects of illness.

‘I to-day received the skin of a young bullock, about one year and

SEVERITY OF WARBLE-ATTACK. XV

a half old, which was very much warbled, and which showed signs of
a considerable amount of inflammation. I have cut a piece out and
forward it for your inspection. .... You will notice that the mem-
brane covering the warble is much thinner than at a later period. I
cannot help thinking that the death of this animal has been brought
about solely by warbles: the irritation caused by the presence of so
large a number must have been very great, and it may be supposed
the draw upon the system to supply such a large colony with food
must have been more than could be borne.’”’ —Joun Daron, Wigton,
March 28th, 1885.

[The thinness alluded to was very noticeable, the segments of the
maggot being clearly discernible through the membrane. The piece
of hide contained eight or nine warbles in a space of not more than
two and a half inches square, and was in a state of inflammation. The
maggots were upwards of a sixth of their full growth, and the warbles
containing them in some cases so close together as not to be clearly
distinguishable from each other.—Ep.]

‘«« Almost immediately after receipt of your letter to-day we had-the
skin of a yearling sent in; it was covered with warbles down the
centre of the back. The man who brought it said they considered it
died of ‘blackleg.’ We think the warbles killed it. This makes the
fifth within the last four or five days, all supposed to die of ‘ blackleg,
or quarter-evil,’ but all equally affected by warbles. By this post we
send you a box of the maggots, all of which the writer cut out within
the space of this sheet of paper.’”’—Messrs. C. and H. Harton, Barton
Tannery, Hereford.

‘‘We received a hide to-day taken off a beast supposed to have
died of ‘blackleg.’ Looking at it spread open, it was most distressing
to think that a poor beast should be allowed to get in such a state.
However, we have cut the centre out, and send it you by this post.’’—
Messrs. C. and H. Harron, Barton Tannery, Hereford.

[The piece of hide was 28 in. long by 84 in. at the widest part, and
contained upwards of seventy-two warbles.—Ep. |

From Mr. W. Williams (tanner), of Haverfordwest, I heard (when
“writing regarding distribution of leaflets) :—

“T should make a point of giving a copy to each farmer when
paying him for his dead hides, of which great numbers come in every
spring with their backs in a mass of jelly from warbles. I have some-
times pointed out cases where the warbles were sufficient to cause
death, but the farmers will not believe it, and say it was inflammation
of the kidneys.”

In the course of our investigations, through the courtesy of Prof.
Wortley Axe, of the Royal Veterinary College, Camden Town, who at
my request examined for me the heart of a rant which was warbled

xvi WARBLE FLY.

(not specially largely, but just along the course of the spine), it was
found that blood-poisoning was certainly coincident with the sudden
death of the animal; and I have many other notes showing the illness,
even up to death, in bad cases of warbles.

The following observations, forwarded in 1888, are just a few
examples of the communications sent me regarding serious injury to
the condition of the infested animal, in some cases ending in death,
occurring from warble-attack.

Karly in May, Mr. Charles Magniac, of Colworth, near Bedford,
wrote me :—

“Your lecture at the Farmer’s Club suggested to me that a
young steer I saw lately on my farm was dying of warbles. I have
examined him to-day, and have no doubt of it. His back is like a
newly-metalled road.’”’ On May 8th I received a note from the bailiff
(from the Colworth Estate Office) that the animal was dead.

On June 9th Mr. G. E. Phillips, Treriffith, Moylgrove, near Car-
digan, reported without doubt of the serious nature of the attack, and
I give his precise wording, as I do not know that any would be more
appropriate to the misery caused by the feeding of more than two
hundred maggots on one wretched animal :—

“These infernal maggots are something abominable this season.
ITand my man actually squeezed 210 out of the back of a yearling
beast, and had to leave many behind; the poor creature was nothing
but a mass of corruption.”

Mr. M. Johnson, writing from Varmontly Hall, Whitfield, Langley-
on-T'yne, mentioned :—

‘“‘T live where it is all grazing farms, and the good work has not
begun yet. Several of the cattle which were grazed on our highest
land did very badly through the winter, and I could only keep them
up with very good feeding. These turned out to be totally covered
with warbles.. Some of the lumps when squeezed out contained
nothing but a lot of sticky matter: they have got the turn now, but I
firmly believe it was nothing but the warble-attack that was killing
them.”

On May 28th Mr. Francis Drawfield, Alton Manor Farm, Wirks-
worth, Derbyshire, sent me the following acoount :—

‘“‘In the beginning of April I had a heifer that began to lose flesh
(of course she was in calf), and all the good keep and care would not
prevent the flesh from going.

“She went on till the beginning of this month, when she got
down and could not get up, but still kept on eating as usual.

‘‘T had her removed into a warm paddock ; I set a trough in front
of her with bran, linseed-cake, and malt, which she continued to eat ;
I mashed her malt and put gentian-root into the mash, and she drank

DEATH FROM WARBLE-ATTACK, Xvii

the liquid from the mash. We left her at night to all appearance as
lively as usual, but the next morning we found her dead.

‘* When taking off the skin, I found from the shoulders to the hips
bored one complete riddle with warble-maggots.

‘In counting, I found no less than 310 holes; on taking it to the
tan-yard, they pronounced it good for nothing.

‘There is no doubt the warbles were the cause of death,

“Tt will be a great blessing for the poor cattle if something is found
out to remove the pest.”

On June 16th the following note was sent me by Mr, John R.
Golding, of Baunmore, Clare, Galway, Ireland, regarding serious
amount of injury from warbles :—

‘** Owing to the prolonged excessive heat last summer, the warble-
pest has done great injury to young cattle in this district, causing death
in some instances by their numbers, from March last up to this,”

Another note on the same subject was sent me on May 15th, by
Mr. Thomas Barrett Lennard, of Horsford Manor, Norwich, who
wrote :—

‘“‘ Many of my beasts have bumps, but one—which is so thin and
wretched that he seems not long for this world—is one mass of
bumps.”

i

Se
Ai ti

Fia. 14.—Piece of yearling skin with 402 warble-holes.

From specimens then sent to myself, I was able to speak personally
to the serious extent to which the attack would run on. In one of the
b

XVI WARBLE FLY.

hides, that of a two-year-old heifer, there were 800 warble-holes; and
in another taken from an animal which died on consequent morti-
fication of the back, there the warble-holes were more than 400 in
number. The accompanying figure (see previous page), giving some
idea of this damaged hide, though necessarily in miniature, is from
a photograph presented to me by Messrs. R. Parsons and Son, tanners,
Kast Street, Taunton, of a piece of a yearling skin, 24 by 14 inches,
containing 402 warble-holes.

Loss on the hides is a very serious matter, and special estimates
and calculations are given on this head by themselves further on ; but
in the above observations the condition of the hide has chiefly been
alluded to in connection with the illness or death of the attacked
animal, of which the infested hide showed the cause, sometimes little
suspected until attention chanced almost accidentally to be directed to

Fic. 15.—Piece of under side of warbled hide; warbles about half-size.
From a photo by Messrs. Byrne, Richmond, Surrey.

it, as in the observation of the late Mr. Magniac, of Colworth. But
bad as this loss on hides is,—and to be counted by hundreds and even
thousands of pounds per annum to individual firms,—this is only a

LICKED BEEF, xix

part of the loss caused by warble-attack: in the words of Mr, R.
Stratton, of the Duffryn, Newport, Monmouthshire, to whom I have
from the beginning of our work been greatly indebted for co-operation,
‘‘it is as pennies to sovereigns’? compared to the loss on the animals,

Licked Beef.

Warble-attack, when severe to an extent often found to be the
case, causes inflammation, and consequently very evident alteration
in the state of the tissues immediately beneath the warbled part of
the hide.

This condition, known as ‘licked beef” or ‘‘jelly,”’ has long
been only too well known to all connected with dressing cattle after
slaughter, but the nature and precise cause of the condition was, as
far as I am aware, not known. And in the year 1889 we were enabled,
through post mortem examinations, to obtain clear proof of connection
between presence of inflammation seriously injurious to condition of
the animal and presence of warble in the overlying part of the hide.*

In the investigation I was greatly indebted for assistance to Prof.
John Penberthy, of the Royal Veterinary College, Camden Town,
N.W.; to Mr. Henry Thompson, M.R.C.V.S., of Aspatria, Cumber-
land, who has long devoted much attention to warble-treatment ; and
also to Mr. John Child, Managing Secretary of the Leeds and District
Hide, Skin, &c., Company.

The reasons for the name of ‘licked beef’? being applied to the altered
condition, and a description of this altered state, is given in the
following observations, with which I was favoured in reply to my
enquiries by Mr. Henry Thompson, M.R.C.V.S., Aspatria, Cumber-
land :—

‘‘ With reference to what you call ‘licked beef,’ I suppose you
mean that portion of the back (sirloin) where the warbles are generally
most numerous, and, when ready to leave their quarters, cause so
much irritation that the cow licks them with her rough tongue, and
assists in their removal, and is thus thought by many to damage the
flesh underneath ; hence the name, ‘licked beef.’ But I cannot see

* The reader will please observe that in these notes I am entirely limiting
myself to observation of the nature of the mischiéf caused by warble-presence,
Inflammation may be caused by injury to the animal, or local disease, or it is
considered sometimes to arise from too-high keep given to push on the condition of
the animal rapidly; but the great cause of the alteration under consideration is
warble-presence, therefore I have only given the results of examination of speci-
mens where we had the warble-presence in connection. The mischief itself and
its origin from warbles we have ample evidence of for many years back; but the
point especially asked for was to learn what this changed state was, anatomically
considered.—E. A. O.

b2

KX WARBLE FLY.

this; the heavy, thick skin will protect the beef from being damaged
with the cow’s tongue; therefore, in my opinion, the term ‘licked
beef’ is a misnomer.

‘Now, what causes the damaged meat, or beef, is the chronic
inflammation set up by the warbles in the skin, which extends to the
connective tissues, thence to the flesh, producing the straw-coloured,
jelly-like appearance of a new-slaughtered carcase of beef, which in
twelve to twenty-four hours, when exposed to the air, turns a dirty
greenish yellow colour; and this spoils the beef, having a frothy dis-
charge oozing from the surface, with a soapy-like look; hence the
name, ‘licked beef.’’’—H. T.

With regard to this altered material, which has to be scraped
away, Mr. John Child, Manager of the Leeds and District Hide, Skin,
and Fat Co., wrote me on the 8rd of July :—‘‘In the worst part of
the warble season I could get you bucketfuls of inflamed tissue (com-
monly called by the butchers, ‘jelly’), cut and scraped from the
carcase after the hide is taken off. The formation of this matter must
be a great drain on the health, condition, and quality of the animal,
and must be a great loss to somebody.”

The height of the warble-season was then quite past, but on
July 16th Mr. Child forwarded me a sample of this so-called “jelly,”
with the remark that it was ‘difficult to get at this time of year.
When the grub leaves the hide, the inflamed tissue soon diminishes,
and in a very few weeks disappears altogether ; but during the most
active part of the warble-season the condition of the carcase of the
animal is such as to considerably reduce the value to the butcher.”
—J.C.

This disgusting-looking sample of scrapings from the inflamed
surface appeared to the unpractised eye as a mass of variously dis-
coloured, soft, wet, or jelly-like-looking material, in which there were
here and there orange- or ochre-coloured patches or streaks, and dark
red lumps or patches like coagulated blood ; and in this material, or
jelly, the warble-maggots were still to be found.

This sample I forwarded, by his kind permission, to Prof. Penberthy,
who wrote me regarding it as follows :—‘ I have made an examination
of the post mortem specimen sent. The so-called ‘jelly’ is the product
of inflammation, and there is every reason for believing that this
inflammation is due to the warble. In the small portion of material
received there were three apparently healthy warbles, evidence of two
others in a decomposing state, and three cavities where other warbles
had been lodged. The material is not fit for human consumption.
I think it very deleterious to the health and comfort of the affected
animal.”

In reply to my enquiry as to how I should rightly describe the

LICKED BEEF. Sox

altered tissues, Professor Penberthy wrote me :--‘‘I should call the
material inflammatory product in the subcutaneous tissues.....
Inflammatory product is made up of constituents of blood exuded
through vessel-walls which have been damaged. It is allowed, too, by
some pathologists that inflammation, too, may excite growth of the
cells previously existing in the part. The dark red colouring is most
probably due to escape of blood from small vessels which have ruptured ;
the orange-coloured material which I have found in some cases is
inflammatory product undergoing degenerative changes, in others
decomposing warbles.’’—J. P.

A few days later Mr. Child further wrote that the sample which he
sent me of inflamed tissue was obtained from the animal while in the
process of dressing, so that the inflamed matter was taken both from
the hide and the carcase at the same time.

‘‘In watching the slaughterman take off the hide, we were sur-
prised to find the warble-grub present, a somewhat rare case so late
in July; however, it enabled me to send you a perfect sample on a
small scale. But during the worst part of the warble-season they
sometimes cover one-third and in some few cases one-half of the entire
carcase ; the warble always develops on the top of the animal from the
shoulder to the tail-head, which spoils the choicest parts of the carcase,
ruins the best parts of the hide, and makes it worthless when tanned
for many purposes, namely, for harness, engine-straps, boot-soles, &c.
The effect on the carcase of the animal afflicted with warbles in regard
to colour is, when quite dry after dressing, in some cases a pale
yellow, in others a light brown, and in some scarce examples dark as
mahogany.’’—J. C.

On the 17th of May a very good specimen was sent me, by favour
of Mr. Henry Thompson, from Workington, in Cumberland. This
was a large piece, containing the back-bone, flesh, and hide, all cut
right out of the centre of the animal after slaughtering. This was
an excellent specimen for our purpose, because it was so moderately
warbled that it showed how mischief may arise, even from an average
or less than average amount of warble-presence.

Regarding this specimen, Prof. Penberthy (who kindly examined it
for me) wrote me from the Royal Veterinary College on May 20th :—
«The parcel arrived quite safely, and the contents in good preserva-
tion.” . . . ‘In a superficies of 450 inches I found eighteen well-
developed and eight very small warbles. There was, however, ample
evidence of inflammatory products.

«The change had not apparently affected the red flesh (muscles).
It so happens that in the parts more seriously invaded the muscles are
covered with dense fibrous tissue.

«This morning, in those parts in which the warbles were most

XXil WARBLE FLY.

numerous, putrefactive change was much more advanced than in those
in which there were no warbles.’’—J. P.

The following communication from Mr. C. E. Pearson (wholesale
butcher), Sheffield, is valuable both from the practical information
conveyed, and pointing out extent to which warble-presence un-
avoidably tells against the health and thriving of the infested
animal :—

‘In answer to yours of March 9th, I may say that the effects of
warbles on the carcase is more serious than can possibly be imagined
by an outside appearance of the beast. The beef, as I stated in my
letter to the ‘Meat Trade’s Journal,’ is most unsightly, but the taste
of the beef is very bitter where the warble has been, and very
objectionable to the consumer. The carcase of beef a-sumes a nasty
yellow colour, and also a soft flabby appearance on the outside rind of
the beast (where the warble has been in operation) ; so much so, that
the carcase has to be pared in some cases down to the flesh to make
the appearance of the animal at all presentable for the market, thereby
causing a grievous amount of loss to the butcher, and an unsightly
article to the consumer. Jam, of course, speaking from experience,
killing on an average twenty beasts or more a week, and the loss
to me alone in hides last year amounted to something like £3 per
week during the season that warbles had developed on the hide, and
no one a gainer.”

Amongst various more general observations in Mr. Pearson’s letter,
sent to me at his request by the Editor of the ‘ Meat Trade’s Journal,’
he added the following very just remarks as to loss caused to owners
by the wearing pain and discomfort in which the animals are kept by
presence of warbles :—

‘«‘They are a pest not only to the butcher as a matter of loss, but,
from a humane point of view, to the poor beasts that suffer from them,
ves » Causing a great amount of pain that might be avoided if only
the farmer would be at the trouble to try at least to rid them of the
pest. Of course, while the animals are suffering physical pain the
owners themselves are suffering in pockat, and more than they imagine;
the loss results from the lowering of the condition of the cattle, and
the dairy-farmer loses from the yield of milk, not only reduced in
quality, but also in quantity, and it is an impossible thing for the
general health of the cattle to be so good when suffering the pain
caused by the warbles.”’

I have myself also had the opportunity of seeing the altered state
and colour of parts of the surface of a carcase from which the hide,
when removed, had been found to be so infested with warbles that I
was asked to come and look at it. This was at Spring Grove, near
Isleworth, and the butcher cut thin slices off the discoloured yellow

LICKED BEEF. XXill

part to show me how much the condition was altered from that of the
healthy portions.— Ep.

The hide in this case, and in the others in which pieces were sent
to show the condition when badly infested, was a truly loathsome
sight. The figure at p. 18 shows just a small piece with the warble-
cells as they appear on the lower surface when the hide has been
removed, but in this case only half the full size. Those whose busi-
ness connects them with observation of this state of things know well
what a sight a much-infested, newly-flayed hide is. Those who do
not may imagine the inner side scattered over along the region of the
loins or upper part of the back with a quantity of loose bagey-looking
lumps, which, if watched, will show the shape of the thick fleshy
maggots, up to about an inch in length, wriggling about within, and
in some cases breaking out through the thin tissues of the lower part
of the hide. With this comes the flow of the filthy matter they have
been feeding on, and the sight, accompanied by all the various dis-
colorations from inflammation, ulceration, and other wretched circum-
stances, is, in the words of the heads of one of our tanning firms,
‘‘truly sickening.”’

In answer to an enquiry of mine whether the alteration in the
carcase, called ‘‘licked beef,’’ takes place only where the beast can
lick the place, Mr. Pearson replied :--‘‘It will take place whether
the beast can lick it or not, as there is the irritation continually
going on; of course licking aggravates the case, and makes the carcase
worse.”’

Much communication on this subject passed through my hands
during the investigation ; but without entering on all these, the above
observations and just the two following short notes, with which I was
favoured, are quite enough to show the nature of this diseased con-
dition consequent on warble-attack.

The first is from Mr. Joseph Wing, hide broker, of Pen Street,
Boston, who noted from his own observations as to condition of warbled
beasts :-—‘‘ The effects are something as you state. There is a jelly or
watery substance on the back of the carcase when dressed, on and
between the rind or thick skin and the bone of the beast.”

The following note was given me at the beginning of April by Mr.
John Risdon, of Golsoncott Farm, Washford, Taunton (auctioneer to
the Devon Cattle Breeders’ Society) :-—‘‘ I received your communication
on my way to Taunton Market on Saturday ; one butcher, well known
to me, and a man of great experience, told me he killed a bullock a
few days before so discoloured by licking the warble-grubs that he had
to scrape off nearly the whole of the spine (fat) to render the carcase
presentable for sale.”

To these may be added the following detailed note turning partly

XXIV WARBLE FLY.

on presence of the condition known as ‘‘ licked beef,’’ with the accom-
panying ‘‘butcher’s jelly’; and also noting the loss on hide, loss on
meat, and loss from the warbled animal not answering properly to her
extra good keep .

On April 10th, 1889, Mr. James Sparkes, of Wearhead, Dar-
lington, forwarded me the following information regarding loss con-
sequent on bad warble-presence in the case of a heifer he had lately
sold :——

‘“‘T recently sold to a butcher here a very good heifer, which turned
out a much lighter weight than I anticipated from the extra good feed,
&c., and much surprised to find the poor animal had been one of the
martyrs, hide considerably reduced in value, and understand some
parts of the meat had to be scraped to be made presentable. I will
now take good care this shall not occur again, having procured
McDougall’s Smear and careful inspection.”

A few days later, in reply to my request for further details, Mr. J.
Sparkes wrote me that the butcher had found the badly-warbled animal
above mentioned :—-‘‘ Down the spine was frothy, loose, and mattery,
or suppose in a sort of jelly-state, and (as I said in my last) some of
the beef to scrape before sending it out. The loss on hide, 1d. per Ib. ;
suppose that would mean on hide, 5s.

‘** Now, loss in beef fell upon myself, the animal being sold to the
butcher so much per stone. But (as I said before) the heifer did not
make near the weight I anticipated from the extra good feed and length
of the time she had. It should have been at least six stones more, so
may venture to say, loss in beef and hide from fifty to sixty shillings.
I never suspected warble-trouble until told by the butcher.”’

How far the altered condition of the surface may affect the taste of the
meat does not seem certain; I have only had a few reports on this
subject, but from these most of the evidence appears to lean to the
taste being altered.

In the following notes, kindly procured for me by Mr. McGillivray,
secretary of the Hide Inspection Society, Newcastle-on-Tyne, from
bntchers of that town, it will be seen two of the writers consider the
taste to be altered, but the other writer does not :—

Mr. M. H. Penman, Gateshead, writes :--‘‘ Your letter to hand.
There is nothing nastier than licked beef, and the worst of it is that it
is always licked on the most expensive parts, viz., the back, which
comprises the sirloin and forechain; and it is quite true that it not
only gives the beef an unpleasant appearance, but a nasty bitter taste. ~
If I knew, I would not buy a licked beast, supposing I could get it at
a shilling a stone less.”’

Mr. W. C. Brown, Newcastle, writes :—-‘‘ In reply to your note of
to-day respecting ‘licked beef,’ my experience teaches me that the

CLASSES OF HIDE Must ATTACKED. XKV

quality is not at all deteriorated; it interferes very much with the
outward appearance, and more if the beef hangs for a week or more ;
the colour becomes somewhat darker, but certainly it has not a bitter
taste, for only on Sunday last we cooked a piece (of beef of that
character) from an animal slaughtered ten days before, which was very
much licked, and beef of better quality no one could eat.”

Mr. Wm. Thompson, Neweastle, writes :——‘‘ When beef is badly
licked, it is very bitter ; I have seen it quite unsaleable, all the outside
fat taken off, and you could not get the bottom of it. Sometimes it is
so bad that it is right through the chain and down to the rib-bone,
when it is as bad as that it is quite useless.”

It is perhaps worse than useless to venture a conjecture where
those who thoroughly understand the subject differ amongst themselves
in opinion, but it does occur whether the difference in bitterness of
taste may not be according to the completeness with which the diseased
tissues above the meat may have been removed.——-Ep.

With regard to age of cattle at which infestation has been found most
prevalent, it will be seen by casting the eye along the columns of the
folding table of particulars of sound and warbled hides sold at one of
the Birmingham markets, that the three heaviest classes named,
ranging from 75 lbs. to 95 lbs. and upwards, do not suffer as much as
the three lighter classes, of which details are given on the same table.

The three lighter classes (that is, the classes weighing 65 to 74 lbs.,
56 to 64 1bs., and 55 lbs. and under) are principally heifer hides, and
are shown by the table to be the greatest sufferers. We also find that
in these three lighter classes infestation was found contimuing from
about seven to sixteen weeks later in the season than with the three
heavier classes, warble being still present in the lighter classes to some
degree up to Sept. 19th. Dates from Feb. 14th to Sept. 19th, 1885.

The following notes give some individual observations on the
subject of the warble-maggots being found in young things, down to
the size of animal of which the back can be reached by a little lad of
ten years old. These are perhaps no information to all versed in
warble matters, but are inserted partly in reply to an enquiry, or
erroneous view, recently sent me :—-

‘Cattle at the age of one or two years are most subject to attack.”
—Joun Darton, Wigton, Cumberland.

“Young (yearling and two-year-old) beasts are most subject to
attack [of warbles], and shorthorns more so than the thicker-skinned
Welsh or Scotch breeds; the hide of a Welsh ‘runt’ is quite twice as
thick as that of a shorthorn bullock.’’—-E. A. Fircu, Brick House,
Maldon, Essex.

«They are worst upon young cattle, if they strike, as they often

XXV1 WARBLE FLY.

do, when they are stirks six or eight months old. The infliction
takes greater effect upon a young growing animal than upon one that
is older and fuller in condition.’”” —- W. H. Lippert, Leather Market,
Bermondsey, London.

‘“‘T notice that nearly all kips (that is, hides off yearling cattle)
that have died a natural death are covered with warbles. Are deaths
of these almost calves to be attributed to the fact that the irritation
they cause exhausts nature ?’’—-H. C. Harnes, Newport, Mon.

On Feb, 24th (see my Warble Report for 1884), Mr. H. Thompson,
M.R.C.Y.S., Aspatria, Cumberland, reported that on that day some of
the pupils at the College of Agriculture had found several enlarge-
ments on the backs of young cattle at the farm; and in the course of
our work, carried on by the boys of the Aldersey Grammar School
(referred to in detail further on), one little lad, only ten years old, not
to be behind his fellows in the extent of his powers, as he could not
reach up to the full-grown cattle, brought in his contribution of
maggots, which he had squeezed out of the calves.

Lhe almost world-wide distribution of this cattle-pest is important
relatively to possibility, or rather certainty, of its importation from
some countries, and also of its general transmission colonially. I have
myself been consulted in the case of transmission to a Cheshire farm
irom the U.b.A.

‘ne following note gives the wide distribution of the species on the
first-rate authority of Dr. Friedrich Brauer.* This species is distri-
buted from Scandinavia to the most southern parts of Europe, and is
also to be found occurring in Asia, Africa, and North America.” ... .
“A beautitul variety was shown me by Prof, Low, from Asia Minor.
This differed from the ordinary species in all of what are usually
yellow hairs, being in the variety of a pure white.t+

‘he following notes of amount of mjury to imported hides, for
which 1 was indebted to the courtesy of the Colonial Company in
favouring me with a reply to my enquiry, adda very solid practical
confirmation to Dr. Brauer’s entomological statement :—

On the 8th of August, 1884, Mr. b. Brown, Secretary, wrote me as
follows :——‘‘ 1 enclose copy of reply 1 have just received from an
experienced firm of hide and skin brokers to an enquiry we made of
them as to the injury done to hides, &c., by the Warble Fly.”

« Reply to the inquiry of the Colonial Company respecting the
damage done to hides anu skins by the Warble Fly :—

«© Parcels of Ox- and Cow-hides and Goat and Sheep skins coming

* See ‘Monographie der (striden,’ von Fr. Brauer, Wien. 1863, p, 127.

+ This to some degree resembles the variety of which a few specimens were
found by Mr. C. C. Martyn amongst the Warble Flies which he reared from
chrysalids captured by himself at Aspatria, Cumberland (see p. 11).

LOSSES FROM WARBLE-ATTACK. XXV

from all parts of the world, all contain a varying proportion of warbled
hides and skins, the damage, as a rule, being greatest on those from
the hottest climates, and generally affecting goat skins to the greatest
extent.

««« Those hides and skins coming from Mogador and other northern
parts of Africa suffer most in this respect, an average perhaps of about
one-fourth of them being damaged to the extent of 60 or 70 per cent.
Those from Kurrachee also suffer damage to almost the same extent,
while those from Caleutta, Madras, and Bombay are depreciated
perhaps to the extent of 50 per cent. on 10 per cent. of the skins.

‘««« Fyrom Cape Colonies the damage is comparatively slight, and stall
less in those hides and skins from Australia and South America,’ ’’—
Communicated by sec. of Colonial Co., Leadenhall Street, London.

The great injury, however, which is caused year after year by this
attack is not only from the perforations of the maggots lessening the
value of the hides, but the loss in flesh and milk and health in summer,
when the animals are started by their terror of the fly to gallop as
fast as they can go, and later on the suffering and drag on the system
of supporting may be six, ten, or twenty, sometimes even a hundred,
or two, three or four hundred, of these strong maggots growing up to
an inch in length and feeding in the sore, which they keep up from
January or February until they are full-grown.

What the losses from effect of warble-attack may amount to yearly
is difficult to calculate with certainty. Mr. W. H. Liddell, of Ber-
mondsey, put it at two million pounds sterling annually to Great
Britain and Ireland; and on March 8rd, 1885, Mr. Richard Stratton,
of The Duffryn, Newport, Mon., remarked :—‘‘ You have made one
trifling mistake, and that is in the amount of my estimate of the annual
loss sustained by the fly, you make me put it at a million, but I do
not think I have ever put it at less than a pound per head on every
animal unsheltered from the ravages of the fly, which would probably
be seven or eight millions for the United Kingdom, and this, I fully
believe, is not above the mark.”

This looks a large estimate just on the face of the thing, but a great
deal of the amount may be fairly approximated, calculated out by
returns of loss per stone, or per carcase, on damaged animals, and
losses on hide, of which some notes are given below.

To these have to be added, for one thing, losses on fatting beasts ;
in the words of Mr. R. Stratton, on August 8th, 1884 :—* Cattle are
suffering very much at this time from the fly. Fancy a fat beast
having to run perhaps ten miles a day in this heat! Many lose £1
worth of beef in a week from this cause.”——-R. Srrarron, The Duffryn,
Newport, Mon.

Also as mentioned below :—

XXVlii WARBLE FLY,

Wess: UM ‘Tn the hot summer days our cows are tormented by the
fly, and we frequently see them galloping with tails up to get out
of the way of their tormentor; this lessens the quantity of milk,
and prevents feeding cattle growing.”—D. Byrp, Spurstow Hall,
Tarporley.

All who are at all connected with management of cattle know so
well about the mischief caused by these wild gallops that it is not
necessary to give observations of these in detail, more particularly as
they have to be mentioned further on in the notes from contributors
regarding successful methods of prevention and remedy ; but all stock
keepers and dairy farmers know to their cost the mischief thus caused,
not only in delaying fattening, but danger both in the gallop itself,
and risk of accidents to incalf cows, and also loss in quantity and
deterioration both in quality and condition of the milk.

Loss on milk.—The only precise calculation I know of on the subject
is thus referred to by Prof. Riley, late Entomologist of the U.S.A.
Department of Agriculture :—‘‘‘The Effect of the Warbles in the
Dairy’ is the title of an interesting article by T. D. Curtis, in which
the loss in the quantity of the flow of milk as well as its deterioration
in quality, resulting from the annoyance of the animals by the flies
while the latter are depositing eggs, and later by the grubs, is conclu-
sively shown, and he estimates the shrinkage at 10 per cent., and the
loss in quality at the same rate, making a total of 20 per cent.’”—See
‘Insect Life.’ Periodical Bulletin of U.S.A. Department of Agri-
culture. Vol. i., No. 5, p. 158. Washington, U.S. A., 1889.

The following note, from personal observations by Mr. D. Byrd,
gives approwimate estimates of loss of value on growth of feeding cattle from
disturbance, and on weight of cheese and percentage of milk calculably
lessened by the same cause :—

“We all know to our cost how greatly these tormenting flies
irritate and madden the cattle, causing them to gallop or run, as if for
their lives, to get away from the buzz and presence of their tormentors.
Feeding cattle cannot grow in flesh without quiet and rest, and
milking cows must suffer to a greater extent than we are aware of. To
use a common remark, they soon ‘ bate’—give less milk. To drive a
cow fast, or cause her to be excited, reduces the quantity and quality
of the milk. Without perfect quiet and rest they cannot do their best
for Us.

‘This leads me to the one important point. What is our loss in
the cheese-tub caused: by the Warble and Gad Fly? I have tried to
estimate the loss during the four or five summer months, or even the
eight months that a cow is supposed to be in profit. There are certain
times of unrest when the cow will give about one-half of her usual
flow of milk. These tormenting flies, and the continued presence of

LOSSES FROM LICKED BEEF. XXix

the prickly-coated warble-maggot, must keep up a perpetual uneasiness,
and retard the growth of our feeding cattle to our loss, it may be, of
£2 per head. In the dairy cows the loss will be greater. The daily
loss of milk may make a difference of 1 cwt. or 3 cwt. of cheese per
cow per annum. Halfa hundredweight, or 124 per cent., of milk less
in a dairy making 4 cwt. at 70s., comes to 35s.; but 124 per cent. is
too low an estimate: it may in some cases be put at £8 per head,
and in a dairy of 100 cows would. show a loss of £300.” *—-D. Byrp,
Spurstow Hall, Tarporley, Cheshire.

With regard to direct loss in value of the carcase of the animal by beef
being what ts called ‘‘licked.’’—In some serviceable observations with
which I was favoured in 1889 by Mr. John Child, managing secretary
of the Leeds and District Hide, &c., Company, as to details requisite
for forming estimate of our British loss in the aggregate from warble-
attack, he mentions:—‘‘ The greatest loss on the worst carcases of beef
I ever saw, taking a number together, would not be less than £1 per
carease, or 6d. per stone; of course there are some exceptional cases

‘worse than these, but they are rare——in fact so rare that they should
not come within your calculations.

“‘T think I am right in saying that the depreciation in the value of
licked carcases of beef are from 6d. per stone down to 1d. per stone,
and as the highest figure named comes in fewest number, the average
figure for reduction in value should not be taken at more than 2d. per
stone. Take the average weight of cattle affected by ‘lick’ and
‘Warble’ at forty stone, we have thus a loss on the carcase of
6s. 8d." —J. C.

This estimate of our scale of loss or lessened value on this one item
appears to run lower than that in America. The above estimate at
1d. to 6d. per stone equalling 3s. 4d. to 20s. per carcase at average
weight given, runs a good deal lower than the Chicago estimate of
2 dollars to 5 dollars per carcase, that is, 8s. to 20s. of our money.
Our highest estimate is considered to occur so rarely comparatively,

* The above note also formed part of a paper communicated by Mr. Byrd to the
‘Chester Chronicle’ of Feb. 7th, 1884. Mr. Byrd’s mention of ‘‘ the Warble and
Gad Fly ”’ is very important, as these two very different attacks are often confused.
The Gad Fly, Tabanus bovinus, is much larger than the Warble Fly; it does not
injure the animals by means of its grubs, as these feed in the ground, but it causes
mischief by driving its sucking apparatus into the cattle very painfully and drawing
away the blood, and also, like the Warble Fly, by terrifying them into the wild
gallops we know so well. From some of the various subsequent observations given
it appears that the applications noted as useful to keep off one sort of fly are
equally useful to keep off the other; and this point of the cattle so dressed being
able to feed in peace whilst the others were being hurried in all directions is well
worth consideration,

XXX WARBLE FLY.

that our average loss as calculated above is 6s. 8d., not quite up to the
lowest sum noted from Chicago.*

“The amount of this loss can be better appreciated, perhaps, by
reproducing in condensed form the approximate estimate of the loss
on the hides of cattle received at the Union Stock-yards of Chicago
during the grubby season, which includes the months from January to
June. Using the reports by States above given as a basis, it is
estimated that fifty per cent. of the cattle received are grubby. The
average value of a hide is put at 8-90 dollars; and while, from the
report referred to, one-third value is the usual deduction for grubby
hides in this estimate, but 1 dollar is deducted, or less than one-third.
The number of cattle received in 1889 for the six months indicated
was 1,335,026, giving a loss on the fifty per cent. of grubby animals,
667,513 dollars. When to this is added the loss from depreciated value
and lessened quantity of the beef, the amount for each infested animal
is put at 5 dollars, indicating a total loss on these animals from the
attack of the fly of 3,337,565 dollars.’’—-See ‘ Insect Life.’ Periodical
Bulletin of U.S.A. Department of Agriculture. Vol. ii., No. 5, pp.
156, 157. Washington, U.S. A.: Government Printing Office.

As it is of a good deal of interest to be able in some degree to
compare the proportion of warble-presence in infested cattle, and also
estimates of rate of money-loss thereby in countries which (as in the
present case) suffer connectedly by reason of cattle-traffic from this
cause, I give the preceding observation, with some amount of estimate
as to amount of warble-presence, and injury from it, in the U.S. A.;
reference to the original reports is subjoined in the foot-note.

The great points of our national loss from warble-infestation turn
on loss of health and sometimes death of the beasts, loss of milk,
injury to produce in the herd, and loss of flesh in the fatting beasts.
All this falls on the cattle owner, but also there is enormous loss
running through all classes concerned on the warbled hides.

* During the year 1889, very widely extended investigations regarding warble-
attack were set on foot, under the superintendence of Mr. A. S. Alexander,
Member of the Highland and Agricultural Society of Scotland, and whilst still in
this country one of the contributors to my own Annual Reports, then Editor to the
‘Farmer’s Review’ of Chicago, U.S.A. Circulars were sent out by the proprietors
of the paper over an enormous area of stock-producing country, and much informa-
tion sent in, of which some was valuable, some not so, but when sifted and arranged,
the reports are well worth attention.

These will be found at length in the ‘ Farmer’s Review’ (Offices 134, Van Bureu
Street, Chicago, Illinois, U. 8. A.), in Nos. for July 17th, 24th, 31st, and for August
7th and 14th, 1889; and an abstract of these reports was published in the U.S. A.
Department of Agriculture Bulletin entitled ‘ Insect Life’ for Nov. 1889.

None but those very intimately concerned could be expected to wade through
the mases of reports sent in, which I have, however, still at hand, but the above
short abstract is of considerable interest.

LOSSES ON WARBLED HIDES. XXXi

This strikes first, of course, where the Warbles are first observed: it
may come, like the rest, on the cattle owner or farmer ; or it may come on
the butcher or tanner ; or further on tt comes on the many trades in which
leather, discovered after purchase to be pierced, is useless for its purpose,—
a loss to the manufacturer ; or a loss, or even a danger, to the wearer
or user,

Loss on Warsuep Hipss.

In the following pages I submit returns of information with which
I was favoured in reply to my enquiries regarding amount of money-
loss on hides from warble injury (during one year, or during the warble
season) from several of our chief hide markets, companies or associa-
tions connected with business in hides, namely, from Aberdeen, Bir-
mingham, Boston, Bristol, Glasgow, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester,
Newcastle-on-Tyne, Nottingham and Sheffield.

Most of these were placed in my hands in the year 1888; but
particulars on the annexed table, with which I was favoured by the
courtesy of Messrs. Fry and Company, Leather and Hide Factors,
Moor Street, Birmingham, was placed in my hands in 1884.

Particulars of seven weeks’ supply of sia classes of hides, being the total of
each class of sound and warbled sold at two markets in Birmingham,
commencing May 8rd up to and including June 14th, 1884, and showing
the actual loss of each class of warbled hide :-—

Six Classes of Hides. eee
: 2 ag apes ae * Loss on
7 Jo. . of Per hid
een om axe Sian! Sold at less thanitite Semen. Gach, Class:

Ee Be Gk

95 lbs. and upwards): 286 67 | 3d. per lb. or 6s. 3d. per hide) 20 18 0
85 lbs. to 94 lbs ...... 446 222) 2d. 5 wm OSsiaG: 5 (sy ae
To) Bo Bey: aera 754 SySy |} lel ‘5 OS aOGs ne 124 6 8
(01) 2 oe eee 881 579) | 1d. 5 oss LOG 6 16S "G
DOMES (OL. sectees 629 441 | ld. - Pos Ode A LORS 0)
55 lbs. and under...| 283 | 224] 1d. ,, 1 Ceo Ble x ATAQe |
‘Totals....-- 38279 | 1906 Motaileceeee 545 0 8

It will be observed that of the total number of hides (viz., 5185)
over one-third were warbled ; and looking merely at one line of the
figures, it shows that out of 1460 hides, ranging from 65 lbs. to 74 lbs.
weight, 579 were lessened in value at the rate of 1d. per pound, or
5s. 10d. per hide, giving a total loss on these of £168 17s. 6d.

The above table of particulars does not include the three classes
known as “heavy” and “light” cows’ and bulls’ hides, which also
were warbled, but the numbers of which were not taken, on account
of Messrs. Fry not being as much interested in these as in the other
classes,

XXXll WARBLE FLY,

The following notes give amounts or approwimate estimates of number
of hides pissing through various markets (specified) in the course of one
year; also amounts or approwvimate estimates of the propartion warbled
and loss thereon,

The first I was favoured with was from Newcastle-on-Tyne :—

‘“‘ Last year (ending May, 1888) 102,877 hides passed through our
markets, and of these we estimate that 60,000 were more or less

Portion of inside of tanned warbled hide.

warbled. Taking an average of five shillings each, which is rather
under than over the mark, this gives a loss of £15,000 on our New-
castle hides from this cause for the year.’””-—J. McGunuivray, Secretary,
Newcastle-on-Tyne Hide Inspection Society.

‘*Warbles begin to show in March and continue until October.
Out of 85,000 hides passing through this market within this period,
I should say that one-fourth, or say 8500, would be more or less
warbled, and I should estimate the money loss at from £1500 to
£2000.”--W. B. Wexzourn, Secretary, Nottingham Hide, Skin and
Fat Market Co., Limited.

“Number of hides passing through our market in one year, about
30,000. Number of these that are warbled, fully one-third, or
10,000. Loss on these warbled hides, at least three shillings per
hide, or a total loss of £1500 per annum. We believe the above to
be fairly near, and rather under than over the mark.’”—-Joun Cum,
Managing Secretary, Leeds and District Hide, Skin and Tallow Co.,
Limited.

““We should say that during the months of March to August
inclusive there will be fully 60 per cent, of the hides more or less

LOSSES ON WARBLED HIDES, XXXlil

affected, with an estimated loss of 2s. 6d. per hide average.”’ —- JamEs
Watson & Sons, Hide Market, Whitehall Road, Leeds.

‘‘The delay in forwarding this letter has been due to my ascer-
taining from our local tanners the effect of warbles on our supply of
hides.

‘‘T have no means of ascertaining definitely, and can only approxi-
mate the following results :—-

‘“«The hides suffer most severely from March to the end of August
in each year; they are slightly damaged during the months of February,
September, and October ; whilst during the other three months of the
year they show slight traces, after tanning, by the marks left after the
warble-holes have closed up.

‘“‘ Taking our supply of 50,000 hides (excluding odd numbers) sold
during 1888, the amount of damage on the following basis would run
thus :—

te Sonal.

2s. 6d. per hide on 9000 hides, being one-third

received from March 1st to August 31st ... 1125 0 0
1s. 6d. per hide on 2500 hides, being one-fourth

received during February, September, and ,

Oclanerin. etl oreglsioatie ee tedn nmi ss<¢ aces rn L8s-40, OD
9d. per hide on 8000 hides, being one-fourth

received during November, December, and

SATAN ad pectee. oes: seat ad nahi beat. take 10) 0

Moral so as iaep. O40

‘¢ Adopting another basis of calculation, taking the average to be
25 per cent. from March 1st to October 31st, and 124 per cent. for the
remaining portion of the year, and taking the damage at an average of
2s. 6d. per hide, the result would be £1250.

‘‘T am inclined to think that both these estimates considerably
under-rate the mischief done, and would especially point out that these
figures refer only to the deterioration to the sale of the hides in a
green state, and do not take into account the loss to the tanner on the
finished article being depreciated in value, or the cost of labour and
materials expended in producing leather which when finished is found
to be unfit for the purpose intended.

‘«« Another very important matter is the deterioration of the animal
whilst living,” &c.— W. H. Hin, manager to the Sheffield Butchers’
Hide and Skin Co., Limited.

‘“‘T should say” the warble ‘‘ makes from a farthing to sometimes a
penny per pound difference to the butcher (about four or five shillings
each hide difference).”—F rom a communication on the general bearing

c

XXXIV WARBLE FLY.

of the subject, by Mr. Joseph Wine, Hide, Skin, and Fat Broker,
16, Pen Street, Boston.

‘Re warbles, we give you particulars as far as possible. The
number of hides sold in the Hide Market in Liverpool and the
American Lairage in Birkenhead is about 130,000 per year; this is
exclusive of the hides under 80 lbs., which we eall kips.

‘‘ We reckon the warbled hides to be—in the month of February,
20 per cent.; in March, 45 per cent.; in April, 80 per cent. ; and in
May, 20 per cent.

‘‘The average weight of the above 130,000 we calculate at 65 lbs.
each, and the loss in price at three farthings per pound.” * —— Messrs.
Wuiyyates, Wesster, McNaveur & Co., Hide, Skin, and Fat Brokers,
The Market, Gill Street, Liverpool.

‘«‘T regret Iam unable to give you any reliable information respecting
warbled hides, as in this neighbourhood we have never kept a separate
class and account of them.

‘Here we have thrown them into the same class as cut hides and
damaged hides, and previous to some years ago we passed them as
sound hides unless they were badly warbled.

‘‘The Bristol slaughter of beasts would be about 700 per week,
and during the summer and autumn months fully one-third of this
number would be warbled. Some of the heavier hides would lose in
consequence ten shillings per hide, and even more; but taking the
heavy hides and light hides together, their average loss would be not
less than five shillings per hide.” +|—-- Winu1am Wiis, Bristol and
Western Counties Butchers’ Hide and Skin Co., Limited, 88, Thomas
Street, Bristol.

“Tn our market we have a system of inspection for all market
hides, being hides of cattle slaughtered in Glasgow and neighbourhood
for food purposes only. Under this system the hides are classified,——
first and second classes, the latter being faulty flayed, and warbled
hides.

‘«‘ Referring to enclosed sheet you may note that in 1888 the total
number of such hides have been 104,551.

* «We handle large numbers of horse-hides, and we never saw a warbled
horse-hide.”’

+ ‘Taking the above estimate of 700 hides per week, would give 36,400 in the
year, and 12,133 for four months (say) May to August inclusive. One-third of this
amount (that is, 4044 hides), estimated to be warbled at a loss of five shillings per
hide, would show a loss of £1011,”

LOSSES ON WARBLED HIDES, XXXV

Total Market Hides.

1888. Firsts. Seconds. Totals,
January, ... %,. 5820 3361 9181
February ...0 %: 5476 ‘5892 11368
March eee: 3541 4559 8100
10) 1 eee 3582 3922 7504
May pss Ge os 3229 5618 8847
SUMO: sam sad 3144 8770 6914
SRD yARe Ee) ds ase Souk 3283 3231 6514
AUBUSG. ice | sas 5020 3728 8748
September sa 4857 3084 7941
Ostobery <2. ss 7228 3451 10679
November... ... 6747 2647 9394
December... ... 6811 2550 9361

Total .29" 68788 45813 104551

‘Taking the warble months as February to May inclusive, we find
the proportion of second class to be 56 per cent., while from June to
December the proportion is only about 36 per cent., being, on a fair
calculation, an increase of 20 per cent. on account of warbles.

‘Tf we then take the number slaughtered in February to May as
about 86,000, we find 20 per cent. on that number yield 7200 warbled
hides: “damaged by warbles to the extent of (say) one penny per
pound, at an average of 60 lbs. per hide, shows £1800 as the loss thus
incurred.

‘Further, we may legitimately add that, as the cost of manu-
facture is the same as for sound hides, the loss to the community or
national wealth will show double the amount, or in round numbers a
loss of £4000 annually in the district.

‘‘No account is here made of Irish and country hides, of which
we pass about 50,000 annually, and among which the damage is
probably in a higher ratio than the others.’’— Messrs. Ropert RamsEy
& Co., Auction Brokers, Hides, &¢., Greendyke Street, Glasgow, N.B.

The following table, with which I am favoured by Messrs. W.
Murray & Son, of Aberdeen, gives the number of sound hides, and
number of warbled hides, and estimated loss per week thereon from
February 8rd to June 29th inclusive, and includes all the hides in
Aberdeen, viz., those of Messrs. Murray, and those sold by the Co-
operative Company.

XXXV1 WARBLE FLY,

Estimated Loss by Warble on Hides passing through Aberdeen Market
from February to June, 1888, inclusive.

Number of Number of Estimated Loss
Week ending Sound Hides. Warbled Hides. per Week.
Ly oa:
February De cee 9344 418 80,19. 9
2s apes (C0 Bioaie V) 2300 443 85 16 74
ae Uy ee 9454 473 91 12 104
ae 24. Ne 9374 501 97 1 4
Mateh— 2—. 2641 569 110: 435
ny O agi: 2124 611 TLS. es
reac Gt wasn 2949 602 Li6. 12279
ee se 2137 719 189 6 14
mY RDO OL 2095 718 189 27s
Agen 164. sc: 9181 750 145. 6°83
OO Do cas 2207 755 146 5 74
ee ane 1699 705 136 11 104
Piet | te 2021 640 194 Oe
May Aen PR 2308 755 146 5 74
Pee esl: ahd 2257 754 146 2 48
tal sae ee 2076 875 169 10 74
See) ar 1660 664 128 138 O
dume dor... 2091 916 177? See
Mn Sar ee 1981 TAT 144 14 74
Sm 5) an 1948 ele 149 7 74
AD i wet 1685 wo 145 10 14
See ene 1446 6938 134 5 44
Total for 5 months... 46273 14830 2873 6 3

‘Being about 25 per cent. of total number of hides affected by
warble.

« Average depreciation calculated at 3d. per pound. Weight of hides
principally affected, 50 to 70 pounds.”’——-Messrs. Wint1am Murray & Son,
George Street, Aberdeen, N.B.

To the above returns I prefix (p. 81) and append the tables, with
which I was favoured respectively in 1884 and 1885 through the
courtesy of Messrs. Fry & Co., Leather and Hide Factors, of Moor
Street, Birmingham, which show how the amount of loss may be cal-
culated to a nicety at markets where warbled hides are ‘“ outclassed.”

The preceding table, it will be seen, does not include the three
classes known as ‘“‘ heavy” and “light” cows’ hides, and bulls’ hides
which also were warbled. In this table the results of calculation of
loss on the six classes of hides only are given; in the folding table
the cows’ hides are included, and the particulars are given week by
week in detail from February 14th to September 19th.

This accompanying folding table, with which I was favoured by

A

Particulars of Sound and Warbled Hid Vi2-,

E = =
= Pee Ms lhe alee
fe | 2 |48/3)ee)2 |es|8/8 i 22 | 32
ee he een) eae alee) -E | a | see) Ee
© i) 6 29 | 48 31
Feb. 14 || X 33} bi |44| 1/431 9315 | 52] 1] 4g] 052] ©
O 15:| 54 9 | 43 19°
» 21 |X 15,| 54|30| 1| 43117 | 54] 26] 2 | 48 | o'8| 47
O 20)| 5 22 | 45 ie hee
» 28 |X 18s] 58} 38] 2] 43 |! 10] 58] 32] 5 | 43/194) =
O 23)| 54 16 | 43 |) 22, eee
March7 || X of 5e | 32) 4) 4g || 11 | 54 127 | 10 | 43 | 19'S |
O 16)| 54 15 | 43 hoy ane
eS ee 1st 54 | 30| 6 | 4g || 22 | 54 | 37 | 10 | 4g |] 92 'B | Of
O 9)| 54 21 | 43 15 8
Pie: ee 12} bg | 21] 3| 4%] 7) 54] 98) 11] 4g} i5| 4%
O 12)| 58 6 | 43 148 ae
» 28 || X 13} 52 | 30| 8| 4z | 17 | 54] 23/11 | 4g | 16 | 49
O 14)| 58 20 | 54 ie
April 4 || X 10} Be | 241 16) ae | 7 | Se. | 27 | 16 | 45 ll ag 8 | 2
O 10)| 54 17 | 4¢ Aa
» |} X 19s] 5¢] 23! 9] 43] 12] 52] 29] 9 | 43] a7 tt] 32
O 16)| 54 18 | 5 ~ | 334
» 18 || xX sf| 5g | 24] 11] 4g |] 12 | 5a | 30! 13 | 4g | 1344) 34
O 12)| 53 16 | 5 26 48
» 25 |X 11f/5¢| 23] 1/5 | 13/52] 29] 9| 43] 6 48| 24
O 9} 5g 27 | 5a i gal ae
May 2||X 6)/6 |15| 2/53 || 10/58 | 37] 14/| 4g.) 1748] 39
O 15)| 53 28 | 54 49 42 |
» 9X 6f|5¢|ar] 4/54) 6| 5a] 34) 7] 4a] 1448] 44
O 51/58 13 | 54 ag oe
, 16) X 10f|52)a5!) ols | 7|se!20} 4] 4211948 | 4
| 51] St 23 | 43 36 48
|, 23 1/X 91/58] 14] 3] 421117] 54] 40| 2] 43 | a3 48| 32
O 15)| 54 15 | 43 * | 9g 48].
Pea 4)) 52 19) 2) 42 415 | 19) 4) 4g] 13 48-|- 2°
O 6)| 54 6 | 43 51 pereee
June 6 |X 6]] 54] 12] 0 Spel i467) ae | is Ao eae
O 3)| 52 13 | 43 33 *.
Penix 2)\ 52 | 5 6 Tia | 205) alliae) hag Se ltaee
ees: 8 | 43 50) ae
» 20 || X a 5g | 4] 0 6 | 54 | 14] 1] 42 |] 19 43 | 31
O 2)| 58 8 | 43 | 3 =)
Peewee 1) 6 2/0 Se isd) 42 || ig pace
O 8)| 54 11 18 4
July 4||X 4]| 52] 12] 0 15 | 58 | 26] 0 15 48 | 47
O 6)| 53 8 | 54 25
Sane Xx 10} 53116| 0 12 | 52 | 20] 1/42 | 13 48) 44
O 6)| 58 9 | 5k "| 95 3x
ds) || -X 5} 58/11] 0 12 | 54 | 21] 0 96 44 | *#
O 5)| 54 8 | 54 | 20 4,
poo Re 16y OR 1d | 0 12 | 58 | 20! 0 yee) ==
O 1)| 52 9 | 54 os Ah te
Aug. 1/| X 5} 58116] 0 16 | 58/25] 1| 43 | 18 48 | *
O 2)| 54 11 | 5 | 44 ele
,) eX wWlae) 9] o 21 | 5: | 32] 0 i? ee
O 2)/| 54 12] 5. 29 2
Page| % 14) | 58 | 16) 0 22 | 51 | 341 0 ig 43 | +4
O 4)|5 17 | 43 a7 32
,» 22 |X 13f] st] 17] 0 i3|5 |30| 0 18 fee
O 6)| 54 17 | 4g 38 3 | |
» 29 |X 15s] 58] 21] o 14/51/31] 0 D1 (ee jee
O 7)| 58 21 | 4% 37 3
Sept. 5 | X 13/| 54 | 20] 0 23151] 44| 0 19, 44 | 64
O 3)| 53 17 | 43 35| 38
See) || X 11} ce id | 0 15 | 51132] 0 23| 48) 46
O 9) |\5s 22 | 4z | 32| 3g
» 19] KX 16;| 58 | 25] 0 Bie |e AS |G 32| 48 | 60
——— ee | eo a |||
32 weeks. 621 | 68 911 |138 Ke gees

O for ordinaries. x

Price.

yy Gey Co Gy Gy Sl GG BO & | woxpte.

Or

vat ae o
if ¢
in YA e: 7)
; a; y : rim
an 5 i ce . ey 5
7 7 Nia vil vin
ES win
TA : yi ae
' - ; i i At ’
. H ee >, Zz
ye pe ‘ fei nied
? Mena ms ty van
" v . a + hn
“Ege tea? era
mn _ oo iy
: Tey ’ :
- vae '

Vie
i
Le
nt

- ni

ae an ANN i

~~

Particulars of Sound and Warbled Hides, sold at one of the three Birmingham markets. fr
g arkets, from

February 14th; to the end,—September 1)th,—1885 ieee TC ao

By co a FS F “
os o oi) 4 —
ay . s| a f a - 2 3 A i ; n a , o]
ae |= ge/2 (22/2 ae1e/eie|8| 22/4] 8 Bias ca Bo og: lel ete eae 3 aloe 3 nj
EE Te ee eee ee eee nee
eS. as | Sa 3 uf B 5 . S| 2 Sale = M7 = 3 =
7 5 29 | 48 31 | 44 Eee a a ee ee ee ee Bla |as| 8 | 6S |e :
Feb. 14 || X 33]| 54 | 44] 1] 44 || 23/5 | 52] 1 | 48 || 25) 4 44 | 44 38 | 44 ; —— | _—_—_—_—_ |_|
O 15)| 5k 9 | 43 25) 2) 56 | 8/44] 28) 44) mo | 8/4 | ae] 49 2) calle: 44 | 4 54 | 4 <
ellis] laf Alt) | sla |B) w fools [El nlc 181 cal olor| 21a oo ln lae) le
22 | 43 29 | 4 ae 4 || 10/48 | 47 16 2 ei : 4
Saal i) gp | 98] 2/42 | 10 | 54] 92 | 6) 44 | 18 ai} ae | 7 lap] ial ae] a are Abra elee hotel
16 | 4 22 9 ae Ne ee ase eee \ 3 | 4
Mareh7 | X 3} ot s2| 4| 4g |) 11 | 54 | 27 | 10 | 44 | 19 | at | a 43 || 16 | 52 sili * Tas} l +188 | a7 | ae ea ie |
15 | 4 95'| 43 leg 264) Oh aaa a ee | F
as e id) Bt 30| 6 | 4% | 22 5 37 | 10 | 48 22 vil a7 |14| 43 aa ri alee 29 | 43 a 2 a1| 6/4 2 4 56 | 5| 33 é 4g 55 |. 7| 88
Die |PAl r 5 4 3 4h 9 | 48 38 2 F ea:
=) ule|| es 12} be | O1,|) 3 | 47 | 7 a 98 | 11 | 48 Daal ae 20 | 48 1B | 43 0; 4 2|44|20| 14/4 || 8| 48 | 40 | 18) 3g | 10 | 48 54 | 5 | 88
O 12)| 53 6 | 43 b |] 15) 4) 80 | 19) 48 | 20) 48 | 40 | 28) 4g) 15 | 48) 30 | 28) 4 real cel 40 | 44
: 45 2
See les 18} 5 | 30) 8 | 4g || 17 | 54] 23 | 11 | 4g || 16 EP law \eght age levee eae 31 | 44 Ages Hk eae en cade |e 44 | 6 | 3g
? 0 io} og 20 | 54 26 | 43 4 || 15 | 42] 48 | 38) 45] 9 | 42) 40 | 21) 4h) 4 | 44) 28) 8] 4 4 3 33 pale ee
April 4 || X 10}| 5 | 24| 6| 43) 7| 52] 27| 16 | 48 16] 46 | 42 | 37 | 4 30 | 44 29 | 44 Eula ag 4 9| 32] 6|44| 49 | 9| 38
x 19} a 17 | 44 41|| 43 | & 10) 28 | 40q) 48 4a 8) 4h) 87 | B24) 2 | ae | We) tea “olde | 44 | a6 Bie
pola B28 bf | 25) 9 | 48 12 | 54 | 29| 9| 43 |) 17| 46 | 58 | 24 | 44 eae ele | 23 | 48 is | 44 ? pA a 1/88) She 33 | 9 | 32
5 1s orale 8 3%
18 || x e 24 a4] 11 5 33 | 42 30 | 43 if ae ee ae 1] 44|19|13| 3g || 4) 4¢| 33 | 7] 38] 4 | 44) St | 5) 38
” a || 5g 11 | 4g || 12 | 5g | 30 | 13 | 4g | 13} 54 | 46 | 24] 4g] 10 | 48] 4 23 | 48 14 | 44 32 | 43 32 | 4
Pall ea 16 | 5 26 | 4 0 | 20 aes || ee eerie | (2) | 28 ee 11 | 43| 43 | 138 | 2g || 2| 43] 34 | 10
Py O85. x TL] 5g 23| 1/5 || 13 | 54 | 29) 9 | 421) 6) 5 so |o2| 4p ll 9] 49 | : 23 | 44 6 | 4 90'| at i * Fs i 3g
2 3 5g 27 | 5 41 | 42 3( i 38/22") a 3/43] 26 | 24/4 3 | 43 | 9 | 25| 4 8 | 42 | 98 4 0 ‘a 34 2
28 | 54 49) 43] 4g | 31 |14| 43 || 2 | 43 | 23] 26 | 44 | 7.| 43 | 35 , ,
oe 6 21] 4| 531 6|5a| 34] 7 | 42 | 14 47 | 4 31 | 44 al an 7/44] 35 | 6/4 || 6| 48) 39 | 5/88
‘ 4\| 4g | 56 | 14] 4 6 | 4 3 3 | 45 33 | 44 39 | 4
O 5\| 58 Riles ie 8 2| 53 [16] 4g || 4) 42] 35 | 13 | 4 | f
9 | 4% 48 | 4 4 || 0 | 4g | 13 |-13.| 33 || 9 | 44] 42 | 10] 32] 5) 48) 44 | 5) 38
, 16 |X 10;| 5¢|15| 5|5 || 7) 58) 20] 4) 42/1 5 44 | 43 1 * Il 98 | ag " oes
Dll 4 | 4 28 | 4 é
a e B ot fal ela 23 4 i, i 7 a 51 | 13 | 48 x ri 61 | 21 | 3g re a 52 | 25 | 3g ‘3 48 | 14 | 10 | 33 |) 12 a 40 | 2| 33 i 3 40 | 9| 32
“ Whee : 5 2| 48 | 13) 42 | 49 | 15 | 43] 14] 48 | 5 ‘ 5 | 4% Bl | 3g 25 | 44
© 15\| 52 15 | 43 Wal ae 5 | 45 53 | 12] 3% || 5] 42| 45 | 23] 32] 2 | 42] 17] 16 | 3g] 6 | 48] 37 3
, 80x 4j| 58) 19| 2) 42] 4]5 | 19] 4] 44] 1 8 31 | 4 30 | 44 fe | aa B | 38 8 8 | 38 || 6 | 48) 31 3 | 3g
é 3i| 42 | 41 | dz | 4 |) ot 4 9 x 43 16 | 4% 21 | 44
O 6)| 58 6 | 43 31 | 43 5 4 | 42 | 19] 33] 5| 44] 35 | 14] 3g] 2 | 43 | 16 | 13 | 33} 6 5 3 ,
48 | 22 35 || 7 | 48 | 28 | 5 | 3g
June 6 || X 6)| 54 | 12) 0 8 | 54 | 14] 2 | 48 7 23 37 | 48 33 | 43 2 i ae D | 8 | 8 8
5 £ yt 5 | 34 17 | 4 95 | 2
Pe aulce | 5 |. 0 Peale PTasla| 1” Wh 85 it 6 OT oa | a a ie level 4) 04] 0 | 94] 3) 49] 20 | 1 ||) 4 1a | 20 | 6 | 33
” Meeoe) 5h | 20| 4] 48/16 | 43 | 49 | 10] 43 |) 10| 48 | 45 32 || 10 | zl | 44 _ |) 84 | 3g ~ |] 88 | 4
Be ea list ee Wiige | = 4 ¢| 45 | 20/32/10] 44] 42 | a3 | 3g] 2| 44 | 23) 9 | 33) 2] 48 | 36 3a | 2148 | 4
» 20} X 5; 5g a 0 6 5k 14 1 3 28 | 44 38 | 44 29 41 aN eel c= Ad cae) 4 | 33 | as 4 0 7 | 34
2\ ane 3 ‘ 8 | 44 WN o8l\ ae a ial a cee ae eee 4 | 30 | 10 | 34 5 if Jol) glial CaalWage| 20 Vee ealne
” ea.)8 7| 54/15] 1) 43 | 16| 4¢| 39 | 6|4 |) 12) 4¢| 66 a7 | 4% _ || 19 | 3% ~ || a9 | 4
O 8)| 54 ls i g j 12 | 4g] 66 | 34 | 32) 2/43) 36 | 23) 3g] 3 | 42 | 30) § 9: rile : ne
: ‘ 8 | 4% 53 | 4 8 i )| Bh |] 4] 4h] 23 6| 3a || 4| 44) 33 | 9 | 34
July 4 || X at 53 | 12] 0 15 | 58 | 26| 0 a 8 54 | 43 34 | 4 99 | ¢ 4 |
Besliremed\ te 2 1si| se | 33 | 4/4 | 17148) 7O | 2613 sl ae| 6 5 || 22 | 3g 42 | 4
10) 6) 5} 8 | 5} Bye 8 | 3g 6 | 43 60 15 | 3% 2 | 43 | 3t Qies valle 3 | oF ‘ 2 ‘
t| BE 25 | 4g 27 | 44 2 |) East} 20 4 || 3 | 48) 25 2/34 || 5| 48) 47 3 | 3h
Pett lm 10) ba) 16) 0 12 | 58 | 20| 11] 43 13 2 51 | 43 | 97 | 44 93 | : 2 | . 2
. Re ; 2 5 38 5 41 12 43 39 15 4 9 Neer erat | me 3g 39 t
O 61| 58 9 | 5a on 8 8 : 46 | 60 $13] 3g || 1| 48 | 28] 8 | 3g || 5 | 4 | 4s
5 ‘ 5 || 43 42 | 48 ‘ 8 | 3g |] 5 | 4g) 28 1| 3g] 5] 48] 44 8 | 3h
wy, alesis 5} Hy |p abe yw 12 | 54 | 21 | 0 96 x 7 | 8 37 | 48 33° 4 93 | ¢ PW es Ss b}
= ‘ : 1 1) Ae 20 | 489) 62) 12) 4 9 | 4 ¢ 2 23 | 3g 36 | 3%
OO 5)| 54 8 | 54 20 , ‘ 8 0 ) | 44 | 46 12 | 3g 5 | 44 | 43 | 6 | 3% 9 5 4 le
| és | || 22 43. 99 | 4 3 | 3h |) 9 | 44 32 29| 32 /| 8) 44) 44 £ | 33
ees 2) || 6 5e | 11) 0 12 | 58 | 20] 0 E i 38 | 43 30 | 34 | r4 | ¢ 2 2
| 5 20/5 | 40 | 0 16 | 4¢| 45.| 5 | 4 : “3 crs leo 40.) 4
O 1)| 5% 975 Bil | ac 8 2) 8 | 44 | 46 P10 | 3g || 6 | 44 | 36) 9) 3 | 6 3( | eel eee P
pane. i : 15) a 16 | 0 16 3 25 | 1] 48 18 41 | 1| 42 | os & ae NO o ri ae M4 ~ || 95 | ri : 16 3 diel lc ‘s * wa al
2) é DLN} 35 Se 44] 42 | 51 Ai . a 5 u 3g 3 | 48 | 28 q | 35 il 5 44 21 0 3 | 43 45 3/3
Pemex 7 be | 0'| 0 21 | 51 | 32 | ea pe ce 55 | 4g 7a Aa 23 | 3z | an ledge "2
1 oO 2) 5t 1215 0 ra a 61 | 0 22 ri 73 2) 4 2 4} 57 6 | 3g PA Me Ns Dayal 32 33 | 8 s 31 1 | 38 | zt re 29 1 3
r 15 x 14 j 58 16 0 22 5h 34 0 19 3 48 | 0 4 re : 60 43 | 29 | 34 | || 98 34 8 | 40 | 33 og
O 4)|5 17 | 43 all aan aa ee ge | 7\4¢\a6| 5|3ei| 8i4e| 36 | o| || 4] 44| 44 | 2] 3a]
» 22: |) X 13) oF 17 0 | 13 | 6 30 0 18 43 45 | O 13 | 43 43 ry. 62 | 45 z 33 | 3g | ~ | 39 | 3 | | 37 33 : ei
QO 8 83 17 | 4% 38 | 42 | 65 | 48 aloes a i 80 2) 3¢ | 5 | 44 | 33) 0 |) 9 | 44 | 39 1 | 38 11/43] 48 | 2/3
oe) oe Ly 58 21 0 | 14 5h 31 0 21 4a 9 0 30 | 44 95 213 D s | 33 of | 44 | 33 * Il 52 | 33 a
Geet iee ar | 26 37 | 4g | 59/| mle ales) 78 faa) 2) | 4 | 88 | Sem A | ee) ee | 8 4|44| 56 | 0
Sept. 5 || X 13)| 53] 20) 0 23 | 51 | 44} 0 lig} 421 46 | 0 16 | 4 p 90 | 3g ft 27 | 3¢ | | ~ || 24 | 33 | 55 | 34 |
O 3)| 54 17 | 43 | 35 | 42 65 | 2 : 35 | 0 6|4t| 30 | o| F | 9 44| 64 | 0
Sag ee wos] 14 | 0 15 | 51 | 32] 0 23| 43 | 58 | 0 pale lca! 28 | 3¢ | Wrses:
Oo 9\ 54 22 | 43 | 32 | 43 59 41 — > 47 | 2 | 34 9 | 43 | 37 | 0 | 6| 43 | 46 0
» 19 || X 16j| 58 | 25) 0 21/5 | 43) O 32 | 43 | - 64 0 31 ie 90 | 40 | 33 | 50 | 3g
— | || | lake S082 ohh) 8 | 4 | 46 0 10 | 48 | 60 0
32 weeks. 621 | 68 loa l138 | . = —— —|—|—_ — es Se a ies
1495 306 Piliee |_|
> 1789 873 fag | we 140 1382 {151
| | !

O for ordinaries. X for extra flayed. The black lines show date of Cessation of} Sale of warbled hides in these classes.—Ep.

’
|
3

oe

LOSSES ON WARBLED HIDES. XXXVil

Messrs. Fry & Co., of Birmingham, gives particulars of the numbers
of sound and warbled hides sold at one of the Birmingham markets,
and the price each parcel sold at, from the beginning of the warbled
season, viz., February 14th, to the end, September 19th, in 1885.

These details, it will be seen, extend over a duration of thirty-two
weeks, and include price per pound of ‘ordinary’ and ‘extra-flayed’
hide (marked down the third column as ‘0’ and ‘x’ respectively), as
well as those which are warbled. .

By casting the eye along the columns it will be seen that the first
three heavy classes, namely, those of 95 Ibs. and upwards, 85 to 94 lbs.,
and 75 to 84 lbs., which are all, or nearly all, ox-hides, do not suffer as
much as the three following. These last--that is, the classes weighing
65 to 74 lbs., 56 to 64 lbs., and 55 lbs. and under——are principally
heifer-hides, and are the greatest sufferers. Bulls’ hides are stated,
as a rule, to be also very much warbled, but as these are not what is
termed ‘thrown out,’ but sold (sound and warbled) together, the pro-
portion of warbled hide could not be given.

The following abstract of the larger tables is given for convenience
of reference. The amount sold during the thirty-two weeks of sound
and of warbled hides may thus be conveniently compared, together
with the highest and lowest prices per pound of each. The sound
hides include both the ordinary and the extra-flayed.

Abstract of Table, with particulars of different classes of Hides sold during
warbled season of thirty-two weeks, from February 14th to September
19th, 1885.

No. of Highest and No. of Highest and

Weight and Description Sound Lowest Prices Warbled Lowest Prices

of Classes of Hides. Hides. per lb. Hides. per lb.

95 lbs. and upwards 621 5d. to 6d. 68 44d. to 54d.

85. lbs. to 94 Ibs. ... la 43d.,, 53d 188 48d. e Ad.

WEEE OL ss asec, L200 Aid. ,, 52d. 306 ad. 3A 43d.

(i op apart ean ie SRA er tame 0) 4d. ,, 42d 541 3éd. ,, 44d.

moo) O44," gee (L692 8id. ,, 42d 497 Bid. ,, 44d.

55 lbs. and under ... 873 B3d.,, 423d. 305 34d. ,, 44d.

Heavy cow-hides .... 1198 did. ,, 43d 140 34d. ,, 4d.

Light cow-hides ... 1882 3id.,, 43d fol 3id. ,. 82d.

Totals ... 9956 2146

Careful study of the detailed (folding) tables is well worth while
for those practically interested. They show the different time over
which attack extends from February 14th, and that it certainly cannot
be considered as stopping in July. We find it in the three lighter
classes of hides as still present on September 19th, but it is worth
some notice that three heavy classes did not contain warbled hides at
a much earlier date. The heaviest ox-hides, 95 lbs. and upwards,

XXXV1il WARBLE FLY.

were free after May 30th, and the two others of these heavy classes
were free (save two hides in one class and one in the other) respectively
after June 27th and July 18th.

It may also be seen that sometimes, at what may be called the
height of the warble season, the number of warbled hides exceeds
that of the sound in some of the classes. On April 25th entries occur
amongst the ‘65 to 74 lbs.’ and the ‘55 lbs. and under’ hides
respectively, of sales of 42 warbled and 88 sound, and 25 warbled to
9 sound.”

I was also favoured by the following valuable information from
Messrs. Richard Markendale & Co., Manchester, which may stand as a
very special example of the serious amount of the loss which is going
forward. A return showing over 88,000 hides damaged by warble,
and loss thereon of over £16,000 in one year, is a matter for serious
consideration.

The return I am favoured with is as follows :--

‘March 6th, 1889. Further to yours of January 14th, 1889,
ve numbers warbled, and loss of hides passing through this market
in one year. We now have much pleasure in sending you the
information. .

“1888. Jan. to Dec. Number of hides, 250,740 total.
i. 5 44 bs 88,580 warbled.
Loss on same, £16,716 for one year.”’
—-Messrs. Ricnarp Marxenpate & Co., Limited, Hide, Skin, and Fat
Market, Manchester.

A glance at the sum totals of warbled hides, and calculations of
loss thereon, will give some idea of the loss and waste of material that
is going on, but very far from a full one. The returns show depreciation
of market value, but it should also be considered (as pointed out by
Messrs. Ramsey, of Glasgow, and Mr. Hill, President of the Sheffield
Butchers’ Company) that this loss is quite independent of the sub-
sequent waste of money consequent on the expenses of manufacture of
damaged material, which, when finished, may be useless for the pur-
poses needed,

Messrs. Ramsey’s approximate estimate of this gives about double
the original loss on the injured hides as the amount thus wasted to the
community,—that is, to the national wealth.

But further, although the bulk of the English hides are distributed
from the hide-markets to the tanneries, there is still no small amount
received directly by tanners from local farmers or butchers.

On my application to Messrs. C. & H. Hatton, of the Barton
Tannery, Hereford, as to their estimate of the loss suffered by them-

selves from warble-injury, they drew my attention to this point, and
added: -

LOSSES ON WARBLED HIDES. XXx1X

‘¢ We venture to think it would be sufficient to state that one-half
of the hides taken in by tanners direct from the butchers are warbled,
and show an average loss of 5s. to 6s. each; this would, of course,
show a rough estimate of some thousands of pounds in the United
Kingdom, independently of the numbers declared from the markets,
and we regret to say that many hides which are classed as perfect on
the market * prove to be covered with minute warble-grubs when the
flesh and hair are removed by the tanner.”

Various other communications were sent me from tanners as to
amount of warble-presence in hides sent in, but these have been
enough entered on under warble-effects in the preceding pages.

It may not, however, be out of place here to point out what great good
could be done towards warble-prevention by exhibition of warbled hides.
When the hide is on the animal the mischief is very much hidden by
the hair; but when the hide is displayed after death, then its loath-
some condition, with the maggots working in it, shows the state of
the case. The farmer naturally is not likely to be forward to draw
attention to his beast being warbled; the cattle salesman or auctioneer
will (or too often will) declare anything to get a beast, whose back is
well-nigh eaten up with so-called ‘‘ rottenness”’ from maggots, off his
hands; and for the butcher it would be no gaining speculation to
show the fearfully disgusting state of hides, beneath which the backs
were, in the words of Mr. Williams (tanner), of Haverfordwest,
‘a mass of jelly from warbles.” So the matter gets hushed up, but
if the real state of the case could be shown it would be thoroughly
desirable.

* « Classed as perfect on the market.’? During the time when it was necessary
I should examine the condition of hide personally, to ascertain what might be going
on for myself, I was one day examining a newly-flayed warbled hide, shown me by
a neighbouring butcher on a large scale, who worked a good deal for me on the
matter of warble investigation ; and, with the under side of the warbled hide before
us, he showed me how to pass a ‘‘ grubby”’ hide on the inspectors as perfect. The
process was simple. Just with a penknife to make a little slit across the thin
tissue covering the maggot; then a gentle pressure frees it, or allows it to come out ;
the puffed-up apparent swelling caused by the maggot-presence sinks down flat ; and
though I did not experiment myself enough to be sure of possibilities of deceiving
the inspector, I should say that the plan was one which, if not known of, it might
be well to draw attention to as practicable. It may be well to add that my
informant was then a butcher doing a large business, and in communication with
hide firms, but has now retired.— Ep.

xl WARBLE FLY.

METHODS OF PREVENTION AND REMEDY.

The notes directly following refer to prevention of attack, or of
the fly ‘ striking,” as it is called, by application of washes or dressings
such as may make the coat of the animal obnoxious to the fly, or may
destroy the vitality of the egg, or may kill the newly-hatched maggot ;
also the feeding-ground being where there is shelter—natural or
artificial—when the fly is about, or where there is access to water.

The following notes confirm the opinion (brought forward, I
believe, first by Bracy Clark, and held by many writers) that the
Warble Fly does not follow the cattle over water, consequently that allowing

access to shallow pools is a great preservation from attack :—

The first observation on these points was sent me by Mr. Henry
Thompson, M.R.C.V.8., Aspatria, Cumberland:—‘‘The amount of
warbles on an animal and amount of warbled animals in a herd will
be rather difficult to arrive at, but I would say from fifteen to twenty
warbles on the back of each animal,—-that is, grazing on lands well
sheltered with trees; but where there are good large ponds, and the
animals go into the water and stand during the hottest part of the day,
they are not so rife. From what I can gather, as well as from observa-
tion, I find the Warble Fly will not cross any extent of water.”

June 28th, 1884. ‘During the recent hot weather I have frequently
seen my feeding bullocks suddenly gallop off, with their tails erect, and
rush into the nearest water, where they seem to be less tormented by
the flies.”’—J. B. Scorr, Sutterton Grange, near Spalding.

‘Our cattle do not suffer much, but then we have plenty of
marshy ground close at hand, and a good deal of timber which affords
shade.’’—Prof. W. Fream, College of Agriculture, Downton (1884).

In a communication on warble prevention sent me by Mr. B. St.
John Ackers, of Prinknash, Painswick, he mentioned regarding the
cattle, ‘‘ Those that are in sheds escape entirely with me.”

The following note, sent me by Mr. W. KE. Cattley, Edderton,
Ross-shire, N.B., refers very specially to benefit (with one exception)
from housing cattle as a preventive to attack :—‘‘ A lot of three-year-
old heifers (black polls), which had not been housed last summer
except in bad weather, were all affected. They have now calves at
foot. The short-horn crosses used for the dairy, which had been kept
in at night all the summer, were clear of warbles, except a three-year-
old, which was always in the house at night.”

Whilst I was still resident at Sedbury Park, Gloucestershire, I
have seen our cows going at the swinging trot that shows fly attack
in the exposed pastures, or in the park, but I never saw this in

CAPTURE OF ATTACKING FLY. xli

one field where there was a thick open grove of oaks with a shed
beneath it, within and around which the herd sheltered themselves
and picked the hay which might be strewn about.—Ep.

The following note refers to the above point, and likewise to
housing at night, which may prove important relatively to some of the
(Estrideé being exceedingly lively in the bright moonlight :-—‘‘ I seldom
get any warbles in my own young cattle, and I think from this cause,
—that they have sheds to run under during the summer, and are housed at
night, and have a good feed of cake,’ &c.—H. R. Berry Torr, West-
leigh House, Bideford.

It would be useful if we could have more notes on the above heads,
for if water and tree protection are to be depended on as preventive of
attack something might often be done to give this to the cattle simply
by leaving gates open. It is not a question of making ponds, or
building sheds, or going into expenses, but in many cases of letting
the cattle have the benefit of what exists.

The following communication gives an example of an animal who,
by special circumstances was feeding on tether where most of the herd
were house-fed in hot weather, broke his tether and came straight home
for protection on attack. The Warble Fly itself is seldom captured,
but I was fortunate enough in the summer of 1887 to have two speci-
mens sent to me by Mr. W.S. Richards, of Rathturret, Warrenpoint,
Co. Down, Ireland. The first was forwarded
on the 80th of June, with the observation :—
‘It seems that when the cattle hear it in the
air they are off. It does not seem to do more
than rest on the cattle for less than a second.
My cows are docile; I can stand near them Gee ee ee
and watch. Bees of different kinds they took no Fig, 5, p. 1 (repeated
notice of, but knew the hum of this insect.” On ae trouble in re-
the 17th of August Mr. Richards sent me the
second very beautiful specimen, which was quite soft and uninjured
when I received it. From the downy appearance the insect looked
exceedingly like a good-sized bee (only with one instead of two pairs
of wings), and the biack band across the body between the wings, with
a yellowish band before it, also the blackish band across the abdomen,
and orange colour at the tip showed well (see figure, p. 1). Mr.
Richards wrote accompanying, after alluding to my previous letter on
Ox Warble Fly. ‘We have been since trying to catch some more,
and, though we had several chases, only were able to get one this

MHGEMIN, sw This one flew at the legs and flanks of a young
Guernsey bull; he broke tether and came home, the fly still at him;
we got them both. ..... All my cattle are on tethers, and house-

fed by day in hot weather, excepting six before mentioned’’ (referred

xlii WARBLE FLY.

to in Mr. Richards’ letter), ‘‘ which I had no room for and could not
then sell.”

It is worth remark, that where the cattle were from necessary
circumstances, as above mentioned, more exposed to attack, the fly was
so much more noticeable as to allow having several chases and two
captures, and it was also mentioned that the few cattle that were free
were so maddened by the fly as to leap a parapet wall for the purpose
of getting into water, and continued swimming about in a reservoir nine
feet deep, with their own good will, to avoid attack.

Summer Attack.

About four weeks after the maggots have been noticed leaving the backs of
the cattle the summer attack from Warble I*ly may be expected to begin, and
to be great or small in amount according to the number of maggots which
were allowed to live.

In the following notes of applications or treatment of the animals,
which have been found to prevent attack, it will be seen that there are
a few special points acted on. These are—Ist, applying miatures of
such ‘a strong smell as may be obnoxious to the fly and overpower the
attraction of the smell of the animal; 2nd, applications which would stick
the fly fast or kill the egg; 3rd, washes which womld clear off the eggs or
destroy them tf laid on the skin, or kill the grub whilst near the surface ;
4th, protection afferded to cattle by being housed at egg-laying time.

‘«« Respecting the application of anything to prevent the Warble Fly
depositing the eggs, there are a number of matters of a tarry nature
that might be appled, and nothing better than Stockholm or green
tar itself rubbed along the cows’ backs before turning them out, which
would last all the summer season, or applied in May or June between
the top of the shoulder-blade and loins. This is the only part the cow
cannot lick, rub, or lash with the tail; hence the only peaceable place
where the fly can leave its egg. Or sheep-salve (bad butter and tar
mixed with sulphur). About two applications would last a full season.
Or the application of brine and the mixture I have already given you.
Paraffin, kerosine, carbolic acid, phenyle, &c., are all too transient to
be of much service, and would have to be applied frequently.”—H.
Tompson, M.R.C.Y.8., Aspatria (1884).

Mr. Thompson further noted that he had been told it was a common
practice to wash the cows’ backs with pickling brine, the application
being used two or three times during the season. In this part large
farmers keep what is called the pickling-tub, wherein they put beef
and mutton; the brine is made with salt and water, salt being added
till an egg will float. This is an old remedy, and I think a good one,
as I think the ova would be destroyed immediately it was placed in
the skin.

DRESSINGS TO PREVENT ATTACK. xhii

‘‘T have used and also recommend the following mixtures as a
preventive :—Flour of sulphur, 4 0z.; spirits of tar, 1 gill; train
(whale) oil, 1 quart. Mix well together, and apply along the spine of
the cow once a week with a small brush. The smell drives off the
flies, and prevents them depositing their eggs, and the cattle are left
at peace to graze, and warbles thus prevented.””—Hrnry Tompson,
Aspatria. :

‘‘T venture to give my experience of many years. If cattle that
are turned out into the fields (those that are in sheds escape entirely
with me) are rubbed all down the spine with train oil, and a little also
on the loins and ribs, they will be free from this pest, have their
hides uninjured, will do much better, and will graze quietly at the
time that others not so treated are tearing about with their tails in
the air.

“Two or three dressings I generally find enough, but much
depends on the season and the thickness of the ‘coat.’’’—B. Sr. Joun
Acxers, Prinknash Park, Painswick.

‘“‘T should have written you before as to the effect of dressing for
fly, but thought I would wait and make quite sure as to the results.
I prepared mixture as you recommended, id est, 4 oz. flower of sulphur,
1 gill spirits of tar, and 1 quart of train oil, and applied the same to
sixteen beasts. The effect was very marked; previously they had been
galloping about all the day, continually getting out of the field and
giving much trouble thereby; since not one of them has got out, and
the men who were making hay in adjoining fields, and had full oppor-
tunity of watching them, tell me that since being dressed they have
scarcely run about at all. I have since applied the same mixture to the
whole of the beasts on my farm, and am so well satisfied with this
application that I have not tried either of the other receipts.”--H. J.
Hitrarp, Helland, North Curry, Taunton.

‘‘T am glad to say my cattle have to my knowledge only once been
disturbed through this very hot weather. I have dressed this year
with sulphur and train oil, which I see you recommended.’—W.
Davinson, Lower Green, Acton, Northwich.

“T had each cow dusted along the back with sulphur. ‘The result
is that only two cows had one solitary deposit each; the others were
perfectly free, whilst there are several on the backs of their calves.
To those deposits I have used carbolic acid mixed with hog’s lard, in
the proportion of one to twenty, with excellent effect.”—T. Ducxuay,
Baysham Court, Ross.

‘‘T promised to write you again regarding dressing cattle against
the Warble Fly. My experience at present is that they lie much
quieter in the fields, and appear far more contented, after being dressed
than without. I dressed them with MeDougall’s Smear, and then

xliv WARBLE FLY.

powdered them over with flour of sulphur.’”’—T. Rocrrs, The Homme,
Dilwyn, Leominster.

“As a preventative from attack we rubbed a quantity of dry
sulphur upon the back of our dairy cattle, from the shoulder to hip on
each side of the spine, and a little on the brisket. We believe the
sulphur had the desired effect, as our cattle were quiet in their
pastures, while I could see some herds near were much tormented.
The dressing was repeated frequently ; the brisket was dressed to keep
the Gad Fly away. We used sulphur as being free from smell, and
not liable to taint the milk.’---Davip Byrp, Tarporley, Cheshire.

‘‘For many years I have used a weak solution of McDougall’s
sheep-dip, and have found it keep my grazing cattle perfectly quiet in
the hottest day. We drive the cattle to a corner and keep them
jammed close together by the dog, whilst the man sprinkles them with
a common garden watering-pot with a rose on the spout. This is
done every week if the weather is wet, otherwise about every ten
days.’’-—-H. Linpsay Carnecin, Kinblethmont, Arbroath, Nov. 18.

On looking over the preventatives for attack, the sulphur, or
sulphur, tar, and train oil, mixtures appear to be most approved; but
the frequent mention that where the warble-maggots had been de-
stroyed the herds rested at peace is a matter that calls for careful
consideration. I give only a few words on this here, as the subject
occurs further on under heading of remedial measures. But in a
communication from Mr. Stratton, of The Duffryn, Newport, in 1884,
he mentioned:—‘ . . . Here, where I had all the warbles destroyed,
I have observed only one animal running from fly so far, though in
other years they have suffered badly enough. ‘This looks like the
effect of treatment, and, if so, indicates that the fly does not go far
from its birthplace ”’

The following observation bears on the same subject :——

«Regarding the Ox Bot Fly, I may say that I have had none on
my farm for at least ten years. My cattle are now never seen, with
tails erected, running as fast as their feet can carry them. Purchased
animals generally have these warbles in their backs; these we take
good care to take out by making a small opening with a penknife and
pressing out the worms. Thus we do not have the Bot Fly, neither
does it seem to come from other farms.”—-JoHn Murine, Mains of
Laithers, Turriff, Aberdeenshire.

A few remarks should perhaps here be given on the Ox Gad Fly,
Tabanus bovinus, as, although this insect differs in every point as of
size, appearance, and habits, in all its stages from the Warble Fly, its
attacks cause severe pain, and in neighbourhoods frequented by the

OX GAD FLY. xly

fly, the galloping of the cattle is as bad from this cause as from
Warble Fly presence.

The Ox Gad Fly, figured below, life size, is very much larger than
the Warble Fly, and is mostly brown or bees-wax colour; the abdomen
handsomely banded across with alternate brown and tawny yellow.
This fly does mischief by piercing into the hide with the sharp knife-
or lancet-like apparatus, enclosed in its proboscis, possessed by the
female, and sucking away the blood. This is a great distinction

Tabanus bovinus, “‘ Ox Gad Fly’’; side view, showing proboscis.

between the Gad Fly and the Warble Fly, which has nothing that can
be called a feeding-mouth.

The two kinds of flies differ also in their early stages. The maggot
of the Gad Fly never lives in the hides of cattle. It lives in the ground,
something in the manner of the Daddy Longlegs grub, and, somewhat
similarly, is long and cylindrical, and it has a shining brown elongated
head. The chrysalis is long and somewhat cylindrical, and both in
development and pupation these Gad Flies resemble the Daddy Long-
legs. The buzz of this great fly is described as a kind of heavy,
droning, intense noise, easily known when it has once been heard.

I believe this fly not to be very common in England, and I have
only rarely received specimens; but it is sometimes greatly confused
with the Warble Fly, without the slightest regard to its very name
showing the difference of possession of the ‘‘mouth-gads,” or prickers,
which are such a clear distinction, and therefore it seems desirable to
mention it.

As far as we are aware, the same deterrent dressings which are
useful against the Warble Fly serve equally well against this Gad Fly.
Tt will be observed that in the remarks by Mr. David Byrd, at p. 44,
he mentions, ‘“‘ The brisket was dressed to keep the Gad Fly away.”

xlvi WARBLE FLY.

METHODS OF DESTROYING THE WARBLE-MAGGOT IN THE HIpE.

When the warble-swelling has ‘“ ripened,” as it is called (that is,
has opened so that the two black specks at the end of the tail of the
maggot are visible), then it ean be destroyed easily and cheaply by so
many kinds of applications, or kinds of treatment, that it is difficult
to arrange them in some sort of order for reference.

Where the maggot can be squeezed out, this is probably the very
best plan of all. The grub is thus cleared out bodily,—quite got rid
of,—the filthy fluid in the hole oozes out, the cavity draws together in
somewhere about three weeks (where we have the date of healing
given), and, excepting that the false skin (see p. 18) remains for a
while in the opening, and that there will always be more or less of a
scar or injured condition of the spot, the work is complete. But it is
not always possible to manage this squeezing out; the maggot may
not be advanced enough to come away, and later on, where attack is
bad, the back may be too sore to bear handling.

For such conditions, dressings or applications to the entrance-hole
of the warble are needed, and all that is wanted is something that will
stifle the maggot by choking up the breathing-pores at the end of its
tail, or that will poison it by running down into the warble-cell where
the maggot is lymg mouth-end downward, and, mixing with the fluid
which it sucks in, thus poison it.

Amongst the many applications of which we have notes of success
on sound authority, I think the only really poisonous one advised is
mercurial ointment, and observations have been sent in, of which
several are given below, of the safe and successful use of mercurial
ointment for killing the maggot in the warble from various cattle-
owners and others who have used it up to the amount of application
to 250 head in a herd of 800 cattle.

In these cases the ointment has been used in the manner I have
always most carefully advised, namely, only as a small touch on the
opening of the warble. By no means as a large dab, nor as a smear,
nor (where warbles were gradually appearing or were numerous)
as an application to be made repeatedly over a large surface of warbled
hide.*

The first communication on this subject was sent me from Mr. R.
Stratton, of The Duffryn, Newport, Mon., on April 11th, 1884, with a
few remarks on some other remedies :—

‘‘T have treated Some warbles with acetic acid, some with tar, and

* Only one instance has ever been reported to me of ill effects, and in this case
the ointment was not applied according to directions, but the animal, which was
suffering to a quite unusual extent from warbles, was smeared along from head to
tail. Details, comments, and opinions thereon will be found in the ‘ Agricultural
Gazette,’ Nos. 598, 599, and 601 (1885).

MERCURIAL OINTMENT. xlvii

some with mercurial ointment; I have not the slightest doubt but that
all will be effectual. I am satisfied there will be no difficulty in killing
the grub with any one of fifty simple remedies.”’

About a week later Mr. Stratton added :—-—‘‘I treated others with
mercurial ointment (such as is used for scab in sheep); the effect of
this is very remarkable, for in a couple of days after the application
the grub appears to be quite decomposed ; and I am persuaded that no
remedy can be more safe, simple, and effectual than this. It would
not cost twopence a head to treat all the cattle in the country in
this way.

‘Tt is quite easy to destroy the grub by a stab, but the cattle
object to it; it appears to hurt them almost as much as a puncture
through the skin. The objection to the scalpel, &c., is that when you
treat an animal for this attack all the grubs are not in the same stage,
and some have no orifice developed, or only a small one, through
which it would be difficult to make an insertion; whereas, whether
visible or not, a little of the ointment rubbed in would destroy the
erub effectually.

‘Tar had the desired effect in every case but one, and in that I
think the hair kept it from the opening. Acetic acid was perfectly effec-
tive.’’--R. Srrarron, The Duffryn, Newport, Mon.

Other notes of approval of the application were sent in, from which
I have chosen the following, as being from large cattle-owners, or, in
the first instance, from Professor Riley, who has given special study,
practical as well as scientific, to warble-treatment :—

“In America it has been found that a little mercurial ointment
applied to the swellings in autumn acts very well in killing the young
Hypoderma larva, but the simpler and equally effectual way is to rub
the back and sides, and especially the back, with pure kerosine oil.’ —
Prof. C. V. Rinny, Consulting Entomologist, Department of Agriculture,
Washington, U.S.A.

“The smallest quantity of mercurial ointment (as much as a small
pea) placed on the hole in the skin carries death within twenty-four
hours. After applying the ointment to about forty-five cows, I cannot
tell exactly the numbers that were in the cows’ backs, but my im-
pression is that there were seldom more than six in one beast.’’— EK. E.
McBrinz, Glendonagh, Middleton, Co. Cork.

“June 10th, 1885. Resulting from your advice, I have within
two months dressed about 250 head of cattle out of 800 with mercurial
ointment for warble-maggots with speedy and complete success, and
without any bad effect whatever. My herdsmen all now swear by your
remedy ; but I think at a very early period in spring, dressing down
the backbone with sulphur might be a great prevention also.” — J. A.
FaprEwi, Esq., D.L., Moynalty, Kells, Co. Meath, Ireland,

xlvili WARBLE FLY,

‘We put the mercurial ointment on to the swellings this year,
and I was much pleased with the effect, as the cattle were certainly
much smoother than last year.’’— Colonel G. Coussmaxer, Westwood,
Guildford.

‘‘T have used the mercurial ointment on several beasts, and in
most instances the grub has been killed. Iam going to dress again
the lumps where there seems to be a grub alive.””’—Hon. Crcm Parker,
Eaton Estate Office, Eccleston, Chester.

‘‘ After reading Miss Ormerod’s pamphlet on the subject, I sent for
some mercurial omtment, both blue and yellow, and got the bailiff to
apply it at once, as most of our cattle were infested with warbles.
This he did by putting a small quantity sufficient to cover each hole,
and slightly rubbing it in, and I believe in every case it had the
desired effect. It either choked or poisoned the maggots, for on
pressing the warbles a few days afterwards it was evident they were
killed and decomposed, as nothing but a yellowish matter came from
the sores. Both ointments appeared equally efficacious, and no harm
resulted to the cattle from its use. I intend to renew the treatment
next year.” —T. A. Surron, Yew Tree Farm, Tarporley, Cheshire.

To the above I venture to add some parts of a letter by Dr. G.
Fleming, which he was good enough to write me on my laying the details
of the case above alluded to before him, and also permitted me to give
in the ‘Agricultural Gazette’ (see reference in note, p. 46).

‘With regard to the cases of supposed poisoning of cattle in Corn-
wall, I cannot understand how such an accident could happen, unless
your instructions were ignored, and the animals were smeared and
rubbed with a large quantity of the ointment.” ... ‘“* You recommend
destroying the maggot of the Warble Fly by just touching it with a little
mercurial ointment, such as is used for scab in sheep... .”’

Dr. Fleming went into all the points seriatim of the illness and
death of the animal, which was ascribed to treatment with mercurial
ointment, giving details as to amount and effects of action of mercurial
ointment, all which will be found in ‘ Agricultural Gazette,’ as referred
to; and ended the long consideration he was so good as to place in my
hands with this sentence :—‘‘I am confident that no ill-effects can
arise if your directions are followed with anything like ordinary care.”’
—G. Fiemine, LL.D., F.R.C.V.S.

If used under proper superintendence, and according to direction,
mercurial ointment is a safe and serviceable remedy; but, seeing the
liability there is to carelessness and misunderstanding in the matter, in
my later leaflets on Warble Fly I have only slightly alluded to the
application, thus :——‘‘ Mercurial ointment answers, if carefully used—
that is, in very small quantity, and only applied once as a small touch
on the warble; but where there is any risk of careless application it
ghould not be used.”

om,

APPLICATIONS. xlix

Where cattle are suffering badly from warbles, so that the health is
clearly affected, and the animal wasting, the use of the well-known old
** black oils” has been found to do much good.

Mr. Henry Thompson, M.R.C.V.S., of Aspatria, Cumberland, gives
the following recipe used for a bad case :—

“‘Tast year about this time I was called in to a little three-year-
old heifer whose back was almost covered with warbles, and the effect
on the constitution was very marked; the poor thing was very thin,
and would not eat. I was satisfied that the irritation set up by the
warbles was the cause, and applied the following :—Turpentine, 1} 0z.;
sulphuric acid, 1 drachm (here a chemical action takes place, and it
must be done with caution). To this I added 10 oz. raw linseed-oil,
and rubbed the cow’s back once a day with the mixture.

“Tn a fortnight the back was cleaned, and all the maggots de-
stroyed.”” — Henry Tompson, M.R.C.V.S., Aspatria, Cumberland,
April 11th, 1887.

Where neither proper advice nor more elaborate applications are at
hand, lard or rancid butter, mixed with a little sulphur, or cart-grease
(if not of too strong a kind), also mixed with a little sulphur, have
been found to succeed well; and, as shown in the following observa-
tion, the butter or lard will answer well in very bad cases, by being
soothing in effect, as well as destructive to the maggot, and this, as
will be seen, safely and satisfactorily in about the most ignorant and
untrustworthy hands that could be found.

In 1885 a communication was sent me by Mr. P. M‘Hale Greer,
Ballycastle, Co. Mayo, Ireland, to the effect that when the cattle were
severely affected by warbles, it was a common practice to take them to
the charmers, who in some way or other killed the maggots :—

‘“‘Tn the barren and bleak districts of West Connaught, exposed to
the searching rays of the sun, and without stream or pond, tree or
bush, to afford coolness or shade, the hardy mountain cattle suffer to
an alarming extent from the ravages of the Warble Fly when laying
its eggs. The tract of country through which some of these poor
animals career is often surprising. It extends to miles, and eventually
causes their owners no little trouble and expense to bring them back
again. The injury done to the animals themselves from exhaustion
during the summer, and from irritation in the winter, is so great that
many a strong and healthy animal becomes languid, unable to eat, and

‘unable consequently to thrive. These cattle have not been properly
housed, and oftener than not half-fed, and the warble-maggot develops
with extraordinary rapidity and to a large size. The larger the
maggot grows the more pus it requires for its support, so that, what
with insufficient food and the great annoyance caused, the cow becomes
_a fit subject for the ‘charmer’ and her spells. She is generally an
d

1 WARBLE FLY.

old woman, and the methods of procedure are very simple. When she
enters the stable of the sick cow she calls for some butter or lard.
After it has been placed before her she prays for a time to some spirit
(that I wot not of, nor could I find out). After the spirit of de-
struction is exorcised she takes the butter, and gently covers the
breathing aperture of the maggot and crosses it. The result of all
this is that the maggots die, and fall, or are easily picked out, without
causing the least pain. I know not what good the incantations of the
‘charmer’ may have exercised, but a little butter or lard, and I
should say a small quantity of sulphur (I believe the ‘charmers’ use
sulphur), laid on as we have seen, will leave a warble-less hide.”—
P. M‘Hate Greer.

As the ‘“‘charmers”’ require a good sum for their services, I felt
sure that the remedy must be one that acted, as well as something
very simple, and therefore obtained a quiet investigation, with the
above results.

Lard and butter answer well as being soothing, in addition to their
direct effect in killing the maggot, and so does “ cart-grease,”’ if there
are no irritating ingredients in it; but some of the mixtures sold under
this or similar names, as ‘‘axle-grease”’ or ‘railway grease,” are too
irritating in their action to be safely applied excepting with care, and
(till the action is known) watching as to effects.

The above applications are especially useful in their different ways
where the back is too tender to be touched; but lard or rancid butter
is not always at hand, and for regular work the smears and dips, of
which so many kinds are furnished by many well-known firms, are
the most commonly used.

Destruction of warble-maggots by application of smears or dressings or
washes.—It should be carefully kept before the minds of herdsmen, with
regard both to dressings to keep fly off and to destroy maggots, that—
though the effect of some kinds lasts a long time-—it is often almost
waste money just to run the animal over with some wash of which the
effect soon goes off.

The number of kinds of dressings that will answer the purpose are
endless. All that is needed is that the grease or mixture should be
thick enough, and tenacious enough, for a little ‘‘dab”’ of it, when
placed on the opening of the warble, to adhere firmly, and thus choke
the maggot by preventing it drawing in air through the breathing-
apparatus in the two black spots at the end of the tail, which may
usually be seen in the opening of the warble-swelling.* If, besides
the above, anything can be added to the application having a scent
likely to deter attack, it is all the better.

* This of course does not apply to washes of brine, which are sometimes very
useful,

APPLICATIONS, li

In the following notes observations have been chosen from great
numbers, just to show the variety of applications that answer, and
that various firms furnish them; but readers will please observe that
this is without prejudice of others, whose manufactures, so long as
the above-mentioned conditions of the dressing were held to, and
due care exercised in applying them, could not fail to have good
effects.

The following observations, with which I was favoured on June
5th, by Mr. Gerard Meynell (of the Norfolk Estuary Company), writing
from 20, Whitehall Place, London, 8.W., refer to the successful uge of
Calvert’s carbolic sheep-wash for destroying warble-maggot :—

‘‘ For some years past the sheep on this Company’s farm at Lynn
have been dipped in a solution of Messrs. F. C. Calvert & Co.’s carbolic
sheep-wash,—80 to 100 of water to 1 of the carbolic wash supplied,—
which has effectually kept them free from all scab, lice, ticks, fleas,
&e. Last week I examined the Company’s herd, and found some of
them affected with warbles. I had a somewhat stronger solution of
the carbolic sheep-wash applied to the parts affected. On the following
day all the warbles appeared to be dead; the more mature ones
certainly were so”’ (1888, as also the three following notes).

Mr. J. Stewart Peter, of Calley, Bridge of Calley, Perthshire, on
June 20th, sent me the following note, suggestive of dilute carbolic
acid being in some cases better than greasy applications :—

‘‘T have dressed a number of short-horn crosses as directed, and
feel sure that they will derive great benefit from it. I rather object to
dressing my West Highlanders, though, with an oily or greasy mixture,
as it will mat their shaggy hair, and prejudice the English buyers
against them when they come north in November. I think for them
carbolic acid and water ought to suffice.”

The two following observations refer to successful use of ointment
prepared by the Dee Oil Company, Chester. The first was forwarded
to me by Sir James T. Stewart Richardson, Bart., of Pitfour Castle,
Perth, N.B. :—

‘“‘T have been trying a new warble ointment this summer, from
the Dee Oil Company, Chester, and the effect on the maggots in the
warbles was marvellous, and I am now dressing all my cattle to pre-
vent the fly striking next month.”

Miss Lyle Smith, writing from Barrowmore Farm, Chester, also
sent the following note :—

‘You may be interested to know that the Dee Oil Company, in
Chester, prepare a kind of grease of which they send samples gratis
to any farmer who will try it. I found it most efficacious, as did algo
a neighbour, who had lost a heifer simply from attack of this creature
[warble-maggot—Ep.] in the spring.”

dQ

hii WARBLE FLY.

The following reports are a few of the observations sent me of
successful use of Messrs. McDougall’s preparations :—

“My cattle have been very much troubled with warbles. The
summer before last, in the end of May, I dressed them with McDougall’s
sheep-dip, repeating the dressing occasionally till the end of August.
The result was most satisfactory, as the newt year they were almost free
from them. I shall in consequence always continue to dress them so.”’
—Joun M. Movsray, Broom Court, Alcester (1886).

‘‘T always notice that bought cattle, and especially those from
Wales and the West Country, are more affected with warbles than our
own. Iam strongly of opinion that the best way of killing the grub
is to rub some unguent on the surface of the lump-hole in spring. An
old friend of mine always used McDougall’s sheep-dip preparation for
this purpose with good effect. This method, of course, leaves the
hide injured by holes. If there is any chance, however, of extermi-
nating the fly, it is a feasible and right method.”—Prof. H. J.
Lirtte.

In 1885, Mr. David Byrd, writing from Spurstow Hall, Tarporley,
Cheshire, mentioned :—‘‘ I am glad to say that we found McDougall’s
smear effectually killed the warble-grubs. The mode of dressing we
adopted was to shape a piece of wood or stick like a knife-blade with a
point. We searched carefully for the warble-hole, leaving a good
portion of the smear on the warble; this appeared to completely choke
up and kill the maggot. The mode of dressing to kill the warble was
not painful to the cattle; those that were quiet appeared to like the
friction.”

On June 27th, 1888, Mr. Saml. R. Sherwood, of Hazlewood Hall,
Friston, Saxmundham, wrote :—

““T caught all my cattle a few days since and dressed them with
McDougall’s smear for bots, and only wish I had done it before;” and
on the same day Mr. G. Thomas, of Coosenwartha, Scorrier, Cornwall,
wrote that, ‘‘ thanks to the advice and use of preventives, my cattle
are entirely free from warbles, and I shall never allow them to go
undressed again.

‘“‘T found wheel-grease too strong, as it blistered. McDougall’s
dip proved excellent, but it is difficult to procure here as there are no
agents.”

The following note, sent me on July 5th by Mr. John Watson, jun.,
from the Estate Office, Sherburn, near Tetsworth, also mentions
serviceableness of MeDougall’s smear :—

“T have been making use of your advice about warbles with
most satisfactory results. McDougall’s smear is an excellent cure as
well as preventive, and I am sure the trouble and expense is well
repaid by the increase in the animals’ comfort,”’

APPLICATIONS. liii

On June 21st, 1889, Mr. G. F. Street, writing from Maulden,
Ampthill, observed :—‘‘ Warbles are getting quite stamped out now on
our two farms, as for the past three years we have not had on an
average one dozen warbles on from sixty to seventy head of cattle,
mostly young stock. We always use the McDougall’s smear, and find
it a safe remedy.” —G. F. 8.

In a letter from Messrs. J. R. and R. R. Kirkham, of Biscathorpe,
Lincoln, the Warble Fly paste, manufactured by Messrs. Tomlinson
and Hayward, of Lincoln, is mentioned as very efficacious, not only
by preventing the fly striking (if put on in time), but, if this has not
been the case, by killing the maggot. This paste is mentioned as
better than a liquid cure, for it is easier to use, adheres much longer
on the cattle’s back, and is not so easily washed off by the rain (1894).

The following report from Mr. IF. C. Smith, of Clayton Park
Square, Newcastle-on-Tyne, who bestowed much time and trouble on
drawing attention to the subject of warble prevention, was sent me
on June 4th, 1888 :—

“T lately met Mr. James Renton, tenant of North and South
Brackley farms, near Blagdon, to whom I gave a copy of your notes
about a year ago, and who then told me that his stock—numbering
about forty head—were infested with warbles. He forthwith com-
menced to use a dressing* composed of train oil and sulphur, of the
consistence of thick cream, which he applied to the warbles with most
excellent results; and later on, in August, he dressed them with the
same preparation,—over the shoulders, and along the spine, and down
to the hocks.”

He reports that no warbles are upon stock of his own breeding,
although he has had much trouble with Jrish stock brought to fatten
off; and that many of his neighbours are in a bad way with their
stock suffering from warbles, and these people are now going to adopt
the same remedial measures as my informant has proved to be so
effectual.

On June 14th Mr. Ernest Mead, who had communicated with me
before on the subject of warbles, from 1, Western Road, Tring, wrote
as the result of his application of oil and sulphur to the back of cattle
in the previous summer :—

‘As regards some three-year-old bullocks that were dressed, I have
kept some of them till quite recently. After examining them several
times I have not seen a trace of warble.”

Relatively to the effect of salt in destroying the maggots, Mr. Edw.
Argyle, writing from Tamworth, with the mention that he was an

* Mr. Renton says that a gallon of train oil, costing three shillings, and sulphur,
costing say threepence, was sufficient to dress thirty-two head once,

liv WARBLE FLY.

amateur breeder and keeper of stock, noted ag a report of the success
of his treatment in 1889 :—‘‘I am glad to say that I believe the fly
has not been anything like so troublesome about here this season as it
has usually been. I have never seen my cattle at all distressed by it.
I may mention that I have employed common salt for the destruction
of the grub this season with good results. I bought some young
cattle of very nice quality in the early summer; they were terribly
infested with grubs. I had their backs damped, and salt well rubbed
in, and this was repeated about a week later. The result was that
every grub was destroyed.”

Very many other dressings have been duly recorded as found to
answer; but in looking over the United States returns I do not find
that there is any dressing or treatment better than ours, unless it
may be a greater use of salt and water, or brine, for washing the coats
of the animals. This is an old-fashioned but apparently very good
preventive measure, which is noted by Mr. Henry Thompson as used
in the North of England, and the application of it by rubbing it well
on with a wisp of straw (as mentioned by one of the U.S.A. reporters)
would probably be very serviceable in removing eggs; and getting the
wash thoroughly in amongst the hair, and well down into the minute
hair-like channels through the hide, at the bottom of which we find
the maggot in the very earliest stage at which the infestation is easily
observable.

In the foregoing pages observations are given of various easy
methods of destroying the Warble Fly maggot by stifling it in its cell,
poisoning it, &c.; but there is yet another method which, when
circumstances allow (such as condition of the hide, and open state of
warble), is probably the best of all, namely, squeezing out the maggot,
and thus getting entirely rid of it at once.

This requires no outlay in mixtures, no trouble in looking them
up, and careful application of them when needed, but is what may be
done by any man or boy on the farm, and which commonly (especially
in the case of the boys) they enjoy doing. Where care is bestowed on
the subject, squeezing out may usefully follow on killing by smears, &c.,
in the hide, and healing up happen sooner, and also there will be
proof that the work was thoroughly done.

During the whole course of our ten years’ work we have been kept
constantly aware of the success of the plan acted on (that is, destroying
in the maggot form) preventing recurrence of attack. It is obvious
indeed that if it had not answered, the plan would not have been gone
on with, and in the preceding pages reports of the success of this have
been given; but I just add a few below, received in 1889 (taken from
many others), regarding benefit obtained.

The following note, with which I was favoured on September 21st

GOOD RESULTS OF TREATMENT. ly

by the Hon. Cecil Parker, from the Eaton Estate Office, Eccleston,
Chester, also mentions the attack having been nearly got rid of :—
«T am quite sure that more notice has been taken of the means of
destroying the warble. As far as our own cattle are concerned, we
have nearly exterminated them by killing the maggot in the beast, and
also by smearing the backs of the stock twice in the season. If the
farmers could be persuaded that they lose money,—in cows by the
milk getting less, and by the beasts losing flesh,—they would take
more interest’ (1889, as also three following notes).

Sir J. Stewart Richardson, Bart., of Pitfour Castle, Perth, N.B.,
writing on September 24th, similarly mentioned benefit following the
care taken :—‘‘ For the last three years I have been waging war
against the warble-pest, and think I have done a good deal to alleviate
the sufferings of my cattle, and the result is that I have nothing to
complain of as to the way they have fed.”

In September last, Mr. J. Risdon, Auctioneer of the Devon Cattle
Breeders’ Society, writing from Golsoncott Farm, near Taunton,
mentioned that last spring he had all the animals in his own herd
dressed with sulphur and lard, which, he believed, killed every maggot
in their skins. He further added:—‘‘ There are many farmers who
at first regarded the Warble Fly as a mere ‘fad,’ who are now anxious
to use means to relieve their cattle of the pest.” —J. R.

Mr. Henry Thorp Hincks (Auctioneer), Silver Street, Leicester,
wrote on April 9th, with regard to success of preventive measures :—
“ Out of a herd of over seventy head dressed last year for warbles, this
season one cow only has one warble upon it.” —H. T. H.

These show success in the special localities reported from; but the
manner in which, by steady quiet attention, the warble-presence in
the cattle-farming district round Bunbury and Tarporley was reduced
from its enormous prevalence a few years ago down to the result of
most careful search only bringing in twenty maggots, is a very
important record.

This has been the work of the boys of the Aldersey Grammar School at
Bunbury, Tarporley, Cheshire, at first under the suggestion and instruc-
tion of the Head Master, Mr. W. Bailey, but now continued also from
the benefit accruing to the cattle and thence to their owners.

The majority of the boys of the school are sons of farmers, and
the returns therefore show the benefit of the treatment, whether on
the broad scale of the many head of cattle owned by tenants of large
farms under the Duke of Westminster or other great land-owners,
or to the one or two cows of a small holder, to whom the health of
his animals is even more important.

We (I can say we, as I had the pleasure of co-operating with Mr.

lvi WARBLE FLY.

Bailey in his work) did not go into scientific points, nor was the work
in any way compulsory. In 1885 the boys were shown the warbles,
told their history, and begged to bring what they could find; amongst
them, one pupil alone brought in 250, and in the following year, when
he examined his father’s and his brother’s stock (numbering 114 head
of cattle), he found no warbles, excepting on young cattle which had not
been dressed because they were out in the fields.

So year by year the work continued. The boys examined the
cattle at the time when the maggots were beginning to be in a state to
remoye, and brought them in to Mr. Bailey, who noted numbers and
details, and gave me the results yearly in tabulated form until the
pest was nearly stamped out. These gave in separate columns the
names of the finders, the number of stock examined,—ranging in the
table before me from a single cow up to eighty-six,—and also the
amount of warbles on cow, calf, or heifers. From these tables and
notes the steady and immediate drop in amount of warble-presence
where care was taken was clearly shown, and also the immediate
running-up of numbers where uncared-for cattle had been brought in,
or from some cause there had been difficulty in giving the necessary
attention.

Relatively to this point, on April 18th, 1887, Mr. Bailey informed
me :—‘ Another lot of boys have examined and reported to me on
250 head of stock. The results agree with those I sent you.

‘* Where the cattle were properly attended to last year by the warble-
maggots being squeezed out, or dressed with McDougall’s smear or
cart-grease, there are scacely any maggots to be seen now; where,
however, this precaution has not been taken, the enemy is to be found
in full force.”

As examples of the former, Mr. Bailey mentioned two of the boys,
who had paid great attention to the matter in the previous year, and
had (at time of report) examined, respectively, one 58, the other 58
cows and heifers; in the first case finding only one warble, in the other
only six.

‘‘On the other side, where remedies had not been applied, two
brothers removed 40 maggots this week from one stock, and their task
is not half done; another boy applied McDougall’s smear to 70
warble-maggots.

‘It is not only on our large farms where so much energy is being
shown in an effort to stamp out this pest, but the sons of our cottagers
are equally active in the cause. These boys in a few years will be
our agricultural labourers, and I encourage them to examine and
report to me on their one cow and heifer.

‘‘ Where the stock is free from the pest the boys tell me the cows
are milking unusually well this year.” .... ‘* J have no hesitation in

WORK OF THE ALDERSEY GRAMMAR SCHOOL. lvii

saying that in this parish alone what has been done at your suggestion has
put many pounds into our farmers’ pockets, for their stocks are giving more
milk, and are feeding better. The hides also are worth more money.’—
Web:

I have given the above at length as the work being done under the
eyes of Mr. Bailey, and likewise of Mr. D. Byrd, of Bunbury Heath,
and many of the other farmers of the neighbourhood: it is no mere
fancy or half-proved experiment, but what could be judged of by all
connected with the stock in the district, and it shows not only the
benefit of getting rid of warble-grubs, and the thoroughness with
which they can be cleared out of a district, but the benefit of plain
common-sense instruction on the subject of farm-insect pests.

The work was carried on with the full approbation of the Haber-
dashers’ Company, to which the Aldersey Grammar Schools belong ;
also it was considered so satisfactory that an account of it, written by
Mr. Bailey to His Grace the Duke of Westminster, was read by the
Hon. Cecil Parker before one of the Committees of the Royal Agri-
cultural Society of England in 1887, and recommended for publication ;
and the work since has been equally satisfactory.

The treatment, so far as 1am aware, was wholly either squeezing
out the maggots, or killing them by cart-grease, or application of the
ointments prepared by Messrs. McDougall Brothers, the Dee Oil
Company, Chester, and Jeyes’ Sanitary Compounds Company
(Limited), the effect in the case of all the dressings being very satis-
factory.

Last year (1893) the result of the spring search produced scarcely
any maggots, and in this year Mr. Bailey, writing to me on the 6th of
November (that is, the 6th inst.), reported, in reply to my enquiries,
as follows :—

‘‘The specimens brought to me this season, notwithstanding a
most diligent search, have been so few that I think we may now claim
that, in this parish, the pest is practically stamped out. The total
number of warble-maggots found by the boys did not exceed a score,
although special marks were given for every maggot brought, and the
contest between some of the boys for the prizes which you so kindly
give was very keen.

“Tf you will refer to my report to you in 1889—only five years ago
—you will notice that 577 head of cattle were then examined by the
boys, and that no fewer than 1077 maggots had been squeezed out and
destroyed by them, or killed by the application of smears.” ... ‘‘ The
farmers in this district are fully alive to the importance of this duty.
Stocks are regularly and carefully overlooked, and cattle bought at
fairs or elsewhere are specially examined.’’—W. B.

lviii WARBLE FLY,

During the present year the application to myself for information
regarding special cases of infestation, papers for publication, and for
leaflets has in no way lessened: for, on reference to my letter-book, I
find it began on the 2nd of January, and continued at intervals to the
20th of April. From that date, until the 8th of June, hardly a day
occurred without applications regarding warble, sometimes amounting
to as many as five, eight, or ten per diem; and since then, though not
as frequently, the applications have continued until within a few days
of the date of writing, Nov. 9th.

As many of the applications have been for leaflets for distribution,
it may be hoped that information is gaining ground; and one marked
advance in the past season has been the number of applications from
Ireland, from localities in nearly all the Irish counties. The simple
methods of treatment continue to be approved wherever they are
carried out with any sort of care.

SUMMARY.

The information in the preceding abstract is almost entirely taken
from reports sent me from British and Irish observers, and colleagues
in the work, and published in my Annual Reports on Injurious Insects
from the year 1884 to 1890 inclusive. Of these the first—that for
1884—deals with as much of the history of the infestation and means
of prevention as could then be collected. The second (of 1885),
besides what may be called the notes of practical treatment given in
all the Reports, contains hide returns from Birmingham, and figures
and notes of the anatomical structure of the maggot by myself. In
1886 some observations on horse-warble were also given. Losses on
hides are especially entered on in returns from hide and cattle firms
in 1888; and in 1889 the damage known as “licked beef’’ is more
especially entered on. In the Report for 1890 various good notes were
given of loss from ‘licked beef,” diminished amount of Warble Fly-
presence where the cattle had access to water, and other points con-
firming previous observations; and in 1891, as it appeared unnecessary
to go over the information yearly, I only gave a short abstract of the
work.*

Through all these years, up to the present date of writing, the
work of reply to enquiries had been carried on and (since their issue)
the leaflets, giving in short serviceable form the main points of history
of attack and well-proved means for its prevention and remedy, distri-

* See Annual Reports on Injurious Insects for years named, price 1s. 6d. each,
published by Messrs. Simipkin, Marshall & Co., Stationers’ Hall Court, London,
E.C. Also (same publishers), ‘ Warble Fly’: Special Reports (from ‘ Reports on
Injurious Insects’ for 1884, 1888, and 1889). Royal 8vo, price 3d.; 2s. 6d. per
dozen; 16s. per 100. References to U.S.A. Board of Agriculture publications are
given, with passages quoted.

SUMMARY. lix

buted to all applicants. This has been mostly gratuitously, at my own
wish and request, though not entirely so. As 133,000 of the four-page
warble leaflet have been distributed, and about 25,000 of the longer
leaflet entitled ‘ Licked Beef,’ and as those who were good enough to
help our important cause by undertaking distribution of large numbers
had all the trouble and postal expenses, I declined wherever I could to
receive payment.

In this present abstract, which I have now the honour of laying
before my readers, I have endeavoured so to arrange the main points
of the information collected in our many years’ work as to form a
connected account, beginning with egg and egg-laying of the Warble
Fly, and working on through its life-history and habits, and structural
details of the maggot (by which it lies in our power to destroy it), up
to its complete development; then to continue with the sometimes
ruinous and constantly injurious effects of the attack to health and
produce and return to grower and purchaser of the infested animals,
giving under these heads the result of special investigations as to
‘‘ licked beef,” and also special returns regarding losses on hides. To
this is added, at considerable length, details of measures of prevention
and remedy, and also result of the same in getting rid of the pest, not
only locally, but, as in the case of our carefully watched work at Bun-
bury and Tarporley, Cheshire, over a whole district.

In this I have endeavoured with the greatest care to do justice to
the importance of the subject, and it will be seen that I have carefully
avoided giving general views and considerations that may or may not
be right, but have as far as possible given each observation in the
contributor’s own words, with the name appended. Very much more
could be given from my Reports—because for several years we went
over the same ground—especially of means of prevention and remedy,
that by the evidence of so many witnesses, giving their separate testimony
in their own words, the fact which we were working up to of the
possibility of certainly and cheaply stamping out warble-attack might
be made sure. Those who wish to go over the many repeated details
will find them in the Reports referred to at p. 58; but in this
pamphlet I have taken those standing on the highest authority, and
I think those who will look at the high standing of the names of those
leading men and leading firms who have given their help in the
different branches of this national investigation, will think we need
not fear to go far astray.

One thing I do greatly fear, and that is mischief from erroneous
advice of those who, whilst they have neither practical nor scientific
knowledge of the attack or its cure, yet unfortunately may, by their
attempts to institute unfounded methods of treatment, put back our
good work. J would most earnestly beg all interested to be on their guard.

Ix WARBLE FLY.

What can be done to induce farmers to pay greater attention to
warble extirpation is a problem very difficult to solve, but personally I
put great confidence in the simple measure of dissemination of plain
and true information. It has only been in the last few years that
sound practical knowledge has been attainable for general agricultural
use on warble matters, and now it is equally as certain that the
information is doing good in many places as it is that the subject is
by no means receiving the general attention it deserves.

Whilst these observations were going to press I was favoured, in
the course of communication with Mr. W. H. Hill, President of the
Sheffield Butchers’ Association (and from whom I have received at
various times valuable information), with the following remark, which
unfortunately describes the state of things only too truly :—

‘‘T have often discussed the matter with farmers, but as a class,
whilst admitting the evil, and further admitting it is expensive to
cure and simple of treatment, yet it is ‘too much trouble,’ or ‘cattle
always were so affected,’ or ‘they are too busy with other things’;
with the result that, whilst agriculture is, in their opinion, going to
the dogs, and the bulk of them, they say, on the verge of bankruptcy,
yet they, taking farmers as a whole, are rich enough to throw away
several million pounds yearly in the reduced value of their cattle due
to this pest.” —W. H. H.

The matter seems to stand something in this way. On the farms
this attack, unless in its fully-developed state, and to an unusual
extent, is often what may be called a ‘‘ hidden evil.” From ignorance
and idleness and utter carelessness, even when the beasts are sickened
with it, the cause is often overlooked. But how this can be met by any
outside influence is the difficulty. ‘‘ Inspection” is sometimes spoken
of, but it is not clear how this could be brought to bear on an attack
of this sort, where the presence of the warbles may very likely indeed
not be observable all at one time, even on one beast, much less on all
through a district, but may show gradually, according to date of egg-
laying and circumstances of treatment, as in- or out-of-doors feeding
of the animal, &ce.

The point where it appeals to me (under correction of those who
understand the bearings of the case far better than myself) 1s, with
regard to badly-warbled beasts sold for slaughter, whether, so far as
direct losses to butchers go from ‘licked beef,’ 7. e., state of carcase
and coincident bad state of hide, something might not be done by
inspection. It need not‘be ‘‘ governmental.’’ In this sense most of us,
I believe, would quite endorse Mr. Hill’s remark now before me, ‘I
am afraid ‘inspectors’ would be a nuisance, for we have too much red
tape as it is’’; butif the butchers could be spirited up to inspect the
animals thoroughly themselves before purchase, or to employ a man to

SUMMARY. lxi

examine them, this would meet part of the trouble. If he did not
know his work they would discharge him; and if he did, his wages
would, divided as an outgoing payment from the body of his employers,
be a great saving to them.

This would not meet the loss on hide from former injury ; it would
not meet the losses from coming-on injury; again quoting Mr. Hill’s
letter to me of the 18th inst. on these points :—‘‘ A warbled hide
THIS year will bear signs, and is damaged by the result of tasr year,
even when externally nothing could be detected. So, when the
maggots are small, or have left their cells, the damage is still there,
but by casual inspection not so easily discernible” (W.H.H.). But
it would do something.

The great loss from ‘licked beef’ and ‘jelly’ ranges, of course,
with the height of the warble-season. After that is over there is not
the same need for care (see remarks by Mr. John Child, Manager of
the Leeds and District Hide, &., Co., at pp. 20, 21). Therefore, the
expense of examination for this part of the trouble would be only for
a portion of the year. Some butchers are well aware of the bearing
of the matter, some obviously not; and if all could be got to be on the
alert, even about this one part when the attack is obvious to moderate
examination, it would do something towards saving loss.

At present we seem to be just in the condition described by Prof.
Riley, the late Entomologist of the Department of Agriculture of the
U.S. A., when, after the widespread American investigation in 1889,
he was requested to take up the question officially. After some
observations on the bearing of the subject, in which he greatly
noticed our British observations and recommendations, he said he
considered there was little to be done, excepting continuing the enquiry
on statistical lines similar to those which had been already followed by
the investigators; also, that even admitting that some more careful
observations might be made on one or two points, that ‘these are
points of biologic interest rather than of economic importance.”
Therefore, as the case stood, Prof. Riley, speaking officially, stated
that, as regarded investigation with a view to fuller statistical informa-
tion, ‘‘we should hardly feel justified in spending time and means
therefor’; . . . and he closed his paper with this sentence :—‘ Being
thoroughly familiar with the stock-interests of the country, we know
how difficult it is to get farmers to care for their stock, so far as
this warble is concerned; and we are satisfied that where self-
interest does not dictate better attention we can do little more than
point out the means of avoiding injury and the desirability of so ©
doing.’ *—C. V. R.

* Insect Life. Periodical Bulletin of U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. Vol. ii. No. 6,
pp. 176, 177.

lxii WARBLE FLY.

This comes very strongly from a man of Prof, Riley’s standing,
who, besides being unsurpassed for sound knowledge of insect-life, can
speak with practical weight as having been a farmer, and for some
years manager of 300 head of stock ; but still it seems at least open to
hope that with the perfect knowledge of the needs and of the state of
the case possessed by our great associations connected with hide and
cattle trade in this country, their thoroughly informed considerations,
and perhaps united action, might lay a basis which would bring about
a much more regulated condition of this great trouble.

ELEANOR A. ORMEROD,
Late Consulting Entomologist of the Royal Agricultural Society.

Torrincton Houser, Sr. ALBans,
Nov, 20th, 1894.

INDEX.

a Se

‘“« Anti-pest,” a serviceable insecticide,
65; as a remedy for Pear-leaf Blister
Mite, 90

Antler Moth, 12—23; infestation of, in
Scotland, 12; life-history of, 13, 14;
localities of appearance of, 15, 16, 20,
21; Thread-worm (Mermis) parasites,
16, 17; ‘‘Flacherie,’? 17—19; para-
sitic flies (Tachinids), 19,21; Laxorista
loti, Preface iv; moths numerous in
autumn, 21; infestation on ground
previously infested by Voles, 22

Aphis, Corn and Grass, 24—27; on grass
near Newcastle-on-Tyne, 24; slight
variation in marking of, 25

Apple, 1—6

Beet Eelworm, found by Prof. Percival
in Hop-roots, 53; description of
female, 57; life-history of, 57; notes
of observation of, 58, 59,—in con-
nection with ‘netile-top’’ growth of
Hops, 54; effect of attack of, on Beet
plants, 59

Black Currant Gall Mite, 92, 93

Black Ladybird, 74

Bryobia pretiosa, 62

Calathus cisteloides, 95
Carrot Ily, 117, 118; soft-soap and
paraffin oil mixture serviceable to
check infestation, 118
Cecidomyia destructor, 33
oe pygmeus, not reported in 1894,
1

Ceutorhynchus contractus (see Charlock
Weevil)

Charlock Weevil, 83—86; at young
Mustard, 83; on older Mustard, 84;
early sown crops suffered, 84

Cherry, 6—12

“Chiswick Compound,”’ serviceable in-
secticide, 69

cee teniopus, present in Barley,

Chrysopa perla, 70

Coccinella ocellata, 72

Corn and Grass, 12—43

Corn Sawfly, not reported in 1894, 41

Currant, 43—47

Currant Clearwing Moth, 43—47; cater-
pillars sent in shoots early in January,
43; history of infestation by Prof. W.

Saunders, 44; observation of cater-
pillar-workings, 44, 45; means of
prevention and remedy, 46, 47

Diamond-back Moth, 98—104; date of
first observations of moth and cater-
pillar of, 98—100; treatment to check,
101; birds useful in destroying, 102 ;
description and life-history of, 103

Eelworms, 47—61

Har-cockles (in Wheat), 48, 49; to pre-
vent infestation of, 48

Eyed Hawk Moth, 1—4

Kyed Ladybird, 72—74; occurrence of,
on Hop, 72; usually frequents Pine
and Fir, 73

False Ergot (see Ear-cockles), 48
Frit Fly, not observed as doing much
mischief, 41

Gall Mites (see Phytoptide), 86

Gastropacha quercifolia, 4

Golden Eye, 70—72; hybernation of, °
71

Gooseberry, 62—70

Gooseberry Red Spider, 62—70; dates
of appearance of, 62; habits of, 64:
Kerosine Emulsion serviceable to de-
stroy, 65,—time of application of, 66;
observations by Dr. Fr. Thomas of
an allied species on Gooseberry in
Germany, 67; moisture observed to
partially stupefy these mites, 68;
various applications useful for de-
stroying the ‘‘ Red Spider,’’ 69; Knap-
sack Pump good for distribution of
spray, 69,—insoluble collars and
washers for, 69

Gout Fly, present in Barley, 41

Grass Moth (see Antler Moth), 12—28

Ground Beetles, 93—97

Harpalus ruficornis (see Ground Bee-
tles), attack on Strawberry fruit by,
94; on Strawberries in Zeeland in
1892, 95

Hay Mites, 27—33; vast numbers in
which they are observed, 28, 29;
found in well-saved hay, 29,—but little
heated, 29, 30; not injurious to stock,
32; sometimes cause coughing, 32

9 INDEX.

Helophorus rugosus=H. fennicus, 104

Hessian Fly, 33—36; little report of
presence in 1894, 34; damage from,
lessened by good growing weather,
35

Heterodera radicicola (see Root-knot
Helworm)

Heterodera schachtii (see Beet Hel-
worm

Hop, 70—75; beneficial insects found,
70—75; EKelworms at Hop-roots, 52
—60

Horse, 75—77

Horse Warble Fly, 75—77; unusually
large number of warbles on mare, 75 ;
horse-hides seldom much warbled,
77

Hypoderma bovis (see Appendix)

», ? Loiseti(see Horse Warble), 75

Hylemyia coarectata (see Wheat-bulb

Maggot), 41

Julide, 78—82
Julus guttatus, J. londinensis, J. ter-
restris, short descriptions of, 78

Kerosine Emulsion, to prepare, 65;
application of it while heated found
serviceable, 65; a good preventive of
Pear-leaf Blister Mite, 91

Knapsack Sprayer, 66

Ladybird Beetles, 72—74
Lappet Moth, 4—6

Mangolds, 78; attacks of Millepedes to,
_ 80,81; Pterostichus madidus at, 96
(2?) Miana expolita, 37
Millepedes, 78—82; colour of various
kinds, 78; at Pea-roots, and in Vine-
borders, 79; at Mangolds, 80, 81
Mites, Gall, 86—93
» Haystack, 27
», Pear-leaf Blister, 86—91
Mud-beetle, Turnip, 104—110 ; method
of maggot-attack, 107—109; infesta-
tion most observed where Turnips
have recently been grown near, 109
Mustard, 83—86

Notodonta camelina,
Apple (note), 3

“ Nettle-top”’ in Hops, in connection
with Eelworm attack at the roots, 52,
59

caterpillar on

(Estrus bovis (see Hypoderma bovis and
Appendix)

Oscinis fril, slight injury from, 41

Ox Bot Fly (see Warble Fly, Appendix)

Ox Gad Fly, Appendix xliv; should not
be confused with Ox Warble Fly, xlv

Pear-leaf Blister Mite, 86—92; descrip-
tion of attack, 87, 88 ; short descrip-
tion of Blister Mite, 89; condition

during winter, 89; Kerosine Emulsion
as a special remedy for, 90; experi-
ments as to use of, in U.S.A., 91

Percival, Prof. J., discovery of Kelworms
in Hop-roots by, 52—54

Phytoptide (Gall Mites), 86

Phytoptus ribis, 92, 93

a3 pyri, 86—92

Plutella cruciferarum, 98

Polydesmus complanatus, 78

Psila rose, 117

Pterostichus madidus, at Strawberry
fruit, 94; at Mangolds, 96

Red Spider, Gooseberry and Ivy, 62

Root-knot Eelworm, 60, 61; females
much resembling those of H. schachtit
in shape, 60; description of gall-
growths formed by, 61

Scymnus minimus, 72

Siphonophora granaria, 24

Smerinthus ocellatus, 1

Smynthurus luteus and §. niger (see
Springtails)

Soft-soap and sulphur compound, ser-
viceable insecticide, 69

Springtails, 110—114; injurious to Tur-
nip-leafage, 111; description of, 113;
“ springing-fork ” of, 113

Stem Eelworm, 49; explanation of
figures of, in Plate, 50,51; dimensions
of, 51; some of the plants attacked
by, 51; discovery of, in Hop-roots by
Prof. Percival, 52—54; observations
on this infestation, 54—56

Strawberry, 93—97; Ground Beetles
injurious to fruit of, 93,—deseriptions
of species of beetles mentioned, 95,—
attack of kind specified on ripe Straw-
berry fruit at locality in the Nether-
lands, 95,—known to be partly vege-
table-feeders, 96

Tabanus bovinus, Appendix xliy

Thrips, Corn, observation regarding, 42

Tortoise-shell Butterfly, Large, 6—12;
caterpillars of, on Cherry, 8—10;
habits of caterpillars, 9; eggs of, 10;
chrysalids of, 10, 11; on Elm, 11

Trichocera hiemalis and T. regelationis
(see Winter Turnip Gnats)

Tulip-root in Oats, 41

Turnip, 98—116

Turnip Mud-beetle, 104—110; localities
where found, 105; description of
beetle, 105; description of maggot,
and method of attack to Turnip-bulb
and leafage, 106—107; observations
on, in 1893 and 1894, 108, 109

Tylenchus devastatrix (see Stem Eel-
worm)

Tylenchus tritici, 48

Tyroglyphus longior, 27

Vanessa polychloros, 6

INDEX.

3

Vespide, 119 Wheat-bulb Maggot, only slightly in-

Vibrio tritici (see Tylenchus tritici), 48

Warble Fly (see Appendix)
Wasps, 119—122; Queens seen on the

jurious, 41

Wheat (Young) Moth Caterpillars, 37—

40; description of method of injury,
37; description of caterpillars, 38;
considerations as to species, 39

wing not reported as unusuallynume- | Winter Turnip Gnats, 114—116; de-

rous, 120; Queens collected not cer-
tainly fresh specimens, 121

scription of, 115; observations and
description of Thaw Gnats, 115, 116

APPENDIX.

Warble Fly, Appendix i—Ixii; previous
observations of, i, ii; life-history of,
iii—yvi ; structure of maggot, vli—ix ;
development to perfect insect, x—x1;
formation of warble, xi—xiv; serious
injury caused by infestation, xiv—xix;
‘‘Licked beef,’? xix—xxv; age at
which attack is most prevalent, xxv ;
countries most infested, xxvi—xxvii ;
losses from, xxvii—xxxi; losses on
warbled hides, xxxi—xxxix; means

of prevention and remedy, xl—-lviii ;
of summer attack, xlii—xliv; (obser-
vation on Ox Gad Fly, xliv, xlv); to
destroy Warble Fly maggot in the
hide, xlvi—l,—to destroy by smears
or dressings, l—lv; Aldersey Gram-
mar School, warble-attack stamped
out in surrounding district by good
work of the boys of, lv—lvii; sum-
mary, lviii—lxii

WEST, NEWMAN AND CO., PRINTERS, HATTON GARDEN, LONDON, E.C;

gh tying oapelie dia ei

mE by eaO%

- bala thee (ouwkP a
fk bee Bett ase to’ potty iisash (Oe > eo

at be aE nyo fostered - Fe se “(eibwoutt oa

" A” Weteec tl siroetpe OL wet eptetiots hitioe itt io eae yerver' *? SSS
- sane: Wife bUP tans qiow Fe Ole ot <a Gren ard it an Bark
ea oar At hiss acoder raiedo ‘eP ijn Deh ree = Pel rable eras
; ce sigs Wil TIF waa) wait'l to Ong aaeoB me) ’ Bas | ATiDERTRS! fe i
: * : =
Atl wd ea
SHUETe hac tee anhalt 45, ney Osh egies
elew ss Ua ce eae Pat =e hn j { ibolii tad hae
WF ue rick fink? Bo). oa ) pert oO ee
i “ t Sibi oid Mig i Pee,
+ 1 H wh i? } fh 5 rive }
Fi a) Taetolx ¥ 5 * ’ \ ‘
Myer ial reel, bé [ F sii
j { . ry beat uf i aus
ti ievl E> ined ent a
| oa) T 24
;
.
»
=
re ‘
/ $
: i
a Tr —— ea _— z ——— A
ee OLA ALi? BOTTA ORR RE ee i Se ae .
¢

Sie,

Singt ore

ed

H 4 a oe

5

<==

ee

Ty

&
%,

cS a lai : hy in fF ,

ey 4
7 i
“s, ‘

Si

i é
i ve 2

j

“a , i >

< =~ ‘Md i } | “hy NA

Pr Monn tind One