1920. \ 11 



REPORT ON A VISIT TO TRINIDAD IN CONNEXION 

 WITH FROGHOPPER BLIGHT OF SUGAR-CANE. 



By W. Nowell, D.I.C, 

 Mycologist, Imperial Department of Agriculture for the West Indies. 



Imperial Commissioner, 



In pursuance of the arrangement made at the conclusion of my 

 previous visit I left Barbados for Trinidad on the S.S. " Arzila", depart- 

 ing from Bridgetown on Friday, September 19, and arriving in 

 Port-of-Spain on September 20. On the same day I got into touch 

 with the Acting Director of Agriculture and on the 27tli I had an 

 interview with His Excellency the Acting Governor. I attended and 

 reported at meetings of the Board of Agriculture on October 16 and 

 November 20. On November 20 and 22 I had interviews with His 

 Excellency Sir John Chancellor who had then recently resumed the 

 Governorship of the Colony. I left for Barbados by the "Chaudiere" 

 on November 22, arriving in Bridgetown on Monday November 24. 



2. The purpose of this visit, as suggested at the meeting of the 

 Eroghopper Committee of the Board of Agriculture held January 16, 

 1919, was to afford an opportunity of seeing froghopper infestations in 

 an active phase. This object was satisfactorily effected although the 

 number and area of the third brood infestations, current during my 

 visit, were relatively small this year. 



3. I regret that the investigation was considerably interfered with by 

 an attack of dysentery which began to develop within a few daj's of 

 my arrival in the Colony. Later I spent some ten days in hospital in 

 San Fernando, and my capacity for work was reduced for a much 

 longer period. 



4. Following the lines of my previous visit, the enquiry was pursued 

 in close co-operation with Mr. C. B. Williams, Entomologist in charge 

 of Froghopper Investigations, whose accumulation of observations 

 and ideas regarding froghopper blight formed the basis of our joint 

 investigations. Our combined conclusions have been already put forward 

 in the form of a summary, and the present report is an expansion of this 

 from my own point of view. 



5. It may be said at the outset that the observations made this year 

 do not at any point conflict with the opinions expressed in my previous 

 report, (1) which dealt with conditions after the cessation of froghopper 

 activity. What follows is intended to be taken as an earlier chapter in 

 the same story, subject to the differences arising from the restricted 

 area of infestation this season. 



6. It became evident from the study of infested fields that the 

 immediate effect of froghopper attack is the direct production, with a 

 greater or less degree of development, of a definite and recognisable 

 type of injury to the growing plants. This condition, of which so far as 

 I can learn no exact and detailed description has been published, may 

 appropriately be referred to as froghojpper hliglit, to distinguish it from 

 sugar-cane blight in general, which may be due to any cause or 

 combination of causes. 



(1) " Eeport on an Investigation of Froghopper Pest and Diseases of Sugar Cane 

 in Trinidad."— £w«. Dcpt. Ayr. XVlll. 1919, 57-69. 



