AUXILIARY WORK. 



133 



have insccticidal properties much t^upcrior to those of the copper 

 sprays. 



The Department woi-k conducted by Mr. Hawley seems to have clearly 

 demonstrated the possibility of controlling- the most severe attacks of 

 curl in the lake shore region of Michigan with a single spraying, when 

 this is done thoroughly and at the proper time. In experiment cS the 

 untreated trees were so l)a(lly atlected tiiat, as already stated. i>() per 

 cent of the foliage and all l)ut 8.7 pounds of the fruitfell from the trees, 

 but })y spraying similar trees Mr. Hawley saved all l»ut 8 per cent of the 

 leaves — a gain of 2,900 per cent of foliage — l)esides increasing the yield 

 of fruit 1,424 per cent. In other words, the sprayed trees held 30 

 times as much spring foliage and over 15 times as nmch fruit as the 

 unsprayed trees at their side, all l)eing of the same variety. 



In the southern portion of the Michigan fruit belt a number of 

 growers assisted the Department in conducting experiments. Among 

 the reports received from that section is on(> by Mr. (leorge Lannin, 

 of South Haven. Mr. Lannin's work is summarized in the foUowinp' 

 table : 



Table 37. — Experimental work conducted hy Mr. George Lanniri, of South Haven, Mich., 



in the spring and summer of 1S95. 



[Nature of soil, sandy.] 



The spray formulae tested by Mr. Lannin were not included in the 

 work of Mr. Hawley, and are therefore characterized as Formulas D, 

 E, F, and G. As Mr. Lannin sprayed different varieties of peach trees 

 with 4 formulae, the experiments can not be compared with one another 



