FORMALDEHYDE INJURY TO WHEAT. 



«. H. COONS AND H. 11. MCKINNKY. 



(Preliminary Note.) 



For many years formaldeliyde* lias been the most commonly used chem- 

 ical in seed disinfection. It lias found its widest application in )reatin« oata 

 for smut, and its next most imiK)rtant utilization in wheat treatment to pre- 

 vent Stinking Hmut. To a limited extent, barley and rye have been treated. 



Following the first preliminary experiments in the utilization of Fomalde- 

 hyde for this purpo.-e, gradually there came a great number of empirical experi- 

 ments and accordingly a vast array of formulae and rules develoi>ed. Agri- 

 cultural practice settled upon a few simple methods of application and these 

 methods have continued to be recommended without critical test for a num- 

 ber of years. For oats, the so-called "Sprinkling method" iu which the grain 

 is sprinkled until thoroughly wet with a solution of formaldehyde. 1 pint to 

 40 gallons of water, is commonly employed. After the sprinkling, the grain 

 is covered 12 hours, spread out thinly to dry and then planted. 



For wheat, the same solution is employed, but the grain is soaked in the 

 liquid and floating smut balls and light grains are skimmed off. The period 

 of covering, etc., is the same. 



It has been found that farmers are prone to use the method recom- 

 mended for oats in treating wheat. This method is obviously much more 

 rapid than the "soak and skim" method. It would pro1)ably be as effective if 

 the wheat were thoroughly fanned to remove smut balls. 



Very early in the history of grain treatments, Clinton' experimented with 

 concentrated formaliiehyde in a simple experiment in which he exposed wheat 

 to fumes from concentrated formaldehyde sprinkled upon a portion of the 

 .sample. He controlled smut in his experiment. In his discussion of the smut 

 control problem he points out the disadvantage which arises from wetting 

 the grain and then subsequently drying it before planting. 



Bolley- in 1897 cairied on exi)eriments attempting to devise a method for 

 killing smut on grain with the vapor from formaldehyde. While these experi- 

 ments gave great promise, no definite practical recommendations were made. 



For a number of years various "patent" smut remedies, whose active 

 ingredient is formaldehyde, have been using a method of control in which a 

 stronger solution of formaldehyde is employed than the ordinary one, and in 

 which a sniall amount of .solution is employed per bushel, li. J. HaskelP of 

 Cornell I'liivcrsity. in icsting some patent preparations carried out experi- 



*In this article. ■'rortTiiililrli.vdc" rri'crs to flu- staiid.irfl, approximaloly 40'>f , solu 

 tiim of I'orinaltlcliVfli' uas in waliT. 

 'Clinton, (i. I'. 111. Sta. Bui. .".7. 

 -Bolley. H. I.,. N. I). Sta. Bui. 27 anil .JT. 

 'Haskpll, K. J. Phytopathology 7 : 381-383. 



21st Mich. Acad. Sci. Kept., 1919. 



