322 TWENTY-FIUST REPORT. 



ments with oats in which formaldehyde diluted in 5 parts of water was 

 sprayed on oats followed by five hours covering. This method is manifestly 

 a great simplification of the former one and all the disadvantage of the wet, 

 swollen grain is obviated. When this method was used by farmers it 

 instantly became popular. 



Farmers in Kent County in Michigan in 1917 used the method advised for 

 oats on wheat, and had marked success in stinking smut control. The atten- 

 tion of the writer was called to this successful application of the new, or 

 so-called "dry method" and counts were made in Grand Rapids' fields to deter- 

 mine the success of the treatment. It was found that the treatment controlled 

 stinking smut. Laboratory tests were then undertaken, using small quantities 

 of wheat and proportionate amounts of formaldehyde. Under the conditions 

 of the experiment, the treatment was found safe in its effect upon germina- 

 tion of wheat. 



In a college circular, the details of this treatment were given along with 

 directions for the standard sprinkling treatment on fanned grain. The new 

 treatment was used quite generally by men who had treated oats by the dry 

 method. 



The planting season of 1917 was unprecedented. Following an extremely 

 dry season which made early plowing almost out of the question, the fall 

 started in the middle of September with a series of rainy periods which fol- 

 lowed in close succession until about October 20th. The net result of the 

 unfavorable weather was that planting of wheat stretched out over two or 

 three weeks. The weather which followed was cold and disagreeable. 



When the wheat came up it was found that in many cases the stand was 

 very poor. That treatment was responsible was proved in many fields because 

 of the poor stand of treated as compared to plantings of untreated graiti. 

 That formaldehyde could injure germination under certain conditions was evi- 

 dent from the 1917 experience. 



Examination was made of all the cases of loss reported, and many cases 

 poor stands were found associated with the "dry" treatment. There were 

 some cases, also, in which similar injury was produced by the wet or 

 "sprinkling" treatment, the greater percentage in case of the former treat- 

 ment being due to the larger number of fields in which the dry method was 

 used. Fields planted early were without exception of good stand and ijer- 

 fectly satisfactory. Fields planted during the cold, wet perioa showed injury. 



The eases of injury to wheat could be grouped into two classes,— (a) 

 those in which an over-do.sage of or an ()ver-exiH)suro to formaldehyde had 

 been given, and (Id those in wliidi (liiv<)i(.iis bad itcen followed inil a long 

 period of airing was necessary lu'caiiso ,,r dciiiycd planting. 



Injury of (lie first class is surely to be expected when farmers are 

 handling a chemical so toxic to wheat as i.s formaldehyde. With the dry 



