REPORT OF THE STATE ENTOMOLOGIST I9I I 31 



Series 2 largely confirms the results obtained in series 1 

 though the crop was somewhat larger, the trees older and con- 

 sequently more difficult to spray thoroughly. On the other 

 hand the nearly level ground facilitated the use of a tower, 

 while the greater abundance of the codling moth afforded a 

 more severe test of the efficacy of spraying. 



Plot 1 produced 20,802 apples, the individual trees yielding 

 from 2935 to 4262. The average percentage of sound fruit was 

 98.07, the trees varying from 96.15 to 99.22. There were 401 

 wormy apples, the number per tree ranging from 33 to 109. 

 There were only 42 end wormy, while the great majority, 2>72» 

 were side wormy. This one treatment resulted in saving nearly 

 21 per cent of what otherwise would have been wormy fruit or 

 about 4000 apples, approximately 8 barrels. This was effected 

 at a cost of about 60 cents or less than 10 cents per barrel. 



Plot 2 produced a total of 34,019 apples, the individual trees 

 yielding from 4155 to 7286. The average percentage of worm- 

 free fruit was 98.50, the trees varying from 98.23 to 99.43. 

 There were 509 wormy apples, 107 being end wormy and 456 

 side wormy. It will be noted that this second treatment re- 

 sulted in securing nearly l /> of 1 per cent (.43 per cent) more 

 sound apples than in the case of plot 1. 



Plot 3 produced 31,119 apples, the individual trees yielding 

 from 3390 to 6982. The average percentage of sound fruit was 

 99.14, varying from 97.20 to 99.73. There were only 267 

 wormy apples, 83 being end wormy and 107 side wormy. Tree 

 A for some reason or other gave distinctly less satisfactory re- 

 sults than the others. It produced over one-third of the wormy 

 apples and had a percentage of only 97.20, otherwise the average 

 percentage would have been perceptibly higher for this plot. As 

 it is, there were about 1 per cent more worm-free apples on 

 plot 3 than on plot 1, and it is possible that there should have 

 been 1^2 per cent additional sound fruit. 



The four trees of plot 4 produced 16,815 apples, the indi- 

 vidual trees varying from 617 to 7188. The percentage of sound 

 fruit was 77.98, it varying from 68.02 to 82.80. There were 3702 

 wormy apples, 2000 of these being end wormy and 2280 side 

 wormy. Over one-quarter of this latter number included in 

 the totals of end wormy and of side wormy were end and side 

 wormy. Accepting the check trees as standard, this one late 

 application resulted in nearly 10 per cent additional sound fruit 

 or about 1600 apples, over three barrels, the one treatment cost- 



