THE FRUIT SHED IN RELATION TO THE CONTROL 

 OF THE CODLING MOTH. 



By F. W. Pettey, B.A., Ph.D. 



JVith I Chart. 



Read July lo, 1919. 



Little has been written regarding the control of the codling 

 moth in the orchard as affected by its emergence and control in 

 fruit sheds. Chapin. in the " Report of the Second Annual Con- 

 vention of California Fruit Growers,'' in 1883, states that over 

 15,000 moths were caught in a fruit room in one season. Samp- 

 son, in Bull. No. 41, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1903. 

 s'tates that a Mr. de Long, in California, reported the capture 

 of 11,974 moths in his fruit shed from April 15 to August 12. 



Burgess, in a paper read at the meeting of the American 

 Association for the Advancement of Science, held at Philadelphia 

 in 1914, reports that cyanide 1-1-3 formula for 100 cubic feet of 

 room space killed only about 40 per cent, of the larvae. L. 

 Qesar, of Ontario Agricultural College, suggests, in a paper con- 

 cerning codling moth written in 191 1, that fumigation with sul- 

 phur is probably the best remedy for coclling moth control in the 

 fruit shed, but apparently his statement is not based on experi- 

 mental data. Various writers have reported greater infestation 

 of the insect in that part of the orchard nearest the fruit shed, 

 and have recommended the screening of doors and windows to 

 prevent the flying of moths to the orchard which emerge in the 

 fruit shed. 



It is quite evident that the custom among fruit growers to 

 bring pears and apples to sheds and store them a more or less 

 considerable length of time, until they are ready for cutting, 

 before drying, or until they are pack'^d for market, makes it 

 possible for the majority of the larvae that are in the infested 

 fruit to leave the pears and apples, and seek shelter in cracks and 

 crevices of the walls, floors and boxes of the packing shed, where 

 they make their cocoons, hibernate, and finally develop into moths, 

 which emerge in the packing sheds in the spring. 



The failure of Burgess to destroy these hibernating larva 

 satisfactorily was probably due to the fact that the cyanide could 

 not penetrate many of the cocoons or crevices where the larvae 

 had sought shelter. It is quite probable that sulphur fumes would 

 be no more satisfactory than cyanide in this respect. Success 

 with fumigation measures is at a disadvantage, as it must be 

 attempted during the cold temperature of winter or very early 

 spring, before the insect pupates, a time when gases will not 

 penetrate small openings, and when the respiration of the hiber- 

 nating insect is very slight. Many fruit sheds are so constructed 



