RELATION OF KINDS AND VARIETIES OF GRAIN TO 

 HESSIAN-FLY INJURY^ 



[PRELIMINARY REPORT] 



By James W. McColloch, Assistant Entomologist, and S. C. Salmon, Professor of 

 Farm Crops, Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station 



It has long been known that certain varieties of wheat (Triticum spp.) 

 are injured less than others by the Hessian fly {Mayeiiola destrticior). 

 Packard ^ mentions the Underhill, Mediterranean, Lancaster, and 

 Clawson varieties as being noted for resistance. He states that the 

 Underhill variety has been highly recommended for nearly a century. 



Woodworth ^ made observations on 125 varieties of wheat grown at 

 the California Experiment Station in 1886, 1887, and 1889, and noted 

 the damage by Hessian fly in each. The Volo and Washington Glass 

 varieties were not injured. Forelle; bearded wheat from Missoyen, 

 Palestine; Polish; Bluegrass; Common March; Diamond; and Egyptian 

 Imported were practically free from injury. 



Roberts, Slingerland, and Stone,'* in summarizing their observations on 

 Hessian-fly injury in New York, conclude that 

 the resisting power of varieties varies greatly 

 and that 



those with large, coarse, strong straw are less liable to injury than weak-strawed and 

 slow-growing varieties. 



Six varieties are mentioned which were not appreciably affected by 

 the fly in 1901, although numerous other varieties in the same neighbor- 

 hoods were much injured. These varieties were Dawson Golden Chaff, 

 Prosperity, No. 8, Democrat, Red Russian, and White Chaff Mediterranean. 



Gossard and Houser^ made careful observations on 75 varieties of 

 wheat and other grains grown at the Ohio Experiment Station in 1904, 

 1905, and 1906. They determined the percentage of stalks infested and 

 of fallen straws. Their observations 



give but little support to the idea that there are immune varieties, 

 and they suggest that cases of supposed immunity may be explained by 

 some other hypothesis. They state, however, that the most persistent 



• Contribution from the Entomological Laboratory (Paper No. 30) and the Department of Agronomy 

 (Paper No. 13) cooperating. This paper embodies some of the results obtained in the prosecution of projects 

 No. 8 and 67 of the Kansas Asricultural Experiment Station. 



* Packard, A. S. the hessian fly — its i^avages, habits, and the means of preventing its in- 

 crease. In 3rd Rpt. U. S. Ent. Com., p. 227-228. 1883. 



» WOODWORTH, C. W. VARIATION IN HESSIAN FLY INJURY. In Cal. Agr. Exp. Sta., Rpt., iSgo, p. 312. 



I89I. 



< Roberts, I. P., Si,ingeri.and, M. V., and Stone. J. L. the hessian fly. its ravages in new 

 YORK IN 1901. N. Y. Cornell Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 194, p. 226-260, fig. 95-98. 1901. 



' Gossard, H. A., and Houser, J. S. the herslan fly. Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 177, 39 p., 2 fig., 

 I col. pi., map. 1906. 



Journal of Agricultural Research, Vol. XII, No. 8 



Washington, D. C. Feb. 25. 1918 



mc Key No. Kans.— n 



(SI9) 



