April, '12] 



FELT: CODLING MOTH 



155 



first application began May 23d and, owing to unfavorable weather, 

 was not completed till the 25th. The second application was given 

 June 19 and the third July 29. A power spraying outfit was used as 

 in the preceding series and a tower employed, one man being located 

 on this and the other with an extension nozzle operating from the 

 ground. There was probably considerably more spray material 

 applied per tree than in the preceding series. The blossom ends were 

 well sprinkled but there was practically no penetration of the poison to 

 the inner calyx cavity. The leaves were well covered with the spray 

 and rarely flooded. 



The results obtained in these two series are at least fairly uniform 

 and are well shown in the following summary of the plots. 



SUMMARY OF PLOTS, 1911 



A study of the summary of plots shows that conditions were fairly 

 comparable in the two series, though the yield from the second was 

 somewhat greater. The larger product of series 2 is, in some measure, 

 offset by the trees being larger and more difficult to spray, an operation 

 also hindered by interplanted plum and peach trees. The percentages 

 of sound fruit from the plots in these two series show a fairly uniform 

 increase with additional sprayings, though in the case of series 1 there 

 is no difference between the percentage of sound fruit produced by 

 plots 2 and 3, each yielding 99.54. There is, however, a nearly uni- 

 form gain in series 2, of | of 1% from each spraying after the first. 

 There is a marked contrast between the amount of sound fruit pro- 

 duced on plots receiving one treatment just after the blossoms dropped 

 and similar plots sprayed three weeks later, the benefit resulting from 

 this treatment ranging from ^ to f that of the early spray. An exam- 



