87 



during June- August. ^Macaroni in bags kept in a warehouse with bags 

 of infested barley was also attacked. A systematic campaign against 

 this pest in railway warehouses is necessary, and its success will largely 

 depend on the provision by the railway companies of new iron and 

 concrete buildings, as the existing wooden ones provide safe hiding 

 places for the weevils and defy all attempts to control them by fumi- 

 gation and disinfection. The grain was also infested with mites. 

 Flour was seriously attacked by Ephestia hUlmiella and other pests ; 

 against these, fumigation with carbon bisulphide must be thoroughly 

 carried out in specially built disinfecting chambers. 



S. CapaHMa bt» CeMMnanaiMHCKOM ofinacTM. [Pachi/tylus migratorius 

 in the Province of Semipalatinsk.]— « SeMJlOfl'feJlbMeCHafl faaCTa.)) 

 [The Agricultural Gazette], Petrograd, no. 4 (120), 5th February 

 1916, pp. 99-100. [Received 5th December 1916.] 



An enormous outbreak of Lociista {Pachytylus) migratoria took place 

 in August 1915 in the province of Semipalatinsk in Russian Central 

 Asia. So vast were the swarms in the middle of October that 

 they are said to have obscured the sun and caused domestic animals to 

 stampede. Dogs, foxes, wolves and the steppe birds became fat on a 

 diet of these insects. As the harvest was practically over at the time 

 of the outbreak, no serious damage was done, but the locusts infested 

 "with their egg-clusters an area of over 5,000 square miles. The 

 Department of Agriculture has therefore been approached by the 

 Provincial Authority with a request to organise a campaign against 

 these insects, and to sanction an expenditure of £10,000 from local 

 funds for this purpose. 



UvARov (B. p.). Eme lexHMKt 6opb6bi ct> capaHMeebiMM. [Further 

 Notes as to the Technique of the Control of Locusts.] — «3eMJie- 

 A'^JIbMeCKan faaeia.)) [The Agricultural Gazette], Petrograd, nos. 

 8 & 9 (124 & 125], 5th & 12th February 1916, pp. 204-205 k 

 227-229. [Received 5th December 1916.] 



This paper is a reply to the remarks of E. V. Jatzentkovsky on a 

 previous article by the author [see this Review, Ser. A, iii, p. 98 and 642], 

 who here reiterates his former views as to the advantages of the use of 

 poisoned baits against locusts. 



UvAROV (B. p.). BpeflHbl-nH OnpblCKMBaHifl MblllJbflKOBMCTbll(l"b 



HaTpOMl) ? [Is Spraying with Sodium Ai'senite injurious ?] 

 — « SeMJiefltnbHeCKan raaeia.w [The Agricultural Gazette], 

 Petrograd, no. 18 (134), 13th May 1916, pp. 496-497. [Received 

 5th December 1916.] 



The author refers to a note published by the Honolulu Experimental 

 Agricultural Station as to the dangerous effects of spraying with sodium 

 arsenite. This, if correct, would be of practical importance in Russia, 

 where the use of this insecticide has been increasing of late in the 

 campaign against locusts. Not having seen the original work, which 

 described experiments with this insecticide as a means of controlling 

 w^eeds, the author assumes that the strength of the solution for this 



