I'K()Liri:i{ATI()\ AS A FAITOR I\ TlIK NATrUAL COXTIJOL OF 

 Till': MKXK'AN COTTON IIOLL WEKVIL. 



INTRODUCTION. 

 EARLIEST OBSERVATIONS. 



Soon after tlio be<j:inniii«; of the laboratory work upon tlio cotton 

 boll weevil at Victoria, Tex., in 1902, it was noticed that the attack of 

 the weevil was frequently followed by a very decided c]ian'i:e in the 

 structure of the tissues near tlie ])oint of attack in l)oth ])uds and l)o]ls. 

 The significance of this change was not at that time fully appreciated, 

 and the observations made U])on the weevil (hd not inclu(k» records as 

 to the occurrence and effect of this phenomenon. For this reason the 

 earlv observations made before the autumn of 1903 have furnished 

 coinj^aratively little material which coidd be used in making tabular 

 stftteuients, such as have been uiade from more recent studies of the 

 effect of proliferation upon the development of the ])oll weevil. 



When and by whoui proliferation was first observed in cotton is not 

 known to the writ(>r, but no publication relating to this phenomenon 

 prioi- to tliat made in Bulletin Xo. 4 "> of the Bureau of Entomology, 

 pages 9() and 97. lias been found. The earliest notes Uj)on the occur- 

 rence of j)roliferation and its effect U])on the weevil were made by the 

 writer in September, 1902. Since that time tlu^re lias been gradually 

 accumulating in the notes of the agents of the Bureau of Entomology 

 who have i)een studying the boll weevil, a large amount of data bearing 

 upon this subject. 



In the plans made for the work of 1904, at the beginning of the 

 season, definite provision was made for observations u|)on this phe- 

 nomenon in a number of varieties of cotton and for testing the 

 infiuence of fertilizers in stimulating a greater manifestation of prolif- 

 erati.)!! in the plants treated. Since that time the ob.servations u|)on 

 j)roliferation and its effect upon weevil development and injury have 

 b(>en carried on continuously. 



SCOl'K OK PRESENT DISCUSSION. 



The present paper does iu)t jiretend to bo a stufly of proliferation in 

 the botanical aspects of the (juestit>n, but rather a ])ractical statement 

 of the large number of observations made by agents of the Bureau of 

 Entomology i)riniarily regarding the effect of this formation of loose 



7 



