ORRKRVATIONS ON SQITARKS. 



13 



Table III. — Proliferalion in King ami Shine squares — different seasons ami localities. 



o Weighted average. 



Two rather strikino; contrasts are shown by a study of the fig;ures in 

 this tal)le. First, in the 1,040 King squares examined there were 

 found 417 weevil staf]^es, while in 672 Shine squares examined there 

 were found 54.3 sta<jes. Stated in a way to make the contrast most 

 evident, in King there was found an average of one weevil stage for 

 each 2.0 squares; in Shine an average of one weevil stage for each 1.24 

 squares. That is, in Shine there were almost exactly twice as many 

 weevil stages found, in proportion to the number of squares examined, 

 as in King. This is a factor, however, which would naturally vary 

 widely with the degree of infestation found in the field and it is a wt'll- 

 established fact that weevils were much more numerous and injurious 

 at San Antonio in 1905 than the}' were at Calvert, Tex. The second 

 striking contrast is to be found in the ])(>rcentage of mortality. In 

 King squares without proliferation only 0.9 per cent ttf tlic wccNil 

 stages found were dead, wbile in Shine .stpiares without |)r<)lifcralioii 

 ten times as large a ])rop()rtion, or i).l per cent, of the stages found 

 were dead. I)oul)tless much of this diO'crence may have been due to 

 sea.sonal rather than to varietal diO'erences, since it appears that in 

 King sfjuares at Calvert in 1905 tlie percentage of mortidity was much 

 greater than at Victoria in 1904. 



In other respects there is a most striking uniformity in tlu^ results 

 showni. The ])ercentage of s(|uares showing proliferation varies only 

 between 49.7 per cent for Shine mid 54 per cent for King. The 



