JVeiv Disease in TVheat. 129 



" • '''■•- .' ' - ■ • ■ = 



colour of the stalk of wheat. In the roots of those 

 stalks, most decayed, there were insects 'in a quiet or 

 dead state ^ or more properly speaking in a state of ab- 

 solute rest, and of the colour of a ripe flax seed, though 

 not of that shape — they were rounder and longer; but 

 in no instance as long as the live worm. I take this to 

 be the second state of this destructive insect — and that 

 the third state is probably a fly. The chrysalis or first 

 remove from a worm, is not lodged in the stalk of the 

 grain, but amongst the roots, or in the first insertion of 

 the leaves adjoining the root. The destruction of the 

 gi"ain appears owing to the ravages of the worm on the 

 fine arid tender roots, under the surface of the earth, and 

 the reason that so few are found in pulling up the wheat 

 and examining the stalks, I imagine, is owing to the 

 worm's being concealed by the dirt adhering to the 

 roots, and their being shaken ofi" with the dirt before 

 the roots are examined. I am led to believe that this is 

 a new species of worm, as it has made a more complete 

 destruction of the spring wheat than the winter -wheat. 

 I have always understood that the hessian fl}^ was pro- 

 duced from eggs laid in the young shoots of wheat in 

 the fall — and that wheat late sowed, and on highly ma- 

 nured lands, always escapes their ravages. By the way 

 I would observe that some of these worms were disco- 

 vered in my winter wheat, which \\^as very late sown — 

 but they did it but little damage. My spring wheat 

 was sown partly on land, last season in corn and pota- 

 toes, and was but an indifferent soil^ — the rest in a small 

 adjoining field which had been one year in grass, and 

 was this spring broken up in order to prepare the ground 



for planting an orchard. P. Colt. 



E e 



