320 Proceedings of hidiana Academy of Science 



abnormal conditions had a particularly harmful effect in the treated 

 rows while the untreated rows were apparently not so seriously affected. 

 The results of some of the growers are as follows: Joe Munster, who 

 treated all his seed, reports that he did not harvest the crop because it 

 was a complete failure. John DeVries did not get any difference in 

 yield between his treated and untreated fields. Andrew Krooswyk states 

 that his treated seed was somewhat better than the untreated but neither 

 was worth much. In other words, the treatment did not seem to have 

 had the beneficial effects obtained in previous years. 



The explanation of this trouble seems to be that the treatment per- 

 mitted a heavy growth of onions whereas the untreated areas were very 

 much thinned by the smut. The continued dry weather so depleted the 

 soil of water that in the heavy, normal stands the plants were unable 

 to make any growth and as a result most of the bulbs did not develop. 

 On the other hand, there was not so much competition among the plants 

 of the diseased (untreated) rows and the few that remained were able 

 to get sufficient moistuie to develop small bulbs which were just the 

 right size for sets. This resulted in approximately the same yields in 

 the treated and untreated onions. Viewed in connection with previous 

 experiences and from all angles, this peculiar and unexpected effect is 

 really an argument for the treatment since it .shows that smut control 

 permits a much thicker stand which in normal years would produce an 

 almost perfect yield. 



