a 
¢ 
Ww 
ir. ie iar 
Gig wa or <a 
oF ths 
OF J 
raw 
A: 
214 REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER > 
Under your intelligent supervision of the inquiry, and with the facilities whi 
possess from different sections of the South, I have no doubt that this imp 
matter will receive final and full elucidation. 
My thanks are due to Mr. Z. Bauers, of Saint Catharine’s Island; Dr. W. S. 
ton, of Savannah; Messrs. T. G. Holt, of Macon, Ga.; J. E. Redwine, Hull Cou 
Georgia; E. C. Grier, Griswoldville, Jones County; J. Pinckney Thomas, Wa; 
Binff, Burke County, Georgia; State Geologist, George A. Little, of Atlanta, 
and others, who have assisted me in my work. 
Yours, respectfully, 
Prof:€: V..Rinny,  . 
Entomologist Department Agriculture. $ Gabe 
Starting south myself the latter part of August, I passed through 
Tennessee to Mitchell County in Southwest Georgia, and thence, during 
September, through the cotton sections of the southeastern part of that 
State and of the Carolinas and Virginia. I was at this time made pain- 
fully aware of the hindering effects of the yellow fever. Onecanscarcely a 
conceive of the panic and excitement that prevailed, even in regions 
where there was little or no danger. But a few weeks beforein the 
thicker cotton counties of Alabama and Georgia the prevailing topic of — 
conversation, as I learned, was the work of the Cotton-worm. At the 
time of my visit its injuries were forgotten in the all-absorbing subjeet — 
of the epidemic. Cotton fields were neglected, and in sight of acres of 
stripped and spindling stalks one heard but the universal refrain—yellow 
fever, yellow fever. It seriously interfered with my own plans, and — 
obliged me to avoid the very Mississippi cotton-fields which 1 desired _ 
most to visit. 
Notwithstanding this serious drawback to the present year’s opera- 
tions, much that is valuable and important has been learned. There is 
a very general want of knowledge among the people of the South regard-— 
ing the real habits of the Cotton-worm, and I find that the opinions of 
the most observant are seldom founded on intelligent observation; and 
that such opinions are consequently of little value. This state of things 
is due to three evident causes: First, the general unhealthiness of the 
region in which the insect does most damage, and the intense heat that 
prevails during the months when most of the observations must be made; 
second, the fact that the culture of the crop is turned over to uneduca- 
ted and unobserving negroes; third, the failure to discriminate between 
the Cotton-worm and the Boll-worm (Heliothis armigera) in their later 
stages, and the natural difficulty that besets the solution of some of the — 
questions, such as the winter habits of the Aletia, 
It had often been a wonder to me that no true parasite had ever been 
found infesting this insect, since there scarcely exisis a plant-feeding __ 
species that is noteattacked by some parasite. No less than nine dis-  — 
tinet species of these parasites have been discovered on the Cotton-worm 
this summer, and this fact has an important bearing on several of the 
knotty questions that present themselves in our inquiry. Again, ihad — 
wondered what plants the moths naturally fed from, since it was known 
to be fond of sweets, and had, to my knowledge, done considerable injury _ 
by boring into various ripe fruits. The cotton plant is peculiar for 
having a gland on the under side of from one to three ribs of the more 
mature leaves, and a still larger gland at the,outer base of the three. 
lobes of the involucre. As soon as | learned that these glands seereted - 
a sweetened liquid, I inferred that the plant would be found to furnish 
nourishment to the moth as well as to the larva, and drew attention to 
this belief in the Atlanta (Ga.) Constitution, of September 8, 1878. It 
was with no small degree of pleasure that at Baconton subsequently, m 
company with Professors Comstock aud Willett, 1 was able to prove my 
Cr a 
n 
yhe 
A.B. GROTE. 
