RUST AND STINKING SMUT IN WHEAT. 611 
growing a number of varieties in certain areas liable to 
rust, there were usually some which were comparatively 
free, although none were absolutely rust-proof; and by 
selecting the cleanest plants year after year, ultimately a 
rust-resistant variety might be secured for that district. 
But that quality and rust resistance might be, and often is, 
associated with other qualities which rendered wheat un- 
desirable. Cross-breeding would then step in, and new 
kinds might be made, which would combine the desirable 
qualities with the indispensable rust-resistance. A process 
of vigorous selection would be required to fix the characters 
of those improved wheats, and the varieties thus obtained 
could be tested in different districts, for they might prove 
rust resisting and prolific in one locality, and fail in one 
or both of those characters in another. 
RESULTS OF TREATMENT FOR Bunt, oR STINKING SMuvT. 
Experiments were directed during the past season to the 
three principal substances which were known to destroy 
the bunt spores, and their relative effects on the germina- 
tion of the grain were noted. These were: Sulphate of 
copper, corrosive sublimate, and formalin. The results of 
the treatment were :— 
1 
Ss 4 a | +H 
Brees oe 8 
a a0 8 =i = Ay 
a an | oe | oe 
3 3 figs here 
7 _ o D os 
S 5 Pp, op | G4 AQ 
Bluestone, 1 Ib. to 5 gallons ........-.....seseeeee 1000 | 459 | 46 0 
Corrosive sublimate, 1 in 1000 ......-2.......0065 1000 712 ef 0 
AaHpele API ORStsse sas Vosncewegs floes dngdeaeehe stlsaniaes 1000 | 960} 96 95 
Formalin, 1 in 500, dipped for 10 minutes ....| 1000 | 621 62 0 
Formalin, 1 in 1000, dipped for 10 minutes...) 1000 | 692} 69 0 
