340 



FARMERS' REGISTER. 



[No. 6 



ON THE HABITS OF THE HESSIAN FLY. 



To the Editor of the Farmers' Register. 



Cambridge, Eastern Shore, 3fd., > 

 j/itgust Sth, 1836. 5 



By the late disastrous ravages of the "Hessian 

 Fly" throughout the whole wheat-growing district 

 of the United States, and the false notions enter- 

 tained and circulated of the habits of this insect, 

 giving astonishing currency to the most futile, yet 

 strongly vouched remedies, for many years pub- 

 lished, and yet publishing to the credulous commu- 

 nity, lately in the "Baltimore American," lormer- 

 ly in the "American Farmer," and also in the "Far- 

 mer's Register," vol. I., p. 351, (in which latter, 

 I am happy to see m a note appended, you dissent 

 from the hypothesis to which I particularly allude,) 

 I am led to offer a ihw remarks in opposition to the 

 "prevalent and deleterious doctrine" — "the erro- 

 neous principles on which it is founded," and the 

 consequently "erroneous prescription of the much- 

 extolled specific." 



An apology cannot be required for discussing one 

 of the mast interesting questions that is, or ever 

 has been, before the agricultural community — "a 

 preventive for the ravages of the Hessian Fly." 



It is not that I am enabled to settle this mooted 

 point of vital importance that I make this commu- 

 nication, but it is in the hope of approximating the 

 truth, by the detection of error : and it is thus, 

 'Hnstar omnibus,'''' that man, with his finite capa- 

 city, must approach andinvestigate the mysterious 

 modes and results of infinite wisdom. And for 

 the sn>all contribution I now offer to this point, if 

 it meet your approbation, I ask the favor of^a space 

 of your "Farmer's Register," where zeal is sanc- 

 tioned by example, and confidence promoted by li- 

 berality. 



The author of the communication, lately in the 

 "Baltimore American," signed "Maryland Agri- 

 culturist" — "others also to the same effect," re- 

 marks, "it," (the Hessian Fly,) "is either generat- 

 ed in the grain of wheat, similar to the bug wlrich 

 infests the pea: or, the insect, when in its winged 

 state, deposites an egg on the surface of the grain, 

 when in the ear ; and thus, when the wheat is 

 sown and begins to vegitate, the egg vivifies, and 

 the destructive worm is formed." 



He adopts the latter opinion, and makes it the 

 basis of his remedy. 



His reasons for the opinion are, 1st. "That the 

 insect releases itself by bursting the blade that 

 covers it, when the head is forming, and assumes 

 its winged state, and deposites its egg on the 

 wheat when filling and coming to perfection." 



2nd. "That with the aid of a microscope, the 

 egg is discernible in the form of a glutinous mat- 

 ter." 



Hence he deduces the remedy which he earnest- 

 ly recommends to the notice of the farmer, viz: 

 "to pass the seed, through brine or pickle, wash- 

 ing it well, and then roll it in lime." 



By what means he does not inform us, he has 

 arrived at the conclusion of this alternative, for the 

 parental selection of a nidus; nor why he rejects 

 the possibility of some other part of the plant be- 

 ing the chosen spot. 



Indeed, the hypothesis adopted by this gentle- 

 man, and lor many years, by others, so ardently, 

 and no doubt so honestly pressed upon the agri- 

 cultural community, rests upon a concatenated 



string of errors in fact, "false principles" and 

 "false conclusions," and will lead, if practiced, to 

 infallible disappointment. 



It is not a fact, "that this insect releases itself 

 'by bursting the blade that covers it, when the 

 head is forming, and then assumes the winged 

 state' from which the writer inters the deposite ot 

 its eggs, when the g;rain '\s filling. " 



It is a fact, well known, I had supposed, to every 

 wheat grower in the United Slates, who has no- 

 ticed the habits of the He.«sian Fly, that they have 

 at least two broods m the year, the fall and the 

 spring brood, and probably more; the two are 

 well known^ because of iheir efleets upon a valua- 

 ble crop; others are not generally known. 



The first of" the two is deposited (or, I will say, 

 "appears,'''') as every o^ne knows, on 'he young au- 

 tumnal wheat, where, it reslsat the ba.'c of the blade^ 

 till the vegetable juices have nourished it, and the so- 

 larbeams have matured it, which, in g^eneral, doesp 

 not occur, at least in the climate of Maiyland, until 

 between the first and tenth of the following "il/c/t/," 

 when they are seen, on the wing, over the 

 wheat fields, though in a momentary period, per- 

 petrating their appalling deeds of miscfiief,. by thai 

 almost incredible mulliplrcation and celerity of per- 

 formance, which all thesmallerand ephemeral in- 

 sects are capable of. Their progression, then, 

 from the en-g to the '■'■larva,''' the ''chrysalid,^^ ami 

 the parent, or winged state, is more or less 

 rapid, as the weather is favorable. 



I would ask those numerous arKl respectable en- 

 tomologists, and fctrmers, who contend that the 

 grain is (he medium through Avhich the parent 

 transmits the neio progeny 'intoWi'e, "what becomes 

 of those whose destinies have fJxed their first 

 stage upon a period when the grain is not formed? 

 set. the "spring," or the "•May" brood. Will 

 they say that one brood adopts the grain, and 

 another the blade for a nidus? This contrariety 

 of habit in the same insect is seen no where. It 

 would be repugnant tothe "known laws of nature," 

 to "analogy," and to the "character of instinct,'''' 

 which is notoriously immutable. Will they unite 

 with us in the apostrophe — '■'Naiura ! quam ie coli- 

 7mis inviti qvoque''' 



From the difficulty ofaccommodating this '■'May 

 brood," then, it would seem to be deducible, as a 

 matter of necessity, " as they must be accommo- 

 dated, and a priori'''' in a similar manner as the 

 fall brood; and there is then no grain accommoda- 

 tion lor them, there being no grain formed at that 

 time; and yet they continue t heir procreation, "that 

 the numerous and respectable entomologists, and 

 fiirmcrs, who advocate the deposite on or in the 

 grain, are '^quoad hoc'" in error; and their reme- 

 tly, consequently and absolutely erroneous, and 

 wholly inefficacious. 



It is certain that the deposite must be made upon 

 a part of the plant already substantial, visible and 

 tangible at the time, but the "May" deposite finds 

 no grain in this condition ; and the dogma, "that 

 it?/f(/s/ be on or in the grain, must be abandoned 

 as wholly untenable ; and some other part of the 

 plant must be sought as the selected spot of the 

 dep().sit(\ I will presently show that this part is 

 the blade. 



2nly. The writer says, "if I had any doubts on 

 this subject, (hey would be removed by the fact, 

 that with the aid of a microscope the egg is dis- 

 cernible in the form of a glutinous matter." 



