66 



THE LANCASTER FARMER. 



[May, 



variety in detail, than all other branches of 

 natural history put together; hence, those 

 most thorough in it — those who have made 

 the most valuable contributions to its litera- 

 ture, are specialists, and never aspire to any- 

 thing more: nevertheless, they are still Ento- 

 mologists, just as much as those are Botanists, 

 ■who make the study of trees, or shrubbery, 

 flowering plants, lichens, mosses, or fungi 

 their specialties. Scientific specialism is not 

 as common in the United States as it is in 

 Europe, where, amongst her entomologists are 

 to be found many who are, or who hnve heen 

 Coleopterists, Orthopterists, Hemipterists, 

 Lepidopterists, Keuropteris s, Ilymenopter- 

 ists, Dipterists, &c., and who aspire to noth- 

 ing beyond these specialties; altljough, in the 

 pursuit of any of tliese branches, it would be 

 next to impossible not to know something 

 about collateral branches:— indeed, even in the 

 United States, we have many who devote 

 themselves almost exclusively to special 

 branches in entomology, and have distin- 

 guished themselves therein. 



But considered from a. 2jractical standpoint, 

 and as it stands related to the agricultural 

 and domestic productions of the human 

 family, as well as to the animal world in 

 general ; entomology and entomologists have 

 had an immense responsibility thrust upon 

 them, much of which they cannot know any- 

 thing more about — and it is not their business 

 to know anything more aljout — than any other 

 people of equal intelligence ; and through this 

 promiscuous demand upon their scientific 

 energies, their special studies are invaded or 

 dissipated, and hence they are liable to be- 

 come "Jacks of all trades, and masters of 

 none." Even a specialist may know abso- 

 lutely more about what many things are not 

 in his specialty, than what they really are ; 

 and his humble confession to that effect may 

 indicate an infinitely greater advance in 

 scientific lore than an empty pretension to 

 know all about things of which he may be 

 profoundly ignorant. Any man, no matter 

 how ignorant or stupid he is, may be aole to 

 propound a problem or- a question that the 

 most intelligent or profound scientist cannot 

 satisfactorily answer — at least not to the 

 satisfaction of the ignorant propounder — but 

 that does not prove the former a philosopher, 

 nor the latter a knave. A mechanic may be 

 able to construct the most complicated philo- 

 sophical instrument, and yet be totally nu- 

 able to make a shoe or a coat, and yet, he 

 may be eminently entitled to the name of 

 a mechanic ; but how absurd it would appear 

 for any one to write — " "With all their know- 

 ledge of mechanism, pliilosophical instrument 

 makers are unable to construct a shoe or a 

 coat." 



How long has it been since the sciences of 

 medicine, of anatomy, of surgery and of 

 physiology have been introduced to the study 

 of professional specialists ? How many paid 

 professors have been dispensing scientific 

 lore V How many magnificent temples for 

 their accommodation have been erected in 

 dift'erent parts of the world ? And how many 

 pecuniary endowments have been bestowed 

 upon them in order to facilitate their progress 

 and their usefulness ; and yet, how many 

 cases occur in this line of science aljout which 

 its students and its professors appear to know 



absolutely nothing; seemingly just to illus- 

 trate how little is known about the branches 

 they profess to study ^nd to teach, and that 

 men must be ever learning ''a knowledge of 

 the truth." Tiie pursuit of any branch of 

 natural science is something like exploring a 

 seemingly endless .stream, that ever and anon 

 sinks into the earth, and bubbles up again at 

 a more or less remote distance from where 

 its traces have been lost. 



The explorer may learn much, or all. of 

 that part of it which comes under his immedi- 

 ate observation, but of that part of it which 

 has sunken into the bowels of the earth — ex- 

 cept theoretically — he may be profoundly ig- 

 norant. In like manner, the transformations 

 and developmental progress of some animals 

 are involved in conjecture, and amongst these 

 are included the "gapes," the "hair-woi-ms," 

 and their cogeners which are only known so 

 far as their development has come under 

 human observation. Observation, cannot 

 draw an exact focus upon that which is under 

 ground — which must be left mainly to theory, 

 analogy or conjecture, for solution. The case 

 is similiir in the history of the "gapes" and 

 its cogeners. There is " here and there " an 

 out-croping— as it were — in the development 

 of these animal.s, and the unseen is "analo- 

 gized" from that which is .seen. True, it is 

 of paramount importance that it should be 

 known how the strangiilm or gapes, get 

 into the tracheae, or windpipes, of the fowls 

 they infest, and also where and how they live 

 "during the season before and after they at- 

 tack the chickens, although it does not seem 

 essential that the entomologist should know 

 this as a qualification necessary to the success- 

 ful pursuit of his specially in natural science; 

 and yet, he may occasionally have illustra- 

 tions or something analogous to it in insect 

 physiology. For instance, it has been demon- 

 strated by those who are reputed to be com- 

 petent authorities, that, like the spores of 

 fungi, or the sporific germs of epizooty, the em- 

 bryo of gapes may be in the soil, in the food, 

 or in the water to which fowls have access ; 

 and not only this, but they retain their vitality 

 for an indefinite period, even after they are 

 perfectly dried; and also that they are per- 

 petuated by carelessly throwing them aside, 

 without first killing them, after they have 

 been dislodged from the windpipes of the in- 

 fested fowls. 



But, the following, which we clip from the 

 columns of a cotemporary, seems to deny that 

 the gapes are animal organisms at all, which 

 would remove them still farther from the 

 category of entomology. 



Gapes and Chicken Cholera. 



The season is at hand when young chickens 

 require attention, and a word on the subje^ t 

 may be read with some interest. It is an old 

 .saying that an ounce of prevention is better 

 than a pound of cure, and the rule is eminent- 

 ly a good one with young chickens. One of 

 the most necessary things to prevent gapes is 

 to keep them dry and well protected from the 

 chilly rains of spring, as this disease is a 

 species of croup, similar to the chronic croup 

 in children, when a false membrane forms in 

 the windpipe and proves fatal in nearly all 

 cases. This is usually caused by a neglected 

 cold, and it is so with the young clnckens; 

 hence the necessity of keeping them dry and 

 warm during the wet days common in spring. 

 The membrane formed" in the chicken and 

 usually supposed to be a red worm, can be re- 



moved by folding a horsehair and forcing the 

 loop down the windpipe, and a sudden pull 

 will bring out the membrane. Others use a 

 feather, and I have seen a strong pinch of the 

 windpipe loosen it. and the chicken cough it 

 up; but all often fail to save the life of the 

 chicken. 



Formerly I lo.st many chickens in the spring, J 

 but for years, since learning the preventive •■ 

 raeasureof keeping them dry and warm during 

 the cold, damp weather, I have not seen a 

 chicken with the gapes. 



The following remedy and preventive of 

 chicken cholera is highly recommended as a 

 sure thing: Permanganate of potash and 

 cldorate of potash, of each 10 grains. Mix in 

 one powder and dissolve in water enough to 

 mix a quart of feed. This will be enough for 

 twenty to thirty chickens, to be given several 

 times during the spring. 



And this: 



Gapes. 



Gapes in chicks are caused by the presence 

 of minute worms in the windpipe, and when 

 these worms are present in great numbers the 

 chicks die of suffocation. I don't know 

 how the worms get there, and it don't matter 

 much ; the main idea is to prevent them from 

 getting there. In the whole list of cliicken 

 ailments ihere is no disease more easily pre- 

 vented or cured than gapes. To prevent 

 them feed cayenne pepper and sulpluir with 

 the soft food two or three times a week, and 

 use the " Douglass mixture " in the drinking 

 water three times a week. 



Gapes may be cured by giving a piece of 

 camplior gum the size of a small pea every day 

 until the chick seems well. Sometimes two 

 or three liberal do.ses of pepper wtU effect a 

 cure. If the chicks are very bad fumigate 

 with sulphur and give two or three drops of 

 solution of carbolic acid and water ; sixty 

 drops of water to one drop of acid forms the 

 solution. Don't hold the chicks directly over 

 the fumes of burning sulphur, and don't 

 fumigate too long, or the remedy may prove 

 worse than the disease. Let the chicks in- 

 hale the fumes lor two or three minutes, and 

 in most cases that will be sufficient to effect a 

 cure. — Prairie Farmer. 



And this : 



Gapes. 



Chicks most subject to gapes are those that 

 run on damp, low places. It is generally un- 

 derstood now that gapes are caused by small 

 worms in the windpipe. These can be re- 

 moved by the use of a fine horse hair twisted 

 and run down the windpipe; a quick jerk 

 after turning around will remove the worms 

 or kill them. But one must be dexterous and 

 practiced to do this. A small feather is per- 

 haps better. Lei^ve only the tip, which wet 

 with one ounce of glycerine and twenty drops 

 carbolic acid. Twist it quickly in the wind- 

 pipe, withdraw and repeat. You will see the 

 worms or a little blood come out. 



Here are two good gape remedies. Give 

 the chick a piece of camphor the size of a pea. 

 The fumes will kill the little worms. Camphor 

 in the drinking water will prevent gapes. 

 Another good remedy is spirits of turpentine; 

 dose five to ten drops at a time. Either of 

 these two remedies will do. If not, increase 

 the dose. If that fails use the feather or 

 twisted loop in the windpipe. Change the 

 chicks to high, dry ground and put camphor 

 in the water, and it will save the rest of the 

 flock. — Journal of Agriculture and Farmer. 



And, if more is desired on the subject, we 

 would respectfully refer the reader to vol- 

 ume 13, No. 6 (June 1881), of the Lancas- 

 ter Farmer, where he may find eight col- 

 umns on the subject of the "gapes" in fowls 

 [Strangyhis syngamus), and its corelatives, 

 discussed at large. To those of our readers who 

 do not subscribe for tlie Farmer, we would 

 respectfully suggest that they make immedi- 

 ate application to the publisher, perhaps they 

 may be able to procure that number; and if 



