General Treatment for Smuts. 115 



is stronger, behind, yet this also eventually evaporates, especially in warm 

 places. It is therefora advisable to keep the solution corked, if only to keep 

 the strength even. 



Whether bluestone or formalin be used, the treated seed should never be 

 put into old bags unless they have first been dipped in the pickle. 



Another precaution to be taken is to skim of? any smut-balls as well as 

 imperfect seeds. Of course, the wheat used for seed should be free from 

 smut-balls, but farmers are not always as careful as they ought to be in the 

 selection of seed-wheat. It is well known that while sound grain sinks in 

 water the bunt-balls float. One hundred grains of each were taken of Federa- 

 tion wheat, and while the sound wheat weighed <)7| grains, the bunty wheat 

 was only 24^ grains, or a little more than one-third the weight. The bunt- 

 balls may at first be carried down with the sound grains and remain attached 

 by means of air bubbles, but by constant shaking and stirring they come to 

 the top. In practice it is found that all the bunt-balls do not rise to the sur- 

 face, but the probabilities are that these are cracked, and so their germinating 

 power will be destroyed by the solution. 



Effect of Formalin and Bluestone on the Germination of 

 Seed Wheat. 

 While either of these substances has given satisfactory results in the treat- 

 ment of bunt or ball smut, as it is often called by farmers, there is considerable 

 difference of opinion as to their effects upon the grain, both as regards ger- 

 mination and the subsequent growth of the plant. Extensive experiments 

 were conducted to answer this question, extending over five successive 

 seasons, and in the last year, when 20 acres were treated, the seed was sown 

 with a drill, bluestone being used at the rate of 1 lb. to 5 gallons of water, 

 and formalin at a strength of 1 lb. in 40 gallons of water. The result of the 

 treatment was very conclusive, and was stated as follows : — " While the 

 untreated plot contained at least 50 per cent, of smut, careful search over the 

 treated plots failed to reveal a single smutty head. Thus both solutions were 

 equally successful in destroying the bunt, but it was noticeable that the plot 

 treated with formalin looked much better and w^as a little further advanced." 



A special test was made with 1,000 grains each of the same variety 

 of wheat sown at the same time and under similar conditions, the formalin 

 and bluestone treatment being compared as before, with the following 

 results : — 



Untreated . . . . . . . . 884 grains germinated 



Formalin, 1 lb. hi 40 gallons of water . . 740 ,, ,, 



Bluestone, 1 lb. in 5 gallons of water . . 606 ,, „ 



The bluestone treatment affected the germination much more injuriously 

 than the formalin, and the plants afterwards did not look so healthy. 



In all these experiments, however, the grain was sown not more than a 

 day or two after treatment, but it sometimes happens in the ordinarv course 

 of farming that sowing is delayed after treatment owing to the state of the 

 weather, or grain is sown in some cases in anticipation of rain, which does 

 not come, and the question arises — how does the treated grain compare with 

 the untreated under such conditions, when germination does occur ? 

 Accordingly, tests were made with varying strengths of formalin and varying 

 periods of sowing after treatment. It may be noted here that formalin 

 exercises a hardening effect upon the grain, which soon becomes bone dry, 

 so that the young germ does not so readily force its way through the skin, 

 while in the case of bluestone there is a fine film of the substance left on the 

 seed after treatment, and this will likely have a preservative and protective 

 effect upon the grain. 



