II^SECTS IN^JURIOUS TO C0TT02^. 211 



the plants, many of the blossoms and squares containing 

 weevils will be jarred to the ground and buried, together 

 with those already on the ground, in moist soil, and a 

 large percentage of the material will rot before the con- 

 tained insects have developed." (Howard, I.e.) 



The advantage of controlling this and other insect pests 

 by such cultural methods is at once apparent when the 

 small margin of profit in the growing of cotton and the 

 economic conditions incident to large areas of land being 

 farmed by tenants are considered. Such cultural methods 

 involve no outlay of cash, which makes any other method 

 prohibitive to most tenants. There seems, also, to be a 

 real danger of an overproduction of the cotton crop, and 

 a diversification and rotation of crops would do much to 

 solve the question of how to combat this and other insects 

 of the cotton-plant. It seems certain that the control of 

 this pest merely requires a better system of agricultural 

 practice, as is the case with the Hessian Fly (see page 110) 

 and many of our worst insects. 



On a small scale much may be done by planting the 

 rows farther apart than usual. Where the roAvs of cotton 

 are grown close together the soil between them is shaded 

 from the sun and remains moist, furnishing the best con- 

 dition for the development of the larvje in the fallen 

 squares. Where rows are farther apart the soil is heated 

 by the sun to such an extent as to kill large numbers of 

 the larvae. That the rows are usually placed too close for 

 the proper growth of the crop has been demonstrated by 

 several agricultural experiment stations. It has been 

 shown that in spite of the much smaller number of plants, 

 one-fourth more cotton can be secured from rows five feet 

 apart than from those three feet apart. 



