32 NEW YORK STATE MUSEUM 



ing- approximately 40 cents. It paid for itself though the work 

 would have been much more profitable had it been done three 

 weeks earlier. 



The check trees yielded 14,670 apples, the individual trees 

 5152 and 9518. The average percentage of sound fruit was 

 67.21, there being very little variation in this respect. These 

 two trees produced 4810 wormy apples, 2997 being end wormy 

 and 2762 side wormy. Here we have again most conclusive 

 evidence showing that the major portion of the protection ac- 

 crues from the first spraying as a result of its destroying young 

 codling moth caterpillars entering at the blossom end of the 

 fruit. 



Series j. Certain corroborative experiments were conducted 

 in the young- orchard of Mr William Hotaling of Kinderhook, 

 N. Y. The trees are exceptionally fine, being only six or seven 

 years old, dwarf in habit and, as a rule, well laden for such 

 young trees. They are set in four rows, running approximately 

 north, with rows of peach trees between, and in the case of the 

 experimental areas the Wealthy apples alternate with Mackin- 

 tosh. Three plots were laid out, the trees invariably being on 

 the two middle rows. Plot i was limited to transverse rows 

 35' 36, 37 and 38, and plot 2 to transverse rows 39, 40, 41, 42, 

 43, z^4 and 45, numbering from the house toward the railroad. 

 The check trees were in transverse rows 23, 24 and 25. The 

 trees were small and the spraying was very thorough, being 

 made by Mr Hotaling personally. He took special pains to 

 cover the under as well as the upper surface of the leaves, apply- 

 ing so much that there was considerable dripping. There was 

 relatively more spray material used for each tree than in any 

 other experiments during the season. Arsenate of lead (15 per 

 cent arsenic oxid) was used at the rate of 4 pounds to 44 

 gallons of mixture, and a home-made lime-sulfur wash (33° 

 Baume) at a rate of i gallon to 30 gallons of spray. The 

 first treatment was given May 23d to plots i and 2. Plot 2 was 

 sprayed a second time June 19th, the treatment being limited 

 to the experimental trees and the barrier trees in the longitu- 

 dinal rows. At that time much of the fruit in this orchard 

 had dropped, though it was not attributed to the spraying. 

 There was some burning from the earlier application to the 



