114 



Table XXIX. — Progress of infestation, field 1, Victoria, Tex. 



Block. 



Date. 



Number 

 of 



squares 

 exam* 

 ined. 



Number 



of 

 squares 

 infested. 



Percent- 

 age. 



Remarks. 





1903. 



4,200 

 467 

 '249 

 278 

 91 

 358 

 331 

 300 

 699 



675 

 211 

 193 

 224 

 85 

 168 

 148 

 100 

 636 



16.0 

 45.0 

 77.5 

 80.6 

 93.5 

 46.6 

 44.7 

 33.3 

 91.1 



Work of hibernated weevils only. 

 Second generation at work. 

 Third generation beginning. 





July 13 



I 



July 22 





August 4 





August 29 



About four generations now working. 

 Much cotton dving from root rot. 





[July 30 



n 



August 1 



\ugust 4 







August 20 







Total 







6,973 



2,440 



35.0 











The observations made in Block 1 cover a longer period, and are, 

 therefore, more suggestive than those made in Block 11. . Evidently 

 infestation began with the first appearance of squares. So long as 

 the hibernated weevils alone were at work the percentage did not 

 increase ver}^ rapidly, but with the advent of the second generation 

 a much larger proportion of the squares became infested. Corre- 

 sponding increases are seen with the third generation, but from that 

 time on so large a proportion of the squares were infested that the 

 percentage did not increase so rapidl}^ It may be noted in each 

 block that the maximum percentage of infestation is slightly over 90. 

 Some clean squares may alwa3^s be found, however numerous the 

 weevils may be, but those which escape weevil puncture are mostly 

 less than half grown, so that while the percentage varies but slighth^, 

 few of these clean squares would escape the later attacks of the 

 weedls and form blooms. In Block I the infestation was quite gen- 

 eral. The situation of the block was especially favorable to the hiber- 

 nation of a large number of weevils. Bounded on one side b}^ a fence 

 row, on the opposite side by a cornfield, and at one end by the build- 

 ings used by the tenant, an abundance of hibernating places was 

 afforded the weevils, and as a result they came into the field in the 

 spring from all those directions (PI. XVII, fig. 75). It was noticeable, 

 however, that the portion of greatest infestation early in the season 

 la}^ in the corner between the fence row and the buildings. From the 

 fence row especially the weevils spread toward the center of the field. 



The second field, as has been stated, was comparativeh^ isolated, so 

 that infestation first began late in the season. Block I in this case 

 la}^ in the corner between crossroads. Block II adjoined the road 

 farther on, while the third block was taken as far from these two as 

 was possible. Infestation began in the corner covered by Block I. 

 In stud3^ing this block, lots 1, 2, and 3, as numbered in the table, were 

 taken diagonally across the block, away from the corner. Block II 

 was separated from Block I by corn, the ends of the rows being at the 

 road which passed the point of original infestation. The lots in Block 



