42 BULLETIN 1320, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
planting, more remote from other cotton, was made on May 12 and 
was not protected by poison or square stripping. 
In the successive plantings at San Antonio the squares were 
removed from plants of the first two plantings, and poison was 
applied to the entire field on June 12. Reinfestation was found two 
weeks afterwards, probably from weevils bred in early squares which 
had been shed before the control measures were used. 
At Charleston the squares were removed from the plants and poison 
applied on June 20. No trace of weevil injury was found until 
uly 12. 
At Gainesville the squares were removed on June 6. Abnormally 
late emergence of weevils caused reinfestation after control measures 
were applied. 
Infestation from overwintered weevils was avoided in the separate 
late planting made on May 12 at San Antonio. This planting became 
infested early in July, however, probably from weevils migrating 
from near-by plantings. 
Comparisons of plants from which’ the squares were stripped with 
unstripped plants were made at Charleston. No increase in height 
of plants or number of fruiting branches resulted from the removal 
of squares. More nodes developed on the fruiting branches of 
stripped plants, indicating that removal of early squares tended to 
pro ae the period of growth of fruiting branches. (Tables 22, 23, 
94, 25. 
At San Antonio and Charleston late-planted cotton grew more 
rapidly during the seedling stage. Nodes were produced on the mam 
stalk at a faster rate, and the internodes were longer than on the 
early-planted cotton. The first squares on the later plantings were 
produced in fewer days after planting. (Tables 2, 3, 9.) 
The last of the successive plantings at San Antonio on May 12 
produced nearly as many fruiting branches as the first planting on 
April 19. The lower fruiting branches of the later plantings pro- 
duced gee nodes than the early plantings. (Tables 6, 7, 8; figs. 3 
and 4. 
At Charleston the growth of the early-planted cotton was checked 
about the middle of July, while the later plantings continued normal 
growth. By August 11 the average number of fruiting branches was 
practically the same on all plantings. (Table 20.) 
Owing to the production of more nodes on the lower fruiting 
branches, the later plantings produced a larger total number of 
floral buds than the early-planted cotton. (Table 21.) 
The later planted cotton at San Antonio and Charleston contmued 
a high rate of flowering later in the season and produced a slightly 
larger total number of flowers than the early-planted cotton. 
(Tables 9, 26; figs. 5 and 9.) 
In the separate late planting on May 12 at San Antonio plants in 
unthinned open-stand rows when compared with plants left two in a 
hill showed that 38 per cent more flowers were produced in the 
unthinned cotton than where the plants were left in hills. More than 
twice as many flowers were recorded on the unthinned plants during 
the first 10 days of the flowering period. (Table 15.) 
Data on flower production and boll shedding during the period 
from June 25 to August 2 indicated that the proportion of shed bolls 
