When sex ratio of the bollworms removed from light traps 
was noted briefly late in July and early August, it was found 
to be so near 50:50 that the sex of the moth was disregarded 
after a few days. Female H. zea were neither depleted of eggs 
nor incapable of ovipositing when they were attracted to the 
traps. Also casual observation to determine how the insects 
entered the traps revealed that the catches included bollworm 
moths of all categories of physical fitness. Almost all females 
inspected showed evidence of being potential egg producers. 
Females collected from traps, placed in an oviposition cage, and 
supplied with beer, oviposited abundantly. One such female, 
the only insect trapped one evening between 8 and 9 p.m. in one 
of the timed-interval traps, laid 258 eggs in the container 
before succumbing to the weak cyanide fumigant in the container. 
Admittedly, the insect was under stress. However, she was 
attracted to the light trap and was capable of ovipositing this 
large quantity of eggs in a short time, 
Data obtained from the weekly larval collections (table 2) 
indicate that the percentage of H. virescens (compared with 
H. zea) in field populations was extremely small until the last 
of August. This ratio parallels the ratio of the two species 
collected in traps. 
One discouraging fact discovered late in the season is an 
argument against the use of electric insect traps to control 
lepidopterous insect populations. With denser populations, the 
pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders), became more 
generally distributed than it ha een in several years in 
Reeves County. The increase greatly concerned most cotton 
growers in the area. Farmers having the most trouble were those 
that had used light traps and very few insecticide applications 
during the 1965 season, 
In short, the trapping system was not particularly effective 
in one test but was promising in another. However, the mere fact 
that traps had been installed had a phychological effect on the 
farmers and on the insect checkers (insecticide sales-servicemen) 
and could have caused the reported reduced numbers of applica- 
tions of insecticides. When the overall injurious insect 
populations are low, as in the 1965 season, the phychological 
effect is hard to separate from the real value that should 
rightly be given the trapping system. 
The system of using traps equipped with blacklight lamps 
to reduce insect populations is certainly not a cure for all 
the insect problems of cotton growers; neither is it something 
to be overlooked. 
15 
