94 



174. , and Davis, J. W. 1968. Field tests with conventional low-volume 

 or ultra-low-voliime sprays for control of the boll weevil, bollworm, 

 and tobacco hudworm on cotton in 1967. J. Econ. Entomol. 61: 1115-1116. 



All materials gave good control of the boll weevil, Anthonomus grandis . However, 

 more effective Insecticides are needed for control of Heliothis spp. on cotton, 

 especially when a high percentage of the population is the tobacco budworm. 

 Even with as many as 11 applications of large doses of experimental and recom- 

 mended insecticides, there was considerable loss in yield to Heliothis spp. 



175. Cross, W. H, 1973. Biology, control and eradication of the boll weevil. 

 Annu. Rev. Entomol. 18: 17-46. 



The review summarizes developments sinc«^ 1965 which hopefully are leading 

 toward eradication. It deals with: (1) the basic studies in biology, life 

 history, and behavior; (2) the application of this information to control; 

 and (3) the combination of the most promising methods in an overall eradica- 

 tion program. 



176. . 1974. Inportance of dispersal and migration of the boll weevil to 

 an eradication program. Proc. 1974 Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf., 

 p. 130. 



The knowledge of rates of dispersal and distances over which boll weevils 

 move b>t- the several generations of adults as well as collectively during 

 the season is iniportant to planning widths of buffer zones in eradication 

 attempts. Many observations by various entomologists since 1894 through 

 experiments completed during t!ie 197 3 season indicate that the boll weevil 

 ■ has the capacity -o disperse and migrate as an airborne adult. The most 

 extreme example (Hcason of 1909) was an advance of 120 miles through pre- 

 viously uninfestc'd areas of Mississippi apparently largely as a result of 

 >. wind transport by cyclonic storms. More noticeable advance in the direction 



\ 



^ 



