yy^ r.,T;r?rr ^22CT 



224 



431. Jacobson, M. 1966. Chemical insect attractants and repellents. Annu. 

 Rev. Entoraol. 11: 403-422. 



This review summarizes the main recent advances in the field of chemical 

 attractants and repellents since 1960. Insects in which females and males 

 produce sex attractants or excitants are listed. 



432. James, P. E.; Hollingsworth, J. P.; Schoenleber, L. G. ; and Glover, 

 D., Jr. 1973. A mobile facility for rearing insects. J. Econ. Entoraol. 

 66: 243-245. 



An experimental mobile laboratory for insect rearing was designed and constructed 

 to determine facilities for mass rearing of cotton insects, particularly the boll 

 weevil, Anthonomus grandis Boheman. It was expected that this facility would 

 serve as a model for larger-scale production units. Also, such small mobile 

 units could serve as alternate facilities in case of equipment break-down or 

 disease problems at major production facilities. 



433. Jenkins, J. N. 1976. Boll weevil resistant cotton varieties. In Boll 

 Weevil Suppression, Management, and Elimination Technology. Proceedings 

 of a Conference, February 13-15, 1974, Memphis, Tennessee. U.S. Agric. 

 Res. Serv. [Rep.] ARS-S-71, pp. 45-49. 



Research in host plant resistance has been em{)hasized from the beginning at 

 the Boll VJeevil Research Laboratory (BWRL) in Mississippi. We have found a 

 number of cotton lines with various degrees of boll weevil resistance. This 

 report, however, concerns itself only with one character for resistance, 

 Feego bract. From a genetic standpoint, this morphological trait is the 

 easiest to work with of all the traits we have found. It is also the one 

 that has the greatest potential at the present for near-immediate use in 

 variety development. Though it has been tested more extensively than any- 



