39 



Glover, Townend. — Eeport of the Entomologist. (Eept. [U. S.] 

 Commiss. Agric, 1872, p. 121.) 



Mentions regions where special damacje was clone to sorghum by 

 the chinch bug. Newly-sown [fall?] wheat injured in several 

 counties in Indiana and Missouri, and in Linn Co., Kansas. 

 Franklin Co., 111., was overrun to the great damage of the corn 

 crop, as also certain counties in Indiana and Missouri, and Linn 

 Oo., Kansas. In Crawford Co., Missouri, three distinct broods are 

 noted: first early in May; second late in June; third about the 

 last of August. [First and third are, of course, the same.] 



LeBaeon, Wm. — The Chinch Bug { Micropierus leucopi ems, Say). 

 (Third Eept. State Ent. 111., 1871, pp. 142-ll6. See also 5th 

 Ann. Eept. Board of Trustees 111. Industrial Univ., 1871-72, 

 pp. 193-200.) 



Notes the excessive prevalence of the chinch bug in 1871. The 

 most serious depredations occurred in a belt of territory 100 miles 

 wide, commencing in the western part of Indiana and extending 

 more than 400 miles west, and embracing more than 40,000 square 

 miles. Over this area spring wheat was reduced to not more than 

 a quarter of an average crop, and in many places wholly destroyed; 

 barley was less than half a crop; and oats not more than three 

 fourths. Center of belt a little north of the center of Illinois, 

 being about on a line with the junction of Iowa and Missouri, and 

 taking in a corresponding part of Southern Iowa and Nebraska 

 and of Northern Missouri and Kansas. South of this belt no con- 

 siderable damage, owing to prevalence of winter wheat as a crop 

 f r]; and north of it a tolerable crop of spring wheat was harvested, 

 though chinch bugs were numerous enough in Northern Illinois 

 and Southern Wisconsin to damage the crop somewhat and to ex- 

 cite serious apprehensions for the future. Estimates the "total 

 loss by chinch bugs in the State of Illinois in the year 1871 up- 

 wards of $10,500,000," and the combined loss in the Norlhwestern 

 States, from this insect, during the same year, upwards of $30,000,000. 

 Treats of destruction and prevention under six heads. (1) Natural 

 enemies. Lady-bugs, larv^je of lace-winged flies, and quails are, he 

 says, so reported. He has no hope of essential aid from natural 

 enemies in destruction of chinch bug. (2) Early sowing. Says 

 this seems not a reliable measure. In this connection recommends 

 the x>lan of sowing stimulating substances (as salt and lime) with 

 the grain to hasten ripening as a plan well w^orthy of trial^ and 

 •cites an encouraging instance. (3) Prevention of migration. Men- 

 tions as the two principal measures, plowing a succession of 

 furrows across path of insects, and barricading with fence-boards 

 besmeared with coal-tar or kerosene oil. Says the last plan is 

 most effective, but that the boards may be discarded as an un- 

 necessary trouble and expense, as it has been demonstrated that 

 a stream of coal-tar poured on the ground will intercept the pro- 

 gress of the insects if renewed every other day. (4) Burning 

 •corn stalks and rubbish in the fall. On this point he quotes at 

 some length from a letter written him on the subject by a practical 



