84 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bui. 10 
Table 55 — Cumulative effect of spraying 
(by percentages) 
Variety 
Plat 
Insect 
injury 
Fungous 
injury 
Mo. Pippin j 
I 
1 
2 
check 
5.73 
12.83 
33.54 
22.84 
57.32 
210.58 
Both plats in table 55 were sprayed in 1915, but only plat 1 
received any spray in 1914. The plats were only two rows apart 
in the same orchard. In recording fungous injury, 210 per cent 
was secured by adding together the apples affected by scab, 
blotch, and sooty blotch. 
The foregoing data, while not exhaustive, serve to indicate 
the importance of continued effort in insect and disease control. 
Table 56 — Cumulative effect of spraying 
(by percentages) 
Insect 
Fungous 
Variety 
Plat 
injury 
injury 
Jonathan .... 
1 
9.79 
30.37 
Ben Davis . . . 
1 
19.65 
50.34 
total 
11.15 
33.12 
Ben Davis . . . 
2 
110.42 
192.02 
Jonathan . 
2 
77.44 
99.95 
total 
94.62 
147.90 
At Omaha (table 56), neither plat was sprayed in 1915, the 
year in which the data were taken. Plat 1 was sprayed for five 
consecutive years prior to 1915. Plat 2 has never been sprayed. 
The plats were situated one-half mile apart. 
COST OF SPRAYING 
Accurate accounts were kept of all labor and materials used 
in spraying thruout the three seasons' work. In computing costs 
of spraying, averages were made for each type of machine, for all 
Bordeaux schedules, for lime sulphur schedules, and for the mist 
and penetration schedules. In computing the cost of lime 
sulphur the lJ-2-50 formula was used, the cost of poison being 
included. In computing the cost of Bordeaux and arsenate of lead 
the 3-4-2-50 formula was used. 
The following tables show the comparative efficiency of the 
general types of spraying machinery as well as the cost of the 
spraying. 
