34 BULLETIN 1284, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
One strain of Dwarf White milo was grown at Manhattan in 1920. ' 
(Table 7.) No smutted plants were found in a total of 131. Another 
strain of this milo was grown at Brooklyn in 1921. Only 13 plants 
matured, none of which was smutted. 
Three strains of Standard White milo were grown at Columbia; 
only one plant out of a total of 653 was infected. Standard White 
milo (C. I. No. 352) was grown six years at Manhattan and four years, 
at Amarillo. At Manhattan one plant out of a total of 700 was 
infected and at Amarillo one plant out of 694. Two different strains 
were grown at Brooklyn and at Rosslyn, but no infected plants were 
obtained in totals of 114 at Brooklyn and 95 at Rosslyn. 
Out of a total of 2,256 plants of Standard White milo grown at the 
various stations, only three infected plants were observed — one at 
Columbia, one at Manhattan, and one at Amarillo. The smutted 
plants at Columbia and Manhattan may have belonged to some 
other susceptible variety of sorghum. An uninfected plant of other 
varieties was occasionally found in the rows, but this was easily 
recognized and removed. The smutted plants, however, could not 
be identified positively. 
There seems to be no doubt that the infected plant at Amarillo 
was Standard White milo. Only a portion of the head on this plant 
was infected. A few sound kernels were obtained and sown the fol- 
lowing season, all of which developed typical Standard White milo 
plants (PI. X, tig. 2). 
Nine strains of Dwarf Yellow milo were grown at Columbia. A 
total of 1,912 plants was obtained, none of which was infected. 
Some of these strains were grown also at Rosslyn and Brooklyn, with 
the same results. Dwarf Yellow milo (C. I. No. 332) was grown four 
years at Manhattan and Amarillo, with a total of 1,564 plants. At 
Rosslyn 555 plants and at Brooklyn 89 plants of this strain were 
grown. At Manhattan 223 plants of a strain from the Kansas 
station were grown in 1920 and 1921. In no case did any infection 
occur. 
Four strains of Standard Yellow milo were grown at Columbia, 
with a total of 455 plants. Standard Yellow milo (C. I. No. 234) 
was grown three years at Manhattan and four at Amarillo, a total 
of 1,051 plants being grown at the two stations. At Manhattan a 
strain from Hays, Kans., also was grown two years, with a total of 
206 plants. At Brooklyn 178 plants of different strains were grown 
and at Rosslyn 184 plants. No infection appeared in any of these 
experiments. 
It is very evident that all the milos grown possess remarkable 
qualities of resistance to the covered kernel smut. At all five of the 
stations a total of 4,529 plants of Dwarf Yellow milo was grown 
and no smut observed. (Table 7.) In view of these results the data 
reported by Kulkarni (64) are not only interesting but worthy of 
further consideration. 10 Kulkarni obtained seed of Dwarf Yellow 
10 Since this manuscript was prepared, one of the kernel smuts was reported as occurring in yellow milo in 
two localities in Texas and one in Kansas in 1923. B. F. Barnes, superintendent of the Colby Branch 
Station, Colby, Kans., found a few infected heads in Dwarf Yellow milo at that station. E. W. 
Thomas, county agent, Plainview, Tex., found a few smutted plants of the same variety in one field in Hale 
County, Tex. H. J. Clemmer, of the Dalhart Field Station, Dalhart, Tex., reported the occurrence of 
kernel smut in several fields of milo in that locality. He found 11 per cent of the heads infected in a 
part of one field. Samples of the smut and of the milo from these localities have been examined by 
members of the stall of the Office of Cereal Investigations and of the Kansas Agricultural Experiment 
Station and the identifications verified. 
