Quarterhj Report of the Hon. Consulting Entomologist . 133 
Special inquiry has been made as to measures serviceable for pre- 
vention of attack of Wheat-bulb Maggot, ’which is the cause of 
serious yearly loss in many districts. This I drew attention to in 
my December report to the Society, and, in my Annual Report for the 
year 1891, I have given in detail the observations which point to tlie 
egg of the wheat-bulb fly {Hylemyia coarctata) being laid in summer 
or autumn on the fallow or exposed land, after which condition of 
land attack of wheat-bulb maggot is found to be most prevalent in 
the young wheat plants. Therefore measures, such as applications 
of chemical dressings, or ploughing with a skim coulter attached, or 
any treatment calculated to poison the young maggots in the surface 
soil, or to bury them well down, might be expected to be of use. 
Also, where the bulb maggot attack is of frequent recurrence the 
practice (adopted some years ago in a badly infested district) of not 
putting in wheat after bare fallow would not fail to be of service. 
Some good might just possibly be done (in the time now approach- 
ing) by keeping careful watch on young wheat in fields where attack 
may be likely to occur, and at once applying some stimulating dress- 
ing. The mischief is caused by the small maggot feeding within 
one or more shoots (usually the centre or strongest shoot) ; usually, 
also, the damage is not observed, or at least reported, until April or 
May, when the whole field is markedly infested and past hope. If, 
instead, the attack was taken early, and some such chemical dressing 
applied (suitable to the nature and condition of the soil) as would 
push on growth, this would be very likely to help on the weak 
plants, or cause the others to tiller in time to give an even crop. A 
mixture of guano and salt sometimes answers exceedingly well in 
corn insect attack. 
Additional reports of the results of the summer attack of Diamoxd- 
back-Moth were sent in answer to my inquiries from a few selected 
localities at distances along the main area of attack up to January 
3rd of the present year. These gave for the most part observations 
of the leafage on the attacked plants having been enormous (quite 
over-luxuriant) and the bulbs small, or smaller than they ought 
to have been, and in some instances the amount of injury had proved 
very serious. On December 23rd, Mr. James Swan, of Inverpeffer, 
Carnoustie, Forfar, who had observed the attack carefully from its 
commencement, summarised the very full details he placed in my 
hands in these words : “ In fifty years’ actual practice, the Diamond- 
back moth has hit the heaviest blow I have experienced.” 
The recent attack has certainly done a great deal of harm, but 
■with regard to the future, though any forecast must of course be 
very uncertain, still, after going into all recent details and previous 
records as carefully as I could, it does not appear to me that we are 
likely to be troubled by a recurrence of such another bad attack of 
this infestation unless, as in last year, we have coincidence of 
similar meteorological conditions (i.e., wind and weather influences) 
at the time, and also following on those of preceding months and 
coinciding, where the damage was worst, with the suitable condition 
of the turnips to receive attack. 
