-1+51- 
from 25 to 50 percent of the crop was threatened. The most significant 
feature of the season was the discovery of this weevil in Manatee County, 
Fla. , in May. Scouting revealed the presence of the insect in nearly every 
pepper field in the county, "but none in the adjoining counties. An eradication 
campaign was inaugurated and all of the pepper plants and wild host plants in 
the infested area were destroyed. In the collections of the National Museum 
there are specimens labeled "Mansura, La., June 29 , I90U." 
MEXICAN BEAN BEETLE 
Reports on the survival of the Mexican bean beetle in cages at Colum- 
bus, Ohio, a.t Newark, Del., and in the Estancia Valley, N. Mex. , showed that 
the winter mortality was higher than usual. The beetle overcame this early 
handicap, and by the middle of July it had built up heavy populations over 
most of its range east of the Mississippi River. By the end of the season 
it had caused the most serious injury in several years. It extended its 
range of destructive abundance and several points of new infestation were 
discovered. The accompanying map shows the spread since 1932. 
BEET LEAFHOPPER 
The curly-top disease caused by the beet leaf hopper was not so serious 
as in 193^« Cool, wet weather in the spring retarded development of the 
leafhopper in the S a n Joaquin Valley and little damage was done. The insect 
became normally abundant in Idaho and Utah and injured beets, tomatoes, and 
beans. Weather favorable to the growth of sugar beets prevailed in July and 
some of the curly- top injury to the crop was overcome. 
INTRODUCED WEEVIL 
A recently introduced weevil, Calomycterus setarius Roelofs, attract- 
ed considerable attention during the summer in isolated heavy infestations *, 
in Cumberland County, Pa. , Baltimore County, Md., and Litchfield and Pair- 
field Counties, Conn. A great variety of host plants were attacked. The 
weevil was first discovered in this country in 192J in W u stchester County, 
N. Y. , and in 1932 it was found to be established in Litchfield County, 
Conn, 
BOLL WEEVIL 
Damage by the boll weevil was comparatively light during 1935* Through- 
out the States where the weevil occurs the infestations varied greatly, even 
in limited areas. These variations in abundance were due to such factors 
as local differences in rainfall > proximity to hibernation quarters, and 
whether or not the cotton leaf worm defoliated the cotton in the fall of 193^ • 
In some counties during midsummer the infestations ranged from less than 5 
percent punctured squares in some fields to more than 90 percent in others. 
Although in all sections the weevils were largely held in check by natural 
conditions, this was especially true in the southern and northern thirds of 
the Cotton Belt. In the region within 200 miles of the Gulf coast in the 
States east of Texas the population was never heavy, except in limited areas. 
This favorable condition that prevailed in the Gulf coast region was due 
partly to a light spring population, because few weevils entered hibernation 
LIBRARY 
STATE PLANT BOAKD 
