ANSWERS TO CIRCULAR NO. 
[85] 
had made theil appearance by destroying by baud, but without success ; for suddenly, 
without the possibility of such an increase by reproduction, they would appear ill such 
numbers as to destroy every leaf in two or three days. Again, in another instance, 
when no worms were in this neighborhood, four days after a diligent and careful 
search, when no sign of them could be found, they suddenly appeared, and in three 
days not a cotton leaf could be found in my held except about one acre near the mid- 
dle of it, which was planted much later than the rest, not a leaf of which they touched, 
although some of the branches interlocked : but some weeks afterwards, when this 
patch of eotton had arrived at the same stage of growth, it was also stripped of its 
leaves as the other. In all my observation, the worm when it has exhausted the sup- 
ply of cotton leaf u iU eat nothing etee, but crawls up on the weeds, bushes, and feuces, 
and dies. 
8. From this experience, connected with the facts of their irregular appearance, and 
that only under the same conditions of wet, warm, and cloudy weather, which is always 
unfavorable for a healthy grow th of the cotton plant, and that the worm never ap- 
pears in the spring or early summer, at least not in such numbers as to be noticed; 
its power of quick reproduction ; its total absence from the cotton plant at that time 
when it could not escape detection ; and the temperature of May and June alw ays 
high enough for the development of the worm through all its forms, leads me to believe 
that the Cotton Caterpillar is the spontaneous production of diseased cotton plants. 
9. All efforts todestro\ and stop the progress of the worm when the condition for 
its appearance and increase is favorable has proved futile so far as my experience 
extendi In the cultivation of cotton for thirty yean. 
Yours, very respectfully, 
H. O. DIXON. 
Prof. C. V. BlLBT. 
T.APTttttA Chkkokke County, Tkxas, 
October 13, 1S79. 
In answer to your 4th inquiry, vi/. : "Do wet or dry summers favor its multiplica- 
tion?" I would answet that about ten years ago the Kev. N. A. Davis, now of Jack- 
sonville, iu this county, suggested to me the probability that the small red or brown 
ant. abundant in the South, was the nat ural enemy of the Cotton Worm, and especially 
effective during dry summers. After two summers' observation, I was convinced of 
the truth of the reverend gent leman's conclusions. His opinion and two years' obser- 
vation induced me to write the following to one of our county papers: 
THE COTTON WORM (HT1). 
"The danger from the Cotton Worm is now over and we may review the history of 
its depredations during the summer. Only a few farmers have suffered save in the 
anxiety which they have felt during the maturation of their crops. If you recollect, 
the worm was worst; during the few weeks following the rainy season : and as the dry 
season since advanced, the worm gradually receded and the hopes of the fanner 
revived. The first generation of these troublesome insects appealed to have taken 
place in the wettest lands early in the spring, and it was about the second generation 
that menaced the crops. Wet weather favors the increase of the worm and dry- 
weather soon destroys it. This observation has been made by many fanners long ago. 
A similar observation has long since been made in regard to the Cotton Louse. Early 
in the spring (when the cotton is in its first and second leaf), if the weather is rainy, 
the louse soon covers the tender cotton plant and threatens to destroy it. But when 
the dry season supervenes the little insect disappears, and the plant soon recovers 
from the mischief. To what shall we attribute the disappearance of the insect iu both 
cases? It is evidently due to that little predatory and almost omnipotent ant which 
retreats to its hole and gathers in large bunches in dry places during the rainy sea- 
sous ; but whenever the drought sets in, it climbs the stalk of every plant in search of 
prey. It is carnivorous and deals death and destruction among insects in the crawl- 
ing stage of existence wherever it goes. When the Cotton Louse multiplies danger- 
ously on the tender plant, favored by a rainy season, the fanner loses all hope of his 
crop, unless the dry weather comes and the little ant begins to milk the cows (the lies 
are called 'ant cows') by climbing up to them and striking them with their hands, 
and eating a fluid which is made to exude from them by the concussion. This procesi 
soon destroys them. Then, at a later season, especially if the ant is driven to its shel- 
ter by rains, the Cotton Worm, having increased to a dangerous extent, threatens the 
more mature plant. Again the same ant, when the sunshine permits, saves the cotton 
by ( limbing the stems and seizing the flouncing worm, cuts it into two on the ground, 
to w hich both have fallen in the struggle, and thus in a very short time it thinned out 
the worm, either destroying or holding it in abeyance. 
" The history of these two enemies of cotton-growers accords with the experience of 
observers. Tlie dry weather, JW se, does not save the cotton from louse or worm in 
