ables for this year—have, of course, the explanation already given; 
iz., that the tiees set very full in spring and early cast a great 
uantity of their surplus apples. 
A curious drop in the ratios of injury of both check and ex- 
eiimental tiees for the observation of September 8, probably 
larks an interval between second and third broods similar to 
rat already noticed between the first and second of last year.* * 
he same indication is apparent on Tables IV., VI., and IX. 
Of the apples borne by these trees, we examined 2,060 from the 
leek, and 1,580 from the tree sprayed with poison. The number 
a these and several other of the trees was so great that towards 
le end of the season we did not handle them all, but stopped 
hen we had demonstrated that we had a fair average of the 
hole. 
The incieased benefit from a second spraying is made evident 
y a comparison of Table IV. with the preceding one. Although the 
itio of benefit to fallen fruit is somewhat less, the fifty-one per 
mt. benefit to the picked apples once sprayed (TableIII.) be- 
>mes eighty-four percent, after the second spraying (Table IV.). 
uriously, the third spraying (Table V.) seems' to have been 
Lthout important effect, the benefit to fallen fruit being a little 
eater and that to picked fruit a little less on this table than on 
e preceding. The record from two other trees not tabulated 
‘re, gives a similar result. 
The respective advantages of spraying once and twice are more 
dj represented on Table VI. The benefit from the second spray- 
g begins to be conspicuous August 31, and continues ciuite ' to 
e end ot the season, October 4. The total effect on the fallen 
nt is apparently slight; but this is due to the fact that much 
e argei part of the apples fell from general causes early in the 
ison. I he ratios relating to the pickpd fruit are not disturbed 
t ns superabundance of early windfalls, and more correctly ex- 
3it the lelative effects of spraying once and twice. By this the 
ma ?u P lc ked fruit after twice spraying was only about one 
venth that alter spraying but once. 
The most remarkable exhibition of benefit is that of Table VII., 
ere a single tree ‘ twice sprayed—the Vandevere variety- 
compared with its selected check. The damage to the latter 
lges as will be seen, from naught to sixty-two per cent., the 
leral average for the fallen fruit being forty-eight per cent, and 
• the picked apples forty-three per cent.; while that to the treated 
e varies only from zero to six per cent., the “total fallen” being 
th f ] ^ Vie were rft P° rted by the assistants engaged ontheworkas “mostly 
• w not n?ore S th«n m h nr l' &S o OS T J I ul1 « rown - bot with specimens occasionally oecuriiug 
n th half SI *?: September 2", on the other hand, when 1,146 apples were exam 
^ fourths to five sixths) of the apples contained very small 
tn October l TnX msnvnfthT enrl , and apparently just entering, the others being all full 
one third to y of the apples contained very young larvae, although th- majoritv 
one third to two thirds grown. The notes of the assistants are supported by alcoholic sped- 
S. 
