39 
Glover, Townend. —Report of the Entomologist. (Rept. fU. S. ] 
Commiss. Agric., 1872, p. 121.) 
Mentions regions where special damage was done to sorghum by 
the chinch bug. Newly-sown [fall?] wheat injured in several 
counties in Indiana and Missouri, and in Linn Co., Kansas. 
Franklin Co., Ill., was overrun to the great damage of the corn 
crop, as also certain counties in Indiana and Missouri, and Linn 
Co., Kansas. In Crawford Co., Missouri, three distinct broods are 
noted: first early in May; second late in June; third about the 
last of August. [First and third are, of course, the same. ] 
LeBaron, Wm. —The Chinch Bug (Microjifl rus leucopterus , Say). 
(Third Bept. State Ent. Ill., 1871, pp. 142-156. See also 5tli 
Ann. Rept. Board of Trustees Ill. Industrial Univ., 1871-72, 
pp. 193-200.) 
Notes the excessive prevalence of the chinch bug in 1871. The 
most serious depredations occurred in a belt of territory 100 miles 
wide, commencing in the western part of Indiana and extending 
more than 400 miles west, and embracing more than 40,000 square 
miles. Over this area spring wheat was reduced to not more than 
a quarter of an average crop, and in many places wholly destroyed; 
barley was less than half a crop; and oats not more than three 
fourths. Center of belt a little north of the center of Illinois, 
being about on a line with the junction of Iowa and Missouri, and 
taking in a corresponding part of Southern Iowa and Nebraska 
and of Northern Missouri and Kansas. South of this belt no con¬ 
siderable damage, owing to prevalence of winter wheat as a crop 
[ r]; and north of it a tolerable crop of spring wheat was harvested, 
though chinch bugs were numerous enough in Northern Illinois 
and Southern Wisconsin to damage the crop somewhat and to ex¬ 
cite serious apprehensions for the future. Estimates the “total 
loss by chinch bugs in the State of Illinois in the year 1871 up¬ 
wards of $10,500,000/’ and the combined loss in the Northwestern 
States, from this insect, during the same year, upwards of $30,000,000. 
Treats of destruction and prevention under six heads. (1) Natural 
enemies. Lady-bugs, larvae of lace-winged flies, and quails are, he 
says, so reported. He has no hope of essential aid from natural 
enemies in destruction of chinch bug. (2) Early sowing. Says 
this seems not a reliable measure. In this connection recommends 
the plan of sowing stimulating substances (as salt and lime) with 
the grain to hasten ripening as a plan well worthy of trial, and 
cites an encouraging instance. (3) Prevention of migration. Men¬ 
tions as the two principal measures, plowing a succession of 
furrows across path of insects, and barricading with fence-boards 
besmeared with coal-tar or kerosene oil. Says the last plan is 
most effective, but that the boards may be discarded as an un¬ 
necessary trouble and expense, as it has been demonstrated that 
a stream of coal-tar poured on the ground will intercept the pro¬ 
gress of the insects if renewed every other day. (4) Burning 
corn stalks and rubbish in the fall. On this point he quotes at 
some length from a letter written him on the subject by a practical 
