68 
CORN. 
On the 19tli of July Mr. Robert Holland further mentioned that, 
though he had grown Oats for thirty years at least, and been in the 
habit of observing, yet he could not positively say he had seen Tulip- 
root until the previous year. He further remarked, “ The plants I 
sent you were grown in Flintshire, though only four miles from 
Chester, but the disease was also observed in Cheshire, at Mr. John 
Lea’s of Stapleford Hall, not far from Tarporley. . . . The field 
from which my specimens were obtained was in Wheat in 1885. The 
Wheat was succeeded by Oats in 1886, and, as I mentioned, they were 
destroyed by the disease. They were sown on the same ground again 
this year, partly with a view of ascertaining whether they would 
again be affected. They are so, though hardly to so great an extent. 
That the Oats, this year, were attacked by the parasites which 
remained in the ground, or in the stubble, from last year’s crop, one 
can scarcely doubt; but then, how did last year’s Oats become 
diseased ? I think, but I am not sure, that the Wheat was grown on 
Clover ley; but we are not subject to Clover-sickness in this part of 
the country.” 
In this case (as in many others) we cannot tell for sure how the 
attack came, but still Mr. Holland’s note shows that the land has been 
four years under plants subject to Eelworm, so that a change to a 
crop not liable to infestation is now important. 
On August 80th I was favoured with the following report by Mr. 
Robert Dundas, of Arniston, Gorebridge, Mid Lothian, N.B. In the 
previous year Mr. Dundas had contributed some notes of much 
interest on the subject, together with a map of fields attacked at 
Arniston Mains, which I have given at page 42 of my 10th Report, 
and the information now added is very serviceable, both as showing 
that attack is not necessarily continued from one year to the next; 
consequently it would help very much in badly infested districts, if we 
could have notes of treatment which has been used in these cases 
where attack has not continued, and also in cases where attack lias 
continued. 
Mr. Dundas mentioned, . . . “In 1885 a field of Oats w T as 
badly affected with the disease, but during the past two years nothing 
has been observed wrong with the pasture. In 1886 another field of 
Oats was badly affected by the disease, one spot in particular, of 
about four acres in extent, being quite destroyed. This year, on that 
place, no sign appears of anything being amiss with the Clover, which 
is a good crop. 
“In 1887 a third field of Oats has been affected by Tulip-root, from 
which the enclosed bundle has been taken. But instead of great 
spots over several acres this year, the spots in the field affected are few 
in number, and only of a few yards in extent. In fact, if I had not 
