24 
C)ORN« 
Cirencester, by Prof. W. M‘Cracken, is well worth study for practical 
purposes:—. . . Another field gives a farther example of the 
influence of the date of sowing upon insect-attack.” In this case the 
crop was Barley, and the depredator the Gout Fly. 
“ The field was sown in three patches as the preceding crop of 
Swedes was fed off. The first patch was sown in March, and is 
practically free from injury. The second part was sown on April 6th, 
and is affected to the extent of about 2 per cent. The third part was 
sown on May 3rd, and has suffered to the extent of not less than 
20 per cent. Having been thickly sown, however, the yield will still 
be fairly good.” 
The above note joined to that of Prof. W. M‘Cracken, of similar 
observation as to amount of Frit-fly attack on Oats sown at various 
dates, deserves careful thought. They point to the early-sown Oats 
being so well established before the Gout Fly was ready to attack them, 
that, when it did come, either the plant had passed the condition in 
which it is suitable for egg-laying, or it was so strong that it grew on 
without injury from the attack. 
On July 31st, Chloi'ojjs-attacked Barley-heads were sent me by Mr. 
D. Petrie from Dunmore, Durrow, Queen’s Co., Ireland, as samples of 
an injury which had been noticed for the first time last year, and was 
doing much more harm on this year’s crop. 
Of the later reports, one sent from near Farnborough, Kent, on 
August 15th, noted that, of two fields that were infested, one was 
damaged in some parts to the extent of nearly half of the crop; in 
this instance some of the heads were still quite stunted and wrapped. 
The following observation was sent on August 22nd from Fairfield, 
near Bridgewater, by Mr. H. L. T. Blake, accompanied by specimens 
of Barley, in the straw, badly diseased by Chlorous- attack. The plants 
had the heads still sheathed, and ran hardly 10 in. in height. Of 
these Mr. Blake noted :—“ The plant commenced to fail (perceptibly) 
as it first came into ear, from which period of its growth it got 
gradually worse, until it dwindled down almost into nothing, and the 
ear, you will notice, has entirely perished. After the original ear 
came up and died away, other shoots have sprung up, as you will 
perceive; but they are of very feeble growth, and are quite green, 
while the rest of the Barley that has escaped the disease is almost ripe 
for cutting. The soil is of red marl, facing north, and the ground is 
undulating.” 
On August 27th, specimens that were poor in growth, but still in 
which the ears were visible, were sent me by Mr. J. B. Newitt, 
Cranford, Kettering, with the following note:—“Here is a very con¬ 
siderable amount of damage done to the crop, and the ears, where 
attacked, have in most instances not fully grown out of the sheath, 
