Historic, archived document

Do not assume content reflects current
scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

BULLETIN No. 363

Contribution from the Bureau of Entomology
L. O. HOWARD, Chief

Washington, D. C. PROFESSIONAL PAPER. May 8, 1916.

THE PINK CORN-WORM:
AN INSECT DESTRUCTIVE TO CORN IN THE CRIB.

By F. H. Curtrenven, In Charge of Truck Crop and Stored Product Insect Investigations.

CONTENTS.
Page. Page

TTETOGUICTION Rc setae ee ts seek we i eEastonyzandslitera tunes. eee ees eee 12
NatuEcOMmni Utyaesses-o- oe ee Re eee Zia PASS OGIAeOGINS CCL aes see ae eterna ae ee 14
AD OSGr OMe IR 5 G8 PE Sa es Seal Naturallememleseee aes ee = Seay seen eee aya 15

INOO MONA Sse cuoEssebos lcs oe esse oeaae 33 ee thodstolcomtroleee sass ee 15

PIREN OTE Riera a Pe eM Sled or i 4 Carbongbisulphide mes 22 se wee ee 16

RN eRyOll ey lanvaesere aaee Seas. e wen os URES) Wirectionsforuses- sys 16

heywull-orowmpatyas- seep eee sae 5 PLO CALLGIONS Aer eee epee: Bee 17

ALA eyPUP Base See se Soke ees RE Ere 6 Otherremediosy ss: se Aw arp oer 18

PIRI \COCOO TIS eesti eee ce cecises Ors |e Summary ees cee set cee ae Pee 18
DISUEIDUEIOMes sesame = eee nce ea Gm|e bibliography seems eee esse ee eee 19
ecordsofanjuryecesccee 2 se ese see oe se 6

INTRODUCTION.

For nearly three-fourths of a century the larva of a small moth (Ba-
trachedra rileyi Wals.), commonly known as the pink corn-worm (fig. 1),
has been found in corn in the
field and in store as well as in
blasted cotton bolls. Itwas
not, however, until the year
1914 that this species was Fie. 1.—The pink corn-worm (Batrachedra rileyi): Full-
reco oniz ed asa p est. Dur- grown larva, lateral view. Enlarged. (Original.)
ing November and December of that year complaints were made of
damage by the pink corn-worm to corn in cribs. The number of
complaints was enormous and the damage in Mississippi was so
widespread that much alarm was felt in infested districts. The
correspondence, which will presently be quoted, shows plainly the
extent of the insect’s ravages as also the fear that entire crops

NotEe.—This bulletin points out the increasing menace of this insect, which has never been considered
a serious enemy of grain, but now assumes nearly the same importance as the Angoumois grain moth and is
much more troublesome than the European grain moth. It also recommends methods of control. It
will prove of interest to farmers in the region extending from South Carolina westward to central Texas,
southward to southern Texas, and northward to Arxansas and Tennessee.

26427°—Bull. 363—16——1

2 BULLETIN 363, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

of corn in the principal regions infested might be lost. While the
insect confined its attacks largely to Mississippi, it was also observed
in injurious numbers in Arkansas, Alabama, Texas, and Louisiana.
' Singularly, the species was not described until the year 1882, when
Lord Walsingham gave it the name of Batrachedra rileyr, but it now
assumes nearly the same importance as the Angoumois grain moth 1
and is much more troublesome now than the European grain moth.”
The species sufficiently resembles the latter to have been mistaken
for it by Glover and others, and its work has been compared to that
of the former. In reality it bears some resemblance to both species
in appearance and habits.
The pink corn-worm was first brought to the writer’s attention
in ripening ears of corn from Texas in 1894 (Chittenden, 1897).3

From the fact that the larve first seen were feeding on the husks.

and the species was not then identified as feeding naturally on the
kernels of corn, it was for convenience called the corn-husk moth,
and this name might have been retained had not the insect devel-
oped later into a destructive grain-feeding species. The names
pink corn-worm, pink worm, and red corn-worm are now in general

use in the South.
NATURE OF INJURY.

In material received from Baton Rouge, La., and Beeville, Tex.,
in 1895, the little rose-colored larve were noticed by the writer
chiefly between the husks, which were fresh and succulent, and on

these they were feeding. A few moths were afterwards reared

from the husked ear. The Texas sending afforded a fair opportunity
for the study of the work of the species. One undeveloped ear
harbored numbers of the larvee which had gnawed into every part
of it from the outer husk to the dwarfed ear within.

The injured grains when examined individually have somewhat the
appearance of being infested by the Indian-meal moth (Plodia inéer-
punctella Hbn.) but not by the Angoumcis grain moth. The larve
evidently begin to feed on the grains while the latter are still ‘‘in the
milk” or very soon afterwards, beginning at their insertion and work-
ing outward toward the crown. The embryo and surrounding parts
are hollowed out and the seed envelope is often eaten away about the
base or ‘‘tip”’ of the seed. An astonishing amount of frass is deVel-
oped which is neither eaten a second time nor packed tightly within
the kernel, as is evidently the case with the Angoumois moth larva,
but the particles, being loosely jomed by webbing, fill the interstices
between the kernels. (Pl. I.) Usually a single larva inhabits a
kernel but frequently the interior of a grain is completely devoured,
so that the only part remaining is the thin outer integument inclosing
a varying amount of accumulated frass. Doubtless this is the work

1 Sitotroga cerealella Zell. 2 Tinea granella lL. 3 See Bibliography, p. 19.

-
+
\
a
a.

THE PINK CORN-WORM. 33

of more than one caterpillar. It will be noted that the caterpillar
does not confine itself, as does the Angoumois moth, to the kernel or
any part of it, but attacks seed, husk, and cob alike.

While no positive statement can be made as to the cause of the sud-
_ den increase of the pink corn-worm, it may, perhaps, be due to the
fact that cotton is not cultivated on so large a scale or so universally
as in the past, and possibly it may be due to the destruction of the
bolls by plowing them under as a remedy against the boll weevil. These
practices would naturally have the effect of driving the moths to
deposit their eggs on corn, and this acquired taste of the larve might
in time be transmitted to their descendants. There can be no doubt
that when. corn is left too long in the field the ears are more easily
‘penetrated by the insects. Often, too, if they are permitted to remain
there over long they become moist, and if stored in this condition
injury by the pink corn-worm and other insects is greatly hastened.
Still another practice favors the multiplication of the moth, namely,
storing corn too long in the husk. The layers of husks just under the
outer sheath are frequently badly eaten at about the middle, only the
longitudinal veins being rejected. On one fully developed ear nearly
every kernel was infested and the ear was so completely enveloped in
frass and webbing as to be useless for any purpose. [Every ear in
which this species was found lodged had been first attacked by the
corn-ear worm (Heliothis obsoleta Fab.). (PL. I.)

DESCRIPTION.

THE MOTH.

Batrachedra rileyt belongs to the same lepidopterous superfamily 1
as the Angoumois and European grain moths, but to a different
family.?- From either of the others this species may be easily dis-
tinguished by its smaller size and by its remarkably slender hind-
wings and their correspondingly long fringes. The forewings are
banded and feebly mottled with yellow, reddish-brown, and black.
The antenne are white, annulated with fuscous, and the legs are
banded with fuscous. (See fig. 2.)

The wings measure, when expanded from tip to tip, a little less
than half an inch (9-11 mm.).

The moths are very active on their feet and when at rest fold
their forewings closely together with their tips ‘‘cocked up” after
the manner of many other tineids and related moths. |

Following is the original description by Walsingham:

Head chestnut-brown; palpi widely divergent, whitish, with an oblique pale
brown mark on each side near the end of the second joint, and two or three brownish

1 Superfamily Tineina.

2 Family Elachistidae.

2 Walsingham, Lord.—Notes on Tineidae of North America. In Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc., v. 10, p. 198-
199, 1882.

4 BULLETIN 363, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

spots on the sides of the apical joint. Antennze with white and fuscous annulations;
the basal joint elongate, chestnut brown. Fore-wings chestnut-brown, slightly
shaded with fuscous towards the costal margin; a whitish ochreous streak at the base of

“the dorsal margin, followed by two or three other smaller ones along the dorsal margin
(in some specimens these are obsolete); above the dorsal margin are two oblique
whitish ochreous streaks, the first before the middle, the second before the anal |
angle. A similar streak from the costal margin immediately before the apex is out-
wardly margined by a streak of black scales, the apex and apical margin being alse
black; there is also a faint fuscous streak running downwards through the cilia below
the apex. On the cell are two elongate patches of black scales, one immediately
before the middle of the wing, the other halfway between this and the base. Fringes
erey, with a slight yellowish tinge. Hind wings pale greyish. Hind tibie greyish
white, outwardly fuscous; hind tarsi whitish, with a wide fuscous band followed by
two fuscous spots on their outer sides. Expanse 11 millim.

Fig. 2.—The pink corn-worm: Moth, showing head covered with scales; below,
at left, head showing eyes at side; below, at right, hind leg. Moth much en-
larged, head and leg more enlarged. (Original.)

THE EGG.

The eggs of this species resemble considerably those of the Angou-
mois grain moth (Svtotroga cerealeila). They have been found
deposited on dry corn husks and in such locations are much flat-
tened on the surface, differing in this respect from those of Sitotroga.
The egg may be described as follows:

Flattened oval; widest near the middle; truncate at one end and narrowed at the
other, with the surface strongly wrinkled, forming coarse, irregular, ridgelike longi-
tudinal. lines. As would naturally be expected in a species so much smaller than
the Angoumois moth the egg is much smaller, and instead of being red it is pearly
white throughout with a perceptible iridescence.

Measurement: Length, 0.4 mm.; width, 0.1 mm.

The eggs are deposited singly or in groups up to three or four.
Since they are nearly colorless, not pinkish like those of the Angou-
mois moth, they are quite difficult to locate with the unaided eye.
The egg is illustrated by figures 3 and 4.

Bul. 363, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE I.

WORK OF THE CORN-EAR WORM AND THE PINK CoRN-WoRrM.

Corn ears showing primary injury by corn-ear worm (Heliothis obsoleta) at top
and additional injury by pink corn-worm (Batrachedra rileyi), especially on
right ear. (Original.)

PLATE Il.

Bul. 363, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.

t

hae
“-<: FT pas
Peed

ty
ten?

On i

COCOON OF THE PiNK CORN-WoRM ON SECTION OF DRY CORN HUSK, SHOWING A

ALSO LOCATION OF ONE

I

PUPA NEAR TOP AND TWO OVERLAPPING NEAR MIDDLE

OR TWO OTHERS AT LEFT.

(ORIGINAL.)

THE PINK CORN-WORM. 5

THE YOUNG LARVA.

The larva when first hatched is nearly white, but soon becomes
pinkish. The head and thoracic plate are darker. It is at this time
about 1 mm. in length and quite slender.

Fig. 3.—The pink corn-worm: Eggs, highly magnified. (Original. )

THE FULL-GROWN LARVA.

When full grown the larva of this species bears some resemblance
to that of the Indian-meal moth (Plodia interpunctella). It is, how-

Fig. 4.—The pink
corn-worm: Ege,
highly magnified.
(Original. )

along the sides.

ever, considerably smaller and more slender, and is
somewhat flattened by comparison. It may be de-
scribed as follows:

When fully extended it is about eight times as long as wide.
Head quite narrow, in contour nearly identical with that of
Plodia; of the same pale brown color, with sutures well marked,
and appendages and mouth-parts still darker. Thoracic plate
nearly one-third wider than head, well divided at middle; light
brown dorsally and dark brown at sides. Thorax and dorsum
sparsely covered with concolorous piliferous tubercles with incon-
spicuous hairs. Body entirely pale carneous or pinkish; lower
surface showing slight carneous tint in first two thoracic joints and
Anal plate quite small, about the same color as the head. Legs

whitish and rather short. Prolegs consisting of five pairs. Length, 8 mm.; width,

1.2 mm.

The full-grown larva is illustrated in figures 1 and 5.

6 BULLETIN 363, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

The arrangement or pattern of the pink color is shown in figure 5.
It appears to be distinctive.
THE PUPA.

Somewhat robust, about three times as long as wide; head subtruncately rounded
at apex; eyes large, black, passing under the basal joints of antenne, showing plainly
at the sides and from the back; wing-cases and antennal cases reaching nearly to
penultimate segment; segments well-defined, last segment with rounded area near
middle and terminating with several short, delicate bristles curved at extreme apices
like minute hooks; color yellowish brown.

Length, about 4.5 mm.; width, 1.5 mm.

Figure 6 shows the ventral view of the pupa at the left and the ~
ventral view in outline at the right.

THE COCOON.

The larva spins rather copiously and when fully mature it makes a
cocoon of silk, coated somewhat irregularly on the outer surface with
frass and other accumulations. A cocoon before
the writer measures 7 mm. in length and 2.8 mm.
in width, being subcylindrical and a little larger at
the end where the head rests than at the anal end.
The cocoons vary considerably in appearance, some
being much flattened as shown in Plate II. The
one described was deposited on a dry husk and
partakes of the faded gray color of the latter.

DISTRIBUTION.

As has already been stated, this species has thus
far been found most abundantly in Mississippi but
it inhabits all of the States bordering on the Gulf,
as also Arkansas, Tennessee, South Carolina, and
Georgia. (Fig.7.) The southernmost point from
which it has been reported is Brownsville, Tex., and

it.is without doubt present in Mexico. The most

ale Sn ee a northern point isin Tennessee. The species is also
va, dorsal view. En- ' found in Hawaii and may be native to the Orient,
eta i although we have no record of this. The probabili-
ties are that it is not indigenous to Hawaii but may be to Mexico and

our Gulf States.

RECORDS OF INJURY.

The reports which follow are not verbatim but they give a very
good idea of the nature of injury in different localities and the opin-
ions of practical growers in regard to losses and danger of future
eae INJURY DURING 1914.

November 9, 1914, Mr. W. B. Thomasson, jr., Murfreesboro, Ark.,
sent many ears of old, musty corn, badly injured by the pink corn-

THE PINK CORN-WORM. 7

worm as evidenced by abundant webbed-up excrement. He stated
that this species, together with the rice weevil, whose presence was
shown by characteristic holes in the corn, was at that time destroying
all corn in the crib throughout the country, and that if not prevented
from so doing the ‘“‘worms”’ would destroy all the corn there.

November 28, Mr. R. W. Harned, entomologist, Mississippi Agri-
cultural and Mechanical College, Agricultural College, Miss., sent
specimens of corn which were badly infested with this small pink
larva. He wrote:

During the past few weeks we have received dozens of complaints from correspond-
ents in regard to the damage caused by these insects. Some claim that practically
all of their corn has been consumed by these small ‘‘pink worms.’’ Many who claim
to have raised corn for years state that they have never before seen anything of this
kind. Although I have received dozens of samples of these insects I have so far
been able to rear only one adult or moth, and
Ihave noticed only one kind of larva. They
are these little pink larve that make webs
wherever they go. Insome cases they eat
the entire grains.

In order to furnish you with an idea as to
what farmers in Mississippi think about the
pink corn-worm I quote from a few letters
on file as they come to me:

Mr. W. M. Taylor, Kilmichael, Miss.,
wrote, ‘‘Iam sending specimens of small pink
worms which are doing considerable damage
in this section to stored corn.”’

George M. Bates, Union, Miss., wrote,
““There is a small worm of a reddish color
eating up the corn in the bins. I want to
know the origin of this worm and what rem-
edy to use to stop its work.”’

ie H. Rice, Sardis, Miss., wrote, ‘‘I have Fic. 6.—The pink corn-worm: Pupa, ventral
3 4 view at right, lateral view at left. Enlarged.
inspected and find a small red worm in (Onan)
every earofcorn. * * * It seems to be
eating the corn severely. I have looked at several other places around Sardis and find
them in every place.”’

C. 8. Tindall, Winona, Miss., wrote, ‘‘I am sending some pink worms found in my
corn. Every ear has from 1 to 50 worms and the corn that has been in the barn
longest seems worst infested. The recent cold weather did not kill them on the corn in
the fields.’’

Jason N. McColl, McColl, Miss., wrote, ‘‘Am inclosing small box of worms which
are very numerous in everyone’s corn in this section.”’

L. P. Bell, West, Miss., wrote, ‘‘We find a small pink-colored worm in our corn.
They enter the grain at the little end next to the cob and eat up the grains. Some farmers
report that cribs of corn have been destroyed in places. Investigation shows that they
are in all cribs of corn in more or less quantities and the farmers are becoming very
uneasy for fear the entire corn crop will be devoured. They appear to be worse in
damaged corn but are found in sound ears too.”’

G. C. Tucker, Tyro, Miss., wrote * * * ‘“‘Tamsendinganearofcorn. You will
see how itisdamaged. My entire crop is infested with thisinsect; in fact, it is almost
half ruined. I want to crib my corn at once but an afraid to do so in the condition it
is in.”’

8 BULLETIN 363, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

M. D. Doss, Dossville, Miss., wrote, ‘‘I am sending an ear of corn which has some
kind ofa worminitthatiseatingitup. Itisavery small pink-looking worm. Ihave
heard a great many people in this community talking about this worm in their corn.
Please tell me what it is and how to get rid of the same.”’

W. H. Ellard, Kosciusko, Miss., wrote, *‘ Would like to know what to do for my corn.
T find a small pink worm about the size of a large needle. They seem to work from top
to butt. Would like to know what to do to destroy them at once. I have 600 bushels
infested this way.”’

W. L. Synnott, Embry, Miss., wrote, ‘‘The corn in this section is infested with a
small pink worm which seems to be doing considerable damage.”’

J. B. Harris, Stewart, Miss., wrote * * * ‘‘T am sending you an ear of corn
infested with a worm that I am informed is destroying entire cribs of corn in some
sections. Practically all of the corn in this section is more or less infested.”’

Fic. 7.—Map showing distribution of the pink corn-worm in the United States.
(Original.)

L. L. Wilson, Ethel, Miss., wrote, ‘‘There is a little red worm eating my corn—doing
a lot of damage.”

J. W. Johnson, Rio, Miss., wrote, ‘‘I am sending you specimens of worms that are
eating up everybody’s corn in this country.”’

On December 8, Mr. Harned again wrote in regard to this species,
furnishing the followmg notes concerning correspondence during
November:

* * * “From the large number of letters that I have received this pest is un-
doubtedly most serious in Attala County and the counties immediately joining it.
There can be no doubt that this insect is causing an immense amount of damage in
this State at the present time. The farmers have become excited about it and many
have called me over the long-distance telephone and every mail brings in letters in

THE PINK CORN-WORM. 8)

regard toit. We find the ears infested in the fields as well asin the cribs. I am sure
that they work on sound cobs.

Mr. L. P. Bell, West, Miss., whose letter has just been quoted in
brief, wrote:

Investigation shows that they are in all cribs of corn * * * the farmers are

becoming uneasy about the crop. They appear to be worst in damaged corn but are
found in sound ears too.

Mr. Thos. H. Jones, who has been working under the writer’s
direction, makes practically the same statement, and Mr. J. B. Gar-
rett, Assistant Director of the North Louisiana Experiment Station,
Calhoun, La., under date of November 24, 1915, wrote as follows:

It would appear from my observation, which of course is rather limited, that the
“pink corn-worm” is found in ears of corn most frequently where they have been
previously injured by bollworms, birds, etc., but I have seen them in ears which were
perfectly sound and showed no signs of other injury.

We must accept this as the truth m spite of the fact that the writer
and several others have never seen any infested ear of corn which
was not first attacked, if ever so lightly, at the tip of the husk by the
bollworm or some other insect, giving ample opportunity for the moth
of this species to deposit her eggs.

On December 2 Mr. W. H. Horne wrote from Laurel, Miss., that
his community was thrown into considerable confusion by the dis-
covery of a little pmk corn-worm which was doing damage to many
cribs of corn. As the pest seemed to be comparatively new he was
desirous of any information that would enable the growers to stem
its ravages. He desired also a personal visit from an agent of the
department.

The Bureau of Entomology received later, through Hon. T. U.
Sisson, a communication from Mr. W. B. Rainey, Hesterville, Miss.,
stating that there was a little worm known as the “pink worm”’ in
that country eating the corn after it was cribbed. Information in
regard to some remedy was urgently requested. The statement that
the insect formed a web at the little end of the ear, and from there
proceeded downward eating and webbing, left no doubt that this was
the species in question.

On December 5 Mr. R. P. Wright, wrote from Carthage, Miss.,
amply describing this insect, saying that it threatened to destroy the
corn in that vicinity, and that numbers were imbedded in almost
every ear of corn, which they ate most voraciously.

INJURY DURING 1915.

During January, 1915, ears of corn showing average infestation
of the pmk corn-worm were received from Mr. K. H. Diggs, Lexing-
ton, Miss.; there were three varieties of corn taken from five different
cribs. The corn was planted between April 5 and May 10, and har-

26427°—Bull. 363—16 2

10 BULLETIN 363, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

vested in October and November. Mr. Diggs reported that he found
the worst damage in immature or imperfect ears where the bollworm
or birds had attacked the ear.

During the last days of December, and on January 1, this species
was reared from different lots of corn received from Mississippi.
One of these localities is Sardis; anotker is Batesville. The material
was received about November 19.

Twenty ears of corn were received on January 7 from Mr. Thos. H.
Jones, of the Bureau of Entomology, Baton Rouge, La.; all were
imperfect, every ear having been mjured and much stunted by the
corn-ear worm (Heliothis obsoleta). The larval forms of Batrachedra
rileyi were crawling over the husks of the corn in great numbers,
as also on the inside of the bags, seeking a suitable spot for pupa-
tion. There were approximately 400 larve of various sizes. The
larvee worked on the underside of the grain, especially in the decaying
erains or parts of the ears, but the actual damage resulting in this
instance was not great. Pupz were also found in various places—
in the husks, beneath the hollow grain, in the cob, and among the
castings on the ear. Mr. Jones wrote as follows:

Larvee were common in undeveloped and poorly formed ears of yellow flint corn in
a field at Baton Rouge, on January 2. The valuable ears had been pulled from the
stalks in the fall, the stalks at present being dead and brown and, for the most part,
still standing. The larvze were found beneath the husk, working on the surface of the
cob among the remains of the kernels, many of which have never matured.

January 29, Mr. J. J. W. Smith, Waterford, Marshall County, Miss.,
sent three ears of corn badly infested with the little worms. They
were described as doing much damage to the corn.

They go from one end to the other in the heart of the corn. Shucking the corn out
is the best and safest way to save the corn. Cold weather does not seem to have any

effect on them while the shuck is on the corn. But when the corn is shucked and
knocked about it helps the corn and does not give the worms such a good chance.

February 1, Mr. W. T. McDonald, Bailey, Miss., sent specimens
working in corn ears injured by the corn-ear worm, with the state-
ment——
we attribute the heavy infestation of the worms this season to the extreme dry weather
while the corn was making. I find on my place that the corn worst hurt by the
drought is worst infested by the ‘‘worms.’? * * *. I have never had any experi-
ence with the pest prior to the present season, and I may be in error.

Similar complaints were also received of injury to corn from various
other localities, as follows: Brownsville, Tex., reported by M. M.
High; Lawrence, Union, Saltillo, Harris, Louin, Battlefield, Chunky,
Coila, Beach, and Thyatira, Miss.; Fayette, Ala., and Scott, Ark.
The insect has been reported by Prof. J. M. Beal, Agricultural Col-
lege, Miss., to have attacked Kafir corn. During November of 1915
complaint of injury by this species was made at Quitman, Miss.

THE PINK CORN-WORM. 11

January 16, 1915, Mr. C. E. Smith collected in the field at Baton
Rouge, La., and sent to the writer several cobs of corn in the husk.
The cobs were poorly formed, most of them having few developed
grains, and they showed old work of the corn stalk-borer (Diatraea
saccharalis Fab.) and of the corn-ear worm. A number of adults of the
rice weevil (Calandra oryza L.) were present in the husks, and adults
of Cathartus gemellatus Duv. were abundant in the same situation.

The pink corn-worm was found among the leaves of the husk, in
the kernels, and in the cob itself. Larvze of various sizes were present,
but were mostly nearly full-erown, judging from some that were
observed in silken cocoons in all locations where larvee were observed.

It was difficult in this case to estimate how much feeding had been
done on the husks, kernels, and cobs by the Batrachedra larvee
because of the injury by, and the presence of, other insects. Larvee
of Cathartus gemellatus and of Sitotroga cerealella were also present
and may have caused some injury. It seems, however, that a part
of the silk and most of the small pellets are due to the work of the
Batrachedra larve and that some of the cavities in the kernels were
due to them.

Messrs. Thos. H. Jones and C. E. Smith found the pink corn-worm
Mm various sizes, some apparently full-grown, working on ears of
sweet corn, in company with several other species. In some ears
they were working where the husk was still green and in some cases
where the husk had begun to dry. The larve followed attack by
other insects, or where from some other cause a portion of the ear
had become exposed as from injury by birds, and ‘nipping off”’ of
the tips by a horse, etc. In many cases the ears in which they were
working were in bad condition, being so injured as to be of little value.

At Baton Rouge, La., on July 24, 1915, moths were placed in a jar
containing yellow cornmeal with a piece of sponge moistened in
sweetened water, the jar being placed in the insectary. The first
moth, coming from eggs laid by moths placed in the jar at this date,
was noted on September 30. The time taken for the development
would indicate, when compared with the rate of growth on other
substances, that cornmeal is not a particularly good food for the
larve. It will be noted here that it was possible to rear this insect
in cornmeal in experiments conducted at Washington. Another
point should be made, namely, that infestation in Louisiana has not
been anywhere near as severe as in Mississippi, and that most of the
corn ears received from the latter State were in exceedingly bad
condition.

EARLIER RECORDS.

From correspondents of the Bureau of Entomology we have had
this species from Colquitt, Perry, and Atlanta, Ga., and New Orleans,
La., in cotton bolls.

12 BULLETIN 363, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

In September of 1894 and again in November, 1895, specimens in
the several stages, together with ears of corn in which the insect was
living, were kindly sent the writer by Mr. E. A. Schwarz, who gathered
them im the field at Baton Rouge, La., and Beeville, Tex., respec-
tively.

June 6, 1909, Mr. D. K. McMillan sent some of this species feeding
in the seed-heads of sorghum from Kingsville, Tex. About the same
time he sent specimens of what he described as ‘‘ pink larve,’’ com-
mon under the shuck on corn ears, from Santa Maria; Tex. Later he
sent more material from Kingsville, Tex., from which six adults were
found on June 25, three on July 10, one on July 12, and more on
July 13, 16, and 26. On June 20 he found this species working in corn
in the husk at Beeville, Tex. November 9 of the same year the larva
was again found in the heads of sorghum.

During 1912 specimens were received from Mr. M. M. High, Bureau
of Entomology. On February 16 they were found working on corn.
Seven living larve were placed in cornmeal and all died in two days.

During 1913 this species was received in dasheens (Colocasia sp.)
from Mr. R. A. Young, Brooksville, Fla. The adults issued Decem-
ber 3 and continued to issue from the dry corms.

HISTORY AND LITERATURE.

Our early literature bearing on the biology of this moth, if we ex-
cept line notices and brief mention,’ is contained in the accounts of
Townend Glover. In his first two entomological reports (Glover,
1855, 1856) its habits are described and the insect in its several stages
figured. In the first article the species is treated under the name
of “eran moth (Tinea?)”’; in the second as the “corn worm
(Heliothes?).”” Afterwards in his Manuscript Notes from My
Journal, or Entomological Index (Glover, 1877) the same writer
refers to this species as Tinea granella, throwing the responsibility of
its previous determination as “‘[Heliothes?”’ upon D. J. Blrowne]. He
found it in the cornfields of South Carolina and Georgia in September
and says: “It infests the cornfields, where it is sheltered by the
husks, and burrows between the grains, upon which it feeds, some-
what in the manner of the Angoumois moth, except that the kernels
are more irregularly eaten,” and that ‘these worms also appear to
attack corn out of the field as well as in.’ Beyond this statement
the writer is not aware that the insect has ever been mentioned as
occurring in the granary, but froin personal experience several years
ago it was learned that it feeds upon the ripened corn and is per-
fectly capable of living indoors and that it unquestionably does so.
Whether it is possible for the species to breed ab ovo in stored, 1. e.,

1In the American Entomologist for May, 1880 (v. 3, p. 129), and again on page 121 of the appendix of

the Fourth Report of the United States Entomological Commission, incidental mention is made of this
species with the comment that, according to Chambers, it is a new species of Laverna.

THE PINK CORN-WORM. 3

dry, grain, it was at that time impossible to say. Glover also men-
tioned the occurrence of the insect in cotton bolls that had previously
been pierced by the bollworm or split open by the rot.

In an article on the cowpea-pod weevil (Chalcodermus aeneus Boh.)
the writer (Chittenden, 1904) mentioned the fact that the holes left
in the pods affected by this weevil, which were formed by cracking
or otherwise, led to secondary infestation by other insects. Among
those reared during that year from cowpea was the species under
consideration.

In a paper by Mr. E. 8S. Tucker published in 1911 (Tucker, 1911)
mention of this species is made as follows: ‘ Larve of this moth were
frequently found in fallen bolls associated with and without Araecerus
fasciculatus or its work. The larva is supposed to feed on insect
remains.’ Again in the same article Mr. Tucker notes the finding
of the same species at Alexandria, La., September 18, 1908, ‘“‘in
cornstalks infested by <Araecerus fasciculatus, or where the latter
had worked and left, and decay had begun,” * * * “nparticu-
larly in rotting, rain-soaked stalks’’; the adults maturing in the
breeding cage October 22-29. Mr. Tucker also reports that he found
it ‘in green cornstalks, and sometimes in ear tips injured by the corn
worm, Heliothis obsoleta Fab., at same place, August 2, 1909,’’ and
that ‘Mr. J. D. Mitchell submitted pupal cases taken from Araecerus
cavities, in cornstalks at Victoria, Tex., March 7, 1909.”’

In his article on insects which affect the cotton plant, Dr. L. O.
Howard (Howard, 1896) mentions this species in connection with
its occurrence in young cotton bolls, and states that there was a gen-
eral belief among planters that the species acts dependently of
‘cotton-worm damage. - He added:

This statement, however, has not yet been satisfactorily substantiated so far as it
refers to the bolls. In the young squares, however, the active little reddish larva of
this Batrachedra is very often found as unquestionably an original inhabitant, and it
undoubtedly frequently causes quite an extensive shedding of the squares. This,
however, occurs only in the spring, at a time when there is a surplus of bloom and when

many squares can be spared without great reduction of the crop. Later in the season
the Batrachedra larva is found boring in the unopened flower heads of various weeds.

The following year the writer (Chittenden, 1897) published some
notes on this species, identifying Glover’s corn-feeding tineid as
Batrachedra riley.

In 1909 Mr. Otto H. Swezey (1909) repeats Walsingham’s descrip-
tion and states that the larva was found in Hawaii feeding in various
situations, most frequently on dead vegetable matter or refuse sub-
stances, and that therefore it was not particularly injurious. The
larva was observed feeding beneath leaf-sheaths of dead cane; also in
“‘borered’’ cane stalks in places where the leaves were dirty and
sticky from the attack of aphides or leafhoppers. It was also found
working in the tassels and very numerous in sweet-corn ears, feeding

14 BULLETIN 363, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

on the ‘‘silks,’’ mner husks, pith, and other parts of the cob; also in
ears of field corn, eating into the kernels and cobs. At another time
he observed it on a large woody twining bean vine, feeding on dying
leaves and ripening pods, especially where there was an accumulation
of webs and frass, or where other insects had been at work. Among
other food plants he mentioned lantana, palm leaves, and the dead
leaves of Pandanus, banana, and ‘‘various other plants.’’ On banana
the larvee fed in the bunch on the dead or injured fruit and on the
skin of the ripened fruit which they sometimes punctured, even eating
into the fruit within.
ASSOCIATED INSECTS.

It has already been reported that this species usually follows the
attack of the corn-ear worm (feliothis obsoleta Fab. [Pl. I]), which
is true of most other forms of stored-grain insects in the South. At
about the same time the rice weevil (Calandra oryza L.) enters the
corn but does not seem to work with the same rapidity as does the
species In question. Later, in all probability, another species which
is quite common, the square-necked grain beetle (Cathartus gemellatus
Duy.) enters the ears and causes considerable damage both in the
field and in store. This same insect is often found associated with
the pink corn-worm in cotton bolls, and breeds in the same. The rice
weevil occasionally enters cotton bolls, especially when they are on the
sround, but does not breed in them, merely entering them for shelter
or for hibernation. The Angoumois grain moth (Sitotroga cerealella
Zell.) also breeds in corn with the species under consideration but thus
far has not been found in many instances. It was observed at Agri-
cultural College, Miss., in a sending dated November 28. The sor-
ghum midge (Contarinia sorghicola Coq.) was also found associated
with the pmk corn-worm in sorghum seed from Brownsville, Tex.,
collected by A. K. McMillan, Nov. 9, 1909. A common moth ([ Nola]
Nigetia sorghiella Riley) was found in the same lot with the sorghum
midge and it is probable that in this case the pimk corn-worm fol-
lowed attack of the Nigetia moth.

Among other associated insects are the foreign grain beetle
(Cathartus advena Walt.) and the coffee-bean weevil (Araecerus
fasciculatus DeG.). The former is of comparatively little economic
importance, feeding for the most part on stale grain, fruits, and other
stored material, being naturally of a scavenging nature. Neverthe-
less, it has been quite troublesome during the past two years. The
latter attacks coffee beans, mace, dried figs, and various other dried
articles of commerce, and is also found somewhat commonly in
diseased cotton bolls. A small ortalid fly (Huzesta anonae Fab.)
was reared January 29, 1914, from dasheen (Colocasia sp.) affected
with the pinkcorn-worm. This Jast species is without doubt a natural
feeder on dasheen, but no record of its habits is available.

1 ' ,
, c
ay \ . ; a f
, ,
4 :
\ Co ‘ ¥
’ A \y
\ a ° “
i = ;
4
’ ¥ } '
* , ‘ 4
r. i ,

No. 363, JU. g. peers og Agricult

ae connmerroN Sete.

ee ee em

Dale taet | on ae
Page 15, first paragraph under "Methods of —

co 4roi" should read as follows; | an
“Assuming that the damage in Mi ississippl and
2S tes in the South is due largely to decreased prt
bon ee cotton and +o the fact that it follows
: it is suggested that if we coulc
a fully iene the bollworm or corn- ear worm if
e decided effect in lessening the numbers of
corn-worm. ‘ | a

Act

a

=
_—
~@
ice
—
re
aes 2
sy
e
ae oy :
ja0*
c; ‘ het
aa are
ser ag Ve
* A) ‘
te _
- - :

THE PINK CORN-WORM. 15

To show how severe is the injury wrought by the pink corn-worm,
an ear of corn which has been infested only about 10 months is shown
in Plate III. The larve were swarming under the husk, which has
been removed to show the extensive webbing and injury to the
kernels. For comparison with this is shown another ear of corn
(Pi. IV) which was infested originally by the Angoumois grain moth
and afterwards by the Indian-meal moth and rice weevil. At the
time the photograph was made the Indian-meal moth had escaped,
leaving its webbing. The latter ear weighs about twice as much as
the former. The ear in Plate III was the best that could be found
out of eight infested by the pink corn-worm, while that in Plate IV
was picked at random to show the holes made by the Angoumois
grain moth in escaping from the kernels and the extensive and pecul-
iar webbing of the Indian-meal moth. In Plate III the pink corn-
worm was still working in numbers, but in Plate IV neither of the
moths mentioned could be found in any stage. While the ear in
Plate IV had been held in store for two years, that in Plate III had
been stored only 10 months.

NATURAL ENEMIES.

For some unexplained reason this insect appears to have few
natural enemies, only one parasite having been reared. It is more
than probable, however, that some predaceous insects, as well as bats
and nocturnal birds, attack the moth when in flight in the fields and
about the infested cribs. From larve received from Mr. E. A.
Schwarz in cotton bolls gathered at Virginia Point, Tex., December,
1878, an ichneumon parasite issued March 3, 1879, and was identified
as Pumpla sp. (U.S. D. A. No. 1041 P.°).

METHODS OF CONTROL.

Assuming that the damage in Mississippi and other States in the
South is due largely to increased production of cotton and to the
fact that it follows attack by the bollworm, it is suggested that if we
could successfully combat the bollworm or corn-ear worm it should
have a decided effect in lessening the numbers of pink corn-worm.

The corn should be gathered and husked as soon as possible, and the
ears showing infestation by the pink worm should be fumigated
immediately or fed to swine or poultry. This would prevent the
infestation of other corn in store. Particular attention is called to
this method of treatment since in some parts of the South it is cus-
tomary to gather corn by ‘‘snapping’”’ the ears, these afterwards
being stored with the husks intact. This practice especially favors
the development of certain grain-feeding pests, including the pink
corn-worm. Moreover, the closeness of the husks renders successful
fumigation by means of carbon bisulphid nearly impossible.

16 BULLETIN 363, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

The additional handling incident to the husking process is also of
benefit, as many of the larve are dislodged thereby, and the husked
ears afford little concealment for pupation and for the feeding of
the larve.

The best ears when dry could be saved to a considerable extent
by placing them in an isolated weevil-and-mouse-proof fumigator
such as a metal crib, to be made as nearly air-tight as possible.

CARBON BISULPHID.

In the South, where the pink corn-worm is so injurious, bisulphid
of carbon is the best remedy and has already been used for its control.
Carbon bisulphid, or bisulphid of carbon (CS,), is a heavy liquid,
colorless when pure, and is one of the standard chemicals for the
control of insects injurious to stored products. Its value lies in the
fact that it is extremely volatile, passing into the open air as a heavy
gas which settles to the bottom of receptacles in which the liquid i is
exposed and, by replacing the air, causes suffocation. It is much
used seagate the Angoumois grain moth and various other insects
injurious to corn and other cereals. It is less poisonous to human
pelags than hydrocyanic- acid gas and, while there is danger from
fire owing to its inflammability, with a reasonable amount of care
this chemical may be cheaply and effectively applied to almost any
stored product infested by insects.

It is more effective at a high temperature, 76° to 90° F. proving
the best for its use. It is less effective under 70°, and not efficient as
low as 50° F.

DIRECTIONS FOR USE.

Since carbon bisulphid is extremely volatile, it is best evaporated
in flat vessels—milk pans, pie tins, and cheap plates serving this
purpose admirably. An average application is 2 or 3 pounds to 1,000
cubic feet of air space, or 1 pound to 100 bushels. Less may be used,
but it has been found that in a structure which can not be made
positively air-tight it is necessary to use this amount to insure
success. The liquid is poured mto the evaporators, a half pint or
more in each, and, as the gas is heavier than air, the evaporators are
then placed in the higher parts of the bin or fumigator. Evaporating
pans are frequently set on the top of the grain, allowing the gas to
penetrate to the bottom, or, in the case of shelled corn, a perforated
tube, such as a drive-well point, may be thrust into the grain and the
requisite amount of the liquid poured therein.

When the gas is used in open bins or other receptacles the surface
of the grain should be covered with heavy tarpaulin or canvas. The
bin should be kept closed as tightly as possible for about 36 hours;
this will not destroy the germinating power of the seed. With grains
not desired for planting the bins may be allowed to remain closed as
long as the gas evaporates.

PLATE III.

Bul. 363, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture.

EAR OF CORN FROM WHICH THE HUSK HAS BEEN REMOVED TO SHOW SEVERE

(ORIGINAL. )

INJURY BY THE PINK CORN-WoRM.

Bul. 363, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE IV.

CorRN EAR SHOWING INFESTATION BY THE ANGOUMOIS GRAIN
MoTH (SITOTROGA CEREALELLA) AND AFTERWARDS BY
THE INDIAN-MEAL MOTH (PLODIA INTERPUNCTELLA).
(ORIGINAL. )

lay f

THE PINK CORN-WORM. 17

The pink corn-worm and associated insect pests which have been
mentioned enter the seed of grain in the field, so that treatment is ‘
most effective if made as soon as possible after harvest.

In the case of small quantities of seed a tight barrel may be used as
a receptacle. One or two ounces of carbon bisulphid may be placed
in a small saucer or pie tin upon the top of the grain and the top of
the barrel covered with heavy cloths or oilcloth.

In the fumigation of a large building at least two, and preferably
three, men should assist in the operation. The building should be
tightly closed and the pans or containers for the liquid distributed
about the building. Then, as far as possible, the work should be
begun in the lower parts of the building, working toward the top.
After the cubic capacity of the building and of the separate rooms
has been computed, the requisite quantity should be divided among
the pans in each room, about one pan to each 100 square feet of floor
space being used. After the hquid has been poured into the pan
the room should be left at once and the other parts of the building
treated in the same manner. While the gas is not immediately fatal,
it is well not to inhale too much of it, since nausea and severe headache
are likely to result. After the building has been treated in the manner
mentioned, exit should be made promptly and the doors tightly
closed.

At the end of the period of exposure doors and windows should be
opened wide so that the gas may escape. One or two hours should
then elapse before work is resumed in the building. A slight odor
may still linger in the poorly ventilated corners of rooms but there
will be no danger to occupants from the gas, and the odor will gradu-
ally disappear with ventilation.

PRECAUTIONS.

Particular attention must be called to the danger from fire due to
the presence of carbon bisulphid in the air, and special reference
should be made to it in connection with the treatment of buildings.

The danger of bringing a lighted cigar or other lights, such as a
lantern, into the presence of the gas must always be borne in mind,
since in at least one case an explosion of considerable violence was
caused by such carelessness.

The application should always be made in daylight, as no arti-
ficial hg¢ht of any kind 1s allowable. Even electric lights may not be
used, since there is always danger from the sparks caused by turning
them on and off. | Electric and other motors and steam pipes should
be turned off, that no danger may result from the sparks or heat.

Owners of adjoiming premises should be warned as to the charac-
ter of the work that is being done and the need for care if vapor
should penetrate their rooms to any extent.

18 BULLETIN 363, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

It would be an added measure of safety if a watchman were
kept on guard on the premises from the time the application is
made until ventilation is complete. It would also be well to place
large ‘‘DANGER”’ signs on the doors.

OTHER REMEDIES.

Among other remedial measures storage of corn in large bulk is
recommended, since the surface layers of shelled corn or other grain
are most exposed to infestation while the lower portions are not so
apt to be injured, if at all. The larve could penetrate corn in the
ear to a considerable depth, but, as their hfe is short, this is probably
seldom done. The moths are unable to do so. Agitation applied to
a mass of grain is also destructive to the moths, since they are unable
to extricate themselves and perish in the attempt. Cold storage
may be employed for valuable seed corn, and naphthalene balls may
be used for the same purpose. The most scrupulous cleanliness
should always be observed, much injury due to stored grain insects
being directly traceable to disregard of this. Old grain and refuse
material containing sweepings of grain, dust, dirt, and rubbish in
general should not be allowed to accumulate and serve as breeding
places for injurious insects.

In conclusion, it should be stated that promptness is absolutely
necessary for the control of the pink corn-worm and that bisulphid
of carbon can not be profitably used in open cribs, so that if this
insect continues its ravages it may be necessary to construct special
fumigating buildings and to store the corn in tighter receptacles than
the cribs and bins now used.

SUMMARY.

1. The so-called pink corn-worm is not a true worm, but the cater-
pular or larva of a minute moth known as Batrachedra rileyi.

2. Attack on corn begins in the field and continues after the corn
has been stored. When the stored product is husked, the infested
ears show injury by accumulations of webbing and frass or excre-
mentitious matter. A careful inspection discloses the ‘‘ pink worm.”

3. The eggs are deposited in the field where the tips of the corn
ears are more or less open, due to the attack of the corn-ear worm.
After the latter has departed the pimk corn-worm continues the
injury and by its work makes it easy for other insects and water to
enter the ears, which eventually are ruined.

4. From the cob or between the rows of grains the worm pene-
trates the kernels at the tip or point of attachment, works into the
embryo or ‘“‘germ,”’ which it destroys, then outward to the crown.

5. Unlike the Angoumois grain moth and the rice weevil, which
are usually to be found working in the same fields and frequently in

THE PINK CORN-WORM. 19

the same ears, this ‘‘worm”’ does not confine itself to the kernel, but
attacks kernel, husk, and cob alike.

6. Also, unlike most other grain pests, 1t appears to be confined
among cereals to corn and sorghum, although it attacks, but does
not seriously injure, cotton bolls which are more or less open, and
some other plants.

7. While thus far it has proved most injurious in Mississippi, it
ranges from South Carolina westward to central Texas, southward
to tropical Texas, and northward to Arkansas and Tennessee.

8. During the years 1914-15 the pink corn-worm was reported to
have occasioned very considerable injury, and much alarm was felt
because of its abundance in the regions mentioned. Previously,
although known to attack corn, it has never been considered a serious
enemy of grain.

9. Naturally it can not be foretold when, if ever, such an outbreak
will recur. :

10. As a preventive of injury, corn should be left in the field no
longer than is absolutely necessary for drying it; the husks should
then be removed as soon as possible, the poorest of the infested ears
destroyed promptly or fed to swine or poultry, and the best ears
fumigated with carbon bisulphid according to the directions given
on previous pages.

11. The bins or cribs should be kept scrupulously clean, and should
be fumigated before new material is stored in. them.

12. Cooperation among corn growers of as large a territory as
possible where the species occurs should be secured, that future losses

may be prevented.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.

1855. GLOVER, TOWNEND. Insects injurious and beneficial to vegetation. Jn Rpt.
Comr. Patents f. 1854, p. 59-87.

A half-page general account with special reference to the occurrence of the species in corn.
Mention as the ‘‘grain moth ( Tinea ?).’’ ‘‘Larvae attack corn out of the field as wellas in,”’ p.
65-66, pl. 4.

1856. GLOVER, TOWNEND. Insects. Jn Rpt. Comr. Patents f. 1855, p. 64-121.

An account of the same general character as the preceding and with particular reference to
occurrence of larvz in diseased cotton bolls. Mention as ‘‘ Heliothes ?,’’ p. 98, pl. 9, fig. 3.

1877. GLOVER, TOWNEND. Manuscript Notes from My Journal, 103 p. Washington,

Dac:
Mention as Tinea granella. ‘‘l{arva] injures maize; found in old cotton bolls; prob for seed,’’
p. 73.
1878. GLOVER, TOWNEND. Manuscript Notes from My Journal. Cotton. 2 p.,
22 pl.
A lithographic plate showing the moth, larva, pupa, cocoon, and work of larva in kernel
of corn.

1882-83. WALSINGHAM, Lorp. Notes on Tineidze of North America. Jn Trans.
Amer. Ent. Soc., v. 10, p. 165-204.

Original description. ‘‘Bred from rotten cotton-bolls.’’ Notes on larval habits of genus,
which is naturally scavenging.

4]

20 BULLETIN 363, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
1896. Howarp, L. O. The insects which affect the cotton plant in the United States.

In U.S. Dept. Agr. Office Expt. Stas. Bul. 33, p. 317-350, pl. 4, fig. 9-29.
Also U.S. Dept. Agr. Farmers’ Bul. 47.

Note on occurrence of larv in cotton bolls and young squares; in latter stated to be ‘‘unques-
tionably an original inhabitant,’’ p. 348.
1897. CHITTENDEN, F. H.

Some little-known insects affecting stored vegetable
products.

U.S. Dept. Agr. Div. Ent. Bul. 8, n. s., 45 p., 10 fig.

Quotations from published writings, with what seems to be the first public recognition of
this species as an enemy of stored corn and as the ‘* Tinea granella”’ of Glover.

1904. CHITTENDEN, F. H. The cowpea-pod weevil (Chalcodermus aeneus Boh.). In
U.S. Dept. Agr. Div. Ent. Bul. 44, p. 39-48, fig. 13-16.

Mention as having been reared with Batrachedra rileyi Wals. in cowpeas.

1909. Swezey, Orro H. The Hawaiian sugar cane bud moth (Erewnetis flavistriata).
Hawaiian Sugar Planters’ Assoc. Div. Ent. Bul. 6, 40 p., 4 pl.
Quoted description; larva beneath leaf-sheaves of sugar cane; in sweet corn ears, feeding on
‘¢silks,’? Inner husks, and pith; eating kernels of corn on cobs; in dead leaves of Pandanus,
banana, and other plants. Life history in brief.
LSTA.

Tucker, E.S. Random notes on entomological field work. Jn Canad. Ent.,
v. 43, no. 1, p. 22-82.

Occurrence of larva in cotton bolls with Araecerus fasciculatus, in cornstalks infested by same,
in green cornstalks, and in tips of ears injured by Heliothis obsoleta.

ADDITIONAL COPIES
OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PROCURED FROM
THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON, D. C.
AT

10 CENTS PER COPY
V

WASHINGTON : GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1916

-
=