Rocky Mountain husbandman. [volume] (Diamond City, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1875-12-02
SMUT IN WHEAT.

come to very erroneous conclusion respect
ing the matter, but that is no reason why
those versed in scientific theories should rid
icule the efforts. If we hope to find the
remedy, we must first know the cause. To
ascertain this, has cost years of scientific
research; many able and lengthy discussions.
But the farmer, on account of his lack of
means, has no recourse to large libraries
like our scientific men, and it is to be ex-
pected, will err once in while. Now, al
though a thorough analysis has been made,
no very material advantage has been derived
therefrom, as to-day finds us practicing
much the same method as was in vogue
among the farmers of Rome hundreds Of
years ago. Widely different, indeed, are the
opinions IF farmers upon this subject, yet
all agree upon very similar treatment, viz :
that of soiking the grain before sowing in a
solution Of lime, soda or blue stone There
are many no doubt, thatfollow this practice
who could not tell to save them why they
did it, except that the result proved benefi-
cial.
We clip from the New York Sun a full
analysis, but, as general rule, our plain,
practical farmers know as little about these
scientific analyses as our scientific men know
about practical farming:
''There are large number of parasitic
plants which attack wheat, rye, corn, and
closely allied cereal grasses. They are known
under few common names, such as smut
bunt rust and mildew. These minute fun
gold plants have been known to farmers in
all ages, but it is only within the past cen
turv that t2nything definite has been discov-
cred with regard to their structure or mode
of reproductions. Before the invention of
our higher power microscopes it was impos-
sible for man to study such subjects, hence
all that has been written in regard to these
plants previously may be considered sheer
guess-Worll. 1t is certainly true that some
of the more practical of the ancient Roman
agricultu1ists discovered that soaking seed
wheat in the urine of animals and other So
lutions tended to decrease the quantity of
smut. while some Of the more theoretical
and superstitious among them resorted to
i've measures, and we presume the latter
were just as efficacious in preventing the
spread orappearance of the disease as some
of the practices resorted to at the present
day.
But through the Investigations of our later
microsconsts much Of the mysterious char
acter formerly attributed to or surrounding
such subjects has been cleared up, and we
now llnoW that rust, smut and mlldeW are
true plants, capable Of reproducing their
kind, the same as species belonging to higher
orders. It is also known that there are hun
dreds Of distinct species of these microscopic
plants, each remaining distinct through sue
cessiye generations, and as unvarying in
character as species of higher orders. The
smut found upon corn, (Ustilago ,naydis,) is
distinct species from the common wheat
and grass seed smut, (U-segetum, or the
common bunt in wheat, (1Elletia carries, and |
because farmer is unable to distinguish one
from theIother it does not follow that they
are not distinct, or that their habits are a
mysteryto scientific nricroscopists.
It is quite prevalent belief among farm
ers that these minute parasitic plants are
produced through kind of spontaneous
evolution, having no fixed or certain origin
or organs for perpetuation of their species,
which in fact is far from the truth, inasmuch |
as it is now positively known that all these
lower orders of filngoid growths produce
spores which, although different in form
and structure, are at the same time equiva-