Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1906-04-04
Smut Once More.

Again we wish to remind oul
readers Of the desirability of treat.
ing their seed grain for smut. Prof
u. l.. Bolley, horticulturist OF the
North Dakota experiment station, an
authority on plant diseases, recently
contributed AN article to the North
western Agriculturist, in which lie
states that it is his opinion that the
iamage done to wheat in the three
states, Minnesota, South Dakota and
North Dakota, annually amounts to
about Sl0,000,0O0 He believes
that smut has reduced the wheat
weld 10 per cent per annum for the
last ten years. This is certainly a
strong statement, but coming from
an authority like Prof. Bolley, no one
will dispute it.
The direct loss in yield is not the
only consideration. The price per
bushel of smutty wheat is often five
cents below the selling value of simi
Lar wheat free from smut Prof. Boil
ley began experimenting with the
ase of formalin as smut preventive
for small grain in 1898; since that
year he has treated the small grain
at the station every spring and he
has never known The treatment to
fail to give good results. Our ex-
perience, . he says, year after year
mas shown anaverage increased yield
for treated wheat exceeding three
bushels per acre: for oats the in
crease exceeds ten bushels per acre.
The cost of treatment when done
for several hundred acres should not
xceed one cent per bushel. Many
Of our larger farmersof Moth Dako-
ia estimate the cost of properly
treating seed wheat at ! cent per
bRshel.' -
When purchasing formalin, which
should be used at the rate of one
pound to every l5 gallons of water,
insist upon getting a product that is
guaranteed 10 contain 40 per cent of
formaldehyde gas. Since the use of
formalin has become quite general
unscrupulous dealers have put an
inferior product on the market, hence
the necessity OF farmers being careful
when purchasing formaldehyde tosse-
cure it from reliable druggists. Ask
them to test it and get their guaran
lee. We quote again from Prof.
Bolley's article as follows: Every
one should treat every year. Let us
get rid Of this smut trouble and stay
I'D Of it. The reason for treatmcn,
is simple. The grain plants are at
tackled by a fungus parasite. This
smut fungus is made up of count
less fine tilaments or threads simi-
lar to the spawn of the mushroom
in appearance but much more min
ute. These threads penetrate all
parts of the growing wheat or oat
plant and finally produce the spores
of the parasite in the young grains
Of wheat, oats, or barley. Countless
numbers Of these spores make up
the smut of an ordinary smut ball
These spores get busted on the seed
grain at harvest or threshing time.
We treat the seed to kill the spores
which are lodged upon each grain
Therefore, see to it that all of the
grains of wheat are made wet with
the solution over their entire sur
faces"
Our readers will remember that
we published an article in one OF
our recent issues by Prof. Moore, of
the Wisconsin station, in which he
stated that observations conducted
over the state of Wisconsin showed
conclusively that the oat crop in that
state was injured to the extent OF l .
bushels per acre the state over, and
that much has already been done to
eliminate oat smut from that state
a loss of l5 bushels of oats per acre
may not seem large, but even at 20
cents per bushel it amounts to 81
cents per acre, and if the seed for an
acre can be treated at cost of one
or one-nalf cents per acre, it does
not take much of mathematician to
figure out a good dividend on the
money invested in smut cleaning.
If the formaldehyde solution is pre-
pared as directed above good results
will be secured, either by the use Of
smut machines or by mere sprink-
ling the solution over the grain so
as to insure wetting every kernel to
be seeded. See back numbers for
full directions, Let us hear from
readers who have used the formalin
treatment Farmers Tribune.