Handbook of Natural Pesticides:

Methods : Volume I: Theory, Practice,

and Detection First Edition Mandava
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/handbook-of-natural-pesticides-methods-volume-i-the
ory-practice-and-detection-first-edition-mandava/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook Loucas

https://textbookfull.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-
loucas/

Coulson and Richardson’s Chemical Engineering, Fourth

Edition: Volume 3A: Chemical and Biochemical Reactors
and Reaction Engineering R. Ravi

https://textbookfull.com/product/coulson-and-richardsons-
chemical-engineering-fourth-edition-volume-3a-chemical-and-
biochemical-reactors-and-reaction-engineering-r-ravi/

Handbook of Natural Pesticides : Volume VI: Insect

Attractants and Repellents First Edition E. David
Morgan

https://textbookfull.com/product/handbook-of-natural-pesticides-
volume-vi-insect-attractants-and-repellents-first-edition-e-
david-morgan/

Rapid Detection of Food Adulterants and Contaminants:

Theory and Practice 1st Edition Jha

https://textbookfull.com/product/rapid-detection-of-food-
adulterants-and-contaminants-theory-and-practice-1st-edition-jha/
Handbook of Item Response Theory, Three Volume Set -
First Edition Van Der Linden

https://textbookfull.com/product/handbook-of-item-response-
theory-three-volume-set-first-edition-van-der-linden/

Handbook of Theory and Practice of Sustainable

Development in Higher Education Volume 2 1st Edition
Walter Leal Filho

https://textbookfull.com/product/handbook-of-theory-and-practice-
of-sustainable-development-in-higher-education-volume-2-1st-
edition-walter-leal-filho/

Handbook of natural fibres Volume 2 Processing and

applications Second Edition Koz■owski

https://textbookfull.com/product/handbook-of-natural-fibres-
volume-2-processing-and-applications-second-edition-kozlowski/

Agrochemicals Detection Treatment and Remediation

Pesticides and Chemical Fertilizers 1st Edition Majeti
Narasimha Vara Prasad (Editor)

https://textbookfull.com/product/agrochemicals-detection-
treatment-and-remediation-pesticides-and-chemical-
fertilizers-1st-edition-majeti-narasimha-vara-prasad-editor/

CRC handbook of chromatography. Volume I, Plant

pigments Kost

https://textbookfull.com/product/crc-handbook-of-chromatography-
volume-i-plant-pigments-kost/
CRC Series in Naturally Occurring Pesticides
Series Editor-in-Chief
N. Bhushan Mandava

Handbook of Natural Pesticides: Methods

Volume I: Theory, Practice, and Detection
Volume II: Isolation and Identification
Editor
N. Bhushan Mandava

Handbook of Natural Pesticides

Volume III: Insect Growth Regulators
Volume IV: Pheromones
Editors
E. David Morgan
N. Bhushan Mandava

Future Volumes
Handbook of Natural Pesticides

Insect Attractants, Deterrents, and Defensive Secretions

Editors
E. David Morgan
N. Bhushan Mandava

Plant Growth Regulators

Editor
N. Bhushan Mandava

Microbial Insecticides
Editor
Carl M. Ignoffo
 CRC
Handbook
of
Natural Pesticides:
Methods
Volume I
Theory, Practice,
and
Detection
Editor
N. Bhushan Mandava, Ph.D.
Senior Chemist
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Washington, D.C.

CRC Series in Naturally Occurring Pesticides

Series Editor-in-Chief
N. Bhushan Mandava, Ph.D.

Boca Raton London New York

CRC Press is an imprint of the

Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
First published 1985 by CRC Press
Taylor & Francis Group
6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300
Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742

Reissued 2018 by CRC Press

© 1985 by Taylor & Francis

CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business

No claim to original U.S. Government works

This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reasonable efforts have been
made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and publisher cannot assume responsibility for the
validity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The authors and publishers have attempted to trace the
copyright holders of all material reproduced in this publication and apologize to copyright holders if permission to
publish in this form has not been obtained. If any copyright material has not been acknowledged please write and let
us know so we may rectify in any future reprint.

Except as permitted under U.S. Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or
utilized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including
photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written
permission from the publishers.

For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, please access www. copyright.com
(http://www.copyright.com/) or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers,
MA 01923, 978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organiza-tion that provides licenses and registration for a variety
of users. For organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by the CCC, a separate system of payment has
been arranged.

Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for
identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

A Library of Congress record exists under LC control number: 84012092

Publisher's Note
The publisher has gone to great lengths to ensure the quality of this reprint but points out that some imperfections in
the original copies may be apparent.

Disclaimer
The publisher has made every effort to trace copyright holders and welcomes correspondence from those they have
been unable to contact.

ISBN 13: 978-1-315-89361-7 (hbk)

ISBN 13: 978-1-351-07271-7 (ebk)

Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at http://www.taylorandfrancis.com and the
CRC Press Web site at http://www.crcpress.com
 CRC Handbook Series in Naturally Occurring Pesticides

INTRODUCTION

The United States has been blessed with high quality, dependable supplies of low cost
food and fiber, but few people are aware of the never-ending battle that makes this possible.
There are at present approximately 1,100,000 species of animals, many of them very simple
forms, and 350,000 species of plants that currently inhabit the planet earth. In the U.S.
there are an estimated 10,000 species of insects and related acarinids which at sometime or
other cause significant agricultural damage. O f these, about 200 species are serious pests
which require control or suppression every year. World-wide, the total number of insect
pests is about ten times greater. The annual losses of crops, livestock, agricultural products,
and forests caused by insect pests in the U.S. have been estimated to aggregate about 12%
of the total crop production and to represent a value of about $4 billion (1984 dollars). On
a world-wide basis, the insect pests annually damage or destroy about 15% of total potential
crop production, with a value of more than $35 billion, enough food to feed more than the
population of a country like India. Thus, both the losses caused by pests and the costs of
their control are considerably high. Insect control is a complex problem for there are more
than 200 insects that are or have been subsisting on our main crops, livestock, forests, and
aquatic resources. Today, in the U .S., conventional insecticides are needed to control more
than half of the insect problems affecting agriculture and public health. If the use of pesticides
were to be completely banned, crop losses would soar and food prices would also increase
dramatically.
About 1 billion pounds of pesticides are used annually in the U.S. for pest control. The
benefits of pesticides have been estimated at about $4/$l cost. In other words, chemical
pest control in U.S. crop production costs an estimated $2.2 billion and yields a gross return
of $8.7 billion annually.
Another contributing factor for increased crop production is the effective control of weeds,
nematodes, and plant diseases. Crop losses due to unwanted weed species are very high.
Of the total losses caused by pests, weeds alone count for about 10% of the agricultural
production losses valued at more than $12 billion annually. Farmers spend more than $6.2
billion each year to control weeds. Today, nearly all major crops grown in the U.S. are
treated with herbicides. As in insect pest and weed control programs, several chemicals are
used in the disease programs. Chemical compounds (e.g., fungicides, bactericides, nema-
ticides, and viracides) that are toxic to pathogens are used for controlling plant diseases.
Several million dollars are spent annually by American farmers to control the diseases of
major crops such as cotton and soybeans.
Another aspect for improved crop efficiency and production is the use of plant growth
regulators. These chemicals that regulate the growth and development of plants are used by
farmers in the U.S. on a modest scale. The annual sale of growth regulators is about $130
million. The plant growth regulator market is made up of two distinct entities — growth
regulators and harvest aids. Growth regulators are used to increase crop yield or quality.
Harvest aids are used at the end of the crop cycle. For instance, harvest aids defoliate cotton
before picking or desiccate potatoes before digging.
The use of modem pesticides has accounted for astonishing gains in agricultural production
as the pesticides have reduced the hidden toll exacted by the aggregate attack of insect pests,
weeds, and diseases, and also improved the health of humans and livestock as they control
parasites and other microorganisms. However, the same chemicals have allegedly posed
some serious problems to health and environmental safety, because of their high toxicity
and severe persistence, and have become a grave public concern in the last 2 decades. Since
the general public is very much concerned about their hazards, the U.S. Environmental
 Protection Agency enforced strong regulations for use, application, and handling of the
pesticides. Moreover, such toxic pesticides as DDT 2,4,5-T and toxaphene were either
completely banned or approved for limited use. They were, however, replaced with less
dangerous chemicals for insect control. Newer approaches for pest control are continuously
sought, and several of them look very promising.
According to a recent study by the National Academy of Sciences, pesticides of several
kinds will be widely used in the foreseeable future. However, newer selective and biode­
gradable compounds must replace older highly toxic persistent chemicals. The pest control
methods that are being tested or used on different insects and weeds include: (1) use of
natural predators, parasites, and pathogens, (2) breeding of resistant varieties of species, (3)
genetic sterilization techniques, (4) use of mating and feeding attractants, (5) use of traps,
(6) development of hormones to interfere with life cycles, (7) improvement of cultural
practices, and (8) development of better biodegradable insecticides and growth regulators
that will effectively combat the target species without doing damage to beneficial insects,
wildlife, or man. Many leads are now available, such as the hormone mimics of the insect
juvenile and molting hormones. Synthetic pyretheroids are now replacing the conventional
insecticides. These insecticides, which are a synthesized version of the extract of the pyr-
ethrum flower, are much more attractive biologically than the traditional insecticides. Thus,
the application rates are much lower in some cases, one tenth the rates of more traditional
insecticides such as organophosphorus pesticides. The pyrethroids are found to be very
specific for killing insects and apparently exhibit no negative effects on plants, livestock,
or humans. Another apparent benefit is that there is no resistance to these compounds
accumulated in the insects. The use of these compounds is now widely accepted for use on
cotton, field com, soybean, and vegetable crops.
For the long term, integrated pest management (IPM) will have tremendous impact on
pest control for crop improvement and efficiency. Under this concept, all types of pest
control — cultural, chemical, inbred, and biological — are integrated to control all types
of pests and weeds. The chemical control includes all of the traditional pesticides. Cultural
controls consist of cultivation, crop rotation, optimum planting dates, and sanitation. Inbred
plant resistance involves the use of varieties and hybrids that are resistant to certain pests.
Finally, the biological control involves encouraging natural predators, parasites, and micro-
bials. Under this system, pest-detection scouts measure pest populations and determine the
best time for applying pesticides. If properly practiced, IPM could reduce pesticide use up
to 75% on some crops.
The naturally occurring pesticides appear to have a prominent role for the development
of future commercial pesticides not only for agricultural crop productivity but also for the
safety of the environment and public health. They are produced by plants, insects, and
several microorganisms, which utilize them for survival and maintenance of defense mech­
anisms, as well as for growth and development. They are easily biodegradable, often times
species-specific and also sometimes less toxic (or nontoxic) on other non-target organisms
or species, an important consideration for alternate approaches of pest control. Several of
the compounds, especially those produced by crop plants and other organisms, are consumed
by humans and livestock, and yet appear to have no detrimental effects. They appear to be
safe and will not contaminate the environment. Hence, they will be readily accepted for use
in pest control by the public and the regulatory agencies. These natural compounds occur
in nature only in trace amounts and require very low dosage for pesticide use. It is hoped
that the knowledge gained by studying these compounds is helpful for the development of
new pest control methods such as their use for interference with hormonal life cycles and
trapping insects with pheromones, and also for the development of safe and biodegradable
chemicals (e.g., pyrethroid insecticides). Undoubtedly, the costs are very high as compared
to the presently used pesticides. But hopefully, these costs would be compensated for by
the benefits derived through these natural pesticides from the lower volume of pesticide use
 and elimination of risks. Furthermore, the indirect or external costs resulting from pesticide
poisoning, fatalities, livestock losses, and increased control expenses (due to the destruction
of natural enemies and beneficial insects as well as the environmental contamination and
pollution from chlorinated, organophosphorus, and carbamate pesticides) could be assessed
against benefits vs. risks. The development and use of such naturally occurring chemicals
could become an integral part of IPM strategies.
As long as they remain endogenously, several of the natural products presented in this
handbook series serve as hormones, growth regulators, and sensory compounds for growth,
development, and reproduction of insects, plants, and microorganisms. Others are useful
for defense or attack against other species or organisms. Once these chemicals or their
analogs and derivatives are applied by external means to the same (where produced) or
different species, they come under the label “ pesticides” because they contaminate the
environment. Therefore, they are subject to regulatory requirements, in the same way the
other pesticides are handled before they are used commercially. However, it is anticipated
that the naturally occurring pesticides would easily meet the regulatory and environmental
requirements for their safe and effective use in pest control programs.
A vast body of literature has been accumulated on naturally occurring pesticides during
the last 2 or 3 decades; we plan to assemble this information in this handbook series. However,
we realize that it is a single handbook series. Therefore, we have limited our attempts to
chemical and a few biological aspects concerned with biochemistry and physiology. Wher­
ever possible, we tried to focus our attention on the application of these compounds for
pesticidal use. We hope that the first volume which deals with theory and practice will serve
as an introductory volume and will be useful to everyone interested in learning about the
current technology that is being adapted from compound identification to the field trials.
The subsequent volumes deal with the chemical, biochemical, and physiological aspects of
naturally occurring compounds, grouped under such titles as insect growth regulators, plant
growth regulators, etc.
In a handbook series of this type with diversified subjects dealing with plant, insect, and
microbial compounds, it is very difficult to achieve either uniformity or complete coverage
while putting the subject matter together. This goal was achieved to a large extent with the
understanding and full cooperation of chapter contributors who deserve my sincere appreciation.
The editors of the individual volumes relentlessly sought to meet the deadlines and, more
importantly, to bring a balanced coverage of the subject matter, but, however, that seems
to be an unattainable goal. Therefore, they bear full responsibility for any pitfalls and
deficiencies. We invite comments and criticisms from readers and users as they will greatly
help to update future editions. It is hoped that this handbook series will serve as a source
book for chemists, biochemists, physiologists, and other biologists alike — those engaged
in active research as well as those interested in different areas of natural products that affect
the growth and development of plants, insects, and other organisms.
The editors wish to acknowledge their sincere thanks to the members of the Advisory
Board for their helpful suggestions and comments. Their appreciation is extended to the
publishing staff, especially Pamela Woodcock, Amy Skallerup, and Sandy Pearlman for
their ready cooperation and unlimited support from the initiation to the completion of this
project.

N. Bhushan Mandava
Editor-in-Chief
 FOREWORD

Humankind has long competed with its fellow creatures for the food which agriculture
brings forth from the earth. Much of the genesis of civilization is related to the ability to
produce, thus freeing time to be spent in a variety of pursuits. Today in the U.S. less than
3% of the population works on the farm. Yet that 3% of our people manage to feed the
nation and a good part of the world.
A very significant contribution to the ability of that 3% to sustain the rest of us is made
by the various materials which are generally described as “ pesticides” . It is very clear that
without the contributions pesticides make to modem agriculture the cost of food would
skyrocket, with significant negative impact on those in society who are not economically
advantaged. Without pesticides it is not clear that our system of food distribution, unsurpassed
in the world, would function. Exposed to the uncontrolled ravages of fungi, vermin, and
various insects the food would be spoiled or lost before it could reach markets. Failure of
the food dictribution system would produce severe societal dislocations and provide the
possibility of widespread malnutrition.
It is certainly clear that pesticides, this includes insecticides, herbicides, rodenticides,
disinfectants, fungicides, viricides, and nematicides, provide for a key element in America’s
agricultural production success story. Yet, as the preface to this handbook series points out,
the use of pesticides has also provided a two-edged sword in the hands of the agriculturist.
This is a result of the fact that pesticides are by design biologically active. If used in an
uncontrolled fashion they can create human health and environmental problems. It is in this
recognition that the sale and use of pesticides has been governed by various federal and
state laws since the 1920s. The basic federal pesticide act was enacted in its modem form
in 1946. It has been extensively amended, most significantly in 1972. As the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), it is currently administered by the
Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances
(OPTS).
FIFRA provides for a system of premarket registration of pesticides and for continuous
review of registered pesticides to allow for control of any problems which may turn up in
practice. This system is considered by those who must market pesticides here and abroad
as one of the most stringent in the world.
Many of the problems encountered with some of the older commodity pesticides were
due to the fact that, while these materials were often not very acutely toxic, they persisted
in the environment, often accumulated in food chains, and sometimes posed risks of long
term health effects. Many of these older commodity pesticides were of the structural family
of chlorinated hydrocarbons (e.g., DDT, heptachlor, toxaphene). As regulatory pressure on
these sorts of materials mounted, different chemicals came to the forefront — most notably
the organophosphate and carbamate insecticides. These materials generally provided the
advantage of posing fewer and smaller risks of long term human health and environmental
effects. They were frequently, however, more acutely toxic than the organochlorine pesticides
they displaced.
Over the last 10 years we have also seen a huge decrease in the total amount of insecticides
used in agriculture and a very significant increase in the amount of herbicides used.
The ingenuity of the pesticide researcher has also, over the last 10 years, turned to the
study of natural products chemistry for leads in the ceaseless battle to protect the food supply.
Current fruits of that research include juvenile hormones. There has been a constant effort
to develop pesticidal materials which have the folowing sorts of characteristics:

• Biodegrade readily
• Highly target species/genus selective
• Low application rates
• Provide quick “ knock down” of pest pressure
• Are not energy intensive or labor intensive to apply

Significant gains have been made in both pesticides based on naturally occurring pesticide
chemicals and on those based on the inventiveness of the synthetic chemist. It is with the
former, however, that this handbook series is concerned.
Prediction of the future is at best an uncertain art. The prospects for the future can be
markedly improved, however, if the regulator, the researcher, the agronomist/agriculturist,
and the public health scientist begin to realize that they are all partners in support of a
growing and healthy American agricultural enterprise.

John A. Todhunter, Ph.D.

Assistant Administrator for
Pesticides and Toxic Substances
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C.
 PREFACE

Naturally occurring pesticides have an important role in the growth, development, and
reproduction of plants, insects, and several microorganisms. They are categorized under
such terms as hormones, growth regulators, pheromones, feeding deterrents, etc. These
bioregulators are produced in minute quantities and utilized by plants and pests for their
survival, and also for the maintenance of defense mechanisms. Thus, Mother Nature pro­
vides, to a large extent, with these chemical messengers, a shield of protection to plants
from insect attack. At the same time these chemicals are essential for growth and development
as well as for sexual reproduction of plants and pests. Because of the ever increasing demand
for food and fiber for human and animal consumption, various approaches were sought for
the efficiency of crop production. They have resulted in the development of modem agri­
cultural practices that not only include better irrigation methods and the use of chemical
fertilizers, but also utilize safer pest control technology for plant protection from insect
invasion.
With the application of several synthetic pesticides for pest control, crop production has
increased to record levels, and animal and human health has significantly improved with
the eradication of diseases caused by pathogenic pests and parasites. But the same pesticides
also posed some threats and dangers such as producing more resistant pests, killing wildlife
and beneficial pests and predators, and contaminating the environment with toxic pesticide
residues which poison food, water, and air. Because of this, new approaches are continuously
being sought to overcome the dangers caused by the synthetic pesticides. Biological control
and other integrated pest management methods are recommended as alternatives for future
pest control practices. In this respect, naturally occurring pesticides appear to play a vital
role because they are easily biodegradable, leave no residues, are sometimes less toxic (or
nontoxic), and seem to be selective. Hence, their use in integrated pest management systems
is highly recommended.
This handbook series includes several naturally occurring chemicals that exhibit biological
activity. These chemicals are derived from plants, insects, and several microorganisms.
Volumes I and II which serve as introductory volumes to the series are devoted to methods,
theory, and practice for pest control technology. For convenience, the parts that cover the
theory and practice of the strategies for pest control and methods for detection are included
in Volume I. Methods for isolation and characterization appear to be very important for
gaining knowledge on how to discover these chemicals when present in such minute amounts
(ppm to ppb levels) in nature. Several chemical and biological methods have been developed
for isolation, characterization, and analysis of natural pesticides and are included in the
second part of Volume II.
The opening chapter of Volume I entitled “ Pests and Their Control” serves as an intro­
duction. There are three chapters devoted to pest management practices. Einhellig in Volume
I discusses allelopathy and allelochemicals which appear to provide natural protection and
inclusion of this chapter in this volume is therefore justified. A more detailed chapter on
allelochemicals is included in a later volume. Dickens and Payne in Volume I dealing with
chemical messengers and insect behavior inform the reader on how insects depend on sensory
chemicals for reproduction. Two chapters are devoted to regulations and registration re­
quirements for pesticides. Perkins in Volume I indicates a bright future for naturally occurring
pesticides based on the past record for pesticides.
Three chapters comprising “ Methods for Detection” are included in Volume I. Biological
assays are not only important in the detection, but are also useful during isolation of the
bioactive natural compounds.
Volume II is concerned with the methods for characterization of naturally occurring
pesticides. “ Methods for Isolation” contains four chapters and the first chapter outlines the
general isolation techniques for naturally biologically active materials. Analytical methods,
especially chromatography, are very useful for isolation and analysis. The chapter that deals
with chromatographic methods illustrates this fact very briefly. A chapter on a new method
termed countercurrent chromatography is introduced and this method is hopefully applied
as complementary to other chromatographic methods. However tedious the method is, coun­
tercurrent distribution is still useful, especially for the separation of natural products and
other biopolymers.
There are 11 chapters in “ Methods for Identification” devoted to spectroscopic methods
for characterization of bioactive natural compounds. The spectral methods, except mass
spectrometry, are nondestructive techniques and require microgram levels for characteri­
zation. These methods will aid in the final identification and will also be useful for analysis
of the compounds when present in small quantities. All the chapters are written in detail
when dealing with the applications of the methods. Combination of the use of spectral data
will lead to unequivocal structural elucidation of the compounds. The last chapter of the
volume deals with methodology for gene expression which is rapidly expanding and illustrates
the state of the art in the field of natural pesticides.
As mentioned elsewhere, these two handbook volumes are intended for multidisciplinary
groups who are interested in knowing the details of the methods and techniques upon which
depend identification and analysis of all compounds that appear in the succeeding volumes.
The contributors of these two volumes took special care to focus their subject matter to
nonspecialists and I thank them for their simple and explicit presentations. The advisors
provided counsel and constant guidance for which I am indebted to them. I am particularly
grateful to my wife, Leela, for her patience and understanding while I was spending long
hours away from home during the course of writing the chapters and editing the volumes.
Finally I wish to express my appreciation to John Kalinich, Sunny Keithley, and Martha
Ryan who helped me while preparing this series. The publisher has provided ample editorial
help which is also acknowledged.

N. Bhushan Mandava
Editor—Volumes I and II
 THE EDITOR

N. Bhushan Mandava holds B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in chemistry and has published
over 110 papers including a U.S. patent, several monographs and reviews, and a book in
the areas of pesticides and growth regulators and other natural products. He is now Senior
Science Advisor to the Assistant Administrator for Pesticides and Toxic Substances at the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Formerly he was associated with the U.S. Depart­
ment of Agriculture as a Research Chemist. He is active in several professional organizations,
serving as Councilor of the American Chemical Society and President of the Chemical
Society of Washington.
Dr. Mandava’s current research interests include analytical methods development for and
application to pesticides and plant growth regulators. He has been active in the isolation of
naturally occurring pesticides. He has recently edited a special issue on countercurrent
chromatography for the Journal o f Liquid Chromatography for which he serves as editorial
advisor.
 ADVISORY BOARD

Martin Jacobson
Chief, Biologically Active Natural Products Laboratory
Agricultural Environmental Quality Institute
United States Department of Agriculture
Beltsville, Maryland

David Pimentel, Ph.D.

Professor, Department of Entomology
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York
 CONTRIBUTORS
Joseph C. Dickens, Ph.D.
Research Entomologist
USDA-ARS
Boll Weevil Research Laboratory
Mississippi State University
Mississippi State, Mississippi
Frank Einhellig, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Biology
University of South Dakota
Vermillion, South Dakota
Kamal M. El-Zik, Ph.D.
Plant Pathologist and Geneticist
Texas Agricultural and Experiment
Station
Texas A&M University
College Station, Texas
Raymond E. Frisbie, Ph.D.
Integrated Pest Management Coordinator
Texas A&M University
College Station, Texas
Stuart H. Gage, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Entomology
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan
Ralph J. Hodosh, Ph.D.
Registration Specialist
Albany International-Controlled Release
Division
Needham Heights, Massachusetts
Ellen M. Keough, Ph.D.
Morphologist
Department of Surgery
Tufts New England Medical Center
Boston, Massachusetts
Yugal K. Luthra, Ph.D.
Head, Flavor Safety Assurance
Corporate Safety Assurance
International Flavors and Fragrances
Union Beach, New Jersey
Thomas L. Payne, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Entomology
Texas A&M University
College Station, Texas
John H. Perkins, Ph.D.
Senior Academic Dean
The Evergreen State College
Olympia, Washington
David Pimental, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Entomology
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York
Robert E. Redfern
Research Entomologist
Agricultural Environmental Quality
Institute
Agricultural Research Service
United States Department of Agriculture
Beltsville, Maryland
Charles F. Reichelderfer, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Entomology
University of Maryland
College Park, Maryland
Warren C. Shaw, Ph.D.
National Program Staff
Agricultural Research Service
United States Department of Agriculture
Beltsville, Maryland
R. Lai Tummala, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Departments of Electrical Engineering
and Systems Science and Entomology
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan
William M. Upholt, Ph.D.
Retired Scientist Administrator
United States Environmental Protection
Agency
Washington, D.C.

John H. Yopp, Ph.D.

Professor
Department of Botany
Southern Illinois University
Carbondale, Illinois
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Volume I

THEORY AND PRACTICE

Pests and Their C ontrol................................................................................................................3
Integrated Crop Management Systems for Pest C ontrol........................................................21
Integrated Weed Management Systems Technology for Agroecosystem Management ..123
Computers and Pest M anagem ent...........................................................................................141
Allelopathy — A Natural Protection, Allelochemicals......................................................... 161
Chemical Messengers and Insect Behavior........................................................................... 201
Toxicological Evaluation and Registration Requirements for Biorational Pesticides__ 231
The Regulation of Pesticides................................................................................................... 273
Naturally Occurring Pesticides and the Pesticide Crisis, 1945 to 1980 ............................ 297

METHODS FOR DETECTION

Bioassays for Plant Hormones and Other Naturally Occurring Plant Growth
Regulators..................................................................................................................................329
Insect Bioassays......................................................................................................................... 479
Biological Assays with Insect Pathogens...............................................................................489

Index............................................................................................................................................ 519
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Volume II

METHODS FOR ISOLATION

Methods and Techniques for Isolation of Pesticides
Chromatographic Methods for Isolation and Identification
of Naturally Occurring Pesticides
Countercurrent Chromatography
Countercurrent Distribution

METHODS FOR IDENTIFICATION

Introduction to Spectroscopy
Ultraviolet (UV) Spectroscopy
Applications of UV Spectroscopy — Plant Growth Substances
Applications of UV Spectroscopy — Other Naturally Occurring Pesticides
Infrared (IR) Spectroscopy
Supplemental Data
Applications of IR Spectroscopy
Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
Mass Spectrometry (MS)
Optical Rotary Dispersion and Circular Dichroism
Molecular Structure Determination by X-Ray Diffraction Analysis
Electron Spin Resonance
Fluorescence of Naturally Occurring Chemicals
Methodology for Gene Expression

Index
Theory and Practice
 Volume I: Theory, Practice, and Detection 3

PESTS AND THEIR CONTROL

David Pimentel

LOSSES TO PESTS

Currently, an estimated 37% of all crops is lost annually to pests (13% to insects,
12% to pathogens, and 12% to weeds) in spite of the use of pesticidal and nonchemical
controls.1'3 According to survey data collected from 1942 to the present, losses from weeds
have declined slightly, from 13.5 to 12%, over the last 35 years. This is due to improved
herbicidal, mechanical, and cultural weed control practices. Over that same period, losses
from plant pathogens, including nematodes, have increased only slightly, from 10.5% to
about 12% (Table 1).
Crop losses on the average due to insect pests, however, have increased nearly twofold
(7% to about 13%) from the 1940s to the present (Table 1). This occurred in spite of a more
than tenfold increase in insecticide use. The impact of this loss in terms of production has
been effectively offset by increased crop yield, obtained through the use of higher yielding
varieties and increased use of fertilizers and other inputs.4
The substantial increase in crop losses due to insect damage despite increased insecticide
use can be accounted for by some of the major changes that have taken place in agriculture
since the 1940s. These include the planting of some crop varieties that are more susceptible
to insect pests; destruction of natural enemies of certain pests, which created the need for
additional pesticide treatments (e.g., cotton5); increase in pesticide resistance in insects;6 9
reduced crop rotations and crop diversity, with an increase in the continuous culture of a
single crop (e.g., com 1012); reduced FDA tolerance and increased “ cosmetic standards” of
processors and retailers for fruits and vegetables;13 reduced sanitation, including less attention
to the destruction of infected fruit and crop residues (e.g., apples); reduced tillage, with
more crop remains left on the land surface (e.g., corn14); culturing crops in climatic regions
in which they are more susceptible to insect attack (e.g., potatoes and broccoli11); and use
of pesticides that have been found to alter the physiology of crop plants, making them more
susceptible to insect attack (e.g., com 1516).
Crop losses from birds and mammals are estimated to be less than 1% overall. However,
with certain crops in certain locations (e.g., cherries and com grown near water, where
some birds nest) losses may range from 10 to 50%.

CAUSES OF PEST PROBLEMS

No one factor is the cause of all pest problems in crops. In most crops usually a combination
of several factors forms the ecological basis of most pest problems. In this brief discussion
of the causes of pest problems, I will discuss each factor separately as it contributes to pest
problems, but this is done with the recognition that most pest problems are the result of a
combination of factors.11

Monocultures
Natural ecosystems tend to evolve toward stable climax communities for each particular
habitat in the world. The natural plant community that exists in climax communities is most
often not composed of the plant(s) that man utilizes in agriculture. For agriculture, the natural
plant community is removed, destroyed, and usually replaced by a single crop species.
As soon as the land is cleared of the natural vegetation, man’s battle with what he terms
pests begins. The seeds that are planted germinate but so do hundreds of seeds of other
plant species that lay in the soil, some of which may have been dormant for many years.
4 CRC Handbook o f Natural Pesticides: Methods
Table 1
COMPARISON OF ANNUAL PEST LOSSES (DOLLARS) IN THE U.S. FOR THE
PERIODS 1904, 1910— 1935, 1942— 1951, 1951—1960, 1974, PLUS AN ESTIMATE
OF LOSSES IF NO PESTICIDES WERE USED AND IF SOME NONCHEMICAL
ALTERNATIVES WERE EMPLOYED

Percentage of pest losses in crops Crop value

Period Source Insects Diseases Weeds Total $ x 109 Source

1980 2 13.0 12.0 12.0 37 78 87

j

Without pesticides'1 30
18.0 15.0 9.0 42.0b 77 29
1974 2 13.0 12.0 8.0 33.0 77 29
1951 — 1960 1 12.9 12.2 8.5 33.6 30 88
1942— 1951 84 7.1. 10.5 13.8 31.4 27 84
1910— 1935 85 10.5 NAL' NA NA 6 89
1904 86 9.8 NA NA NA 4 86

Includes the substitution of some nonchemical alternative controls.

b
Does not total because of rounding error.
c
Not available.

Many of these species are annual and biennial plants that are the normal, early successional
plants of the serai or pioneer stages of ecosystem development. All the plants that germinate
except the crop plant are considered to be weeds.
Alteration of the ecosystem and restricting the macro-plant community to a single crop
plant has other ramifications. Some microorganisms that remain in the altered ecosystem
containing only the crop plant now utilize the crop plant as their food host. These relatively
nonspecific microorganisms may be highly pathogenic to crop plants. In other cases specific
pathogens may be present, having survived previously on a related species, and these infect
the new introduction.
Insects are usually less of a problem than weeds in newly altered ecosystems. However,
because some insects are broadly adapted to feeding on a wide variety of plant hosts, they
too become a problem to some crop plants in newly opened ecosystems (e.g., grasshoppers,
crickets, cutworms). In addition, insects have excellent mobility and are likely to find new
crop plantings.

Densities and Economics

Included in the ecological parameters of pest populations is the factor of density.17 The
usual description of a pest population is one of high densities. Pest populations do not have
to exist at such high levels to decrease crop yields. In fact, in some cases the insect, pathogen,
weed, mammal, or bird pest population may not be any more abundantly associated with
the cultivated crop than it had been under natural conditions. However, because the numbers
of these organisms are sufficiently abundant to damage crops or livestock they are labeled
as pests.
For example, a species population may actually exist at relatively low densities in crop
ecosystems but it is identified as a pest because it feeds on or causes observable damage to
a valuable part of the crop. This is the case with birds feeding on cherries and mice girdling
fruit trees. The apple maggot fly (Rhagoletispomonella) attacks individual apples and hence,
can be a serious pest even at relatively low densities.93
 Volume I: Theory, Practice, and Detection 5

Introducing Crops
Some pest problems occur when crops or livestock are introduced into new biotic com­
munities. For instance, a new crop plant or animal species introduced into a community
may attract a new predator or parasite species in the community to feed on it. This happens
because the newly introduced species, never having been exposed to the organisms in the
biotic community, lack any natural resistance to any potential parasite or predator. Thus,
these new parasites or predators may become serious pests.
For example, when the potato (Solanum tuberosum), which originated in Bolivia and
Peru,18 was introduced into the southwestern U.S., it acquired a serious pest, the Colorado
potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata). Native to the U.S., the Colorado potato beetle
had originally co-evolved with and fed on wild sand bur (Solanum rostratum).,9 When the
potato was introduced into the Southwest for production, the beetle spread onto the potato
plants. Since the potato had never been exposed to this beetle, it lacked any natural resistance
to it. Since then, this insect has become the most serious pest of the potato in the world.
Another crop that acquired a new pest when it was introduced into a new biotic community
was the apple (Malus sp.). Originally, the apple maggot fly (Rhagoletis pomonella) fed on
wild hawthorn (Crataegus spp.) in the northeastern U.S. When the apple was introduced
from Europe,20 the apple maggot fly spread from hawthorn to the apple and is now considered
the most serious pest of apple in the northeastern U.S.

Introducing Pests
Some insects, pathogens, plants, mammals, or birds may be introduced into new biotic
communities and become pests.21 The ecological principle involved is again the new as­
sociations between exploiting species and victims (prey or hosts). Because the victim lacks
any natural resistance, the exploiter population can increase to outbreak levels.1122 23
A few examples of newly introduced species that became pests include the European
rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus), Japanese beetle (Popillia japonica), Dutch Elm disease
(Ceratocystis ulmi), and water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes). In 1859 the European rabbit
was introduced into Australia and increased rapidly during the next 20 years.24 The association
between the European rabbit and the Australian biotic community was a new one. Because
the natural plant community lacked any resistance or tolerance to feeding by the rabbit, and
few natural enemies of the rabbit existed, rabbits increased rapidly resulting in a severe
impact upon the natural vegetation.
The European gypsy moth (Porthetria dispar) introduced into the eastern U.S. is another
example of a newly introduced species reaching outbreak levels on its new plant hosts
(primarily oaks and related hardwoods).25 The Japanese beetle (Popillia japonica) is another
introduced insect that became a pest in the eastern U.S.26

Climatic Regions
Some plants and animals are able to escape severe attack from their usual parasites and
predators by the ability to exist in a climatic region in which their natural enemies have
difficulty surviving. Thus, we find situations where the distribution of some plants and
animals in nature is the result of the differential survival of parasite, predator, and host.27 28
In agriculture, climatic conditions influence the relative degree of pest attack on the same
crop or animal. For example, potatoes grown in northern Maine or in North Dakota have
fewer insect pests and these pests cause less damage than on potatoes grown in warmer
regions of the country. The potato aphid (Macrosiphum euphorbiae), potato stalk borer
(Trichobaris trinotata), and potato tuberworm (Phthorimaea operculella) are all more serious
pests (especially the borer and tuberworm) in the warmer Southeast than in the cooler northern
and mountain regions. The more serious pest problem is also reflected in the fact that almost
100% of the potato acreage in the Southeast is treated with insecticides, compared with 65%
in the cooler mountain region.29
6 CRC Handbook o f Natural Pesticides: Methods

In addition to temperature, moisture can also influence the distribution of pests relative
to crops. Com, for example, in most areas of the U.S. is seldom attacked by mites. However,
in the irrigated moist areas of Nebraska and Kansas, mites are a serious problem on grain
com .30

Crop Breeding
One of the most important ecological factors involved in pest problems is the breeding
of susceptible crop genotypes.31 Most texts on plant breeding emphasize that the prime aim
of the plant breeder is to increase crop yields. When altering the genetic makeup of the crop
plant to increase yield with little or no attention given to pest attack, natural resistance can
be lost or greatly reduced. Of importance then is breeding plants that not only have high
yields but are resistant to their major pests.
The differences in levels of resistance that may exist in crop plants and their effectiveness
is well illustrated with pea aphids {Acythosiphon pisum) associated with alfalfa (Medicago
sativa)\ 5 young pea aphids placed on a common crop variety of alfalfa produced a total of
290 offspring in 10 days, whereas the same number of aphids for a similar period on a
resistant variety of alfalfa produced a total of only 2 offspring per-aphid.32 Obviously, a
pest population with a 145-fold greater rate of increase on a host plant would inflict greater
damage on the host plant than one with an extremely low rate of increase.
Sometimes in an effort to breed crops more palatable to human taste, the plants become
more susceptible to pests. In particular, selecting and breeding plants to eliminate such
factors as bitterness, hairiness, or other characters that are disliked by man may eliminate
the exact factor that helps the plant resist pest attack. For example, cabbage, broccoli, or
collard plants grown in wild areas were consumed rapidly and were selectively preferred by
slugs and m ice.10 Wild cruciferae, however, growing in the same wild area were hardly
touched at all. The leaves of the young, tame cole plants were palatable, but the leaves of
the wild cruciferan plants were bitter and indeed, were repulsive. Whether the observed
bitterness of the wild plants affected the mice and slugs remains an unproven possibility.
Crop breeding is indeed complex and difficult and may well alter the resistance to pest
attack. Therefore, it is encouraging to note that recent efforts by plant breeders include
attention to increasing plant resistance to pests.

Diversity of Crops
Much has been written about diversity and its influence on stability in ecological systems.33
Frequently, outbreaks of insect pests in agriculture have been attributed to the practice of
crop monocultures. For example, Marchal34 wrote that when man plants a vast extent of the
country with certain crops while excluding others, he offers to the insect pests feeding on
these plants favorable conditions for their explosive increase.
On the same subject, Graham33 wrote, “ that pines [white, Pinus strobus] growing in
mixture with other species such as Norway pine [Pinus resinosa] are somewhat less subject
to attack” from the white-pine weevil (Pissodes strobi). Further support for this observation
has come from the works of Pierson,36 Graham,37 and MacAloney,38 who noted that the
white-pine weevil was excessively abundant in pure stands of white pine, but when the pine
grew with mixed hardwoods infestations were insignificant. According to von Hassel,39
insect outbreaks were common in the monocultured forests of Germany but seldom occurred
in the virgin forests of South America. Tragardh,40 comparing outbreaks in the forests of
Germany and Sweden, concluded that fewer outbreaks took place in Sweden because about
two thirds of its forests are mixed pine-spruce-birch. Rohrl41 and Freiderichs42 observed that
catastrophes occur in forests where man has changed the environment by monoculture, and
they suggested that the lack of diversity characteristic of mixed stands was responsible for
the outbreaks noted. Damage from two moths was found to be negligible to spruce trees in
mixed woods, but in pure stands severe damage often resulted.43
 Volume I: Theory, Practice, and Detection 1

Genetic Diversity
Based on numerous examples it is clear that many parasites have the genetic variability
to evolve and overcome “ single-factor” resistance in their host. Hence, although parasites
associated with hosts in natural situations appear to be genetically stable, in agricultural
ecosystems when the parasite is stressed by a single factor, the parasite can often evolve
and overcome host resistance and cause serious damage to crops. For example, parasitic
stem rust and crown rust have been found to overcome genetic resistance bred into their oat
host. Since 1940, oat varieties have been changed in the com belt region every 4 to 5 years
to counter the changes in the races of stem rust and crown rust.44*45
Recently the southern com leaf blight parasite overcame resistance in com.46 The use of
Texas sources of cytoplasmically inherited male sterility (TMS) narrowed the resistance
character in about 85% of the com grown in the U.S. to almost genetic homogeneity.47'48
Then in 1970, favorable environmental conditions resulted in selecting race T of Helmin-
thosporium maydis (southern com leaf blight) which is virulent on all plants with TMS
cytoplasm. The result was an epidemic causing devastating losses in the genetically ho­
mogeneous com host.49

Plant Spacings
In cultivated fields, crop plant densities are carefully controlled to obtain the maximum
population possible for optimal growth resulting in maximum economic yield. Seldom are
the spacings of such plants similar to those in the wild. The new plant spacings result in an
ecological situation that encourages pest outbreaks.
Plants utilize various strategies to limit the impact of predatory animals feeding upon
them. Plants and other hosts for example, existing in relatively dense stands may overwhelm
the numbers of herbivores. Lebedev50 reported that planting dense stands of turnips reduced
the numbers of flea beetles (Phyllotreta spp.) on the turnip plants. Also, Pimentel51 inves­
tigated the impact of three different planting densities on animals feeding on cabbage,
collards, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, and kale. Plants in the dense planting were spaced 15
by 15 cm from one another and totaled about 443,000 plants per hectare. Plants in the sparse
planting were spaced 46 by 91 cm from one another (normal planting distance) and totaled
about 26,000 plants per hectare. Plants in the dispersed planting were spaced 2.7 by 2.7 m
from one another and totaled about 1200 per hectare. Although there were more total
herbivores in the dense planting than in either the sparse or dispersed hectare equivalent
region, herbivores per plant surface area in both the sparse and dispersed plantings were
more than five times more abundant than in the dense planting. Feeding pressure and impact
of herbivores depends directly upon the relative abundance of herbivores per unit biomass
(plant surface area). Thus, plant survival may depend upon a spatial pattern of dense design.
In summary, alteration of natural plant spatial patterns from either dense to sparse or
sparse to dense may increase the relative abundance of exploiters feeding on the host
population and, therefore, a serious pest problem may result from the new spatial pattern.

Continuous Crop Culture

Grown in the wild, annual and biennial plants often do not remain in the same location
for many years but disperse and become established in new locations. This movement from
one location to another helps some plants avoid attack from harmful insects and pathogens.
In agriculture, when crops are maintained in the same area year after year, pests associated
with the crops or livestock tend to increase in number and this compares in severity. For
example, if cole crops are cultured for several years in the same soil, club root (Plasmo-
diophora brassicae) organism increase rapidly and can totally ruin production.52 Effective
control of these pests is to plant noncole type crops on the land for several years.
Rotating com with soybeans helps control the most serious insect pest of com, com
8 CRC Handbook of Natural Pesticides: Methods

rootworms.94 Corn must be rotated every year to provide effective control of rootworms,
and this rotation combines nicely with soybeans and small grains.

Soil Nutrients
All parasites and predators have specific nutrient requirements. Altering the nutrient level
in the soil and then in the host plant influences the parasites and predators feeding on the
plant. An improvement in nutrients often results in parasite and predator population numbers
increasing and a decline in nutrients results in the reverse.
For example, Haseman53 reported that the grain aphid (Macrosiphum granarium) feeding
on small grain plants with high nutrients (high nitrogen) produced an average 33 progeny
per aphid whereas on plants with low levels of nitrogen, progeny production averaged only
13 per aphid. Barker and Tauber54 found that the pea aphid feeding on the garden pea with
a high nutrient level (high nitrogen) produced an average of 69 progeny per aphid whereas
on low nitrogen, progeny production averaged 47 per aphid.
Of course, differences exist in exactly how individual species respond to various nutrients
and nutrient levels. For example, purple scale (Lepidosaphes beckii) on citrus increases with
increased amounts of magnesium55 and a similar response occurred with pea aphid on peas.54
However, although the pea aphid on peas increased with increasing phosphorus,54 the chinch
bug (Blissus leucopterus) on sorghum decreased with increasing phosphorus.56 Mites
(Tetranychus telarius) on tomatoes were likewise found to be negatively correlated with
phosphorus dosage.57 Also, contrary to aphids, greenhouse thrips (Heliothrips haemorrhoi-
dalis) do poorly on spinach with high levels of nitrogen58 and mites on tomatoes likewise
do poorly with high nitrogen.57

Planting Times
Some plants in nature begin to grow early or late in the growing season and thereby
manage to escape the attack of certain pests. Wild radishes have been observed to germinate
early in the spring and make most of their growth before the cabbage maggot fly emerges
and attacks the radishes. Damage to the radishes under these conditions is usually minimal.95
In other situations plants may escape attack by starting growth after the pest population
has emerged and begun to die. This strategy has been employed by agriculturalists to reduce
the attack on wheat by the Hessian fly. Delaying the seeding of wheat fields is effective in
reducing the attack from the dangerous fall brood of the Hessian fly.59 The spring brood of
the Hessian fly is less serious and delayed planting does not reduce the spring brood attack.

Crop Associations
Some parasites and predators can attack and feed on several species of host plants. These
parasites and predators can move from one host plant to another when one of the host plant
populations declines in abundance for some reason.
In the U.S., for example, plant bugs (Lygus spp.) feed on alfalfa and cotton. When alfalfa
is mowed for hay and eliminated as a food course for the bugs, they will move on to cotton
in large numbers.60 Thereafter, the bugs will cause damage to cotton if present in sufficient
numbers. The plant bugs generally prefer alfalfa and therefore if the alfalfa is carefully
managed by planned cutting, the Lygus bug population on cotton can be kept to a minimum.
The successful strategy is to cut only a portion of the alfalfa at a time leaving sufficient
alfalfa to attract the bugs and keep them away from the cotton. Another strategy is to plant
narrow strips of alfalfa (6 m wide) for every 91 to 122 m of cotton in the cotton field. This
not only attracts the plant bugs but may provide a source of natural enemies of such pests
as cotton boll worms.

Plant Physiology and Pesticides

Pesticides are potent biocides and in some cases adversely affect the physiology of crop
 Volume I: Theory, Practice, and Detection 9

Table 2
SOME EXAMPLES OF PERCENTAGES OF CROP ACRES TREATED, OF
PESTICIDE AMOUNTS USED ON CROPS, AND OF ACRES PLANTED TO
THIS CROP29 64

Insecticides Herbicides Fungicides

% % %
Crops Acres % Amount Acres % Amount Acres % Amount

Nonfood NA“ 42 NA 5 NA NA
Cotton 60 40 84 5 9 1
Tobacco 76 2 55 >0 30 >0
Field Crops NA 39 NA 90 NA 19
Corn 38 20 90 52 1 NA
Peanuts 55 1 93 1 76 16
Rice 11 >0 83 2 0 2
Wheat 14 4 38 6 1 >0
Soybeans 7 5 88 21 3 NA
Pasture (hay + 0.5 4 1 3 0 NA
range)
Vegetables 58 7 NA 2 NA 24
Potatoes 84 2 51 NA 49 10
Fruit 90 9 NA 1 NA 60
Apples 91 3 35 NA 61 18
Citrus 72 2 22 NA 47 24
All crops 9 25 24 60 1.5 15

Not available.

plants. Any change in the physiology of a crop plant may result either in making the plant
more resistant or more susceptible to attack by its parasites and predators. Since crop plants
which are not physiologically stressed are generally more effective in resisting parasite and
predator attack, any chemical that alters normal physiology is likely to increase the suscep­
tibility of the crop plant. This was demonstrated when calcium arsenate was used on cotton.
McGarr61 reported that aphids on untreated cotton plants averaged 0.91 per 6 cm2 of leaf
area whereas aphids numbered 6.05 on plants treated with calcium arsenate at about 6.7 kg/
ha.
Herbicides have also been found to increase insect pest and pathogen problems associated
with com. For example, when com plots were treated with a regular dosage of 0.55 kg,
2,4-D per hectare, aphid numbers on the corn averaged 1679, whereas on the untreated they
averaged only 618.16 Com borer infestation averaged 28% in the 2,4-D-treated com pop­
ulation compared with only 16% in the untreated com population.
In laboratory investigations of the impact of 2,4-D on the relative resistance of com plants
to pathogens, exposed com plants were significantly more susceptible to com smut disease
(Ustilago maydis)62 and to southern corn leaf blight (Helminthosporium maydis).'6

PESTICIDE CONTROLS

Extent of Pesticide Use

About 1 billion lb of pesticides are used annually in the U.S. in an effort to control crop
pests.63 Pesticides are employed primarily against insect pests, plant pathogens, and weeds.
Of the pesticides used annually in agriculture, about 60% are herbicides, 25% insecticides,
and 15% fungicides (Table 2).
10 CRC Handbook o f Natural Pesticides: Methods

The distribution of these pesticides on crops is uneven. For example, 42% of all insecticide
used in agriculture is applied to the nonfood crops cotton and tobacco (Table 2). Of the
food crops, com, fruits, and vegetables receive the largest amount of insecticide; 52% of
all herbicides used in the U.S. is applied to com. Soybeans account for an additional 21%,
with the remainder distributed among other crops. The major users of fungicides are the
fruit crops (60%) and vegetables (24%, Table 2).
On a per acre basis, of the 890 million acres of U.S. cropland (including pastures), only
24% are treated with herbicides, 9% with insecticides, and 1.5% with fungicides.64 For any
one crop, insecticide treatment may vary by geographic region. For example, in the mountain
region, where large quantities of potatoes are grown, 65% of the potato acreage is treated
with insecticides; in the Southeast, where early potatoes are grown, 100% of the potato
acreage is treated.29 This difference in use probably reflects the higher intensity of pest
attack that occurs in the warmer regions. Cotton insect pests are also more of a problem in
the Southeast than in other regions.12 In the Southeast and Delta states, 84% of cotton acres
are treated, whereas in the southern plains region only 41% are treated.
Only a few food crops, mainly fruits and vegetables, have more than 75% of their acreage
treated with insecticides (Table 2). Many acres of small grains and pasture receive little or
no insecticide treatment.
Herbicide use has increased more rapidly compared with that of other pesticides during
the last decade.65 Those crops for which more than half the acreage is treated include cotton,
corn, peanuts, rice, and soybeans.
Fungicides are used on more than half of the acreage of apples, certain other fruits, a few
vegetables, and peanuts (Table 2). Most other crops, however, are grown successfully with
little or no fungicide treatment.
Fungicides and insecticides used to treat seeds before planting were not included in our
assessment. The amounts used are small, totaling only about 5 million lb (estimate based
on information from 1965 to 1966). In addition, the environmental and public health hazards
of seed treatment are of little consequence because of the small amount of pesticide applied
and the fact that treated seeds are placed directly underground.

Estimated Crop Losses without Pesticides

Estimates of expected pest losses for major crops grown without pesticides were made
by examining data on current crop losses, loss data based on experimental field tests without
treatment, and by consulting with pest control specialists (Table l).30 The calculated losses
without pesticides are probably overestimated for several reasons. First, the loss data based
on experimental field tests, where treated and untreated plots were compared, usually em­
phasized the benefits of pesticide use, as these plots were normally established in regions
where infestations of the pests were severe.
Loss estimates without pesticide use were further exaggerated because insect, disease,
and weed losses were assessed separately and then combined. For example, on untreated
apples, insects were estimated to cause a 60% loss, pathogens 60%, and weeds 6%.30 Thus,
this approach yields an estimated total loss of 126% for apples from all pests combined.
Obviously, apple losses cannot be greater than 100%. A more accurate estimate is above
90% loss without pesticides. Exactly how much overlap exists in the loss figures is not
known.
With current insecticide use, the total dollar value of crop losses due to insects is estimated
to be 13% of the potential crop value (Table 1). If insecticide use were withdrawn, and a
few readily available nonchemical controls were substituted where possible, dollar values
of crop losses due to insects would increase an estimated additional 5% (Table 1).
At this time, it is not clear whether crop losses due to insect pests would continue to
increase or would decrease over time if pesticide use were terminated. It is expected that
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Mrs. Rayburn was quite willing. Many a time at Hemsborough had her
fingers itched to whip one or the other, or both, for she had scant patience
with children, and Janet had perhaps too much. But as she put forth a
hand to take hold of Fred, Frank pushed in between them, keeping the
child behind him, and crying, as he faced her like a little lion—

"No, you've whipped me, and that's enough. If you touch Fred, I'll—I'll
push you into the water! We'll run away and be lost; you shan't—you
shan't touch Fred."

"Here's a row," said Mrs. Rayburn, half frightened at the violence of the
usually gentle child, and the angry spark in his eyes. "I told you," she
continued, "that I'd let him off this time, and I will, though he'd provoke a
saint. But if you're to stay here, you must obey me, and I just mean to let
you see that at once. There, now, come to dinner, and let me hear no
more nonsense."

They followed her, a sad, quenched little couple as ever you saw. Frank
could eat no dinner; the remembrance of that terrible scene was too much
for him; and Fred, seeing this, shook his wee white fist at grandma—when
her back was turned.

Dinner over, Mrs. Rayburn seated herself in her easy-chair, and took from
her pocket Janet's list of the boys' belongings.

"What picture of your father is this on your list?" she asked. "It is not
among your clothes. You'd best give it to me to keep for you."

"Muddie said I was to keep it, and show it to Fred every day, for fear we'd
forget him. He's been so long away, you see."

"Well, show it to me."

Reluctantly, Frank drew from his pocket a little square brown case, and,
opening it, showed the handsome, pleasant face of his father.

"Oh, only that! Why, it's the cabinet one just cut to fit the case. Yes, you
can keep it. Fred there is very like him. You're like your mother. Eh,
what's that child doing over there?"

"Nuffin," said Fred, hurriedly abandoning his design to pull the needles out
of her knitting.

"You may both go now and play in the court," said Mrs. Rayburn. "There's
no flowers there for you to spoil. I'm going to take a nap, for I'm tired out
running after you. Now, mind me, boys, particularly Frank, as he's the
eldest. I'll be good to you, if you're good; but you may as well give in at
once, for I'm not like your mother, that never brought you into order by
so much as a smack. Now, you know that I'm in earnest, so run away."

They stole away, hand-in-hand. Frank sat down on the white stone steps.

"Fred, dear," he said, "I do feel so sick and foolish."

"Poo' Fwank, mine own Fwankie," and the little arms stoles round Frank's
neck, and the rosy cheek was fondly rubbed against the white one. "It
was bad of Fwed not to mind you; Fwed will mind you always now; and be
so good. Oh, Fwank, where's muddie?"

"She'll send for us as soon as ever she can. Muddie did not know that
grandma would be cross."

But, it was curious enough, Frank was not one whit surprised to find her
so.

CHAPTER V.
ALL THE WAY TO GATTIGO.

JANET hardly knew how the time passed during her journey back to
Liverpool. She was not asleep, though her fellow-travellers thought she
was, for she sat perfectly still with her eyes shut. She felt so awfully alone
that she did not know how to bear it.

Arrived in Liverpool, her first care was to secure a berth on board the
ship; she had not done so before, not being certain that the children
would not be with her. She saw the stewardess, and got her to give her a
list of the few things she might want during the passage more than what
was supplied by the company. Then she went back to her lodgings, paid
up her few debts, packed up everything, went to the school and settled
things there; finally, she had everything ready in good time.

It was well that she had so much to do, and so little time in which to do it.
For she was very unhappy, when she had time to think. She could not
reconcile herself to the step she had taken at her husband's desire. To
part with her boys—ah! It seemed cruel. Surely she could not have done
it? Surely the door would open, and a baby face peep in, and a merry
shout of "Muddie, Muddie, we've come home!" would be heard. But no, all
was silence. Fred's loudest howl would have been music to his mother.

And there was another thing that she could not help feeling uncomfortable
about. She had not told Mrs. Rayburn that Fred's trouble was so serious
that he had been imprisoned and must stand his trial. She had no
suspicion that Mrs. Rayburn was not the good-tempered, obliging person
she had always appeared, but she did know that she was a great talker
and a great gossip. She might write all this to her sister-in-law in
Hemsborough; she might even tell the boys, from whom their father so
much desired to conceal it.

It had seemed to Janet that there could be no harm in keeping back the
worst part of the story, but now she felt uneasy at having done so, being
a very truthful and candid woman. Events proved that it would have been
wiser to tell all; yet I do not think Janet was to blame for her reticence.

At last the time came for her to go on board; and she and her luggage
reached the vessel in safety. It was a lovely evening, and the Mersey as
smooth as glass, yet before the vessel left the river, poor Janet was lying
in her berth, deadly sick, and only hearing a voice as at a great distance,
saying—

"Dear, dear, fancy being took like this before we're out of the river!"

On the river, or on the broad Atlantic, it was all much the same to poor
Janet. She was never free from sickness till she found herself landed
alone in a strange land. They told her on board that she would feel all
right the moment she landed, but she did not feel much better than when
at sea. Then she dimly hoped that a night's sleep would cure her, and that
everything would cease to swim before her eyes, and leave off coming
into violent contact with her when she tried to move. But the night
brought no sleep, and no refreshment.

"I must go on to Gattigo. I must get to Fred and Gilbert. I'm going to be
ill," she said aloud. And she dressed herself with much difficulty, and
made her way to the railway station named in Gilbert's notes.
How she remembered her route, as sent her by Gilbert, how she contrived
to drag herself from place to place, and to keep her luggage together—but
that is, I believe, easier in Canada than at home—she never could
remember. Her head ached so dreadfully that the effort of moving or
speaking was agony, and every now and then she lost all sense of her
present surroundings and fell into a half-conscious state of fear and
misery, only to be realized by those who have endured the slow coming-
on of a bad fever.

She reached Gattigo at last. No Fred was visible, but Gilbert was waiting
for her.

"Why, here you are, my brave girl," he said pityingly, "and, as things have
turned out, I need not have hurried you so."

Janet caught at his arm to keep herself from falling, crying out—

"Gilbert—is he dead?"

"No, no; hold up, Janet. Why, the poor girl has fainted! Here, Brett!"—to a
passing railway clerk. "Lend me a hand."

"Your sister that you were expecting? Ah, poor girl, no doubt it was a
shock."

"I hadn't time to shock her; she took me up wrong, and thought her
husband was dead. Help me, and I'll get her into my waggon and make
tracks for home. I think she's ill by the look of her, and finding every one
curious about her would make her worse. I must get her home to my
wife; she'll manage her."

With his friend's help, he got Janet out of the station, and into his light
spring-waggon, where they made her as comfortable as possible. She had
revived a little by this time, and obediently swallowed something hot
which Brett brought for her. But before they had passed over the fifteen
miles of rough road which lay between Gattigo and "Old Man's Ferry," she
was almost unconscious; and in that state she lay for hours. Even when
this passed off, and she seemed more alive, she never spoke, nor looked
as if she knew what they were doing to her.

Mrs. Gray, a bright-looking little French Canadian, who, without a single

really good feature except her dark, vivacious eyes, was a very pretty
woman, was lost in admiration of Janet's regular features and white skin.

"But you never told me that your sister was so pretty, Gilbert?"
"I declare, I never thought about it," he answered. "Poor mother used to
be very proud of her looks, and her good marriage, poor child!"

"Gilbert, is there no chance that we may keep them here? Now that she is
getting better, we ought to settle what to say to her."

"You wish to keep them?"

"Well, think of our long, lonely winters! Even the children would be glad of
two new companions. And for me, a woman like her—ah, what a
comfort!"

"But, Aimée, the hotel notion won't work—not with Rayburn as manager;
he's done for that plan."

"I suppose so; but, should you try it with another manager, you would
want help here, and so should I. And you would have to drive to Gattigo
much oftener than now. You could trust him?"

"Well, I hope so."

"Why, Gilbert, you always say you think him innocent."

"Yes; but he failed to convince the court of it. It is a tangled skein, Aimée,
and we can settle nothing till we have him here and Janet well again."

He got up and walked once or twice up and down the long, low room, with
a cooking-stove at one end and an open grate for burning wood at the
other. Coming to a standstill near the stove, at which Aimée was busy, he
said, as if to himself—

"And one thinks of the disgrace, too."

"Now, Gilbert, the case went against him, no doubt; but there were many
who, like you, believed him innocent of all but careless folly. It would be
forgotten in time if he works steadily here, and makes people like him."

"To like him would be easy; he's a taking kind of fellow enough. Whether
he has it in him to bear up under all this misfortune, and live it down, is a
different question."

"He would have a better chance here, under your eye, than in any other
place."

"That is true. Anyhow, I have Janet and the two boys to think of."
This conversation passed one day that Janet had seemed a little better,
but it was not for some time afterwards that she was really quite herself
again; even then her weakness was very great. The first time she spoke
was a great joy to Aimée, who had begun to fear that her mind was really
affected.

Aimée had come to the bedside with a cup of soup and a dainty little bit of
toast, when something in the wistful gaze she met, made her say with a
smile—

"It is your soup, my dear. Let me raise you up a little."

"You are so kind!" Janet whispered. "Tell me, am I in a hospital? I do not

remember coming here."

"No, you were so ill. This is your brother's house, and I am his wife,
Aimée."

"And my husband—is dead," Janet said slowly.

"Not he. What made you think that? He will be here in a day or two, and
will tell you all about it himself, and why he could not come sooner."

Janet took the speaker's hand, and held it with more strength than she
looked capable of.

"You are sure—you do not say this only to quiet me?"

"No, my dear, indeed I would not be so cruel. Your Fred is in good health,
and will be here very soon now."

Janet closed her eyes and fell asleep; indeed, it seemed to her that she
did nothing but sleep until one day she awoke to find Fred sitting beside
her, watching for the opening of her eyes.
 CHAPTER VI.
MRS. RAYBURN'S CAP.

WE must now return to Kelmersdale. Happily for us, we can do so without

being sick like poor Janet!

In spite of little Fred's good resolutions, things frequently went wrong

between him and Mrs. Rayburn. She was not fond of children. Her one
idea about them was that they must be well fed, go to bed early, and
never be in the way at any time. Now, Fred was nearly always in the way.
The children had no employment and amusement, for they never went
out except into the stone court, and though they could play there for a
time, when Frank got tired of running (which he did very quickly) Fred
positively could not keep out of mischief of a very babyish, innocent kind;
but his misdemeanours made Mrs. Rayburn very angry, and once or twice
she whipped Frank for being so lazy, sitting half asleep and not seeing
after his little brother.

If she had whipped Fred, she would have done no harm, for Fred was a
boy to whom a whipping would have been a small affliction. He would no
doubt have roared during the infliction, and laughed in her face five
minutes afterwards. But Frank was very different—a sensitive, delicate
child, to whom such a punishment was a real cruelty. Not that she
whipped him severely; that she never did, but the injustice of her
proceedings and the disgrace of the punishment was breaking Frank's
heart and ruining Fred's temper. The little creature began to hate her with
an intensity of which she had no idea; she never even observed the way
in which he would sit staring at her with a frown on the smooth little
forehead, and a sidelong look occasionally at some of her belongings,
against which he was forming plans. As long as Fred lives, he will never
forget her face.

Weeks passed, and no letter came from Janet. Mrs. Rayburn grumbled,
but she really did not mind, as the children were no expense to her. But,
after a time, she received a letter from her sister-in-law at Hemsborough
which made her very angry. The letter informed her that her married
niece, Mrs. John Martin, had heard from her husband, who had gone to
America on business, and he had sent her the newspaper now forwarded
to Mrs. Rayburn. Mr. Martin had been at New Durham, had heard people
speaking of the trial that was soon to take place, and had, of course,
recognized the Hemsborough name. The paper contained an account of
Mr. Turner's transactions, his escape, the arrest of his partner, and the
trial. The account was very brief. The prisoner had denied being a partner,
though he had been assisting in the business. Of the foundry and the
actual work he knew nothing. But it came out that he had advanced a
sum of money to carry on the works, and the court was not satisfied that
he knew nothing of the deceptions practised. The upshot was that
Rayburn was sentenced to a term of imprisonment. There was no doubt
that the Frederick Rayburn so sentenced was really Hopper and Mason's
late manager, for Martin had been present at the trial, and knew him very
well.

"Here's a pretty kettle of fish, Maria!" Mrs. Rayburn cried, as the girl
entered her sitting-room just as she finished reading all this. "There's my
precious stepson been cheating right and left, somewhere in Canada, and
sent to jail for it, and no doubt, he and his wife mean to make off as soon
as he gets out, and leave the boys to me! And what can I do but send
them to the workhouse?"

"The poor little things!" said Maria. "La! Ma'am, they do no harm here."

"But what's to become of them? I can't put them to school; I haven't a

penny, thanks to their father. I just ask you what's to become of them?"

"Well, my lord will be here soon, ma'am, and maybe he'll be able to
advise you about them."

For Lord Beaucourt's visits were looked upon as the time when knotty
questions would be decided for the inmates of the Castle.

Presently it was time to summon the children to dinner, and when they
were seated at table, and Mrs. Rayburn was carving, she said to Maria—

"Poor unfortunate little souls, what's to become of them now?"

"What's the matter?" asked Frank. "Have you had a letter from muddie?"

"No, indeed, and I doubt I never shall. I wonder, Maria, did she know of
this when she was here?"

"Know of what?" Frank cried. "Do tell me, grandma."

"Indeed, I suppose you must know it sooner or later. Your father's in

trouble again. First, he loses his good place, and then he goes to Canada
and gets put in jail for cheating."
Fred was frightened, though he did not understand. Frank did, and said
boldly—

"It's not true. Father never did that—never!"

"Poor child!" said Maria. "Never mind, it's no fault of yours, if he did."

"But he did not. He couldn't," Frank insisted.

"Don't tell him not to mind, Maria, for he'll have to know it. It is all here in
black and white, printed in a newspaper."

"It's a mistake, grandma. Father did not—do that."

"My poor child, there's no use denying it. You remember John Martin—he
married my niece, Annie Thompson that was—he was foreman at Timpson
and Booth's, in Hemsborough? Do you remember him?"

"Yes, I do," Frank admitted.

"Well, he was at this place—New Durham, or Dorset, I forget which

exactly—and he saw your father tried and found guilty. He's in jail for it
now, and it would be a good thing, if they'd keep him there."

"Do you mean always? Will they keep him always?"

"It's much the same as far as you're concerned. He's got your mother out
now, and got rid of you two—I only hope it wasn't a plan laid between
them. Eat your dinner, child. Goodness knows how you're to get a dinner
when my lord puts you out of this, and it stands to reason he will not keep
you for ever."

"I can't eat. It's not that I believe it; muddie would never leave us here
always—she wants us—but—but—" the clear little voice broke down
—"muddie will come for us soon," he said, with a sob.

"I wish I could think so," Mrs. Rayburn said dolefully, "for I see nothing
before you but the poorhouse. What's that, Maria?"

"A telegram from my lord, ma'am."

The telegram gave notice that Lord Beaucourt was coming that evening to
get through some business with the steward and keepers, and to arrange
with Mrs. Rayburn about rooms, etc., for the shooting-party which was
presently to assemble at Kelmersdale.
All was now bustle and preparation. The notice was short, but still all
could easily be got ready in time. The children were sent out into the
court, and told that Lord Beaucourt must now be informed that they were
left on their grandmother's hands, and that he would probably insist on
their being sent away.

"And that means the poorhouse," Mrs. Rayburn said mournfully.

Frank sat on the steps, and for a time Fred was with him. The poor child,
being very wretched, did not observe that the young rogue soon left him,
and stole into the house.

Jacob was going in the cart to do some errands for Mrs. Rayburn. He
drove into the court presently, and the great gates were left open for him
to drive out again. Frank was looking wistfully out at the green glades in
which he was not allowed to wander, and he felt a wild longing to run out,
if only for a minute, when suddenly Fred ran out of the house, looking
somewhat scared.

"Fwank, Fwank, turn and put it out—turn quick!"

"Put what out?" said Frank, getting up.

"Gwandma's cap. Oh, I only meant to burn a hole in the wibbon, just to
vex her, but when I stwuck the match, it all blazed up—all the cap—all
blazes, and the bed! Fwank, make haste."

The little monkey had been watching grandma, and, seeing her leave the
bedroom, he had stolen in to see what she had been about. She had been
laying out her best attire to wear for the earl's arrival; on the bed lay a
silk dress and a large cap, with streamers and flowers enough for three;
on the table lay a matchbox. Here was a glorious opportunity! How vexed
grandma would be! But lace caps are highly inflammable, and the result
of his experiment frightened Fred.

The boys raced through the hall, and just as they reached the bedroom,
Mrs. Rayburn opened the door of her sitting-room, which was just
opposite. Frank scarcely saw her; he was old enough to know something
of the danger. He flung the bedroom door wide, and at the sight that met
her eyes, Mrs. Rayburn set up an appalling shout. At the sound, Fred
turned and ran off to hide. Jacob and several others came running; the
fire was soon put out, but Mrs. Rayburn's silk gown and cap were
destroyed.
"It's all out, mum; you don't need to be frightened any more," Jacob said,
looking ruefully at his singed and blackened garments. "But how on earth
did the things take fire?"

Mrs. Rayburn looked round. There stood Frank—and Frank (against his
will, for he tried not to do it) looked at the matchbox that lay open on the
floor.

"It was your doing!" she cried excitedly. "Well, that settles the matter! My
lord will insist on my sending you away, and I have nowhere to send you
but to the poorhouse. The boy who could set fire to things that way
certainly will not be kept here. You might have burned down the Castle.
It's an offence you might be sent to prison for."

"Indeed, I wish my lord would insist upon his being sent to prison, the
wicked little cub," said Jacob; "but I'm sure he'll send him out of the
Castle. Lock him up safe, mum, till my lord comes."

"I shall, Jacob; but he really ought to get a good flogging at once. I never
thought he'd do such a wicked thing."

"I'll give him a flogging that he won't forget in a hurry," said Jacob, who,
having been much frightened, was now very angry. He laid hands on the
supposed culprit, and led him out into the hall. There he took a whip from
its place on the wall, and desired Frank to take off his jacket, which Frank,
trembling and tearful but silent, was doing, when, from some hiding-
place, Fred rushed out, crying—

"'Twas me did it; you s'ant beat Fwank."

"You! I don't believe it," said Mrs. Rayburn; "why, you're only a baby."

"I'm not!" cried Fred. "I stwuck a match and set your cap in a blaze, and
then I wan for Fwank to put it out."

"Hold your tongue, Fred," said the elder boy; "he'd kill you; you're too
little to bear it."

Jacob, uttering some queer, inarticulate sound, hung up the whip and
walked oft. As long as he lived, he never forgot the look of the slender
little lad standing there ready to bear anything to shield his little brother.

Mrs. Rayburn, thus left to her own devices, took the two children to her
sitting-room, and opened a queer little hiding-hole in the thickness of the
wall, into which she pushed Frank, saying—
"There you both stay, till my lord says what is to be done with you;" and
she was in the act of pushing Fred in too, when he dived suddenly under
her ample skirts and fled, nor could she find him, though she followed as
soon as she had shut Frank in.

Frank sat down on the floor of his prison, and tried to collect his thoughts.
He had not quite succeeded when the door of the closet was softly
opened, and little Fred crept in.

"Oh, Fwank, she'll send me away and keep you!"

"How do you know?"

"I was hid away in the big room, and she and Mawia came in to dust it
and make weady; and she was telling Mawia."

"Yes; tell me what they said."

"Said I was a awful bad child, and that there was no managing the two of
us. Gwandma said she'd keep you and send me away; my lord would
manage it for her."

Frank scrambled to his feet.

"She'd send you to the poorhouse! Fred, it was very bad of you to set the
cap on fire, and you must never do such a thing again. But she shan't part
us. Who would take care of you? And I promised muddie I would. I will,
too. We'll slip out—the great gate is open still, or I'd have heard the clang
—and we'll run away."

"Oh, jolly, jolly!" cried Fred, performing as lively a dance as the space
would permit. "We'll wun away and be beggars! Won't it be fun?"

"It can't be wrong," Frank said thoughtfully. "She'd part us, and—no, it
must be right for me to save you. We'll go to Liverpool, and find our
school. Mrs. Crane was very kind to us, and she'll find out where muddie
is for us. That's what we'll do. Fred, stay here till I come back. I must go
to our room to get my money."

He was the proud possessor of a few shillings, which his mother had given
him, and a sixpence with a hole in it, given him "by father years ago," he
said himself.

He shut Fred into the closet, and stole like a little mouse out of the room
and along the passage. He took a brush and comb bag, and stuffed some
of Fred's clothes into it, with its usual contents. Another bag—a work-bag
when it was new—held some of his own clothes. The big red comforter
might be useful, for if they could not reach Liverpool before night, they
must sleep in the fields. Then the money. Father's picture was safe in his
pocket.

Then he stole back and released Fred. They crept across the hall and into
the porch. The cart was still there, for Jacob had gone to make himself
presentable after his adventures as a fireman, and the great gate was still
open. In a few moments Janet's two darlings were out of the court, and
had darted into a side path, where some shrubs concealed them from
view.

"But we must get back to the big road when we are far enough from the
Castle," said Frank, "and get to the gate. I remember the gate. Jacob
called 'gate,' and an old woman came and opened it."

"I can call 'gate' just like Jacob," said Fred. "Listen—gate!"

"Hush, hush! We'll be caught, if you shout. Come, let us get back into the
road."

The poor little souls were as merry as grigs, running and jumping, then
walking hand-in-hand, talking and laughing in the delights of their
newfound freedom. They never heard the sound of wheels, till Jacob
called "Hullo, boys!" When they stood gazing, and gave themselves up for
lost.

"Hullo, boys! What brings you here?"

"We—came out—the gate was open," Frank answered.

"And you wanted a breath of fresh air? And, indeed, 'tis a shame to keep
you mewed up in the court. But you'll be lost, and that won't do. Come
now, jump in here, and I'll take you as far as the north gate, and then you
can run back to the Castle. I'm doing this for you, Frank—you're a right
brave little chap; not for you, Fred, that wanted to burn the old place
down."

"No, not the place at all, Jacob; only grandma's cap. The west happened
of itself," Fred explained.

"Fred, it was not right," put in Frank.

"I never will again, Fwank—weally never."

"You won't have a chance, you little fool," said Jacob. "Maria was telling
me Mrs. Rayburn won't keep you, even if my lord would let her. You'll be
sent away, and Frank will stay till he's old enough to go as a page-boy at
Beaucourt. That's what Mrs. Rayburn has made up her mind to."

Fred, thoroughly frightened, clung to his poor little protector, who

whispered—

"I'll save you; only don't say a word."

They soon reached the north gate. It was open, and Jacob said to the
boys—

"Out with you now, and run home. I want to speak to Mrs. Price."

The boys tumbled out, clutching their bags. Jacob went to the lodge:
when he came back, the boys were gone. They had run across the road
and scrambled over the low fence into a field, where they hid, until Jacob
came out and put his horse into a brisk trot.

"We won't go by that road, because we'd meet him coming back," said
Frank. "We'll go along by the wall; it's nice and shady, too. By-and-by,
we'll buy some bread, and ask the way to Liverpool. This bag is very
heavy."

"So is mine," said Fred; "but come along. It's very jolly!"

Away they went—poor Janet's babies!

"WE'LL GO ALONG BY THE WALL."

CHAPTER VII.
THE BOYS' ESCAPE.
LORD BEAUCOURT arrived at Kelmersdale somewhat too early for dinner,
and, having been duly informed by Mrs. Rayburn that she was in
difficulties about the two children, he desired her to come to his study and
tell him all about it.

"Now, Mrs. Thompson—no, Rayburn, by the way—what's wrong with

you?"

"My lord, that unlucky young man, my stepson, not content with ruining
himself and me, speculating and getting dismissed, has got into worse
trouble in America. To the best of my belief, he's at this present time in
prison for some offence or other—cheating people, I believe. He wrote for
his wife, and she brought the boys to me and went off, and not a line
have I had from her since. And the boys are—well, indeed, my lord, they
are in mischief from morning to night, and I am worn out running after
them. Since the shock I got about their father, my health is not at all
good."

Being further questioned, she described the affair of that morning, and I
am sorry to say that Lord Beaucourt, who was a nobleman of a merry turn
of mind, laughed heartily.

"The little pickles!" he exclaimed. "They deserved a rod, no doubt."

"They might have burned down the Castle, my lord."

"Best thing that could happen to it, Mrs. Rayburn. It is nothing but an
expense. But stone walls four feet thick do not burn easily. Well, I will
think about it. I know several institutions that might answer; it would be
easier, of course, if they were orphans. But, never mind, we'll find a
school for them somewhere. I will talk to you again about it."

He had to talk to her again, much sooner than he either wished or

expected. As soon as dinner was fairly served, Mrs. Rayburn, who had
been assisting the somewhat inexperienced cook, went to look for Fred,
whom she expected to find in the little turret bedroom, as she had done
on similar occasions more than once. For Fred had quite a genius for
disappearing when most wanted to answer for some choice piece of
mischief. Not finding him there, she said to herself:

"He's hiding in my sitting-room, to be near Frank."

She searched the sitting-room, but, as we know, Fred was not there, nor
was Frank in the closet.
"Those boys," said Mrs. Rayburn, in a loud voice, "will live to be hanged,
as sure as my name is Lydia Rayburn. There's no use going on like this,
boys," she went on, seating herself in her easy-chair. "You're hiding, I
know, but you may as well come out. My lord will not get you punished as
you deserve, and I shall say no more about it. I forgive you both this
once."

She lay back, pretending to doze, but really watching the first movement
of curtain or tablecloth, to pounce upon the sinners. The sinners, however,
were not there to be pounced upon.

After a few moments Mrs. Rayburn's pretended doze turned into a real
one, and she filled the cosy room with portentous snores. She woke up
suddenly in a fright.

"Bother those boys!" she exclaimed. "Where on earth are they hid?" And,
getting up, she began a systematic search. They were not in her rooms,
she soon discovered, so she went out into the hall and began poking
about behind the suits of armour that stood like ghostly sentinels round
the walls. She was thus engaged when Jacob drove up to the porch. The
hall being lighted, though but dimly, he saw the housekeeper at her queer
employment.

"I had to wait some time, mum, for the parcel was sent by goods train.
Whatever are you doing, Mrs. Rayburn, mum?"

"Looking for those two young pests, if you must know. I locked Frank up—
the young one escaped me—just to keep them out of mischief while I was
busy, and now, lo and behold! They're both gone."

"When did you lock the boy up, mum?"

"At once; just after the fire was put out."

"Well, then," said Jacob, excitedly, "the boys got out somehow, for I
overtook them halfway to the north gate. I bid them run back, and I made
sure they would, but they did not, I suppose. The big fish-ponds are close
to the approach, just a bit to the left, and if the boys went near the
ponds, they're both drowned long ago. 'Tis a dangerous place for children;
keeper's two were drowned there two years ago. Well, these two were
pretty boys; 'tis a pity of them."

Jacob kept on talking in this disjointed way, because he did not want to be
questioned and have to say that he had given the boys a lift. In a simple,
cunning way, he thought that if he frightened Mrs. Rayburn sufficiently,
she would not be able to question him effectually. He succeeded, but, like
many another, perhaps he wished he had not succeeded quite so well, for
Mrs. Rayburn flopped down upon a hard and narrow hall bench with such
reckless speed that she tumbled off at the other side, and knocked down
one of the ghostly sentinels, whereupon the armour all fell apart with a
tremendous clatter, and Mrs. Rayburn set up a doleful screaming which
echoed through the old hall, and brought people running from every
direction. Even Lord Beaucourt sent to inquire what was the matter, and
received for reply a message stating that Jacob had brought word that the
two little Rayburns had been drowned in the fish-ponds. On this the earl
abandoned his dessert and came himself to the hall, where his presence
produced silence, except for Mrs. Rayburn's cries.

"Where is this man Jacob?" said Lord Beaucourt. "Oh—well, Jacob, it is too
dark for you to have seen into the ponds. What makes you so sure that
the boys fell in?"

Jacob repeated his story, and, in the alarm produced by being questioned
by "my lord," he began that pawing movement which was his way of
showing embarrassment.

"You saw the boys near the ponds, and desired them to return to the
Castle. It does not seem to me that you have any valid reason for thinking
that they went to the ponds at all. Mrs. Rayburn, go to your rooms, and I
will send out the few men we have here to look for your little grandsons."

When Mrs. Rayburn, still wailing in a terrified manner, had been removed
by the women-servants, Lord Beaucourt turned to Jacob.

"Look here, my man. You are not telling the whole truth about this matter.
You met the boys near the ponds; where did you part from them?"

"Oh, my lord, it was on the north avenue, and they got into the spring
cart and came on a bit, and then I bid them run home."

"Stand still, if you please." Jacob ceased to paw. "Had you any reason for
concealing this from Mrs. Rayburn?"

"Only, my lord, I thought she'd be angry, seeing the boys had run off
without her knowledge."

"Another time I should advise you to avoid foolish concealments. If

anything has happened to these boys, whom you were the last person to
see, and about whom you tell their grandmother half the truth, adding a
perfectly gratuitous suggestion that the children are drowned, you may
find yourself in a very awkward position. Mansfield, bring me my hat and
coat, and send some one to the keeper's lodge, desiring him to meet me
at the ponds at once."

Jacob volunteered to carry the message, and as Lord Beaucourt had very
little suspicion that he had put the boys into the pond, he allowed him to
go. I may mention that Jacob was not in the least alarmed, being quite
too stupid to understand Lord Beaucourt's meaning.

The ponds were searched. They were clear and shallow, save for one deep
hole where there was a spring; this was searched with long poles tipped
with hooks. Nothing was found. The park, shrubberies, and gardens were
thoroughly searched, and as no trace of the boys was found, next
morning the search was continued outside the estate. It was found that
two boys answering to the description had been seen by some workmen
going towards the bridge over the Kelmer, which crossed the road after
leaving Kelmersdale Park. Near the bridge the searchers found a bag
containing a brush and comb and some underclothing, marked F. R. The
bag was red, with the word "Janet" worked on it in white, and Mrs.
Rayburn recognized it as the boys' property.

Beyond the fact that this proved that the children intended to run away, it
was a useless find, and, in spite of a most diligent search, the boys were
not heard of. After a time, people generally believed that they had been
tempted to clamber down to the water, and had fallen in. The Kelmer is
full of deep holes, and is known as a river that seldom gives up a victim.
Jacob, when he heard this conclusion spoken of, remarked that he had
always said that the boys were drowned. Mansfield, Lord Beaucourt's
man, who was present, replied—

"It is well for you that the old woman at the lodge declared that the boys
were not with you when you passed the gate."

"Why?" asked Jacob, after a pause for meditation.

"Well, as they were seen alive on the road, and did not go out with you,
don't you see that there can be no suspicion that you made away with
them, though you were so queer about them that first night?"

Jacob considered this gravely, and then said, "Any man that says that I
would do the like, I shall be obliged to see whether his fist or mine is the
heaviest. They were pretty boys, and Frank had a lot of pluck. But I
always said they were drowned," he concluded defiantly.

Mansfield shrugged his shoulders and said no more.

Where were the boys all this time? Not drowned in the Kelmer, at all
events. The poor little couple had wandered on all that day, very happy in
the freedom they had gained so easily. The bread they bought at a tiny
village seemed to them the sweetest they had tasted since they left
"muddie." They reached Rugeley, to which this hilly and devious old road
led in a roundabout fashion, peculiar to old roads, about an hour after
Jacob left the station with the cart. As they drew near, meaning to ask the
first man they met to send them back to Liverpool, they heard a loud,
rough voice from a room in the station call out, "Here's another parcel for
Kelmersdale. Is that man Jacob gone yet?"

Not waiting for the reply, the boys fled as fast as tired out little legs would
go. In their fright they passed the gate by which they had entered,
running on all the way down the long platform until they reached the end
of it. It was a raised platform ending abruptly, and in the twilight they
very nearly fell off, stopping but just in time. They looked round and saw
—or fancied they saw—a man coming after them. At a siding stood a
couple of vans, waiting there to be joined to the goods train from the
north presently; one door was open.

"In here, Fred," cried Frank, quickly.

In they clambered, sat down on some sacks of wool behind the door, and
listened. Yes, a man came and put a big box in through the door, which he
then shut. The boys were in utter darkness, but the sacks were soft; that
is, the wool was, and they were tired. So very soon they were fast asleep.
Fred lying along the sacks with his head on Frank's knee, Frank's arms
round him, and Frank's voice murmuring in his sleep—

"Don't be afraid, Fred. We're quite safe, and to-morrow we—will—search

for muddie."

During the night, the train was coupled on to that expected from the
north, and before the boys awoke, they were stationary in another town,
far enough from Rugeley. They had a glimmer of light now, but for a few
minutes they could not imagine where they were. Then they remembered
their escape, and how they had crept in here to hide; but that the van had
moved since they entered it they did not in the least suspect.

"Oh, Fwank, I'm so hungry!" said Fred.

"Here's some bread I kept for you, because I know you're such a hungry
boy. Eat it up."

Fred required no pressing; the bread disappeared.