py I OE at pgp ET en wannete age gerennete se ere geenbet enero ey erent a weer Ne TE a petal > aw” Pet att md ~ OR ereet ee A Setghatat eee Oe ena pete ote’ cnet aher scatiennteta” Coltrnleere ith A . pies ethan et ote : lear eneer en err hetet whieh ete ded are ooeretate TT aed sgh teewrelntetel™ eta atelet tial etinkint uae SS id Nd tt a al . pe agticrian raicbtnin ty benign gp tonne : : plate wiugeheeletovetat et te Ow - niet minced ecbie a . J . cower aap halal ethnlied intent the . ere Mcmanatinttintd vital e Otte ote oh are satin laahtatteniteNatiel ae pata OF otha ag! atealdnsvaotal ree aerate “Abate al Le tat at er Te an cae testi ai ena afl? se eeaie ael Aabetfette Nee pare te Oe leet he tnd Lae eat tet, nee ee as Splatter er og gta ctete) wt ee eer ee ee aan arene ON aruedieerne Ce WHE Ne oP eine ee a anes were yee” Ee ane Oe re “~ ’ eee 0 A tel ag obeterene” caer oheted weet emer’ —* Pata? heya inane dette v r ta oe par ne yt OL ets tot a sm epnamenedehy waren mn een ctl pA et ela ait rain hat AE le " “ - al Or oere ag ore ETT ta? heen portal enerete” ee ed ee ed are we cenegner rene Oe OO OO = TN rare er ond abet a ee ied “ ar a pe eT ae TT aiid ee other wig etete: rye = ott tet ted ete otal : "i wrereTy > cleaner ee aera ee whe + So etwrwtie peeled ete gai ~V~ | pare ie r pysghetatyrorsnyreler arene eden eae iS eG let eet catnip eat es eS eg eles ® reopen anger ee or reurenyreeurer ye what ete tee oO meted ot to a eal i ao Pheer nearer ea ee eae at eel wba ely ee anemia " Patented Denial Oat Pe Rat ee J cd ol gata ve ad + Pt wit areal eogenpnnene rer 4 peree COO en aad iu wee ogre’ ong? oot © geen even en -_ getatotn gest rt® _— ~ , yee eng hay ee errr mtb te pmaeaet aire eteur herr guage Ye’ ="? bi : aaa | oe’? er kd were? aor? ae eye =e seiegcenr™ gopncteatns ager O18 tte re eprqnatrny © oat it verge ree NT ae hatter ONT Te WY eotegeeiw et — ore A = eee aa ow Sr akg hate een a a ree Se bd pairs —= tr ae Os ~ one one te weer ern neti Oe ea — ere ST cotent ner ¥ . eh adied — Hee ee seen eed gh ay ete? tue oe" ae a 2 are wie e ooo i ane ~~ wet oan ee bated tere FT el ae a “ry wanes fe owe gett ot he eee got sant ett aulte « hh ian aaeiat ee ebted eee apes é orerere OT —e-* anertea es bene ww ele etetager ge ee rs — = 6 alga -or eT aed poe ie ed a enn ree == sone = cw satya eter itn na ‘ne _ une ere Geter or 0 en =yser int tel Pete AN ela y wie je pene erat na dae eee nantes ee dln git te ew ate wtt «tenggrtre yng ented eoew tue nafgietete ete s - “es > agen oro get ee oeknerate oer op ate pateationy - ee ae maayteeteterste™= oe Pye qe erway petal aa ee dele aes tat ie ng een e paee ieee aenareeenrts ets ie ptede® wha ate - io* — gtete aie & wie er TF Oe de tw wrt toe el we - gf ee * o . ntl i ’ owe’ aged .*ate arene eee OS ean eS etre meer a aiars er ee gn tm een tee Gece wheter nears aetald ae moot ma Ne onl chetangr enn eee Mee cheng een eeaers eeenne ae” ote" et eee ae COe are we ange ne cng atte me . meres Gh aN “ 7 - eee ne ene Syne _—-* — te + » ota es » a ss “ 4 - og =" ¢ a “-« owe! . — * mf - = ow to gle et ee pare rete a me re ’ _ * ret ee . “h ™ ate? sao ete we ~ ed SO OOF. nid Jie he : «- 4 ee te OT a goon eae oor meee ee or : segs ed ain oat omit - -* ore - - a wate Ltd —_ ua a - ———— yarn v - cnr r- ° r _ o pe a ded Paiva! J Z ~ » — nee arene hee ~ihr odie . a ne o Wiebatg ate wae - ro ier ye” jeearet state obe eemery em moor ed es hediaetie' wane xt ae outer etree a-< aye ~. © ae ers Gee OP ee = wot ev ° *. = nts - - o : aaivainel tr eee “ine tiated wd whee tw gtaretetete re ad « - ° ° m pa hg 7 ant sai s\n intawcte!'e™ Jute ion ee . o~ - - - “~ of ot te ere ar ; 4 - Se . van iawn igereaene =" " re’ ter tanetent so wernt Nn a oe teat genes ty a a —_ -t aa ro a a cm ccaiptadadeteteta"a"e aeretg’!t . x - “0s o. ow? 4 = : P ¢ PARE” rie tan te “es - ne - . ~ . s ” y _ “a -— RT diel ator oe oe ‘ ee ~* ee 7 = - * . * > ri = — a ot , s o-e ~ - 4 fe - tga tn! = 'e gh ee ee z ae - = . 4 3 re - 7 pe eee a > '* : aa > _ , ' 7 7 - rt “a md ¥ 4 . ea ee natriratg telat -—* . ’ * - " 7 ” - ~ tied - mado esoue' ach phatnteatatet eed amet ” a . ~~ n't - po - 7 = ve 7 oneteres ene a ~ : i + aah renee ‘ af iad > wor “~ ail ~~ - « Y ae = a = er at iain a - a - rd he » . ot hnte ~ . . . 7 anal oiento™ phate Catia ene™s - ; ° 7 Y os sie ote ew cnrta "9 tetera te TS ire 7 oe a al ial eee ete te on = ad -—- s ps ‘ ee aiid ~~ «ee “rr “+ ~ ~ - . otatet ee ee ns ent ee ~~ * bc a - . ave oe oe - =e - : = z = ~ Wie OOOO eae oe ee ’ — * Ps ee betel ote ~ - «pe “see - od ae et als . ae , 7 - - . - so iediieed we -—« oe’ eoMtg’ oe - “ . » a) -- “es : = am “# are Iogear — = enn nn te re - . rs ‘ - ~~ . os “= ‘ fo - ed - - ” “" - “ + ~~ 7 / -y ‘ oe oe oo be ietatee re” ats A - - - e » ~~ . owe - . « nalies ~~ ‘ oe 9'e® - ~ ape . = ; “ ‘e ’ ° + 7 = _ ihe . 7 - r os 2 ; - ores ied é o “ ee re EE cater teeth * ~ é * - « ne ae ny re ene “-s ? ‘ o - : = y > ~ 8 ir dl a aa = ~ » sa00e > = ~~ tare > ar : 7 Pr ae r- * é ee eee see Be . « f ee ee . a ati a aaa Ep ais s : - 7: i ad “* wer sie J ~~ - - - = ~ - a ae * ' , - - o- é » ‘ re . o* ~ 7 * ae ; or ster eters - —_ > ° a7 ~or ” : A - - ~ en a “* wader ea . , : - “ 4 ain : — . < -* ~ vr J % —_— dutre tone lind <* a ee ane ew etal le ~ at ‘ - — « . o eee’ ian Song “= ” « 17 . - - ev v's * aha tn wet ger er ‘ -: ad wee , ae -- > =< - . =" -* ed . - . ~ . or eee’ tate ot "* ere'e ed - aw ee ° ‘ote ade wo? =~ nd we ’ “7 eu’ « -. ee Pree .* af ue -*@ - “> aa . ~« © 7 tote mae Tete et . 2 —_ « @&t wor © « pinto. a etetetetas eo. Bh pai tt rer ify LUC prr elit | bi Sig Shirai test Pad, ; ve mdf Jd e L vod oon ‘ws! wi we *y wy WY NAA ht’ ’ é osy a - ig Me nL gMityetetr ty, WAI, sf atte we y qt CIN dt vend Ay, | Mly,w' = f oe he "y tw vi silica why WO btoig, | sng JNA uuten rw v Vivir! ~; a .' A } vv ¢/ dds "Wtriviy vo Malet his, lnty AS bwjnayer =~. oy } inh >< ! ad w % » ~ 4 w ( Ate ow: } ols vs een 5 eee BSS. aa i tid vty, ! wae / Appi! | we uw v vw Le ON oes Mala, ire lo elegy Wi Cada aS Me (HTS oo eihy ert Pen ae pa NIELS aaa tT, S vevee™. ’ rye % ial yew , Wy) i te Ces YN Igy NO ry ow Ie hail ire ie oe : teiwe Ire vy. *) ’ ty 7 7 4 x, a Yow - i ok Mat 7 ek ht Ca Ate vty “hobobi bl Ree eR TISD ie, i ab oees Re ah fs a wy w Wee vei “f ryt ity Jit cate aR | and wayne EC Te lala NIN aaa " Chieu Hae “Pt y wre oS) | | au iinice a, wre, fe} | fu Nw Ten w/ ¥ ae ’ » iP a 4 m5, - yt can ji be OE a" PUee ent Ae i ws Ni jod ‘ ot fy | Hye LE a7 ) y ATS dee ¥ hg ~g pee we a Ao he aa ude ithe ~| . an) “hon nt pm) NV elvlviy « ; yy) De : ww" dg? NONE i sen ae mm MAM SSMU BT SPC hig a ree ately AMIN hi nan =a tae ie angighie’ L~ at -w® ry Wey *ae ' Wee wee _ se Key Rovin ety BALA COs | ine Mop oN 4; pincecrcaee occ Wy vit Beet atte! meth) ’ 3 aseer! inae Wy) ) Ade”, ” 7 ly nave ~~ © rf Wari ive? PE ES PRC ae i tie! i wee la | pr Tree see lees” cartes i Al gee cone othe wey int adh 2 "a re ; } ' rye Ny a4 * yf TAA ae / ay RR hore ae Nr - nit UN w lors 2mieirs? "eh My ety dc ey } Sh ireteueY POUTY as TUOMAS Nh dal BT Me Mena ety te IT Ac SS eNO d Alar ae wv ( yi" Tg Reps fea { Seu Gann aeehba thy My itl Ane corey “Sore “tye” Wy « Ney went z | 4} vee ee’ '® yvl’e ‘ely © a a we Os ¥ wie le veeri ll (i ft. | AAA ee he wa iatety tte tiny Mt, c TN tot dy Seah " ¥ vy Be | eg agate } v Mornin, A a ae mA Petter! | Vv —_ Vy at Taf ade NSS Ae Sy : mae area tan cant A tb ad Ag coy weet Sy id HM : th SOROS, ) | Sh a di ¥e" wtEC CIT ty ye SS MeN aiely, © WANS Tet i; ‘ te" agate ink Wvveronnattyyantntine Tia ‘ ~ “Ny ny, She Mai, v7 wn wire 2 a hy, » ve ey, ee aaa » | w WW | e ws © ~ hh ie dy. Wy jer ale eye Nise ne eee Annee ~ was tui tha aK, » dng Wy EIS AM 2 SLC Nae vite enters vated Meld oS SAS. a Sarg Leaves y eee 107 oD Weel” | ny ” bio! wait { wie inte ye 7 eR AR HLT yan wt ve ie 7 . ne gh , ~ eh js Hal . ra ¥ \ ' yy 1 } + ve ev | ree ee wi } : a - ” be _ my sf VT ys Me i i i yt .? ere adv alana £ {LN are ~t Aad 7 4 | {pg A, iii! vee ge oa Rn it y] J bs { Jl shone ae ~ _* Sa “Aa hte = te rebate wat Myr” af - e prone ¥ 5 ,, e&. =" lng a ay v aN 7 {yy ey ‘hw fu 4s ad VE, / J | ] ~ LMI ssn See Meath Mae aa ccc ; viet " A Ad Eada Natl o, ony BA Nate a ash : , co rae : FHL i MAL iy ri Meenas eh et gure ENT stone” wi A we, ‘ 4 2 F vty ww of Ned etude’ l renin: ee Hwee Lacie ae nati Ny iv pd | viel syns Pe Mee hey viol os i add We Wwe Publ ver a RT) ania ry lee Bub orreiyy(y See * et vey Hiei ve vv ylyitt ay vive tv " . " eye © | {| viv! né / j ¥ 4 we! voor ~ww" wh U hale! wy! vel witty ete rv. wh wit Ay 4 ro. MY / y / wt gf Ko sus a 4 nk mia . ’ Na uA a AoW de dock | i ‘ wath ‘ yd? 4 I ey r a jwinlit tly 2 as wv bedi nd van \ ie Ys M4 yy 4 , » ye! ; YON Aj es TE | “esbaivonvony, - ; ls ASTRA bea eh ht ete) PEE E rR Wola pee th oo De ee aes fee MPORTATION INTO THE UNITED STATES ND PARASITES OF THE GIPSY oe ma sod HOWARD, pe 2 Wes . | Chief Bur of Ertomelagy, BE ab Cee : eens’ eee ow. F. FISKE, Se pee ae ys (Oige, Gipsy Moth Parasite Laboratory, Nigh ao a gt ag % OM Melrose eine, Was fin tees? eee gp eo eee ‘ ee : = = : nee 7 4 ; i > Sie err ae n= = £ a i ii \ = = e 4 a aa é = ft if I te WZ i ie ee y Z 5 > ( “tag ge ey dae yp bara t $ | m a TURE ES POOR ie _- WASHINGTON: - aie Spa ey Bul. 91, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE I. CALOSOMA SYCOPHANTA. Adult eating gipsy-moth caterpillar, lower left; pupa, lower right; eggs, upper left; eaten chrys- alides of gipsy moth, upper right; full-grown larve from above and from below. (Original.) Nite eS. PERAK LMEANT: OF AGRICULTURE, BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY—BULLETIN No. 91. L. O. HOWARD, Entomologist and Chief of Bureau. THE IMPORTATION INTO THE UNITED STATES OF THE PARASITES OF THE GIPSY MOTH AND THE BROWN-TAIL MOTH: A REPORT OF PROGRESS, WITH SOME CONSIDERATION OF PREVIOUS AND CONCURRENT EFFORTS OF THIS KIND. BY . LL. O. HOWARD, Chief, Eurecu cf Intomology, AND W. F. FISKE, In Charge, Gipsy Moth Parasite Laboratory, Melrose Iignlands, Mass. IssuEp JuLy 29, 1911. as ATT) eau Ty aula in il] py il rae bai | VES We Pt sal eee —— w= age =e A ish nits = “fl Ny WASHINGTON : GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. Ou: BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY. L. 0. Howarp, Entomologist and Chief of Bureau. C. L. Maruattr, Entomologist and Acting Chief in Absence of Chief. _R.S. Currron, Executive Assistant. ~W.F. Fasret, Chief Clerk. F,. H. CuirrenpDeEn, 7 charge of truck crop and stored product insect investigations. A. D. Hopkins, 2n charge of forest insect investigations. W. D. Hunter, in charge of southern field crop insect investigations. I’. M. WEBSTER, 17 charge of cereal and forage insect investigations. A. L. QUAINTANCE, tn charge of deciduous fruit insect investigations. E. F. Pururres, in charge of bee eulture. D. M. Rogers, in charge of preventing spread of moths, field work. Roa P. Currie, in charge of editorial work. Mase. Coxtcorp, im charge of library. PREVENTING SPREAD OF Morus. PARASITE LABORATORY. W. F. Fiske, in charge; A. F. Bureress, C. W. Cottins, R. Wooxpriper, J. D. Totuiiy, C. W. Stockwett, H. E. Surra, W. NN. Dovener, F. H. MosHeEr, assistants. FIELD WORK. D. M. Rocers, in charge; H. B. Datron, H. W. Vinton, D. G. Murpny, I. L. Bartey, H. L. McIntyre, assistants. 2 q a : Perr ReOP TRANSMITTAL. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, - BuREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY, Washington, D. C., April 12, 1911. Sir: I have the honor to transmit herewith the manuscript of a report of progress on the importation into the United States of the parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth. To this has been added some consideration of previous and concurrent efforts to handle the parasites of destructive insects in a practical way. The work with the foreign parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown- tail moth has been going on now for rather more than five years. It promises excellent results, and the present seems the proper time to present to the people interested a somewhat detailed account of what has been done and of the present condition of the work. I recommend that this manuscript be published as Bulletin No. 91 of this bureau. Respectfully, L. O. Howarp, | Entomologist and Chief of Bureau. Hon. JAMEs WILSON, Secretary of Agriculture. ONL EB NLS. Introduction. .....-.- Se sae cices ain Sip pA th eke nen Dae ana Previous work in the practical handling of natural enemies of injurious insects. - pierre eure ae eee Seo Vic het sind oiauraten oe eee eee so 8 Beeemtentnretie. pahasives tO escape. ... 2. 52.0.2 24's - oss twee own es Santee The transportation of parasites from one part of a given country to another The transfer of beneficial insects from one country to another............-- LALLA? SUNS PINCUS te Pi ie ee Ot eae ee ae oi eee Se ee The Australian ladybird (Novius cardinalis Muls.) in the United Mecranoml elordals 22.4 | so. Se ee eae sth ote ee are ae See Ona Wovitts in Cape Colony: J.4.22 002404554 EIS So EI OE OE. Novius in Egypt and the Hawaiian Islands. ip RAs Meee a Gals) Deer igee ee / BEDS EEO TRIB yal i Na oi mre ae ne ce TN Od ee ee Te pee Ned 1, SEPM y SITTORS VET a te go ee cy Se ee Ee, mheweasons:tor the success of Nowitis: . 2. as ...2822 22 e235. Jee pte Introduction of Entedon epigonus Walk. into the United States... .._-. Other introductions by Koebele into California.......................- International work with enemies of the black scale....-.......-2-..-. Semen blearcumtcnieny Obie ee ores eh SS eRe ke See als 2 An importation of Clerus from Germany. . Eee Marlatt’s journey for enemies of the San re ose oe bias Wan Sean aw 5 tere. a aeparasites o1 Miaspis pentagona Varg: 22.2 .522 2 ete eh ee ne mwonie oir’ Geers CoMmperas. 2) Joe.) 2b 5e 2 ee SS! Work with the ege parasite of the elm leaf-beetle._................... WrotkemmiinparasibestOn LCkS2 22h. een cos ak ole. cain pe Mr. Frogeatt’s journey to various parts of the world in 1907-8......... Other work of this kind (by Berlese; by Silvestri; in Algeria; in the Ebtippmes- oy We bussy. im Permyt. 2.49 Jy ee. gee wscits < - Early ideas on introducing the natural enemies of the gipsy moth.-..-.-........- Circumstances which brought about the actual beginning of the work..._....-. Pai vertication of the mtroduction work. 2... .2.-2222-2-)5+---.- 24-2 s-- eatin Oo! pe proeress O1 tae work. 2292. 82k oN 2 se eels hac ee ee wa des Known and recorded parasites of the gipsy moth and of the brown-tail moth... Establishment and dispersion of the newly introduced parasites........-...-.- Disease as a factor in the natural control of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail Studies in the parasitism of sae GRIN SCC USM se et ns se Fo eg Se Parasitism as a factor in insect control............-. Lr eal ae The rate of increase of the gipsy moth in Hee Beta nie. ee See ee Amount of additional control necessary to check the increase of the gipsy moth OO AEE SL stk. Sie 0 aR aS So et ey The extent to which the gipsy moth is controlled through parasitism abroad. - - - Eaaaiisnion tie sipsy moth Mi Japan..2.-.5....2.2--.2.22-..-.-5-5-+----- Parasitism of the gipsy ‘TRL Tn TRIES a eee a ae eg ae Parasitism of the gipsy moth in ones eee 2.) eee oe 102 105 109 114 117 120 123 129 6 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Sequence of parasites of the gipsy moth in Europe.....................-.----- The brown-tail moth and its parasites in Europe..-.....:-.......:..... eee Sequence of parasites of the brown-tail moth in Europe......-....-.....--- Parasitism of the gipsy moth in America../..-... 2.22.5 2.0. 2-5. eee Summary of rearing work carried on at the laboratory in 1910 ..........--- Parasitism of the brown-tail moth in America....- hig eer ae 1 ee Summary of rearing work in 1910.2 ........--:. 2-1-3 ee Importation and handling of parasite material...................-- ... eee = Egg. masses of the gipsy moth..._:.....-2 2.2.5.2. J. 3ee ee Gipsy-moth caterpillars, first stage_<-2-.2... 2.2...) 22 =e Gipsy-moth caterpillars, second to fifth stages. .>....4_.... ..-. = eee European importatione.: 2225.0. 522eh inte: 1 ee Japanese importationsy./.: 2.25.72: 9R ie eee eee Gipsy-moth caterpillars, full-fed and pupating..................-...--2- abs Gipsy-moth pupe...2. 72.0. 3202-2 Se ee eee Brown-tail moth egg massés...:2.02.52..2-) Soc2ncic le eee 160 Hibernating nests of the brown-tail moth... ...--...2...2..2-._2 |e eee 161 Immature caterpillars of the brown-tail moth........... 1. 5 Full-fed and pupating caterpillars of the bet ‘ail ote = oS... ee 162 Brown-tail-moth pupescu2 5. 53 ee oe ee et ee eee 164 Cocoons of hymenopterous parasites. ..-c:2.:..-2.s.5.-25..-4-5 2 eee 165 Tachinid puparia ~..2 2.2252. 5h Se. Se ee eee 166 Calosoma and other predaceous beetles. --.-.9:20..02 22. AL eee 167 Quantity of parasite materml mported:~-....2..2.-2--2 i222. eee -167 Localities from which the parasite material has been received..............--- — 168 The egg parasites-of the.gipsy moth..-_....2.-._ 2. 5 22._2 7. 2 eee 168 Anastatus bifasciattts POnse so eae Fee ees a oe +. eae. Schedius kuvanze GOW 222.0082 225g 8S. 2 eo? ee ee eee 176 Life of Schedius and its relations to other egg parasites, primary and secondary...-.---- iene Poems Acie g pene ECE A eM TUR Deste o 177 Rearing and colomization =.-. 2.232.222 So be yo = er 184 The parasites of the gipsy-moth caterpillars. >. 222... 22.0222... 2 32 188 Apparently unimportant hymenopterous parasites.......--.....-.-.---.--- 188 Apanieles solitarius Mata. 222 22S. Se. ee 189 Metcorus versicolor Wes = Soe 2 ae ee BP 190 Meteorus pulchricornis Wesm.- 253. .2. 22) 2262s ee ee 190 Meteorus japonicus Ashm 2... 22-23 5.222 223 2 22 2 ee eee 190 Limnerium disparis Vier. - awe lgiectvaeo abeee st oes . 06 eee Limnertum (Anilastus) ree ee WU libe ote 20 ee 192 Apanteles fulvipes Hal_....2.2.220. 2 ee er 193 Secondary parasites attacking Apanteles fulvipes........-..-.---------- 198 Tachinid parasites of the gipsy moth.....* 2... 2. S2es-2 ee =e 202 — The rearing and colonization of tachinid flies; large cages versus small cages. 204 Hyperparasites attacking the Tachinide. ...2.2).....- 22 --26- += ee 207 Périlangus cuprinus POS | Saoc6 eee 3). ee 208 Mehtiobia acasta Walk..........0 222 2... en eee 209 Chalets fiskes Craiwt. 05222-2523. ee eee 212 Monodontomerus 2reus Walk... 2.022 222 eee oe tee ne 212 Miscellaneous parasites... - 2.00.02 2. 222255 213 Blepharipa seutellata. Desv: -........ 2. - -.. 22 Se a ee eee 213 Compsilura concinnata Mleig....:---------- saa ed be ee 218 Tachina larvarum Ui. oe en eee 8 eee 225 Tachina japonica Townes. 222-7_ 25. 2-0 2 Se eee Se heen oe 227 CONTENTS. Tachinid parasites of the gipsy moth—Continued. Prep aemen iG ISAM E Nyro forse Se Oe gue sag ee SEs oe a LS mmmmEserogena Segregaia WONG... 2. -.-2.25 bos 252 tees ee - Si Se S es ea PET PUM MM CNG oe teeter to eS. en. be Kee Seg he eo ve ee Mennuaiiin nidicola Towiise..o. 002... 2.220. 2- 2 2. ee ee epee ee Rue (| PEST ATS) OA QE QUTEDE aN CT CI Se ae a 21 oa ee gap ee an a Sreccecosni jlavoscutellata senimer (?): 2. 25.2..5....5-.2-- 2-25-22 eee senses -Unimportant tachinid parasites of the gipsy cli Sh Sacto feeermnes or une CIpsy -MmObm, NUP ss... 2-- 2 2 2s ee cee ewes ee ie cenus Theronia.......-..-.--- EEA: 80h) 2, Sone. ot eee i te See eee ee IN Meh ae eee So oe els. yh eee ek et oe Mammaraniisnaria boar. 4-8). 2.5 svete iL. se ea). tele eee The genus Chalcis...... PAR re eae tint, Seedy WOR SME ss Weak oe MenmOnOMlOnienescrrcus Walk... )<.. S088) 2). 22. MS eb Ltn ek ee OB Seopa) eae Se a eee i eae pe ace en ea eee ys Mee aermredaceous beetles. 2. )... 2.222522. -22 5-224 SS np eee ee eye Dae Bs Wieees parasites of the brown-tail moth... .-..:.....-.2-2-.+2+---- 89 megacephala, host of Compsilura concinnata.............----------- 89 qumicis, Host of Compsilyra COnCINNAlAs. 2465 -b adineinei- 2 --- s = 89 DRUG: LOT UT UTNE sy A Gay re: Bh eonss eewpcrniny « woes relate +... 90 ET UT UR FIOT ee ae, ee A eg nen fee a a UA 92 paces. WOst OL. COMmpBStHUO. CONCINMALO Ss wei. Dus oo Saaeteye ss oe ds oe en = 89 BERNE SOAS TR ee ea Sag DO ae PREM ie RENIN LL Bs I a 92 Adopxa Dicots Most Of ts CPROMGC MBIGOTIS..-. 2s wi sin - es - e222 RSS Se He 91 weeerii@ webber, fungus altecting Aleyrodes citrt.....-..-=.-..-..--+-.+--2+-2-- 46 wasrousicandciarim, host.ot Derodes nigripes.-..-..---------------+----+------ 88, 91 glareosa, host of Echinomyia fera.....-.--- Pe eS I Heal aks ees 89 nod. Gat Ol Mihi tMMMMNOTI 8 A. oie kw we heii oe ee eee ein = 90 SG Osh OL Mimoromyil MOeBUACOTNIS.....-<- 5.22 ~20-e- ene cee eeenn 89, 92 ROPGMEI CAE an Ohi mICS OUI ok eek i eo nee aed 92 PU OGTE Dede MOstiGl © G1eS POUIGG.. 2022-625. 4hes.2 4.1.5 4-02 eee 200 Anatis 15-punctata, enemy of gipsy moth<< 2424. - 2.52. .-- +--+. ae 252 Anilastus tricoloripes. (See Limnerium tricoloripes.) Anisocyrta sp., parasite of gipsy moth in America .....................--.-- 138 Anomalon exile, parasite of brown-tail moth in America............... 144,147-149 tent caterpillar (Malacosoma)....2..2.....-52.222 144 Antherxa mylitta, host of-Crossocosmia serieart#!. 2522...) ee eae 88 yamamai (see also Silkworm, Japanese). host of Crossocosmia sericariz......2...-2-- eee 88 Anthonomus grandis. (See Weevil, cotton boll.) of apple, control by caging and permitting parasites to escape.... 19 Anthrenus varius, enemy of gipsy moth . a Get 2. SS ee 252 tussock moth a ianeecnte leucostigma)..... 252 Apanteles conspersx, comparison with Apanteles lacteicolor, ficken difier ehees 252. Re ee eee 285-286 parasite of Japanese brown-tail moth (Euwproctis con- SPONSE) 2 2 oe css teers SPOTS BESS eee 285-286 difficilis, parasite of ee tail moth, recorded in iterators Se ele 86 jisket, host-of Mesochorus ne Bp Ss 22228202. 2S) ee 265 parasite of Parorgyia aon SPOS) PMA SS ly. eee 265 Jfuloipes, gross number colonized?) 0. 22. 2229222 2... 2. 310 how many individuals constitute a good colony?.......-. 96 parasite of gipsy moth, importation and handling of edcoons? =: >. . 2.26 ... 165-166 m Europe - > >. 2) 2. ee 57 position in ‘‘sequence”’. 132 Japan, position in “‘sequence’’. 121 Russia... ...2..7. 2022 ee introduction into United gers habits. PPO A reared at libeeatary ole Eee 85 recorded in fics: Ss xe 85 results of rearing work ae 1910. a eee status in United Statesin 1910... 308 perhaps synonymous with Apanteles nemorum.......-.---- 193 possibility that it has been successfully colonized in United Stabeg SLT ec ene sae Sele se ae a 2 277-278 prey of Corymbttes. o.oo Toes so eo eh eee er 252 secondary parasites... 52-5. 2=--2 52.0.2 oe ee 198-202 liparidis (see also A panteles liparidis). _ parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature ..... 85 glomeratus, parasite of common: cabbage caterpillar (Pontia rape), first observation of exit of larve..........- 16 gipsy moth, recorded in literature........--. 85 Pocntia rape, introduction into United States. 24 hyphantriz, host of Mesochorus sp. . 2. .-..252a@eeem ee eeee aS eee 265 INDEX. 815 Page Apanteles inclusus, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature......... 86 lacteicolor, comparison with Apanteles conspersx, biological differ- CHGS eae ee ee ee ee 285-286 press number aelomiaeie > AR GeNseS Niek) ee 310 host-of Mesackorus pala ness chi issn tle 263, 265, 267, 289 Monodontomentsaraiseoee>. Seve eos: 249, 266, 267 Pteromalus egregws.....-.-.------- 266, 267, 275, 283-284 parasite of brown-tail moth, hibernating with host. .... 262-267 in Europe, position in ‘“‘se- | queneerd 26 isa. teed. se 136 introduction into United | tates, habits. -2fsss0 2h. 278-285 ; reared at laboratory......... 86 | status in United States in PNR reriten, 32 2 te: 309 | Diana sce, eaten see ees Fe ae 284 | Ely phantrignesierces Sate mere es oe lS: 284 | liparidis (see also Apanteles fulvipes liparidis). } parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature .......-. 86 | NamoTIEM,, parasite Of LaAsiocaii pd. Pints. Ys s22s2282 02-22-22 2... 193 | peraaps—A pantcles fuluipese’. +i sovsseee lk Jos teed lst - 193 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, introduction into United } | Be etek agegh lo. oes ae 70 i gipsy moth in Europe, intruduction into United States... 69 Japan, introduction into United States. 47, 73, 74 | oy) ieee Ae ce staan Ee 124-125 ! cence. paras en Gipsy moth. os teeisee sa ameaee eS ee. 81 } _solitarius, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature........ 86 gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence’’ 132 | Beespiais er | Bev ecs Sh seadett 79-82 1 introduction into United States, piaetsiya i: Asha th eas & 189-190 reared at laboratory.....-.-..-.... 85 recorded in literature............. 85 1 melanoscelus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature 85 | ? ocnenix&, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature.. 85 ape cdelicarus?). host of elacherhined.s-ctieoh4- i dose aqcedsele- eae. 139 parasite of gipsy moth in America............-- 188-139 white-marked tussock moth (Hemero- CoM pa 1eUcOstigMG)-<)- <<-pe ee oeg-2eno2 138 | tenebrosus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature. ....-.-.- 85 | ultor, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. .......... 86 vitripennis, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. 86, 295-296 Apechthis brassicariz. (See Pimpla brassicarix.) Aphelinus mali, parasite of Lepidosaphes ulmi, transportation from one part of | | EMME ANOUMECT Pato). fs, 1 ok Sa SE en 20 Aphiochexta scalaris, reared from dead gipsy moth (Porthetria dispar)........-- 90 setacea, reared from dead gipsy moth (Porthetria dispar)..........- 90 Aphis, hop. (See Hop aphis.) iT spring grain. (See Toxoptera graminum.) A popestes spectrum, host of Masicera sylvatica... ..---.--. +--+ - 2-522 ee ee eee 92 Aporia crategi, host of Blepharidea vulgaris. .....-...-..---+------+5+-++++- 91 Spa SRR EAN 2 pj oo cs oosy eG, -ng > Lae nig jee eM HER Sas Oe 133 ath | 316 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Page. Apple, food plant of Anthonomus: .. 2. 220. 2.22229. 6 4S ~ 19 Aporiacratagin wo I ee eee 133 brown-tail.moth......20.. i 2 ee. See 133 tent. caterpillar (Malacosoma)::. o:c:29a% -. 2 eee 98, 104 wild haw, original food plant of Aspidiotus perniciosus..........-.-.-- at Araschinia levana, host of Blepharidea vulgaris ...........----2222222eecee-ee 91 Compsilura-concinnata: 2.200.222 2 =. eee 89 prorsa, host of Blepharidea vulgaris.2 9 2.82 SOAR ae eee 91 Compstlura concinnata : of 22's. 222200 ee 89 Arbusier, food plant.of brewn-tail moth «2205222022... 2.2... eb ee 134 Arbutus sp. (See Arbusier.) Archips rosaceana, host of Trichogramma sp. . -- 2221.22.02... é. 22s oe eee 259-260 Arctia aulica, host-of Echinomyia-fera 222. 22 5 a eee 89 Archa:caja; host of Carceha eneise 02:2 222.2 se os a eee 89 Compsilhuracontinmata sis. . 2... set - eee ae Erorista-ajimis 2 oR os oe 89 Histochcta Mariner 2 RRA. 2 ee Lee 89 Parexorista cheloniz 20 83S NE eee 92 Packing larvartans 80 52) VISE Le BRE eee 90 Tricholyga grandis..c3 23220228, 2 ee eee 88, 92 hebe, host of Blepharidea vulgaris. 22.4223. eRe eee 91 Cartelia-encisa 0s). ho. ie ee ee - 89 Porezorista cheloniz. 2S... a eee 92 quenselu; host of- Histochxta‘marmorata: 0.22 62200 AVE. 2 eee ie 89 vilken, host of Careelia etcisa. 22203 es Di eee 89 Histochzia ‘marmorata@vous. 2.32.2... eee 89 Parexorista chelonie....02 22)... AS eee 92 Tochina larvarum 2 ON OE eae 90 Argynnis lathona, lost‘of Blepharidea vulgaris’. 22902... - 2... 222 2 eee 91 Argyrophylax atropivora, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature......... 88 recorded hhoste...... 2.222 eee 89 Aritranis amenus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature.........- ae 85 Arrhenotokous hymenopterous parasites, chances of successful establishment ma new country?) 02/220) A. MAS... LES 95 Arrhenotoky in Schediws kuvane ~ 120232 SE. eee 183 Trchopramma th.) 2S. See ed, Cee ae 257, 258 Ascometia caliginosa, host of Dexodes migripes +. 0002 0. 222. Sa ae 88, 91 Asecodes, parasite of Apanicles fuivipes. 2. Peete 6. o-. e 199, 200 Asphondylia lupini, control by caging and permitting parasites to escape...... 19 Aspidiotus perniciosus, prey of Chilocorus similis, attempted control by intro- duction of enemy s/.2.22. 2.22202 ee ee eee 36-38 Astomaspis fulvipes (Grav.)=Astomaspis nanus (Grav.).......---------------- 85 parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............- 85 nanus (Grav.), Astomaspis fulvipes (Grav.) a synonym. .....-.-...-. 85 Aittacus cyntina, host of Compsitura concinnata-.222-. 52-2. 32 22 89 Pates povida 220 os eedeeies 1 ee eee 92 tumula, host of Pales paviuda:. 220 Oo PR DE See 92 Axle grease as protective barrier against gipsy moth. ................-..---.. 124 Bagworm. (See Thyridopteryx ephemerxformis.) Banana, food plant of Omiodes blackhiirnits. 28 2 St See 35 Barkbeetles, prey of Thanasimus formicarius..........--.--------------+----- 36 Beetles, predaceous, enemies of pipsy moth !)0 22.272 a es ee eee 251-255 Biological characters for separating species jindiniinpiachuiile morphologically.. 225- 226, 257, 285-286 | INDEX. 317 | Page. | ipifds and other predators in) control of insects2... 622225220. 107-108 | enemies Of camkerworme. «J onoesconash lez esas Zh eee eg ed 113 Da MO UM. 248 Yael Seema eee Se EST 113 Blepharidea vulgaris, parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘‘se- | ence” Aetna e 136 | introduction into United Patera are tes ot RY 304 reared at laboratory..........- oF recorded hosts hy of 36 2a) PO Be OS, A EE oases 91 Biepharipa scutellaia, difficulty in hibernating puparia ................---- 158-159 gross. nim ber. colmmizerL + ees US oe kel as 310 parasite of gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘“‘sequence”. 132 RRMISGI EA Ms Lets. Belo IG Feuk 127 introduction into United States, PEGS a cciiae daa as ESS 8 213-218 reared at laboratory. .........-.-. 88 results of rearing work in 1910... 141, 142 status in United Statesin 1910.... 308 recordedthostasy. 1.6. IGae eeeIORS, YO 88 Boarmia lariciaria, host of Blepharidea vulgaris.......-..--2+--2+-----+---+--- 91 Boll weevil. (See Weevil, cotton boll.) Bombus pennsylvanicus, introduction into Philippine Islands................. 45 : Breeding cage. (See Cage.) maepnos now, host of Zenillia libetrigns.0 so 08 oe ek eek A. 90 Brotolomia meticulosa, host of Blepharidea vulgaris. ......-..----------+---+-+-- 91 Brown-tail moth and gipsy moth parasites. (See Parasites of gipsy and brown- tail moths.) caterpillars, full-fed and pupating, importation and han- firs ee Ye RO ea ES a aiecte eer pe 162-164 immature, importation and handling.......... 161-162 dipiecaneupiraniies set 2. k 5 ike soi ok She ewe 91-93 ege masses, importation and handhng........-.-..---..--- 160-161 fOrciom: taehimidparaciiess ar). huts: 25. k eet .. 2-22-22 91 PO OU GISCASC 2 oof an See eee A eee 135, 270, 291 hibernation nests, importation and handling. ........-....-- 161 ie MmeHOpLCrOus Parasibes.........5..... 2,83 asaiaee. ace See 86-87 NE SDB A a on eRe Memy Baal sane teas CAN). be, 132-135 native tachinids reared therefrom... 2 .e-2!- cause si 93 HAGUE GOMOD Y GOAS@RSe . 3 2cye erneyya-- = 2 - 222-22 ee ee 97-102 parasites hibernating imy webs i. 2. c0ese9 yezie = - ase Deb. - 261-295 possible interrelations. ........ 267 ; TIA REGO ec ao conn’ Bye a hag ets teed einai, eh aay 132-135 WIBCRMICIE Oe -owte eens Sas So avec ~ way heels 135, 136 of eggs, introduction, into United States, habits.. 256-261 hibernating caterpillars, introduction into United SEZ HNG SRT) OTE Le eke NN eee neers oS 268-295 larger caterpillars, introduction into United Dba bess MONS oo.) eerie fete AR ies i 2 = 295-304 pupe, introduction into United States, habits.. 304-305 parasitism in America.......-. ay eh a a alg te! i on 2 143-151 Dupe imponanion and andling...2...2...0.22522...5-.5- 164-165 rash at gipsy-moth parasite laboratory and elsewhere.....-. 65-67, 162-164, 279 recorded hosts of foreign tachinids reared therefrom at labora- he a 318 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Page. Brown-tail moth, recorded hosts of foreign tachinids recorded as parasitic — thereon 22.b 0) ce bsee ete ooo een ae ee 92 tachinid parasités:........ 22... 4+ on cea eee 296-304 Bumblebee. (See Bombus.) Bupalus piniarius, host, of Careeha,encisa.. j.o54-2.- eek dads os Ye 89 Deowodes nigripes 2x2 02. 3.2 2) ok 88, 91 Cabbage worm, imported. (See Pieris rape and Pontia rape. . Cage for rearing parasites from brown-tail moth webs. ...........-.---------- 269 tachinid parasites of the brown-tail moth................-. 150-151 Cages for colonization of Anastatus bifasciatus....- 2-2-2. 2222 ene e bnew een ee 174 tachinid, flies, ... i@civjos-ced atid ee. eee 204-207 Calliephialtes messor, parasite of codling moth, introduction into California... . 38-39 Callimorpha dominula, host.of Carcehejercisa._.... . 2.1 2+ -'s oats Sone 89 Callineda testudinaria, enemy of Perkinsiella saccharicida, introduction into Flawatian Islands). 22 20% .0u scpnteiiee Ss ous op bee ses oe 35 Calosoma and other predaceous beetles, importation and handling............. 167 disease of gipsy moth as obstacle to establishment a niedece eee 99 enemy of eipsy moth; in ussian. 2.2.0... .. 23) bs 80-81 inquisitor, enemy of gipsy moth, early ideas on introduction.......-. 48 introduction into United States 59, 62, 254 gross number colonized ....iLed awe... 1 78-2 ee 310 native species, status as enemies of gipsy moth. -......-.-...-...-- 48 reticulatum, gross number colonized..._.-.-.,-...20#21 4303. ae 310 slow dispersion as justifying small colony.-.........--..-.---:..-- 94 sycophanta, enemy of gipsy moth, early ideas on introduction. -...-. 48 first practical handling............ 18 in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence”’ of parasites... Ug nles,. oo 132 introduction into United States, WBMES. 2 5 See 59, 62, 253-255 status in United States in 1910.... 309 gross number edlonazed 2 ae F204 SR ee 310 respect in which similar to Blepharipa scutellata in rela- tion to gipsy moth... 1... BAe tee 218 Calymmia trapezina, host. of Blepharidea vulgaris... 2 P2205 a ee 91 Camel (see also Dromedary). host.ef Rhipicephalus sanguimeus: oo: 24s 6 2 8 eS 42 Campoplex conicus, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature........- 86 gipsy moth, recorded in literature...........-. 85 difformis. (See Omorgius difformis.) Osiwkerworms, prey of birds). 22 Sl 122.2 - se ened oe ees oh ness 2 13 Carabus arvensis, gross number colonized 5... 200205; 2s... ...- ee 310 auratus, enemy of earwies, practical handling. ............-...-...-- 18 erdss number colonigeds:< !o 0 Sar7 Qe Linn eae ee 310 nemoraus; ‘eross number colonized 2.330 529277. 0)... ss . . a 310 violaceus, gross- number eolonized 25). .0 2 2.) 5. 2-050) ee 310 Carcelia excisa, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............-..-- 88 recorded ‘hogtesc2c: £..Jot scares See he ac aa Soa ee 89 gnava, pross“number colonized: 26.22 5 Se ae ok ee 310 parasite of gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence”..... 132 introduction into United States....... 231-232 réared at laboratory... -s.<- 54 .- cess ace 88 status in United States in 1910........ 308 TeCOraed WSIS. ooo. cecmce - oe betes Sk ee ee oe 88 INDEX. 319 Page Casinaria tenuiventris, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature.......... 85 Catocala fraxini, host of Tachina larvarum...... RIES INES BOAT EA 89 promise, host ol Conrpsiluira eontinmatas. 0S ol POT ee 89 Swans capiiaia, quest for natural enemies #...225:22..22520 220200 22 f ee... 39 Ceroplastes cirripediformis, host of Scutellista cyanea.......--..--.-------+---- 31 lomidensis host Gh Seuwtellista Cyanmegnskics sei s2ecc nore ieee as) rubens, introduction of parasites and enemies into Hawaii........-.- 35 PUSH HOSOI ICUNC Ista: CHONED «fe. SS DETS ON Se Sen ey eee 3 Cehateid fies, parasites of gipsy moth in Russia... / 0.2 2 81 Chalcidid, small, parasite of Compsilura concinnata......--..2-2.-2-2202222-22-- 224 Chalcis ee Parasite-of eipsy moti injapam: S212 ea Pe ee Be 240 reeorded i literature. 2. FS 9o8 27 9 86 Rees: parasite issuing from brown-tail moth cocoons..........-.- 145 OM OCOMPSILUNG CONCINNGLN. 324202202 2S pyre ee 240 jisket, an undesirable foreign hyperparasite...........----.-.-.-------- 202 parasite of Crossocosmia sericariz and Tachina japonica........--- 240 flavipes, parasite of gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence”.... 132 introduction into United Neat habits 240-245 reared at laboratory. . a ey i 86 status in United States j in 1910. iis beh ‘white-marked tussock moth a eee ee A SEUSED pen ae Sg Sei Ma aM are oer Bae pope Oe 241-244 fonscolombei, parasite of sarcophagids Seid with gipsy moth. ....-. — 24) minuta, parasite of sarcophagids associated with gipsy moth........... 241 obscurata, parasite of gipsy moth in Japan, position in ‘“‘sequence”.... 121 introduction into United States, JUN US aged MMI yl eg RN A NG 240-245 feared, aa laboratory: 22222.) s5 220 oe 86 status in United States in 1910....-- 308 Omiodes blackburni, introduction into Hawaiian USI 2c TG US eR eae phe Sees in Se yg aa ean A 35 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucos- IT ee neg ees ets LI A fe tat Rag eRe RapO AGE ae ace ae 241-244 ovata, not yet peared as parasive Of cipsy moth... .2u... eee. 240 paraplesia, parasite of sarcophagids associated with gipsy moth........ 241 PREASILS OL COM PSiVara CONEINWONG 0-2 Sow ee ee ee 224 parasites of brown-tail moth in America, results of rearing work in 1910. 147-149 scirropoda, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. ........ 87 BD pe ross niniOer COloltaed. aot lA ele ec ee ee 310 Cherry, food plant of tent caterpillar (Malacosoma).......-......------------ 98, 104 wild, food plant of tent caterpillar (Malacosoma)..-.......-...----.-- 105 Chilocorus bwulnerus, enemy of Diaspis pentagona, introduction into Italy.... 44-45 similis (see also Ladybird, Chinese). enemy of Aspidiotus perniciosus, introduction into United Ruruer tae eres Caen Nery THN GENRES SM pe 37-38 Cimbex femorata, host of Parexorista chelonix.........2..22-2222222-2 2-222 2e- 92 humeralis, host of Compsilura concinnata. 20.02.50. bee ei 89 Clerus formicarius. (See Thanasimus formicarius.) Clisiocampa (see also Malacosoma and Tent caterpillar). host ot-Lamnnervunm elistocampaes ee PSS sos ee ee 192 Clover, red, fertilization by Bombus pennsylvanicus..-......---.------------ 45 Coccinella californica, transportation from one part of country to another part in comic or plant-hce (A plididesy. 2908) oe Pe) Lee 22-23 320 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Page. Coccinella repanda, enemy of plant-lice (Aphididz) on sugarcaneand othercrops, introduction into Hawaiian Islands.....................----- 4x ee undeimpunctata, enemy of plant-lice (Aphidide), introduction into New Zealand. .2. 2.20255. 2). detach bo ee a 24 Coccinellid enemy of mealy bugs (Pseudococcus), introduction into United _ ERG oo nea eles ee ele a ale SI Meare Se on Sa le 46 Cochylis of grapevine, control by caging and permitting parasites to escape... 19 Codling moth (Carpocapsa pomonella), host of Calliephialtes messor, attempted control by introduction; of parasites. s2 0 4s22 4206 et. 5 ee ee 38-39 Coffee, food plant of Pulvinaria pstditess..se2 nok eee ¢ baiedsese eee 34 Compsilura concinnata, characters of larva £2... 2. ..~~#5<4+<«+2--es ae eross number colonized si ibys. L250. ae 310 host of Chalets compstlurser onc picndswGaehao> soa 240 Monodontomerus xreus.. 4.2...) 22 eS 249 parasite of brown-tail moth, hibernating in webs of ; latter... 2.tigiee pec ee in Europe, position in ‘‘se- quence ” .. 2 1.2.26 136 introduction into United States. ....23 5. eee 296 reared at laboratory.....-. 91 recorded in literature... .. fa results of rearing work in 1910. 2.-..iiasehe open eee status In United States in 1990.2 2.2 yk fall webworm (Hyphantria)................ 224 gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘“‘se- quence” . 2)... ee ee 132 introduction into United States, ha bidits. 72...) 2 ee ee 218-225 reared at laboratory............. 88 recorded in literature.........-. 88 relative abundance in Massa- chusetts and Russia......-... 127 results of rearing work of 1910 141, 142 status in United Statesin 1910.. 308 Ponta rapa .. ) 20a ho eee 223 tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma). 221-223 recorded hosts. .......-- sutesnds sein) 89 similarity to Devodes:nigripes: -.do22:.- xeaale Soe ae 296-297 “Compsilura-like.”-pardsite of pipsy mothe x... qa. d. bi -4esees ee 235 Conotrachelus nenuphar. (See Curculio, plum.) Contarinia tritici, attempt at control by introduction of parasites from Europe. 23-24 burning débris in control may result in destroying beneficial parasites: -.5 2.22252 se eee ete 8 20 Gorymbites,; enemy of Apanteles fulvipesicsiccse..uew see te es te don deere 252, pipsy moth. . . o.isueuh eee ak: : Jee 252 Cosmotriche potatoria, host of Blepharidea vulgaris.......-..----.----++++++++++- 91 Tachina larvarittih@e ooo Bol ke ee ee 90 NochUarUbIMs ved. Be Le. Be eee ee 90 Cessus cossus, host,of Zenillea. fauna 9.0 Seis aah AR Ce eel aaa 92 Cotton boll weevil. (See Weevil, cotton boll.) INDEX. $21 Page. Cotton caterpillar. (See Alabama argillacea.) Food) plamt Ob FICMUChIONUSPIS WIN. oobi any ------s0sceeeshedeeee 45 wool as protective barrier against gipsy moth....................-...-- 124 Craniophora ligustri, host of Compsilura concinnata..............------------ 89 Peemeerais food plant of brown-tatl nT0th. 27 on kn wh 54, ore -cbMleieeen Gees 134 BRIS REMOU Ref ES wt on ered 82 scrubs containing nests of brown-tail moth........................- 133 Crossocosmia flavoscutellata (?), parasite of gipsy moth, introduction into United Sigtes.. -oeaesnedes 234-235 in Europe, position in PRO MCIGE.) cr cn ccvachaey thal pe sericarize and Crossocosmia flavoscutellata, gross number colonized.. 310 habits as compared with Blepharipa scutellata........ sre ph eats peal GSE ORC GES USC na ea Recs mete So 2.0 o's a 5 ow aid ac eae 240 parasite of gipsy moth and of Japanese silkworm, intro- duction into United States, TGS a ec aadis Serie 232-234 in Japan, position in ‘“‘sequence”. 121 reared.at laboratory.....:.2-..<.<- 88 TOWN Gin CMAs. het ee sok ise tid ks Sanaa be Mare ree 88 spp., parasites of gipsy moth, status in United States in 1910. .... 308 Cryptognatha flavescens, enemy of Aleyrodes citri, attempted introduction into eR es rer oa 80a) a2 a a) 2 5 S's > aR Sed im be ee 46 Cryptolemus montrouziert, enemy of mealy bugs (Pseudococcus) and Pulvi- naria psidw, introduction into United States and Hawaiian Islands............ 34-35 Pseudococcus, attempted introduction REGO SAA Ne Re ee eed oe ee 35 Cryptus amenus. (See Aritranis amenus.) atripes. (See Idiolispa atripes.) cyanator, parasite of gipsy moth, recordeu in literature...........-.... 85 moschator, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. ........ 86 Cucuilia anthemidis, host of Blepharidea vulgaris, ...-.-. 2255+ s220--2------22- 91 Griemusie, MOSOr PIRESHOCONSODITIGS. .n.. $e. vis oe ee aaraerndiyeronm eet 89 Bess WOT Oly PC PRGTLOCE MULGOT US. tase kata ten yays ee en oe 91 DUE HGOESMDIEE MES epee wis oo nero t eeu. soe eee 88, 91 lacie, BOS Gl. COM PSHUTG CONCINNOLA. =... 325.0 noes oe dn on wees os 89 prenaihes, Host Gt Lacking larvarum...2. 2003s... 2 2 ee ates Jape 28 90 SCO WON NOst OF \COTCEIG EXCISE jus tedar o Ue owe). iy ae bao... 89 UEUNSEL, OSL Ol BlePhATIdcd VULGCIUS ihe ce oe Soci els 2 floes cee ee 91 Cai DSN TE, COM EIUI UE aa orerd tore ee taneaic Peincestee woe 89 FSM Ae MT MOTO oe ro oA SS ee 89 MOST ECT SOR UGICN 2 Au ene) dete on ade mae t oe 92 Curculio, plum (Conotrachelus nenuphar), host of Sigalphus curculionis, artificial control by transportation of its parasite suggested ..........-....-.5--------- 20 Cyclotophrys anser, parasite of brown-tail moth, habits................--.--.--.- 304 in Europe, position in “‘se- Gietige see ke Pt 2 fe 136 reared at laboratory........--- 91 Dacus, introduction of parasites into western Australia. ........-.---.------- 39 olex (see also Olive fly). control by caging and permitting parasites to escape....-.--------- 19 Dasichirg yascelina, host, of Tachng Jarvgrum.. 2... 2. 6... 2-2 a 2 90 7362°—11——2 322 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS, Page. Dasychira pudibunda, host of Carcelta excisa~~---2 25.) 50 222 es eee ~ 89 Compsitura conemnata:-?. 2S... 2. 89 Lenitier abate Te ee 90 Datana, host of Apanteles lacteicolor...........-..------- tia eee ae ee 284 Deilephila euphorihiz, host’ot Dexodes nigripes- <0... so ee 88, 91 Masicera sylvatica. : 6220775). Se 92 Tachina'larverum <2. P28 oe 90 galin,; host of Masteera sylvaiveay. 2202 e se 92 Tachina larvarum.. .. 20.422. eS 90 vesperiho; host of “Masicera sylvatica: . 2). 52.02.2252. eee 92 Dendroctonus frontalis, attempted control by introduction of Thanasimus formi- carius iromi'Germanys-<. ee S ds st eoee et ene eee eee ee oo 36 Dendrolimus pint, host of Blepharidea vulgaris. <9 3.2... Ls eee 91 Phryxe erythrastomas 20 oS. 89 Fackina larcaruim 2? Soe ee ee ke | 90 Dermestid beetles, enemies of gipsy moth.............----....--.-.--.+--- 251-255 Dexodes nigripes; etoss number colonrzed...........2. 272.422 2 ee 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in “‘se- quence’... 2. 2 ee 136 introduction into United States, habite:? 2. 5° 2-2 2 eee 296-297 reared at laboratory............- is) status in United States in 1910... 309 gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence”.... 132 introduction into United States.....-- 220 rarely associated with that host... .--- 235 reared at laboratory-:>..- eee 88 recorded hosts:..) 20 eee 88, 91 Diaspis pentagona, host of Prospaltella berleser, control by introduction of para- site into laly.... : 5.7.20) Se ee 44 prey of Chilocorus bivulnerus and Microweisea misella, control by introduction of enemies into Italy...........--..---. 4445 work with parasites. {00.7 70 Tyee eee 38 Dibrachys boucheanus, parasite of introduced Tachinide..........---..------- 213 secondary parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in liter- ature. Poe. oS ee 87 gipsy moth, recorded in literature. 86 host relations. 2.252224 2a TP ee oe ee 200 parasite of Apanieles fulvipest .i0lT22 ee 199, 200 Compstlura ‘coneimmima:s. . 2.028 0 ee 224 Diglochis omnivora, parasite of brown-tail moth in America.........----- 144, 147-149 . Burope. oo 2.3. eee 305 position in ‘“‘se- ; quence” 227) aeten 136 reared at laboratory. -..-..--.-- 87 gipsy moth in America. .22...--- 24. - =. eee 138 Dilina tiliz, Trost of Compsitura concinnata... 22.020. sels ee st 89 Masicera sylvatica....... rer Tse 92 Dilobia ceruleocephala, host of Compsilura concinnata.......---.-------------- 89 Dimmockia, parasite of A panteles fulvipes: if oi. ae ae oe he oi ee ee 199 Dipterygia scabriuscula, host of Compsilura concinnata.........-...-+--+-------- 89 Disease as factor in control of gipsy moth and brown-tail moth............-..- 97-102 iil PRISE. So, ack coe cee ere Fey oe 125 INSCCHAL!. Dos ja dae De BE ee ee 108, 114 INDEX. 3238 Page. Disease as factor in control of ‘‘pine tussock moth” ....................- 101, 103-104 tent caterpillar (Malacosoma).............. 98, 101, 105 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leu- PESUD SNL. GSMS, fe eae ee eae 100-101 ee ost Or kenecphalus sangquineuse..2 2... 200222 IPP Le Le 42 POTS OR RR ene gee ee teed tee SL ee PL SEAS 4] Dromedary (see also Camel). trypanosome disease transmitted by tabanid flies...........-..... 45 Drymonia chaonia, host of Compsilura concinnata....-...--...-....2-2+------- 89 Earwigs (Forficulidee), prey of Carabus auratus, artificial control by means of ES ememby 44.1 M 30 eM RMI oy eke 18 Staphylinus olens, artificial control by means of iS enenty ae SOON A Pegs PA SERIO Fle 18 Echinomyia fera, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature.........-..-- 88 REGIS Eye TOS Spy hy Seth age Beouie Pe pig iy kk ba Ss ae 89 prexceps, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature........ 91 RCCMnM eC Hblsts ek Ls ate Sone PRA OMAN ES Le ie ls 92 Ecthrodelphax fairchildu, parasite of Perkinsiella saccharicida, introduction into mL eR CM tii ete ee et eee ins ie R's AM, Shee de ee I 35 Mackornine parasite of Apanieles sp. (delicatus'?) /.2 2002. .-222.-- 222s. =~ «189 Pideaaus pacasite:ol A panteles fulvipes. i: 2.2052. 2 ae eee. 199 Elm (see also Ulmus). iy Mya Blatt OL PIpsy MoU. =. 2 F2.. 2-222 eS ee er ee eer ee ae 81 leaf-beetle (Galerucella luteola), host of Tetrastichus xanthomelenx....-..-- 62-63 work with ege-parasite, Tetrastichus xan- OTE CPUS tae edhe al ee ER AS A 39-41 Pamiuiscingiiim, wost ot Pales pavida.”. . 5-2 ince oa oe ee eee kt 92 memes Nersicolora, Bost of Carcelia excise ooo. oo eo ee 89 Entedon albitarsis, parasite of Pteromalus egregius............------ 263, 266, 267, 269 -epigonus, parasite of Mayetiola destructor, introduction into United SPL REL Oe SS Rie Bok aie Atal ty Annee arin be ae en See Ra ara 30 mons nucore, Wwost.ot blepharidca vulgaris... ...0..-.-----2----t-------+-- 91 Epicampocera crassiseta, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature. .....--- 88 TEIECINO CISL OS Stallone i pele ES mo RA a ae RNIN 89 mpyncuroni cespitis, host of Blepharidea vulgaris... 22-2 -.-----o/---- 22-3: 91 Epiurus inquisitoriella. (See Pimpla inquisitoriella.) Erastria scitula, parasite of black scale (Saissetia olex), introduction into United TEES 2 A AL ee a AE ee eng es Aen ee reitiae ie arr Senn 34 POGUSiCr Cte MOS OL PQICS POVIOE on wn ee ee ee ee ces ecw 92 Ernestia consobrina, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............ 88 EC OEN CU ONSR go Lee erie Mores on oo oe pew alae wks a 89 Erycia ferruginea, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. ........ 91 ficsre PMNS edi Bre enn Goin Ac ce ys Pee aia e shoe G's Seno 92 Euchloe cardamines, host of Blepharidea vulgaris.......- EHiaathnatas aellh > aliie e 91 Eudoromyia magnicornis, gross number colonized...............-.--.------- 309 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in PHS on mo Sepa 136 introduction into United States, habits........ 303-304 reared at laboratory - --.. 91 recorded in literature - -. 88 status in United States in ELE RSI Cielo Arey a 309 PORE ee MOM fre a) Aree eee oe ee me atonal 89, 92. 324 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Page Eulophid parasite of Apanteles fulvipess » 2.2 4 4-a0202+ 3 dostens 4h onset oe eee eee 121 MEEROS. os:occaeils pad Soe ee ee ee ee ee 168-188 Jaryee . 22 ce.s bk Seopa i) 2a 188-202 Dil psi hig ook oe ead oa et eee ee eee 236-255 INDEX. 325 Page. Camayrmoth, parasitism) in’ America: fate tid ousi sole. oe UL a De, 136-143 Pape CEASERS SOS SPs SP PS 120-123 GEER ae Sy a PES Sk OT ee 123-129 SouthermMeanceit. ors uo. 2. AYE ee 129-131 pups importation-and handling hs seu). ed MR 159-160 rate of increase im New Hnelamad ve. cc yokes. he a Se. 109-114 recorded hosts of foreign tachinids reared therefrom at laboratory - 88 recorded as parasitic thereon.. 89-90 Par nmin Mat toNties Sse : ART IE SAE ae 202-236 Goniarctena rufipes, host of Histocheta marmorata...... 0.22.22 0.0 02 2 89 Grapevine Cochylis. (See Cochylis.) feaoeenpers. nosis of sarcophagids:. lol ls. 00 6 ea, ee 250 “‘Green bug.’”’ (See Toxoptera graminum.) Habrobracon brevicornis, hibernating in brown-tail moth nests.........-.. 61, 269-270 idanene adusta, host.of Hudoromya magmicorms .. 2252.22.20 ob ee 2 89, 92 SECAISUROSh Ob PArevonistye Chelanie.. sO Ra sos PILE: AP 92 Hemaphysalis leports-palustris, host of Ixodiphagus texanus........----------- 41 parasite of cottonAailitabbit.... 2.226802 2.2. 41 Hematobia serrata, quest of parasites for introduction into Hawaiian Islands. . . 36 Haplogonatopus witiensis, parasite of Perkinsiella saccharicida, introduction into Hawaiian Islands. ..-..- dA RR RE RE Xd PRN, WEIR yi ST Ee oo) rae ae 30 Sowinern containing nesis.of brown-taal moth... .. 22... F222 2... eee ee 3 Eleliaiis obsoleta, host: of Trichogramme pretiosa..........--..-5-0-.2-- 20 252-- 45 Seam east Ol ICLOdes WGMIPUS. oi. con... ee 88, 91 memes jucivormis, host. ol Mewnomypaipreceps.........---..'2.-------+-2224- 92 Hemerocampa leucostigma. (See 'Tussock moth, white-marked.) Hemichionaspis minor on cotton, importation of Prospaliella berlesei for control. - 45 Hemiteles bicolorius, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............- 85 fulvipes. (See Astomaspis fulvipes.) socialis, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature........... 87 Bpp:;: parasttes-of A panteles fulsipes OP Soe. Se. 199, 200 utilis, parasite of Iimnerium sp. (fugitiva?)..-......--------------- 138 Hessian fly ( Mayetiola destructor), burning stubble in .control may result in destroying beneficial parasites. .......... 19 host of Entedon epigonus, attempted control by introduction of parasite.....--- 30 Polygnotus hiemalis, control by trans- portation of parasite... ......2-2-- 21 leterocampn, control by starvation .......2.2..022 9) 002... ANIM op eh 103 SE Mtes Mis Param eine 105" S27 ve SPE Ae RE AR | 103 Hippodamia convergens, enemy of plant-lice, transportation from one part of Patty COI NOLMen Darl... ¢~ «se ou doses ak ee SSUP OWA ES PMT SST 22-23 Histocheta marmorata, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature......-..-- 88 reeorded hosts... 2 229 IP Lt 2 QO TSRIS YMRS S | Bren 89 Momelotylus) ‘parasite of ladybird larvers)!o sl. 2228. ere Sell le ee 30 Hop aphis, prey of common English ladybird, artificial control by means of its CUEVESET SEG 12.07 375 eine NES ce Ae a 17 Horn fly. (See Hematobia serrata.) Horse chestnut, food plant of Hemerocampa lewcostigma........--------------- 101 host of Rhipicephalus texanus.....- PAE SO CRS, REO REST As BIOS I. 42 ise Clsitome. Or My Penpaeinltes.....cszselas4isessseseceee2 e223 LILI 201-202 PHOMIING -PARACS sa enrern eh eee oo Se PRE WOE. IPS 203-204 Hunterellus hookeri. parasite of Rhipicephalus sanguineus......---.------------ 41-42 texanus, introductions into Africa. 41-42 326 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Hunterellus hookeri, question as to original home..................2-...-.- ae Hybernia defoliaria, host of Blepharidea vulgaris........-.-- eect te ap., host of Dexodes nigripes....-.s-- 51-50 SEGRE, - Hybridization between Tachina mella and Tachina larvarum, possibility thereof. 227 Hydrocyanic-acid gas against fluted scaler izi.: 228 2228242 1 Oi. ee 24 Hyloicus pinasiri, host of Blepharidea vulgarisn. 1.90.0. 55.2250 ot ee gl Carceliavexciga i 2.5062 202). So Pe 89 Compsiture concinnata....... 02-2 ..2-.- 89 Phrixe erythrosioma....:..=--.222 i 89 Hylophila prasinana, host of Blepharidea vulgaris........---------- Peers es: 91 Hymenopterous parasite cocoons, importation and handling.....-..........- 165-166 Hyperparasites, host relations...........-.------200i:080 208-32 Soe 201-202 Hyphantria (see also Webworm, fall). host of Apanteles lacteicolor...........------- 5. a 284 Hypopteromalus, parasite of Apanteles fulvipes........-.-.---.------+------ 199, 200 feerya xgypiiaca, prey of Novius cardinalis..2. 22. s.4 ao. 905422 2. ee ee 28-29 purchasi, mtroduction into Florida. -.sc2. 22 2222.2... 9 ee 28 prey of Novius cardinalis, in Cape Colony................---- 28 Formosa-i.z. 2 Joo ee 29 i Hawaiian Islands.......... sey 29 lialy.....-...-2:-+.. Soe 29° New. Zealand. 2.2. stp Ree BF Portugal, 2:2). 2 eee 27-28 SyMawt sso fh oe Ge 29 United States. .2. 2.24... 0395 24-27 Ichneumon disparis, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. ....... 86 sipsy moth in. Horope..-2) i221) 2G See 239 position in ‘‘sequence”’.. 132 reared at laboratory..............- 85 recorded in literature.............- 85 fly, parasite of Ceratitis capitata, introduction into western Australia. 39. pictus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature.-..........-.-- 85 scutellator, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature... ... 86 Idiolispa atripes, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature......-..... 86 Insects, control by. birds.and other predatots...sse2:..2+2.222.5+----4- 0-5 GINGA BO 3p ion 32 ha dint es a a eon on pumice ane re 108, 114 pargsviiena gc 2 eee Aa co ee ae teak Se 105-109 slarvaiianl. Son pAieat ees ects ets dats ses. e520. 114 weather conditigns....22.:... au ede ot ee ee 107 native, studies In parasitism .\. .. 2.444... eed ibe a a 102-105 species differing in biological characters only... .....- 225-226, 257, 285-286 the three groups of factors in natural control.........-.--.-..-------- 114 Itoplectis conquisitor. (See Pimpla conquisitor. ) ; Ixodiphagus texanus, parasite of Hemaphysalis leporis-palustris..........------ 41 Kincaid, Trevor, Russian observations on gipsy and brown-tail moths. . 78-82, 124-125 Ladybird, Asiatic. (See Ladybird, Chinese, and Chilocorus similis.) Australian. (See Novius cardinalis.) Chinese (see also Chilocorus similis). attacked by American ladybird parasites........ ....----- 30 common English, enemy of hop aphis, practical handling suggested. . 17 Ladybirds, parasites. ..... 22.4... -. scat ask ne. see eee 30 Lampyrid beetles, enemies of gipsy moth................60-sccc-eeeece eee 252-253 Larentia autumnalis, host of Zenillia libatriz........22.0-eeeennes------ sl cis 90 INDEX. 327 * Page = Barvipositor of Compsihira conemmatas. =. (28 oS SS) 2 SS SSL 219 Lasiocampa. pini, host of ‘A panteles nemorwm...22. 28 ee eee 2k - 193 quercus, host of dMasiwerm splice Ae CONE PMG vk Pe PN 92 Dacia aromnTe: PHONE LO) PPR SR S22 90 Leaf crumpler, rascal. (See Mineola indiginella.) worm, cotton. (See Alabama argillacea.) memo toad plant of Jcerya. purchasies 22S IS PL PIE PNY (24 Ee niocaphes beck, enemy ol-oranges

--. 5-22 =. 88, 92 persicariz, host-ot Blepharidea vulgaris-- .2 22... 2225... 22 a eee 91 Compsilura concinnaia.....-.-. 2-7 89 pin, host of Derodes nogripes...-.-2-22- 2.2 --- = 2-2 26 88, 91 Pichinowapa fera.. 2. io. ec ewes oo Re eee 89 PT UCHOUAG OT OIIS San ae oe ee ee peed eipoeds 88, 92 reticulata, host of Blephariea gulgarts. .-~.-. - . s- - 3 sa. 91 Maple (see also Acer). . food Plant Of PIpsy MOU... 7 ee ae ee 80 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma)..-. 101 Masicera sylvatica, gross number colonized ...........-- tet dole: 2 eee 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘‘se- quence”... 2: 22 2c. 22a eee 136 introduction into United States. 303 reared at laboratory.....--...-. 91 recordéd hosts... 2522025 o Se. ee ee 92 Mayetiola destructor. (See Hessian fly.) Mealy bugs (Pseudococcus), prey of coccinellids introduced from abroad... --- 46 Cryptolemus montrouziert.....-..-------- 34 Meigenia bisignata, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............-. 88, 89 Mehixa athailva, host of Blepharidea vaigaris. To. SeP o0 52 2S ee es bee 91 LPG Cia ferrUginenh se gee an Bae eons cn oo 0 92 muri, Wost‘ot Firycia ferrugineae sh 2... see be ee ee ee 92 didyma, host of Tachina larvarum.........----- Ries 2) $0 Melittobia acasta, parasite of introduced Tachinide and Sarcophagide....... 209-212 parasite of tachinids, an undesirable introduction. ..............--. 202 Melopsilus porceltus; host-of Pachina'tarvarwim..... o. =. saab te oe ea ee 90 Mesochorus confusus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature... .. Bashers 85 dilutus, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature......... - 87 INDEX. | 329 ; Page. Mesochorus gracilis, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature. ............ 85 Ds Sp ‘parasite ul Apunteles isha Vis... 22s cee eee eee 265 pallipes, parasite of Apanteles lacteicolor.......-...-- 263, 265-266, 267, 289 pectoralis, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature....... 87 gipsy moth, recorded in literature........... 85 semirufus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature........... 85 apy i pursue Of A pantelesdiypphaninie. 022 22.2 2 cose beeen ee aie 265 splendidulus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature......... 85 _ Meteorus ictericus, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature.......... 86 japonicus, parasite of gipsy moth in Japan.........-5......-- 121, 190-191 position in ‘‘sequence”... 121 reared at laboralory. sois2 as o4ases =: 85 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, introduction into United Sea Lesa Sk MONO PASE os 2 wisi oo ew nd od nasil Boe 70 gipsy moth in Russia, introduction into United States. -. 69 a4 pulchricornis, parasite of gipsy mothin Europe, position in ‘‘se- GmMENCE Ou. Shakes ase oss as 132 introduction into United States.. 190 reared at laboratory.2.. 235.245: 85. scutellator, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............- 85 aersicolan: eTocs number colonizedks bees nc 2-22-4535 ee lee wees oe ee 310 Hostel Pig OOS COTAGMIGHED, .. wis rks vo ge Bese oes sda 266, 267 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘“‘se- IMICMIC Ei, oh aos wale e 5G See 136 introduction into United States, habits... 262, 264-267, 286-289, 295 reared.at laboratory......-:---- 86 recorded in literature. .......- 86. results of rearing work in DOO PLA ES 2s vos ee ges 28 147-149 status in United Statesin 1910. 309 fall easton (ipgalttndrigyeyl : 2-2 2522544 «x: 289 gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence”.. 132 introduction into United States..... 190 reared di laboratory. 2. ssiiseies eee 85 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leu- COstigine). OF at UEte WMO oud Jack ee 221-223, 289 Metopsilus porcellus, host: of Blepharidea vulgariswcs i. wie esi. o. eeu lava sceeues 91 Mina iiierosd, nostal Dexodes nigripes. wedeires Sok Tee Wad sack dees aGee 88, 91 Pocroctonus, parasite ot ladybird adwlip-c-.sseng5c.2aeis dso swioe. ode wed eed 30 Microgaster calceata, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature........ 86 gipsy moth, recorded in literature...........-. 85 consularis (Hal.)== Microgaster connexa Nees...........----2--2000- 86 connexa, “Microgaster consularis a, 8yMODYM. . .........5.526.-s-66- 86 consularis, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature...... 86 fulvipes liparidis. (See Apanteles fulvipes liparidis.) tibialis, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature.............. 85 Microweisia misella, enemy of Diaspis pentagona, introduction into Italy...... 44-45 Mineola indiginella, control by permitting parasites to escape. ..............- 18-19 Monedula carolina, enemy of tabanid flies, introduction into ee Boa saben 45 Monodontomerus xreus, gross number colonized..........-.-------------+----- 310 hibernating in brown-tail nests. .......-...-.-. 262, 266, 267 pis IMC Meiee sc 2 Sie Sac ceases secede ssacanet 266 7362°—11——_3 330 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Page. Monodontomerus xreus, parasite of Apanteles lacteicolor..... id iaetn Soe 249, 267 brown-tail moth in Europe..........-....- 304 position in ‘‘se- quenge,’?...ia . Tae introduction into United States, habits.2oc22-.. 245-250 reared at laboratory....... 87 recorded in literature..... 87 results of rearing work in 1910.) 3¢.2cr. cohepuge aan status in United States in 191002... ss. i Compsilura continnélaiw22s') 22. nl eee eee pipsy moth.in Europes. 2u2.. 2s 304 poree™ in ‘‘se- quence” Boat eae introduction into Uimaned States, habits. PEP reared at inborsiae ape 86 status in United Statesin1910.. 308 introduced Tachinide. ... 2.2.2.2. 522.-.- 212-213 Pimptayie solve sie 2 i, 246, 249 tachinid and sarcophagid puparia.......... 246 Theron... Ls eee 246 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa lewcoshigma) oS... 2 eer 249 Lygovothria nidveold. 2s. = 13 ee eee 267 reared from brown-tail moth webs, host relate . 269-270 suecessiul eolonization ..) 2.51... 5.0.25. 276-277 unfortunately a secondary as well as a primary para- SUL: SIRMS er. Wn ia aaa alate pa ee 202 Walk:—Teorymus anephetus (Ratz. +... 22 soe 87 dentipes, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature: . . 87 Mulberry, food plant-ol Diaspis pentagona. 22.2. .2.. 2:2. 5.01 dv. 2) See 38 Mymarid parasite of weevil allied to Phytonomus murinus, introduction into United States to combat the latter. ............... bebe leevec 46 Natural control of insects, three groups of factors. .........-.--.-- dtp 114 Nematus ribesi, host of Dexodes nigripes 3... 2522. 205. I Oe 88, 91 Nonagria typhiz, host of .Masteera sylvatica ...5.%. 2 2. Se) 2 ee 92 Notodonta trepida, host of Argyrophylax atropwora........-.-.-+-++--+++---- 89 Nun moth (see also Porthetria monacha). prey: of -Calosoma-cycophantee. 2))0 Wai}. on. 3a. 225.2. cee 48 Novius cardinalis, enemy of Icerya epics introduction into Egypt. - .. 28-29 purchasi, introduction into Cape Glolimeget 28 Formosao>. 2.5. 29 Hawaiian Is- fandesie: 2222 29 ltaly.: 7st Soames 29 New Zealand... . 27 Portugalsyo.24e% 27-28 Syria 202 ute 29 United States... 24-27 reasons for its success. ----------- 29-30 INDEX. 331 Page. eeoniaad plant of pay mothe 22. .syanitee pireissas st wis. bed a 77, 80, 81, 124-125 menera deriva, host ot Taching larvermitucowicws eae. -- ee ee 90 (onistis quadra, host of Compsilura concinnata.o. 220. j2 dees ee dete eee ss 89 ECRUROMYUG [RG Dep es, 15S ween < Pees 89 Olethreutes hercyniana, host of Tachina larvarum............---------+----+-+-+-- 90 Olive fly (see also Dacus olex). method) ofemecourapine parasites aiid, .25,~ atoawows ol hidiewe bene 20 Omiodes blackburni, host of Chalcis obscurata, control by introduction of para- ened reer s bytes bcp sar. ot Sie Mens Sd eer ehns Gesch ys venta eepins o's raaveg ates eye - 35 Omorgius difformis, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature......... 86 Ootetrastichus beatus, parasite of Perkinsiella saccharicida, introduction into Peavadian, TWslands. .. 5.0.2: ae asses enacts ere Sat ea al es ae See 35 Opiellus trimaculatus, parasite of Ceratitis capitata, attempted introduction into Perit RUSTE ANIA cas 27. le eres RE bat! ds elem cine neler epiuainseein gerne 39 meesnse 00d. Planter Aleyrodes Cpe) since aire ioe ys ye eel. - 2-2 see eve os = 46 E EIT TTS. NOSTM, 0p SO oe a i POE CO ee 24 IE Cpiosapbe DOOR 8). Jo seb oe Se ee ee dee eae 28 Pee ee ect ES Se De Ney aia Nae 28 ENE IgthO. OSL OF Corcelumemeisde).2. . i. is 02l ss ace. ese ee cee ek 89 RU GRN Gee ee ii ati oe eis ik Se oc oy as 88 Price. Os beO MERON ES QI OMe cag i. oe geo E a ie eos ee ae eee See eee oe 92 . LTR IICTS S002 7 So ee 90 wanasiiqma, Host, of Tachinaerverum. 20-5 fantrceece 2 ose es eee be ee 6 retina vertumoia, host, of, Derodes nagripes ..)202% 2.25 - - -Lieow ado s won dees ec 88, 91 Oishosia, hans, host, of Vachinas lar vartine ie ef ti tae ep dines wae ee oe aa 90 PSCC ENON. Ob FOTCLORSIIsCRELONGE 0.2 ois so sas ewe ee se eae = he ot 92 Pachyneuron gifuensis, parasite of Anastatus bifasciatus........--.-----.---+-- "183 SORCUUS MUON 2a. 2 2s 5 oes = ge eon oe 183 Feared irom e1psy Mob, Case os. eho ate 178 superparasitized by Pachyneuron gifuensis............ 183 LYRGOTICHUS WON As ous eae oie 183 machwiclia tellosella, ost of Maxorista affints 2... 2... - f.6ns0044555sbe+s42 5st n5- 89 Packing and shipment of brown-tail moth egg masses..............-....---- 160-161 larvee, full-fed and pupating..... 162-164 TIMER RTE dies l= od. Ls os ee a [OUI Ce SIRs Ne pt Mae Ree Se Sipe 164 Calosoma and other predaceous beetles...........- 167 gipsy-moth egg masses from Japan.......-.....-- 152-153 larvee, full-fed and pupating......... 156-159 second to fifth stages from Europe. 154 UO Se cet oS By sarap ee big 28 Si we a 159-160 hymenopterous parasite cocoons...........-....- 165-166 ge ME PU BARA ie oc. c ene = in Ss NRE cla, Ste 166-167 Paes avian. ctosa mumbencolonized | 2. 2 22.0 cceb ee ee oe ne es eee eee nse oe 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence”.. 136 introduction into United States, IVE. S Spe RAR ae a vate Oa 300-302 Feared at labortory . «05-6242 5 = ne ee 91 recorded im, literature... . <2. - 522-8 91 status in United States in 1910.....- 310 Sra Maat im MiunOpe: /. 2... scc2 kn sae se ates 5 235, 302 position in ‘‘sequence”....... 132 ie Ree Se cro a es ers a Bass nak 4 wi ences 92 Bales. tod plants ot timiodes blacbburnt... 4.02 Se 2 ee ee 35 832 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. : Page Pamphilius stellatus, host of Parexorista chelonix..........-----.--- 2222020 92 Tachina-larvarum S20 S09 22 Pe 3. 1k ae 90 Panolis griseovariegata, host of Echinomyta fera.......--------------22202002-2- 89 Pales pavida.:822 \ PO. . eee 92 Tachina tarvarum) 3.022 +. 2. Ue eae 90 Papilio machaon, host of Tachina larvarum. ..........1 2°02 eee 90 Paranagrus optabilis, parasite of Perkwnsiella saccharicida, introduction into Hawaiteos it ud So Soe, 22a eae ee ee 35 perforator, parasite of Perkinsiella saccharicida, introduction into Hawari ts. U. 202 oh gee Ae eee, ee 35 Parasa hilarwle’= Parasa stmiea' 2222 . PATA ee eee 170 sinica, hibernating in egg masses of gipsy moth......-....----.-...-.-. 170 Parasemia plantaginis, host of Blepharidea vulgaris............--..----+-----++- 91 galt ds segregata, gross number colonized -------..2+.22.5.+-2-2--200+2-0 310 handling of puparia toe A Ee 159 parasite of gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘se- quence” ais2. 02a eee 132 introduction into United States, habits eee 229-231 reared at laboratory...........- 88 recorded in literature.......... 88 status In United Statesin 1910. 308 recorded hosts..g2fl2 222 PELE eee 89 Parasites of brown-tail moth. (See Brown-tail moth parasites.) gipsy and brown-tail moths, difficulty of naming European species. 68-69 diiportation :'2) ) 2012 Pee ae 1-312 and handling.......... 152-167 an investigation of the circumstances bringing about beginning of developments of year 1910 io oo ee 311-312 tion... 5.45 47-49 establishment and disper- BON. «602 0 94-96 gross number of various species colonized ...... 310 improvements in rearing methods: ....+..5e9eeee 71-73 introduction to bulletin.. 13-16 narrative of progress of work 22 22 OS Pte cae 54-84 summary and conclu- sions....29. eeueees 305-307 visit of junior author in Riussiaee. 4. 125-129 Prof. Kincaid in Japan’ 2.20% 73-74 Russia ...... 75, 76 visits of senior author in INDEX. 333 Page. Parasites of gipsy and brown-tail moths, imported into United States, present SUULAC ch toe ore Da hg eS a gag aa EY 307-310 known and recorded....-.........-.-.-- 84-92 localities from which material has been Beeeuyed Hel ENA Ota 168, 169 quantity of material imported...... 167-168 moth. (See Gipsy moth parasites.) injurious insects, early practical work in handling................- 17-18 Froggatt’s journey for investigation of their utility. 42-44 method of encouragemente 5). 2 77 OVS... 20 permitting them to escape...........-..-------- 18-20 previous work in practical handling. .........-- 16-45 transfer from one country to another............ 23-46 transportation from one part of a given country to BROtner pal? HUTA Iat IY APIS S IR 20-23 seedndary, host-relatioms sis: Rese Pee A 201-202 Pomarsiem ao a tactoran imsect:controlis( [UI SPN. . elise. 105-109 ot brewn-tal moth-m-Amerteg Ye 22000. sks eyedeieeeeues. 143-151 BUPOpe: POT CAE Se SU, 5 WE 132-135 pipsy mothim Amernea: < . 2530. 4.2 9 OP III oie so es done 136-143 Ja panes 525 20S, PRCA, OP). 2 Se 120-123 USENET OP Ee JPA Pe 123-129 potthera Wraneeie fis. oS YM ee 129-131 notinedinsects studies thereitiss.dsvsso2K. YS I ae 102-105 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma) in country Weise City 2a UA SN SES PAUP SI 119-120 Parexorista chelonix, American race, parasite of Malacosoma americana and Mala- COSONUCISSUF i =-2 - UEP MUTE POU ORO SR 299-300 biological differences between American and European PACER. cA t+ ehess seco PORES Je aE 257, 286, 299 gross number colonized........--.- Wi DUG Se POS Pe a parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘se- CONC O I, ot BP we 136 introduction into United States,nalbite, oss 5 2s 297-300 reared at laboratory......... 91 status in United Statesin 1910 310 probable interbreeding of American and European forms 299-300 FECEraCaemO StS. S80 Ps JI SPA Oe Yes caves. 92 Paris green against gipsy moth, formerly recommended..............--.---- a 47 Parone sp., Host-ok Apanteles Fisker. oo OS OE PLE POOL Oe 265 Parthenogenesis as a factor in establishment of hymenopterous parasites in a mews COumMtins Aemae se SUTURE VAR. bee eee e be 95 in Melittobiaaeasta.2 2. ae SS. dente Jy incre ae. NEALE 211-212 SENOMIMS MON RO ROIYR PUN oo os alae cece Sencend 179, 183 Mrmeltepranamia gel e e . esa cand eSeseesaecs 257-258 Pear: food plant.of Apommenatugy 22 bIAe th Oe SAO AL ee 133 PONE ROUND aoseir ai clee as Jan Soy teak gles eers sees) E68 wild, containing nests of brown-tail moth...................-.-..----.-- 133 Pediculoides ventricosus, enemy of brown-tail moth caterpillars and their para- Birenenemoteee Uy kes yy SNe dae s 267-268 MeiLelliIsin ciyamem. .. LS O0I8 WR Pe ee ES, 33 Perilampus cuprinus, an undesirable foreign hyperparasite...........--..---- 202 parasite of introduced Tachinide....................- 208-209 334 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Page. Perilampus hyalinus, secondary parasite of fall webworm Sait habits 208-209 Perilitus, parasite of ladybird adults....................--.- Aad 30 Perissopterus javensis, reared from gipsy-moth eggs........-.-.---------------- 178 Perkinsiella saccharicida, enemy of sugar cane, introduction of parasites and enemies into Hawaiian. Islands.tescocise- eee 238 position in ‘‘sequence”.. 132 reared at laboratory......-..-------- 85 conquisitor, not properly a kost of Theronia fulvescens.......-.-...----- 137 parasite of brown-tail moth in America..........-.... 144, 147-149 gipsy moth in America............-.- 2+ oe SS tent caterpillar (Malacosoma)...........-..----- 238 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma)... .... «Seperate? 2 eee 238 disparis, parasite of gipsy moth in Japan..........2.2+--.-+--+2-+---- 238 position in ‘‘sequence”’....... 121 reared at laboratory. ..........-+----- 85 examinator, parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe..-......-.---.--..---- 144 position in “‘se- quengets23.35 ae 136 reared at laboratory ....:-.--..-. 86 INDEX. 335 Pimpla examinator, parasite of brown-tail moth recorded in literature......... 86 statusin United Statesin 1910. 310 gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence”’. 132 introduction into United States. . 237-239 reared at laboratory...............- 85 recorded in literaturesi: [3022 [2oc5: 85 At OF MONMODONTOMETUS LTCUS. o 5 os ncn ha ow ops aR Sh Se oe be be 246, 249 pieisioricia. wost of Pimple mstigdvor....-.-..-. - <. 2ee ot Pale eee 237 parasite of tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma).. 237-238 instigator, parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe.............-------- 144 position in “se- quence? "722222 136 reared at laboratory.......-..-- 86 recorded in literature...........- 86 status in United Statesin 1910.. 310 gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence”... 132 introduction into United States, EROS See eae ee 237-239 tered at laboratory: 22525.02 2522s 85 recorded in literature............---- 85 ; Y Pome Vigustior elas S250 35 yea Saas 545 237 pedalis, parasite of brown-tail moth in America........--.----- 144, 147-149 gipsy moth in America.........-.------- 137-138, 237-239 pluto, parasite oi gipsy moth in Japan, position in ‘‘sequence”’...-.-.- P20 introduction into United States, habits. 237-239 reared at laboratorye-yi4ads 159... Sass cis 85 porthetrix, parasite of gipsy moth in Japan, position in ‘‘sequence”... 121 introduction into United States, habrtalea ur lotensuc ba adaciercet: Je 237-239 reared at laboratory. -......-..-..-.- 85 Bp pinetoss number colomrmed | .-2444) sas tn Peas - soe ose Gs.s: 310 parasites of gipsy moth, status in United States in 1910........ 308,310 tenuicornis, parasite of gipsy moth in America...........-....-------- 138 igeee, food plat, of. pie tussock moth’. - hievussies-sedaiesa axes. 202. SS 103 Piroplasmosis, transmission by Rhipicephalus sanguineus.........------------ 41-42 Peet. Sire On herlampus.. 2, -....5- 594 Sees. - - o ee 208 Plant-lice, prey of Coccinella californica, control by transportation of enemy from one part of country to another part .....- 22-23 repanda, control by introduction of enemy.....-. 35 BMUCCUNUPURLIOUE. ho senor ee ee a ee eS 24 Hippodamia convergens, control by transportation of enemy from one part of country to another part.............-.--- 22-23 Plum curculio. (See Curculio, plum.) measseyesives, host of Compsilura concinmatas..wi2ssee. 2-2 Ss 89 gona, host, of Blepharided vulgaris oy a0o65.2 2. 9/ Seaeela g.---- ~~... 91. Cam pera Cconcipnaia>s aio: Fo eteetes yyeeeckaied ...- 89 Diodes wigri pes on. 53 8a elke Aweloe yes. - 88, 91 ee IOP eee res oo os What oie she ee ae 92 (OH OSE. Ob, PaChint UmaLIne Ts Sahm we eT 90 Padisus Sp. enemy of Apunielesfuluipess: ect. Piaoy eis Wa a ANew tes -seee - 199 Pecelocampa populi, host of Compsilura concinnata......--.-------+-+---++---- 89 Polygnotus hiemalis, parasite of Mayetiola destructor, transportation from one Part of cqusiiem tolanubier parte. 2ee: fi. sent Siro inating ani Shoes... 21 886 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Page Pontia rapzx (see also Pieris rapz). control by caging and permitting parasites to escape............-- 19 hostof Apanteles glomaratas 20. oJ Ws: .. 2... 2k Ree 24 Compstluracovcitingia ss 08.220 eos. 2. Re 223 Poplar (see also Populus). black, food :plant‘sipipsy moth siwe: es ee Oe eee 80 food ‘plant. of gipsy ‘moth ..¢. 3355... 0s Sie De BO 57, 82 Populus (see also Poplar). nigra; food plant of gipsy mothe » rrcse il eee, Se 124 Porthesia similis, host of Compsttura. coneinnata 22 080. 9.'. 02 O22 ee 89 Demodes WiGri pes Tso 02 ke yess es 88, 91 Brycie ferrugined so 32 of IS Me eee 92 Porthetria (Lymantria) monacha (see also Nun moth). hostioiwarceha excisas.. 07k 4... 89 Compsilura concinmaéta..../ss2aueeee 89 Hehtnornoa fora. .........-25. See 89 Parasetigena segregata....-..-.-.------ 89, 229 Paching larvarwm....-.'.425 2344 90 Zygobothria bimaculata.......-..----- $0 Prays oleellus, control by caging and permitting parasites to escape. .--.-...-- 19 Procrustes coriaceus, host of Blepharidea wilgaris:: 2090. 3... .--- 2 --.----2 see 91 Proctotrypid parasite of Compsilura concinnata............2.-22.2202222----+- 224 Prospaltella berlesei, importation into Peru for controlling Hemichionaspis minor . 45 parasite of Diaspis pentagona, introduction into Italy... .-- 38, 44 lahorensis, parasite of Aleyrodes citri..........-.-.---.-.-----+---- 46 Pseudococcus. (See Mealy bugs.) Pseudogonatopus spp., peur of Perkinsiella saccharicida, introduction into Hawai Telamdaut ¢2 2 ie Reve aese0s ... 2 ene co ec eee eee 35 Féeromalid parasite of Apanteles fulsipess. 2.22.25... food enc ss. 32 eee 200 Pteromalus chrysorrhea D. T., Pteromalus rotundatus Ratz. a synonym. ...-.--- 87 cuproideus, parasite of white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa lewcdstigmayosel. PIIIGA EOWA LeU. SR Ce 305 Pteromalus egregius Forst., Pteromalus nidulans Thoms. a synonym..-..-...-.:-- 87 gross number colonized. +..c221S AW. 002. . eee 310 host. of Hniedowalbitarsisnige205 0. Sea 263, 266, 267, 269 emlophid (2 xii snaeececett qi hee ae 202 parasite of Apanteles lacteicolor......-...-..---- 266, 267, 283-284 brown-tail moth, colonization in United States, host velations. . soos eeeae 61, 65, 96, 262, 263, 265-267, 268-278 ce in Europe, position in ‘‘se- quence”. uv5l ..... 2288 136 status in United Statesin1910. 309 Meteorite versitolors)s eevee. 10. eee 266, 267 unfortunately a secondary as well as a primary parasite.... 202 halidayanus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature... ..-...- 86 nidulans, parasite of brown-tail moth, reared at laboratory... -.-.- 87 recorded in literature......-- 87 Thoms. = Pteromalus egregius POtato) 2204 5. 87 pini, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature.............--- 86 processionex, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature... . 87 puparum, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. ..-..-- 87 rotundatus, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature.....- 87 INDEX. | oar Page Pteromalus rotundatus, Ratz.=Pteromalus chrysorrhea D. T............------- 87 sp., near cuproideus, parasite of brown-tail moth...........-.-....- 305 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence” 136 reared at laboratory. ........--..- 87 mexesroma palma, host/of Corcela egcisa.._.abig. 12..----+--.-------------- 89 Ptilotachina larvincola, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature.......... 88, 90 monacha, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............ 88,90 Pulvinaria psidii, prey of Cryptolemus monirouziert, control by introduction of MI nc cam an mo SERRE LENS eso wiern, 3 akan nah AOE Meg re See? 5 aati 34-35 Pygzxra anachoreta, host of Compsilura concinnata.........-..--------+-++-++---+- 89 omrtula. host:of Corcolia excisa :os004. ih. atithan Ba a; 89 piord; hest.of Zenilina hbairia: wets eet. be as has. . ebay 90 Pyrameis atalanta, host of Compsilura concinnata.......-.---.--------+-++++--- 89 Rabbit, cotton-tail, host of Hemaphysalis leporis-palustris..............-.+--- 4] Rearing cage. (See Cage.) Reproduction experiments with Melittobia acasta........--------.--------- 211-212 Schedins bummmiaes Asti D2 eee nhs 184 Mruchastamimiane coris ty tices. - 2.2. 257-258 Rhipicephalus sanguineus, host of Hunterellus hookert.........--.-.--------++- 41-42 Passe Ghveameel ) yoy es be Js Pie ewneies ties ft 42 . a 3 et eS AU Oe tas 42 iransmipter efipiroplasmosiss.;: 22... 2... = ~~ =. <0+-\s.-\- - 41-42 iexanus, host.of Hunteréliesihookerts. oss ek seieeeiacs ss... oo. 41 Parasiicvoivelae santas t, loses Mieciwrccin. - oe ok 4] hermes) (bce eesiies Jo misses. asin tl 42 Rhizobius ventralis, enemy of black scale (Saissetia olex), introduction into Cali- a yaya ease nicks BE ARR IS ete go 8 gs 31 Rhogas. (See Rogas.) Fuagearia purpurata, host of Parexorista chelonivarsiiecs. ss: 2-2... ..5---->--- 92 Rogas geniculator, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature........... 86 pulchripes, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature.........-. 86 testaceus, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. ........... 86 Rose, food plant of gipsy moth...........- pe Se sheen? (aes wratiner ds 82 Saissetia olex. (See Scale, black.) Salix (see also Willow). fe Plant OF Clpsy NOUN... 2.) sie s Fiw B ede wee epee a 124 Sarcophaga sp., reared from dead gipsy moth (Porthetria dispar).....-.-..---.--- 90 Sarcophagid puparia from gipsy moth pupe, results of rearing work of 1910.... 141 Sarcophagids, hosts of Monodontomerus xreus............--.22---222--2--2-0- 246 parsnites of sreshopperarse:'. Jao) gediid 3) ulee ti b-eh web bh ew 250 probable parasites of ‘‘pine tussock moth” ..............--...-- 251 . that feed upon gipsy moth pupe; are they parasites or scaven- Bete re Seas et itn eel A oh eet. 250-251 Saturnia pavonia, host of Exorista affinis.....----.---- Ae ee! load ts Saintes 89 Miresnerr ge phim why rae OE Fe ao ohne sm a inn Semnenin’a as - 92 Lire cho mG mNrrmndes et ss eels Sy teil. Sebmaeieineg - - 52% 88, 92 FIOM Ghtvaecalimetsts i tn4s 2saet A Wee se@R ee 26 1G Db isln 89 PAIGE ne BA et Le eT ee 89 WMasieenmsiimalargedd ope. So) 95 fos hs HSN) 5 See> SBEIEbY 92 Vache Jorvarumapeacdeadt > tie: aid oe ede 90 CNOIIGH GEEnMIS. 2. bine oe No saa 5 «Se 88, 92 spini, host of Masicera sylvatica. ......-.-------- Ss te taal Leet epee 92 338 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS, Page. Scale, black (Sazssetia olex), host of Tomocera californica, control by transporta- tion of parasite suggested ...2.2.2.225.0.01..20. 21 international work with enemies. .............-- 31-34 prey of Rhizobius ventralis, control by introduction of latter... 29/083 Dsienbl_ 2) ee) 31 coffee, host: of Scutellista’ cyanea...2205 AER ee eae xd 31 cottony cushion. (See Jcerya purchast.) fluted. (See Icerya purchasi.) long. (See Lepidosaphes gloveri.) oyster-shell. (See Lepidosaphes ulmi.) purple. (See Lepidosaphes beckiiv.) San Jose. (See Aspidiotus perniciosus.) wax. (See Ceroplastes.) West Indian peach. (See Diaspis pentagona.) Schedius kuvanx, gross number colonized...........-.---. 22220 22eeeeeee eee ee 310 host of .Pachyneuron:gifuensises... Ali siehi wae ee 183 Vyndarichwus Wawr QAP Pe). t=. «2 hy ee 183 parasite of gipsy moth in Japan, position in ‘‘sequence’’..... 121 introduction into United States, hab- ISS. Uh. TOBY... Code eee 75, 176-188 reared at laboratory .........-2.seeeee 86 status in United States in 1910........ 307 superparasitized by Schedius kuvanx.........-.------------ 181-183 superparasitizing Anastatus bifasciatus....-...---..------- 181-183 Scutellista cyanea, parasite of coffee scale, black scale (Saissetia olex), and Cero- plastes spp., introduction into United States and Italy.... 31 prey ol. .Pedieuloides veniricosus....../.6cued 2 oot 33 ‘Sequence’” of parasites... 6 222 cen ot al ae cin diese ae oe oe 106 of brown-tail moth in Europe.......---..---.------ 135, 136 cipsy moth in Hurepe: yu: ki oes. 131 Japans wPP WL 12 See eee 121 Sericaria mori, host of Crossocosmia sericari#............2220200000002eee ee tee 88 Sigalphus curculionis, parasite of plum curculio, transportation from one part of country to other parts suggested. ..4....-:-----.1 2260 .Si4uo Seth 20 Silkworm, common. (See Sericaria mori.) Japanese (see also Antherea yamamat). “fj? PAMASIGERY 3s kl Uit EO OD Slee A Oe Ce 232-234 Smerinthus ocellatius; host of Zentlha faunas. 2 2255..22) 9. 82 5. Se Se a2 populi, host of Compsilura concinnatas: 2i2wke 2.0 ee 89 Species of insects differing in biological characters only.-.-.-.... 225-226, 257, 285-286 Sphinx ligustri, host of Carcelia excisa.......2+2-.222-02205020082000- _ a 89 Masicera sylvaticns ..)0082 98425. G0e, es ee ee 92 Tricholyg@:, QRONQIS oie ot aan > 4 Dredge = SO 2 ee 88, 92 Spilosoma lubricipeda, host of Compsilura concinnata........--..--------++----- 89 Parexorisia cheloniiee S958. 50 o ce 92 menthastri, host of Compsilura concinnata..........----------+------- 89 Staphylinid beetle, enemy of Ceratitis capitata, introduction into Western Aus- PAIS 2 2 SoS ere enema tte Pant + SR na REM as 39 Staphylinus olens, enemy of earwigs, practical handling.......-...----..------ 18 Starvation as factor in control of Heterocampa .-.::..:.-....---.------=----- 103 inseCtSs a: BUR SSE WA OB RaS ee eae ee 114 Stauropus fagi, host of Compsilura concinnata........-------+--+-++-++----- ne Gea 89 Lygovot pris Gwlve.'. 2. < xa sae ave sae aide a eee 90 INDEX. 339 Page. memoria sates: HOSL Of Carcel exesa 2! sbi! PMA Seas ee ee. 3 89 Nate k NB SOD salah at S NNO URS Bis Ged 8 88 Compsthurt conan. steed, 8S SUSE SS SPO. PIES 89 Parexorist# chelonta 22 rs Pee 28 A JL, 2. 92 TAhvid Larvarant-ns roe re eee eed le 90 Sugar-cane borer (Rhabdocnemis obscurus), quest of parasites for introduction imio tawatian>iglands:<. Seer eee Pe Wa ce SO Sos 36 food plant o1 Perbinsielta sucthariciaG 20 POL TTas DIAN ae ew. bo. 35 Plant ee eee ae, Le SOE, FENTON DEES 35 leafhopper. (See Perkinsiella saccharicida. ) Sycamore, food plant of white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma) 101 Syntomosphyrum esurus, parasite of brown-tail moth in America.... 139, 144, 147-149 eappy amet in“ Amerteres: so00: seis $2 ea) ae Pabst on mye farver ss 2 Oke Rite ee eect eek bee 30 wana dies, prey of Monedula carolina.....-22.... 20.52.25. st shel tales: 45 transmitters of trypanosomiasis of dromedaries..........------- 45 Tachina, biological character separating the species mella and larvarum....-.-. 257 wapouin. Mrons Wiimhier COlOMIZEG ...'2. 322222502. 2el6 hl selg.4522 225. 310 |S SURGE, OAT 0 at aed eae gedaan mabe ape Mien are eee 240 parasite of gipsy moth in Japan, position in ‘‘sequence”’... 121 introduction into United States... 227-228 reared at laboratory. - 2 eos 88 status in United Bitte in 11910... denne 5 308 Teemded HOBiNe eh. 2 foc ee eos Satake - PGS farearam. “ross niimber colonized s...2). F220 SU Pree Ag oe. 310 parasite of brown-tailmoth in Europe, position in SeQuenCe ss eee. See ee 136 introduction into United States 296 reared at laboratory........... 91 status in United States in 1910 308, 309 gipsy moth in Europe, positionin ‘‘sequence”.. 132 introduction into United States, Naps. ee) ee ee ee 225-227 reared at laboratory. .............- 88 recorded in literature.............. 88 status in United States in 1910..... 308 RE GOT SE ya 008s 5 tae Ae et gen ake aa Sd ee ene A ae 90 latifrons, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature........ 91 PECORAGUMMCSI NS oe ee LON BROT UE” aber a ge “‘Tachina-like”’ parasite of gipsy moth, results of rearing work of 1910........ 142 Tachina mella and Tachina larvarum, biological differences................... 286 parasite of brown-tail moth in America................ 93, 145, 147-149 Sifisy meet im 8 Wermeds 8 ok 90, 139-140 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostig- 1 ei le cai ay ny Re Ea 221-223 noctuarum, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature..........-- 88 ETL TG S72 sk 3 010s ita a al At gic hh eS agh pla IO A A eho 90 parasite of gipsy moth, relative abundance in Massachusetts and ae ee tee oh CS TU ee eM at Woe. Ree Sew aes 4 eae 127 LOPE NGS Pee Cin Fn 2 7 Pe a a pe eC Me dagen er ee 207-213 Tachinid flies, rearing and colonization, large cages versus small cages. .....- - 204-207 patasives Gf (he browl-sam moth. 60)... 2 Le ode eee 296-304 SDE ECL SI acy ile Uae ae are © age eee Rig olen eae 202-236 340 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Page. Tachinid puparia, importation and handling ................. ‘wane + atl ae undetermined, parasite of brown-tail moth in America... 145-146, 147-149 Tachinids, host relations, physiological and physical restrictions thereto... -. 202-204 hosts of Melittobiaw.. - 2. G3.e. sitewide Dee ican 4 202 Monodontomerts Breus - wosshauyh aaededs 2s 23 eee 246 miscellaneous, parasites of gipsy moth, results of rearing workof1910. 141 parasites of gipsy moth im Russia... 2.6 pit - welaine ake eee 81, 125 undetermined species, reared from gipsy moth in America........ 141 Txniocampa stabilis, host of Compsilura concinnata........-.....----+--------+ 89 Tapinosiola elyma, host.of Dewodes nigripes:.4) od < sabe 5e acke + ~~ ame eee 88, 91 Telenomus phalenarum, gross number colonized.................----------- 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘sequence "<2 22 eee 136 introduction into United Stakes: 4.5 2 ee 64, 260-261 reared at laboratory. ..... 87 recorded in literature... . 87 status In United States in 1910... ines ae Tent caterpillar (see also Clisiocampa and Malacosoma). control oy; disease... toe iee Sock Se on a. ok 98, 101, 105 host Of Amoi glen COU orice cin 8 ooo ad $a a Se 144 Mampeaum.clasiosginpe.... 2.2 ee 143 Pim pla. congunstiog. i .cncte oo 24.2. ee ee PARAS. ose ote ts ee i ee 102, 104-105 forest. (See Malacosoma disstria.) Tephroclysiva virgaureaia,host.of .Derodes.migripes....-... 2... .-»--«. 42s 88, 91 Tetrastichus xanthomelenex, parasite of elm leaf-beetle (Galerucella luteola), mitroduction tite,Vmied States. 23 05.82 6 Se 2 pe er 39-41, 62-63 Thalvochxres pannonice, host.ol Carcelia excisa......-..--2-.~--. 2. +2 eee 89 Thalpochares cocciphaga, parasite of black scale (Saissetia olex), introductioninto _ United Sha pea cits pti ta ele iE gee oles ke bean 34 Thamnonona wavaria, host of Blepharidea vulgaris.......-..--.---------------- 91 Thanasimus formicarius, enemy of barkbeetles, introduction into United SLAHES. suwectins- o Jc eens eee Rachie pies -'a ss da Psdee see see 36 Thaumetopea pinivora,-best of Denodes nigmpes.......5.... 2... .-25. 88, 91 pliyocampa; hostiet Blepharidea vulgaris... 2... ... 5.2232 eee 91 Compsilura concinnait. . 60. oy ee ae 89 TricholgO Quangis< 35. - x ri ai +n 4 88, 92 processionea, host of Blepharidea vulgaris.......---.----------+--- 91 CANGEIIG, CXCIEO - n.n wna p ne 4ja> 4402 9 ts 89 COMPSIUUTE CONCINNOGE.« 238 26 9+ dae ee 89 EPPO POCENG CVOSSISCIO ? 5 0.2 <5 nico 6 2 Se 89 Poles DAUHG: sen cae uinekes <9 2+ Oke 92 ZCRIUIG LIDGE in matide< ~- - 2-6 eee 90 Thelyotokous hymenopterous parasites, chances of successful establishment in De TRO W COMIUEE «wien eee G0 ee tanner el ta eh G5 Thelyotoky in. Trichogramma. .. ..- 0. 22. on sia be Sak le 2 257, 258 Theronia atalantx, parasite of brown-tail rape in FAODE ||. .s..- jas ee 304 position in “‘se- quence”... . 4 reared at laboratory......-.-..-- 86 recorded in literature.........- 86 INDEX. 341 Page Theronia atalantx, parasite of gipsy moth in Europe..........-.........-.---- 236 position in “‘sequence’”’.. 132 rearea at laboratory. .2....5....-2-..4 85 recorded in literature...........---- 85 fulvescens, not properly a parasite of Pimpla conquisitor.........--..- 137 * parasite of brown-tail moth in America......--.. 144, 147-149, 304 gipsy moth in America......... 137, 141, 142, 236-237 ihost.at, Monodontomerus-areuss 222555 Seo. SI. eck 246 japonica, parasite of gipsy moth in Japan .....--.....---..--------- 236 position in ‘‘sequence’”’..... 121 melanocephala, not known to be parasite of gipsy moth. ......-.....--- 137 Thyridopteryx ephemerxformis, control by caging and permitting parasites to 22 LED EL 2 cigs 25 i Wee BP RR SSR ie aps ieee te alleen aren en agra eee 19 Meee eemMPRE NEUMMPIATOSILCSS 2-2 oo ee os eel et eee See eee eee 41-42 Tmaanarn ama host of Compsilura concinnata-...... 22... 2... ------.22--- 89 iemamemrade man Of Heliothis obsoleta. -. =... 2252-2 2-2 i. bi ei tele seit eet 45 Tomocera californica, parasite of Saissetia olex, transportation from one part of mene aitwuter part suptested : 2.22.22). 52222222. 222.. 525-42 ee ele 21 Torymus anephelus Ratz.= Monodontomerus xreus Walk......-..-------------- 87 Toxocampa pastinum, host of Blepharidea vulgaris............--++-++++++++--- 91 Toxoptera graminum, host of Lysiphlebus tritici, experiments in control by EwEnREmmennen Its parasite.-.0.2-0 00002 PS eli bse eis s2222i.2e ie 2lece 22 Trachea atriplicis, host of Compsilura concinnata...........------------+-++-- 89 Tray, caneleiooted,’’ for brown-tail caterpillars._......-...../5-2..0022---0. 280 Trichiocampus viminalis, host of Compsilura concinnata........-----2-2+--+--- 89 Trichogramma, biological characters separating pretiosa from European pre- ECS GEE SEG TCT ages geal DD te Ahh ee el Re a ee Ee 257 pretiosa-like form, parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in sequence .... 136 introduction into United States, abit ous 22 Sek 256-260 pretiosa, parasite of brown-tail moth in America, habits.. 143, 256-260 Heliothis obsoleta, shipment to Sumatra... . 45 Spy parasite ol Arcps rosmecdia...- = 6s524.29265. 2 5a55 s28 22 259-260 brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘“‘se- TEN STG iio, i Rae apis ge op ac ac: apace aaa iia tebe 136 spp., gross number colonized... ..........-.....- amit abe Sut 310 parasites of brown-tail moth, status in United States in LSI ye og 2 etme tg hy yes Sea denen pecs ice, Wg A ae eR Se 309 sp. I, parasite of brown-tail moth, reared at laboratory........ 87 II, parasite of brown-tail moth, reared at laboratory....... 87 Prcholmga grandis’ vross mumber colonized ~:- 6.2 652222 22 2s heii: 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe....................- 296 position in ‘“‘se- quence” Sto 4. 2225-136 reared at laboratory........... 91 gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence”.. 132 introduction into United States, feeN ON Se oe * ot ees 228-229 reared ab laboratory. 22225252226... 88 - status in United States in 1910....-. 308 ei MEN SS he 00 hiss og pleat Rie tle il lee Vibe ee ee ae 88, 92 842 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Trogoderma tarsale, enemy of gipsy moth. .......-.....-...-... > ceo ie white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leu- COMGDID szis8\o 6 winnie ~ pins 3 ats 252 Trogus flavitorius [sic] lutorius (Fab.)?, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature... - . - 26. . L t ¢ . fi o£ = Py Pl 4 ‘ ‘ . Fy f a ‘ we} a , 4 " A “ . a T a eR 5 Fi - wor % ‘ Pesky ; 4 oe : - = s ¢ — : ‘ nh q> so7.4 - Se a tiie : a7-9 ame “ _ f 4 | » cs, as { \ ¥. % t . po F = . . : ¥ ae x > Ld 4, Rit ' % » Mee } A 7 . 7 f ye ge r af 7 i F a es - i } ; oe - * £ . ’ S. DEPARTMENT. OF AGRICULTURE, te ae _ BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY—BULLETIN No. 1 Pee ns See et Ae i ‘ia 4) hen i: Ye art sd BOP We Slash)" Bae (3 ioe cous iL O. HOWARD, Entomslogt and Chie of Bre, ee eee ott, Sa 2 Py 2 ‘ : : “yt et et ne, . aT el pee i EG y ae : - n THE PARASITES ( OF THE GIPSY OTH _ AND, THE BROWN- TAIL MOTH: i axsoR OF. PROGRESS, ‘WITH SOME. CONSIDERATION or \ i % ee | ; oe >t ss ahs iE BY. ‘ oes a. 6 wowanD. <3). = oak ea gel Chief, Bureau of Entomology, a TE ee ape eas bean ne Naprneyer “AND peas Spies ae see eres \ oo eR RISER, <* ee In Charge, Gigsy Moth Parasite Laboratory, ee : Melrose oo fe my ae Regen as — z ‘ esos sees is z Ae ah :! A S aan oor ~ ; | : A Pees F ¢ + 5 Z ire == am Se a v2 = : aS i! ve < | ane onion non ? eras on ea AT “WASHINGTON: — © Sea) GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 3 No i wt ba a e BS ¢ : 2 2S, % - Rens } > y . * re x ’ Be Poe r ot - “ Sake oe mn f We s a ay = = j Bul. 91, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. CALOSOMA SYCOPHANTA. Adult eating gipsy-moth caterpillar, lower oe alides of gipsy moth, upper right; full grown larve from above and from below. PLATE |. AtoenSLo Ballimare pupa, lower right; eggs, upper left; eaten chrys- (Original. ) 62p CoNGRESS DocuMENT aie HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1 aon oes. DEPARTMENT ?COPr AGRICULTURE, BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY—BULLETIN No. 91. L. O. HOWARD, Entomologist and Chief of Bureau. THE IMPORTATION INTO THE UNITED STATES OF THE PARASITES OF THE GIPSY MOTH AND THE BROWN-TAIL MOTH: A REPORT OF PROGRESS, WITH SOME CONSIDERATION OF PREVIOUS AND CONCURRENT EFFORTS OF THIS KIND. BY L. O. HOWARD, Chief, Bureau of Entomology, AND W. F. FISKE, In Charge, Gigsy Moth Parasite Laboratory, Melrose Highlands, Mass. ©. > ne. il fz k= = Sk ce i i g Q fe ¢: ery oy i] be lb ial will Wil Is lie it ef m i { nf all by ba bu ivy =f}! 4 “SQ e, cf le B 1) : LOGRs OS Cewers NSU orn NNhEsssss> WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1912, BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY. L. O. Howarp, Entomologist and Chief of Bureau. C. L. Maruarr, Entomologist and Acting Chief in Absence of Chief. R. 8. Cirrron, Executive Assistant. W. FE. Taster, Chief Clerk: . H. CairrENDEN, in charge of truck crop and stored product insect investigations. . D. Hopxtins, in charge of forest insect investigations. . D. Hunter, in charge of southern field crop insect investigations. .M. Wesster, in charge of cereal and forage insect investigations. . L. QUAINTANCE, 1n charge of deciduous fruit insect investigations. . F. Puriurps, in charge of bee culture. D. M. Rogers, in charge of preventing spread of moths, field work. Roa P. Currie, in charge of editorial work. Mase CoxicorpD, in charge of library. pigs = PREVENTING SPREAD OF Morass. PARASITE LABORATORY. W. F. Fiske, in charge; A. F. Buresss, C. W. Corimns, R. Woorpriner, J. D. Totum1i, C. W. StockweEL.L, H. E. Smita, W. N. Dovener, F. H. MosHer, assistants. FIELD WORK. D. M. Rogers, in charge; H. B. Darron, H. W. Vinton, DioGl Migr i E. BaiLey, H. L. McIntyre, assistants. 2 be LTE RO TRANSMITTAL. U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Bureau OF ENTOMOLOGY, Washington, D. C., April 12, 1911. Str: I have the honor to transmit herewith the manuscript of a report of progress on the importation into the United States of the parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth. To this has been added some consideration of previous and concurrent efforts to handle the parasites of destructive insects in a practical way. The work with the foreign parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown- tail moth has been going on now for rather more than five years. It promises excellent results, and the present seems the proper time to present to the people interested a somewhat detailed account of what has been done and of the present condition of the work. I recommend that this manuscript be published as Bulletin No. 91 of this bureau. Respectfully, L. O. Howarp, Entomologist and Chef of Bureau. Hon. JAMEs WILson, Secretary of Agriculture. CONTENTS. a da RES ASAE ll ag oa Previous work in the practical SS of natural enemies of injurious insects. - RPE NEMUE RR eee. oe ke Sek ete ae pe ee eee ee ee ee Permitting the parasites to escape..-..... ty BiH, pk be piceab inane platens The transportation of parasites from one part of a given country to another GEE Eee a SRG naan a Soa Tac we Sean ome ae oo See a eee The transfer of beneficial insects from one country to another...-.....-.--- aE aa ea See oo Ne ae a ees A NR ee es wee eae The Australian ladybird (Novius cardinalis Muls.) in the United CETTE DLL ESTES cg ee Ul a pe ee a age a ra Memmteritite ape (Oly. 2-22. soc Peete ees does c ere ece ee -Novius in Egypt and the Hawaiian Islands...-.......-.--.------...--- LO LDUE EE LP LS Te REA ik A ir eal lege a ley ia ELUTE EDL STP NG ig a a ae eeenyige es = 8 Mnadeesiciines ae weasous tor the success of Novius..-_-----..---.----2--.22.---.2.- Introduction of Entedon epigonus Walk. into the United States........ Other introductions by Koebele into California........................ International work with enemies of the black scale.................-. (LE ELIE TEMS re 2a Sa le ee i a a An importation of Clerus from Germany... : bablatiah ict sp atheremadts Marlatt’s journey for enemies of the San Fos ose oeate ae ap aE es ge oR The parasites of Diaspis pentagona Targ......- RSS ee ee eee mmewwerk. or ir. Geore Compere: io 200020032. 2 ee 2 Pe Se Work with the egg parasite of the elm leaf-beetle...................-. Work with parasites of ticks. - : MA eas Mr. Froggatt’s journey to various er of ae aera in n 1907-8... ee ee Other work of this kind (by Berlese; by Silvestri; in Algeria; in the Philippines; by De Bussy; in Peru) ng pe Mh it, hs genie Dae ble gl ae Early ideas on introducing the natural enemies of the gipsy moth............... Circumstances which brought about the actual beginning of the work.......... PE everrioaLion of the amtroduction work. ./..........2- 2-2-2222. ele eee Mereative Of the propress Of the works. .-22. 222. J.22:,5.25.5222. 50 le el ee: Known and recorded parasites of the gipsy moth and of the brown-tail moth... Establishment and dispersion of the newly introduced parasites............... Disease as a factor in the natural control of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail Studies in the parasitism #native insects. . Parasitism as a factor in insect control.. The rate of increase of the gipsy moth in eer Bee iad oe Amount of additional control necessary to check the increase at nee gipsy eanerh The extent to which the gipsy moth is controlled through parasitism abroad. - - - Parasitism of the gipsy TAGE te Saale Gee sas SO NS La Parasitism of the gipsy moth in Russia.. eee Parasitism of the gipsy moth in southern Rowe 102 105 109 114 117 120 123 129 6 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. , Page. Sequence of parasites of the gipsy moth in Europe.....................5005 ee 31 The brown-tail moth and its parasites in Europe...........-.......: 4.20 ene 132 Sequence of parasites of the brown-tail moth in Europe.........- etc 135 Parasitism of the gipsy moth in America...:.../.11.1..........) 3 136 Summary of rearing work carried on at the laboratory in 1910 ............. 141 Parasitism of the brown-tail moth in America....2:................. eo Summary of rearing.work in 1910 ...............-+..-.-..).-..55 eee 146 Importation and handling of parasite material....-.-.,.:...4.2-4-.9. ee 152 Hge masses of the gipsy moth.........2.<..-2..«--2.---- 2 152 Gipsy-moth caterpillars, first stage... .% .2.-. 2-0 <.- 44042-2005 ee 153 Gipsy-moth caterpillars, second t@ fifth stages........-... 2... - ee 154 Kuropean importations........-..-<2..-05----:.-+s.5)50) rr 154 Japanese importations. ...--..0-- 22-6 -e< - “edn oe rr 155 Gipsy-moth caterpillars, full-fed and pupating.................. Sees 156 Gipsy-moth PMUpe s.. .-6)e) saeedinene ech nate. Sale ee ee 159 Brown-tail moth egg masses.........-..:....-._-....----2 2 160 Hibernating nests of the brown-tail moth.............-.2...4, 9850) eee 161 Immature caterpillars of the brown-tail moth....-..........92 2 eee 161 Full-fed and pupating caterpillars of the brown-tail moth.................- 162 Brown-tail moth pupe:...2. 2. -2...h4/ 2.424 54854 72< cere aoe 164 Cocoons of hymenopterous parasites............-..-....+.. 95 165 Pepehimiey pupae. 265.200 ule os he delceeeeeetesds tle. 166 Calosoma and other predaceous beetles......:............2.-.0 epee ee Quantity of parasite material. imported... -.......... ~~~. 21: 40322 pee 167 Localities from which the parasite material has been received...............-- 168 The ege parasites of the gipsy moth... ..2.5.-..0 2. +..4¢2-5-550. 168 Anastaius bifasciatus Fomse......2.-.--2.0+-5.-+---45- 3 eee 168 Schedius kuvonz How. «22... 260. 26 oc se 3 seen ee eee 176 Life of Schedius and its relations to other egg parasites, primary and secondary 0. 2..------ one = ode eae oe £77 Rearing and colonization .......-..-2265-244)....752 7 eee 184 The parasites of the gipsy-moth caterpillars,.........._........ 4-2 188 Apparently unimportant hymenopterous parasites..¢:...:....- 3. ee 188 Apanteles solitarius Ratz.n< 232. -en-22 db a-e oe-e Ae ok eee 189 Metgorus. versicolor. West: oe a oot te ae cae eee ee 190 Meteorus pulchricornis WeSM.. - .-.002 —- ~~~ 22030 on 4 - ae 190 Meteorus japonicus Ashm..0-:~+.<+.-..- Line ene = sel pee 190 Limnertum disparis, ViCP econ hte cela wale odie oS a 191 _ Limnerium (Anilastus) tricoloripes Vier «... ~~~ -.-= =< 42-<--=5 192 Apanteles fulvipes Hal......+-0.02---5---422- -ee 2 sje de eee 193 Secondary parasites attacking Apanteles fulvipes............-.---- 2 Sy ea ON Tachinid parasites of the.gipsy moth. .....<... 2... 4-2-0. 4.20) 4202 The rearing and colonization of tachinid flies; large cages versus small cages.. 204 Hyperparasites attacking the Tachinide............:......... 207 Perilampus cuprinus Forst.... 2. = --=22004 42-22 ee 4-2 ee 208 Mehitobia acasta Walk.......---<- 5-4. SSeeeeet 22). 4d oe ee 209 Chaleis fisket Crawl... : -sabeet)-wasdl> ge aber wite ihe ee 212 Monodontomerus zreus Walk. xo. 4: speeeeou: 2eeteies 4a 212 Miscellaneous parasites... 2. .- os s5/84- eas oe oh be 213 Blepharipa scutellata Desvie.-+<- + >see ae ee eee 225 Tachina japonica TOWNS: - ..- +=. 2s 4 -a2=genbe He Alege jeep ee 227 CONTENTS. Tachinid parasites of the gipsy moth—Continued. BORO S 2G G n Me ee GTEUMEM CONC... 300 ee es ee ee Se ee eee ne or eneree 2 ae ee eae Je ek eee eee bee ee NE CEERI CUD VG) 0S PERM NC aries CONN. saa. 2. se te ek SIRES Le eee ee cee ee eras avoscuvenam Schiner (?)....0..2-.02.-2--5--2 02-2 ee eee Mmm portant tachinid parasites of the g:psy moth.......2...-......----..--- Peete TOL WHE Sipsy-MOth PUpe._...2....-..--.-- 222+ eee ee eee eee eee eee eee (oe EE LTS SIGINT RLS 2 Bee ee ee ae a ach aia a ere (2 RSLS) CETUDIND 2 2 2 SEIS Sees Cre See end ae tie nea Ichneumon lee Poda..- The genus Chalcis- . pe Ae es A Monodontomerus xreus nee 2 a Se Se On ae een ot a pumas TCHS ee Sy ee RI ee I Pl dae ed a tua LE YEUNG SGU C@E ESE ae te ene ae ene an en ee fees earacites of the brown-tail moth. ........-.-- 2. 2.2222- 4-22 2¢-5+ sees: 1 SRLS UNS GLTONCT 2 00.1727 ga mn em mnupnianenaniM NGCCS foe 222k ea kin Sipe Sa need wee eee tees sete snes Parasites which hibernate within the webs of the brown-tail moth............. Pe eMC MHACOSHS NI@WiMi. = bac. 5ck 9 c.n.che ape oom wha a SA ness wine wd oe ee OPS GR BURUES LETS a ee MPC COUNT a he fo ws ae ae eee oP ES COIS DASE NE) ee ee Metcorius versicolor Wesm..:........-...---- EE soe nen eer ae eae tem SE USM NON cS Se a Parasites attacking the larger caterpillars of the brown-tail moth.............. 22 EE ELL GP SRG USP ORT ST eS ee 8p LENG [ELISE a <2 SS ee ee LED EES PIES 2 I CRORES eR STE Pe eg a ene en een gree ee CLORISHINGOCIONUA ANON 5 2. oes oy ie et bes «5 gins snes see Pales pavida Meig...-.-. bE he Ee ee BR EO Oe RR ates, RE ae BieroracrmnnOen Gitmo pio ale 2 ee LS he ad ke doa take e hs oes ae oe Ue rrree cme RN NN ee ooh a ah cpen = ape mings GH mjaye a ed's os ei ew oe OO TOMA NOM MUOMINVCOMNIS: HOU. cia. 2) ims = = msc Sinise is amie vee wee oe en ye ee aT CISET, NOMMGS 2 ott eswyleiel Jd. ola See dehond h. 182 2a achyneuron. gifuensis:. Larval mandibles: .- 22... 202...0200 422.22... 182 2G anustauss bifasciaius: Larval mandibles. - 20... 222222. 2.2. ee 182 27. Gipsy-moth egg mass showing exit holes of Schedius kuvane......... 186 28. Apantales solitarius: Adult female and cocoon ..-................... 189 Parma Gis paris. OOCOOM.0.2. 2. 20s be ee ee oe 191 einanenium, aspuris:) Nault males st... sessed eee. eb ee see ll. 191 ne amiaclesye ad pes) NOULE 229050 Se Ss Sec eek. evade eee. 193 32. Apanteles fulvipes: Larve leaving gipsy-moth caterpillar............. 194. 33. Apanteles fulvipes: Cocoons surrounding dead gipsy-moth caterpillar.. 195 34. Apanteles fulvipes: Cocoons from which Apanteles and its secondaries emeNISSeOe eres he Mee Sets oh oe Dee eee S Cg Stab k Ne SE 199 nae eeprearipascutcllata: Adult females 2.2222 .208s.s. Piel e O81 4 213 36. Blepharipa scutellata: Eggsin situ on fragment of leaf...........-.... 214 37. Eggs of Blepharipa scutellata and Pales pavida......--- ae Le 214 Semienparina sculellata: Pirst-stage larvee.-.........---.-------.-----4- 215 39. Blepharipa scutellata: Second-stage larva in situ..........-------.--- at 40. Blepharipa scutellata: Basal portion of tracheal ‘‘funnel”...........-- 216 41. Compsilura concinnata: Adult female and details.-..............-..- 219 42. Map showing distribution of Compsilura concinnata in Massachusetts. 222 43. Tachina larvarum: Adult female and head in profile..-......-....... 225 PMC mamipess INGUIN. 2 252s 20 oa) ie be dake ete ‘a ba " iv ‘s tee a +. Les © s7* i : 4 3 ie i ». é t; # f . ‘ ‘ ; a F 3 % a 7 £ « : eo ' S NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. 57 After Portici, Florence was visited, where a conference was held with Prof. A. Berlese, of the Royal Station of Agricultural Ento- -mology, and his assistants, Drs. Del Guercio and Ribaga. It seemed that no occurrences of either the gipsy moth or the brown-tail moth were known that season in Tuscany or adjoining portions of Italy. Prof. Berlese spoke of the destruction of an outbreak of the gipsy moth in southern Italy some years previously by a disease which he considered to be identical with the pébrine of the domestic silk- worm. He promised to keep up a watch for occurrences of the pests and wherever possible to assist in the introduction of parasites. A few days were then spent in Lombardy, searching for the larve of either of the injurious species,. but without success. Then, pro- ceeding to Vienna, the celebrated Natural History Museum was visited and the well-known curator of Lepidoptera, Dr. Hans Rebel, was interviewed. Dr. Rebel stated that both the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth were to be found rather commonly in parts of Austria, and it was decided to employ a professional collector to assist in the work of shipping larve to Boston. Upon Dr. Rebel’s recommendation, Mr. Fritz Wagner was employed. Mr. Wagner was and is a resident of Vienna, is well versed in the subject of European butterflies and moths, and perfectly familiar with all the best collecting places for many miles about Vienna. Mr. Wagner accompanied the writer on several expeditions. The first trip was taken to the suburbs of Vienna, and there the first European specimen of the gipsy-moth larva was found. It was resting on the trunk of a locust tree by the side of the street, and further examination showed that there were a hundred or more caterpillars on the trunk and limbs of the same tree. There was some evidence of parasitism, and the white cocoons of a microgaster parasite (Apanteles fulvipes Hal.) were found here and there in the crevices of the bark. This particular tree and another one, to be mentioned later, indicate very well the condition of the gipsy moth in Europe. A hundred nearly full-grown larve were present, but there was hardly any evidence of defoliation. A trained ento- mologist walking by the tree would not have noticed that insects had been feeding upon it to any serious extent. On the other hand, a similar tree in any of the small towns about Boston would have carried not 100 larve, but probably some thousands, and at that time of the year would hardly have had a whole leaf. These specimens were collected and sent to Boston. Later a trip was taken into the country to the battlefield of Wa- gram, and here on two roadside poplars was found another colony of the caterpillars ranging in size from the second stage to full-grown larvee. ‘There was here more extensive evidence of parasitism by 58 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. microgaster parasites. ‘Their white cocoons were found abundantly, and here again, although there must have been 250 or more larvee on the trees, the evidences of defoliation were very slight—so much so that at a rather short distance the trees appeared in full leaf. Dur- ing the remainder of June and July Mr. Wagner continued the search and sent considerable material to Mr. Kirkland, at Boston. After Vienna, the city of Budapest was visited. At the Natural History Museum in that city Dr. G. Horvath, the well-known director, and Prof. Alexander Mocsary were consulted, Prof. Mocsary being one of the first authorities in Europe on the subject of parasitic Hymen- _optera. Neither of these gentlemen, however, was able to give any new points in connection with the parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth. The agricultural experiment station in the sub- urbs of Pesth was then visited, and Prof. Josef Jablonowski, the entomologist of the station, was consulted. By this time it was the 4th of July, and already the season in Hungary was far advanced, being about two weeks or more earlier there than at Vienna. Prof. Jablonowski stated that gipsy moths had been found in certain localities in Transylvania, but that the adults were already issuing and that the brown-tail moths had been flying for some time. He exhibited, however, a large box full of the previous winter’s nests of brown-tail larve, and stated that in the early spring he had reared from these nests many hundreds of parasitic insects. This at once seemed to indicate a very easy way of importing such parasites, since these nests could be readily collected in the winter in large numbers and sent to Boston in great packages—a bushel or more in each package—in the late fall or winter season, and Prof. Jablonowski volunteered to make every effort the following winter to send over a large quantity. Taking into consideration the small size of the brown-tail moth caterpillars during hibernation, it seemed very strange that they should be so extensively parasitized as indicated by Jablonowski. The larger caterpillars in the late spring and early summer would seem to be much more likely to be extensively infested. These winter nests, remaining alone on the trees after the leaves have fallen, would seem to be an attractive place for small Hymenoptera of various kinds, in which they might seek shelter for hibernation, and, while of course there was a chance that some of the true parasites of later stages might thus be sheltered, it was with considerable doubts as to the ultimate result that the writer arranged for the importation of these nests in large quantity. Even if unsuccessful, however, it seemed that the experiment must be tried. From Budapest, Dresden was reached, and, as in Vienna and Budapest, the principal museum (the Zoological Ethnological Museum) was at once visited. Dr. K. M. Heller, at that time acting director of the museum, was asked to recommend a good man who NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. 59 might be employed as a professional collector to undertake work in the same manner as that done by Fritz Wagner in Vienna. Dr. Heller recommended Mr. Edward Schopfer, who was at once engaged. Although at the date of the first visit to him the season was already considerably advanced (July 7), Mr. Schopfer had rearing cages in operation in his rooms, and in these cages were a number of nearly full-grown larve of the gipsy moth. He knew the localities about Dresden where these insects were to be found, and at once began sending specimens to Boston. The well-known Forest Academy at Tharandt, near Dresden, was visited, and Prof. Arnold Jacobi and his assistant, Mr. W. Baer, were interested and promised assistance, especially in the matter of sending specimens of Calosoma sycophanta (see Pl. I, frontispiece) and C. inqusitor. Other trips were made in the vicinity of Dresden, and then the journey was resumed to Zurich, where, through the kindness of Dr. Herbert Haviland Field, director of the Concilium Bibliographicum Zoologicum, the writer met Miss Marie Ruhl, editor of the Societas Entomologica, a very well-posted entomologist, especially on matters relating to Lepidop- tera, who had and has a large correspondence throughout northern Germany. She was engaged as the official agent of the investigation for that part of Germany and was able, through her own work and that of her correspondents, to send a large amount of material to Boston before the close of the season of 1905, and has since continued the work. From Zurich the trip was resumed to Paris, where some time was spent in interviewing Dr. Paul Marchal, the entomologist of the agricultural school conducted under the ministry of agriculture, and other entomologists, and in visiting the scientific societies for the pur- pose of interesting naturalists in the work. Many trips were taken to towns around Paris in search of the pup of the gipsy moth and to visit local collectors in search of information, after which the return journey was made to America. The result of this initial trip was to demonstrate that it is an easy matter and a comparatively inexpensive one to import certain of the parasites of both the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth in living condition into the United States. The most important part of the European range of the two species was visited, and the entomologists were organized into an active body of assistants. Mention has already been made of the number of boxes sent in by Dr. Leonardi from Sardinia. Ten boxes were shipped by Fritz Wag- ner from Vienna, 47 boxes from Schopfer in Dresden, and 36 from Miss Rithl in Zurich, all of these containing parasitized larvee or pupe of the gipsy moth or brown-tail moth. Acting upon Prof. Jablonowski’s observations concerning the existence of parasites in the wintering nests of the brown-tail moth, a >i Siton | i 60 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. | arrangements were made with Miss Rihl, Mr. Schopfer, Prof. A. J. Cook, who was then in Berlin, and several volunteer collectors to send in numbers of the winter nests. During his visit to Paris in July, the chief of the bureau had addressed a meeting of the Entomological Society of France on the subject of his mission and asked the members of the society to assist in the work. The most remarkable response to this request came from Mr. Rene Oberthiir, of Rennes, who, although not present at the meeting, read the account in the bulletin of the society, and placed himself and his services entirely at the disposal of the United States authorities. During the autvmn of 1905 and the winter of 1905-6 he sent to Boston more than 10,000 winter nests of the brown-tail moth. In all, 117,000 nests were received and cared for during that winter. | In the autumn the laboratory house (PI. II, fig. 1, p. 56) at North Saugus was taken possession of by Mr. Kirkland, fitted up as pre- viously described, and occupied by Mr. Mosher; the parasite material from Malden was brought over and installed, and arrangements were made for the receipt of the brown-tail winter nests. Very many large boxes were constructed, somewhat on the plan of the Cali- fornia parasite-rearing cage, each one large enough to contain from 500 to 1,000 nests of the brown-tail moth, the front being pierced with auger holes in which were inserted round-bottom glass tubes into which the emerging parasites would come in search of light and through which they might be examined to differentiate between the primaries and the hyperparasites. Much carpenter work was done during the autumn and winter months and on into the spring. Double windows and double doors were provided, and every crack in the laboratory rooms was sealed. Realizing that many different kinds of insects might emerge from this large supply of silken nests, _ including possibly species injurious to agriculture not previously introduced into the United States, as well as dangerous parasites of beneficial insects, every possible effort was made to prevent the escape of any insect whatever from the laboratory rooms. On account of the importance of a speedy detection of injurious forms coming from these rearing cages, and on account of the necessity for the most expert supervision of the laboratory end of the experiment, Mr. E. S. G. Titus, an especially well trained expert from the Bureau of Entomology, was assigned in the spring of 1906 to the charge of the laboratory end of the introduction. In March, 1906, Mr. Titus, with the chief of the bureau and with Mr. Kirkland and Mr. Mosher, visited the parasite laboratory, and for the first time examined the contents of the imported nests. There were in the different cages, well separated as to localities, winter nests from almost the whele of the European range of the brown-tail moth,:from Transylvania on the southeast to Brittany i NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. 61 on the northwest, and from the Pyrenees on the southwest to the shores of the Baltic on the northeast. In spite of the voluntary assistance of such men as Rene Oberthiir and Josef Jablonowski, the expense of getting these nests to Boston had been very considerable, and the moment when this examination was begun was considered to be rather a critical one. No published record of the rearing of parasites from these winter nests was recalled by the senior author or by any of his European correspondents, and the expensive experi- ment rested solely on the unpublished observation of Jablonowski, and he himself had simply seen parasites emerge from nests in the spring. Would they prove useless? Had the parasitic insects, even if useful, simply crawled into the nests for hibernation? Or were they, some of them, true parasites of the young larve? Representative nests were examined from a number of different localities, and the relief and joy were great when parasitic larve were found in considerable numbers in each of the nests examined, feeding within the nest pockets externally upon the brown-tail larve. This particular experiment was a success, and the expenditure of money and trouble was justified. About April 25 these parasites began to issue from the nests. The nests had been gathered in all from 33 different localities, and from some of them only a small number of parasites was reared. In all, about 70,000 issued, of which about 8 per cent were hyperparasites. In the rearing cages above mentioned it was a comparatively easy matter for Mr. Titus to separate the hyperparasites from the true parasites and to destroy the former. Of the species issuing in that spring—and they continued to issue until about June 15—there were two species which appeared to be important, namely Pteromalus egregius Férst. and Habrobracon brevicornis Wesm. The latter species proved later to have entered the nests for hibernation only. With the cooperation of Mr. Kirkland, several localities were found in which there was slight danger of forest fire and in which no work against the moths would apparently be undertaken for at least some months to come, and colonies of various sizes—the three principal ones including, respectively, 10,000, 15,000, and 25,000 parasites— were liberated in the open. Outdoor cages had been built over trees, and some smaller colonies of the parasites were placed in these cages. Both the outdoor experiments and the open experiments were seriously hampered, however, by the fact that the season proved to be one of extraordinary humidity, which caused the appearance of a fungous disease which destroyed a large proportion of the brown-tail moth larve in the vicinity of Boston. Coincident with the issuing of these parasites from the nests, as the season grew warm the young larve swarmed from the nests and filled the glass tubes in the breeding cages and were constantly being destroyed by the assistants in the laboratory, and when. the parasites 62 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. ceased to issue the remaining nests and larve were burned. But later observations showed this destruction to have been a mistake. It was not considered likely that other parasites could be reared from these imported larve if they were fed and reared as far as pos- sible, but such proved to be the case, as will be shown later. During the winter of 1905-6 efforts were made to import in winter- ing conditions the two large European ground-beetles, Calosoma sycophanta (see Pl. I, frontispiece) and (C. wnquisitor. No success in importing living specimens was gained until March, 1906, but from that time on until July small consignments of living adult beetles were received, and in all 690 living specimens of Calosoma sycophanta and 172 of C. wnquisitor arrived at Boston alive, some of them dying soon after arrival. Colonies were started in various localities about Boston. Consideration of the history of these two species will be given in Bulletin 101. After visiting the parasite laboratory in March and determining the success of the importation of the brown-tail nests, the senior author sailed from New York on the 17th of the month for Europe, returning to America May 17. | Proceeding directly to Paris, Mr. Rene Oberthiir was met by appoint- ment, and the whole subject of the summer work was carefully con- sidered. Mr. Oberthir is a man of affairs, proprietor of a large printing business, a learned amateur entomologist, and the possessor of one of the largest insect collections in the world. His advice and assistance throughout the whole work has been most important, and he assures the American representatives that he has highly appre- ciated the opportunity of being of assistance and of taking part in such an interesting piece of work. At his advice the writer proceeded to the south of France, after interviewing correspondents and agents in Paris, and visited Prof. Valery Mayet at the agricultural school at Montpellier, Dr. P. Siepi, of the Zoological Gardens in Marseilles, and Mr. Harold Powell, of Hyéres. Both Prof. Mayet and Dr. Siepi stated that both of the injurious species of insects were rare in their vicinity, but both promised to assist in the importation of the Calosoma beetles. Mr. Powell proved to be a lepidopterist who had been employed professionally by Mr. Oberthir as a collector, and he was engaged to collect parasitized larve in Hyéres and in the Enghadine district. He sent inmuch good material, and later, as will be shown in subsequent pages, organized a very efficient service in the summer of 1909. The visit to Prof. Mayet at Montpellier, moreover, was by no means devoid of results, since at a later date he was able to send a few specimens of carabid beetles, and in 1908, as a result of this personal interview, he was able to send to America the first living specimens of the European egg parasite of the imported elm leaf- beetle, Tetrastichus xanthomelene Marchal, which, as a result of this i Pee NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. 63 sending, is now possibly established in New England, although it was not recovered during the summers of 1909 and 1910. While at Marseilles interviewing Dr. Siepi, April 10, the news was received of the eruption of Vesuvius and the partial destruction by lava flow of Boscatrecase and other villages on the slope of Vesuvius. Having to interview Prof. Silvestri and Dr. Leonardi at Portici, and fearing for their safety, the visitor proceeded at once to Naples, arriving there the day of the great market-house accident in which the roof fell in from the weight of volcanic ash and a number of persons were killed. Everything in Naples was in a state of con- fusion; the streets were filled with volcanic ash almost knee-deep, and it was with great difficulty that a conveyance could be secured to drive to Portici. Portici is almost on a direct line between Naples and Mount Vesuvius, and the agricultural college was found to be in bad condition; the gardens were utterly destroyed by ashes, and the roof of the old building was deeply covered. The accident happened the week before Easter, and the majority of the faculty and students had, on account of the catastrophe, anticipated their Easter vacations | and had departed for their homes, Silvestri and Leonardi among the rest. Letters were forwarded to them, however, giving detailed suggestions as to methods of packing and shipment of parasites. As in 190%, Florence, Milan, Vienna, Budapest, Dresden, Tharandt, and Zurich were visited. Efforts were made to learn of localities where either the gipsy moth or the brown-tail moth might reasonably be expected to be abundant during the summer of 1906, and a number of such localities were learned and the information given to agents. All of the agents and correspondents were given full instructions regarding the work for the summer of 1906 and the winter of 1907. The experience of 1905 with regard to the best methods of packing and shipment and the best kinds of boxes used was related to all, and these points were fully discussed, with the result that the material received during the summer of 1906 was not only greater in quantity but better in condition than that received during the previous summer. In Vienna the visitor had the good fortune to find Dr. Gustav Mayr, whom he had missed in the summer of 1905. Dr. Mayr (since deceased) was the European authority, on several of the groups of parasites most intimately connected with the work in hand, and the writer had a long consultation with him concerning the systematic position of some of the forms already imported and concerning the practical possibilities of the whole series of Microhymenoptera. Through him was learned the probable importance of certain egg parasites of the brown-tail moth, which he himself had reared in Europe and had described. As a result of this information the agents visited later were instructed to send over egg masses of the > ae x a4. 64 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. brown-tail moth to Massachusetts in midsummer, and later to send over egg masses of the gipsy moth. From the brown-tail moth egg masses parasites were reared by Mr. Titus at North Saugus and were observed to oviposit in native eggs. Mr. Titus reared not only the species referred to by Dr. Mayr, namely, Telenomus phalz- narum Nees, which came from eggs forwarded by Miss Rithl and collected in Croatia, but he also reared an interesting parasite of the genus Trichogramma from egg masses received from Wiirtemberg, Dalmatia, and Rhenish Prussia. At Biailtepast the visitor was especially glad to be ee: to announce to Prof. Jablonowski the success of the rearings of parasites from the winter nests of the brown-tail moth, so many of which had been brought over from Europe the previous winter on the basis of Jablo- nowski’s unpublished observations. At the time of this visit Prof. Jablonowski was too busy completing his important work upon the migratory grasshoppers invading Hungary to be able to promise much, assistance beyond that of corresponding with foresters and other persons well located in Hungary in order to obtain information as to good places to secure material. Returning to America about the end of May, the laboratory at North Saugus was again visited, with Mr. Kirkland and Mr. Titus, and the work of preparing indoor cages and field cages was pushed. In the course of the summer a number of outdoor houses were con- structed, and in these houses it was hoped to study the breeding habits of the imported insects. During the summer the number of shipments received from Europe was so large that Mr. Kirkland made no attempt to list them in his Second Annual Report published January 1, 1907. In June, in ad- dition to egg masses previously mentioned, larve and pupe of both the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth were received in number from many different European localities, and from these a large number of parasites of several different species were reared, the most abund- ant having been tachina flies. In one lot received from Holland more tachinids were reared than there were gipsy moth caterpillars orig- inally. Nearly 40,000 gipsy-moth larve and pup were received and more than 35,000 brown-tail moth larve and pupe. The receipt of predatory beetles is recorded in a previous paragraph. It will be noticed that in the work conducted so far the effort to import parasites was confined to the continent of Europe west of Russia, whereas the well-known occurrence at intervals in large numbers of the gipsy moth in parts of Russia, and especially in southern Russia (a very good account of which will be found in the Third Report on the Gipsy Moth, by Forbush and Fernald), seemed to render it desirable that search should be made in those regions for parasites, The fact, however, that during these two years = NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. 65 the writer had been unable to secure answers to letters addressed to correspondents in Russia and the reported unsettled condition of affairs in that country deterred him during the 1905 and 1906 trips from visiting the Russian southern Provinces. In the late summer of 1906, however, advices were received from Prof. J. Por- _ chinsky, of the ministry of agriculture at St. Petersburg, with the information that in the southern part of Russia both the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth were at that time occurring in sufficiently great numbers to enable the collection of parasites and commending the writer to certain officials, trained entomologists, in Simferopol (Crimea), Kishenef (Bessarabia), and Kief. Prof. Porchinsky wrote that he had apprised these officials of the intended visit, and plans were therefore made to include southern Russia in the itinerary for the spring of 1907. During the autumn of 1906 egg masses of the gipsy moth con- tinued to be received from parts of Europe, and during the winter hibernating nests of the brown-tail moth were sent in. More than 111,000 nests were received from different portions of the European range of the species. These were placed in the especially constructed cages, and from many of them large numbers of parasites were reared, issuing mainly during the month of May, 1907. As it hap- pened, the month of May in New England, as well as in other parts of the United States, was phenomenally cold and wet. As a result of this unlooked-for condition very many of the parasites refused to leave the nests until they were so weakened as to be unable to survive the close confinement and careful scrutiny to which they were necessarily subjected in order to eliminate the danger of intro- ducing secondary parasites. As a result, a smaller number of Ptero- malus egregvus was colonized in the summer of 1906, but 40,000 speci- mens were put out in several localities, the principal colonies consist- ing, respectively, of 13,000, 11,000, and 7,000 individuals. At this time, as well as in the summer of 1906, although this fact has not as yet been stated, a number of important parasites of the genus Mono- dontomerus issued from the winter nests and were allowed to escape. As will be shown subsequently, this parasite has proved to be more ‘important than the Pteromalus and has made a phenomenal spread. -in this important work with the introduced hibernation nests of the brown-tail moth it was early found most difficult to preserve the health of the laboratory assistants. The irritating and poisonous hairs of the brown-tail moth larve, of which the nests are full, soon penetrated the skin of the assistants handling them, entered their eyes and throats, and the atmosphere of the laboratory became almost filled with them. Jt was necessary that the rooms should be kept thoroughly closed; double windows and screens were used, 62188°—Bull. 91—12——5 a 66 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. and the doors of the rooms were doubled, in order that a possible secondary parasite, if accidentally liberated, should have no chance of escape. This made the rooms very warm and increased the irritating effect of the larval hairs. Some of the assistants employed could not stand the work and resigned. One of the best and most experienced helpers was induced to continue the second year only upon the promise that he would be relieved from this especial class of work. Spectacles, gloves, masks, and even headpieces were invented to avoid this difficulty, but these, while greatly increasing the suffer- ing from the heat, were not entirely effective. The most serious result of this trouble was the breaking down in health of Mr. E. S. G. Titus of the bureau, in charge of the laboratory at Saugus, who was obliged to resign in May, 1907, on his physician’s advice, in order to save his life. The difficulty in Mr. Titus’s case was the intense irritation to his lungs from the entrance of the barbed hairs. Mr. Titus was soon after appointed entomologist of the Utah Agricul- tural Experiment Station, and the change of work and climate fortunately brought about a speedy recovery. His necessitated departure in the midst of important work, however, threw us into what appeared to be a serious dilemma, but fortunately it so hap- pened that the services of the junior author, then occupying another position in the Bureau of Entomology in Washington, could be spared from the other work upon which he had been engaged, and, since he had made especial studies of the parasitic Hymenoptera and had done a large amount of rearing of parasites in the course of his other work, he was sent on from Washington to replace Mr. Titus in the parasite laboratory and has since had charge of the laboratory. One of the early points to which the junior author devoted his attention was the invention of new methods of handling the brown- tail nests in order to avoid the serious effect upon the work of the breaking out of the rash on himself and his assistants. He soon devised an apparatus like the ordinary show cases that are seen in shops, the glass on one side being replaced by cloth with armholes, through which the gloved hands of the worker could be thrust and the brown-tail nests handled in full sight through the top glass. Most of the work with these nests, it has been found, can be done in these cases with a minimum escape of the barbed hairs. There stall continued, however, considerable trouble from the rash, since much rearing of brown-tail larve must be carried on under conditions in which such cases can not be used, and this difficulty still exists. — Miss Ruhl, of Zurich, in handling and repacking the large number of nests sent to her by her European correspondents and forwarded by her to Boston, has been a great sufferer from the rash. She has made for herself a complete costume of an especially finely woven cloth, and has made a large light helmet covered with cloth and provided NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. 67 with a cape, the space opposite the eyes being fitted with a sheet of very transparent celluloid. Of course this costume would be very uncomfortable in the summer time on account of the heat, but since she handles her nests for the most part in the autumn and winter, she has been able to reduce the discomfort of the brown-tail rash to a minimum. Sailing again for Europe on April 20, 1907, the senior author landed at Cherbourg and proceeded directly to Paris, and from Paris to Budapest by the Oriental Express. At Budapest, by prearrange- ment, he met Mr. Alexander Pichler, whom he had engaged as a guide and courier for the Russian trip. After a conference at Buda- pest with Dr. Horvath and Prof. Mocsary, of the Natural History Museum, and Prof. Jablonowski, of the agricultural station, he pro- ceeded to Kief, via Lemburg. Prof. Porchinsky, of the ministry of agriculture, had arranged with Prof. Waldemar Pospielow, of the University of Kief, to consult with the Chief of the Bureau of Ento- mology about future arrangements, and a conference with Prof. Pospielow was held, in the course of which it was agreed that one of Pospielow’s assistants, engaged especially for the purpose, at 34 rubles per month, should occupy himself throughout the summer, | under Pospielow’s directions, in collecting larve of the gipsy moth and brown-tail moth, forwarding material to Boston, rearing and studying the parasites, and conducting observations in an orchard in the suburbs of Kief, rented by the writer for the State of Massa- chusetts for the summer at the rate of 20 rubles per month. This procedure was novel in the work, but was later tried in another locality, as will be shown in subsequent pages. From Kief, Pichler and the visitor proceeded to Odessa and from Odessa to Kishenef, at which point he had been recommended to Dr. Isaak Krassilstschik by Prof. Porchinsky. Through some mis- understanding as to dates, owing to the difference between the Russian calendar and the one in use in other parts of the world, Prof. Krassilstschik had mistaken the date of arrival announced in the letter sent in advance, and was absent from Kishenef on a brief visit to Germany. Full written instructions, however, were left for him at Kishenef, and the visitor returned to Odessa and thence by boat to Sebastopol, and by train to Simferopol. At Simferopol he was expected by Prof. Sigismond Mokshetsky, the director of the Museum of Natural History at that place and an enthusiastic economic ento- mologist, through whose efforts American methods in the warfare against insects had been introduced into southern Russia. Prof. Mokshetsky had done some rearing of the Russian parasites of both the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth, and was able to furnish much valuable information. His hospitality and cordiality were of the most encouraging nature, and after consultation as to the best 68 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. methods, he promised his hearty support to the work, refusing, how- ever, to accept any compensation from the State of Massachusetts or from the United States Government. | The visitor then proceeded by boat from Sebastopol to Con- stantinople, but was unable to learn of any person in Turkey having any information on the subject of insect pests, nor was he able in the country about Constantinople to find any indication of the occurrence of either gipsy moth or brown-tail moth. Leaving Constantinople, the expedition proceeded to Vienna, drop- ping Mr. Pichler at Budapest. At Vienna the Seventh International Congress of Agriculture was held, beginning May 22, 1907. The visitor met there a number of delegates from the different countries in Europe, with whom he discussed the question of parasite importa- tion, receiving warm assurances of support, especially from Prof. Dr. Max Hollrung, of the Agricultural Department of the University of Halle, Prof. Dr. Karl Eckstein, of the Forest Academy at Ebers- walde, and Prof. Dr. J. Ritzema Bos, director of the Phytopatho- logical Station at Wageningen, Holland. While in Vienna arrange- ments were made with Mr. Fritz Wagner for continuance of the work, and a further consultation on the subject of parasites was held with Dr. Gustav Mayr. After Vienna, Mr. Schopfer was visited in Dresden, Dr. Hollrung at Halle, Dr. R. Heymons in Berlin, Dr. Eckstein in Eberswalde, Miss Riihl at Zurich, and Prof. G. Severin at Brussels. Prof. Severin is connected with the Royal Natural History Museum at Brussels, is an admirably well-posted entomologist, and is connected with the Forest Conservation Commission of Belgium. He was able togive good advice in the parasite work and promised assistance. Returning to France, an important conference was held with Mr. Rene Oberthiir, and it was arranged to establish during the summer of 1908 a field station at Rennes, to be placed in charge of a special expert, Mr. A. Vuillet, chosen by Prof. Houlbert, of the University of Rennes. Through Mr. Oberthiir’s courtesy it was arranged to establish field rearing cages at a convenient point near the University of Rennes and to carry on the work in much the same way as it had been arranged for the present summer at Kief. The University of Rennes having a certain connection with the University of Paris, it was considered desirable that the cooperation of the scientific faculty of the University of Paris be gained by direct application. This was readily arranged, through the cordial and sympathetic cooperation of Prof. Alfred Giard, of the faculty of science of the University of Paris (since deceased). In dealing with the European parasites reared at North Saugus, considerable difficulty was experienced in ascertaining their names. It was very desirable. of course. to have a definite name by which to NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. 69 designate each species, and by which to correlate it with published accounts of observations already made. With the assistance of Dr. O. Schmiedeknecht, of Cassel, Germany, a number of these forms had been named, but with others it seemed practically impossible to bring this about by correspondence. As a result, on the trip in question the writer made an effort, by studying the collections in some of the principal European museums, to determine a few of the unnamed forms reared in America from European material. The difficulty of this search was surprising. The Pteromalus, for example, which had been reared in Boston by scores of thousands and which, there- fore, must be a very common European insect, was found to be absolutely unrepresented in the large natural history museums of Vienna, Dresden, Berlin, Brussels, and London; nor did it occur in the type collections of Ratzeburg carefully preserved by Dr. Eck- stein at the Forest Academy at Eberswalde, where, on account of Ratzeburg’s important work on the parasites of European forest insects, one would naturally expect to find it. At last, in a small special collection in the Museum of Natural History in the Jardin des Plantes at Paris, Mr. H. du Buysson of the museum found in the laboratory a box containing parasites reared many years ago by the French entomologist, Sichel, which had been named for him by the eminent authority on parasitic Hymenoptera, Arnold Forster, of Germany. In this box were specimens of the Pteromalus labeled “Pt. egregius”’ in the handwriting of Férster himself. Especial efforts were made on the trip to arrange for the importa- tion of large numbers of the egg parasites of both species and to introduce in living condition the important parasites of the genus Apanteles, which, according to the visitor’s field observations, are among the most important of the European enemies of the gipsy moth. Previous importations of these parasites had failed, owing to the fact that they emerged and died on the journey. On this trip, however, specific directions were given to agents to send in young larve of the second stage, and by this means living specimens in considerable numbers were later reared in the laboratory at North Saugus. These on issuing laid their eggs in the gipsy-moth larve of the first stage, and from these caterpillars were secured the cocoons of adults of a second generation which was reared through all of its stages on American soil. From Kief there were received two species hitherto unknown as parasites of the gipsy moth, and one of these, being a rapid breeder, promised to be of much assistance. This species, belonging to the genus Meteorus, seemed to produce cocoons in about 10 days after ege laying, and will be considered later in this bulletin. We have previously referred to the destruction in 1906 of the _ great bulk of brown-tail caterpillars imported from Europe after the 70 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. early appearance of adult parasites. Mr. Titus, in 1906, tried the experiment of rearing a very few of these imported larve, and found that in their later growth they gave out a second lot of parasites entirely different from those reared in May from the very young hibernating larve, indicating a delayed development of eggs which must have been laid by adult parasites the previous autumn. Among these were at least two species, one belonging to the genus Apanteles and the other a Meteorus. Before his resignation in 1907 he started an extensive series of rearing experiments with the end in view of securing these parasites in large numbers. Partly on account of his enforced absence from the laboratory during a critical period, and partly through the unsuitable character of the rearing cages which were employed, the project did not meet with entire success. Only about 1,000 of the parasites were reared, of which all but a small percentage were the Apanteles. in The importations of the summer following the trip above described were very large, and reasonably successful, and during June alone 872 boxes were received, many others following during July and into August, shipments of brown-tail eggs and gipsy-moth eggs following, and of brown-tail winter nests in the late autumn and during the winter. As in 1906, tachinids made up the great bulk of the para- sites secured through the importation of pupe and active caterpillars. Notwithstanding the improvement in methods of shipment over previous years, Apanteles invariably hatched en route, and only dead adults or secondary. parasites were received.: Before the close of the summer it had become obvious that better quarters for the Massachusetts laboratory were necessary. The heating and lighting arrangements at North Saugus were insuffi- cient; the building was not sufficiently commodious, and the location was not convenient. Therefore, after considerable search, Mr. Kirkland found and leased for a term of years a commodious house at Melrose Highlands (No. 17 East Highland Avenue) (see Pl. I, fig. 2, p. 56.) The building was remodeled so far as necessary to fit it for the work. The grounds back of the house were sufficiently ample to enable the building of several outdoor laboratories, properly screened and ventilated, which were planned and erected under the direetion of the junior author. The building is well warmed, lighted with electricity, and, being close to fire protection, possesses many advantages over the old laboratory. Moreover, it is much nearer the central office in Boston, enabling an important saving of time in sending to the laboratory shipments of parasites received from abroad. The rental and the expense of construction were all borne by the State of Massachusetts. The new quarters are also within a stone’s throw of a large area of waste land covered with scrub oak. NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. vl In planning the work for the season of 1908, several new features were introduced. The parasites constantly sent over by agents belong to three main groups, namely, those of the order Hymenop- tera, including the ichneumon flies, the chalcis flies, and others; those of the Diptera, including the tachina flies, and those of the order Coleoptera, including the predaceous ground beetles. The amount of material received had been so great, and the character of the different life histories of the insects involved had been so diverse, that no one expert was able to do the fullest justice to the situation. Therefore, while the junior author was left in general charge of the whole mass of importations and retained his expert supervision of the work on the biology of the parasitic Hymenoptera, Mr. C. H. T. Townsend, of the Bureau of Entomology, was assigned to the work on the biology of the dipterous parasites, and Mr. A. F. Burgess, also of the Bireau of Entomology, was assigned to the expert charge of the ground beetles. Owing to the fact that the condition of European sendings by mail and express during the summer of 1907 had been by no means uni- formly good—those from eastern Europe, subjected to long railway journeys in addition to the sea voyage, frequently arriving in bad condition—the second innovation was made by establishing at Rennes, France, a general laboratory depot in addition to the field cages and rearing station mentioned in a previous paragraph. The — expert assistant designated by Prof. Houlbert, of the University of Rennes, was Mr. A. Vuillet, who was placed in specific charge of the general laboratory depot under the general supervision of Mr. Rene Oberthir. Mr. Vuillet placed himself in relations with the steamship company agents at Cherbourg and Havre and was kept informed as to the dates of the sailings of steamers. Nearly all of the European sendings were shipped to Rennes, examined, repacked, and carried personally by Mr. Vuillet to Cherbourg or Havre on the known days of sailing of certain steamers and then placed in the hands of chief stewards of the vessels and carried in the cold rooms to New York, whence they were sent to Boston. Early in the course of the work the honorable the Secretary of the Treasury, upon request of the honorable the Secretary of Agriculture, had issued orders to the col- lector of the port of New York to admit all such packages without examination and to hasten their departure for Boston through the United States dispatch agent. The steamship officials showed them- selves uniformly courteous, and as a result of this new arrangement the average condition of the material received proved to be much better. With the installation of the new laboratory at Melrose Highlands, and with the added space afforded by the new structures in the gar- 72 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. den, the junior author was able to carry out some new ideas with admirable results. The first of these was the carrying on of active winter work with parasites, especially those secured from the imported nests of the brown-tail moth, which began to come in from Europe in December. It was found quite possible to rear these parasites in artificially heated rooms, feeding them upon hibernating native brown-tail larve brought in in their nests from out of doors, feeding the latter upon lettuce and other hothouse foliage, and in the early spring securing more normal food for them by sending it up in boxes by mail from Washington and points south. In this way the rear- ing of the parasites of the genus Pteromalus was carried forward uninterruptedly throughout the winter, and, as during the rearing of — successive generations they multiplied exceedingly, it was possible later in the year to liberate a vastly greater number of individuals than had the imported species been allowed to hibernate normally in the nests. In the course of this work the junior author invented a rearing tray which was of the utmost advantage and which has since greatly facilitated parasite rearing work. This tray will be described later. With the importation of brown-tail moth eggs it often happened that they hatched too soon to be of use in America; or too late, arriving after the American eggs had all hatched. It was ascertained by the junior author during the summer and autumn that native eggs can be kept in cold storage until the arrival of the European egg parasites, which were found to lay their eggs and breed in these cold- storage eggs as freely as in those which they attack in the state of nature. It was found that this process can be carried on for a long time, and that successive generations of these egg parasites may be reared from eggs retarded in their development by cold storage. It was thus shown that it is easy to rear and liberate an almost infinitely greater number of these egg parasites, and under favorable conditions, than would have been possible from a simple importation of European parasitized eggs which would have to arrive in America at a specific time. In the same way great advance was made in the rearing of the tachinid parasites in Mr. Townsend’s charge. This expert devised methods and made observations that greatly added to our knowledge of the biology of these insects and resulted in the accumulation of a store of information of the greatest practical value, not only in the prosecution of the present undertaking but in any problem of parasite introduction or control that may arise later. Extraordinary and almost revolutionary discoveries were made in the life histories of certain of these flies, and without this knowledge the greatest success in handling them practically could not have been reached. Certain of these facts regarding the most important of these parasites are NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. 13 related in a later part of this bulletin, and many of them have been described in some detail in Technical Series No. 12, Part VI, Bureau of Entomology, United States Department of Agriculture (1908), by Mr. Townsend. Similarly Mr. Burgess, in charge of the Coleoptera, succeeded in a very perfect way in rearing and liberating the important European predatory beetle, Calosoma sycophanta, as well as some other insects of the family Carabide. While these extensive importations from Europe were going on, Japan had by no means been lost sight of. While it seemed probable that the European parasites in themselves would succeed in reestab- lishing the balance of nature in New England, and in spite of the somewhat dangerous nature of Japanese importations on the ground that the Japanese gipsy moth is probably a different species and might prove in New England even more voracious and destructive than the European moth, there was at no time any intention to neglect Japan in the search for effective parasites. Continuous correspond- ence had been carried on with Japanese entomologists, and some shipments had been made by correspondents which resulted unsuc- cessfully. For some time the Apanteles previously mentioned was the only gipsy-moth parasite known to occur in Japan. Later information was received from Prof. U. Nawa, of Gifu, Japan, to the effect that there exists in Japan an important egg parasite of the _gipsy moth. During the previous annual trips of the Chief of the Bureau of Entomology to Europe the European service of collectors, agents, and advisers had been well organized and instructed, and the work during 1908 was reasonably sure to be well continued without further personal consultation; it was therefore decided to interrupt the European trip for 1908 and to send a skilled agent to Japan. In considering the appointment of such an agent, Prof. Trevor Kincaid, of the University of Washington at Seattle, was at once suggested to the mind of the writer, primarily on account of his extraordinary skill as a collector, as indicated in the remarkable results of his work on the Harriman expedition to Alaska in 1899, and also on account of his comparative proximity to Japan and the fact that he was per- sonally acquainted with many persons in Japan. He was therefore recommended to the State officials of Massachusetts for appointment, and was commissioned by the State to undertake the expedition. At the same time he was formally appointed a collaborator of the Bureau of Entomology of the United States Department of Agricul- ture, and the Japanese Government was formally notified by the honorable the Secretary of Agriculture, through the Department of State, of the intended visit, the writer having also notified by per- sonal correspondence some of the well-known Japanese entomologists. Prof. Kincaid sailed from Seattle on March 2, and the results of his 74 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. - expedition far more than justified the expense involved. A very large amount of parasite material was received from him in good condition at Boston, and very many parasites from Japan were colonized in the woodlands in New England. Prof. Kincaid was received with the most extreme courtesy and cordiality by the Japanese Government and by official and private entomologists everywhere. His work was facilitated in every possible way; assist- ants were placed at his disposal and in this way a large number of individuals occupied themselves in the collection of parasitized material. After consultation with the Japanese entomologists, whose great cleverness in manipulation and ingenuity in devising methods are well known, Prof. Kincaid was able to pack his shipments in such a way as to bring about a minimum of mortality on the jour- ney. The steamship companies showed him every courtesy, and much of his material arrived at Melrose Highlands in better condition than. corresponding sendings received from Europe. A single indi- cation of the value of Prof. Kincaid’s work may be mentioned: From one shipment of cocoons between 40,000 and 50,000 adults of the Japanese Apanteles were reared and were liberated directly in the open in Massachusetts, and this is the species which, although repeatedly sent by correspondents, had never arrived in New England in such condition that a single living adult could be reared. The European importations in the meantime continued to arrive in numbers, and at the close of the summer it was found that the actual number of beneficial insects liberated had been far in excess of that for 1906 or 1907, and that the list included several species of apparently great importance and promise that had never before been received at the laboratory in living condition. The successful European importations ali came from western Europe, and unfortunately the few shipments sent from Russia arrived in very bad condition. This is considered to have been most .- unfortunate, since several of the Russian parasites were very promis- ing, and the subject of improving the Russian service was taken into consideration. With the great success of the summer’s Japanese work, and the question of the great desirability of similar work in Russia in his mind, the senior author, visiting the Pacific coast in the autumn of that year (1908) on a tour of inspection of the field laboratories of the Bureau of Entomology, called on Prof. Kincaid at Seattle and dis- cussed with him at length the plans for 1909. Although Kincaid expressed himself as charmed with Japan and anxious to repeat his visit to that most interesting country, his innate honesty compelled him to state that he considered the expense of the trip unnecessary; that he had found the Japanese entomologists, officials, and others so intelligent and so thoroughly competent, and at the same time NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. 75 so heartily interested in the experiment, that he considered them not only perfectly able, but perfectly willing to carry on the work by themselves. After this authoritative expression of opinion from one who knew the ground so well, the visitor asked Mr. Kincaid whether he would care to spend the early summer months of 1909 in Russia, _ and, upon his affirmative reply, later recommended his reappointment to the Massachusetts State authorities for that purpose. During the autumn and winter shipments of eggs of the gipsy moth were received from Japan, principally from Prof. Kuwana. From these eggs were reared numerous specimens of Anastatus bifas- ciatus Fonsc., a previously known European parasite of these eggs, and of another parasite belonging to a genus and species new to science (since named by the senior author Schedius kuwvane) which has turned out to be an important primary parasite and which is considered in later pages. During the winter, also, Prof. Jablonowski, of Budapest, sent over several thousand egg masses of the gipsy moth collected in various localities in Hungary. After they arrived in Massachusetts there were reared from them and liberated under the most favorable conditions more than 75,000 adult individuals of Anastatus bifasciatus. This was a surprising thing to the laboratory workers, since less than 1,000 parasites of this species had been received from all localities, the earlier ones having come from southern Russia and from Japan. The winter of 1908-9 was spent at the laboratory, in additional rearing operations, some of them on a large scale, and in studying the parasites already reared, and planning for the coming summer. As it happened, during the winter the brown-tail moth was intro- duced into the United States upon nursery stock from France in large numbers. Shipments of nursery stock bearing winter nests of this insect were sent to many States of the Union. Fortunately this was discovered early in the winter, and through prompt action and the cooperation of the customs officials and the railroads prob- ably every sending was traced to its ultimate destination, and was there inspected and the nests destroyed either by State officials or by persons appointed for this purpose by the United States Department of Agriculture. : In the spring of 1909 it seemed necessary for the chief of the bureau to proceed to Europe for the purpose of making an investi- gation of the European methods of growing nursery stock, with a view to the prevention of similar introductions in the future either by general legislation by the United States Government or in some other way. On this trip he utilized the opportunity to consult further with European agents in the importation of the parasites and to arrange for the summer’s work. In the meantime Prof. Kincaid, whose appointment had been made by the State of Massachusetts, and who had again been made an 76 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. official collaborator of the Bureau of Entomology of the United States Department of Agriculture, securing leave of absence from the University of Washington, proceeded to Russia, and stationed himself in Bessarabia for the purpose of collecting and sending para- sitized material from that country to the United States. It had been noticed by Mr. Vuillet at Rennes during the preceding summer that all material coming from Russia had been opened on the journey and had deteriorated in consequence. Before Prof. Kincaid’s departure from America, Russian officials had been communicated with through correspondence between the chief of the Bureau of Entomology and Prof. Porchinsky, of the ministry of agriculture, and also directly between the United States Department of State and the American ambassador at St. Petersburg through the instigation of the honor- able the Secretary of Agriculture. The United States Government was assured that the Russian Government would welcome the expe- dition and would facilitate the sending of material in every way possible. The chief of the bureau landed at Cherbourg May 12. He pro- ceeded immediately to Paris, where a conference had been arranged in advance with M. Oberthiir, M. Vuillet, and Mr. Henry Brown, the latter an English entomologist resident in Paris. At this conference it was decided to abandon the forwarding laboratory at Rennes and to station Mr. Vuillet, during the forwarding season, at Cherbourg. He was instructed to engage quarters at that seaport and to arrange I for cold-storage facilities, with the intention that shipments from — 1 France, Switzerland, and Italy should be forwarded to him to be } kept in cold storage until the date of sailing of vessels, and then : | should be transferred to the cold room of the next steamer, thus practically keeping all living specimens dormant from the time of : arrival in Cherbourg until the time of arrival in New York, making | the exposure to summer temperature practically only 24 hours orless in Europe and 24 hours or less in the United States. In the mean- time Mr. Oberthir was authorized to arrange for an extensive service in the south of France, through Mr. H. Powell, of Hyéres, one of the agents for the year 1906. The preparation of the requisite boxes was intrusted, as in previous years, to the superintendence of Mr. Oberthtir, and Mr. Powell was authorized to engage as many col- lectors as the material would seem to need, with full instructions as to packing and shipping to Cherbourg. The visitor then proceeded to Wageningen, Holland, where he arranged for further assistance from Prof. Dr. J. Ritzema Bos. From there he went to Hamburg, where he arranged with the American Express Co. to care for shipments coming from Germany, Russia, and Austria-Hungary, arrangements being made to keep the material on ice until the next steamer should sail, and in case of the breakage Bul. 91, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE III. FiG. 1.—ROADSIDE OAK IN BRITTANY, WITH LEAVES RAGGED BY GIPSY-MOTH CATER- PILLARS. (L. O. HOWARD, JUNE, 1909.) (ORIGINAL.) rll | te Agr Fig. 2.—M. RENE OBERTHUR (IN CENTER), DR. PAUL MARCHAL (AT RIGHT), WITH ROAD- SIDE OAKS (BEHIND) RAGGED BY GiIPSY-MOTH CATERPILLARS. (L. O. HOWARD, JUNE, 1909.) (ORIGINAL.) Bul. 91, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE IV. Fic. 1.—CATERPILLAR HUNTERS IN THE SOUTH OF FRANCE, UNDER M. DILLON, 1909. (ORIGINAL. ) Fic. 2.—PACKING PARASITIZED CATERPILLARS AT HYERES, FRANCE, FOR SHIPMENT TO THE UNITED STATES, 1909. (ORIGINAL.) NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. a or other bad condition of packages arrangements were made with Dr. L. Reh, of the Hamburg Museum, to act as expert adviser of the express company. From Hamburg he proceeded to Berlin for a short consultation with Dr. R. Heymons, and thence to St. Petersburg. At St. Peters- _ burg he was assured by Mr. Montgomery Schuyler, the secretary of the embassy, that all arrangements had been made with the Russian Government, and the same assurance was given by Prof. Porchinsky. The Russian officials insisted that none of the 1908 packages going out of Russia had been opened by the Russian postal authorities, and stated that in their opinion the opening must have been done at the German frontier by German officials. A strong letter was then writ- ten to the Hon. David J. Hill, United States ambassador to Germany, reciting the facts, dwelling upon the importance to America of these importations, and urging him to secure from the German Govern- ment orders to postal officials to pass without opening boxes of these parasites addressed to the American Express Co.in Hamburg. Later, in Dresden, a reply was received from Ambassador Hill, stating that the German Government consented to issue the necessary instruc- tions, but still later, in Paris, an additional communication from the ~ ambassador requested detailed information as to the points on the German frontier where these sendings would enter the Empire. By telegraphic communication with Prof. Kincaid, in southern Russia, and the Austrian agents, this information was furnished, but there seems still to have been some opening of the Russian boxes with resulting damage to their contents. After Russia, Dresden, Tetschen, Vienna, Budapest, Innsbruck, Zurich, and ee were corse fee sell and agents were instructed concerning the new arrangements a shipping material. At Innsbruck the visitor met for the first time Prof. K. W. von Dalla Torre, the author of the great catalogue of the Hymenoptera of the world, and got his views on the subject of the parasitic Hymenoptera and their practical handling. From Paris he took a trip into Normandy and Brittany with Dr. Paul Marchal, of the ministry of agriculture of France, and Mr. René Oberthiir, for the pupose of examining into the export nursery indus- try, and at the same time with a view of observing gipsy-moth and brown-tail moth conditions in that part of France. (See Pl. ITI, fig. 2.). It transpired that both of the injurious insects were unusu- ally abundant in portions of this territory, and by good fortune a small oak forest covering some hundreds of acres was found not far from Nantes, in which there had been an outbreak of the gipsy-moth more serious than either Dr. Marchal or Mr. Oberthiir had ever seen or had ever heard of in France. Practically every tree was defoli- ated (see PI, ITI, fig. 1), and at the time of the visit, the last week 78 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. in June, the larve were about full grown and making ready to spin. The natural enemies of the gipsy-moth were not abundant in this forest, although a few were seen on trees along the highway in this general region. Nevertheless the invariable experience in Europe is ~ that following such an outbreak as this parasites congregate in the region the following year and multiply in enormous numbers. The finding of this area, therefore, seemed fortunate, since during the season of 1910 it seemed probable that parasites would be abundant at that point. This hope was not fulfilled, however, and in 1910 practically no gipsy-moth larve were to be found in that general region. In the meantime the honorable minister of agriculture for Japan - had at the request of the honorable the Secretary of Agriculture of the United States designated Prof. S. I. Kuwana, of the Imperial Agricultural Station at Tokyo, to be the official representative of the Japanese Government in the parasite work to be carried on during the spring and summer of 1909, and to conduct his operations in cooperation with and in correspondence with the chief of the Bureau of Entomology of the United States Department. Prof. Kuwana has shown himself in this, as in his previous work, a man of extra-— ordinary intelligence and activity, and has sent in a number of inter- esting and valuable lots of parasitic material which were received at Melrose Highlands in uniformly good condition. This was due to the great care and intelligence shown by Prof. Kuwana in its collec- tion and in his methods of packing and shipping. The most nearly perfect European service during the summer of 1909 was secured in France, owing to the arrangement made at the May conference in Paris. In the south of France very many people were employed under Mr. Powell, and several thousand boxes of good material were received at the parasite laboratory from this region. (See Pl. IV, fig. 2.) In quantity it exceeded the total of all the importations of a similar character made since the inception of the work, and from it have been reared a greater number of important tachinid parasites than have been reared from all other importations _ of similar character taken together. The size of the French shipments is largely due to the intelligent energy of Mr. M. Dillon (see Pl. IV, fig. 1), with whom the bureau was placed in relations by Mr. Powell. Quantities of miscellaneous material were also received, as for- merly, from numerous collectors in Germany, Austria, Italy, Hol- land, Belgium, and Switzerland. Prof. Kincaid’s account of his Russian observations is as follows: At the request of Dr. L. O. Howard, Chief of the Bureau of En- tomology, United States Department of Agriculture, the writer visited the provinces of Russia bordering upon the Black Sea during the summer of 1909 with a view to the introduction into America NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. | 79 of the parasites of the gipsy moth reported to exist in that part of Europe. Proceeding to St. Petersburg via New York and Paris, an interview was had with Prof. Porchinsky, of the Russian Bureau of Entomology, who supplied valuable information and suggestions for the furtherance of the investigation. Leaving the Russian capital on April 28, a journey of 48 hours brought the writer to the city of Kishenef and after making a survey it was decided to establish a base of operations in the forest of Gauchesty, an area of wooded hills adjacent to a village of that name about 30 versts! northwest from Kishenef. Since the accommodations in the village of Gau- chesty were of an unsatisfactory character, Mr. Artemy Nazaroff, the manager of the estate of Prince Manook Bey, on the lands of which the more important infested areas existed, invited the writer and his interpreter to become his guests during the progress of the investigation. A suite of rooms in the guest house of Gauchesty castle was placed at our disposal, and Mr. Nazaroff did all in his power to forward our interests and to make agreeable our stay in that part of Russia. An outbuilding upon the farm of the estate was transformed into a laboratory in which was erected a set of rearing frames for the rearing of the parasites. During the first week of April systematic exploration of the adjacent wooded areas was begun. The forest cover was found to consist almost exclusively of young oaks, with a few scattering trees of other species. The eround beneath the trees was fairly free from underbrush and was carpeted with a rich profusion of shrubs and flowers. At a distance of 7 versts from Gauchesty was an area covered with trees of con- siderable age among which the underbrush was comparatively dense. From the forester in charge of the timbered areas upon the estate it was learned that the gipsy moth had done great damage to the forest during the previous season, large areas having been completely defoliated. This statement was borne out by the immense number of egg masses attached to the trees. At the time we commenced our investigations the caterpillars had emerged from the eggs but were still resting upon the bark. Few signs of previous parasitic activity were observed beyond the discovery of a number of empty cocoons of Apanteles solitarius Ratz. attached to the bark of the trees. In the ancient forest mentioned above the egg masses were very numerous, but the number of larve upon the bark was remark- ably small. From the abnormal appearance of most of these egg masses, and from the fact that several Microhymenoptera were dis- covered in them, it seemed probable that a considerable number: of the eggs had been destroyed through this agency. In other parts of the forest no evidence was secured indicating the presence of egg parasites. The brown-tail moth seemed to be practically absent from the forested areas, but in the open rolling country between Kishenef and Gauchesty many wild pear growing in cultivated fields were found to be completely defoliated. A large number of the larve were placed in rearing frames but yielded no parasites, not even Meteorus making its appearance. By June 1 the caterpillars of the gipsy moth had passed into the second stage and the oak trees were showing obvious signs of damage, but up to this date there was no indication of the emergence of 1 Verst; Russian measure of distance=3,500 English feet; 6 versts=approximately 4 English miles. 80 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. hymenopterous parasites either in the field or from the thousands of larvee reared in rearing frames. It became apparent that the con- ditions were unfavorable for the purposes in mind of assembling parasites for export, and it was decided to shift our headquarters to a more promising locality. | On June 5 a new base of operations was established at the town of Bendery on the Dniester River. Quarters were selected in the principal hotel, the Petersburgia, and in a remote corner of the exten- sive grounds of the hostelry a temporary laboratory was constructed in which several tiers of rearing frames were erected. The forest conditions in this district were much more diversified than at Gau- chesty. To the northeast of the town at a distance of 7 versts was the forest of Gerbofsky, occupying a dry elevated area of about 5,000 acres and consisting almost exclusively of mature oak trees. To the southward, on the banks of the river, was the forest of Kitz- kany, composed largely of black poplar, maple, and willow. In both of these forests the caterpillars of the gipsy moth were found in immense numbers, and evidence of attack by both hymenopterous and dipterous parasites was readily obtained, although nowhere in the abundance hoped for. For two weeks the two forests, as well as the extensive orchards in the vicinity of Bendery and the neighboring town of Tiraspol, were scoured for parasites. A number of Russian boys were pressed into service and trained to assist in making collec- tions, at which they became quite expert. Except for a few clusters of cocoons derived from Apanteles spalees Hal., the only hymenop- terous parasite to appear in considerable abundance was Apanteles solitarius. Caterpillars of the gipsy moth attacked by this species crawl down to the trunk or lower branches of the tree and collect in colonies on the lower side of the branches, under bark; in cavities and other sheltered places. Here the larva of the parasite emerges and spins its cocoon beneath the body of its host. The task of col- lecting these scattered cocoons was a tedious one, since it was neces- sary to remove each one carefully from the bark without undue pressure and also to disentangle it from the hairy body of its host. In the forest of Kitzkany, where the conditions were favorable for bacterial infection owing to excessive dampness, the caterpillars of the gipsy moth were swept away in vast numbers by a bacterial disease before any extensive defoliation took place. The search for hymenopterous parasites in this district soon become a vain one, since very few of the caterpillars appeared to have escaped the infection. The forest of Gerbofsky, owing to its being elevated, open, and well drained, was not favorable for bacterial infection and no trace of disease was observed. This forest was therefore almost com- pletely defoliated by the caterpillars, and multitudes of the insects, failing to find any further nourishment upon the oaks, descended to the ground, where they died in great numbers, a pe from starvation. Hymenopterous parasites seemed to play a relatively small part in the destruction of the caterpillars, since the attacks of Apanteles solitarius were of the most scattering character. In the shrubbery growths adjacent to the main forest, where new planta- tions had been recently established by the forester in charge, a con- siderable number of Calosoma were found at work destroying the caterpillars, but their operations did not appear to extend into the NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. 81 main forest, where the open grass-covered ground did not offer suf- ficient concealment for the beetles. The principal check to the depredations of the caterpillars of the Bipsy moth in this forest came with the advent of the tachinids, the atter appearing upon the scene after the trees had been almost or entirely defoliated. Chalcid flies also appeared at this time, but not in considerable numbers. The species of Limnerium, a few speci- mens of which had been previously received from Russia, and of which it had been hoped to secure a supply for transfer to America, proved to be exceedingly rare, only three specimens being found. The larva of this parasite on emerging from its host spins an elongated silken thread, at the end of which it spins a cocoon and transforms to the pupal state. Considerable numbers of the cocoons of Apanteles solitarius were collected from the forest, from the extensive orchards of the neigh- borhood, and from clumps of willow bushes conmonly found at the edges of fields. For several weeks shipments were made almost daily to Hamburg, from which port the packages were shipped in cold storage to New York. Many difficulties arose in attempting to make rapid shipments. The postal connections were very unsatis- factory and caused annoying delays, while at the German frontier another cause for loss of time developed through the formalities of the customs authorities of the German Government. The brown-tail moth seemed to be quite uncommon in the region about Bendery, and no parasites were observed upon the small num- ber of larvee collected at this point. Since it seemed desirable to cover as extensive a territory as pos- sible during the season, the writer, leaving an assistant in charge of the laboratory and collecting organization at Bendery, journeyed northward on June 17 and established a new center of exploration at the city of Kief, in the province of the same name. Through the courtesy of Prof. Waldemar Pospielow the writer was furnished with much valuable information in regard to the forests of this portion of Russia and concerning the areas in which the gipsy moth was known to exist. Several immense forested areas were traversed, but as they were for the most part purely coniferous in character the gipsy moth appeared to be quite a rare insect. Through information supplied by Prof. Pospielow it was ascertained that at Mechnigori, a monas- terial institution on the banks of the Dnieper, several hours by steamer from Kief, an area of woodland existed which was infested to a moderate extent by caterpillars of the gipsy moth, among which the perpeiies were reported to be much in evidence. A visit to the locality showed an interesting condition. ‘The monastery was sur- rounded by beautiful groves of elm and oak trees in which the gipsy moth had made considerable inroads, but the parasites had developed to a sufficient extent to practically clear the foliage of caterpillars. Almost the sole agency in bringing about this condition was Apan- teles rufipes, which attacks the larve of the gipsy moth in a manner closely resembling Apanteles japonicus, as observed during the pre- ceding season in Japan, but in the case of the latter the caterpillars usually die upon the leaves of the trees, whereas in the former the caterpillars descend to the trunk and lower branches to form colonies. On emerging from the caterpillars the parasites spin cocoons beneath 62188°—Bull. 91—12——6 82 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. the host, which are also attached ventrally to the bark of the tree, and as numerous caterpillars die in a restricted area a mass of Apan- teles cocoons, often of considerable thickness, is formed. Such masses standing out as white patches against the dark tree trunks on which they rest may be seen for considerable distances. Cocoons of Apantales solitarvus were also observed in the forest of Mechnigori, but were comparatively rare, so this species evidently did not repre- sent a very important element in the control of the gipsy moth. In the forested areas about Kief the caterpillars of the brown-tail moth were rarely met with, but in several of the parks on the out- skirts of the city they were found in abundance. In the grounds of the military school a large number of magnificent oak trees were almost denuded of foliage, and some of the other deciduous trees and shrubs, such as poplars, rose bushes, and Crategus, were severely damaged. The usual brown-tail parasites were found at work, the most effective being Meteorus. Almost every branch of the injured trees bore the suspended cocoons of this parasite. Tachinids were also active, so it was obvious that very few of the caterpillars would reach maturity. On departing from Kief on July 9 the season was practically over, and gipsy moths were in flight. Returning to Bendery, it was found that the season was over so far as Apantales solitarius was concerned, but large numbers of tachinid puparia were in evidence. As many as possible of these were assem- bled and shipped to America. The chrysalides of the gipsy moth were also forwarded in considerable numbers in the hope of securing pupal parasites. These lines of work were continued till July 16, by which time the season was so advanced that the moths were beginning to deposit their egos for the succeeding season. From the abundance of moths in flight it was obvious that unless the natural parasites multiplied suf- ficiently to control the situation the region would experience another visitation of the same character during the following year. Leaving Bendery on July 16, the writer returned to Paris via Odessa, Constantinople, and Naples, arriving in New York August 28. Owing to various unforeseen conditions, and principally owing to the deficient transportation facilities, the material received as the result of Prof. Kincaid’s expedition proved to be unsatisfactory on the whole. In May and June, 1910, the senior author went to Europe once more, visited agents and officials in Italy and France, and, through the courtesy of the Spanish and Portuguese Governments, was able to start new official services in each of these countries for the collec- tion and sending of parasitized gipsy-moth larve to the United States. In Italy Prof. Silvestri at Portici and Dr. Berlese at Flor- ence were visited and informed as to the latest ideas of the laboratory regarding methods of shipment. In Spain Prof. Leandro Navarro, of the Phytopathological Station at Madrid, volunteered his services with the approval of the minister of agriculture. In Portugal Senhor Alfredo Carlos Lecocq, director of agriculture, placed the visitor in relation with Prof. A. F, de Seabra, of the Phytopathological Station NARRATIVE OF PROGRESS OF WORK. 83 at Lisbon, and the latter gladly consented to act as the agent of the bureau in this work in Portugal. In France arrangements were made with Mr. Dillon as during the previous year in the south of France, and arrangements were renewed with Miss Ruhl in Zurich and Mr. Schopfer in Dresden. The distributing agency in Hamburg was con- tinued, and a new distributing agency was started at Havre, France, on account of its convenient proximity to the American line steamers starting from Southampton. In order to insure the best results, Mr. Dillon accompanied certain large shipments from Hyéres to Havre, and personally saw that they were placed upon the channel steamer the night before the sailing of an American line steamer from Southampton. Sendings from Japan were continued in the same manner as dur- ing the previous year. The minister of agriculture for Japan, at the request of the Secretary of Agriculture of the United States, again designated Prof. S. I. Kuwana, of the Imperial Agricultural Experi- ment Station at Tokyo, to be its official representative in this work, and he continued his extremely valuable sendings. The amount received during the summer was larger than ever before, but the results obtained, owing partly to the condition of the material on receipt and owing to curious seasonal fluctuations and differences in the countries of origin and in the infested territory in America, the results by no means corresponded with the increased matevial. The work carried on in the laboratory during the season and the results obtained are mentioned later. In the autumn the junior author visited France and Russia for the purpose of studying certain important points regarding the question of alternate hosts of the parasites and methods of hibernation. The results of his observations will be given in detail in the later section headed ‘‘The extent to which the gipsy moth is controlled through parasitism abroad.’’ At the close of the season of 1910, and in part owing to the prepara- tion of the present bulletin, a general review of the whole work was undertaken, and a summing up of present conditions seemed to indi- cate that nearly as much had already been accomplished by present methods as could be expected. The great need at this time seemed to be a careful study in the countries of origin of the species of appar- ent importance which have been sent over but have not become established, in order to ascertain the reasons for the apparent failure; and, further, to see on the spot what can be done with regard to the importation of parasites of apparently lesser importance, but which, through the fact that they may fill in gaps in the parasitic chain and may at the same time increase beyond their native wont when con- fronted with American conditions, may be very desirable. Accord- 84 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. ingly the junior author was commissioned to visit France, Italy, and Russia in the winter and early spring of 1911, and subsequently to spend the breeding season. if found desirable, in Japan. He was given authority to employ the necessary agents in each of these coun- tries. He sailed January 5, 1911. KNOWN AND RECORDED PARASITES OF THE GIPSY MOTH AND OF THE BROWN-TAIL MOTH. When the work of introducing the parasites of the gipsy moth and of the brown-tail moth was begun in 1905, the available assets con- sisted of generous appropriations by the State of Massachusetts and the Federal Government, an abundant faith in the validity of the theory which was to be put to test, and a long bibliographical list of the parasites which were recorded as attacking these insects in Europe and Japan. Of these, the appropriations have withstood most effectively the ordeal of the years which have since passed. Our faith in the validity of the principle at stake has also stood out wonderfully well, when the numerous trials to which it has been subjected are taken into consideration. It is not too much to say that at the present time it is stronger than ever, notwithstanding that a good many facts have come to light in this period which are more or less flatly in contradiction to the theory of parasite control as generally accepted at the beginning. It has more than once been necessary to modify beliefs and ideas as previously held, in order to make them conform to the actuai facts. To take a pertinent exam- ple, it was necessary to place an entirely different value upon the bibliographical list above mentioned than that which was placed upon ‘it when the work was begun, and when the policies of the laboratory were first determined. | ? Nearly thirty years ago the present head of the Bureau of Ento- mology undertook the compilation of a card catalogue of references to the host relations of the parasitic Hymenoptera of the world. For more than twenty years the work was continued until some 30,000 such references were accumulated. From among them those in which the gipsy moth was mentioned as the host were collected and a list of gipsy-moth parasites was published in Insect Life." With the exception of -a comparatively few recent additions this list forms the basis of that which follows. That of the parasites which have been recorded as attacking the brown-tail moth is largely from the same source. 10, S, Department of Agriculture, Division of Entomology, Insect Life, vol. 2, pp. 210-211, 1890. KNOWN AND RECORDED PARASITES. RA HYMENOPTEROUS PARASITES OF THE GIPSY MOTH (Porthetria dispar L.). BRACONID. Reared at laboratory. Recorded as parasites. Apanteles fulvipes (Hal.). Apanteles fulvipes (Hal.). ! ? Apanteles solitarius (Ratz.). Apanteles solitarius (Ratz.).1 ? Microgaster calceata Hal.! ? Apanteles tenebrosus (Wesm.).! Microgaster tibialis Nees.1 (Microgaster) Apanteles fulvipes liparidis (Bouché). 2 Apanteles glomeratus (L.).} ? Apanteles solitarius var. ‘melanoscelus (Ratz.).} Apanteles solitarius? ocnerie Svanov. Meteorus versicolor (Wesm.). Meteorus scutellator (Nees).! Meteorus pulchricornis (Wesm.). Meteorus japonicus Ashm.? IcCHNEUMONID#. PRIMARY. Pimpla (Pimpla) instigator (Fab.). Pimpla (Pimpla) instigator (Fab.).! ? Pimpla (Pimpla) porthetrie Vier.’ Pimpla (Pimpla) examinator (Fab.)! Pimpla examinator (Fab.).} Pimpla (Pimpla) pluto Ashm.? Pimpla (Apechths) brassicarie (Poda). Pimpla (Pimpla) disparis Vier.* Theronia atalante (Poda). Theroma atalantx (Poda).! ? LIimnerium (Hyposoter) disparis Vier. Campoplex conicus Ratz.} Limnerium (Anilastus) tricoloripes Vier. Casinaria tenuiventris (Grav.).1 Ichneumon disparis (Poda). Ichneumon disparis (Poda).} 2 Ichneumon pictus (Gmel.).? 2 | Amblyteles varipes Rdw.? Trogus flavitorius [sic.] lutorius (Fab.)? 1? (Cryptus) Aritranis amenus (Grav.).} Cryptus cyanator Grav.! PROBABLY SECONDARY BUT RECORDED AS PRIMARY. Mesochorus pectoralis Ratz.} ? Mesochorus gracilis Brischke.! ? Mesochorus splendidulus Grav. 2 Mesochorus confusus Holmer.? Mesochorus semirufus Holmgr.! (Hemiteles) Astomaspis fulvipes (Grav.).} ? =A. nanus (Grav.) according to Pfan- kuch. Hemiteles bicolorius Grav.” Pezomachus hortensis Grav.? Pezomachus fasciatus (Fab.) !=Pezomachus melanocephalus (Schrk.). =—— aE t Recorded by the senior author in a card catalogue of parasites kept in the Bureau of i Selesoer 2 Recorded by Dalla Torre in Catalogus Hymenopterorum. 3 Japanese species. 86 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. CHALCIDIDA. Reared at laboratory. - Recorded as parasites. Pteromalus halidayanus Ratz. Pteromalus pint Hartig.} Dibrachys boucheanus Ratz.2 (Second- ary.) Hurytoma abrotani Panzer } 2— appendi- , gaster Swed. (Secondary. ) Eupelmus bifasciatus Fonsc. Eupelmus bifasciatus Fonsc.! ? Monodontomerus xreus Walk. Chalcis flavipes Panz. Chalcis callipus Kby.* Chalcis obscurata Walk.* Schedius kuvane How.* HYMENOPTEROUS PARASITES OF THE BROWN-TAIL MOTH (EKuproctis chrysorrhea L.). BRACONIDE. Reared at laboratory. Recorded as parasites. Meteorus versicolor (Wesm.). Metcorus versicolor (Wesm. ).° Meteorus ictericus (Nees).* Apanteles lacteicolor Vier. Apanteles inclusus (Ratz.) ? ® Apanteles ultor Reinh.! 23 — Apanteles difficilis (Nees).* Apanteles liparidis (Bouché).* Apanteles vitripennis (Hal.).° Apanteles solitarius (Ratz.).° Microgaster consularis (Hal.) *= Microgas- ter connexa Nees. Microgaster calceata Hal.! Rogas geniculator Nees.? * Rogas testaceus (Spin.).' . Rogas pulchripes (Wesm.).} IcHNEUMONIDS. PRIMARY. Pimpla (Pimpla) examinator (Fab.).- Pimpla (Pimpla) examinator (Fab.).2 Pimpla (Pimpla) instigator (Fab.). Pimpla (Pimpla) instigator (Fab.).! ? Pimpla (Apechthis) brassicarize (Poda). Theronia atalante (Poda). Theronia atalantx (Poda).} ? * Campoplex conicus Ratz.® (Campoplex) Omorgus difformis (Gmel.).5 Cryptus moschator (Fab.).? (Cryptus) Idiolispa atripes (Grav.).1 Ichneumon disparis (Poda).° Ichneumon scutellator (Grav.).? 5 3 1 Recorded by the senior author in a card catalogue of parasites kept in the Bureau of Entomology. 2 Recorded by Dalla Torre in Catalogus Hee 3 Reared by Dr. S. I. Kuwana. 4 Japanese species. 5 Recorded by Emelyanoff. KNOWN AND RECORDED PARASITES. 87 PROBABLY SECONDARY, BUT RECORDED AS PRIMARY. Reared at laboratory. Recorded as parasites. Mesochorus pectoralis Ratz.' ? Mesochorus dilutus Ratz.? * Hemiteles socialis Ratz.* CHALCIDID®. Pteromalus sp. Pteromalus rotundatus Ratz.2?=Pt. chry- sored DAT Pteromalus nidulans Thoms.= Pt. egregius Pteromalus processionex Ratz.! * Forst. Diglochis omnivora Walk. Pteromalus nidulans Thoms.' 4 Pteromalus puparum L.? Dibrachys bowcheanus (Ratz.).2 (Second- ary.) Chalcis scirropoda Foérst.1 Monodontomerus xreus Walk. Torymus anephelus Ratz.?= Monodontome- rus xreus Walk.! 2 Monodontomerus dentipes Boh.! ? Anagrus ovivorus Rondani.? Trichogramma sp. I. Trichogramma sp. II. PROCTOTRYPID®. Telenomus phalenarum Nees (?). Telenomus phalenarum Nees.} 2 3 DIPTEROUS PARASITES OF THE GIPSY MOTH (Porthetria dispar L.). The following are lists of the dipterous parasites reared and recorded from Porthetria dispar L.and Euproctis chrysorrhaa L. Each list is supplemented by a list of recorded hosts for each species enumerated. These lists have been compiled from various sources, the principal being the ‘‘ Katalog der Paliarktischen Dipteren,’”’ Brauer & Bergen- stamm’s ‘‘Die Zweifliigler des Kaiserlichen Museums zu Wien,” Fer- nald and Forbush’s ‘‘The Gipsy Moth,” and the senior author’s ‘‘List of parasites bred from imported material during the year 1907” (3d annual report of the popetintendent for suppressing the gipsy and brown-tail moths). In the choice of names of the ees tachinids the Katalog der Palaarktischen Dipteren has been followed with the exception of a few cases in which other names have been in use at the Gipsy Moth Parasite Laboratory; in these few cases, to avoid confusion, no change has been made. 1 Recorded by Emelyanoff. 2 Recorded by Dalla Torre in Catalogus Hymenopterorum. 3 Recorded by the senior author in a card catalogue of parasites kept in the Bureau of Entomology. 88 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS, ForEIGN TACHINID PARASITES ON PORTHETRIA DISPAR. Reared. Blepharipa scutellata R. D. Carcelia gnava Meig. Compsilura concinnata Meig. _ Crossocosmia sericarix Corn. Dexodes nigripes Fall. Parasetigena segregata Rond. Recorded. Argyrophylax atropivora R. D. Carcelia excisa Fall. Compsilura concinnata Meig. Echinomyia fera L. Epicampocera crassiseta Rond. Ernestia consobrina Meig. Tachina larvarum L. Tachina japonica Towns. Tricholyga grandis Zett. Zygobothria gilva Hartig. Eudoromyia magnicornis Zett. Exorisia affinis Fall. Histochxta marmorata Fab. Lydella pinivore Ratz. Meigenia bisignata Schin. Parasetigena segregata Rond. Phryxe erythrostoma Hartig. Ptilotachina larvincola Ratz. Ptilotachina monacha Ratz. Tachina larvarum L. Tachina noctuarum Rond. Zenillia libatrix Panz. Zygobothria gilva Hartig. Zygobothria bimaculata Hartig.- N. B.—It is interesting to note that only four species are common to both lists. ReEcorDED Hosts or FOREIGN TACHINID PARASITES OF PORTHETRIA DISPAR ees AT THE Gipsy Mors ParRAsitE LABORATORY. BLEPHARIPA SCUTELLATA R. D.: Acherontia atropos L.; Vanessa antiopa I. CARCELIA GNAVA Meig.: Malacosoma neustria L.; Orgyia antiqua I..; Stilpnotia salicis L. COMPSILURA CONCINNATA Meig.: See list of recorded parasites of P. dispar (ROSSOCOSMIA SERICARI@ Corn.: Antherea yamamai Guér.; A. mylitta Moore; Sericaria mori L. DEXODES NIGRIPES Fall.: a% Ascometia caliginosa Hb.; Agrotis candelarum Stgr:; Bupalus piniarius L.; Cucullia asteris Schiff.; Deilephila euphorbix L.; Eurrhypara urtice L.; Heliothis scutosa Schiff.; Hybernia sp.; Mamestra pisi L.; Miana literosa Hw.; Ortholitha cervinata Schiff.; Phragmatobia fuliginosa L.; Plusia gamma L.; Porthesia similis Fussl.; Tapinostola elymi Tr.; Tephroclystia virgauriata Dbld.; Thau- metopea pinivora Tr.; Vanessa io 1..; V. polychloros L.; V. urtice L.; Lophyrus sp.; Nematus ribesit Scop. PARASETIGENA SEGREGATA Rond.: (See list of recorded parasites of P. dispar.) TACHINA LARVARUM L.: (See list of recorded parasites of P. dispar.) TACHINA JAPONICA Towns.: Porthetria dispar L. TRICHOLYGA GRANDIS Zett. Arctia caja L.; Mamestra oleracea 1..; M. pisi L.; Saturnia pavonia L.; S. pyri Schiff.; Sphinx ligustri L.; Thaumetopea pityocampa Schiff.; Vanessa io L. KNOWN AND RECORDED PARASITES. 89 RecorpED Hosts or FoREIGN TACHINID PARASITES RECORDED ON PORTHETRIA DISPAR. ARGYROPHYLAX ATROPIVORA R. D.: P. dispar L.; Acherontia atropos L.; Notodonta trepida Esp.; Vanessa io L. CARCELIA EXCISA Fall.: Abrostola tripartita Huin.; A. triplasia L.; Arctia caja L.; A. hebe L.; A. villica L.; Bupalus piniarius L.; Callimorpha dominula L.; Cucullia scrophularix Cap.; Dasychira pudibunda L.; Endromis versicolora L.; Hyloicus pinastri L.; P.dispar L.; P.monacha L.; Malacosoma castrensis L.; M. neustria L.; Orgyia antiqua L.; Phragmatobia fuliginosa L.; Pterostoma palpina L.; Pygera curtula L.; Saturnia pyri Schiff.; Sphinx ligustri L.; Stilpnotia salicis L.; Thalpocheres pannonica Frr.; Thaumetopea processionea I.. CoMPSILURA CONCINNATA Meig.: Abraxas grossulariata L.; Acronycta aceres h:; A alnt x; ) Acuspis Hibs, 7A. megacephala F.; A. rumicis L.; A. dens: Schiff. ; Wee chaite levana ibe A, prorsa L.; ean caja L.; Wares cynthia L.; Ogisenta promissa Esp.; Crane phora ligustri Fab.; Cucullia lactuce Esp.; C. verbasci L.; Dasychira pudibunda L.; Dilina tilie L.; Dilobia ceruleocephala L.; Dipterygia scabriuscula L.; Drymonia chaonia Hb.; Euproctis chrysorrhea L.; Hylowcus pinastri L.; Liby- tha celtis Laich.; Porthetria dispar L.; P. moncha L.; Macrothylacia rubi L.; Mamestra brassice L.; M. oleracea L.; M. persicarize L.; Malacosoma neustria L.; Oconistis quadra L.; Phalera bucephala L.; Pieris brassice L.; P. rape L.; Plusia festuce L.; P. gamma Li.; Pecelocampa populi L.; Porthesia similis Fiissl.; Pygzxra anachoreta Fab.; Pyrameis atalanta L.; Smerinthus populi L.; Spilo- soma lubricipeda L.; S. menthastri Esp.; Stauropus fagi L.; Stilpnotia salicis L.; Teniocampa stabilis View.; Thaumetopea processionea L.; T. pityocampa Schiff.; Timandra amata L.; Trachea atriplicis L.; Vanessa antiopa L.; V.ioL.; V. urtice L.; V. xanthomelas Esp.; Yponomeuta padeila LL.; Cimbex humeralis Fourcr.; Trichiocampus viminalis Fall. EcHINOMYIA FERA L.: Agrotis glareosa Esp.; Arctia aulica L.; Leucania obsoleta Sb.; Porthetria dispar L.; P. monacha L.; Mamestra pisi L.; Oconistis quadra L.; Panolis grieovariegata Goeze. EPICAMPOCERA CRASSISETA Rond.: Porthetria dispar L.; Thaumetopea processionea L. ERNESTIA CONSOBRINA Meig.: Cucullia artemisie Hufn.; Porthetria dispar 1. EUDOROMYIA MAGNICORNIS Zett.: Agrotis sp. ind.; Hadena adusta Esp.; Porthetria dispar 1. ExorIsta AFFINIS Fall.: Acronycta alni L.; Arctia caja L.; Porthetria dispar L.; Pachytelia villosella Ou Saturnia ania Lig 8. pyri Schiff. HisToCHATA MARMORATA ‘Fab.: Arctia caja L.; A. quenselu Payk.; A.villicaL.; Cucullia verbani L.; Malacosoma neustria L.; Porthetria dispar L.; Goniarctena rufipes Payk. LYDELLA PINIVOR# Ratz.: Porthetria dispar L.: MEIGENIA BISIGNATA Schin.: Porthetria dispar .: PARASETIGENA SEGREGATA Rond.: Porthetria dispar L.; P. monacha I..; Lophyrus pini L. PHRYXE ERYTHROSTOMA Hartig: Dendrolimus pini L.; Hyloicus pinastri 1..: 90 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. — PTILOTACHINA LARVINCOLA Ratz.: Porthetria dispar L.: PTILOTACHINA MONACHA Ratz.: Porthetria dispar L..: TACHINA LARVARUM L.: ’ Acronycta rumicis L.; Agrotis precor L.; Arctia caja L.; A. villica L.; Catocola fraxini L.; Cosmotriche potatoria L.; Cucullia prenanthis B.; Dasychira fascellina L.; Deilephila gallii Rott.; D. euphorbixe L.; Dendrolimus pini L.; Gastropacha quercifolia L.; Lasiocampa quercus L.; Porthetria dispar L.; P. monacha L.; Macroglossa stellatarum L.; Macrothylacia rubi L.; Malacosoma castrensis L.; M. neustria L.; Mamestra brassice L.; Melitea didyma O.; Melopsilus porcel- lus L.; Ocneria detrita Esp.; Olethreutes hercyniana Tr.; Orgyia erice Germ.; O. gonostigma F.; Orthosia humilis F.; Panolis griseovariegata Goeze; Papilio machaon L.; Plusia iota L.; Saturnia pyri Schiff.; Stilpnotia salicis L.; Vanessa antiopa L.; Vanessa io L.; V. polychloros L.; V. urtice L.; Yponomeuta evonymella L.; Lophyrus pint L.; Pamphilius stellatus Christ. TACHINA NOCTUARUM Rond.: Cosmotriche potatoria L.; Porthetria dispar L..: ZENILLIA LIBATRIX Panz.: Abrostola asclepiadis Schiff.; Brephos nothum Hb.; Dasychira pudibunda L.; > Leven tia autumnalis Strom.; Enders dispar L.; Palaces neustria L.; Pau pigra Hufn.; ina ianee processionea ive Yponomeuta ence Lek, padella 1. ZYGOBOTHRIA GILVA Hartig: s Porthetria dispar L.; Stauropus fagi L.; shales laricis Jur.; L. pallidus Klug.; Lepr; Ts. ae bain; £. Pee Hartig. ZYGOBOTHRIA aoa Ae Porthetria monacha L.; Lophyrus pallidus Klug.; L. pint L.; L. rufus Latr.; L. socius Klug.; L. DaPEaEE Hart.; L. virens Klug. NativE DiptERA REARED FROM PORTHETRIA DISPAR. Tachinide: 1 Exorista blanda O. 8. Exorista fernaldi Will. Exorista pyste Walk. Tachina mella Walk. Other than Tachinide: ? Aphiocheta setacea Aldr. Phora incisuralis Loew Aphiocheta scalaris Loew. Sarcophaga sp. Gauraz anchora Loew. 1 These have only been reared very occasionally at the Gipsy Moth Parasite Laboratory. 2 At the Gipsy Moth Parasite Laboratory these have been recorded only as scavengers and not as para- sites. ; KNOWN AND RECORDED PARASITES. 91 DIPTEROUS PARASITES OF THE BROWN-TAIL MOTH (Euproctis carysor- rhea L.). Foreign TACHINID PARASITES OF EUPROCTIS CHRYSORRH@A. Reared. Recorded. Blepharidea vulgaris Fall. Compsilura concinnata Meig. Compsilura concinnata Meig. Echinomyia prxceps Meig. Cyclotophrys anser Towns. Erycia ferruginea Meig. Dexodes nigripes Fall. Pales pavida Meig. Eudoromyia magnicornis Zett. Tachina latifrons Rond. Masicera sylvatica Fall. Zenillia fauna Meig. Pales pavida Meig. Zenillia libatrix Panz. Parexorista chelonix Rond. Tachina larvarum L. Tricholyga grandis Zett. Zenillia ibatrix Panz. Zygobothria nidicola Towns. N. B.—It is interesting to note that only three species are common to both lists. REcoORDED Hosts oF FOREIGN TACHINIDS REARED FROM EUPROCTIS CHRYSORRH@A AT THE Gipsy Motu Parasite LABORATORY. BLEPHARIDEA (PHYRXE) VULGARIS Fall.: Abraxas grossulariata L.; Adopxa lineola O0.; Aporia crategi L.; Araschinia levana L.; A. prorsa L.; Argynnis lathonia L.; Arctia hebe L.; Boarmia lariciarva Dbld.; Brotolomia meticulosa L.; Calymnia trapezina L.; Cosmotriche potatoria L.; Cucullia anthemidis Gn.; C. asteris Schiff.; C. verbasci L.; Dendrolimus pini L.; Ephyra linearia Hb.; Epineuronia cespitis F.; Euchloé cardamines L.; Euplexia _lucipara Hb.; Hybernia defoliaria Cl.; Hyloicus pinastri L.; Hylophila prasi- nana L.; Leucania albipuncta F.; L. lythargyria Esp.; Mamestra advena F.; M. persvcarie L.; M. reticulata Vill.; Melitxa athalia Rott.; Metopsilus porcellus L.; Nenia typica L.; Parasemia plantaginis L.; Pieris brassice L.; P. dapli- dice L.; P. rape L.; Plusia gamma L..; Thamnonona wavaria L.; Thaumetopea pityocampa Schiff.; TJ. processionea L.; Toxocampa pastinum Tr.; Vanessa antiopa L.; V. 10 L.; V. urtice L.; V. xanthomelas Esp.; Zygena achillex Esp., ab. janthina; Z. filipendule L. (?); Procrustes coriaceus L. COMPSILURA CONCINNATA Meig.: See host list of tachinid parasites of P. dispar. CYCLOTOPHRYS ANSER Towns.: No records other than at the Gipsy Moth Parasite Laboratory. DExoDES (LYDELLA) NIGRIPES Fall.: Ascometia caliginosa Hb.; Agrotis candelarum Stgr.; Bupalus piniarius L.; Cucullia asteris Schiff.; Deilephila euphorbie L.; Eurrhypara urticata L.; Heli- othis scutosa Schiff.; Hybernia sp.; Mamestra pisi L.; Miana literosa Hw.; Ortholitha cervinata Schiff.; Phragmatobia fuliginosa L.; Plusia gamma L.:; Porthesia similis Fiissl.; Tapinostola elymi Tr.; Tephroclystia virgaureata Dbld.; Thaumetopea pinivora Schiff.; Vanessa io L.; V. polychloros L.; V. urtice L.; Lophyrus sp.; Nematus ribesii Scop. 992 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. _ EvDOROMYIA MAGNICORNIS Zett.: | te Agrotis sp.; Hadena adusta Esp.; Porthetria dispar L. MASICERA SYLVATICA Fall.: Apopestes spectrum Esp.; Cucullia verbasci L.; Deilephila euphorbize L.; D. gallii Rott.; D. vespertilio Esp.; Dilina tilie L.; Gastropacha quercifolia Es Lasio- campa quercus L.; Nonagria typhliz The. : Preris brassicx L.; Satenbll pav- onia L.; S. pyri Schiff.; S. spini Schiff.; Sphinx ligustri L. PALES PAVIDA Meig.: Acronycta tridens Schiff.; Agrotis stugmatica Hb.; A. xanthographa F.; Attacus cynthia L.; A. lunula Fab.; Eriogaster catex 1..; Emphytus cingillum Klug; Euproctis chrysorrhea l.; Orgyia erice Germ.; Panolis griseovariegata Goeze; Plusia gamma L.; Thaumetopea processionea L. PAREXORISTA (EXORISTA) CHELONIZ Rond.: Ammocona cxcimacula Fab.; Arctia caja L.; A. hebe L.; A. villica L.; Hadena secalis L..; Macrothylacia rubi L.; Orthosia pistacina Fab.; Phragmatobia fuli- ginosa L.; Rhyparia purpurata L.; Spilosoma lubricipeda L.; Stilpnotia salicis L.; Cimbex femorata L.; Pamphilius stellatus Christ. TACHINA LARVARUM L.: See host list of foreign tachinids recorded from P. dispar. TRICHOLYGA GRANDIS Zett.: | Arctia caja L.; Mamestra oleracea L.; M. pisi L.; Saturnia pavonia L.; S. pyri Schiff.; Sphinx ligustri L.; Thaumetopea pityocampa Schiff.; Vanessa v0 L. ZENILLIA LIBATRIX Panz.: See host list of foreign tachinids recorded as parasites of P. dispar. ZYGOBOTHRIA NIDICOLA Tn.: No record other than at the Gipsy Moth Parasite Laboratory. ReEcorDED Hosts or ForREIGN TACHINIDS RECORDED AS PARASITIC ON EUPROCTIS CHRYSORRH@A. COMPSILURA CONCINNATA Meig.: See list of recorded hosts of foreign tachinids recorded as parasitic on P. dispar. EcHINOMYIA PR&ECEPS Meig:.: Hemaris fuciformis L.; Euproctis chrysorrhea 1 ERYCIA FERRUGINEA ee . Euproctis chrysorrhea 1L.; Melitwa athalia Rott.; M. aurinia Rott.; Porthesia similis Fiissl.; Vanessa io L. PALES PAVIDA Meig.: See list of recorded hosts of foreign tachinids reared from E. chrysorrhea 1. - TACHINA LATIFRONS Rond.: Euproctis chrysorrhea L..; Zygena filipendulx L. ZENILLIA FAUNA Meig.: Acronycta rumicis L.; Cossus cossus L.; Euproctis chrysorrhea 1..: Smerinthus ocellatus L. ZENILLIA LIBATRIX Panz.:- See list of recorded hosts of foreign tachinids reared from EF. chrysorrhea L. KNOWN AND RECORDED PARASITES. 93 Native (AMERICAN) TACHINIDS REARED FROM EvupPROCTIS CHRYSORRH@A L., AT THE Gipsy Moru Parasite LABORATORY. Phorocera saundersi Will. ? Phorocera leucanix Coq. Euphorocera claripennis Macq. Tachina mella Walk. Exorista boarmiz Coq. N. B.—The above species have only been reared very occasionally. The species, however, doubtfully referred to Phorocera lcucaniz Coq. has been reared through to the pupal stage in considerable numbers. These pup have always been imperfect and ‘‘larviform”’ and at the time of writing none has been reared through to the adult. The compilation of the catalogue of parasites was originally under- taken in the expectation that it would prove of great service upon’ exactly such occasions as the present, when the application of the theory of control by parasites should be put to the test. Its value naturally depended upon the accuracy of the original records, and it was only right to suppose that in the majority of instances these could be depended upon. It was equally natural to suppose that the parasitic fauna of such common, conspicuous, and widely dis- tributed insects as the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth would be well represented in these lists, which were based upon a thorough overhauling of European literature, and it was not expected that any parasites of particular importance would be found which were not thus recorded, unless, indeed, they were confined to Continental Asia or to Japan. In the fall of 1907, as soon as the turmoil of his first summer’s work permitted, the junior author attempted to make use of the numerous bibliographical references for the purpose of learning as much as possible of the insects with which he was to deal. One after another, various species were taken up, until he was in possession of practically all of the published information concerning perhaps half of the Hymenoptera listed. Then he stopped, because the information thus gained was obviously not worth the labor. It was not so much that recorded information was scanty; or lacking in interest, but it was because in a great many instances it was contra- dictory to the results of the actual rearing work which had been carried on in the laboratory throughout thesummer. It was obviously impossible to accept everything at its face value, and apparently next to impossible to choose between the true and the false. But one thing remained to be done, and that was to determine at first hand everything which it was necessary to know concerning the numerous species of parasites which it was desired to introduce into America. If the list of parasites which have been reared at the laboratory from imported eggs, caterpillars, and pupe of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth be compared with the lists which have already been given, the numerous and obvious differences which are immedi- ately apparent will serve better than words to illustrate the situation which confronted us at the close of the season of 1907. 94 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. ESTABLISHMENT AND DISPERSION OF THE NEWLY INTRODUCED PARASITES. In the beginning we were very far from accrediting to that phase of the project which has to do with the establishment and dispersion of the newly introduced parasites the importance which it deserved. Many widely diverse species of insects were known to have been introduced from the Old World and firmly established in America. Presumably they were accidentally imported, as was the case with ‘the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth; presumably, also, they had spread and increased from a small beginning, at first very gradually and later more rapidly, until they had become component parts of the American fauna over a wide territory. The circumstances under which the gipsy moth was imported were well known, and a good guess had been made as to those which resulted in the introduction of the brown-tail moth. But these were and are rare exceptions in this respect, and for the most part the preliminary chapters in the story of each of the insect immigrants never have been and PrHeeay never will be written. Because the two very conspicuous instances of the gipsy moth and | the brown-tail moth were constantly and automatically recurring whenever the probable future of the imtentionally introduced para- sites was considered, it was, perhaps, taken a little too much for granted, that they were to be considered as typical and significant of what to expect. In each instance the invasion started from a small beginning, and while the subsequent histories were different, the more rapid spread of the brown-tail moth was directly due to the fact that the females were capable of flight, and the relatively slow advance of the gipsy moth into new territory to the reverse. Even the brown-tail moth was for some years confined to a comparatively limited area, and it was rather expected that the parasites, if they established themselves at all, would remain for a similar period in the immediate vicinity of the localities where they were first given their freedom. Accordingly, in accepting this theory without submitting it to a test, attempts were made to encompass the rapid dissemination of the parasites coincidently with their introduction. In 1906 and 1907 the parasites which were reared from the imported material were mostly liberated in small and scattered colonies. In a few instances this procedure was the best which could have been adopted; in others the worst. Small colonies of Calosoma, for example, remained for several years in the immediate vicinity of the point where the parent beetles were first liberated before any material dispersion was appar- ent (see Pl. XXIV), and the small colony was thus justified. The gipsy-moth egg parasite Anastatus, as was later determined, ESTABLISHMENT AND DISPERSION. 95 spreads at a rate of but a few hundred feet per year, and if it is to become generally distributed throughout the gipsy-moth-infested area within a reasonable time, natural dispersion must be assisted by artificial. These, however, are both exceptions. In the case of Monodonto- merus, and perhaps of other parasites, gregarious in their habit, it is not only conceivable but probable that a single fertilized female would be sufficient to establish the species in a new country, because the union between the sexes is effected within the body of the host in which they were reared. No matter how far a female may range and no matter how widely separated the victims of her maternal instincts, her progeny will rarely die without each finding its mate. Species having such habits are eminently well fitted to establish themselves wherever they secure foothold, even in the smallest numbers, and the small colony is again justified. Many of the hymenopterous parasites, and very likely all of them, are capable of parthenogenetic reproduction, and here again is a factor which becomes of considerable importance in this connection. Some few of these are thelyotokous (bearing females only) and as such are eminently well fitted to establishment in a new country under other- wise unsatisfactory conditions. Most are arrhenotokous (bearing | males only), and such are probably better fitted to establishment than would be the case if the species were wholly incapable of par- thenogenetic reproduction. It has been proved, for example, that a single female of a strictly arrhenotokous species, may, through fertilization by her own parthenogenetically produced offspring, become the progenetrix of a race the vigor of which appears not to be immediately affected by the fact that their continued multiplica- . tion must be considered as the closest form of inbreeding. Whenever opportunity has offered the ability of the various species to reproduce parthenogenetically has been studied, and many interesting and some peculiar facts have been discovered which, it is hoped, will serve as the subject for a technical paper later on. This power appears to be confined to the Hymenoptera, however, and the tachinid parasites, like their hosts, are rarely or perhaps never parthenogenetic. When continued existence of an insect in a new country is de- pendent upon the mating of isolated females it is at once evident that it is also dependent upon the rapidity of dispersion and upon the number of individuals which are comprised in the original colony. One of the most constant sources of surprise is in the rapidity with which the parasites disperse. One, Monodontomerus, has undoubt- edly extended its range for more than 200 miles in the course of the five years which have elapsed since its liberation, and there is no 96 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. reason to believe that others among the introduced species will not disperse at an equal rate, once they are sufficiently well established. But Monodontomerus is eminently well fitted for dispersion, and its case is altogether different from that of a tachinid which is de- pendent upon sexual reproduction for the continuation of the spe- cies. A few hundred individuals, spreading rapidly toward all points of the compass, soon become widely scattered, and it is, and will remain for a long time, a question just how rare an insect may be and each individual still be able to find its mate. That the indi- viduals of the first colonies of many of the tachinid parasites scat- tered so widely as to make the mating of the next generation purely a matter of chance and of rare occurrence is now accepted as well within the bounds of probability. The first serious doubts as to the wisdom of the policy of the small colony were felt in 1907, and beginning with June of that year larger colonies were planted in the instance of every species than had been the practice up to that time. In the fall of 1908 the recovery of Monodontomerus over a wide territory lent strength to these half- — formed convictions, and when, during 1909 and 1910, one after another of the various parasites were recovered under circumstances which were in most cases essentially similar, all doubts vanished as to the wisdom of the course finally adopted. At the present time there is no more inexorable rule governing the conduct of the labora- tory than that establishment of a newly introduced parasite is first to be secured, while dispersion, if later developments prove that it. can be artificially aided, comes as a wholly secondary consideration. For the most part, however, dispersion may be left to take care of itself. 7 An even larger appreciation of the necessity for strong colonies has been reached during the present winter (1910-11), coincidently with the results of the scouting work for Monodontomerus and Pteromalus in the brown-tail moth hibernating nests. (See maps, Pls. XXII, XXV.) The details will not be given in this imme- diate connection, but they will be found later on in connection with the discussion of these species. It is sufficient at this time to say that the circumstances under which the Pteromalus was recov- ered after the lapse of two years following its colonization were such as to cast doubts upon the conclusions which had been tentatively reached concerning the inability of certain other species to exist in America, and their possible significance had something to do with the decision to continue the work of ‘parasite importation along wholly different lines in 1911. It may be, after all, that 40,000 individuals of Apanteles fulvipes are not enough to make one good colony. DISEASE IN CONTROL OF MOTHS. | 97 DISEASE AS A FACTOR IN THE NATURAL CONTROL OF THE GIPSY 3 MOTH AND THE BROWN-TAIL MOTH. In continuing this work consideration must be given to the proba- ble effect which the prevalence of disease would possibly have in the reduction of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth to the ranks of ordinary rather than of extraordinary pests. In America, as is generally well known, the brown-tail moth is annually destroyed to an extraordinary extent as the result of an epidemic and specific fungous disease, while the gipsy moth is frequently subjected to very material diminution of numbers through a much less well known affection popularly known as ‘‘the wilt,” apparently similar to the silkworm disease ‘‘flacherie.”’ In more respects than one the prevalence of these diseases has been inimical to the prosecution of the parasite work. In the be- ginning, when it was expected that the parasites would remain in the immediate vicinity of the localities where they were first given their freedom, great pains were taken to provide colony sites in situations where the caterpillars were not only common but where there was reason to believe that they would remain healthy for at least one or two years. This was an exceedingly difficult matter, and one which was the cause of more troubles, doubts, and fears during 1907 and 1908 than almost any other phase of the parasite work. With the final recognition of the great superiority of the large col- ony, which came about through a better knowledge of the powers of rapid dispersion possessed by the parasites, this seeming obstacle to success wholly disappeared, except in the case of such parasites as Anastatus, which actually did remain in the spot where they were placed, and which could not travel beyond a certain limited radius, no matter how great the necessity. At the present time the association with the parasite problem of the otherwise wholly separate question of disease as a factor in © the control of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth is entirely confined to speculations as to the probable future of these pests, pro- vided their control is left to disease alone. If, as is conceivable, effective control is exerted through disease, further importation of parasites is rendered not only needless but wholly undesirable. If, on the contrary, such control is likely to be inefficient, from an eco- nomic standpoint, every effort should be exerted to make the parasite work a success. In other words, the decision as to the adoption of a policy for the future conduct of the activities of the laboratory depended very largely upon whether or not disease seemed likely to become effective in the case of the more important of the two pests. ‘The fact that the present plans provide for the continuation of the 62188°—Bull, 91—12——7 98 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. work along even more energetic lines than in the past indicates suffi- ; ciently well the character of the decision finally reached. This is not the place for, nor are the writers prepared to enter ; into, a discussion of the caterpillar diseases of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth, but it is perhaps not out of place to recount — some of the incidents which have been taken into consideration in | the present instance. In this, as in many others similar in character, the brown-tail moth has largely been ignored, owing to its being j generally considered as the lesser pest of the two. As frequently before, the work upon the brown-tail moth parasites, although pursued quite as actively as that upon the parasites of the gipsy moth, was relegated to a secondary position. Very little has been published concerning the gipsy-moth cater- ~ pillar disease previously to 1907, when the junior author first had opportunity to familiarize himself with the situation at first hand. It was to him a novelty when, early in the summer of that year, wholesale destruction of the half-grown caterpillars was first noticed in numerous localities before they had succeeded in effecting the com- plete defoliation of the trees and shrubs upon which they were feeding. In all its essential characters the disease was similar to that which had swept over the army of tent caterpillars which were defoliating the apple and cherry trees in southern New Hampshire in 1898, as recounted in the bulletin upon the parasites of that insect, pub- _lished as No. 5 in the Technical Series of the New Hampshire Agri- cultural Experiment Station. It was believed of this disease, at the time when these investigations were being conducted, that it was infectious, since the inhabitants of whole nests would all perish simultaneously. At the same time, its infectious or contagious nature was not established. On the supposition that the disease of the tent eateries was infectious, and that that of the gipsy-moth caterpillars was similar in ie it looked for a time as though the parasite work was destined to an untimely end through the destruction of the gipsy- moth caterpillars before the parasites had opportunity to establish themselves and increase to the point of efficacy. Neither was there anything observed during the summer of 1907 to render this supposition untenable, except (and from an economic standpoint the exception was one - grave importance) the fact that, taking the infested area as a whole, there was a tremendous increase in the number of egg masses of the gipsy moth in the fall of 1907 over the number which had been present the previous spring. There did not seem to be any particular reason why the disease should not increase in effectiveness as time passed on, however, and when in the spring of 1908 myriads of caterpillars in the first stage were found ‘‘ wilting” in the forests in Melrose, and when just a little DISEASE IN CONTROL OF MOTHS. 99 later practically every caterpillar was destroyed in one particular locality which had been selected as a good place for the very first colony of Apanteles fulvipes, there seemed to be reason to hope for speedy relief through disease. About this time these hopes were rudely shattered by the failure of several attempts to demonstrate the infectious or contagious nature of the disease through experi- ments carried on at the laboratory. Its noncontagious nature was further indicated by the fact that it did not spread across a narrow roadway near the laboratory, one side of which was swarming with dying caterpillars, while the other was peopled with an alarming but not destructive abundance of healthy ones. It appeared, after all, as though the views often expressed by Mr. A. H. Kirkland (at that time superintendent of the moth work in Massachusetts) to the effect that the disease was nothing more than the natural concomi- tant of overpopulation, and that an insufficient or unsuitable food supply was the true explanation of its prevalence, were right. That it was not to be depended upon for immediate results was certain when, at the close of 1908, a further alarming and apparently an unaffected increase in the distribution and abundance of the gipsy moth in Massachusetts and New Hampshire was found to have taken place wherever conditions were not such as to render destruction through disease the only thing which saved the gipsy moth from extinction through starvation, or where active hand suppression work had not been undertaken. In 1909, and again in 1910, observations upon the progress of the disease were made almost daily throughout the caterpillar season. It was no longer looked upon as a serious obstacle to the success of the parasite work, except as it interfered (as it frequently did most seriously) with the work of colonizing Anastatus, and to a lesser extent Calosoma. It was also, as ever, the cause of serious trouble whenever attempts were made to feed caterpillars in the laboratory in confinement. The disease acquired new interest, however, through the gradual accumulation of evidence tending to support the theory that it was either transmissible from one generation to another through the egg or that a tendency to contract it was thus transmitted. | Recognition of this characteristic through cumulative evidence resulting from more occasional or specific observations than it would be possible to review at this time, was accompanied by the almost equally apparent fact that the disease was becoming slightly more effective at a somewhat earlier stage in the progress of a colony of the gipsy moth following its establishment in a new locality. It was found, for example, in New Hampshire in colonies which had barely reached the stripping stage. A few years before the cater- _ pillars composing such colonies would naturally have migrated from 100 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. | the stripped trees to others in the vicinity, and it is an unmistakable fact that such migrations, which have several times been mentioned _ in the earlier reports of the State superintendent of moth work, are now decidedly less frequent, even without taking into consideration the greater territory throughout which the moth is now present in destructive abundance. Although the junior author has personally visited large numbers of outlying colonies of the moth in the course of 1908, 1909, and 1910, he has yet to see one in which the disease had not appeared coincidently with the development of the colony to the stripping stage, if not slightly in advance of that time. It is probably safe to say that such conditions as are described in the first annual report of the superintendent of moth work as pre- vailing over a large territory in the old infested section during 1904 and 1905, will probably not immediately recur in the histcry of the — gipsy moth in eastern Massachusetts. That something approaching this may result in parts of New Hampshire is well within the bounds of probability, and that the conditions will be very bad in that State during the course of the next few years as well as in some of the towns in Massachusetts may be accepted as most probable. What- ever may be the condition presented by the older infested sections in eastern Massachusetts five or ten years from now, the only hope of preventing an ever-increasing wave of destruction from spreading over western Massachusetts, across New Hampshire and Vermont, and over the border into the State of New York, seems to lie, as always, In an increasing expenditure for hand suppression or in the success of the experiment in parasite introduction. Through the methods now in operation it is probable that the pest will very largely be prevented from making long ‘“‘jumps,’ which would otherwise have been of frequent occurrence, but the slower and more steady natural spread, through the agency of wind, and probably, when the headwaters of the Connecticut, Hudson, and Ohio are reached, by water, must be considered in every attempt to discount the future. It was taken into consideration when the future of the parasite work was decided upon. In the course of the studies of the parasites and parasitism of native insects which have been undertaken in connection with those of the para- sites of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth, no less than three spe- cies have been encountered which are controlled to some extent by a disease which bears a very close superficial resemblance to the “wilt” | of the gipsy moth. These are the white-marked tussock moth, the tent caterpillar, and the ‘‘ pine tussock moth.”’ The white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma 8S. & A.) is well known as a defoliating pest in cities, and has been so abundant as at times to become a rival of the gipsy moth in its destructive capacities in certain of the larger cities in southeastern New England. DISEASE IN CONTROL OF MOTHS. 101 It is very subject to a “wilt” disease, and no colony has been observed which has reached such proportions as to threaten the defoliation of street trees in which the disease has not appeared. In one instance the disease was so prevalent as to destroy practically all of the cater- pillars, and, as in the case of the gipsy moth, the scattering caterpillars which hatched from the eggs deposited by the few survivors were seriously affected the following year, notwithstanding the presence of an abundance of food. Furthermore, caterpillars hatching from eges collected in this and similar colonies removed to the country where the few native caterpillars to be found have always been remark- ably healthy, perished through the “wilt” exactly as though they had hatched in the city. Nevertheless, the white-marked tussock moth has been for long, is now, and probably will remain the worst defoliating insect enemy of such trees as the horse chestnut, maple, sycamore, etc.,in strictly urban communities in the Eastern States generally. It does not appear un- reasonable to suppose that the gipsy moth may similarly continue to be a pest in spite of the disease. Asa matter of fact, every observation which has been made upon either the fungous disease of the brown- tail moth caterpillars, the wilt disease of the gipsy-moth caterpillars, or diseases of other defoliating caterpillars, such as that of the white- marked tussock moth, the tent caterpillar, and the “‘ pine tussock moth,” has tended to confirm the conclusion that such insect epidemics rarely play more than the one réle in the economy of nature. They do not prevent an insect from increasing to an extent which renders it a pest, but they may, and frequently do, render very efficient service in effect- ing a wholesale reduction in the abundance of such insects when other agencies fail. When the insect in question is ordinarily controlled by parasites, as appears to be the case with the white-marked tussock moth, the “‘pine tussock moth,” etc., it is probable that a long time will elapse before it will again encounter the combination of favorable circumstances which make possible abnormal increase. When, as with the white-marked tussock moth in cities, the tent cat- erpilar in southeastern New England, or the brown-tail moth and gipsy -moth in America, adequate control by parasites is lacking, reduction in numbers through disease is not likely to result in more than tem- porary relief. The more complete the destruction wrought by the insect the longer the period which must necessarily elapse before it again reaches the state of destructive abundance and, looking at it from this standpoint, it is not unlikely that the gipsy moth is much more abundant at the present time than it would have been had it not been for the prevalence of disease. There are, each year, an abundance of localities where the destruction of a great majority of the caterpillars by disease has been the only thing which has saved the whole race from complete extinction in that locality through con- 102 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. sumption of the entire supply of available food before growth was completed. Under such circumstances the disease has been of posi- tive benefit to the gipsy moth, rather than the reverse. STUDIES IN THE PARASITISM OF NATIVE INSECTS. Among a considerable number and variety of native insects studied at the laboratory which resemble the gipsy moth in habit, or which are more or less closely allied to it in their natural affinities, no two have been found in the economy of which parasitism has played an exactly similar réle. There is this to be said, however, that only one amongst them, and this the tent caterpillar, appears to be ineffectually controlled by parasitism, except under unusual circumstances. Several very beautiful examples of control by parasites have been encountered in the course of these investigations, and, comparatively speaking, the exceptional instances in which parasites lose control through one reason or another are exceedingly rare. Such instances are usually, if not inevitably, accompanied by a conspicuous outbreak of the insect in question. The destructiveness of the white-marked tussock moth in cities is apparently due to the fact that it is peculiarly adapted to life under an urban environment. It is an arboreal insect, and one which is pre- vented through the winglessness of its females from dispersing over the country as the brown-tail moth, for example, would do under simi- lar circumstances. Its parasites, on the other hand, are not always fitted for a peculiarly arboreal existence. Many of them are partially terrestrial, and in addition they are strong upon the wing. Most of the introduced parasites of the gipsy moth and brown-tail moth which are known to have established themselves in America are known to be dispersing at a rapid rate. Several of them have been reared as parasites of the white-marked tussock moth from cater- pillars or pupze collected under urban surroundings, and since we have positive proof of their wandering habits there is every reason to believe that the native parasites of the tussock moth possess similar characteristics. That is to say, instead of staying within the limited area in which their host abounds, they are likely to scatter throughout the country immediately following the completion of their transforma- tions. They are neither fitted for continued existence in the city to the degree which is characteristic of their host, nor are they compelled, like it, to accept it when they find themselves city-born through chance ancestral wanderings. Every season’s observations (and for four consecutive years the tussock moth has received more than a modicum of attention) has added arguments to support the contention that the white-marked tussock moth is controlled in the country through parasitism and not by birds or other predators. In any event it is controlled to such an PARASITISM OF NATIVE INSECTS. 1038 extent as to have made a study in parasitism under strictly rural con- ditions very difficult, except when eggs or caterpillars have been arti- ficially colonized for the purpose. The outbreak of the Heterocampa in New Hampshire and Maine is another exceptional instance. In many respects the results of the relatively limited study given to this insect were the most remarkable of any, since there was offered what, to the writers, was the unique spectacle of unrestricted increase being checked through starvation without the intervention of disease. Notwithstanding the fact that the abundance of this insect was so great.as to bring about complete defoliation of its favored trees over a very wide area, not a sign of dis- ease was observed in the fall of 1909 in forests where millions of cater- pillars were literally starving to death. The final, thoroughly effect- ive, and miraculously complete subjugation of the outbreak, which resulted in the insect dropping from the abundance above mentioned to what is perhaps less than its normal numbers in the course of a single year, has already been described in a paper which appeared in a recent number of the Journal of Economic Entomology. There is every reason to believe that it was entirely the result of insect enemies, including both parasites and a predaceous beetle, which latter, through its ability to increase abnormally at the direct expense of that particular insect, played a réle exactly comparable to that of the true facultative parasites. Such another outbreak of Heterocampa has never been known, and it is probable that it will be very many years before a combination of conditions makes its repetition possible. It is altogether probable that during this period the parasites will remain in full control. A third exceptional instance is the present outbreak of the “pine tussock moth”’ in Wisconsin. This interesting and, as it has proved itself, potentially destructive insect is decidedly rare in Massachusetts, but notwithstanding its scarcity a sufficient number was collected in 1908 and 1909 to make possible a study of its parasites. Para- sitism to an extent rarely exceeded amongst leaf-feeding Lepidoptera was found to be existent, and it is safe to say that had it not been for its parasites the host would have increased at least fivefold or six- fold in 1909 over the numbers which were present in 1908. Such a rate of increase, if continued, would have placed it among the ranks of destructive insects in a very few years, and it appears that some- thing of this sort actually occurred in northern Wisconsin. There, some years ago, it reached a stage of abundance which resulted in partial or complete defoliation of pine throughout a considerable territory and, as was expected, a relatively small percentage of the caterpillars and pup were found to be parasitized. Existing para- sitism in 1910 was not sufficiently effective to prevent its increase to a point which would have made complete defoliation of its food ~ OA PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. plant, and consequently its death through starvation, an accomplished © fact had its abundance not been reduced through the prevalence of a disease superficially similar to the ‘‘ wilt”’ of the gipsy moth. The fall webworm is generally a common and abundant insect in New England, but rarely as common or abundant as it frequently becomes in the South. An elaborate study of its parasites and the effect which parasitism apparently played in effecting its control was made in the fall of 1910, with interesting results. It was found that the prevailing percentage of parasitism was sufficient to offset an increase of no less than fourfold annually, and even at that there is reason to believe that our results err on the side of conservatism. The elimination of these parasites for a very short period of years would undoubtedly be followed by an increase of the host comparable to that of the gipsy moth. The one insect studied at the laboratory which appears habitually and under its normal environment to become so unduly abundant as to invite destruction through disease at regular intervals is the tent caterpillar. In the report upon its parasites,’ it was contended that they played a part subservient to that taken by the disease, and this statement drew forth some criticism at the time of its pubnessnae! It is a satisfaction to note that the original contention appears to be upheld by the results of studies conducted at the gipsy-moth parasite labora- tory. These results seem to justify the further contention that the present status of the tent caterpillar is, in a way, prophetic of that which would result were the gipsy moth to be left to the control of its disease. At frequent but irregular intervals the tent caterpillar increases to such an extent as to become a pest, and unless artificially checked it defoliates fruit trees in southern New England. That it never reaches the destructiveness characteristic of the gipsy-moth invasion is seemingly due to difference in habit. As is well known, the gipsy- moth caterpillar is almost an omnivorous feeder and the female moth is incapable of flight. Its eggs are deposited indiscriminately in every conceivable place to which a caterpillar or moth can gain access. The adult of the tent caterpillar is in no way restricted to the immediate vicinity of the locality where it chose to pupate as a caterpillar, but, instead, uses what really amounts to an unwise amount of discretion in its selection of a place for oviposition. Cherry first and then apple is selected in preference to all other food plants, and with the exception of a limited number of other rosaceous trees and shrubs, its eggs are almost never found elsewhere. As a result, when it is at all abundant its caterpillars, which have not the 1.Technical Bulletin 5, New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station. PARASITISM IN INSECT CONTROL. 105 wandering characteristics of those of the gipsy moth, but rather the opposite, find themselves crowded in excessive numbers upon a _ limited variety of shrubs and trees; complete defoliation of these comparatively few host plants quickly follows, and weather condi- tions being favorable to the development of disease, wholesale destruction is all that intervenes between an unnatural migration or starvation. Such reduction is followed by a period of years during which the parasites check but do not overcome the tendency to increase, and it is only a little while before the process is repeated. There were, in certain localities in eastern Massachusetts in the summer of 1910, continuous strips of roadside grown up to a variety of trees and shrubs, the most of which were defoliated by tent cater- pillars, all of which had hatched from eggs deposited upon the occasional wild-cherry tree which was present. Several such strips were visited at about the time when the caterpillars elsewhere were beginning to pupate, and not a single living caterpillar or pupa could be found amongst the thousands of dead and decomposing remains of the victims of overpopulation. These were but a repeti- tion of conditions as observed a few miles north in New Hampshire 12 years ago. How frequently similar conditions occurred during the intervening period is not known. In addition to those species mentioned in the preceding pages, quite a number of other leaf-feeding Lepidoptera have been more or less casually studied in a less comprehensive but at the same time a careful manner. PARASITISM AS A FACTOR IN INSECT CONTROL. In reviewing the results of these studies, the fact is strikingly evident that parasitism plays a very different part in the economy of different hosts. Some habitually support a parasitic fauna both abundant and varied, while others are subjected to attack by only a limited number of parasites, the most abundant of which is rela- tively uncommon. No two of the lepidopterous hosts studied, unless they chanced to be congencric and practically identical in habit and life history, were found to be victimized by exactly the same species of parasites. Neither are the same species apt to occur in connection with the same host in the same relative abundance, one to another, year after year in the same locality, nor in two different localities the same year. At the same time there are certain features in the parasitism of each species which are common to each of the others, whether these be arctiid, liparid, lasiocampid, tortricid, saturniid, or tineid, one of the most common of which is that each host supports a variety of parasites, oftentimes differing among themselves to a remarkable degree in habit, natural affinities, and methods of attack. Depart- 106 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. ures from this rule have not been encountered among the defoliating Lepidoptera as yet, and while exceptions will probably be found to exist, they will doubtless remain exceptions in proof of the rule. From this the rather obvious conclusion has been drawn, that to be effective in the case of an insect like the gipsy moth or the brown- tail moth, parasitic control must come about through a variety of parasites, working together harmoniously, rather than through one specific parasite, as is known to be the case with certain less spe- cialized insects, having a less well-defined seasonal history. To speak still more plainly, it is believed that the successful conclusion of the experiment in parasite introduction now under consideration depends upon whether or not we shall be able to import and establish in America each of the component parts of an effective ‘‘sequence” of parasites. This belief is further supported by the undoubted fact, that in every locality from which parasite material has been received abroad, both the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth are subjected to attack by such a group or sequence of parasites, of which the component species differ more or less radically in habit and in their manner of attack. In the case of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth abroad, as well as in that of nearly every species of leaf-feeding Lepidouiees studied in America, there are included among the parasites species which attack the eggs, the caterpillars, large and small, and the prepupe and pupe, respectively. Frequently, but not always, there are predatory enemies, which, through their ability to increase at the immediate expense of the insect upon which they prey, when- ever this insect becomes sufficiently abundant to invite such increase, are to be considered as ranking with the true facultative parasites when economically considered. It is, therefore, our aim to secure the firm establishment in America of a sequence of the egg, the caterpillar, and the pupal parasites of the gipsy moth and brown-tail moth as they are found to exist abroad, and until this is either done or proved to be impossible of accomplishment through causes over which we have no control, we can neither give up the fight nor expect to bring it to a successful conclusion. } It was stated a page or two back that some species of insects support a parasitic fauna both numerous and varied, while others are subjected to attack by only a limited number of parasites, none of which can be considered as common. Notwithstanding the fact that somewhat similar differences are discernible between the para- sitic fauna of the same insect at different times or under different environment, it is perfectly safe to elaborate the original statement still further and to say that some species are habitually subjected to a much heavier parasitism than others. Unquestionably the _ PARASITISM IN INSECT CONTROL. 107 average percentage of parasitism of the fall webworm in eastern Massachusetts, taken over a sufficiently long series of years to make a fair average possible, is the same as the average would be over another similar series of years in the same general region. This could be said of the larve of any other insect as well as of that of the fall webworm, but the average percentage of parasitism in another would most likely not be the same, but might be very much larger or very much smaller. To put it dogmatically, each species of insect in a country where the conditions are settled is subjected to a certain fixed average percentage of parasitism, which, in the vast majority of instances and in connection with numerous other controlling agencies, results in the maintenance of a perfect balance. The insect neither increases to such abundance as to be affected by disease or checked from further multiplication through lack of food, nor does it become extinct, but throughout maintains a degree of abundance in relation to other species existing in the same vicinity, which, when averaged for a long series of years, is constant. In order that this balance may exist it is necessary that among the factors which work together in restricting the multiplication of the species there shall be at least one, if not more, which is what is here termed facultative (for want of a better name), and which, by exerting a restraining influence which is relatively more effective when other conditions favor undue increase, serves to pre- vent it. There are a very large number and a great variety of factors of more or less importance in effecting the control of defoli- ating caterpillars, and to attempt to catalogue them would be futile, but however closely they may be scrutinized very few will be found to fall into the class with parasitism, which in the majority of instances, though not in all, is truly ‘‘ facultative.” A very large proportion of the controlling agencies, such as the destruction wrought by storm, low or high temperature, or other climatic conditions, is to be classed as catastrophic, since they are wholly independent in their activities upon whether the insect which incidentally suffers is rare or abundant. The storm which destroys 10 caterpillars out of 50 which chance to be upon a tree would doubt- less have destroyed 20 had there been 100 present, or 100 had there been 500 present. The average percentage of destruction remains the same, no matter how abundant or how near to extinction the insect may have become. Destruction through certain other agencies, notably by birds and other predators, works in a radically different manner. These predators are not directly affected by the abundance or scarcity of any single item in their varied menu. Like all other creatures they are forced to maintain a relatively constant abundance among the 108 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. other forms of animal and plant life, and since their abundance from year to year is not influenced by the abundance or scarcity of any particular species of insect among the many upon which they prey they can not be ranked as elements in the facultative control of such species. On the contrary, it may be considered that they average to destroy a certain gross number of individuals each year, and since this destruction is either constant, or, if variable, is not corre- lated in its variations to the fluctuations in abundance of the insect preyed upon, it would most probably represent a heavier percentage when that insect was scarce than’when it was common. In other words, they work in a manner which is the opposite of ‘‘facultative”’ as here understood. In making the above statement the fact is not for a moment lost to sight that birds which feed with equal freedom upon a variety of insects will destroy a greater gross number of that species which chances to be the most abundant, but with the very few apparent exceptions of those birds which kill for the mere sake of killing they will only destroy a certain maximum number all told. A little reflection will make it plain that the percentage destroyed will never become greater, much if any, as the insect becomes more com- mon, and, moreover, that after a certain limit in abundance is passed this percentage will grow rapidly less. A natural balance can only be maintained through the operation of facultative agencies which effect the destruction of a greater proportionate number of indi- viduals as the insect in question increases in abundance. Of these facultative agencies parasitism appears to be the most subtle in its action. Disease, whether brought about by some specific organism, as with the brown-tail moth, or through insuffi- cient or unsuitable food supply without the intervention of any specific organism, as appears at the present time to be the case with the gipsy moth, does not as a rule become effective until the insect has increased to far beyond its average abundance. There are exceptions to this rule, or appear to be, but comparatively only a very few have come to our immediate attention. Finally, famine and starvation must be considered as the most radical means at nature’s disposal, whereby insects, like the defoliating Lepidoptera, are finally brought into renewed subjugation. With insects like the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth disease does not appear to become a factor until a degree of abundance has been reached which makes the insect in question, 2pso facto, a pest. Whether in the future methods will be devised for artificially ren- dering such diseases more quickly effective, remains to be determined through actual experimental work continued over a considerable number of years. RATE OF INCREASE OF GIPSY MOTH. 109 In effect, the proposition is here submitted as a basis for further discussion that only through parasites and predators, the numerical increase of which is directly affected by the numerical increase of the insect upon which they prey, is that insect to be brought under complete natural control, except in the relatively rare instances in which destruction through disease is not dependent upon super- abundance. The present experiment in parasite introduction was undertaken and has been conducted on the assumption that there existed in America all of the various elements necessary to bring about the complete control of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth, except their respective parasites. Believing that this stand was correctly taken, much time has been devoted to a consideration of the extent to which these pests are already controlled through natural agencies already in operation. The fact that both insects have increased steadily and rapidly in every locality in which they have become established and where adequate suppressive measures have not been undertaken, until they have reached a stage of abundance far in excess of that which prevails in most countries abroad, renders superfluous further comment upon the present ineffectiveness of these agencies. The difference between the rate at which they > have averaged to increase in localities where they have become established and their potential rate of increase as indicated by the number of eggs deposited by the average female should indicate very accurately the efficiency of such agencies, and the difference between the actual rate of increase and no increase similarly indicates the amount of additional control which must be exerted by the para- sites if their numbers are to be kept at an innocuous minimum. THE RATE OF INCREASE OF THE GIPSY MOTH IN NEW ENGLAND. The potential rate of increase as determined by the number of eggs deposited by the average female of the gipsy moth varies con- siderably under different circumstances, and affords an interesting example of a phase of facultative control not touched upon in the last chapter. When the exhaustive studies into its life and habits were conducted under the general supervision of the Massachusetts State Board of Agriculture during the final decade of the last century, it was determined that the number was between 450 and 600. In the opinion of some, the fecundity of the gipsy moth has dis- tinctly decreased during the 14 years which have elapsed since the publication of the report in which these figures were given, and in order to determine the point a considerable number of egg masses was collected during the winter of 1908-9 and the eggs carefully counted. It was found that in those from the older infested terri- tory or from outlying colonies where the moth was particularly 110 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. abundant, the number of eggs to a mass averaged considerably less : than 300. In egg masses from outlying districts where the infesta- tion was new, and where the moth had never reached its maximum abundance, the average in a few masses counted was slightly in excess of 500. The number is, however, very variable, and the character of food and the meteorological conditions during the feed- ing period of the caterpillars are doubtless important features. Hot weather during June forces the development of the caterpillars and they do not become large. Small moths deposit fewer eggs rather than smaller eggs. It is possible that there is actually a decrease in the fecundity of moths brought about by our short and ardent sum- mers, but for the present it is not proved, and it is believed that whenever abundance of the insect is sufficiently reduced the original rate of multiplication will prevail. The point is one well worthy of further investigation, but for the present the potential rate of increase, provided no controlling factors whatever are overative, will be considered as 250-fold annually. The best information available as to the rate of increase of the gipsy moth actually prevailing in Massachusetts is contained in the report entitled ‘‘The Gypsy Moth,” by Mr. Edward H. Forbush and Dr. C. H. Fernald, which was published under the direction of the board of agriculture. These authorities, in their discussion of the matter, say as follows: | The study of the increase and dissemination of the gipsy moth in Massachusetts is most interesting. Perhaps there never has been a case where the origin and advance of an insect could be more readily traced. As the moth appears to be con- fined as yet to a comparatively small area, and as the region has been examined more or less thoroughly for five successive years, the opportunities offered for the study of the multiplication and distribution of the msect have been unequaled. When it is considered that the number of eggs deposited by the female averages from 450 to 600, that 1,000 caterpillars have been seen to hatch from a single egg cluster, and that at least one egg cluster has been found containing over 1,400 eggs, there can be no doubt that the reproductive powers of the moth are enormous. Mr. A. H. Kirkland has made calculations which show that in eight years the unre- stricted increase of a single pair of gipsy moths would be sufficient to devour all vegetation in the United States. This, of course, could never occur in nature, and is mentioned here merely to give an idea of the reproductive capacity of the insect. It seems remarkable at first sight that an insect of such reproductive powers, which had been in existence in the State for 20 years, unrestrained by any organized effort on the part of man, did not spread over a greater territory than 30 townships, or about 220 square miles. Some of the causes which at first checked its increase and lim- ited its diffusion in Medford have already been set forth. Most of the checks which at first served to prevent the excessive multiplication of the gipsy moth in Medford operate effectively to-day wherever the species is isolated. True, it has now become acclimated. But any small isolated moth colony still suffers greatly from the attacks of its natural enemies and from the struggle with other adverse influences which encompass it. The normal rate of increase in such isolated colonies as are found to-day in the outer towns of the infested district seems to be small. The annual increase can be readily ascertained by noting the relative number of egg clusters laid RATE OF INCREASE OF GIPSY MOTH. 8 in successive years, the unhatched or latest clusters being easily distinguished from - the hatched or ‘‘old” clusters, and the age of these latter, whether one, two, three, or more years, being indicated by their state of preservation. The ratio of the aver- age annual increase of 10 such colonies was found to be 6.42; that is, six or seven ege clusters on an average may be found in the second season to one of the first season. If the sumber of eggs deposited by the average female moth be set at 500, and if the sexes of her progeny are equally divided, a potent al increase of 250-fold for each annual generation is provided for. Under complete control only one pair of moths would average to be produced from each mass of eggs deposited, and since each egg represents an individual embryo, all but 2 of each 500 must fail to reach full maturity. Reduced to percentage this is equivalent to the survival of 0.4 per cent and the destruction of 99.6 per cent of the gipsy moths in one stage or another every year. Since the total number of gipsy moths in any locality can not possibly be computed, the only method by which mortality through any cause may be expressed is on this basis. It will surprise many who have not given the matter considera- tion to learn what an extraordinary apparent mortality it requires to offset a potential increase of 250-fold. The gipsy-moth caterpillars | molt five or six times after they hatch and before they change to pupe, making the number of caterpillar stages six or seven. If through natural controlling agencies 50 per cent of the young caterpillars were destroyed in the first stage before they had molted, and this was followed by similar destruction of another 50 per cent in the second stage, and so on through the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh stages, respectively, and in addition 25 per cent of the pupe and 25 per cent of the adults before depositing their eggs were simi- larly destroyed, it would still permit of a slight annual increase. The following table Gf the incongruity of fractions as applied to insects may be overlooked) indicates the number of survivors of each stage resulting from the hatching of a mass of 500 eggs: Number ; Stage. Number.| Loss. remain- | Potential increase. ing. Per cent. DEES. 2. 2.9 St othe eee ee Sv ae | |e aga 500 0{ 500 250 fold. RB ote PIU LE Se Poy sesso ioe Shey ist tS ie a 500 50 | , 250 125 fold. WD. .ca see eae Seconds 252 o22 250 50 | 125 62 fold. DO. LBs ha gee ee Bhi Ges eee ee 125 50 62 8l fold. - LOLS Me ee ea ee HouGthe S202: 62 50 31 15.5 fold. TOAD, Ee iit ers. | ae 31 50 15 7.75 fold. LD a Se ee eer eee oe SIEGES eet 15.5 50 7.75 | 3.875 fold. Iie LE Seventh......- The te 50 3.875 | 2.906 fold. DING 88s. 5 Bak eee Se RO mie pe tee ag ee 3. 875 25 2.906 | 2.179 fold. SOOT TS. 22 Ee er ene ee a oe ee | 2. 906 25 2.179 | 1.634 fold. To give another illustration: The life of the gipsy-moth caterpillar is approximately seven weeks. If beginning on the first day after 112 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. hatching and on every day thereafter during this period a decrease in numbers of 10 per cent should be brought about through natural causes, there would still be enough survivors to permit of a substan- tial increase in the abundance of the insect. | . Twelve gipsy moths (6 pairs) from each egg mass would be suffi- cient to provide for a sixfold annual increase. If reference be made to the preceding table, it will be seen that if all destruction ceased after the caterpillars had reached the fourth stage, the survivors would permit of slightly in excess of sixfold increase; that is, the mortality during the first to the fourth stage, inclusive, with a part of that which resulted during the fifth stage, would be sufficient to account for all of the control at present exerted by natural agencies in New England, and this gives, at the same time, an idea as to the amount of additional control which the parasites must accomplish if they are to become effective. The conditions under which the gipsy moth was studied at the time when the material for the report just quoted was accumulated were, for the most part, abnormal. In only relatively few localities was it allowed to increase undeterred, and there were relatively very few examples of unrestricted increase to the point when defoliation resulted. This,‘in part, explains what seems to be an element of indecision concerning the character of conditions which favored more rapid increase of the moth, as quoted below, from the same source. CONDITIONS FAVORING RAPID INCREASE. When any colony under average normal conditions has grown to a considerable size and then received an added impetus from exceptionally favorable conditions, its power of multiplication and its expansive energy are greatly augmented, and its annual increase arises above all calculations.! Under such influences hundreds of ege clusters will appear in the fall where few were to be seen in the spring, and thou- sands are found where scores only were known before. It is probable that the season of 1889 was particularly favorable for the moth’s increase. The season of 1894 and that of 1895 appear also to have furnished conditions especially favorable for an abnormal multiplication of the insect. The operation of the causes of these sudden outbreaks is not understood. It is evident, however, that the warm, pleasant spring weather of the past two years (1894 and 1895) hastened the development of the caterpillars, thereby shortening their term of life. The length of life of the caterpillars varies from six to twelve weeks. During cold, rainy weather the caterpillars eat little and grow slowly. During warm, dry weather they consume much more food and grow with great rapidity. In the unusu. ally warm spring and early summer of 1895 many of the caterpillars molted a less number of times than usual, and their length of life did not exceed six or seven weeks- Under these conditions they proved more quickly injurious to foliage than in a more _ normal season, and were more completely destructive within any given area in which their numbers were great. And they were not so long exposed to the attacks of their 1 The increase of these large colonies seems to be limited only by the supply of food. Whenever food becomes scarce many of the moths are less prolific. The larve which do not find sufficient food either die or develop early, and the female moths iay fewer eggs than those which transform from well-nourished caterpillars, RATE OF INCREASE OF GIPSY MOTH. 113 enemies. While it may be true that the parasitic enemies of the moth will also develop rapidly under conditions that hasten the growth of their host, birds and other verte- brate enemies will secure fewer of the moths in 6 or 7 weeks than in 10 or 12. It is believed that dry weather is unfavorable for vegetable parasites of insects, but to what extent the caterpillars are affected by them in a humid season it is impossible to say. The past two years have been ‘‘cankerworm years” in the infested region. Many of the birds which habitually feed on the caterpillars of the gipsy moth have been largely occupied during May and the early part of June in catching cankerworms, which they seem to prefer, turning their attention to the gipsy-moth caterpillars in the latter part of June and July, when the cankerworms have disappeared. The birds, therefore, have not been as useful in checking the increase of the gipsy moth as in years when the cankerworms were less numerous. A few of the restraining influences which have been less active than usual during the past two years have been mentioned, and possibly many others have escaped observation, but those given serve in a measure to explain the unusual increase of the moth. It is during such seasons that its destructiveness is most apparent. It is then that the groves and forests are stripped of their leaves, and whole rows of trees in orchards and along highways appear to have been stripped in a single night. The conditions as described seem to be comparable to those pre- vailing at the present time, and at the same time to be inadequately explained. Repeatedly personal observations have been made which indicate beyond the shadow of a doubt that under certain circum- stances the gipsy moth has increased at a rate very far in excess of sixfold annually at the present time. Counts of old egg masses as compared with those newly laid, in several localities, in the spring of 1908 and each spring subsequently, have shown positively that an increase of at least twentyfold was not uncommon. In fact, unless an unduly large number of old egg masses was concealed, it could be said with equal certainty that increase sometimes amounted to fiftyfold in the course of a single generation. The arguments pre- sented by Forbush and Fernald, who evidently observed something very similar, and who were inclined to credit it to seasonal or climatic conditions (in part at least), do not stand, in view of the fact that the rate of increase differs extraordinarily in localities nearly adjacent to where the conditions are practically identical, saving only the varying abundance of the moth; this latter, it may be noted, has in each instance corresponded roughly and in direct ratio to the rate of in- crease. The fact was not considered to be of more than coincidental interest at first, but later, when an attempt was made to classify according to their manner of operation, the various factors which were already responsible for the partial control of the gipsy moth in New England, the correlation between relative abundance and rate of increase recurred and seemed to afford excellent support to the contention which has been made as to the part which birds and most other predators play in bringing this about. 62188°—Bull. 91—12-—_-8 114 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Without attempting to go into the details of rather elaborate cal-— culations, which were made for the purpose of bringing out this point more graphically, attention is merely called to the three divisions into which the elements operative in the natural control of any insect naturally fall as they were outlined in the preceding section. These are, first, the catastrophic (storms, etc.), which result in the destruc- tion of a certain fixed percentage, irrespective of the abundance of the insect; second, that represented by the birds, most other preda- tors, and a part of the parasites which encompass the destruction of a certain gross number, rather than of any given percentage each year or generation; third, the facultative agencies, of which certain parasites are considered to be typical, which increase in efficiency as the insect increases in abundance. } The elements composing this last group are absent in New England, © or, rather, those elements which are present (disease and starvation) and which do not properly belong to it, are inoperative until a state of extreme abundance is attained. Such control as is effected by existing agencies would therefore fall into one or the other of the first two groups mentioned, and since both groups together are obviously inefficient, even when the moth is scarce, that due to the operation of the elements falling in the second group would become relatively less efficient as the time went on and the moth increased. This, it is believed, is actually what has happened and what is happening each year in each of the very numerous outlying colonies of the gipsy moth throughout the more recently infested territory, and thus the larger rate of increase is explained. As a matter of fact, there is reason to believe that the average rate of increase during the first few years immediately following the intro- duction of the moth in a new locality is actually less than sixfold annually, and that it may even be as low as threefold, or perhaps less. In any case, there is a stage in the progress of the moth in which the average is no greater than that recorded by Forbush and Fernald, and there is no longer room for doubt that the lowest rate of increase is in localities where the moth is relatively a rare or uncommon insect for the time being, while the highest occurs in localities where the moth is rapidly approaching its maximum abundance. AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL CONTROL NECESSARY TO CHECK THE INCREASE OF THE GIPSY MOTH IN AMERICA. It was evident in 1907, as it is now, that the problem of the intro- duction of parasites was far from being as simple as it might appear to be upon its surface and as it evidently did appear to be toe some who were at that time agitating for a radical change in the methods adopted for its solution. It was plain that the expense incident to AMOUNT OF CONTROL NEEDED FOR GIPSY MOTH. 115 the actual work of importation was going to be considerably more than had been expected two years before and that practical results could not possibly be achieved until long after the time originally predicted. Additional information upon the biology and habits of - each of the several parasites, if not necessary in every instance, was necessary in some and desirable in all, and here again additional expenditures became imperative. Furthermore, the situation was such as to make of very doubtful advisability the indiscriminate importation of very large quantities of parasite material before a better knowledge of the parasites themselves had been secured. The repetition of the very large shipment of brown-tail hibernating nests winter after winter, as will be described in another chapter, is an instance in point. Had we been in possession of a complete knowl- edge of the parasites hibernating in those webs at the beginning, per- haps one winter’s importation would have been sufficient. There was no certainty that the results of the technical studies as conducted at the American laboratory would be sufficiently full and complete to answer our purposes and make possible the intelligent continuation of the work. Should we fail in this respect, the only alternative to a discontinuation of the introduction work in advance of its logical conclusion was the establishment of a laboratory abroad, at a considerable expenditure. With these several reflections, it was inevitable that the advisability of continuing the work beyond the time limit originally set should come into question. Accordingly, in anticipation of the necessity for making a decision when the time for it should arrive, the whole proposition was subjected anew to the closest sort of scrutiny from every point of view. The successful consummation of the work involved, first of all, the _ establishment in America of a group of parasites or other natural enemies sufficiently powerful to meet and offset the prevailing rate of increase of the gipsy moth. This, as determined by Forbush and Fernald, was at least sixfold annually; as determined by actual observation in the field, it was often far in excess of sixfold. Before the continuation of the work could be recommended it was absolutely necessary to arrive, first, at some conclusion as to the amount of parasitism (gauged on the percentage basis) which would be required in order to offset this increase and.maintain the gipsy moth at an innocuous minimum; and, second, whether parasitism to such an extent actually prevailed abroad or whether natural con- trol in those localities where it was obviously effected was due to the increased efficiency of other agencies. In so far as the first proposition was concerned, it was obvious from the beginning that if enough egg masses could be destroyed each fall so that the number remaining would be no greater than that which had 116 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. oC gene been present in the spring the insect could never, by any possibility, increase beyond the abundance then prevailing. If the increase each year was 6 egg masses for each 1 of the year before, it was merely necessary to destroy 5 out of every 6 in order to maintain the status quo. If the increase was tenfold, the destruction of 9 out of every 10 ege masses would be required, etc. The same would obtain if 5 out of every 6 or 9 out of every 10 eggs in each and every mass were similarly destroyed. Reduced to percentages, this would be equivalent to the destruction of 83.33 per cent or of 90 per cent, respectively, a rate of parasitism which was physically an impossible accomplishment for the egg parasites alone. Additional parasitism of the caterpillars or pup would be a requisite to success, and such parasitism would of neces- sity be similarly limited in many instances through circumstances as completely beyond our control as the physical inability of Schedius or Anastatus to parasitize more than the uppermost layer of eggs in each mass attacked. Without attempting to go into any of the details of the processes by which conclusions were reached, it was finally determined, beyond any doubts arising through arguments which have been presented up to the present time, that an aggregate parasit- ism of 83.33 per cent would be absolutely necessary if a sixfold increase was to be met, but that it made no difference whether this was brought about by one species or two or a dozen, or whether they attacked the egg, the caterpillar, or the pupxz. It was also deter- mined that the aggregate percentage necessary could not be secured by simply adding together the figures representing the parasitism ~ resulting through attack by each of two or more species. It was going to be necessary to combine these several aggregates in a dif- ferent manner. To illustrate: A 50 per cent parasitism of the eggs, if it could possibly be secured, followed by another 50 per cent parasit- ism of the caterpillars, could not by any possibility be considered as resulting in 100 per cent parasitism or complete extinction, but only in 50 per cent parasitism added to 50 per cent of what remained, which amounted, in effect, to 25 per cent of the whole. In this manner an aggregate of 75 per cent only is secured. As is illustrated by the table on page 111, it requires the combina- tion of an imposing array of figures representing relatively small per- centages of parasitism in each instance to acquire a sufficiently large ageregate. It was further determined that any specific amount of parasitism, as 20 per cent of the eggs, was neither more nor less, but exactly as effective as 20 per cent parasitism of the caterpillars or pupz, in so far as its value in constructing the final aggregate was concerned. It can not be denied that when the validity of these conclusions — became established and when in addition the possibility that a much EXTENT OF GIPSY-MOTH PARASITISM ABROAD. 117 greater rate of increase than sixfold would have to be met and offset before the much-to-be-desired consummation could reasonably be expected the prospects looked rather discouraging. Recognition of the correlation which existed between increased abundance and rate of increase served more than anything else to allay the doubts _ which these reflections created. Field work in 1908, 1909, and 1910 showed pretty conclusively that a rate of increase of not in excess of sixfold and possibly considerably less prevailed whenever the moth was in that state of innocuousness incident to the scarcity which it was hoped to bring about and maintain through the introduction of the parasites. An aggregate parasitism of 85 per cent will almost certainly be sufficient, and it may well be that 80 per cent or even 75 per cent will answer equally well. Much less than 75 per cent will probably not be effective. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE GIPSY MOTH IS CONTROLLED THROUGH PARASITISM ABROAD. While it is true that the work which has been done for the purpose of determining the prevailing rate of increase of the gipsy moth in America leaves considerable to be desired in the way of exactness, in the main the statements made by Forbush and Fernald, as confirmed and modified by later observation, may be accepted as essentially accurate. Itis fortunate that the situation is no worse than it appears to be, for if it were necessary to undertake the work of parasite intro- duction with the idea that the maximum rate of increase exhibited by the gipsy moth must be met by the parasites, such an unreasonable percentage of parasitism would be demanded as to make the propo- sition of introducing them a decidedly difficult task. As itis, there seems to be good reason to believe that a parasitism amounting to 75 per cent will be sufficient, provided that it can be maintained during the periods when the moth is relatively rare. It may be that less than that will answer equally well, but it would require actual test or else a much more careful study of the actual rate of increase of the moth under favorable conditions to justify such prophecy. In any event, 85 per cent will probably be amply efficient, if it can be established and maintained during all stages in the abun- dance of the moth. Sucharate would undoubtedly prevent the moth from increasing to destructive abundance in new territory or from regaining ground lost through the activities of disease in older infested regions. Granted that it is sufficient, the question naturally arises as to whether such a degree of parasitism is to be found abroad in coun- tries where the gipsy moth is present without being considered as a serious pest. 118 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. | There is very little published information at hand bearing upon / this subject, and that which is available is general rather than defi- nite in its tenor. Anyone who for the first time encounters a tree covered with caterpillars of the gipsy moth dead and dying through the effects of the ‘‘wilt’”’ disease is very apt to think that at last the gipsy moth has met its Waterloo, and disillusionment has only come in the present work as the result of several years’ consecutive observations in the same or similar localities. In like manner the observations of foreign entomologists, or of American entomologists traveling abroad, as to the actual effectiveness of the parasites in accomplishing the control of the moth have to-be taken with a grain of conservatism. Parasitism by a species as conspicuous as Apan- teles fuluipes to the extent of 50 per cent would undoubtedly create a most favorable impression and the more conspicuous parasitized caterpillars would easily appear to outnumber the healthy. This amount of parasitism would certainly be inefficient in America unless it were supplemented by a much larger amount of parasitism by other species. On this account it has been necessary to depend very largely upon the study of the parasite material imported from abroad as a source for information of this sort. From the beginning accurate notes have been kept of the many thousands of boxes of eggs, caterpillars, and pupz of the gipsy moth and brown-tail moth, in which are recorded the locality from which each lot came, its condition on receipt, and the number and variety of parasites reared in each instance. The records are necessarily based in most instances upon such information as may be gained through a study of the condition of the material on receipt and the parasites reared, but in a few careful dissection work has been carried on to determine the true conditions, and thus to check up the results of the rearing work. It has been found that the amount of dependence which can be placed upon the rearing records is relatively small, and that noth- ing more than a general idea of conditions actually prevailing can be gleaned from them. Nearly always some of the caterpillars or pup are dead or dying upon receipt as a result of the ordeal through which they have passed. On the average, taking the gipsy-moth material from all localities, not: more than 25 per cent has arrived in good condition (when the shipment of eggs is excepted). The brown- tail moth material has averaged very much better, and probably 75 per cent has been in good condition on receipt. It has been found that sometimes a larger percentage of parasites than of caterpillars or pupe died en route, while at other times these conditions are entirely reversed, and since dissections can not be made in every instance, it has been necessary to consider the para- sitism indicated by the notes upon two different bases, i. e., that of EXTENT OF GIPSY-MOTH PARASITISM ABROAD. 119 the number of hosts originally involved and that of the number suc- cessfully completing their transformations. If from a lot of 1,000 brown-tail caterpillars 250 individuals of Parexorista chelonize and 250 moths are reared, it is perfectly safe to assume that parasitism by Parexorista amounts to more than 25 per cent and less than 75 per cent. Further than this nothing absolutely definite may be said. Exactly the same is true of the determination of prevailing rates of parasitism of native insects through rearing work. On account of the inadequacy of these methods when it comes to the point of securing absolutely authentic information, not nearly so much is known of the parasitism of the gipsy moth or of the brown- tail moth abroad as is needed to carry on the work to its best advan- tage. This much, however, can be said definitely, that in some instances existing parasitism is sufficient to answer the requirements of the situation in America; in others it is obviously insufficient; in most the results of the study of imported material are not sufficiently reliable to support either contention. Here, again, was food for serious consideration when it came to the point of making definite recommendations concerning the con- tinuation of the work. Would the foreign parasites certainly meet the demands which would be made upon them in America? This has been answered in the affirmative through its considera- tion from quite a variety of different viewpoints. For one thing, the lack of accurate information as to the conditions under which the parasite material was originally collected, has rendered the results of its study in America of difficult analysis. No one, for example, would seriously question the statement that the white-marked tus- sock moth is under well-nigh perfect control in America except in cities. Nevertheless, if it was desired to transport caterpillars or pupe of this insect to Europe in order that its parasites might be reared, the agent intrusted with the collection of the material for exportation would certainly go to the city for it, and the person who received and studied it upon the other side would find so few para- sites present as to justify exactly the same doubts concerning the parasitism of the tussock moth in America as have actually arisen concerning the parasitism of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth m Europe. The tussock moth is not often subjected to the full extent of parasitism necessary to effect its control in any locality from which caterpillars can be secured in quantity. It is reasonable to suppose that something of the same sort is true of the gipsy moth or of the brown-tail moth. Furthermore, the study of the tussock moth has resulted in demon- strating another fact which is of peculiar interest in this connection, which is, that the parasites which assist in effecting its control in country districts where this control is perfect are sometimes entirely 120 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. = absent in the city. Something of the same sort may be true of the - parasites which assist in effecting the control of the gipsy moth in many localities in Europe where it is so uncommon as to make col- lection of material for exportation in any quantity impossible. Some of the most interesting lots of caterpillars or pup which have been received were from such localities, and it may well be that there are parasites abroad which have not been received at the laboratory in Massachusetts in sufficient quantity for colonization, and which can never be received there until new methods for collecting and import- ing them are devised, but which at the same time are actually among the important species. This fact can only be determined definitely by careful study of the gipsy moth in localities where it was not sufficiently abundant to permit of its collection in large quantities. These studies, it is hoped, will be instituted in 1911, and so long as the gipsy moth continues to be a serious pest in America the inves- tigation of its parasites abroad ought to be continued. The ramifications of the parasite work have been so many and so diverse and have led so far afield, both literally and metaphorically speaking, as to make it practically impossible to report upon it as a whole as fully as would be desirable and practicable were it less extensive and varied. A chapter might be written upon the para- sitism of the gipsy moth and another upon that of the brown-tail moth in each of the several countries in Europe from which the parasite material has been imported, but it is wholly impracticable to do so. At the same time, now that a new phase of the work is. being entered upon, it will not be out of place to review in some slight detail the results of the work which has been carried on in a few of the localities which, for one reason or another, may be selected as of more than general interest in this immediate connection, but which are at the same time and in another sense typical. PARASITISM OF THE GIPSY MOTH IN JAPAN. From the viewpoint of gipsy-moth parasitism Japan possesses a peculiar interest, because, if we are to judge from the reports of those who have been there and incidentally or critically studied the situation, the Japanese gipsy moth is pretty thoroughly controlled through natural agencies, and among these its parasites appear to rank very high. This is the more interesting and encouraging because the Japanese race is notably larger and at the same time more fecund than the European, judging from counts as made at the laboratory of the number of eggs in a mass. In 1908, after several unsuccessful attempts which had been made to import its parasites had served to domonstrate the futility of any less radical course, Prof. Trevor Kincaid, of the University of Wash- ington, Seattle, was delegated to spend the summer there in the EXTENT OF GIPSY-MOTH PARASITISM ABROAD. rea interests of the work. As a result numerous large shipments of parasite cocoons and puparia, as well as of caterpillars in various stages and of pupe were received at the laboratory. The condition of the material on receipt compared more than favorably with the average of similar shipments from Europe, and for the first time opportunity was afforded for the actual first-hand imvestigation of the parasitic fauna of the gipsy moth in Japan. Similar shipments were made in 1909 and 1910, with even better results in so far as the condition of the material on receipt was con- cerned, and several of the more important parasites have now been liberated in the field in America under conditions which are appar- ently ideal and which ought to encompass their introduction and establishment, if such a thing is possible. — TaBLE I.—Sequence of gipsy-moth parasites in Japan. PARASITES. ANASTATUS EIFASCATUS | SCHEDIVS KUVANAE | EGG. | LARVAL STAGES. — _ [PUPAL STAGES. EG EC- SEV- = : FRESH) FIRST ono THIRD\FOURTH FIFTH \SIXTH \ ENT? 5) FRESH) OLD | apy 10 7 7 / 7 7 7 Zz 2 3 Ze , DAYS. | DAYS. 1DAYS.| DAYS\ BAYS.| DAYS.| DAYS.| DAYS.| DAYS. DAYS | DAYS.\ DAYS. G. OLD 260 DAYS. ee rr APANTELES FULVIPES *LIMNERIU/4 DISPARIS *METEORUS JAPONICUS CROSSOCOSINIA SERICARIAE TACHINA JAPONICA *THERONIA JAPONICA | XAYPLA PLUTO XPMPLA OISPARIF , XPIMPLA PORTHETRIAE CHALCIS OBSCURATA % SPECIES NOT CONSIDERED TO BE OF MUCH IMPORTANCE ECONOMICALLY. A total of 14 species of parasites has been reared from the imported material, of which 7 were present in sufficient abun- dance to indicate that they were of real importance in effecting the control of the moth. Two species are of such doubtful host rela- tionship as to have been omitted from Table I. Specimens of one species, Meteorus japonicus, the importance of which is not indicated by the examination of the imported material, have been sent to us by Mr. Kuwana with the statement that it is some- times, locally at least, a common parasite, but none for colonization has been received. Still another is of possible importance, judging from the very limited opportunity which we have had for its investi- gation, but none of the others is of proved worth. Since nothing is actually known of the conditions under which particular lots of 122 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. ~— parasite material were collected, it can not be stated as confidently as tHe circumstances render desirable that some among the others are not incidentally of value in keeping reduced the numbers of the moth in localities where it is too rare to permit of collection of mate- rial for shipment to America. Prof. Kincaid’s reports upon the effectiveness of the parasites, even when taken with more than the prescribed grain of conservatism, have been so consistently optimistic as to leave no room to doubt that the parasitism to which the moth is subjected in Japan, even in localities where it is more than normally prevalent, is sufficient to meet and overcome the rate of increase of the gipsy moth in America. How these parasites work together in bringing about the control of the moth in J apan is indicated in Table I, which, with its explana- tion, was published 1 in a somewhat abbreviated form in the popular palleem by the junior author which was issued through the office of the State forester of Massachusetts a year ago. The addition of the names of the species marked with an asterisk makes the list complete, so far as it may be completed through the information now available. The species so designated are those which have never been received in sufficient abundance to make their colonization possible, and among them are some which are doubtless of wholly insignificant importance from an economic standpoint, while others may, upon investigation, prove to be of more than suffi- cient importance to justify an attempt to secure their introduction — into America. } Opposite the name of each parasite, extending across a certain number of the vertical columns, is a dotted line. The vertical col- umns indicate different stages in the development and transforma- tions of the gipsy moth, as the egg, the caterpillar, and the pupa, and © these are still further divided into caterpillars of different sizes and egos and pupe of different ages and conditions. At the head of each column is stated the approximate number of days during which the individual gipsy moth remains in that particular stage. The dotted line following the name of the parasite indicates those stages in the life of the gipsy moth during which the latter is likely to be attacked by the parasite in question, and it will be seen that in a number of instances, as, for example, Chalcis and Theronia, this period is exceedingly short. The solid line indicates the stages in the life of the gipsy moth during which it is likely to contain the parasite inits body. This, it may also be noted, varies considerably. Crosso- cosmia, for example, gains lodgment in the active caterpillar while it is only about half grown, and the extension of the solid line across all of the columns which stand for the later caterpillar stages, as well as for all of the pupal stages, indicates that the larve of this parasite do not leave the host caterpillar until after it has transformed to a EXTENT OF GIPSY-MOTH PARASITISM ABROAD. 123 pupa, and until the moth would naturally have emerged had the pupa remained healthy and unparasitized. It will be noted that the parasites not designated by the asterisks, and which are therefore to be considered as of some importance in effecting the control of the moth, form, when taken together, a perfect sequence, and that every stage of the moth from the newly deposited ege to the pupa is subjected to attack. It is furthermore of interest to note in this connection that, so far as may be determined from the scanty information available, all of these parasites are present in more or less efficient abundance within a limited area in the vicinity of Tokyo, from which a part, and presumably the greater ay of the material was collected for exportation. PARASITISM OF THE GIPSY MOTH IN RUSSIA. The earliest first-hand knowledge of the gipsy moth and its para- sites In Russia was secured as the result of the visit paid to that country by the senior author in the spring of 1907. Through his instrumentality several of the Russian entomologists were interested in the parasite-introduction work to such a practical extent as to collect or cause to be collected and forwarded to America several small and a few large shipments of the eggs, caterpillars, and pupe of both the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth. The difficulties attending the importation of material from Russia proved to be con- siderably more real and less easily surmountable than those which were so successfully overcome in the instance of the Japanese ship- ments, and for the most part the Russian material was of more interest from a technical than from an economic standpoint by the time it arrived at the laboratory. From a technical standpoint it was exceedingly interesting and valuable, since there were found to be present in the boxes of young gipsy-moth caterpillars the cocoons of several species of hymenop- terous parasites which had either not been received from other sources or which were not known to be sufficiently abundant in any other part of Europe to make possible their collection in large quantities. Prof. Kincaid’s successful prosecution of the Japanese work encour- aged his selection as the best and most experienced agent available for the decidedly more difficult proposition of visiting Russia and attempting to secure an adequate supply of the several species of parasites which could only be secured in that country to advantage, so far as could be determined from the information then at hand. The manner in which he was impressed by the gipsy-moth situa- tion which he encountered there is best described in the following extracts from his letters, in the course of which occasional compari- sons are made between Russian and Japanese conditions. 124 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. BENDERY, BEessarRABIA, Russia, June 11, 1909. The seasor here is in full swing, but the situation causes me considerable anxiety, as the whole business is so utterly different from my experience in Japan. The dam- age wrought by dispar in the forests and orchards of Bessarabia this season is enormous and parasite control seems to be most inefficient in checking the depredations of the caterpillars. When I think of the masterly and well-ordered attack of the Japanese parasites and the splendid fashion in which they wiped out the caterpillars in large areas before depredation took place I am surprised by what I see here. When I left Gauchesty on May 31 the forests of that district were thoroughly riddled over thousands of acres, and yet I had seen no sign of insects, fungous, or bacterial attack except a couple of clusters of Apanteles cocoons. * * * Duspar seemed to be having its own way as fully asin America, so far as could be seen on the surface. * * * Here at Bendery the season is slightly more advanced, owing to the lower altitude, and the prospects of securing parasites of dispar seem better. Even here, however, the situa- tion seems to me quite remarkable. I have available three extensive and very dif- ferent collecting grounds. The great forest of Gerbofsky about 6 versts from Ben- dery is composed almost exclusively of oaks. An immense area is covered by trees of this species, forming magnificent groves of fine trees 80 to 100 years old. Thousands of these great trees are completely defoliated, so that no sign of foliage remains. In the same forest are groves of young trees of the same kind, also greatly damaged. Examining the myriads of caterpillars in the field, I have found no sign of parasite attack or of fungous disease except the work of Apanteles. * * * The percentage of attack by Apanteles is so small that rearing in trays is of little practical importance. One would have to have billions of caterpillars to do any good. Collecting in the field is very difficult, as the caterpillars creep into crevices or suspend themselves to branches at some height from the ground, where they are hard to reach. No sign of bacterial disease has appeared in this area, nor have I seen any evidence of tachinid attack in the field or in my rearing trays. Another great forest of about 500 acres is at Kitzkany, about 7 versts from Bendery on the banks of the Dniester, a low damp situation. This forest has no oaks but is much mixed. The principal tree is Populus nigra, but there are many other trees, as Ulmus, Acer, Salix, etc. Here again the damage is tremendous, with almost no sign of parasite attack. Prolonged search yielded a few cocoons of Apanteles. On the other hand, thousands of the older cater- pillars were found in the pendulous condition so characteristic of bacterial attack. The third condition I found in the numerous orchards adjacent to both of these for- ested areas. These orchards have been almost overwhelmed by dispar. The more progressive peasants have protected their trees by rings of axle grease or by strips of cotton wool, but others have done nothing and the trees are quite stripped. * * * The sight of a tree covered with hundreds of dead caterpillars bearing clusters of Apanteles cocoons such as I saw in Japan seems not to be hoped for. Krier, June 26, 1909. From what I can see in the field and from what I can gather from Prof. Pospielow, dispar was almost exterminated in this district last year through the activity of the parasites. Only a few isolated colonies seem to have survived, the most important of these being at Mishighari, a small place on the river about two hours by steamer from Kief. In this place, which is perhaps 100 acres in extent, the trees are plas- tered with cocoons of Apanteles fulvipes. The attack of the parasite was so thorough that the first generation seems to have been sufficient to wipe out the caterpillars, as I can find no large caterpillars about the place, and a few days will doubtless witness the complete wiping out of dispar. * * * Tachinids also appear to be very active, as I find many eggs, but as these are laid upon caterpillars suffering from the attacks EXTENT OF GIPSY-MOTH PARASITISM ABROAD. 125 of Apanteles it would seem as if the emaciated caterpillars could not supply sufficien} nourishment to bring the tachinids to maturity. * * * From the standpoint of parasite control the situation at Kief is most inspiring, but as a field in which to gather a quantity of material it is evidently not very hopeful. The whole situation is in violent contrast to what I found at Bendery and Gauchesty, where dispar is vastly more abundant this year than last, with little sign of the multiplication of parasites. _ BENDERY, Russia, July 10, 1909. In the forest of Kitzkany where dispar caterpillars prevailed to an incredible extent three weeks ago, not a single caterpillar or pupa is to be found. An epidemic of a bacterial nature swept them away in millions. In the forest of Gerbofsky, among the great oak trees, the number of caterpillars that have formed pupe is surprisingly small. Vast numbers of caterpillars swarmed over the trees, completely stripping them of leaves. Deserting the trees, the caterpillars swarmed over the ground in search of other food and vast numbers died of starvation and disease. These trees are now putting forth new leaves which promise to sustain the life of the forest. After the close of the ‘caterpillar season”’ in 1910 the junior author took a vacation trip to Europe and, thanks to an extension of leave for the purpose and still more to the kindness of Mr. N. Kourdumoff, entomologist of the experiment station in Poltava, was enabled to spend about 10 days in the field in Kief and Kharkof Provinces. In Kief the forest at Mishighari, which is mentioned by Prof. Kincaid as the one locality where he found the parasites in control, was visited, as well as.several other localities in that province. This portion of Kief Province, topographically, meteorologically, and otherwise, is radically different from Massachusetts, and much more like portions of Minnesota than any other part of the United States with which the visitor is at all familiar. The forests, which are limited in extent as compared with those of Massachusetts, are less diversified. For the most part they are of pine, mingled with a small quantity of oak, wild pear, birch, and occasionally other trees. Everywhere the gipsy moth was rare or at least uncommon, and everywhere the cocoon masses of Apanteles fulvipes were at least as abundant as the ego masses of their host. At Mishighari the conditions remained much as described by Prof. Kincaid, except that the cocoon masses of Apanteles were even morc abundant than his letters would indicate. Upon some trees they were litterally matted together by the thousands in such semipro- tected situations as are selected by the caterpillars at the time of molting. The forest in this particular locality was varied to an extent not noticed elsewhere. In addition to the generally distributed oak, birch, and poplar were quantities of beech, alder, Carpinus, maple, elm, and other species, while the shrubs were equally varied and abun- dant. The forest was situated upon the steep bluffs overhanging the Dnieper, running down on one side to its banks, where great willows bore evidence of the high water which sometimes covered their 136 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. trunks, and on the other extending back some little distance until it was met by a wide stretch of treeless prairie. Here, at least, parasite control of the gipsy moth appeared to be pretty thoroughly effective, since there were in evidence a vastly larger number of old cocoon masses of the Apanteles than there were of old egg masses of its host, and the new egg masses were enormously outnumbered by the old. According to Prof. Pospielow, who was a member of the party, the forest in this locality was almost completely defoliated in 1908, but there was no indication of damage to any of the trees composing it, and every indication that the parasites alone were responsible for the disappearance of the moth. In several other localities along the banks of the Dnieper the condi- tions encountered were essentially the same, differing principally in the lesser abundance of both egg masses and parasite cocoons. In one locality quite near to Kief, fresh egg masses were more common than at Mishighari, and cocoon masses of the season of 1910 were also more common. It seemed to offer opportunities for the collection of a sufficiently large quantity of this parasite to make an experiment in importation and colonization possible and practicable in 1911, which it is hoped may be carried out. . In Kharkof conditions, both as regards the gipsy moth, its para- sites, and the country at large, were essentially different from those in Kief. Numerous localities from 5 tg 20 miles out of the city in different directions were visited, and everywhere indications of the recent presence of the gipsy moth were found in abundance. Old egg masses were massed around the base of the trees in a manner exceed- ingly suggestive of uncared for woodland in Massachusetts, and mingled with them were a very few fresh masses; so few, relatively, as to indicate most conclusively that the moth had encountered very adverse conditions during the season of 1910, with the result that its abundance had been most materially reduced. In every locality the conditions were the same, although the character of the forest varied to a material extent. For the most part the province of Kharkof is devoid of forest, and quite suggestive of parts of North Dakota in appearance. Such forest as does occur is mostly confined to the valleys in the neighborhood of streams, and though it, may be fairly extensive, it is rarely very diverse. No pine was seen. Oak predominates very largely and, with the exception of some birch, forms practically pure forests away from the lowlands, except in the best watered localities. Everywhere, irrespective of the character of the forest, the gipsy moth was found under the circumstances recounted above. Every- where there had been an abundance of eggs in the spring, everywhere there had been an abundance of caterpillars, a considerable propor- EXTENT OF GIPSY-MOTH PARASITISM ABROAD. 127 tion of which had gone through to pupation, and everywhere the number of fresh egg masses was very much smaller than was that of the old. Nowhere was there evidence of parasitism by Apanteles fulvipes to anything like the extent which prevailed in the vicinity of Kief. Cocoon masses were occasionally found, nearly always old, sometimes very old and so discolored as to be with difficulty dis- tinguished from the bark to which they were attached. In Kief the number of cocoon masses was everywhere in considerable excess over the number of egg masses. Here the number of egg masses was enor- mously in excess of the number of cocoon masses. Examination of the pupal shells for evidences of parasitism was unavailing. It could be said with assurance that pupal parasites were certainly not common and that the death of the pupe (for pro- portionately very few of them hatched) was not due to any of the pupal parasites which were known from western European localities. The earth beneath the cocoon masses was examined for evidences of tachinid puparia. For a time none was found, but search was finally rewarded by the discovery of Blepharipa scutellata in most extraor- dinary abundance in a single one among the numerous localities visited. This particular forest, which was very near to the village of Rhijhof and about 8 miles from Kharkof, was unique among the others visited in the variety of its trees. The soil was rich, the trees were larger, and the undergrowth was more abundant and varied, but at the same time there was less diversity than was encountered in the forest at Mishighari. Unfortunately, the presence of the puparia could not be considered as of much significance, because they were practically all hatched and obviously dated back more than one year. The parasite had surely not been responsible for the reduction in numbers of the gipsy moth which had taken place in the season of 1910, and neither had it prevented the moth from increasing to such numbers as to bring about partial defoliation of the forest in 1910 before disaster in one form or another had overtaken it. Of other tachinids there were practically none, and it is certain that they would have been found had they been present. Compsilura concinnata is even now so abundant as a parasite of the gipsy moth in Massachusetts as to bring about an appreciable percentage of destruc- tion in 1910, and its puparia are recovered from the field with ease. Had it been one-tenth as common in Russia it could not have failed of detection. The same is true of Tachina, which, although it effects a parasitism of less than 1 per cent in Massachusetts, is not difficult _of detection, and it is safe to say that not much if any more than this amount of parasitism prevailed in Kharkof. All ‘told, not enough parasites were found to indicate that they had played any important part in the reduction of the moth from a serious menace to the well- 128 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. being of the forest to such small numbers as to require several years at least before it would be possible for such conditions to recur. The investigations having been conducted in September, some time after the death of all of the caterpillars and pupe, it was no longer ~ possible to determine with assurance the cause for the peculiar condi- tions, but everything conspired to indicate that nothing less than an epidemic of disease had been responsible. The condition of the pupal shells which hung upon the trees in countless thousands was in every respect identical with the condition of the pupal shells which are to be found in Massachusetts in every locality where the disease has prevailed to a destructive extent the season before. Among the old egg masses which plastered the extreme base of nearly every tree in most of the localities visited were found a variable, and sometimes a very large, proportion which had hatched only in part or not at all. The appearance of these unhatched masses was identical in every respect with the appearance of similarly large numbers which are frequently found in Massachusetts. The reason for the nonhatching of the eggs is not yet plain, but it is the consensus of opinion that this is probably associated with the ‘‘wilt” disease. It is known that affected caterpillars may pupate before death, and it seems not illogi- cal to suppose that slightly affected caterpillars may pupate and produce moths which are able to deposit their eggs, but that these eggs fail to hatch as the direct result of the taint in the blood of their parent. | These Russian experiences seem, on the whole, to indicate that in that country the gipsy moth is not controlled by its parasites to an extent which serves to remove it from the ranks of a destructive pest. But as one day after another in the field at Kharkof served more and more indelibly to deepen this conviction, it served equally, first to create, and finally in retrospect to confirm, the observer in another, which was, in effect, that if this was the best that could be expected of disease as a factor in the control of the gipsy moth in its native home then something better than disease must be found to control it in America. Justso long as conditions similar to those seen in Kharkof or pictured in the letters of Prof. Kincaid are allowed to prevail in Massachusetts just so long will the incentive remain to see the parasite-introduction experiment carried on until success is either achieved or proved impossible. Conditions similar to those prevail- ing in Russia emphatically do not prevail in western Europe, nor, according to all accounts, in Japan. Natural conditions in western Europe and in Japan arein many respects more like those of our own Eastern States than are those of Kharkof Province. Conditions in Kief Province, even, are much more like those of Massachusetts than are those of Kharkof, and in Kief parasite control seemed to be an EXTENT OF GIPSY-MOTH PARASITISM ABROAD. 129 accomplished fact, although of course there is no assurance that it is continuous and Pecies The final outcome of the Russian experience was, therefore, the opposite of what might have been expected, and it peaalbedds in a fituas determination than ever to carry the work through to its end. PARASITISM OF THE GIPSY MOTH IN SOUTHERN FRANCE. Following the 10 days in Russia a shorter period was spent by the junior author in somewhat similar field work in southern France, where, with the aid of M. Dillon, he was enabled to visit the localities from which the largest, and in that respect the most satisfactory, shipments of parasite material ever received at the laboratory were collected. As the direct result of the senior author’s visit to Europe in 1909 some thousands of boxes containing hundreds of thousands of gipsy-moth caterpillars had been collected in the vicinity of Hyéres, about: 50 miles to the eastward of Marseilles. These caterpillars were largely living upon receipt, and in the winter of 1909-10 Mr. W. B. Thompson dissected several hundred preserved specimens and the actual percentage of parasitism was thus determined. Somefew pupe which had also been received from the same locality made possible a fair understanding of the extent to which the pup were parasitized. | The results of these investigations, taken in connection with the actual rearing work, were disappointing. It was evident that the moth was fairly common in the region from which the material was ~ collected—as common, perhaps, as it would need to be in Massachu- setts to provide for an increase of sixfold annually. Nevertheless, the amount of parasitism which was indicated by this, the most thorough study of parasitism of the gipsy moth abroad which was ever undertaken in the laboratory, was less than enough to offset a twofold, much less a sixfold, increase. For this reason much curiosity was felt as to the conditions which prevailed in a country where parasitism of such comparatively insig- nificant proportions was sufficient. . No sooner was the character of the country districts in this portion of France seen than the wonder which had been felt at the small per- centage of parasitism which was sufficient to hold it in check was replaced bya much greater astonishment that the gipsy moth should exist under such conditions at all. It was a country of olive orchards and vineyards, with a strip along the littoral which was so nearly frostless as to permit the culture of citrus fruits, and even of date palms. The hills were semiarid, with the soil exceedingly scanty and - often covered by loose stones. The principal forests consisted largely of cork oak and pine, except in the low and well-watered valleys and bottom lands where other trees in considerable variety occurred. 62188°—Bull. 91—12-—9 7 - 130 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. ee ks The slopes of the higher mountains were fairly well forested and a larger variety of trees and shrubs thrived than on the lower elevations. Over much of the country the soil was either too dry or too scanty or both to permit of cultivation, even in a land so densely populated by so thrifty a race, and here were found occasional thickets of scrub oak, apparently of a deciduous species, which sometimes reached the dignity of a small tree. For the most part such country was covered with a scanty growth which would be called chapparal in some of our States, composed of a variety of uninviting looking shrubs, judging them from the probable viewpoint of a gipsy-moth caterpillar in search of food. Taken altogether, the country may more aptly be compared with southern California than with any other part of the United States. | It seemed to the visitor that if the gipsy moth were to be found in any portion of this region it would most likely be within the rich and well-watered bottom lands, where occasional hedges, or rows and groups of large trees in considerable variety, seemed to offer fairly acceptable conditions for its existence. But to his surprise and amazement he was assured by M. Dillon that it was from the chapparal covered, arid, and uncultivated elevations that most of the enormous quantities of caterpillars had been collected. In support of this asser- tion, after the visitor had searched in vain in what would be the most likely situations in Massachusetts for the concealment of ege masses, pupal shells, or molted skins, M. Dillon proceeded to turn over a few loose stones among those which fairly covered the ground, and thereby disclosed sufficient indication of the presence of the moth in fair abundance to convince the most skeptical. In this particular locality in the vicinity of the little proven¢al town of Meoun, in a thicket of deciduous oak surrounding and concealing the ruins of an ancient chapel, there were sufficient egg masses of the moth to repre- sent a fair degree of infestation, but eggs, pupal shells, and molted larval skins were all so completely hidden as to evade completely the eyes of one who had been trained to look for first evidences in shel- tered places on the bark or in the knot holes and hollow trunks of trees. As a matter of fact, as was abundantly evidenced by that day’s experiences, as well as of the several days which followed, the gipsy moth departed most materially from its characteristic habits in the cooler, better watered and forested localities in which it is present as a pest in America. Instead of being a typically arboreal insect, it is rather terrestrial, and thereby becomes subjected to a variety of nat- ural enemies to which it is practically immune so long as it remains © arboreal. In the course of the several years past a variety of species of the larger European Carabide has been studied at the laboratory for the purpose of determining their availability and probable worth SEQUENCE OF GIPSY-MOTH PARASITES IN EUROPE. 181 as enemies of the gipsy moth. Of them all, not one refused to attack and devour the caterpillars and pupe of the gipsy moth with business- like dispatch, once given an opportunity, but with one or two excep- tions none has shown a disposition to climb trees in search of its prey. Being essentially terrestrial in habit, they were essentially unfitted to prey upon an essentially arboreal insect. We know little of the predatory beetles which are to be found in that part of France which was visited upon this occasion, nor does this lack of knowledge vitiate the strength of the argument to any great extent. The fact was that if present (and undoubtedly some species are to be found) any of the numerous forms which have been studied at the laboratory and discarded as unfit for the purposes de- sired in Massachusetts would immediately assume high rank as ene- mies of the gipsy moth. In other words, the conditions under which the gipsy moth exists in southern France are wholly incomparable with those under which it exists in New England, and the agencies which are effective in accomplishing its control are likewise incomparable. The unimportant réle obviously played by the parasites immediately loses its significance. Those species of true parasites which assist in this control are practically the same as those which assist in other localities, but the demand upon them and their opportunities for mul- tiplication are insignificant compared to those existing in Massachu- setts, if they are ever established there. True to their character as agencies in facultative control, they do not increase in efficiency to an extent which would practically mean the extinction of their host. The results of the rearing and dissection work carried on at the laboratory indicated that a parasitism varying from 25 per cent to something in excess of 40 per cent prevailed in this locality. After seeing the conditions under which the gipsy moth struggled for ex- istence, real wonder was felt that it should be able to survive, and the trip resulted in a firmer conviction than ever in the efficacy of para- sitism, and the validity of the theory upon which the parasite-intro- duction work was conceived. SEQUENCE OF PARASITES OF THE GIPSY MOTH IN EUROPE. The parasitic fauna of the gipsy moth varies considerably in various faunal divisions of Kurope, and no attempt has been made to prepare separate lists of the parasites peculiar to those regions which have been represented in the material imported. In Table II, which is con- structed in accordance with that representing the sequence of para- sites in Japan, as explained on page 122, all of the various species reared from the European material are listed. As in the table of Japanese parasites those species which are of no consequence in the control of the moth (so far as known) are marked with an asterisk. 132 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. THE BROWN-TAIL MOTH AND ITS PARASITES IN EUROPE. Reference has already been made to the fact that in those sections of Massachusetts in which both the gipsy moth and the brown-taij moth occur, the latter is considered as the lesser pest of the two. This opinion, as held by those who are thoroughly familiar with the comparative noxiousness of the two, speaks quite plainly of the char- acter of the gipsy moth as a pest, in view of the very considerable agi- tation which has come about on account of the brown-tail moth in TABLE II.—Sequence of gipsy-moth parasites in Europe. ANASTATUS EIFASCIATUS KAPANTELES SOLITARIUS a "LARVAL STAGES. Za AA ae sr\ OND THIRD O a SagH inn Fis res DUE ia a ai Bi nivs Biel ap se ze ieee ERATION (semaines eee helene iis or Babee | SPECIES NOT CONSIDERED 70 BE OF MUCH IMPORTANCE ECONOMICALLY, = | SPECIES NOT CONSIDERED 70 BE OF MUCH IMPORTANCE ECONOMICALLY, = NOT CONSIDERED 70 BE OF MUCH /MPORTANCE ECONOMICALLY. APANTELES FULV/IFES XMETEORUS VERSICOLOR XMETEORUS PULCHRICORMS XLIMNERIUM DISPAFIS KLIMNER/ UNS CANILASTUS) SLEPHARIPA SCUTELLATA * CROSSOCOS/MA FLAVOSCUTELLATA ’ COMPSILURA CONCINNATA -XDEXODES NIGRIPES ‘ZYGOBOTHRIA GILVA . CARCELIA GNAVA X*AALES PAVIDA PARASETIGENA SEGREGCATA TRICHOLYGA GRANOIS TACHINA LARVARUM *CHNEUMON DISPARIS XTHEROMIA ATALANTAE *PIMPLA EXAMINATRIX XPIMPLA INSTIGATRIX *PIMPLA BRASSICARIAE CHALCIS FLAVIPES ° MONODONTOMERUS AEREUS CALOSOMA SYCOPHANTA localities into which it has preceded the gipsy moth or where the latter has not as yet reached a state of destructive abundance. On account of the lesser interest aroused in the brown-tail moth in Massachusetts, its parasites have not been given quite the considera- tion, in some respects, that has been given to those of the gipsy moth, but this lack of consideration has had entirely to do with the question of the future policy of the laboratory, and has not extended to the actual handling of the parasites themselves. In every respect other than as a basis for calculations as to future policies of the labora- BROWN-TAIL MOTH AND PARASITES IN EUROPE. 133 tory, they have received as much and as careful consideration as have the parasites of the more dangerous pests. So far as known the brown-tail moth does not occur in Japan, and in consequence no determined efforts have been made to secure, from Japanese sources, parasites likely to attackit. It has an ally and con- gener there in Hwproctis conspersa Butl., which is attacked by a variety of parasites, some of which may be expected to attack the brown-tail moth if given an opportunity. A few of them have been collected and forwarded to the laboratory through the great kindness of Mr. Kuwana, but unfortunately have arrived in such condition, or at such time of the year, as to make their colonization impossible. It is intended in the near if not in the immediate future to devote some time to the investigation of the Japanese parasites likely to be of service in this respect, and, if any can be found of promise, to attempt their importation into America. In Europe the brown-tail moth appears to be the more common of the two insects under consideration and, taken all in all, it is probably the more injurious as well. Neither in Europe nor in America does it bring about the wholesale defoliation characteristic of an invasion of the gipsy moth, but its injury is of a more insidious character and more evenly distributed throughout the years. In Russia, in the fall of 1910, the junior author was astounded at the tremendous abun- dance of its nests in many localities, notably on the irregular hedge- rows planted as a windbreak alongside the railroad in the midst of an otherwise open prairie. Occasionally small scrubs of Crategus, or wild pear, completely isolated by what seemed to be miles of open prairie, would be fairly covered with the nests. In gardens in the vicinity of Kief pear and apple trees were fre- quently injured to a considerable extent by its caterpillars, and some- times to a greater extent by the caterpillars of Aporia crategi L., which are similar in their habit, and were constructing their own hiber- nating nests side by side with those of the brown-tail moth. In the forests round about it was common, but except occasionally not quite so common as in southeastern New England. On one occasion in excess of 50 nests were noted upon a small hawthorn which stood at the edge of an oak forest. This was just a little worse than anything which has been seen in America. In southern France the circumstances under which it occurred were as surprising as those under which the gipsy moth was encountered, in respect to their departure from that which past experience led the visitor to consider as the normal. M. Dillon, who had collected and forwarded to the laboratory a considerable quantity of the winter nests, undertook to guide the visitor to the locality where they were collected. The way led through a rich and fertile valley, with many sorts of trees, including apple and pear, as well as hawthorn and oak, 134 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. | every one of which is a favored host plant in other regions, but not a single brown-tail nest was seen and, according to M. Dillon, it was never found upon these trees. Farther on an elevated plain was passed, with occasional ridges of uncultivated land upon which were growths of a deciduous scrub oak. Gipsy-moth eggs, pupal shells, etc., could usually be found by a little search under the stones on these ridges, but the brown-tail moth was conspicuous by its total absence. The next day the route selected passed through an extensive forest of cork oak, mingled with pine, and finally up the sides of the moun- tain, until great plantations of aged chestnut trees were indicative of a change in climatic conditions brought about by the considerable alti-— tude. Various shrubs and a few trees unknown or rare in the lower elevations became a feature of the forest, and among them the arbusier (Arbutus sp.), closely resembling in its growth, in the appearance of its evergreen foliage, and in its habitat the mountain laurel of our own southern mountains. It is very beautiful and unusual in its appear- ance, partly on account of its flowers (which are suggestive of Oxy- dendron) but more particularly because of its fruit. This was globu- lar, about the size of a marble, and hung pendant on long stems in more or less profusion, and in all stages of ripening. In the course of this process it passed from green through a sequence of vivid yellows to orange, and finally intense scarlet. It was at once recognized as the host plant of the hundreds of nests which had been collected and shipped by M. Dillon. Although it was occasionally met with suffi- ciently far down the mountain side to mingle with orchards and hawthorn hedges, according to M. Dillon the brown-tail moth invari- ably seeks it out, even there. The selection of a food plant repre- senting a totally different order from any selected in other parts of Europe or in America, and this in spite of the fact that what are ordinarily its most favored hosts were frequently much the more abundant, was considered to be quite as remarkable as the assump- tion of terrestrial habits by the gipsy moth.' In central and western Europe generally the brown-tail moth finds a stronghold in the dense Cratzegus hedges which are commonly planted in many localities, and upon them as well as upon oak and fruit trees it is frequently abundant. In these regions, also, not only the food plants, but the seasonal and feeding habits are quite like those in New England. Occasionally an apple tree or an oak will be found carrying an abundance of nests and, as noted by the senior author in northwestern France in 1909, the moths are sometimes so 1 It has since been learned that in the warmer parts of the region visited, the brown-tail moth caterpillars not only remain active but feed to some extent during the winter. In the middle of January, 1911, the — nests were found commonly, always upon Arbutus, in parts of the coast regions near Hyéres, and in nearly every instance the caterpillars were active and in most they were feeding. In this particular locality the nests were very different from those typical of the caterpillars in northern localities, being loosely woven, and not at all designed for hibernation in its stricter sense. BROWN-TAIL MOTH AND PARASITES IN EUROPE. 135 numerous as to lay their eggs in quantities on growing nursery seed- lings and low-growing plants. Among the very many lots ot caterpillars and cocoons which have been received at the laboratory there is occasionally one in which a fungous disease is present. Usually, when it is present at all, the majority of the caterpillars received from that particular locality will be found dead and ‘“‘shooting”’ the ascidiospores upon receipt. According to Dr. Roland Thaxter, to whom specimens have several times been submitted, it is specifically identical with the fungus which is so effective in America as to have largely assisted in reduc- ing the moth from the preeminent place which it would otherwise have occupied as a pest. Its presence under these conditions, as it was, for example, in 1909, in practically every box out of a large number which were forwarded to the laboratory from lower Austria, is strongly indicative of the importance of this disease. Looked at from one standpoint, the brown-tail moth situation in America is less satisfactory than is the gipsy-moth situation. In numerous localities throughout western Europe as well as in eastern Europe it frequently increases to such an extent as to become a pest. It hardly seems as though more could be expected of the Kuropean parasites in America than is accomplished by them in Europe, but if even this much can be secured it will aid materially in reducing the frequency of the outbreaks. At the same time, it must be admitted that from nearly every point of view the prospects of unqualified success with the gipsy-moth parasites are better than with the parasites of the brown-tail moth. SEQUENCE OF PARASITES OF THE BROWN-TAIL MOTH IN EUROPE. The accompanying table (Table III), in which are listed all of the parasites of the brown-tail moth which have been definitely asso- ciated with that host in the course of the studies of imported Euro- pean material, is constructed in the same manner as the tables of parasites of the gipsy moth in Japan and in Europe (see pp. 121, 132). It will be noted that the number and variety are slightly larger than of European gipsy-moth parasites, and that the species which are or which appear to be promising as subjects for attempted importation are also slightly more numerous. Very rarely, however, does any one among them become as relatively important as any one of several among the gipsy-moth parasites which might be mentioned. Neither has any lot of brown-tail material produced so many para- sites of all species (as high a percentage of parasitism) as have several lots of gipsy-moth material. 136 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. PARASITISM OF THE GIPSY MOTH IN AMERICA. Although the gipsy moth is attacked by a considerable variety of American parasites the aggregate effectiveness of all the species together is wholly insignificant, so far as has been determined by the rearing work which has been conducted on an extensive scale at the laboratory. Actual effectiveness may be greater than indi- cated, however, because it is possible that the caterpillars or pupe may be attacked by parasites, the larve of which are unable to com- TaBLe III.—Sequence of brown-tail moth parasites in Europe. LARVAL STAGES. PARASITES. £66, LLL STAGES | SABES. WIN-| SPRING STAGES, | “UPAL STAGES. (eee ee eee isl besitos SP XT RICHOGRAMMA PRETIOSA-LIKE - XTELENOMOUS PHALAENARUM4 APANTELES LACTEICOLOR METEORUS VERSICOLOR ZYGOBOTHRIA NIDICOLA | Xe7EROMALUS EGREGIUS *LIMNERIU/4 DISPARIS PAREXORISTA CHELONIAE DEXODES NIGRIPES COMPSILURA conciINNATAE — *GLEPHARIDEA VULGARIS | XCYCLOTOFHRYS ANSER XMASICERA SYLVATICA EUDOROMYVIA. MAGNICORNIS, ZENILLIA LIGATRIX PALES PAVIDA TACHINA LARVARUM X7R/CHOLYGA GRANDIS KYIMPLA BRASSICAPIAE. XPIMPLA INSTIGATRIX KPIMPLA EXAIUNATRIX | XTHEROMA ATALANTAE | MONODONTOMERUS AEREUS® XDIGLOCHIS. OMNIVORA ¥PTEROMALUS SP 4 ATTACKS YOUNG CATERPILLARS BEFORE HIBERNATION, BUT LARVAE APPARENTLY FAIL TO MATURE. -g, ADULT FEMALES HIBERNATE /N WINTER NESTS. *, SPECIES NOT CONSIDERED TO BE OF MUCH IIIPORTANCE ECONOMICALLY. plete their transformations under the conditions in which they find — themselves. This is known to be true in the instance of what would otherwise be a very important parasite, Tachina mella. In such instances the host usually remains unaffected and the par- asite perishes. At other times, as proved through a series of ex- periments carried on by Mr. P. H. Timberlake, of the Gipsy Moth ‘Parasite Laboratory, in the spring of 1910, the host may perish without exhibiting any external symptoms of its condition. No PARASITISM OF GIPSY MOTH IN AMERICA. 137 serious attempt to determine whether this actually happens in the field has been made, but undoubtedly it does occasionally result when the parasite larva finds itself under unnatural surroundings. It is thus well within the bounds of possibility that effective parasitism should pass unnoticed in the course of investigations in which reliance is placed entirely upon the results of rearing work. As will be shown in another place, death of the host through super- parasitism by a species fitted to attack 1t may similarly occur without the true cause becoming apparent. A sufficiently large quantity of the native caterpillars of the gipsy - moth has been dissected at the laboratory to indicate that such con- cealed parasitism, if it is ever a factor in the control of this insect, is of rare occurrence, or else of insignificant proportions. This can not be said of the pupe of the moth in America, which have not been studied sufficiently well as yet. The following native parasites have been reared from the gipsy moth in Massachusetts: THERONIA FULVESCENS ORESS. This, the most common American parasite completing its trans- formations upon the gipsy moth, was mentioned by Forbush and Fernald in their comprehensive report upon ‘‘ The Gypsy Moth” under the name of Therona melanocephala Brullé. The true TZ. melano- cephala appears not to have been reared from this host. The import- ance of T. fulvescens as a gipsy-moth parasite is indicated by the summarized results of the rearing work conducted in 1910. In his account of the parasites of the forest tent caterpillar (Mala- cosoma disstria Hiibn.) in New Hampshire by the junior author it was credited as being a secondary parasite of Pimpla conqusitor Say, and. was not recognized as a primary parasite. Investigations at the laboratory have served to throw considerable light upon its life and habits, and it is now known to be a true primary parasite, but one which, like Pimpla conquisitor itself, is able to complete its transfor- mations under a variety of circumstances. The supposed secondary parasitism, in this instance, is to be classified rather as ‘‘superpara- sitism’’ and is believed to result through the circumstance that the primary host chances to contain the larva of Pimpla, rather than through the deliberate searching out by the parent Theronia of pupz _ thus parasitized. In its relations to the gipsy moth, which is not successfully attacked by Pimpla at all frequently, Theronia has always been a primary parasite so far as known. PIMPLA PEDALIS CRESS. One or two specimens have been reared from the pups of the gipsy moth collected in the field, but it is of extremely rare occurrence as a parasite of this host, so far as recent rearing work indicates. It was 138 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. ee mentioned as one of the more common parasites by Forbush and Fernald, but it is possible that the next following species is intended. PIMPLA CONQUISITOR SAY. Judging from observations made from time to time in the field the pupe of the gipsy moth are frequently attacked by this species, but, unfortunately, the young larve of the Pimpla appear not to thrive upon this host and rarely complete their transformation. It is safe to say that more female Pimplas will be found attacking the gipsy-moth pup in the course of a day’s observations in the field at the proper season of the year than would be reared if that day - were to be spent in collecting pup instead. It is believed that the affected host usually dies, but the subject has not received the atten- tion which it deserves. If it is true, Pumpla conquisitor may prove’ to be of some assistance in the control of the moth. PIMPLA TENUICORNIS CRESS. Recorded as a parasite by Forbush and Fernald, but never reared at the laboratory. Possibly P. ae eter was ce the species reared. DIGLOCHIS OMNIVORA WALK. Mentioned by Forbush and Fernald as of some consequence as haying been reared from this host, but during late years it has been so rare that only a single pupa has been found in which it has com- pleted its transformations. ANISOCYRTA SP. Mentioned by Forbush and Fernald, but the record has not been confirmed by later rearing work. LIMNERIUM SP. A single cocoon, which was directly associated with the remains of the host caterpillar, was collected by Mr. R. L. Webster in 1906 — during his association with the laboratory. It was very likely that of L. fugitiva Say, but the fact will never be known, because a speci- men of Hemiteles utilis Norton, a hyperparasite, actually issued. © . APANTELES SP. In 1910 a colony of the caterpillars of the white-marked tussock moth was established upon some shrubbery in a locality where the gipsy moth was fairly common. The young caterpillars were spar- ingly attacked by a species of Apanteles, possibly A. delicatus How., although the fact was not determined. At the same time and place a young gipsy-moth caterpillar was found from which an Apanteles PARASITISM OF GIPSY MOTH IN AMERICA. 139 larva had issued, and spun a cocoon identical in appearance with that of the species from the tussock moth. This is the only known instance of the parasitism of the gipsy moth by an American Apan- teles, and it is believed that it resulted through the fact that the par- asites were first attracted, and subsequently excited into oviposition, by the tussock elias A considerable number of a minute black and yellow elachertine secondary parasite was reared from this cocoon, so that the specific identity of the Apanteles originally constructing it will forever remain in doubt. SYNTOMOSPHYRUM ESURUS RILEY. In July, 1906, Mr. R. L. Webster, who was at that time associated with the parasite laboratory, found a pupa of the brown-tail moth from which he reared a number of Syntomosphyrum, probably S. esurus Riley. On the same date, July 18, the pupa of a gipsy moth was found to contain the early stages of a chalcidid parasite, presumed to be the same as that reared in connection with the brown-tail moth. At about the same time several chalcidids, apparently of Synto- mosphyrum, were found ovipositing in pup of the gipsy moth, but in no instance was the oviposition successful, so far as the notes indicate. TACHINA MELLA WALK. In their report on the gipsy moth Forbush and Fernald speak of having collected no less than 300 caterpillars of the gipsy moth bearing Tachina eggs which were reared through in the laboratory. The most of these produced moths and the remainder died. No parasites were reared. In 1907 and subsequently large numbers of caterpillars have been found in the open, bearing tachinid eggs, and many hundreds have been kept under observation in confinement with results substan- tially the same as those above mentioned. In one or two instances, however, the tachinids have completed their transformations and in each instance the species was Tachina mella. It is believed, there- fore, that this is the species which deposits its eggs so freely and injudiciously. : The fact that effective parasitism failed to result was attributed by Forbush and Fernald to the molting off of the eggs before they had hatched, and this doubtless does occasionally happen. Mr. C. H. T. Townsend reinvestigated the subject and came to the conclusion that the explanation was to be found in the inability of the newly hatched larvee to penetrate the tough integument of the caterpillars, since he actually observed such failure in one instance, and found 140 — PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. many caterpillars upon which the eggs had actually hatched, but from which no parasites were reared. | That this explanation may serve in part to elucidate the mystery is also true, but still later observations have shown conclusively that the parasite larve may gain entrance into their host and yet failto mature. Two explanations have grown where one was deemed sufficient, as the result of certain technical studies which have been made at the laboratory during the past year. Mr. P. H. Timberlake and, later, Mr. W. R. Thompson have thoroughly demonstrated the fact that a parasite larva gaining lodgment in an unsuitable host may die, and its body may be in great part absorbed through action of the phagocytes without causing the host obvious inconvenience. This very likely takes place with Tachina mella in its relations with the gipsy moth and is probably a better explanation of its failure to become an effective parasite than any other which has yet been put forward. Mr. Thompson also discovered another most remarkable and peculiar phenomenon in connection with parasitism by those tachi- nids the larve of which inhabit integumental funnels similar in character to those formed by Tachina. These funnels appear to be formed as a direct result of the tendency of the skin to grow over and heal the wound caused by the entrance of the tachinid maggot into the body of the host. This wound is kept open by the larva itself, and as a result the growing integument takes the form of an inverted funnel, more or less completely surrounding the parasitic maggot, which continues to breathe through the minute orifice in its apex. When the caterpillar molts the old skin is usually torn away from around this opening, leaving the maggot in situ and unaffected, but occasionally its attachment to the funnel may remain so strong as to result disastrously for the maggot, and the whole funnel, maggot included, may be withdrawn. Thus, not merely the eggs may be molted off, but the internal feeding maggots which have hatched from the eggs may be molted out and perish. ACHAETONEURA FRENCHID WILL. A very few specimens of this species have been reared from time to time in the course of the work at the laboratory. It is probable that the species is synonymous with that mentioned by Forbush and Fernald under the name of Achetoneura fernaldt. EXORISTA BLANDA O. S. Occasionally reared as a parasite of the gipsy moth. PARASITISM OF GIPSY MOTH IN AMERICA. 141 UNDETERMINED TACHINIDS. Dr. S. W. Williston, in reporting upon a collection of Diptera reared from the gipsy moth in Massachusetts and sent to him in 1891 by Dr. Fernald, stated that there were present two species of Exorista and four of Phorocera. Unfortunately these specimens appear to have been lost before being definitely determined. No such variety of tachinids has been reared from this host in Massachusetts during recent years, but several species as yet undetermined, or represented only by unfamiliar puparia, are in our collection. SUMMARY OF REARING WORK CARRIED ON AT THE LABORATORY IN 1910. In Tables IV and V are the condensed results of a part of an extensive series of rearing experiments primarily instituted for the purpose of determining the present status of the introduced parasites of the gipsy moth in America in 1910. They also serve excellently as an indication of the effectiveness of parasitism by native species. In this respect they are typical of the results secured from similar work in previous years. TABLE 1V.—Results of rearing work in 1910 to determine progress of imported parasites and prevalence of parasitism by native parasites of gipsy-moth pupe. Moths reared. Parasites reared. eae Localiti ber of Th C Miscel. eee ratory ocalities. dispar. Blepha- e- omp- iscel- | phagi No, pupe. | Male. |Female.| ripa scu- icc Sate, uesmus DU tellata. cens. nata. nids. 2185 North Andover...| 2,700} 1, ee 259 2A eee: aoe qoosteeene paee se teenie soneeeres 2186 elrose....=------ 500 89 159 11 ies See dl See ene e emer eres A NEE ae - 2187 | North Andover..-| 1,800 683 299 2 OF Sess cas see eee ets 2 ee poe SAAS 1, 400 482 AOL | ee Bere eee 5 he EE as ellis dans aot 2189 BUCUS. -.-2..--.- 1,000 412 725010) ears pee 2 Drih seer ore 3 2190 | Wakefield........ Pepe ee toael <\Oirge 4 ee Siem NORE. ola 1 ZIQOA |=. - « Osea Bee 1106 4 38 ih etree ecoe MD cee ee Vp. 5 cpaeeece 2191. | Swampscott...... 300 159 Tellme: ae os A Coe 0S ol Eee eh eS 4 Sag eee hr See 21924 | North Andover... 300 106 De eee eye creer teen | ae Oe eke ei eee ald > Sm 21928 | Woburn...-....-..- 282 69 SIU tel eae Bee emrente UTR es oe cre PA ce aR SA ete 2192c | North Andover 100 67 ODMR RSE See et ey 2 Bene oe See ane ee Nen (Reeaaee ee as Cll Sos Biv 2AIS | AULUSn <= an. 1,050 274 Pale setae 4 Hoar eames Pad ee Ghesccie 1 2194 | Melrose 2......... 1,700 312 211 1M ee eee Soe soe Seek MAE BE M3 1 2196 | Stoneham........ 1, 047 379 IDA/ SSS Riese re alld eRe (ves eee a eee a t SCSfe fe ate tel ARE ese pol percry Byes eas on 1,000 81 NAP Ee) tangata pga eee eee eres icicle SHE te oat a 13 Ce 1, 000 147 (ta oe ee) a ene ae en RI TT 5 2280) | Saugus. ..----..- 1, 250 253 702 a eee a a 2 1 31 10 2281 | North Andover... 580 232 Opis At Bese 1 al (sete Se ll eet a Se pee 228) |a--~< US Nee tole 1,700 442 218 8 icy tata x 4] 6 ze BOVeLly = ? 2 pe na aaa te 4 ge tve: ENG ta Asse cll, Sanbner cle Oe antes , gee ob -reevaleeateeedl IT (6) Rae SUK og, Scena aria Oe ies | ea erm || eke ae pees eae : a 5 ora attain sets at ae E Abs Ee EOE AN: Cs comes | Seer at ie T (2 ire" Pan me: «ll Sate een | Coneeemes Scammer €T I (Stee aula a a ee eal es aA des A oe Fee ee Iles a aero die cael esenicindl one a Lage a i Meee lee beast eo ecavcrotl ade ie [ape AS SE a Es Rio inca | ENE gam ge Ca * Meret et lac fectstn nal eae Bin! Of ST Yh La Oe IR FANS) Bs pes eae I Ai ed ARAL Ss AG Cet ate, tied ee eased ¢ Pee eee Pall UG BS ESN bape NS |e at ee Sc ree Seas f es P SG STOR Iie 9 Cicer eat Se ete eee, I Sane Whe. See aoe ol | es ihe) age ae |e oe lk Gece © mee ae I Z ane) . . “709 | 2 No» | SMO | sioiog | sejoo | 2t8U jsmnb | bP | a, | tea | tp | So oR, | -eur07 -u00 ooo penta | -uop | en) | Oe ea emits eldutg -10}_ | O07 -00}0] | -0847 -dur09 -epun “poivel soqisvivd poyzodury “YJOUL 7VD7-UN0LG ayy fo sanspund aryou fq wsvyrspund fo aouajpraid pun sapspund pajsodunr fo ssauboud aurwmJajep 02 ‘OT6T ur yson burswed fo synsay—'TA ATVI, 6S 0S CT LT €6 POT TZ 9L TZ 68 c8 OTT ee pe 0G 14 cP 89 8T GL SP 9G 6¢ 88 9G 9T OL 126 VG 8 LLY | 861 8 i 61 OT €1 6 €9 L¥ LT GL Al 8T LY OL GE 0¢ G9 L9 CT ial 67 £6 a Po 06 OL 69 66 6 4 LOL 6L 6 08 ‘e[eur |. ; “oq | OCW *polvel Su}OW @00 4110 -sAIyo JO 10q Eiconauet pe7veur “HSH o AYNG Pe ah oe P10J1S9 AA poe eee UOJIILT |" SPITS. Se Smee PUV[OAOIE) |" "” “FPIS’ ie UOJOTPPI |” EFIS Tce kena OVUIIIIOW |” ~~ “ZPIZ. Dep ewe ears A[IOAOG |" TFIZ ee pee Te snsneg |-""-OFTZ eee ee ee IBJSOONOTY) |" ~~ “6E1S

asl L¥ Vi: ast eae Se S| aera ee as I ai ee eee hans. 8 Wea alee ee 6S GL ae | ae T Gres SRG OL ee eas Fae a A ee ale eet. an OP, OF BP ae Se asta | 20 carer || ee caer a IE, eo Tae | ia eal | ee geaeeen | a | aa (S 9T Tea, Rot Tate > ee | ee AR aol PAPO a oe 6 “SEES cel, & Poecane ER? cae | ee ee ae) Ié Toe, BE || Tae hele RE eel fy oe eae ae GT ie eee | a aan ee eee || an cee || AS 0€ eee ae ol ae ages oe Me eee alo ee tee ates oli Pea eee et ee II ee ae: il (6 Me OPC ee esas | oe Cees Spl eh ee glee Tile GT fe ee eS ae I es Re Peas Ga Pant an lake? eal eee a seen ima tae oe PRM cet) FI Tig eg || ae age || Mee Gea || ee eae ill es PCa G (TDW, Fogel” Sa seid ae as || Saint No GE ROS ne as Sa es see ate eel ee i al a ale dere aT bs ee ERI eee oe De 61 eee eer See hee || aimee = | a = | ag a 9T a ae ee ee ie ee ea ate. GG ST pee eae || ee a ee |e I II ke eae ee al a eee OL (4S ee FG || Seeman || ER ame ane | Rat ey | cee as OT Ta eIS or aol See ae aiaald| Sma | Sa amar | 210) €9 Sa ie Soe came || es ieee (ec act = ae eal aa” |e i eal a cra (a OT (G6 Ta®) re ‘snanse ; ; dN; | ‘snore | . ; “27eU ; sue0 io, | 4 rojoo | -etoo umn | ‘etx jouvoe ff stan | ‘ -ujo |, SE0E | “BP |-eatey upped van | Qe | iaiy | TS | A) aC one “SOU CULOUY) ory |e Cl erdure 7] POU | -UOP | cong ety | LeanISn | 2 -oyusg TL [eur | “-104 | -ouow PW Z | -dutog -apugq ; : “porvol porver soyrsered oATIVN poreer soysered poysodury ee SLT OST 006 002 000 ‘T OST Be pe ee *** ploj ped EAE oe ce ~* pLloou0*) pccares oS Sie OSO1TOW eg ape cS ee ule[eg Taek corel 3 preyuud’y Feo gS eet SUIpPeoy Sete go ele sn3sneg Fea SuUTpvoyYy Fee -----Kpoqevedg Fee kad 25 pleyuuds’y STE Ce HO}OTPPIA Sea cee AINQst[Vg ci pengs -"" "Tena W OT "+" * ATIOANG “SOTII[VOOT ~~ “OT9TS ~~ aT9TS 1 VLOG ) _ 0916 ‘ON A1OVVI -0qeT “ponurjywoj—y7jOW 71D7-UN0.1q ay fo sanspund aavwou fq wsinspund fo aouajnaaud pun sansnind pajiodus fo ssaiboud aurmiajop 0} ‘OT6T Ur yton buruvas fo synsay—'TA AAV L Te Gi cde | Oe nge el cee eloee tye |" 72> eto n. | 9g coy |e | eS | Sane ene lene errs 150 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. As may be noted by reference to the table, the imported parasites are beginning to become sufficiently abundant so that parasitism by — them will compare favorably with that by American species, but are not as yet so abundant as to exceed the American species in relative effectiveness. The table as presented does not indicate at all accu- rately the actual status of the several species of parasites mentioned, on account of the difference in the condition of the material at the time of collection. | : Compsilura, for example, is much more apt to leave the cater- pillars before they spin for pupation, and the same is true of Meteorus. Monodontomerus, Pimpla, Theronia, etc., never attack caterpillars before spinning, and Monodontomerus and Theronia frequently reserve attack until some little time after the host has pupated. As it stands, parasitism by Monodontomerus is about equal to that of Theronia and in excess of that by Pimpla or Anomalon. Parasitism by Compsilura is distinctly more effective than that by all of the other native tachinid parasites of the caterpillars. Meteorus is much more common than indicated in the limited territory over which it is now known to exist, and the specimens reared represented the second generation of adults to develop upon the brown-tail moth in 1910. Apanteles lacteicolor Vier. is not represented in these collections, since it does not attack caterpillars so large as those involved. In carrying on this work several styles of rearing cages were used, of which one was devised for the special purpose of securing the tachinid parasites with the minimum of exposure to the effects of the irritating hairs of the brown-tail caterpillar. This worked very satisfactorily, and since it may possibly be found of service in con- ducting similar work elsewhere, the following description is presented: The basis of this cage (see fig. 10) consisted of a box of stiff paste- board 8 inches square and 12 inches high. About 4 inches from the top a stiff paper funnel (a) was fitted and held in position by the cleats (6), which, in turn, were fastened to the sides of the box by broadheaded upholsterer’s tacks driven in from the outside. These cleats served to support the tray (c), which just fitted into the cage. The bottom of this tray was covered, in some instances with coarse mosquito netting, and in others with a wire screen of $-inch mesh. Two holes in the side of the tray corresponded with two 1-inch holes in the side of the box, and these in turn with similar holes in a wooden strip (d), which was fastened on the outside. When the tray was in position, paper cones (h) and large glass tubes (g) were inserted in these holes. The stiff paper funnel (a) had its apex inserted into another hole bored diagonally in a similar wooden strip which was fitted in the bottom of the cage. Inside of this hole a stiff paper cone (formed like h by rolling up a section of a strip of paper cut to a circular ‘quantity of the larvee PARASITISM OF BROWN-TAIL MOTH IN AMERICA. 151 shape) was held in position by a tack which passed through it into the wooden strip. The end of this cone, passing through the bottom of the cage, permitted a third glass tube (f) similar to the two above mentioned, to be held in position. No further support to this tube was needed than that afforded by the cone itself. In using this cage a mass of cocoons of the brown-tail moth was placed in the tray, and the cover was put on with the several tubes in position. Tachinid maggots issuing from the prepupal caterpillars, or pupe contained in the cocoon mass, in attempting to seek the earth would pass through the bottom of the tray and be conducted by the stiff paper funnel into the lower tube, where they were quickly noticed and easily re- moved. All other parasites, as well as the brown-tail moths themselves, when they emerged, were at- tracted by the light into the two upper tubes, and could be similarly removed with little difficulty. (See Pl. V, fig. 1.) By the aid of this contrivance we were enabled to secure a of the unknown tach- inid, already men- tioned, within a few minutes after they had issued f rom the Fic. 10.—Rearing cage for tachinid parasites of the brown-tail moth’ a, Paper funnel; 0, cleats holding paper funnel in position; c, tray; host, and thereby de- d, wooden strip on outside of cage; e, paper cone connecting paper termined thatthe fail- ‘funnel a@ and glass tube f; h, h, paper funnels supporting glass ure of this species to ““P™% 9% (Onsinal) pupate was in no way due to the unnatural surroundings. Some- times the tubes were partly filled with damp earth, in order that these larve might immediately come in contact with it, and at other times the larve were removed as soon as they dropped and placed upon earth similar to that which they would naturally have encoun- tered had they issued from cocoons in the field under wholly natural conditions. The use of these cages also saved a large amount of exceedingly painful work which would otherwise have been necessary in determin- ing whether or not Parexorista chelonize was present in any of the field collections. = 152 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. IMPORTATION AND HANDLING OF PARASITE MATERIAL. — Since insects like the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth are sub- jected to the attack of different species of parasites at different stages in their development, it has been necessary, in order to secure all of these, to import the host insects in as many different stages as pos- sible and practicable. If the present experiment in parasite intro- duction is brought to a successful conclusion, it will undoubtedly encourage the undertaking of other experiments in which similarly imported pests are involved. Even should it fail, from a severely practical standpoint, and the complete automatic control of neither the gipsy moth nor the brown-tail moth should be effected, it seems to us that the technical results already achieved are sufficient to give encouragement rather ‘than the opposite to similar undertakings in the future. It is therefore desirable to describe in some detail the various methods employed for the importation and ‘subsequent handling of the parasite material. With very few exceptions the methods first employed proved more or less unsuitable. Sometimes they were entirely discarded; usually they were modified to suit the exigencies of the occasion. Some- times these modifications were in comparatively unimportant par- ticulars which would scarcely be pertinent to any other insect than the gipsy moth or the brown-tail moth, and realizing this there will be no attempt in-such cases to enter into lengthy descriptions. At other times radical modifications have been found necessary on account of unforeseen difficulties which would be likely to occur in pretty nearly any other undertaking along anything like similar lines. EGG MASSES OF THE GIPSY MOTH. The importation of egg masses of the gipsy moth (see Pl. VI) from European sources has been attended with no difficulty whatever, beyond that of securing the collection of these eggs in sufficiently large quantities. Any style of package, provided that it were suffi- ciently tight to prevent loose eggs from sifting out, was as good as another, and any one of the established means of transportation served the purpose. In the case of shipments from Japan serious difficulties were encountered. One of the parasites peculiar to that country and unknown in Europe invariably issued en route and died without reproducing. Various attempts to overcome this difficulty without having recourse to cold storage failed and it was only after cold- storage facilities were perfected and used that living parasites of this species were secured in numbers. As in the instance of similar shipments from Europe, no special form of package was required, but at the same time a word of appre- . SS ee lates ts Bul. 91, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE V. Fic. 1.—VIEW OF INTERIOR OF ONE OF THE LABORATORY STRUCTURES, SHOWING REARING CAGES FOR BROWN-TAIL PARASITES. (ORIGINAL.) Fig. 2.—Box USED IN SHIPPING IMMATURE CATERPILLARS OF THE GIPSY MOTH FROM JAPAN. (ORIGINAL.) = —————————— IMPORTATION AND HANDLING OF PARASITE MATERIAL. 158 ciation must be said for the wonderful care with which the Japanese entomologists packed the egg masses for shipment. Good-sized and wonderfully well-constructed wooden boxes were used and each mass was wrapped separately in a small square of soft rice paper. Considering the ease with which egg masses of the gipsy moth ought, theoretically, to be obtained and shipped to the laboratory, the number received in response to the requests which were made for their collection and shipment was astonishingly small during the first two winters. Up to that time only a very few dead parasites of an undescribed genus and species had been received from Japan, and none at all had issued from any of the few European importations. In 1908 the several lots of eggs were placed in small tube cages of the ordinary type and the caterpillars killed as they issued. Some time after the eggs had hatched a few parasites began to appear simultaneously from the Kuropean and Japanese material, which proved upon examination to be Anastatus bifascratus in each instance. Later a few Tyndarichus nave were reared from the Japanese eggs and supposed, rightly. enough, to be secondary, although probably not, as at first supposed, upon Anastatus. This hyperparasitism was by no means certain, and it was resolved to determine the fact definitely the following fall and winter, provided additional importa- tions could be secured. The desired material was imported and an exhaustive study of the parasites which were present was made, with the result that the five species were reared and their host relations as well as their relations one to another definitely determined. The execution of this project proved to be much more tedious than was expected, and was, in fact, the feature of that winter’s work. Fur- ther mention of Ee investigation will appear in the discussion of Schedius kuvane. GIPSY-MOTH CATERPILLARS, FIRST STAGE. In the spring of 1907 an attempt was made to import the cater- pillars of the gipsy moth in their first instar, and a considerable num- ber was received from several different localities. The experiment was not a success and was not repeated. The mortality was heavy en route and only a small proportion of the caterpillars would feed after receipt. Some few. were carried through to Ee but no parasites were reared. It is very probable that if recourse were had to cold storage, caterpillars could very successfully be transported in this stage, but the importation of slightly larger caterpillars indicates that the per- centage of parasitism would average to be very small at the best, and it is probable that the best would rarely be achieved. 154 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. GIPSY-MOTH CATERPILLARS, SECOND TO FIFTH STAGES. EUROPEAN IMPORTATIONS. The first importations of gipsy-moth caterpillars in the second to fifth stages were made in 1907. Small wooden boxes, each with a capacity of about 40 cubic inches, were used for the purpose, and all shipments were by mail. The caterpillars, usually to the number of 100, were inclosed in these boxes, together with several ine ee fresh foliage. The method was of doubtful utility, and at the same time no improvement upon it could be devised short of cold storage en route. On receipt the twigs would usually be stripped bare of foliage. Some of the caterpillars were invariably dead—whether from starvation or from injuries received at the time of collection or subsequently could not be determined. The remaining caterpillars were in all stages of emaciation and many of them, though still living, were too weak to recuperate. . Parasites in considerabie variety but always in very small num- bers issued, for the most part en route, but occasionally from the caterpillars after receipt. Nothing could be decided as a result of these importations and their repetition was resolved upon. It was planned to import much larger numbers in 1908 without modifying the methods employed the year before. In this respect success was not achieved, principally, it would appear, on account of the difficulty of collecting these small caterpillars in numbers, espe- cially in localities where the gipsy moth was not very abundant. Furthermore, it became increasingly evident that the percentage of parasitism (so far as it could be determined by the actual number of parasites secured) was so insignificant as to make the task of import- ing sufficiently large numbers of any one parasite for the purpose of colonization wholly impracticable. Many of the lots of caterpillars which were received in the best condition produced no parasites at all. It was therefore evident that if extensive operations in any locality should be determined upon, complete failure might result through the absence of the parasites in that particular locality dur- ing that particular season. Nothing less than an improvement in the service of several thousand per cent over that of 1907 or 1908 would answer, and this was altogether out of the question, except at an expenditure which even the generous funds appropriated by the State and Federal Governments could not cover. Further importa- tions from Europe were regretfully decided to be impracticable. IMPORTATION AND HANDLING OF PARASITE MATERIAL. 155 JAPANESE IMPORTATIONS. It has already been told how Prof. Kincaid spent the summer of 1908 in Japan in the interests of the parasite work. While there, in cooperation with the Japanese entomologists, he evolved a wholly new method for the transportation of the immature caterpillars of _ the gipsy moth, which would have been applicable in the case of European importations if it had seemed to be worth while to con- tinue these importations in 1909. Large oblong wooden boxes hav- ing a capacity of about 14 cubic feet were used. Like all the boxes received from Japan, they were most excellently constructed of a sort of wood which was less affected by dampness than most. The success of the work was very largely dependent upon both the character of the wood and the excellence of construction. It is cer- tain that ordinary packing boxes would have warped to such an extent as to permit the escape of the smal! caterpillars. These boxes (see Pl. V, fig. 2) were first lined with several thick- nesses of absorbent paper, which was then thoroughly dampened. Small branches of a species of Alnus were attached to the sides, so that the interior was a mass of green foliage; the caterpillars to the number of several hundred were introduced, the cover tightly attached, and the whole sent in cold storage from Yokohama to Boston with scarcely an interruption en route. Sometimes the ends of the branches were thrust into a piece of succulent root (radish or potato), but this proved unnecessary, and rather a detriment than otherwise. The condition of these boxes on receipt was usually good, and in some instances surprising. In some of the best of them scarcely a leaf was withered or even discolored, and in one in particular it seemed almost as though the branches had been freshly collected, with the early morning dew still clinging to the leaves. This illusion was almost instantly destroyed, for within an hour practically every leaf had dropped from the stem and was already beginning to blacken, as though struck by a sudden blight. There was a good deal of difference in the condition of the cater- pillars. Those which had been shipped in the second and third stages almost invariably arrived in the best condition. There was scarcely any mortality en route, and physically they were all in perfect health and ready to feed voraciously. Larger caterpillars did not survive their journey so well, and among those that had reached the fifth stage there was always a heavy mortality, and the survivors were never very healthy and would mostly die without feeding. It would appear that they were so heavy as to be thrown to the bottom of the box while dormant through cold, and thus become injured. While technically a success, these attempts were practically fail- ures. No parasites were secured in anything more than the most 156 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. insignificant numbers, which could not be secured much more easily in other ways, and no further importations were attempted in 1909. Relatively such small quantities of this class of material have been received as to make unnecessary any specially devised methods for their economical handling. With very few exceptions the boxes were opened immediately upon receipt and most carefully sorted for parasites and living caterpillars. A few of the large Japanese boxes were not opened immediately, but holes were bored in the end, cones and tubes inserted, and living insects of all sorts thus attracted to the light and removed. The living caterpillars were placed in cages or trays and fed, and occasionally a few parasites were thus secured in addition to those present in the boxes upon receipt. It is very much to be regretted that the dead and dying cater- pillars were not preserved for subsequent examination and dissection, but it was only in 1909, after the shipments of this sort of material had been discontinued, that the wholesale dissection of caterpillars was attempted for the purpose of ascertaining the proportion of parasitized individuals. At the best, even after long experience, it is a tedious process, especially in me case of material which has been killed and preserved. A few caterpillars, accidentally imported in their early stages with Apanteles cocoons in 1910, were saved and dissected with good results from a technical standpoint. GIPSY-MOTH CATERPILLARS, FULL-FED AND PUPATING. Importations of large caterpillars (Pl. VI) ready or nearly ready to pupate were first made in 1905, and it was demonstrated during that year that they could be brought to America with a fair degree of success, and that at least a proportion of the parasites with which they were infested could be reared. Ever since 1905 we have been attempting to improve upon the methods first used during that year and have experimented with scores of modifications of the most successful, some of which were intentional while others were incidental to the fact that there have been many different collectors, each of whom has displayed some individuality in his methods of collecting and packing. It would be tedious and is probably unnecessary to go into detailed de- scriptions of even a part of these various intentional or accidental experiments. The most successful method yet devised involves the use of rather shallow wooden boxes having a capacity of from 40 to 70 cubic inches. (See Pl. VIII, fig. 3.) Quite a large number of shipments has been made in much larger boxes, but their condition on receipt has almost invariably been very bad. The boxes must be tight to prevent the escape of tachinid larve, which can apparently pass through any Bul. 91, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE VI. AHoen& CoBaltimore DIFFERENT STAGES OF THE GIPSY MOTH (PORTHETRIA DISPAR). Egg mass on center of twig; female moth ovipositing just below; female moth below, at left, enlarged; male moth, somewhat reduced, immediately above; female moth immedialely above, somewhat reduced; male moth with wings folded in upper left; male chrysalis at right of this; female chrysalis again at right; larva at center. (Original.) IMPORTATION AND HANDLING OF PARASITE MATERIAL. 157 opening large enough to accommodate the head. No special pro- vision for ventilation is necessary, but it is necessary to construct the boxes of soft and absorbent wood in order to secure best results. This will not only prevent too rapid evaporation, but superfluous moisture will first be absorbed and subsequently will evaporate. Tin boxes are wholly unsuitable and paper or pasteboard have never been at all satisfactory. Twigs with foliage should be included in each box, and these must be long enough to remain firmly braced in case the caterpillars eat the foliage. Some very bad results have followed the use of loose foliage, a practice which certain collectors have been persistent in following. The fewer the caterpillars included in each box the better the results. The number has gradually been reduced from 100 at first to 20 during the past few years. Undoubtedly 10 would be better yet, but not enough better to make the added expense an economy. The more nearly the caterpillars are ready to pupate when packed the better. If collected just a few days before pupation, they usually arrive in good shape, provided conditions otherwise are as they should be. | Shipments by mail have generally been successful when the boxes were not smashed, as has sometimes happened, or when something else was not wrong. Shipments by express without cold storage have been equally successful when the boxes have been properly packed. As has been said, there is no need to provide for the ven- tilation of the interior of the box, but the exterior must be exposed to the air on at least one side to permit the evaporation of the mois- ture absorbed by the wood. Otherwise, as nearly always happens, when a part of the caterpillars or pup die, they decompose, and as a result of their presence a similar fate usually overtakes the remainder. Some very large shipments were a complete loss in 1907, merely because a European agent, prevented by newly enforced postal regulations from making shipments by mail, packed the boxes tightly in large packing cases and forwarded them by express. When the lids were removed from these cases the sides of the boxes were found to be thoroughly damp, and the whole exhaled an ammoniacal odor _ so strong that it would seem of itself alone sufficient to destroy any ordinary form of insect life. Bundles of boxes wrapped in thick, glazed paper have almost invari- ably been received in bad condition. Ifthe paper is soft and absorbent it is generally satisfactory. One collector wrapped several packages in a thick fabric composed of tarred paper strengthened by muslin, and the contents rotted. Cold storage in the case of shipments of this character would never have been either necessary or even desirable had it not been for the 158 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. difficulties experienced in the importation of Blepharipa scutellata. All other species of parasites could be secured equally as well or better from shipments under normal conditions, but because Blepharipa differed from all the others in this apparently minor characteristic, it was found necessary to make use of cold storage for practically all of the very large shipments made during 1909 and 1910. No large shipments of full-fed caterpillars have been made from Japan. ‘They were rendered unnecessary in the first place on account of the very excellent and intelligent service rendered by the Japanese entomologists. There are but three important parasites to be secured from these large caterpillars in Japan, and the cocoons and puparia of these have been reared and forwarded to us in specially devised packages, with almost uniformly good results. | There have been a few very valuable lots of material of this char- acter shipped otherwise than as above described. It is by no means certain that if sufficient time and experimentation were to be devoted to the subject some of these occasional and successful modifications might not be developed into something better than has yet been tested. Any deviation is apt to prove disastrous, however, as wit- nessed in 1910, when failure resulted because the quality of the paper used for wrapping the bundles of boxes waschanged in several instances from that employed at any time previously. Itis very difficult, and in practice impossible, to foresee such minor contingencies and provide against them. ‘The really serious phase of the situation lies in the fact that such a slight modification may result not only in the com- plete loss of the shipment itself, but in a year’s delay before it can be remedied. By the time the first shipments are received and the trouble recognized, it is apt to be too late to apply a remedy that year, even by the use of the cable. ~ The laboratory methods in use for the handling of the parasite material of this sort have been modified in various ways, more espe- cially for the express purpose of overcoming the difficulty in hiber- nating the puparia of Blepharipa scutellata. Such of these modifica- tions as have been primarily made for this special purpose will be discussed in the account of Blepharipa which will be found elsewhere. In general it has been the practice to open the boxes immediately upon their receipt, and to sort the contents in accordance with their character. The tachinid puparia were always carefully counted, and of late years they have been sorted to a certain extent into species. In 1907 all the puparia were placed in jars, without sorting, with a little very slightly dampened earth which was kept from drying by the use of a wet sponge. In 1908 they were sorted to species, so far as this was practicable, and all were kept dry. In 1909 the Blepharipa puparia were sorted out and placed in earth as soon thereafter as IMPORTATION AND HANDLING OF PARASITE MATERIAL. 159 possible. The remainder were placed in small tube cages, and taken to the field where they were to be liberated. An attendant counted the number of flies issuing, and watched for secondary parasites. Since no secondary parasites issued in the summer from puparia secured in this manner, in 1910 the puparia were merely. placed in cages which were taken to the colony site and left unattended until the flies had ceased to issue. After the adults of the summer-issuing forms have all ceased to emerge, the sound puparia are more or less carefully sorted. Those supposed to be Parasetigena segregata, indistinguishable externally from dead Tricholyga or Tachina, are buried in damp earth for the winter. Mr. J. D. Tothill, one of the assistants at the laboratory, devised an ingenious method for separating the puparia containing the healthy pupe of Parasetigena from those containing dead Tachina or Tricholyga, by holding them so that they were viewed against a narrow beam of very strong light. The method was not infallible, but served its purpose fairly well, and was the first of many which had been experimented with which was at all successful. The living caterpillars removed from the boxes have been placed in cages or trays and fed, but only an insignificant proportion of them has ever lived long enough to be killed by the parasites which many of them have contained. Large numbers of them have been dissected for the purpose of determining the proportions parasitized. The dead caterpillars not infrequently contain the puparia of . Tricholyga, when this parasite happens to be common in the locality from which the shipment originated. Under such circumstances they are placed in tube cages for the emergence of the flies. If Tricholyga is not present in the boxes in the form of free puparia the dead caterpillars may as well be discarded, since it is only very rarely that any other tachinid pupates in this manner. Pupe, both living and dead, nearly always contain a considerable number of the larve of Blepharipa scutellata. They are, therefore, placed over damp earth in order that the larve may pupate under natural conditions. Other tachinids may occur in the pupa, but never in anything but insignificant numbers. GIPSY-MOTH PUPZ. It would seem as though it ought to be an easy matter to import the pupe (Pl. VI) of the gipsy moth in good condition, but for reasons which are not altogether clear in every instance the vast majority of the importations of pupz have been worthless, or worse than worthless, since the handling of worthless material involves an additional waste of labor. Too often the cause of failure is directly and obviously the result of careless packing, and the number of lots of pupe which have been received packed with the care which is 160 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. essential to success is very small. The most successful shipments ever received were carefully packed in slightly dampened sphagnum > moss, so arranged that the individual pupe rarely touched each other. One or two successful importations thus received in 1908 were used as the basis for future instructions to collectors, and in every instance in which the directions were carefully followed in 1909 the results were equally good. In 1910 additional material apparently packed with the same care was received from the same source and via the same route. For no apparent reason whatever it was worthless when received. | In consequence of this another method which has occasionally been followed, will be recommended for shipments in 1911. This has been employed successfully upon various occasions, although without anything like uniform success, and is in effect the same as that used for the shipment of full-fed and pupating caterpillars and the same precautions must be used. It will probably be better to place a somewhat larger quantity of foliage in the box to prevent the pupz from being thrown about too much in transit. So very few shipments of gipsy-moth pupe have been received at the laboratory as to have rendered unnecessary any special devices for their handling after receipt. Each year a few of the lots of cater- pillars have contained a few individuals which were collected as pre- pups or as pup, and from such, an occasional parasite of one or another of the species peculiar to the pupez has been reared. ‘These have been so few, however, as to be of entirely inconsequential value, - except from a technical standpoint. The actual shipments of pupz collected as such have been handled exactly as though they consisted of active caterpillars which pupate en route, with the one difference that the pupz received have usually been inclosed in darkened cages with tubes attached, in order more easily to remove the parasites as they issued. In 1908 pupz were received in satisfactory condition for the first time since the preliminary shipments were made in 1905, and it was — not until then that the host relations of several of the parasites, notably Chalcis spp. and Monodontomerus xreus, were finally deter- mined. ‘These lots were studied with the greatest care, each indi- vidual pupa being opened on receipt and for the most part isolated in a small vial, in order that it might be dissected after the contained parasite had issued. | BROWN-TAIL MOTH EGG MASSES. No difficulty has ever been experienced in the importation of the ego-masses of the brown-tail moth (Pl. VII), except that when cold storage is not used a portion of the parasites are apt to hatch, and either escape or die enroute. Wooden boxes of various sizes and Bul. 91, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE VII. Joveyers patie ARoen& Cn Baltimore DIFFERENT STAGES OF THE BROWN-TAIL MOTH (EUPROCTIS CHRYSORRHCEA). Winter nest at upper left; male and female adults, lower right; another winter nest, upper right; male and female chrysalides above, male at left; full-grown larva in center, somewhat reduced; young larve at its left; egg mass, the eggs hatching, at lower left; female ovipositing on leaf; egg mass also on same leaf. (Original.) IMPORTATION AND HANDLING OF PARASITE MATERIAL. 161 construction have been employed with uniformly good results, and nearly all shipments have been made by mail. All of the parasites have been found amenable to methods of laboratory control, and their reproduction has been undertaken as an economic venture in each instance. Under such circumstances there is no need to import large quantities except for the purpose of discovering other forms of - parasites, should they exist. HIBERNATING NESTS OF THE BROWN-TAIL MOTH. The importation of hibernating nests (Pl. VII) of the brown-tail moth has been attended with very good success, as a rule, but by no means invariably. If they are sent too early in the winter and sub- jected to long continued high temperature before shipment, or while in transit, the caterpillars will die instead of resuming activity in the spring. | If sent too late in the spring, exposure to abnormally high temper- atures en route results in premature activity of the caterpillars and they will arrive in bad and sometimes in worthless condition. If sent in the middle of the winter they will be very nearly ready to resume activity on receipt, but if again exposed to cold they will become dormant and remain so until about the time when they would normally have become active. This seems not too prejudicial to them, if one is to judge by their activities during the first few weeks after the resumption of activity, but in some subtle manner a change has been wrought, and they do not commonly go through to success- ful pupation. This phenomenon, previougly observed with other insects, is discussed at some length in the account of the tachinid Zygobothria nidicola, which hibernates within the caterpillars, but which does not destroy its host until after it has spun for pupation. The failure to rear these caterpillars beyond a certain stage in the spring was at first attributed to some fault in the methods employed, and when it was finally apparent that the fault lay elsewhere there was no longer need to seek to remedy it. The one parasite desired. was found to be already introduced and apparently well established as the result of a colonization some three years before. The methods for handling the imported nests have varied from season to season in accordance with the habits of the parasites which it was desired to rear from them. These methods will be more fully described in the discussions of the several parasites involved: Ptero- malus egregius, Apanteles lacteicolor, and Zygobothria nidicola. IMMATURE CATERPILLARS OF THE*:BROWN-TAIL MOTH. Taken all together, importations of active brown-tail caterpillars {Pl. VIL) in the second to fourth spring stages aggregate a con- siderable number. These importations were undertaken on the .62188°—Bull. 91—12——11 i 162 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. supposition that there were parasites which attacked them as soon as they resumed activity in the spring, and left them before they reached their last stage. There are, indeed, several species which have such habits, but there is none amongst them which may not be secured equally well from either the hibernating caterpillars or from | the full-fed and pupating caterpillars, or from both. In consequence the importation of partly grown caterpillars in the spring has never been attempted except experimentally. Of the considerable number which has been received, nearly all have been packed in the same manner as are the full-fed caterpillars. . They are nearly always alive on receipt, and usually feed voraciously when given an opportunity. Undoubtedly a considerable percentage contains parasites of those species which only emerge after the cocoon is spun, but every attempt to rear these parasites by feeding the cat- erpillars has resulted in failure. They will feed once, at least, but usually not more than a few times, and then die sooner than would have been the case had they not fed at all. Some among them will live for a long time, feeding a little but scarcely growing at all, and sometimes a very small percentage will complete growth and pupate. The percentage is so very small, however, and the labor and pain of handling the caterpillars is so great, as to render the work of feeding them of much more than doubtful economy, in every instance in which it has been attempted. FULL-FED AND PUPATING CATERPILLARS OF THE BROWN-TAIL MOTH. The temptation is strong to use the present opportunity for the purpose of giving vent to certain poorly suppressed and heartfelt expressions of opinion concerning the infliction known euphemisti- cally and very inadequately as the brown-tai! ‘‘rash.” It is a very living subject of discussion during most of the year at the laboratory, but never more so than while the boxes of full-fed and pupating brown-tail caterpillars are being received from Europe. Aside from the fact that the handling of this sort of parasite mate- rial has been productive of most acute physical anguish, it has been altogether the most uniformly satisfactory of any received. No mod- ifications in the methods of packing have been suggested during the past five years, other than a slight modification in the form of the box in order to alleviate the trouble to which reference is made above. Rather shallow boxes, having a capacity of about 50 cubic inches, are used for the purpose. (See Pl. VIII figs. 1,2.) The caterpillars are collected, preferably just before they spin their cocoons, and 100 are placed in each box, together with a few twigs with foliage at- tached, which serve less as food than as a support for the cocoons. When collected at the proper time practically all will spin and pupate IMPORTATION AND HANDLING OF PARASITE MATERIAL. 163 en route, and the cocoons are so strong as to prevent the pup from becoming injured. There has never been any trouble experienced through these boxes sweating en route, as has so frequently happened when boxes con- taining gipsy-moth caterpillars have been too closely confined in box or bundle, but at the same time those which have been exposed to free circulation exteriorly are noticeably in better condition than others. Much the larger proportion of the material of this sort has been received in perfect condition at the laboratory, and large quantities of parasites have been reared from nearly every lot thus received. Occasionally boxes have been used which were not sufficiently tight to prevent the escape of the tachinid larve, and some loss has accrued in consequence. In a number of instances the boxes have been infected with fungous disease, and all or nearly all of the caterpillars or freshly formed pupz have died in consequence. In rather an unnecessary number of instances, or so it would seem, caterpillars have been collected too young, and have failed to pupate en route. Such shipments properly fall in the class last mentioned, and are worthless for the purposes desired. Through a misunderstanding nearly all of this class of material was sent in cold storage in 1909, with the result that the caterpillars failed to pupate en route, as would have been the result otherwise, and a good many of them failed to pupate after receipt. Considera- ble loss resulted on this account before the collectors could be noti- fied to return to the original method of shipping by mail. In handling the boxes of caterpillars and pupe, a variety of meth- ods has been employed, of which the most satisfactory appears to be simply boring a hole in the one end, and introducing a paper cone and tube. Even the removal of the covers from a dozen or more boxes without protection is accompanied by painful results, and owing fo the difficulty of boring the holes without splitting the wood, after the box has been received at the laboratory, collectors are now instructed to prepare the boxes for the reception of the tube at the time of their manufacture. | In 1906 and 1907, when the first shipments of this character were received, and when little was known of the character of the parasites which were likely to be reared from them, it was thought necessary not only to open each box, but to sort it over, and remove the tachi- nid puparia which were always present in a larger or smaller number. It was known that there were always present certain species of tachi- nids which would only complete their final transformations success- fully when their puparia were kept more or less moist, and it was expected that among the parasites of the brown-tail moth would be some possessing this characteristic. Opening the boxes without some 164 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. sort of protection was utterly impossible. Automobile ooete are used to protect the eyes, various forms of respirators to prevent ina inhalation of the spines, the hands were protected by rubber gloves, © and the neck and face were swathed in accordance with the fancy of the operator. Two ingenious types of headdress (Pl. IX, fig. 1) were devised by Mr. E. S. G. Titus in the hope that they would solve the difficulty, but it was found that they were not only unbearably hot, but that the glass fronts would quickly become covered with moisture which could not be removed. In 1907 a much larger quantity of this sort of material was received — than during the previous summer, and it was practically a necessity that some method be devised which would do away with at least part of the trouble. After some little experimentation the arrangement shown in the illustration was the result. (Pl. IX, fig. 2.) It con- sisted of an ordinary show case, with sides and top of glass and with a wooden slide in the back. The two ends were removed and re- placed with boards in which armholes had been cut. Thick canvas sleeves were attached to these, through which the gloved hands of the operator were thrust, and it was found that the work could be done with what was, fap speaking, a minimum of dis- comfort and danger. In 1908, for several reasons which need not be entered into here, it was oaks desirable to discontinue, temporarily, the importation of large quantities of the pupating caterpillars, and it was also demon- strated that all of the parasites which were secured from them would complete their transformations without being kept moist. The work of sorting over the boxes of parasite material was thus demonstrated to be unnecessary, and, consequently, in 1909, when large importa- tions were resumed, the covers were simply removed from the boxes, which were then stacked up in the large wooden tube cages (Pl. X, fig. 1), which had originally been constructed for the rearing of parasites from the imported hibernating nests. BROWN-TAIL MOTH PUP. Several attempts have been made to ship the pupe (Pl. VID of the brown-tail moth, packed in moss, as was at one time rec- ommended for the shipment of the pupz of the gipsy moth. Such attempts have usually been more or less satisfactory, but never as satisfactory as when the cocoons were collected in the field and placed loose in the boxes together with the active caterpillars. If only a small portion of the pup is collected in the field, the only sure method of detecting their presence is by the occurrence of the pupal parasites Bul. 91, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE VIII. Fic. 1.—Boxes USED IN 1910 FoR IMPORTATION OF BROWN-TAIL MOTH CATERPILLARS, WITH TUBES ATTACHED DIRECTLY TO BOXES. (ORIGINAL.) Fia. 2.—INTERIOR OF BOXES IN WHICH BROWN-TAIL MOTH CATERPILLARS WERE IMPORTED, SHOWING CONDITION ON RECEIPT. (ORIGINAL.) Fia. 3.—BOXES USED IN SHIPPING CATERPILLARS OF THE GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS BY MAIL. (ORIGINAL.) Bul. 91, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE IX Fic. 1..—HEADGEAR DEVISED BY MR. E. S. G. TITUS FOR PROTECTION AGAINST BROWN- TAIL RASH. (ORIGINAL.) Fic. 2.—SHow CASE USED WHEN OPENING BOXES OF BROWN-TAIL MOTH CATER- PILLARS RECEIVED FROM ABROAD. (ORIGINAL.) Bul. 91, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE X, Fic. 1.—LARGE TUBE-CAGE FIRST USED FOR REARING PARASITES FROM IMPORTED BROWN-T AIL MOTH NESTS AND LATTERLY FOR VARIOUS PURPOSES. (ORIGINAL.) FiG. 2.—METHOD OF PACKING CALOSOMA BEETLES FOR SHIPMENT. (ORIGINAL.) IMPORTATION AND HANDLING OF PARASITE MATERIAL. 165 among those reared. A large number of the shipments has produced small or large percentages of these parasites. Shipments of pupz collected as such would preferably be made in cold storage. The most of the parasites, including those which are or which appear to be of the most importance, emerge coincidently or nearly so with the moths themselves, and if sent by ordinary mail they are apt to issue and die en route. COCOONS OF HYMENOPTEROUS PARASITES. There is only one hymenopterous parasite of demonstrated impor- tance which attacks the gipsy moth, and which spins a cocoon outside of the host. This is Apanteles fulvipes, of Europe and Japan, and it is probable that the numbers of its cocoons imported as such have amounted to at least 1,000,000. Little care is necessary in packing these for shipment, other than that they must not be crushed, nor yet too damp. A considerable degree of dampness has been sustained without injury, but upon one occasion in which they were packed between sheets of damp blotting paper, there was sufficient moisture present to thoroughly soak the cotton and some loss resulted. The Japanese have displayed no little ingenuity in devising new methods for sending these, and with one exception, just noted, all have been good so far as packing was concerned. One method, which possessed a certain advantage over the others in permitting the adults which chanced to emerge en route a certain amount of very advantageous freedom, was used in a single shipment, which, partly on that account but principally on others, ranks as immeasurably the best ever received. The cocoons, to the number of about 1,000, were inclosed in a little wicker cage, which in turn was inclosed in an envelope of mosquito netting which prevented the cocoons from scat- tering out, but did not hinder the escape of the adults. This cage was supported in the very center of a large, otherwise empty wooden box by means of strings which were passed through screw eyes in the | middle of each side and drawn taut. There was nothing loose in the _ box to crush the delicate parasites, no matter how roughly it was | handled, and they were not only given ample space to expand and _ stretch their wings, but they were kept inactive by the perfect dark- | ness (or at least were presumably so). It would be a simple matter _ to spray a portion of one side of the box with a very fine dew of | honey, and if this were done the life of the adults would probably _ be considerably prolonged. | Cold storage is an absolute necessity if the cocoons of this parasite are to be as much as a week en route. The transformations are apt 166 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. to be concluded in considerably less than one week after the spinning of the cocoon if the weather is hot, and ever. under the best of con- ditions which can be devised for keeping them alive the mortality is heavy. Even in the ordinary temperature of a steamship’ s cold room development continues. TACHINID PUPARIA. The importation of tachinid puparia is by no means so simple as the importation of Apanteles cocoons, but at the same time it is easy as compared with the difficulties attending the importation of live gipsy-moth caterpillars from which to rear these puparia in America. In all, quite large numbers have been received from both Europe and Japan. A variety of methods has been tested in the hope of hit- ting upon one that would be applicable for the purpose. Shipping in damp earth was early attempted, and seems to be the very first method which suggests itself to anyone wishing to ship a quantity of them, but of all ways it is very nearly the worst. It would prob- ably be the best, if the larvee could be allowed to enter the earth naturally and if they were left there wholly undisturbed throughout the time they were in transit, but mingled with damp earth and placed in a box to be sent by mail or express, disaster is pretty sure to result. Cotton has also been used several times, and it is usually as bad and sometimes worse. With the exception of excelsior, cot- ton is about the worst packing for living insects that has come under observation at the laboratory, although gritty moss, of a sort which dries brittle, is also bad. Presumably there are other worse sub- stances, but they have not been discovered at first hand. Peas the best packing material is slightly damp and preferably living sphagnum moss. The live moss retains its moisture in a man- ner wholly different from the moss which has been killed, dried, and subsequently dampened. ‘Test shipments, which were sent to France and back without being opened, returned to the laboratory in good and almost unaltered condition, in the case of those which were inclosed in tight boxes. Even when fully exposed to the air the liv- ing moss seems to dry much more slowly and to hold its moisture more naturally. Sphagnum possesses the great additional advan- tage of being much softer when dry than most other kinds of moss. One disadvantage attending the shipment of puparia, no matter how they are packed, is that of secondary parasites. A single colony of Dibrachys, issuing en route from one of a lot of puparia, will result in the parasitism of a large proportion of the remainder. This might possibly be prevented by packing in sand or earth, but this appears to be about the only advantage possessed by that method. The puparia of certain tachinids must be kept damp, but this is not at all necessary in the case of all. Methods of packing and shipment QUANTITY OF PARASITE MATERIAL IMPORTED. 167 will depend upon the characteristics of the particular species under consideration. So far as known, no tachinid which forms a free puparium outside of its host is injured by exposure to moisture. The pupal period of the majority of the tachinid parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth is quite short, usually lasting less than two weeks. It is therefore necessary to make use of cold storage en route, in order to make certain that the adults will not hatch before arrival. By far the larger part of the puparia which have been received at the laboratory have thus hatched, except when they were of species which naturally hibernated unless they were shipped in cold storage. CALOSOMA AND OTHER PREDACEOUS BEETLES. Quite a variety of the large carabid beetles has been imported from abroad for experimentation as to their serviceability as enemies of the gipsy moth, or for liberation in the field after this point had been demonstrated satisfactorily. At first some difficulty was experi- enced in accomplishing their importation successfully, but later it was found to be a simple matter if proper care was used in packing. The great majority of them have come in ordinary safety-match boxes (Pl. X, fig. 2), each box containing one beetle and a wisp of sphagnum moss. Usually one or two caterpillars or other sort of succulent insect have been included for the purpose of lunch en route, but the practice is of rather doubtful value in the case of those species which have been handled in the largest numbers in the laboratory. Should the beetle not fancy the quality of the sustenance provided, or refuse to eat for any other reason, death and decomposition of the victim may result disastrously and be prejudicial to the health of the beetle. These small match boxes have been packed in larger wooden boxes and sent through the ordinary mails with little loss of life. Other small wooden or paper boxes have similarly been used with equal success. Cold storage has occasionally been employed in a few minor ship- ments from Europe with very good results. In 1910 a large ship- ment of living beetles was received in cold storage from Japan in most excellent condition. QUANTITY OF PARASITE MATERIAL IMPORTED. In Mr. Kirkland’s first report as superintendent for suppressing the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth in Massachusetts, several pages were devoted to a detailed account of each shipment of parasite material received from abroad. After the first year no attempt to continue this practice was made, and if it were now attempted to treat each separate shipment with the same attention to detail, several hundred additional pages would be required. 168 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Accordingly, in order that at least a rough idea of the quantity of material handled at the laboratory may be had, Table VII, which, without being absolutely accurate, is very approximately so, has been prepared by Mr. R. Wooldridge, an assistant at the laboratory. TaBLE VII.—Table showing number of PG at the laboratory since beginning of work. 1905 | 1906 | i907 | 1908 | 1909 | 1910 | | | | Porthetria dispar egg masses....-.--..------- DOReS alae bth 1 18 32 1 Porthetria dispar larve and pupe....-.------.- do. .- 131 923 | 1,539 307 | 8,391 5, 956 Euproctis chrysorrhoea egg masses.---.------- GOs: ali. eetns 46 8 1 Euproctis chrysorrhoea webs....------------- WeDSea|2 saecser 117, 259 | 55,082 | 32,830 | 29,295 | 29,696 Euproctis chrysorrhea larve and pup2 sae WORESS Se 313 || 1,459 160 | 1,167 381 Apanteles fulvipes and Apanteles lacteicolor..do....|.-------|.---------|-------- 13 21 LOCALITIES FROM WHICH THE PARASITE MATERIAL HAS BEEN RECEIVED. Mr. Wooldridge has also prepared the accompanying map (fig. 11) showing the various localities from which parasite material has been received each year from 1905 to 1910, inclusive. It will indicate the thoroughness with which the more accessible parts of the world have been searched for parasites of these pests. THE EGG PARASITES OF THE GIPSY MOTH. ANASTATUS BIFASCIATUS FOoNSC. The first individuals of this species (fig. 12, female) were reared at the laboratory in the spring of 1908 from eggs imported the pre- vious winter from Europe and Japan. The dissimilar sexes were not immediately recognized as of the same species, and for a few days there was some doubt as to whether one, two, or four were represented among the few scattering specimens emerging. The number was soon reduced to two through the obvious attraction between the sexes, and soon after to the one, when the senior author had an opportunity to examine and compare series from European and Japanese sources. Their issuance had been anticipated a long time before, and a quantity of gipsy-moth eggs had been collected in the summer, before embryonic development had progressed beyond its initial Stages, and placed in cold storage. It was thought possible that some species of parasite might be reared from imported eggs during the fall or winter which habitually and necessarily oviposited in unde- veloped eggs, and it was hoped that those collected in the summer might be kept fresh enough to serve as host material for laboratory reproduction. 169 EGG PARASITES OF THE GIPSY MOTH. (‘[BUISTIQ) “PpoeATedel Used sey [eI19}VUL oJIsVIVd YoryA ULOIJ odoin UT Serj{[Voo] snolreA SurMoys dew|W— TT “OWT +0 C/V 10e aS 7 a ? paeuennty visi : eee SING ASS WiAVdINA ONVIHIVL @ SISSYW 997 4 ” fo) PSS STIS OMA 7 7O WANA ? PVAWYT SVASIO VIALFIHLYOP + SISSVWW 997 7 TVANS ® INST a“ SPIM VIOHYHAOSALHI GULIOHSIT xX NOLLONGTAXT 170 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. As soon as females of Anastatus were secured, some of these eggs were removed from storage and found to be dead, with the contents partially decomposed. Nevertheless an attempt was made to use them, and the parasites were given their choice between them and others which contained embryonic caterpillars. A few days after their emergence the females began to betray an interest in both sorts of eggs, and were several times observed in the act of oviposition or attempted oviposition. Apparently this was successfully accomplished, but without further results, for no second generation resulted. The experiment served one purpose, however, in indicating beyond reasonable doubt that the insect actually was a parasite upon the eggs of the gipsy moth, and not upon any chance form of insect life accidentally included.t i 5 i ~ FP Ray, Fic. 12.—A nastatus bifasciatus: Adult female. Greatly enlarged. (From Howard.) oy The exposure of the imported eggs to warmth for the purpose of hastening the emergence of any parasites which they chanced to con- 1 How great is the likelihood of error when parasites are reared from unbroken egg masses has several times been demonstrated in the course of the investigations and rearing work at the laboratory. Upon several occasions small Lepidoptera have been reared from egg masses, and more than~once their para- sitized pup# have been found. Eggs of other species of insects, and occasionally parasitized scale insects, have also been found attached to bits of bark to which egg masses were attached. Very frequently cocoons of A panteles fulvipes are found, wholly or partially covered by the egg mass, and from them several species of hibernating secondaries have been reared. There is a record of a minute eulophid, allied to Entedon, having issued from a small lot of eggs which had been separated from nearly every trace of foreign matter. It was thought then and is still believed that these came from the eggs themselves, and that they were actually parasitic upon either Anastatus or Schedius, but when the material from which they issued was examined two or three cocoons of A panteles fulvipes were found mingled with it, and what might otherwise have been a clear record was spoiled. There is in Japan alimacodid moth—Parasa sinica Moore (hilarula Staud.), as determined by Dr. H. G. Dyar—which appears habitually to seek out the gipsy-moth egg masses asa sitefor pupation. The larva buries itself in the mass before spinning its cocoon, and from outward appearances its presence is hardly noticeable. More than 25 of these moths have been reared under these circumstances from imported egg masses, or their cocoons have been found and destroyed. a EGG PARASITES OF THE GIPSY MOTH. 171 tain in the hope that laboratory reproduction could be secured was soon recognized to be a mistake, and as the Anastatus continued to emerge considerably ahead of the time when they would obviously have issued under more natural conditions, it was resolved to remedy the evil, if possible, by placing the parasitized material in cold stor- age. This experiment was successful. The further transformations of the parasites were retarded = me an without any apparent prejudicial effects upon aye. 13. Anastatus bifas- their vitality, and in July some 500 were reared —

2... 7-4 oa 138 Dilina tiliz, host of-Conipsitura concimnata... 2.20252: = 22 1S 22> 2 89 Masieera Sylvetita.: . . 222ces es ace bus 1 Js doe =e 92 Dilobia ceruleocephala, host of Compsilura concinnata........-----+-----+----- 89 Dimmockia, parasite of A panieles Juluipes: 7277222 aos a = 2 oe es 199 Dipterygia scabriuscula, host of Compsilura concinnata.............------------ 89 Disease as factor in control of gipsy moth and brown-tail moth............-.-- 97-102 Te Otis. Soo. ae 125 insects. .. 2. a's svn nee ee 108, 114 INDEX. alc Page. Disease as factor in control of ‘‘pine tussock moth” ............-.------- 101, 103-104 tent caterpillar (Malacosoma)....-...-...-- 98, 101, 105 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leu- PASGWIO) os . .o. ) ee he a 100-101 Peeeera Or Aainerphalus sanguIneUs..-... 2. - 2s. Sordig aut le Seieest .-- 42 HEE OMOESS MAIC BESS RU. eet EL A a Se 41 Dromedary (see also Camel). trypanosome disease transmitted by tabanid flies...............-- 45 Drymonia chaonia, host of Compsilura concinnata............----...200--22--- 89 Earwigs (Forficulidz), prey of Carabus auratus, artificial control by means of DRROMOMINT , 2. MANS Ot wad ies et Le ee 18 Staphylinus olens, artificial control by means of iareMenbye i Stee TW oa AS Sa eee ce 18 Echinomyia fera, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............-- 88 FOROLOCE: Nossa a AONE ON Ei ty A00. . Disoe a 89 preceps, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature.-.-..-- 91 PECORUGU MOSS. 4. W/o. tga ws Won == 2 Se Ieee sc 92 Ecthrodelphax fairchildu, parasite of Perkinsiella saccharicida, introduction into EMEC Eaters ayy 3 eee te. eS Let) el uel. 35 Elachertine parasite of Apanteles sp. (delicatus?)..2....--.----------------- 189 Beans Parasite of A panicles fulvipess. ... 22.2 20.2.222-5- 2s e ieee. 199 Elm (see also Ulmus). nme mtnoe psy MOL... te 27S Pee E eas SEE RAS hee a 81 leaf-beetle (Galerucella luteola), host of Tetrastichus xanthomelenx.....-.-- 62-63 work with egeg-parasite, Tetrastichus xan- ATES CUED Ce URN SES ER OPNAS De ge OAL Pec crngiiim., host of Pales pavida. i. 22 0020292 ee ek. 92 Pees versicolora, host of Carcelia excisa........---2 2.21.22. 89 Entedon albitarsis, parasite of Pteromalus egregius.....--.---------- 263, 266, 267, 269 epigonus, parasite of Mayetiola destructor, introduction into United ATES SEES Oi rc "5S gn Cc eee 30 Here rnearia, host of blepharidea vulgaris 2 0222... 22 ee ee - 91 Epicampocera crassiseta, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature. .....--- 88 TECOLed MOshs sie Mie a ee ee eee ~ Se 89 _Epineuromia cespitis, host of Blepharidea vulgaris.............---------------- 91 Epiurus inqusitoriella. (See Pimpla inquisitorielia.) Erastria scitula, parasite of black scale (Saissetia olex), introduction into United SORTER Sg ae He De Re a Ie a ete ee dag lap 34 Peraqocen cued. Ost OL ales pavida. ooo 02 Pee ee 8 Eee. 92 Ernestia consobrina, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............ 88 TESTS: EU OSES Mite Salil ad eee tea 89 Erycia ferruginea, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature... ...... 91 PERI E0 SNCS RS aaah epee ean aire fos agai fal ee 92 Euchloe cardamines, host of Blepharidea vulgaris......-...-------------------- 91 Eudoromyia magnicornis, gross number colonized.................-.-------- 309 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in - aequrence™. 228 occ 136 introduction into United ‘States: habrtseet.. . 2 303-304 reared at laboratory . ..-. SI recorded in literature - -. 88 status in United States in Bee ce sos eee hoe 309 Pr GCarhOniny mere t 250.0 Book OS OS Ne he 89, 92 —— ——— en | | : | | | | | 324 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS, = 2 ; Zane Hulophid parasite of Apanteles fulvipés.2 5. .22-0 tade-2 le Ree Peer se 200° Pleromalus-egreguus 1. (2,eee- tile. 11.20, er 202 Eupelmus bifasciatus, parasite of gipsy moth, reared at laboratory............ 86 recorded in literature. ......... 86 parasite of Apanteles fulwipes. . ...~. 201-0520. 28.) 200 Euphorocera claripennis, parasite of brown-tail moth in America. ..-......-.. 93,145 Euphorus, parasite of ladybird adults... .......---...-..tbeus 2 4ea: ae 30 Euplexia lucipara, host of Blepharidea vulgaris..- 2.22) <2 22etis2.@ 2 2-5) Se On Euproctis chrysorrhea. (See Brown-tail moth.) conspersa, host: of Apanteles consperse:s220.. 19-4225 eee 285-286 parasites In Japan... 222uwae tie, - 1 eee 3 Eurrhypara urtice,; host of Dexodes nigripes..o 2 SRN... .. 2 eee 88, 91 Eurytoma abrotant Panzer= Hurytoma eer Swed. MP ay he 86 parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in oe Satd La e 86 appendigaster Swed.., Biayioua abrotani Panzer a synonym.........- 86 Exorista affinis, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature... ...........-- 88 recorded hosts... .:2524..3....:. eept ieee eee 89 blanda, parasite of gipsy moth in America......-..........--- 90,140, 142 boarmie, parasite of brown-tail moth in America.......-.. 93, 145, 147-149 chelonix. (See Parexorista chelonix.) fernaldi, parasite of gipsy moth in America.......-.......-.-------- 90 pyste, parasite of gipsy moth in America-......:.-2:..s 42292 90 two undetermined species, parasites of gipsy moth in America. ...... 141 . Facultative factors im. control of insects.) ...2 22.2 +. -4asts4-cs. es eee 107 “‘Placherie,’?so-calléd; of gipsy.moth - 2). weos.-+.+--. shes er 97-102 Fruit fly. (See Ceratitis capitata.) parasites, Froggatt’s journey for investigating their utility. ......... 4244 Fangous disease of Aleyrodes cttri.._- 2. . \woo~~ sheen} 15-4 22 eee 46 brown-tail moth : i. 3.) inc 42, ted Se 135, 270, 291 Funnel, intezumental, of larva of Pales pavida_.:....2 2.4... l 52268 2 aaee 301-302 Tachima ef a0... . Sin2ccs eee 140 tracheal, of larva of Blepharipa scutellate: ...22..2-.-22 2. <2 eee 214-216 Gastropacha quercifolia, host. of, .Masicera sylvatica... 2.22. -2 2) - =. eee 92 Tachina lervarwivs: 24-62 occas - +). 90 Gaurax anchora, reared from dead gipsy moth (Porthetria dispar) . aba occ 90 Gipsy moth, additional control necessary to check increase in America.... 114-117 and brown-tail moth parasites. (See Parasites of gipsy and see tail moths. ) | caterpillars, first-stage, importation and handling... ... - 153 full-fed and pupating, importation and ees 156-159 second to fifth stages, importation and handling.... 154-156 conditions favoring rapid. imerease..<. 4 4..<-2%- 22-2 -, aoe 112-113 dipterous parasites. ....-....2.--+2-22 32g ee 87-90 egg masses, importation and handling......-..........--..-.-- 152-153 extent of control by parasitism, abroad.<. 0... -2:...¢_. eee 117-131 hymenopterous parasites..o+- +. 2.0% 052..-------.0.-2o 85-86 mortality required to offset potential increase. ..........-.----- 112 native Diptera reared: therefrom. .....-...-.-:.--+<-i/- === 90 natural control by dis@ase... .. 2oc0.2-g30 27. .-+ 02226 97-102 parasites in Europe, ‘‘sequence” . 2: 222.12... --..-.--- see 1st Japan, “sequence”... uo. U242 2s Soe ee yA! OE COO ioe pci Le ot ea ee a er 168-188 larvee. . =... 64.) Se teeete eo tee eee ee 188-202 PUPI. ~ ween = nin oes SA Rint ayn se oe 9 Cee INDEX. | 325 Page. Peo, Parasivism 1m AMeriCHe: ... -.).- 202.2 soon nodded eo oe cone dee. 136-143 BERTON PN. Saco ok ciclm Bie sac cis CNet aangs one ates, 120-123 LEN UGSIST 2 NS ae ie Ee LE ke ae 123-129 Sowipernvbrance.-. i Js! - 52.5 5- eee 129-131 pup, uportation and handling. . .... +2)... .-an. eet eben eee 159-160 fare ot merease in New England. .....22<.4.0. 200) 222 109-114 recorded hosts of foreign tachinids reared therefrom at laboratory . 88 recorded as parasitic thereon.. 89-90 certs PATNI GOs a= a eee SL. SL. we cae eee 202-236 Goniarctena rufipes, host of Histocheta marmorata............-...-.---------- 89 Grapevine Cochylis. (See Cochylis.) easitoneers mostd Of sarcopharids.-... |... bts esse cas. cel 250 “Green bug.’’ (See Toxoptera graminum.) Habrobracon brevicornis, hibernating in brown-tail moth nests. ........-. 61, 269-270 Hadena adusta, host of Hudoromyia magnicornis.......-..------------------- 89, 92 Rens NGS OL -Orevorisle CRelOMIs =o. tow le. ses). 2e unt ee 2 92 Hexmaphysalis leporis-palustris, host of Ixodiphagus texanus.....----- eevee 4] parasite of cotton-tail rabbit. .<:s222....-.-...- 41 Hematobia serrata, quest of parasites for introduction into Hawaiian Teenie 36 Haplogonatopus mitiensis, parasite of Perkinstella saccharicida,. introduction Sip eR TREN IIAC Sesto te ERI oe! Ree cote sen do dpe bes ate me ARSE 35 PMeawinora containins nesis.of brown-tail moth..................-..---.----- 133 Heliothis obsoleta, host of Trichogramma pretiosa...........------------------- 45 eC S Oh OL PICLOUCS WIORUIES 5 Sano oem woe cis sd oe oe ewe ee ss seeds 88, 91 Hemeris juciormis, host of Kchinomyia preceps...........-.--+---+-+-------- 92 Hemerocampa leucostigma. (See Tussock moth, white-marked.) Hemichionaspis minor on cotton, importation of Prospaltella berlesei for control... 45 Hemiteles bicolorius, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............- 85 fulvipes. (See Astomaspis fulvipes.) socialis, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature........... 87 Bape) parasives:ol Apaniclessfuloipesce.os vc. 226 1 2o.. J4eies 4 sk -s- 199, 200 utinis, parasite of Tamnerium sp. (fugitid?) 2: 2. 2.0256. aes ved... .-- 138 Hessian fly ( Mayetiola destructor), burning stubble in .control may result in destroying beneficial parasites. .......... 19 host of Entedon epigonus, attempted control by introduction of parasite........ 30 Polygnotus hiemalis, control by trans- portation, of parasites... ......-..- mA Pereraeatina COULrOl py starvation... 22)..<..:Bels sat 2-0 Pe... eee 103 BEES Up raster. 5, Ne eee ot a nto. eed 103 Hippodamia convergens, enemy of plant-lice, transportation from one part of Pomme eranaveer Mart. | 2 tere taste ost vise Wee be eee SL eS. 22-23 Histocheta marmorata, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature.......-..-.- 88 FEROEGCU OSA: =a tes eet. Urs eee NL cE 89 Biel e hos Pakssike online ypbind lanvces fe We cihis 4g. S2 hp.walien 2 sO. 22s 30 Hop aphis, prey of common English ladybird, artificial control by means of its CoE ETD EE ee i a a Dees eS od dee MLL. .. - - 17 Horn fly. (See Hxematobia serrata.) Horse chestnut, food plant of Hemerocampa leucostigma...........------------ 101 hos eiek i micannalins teaenus. soy seed Dose 08 nc eeu... 42 Elestare aiiwons OF WY Perparasiien=). ooo uo ence ence ae bee ee wee eee EL A 201-202 PARE Panam IES! foo. -. Mmatee re ND jo Wal ae PL 203-204 Hunterellus hookeri parasite of Rhipicephalus sanguineus..........------------ 41-42 texanus, introductions into Africa. 41—42 326 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Hunterellus hookeri, question as to original home.....................-. past Hybernia defoliaria, host of Blepharidea vulgaris......-...........-.-.--+----- sp., host of Dexodes nigripes.......----- 0 Ss, 2 on Hybridization between Tachina mella and Tachina larvarum, possibility thereof. 227 Hydrocyanic-acid gas against fluted scale... -. Bs Se Ae Or ee gees 24 Hyloicus pinasiri, host of Blepharidea. vulgaris... 2-2 22 2... 2 ee 91 Carceliaexcisa [ue oe eS See a) Compsitura.concmnaia......-...22 42 89 Phryzxe erythrosioma...:-..-.5 2 ee ee 89 Hylophila prasinana, host of Blepharidea vulgaris.............-.....---------- 91 Hymenopterous parasite cocoons, importation and handling................. 165-166 Hyperparasites, host relations.........-..-..- 2 SUA eee ene 201-202 Hyphantria (see also Webworm, fall). 2h host of Apanteles lacteicolor-.:..20. 2 2022 2 284 Hypopteromalus, parasite of Apanteles fulvipes...2...-.:.--:---.---+------ 199, 200 Icerya. xgyptiaca, prey of Novius cardimalis.. 2.020.220 220). 2 2 Perego ge 28-29 purchasi, introduction into Florida........-...-.-------- en 22), 1 > eee 29 lialy . .............+ 222 29 New Zealand... 37 a7 Portugal’. .... 2. 27-28 Syfias. 2. 0) eee 29 United States :.. 2... ae 24-27 Ichneumon disparis, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. ....._. 86 gipsy moth in’ Hurope.: : 222.55. 2.222 eee 239 position in ‘‘sequence”.. 132 reared at laboratory...:...--...-.- 85 recorded in literature.............. 85 fly, parasite of Ceratitis capitata, introduction into western Australia. 39 pictus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature.............-. 85 scutellator, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature... .. . ee 2 Idiolispa atripes, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature..-..... ous 86 Insects, control by birds and other a ere) ee 107-108 dis@aserg bse ibe He son beasts ck ee 108, 114 parasitiem. 6... ces. 2 os. 2.2. Das -. a 105-109 siarvationly.:c) wiwhE.) os vu I 114 weather:conditions. oi. .....22 5 SA ee 107 native, studies. in parasitism. < 2445 5. ->..022 Soe eee 102-105 species differing in biological characters only. ........ 225-226, 257, 285-286 the three groups of factors in natural control............-.--.-------- 114 Itoplectis conquisitor. (See Pimpla conquisitor.) Ixodiphagus texanus, parasite.of Hemaphysalis leporis-palustris.......--.------ 41 Kincaid, Trevor, Russian observations on gipsy and brown-tail moths.. 78-82, 124-125 Ladybird, Asiatic. (See Ladybird, Chinese, and Chilocorus similis.) Australian. (See Novius cardinalis.) Shinese (see also Chilocorus similis). attacked by American ladybird parasites................-- a common English, enemy of hop aphis, practical handling suggested. . er Ladybirds, parasites...) 5-3... cn< seo sci ses sateesie «eae es 30 Lampyrid beetles, enemies of gipsy moth.............000-eceesccscccccuess 252-253 Larentia autumnalis, host of Zeniliia libatrix.. 2.2 ccnenscecnnndmetanccancacns 90 INDEX. a27 Page. Veetrepontor of, Conpsilura concinnata....- 2200... 2. eee joe ete... 219 Revcampa pri, host ol Apanteles nemoruny...:-...... me eve ei nesses -- 193 @ucreus, Hostrol Masicera sijlvation. 2.02 6... 6. 42 8d, ea As 92 Pacha larvarunts. 60005. ot SOS ee 90 Leaf crumpler, rascal. (See Mineola indiginelila.) worm, cotton. (See Alabama argillacea.) eee soom plant Ol Jecryd purchast: 22 2S 00 2p ee ew oe Le 24 mm enhes trek, elleIny OL Orange. SSCP bls es. ee oe 28 Hiateri, emeiiy OL Ofatlles eos are se Cl 9228 2... eo ole ence eee Re 28 ulm, host of Aphelinus mali, control by transportation of its para- Bigesek sae oes ee |) ale ee Poa ee bye a BAO 20 Lestophonus iceryx, parasite of Icerya purchast, introduction into United States. - 25 fesace, food of brown-tail moth larve:- 2.2.2). 2.20 ile ek 280, 281 Leucania albipuncta, host of Blepharidea vulgaris................-2-2-2-2+-2--- on lyarguyrva, host of Blepharidea vutgarisi Ses.) 2. of ee ne 2 ot ence, Host UL Bchimiomiyia fora s 2 0t 2 Ee 82 1 Ol ek... eee 89 ineyme exitis, host of Compsilura concinnata. 2.220222... be ee ee ee 89 Lime-sulphur washes against San Jose scale, general use as preventing estab- Sea mENS OCOTUS DIvulnerUs.. VETS aes eee Ys he ekg 38 Limnerium clisiocampe, parasite of brown-tail moth in America..............- 143 Clisiocampa (Malacosoma).....-....-..--- 192 tent caterpillar (Malacosoma)............-- 143 _disparis, parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe. .................- 295 position in ‘“‘se- quence?” 2 ia 136 Spey MOM Wl Muroper. 2. een eek Ms ed, MBO position in ‘‘sequence”. 132 Japan, position in ‘‘sequence”.. 121 introduction into United States, Rabie ct ao ee 191-192 reared at laboratory. 2 22256 22-2 -- 85 Barrteoreipsy moinan Foussia.c.. 2.2)... 0-22. eee ce 81 Epa rugiiied 7) host ot Fiemaiteles willis... 2.0.20. 0 2S ee 138 parasite of gipsy moth im America...0/..2222.2...-.. 338 tricoloripes, parasite of gipsy moth in Europe.........---...-.---- 192 j position in ‘“‘se- GUeNCe” se os we ws aie 132 reared at laboratory... 222.2... 85 Liparis monacna. (See Nun moth and Porthetria monacha.) meer emGdr plait OL Pipsy) MOiMe- 2 oeas 6.5. 2st eee ee ee ee ee eee eee ene 57 MENS AriCrs, Mast GE AYGOUGLNTIG Qilud.. 225-2 .020 2b. 2. cl eee see 90 paludus, Wost-ot Aygoveura bimaculata....-. 22.2 2 le ee ee He oe 90 LUI ee yo a RE a as Rn aa aie 90 Pint MGse Our APOSerigenme SCOTEGQIG.§ 52 22 2 eet eet nen 89 Mr MGCnaGaUGrWNIe. oan. e852 gs Se tS 90 PUGSUGIRTIO OUNUCUIOLG. <8 oe wn 8 ee ees ee- 90 SUERTE BS Bits 8 0 RNR oc tha me eg ence a 90 Pups, Host Of Zygovolnria bIMaACwlala. ©... 22. oe ee ne en eee lee 90 SLT RSS IT SE ale 9 a ea 90 Soerus, Mosk oO Zygovotnrio bumaculata. o.<2..... 22-2) -2<-.+---6s- 90 Bip g ie OIC LOM ES IDO ke oe io intel a = wale me im i ww ne nS 88, 91 variegatus, host of Zygobothria bimaculata.......-...---..------------ 90 ee ins ce ene are utn y eae 90 Ha ie) a, 328 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. — ae 2 Page. Lydella nigripes. (See Dexodes nigripes.) he pinivore, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature. .............. 88, 89 Lymantria monacha. (See Nun moth and Porthetria monacha.) ae Lysiphlebus tritici, parasite of Toxoptera graminum, experiments in transporta- tion from one part of country to another part... ---2. ...2.- . -. 33255 ies 22 Macroglossa stellatarum, host of Tachina larvarum......-..---..----+-----++-- 90 Macrothylacia rubi, host of Compsilura concinnata........-...------- 2s 89 Parexorisia cheloniz.. - soc. Se tes - eee = Tochina larvarum-. --ssssscbe Spee eee 90 Mzmatypica, host. of Blepharidea vulgaris... 210.2 304242)- Sade ee 91 Malacosoma (see also Tent caterpillar and Clisiocampa). . americana, host of American Parexorista chelonix.......-..-.------ 299 castrensis, host of Carcelia exci§a..: =. 2-<\-2 520-42 See eee +e Taching larveruny ono. 22 1 oe eee a disstria, host of American Parexorista chelonix.........-.-.------ 299-300 Theronia fulvescens ....-.--4 622-4. 3-3 2 137 meustria, host of Carcelt@ €£018@. no. 0 oom wc 9 eee 89 . 1D) 5) a POR 6 88 Compsilura concinnata.........---- 2 89 Aistochzta marmorata... ..+. 52 2 +2433 eee 89 Tachina lorvarwm:.:..-.-2-..-2.. 2.4 90 Lenilha hbatrig.... 282. . 22. eee 90 Mamestra advena, host of Blepharidea vulgaris... .... 522. -=- «s=+-=2255eeeeeeee 91. brassicx, host. of Compsilura concinnata......---..-...-.-!. =e Tachina larverum.....:22-.--2--. 2-2 eee 90 oleracea, host of Compsiluraconcinnaia:=...2 2.2. 2: 22-2 = eee 89 Tricholyga grandis: .............--.... persicariz, host of Blepharidea vulgaris... 0.2... - - 2... >= ee 91 Compsilura concinnata.-.. 24.2.2). 522-22 eee 89 pist, host of Dexodes nigrupes...2.-08252 2-22 eee 88, 91 Echinonupia fera.....-. 25 222. Ae eee 89 Tricholyga grandis... 252 3. ibe. 2 eee 88, 92 reticulata, host of Blepharidea vulgaris. ..... .2. <2... 22. =e ee 91 _ Maple (see also Acer). food plant of gipsy moth... .2-255.25 0... 2 ¢24sghsl eee 80 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma).... 101 - Masicera sylvatica, gross numober colonized .....-.2.2..:.......-.---.--eeeeeee 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘“‘se- quence” .2: 26 eae noe 136 introduction into United States. 303 reared at laboratory..........-- 91 recorded: hosts: 2 2. --2222-- 22h ties --- + 455 5 eee 92 Mayetiola destructor. (See Hessian fly.) Mealy bugs (Pseudococcus), prey of coccinellids introduced from abroad. ....- - 46 Cryptolemus montrouziert... ...-. cee 34 Meigenia bisignata, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............-- 88, 89 Melitza athalia, host of Blepharidea vulgaris... .-..-. 22... 2- %.- 32-12. 2 eee 91 Eyycia ferrvugineas.\.. 23,5 sn | oo 92 aurinia, host, of Erycia ferruginéd.«.+-- =.-+--+---+--+---555 eee 92 didyma, host. of. Tachina larvartm,.. 3... ..252. 26 tea: - 2: $0 Melittobia acasta, parasite of introduced Tachinide and Sarcophagide....... 209-212 parasite of tachinids, an undesirable introduction. ..............-- 202 Melopsilus porceilus, host of Tachina larvarwm.......... 2.2 ==. =) 5 -- =e 90 Mesochorus confusus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature..........-- 85 dilutus, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature......... 87 _ INDEX. 329 Page Mesochorus gracilis, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature. ..........-- 85 Ree parastcl Ol apm CleSIISKE 210)... 5-0. @cseanls we beicme et ee ee 265 pallipes, parasite of Apanteles lactevcolor...........-- 263, 265-266, 267, 289 pectoralis, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature....... 87 gipsy moth, recorded in literature........... 85 semirufus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature........... 85 Si pamasibe Ol A ganiteles hyphanirie........-.---.- 20 ---lSncbesions 265 splendidulus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature......... 85 Meteorus ictericus, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature.......... 86 japonicus, parasite of gipsy moth in Japan.........--.-...... 121, 190-191 position in ‘‘sequence”... 121 reared at laboratory. 2... 2.2: -..2% 85 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, introduction into United SS eee is SE, SE eee Oe nn ee A 70 gipsy moth in Russia, introduction into United States... 69 pulchricornis, parasite of gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘“‘se- QUENCES eae te ss 2 oer 132 introduction into United States.. 190 reared at laboratory............- 85 scutellator, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............- 85 ecco PToss mina Der COLOMIZEd 202) 2s... se 2 ie ee sence wee weed 310 NOS Ol TUCO GLUS COTCOUNS AEE oo ack wind abe ee nle bees 266, 267 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘“‘se- CREME Po ae ee eS oe 136 introduction into United States, habits... 262, 264-267, 286-289, 295 reared at laboratory.......--... 86 recorded in literature. ........ 86 results of rearing work in RII. Scent 24 AARMRn ee 147-149 status in United Statesin 1910. 309 fall webworm (Hyphantria).-.......-.-.---.--- 289 gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘“‘sequence”.. 132 introduction into United States..... 190 reared abJaboratory . ¢.....2.<.+-)-s- 85 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leu- COSTING) Set a a4 Fh OH nan 221-223, 289 fee hes porcellus, host of Blepharidea ees the Se ake a ee ee a 91 mare erOSH, NOS OF PICLOUES WIGTUDES Spee «oie Se mie i Uh Nola S6 vhs wokdemwe ads 88, 91 Microctonus, parasite of ladybird eae esc pee a oe Mi 8 58h WR AS rie 30 Microgaster calceata, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature........ 86 gipsy moth, recorded in literature...........-. 85 consularis (Hal.)= Microgaster connexa Nees..........--..-----+--- 86 connexa, Microgasier consularis a synonym. .......--.---.--.------ 86 consularis, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature...... 86 fulvipes liparidis. (See Apanteles fulvipes liparidis.) tibialis, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............-- 85 Vicroweisia misella, enemy of Diaspis pentagona, introduction’into Italy. ..... 44-45 Mineola indiginella, control by permitting parasites to escape. ......-...----- 18-19 Monedula carolina, enemy of tabanid flies, introduction into ee Beare ona 45 Monodontomerus xreus, gross number colonized............-.-----------+---- 310 hibernating in brown-tail nests. ............... 262, 266, 267 Tay REND SEU Sy ERT SUNS aa a ae mT 266 af, aki. Se oothy Sade MS See ee a 330 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. oe oe Monodontomerus xreus, parasite of Apanteles lacteicolor..........--- eta brown-tail moth in Europe.......... eee position in “‘se- . queried?) 2. introduction into United ‘States, habits......... 245-250 reared at laboratory.......— recorded in literature... .. results of rearing work in ~ 1ST es eee status in United States in 1910. .. 0 22 Se Compésilura concinnata..... ... 215 gipsy moth in Europe. ...... 25 ee yee position in ‘‘se- quence” S22. 232 eae introduction into United ee habits. Sine reared at nboranere ee i mak B 86 status in United States in 1910.. 308 introduced Tachinide . 2 ae . 212-213 Pimplas 30.00 Sl... - 1.2 4 eee 246, 249 tachinid and sarcophagid puparia eee 246 Theronig.. .. 0-2). i221 eee 246 white-marked tussock moth pie leucostigima). 22. -.2..:. 249 Zygobothria nidicola.......-.=--2-sse eee 267 reared from brown-tail moth webs, host relations.... 269-270 suceessiul ‘colonization . . 2... -2.2<15 .<..224 eee 276-277 unfortunately a secondary as well as a primary para- BIG PO ee am 2 bo eee ee 202 Walk? Torymus' agephelts Ratz. ...2....2. eee 87 dentipes, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. .. 87 Mulberry, food plant'of Diaspis pentagona...._-...... 2. 22-5222. 38 Mymarid parasite of weevil allied to Phytonomus murinus, introduction into United States to combat the latter: 2... ¢-2 22. i202 S22. - 22 2 Soe 46 Natural control of insects, three groups of factors: -...-....-..--.22 555 114 Nematus ribesti, host of Dexodes nigripes...-..----- Se Io af. pple ed ac 88, 91 Nonagria typhiiz, host of-Masicera sylwatiea ~.. 2. <2. 2-22). =- 2-2 ee 92 Notodonta trepida, host of Argyrophylax atropivora..........-------- eee 89 Nun moth (see also Porthetria monacha). . prey of Calosomea sycophania. 2. 2. 225 52 48 Novius cardinalis, enemy of Icerya xgyptiaca, introduction into Egypt. -.-.--.-- 28-29 purchasi, introduction into Cape Colony. - - - 28 Formosa: 22322 29 Hawaiian Is- longs! mee 29 Tialy ? 4 oeee 29 New Zealand.... 27 Portugal........ 27-28 Syria... soo eee 29 United States... 24-27 q reasons for its success. --.-.----.- 29-30 INDEX. DOL Page. Dea iMant Ob PUpsy MOU 2.0L. see ee ae 77, 80, 81, 124-125 enor ost OF Pachina larvarunes:..:.2.22-..-. @--22 2 52---212--:- 90 Gonistis quadra, host of Compsilura concinnata..........-.-------+----+--+----- 89 PERM (A RIS OTL ra nee’ 89 Olethreutes hercyniana, host of Tachina larvarum.......--...------------------ 90 Olive fly (see also Dacus olezx). jaechod GF CERCOUTatiNg palasiles Sy) 25... 2.2.2 el ere 20 Omiodes blackburni, host of Chalcis obscurata, control by introduction of para~ ~ cn Fee hicte ec ES Es Te AR oe 25 se 35 Omorgius difformis, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature.......-- 86 Ootetrastichus beatus, parasite of Perkinsiella saccharicida, introduction into MCENROE ter a ket PL Wy OR EIeY Tee 8 Es ser Be 35 Opiellus trimaculatus, parasite of nes capitata, attempted introduction into Dae MINIRGIEA MARS Po CLS SO OEE Se IS 2S 39 One, SOND Os OU e GES CUE. 205. Se PRES. = 22 46 Icerya era. ee a eee 8 24 Lepidosaphes cee Bee ee se aie 2 eR oe ee Soe 28 EGRET? ato ere ate I eee PU ee 28 nema Hie], Ol GArcoln CreIs@. 52. 5 ee eee ee 89 . EEE ea We eres 2 eee Ge ee ee 88 eee eGe ee iles MUTE ee eee ee eee ee 92 MME Re con Pe SOL ee. eS 90 mameenoe. NOS) al Packie Marvarwnli. |). 00s os Jeev eee) Lb) eet 90 Ortholitha cervinata, host of Dexodes nigripes.........-.--------------------- 88, 91 Orthosia humilis, host of Tachina larvarum.........--- raerre eee epee ie!) 90 eevee, ost of, P areronistaenerante. <2... 2.2.2 Pe eet le 92 Pachyneuron gifuensis, parasite of Anastatus bifasciatus...........-...-------- 183 SCN AOS LUBE AS 183 Feagee: icon eipsy-moth eves... =. 2522.05. 222s Sk 178 superparasitized by Pachyneuron gifuensis............ 183 Pyndorichus nave. 42 ons ee 183 Pee eeaiosciia, hosiotromsta ajinis. .......-...---.------22-2.-.-3 26+ 89 Packing and shipment of brown-tail moth egg masses.....................-- 160-161 larvee, full-fed and pupating....- 162-164 immature . PSS et ee BUR reer oes. Se See ae et 164 _ Calosoma and other predaceous beetles............ 167 gipsy-moth egg masses from Japan.............-. 152-153 larvee, full-fed and pupating......... 156-159 second to fifth stages from Europe. 154 ET 2 aie Se nara ees t ae 159-160 hymenopterous parasite cocoons. ..-.....-.-.---- 165-166 SS PILED) STC G1 ee ln eg ee 166-167 Paice pumnaeerass mitbeneelnnized - 2... 2.222... 2. one 2 ew ee oe eee ee 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘“‘sequence”.. 136 introduction into United States, AS Foe Ss oat ere ek 300-302 reared at laboratory. - ele unwed 91 recorded in literature. et eos 91 status in United Sate in . 1910 PEPE & 310 Bapay mode «nH WrOpes oe. US Sao. 2. ns oe ew aes 235, 302 position in “‘sequence”....... 132 ee EE re ere ene Pe Pad dee Se Se 92 Palms, food plants of Omiodes blackburn. . Pepe ee eee ee ee 35 fy ee ae | a A aes baat: rats ; 332 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. = Pamphilius stellatus, host of Parexorista chelonix..........-----+-------- ee Tachina larvaerum. wc. 2233 242 eee Panolis griseovariegata, host of Echinomyta fera.......-....--.----------------- chee Pales pavida. 205. 2s eee ; Tachina larverum..:52232.0..>.. . eee Papilio machaon, host of Tachina larvarum........--.2-252:.5.2)- ee Paranagrus optabilis, parasite of Perkinsiella saccharicida, introduction into — Hawailes. io. ..s Ladue. ose te lo. eee 35 perforator, parasite of Perkinsiella saccharicida, introduction into Haaailie.::. a. sutsusee. ise liel ste nis See ae 35 : Perasa Inlarula== Parasa sinictiwcc2s oo eS a eee ie Or sinica, hibernating in egg masses of gipsy moth...........-.--.-.....-- 170 Parasemia plantaginis, host of Blepharidea vulgaris........--..-.-------------- 91 Parasetigena segregata, gross number colonized................---+---+-++--2-- 310 handling of puparia.--....2..>.2:222-2_ See 159° parasite of gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘se- | quence” ..:4..... 4:33 goes 132, introduction into United States, habits. ..22.2.2) 22 ose 229-231 reared at laboratory.......-...- 88 recorded in literature.......... 88 status in United Statesin 1910. 308 recorded hosts... 2. 9222202) ..2.2 1 er 89 Parasites of brown-tail moth. (See Brown-tail moth parasites.) gipsy and brown-tail moths, difficulty of naming European species. 68-69 importation..2°:.2 5. .: 102333 seeeeeee . 1-312 and handling.......... 152-167 an investigation of the circumstances bringing about beginning of developments of year 1916 ..: ...3: 22a 311-312 establishment and disper- sION.. .. .... 2 50 94-96 gross number of various species colonized ...... 310 improvements in rearing methods........ saeeee 71-73 introduction to bulletin.. 13-16 narrative of progress of work . . J). .0S50 ae 54-84 summary and conclu- S108... ... 22222 305-307 Prof. Kincaid in Japan .....6 73-74 Russia ...... 75, 76 INDEX. 333 ; Page. Parasites of gipsy and brown-tail moths imported into United States, present SEATS 3 oi. ats, Ae ae ee eee aed a 307-310 iknow and necorded 2-48 seeeeeccer:. 84-92 localities from which material has been MECCIVIED 3:5... 82c ers k eee poe ee 168, 169 quantity of material imported...... 167-168 moth. (See Gipsy moth parasites.) injurious insects, early practical work in handling................. 17-18 Frogeatt’s journey for investigation of their utility. 42-44 method of encouragement...........--..--..--- 20 permitting them) fo escape. i. 4... 2.05 -S..-66- 18-20 previous work in practical handling. ........... 16-45 transfer from one country to another............ 23-46 transportation from one part of a given country to AMOCMER MA iae paca eel hed hens tah oe 20-23 Pema AG MMOS! TOlAROMS xc 28 oe Ai he AaB cart to's Fe 201-202 Partie asa tactor in insect control... 2... 3..2--.--.2-+-.--- Ba rer on ity: 2 105-109 Suprawd-tatl moth im, America. (044.208. 12-252. 2 2 sess. eee hee 143-151 TATUM 6) Ee 5 See te ke a Ee UNE N eT eY S 132-135 Smee mot Moti: AMMOTICA a 5h jos geese cia) doth += 2 ses 136-143 cy DSTO Reb Re Be er eh ct Mee nRe Pye RIOR I Neen ae nO 120-123 [BSD ISIE oe ates OF CR nee net Meee ae a ona eee ee oS 123-129 PROG eT ENC OA ge Ne hehe ye ea 129-131 Peaitveanhects studies therelm, . -2ocsne2 Ll mie nae mide ken 102-105 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma) in country . POSS CUA ee oe eee oe Se eee 119-120 Parexorista chelonix, American race, Maa of Malacosoma americana and Mala- COSOBUOAUSSINIG® Eph ae Pere or hy yes gle arm Ue 299-300 biological differences between American and European ACCS ee sce ni. = ie ace eR la nde Selo eee 257, 286, 299 PLO SMU en COLOMIZCE sc ject 66 he tac das ete i ced eae rep end 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘‘se- ChUGIUITCE: ee hee Peat 136 introduction into United States, habits! ..<...)...- 297-300 reared at laboratory......... 91 status in United Statesin1910 310 probable interbreeding of American and European forms 299-300 TECORMCE MOSS. os. uf. Lye en ee SY ieee ee es 92 Paris green against gipsy moth, formerly recommended..............--------- 47 Pemearm i A NOS OL ADM CleSfISR EU a= jase oie eso ke erage eyelets in een bb Sexi ea 265 Parthenogenesis as a factor in establishment of hymenopterous parasites in a TREN VEC TUG 7s =, SANE a a me 95 MA CIAERG MIT AO CISD RAE IIa yt oe ee ee ee sow een e 211-212 ISECAGOROS OT WCEP Sas Se EY ee Cn 179, 183 (SIONS) Sh crite he seer a ee SOAs ae eae 257-258 Ete OCD PAIN OR eA POTION GUO ee sia ania oie a eye eg tm Bn sie igs punie so See ey 133 PoRORIPR IROOM oe Ie oe as ue we ae og celal 4 mln 133 Wild: Coiamune nests of browm-tail moth ....2.0........--..-.22-5-2---- 133 Pediculoides ventricosus, enemy of brown-tail moth caterpillars and their para- Sil 2 A ee 267-268 SUPCLISIONCYONCG Maia 8 Bo... Lets Paige 33 Perilampus cuprinus, an undesirable foreign hyperparasite...........-------- 202 patasite of Introduced Tachinid@.......---.+.-55:.9-- 208-209 334 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. = 2 2 : Perilampus hyalinus, secondary parasite of fall webworm (Byphantra) habits bits 208-20 Perilitus, :parasite of ladybird adtdltss2c7 265. ook oc sees cs ee a oe 30 Perissopterus javensis, reared from gipsy-moth eggs...............---- athe See 178 Perkinsiella saccharicida, enemy of sugar cane, introduction of parasites and | enemies into Hawaiian Islandse/27 2:72.22 sox. . ye... 2 er ab Pezomachus fasciatus (Fab.)=Pezomachus melanocephalus (Schrk.)..-......---- 85 parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature. ........... 85 hortensis, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............- oe caelaeeetaiams (Schrk.), ee fasciatus (Fab.) a synonym. . 85 parasites of -A panteles fulutpes... 2024... ooh oe ee 200 Pholera bucephala, host of Compsilura CONCHIINME...- >. 5 hea eed ee 89 Phora incisuralis, reared from dead gipsy moth (Porthetria dispar) ich See 90 Phorocera, four undetermined species, parasites of gipsy moth in America. 141 leucaniz (?), parasite of brown-tail moth in America............-- _ 93, 145 saundersti, parasite of brown-tail moth in America.....-...........- 93, 145 Phragmatobia fuliginosa, host of Carcelia excisa....-...----------- re 89 Dexodes mogrtpes. -.-. 32: -5-- +.) 88, 91 Parexorista chelonix....----- ee ee ee aa 92 Phryze erythrostoma, parasite of gipsy moth, BEE) in literature: 2: 26 a 88 recorded hosts: 5.20. (5: sh629 22 7. ee eee 89 vulgaris. (See Blepharidea vulgaris.) Phygadeuon, parasite of Compsilura concinnatus.22_ 2-2 2... 2 eee 224 Phylloxera of grapevine, prey of Tyroglyphus phylloxere, attempted control by introduction of its ENEMY... ------ 22022 --+eeee eee eee eee eee 24 ‘“‘Physiological” species. (See Biological.) , ata Phytonomus murinus, enemy of alfalfa, quest for parasites in Europe-.........- 46 Pieris brassicx, host: of Blepharidea vulgariss: 8 2 Ss a 91 Compsilura. conpimnaia: 2222. o 25. 222s ee 89 Mastcera syluaticare. oti ee ee 92 daplidice, host of Blepharidea vulgaris....-. Mn Ney eesiinehe es a rape (see also Pontia rape). host of Blepharwdea vulgaris: . {22220 i222 eet. ee ee 91 Compsilura concmnata...2:.6.-. 2 252222 eee 89 Pimpla brassicariz, parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe.......-.....-.-.---.-- 238 position i) se gy quence”*_7 eae eee 136 reared at laboratory.......-..- 86 sipsy moth in Harope.!/...).. 2) 1. eee 238 position in ‘‘sequence”.. 132 “eared ‘at laboratory... /225 eee 85 conquisitor, not properly a host of Theronia fulvescens......-.--.------- 137 parasite of brown-tail moth in America........---.-- 144, 147-149 sipsy moth in Amerteas 22.2) 4): eee 138, 238 tent caterpillar (Malacosoma).-->-. 222. 23222eue 238 -white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma) 22 221 - Nee 238 disparis, parasite of gipsy moth in Japan... 2) 22-5. -- 222 25-2eeee 238 position in “‘sequence”’....... 121 reared ‘at laboratory . -~'2.2-2 eee 85 examinator, parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe..-....-....---.------ 144 position in “se- quenée 2.27 ee 136 reared at laboratory .........- 86 INDEX. ooo Pimpla examinator, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. ......-. 86 statusin United Statesin 1910. 310 gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘“‘sequence”. 132 introduction into United States. . 237-239 reared at laboratorysas-cee-- oe cee: 85 recorded in literature.............. 85 , host of Monodontomerus xreus........2- 220s cece eee eee ee eee eee ee 246, 249 imauisuoriella, host of Punpla wmstigator.225..2.--.2.2-2050.52222. Dey Se PAT. parasite of tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma).. 237-238 instigator, parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe..........----------- 144 position in “‘se- quence”: 43s. eee 136 reared at laboratory...-.----.-- 86 recorded in literature..........-- 86 status in United Statesin 1910.. 310 gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence”’... 132 introduction into United States, [DEVIC TASS eye eee te cane DE oe SNe 237-239 reared, ab laboratory —..0/.--s-se-2-<2 85 recorded i literature. ...-.-. 222-2 - 85 TMU PLO, WIGMISTLORICNG sees "UE wee SO A 2a7 pedalis, parasite of brown-tail moth in America ..........-..-.--- 144, 147-149 . sipay mothin Americas: !. 20.5200) o.0: 137-138, 237-239 pluto, parasite of gipsy moth in Japan, position in ‘“‘sequence”’.....-.- 121 introduction into United States, habits. 237-239 reared-at. laboratary... 322 ees. ae. 3 oo oe 85 porthetrix, parasite of gipsy moth in Japan, position in ‘‘sequence”... 121 introduction into United States, 2 OS eagi i REAS PA A og d 237-239 reared au laboratory es soe se 85 meen mama ber cOlomiged 90. 624. sets ee. PA ea 310 parasites of gipsy moth, status in United States in 1910........ 308, 310 tenuicornis, parasite of gipsy moth in America..........---..---....--- 138 Pine oor ant oi pie tussock moth”: ..0!0/2/.02.22 2.22. be cece ee ee 103 Piroplasmosis, transmission by Rhipicephalus sanguineus........------------- 41-42 preumimimmm sige of Perilampus:s.....--..2-2-.-227-.-- epee Re. 5. 208 Plant-lice, prey of Coccinella californica, control by transportation of enemy from one part of country to another part .-...- 22-23 repanda, control by introduction of enemy....--. 35 COCCI DUMEMEE feo c elas. osceu senso een he 24 Hippodamia convergens, control by transportation of enemy from one part of country to another part...........---.-- 22-23 Plum curculio. (See Curculio, plum.) ium ier NOs Ol Compsiiuna conemnata..°.. 2112.02... 2.2.22 eee es --- 89 Camm MOS iOn ere nwerioem DIlgdrisy of. 8 2.0L eee eee een 91 Campsie eoncvninaia. © 780202 oe 2 See DLS. 89 eraies! (gripes eo) SAIS SLE) SO 88, 91 LUGS EVTDM Se 5 EOS SD a sy a eae 92 Sere Ort Ol Lanimanarverinnt nt Sn ee nee 90 Tugiieepe enemy OLA panreles 7 UlDipes.y.. 2220.00. a IS eo hee ees. 199 Paceocampa popul,, host of Compsilura'concinnata..-....2...2. 22... eee. 89 Polygnotus hiemalis, parasite of Mayetiola destructor, transportation from one part of country toanother' parts. 2.02... Se ern tee eee van ae 336 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Bee Be ee Pontia rapx (see also Pieris rape). ln control by caging and permitting parasites to escape.............- 19 host..of Apanteles glomeratus.....:.....:-.-=-----< +> 2.05 24 Compsilura concinnata-......-.«---------++2.4.5 Poplar (see also Populus). black, food plant, of gipsy, mioth..........-.222+.).:26--.:./-. ee 80 food plant ‘of. gipsy moth..... 222.222)... . 2 eee ee 57, 82 Populus (see also Poplar). mora; food, plant of erpsy smote. .oe32 2 ccs eg eee Pe =. 124 Porthesia sumilis, host of Compsilura: concinnaia... ......-.-22<<.1-..> ee = Dexodes NGTUpes.....2.0c00 S2= > 2 2 88, 91 Eyed fOTUGUNOD 6 iuin ae oe 2 2 ss er 92 Porthetria (Lymantria) monacha (see also Nun moth). | hest,of Corcelia.evcisa.-— ... <2 2 0 1 ie 89 Compsilura concinnata..0.--.--see8 eee 89 Echinomyia feta... ... 2.2.2.2. .5 89 Parasetigena. segregata.. >... eee 89, 229 Tachina larverum......2- 5202 [eee 90 Zygobothria bimaculata..............- 90 Prays oleellus, control by caging and permitting parasites to escape........... 19 Procrustes coriaceus, host of Blepharidea vulgaris..2--..%----.-..) eee 91 Proctotrypid parasite of Compstlura. concinnata...2 »..\. 2: 2-25 224 Prospaltella berlesei, importation into Peru for controlling Hemichionaspis minor. 45 parasite of Diaspis pentagona, introduction into Italy... ..- 38, 44 lahorensis, parasite .of Aleyrodes citri....-.--.---=.-.<--- == 46 Pseudococcus. (See Mealy bugs.) Pseudogonatopus spp., parasite of Perkinsiella saccharicida, introduction into Hawaiian Islands... . ora0s . sacteetyrnt adi a oss 2 nese eee 35 Pteromalid ‘parasite of A panteles fulvupes.:: .. -2.- = 322% 2 +gc5 ee 200 Pteromalus chrysorrhea D. T., Pteromalus rotundatus Ratz. a synonym. ....--- 87 cuproideus, parasite of white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa LeUcosthQ I) ia.c ore De cxda lt os Geka wed ddinrce Sunes dee ae 305 Pteromalus egregius Forst., Pteromalus nidulans Thoms. a synonym........-.-- 87 gross number colonized... «i... -2..camer 920 310 host of Entedon albitarsis. 2.2.2.4 49. 258 soe 263, 266, 267, 269 éulophid...... 22-5. 2+.-+ 20.9 5edo050 See 202 parasite of Apanteles lacteicolor......-....-.---- 266, 267, 283-284 brown-tail moth, colonization in United States, host. relations... 7.2 = eee ee. 65, 96, 262, 263, 265-267, 268-278 in Europe, position in ‘‘se- quence”. «..+ 5... 136 status in United Statesin1910. 309 Meteorus versveol ote, cn inidinninines © 5. Soe eee 266, 267 unfortunately a secondary as well as a primary parasite.... 202 halidayanus, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature........- 86 nidulans, parasite of brown-tail moth, reared at laboratory... ....- 87 recorded in literature.......- 87 Thoms.=Pteromalus egregvus. Foret... ..... 22- 352232 see 87 pini, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............-.--- 86 processionex, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature... . 87 puparum, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature. -.-.-- 87 rotundatus, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature...... 87 INDEX. . 337 Page Pteromalus rotundatus Ratz.=Pteromalus chrysorrhea D. T.......------------ 87 sp., near cwproideus, parasite of brown-tail moth................-- 305 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence” 136 reared at laboratory. ............- 87 umn alpine, host of Carcelia. excis@..-- =... 22 2 eee ce eee 89 Ptilotachina larvincola, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature.......-... 88, 90 monacha, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature............ 88,90 Pulvinaria psidii, prey of Cryptolemus montrouztert, control by introduction of ee a eas oan. ofa) es Sn am ee eee ae es ee oe ee Sele 34-35 Pygzxra anachoreta, host of Compsilura concinnata...........-.---------------- 89 : Beamer hort ot Gareelin eExest....-5.2.2.2 2-2-2). snl 2s Seek eee es 89 OD PAUSE RINE EC) MITT) ee aS ln ea aod Sa 90 Prramets aialania, host of Compsilura concinnata........--..--.---------2---- 89 Rabbit, cotton-tail, host of Hemaphysalis leporis-palustris....-.......-------- 4] Rearing cage. (See Cage.) Reproduction experiments with Melittobia acasta............-------------- 211-212 PY CRAOUUES MROUIE TE rn i ee Shey AL's Oss oo Ss 184 PEIeCnOetanede oc ase ete ee wis soi 257-258 Rhipicephalus sanguineus, host of Hunterellus hookert...........---------+----- 41-42 Patan Ol Camels he el olen ei ean eae ee 42 eRe en ee eae So ose 42 MameMiewer OF PIrOPlasMOsis=--. i 22. yee see ecto 2 41-42 eens. host ol -hunterciias haokert.- 2.222). 22 eS). 2c oe Al FORTIS AT Sic 0G )E ult a ale Sp ih aot 4s rr 41 Gr Se ene se reece ter a ee eee? Bb) 42 Rhizobius ventralis, enemy of black scale (Satissetia olex), introduction into Cali- le eth REE SE cl a cau pater sis li as, 3) ayn 31 Rhogas. (See Rogas.) mayparia purpurata, host of Parevorista chelonix............---------0eeee-ne 92 Rogas geniculator, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature........-.-- 86 pulchripes, pazasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature.........-. 86 testaceus, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature............ 86 neath Or Tipsy mol...) le Ae 82 Saissetia olex. (See Scale, black.) Salix (see also Willow). Pee abiacn ri paymrOun.. 5.2. as 2 Pee ee) ee 124 Sarcophaga sp., reared from dead gipsy moth (Porthetria dispar)................ 90 Sarcophagid puparia from gipsy moth pupe, results of rearing work of 1910.... 141 paceapnarids, hosts oi Monodontomerus xreus....2 20... 6.2. cele 246 pane sePeaRnO pete se... eos. eo 250 probable parasites of“ pine tussock moth” .....2.....22.25.....: . 261 that feed upon gipsy moth pupee; are they parasites or scaven- DEN ce eo es Cs 8 250-251 Simeon, Ost Ol Mrarisia ays...) 2 eT ee ene 89 EOS DERI NY IL GOGO ee pe Sg le a 92 ar aNCnNUMURGM@GS To ear ar ecto ere ee ee Pot ee 88, 92 ae enim merrier ercist 2-7. ce et 2 I 89 te 0) SA pat a et Rll eR eR as 89 RCRCCEAE EN CUES Te See Ae ok LOUSY Re 92 SOE 90 a1 (gel Naa AE ei Sh eh ee og A 90 pega OMI Se ete te ee ee ST es oe 88, 92 Spt, Moto Musicera satumied.- 522222. TST OO eee 92 62188°—Bull. 91—12 22 338 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. = Scale, black (Saissetia olex), host of Tomocera californica, control by transporta- tion of parasite suggested.............-....c. 520) ee international work with enemies..............-- Fre prey of Rhizobius ventralis, control by introduction of-latter.. v.23. 5 at ak. 1.4 ee 31 coffee, host. of Scutellista:cyones... .< ...2 sp ned ate asic an «ee 31 cottony cushion. (See Icerya purchasi.) +7 fluted. (See Icerya purchasv.) long. (See Lepidosaphes glovert.) oyster-shell. (See Lepidosaphes ulmi.) purple. (See Lepidosaphes beckit.) San Jose. (See Aspidiotus perniciosus.) wax. (See Ceroplastes.) West Indian peach. (See Diaspis pentagona. ) Schedius kuvanez, gross number colonized ...2 2.2.2. 2.255.232. eo eee 310 host of Pachyneuron, gijwensis..22282 0: 2-222 eee 3 i Tyndarichus maew 4.28. 262. 2.22. eee ~ 183 parasite of gipsy moth in Japan, position in ‘‘sequence’’..... val introduction into United States, hab- fis ..-.F2 Jamiel da toe 75, 176-188 reared at Hise s _si+e6 eee 86 status in United States in 1910........ 307 superparasitized by Schedius kuvane......-.-.----- rial tena 181-183 superparasitizing Anastatus bifasciatus.............-.----- 181-183 _ Scutellista cyanea, parasite of coffee scale, black scale (Saissetia olex), and Cero- plastes spp., introduction into United States and Italy.... 31 prey of Pediculoides ventricosus... 5-2... ...2.252- ee 33 “Sequeuce’’ of parasites . 2.0... 200 peel etlec ods ieee de 106 — i of brown-tail moth in. Kurope. 2.2. 226-0 eee 135, 136 gipsy moth in Hurope.2--.-s_ 5.335.222 ee 131 JAPA... 28m nee Sob oe 121 Sericaria mort, hostof Crossocosmiag: sericart® x... 212 os. paat Sn, ee 88 Sigalphus curculionis, parasite of plum curculio, transportation from one part of country to other parts suggested...) 220422 ~..2. 0-2 -her-h ene ee 20 Silkworm, common. (See Sericaria mort.) Japanese (see also Antherxa yamamat). “Payit?” ARARI LO Cott, 26,320 Oi atest. ti nie err 939-934 Smerinthus ocellatus, host of Zentilia faune.- = 2-.o....6 322-4 eee 92 populi, host of Compsilura concinnata............-----++++++2++-e- 89 Species of insects differing in biological characters only.......- 225-226, 257, 285-286 Sphins hgustre, host of Carcela, excise... i Ueioo see ee eer 89 Masicena sylvatica... 42.4088 4 nek bee eee 92 Tricholyga grandis... ... 612). -2 5+ 3.0- oes 88, 92 Spilosoma lubricipeda, host of Compsilura concinnata.......-.-...-.---+-------- 89 - Parexorista chelonize....i2225---+..- 22a ee 92 menthasiri, host: of :Compsilura concinnaia.. 2.2.4.4... 5502 seeeeee ¢ 89 Staphylinid beetle, enemy of Ceratitis capitata, introduction into Western Aus- tralia... ccc eee ee ee we ead eteee Bin we 2s 39 Staphylinus olens, enemy of earwigs, practical handling.................------ 18 Starvation as factor in:controlief Heterocampa:...2-22-5--as-...-2 2 eee 103. @ insects. 212s. Be Me ae is ie ee 14s Stauropus fagi, host of Compsilura-concinnatas. 2.23 -\5-5)-42 - se eee 89. 4 ZLygobothria gilva.2 1.22 sae Sap ek Se ee ae 90 INDEX. 339 Page anne slicix nos of Corcelia ercisd.... 2.22.25 202 22 SSS eee eee 89 SMa 2 2 Te eG Sele ee ee So 88 Compsiturwconcmnata.. 2.5.20 5. See ee ees 89 Pareroriste Gheonid <2 62 2: 2 02 A ne 92 RINGO wemiaron sso S25 30. YS os See 90 Sugar-cane borer (Rhabdocnemis obscurus), quest of parasites for introduction Tifosi: Telangds72eaee- += oS 2s SEL. ee 36 food plantas Periinsiella sacchamendas. 2.22... 2... - 22222222 nee 35 plant leeeuss eee oer se oe 2 ee 35 leafhopper. (See Perkinsiella saccharicida.) Sycamore, food plant of white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostigma) 101 Syntomosphyrum esurus, parasite of brown-tail moth in America.... 139, 144, 147-149 sipay mothim America..-......-2¢-.-.--- 139 Paranete or lady ord lances 53.4 seen k tess dose ele e ee 30 amend mies -prey-ot Monedula carolina.............------+--2-22--22---+--- 45 . transmitters of trypanosomiasis of dromedaries.....-...-------- 45 Tachina, biological character separating the species mella and larvarum...-.-. 257 mupmuper rons number colonized... 52% i. 2222 222s ee oe cece ee se se 310 TEE A RG. 1 en 240 parasite of gipsy moth in Japan, position in ‘‘sequence”’... 121 introduction into United States... 227-228 reared at laboratory......-. eee 88 status in United Teeee in n 1910. sire 308 PeCOrded WOSt INS. 22. Seekers s2ec8 88 Pasar Proce number colonized: - 32 +22 seco s2s 2S i RS. 2. ss 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in “‘SeQeMeRs tne seme’ © os! See” 136 introduction into United States 296 reared at laboratory.......-.--- 91 status in United States in 1910 308, 309 gipsy moth in Europe, positionin ‘“‘sequence”.. 132 introduction into United States, 20) S13). 2h AR 50) a Sh se 225-227 reared meataporatony. <2. 252/222: 23 - 88 recorded in literature? .-. 2... 88 status in United States in 1910-..-.. 308 EGO CU O08 Sect aie co 2 an 90 latifrons, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature........ 91 DERI SL OS Sehgal ee ee ea ee 92 *“‘Tachina-like”’ parasite of gipsy moth, results of rearing work of 1910......-. 142 Tachina mella and Tachina larvarum, biological differences..............----- 286 parasite of brown-tail moth in America................- 93, 145, 147-149 Aipoymaneman AiMmernca. 225-252-0222 dae8 90, 139-140 white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leucostig- pee emer A A te MEGA space chery Bs ake 2 221-223 noctuarum, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in literature...........- 88 ee POOR Mera a ins ec Sonn oe ae ee tS 8 90 parasite of gipsy moth, relative abundance in Massachusetts and ELST Ea e's oa ON Spier icra Cy cee ate Sanne te 127 Mi setbers tice iayipemeettie ne 22 fy 528 eA oc ee nt eee 207-213 Tachinid flies, rearing and colonization, large cages versus small cages. ....... 204-207 parapiteyon te ierawd-miil mpi. SS SS tt 296-304 TEL Gee 2 os as 202-236 340 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Page. Tachinid puparia, importation and handling ..............2. 5. 32eneeeeeeee 166-167 | undetermined, parasite of brown-tail moth in America... 145-146, 147-149 Tachinids, host relations, physiological and physical restrictions thereto..... 202-204 hosts of Melittobia.....--. ..ecec-aee eee tod as 202 Monodontomerus xrews .:. .- 22262 n2...22. 0.5 ee ee 246 miscellaneous, parasites of gipsy moth, results of rearing workof1910. 141 parasites of gipsy moth in Russia. -..+:.22)..<... 2 eee 81, 125 undetermined species, reared from gipsy moth in America........ 141 Txmocampa stabilis, host of Compsilura concinnata.....---:=---=..---.5ss0eeee : Tapinosiola elymi, host of Dexodes nigripes . 2. 2: . 252. = 2. - eee 88, 91 Telenomus phalenarum, gross number colonized.............-.--.----------- 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘sequence’ 2s -22. eae 136 introduction into United States.” a. beeeeae 64, 260-261 reared at laboratory. ...-. 87 recorded in literature... . 87 status in United States in 1910. . ...'F: 3 er Tent caterpillar (see also Clisiocampa and Malacosoma). control» by disease 223 ace: 2 nce 2 2: ano Oe ene 98, 101, 105 host of Anomalon exile........---..-..---22--2 eee 144 Tammnervum chisiocampe .........--.-.. 3256 143 Pimpla, conquisitor..:.-.-...-..--- =. 238 PAPASWISIN S308 (espe ee eee eich eee eae ae ee 102, 104-105 forest. (See Malacosoma disstria.) Tephroclysiia virgaureata, ost of Dexodes nigripes.....-...-2- +. 4eese ae 88, 91 Tetrastichus xanthomelenex, parasite of elm leaf-beetle (Galerucella luteola), imiroduction mito. United States... .........2...- 1c 2 ee 39-41, 62-63 Thalpochxres pannonica, host of Carcelia excisa .......-.-.2--.2-24ee 89 Thalpochares cocciphaga, parasite of black scale (Savssetia olex), introduction into Wnitted: States 2-94 Sees oe eee Ch decease: ~ sae 34 Thamnonona wavaria, host of Blepharidea vulgaris.......-.--..---------------- 91 Thanasimus formicarius, enetay of barkbeetles, introduction into United Bidtes-.--..--2-5-- eee on Site oo.) leek 36 Thaumetopea pinivora, host, oi Dexodes: nigripes....--.----.--------2525e=ee 88, 91 pityocampa, host of Blepharidea vulgaris........-.. 2.2 91 Compsilura concinnata.<...... 3.2 eee 89 Tricholyjga QTOnNMS 0. << ..i5--.40 aoe 88, 92 processionea, host of Blepharidea vulgaris. ..<_+.......-22 52s a1. Carcelad. €X0180,-. 0:8 «rie 330 52 rr 89 Compsilura concinnatd.... 22-23. eeee eee 89 EH picampocera, crassiset...< 2 2.242 89 Pales panda. sie .ns oct. = 12 2 92 Leni (bh... ad as - - 1 90 Thelyotokous hymenopterous parasites, chances of successful establishment in a DEW CouMtry: . ... 5 so0. ee ad oleh ee ee ees oe eee Fe eae 95 Thelyotoky in ‘Trichogramma... 2). 221.) < <5 = 2 fee ci 4? ci 257, 258 Theronia atalantx, parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe ......--.----------- 304 position in ‘“‘se- quence”... - -..7 een reared. at laboratory -.-.----254e 86 recorded in literature.......--- 86 INDEX. 341 Page. Theronia atalantx, parasite of gipsy moth in Europe.........-.--.-..--------- 236 position in “‘sequence”’.. 132 reared atelaboratory.22--22 2 5 mee << 85 recorded in ‘iteraturess._ sesso. 2 85 fulvescens, not properly a parasite of Pimpla conquisitor......--.------ 137, parasite of brown-tail moth in America......... 144, 147-149, 304 eipsy moth in America.......-. 137, 141, 142, 236-237 host of Monodontomerus xreus.......----- AOE METIS 2 os Gee ae ae 246 gaponicd,. parasite of gipsy motham Japan 22.....2...2-..--225-----4 236 position in ‘‘sequence”’..... 121 melanocephala, not known to be parasite of gipsy moth. -.............- 137 Thyridopieryx ephemerxformis, control by caging and permitting parasites to a I a aie =~ ni oe ee a Se eS ee ele eee 19 RmnneneevMnUMEDATASILCS 2... 22.6 = EES. 2 So oe bd a eee ee te ee 41-42 Teer amata, host of Compsilura cowemnata......:.....-..5.-.+.---+------ 89 Meemiond plant of Heliothis obsoletaz.....2-..---.5--+-+---s2+52--+-4--- 45 Tomocera californica, parasite of Sarssetia olex, transportation from one part of country to another part suggested. .....-..- of EWE EME ies Bains 5 Ge ie ed Pall Torymus anephelus Ratz.= Monodontomerus xreus Walk.......-.-.--+--------- 87 Tevacampa pastiinum, host of Blepharidea vulgaris...........------+-------+5- 91 Toxoptera graminum, host of Lysiphlebus tritici, experiments in control by Sea MEEIP IMO SW ATISUGC 2 os eo lc oe a ie bbe ee ee eee eee 22 iaeeenmrripicis. host ot Compsilura concimmnata.......-..--..----+---++---+5 89 Tray, ‘‘tanglefooted,’’ for brown-tail caterpillars.....................-.-..--- 280 Trichiocampus viminalis, host of Compsilura concinnata..........-...-.--++--- 89 Trichogramma, biological characters separating pretiosa from European pre- NOSE) INCOSE TAME fea CANS eae RS See ee che SPR La, 207 pretiosa-like form, parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, position in sequence .... 136 introduction into United States, halides sus... 256-260 pretiosa, parasite of brown-tail moth in America, habits.. 143, 256-260 Heliothis obsoleta, shipment to Sumatra... . 45 Spee parasite, OF AT Chips TOSACEONO= 22... 2 Cones dese comes se 259-260 brown-tail moth in Europe, position in ‘“‘se- quience”’ IY Risin: oy. 2) REPOS SITS SN 136 spp ross mmmger, colonizeds ees... ek et eee 310 parasites of brown-tail moth, status in United States in OES See: 3 IS oe. ge niet 8 cS ee a eG 309 sp. I, parasite of brown-tail moth, reared at laboratory.......- 87 II, parasite of brown-tail moth, reared at laboratory....... 87 Prcholyga grandis, eross number colonized .... 2.20... -+ 2... 0 eee dec eweceees 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe..........-.......-.- 296 position in ‘‘se- : : ‘quence Lees... 136 | reared at laboratory........... 91 gipsy moth in Europe, position in ‘‘sequence”.. 132 introduction into United States, Habits S25 4... - Wis Ne tea 228-229 reared at laboratory. .....22...:2..- 88 status in United States in 1910...... 308 TECOTE CED MOSUIESS : =p ey Mame ero ry Yom Bo Be 88, 92 342 PARASITES OF GIPSY AND BROWN-TAIL MOTHS. Trogoderma tarsale, enemy of gipsy moth... /..2....2...2.)1., Sa white-marked tussock moth (Hemerocampa leu- | costignia) init. 2... is. 1.022 eee 252 Trogus flavitorius [sic] lutorius (Fab.)?, parasite of gipsy moth, recorded in ) terature..... 02... ee a eae eel 85 Trypanosomiasis of dromedaries, transmission by tabanid flies................ 45 Tussock moth, pine, control by disease. 22. 222: g0244.4_. 22... et patasitiem. . ...2...:.... eee eee 103-104 probable host of sarcophapids 2... ¢ in. 2i:42:65_ See 251 white-marked (Hemerocampa leucostigma), host of Anthrenus va- TINS A 252 Apanteles sp. (delicatus?) 138 Compsilura conecin- y i eee 221-223 Meteorus versi- color. 221-223, 289 Monodo nto - merus cereus 249 Pimpla_ con- quisitor.... 238 Pimpla = in- quisitoriella ~ 237 Pimpla = in- stigator ......\ 4) jaar Pteromalus cuproideus. 305 Tachina | mella.... 221-223 Trogoderma larsahe. 222% 252 parasitism..-......- 102 in country versus city.. 119-120 Tyndarichus navex, parasite of Anastatus bifasciatus...........-..-.-.--------- 183 Schedius kW@anz. » 5 4.08 20 ~.> 2-2s - eee 183 reared ‘from.gipsy mothvegps..2/.... o.¢) 0.2 So eee 153, 171, 178 superparasitized by Tyndarichus nave.......-------------- 183 superparasitizing Pachyneuron gifuensis.......--.----------- 183 Tyroglyphus phylloxere, enemy of grapevine Phylloxera, introduction into Wurope....-- 2242 -00+2seec eee eens decd joes beck teeters see ae 24 “Uji” parasite of silkworm in Japan. (See Crossocosmia sericariz.) Ulmus (see also Elm). | food plant. of aipsy moti ss-.cs. 3-Se tea nip he . . 25 eeeee 124 Vanessa antiopa, host of Blepharidea vulgaris......-+-2-------.- 2.24255 5eeeeeee 91 Blepharipa seutellatas sa. 22 035. =... 425-22 88 Compsilura concimniia, 2.5.2. ---- 2.2. 2 eee 89 Tachina larverum.....-~%-<--- == .<13 Les). eee 90 io, host of Argyrophylar atropivora....-.--.--..-- LO Webworm, fall (Hyphantria), host of Compsilura concinnata........--..--...-- 224 IMELCOTAES DETSUCON OTS foes soba ee, Les B88 Vantcheia aldricht 2 vn cee ees a 208 Perilampus hyalinus a secondary parasite. .... 208-209 Hiudses am parasitismics _o. .. 252-452... - Peres 104 Weevil, cotton boll (Anthonomus grandis), control by transportation of para- ined. 1s (keene eis Mn ut method of encouraging parasites. . . 20 Wheat midge. (See Contarinia tritici.) White fly of orange. (See Aleyrodes citri.) Willow (see also Salix). hod plant of sipsy moth._.......2.....6 5% Be. Se eeeniden. - 80 Rn RIEaNe Oh St per MOUl 262.22 he vt ee eyes - - ee i geen es 97-102 Yponomeuia evonymella, host of Tachina larvarum......-....---.------------- 90 CHUAN UNO ORUT. oo cn <\- e S s o 90 poactia, host ot Compsihira concimnatd.o...-..-222.......----.-.-- 89 CIEE LEME L DOR ID x2 en eee ed terns oN oa ok 90 Zenillia fauna, parasite of brown-tail moth, recorded in literature............ 91 . Hee EMO GE iE a9 Se ne on ahs voce Sale be ees 92 heerrersetese miner COlOMimed =ho.. 2) 2 os 2c eo eee eee eee 310 parasite of brown-tail moth in Europe, positionin ‘‘sequence”’. 136° introduction into United States, JOS) SECIS hey Sa A 302-303 reared. at laboratory.....-...:..+- 91 recorded in literature............ 91 gipsy moth, recorded in literature................ 88 WMIDUEL OOS syed 2 a re 90 ZYygarne acne MOS OL blepmarided OWIGOTIS........2---.<-- 22. - 0-0 seceenene 91 Jilipendulz (?), host of Blepharidea vulgaris. ..............----------- 91 DR UTA Se os win ww wn hae ee ee ee 92 genta, Nost of -biepharidea vulgaris... -. ~~... 20s 0e cece eneee see se 91 ae gross es ee ee Poe a parasite of gipsy moth i in Europe, position in’ . reared at laboratory. - recorded hosts. .......------ Sa eh nidicola, gross number colonized. ....-.--- & BBSE I bee > Ost of Monodontomerus ge Cee aae aia) Nery 9 in whe position ri quence’ Sess results af. rear O19 >. 33, ae status in United States EGIOS . se os, ee gipsy moth, introduction into United State habitenc 1 eee O A SN Oe i. he 40 eT US Cg SS eee oe, ee Be > ee 5 all yy ey Vevey ye Ov x ' ddd: eyeiews wyh¥ 2 Seu esey ee ! v Se dus F 7 TALE LE yidadd ade yeti y antiga oer syyvgy VN ees IG Gd ygutx? Were yoy ele ty ww wwe’ VIU yg “Wd w¥ ar) gv" ) Wvye iid ees po ANd . wey | Vygvter vy a vy oth wade wa ‘y vv Nawaorile ata slaweresa ues, we vy w v Ww rt] am Me Ue s! tu 1SC LEE judd JViy vey * y ¥ , We v yw wvwvvyei'’ id 4" Wd Seren IO : Ee raat - VyUuer oe wowriwwed ing aie) iy . ; adh Alah we ‘uy WW vvyvl hd a dace hd Ww ewv J vw v Aad wwe ry vg pee aoe Hidde Wvevevd YS ying = ve bade ba wo ve Od Oe WTS ce vw Ww Why yw" wie vee =f ofl v~ Jv Ww LY wey very 4 wey” Ad? eh ts Windy geese nett Pine SE ca eye tet Tabet A yeed buveee.--ceuge res TY MARA LSA w] ww yy Syuyyryy Late Wiad lY vege Jie ser OOOW, yyy pV evgeyy ae ey | we SOO yay vv eels wey yt: Adv rere eat ew LG ; tt tani: Mik WWM seteres men see iced ,m nasaiivhicn Sy Yet a td vadng ~~ oie gy WOO i Wel bmaairat phi es a get ~ ; w wv ow wt wwe ~ TS Nr, ~ wv 7 ~ vals Pe dd s"4s¥ aye cei és ) J ” i ut ped yi fait AAS we ADAAA é UNS © Seu yyy Juve el vw yy thy Move ay vv we v~~ AS MALTA A) Cillwas “?s “hie git yew awe away wary SOLU vi dY ow ugh - veU J vest: we cE Vveien ue Wyyuy “ hd ve: 47 AA, SP ULUMUrY es LUT Bee Wey Vou" Ven" A (yur erteY aT pM ALA tb ly ae fi Uprtie OOS pp A w cew ee oa vee a0". ow ee | we Ved L w wy ~~ Tweeters Jvw ¢cre ow! Ae OD ge’ tf Nie ecyede Ay) sh hehe Att, Sa aaee ~yete: ey” Vy ww we ; 2 Lenin a a?" E64 | \ | oe 4 “ el hs yore we eran De il Lit fer a ea et eNO Bele 1 oa! we ~ HA A. apt PEL Pelt y 2 oe ~= wy VM sey Cw yyy fe ~ eee ¥ vede foue vee Weve yu ~~ pA Ny << gl ‘. yee itera voeugriey Lye coat ai ye rere EE TCS Sty Vv Yves 4 EI gman) oa eer oo ee yy yyy yer ow wka vV oe, = i. sw Wwe" Sg eas = “ J ve NS 5 at 2 a Fe’ = AL ph \ 2 wv a ah tg f i Ney I~ Wwe wrnne bh SL RA NA Nw We very Wwh un Sc a ww*” "y Wow’ Wi ww fe ee ie igh: ™ ywi¥r vevywww! hd sad ouwy v, —- w) Nay Wer Wer WOON yee! are wwh holo uy = WwW, ae | Fee ah t wy = = F Ong : Vuviy’ 5 ~~ yer ly \ vv" 4 ewe le ”) oF yy e 4 : wu ¥¥ mn bad : LAAT 7 ae) apr w w > “ag . vv w ww www OT ~~ Sw | wre Vv wig't v Ai o VY : y bl - Liddidhd bibl aid. - es ta dis tw ‘! wv / | ew le wed eh el = ee | Aes by wae wren Oho lind vv \/\ { Bi ee : | = © wey ww” ; f L] ‘ / Py ‘, vv } ' Swe 9iS duds ade iw Wi Wy yurlyert Pwr tank ka APTS? Pe A > i” S dege A e wi} v/VW . j 4 etd did iid Ys y ww Pim ww Nd PEF wf det Om 4 x © bie! < \ Xv \ ‘ 4 ~ +we' y we } 1W9e | poet, bites _— § Pee Tom i | |