Historic, archived document
Do not assume content reflects current
scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.
of A th? Che bit ve Fae
Pa "5 Tt ao tere Sa ria Mike 7
ud, Ape a Der neg a het 3) Spee ae
4
peaks VS E84 9s Se) Set
eu Pe a Rate "4 . , ~~ ‘
: ; fee it ae Weycty ve pe LS
+o eet ipa Sie ane ey : Set . : are 1h
Bez. U -S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
2 , i Mapes 8 a4 / .
See BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY—BULLETIN No. 67. et
Ny L. O. HOWARD, Entomologist and Chief of Bureau. :
- eal
WF
PROCEEDINGS :
OF THE i
NINETEENTH ANNUAL MEETING \) aie
a 4
ilwaiaes
- =
ir,
ei
eA
a
= ik =
cay ~
f ‘ =
We i > a
WASHINGTON: -
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. ents
Kn Rees 1907. = Fan “in
. cae eo] 2 “_ i}
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY—BULLETIN No. 67.
L. O. HOWARD, Entomologist and Chief of Bureau.
PROCHEDINGS
OF THE
NINETEENTH ANNUAL MEETING
OF THE
a
sven oF Btowoe BYTUOLOKisTs
ISSUED NOVEMBER 25, 1907.
MOOI
¢
oe
ines
lasina
=< ‘g =
== \ ‘. - =
eh
SSE As See
ReaD AN WHE
. BN) al is ALY,
DGD ANN Wag
. CaEtEN SE
A; ? \\ ds coy
‘ WW
WASHINGTON:
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE.
L907.
BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY.
L. O. Howarp, Entomologist and Chief of Bureau.
C. L. Maritatt, Entomologist and Acting Chief in absence of Chief.
R. S. Crirron, Chief Clerk.
I’. H. CHITTENDEN, in charge of breeding experiments.
A. D. HopxKIns, in charge of forest insect investigations.
W. D. HuNTER, in charge of cotton boll weevil investigations.
. M. WEBSTER, in charge of cereal and forage plant insect investigations.
L. QUAINTANCE, in Charge of deciduous fruit insect investigations.
. F. Puriies, in charge of apiculture.
. M. Rocers, in charge of gipsy moth and brown-tail moth work.
A. W. MorriL1, engaged in white fly investigations.
W. F. FIsKeE, in charge of gipsy moth laboratory.
Ww. A Hooker, engaged in cattle tick life history investigations.
A. C. MorGan, engaged in tobacco insect investigations.
R. S. WociLuM, engaged in hydrocyanic acid gas investigations.
C. J. Giiuiss, engaged in silk investigations.
R. P. Currig, assistant in charge of editorial work.
MABEL Coxcorp, librarian.
Smr
9
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.
U. S. DeparTMENT oF AGRICULTURE,
Bureau or ENtToMo.ocy,
Washington, D. C., July 20, 1907.
Sir: I have the honor to transmit herewith the manuscripts of the
proceedings of the nineteenth annual meeting of the Association of
Economic Entomologists, held at New York, N. Y., December 28 and
29, 1906. This association, made up largely of entomologists con-
nected with the State experiment stations, the Bureau of Entomology
of this Department, and others engaged officially in entomological
work, is an important one, and the proceedings of its annual meet-
ings contain papers and discussions on injurious and _ beneficial
insects which should by all means be put in print. I therefore rec-
ommend that, following the custom of previous years, the proceed-
ings of this meeting be published as Bulletin No. 67 of this Bureau.
The two plates and six text figures are necessary for proper illustra-
tion of the text.
Respectfully, L. O. Howarp,
Entomologist and Chief of Bureau.
Hon. James Wison,
Secretary of Agriculture.
ee)
eet.
CONT ENTS
NINETEENTH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC
ENTOMOLOGISTS.
A Great Experiment in Applied Entomology___________z 1. A. Kirkland
emetn, OL Committee-on NOMmenclatHre..- >
—_ —- = ° -
cig acelin
20 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
give the Secretary of Agriculture similar authority against plant enemies as now
exists for procedure against animal diseases by the Bureau of Animal Industry.
C. (1) That the Congress of the United States be asked to enact a law empow-
ering the Secretary of Agriculture to make such regulations as may be deemed
necessary in order to secure uniform methods of nursery inspection and certifica-
tion of all nursery stock which passes into interstate commerce.
(2) That all State or Territorial officials in charge of nursery inspection be
urged to accept these certificates. at their face value and that in States where
laws are now in force which will not allow the acceptance of such certificates,
the inspection departments be requested to endeavor to secure such State legis-
lation as will make this possible.
(3) That each State should make and enforce such regulations as its local
authorities may deem necessary. but that they be made as similar to those of
the United States Department of Agriculture as practicable.
D. Your committee suggests that the Association elect a representative to
form a committee with a representative of the Association of Horticultural
Inspectors and a representative of the American Nurserymen’s Association to
push this legislation before Congress, as in the judgment of your committee
this is the best method available for securing its passage. We would also
suggest that topics A and C, above, be combined in one proposed law; and that
topic B, involving the control of introduced species, be embodied in another
law; and that, if the passage of both measures be impracticable, efforts be
concentrated upon the law involving the inspection of importations and the
control of nursery stock for interstate trade, and that the other measure be
pushed later.
Respectfully submitted.
BE. D. SANDERSON, Chairman.
C.-P> GiLenETr
H. A. Morecan.
A. F.. BURGESS.
S. A. ForBEs.
Mr. Harrison stated that the nursery. interests were being severely
injured on account of the diverse and sometimes unreasonable require-
ments made for shipping stock into different States. He declared
that the better class of nurserymen welcomed thorough inspection,
and that under no circumstances would they be willing to have this
work discontinued, as they considered it a benefit to themselves and
the trade. Any movement which would bring about more uniform
regulations and requirements, so that as little confusion as possible
would result to the nurseryman, was very desirable, and he heartily
favored the report.
Professor Craig stated that he believed that the principle outlined |
in the report was correct and that if workable legislation could be
secured it would greatly benefit the nursery interests. He urged the
necessity of such action as would prevent unjust discrimination, and
which would help the nurseryman who was striving to do an honor-
able business to secure the delivery of his stock without expensive
and objectionable delay. He therefore heartily indorsed the report.
Mr. Albertson remarked that he agreed with the statements made
by the previous speakers and believed that the report submitted by
NATIONAL CONTROL OF INSECT PESTS. 21:
the committee was a step in the right direction. He also pointed
out the fact that the entomologists and nurserymen were coming to a
better understanding of the situation, and thanked the association
for the courtesies extended to himself and the other representatives
of the Nurserymen’s Association.
Mr. Sanderson stated that the problem of bringing about uniform
nursery inspection requirements was a large and difficult one and that
it probably could not be solved in a single year. He felt, however,
that the report of the committee indicated the most practical line of
work to be taken up in this direction, and if the necessary legislation
could be secured it would result in bringing about a condition that
would be more satisfactory to nurserymen, horticulturists, and in-
spectors. The Association of Horticultural Inspectors had adopted
a similar report at their annual meeting at Baton Rogue last month
and had appointed a representative to act on the joint committee
suggested in the report.
Mr. Marlatt said that Congressional action would be taken when the
nurserymen of the country as a whole joined in a strong demand for
it, and that a demand from this source would have great weight with
Congress, especially with the indorsement of the official entomologists
of the different States and the State horticultural inspectors. The
remedy, therefore, lay largely in the hands of the nurserymen of the
country, and without their united support relief could not be hoped
for from Congress.
Mr. Burgess pointed out that for the first time in many years the
entomologists interested in nursery inspection had, through a com-
mittee, proposed a definite scheme for handling the problem. Har-
monious relations now exist with the nurserymen, and they and the
inspectors appear to have come to an agreement as to the best meas-
ure to adopt. He expressed the hope that the entomologists would
accept and adopt the report.
Mr. J. B. Smith stated that, although Congress might pass a
National law, it would not be able to overrule the requirements or
regulations of State officials, and that, this being the case, he could not
see how the law would be enforced so that any great benefit would
result.
Mr. Webster pointed out that if a National law had been passed
years before when the matter was agitated, there would not now have
been very many conflicting State laws to interfere with the work. In
spite of this, he believed the adoption of the report would be a step
in the right direction, and that it was not yet too late to take up and
push forward the work that should have been done years ago.
Mr. Summers called attention to the fact that one of the reasons
for stringent requirements in some States was the careless inspection
of other State officials, and that if many of the State inspectors were
i:
De ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
satisfied that a high standard of inspection requirements was main-
tained, such as would be the case if it were under Government control,
many State requirements would, undoubtedly, be modified in such a
way as to simplify interstate shipments.
After further general remarks a vote was called for, and the report
was unanimously adopted. On motion, the election of the representa-
tive of the association to serve on the joint committee was referred to
the committee on nominations.
The following paper was presented :
A NEW ORIENTAL INSECT PEST (?) IN MASSACHUSETTS.
By H. T. FERNALD, Amherst, Mass.
[ Withdrawn for publication elsewhere. |
A paper was read, as follows:
OCCURRENCE OF THE GIPSY MOTH IN CONNECTICUT.
By W. E. Brirron, New Haven, Conn.
During the season of 1906 my attention has been partly occupied
in attempting to control, and to exterminate if possible, a small gipsy
moth (Porthetria dispar L.) colony in‘Stonington, Conn. Stoning-
ton is the southeast corner town of the State, joining Rhode Island,
and having an area of nearly 75 square miles. The infested portion
covers, so far as we know, only about 1 square mile just north of
the village, in the south part of the town.
For several years we have expected that the gipsy moth would
appear in Connecticut, and have been on the watch for it. It has
been reported several times from different places, but in each case
upon investigation some other species was found to be the cause of
alarm. The first real gipsy moth was taken at Stonington, July 30,
1905, by Mr. Ernst Frensch, a local collector, who recognized the
insect because he had seen it in Germany. He noticed two males
flying about in an apple tree, and, on looking closer, saw a female
resting on the bark of the trunk, and put her in his cyanide jar. He
put the specimen away in his collection, and forgot all about it until
during the winter, when I wrote to the entomologists of the State
asking for cooperation in furnishing records of their rare captures
for use in our lists of Connecticut insects. Mr. Frensch sent me a
number of records, including that of Porthetria dispar. I made an
appointment with him, and visited the place March 6. He showed
me where he had captured the female, and called my attention to an
egg mass on a Norway maple tree near by. He also showed me an
egg mass which he had found on a small bush. Suspecting that
GIPSY MOTH IN CONNECTICUT. 10
these might be gipsy-moth eggs, he had, in order to make sure, cut off
the abdomen of the female moth and, obtaining the eggs from her,
compared them with those of the egg mass and concluded that they
were identical. We inspected the region and found a number of
eg@ masses in some low bushes near the velvet mill. This, as well
as the place where Mr. Frensch found the adult moth, is near the
railroad, and not far from the point where the spur track leading to
the steamboat dock branches from the main track.
The next thing was to learn the extent of the infestation, or, in
other words, the size of the infested area. We applied to Massachu-
setts for a trained scout, and through the kindness of Superintendent
Kirkland we obtained the services of Mr. C. S. Mixter for two weeks.
Mr. Mixter scouted nearly 5 square miles of territory, giving as his
opinion that the infested territory had been well surrounded. The
brush on about 5 acres of land around the pond by the velvet mill
was cut and burned before May 1, the hatching time for the eggs.
The egg masses found were destroyed by soaking them with creosote
oil. Banding trees with burlap was commenced about the middle
of May; only a few were banded at first, but the number was
increased as fast as seemed desirable. We supposed, of course, that
about all of the egg masses had been destroyed, but the number of
caterpillars found showed that some had been overlooked, and during
the summer we ran across a number of these old egg masses—more
even than had previously been destroyed.
Most of the caterpillars were found on old apple trees, though
cherry, quince, rose bushes, and red maple were infested. Many of
the old apple trees had received no care for many years, if ever, and
the tops were crowded with branches, some of which were dead, the
bark was rough, and in many cases trees were hollow or had cavities
caused by broken or rotting branches. All of these faults were serious
hindrances to our work because they furnished hiding places out of
our reach for the caterpillars, so that they would not go under the
bands where we could find them. We therefore pruned and scraped
many trees, and filled up the cavities with stone and cement. A few
trees were sprayed with arsenate of lead, and sticky bands of “ tree
tanglefoot ” were given a trial. In a few cases brush growing near
stone walls was found infested. The brush was cut and the walls
fired with fuel oil to kill any caterpillars that might be hiding in
them.
We had men on the ground continuously from June 7 to September
1, and during the latter part of June and first half of July ten men
were kept busy pruning, scraping, and banding trees, and destroying
caterpillars. The bands were visited each day until after nearly all
the caterpillars had pupated, when they were examined less fre-
quently—perhaps every other day—and finally twice a week, until all
24 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
had transformed. All trees infested with caterpillars or eg@ masses
were marked, as is done in Massachusetts. A breeding cage was made
on the grounds, and in it were reared a number of adults for exhibi-
tion and illustrative purposes. During August a gang of laborers
was employed to cut and burn brush, and the hedgerows through some
of the fields were cleaned up. We interviewed the selectmen, inter-
ested them in our work, and they cooperated by cutting all the brush
along the highways through and for some distance beyond the
infested district. This brush was burned by our men. In four
places caterpillars transformed in the stone walls, and egg masses
were laid there. The walls were overhauled, eggs destroyed, and the
walls relaid. All work was suspended September 1 to enable us to
make the-annual inspection of nurseries. Since November 16 five
men have been employed cutting and burning brush and scouting for
egg masses. |
It was necessary to do considerable educational work, and imimedi-
ately Bulletin 153 was issued from the Connecticut Agricultural Ex-
periment Station giving brief accounts of the gipsy and brown-tail
moths. Two months later the annual report, containing a further
account of the gipsy moth, was distributed. Figures and_ brief
descriptions of the insect and its injuries were printed on cards 11
by 14 inches in size, and nearly 2,000 of these have been distributed
to schools. A number of life history sets in Riker mounts have been
placed in drug-store windows in Stonington, Mystic, Noank, Groton,
and New London. An illustrated lecture was given at New Haven
May 9 and at Stonington November 26; specimens have been shown
and talks given about the insect in about a dozen meetings in various
other parts of the State.
Scouting for egg masses was done in April at Mystic, Midway,
New London, Plainfield, Danielson, Putnam, and Willimantic.
Nearly all portions of the State are visited during the year by some
member of the office force on the lookout for such things, but no
gipsy moths have been found anywhere outside of Stonington.
Up to the present time the results obtaimed may be expressed by
the statistics in the following table:
Egg masses laid in 1905:
Number. destroyeds= sae oat ee a A 2 ee ee eee eee 29
Number. hatched’ t= Uae a ee See SE ok Ss ee ee 36
Hgg masses laid in 1906, number destroyed___-_~-~ bear 47
Caterpillars destroyed? 22226228 Fea et oS en ee 10, 000
Pupse = destroyed: Soke oo ee eS ee ees AT
Number of trees banded, more than___~-—_- ae A ee ees retee 1, 300
Amount:of money expended —= === 252 322 ee eee $1, 700
A word as to funds: A few hundred dollars only could be spared
at that time from our State appropriation for insect work, and the
|
|
ze |
GIPSY MOTH IN CONNECTICUT. 95
Connecticut board of agriculture kindly appropriated $2,000, to be
used if needed, and Governor Roberts and his associates assured us
that if after using this money at our disposal still more was needed
to hold the pest in check it would be forthcoming. We called upon
the board of agriculture for $800, and the remaining $900 has come
from our own insect-pest appropriation. An attempt will be made
to have the State legislature, which soon convenes, set aside a few
thousand dollars to be used if needed in work against the gipsy and
brown-tail moths. The brown-tail moth has not yet been found in
Connecticut, though it must be very near its borders in Massachu-
setts. We shall endeavor to exterminate the gipsy-moth colony at
Stonington, and this can be done if it has not spread beyond the area
where we have found it. The village of Stonington is on a narrow
point of land extending into the ocean. The infested territory ex-
tends from the village northward and slightly eastward; it is flanked
on both sides by water—on the east by the Wequetequock River and
on the west by an arm of the sea extending northward from Ston-
ington Harbor. A line from the northernmost extremity of this salt
water extending easterly to Wequetequock River cuts the mainland
some distance north of where any caterpillars or egg masses have
_ been found, although considerable scouting has been done in this
section and many of the trees were banded in caterpillar time.
? Two natural enemies of the gipsy moth have been observed in
Connecticut. The “caterpillar hunter” or “searcher” (Calosoma
scrutator Fab.) was quite common under the bands, and one of these
in captivity devoured gipsy moth caterpillars with avidity. Out
of the ten thousand or more caterpillars gathered and destroyed four
diseased ones were observed. These shriveled and finally died, as
if attacked by some bacterial disease. While in Massachusetts the
last week in June I observed the same or a similar disease which
killed many caterpillars, though of course only a small proportion.
Dr. G. E. Stone, botanist of the Massachusetts experiment station
at Amherst, was investigating the matter, and I sent him two of the
diseased caterpillars from Stonington. At that time.he was not
ready to report on the nature of the disease, but stated that a number
of different organisms had been isolated from the diseased caterpillars.
Just how the pest reached Stonington may perhaps never be
known, but there is much speculation regarding it. Eggs or pupe
may have been brought on packing boxes to the velvet mill or upon
freight cars left upon the spur track. Certainly the worst infesta-
tion was near the velvet mill and the railroad, and I feel that it must
have reached Stonington on stezm cars via the New York, New
Haven and Hartford Railroad. Some think that it may have been
a direct importation from Europe, as Germans live in the locality,
work in the mill, and occasionally travel back and forth.
ae i a i et ee el
oe? Se
26 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
At the present time it is difficult to find egg masses or, except for
the marked trees and the cutting of brush, any other indications that
the area is infested by the gipsy moth. But the work must be kept
up even after it is believed that the last one has been destroyed.
In reply to a question Mr. Britton stated that the chances for
exterminating this insect in Connecticut appeared to be good, that the
people were interested in the matter, and an urgent appeal would be
made to the State legislature for funds to use in suppressing the moth.
A paper was read, entitled:
NOTES ON FUMIGATION AND DIPPING OF NURSERY TREES.
By T. B. Symons and A. B. GAHAN, College Park, Md.
[| Withdrawn for publication elsewhere. |
Considerable interest was drawn to this paper, owing to the fact
that the State of Oregon has recently required that nursery trees be
dipped in the hme and sulphur wash rather than fumigated before
they are planted.
Mr. Slingerland called attention to the fact that a iamporaane of
180° F. used in one series of the dipping experiments, was unneces-
sarily high, and this probably accounted for the serious injury to the
trees.
Mr. J. L. Phillips stated that he had dipped one-vear apple trees in
cold lime-sulphur wash in the spring of 1906, as follows: 235 Black
Twig, 205 York Imperial, and 20 Albemarle Pippin. The trees were
dug, the tops cut off to within 3 feet of the crowns, and the tops
dipped to the crowns in the wash, made by using 15 pounds of lime, 15
pounds of sulphur, and 5 pounds of salt to 50 gallons of water. The
trees were immediately set in the orchard and all lived and grew
well except one. The results with peach trees were not so good. They
were cut back to within 2 feet of the crown and dipped as follows:
151 Smock, of which 124 lived; 142 Elberta, of which 76 lived; and
80 Salway, of which 66 lived. Many of the peach trees that lived
died back a few inches from the top. As this was a commercial plan-
tation, no checks were planted. There was considerable injury to
both peach and apple trees in the experimental dipping tests, but the
conditions under which the trees were handled may be partly at fault,
as a number of untreated trees planted at the same time died also.
In reply to several questions, Mr. Symons stated that the lowest
temperature used in the dipping experiments was such that a person
could bear his hand in the solution. He could not say definitely
whether all the trees were dug in the spring, but believed this was the
case. No observations could be made as to whether this treatment
killed the scale, as nearly all the treated trees died during the summer.
THE WILLOW BORER AS A NURSERY PEST. 27
In the absence of Mr. Schoene, the following paper was read by Mr.
Parrott:
THE WILLOW BORER AS A NURSERY PEST.
(Cryptorhynchus lapathi 1.)
By W. J. SCHOENE, Geneva, N. Y.
The willows and poplars along the streams and canals, ornamental
willows in the cities, and poplars and willows in the nursery are
being seriously injured by this beetle. The first noticeable out-
break of the insect in this State occurred in a nursery at Rochester
in 1902, and this species is now a serious pest in various parts of the
State. In many poplar and willow plantations the beetle has been
estimated to destroy 10 per cent of the stock and in some instances
the entire plantation has been ruined. The species of willow and
poplar that have been observed to sustain conspicuous injuries are:
Populus monilifera, Salix lucida, S. caprea, S. cordata, S. sericea,
S. alba, and S. amygdaloides.
This insect has been discussed in a comprehensive manner by
Prof. F. M. Webster in a paper entitled “ The Imported Willow and
Poplar Curculo,” which was presented before the Columbus Horti-
cultural Society. This treatise also contains some observations made
by Mr. A. H. Kirkland on the life history of the beetle and its de-
structiveness in Massachusetts.
The increasing importance of this species to the nursery interests
of New York prompted an investigation to determine its life history
in this State for the purpose of ascertaining a practical method for
the control of the pest in poplar plantations. The aim of this paper
is to call attention to the results that have been attained.
To understand clearly the trend of the work it is well at this time
to review in brief the life history of this insect. Oviposition com-
mences about August 1 and lasts through September. The eggs
hatch in eighteen to twenty-one days, and the larva upon hatching
begins to bore in the cambium layer, where it finds subsistence. As
it approaches maturity 1t makes a channel in the heartwood. The
larvee commence to pupate about July 1 and the beetles begin to
emerge two weeks later. For the next ten weeks the adults can be
found in abundance. Before beginning to deposit eggs the beetles
feed for a week or ten days on the bark of one-year shoots, after
which they are more often found upon the older parts of the tree,
especially in the injured portions of the bark and corky overgrowths
caused by pruning. It is because of the large number of punctures
on the young wood that the work of the adult is especially noticeable.
This habit at once suggested the possibility of using arsenical sprays
28 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
as a means of control, and to test the value of these poisons some
experiments were made, as follows:
A young poplar in a nursery row was headed back and sprayed
with poison; a bag of mosquito netting was then put over the tree
to inclose some beetles. As a check to each tree treated in this way,
beetles were confined in a similar manner as mentioned above upon
trees that had not been sprayed. With one exception this work was
done upon nursery poplars that were 2 to 4 years old. |
It is not necessary to give the data in detail, but it is sufficient to
say that the results of a number of experiments made during the fall
of 1905 indicated strongly the possibility of using arsenical sprays
as a remedy. When beetles were confined upon trees sprayed with
poison they died in a few days, while beetles confined in a simular
manner upon unsprayed trees continued to feed and to oviposit.
In order to corroborate these results the work was continued during
1906. In addition, an effort was made to determine the length of
time that the spray was effective and whether or not the poison
acted as a repellent. The experiments were conducted in the same
manner as in the previous year and the results were even more con-
elusive. The poison was found to be effective for thirty days, and
by close observation it was found that the beetles, when feeding,
failed to discriminate between sprayed and unsprayed bark.
While the experiments were conducted according to laboratory
methods and the number of beetles involved was limited to about
three hundred, the results are encouraging and indicate that thorough
spraying of poplar plantations with an arsenical poison materially
reduced the number of beetles and thereby lessened the number of
egos deposited in the trees.
Experiments are now under way in commercial poplar blocks to
determine the value of this treatment. From the work that has been
accomplished it is estimated that an application of an arsenical poison
to nursery poplars will cost about one-fourth of a cent per tree for
labor and poison.
Mr. J. B. Smith stated that this insect was not a nursery pest,
although it was present in New Jersey.
In reply to a question, Mr. Parrott said that the insect was found
in western New York.
Mr. Slingerland related a case which had come under his observa-
tion where infested trees had been treated with pure kerosene and the
borers had been destroyed. 7
Mr. Washburn remarked that nursery trees from New York badly
infested with this insect had been shipped into Minnesota, and he
EFFECTS OF SPRAYS ON APHIS EGGS. 29
thought that some requirements should be made to prevent such stock
being transmitted.
Mr. Kirkland stated that the insect was common in Massachu-
setts and some of the nurseries were badly infested.
Professor Craig called attention to the fact that poplars were unde-
sirable shade trees in the East, and raised the question as to whether
this insect was not a blessing in disguise if it destroyed them. In
‘the Northwest, where other trees would not grow, they were needed.
In the East they should only be used for temporary planting; there-
fore it might be better to leave the growing of them to northwestern
nurserymen.
Mr. Burgess remarked that poplars were undesirable shade trees,
and that in East Cleveland, Ohio, where this borer had become estab-
lished, and the San Jose and oyster-shell scales seriously attacked
them, an ordinance had been passed prohibiting their planting.
The following paper was presented:
EFFECTS OF SPRAYS ON APHIS EGGS.
By H. E. Hopexiss, Geneva, N. Y.
The apple aphides have been unusually abundant for several years
in the orchards and nurseries of New York. The species repre-
sented are Aphis mali Fab., Stphocoryne avenw Fab., and Aphis
malifolie Fitch. The methods commonly used by our nurserymen in
fighting the pests on apple blocks are, either dipping the stocks in oil
emulsions or soapy solutions, or the direct application of these sprays
to the foliage. In years when these pests are most abundant the treat-
ment of the trees in this manner has not been entirely successful
owing to belated applications and the protection derived by the in-
sects from the curling of the leaves. As eggs on the nursery stock,
especially the seedlings, have been numerous, and therefore quite
conspicuous, nurserymen have often asked what would be the effects
of contact sprays on eggs. As there was abundant opportunity for
this work, experiments were conducted during the autumn and winter
of 1904, 1905, and 1906 for the purpose of determining the compara-
tive effects of different contact sprays upon aphis eggs.
For the purpose of the experiment, seedling apple stocks, upon
which large numbers of eggs had been deposited, were selected. As
it was necessary to have the conditions of the experiment under
control, the trees, upon their removal from the nursery blocks, were
grown in a greenhouse. The number of trees under observation was
322, and these divided into five lots. All the sprays were tested in
each lot. The sprays employed were the sulphur washes, kerosene,
kerosene emulsion, whale-oil soap, crude oil, Scalecide, Kil-o-Scale,
30 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
Rex solution, whitewash, K-L mixture, kerosene-whitewash, and
caustic soda. The number of eggs per tree was variable, but there
were not less than 400 eggs on each tree, and the maximum number:
on one tree was 4,800. The total number of eggs by actual count
in the experiment was 223,920, of which 158,885 were firm, while the
rest were more or less shrunken. The trees were planted in boxes
of convenient size, and during the treatment were isolated to prevent
the applications from reaching other stocks. Each tree was exam-
ined daily, and as each egg hatched the aphis was killed and a record
was made of the daily hatching of the eggs.
The results of the last two tests, which are representative, are as
follows:
Fourth experiment: Less than 1 per cent of the eggs hatched on
trees sprayed with the sulphur wash, crude oil, kerosene-whitewash,
and Rex solution. The percentages of eggs that hatched on the
trees receiving other sprays are as follows:
Per cent. Per cent.
SCaleCiGe: eaian Cae aw es eee ee 8:9 | @aalstie Sodale 22 tutcsee ee oe ee Hes
INCENSE ete o> st eee here 6:0 || ISSILEO-8 Call Ged oer eee aren 26.
Kerosene emulsion_____________ 16") CHO GES 8 2 2 eh ee Ae oe pe ree 22. 4
(.
Wihale-ollsoapse 22s. 2 eae See 8
Fifth experiment: No eggs hatched on the trees that received
applications of kerosene-whitewash and whitewash. On the trees
treated with the other sprays the following percentages of eggs
hatched :
Per cent. Per cent.
Sil phuce waSshes=2s esse 3.0 | Caustic, Soda 2. s< So ae ee eee
Scale cial sed Le ee Pee 40 Kil-O-S Calesae "See eee +
INGROSEIG iets ae) < eee eas ae ee 15 Crude oleses Sas SE TG
Kerosene? emulsion =. 222 ae a 6 Rex SOMiMONis =. aes ies i
Wihale-Ollys0 aps a es ee 9 ORC Gls 3 sa Fee ay Fat ow es ee ee 31. 4
Mr. Titus mentioned the fact that aphis eggs are often deposited
in such a manner on the twigs that they overlap, and this being the
case it would be difficult, and in some cases impossible, to cover all
the eggs with the spray material. In making an accurate statement
as to the percentage of eggs destroyed by spraying, this point and
parasitism should be considered.
Mr. Hodgkiss rephed that the small size of the trees enabled a most
thorough application to be made in each and every case. The pur-
pose of the experiment being entirely to test the advisability of spray-
ing nursery stock, the question raised by Mr. Titus would in no way
affect the results obtained. Replying to a question on the value of
MANNER OF BIRTH OF APHIDID®. 31
spraying these eggs he stated that the results show that spraying for
the aphis in the egg stage is of doubtful utility, and the most effective
work may be done soon after the aphides hatch.
A paper was read, entitled:
MANNER OF BIRTH OF THE WOOLLY APHIS OF THE APPLE
(SCHIZONEURA LANIGERA HAUSM.) AND OF OTHER APHI-
DIDZ.
By W. E. Rumsey, VWorgantown, W. Va.
The exact manner of birth of the agamic forms of the woolly aphis
of the apple seems to be a disputed point; at least, there is a variance
in the published records that I have been able to find on the subject.
In a study of this insect, now under way at the West Virginia Agri-
cultural Experiment Station, some additional facts have been ob-
tained along this line which may be of interest.
In the Eighth Report on the Noxious and Beneficial Insects of
Illinois, by Dr. Cyrus Thomas, is a statement relating to the repro-
duction of this species, which says:
In so far as the method of propagation is concerned it has been shown by Dr.
W. M. Smith, of New York, that it differs slightly from the true aphides, in that
the young larvze produced by the agamic females are inclosed in the thin egg-
shaped covering heretofore mentioned, from which they have to free themselves
in a manner analogous to hatching. The remains of this covering may often
be seen attached to the tip of the abdomen, and is doubtless the supposed cottony
secretion alluded to by Doctor Fitch in his description of the young larva.
A view diametrically opposed to that given by Doctor Thomas is
found in the Report of the Department of Agriculture for 1879,
where this insect is treated, and from which the following extract is
taken :
Mr. Howard has repeatedly watched the birth of the young of the wingless
agamic females and positively states that they are born without the enveloping
pellicle or pseudovum. While the head and its appendages were still within the
mother, he has seen the legs kicking vigorously outside.
These conflicting statements have led me to make careful observa-
tions along this line. While a student at Cornell, my study of this
species seemed to corroborate the views of Dr. W. M. Smith. During
my present study of the woolly aphis a large number of births have
been carefully watched, which has added materially to the evidence
sought.
To see the entire operation of birth satisfactorily it was necessary
to devise some method by which the mother could be held in the posi-
tion desired. To accomplish this a rectangular cell was made on a
microscope slide with four small pieces of another slide. The cell
was just wide enough to hold a mature insect when placed on its side,
but of sufficient length to allow free extrusion of the young. The
32 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
pieces of glass were held in position with Canada balsam, and a
cover glass was placed on top to prevent the escape of the insect. All
observations of birth in this cell were made under a microscope, using
a two-thirds or one-fourth inch objective.
The manner of birth, as repeatedly observed by me, is as follows:
First there is a contorted movement of the abdomen of the mother,
which is immediately followed by the appearance of the young
aphis as an egg-like object at the anal opening. In about thirty
seconds the body of the young is forced out until the eyes appear,
when the movement 1s checked, then ceases entirely, with the mother
retaining a hold on the crown of the head. At this time the dark
spots that mark the eyes are the only means by which the object
might at first be distinguished from an egg. The antenne, together
with the legs, are bent toward the tip of the abdomen and held closely
against the ventral surface by a transparent membranous sac. This
sac soon breaks at the crown of the head and is worked backward
(caudad) by a continuous expansion and contraction of the body,
accompanied by an interrupted pulling and pushing movement of
the antenne and legs. These motions are similar to those of an insect
working its way out of a pupa case. The progress of the membrane
as it moves backward (caudad) is at first indicated only by the hairs
at the base of the antenne and on the head springing into an erect
position as they are freed. In from three to five minutes after the
membrane begins moving off, the antenne are liberated, and a small
amount of whitish substance appears at the tip of the abdomen.
Each pair of legs is then hberated in turn. As the sac works farther
back its ragged edge becomes visible and the shriveled membrane at
the tip of the abdomen increases in quantity. The last pair of \egs
is freed in from three to seven minutes after birth. As soon as the ~
legs are freed they begin to kick vigorously, the kicking continuing
from one to two minutes after the last pair is liberated; whereupon
the mother lowers her abdomen and presses her offspring down, seem-
ingly with the intention of assisting it in getting a firm footing, and
at once loosens her hold. After the young is on its feet, the cast
pellicle adheres to the tip of the abdomen for about two minutes,
when it is worked off, leaving the insect smooth and glistening, but
not yet entirely free, for a waxy thread still connects the sete of the
beak with the discarded pellicle. After several tugs and pulls the
thread is broken and the insect crawls away.
Many times I have loosened the young insect from its mother,
while she was holding it by the crown of its head, and carefully
watched its subsequent movements. Only a slight touch with a
camel’s hair brush is necessary to break this hold. The motions of
the body of the young and the freeing of antenne and legs were iden-
Aha »
MANNER OF BIRTH OF APHIDID. 33
tical to those already described, but in many such cases the young
aphis died before freeing itself from the sac. This was probably
due to the fact that the insect lay upon a miscroscope slide instead of
being held aloof from the bark, as under normal! conditions.
How are other species of Aphidide born? In an attempt to
answer this question I have made observations on several species,
among which is the apple aphis (Aphis mali Fab.), which will be
considered at some length. The birth of this species is similar in
all the stages to that of the woolly aphis, except in one or two minor
points. The legs, at least the last pair, are bent back upon them-
selves, so as not to extend beyond the abdomen, while being pressed
to the ventral surface by the pellicle. When the young has all its
legs free from the sac the mother does not in all cases, as observed
with the woolly aphis, press her offspring down for a footing, but
simply loosens her hold. Apparently the greater length of legs in
this species makes it unnecessary for the mother to assist her young
in this way. As soon as the young begin to free their antenne and
legs a delicate whitish substance appears on the tip of the abdomen,
as with the other species described. The so-called honey tubes of the
apple aphis, and kindred species, are bent toward the extremity of
the abdomen and held closely against the body of the insect by the
enveloping pellicle. As the edge of this membrane passes along over
these tubes they bow up, and when the tips are released they
straighten into nearly their normal position. Before the final release
of the tubes the delicate transparent membrane, constituting the pel-
licle, can be readily seen stretched across the intervening space.
Owing to the relatively much shorter beak of the apple aphis than
that of the woolly aphis, I have not been able to see the waxy, thread-
hike connection between the sete and the cast pellicle. If present, th:
separation probably takes place when the last pair of legs is being lib-
erated, which would tend to prevent a view of the thread. When the
legs of the apple aphis are free, the discarded pellicle adheres to the
tip of the abdomen for a short time, whereupon it is worked off by the
movements already described. In one instance, however, I distinctly
saw a young aphis deliberately remove the shriveled pellicle from the
tip of its abdomen with its hind legs.
In all the other species of Aphidide which have been under con-
sideration the manner of birth, in every case, was similar to that of
those already described.
Mr. Quaintance remarked that his observations as to the mode of
birth of aphides agreed with those of the speaker. He called atten-
tion to the fact of recent statements in literature to the effect that
the so-called honeydew of aphides was excreted only from the anus,
T487—No, 67—O07T——3
34 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
the idea that some was secreted also from the cornicles being erro-
neous. He asked for observations of the members present on this
point.
In reply to a question by Mr. Slingerland as to the number of
aphides whose birth had been observed, Mr. Rumsey stated that he
had watched the manner of birth of probably fifty individuals. He
also stated that he had never seen honeydew secreted from the honey
tubes, but always from the anus of the aphides.
Four papers were then presented, and discussed at the close of the
last paper.
UNUSUAL INSECT HAPPENINGS IN NEW JERSEY IN 1906.
By JoHN B. SmitH, New Brunswick, N. J.
The summer of 1906 in New Jersey was remarkable for continuous
rains during the middle of the season, favoring the development of
some crops and insects and interfering seriously with others.
It seems contradictory to include the failure of the periodical cicada
(Tibicen septendecim L.) to appear in New Jersey as scheduled as a
“happening,” yet it deserves to be recorded as such. In 1889 there
had been no definite New Jersey localities for what was then known
as Brood VIII; but in that year I secured four, at such points as to
indicate a diagonal line of occurrence from the Palisades southwest
to the Delaware a little south of Camden. The insect was nowhere
very common and I doubted its reappearance in 1906. To cover the
ground as thoroughly as possible I asked every correspondent of the
office along this line to communicate with me, asked the members of the
Newark, New York, and Philadelphia entomological societies to keep a
lookout for specimens and records, and instructed Mr. KE. L. Dickerson,
one of my assistants, to cover the most likely area of appearance per-
sonally, besides keeping an open eye for “ signs” in the course of his
orchard and nursery inspection work. Mr. Dickerson was also asked
to verify reports that were received, and this proved a wise precau-
tion, since at least three records, apparently safe and in the proper
localities, proved on investigation to be based on error. Not a single
definite record did I get for New Jersey. Mr. Marlatt was good
enough to send me a record from Bergen County, his correspondent
claiming to have seen two specimens and to have heard of others
from several localities. This record has not been verified, but may
easily be correct, although my own correspondents in that same region
failed to find anything. In any case nothing but a fragment of the
brood remains in the State.
Incidentally, my attention was drawn to the other cicada species
in the State, especially after the publications of Osborn, Davis, and —
INSECT HAPPENINGS IN NEW JERSEY IN 1906. 35
Joutel. It was found that all the forms occurred in New Jersey.
and that we had also yet another which was readily identified
as the real pruinosa of Say, leaving the species heretofore identi-
fied as pruinosa without a name. Mr. Grossbeck has proposed the
name sayi for this form. To make certain just which form Linné
intended as ¢/bicen, the original descriptions and figures were studied,
and it seems entirely certain that the original fibicen is a totally dis-
tinct species from the one we have heretofore determined as such.
For the species heretofore known as ¢ébicen the term linnei 1s pro-
posed. |
Perhaps the most interesting feature now in progress is the steady
increase in numbers of the rose-chafer (J/acrodactylus subspinosus
Fab.). When I first came into the State, seventeen years ago, a
scourge was in progress that culminated in 1890 after a period of
gradual rise, and I was told then that some sixteen to twenty years
before there had been a similar trouble, followed by a series of years
when little was seen of the insects. We have had our series of exempt
years, and now for the four years last past the beetle has become
increasingly abundant. In those same localities where it appeared
as a pest sixteen to twenty years ago it is again a pest, but not yet
quite as bad as it was in 1890. I anticipate another vear of increase
before the culmination is reached. As to the cause of the decrease
I could find nothing. There were no apparent parasites; but the
larve seemed simply to become less plentiful each year until little
was seen of them. As to remedial measures practically no progress
has been made. The insects are killed by arsenites, but, especially
when they attack grape, the mischief is caused before the poison can
do its work; to say nothing of the difficulty of getting a sufficient
supply of it on the buds. I am advising our growers for the city
market to bag the most valuable varieties and all others that it will
pay to protect in that way. Bagging as a protection against rot has
been entirely discarded in New Jersey in favor of spraying with the
Bordeaux mixture. .
The army worm (Heliophila unipuncta Haw.) has, for the first
time in many years, appeared as a pest to field crops in a limited
district in southern New Jersey. It was promptly dealt with and
did very little harm, but the interesting feature was the practical
absence of the tachinid parasites that usually attack so large a per-
centage of the caterpillars. Always on previous occasions I have
found an injurious army with the seeds of its own destruction appar-
ent, but in this case there was so little infestation that practically
all the larve collected and placed in breeding cages in the laboratory
came to maturity. It will be a matter of very great interest to watch
developments in southern New Jersey in 1907. In this connection it
might be said that some army-worm injury occurs almost every year
=
36 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
on our cranberry bogs and that, occasionally, there is so great an
increase as to result in actually stripping a section of bog.
The cottony maple scale (Pulvinaria innumerabilis Rathv.), which
has been the theme of papers through many localities in the north-
western section of the State, reached its culmination in New Jersey
in 1905, and in 1906 dropped out of sight completely in those places
where it had been most abundant the year before. It was a curious
repetition of an experience about eight years ago, although the agent
of control this time was apparently different. Mr. E. L. Dickerson’s
paper covers that ground fully and it needs only a mere mention here.
The elm leaf-beetle (Galerucella luteola Mill.) also, after a period
of two years during which no spraying was required at New Bruns-
wick, has taken a new start, and in 1906 the unsprayed trees in parts
of that city were almost completely defoliated. The trees on the
campus of Rutgers College were protected with arsenate of lead,
and I proved to my own satisfaction that the 12-cents-a-pound
material made by one insecticide company was quite as effective
and satisfactory in all respects as the 20-cent product of another
company, while a 17-cent brand was inferior in arsenical content and
was short weight besides. It should be added here that the control-
ling agent in this case is a disease that attacks the pup if the
weather at that period of development is damp. In 1904 it was only
moist, and the disease was not very prevalent; in 1905 the weather
was hot and dry, the beetles all developed normally, and I prepared
for the danger that I felt certain would come in 1906. I was not at
home during the pupation of the brood last summer, so can say noth-
ing as to probabilities for 1907.
The common oyster-shell scale (Lepidosaphes ulmi 1.) has devel-
oped possibilities as a serious pest and has proved quite difficult of
control in the more southern parts of the State. One of the Burlng-
ton County apple growers declares it more dangerous and difficult to
deal with than the San Jose scale. There are two broods of it in
that section of New Jersey, and in one of the towns it has developed as
a serious pest to shade trees, especially maples.
Away off in one part of southern New Jersey is a little section of
land especially adapted to peach growing and where fine trees bear
excellent crops of good quality. In this corner and nowhere else in
the State the peach soft scale (Hulecanium nigrofasciatum Pergande)
has established itself, and our effort now is to prevent its getting away
from there. Fortunately the area is completely isolated, and there is
little or no chance of a natural spread, while no trees are grown for
sale anywhere in the infested territory. Few trees are badly enough
injured as yet to induce the growers to consider active measures, and
matters will probably become a great deal worse before they become
much. better.
INSECT HAPPENINGS IN NEW JERSEY IN 1906. 37
-The catalpa sphinx (Ceratomia catalpew Bdv.) now covers about the
entire State of New Jersey, positive records being absent from one
county only. It always seems to be worse the second year of its
appearance in a given locality, and it has been about as troublesome
in nurseries as anywhere.
Another failure to establish the Chinese mantid (Paratenodera
sinensis Sauss.) in New Jersey is to be recorded. Guide to the Study of Insects. By A. S. Packard. 1869.
¢ Scientific American, Dec., 1879, p. 3302.
@ Gardener’s Monthly, vy. 22, 1880, pp. 18-19.
e Osborn, H., lowa State Hort. Soc., 1883, pp. 127-135.
44 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
the mite was regarded as being generally distributed in the leading
pear-growing States. The mite has attained its promimence in this
country as an orchard pest because of its destructive work on pear
foliage, and for this reason our literature upon the species is en- —
tirely concerned with the economy of the mite in its relationship to
pear growing.
in recent years our attention has been called to the appearance of
the mite in another role—as a pest of apple foliage. The mite has
quite likely been active in this capacity for many years, but important
injuries by it were not brought to our notice till 1902, when it was
found to be very abundant in an apple orchard at Williamson, on
Lake Ontario. In 1903 the infestation of these trees was much more
conspicuous, and the strange appearance of the foliage attracted much
attention from the fruit growers in attendance at the summer meet-
ing of the State Fruit Growers’ Association which was held in
Geneva. Up to the present time its injurious numbers in this orchard
have been maintained. During the same year Prof. M. V. Slinger-
land observed, through the central portion of the State, numerous
apple trees with many of their leaves showing the corky blisters.
characteristic of the work of this creature. The area in which the
mite was present in conspicuous numbers has increased each year,
and in 1905 marked infestation of many orchards in Wayne, Ontario,
Monroe, and Niagara counties was noted. In his apple survey of
Wayne County in 1903, Dr. G. F. Warren ¥ recorded the presence of
the mite in 53 orchards. It is stated that “ the mites were not bad in
more than one-half of a dozen orchards, but in a few orchards some
trees had practically every leaf affected.” A like survey of Orleans
County ® in 1904 showed somewhat similar conditions of apple trees
with respect to this pest. Of 19 orchards showing mite injury, 4
were recorded as seriously infested, + considerably infested, and 11
shghtly infested. During 1906 the work of the mite again attracted
much attention among fruit growers, and in addition to the above
counties the species was also present in large numbers in apple
orchards in Livingston, Wyoming, Seneca, and Yates counties. The
mite may be said to be common in our leading apple-growing sec-
tions in western New York, and its work upon apple leaves has also
been recognized in Pennsylvania and Illinois.
The host plants of this mite, in addition to the apple and pear, are,
as recorded by Dr. Alfred Nalepa, the service-berry (Amelanchier
vulgaris), the common cotoneaster (Cotoneaster vulgaris), the wild
service tree (Sorbus terminalis), the white bean tree (Sorbus aria),
and the European mountain ash (Sorbus aucuparia).
a Bul. 46, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1904, p. 72.
b Cornell Bul. 226, 1905, p. 340; Bul. 229, 1905, p. 489.
THE PEAR BLISTER—MITE. 45
The work of the mite on apple first shows on the upper surface of
the leaf as distinct light-colored pimples, and on the underside as
blisters or thickened areas of the same color as the leaf. The affected
areas are of irregular size and are unevenly distributed, though the
larger proportion of them are about the sides and the base of the leaf.
Some of the blisters may have a reddish tinge, somewhat similar to
the pear leaf-galls, but they are usually of a less brilliant color. As
the galls become older they appear as corky spots of a reddish-brown
color, and not black, as with the pear, which to the touch are very dis-
tinct from the healthy portions of the leaf. The individual galls
average from one-twelfth to one-eighth of an inch in diameter and
are usually oval or quadrangular in shape. Leading to the interior
of each affected area there is usually one or more tiny openings.
Often the spots coalesce, forming large irregular dead areas with
smooth or slightly raised surfaces and of a dark-brown color, which
rupture the leaves at the margins. About July 1 the most striking
effects of the mites upon the leaves appear, especially if there is much
yellowing of the foliage, as frequently occurs. Upon the upper sur-
face of such leaves the mite-infested spots are of a light-brown or of
a dark-green color and are uniformly brown beneath. These spots
are usually thickly massed, forming a dark, broad band of irregular
width along each side of the leaf, which contrasts conspicuously with
the intervening heht-yellow area about the main rib. The mites also
cause pimples about the calyx cavity and on the stems of young
apples. In several instances the work of the mites upon the leaves
and fruit stems of the same cluster had so weakened the stems as to
cause the falling of the fruit. Premature dropping of the apples by
this means seems to be of rare occasion, and even on the worst-infested
trees the loss of fruit is not appreciable. This seems incredible, as it
does not seem possible that the foliage of the trees could be so com-
pletely overrun with mites without losses in crop production.
As has been stated by other observers, notably Prof. T. J. Burrill,
in his study of the species on pear, the mites spend the winter in the
buds, preferably under the second and third layers of the bud scales.
As the buds burst there is a movement of the mites to the unfolding
leaves, in which eggs are deposited. This migration takes place
with the maturing of the bud scales, during the latter part of April
and early May, depending on the season, soon after which the discol-
oration of the leaves by pale and red-colored spots occurs. On pear
foliage the galls are largely grouped in a row on each side of the
main rib, while on apple leaves the affected areas appear in the great-
est numbers about the sides and the base of the leaf. This difference
in the arrangement of the diseased spots on apple and pear foliage
seems to be determined by the manner of the distribution of the pubes-
46 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
cence of the leaves and the condition of the leaves when unfolding,
which differ slightly with these two kinds of fruits. Mature mites
may be found in the leaf tissues during the first week in May, and
from then on into September eggs and larve are present in the galls ©>
of the leaves. During the latter part of May and first part of June —
the mites in greatly increased numbers may be found in the pubes-
cence of the new wood and in the fruit and leaf stems and upon the |
unfolding leaves of the new growth. During October they largely —
abandon the leaves and swell the numbers already in hiding in the |
buds and in the pubescence of the bark of the new wood. MHiberna-
tion occurs under the bud scales and apparently none of the mites —
passes the winter in the pubescence or in crevices of the bark. |
Treatment for the mite is much more difficult on apple than on pear
trees, mainly due to the larger size of the trees and the greater abun-
dance of the pubescence on the buds and the new wood. In our expe-
rience the crude and refined oils, either clear or emulsified, have
proved the most efficient sprays. Because of its comparatively safe
qualities and cheapness, kerosene emulsion diluted with 5 parts of
water appears to be the most practicable remedy for the spraying of
apple orchards when treatment is advisable, the applications being
made either in the late fall or early spring before the buds swell.
In the study of the mites on apple and pear fohage four other
species of Eriophyide have been recognized. These are L'riophyes
pyrt, var. variolata Nal, EHriophyes malifolie Parr., Phyllocoptes
schlechtendali Nal., and FE pitrimerus piri Nal. With the exception of
the first named, these are vagabond species and seem to thrive on the
underside of the leaves. Phyllocoptes schlechtendali and E'pitri-
merus piri are foreign species and appear to be more common here
than on the Continent. The behavior of these two species in the
future is a matter of much interest, as both, because of their large
numbers, seem to show possibilities of developing to greater economic
importance.
In discussing these papers, Mr. J..B. Smith brought out the fact
that experiments were being conducted for the purpose of preparing
arsenate of lead by the action of electricity on lead. Some good
results had been secured, and the process, if perfected, promised to
cheapen the price of this insecticide. He had tried arsenate of lead
made by several manufacturers. |
Mr. Kirkland stated that about 200 tons of arsenate of lead had —
been used the past season for fighting the gipsy and brown-tail moths.
It was applied at the rate of 1 pound to 10 gallons of water, and no
burning of the foliage was observed.
DISCUSSION OF PAPERS. 47
Mr. Quaintance called attention to some tests of various arsenicals
on peach foliage made by the Bureau of Entomology during 1906,
and stated that all arsenicals used—as arsenate of lead (homemade)
and the principal proprietary brands, Paris green and Scheele’s
green—were injurious either to the foliage or fruit. A new insecti-
cide arsenical was tested, namely, arsenic sulphid, which was stated
by chemists to be quite insoluble. Nevertheless this proves to be
more injurious than any of the other arsenicals used—in fact, killing
several of the trees outright.
Mr. Webster recalled the fact that in 1888, while in Tasmania, he
found the pear mite and also a species of fungus in connection with
it. Dr. J. C. Arthur had told him that this fungus was always asso-
ciated with this particular mite.
Mr. Parrott stated that the attack of these mites on foliage was
sometimes mistaken for the pear scab fungus (Venturia pirina
Aderh.).
Mr. Taylor remarked that arsenate of lead was being used to a con-
siderable extent in Colorado. During the past year 16 carloads had
been applied with good results. He had used it on peach trees for
the twig borer (Anarsia lineatella Zell.) and found that it worked
satisfactorily. It can be used on these trees if it carries no free
arsenic. In some cases the branches had been killed by burning.
This trouble is usually indicated by the appearance of purple spots
on the young wood. The rainfall in this section is 7 inches per year,
and this may have some bearing on the effect of poison on the foliage.
Mr. Slingerland called attention to the use of Scalecide and other
miscible oils. He stated that in an orchard badly infested with Asp-
idiotus perniciosus that had come under his observation excellent
results had been secured when scalecide was applied.
Mr. Burgess remarked that he had used Scalecide and Kil-o-scale
on a badly infested apple orchard last spring. The manufacturer’s
directions required the mixing of 1 gallon of these materials to 20
gallons of water. Tests were made using 1| gallon to 9, 14, 19, and 24
gallons of water. Satisfactory results were secured when Kil-o-scale
was used at the rate of 1 gallon to 14 gallons of water, but when
Scalecide was used at the rate of 1 gallon to 9 gallons of water the
San Jose scale was simply held in check.
Mr. J. B. Smith stated that the difference in these two substances
was not very great, although the Kil-o-scale carried more sulphur and
5 per cent less Satan petroleum.
A general discussion of the subject followed, which was participated
‘in by Messrs. Brooks, Taylor, Slingerland, J. B. Smith, Fernald,
Quaintance, Britton, and others. This brought out the fact that
variable results had been secured with these substances, as far as
ja
48 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
killing the scale was concerned, but no injury to the trees was re-
ported. It was considered advisable to use a stronger solution than
the one recommended by the manufacturers.
Mr. Slingerland called attention to the fumigation of greenhouses
for controlling the violet fly (Contarinia violicola Coq.). Some
large violet growers had suffered severe loss from this insect. It
had been found that less than one-half strength of cyanid, as often
recommended, may destroy the foliage of violets. It therefore
seemed quite necessary for some further tests to be made along this
line.
Mr. Sherman gave some general notes from North Carolina, and
stated that where Scalecide had been used at the rate of 1 gallon to 15
gallons of water in the fall, and lime and sulphur had been applhed
in the spring, good results had been secured. The fall armyworm
(Laphygma frugiperda 8S. & A.) did considerable damage during
the past season. Rose bugs (J/acrodactylus subspinosus Fab.), al-
though usually not an important pest, defolhated lquidambar trees
over large areas.
Mr. Brooks stated that the larve of rose bugs are eaten by the
short-tail shrew. He had observed this in West Virginia during the
past season.
The meeting then adjourned until 10 a. m. Saturday.
MORNING SESSION, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 29, 1906.
The meeting was called to order by President Kirkland at 10 a. m.,
and the following paper was presented:
SOME OBSERVATIONS ON THE NATURAL CHECKS OF THE COT-
TONY MAPLE SCALE.
(Pulvinaria innumerabilis Rathy.)
By Enear L. Dickerson, New Brunswick, N. J.
In the various accounts of the cottony.maple scale (Pulvinaria
innumerabilis Rathv.) several parasitic and predaceous enemies have
been recorded as infesting this insect and aiding, to some extent at
least, in keeping it in check. A notable incident is that mentioned
by Dr. L. O. Howard in his account of this species, in which he states
that, because of the parasite Coccophagus lecanii Fitch, “ it was found
almost impossible to carry the scale insect through the season at
Washington in 1898.” The forms acting as the most effective checks
to the scale may differ in the various localities, and apparently even
in the same locality at different periods. For example, it was stated
that in Washington in 1879 the most effective enemy of this insect
~~
| NATURAL CHECKS OF COTTONY MAPLE SCALE. 49
was the larva of Dakruma coccidivora Comst. Some of the enemies,
however, appear to be found wherever the scale occurs, and prominent
among these are the parasite Coccophagus lecanii Fitch and the coc-
cinellid beetle Hyperaspis signata Oliv. and its larva. It has been
due largely to these species that the scale has been controlled in New
Jersey during the past two years.
In 1904 Pulvinaria innumerabilis was noted rather plentifully in
several places in Newark and near-by towns and at New Brunswick,
and the indications were that it would be much more plentiful the
following season. Our dnticipations were realized, and in 1905 the
scale occurred more abundantly than it had for several years. In
order to watch its development the infested districts were visited from
time to time and the condition of the insects and the trees noted.
As the year progressed it was observed that the enemies previously
mentioned were materially and effectively checking the scale, and it
was predicted that the number of the insects would be considerably
reduced and in some localities nearly exterminated in 1906. These
predictions were likewise fulfilled; and in Montclair, where some of
the worst infested districts occurred in 1905, there has been very little
evidence of the Pulvinaria during the past year.
The first signs of parasitism were observed in the middle of April,
after the fertilized female scales had started to develop. While most
of the insects at that time were becoming enlarged, a few were
observed to be quite convex, and an examination showed that they
were infested with parasitic larve, a few of which were full grown.
Only a single larva occurred in each of the scales, which were light
in color at this time, but as the larve pupated the parasitized scales
became dark and hard. From this time on the number of the latter
increased, and by the middle of May two and one-half times as many
parasitized as good scales could be observed on some of the leaves.
The adult parasites were first observed about the middle of May
and continued in increasing numbers until early June, after which
they began to decrease, and were last observed about the middle of
that month. Examples were sent to Dr. William H. Ashmead, who
determined them as Coccophagus lecandi Fitch. Whether this para-
site hibernates as a larva or in the egg stage I am unaware. It is
apparent, however, that the larva begins to develop some time in
early April, and the species continues in evidence for a couple of
months. In emerging it cuts an irregularly rounded hole in the dor-
sal surface of the scale, and, so far as I could observe, it was always
nearest the posterior end.
Thus the parasites had destroyed many of the hibernating females,
but the number of the latter which went into hibernation was so large
748T—No. 67—O07——4
=
50 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
that, in spite of these parasites, there still remained a goodly number
to oviposit and reproduce.
The egg masses began to develop early in June, and by the middle
of the month many of them were apparently full sized. In Mont-
clair, where the worst-infested district was observed, the insects were
so abundant as to form continuous lines along the underside of many
of the infested twigs and branches. An examination of the egg
masses there and in other localities revealed the fact that some of
them were infested by the larva of Hyperaspis signata.
This larva, because of the cottony-lke waxy covering of the dorsal
surface, 1s well protected among the egg masses, especially since it is
often found feeding within the egg mass, when the latter may
appear perfectly normal. Often only a single larva infests an egg
mass; but sometimes more will be found, especially when they are
voung. On the other hand, a single larva may destroy a large pro-
portion of the eggs in several masses.
On June 16, when the coccinellid larve were first observed at
Montclair, a few of them were nearly, if not quite, full grown, while
others were very small. From this time on their number increased
until the early part of July, when they began to: decrease. By
June 28, in Montclair, scarcely an egg mass could be found which
was not or had not been infested by them. The first pup were
observed both in the laboratory and en the infested trees on June 24.
A few of the larve at this time could be observed crawling on the
trunks of the trees and getting beneath the loose bark, where the
pupe were found. The pupa is brown in color, but covered more
or less with the white material from the cast larval skin. The
earliest pupz were found, as just stated, on the trunks of the trees
under the loose bark and in the crevices, and it has been stated that
the insect always goes to these places to pupate. But this is not
the case, for most of the later pupze were found within the eaten-out
egg masses. The truth is that the insect desires to pupate in a pro-
tected situation, whether under the bark or elsewhere.
The first beetles to emerge in the laboratory were observed on
July 7 and came from pup which had been in that stage for two
weeks. It was about this time also that beetles were noted on the
infested trees, and they continued in evidence until the early part of
August, after which no more were observed. While the larva of the
coccinellid fed on the eggs of the Pulvinaria, the beetle itself devoured
the young scales which set on the leaves. The young scale adheres
closely to the leaf, and it was interesting to watch the beetle in its
efforts to secure it. If the latter was not too closely set the beetle
would successfully pull it up and then rapidly devour it; but some-
times the scale was too securely fastened, and then the “coceinellidl
yer
NATURAL CHECKS OF COTTONY MAPLE SCALE. 51
after making several futile attempts to get its mandible under the
side of the scale, would finally give it up and attack another specimen.
The great number of scale insects destroyed by the coccinellid and
its larva can only be realized when we consider the large number
of eggs deposited by the Pulvinaria. At Montclair, where these
insects and beetles were most numerous, between 500 and 1,000 young
scales Were counted on each of several leaves and there were many
leaves just as badly infested; but after the coccinellid had completed
its work not a leaf could be found with more than a dozen scales set
on it, while most of the leaves showed still fewer.
In looking over the long series of beetles bred from larve it was
found that there were some variations in both the males and females
in size and markings. The majority of the specimens were black in
color, with the single reddish spot on the disk of each elytron, but a
few examples were found which showed an extra smaller red spot
near the tip of each elytron. This latter is in all probability the
form which was originally described by Olivier as signata, while the
form with the reddish spots, which occurs most commonly, is the
one Say described later as binotata. Olivier’s name, therefore, has
precedence and should be the one by which the species is designated.
It is interesting to note also that while in 1905 this species was
found almost exclusively feeding on the Pulvinaria and only occa-
sionally attacking Pseudococcus aceris Sign., just the opposite has
been true the past season (1906). The insect has been found where-
ever Pseudococcus aceris occurred, but only in small numbers attack-
ing the Pulvinaria. This is due in part perhaps to the fact that the
latter insect has not been so abundant. Apparently the Pulvinaria is
the favorite food of the coccinellid, but being unable to secure a
sufficient amount of this, it attacks the Pseudococcus and other
" species.
Although the beetle and its larva did such effective work in Mont-
clair in checking the scale, there were other places where it had not
been so abundant, and consequently a much larger number of scales
set and developed in those localities.
On July 24, when, at New Brunswick, I examined some leaves
fairly well set with young Pulvinaria, I found that a few of them
were parasitized and, except for their smaller size, appeared pre-
cisely like the parasitized forms. of the hibernating females. Upon
inspecting the infested trees in other localities I found that conditions
were similar—a few examples parasitized in every case. An examina-
tion of the latter showed larve and pup similar to those of the para-
site of the hibernating form. Within a day or two adults of the
latter made their appearance both in the laboratory and out of
59 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS. :
doors; and except for their smaller size, being not more than one-half
as large, they resembled very closely Coccophagus lecanii, the parasite
of the hibernating scales.
From this time on the number of these insects increased and con-
tinued to appear until about the middle of September, after which
very little was seen of them. Leaves collected August 11 showed 1
parasitized scale to 10 good ones, and leaves observed in September
showed a still greater -proportion. Two of the leaves carefully
examined showed in one case 289 and in the other case 136 para-
sitized insects, and many of the leaves were in a similar condition.
At Montclair, where the coccinellid had almost exterminated the
Pulvinaria, the majority of the few remaining scale sets were para-
sitized. These insects bred and increased rapidly, and in all respects,
except size, resembled Coccophagus lecani.
Specimens were sent to Doctor Ashmead for examination, however,
and he determined them as Coccophagus flavoscutellum Ashm.
However this may be, I am strongly of the opinion that we have a sin-
gle species which is dimorphic, the larger form determined as lecanii
Fitch, bred from the larger hibernating female scales, and the smaller
form, not more than half as large as the lecandi form, which may be
the species described as flavoscutellum Ashm., bred from the smaller
scales, the size of the parasite depending on the size of the host.
SUMMARY.
The trees were badly infested with Pulvinaria innumerabilis
Rathv. in the winter of 1904-5. As the scales developed in the
spring it became evident that they were infested with the parasite
Coccophagus lecanii Fitch, which in some instances destroyed over
two-thirds of the scales and continued in evidence until about the
middle of June. By this time the egg masses of Pulvinaria were.
becoming large and conspicuous, and an examination revealed the
fact that they were infested by the larva of Zyperaspis signata Oliv.,
which in some places, conspicuously at Montclair, destroyed nearly
all the offspring of the scale, the coccinellid larvae feeding on the
eggs and the adult beetles destroying the scale sets. The coccinellid
continued until the 1st of August, by which time the scale larvee had
all-set and were becoming well developed. ‘These young scales were
parasitized like the hibernating females, and the parasites, which con-
tinued until the middle of September, were apparently a smaller
form of the spring parasite. The result of these combined attacks
has been that in some places the scale has been nearly exterminated
and in all the infested localities its numbers are considerably reduced.
Metin
re
METHODS IN CODLING MOTH EXPERIMENTS. 53
Two papers were then presented on codling-moth investigations,
after which they were discussed.
REMARKS ON METHODS USED IN CODLING MOTH EXPERIMENTS.
By A. F. Burcess, Columbus, Ohio.
In the great mass of data already published concerning the codling
moth (Carpocapsa pomonella L.) it will be found that numerous
standards have been used for determining the results of spraying.
Many entomologists have followed the system of basing results sim-
ply on the number of picked apples which are wormy or sound on
treated and check trees, while in other cases samples of one or more
bushels of picked fruit, supposed to represent average conditions,
have been counted and have served for making the determinations of
the benefit derived. Sometimes an estimate of the wormy and sound
dropped fruit has been made at the time of harvesting, but in the
majority of cases no accurate account has been kept of the wormy
fruit that dropped early in the season.
Undoubtedly this lack of data has been largely due to the fact that
most entomologists who have attempted such experiments have not
had at their disposal the necessary time to make complete counts of
fruit. In some sections, also, horticnlturists pay little attention to
the fruit which drops early in the season, considering it a necessary
evil when the crop is light and a direct benefit when the crop is
heavy, as it saves labor in thinning. It would appear, however, if
an accurate statement of the benefit derived by treatment is to be
made, that all fruit growing on the trees should be accounted for.
In order to illustrate the case more fully, two tables are submitted,
showing the percentages of benefit from spraying that may be deduced
from the two different methods. Table I gives the treatment, in
1903, of two rows of 10 trees and 10 check trees in the orchard of
Mr. R. L. Hudson, at Delaware, Ohio, with Disparene and Bordeaux
mixture, also the number of wormy dropped apples, the wormy and
sound picked fruit, and the percentages of sound fruit, using all the
apples as a basis or by using only the picked fruit.
Table II gives similar data taken in the orchard. of Mr. Oscar
Haise, at Birmingham, Ohio, in 1905. The crop in the Hudson
orchard was short, while that in the other orchard was good, but
nearly twice the number of trees were used in the former orchard.
In Table I no sound fruit was recorded when the count of the wind-
falls was made in August. So few sound apples were found that no
record was made, but in later experiments the numbers were carefully
noted, as is shown in Table II.
ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
54
‘ *oIN} XTUI
xnvopilog
Pv 08 96 9L 6 980 ‘F 691 9L9 89 916 »| 28 “--> 9uorvdstq | puvousivdstq
v 68 86 BL 96 S8P ‘PF SOL , g9T¢ GP P88 L&I TSS GUC HORI) JR eer eo es orsa.
iene tame cribs Mrs ee 9L paar rc Oil L¥G ChE T 66 gag L&s [66 PS ieee fee att pina pee ra begs
‘sojdde poyord | -‘surAvads “surAvaids : E
ULOIy A[UO WOT} WLOIT “punos *AUILIO AA “punos *AULIO A
epvuU oso} puv) 4uoTT *punos qyuouUL ‘punos | , é
soldde [pv wody |-aAordutt | quoo rog |-oAorduit| jue sag | PUNOS AUTO AN SS Sth
epvursuolyeynd|) Joos jo a3B Brae ee aye “SuTABIAS PILL) _ :
-M09 Use M4eq | -JUddI0g -{Ud0IE [@-§T “00 I “sny Avids puodes
quowmoAOId UL eee ese AE
JO 98”) U00I0d ; :
ut sousreyiq | ‘Setdde poyord ‘sordds [TV ‘qINIy POY “STIR PULM
*oIN}X1UL
xnvop1l0g
pus ousredstq
~--> guoredsiq
“SULABICS SIT
°
S90} JO
IoquinN
“COGL “PADYIAO § OSD FT ADOSO “AP UY So0dy palivadsun pup pofipads wot qunal fiom pun punos Jo uosiandmog— ft alav LT
“oI XTUL *oIN} X TUL
xnvopl0g Xnvopi0Og
§ 09 P8 69 OL LIP F ¥98 PSG 89F ““-- guoredstq | puvouoredsiq | puvouorvdsig | oT
p 99 06 OL LL P86 “1 626 L8T 9ST pus OUP IGCSIC. ar seo: Seeneges & “*** guoredstq | OT
Biweea Serie. | ne ree ize eg eae clit OLE @LI TL 698 ‘T Sah ‘% ALE ecg oo Bat ltbees. coy 2 ae Smear wera (BI
‘sopddev poxord | ‘surAvids ‘surAvads
wlorf ATUO WOd} urOdy
OpBUL oso} puB) 4JUOUT ‘punos quOoUL ‘punos | , “AULIOM | *AUTIOM
sorddv [ve wody|-dA01d ar | yu90 “eg |-oAOIduN | 7U00 I8g PUNOS | AUOA\ ‘ez ydog | tp sny ‘Sut "800 JO
opBvul suolyeynd) jo ose JO 038B “SurlABIds pA) _ shew: ‘suLABids ISI,
-ul0d UdaM4aq | -JUdDI0g -jud010q Avids puooes PoC EtIiN
yuouIeA O10 WT - ae -
Jo o8vjuo0I0d
uroouosoyiq | ‘“Serdde poxord ‘sordde [TV ‘qIndy pox “S[TBJPUIM
“SO6T “PADYOsO 8 UOSPN A “TY “AM Ut soar. pafivadsun pun pafinuds woul qvnal husom pun punos {oO uos1wmdwog— |] ATAV I,
METHODS IN CODLING MOTH EXPERIMENTS. 55
It will be noted in Table I that on the check rows, where all the
apples were computed, only 7 per cent were sound, and when only
the picked fruit was used the sound apples amounted to 24 per cent.
This was due to the large amount of wormy fruit found on August 4
and September 23. The percentage of improvement is secured by
subtracting the percentage of sound fruit on the check row, made
by each method of computation, from that secured on the treated
rows. This gives a balance of 3 and 4 per cent as a result of the
different methods of computation, the larger percentage in the results
being in favor of considering the entire crop.
In Table IT, if the same methods are followed, a 4 per cent differ-
ence is shown, but this increase is in favor of the method where only
the picked fruit is used. If it is assumed that the correct method is
to have all of the fruit grown on the tree considered in deciding the
percentage value of treatment, then the other method shows 4 per
cent decrease in sound fruit in Table I and 4 per cent increase in
Table II. It is therefore evident, as shown by these tests, that the
error made by using only the picked fruit may range from none to
8 per cent in any experiment.
THE CONTROL OF THE CODLING MOTH IN THE ARID REGIONS.
By E. D. BAtu, Logan, Utah.
The codling moth (Carpocapsa pomonella L.) is by far the most
serious pest with which the apple grower in the arid regions has
to contend. The unsprayed orchards will average, taking one year
with another, fully one worm for each apple. In a year of abundant
crops there will be some apples remaining sound, but the inevitable
light crop following this is likely to have three or four worms to an
apple.
That thorough and persistent spraying will control the codling moth
has been demonstrated so many times as to appear at first sight almost
axiomatic, yet when the writer took up the work in Utah, in the fall
of 1902, he found a very deplorable state of affairs existing through-
out the State. The codling moth had evidently been increasing in
number and destructiveness for a series of years, and many of the
leading fruit growers, who had formerly handled it with ease, were
now meeting with very indifferent success or failing entirely to
control it. Numerous instances were cited where from 4 to 6 or even
more sprayings had failed to save the crop, while those who suc-
ceeded in getting 75 to 85 per cent of the picked fruit sound were
considered highly successful. To add to the confusion, the cry had
gone forth that the poisons were adulterated, that early sprays were
of little value, and that three or even four or more broods were to be
56 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
expected in a season, so even those who were disposed to profit by
their failures knew not which way to turn. Further investigation
revealed the fact that a somewhat similar condition prevailed through-
out the entire intermountain region.
In view of this condition of excessive worminess in apples and the
general uncertainty that prevailed with reference to so many of the
factors involved, it was decided to take up but one factor at a time
and try to work that out by exact methods, so that whatever was dis-
covered would be the result of known feu and could be explained
by the known variation in the factors according to the needs of the
experiment. In this way it has been possible to get quite definite
results on several factors in the course of the four years’ work, and
the most important ones of these are summarized below.
The poisons were first investigated and were found to be first class
in every respect. A few samples of Paris green had been found in
the West that contained some free arsenic, but that would rather, in-
crease than decrease their killing power, so the failure of the spraying
could not be laid at that door.
NUMBER OF BROODS.
In the work on this insect in Colorado, during the time the writer
was an assistant at the State agricultural experiment station, the fact
that there were two definite generations in that region and that these
generations occurred at fairly definite times was thoroughly estab-
lished. These tests were carefully repeated for northern Utah con-
ditions, and a life-history chart showing the times of:appearance of
all stages of the two generations was published in Bulletin 87 of the
Utah Agricultural Experiment Station.
From these investigations it was found that there would be a period
of a few days in which it would be possible to separate the few worms
of the two broods then occurring in the apples. This period, as was
shown by reference to the chart above mentioned, occurred during the
first few days in August in a normal season. As on the accurate
separation of the damage done by each brood depended much of the
value of the other data obtained, this damage was carefully checked
up each year, and in no case was there more than 1 per cent of the
“total wormy” in doubt, and often almost no doubtful cases
appeared.
In practical work methods must come before results; but in this
summary it has been thought best to give results first, and then the
full significance of the methods that gave them can be more fully
appreciated.
¥ CONTROL OF CODLING MOTH IN ARID REGIONS. 57
RELATIVE VALUE OF THE EARLY SPRAYINGS.
(Fig. 1.)
Careful tests of the relative value of each of three early sprayings
were first made in 1905. The first spraying was applied just after the
blossoms fell, the second ten days later, and the third fifteen days
after that. Each spraying was tested alone and again in combina-
tion with the others and the results compared. The tests were car-
ried on in five complete series, three on different blocks of Ben Davis
and one each on Esopus and Missouri Pippin. All five tests gave
similar results, and they are summarized in the following table:
TABLE III.—Worms killed in the first brood by early sprayings.
[
|S |e
al e|s Total Number Number
oe Se ee Reka Number | Percent-| of apples| Percent-| of apples Percent-
eal P| es eee of worms age with age with age
= ise Pal kasd | are killed killed. calyx killed. side killed.
2 ai | = wormy. wormy.
& o =
_ | Re
Pe
“te, Sn oR 72 | 0 0 31 0 41 0
sak ae 1 tl | eee 0 1 | eee ee Ol... Bea 0
So eA eS 15 57 79 | 5 84 10 76
The Ee es 8 64 89 | 1 96 vi 83
a et | 4 | 68 94 3 98 3 93
1 0 ae 3 69 96 2 99 ry 95
In the plat where the third spraying alone was given a few more
wormy apples are shown than in the unsprayed block. This of course
meant that the third spraying alone was of little value and that the
trees happened to average a few more worms than the unsprayed.
They were therefore treated as an unsprayved lot and averaged in
with this lot to get the 72 wormy. This spray, when applied with
the others, killed one more worm; and, strange as it may seem, every
set showed this same result, so it should be given full credit for that
worm.
The second spray, when applied alone, killed almost four-fifths of
the worms, and when applied after the first spraying killed half of
what would have been left. The first spray proved to be the best,
killing almost nine-tenths of the worms when applied alone and
when applied with the second killed 94 per cent.
The difference between the two sprayings was shown in every set
but one, and there they were equal, while the increased value by
applying both together was shown in every case.
WHERE THE WORMS WERE KILLED.
Examining these results to see where the worms were killed, we
found that of the 15 worms left by the second spraying only 5 went
into the calyx; of the 8 left after the first spraying, only 1 went in
at that point; and when these two sprayings were combined an aver-
ix
58 ASSOCIATION. OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
age of less than 1 calyx worm to a tree was obtained. In general,
this shows that such spraying practically exterminates the worms
that go in at the calyx and also shows the superior value of the first
spraying in bringing this about.
e
mn = 84 fo
Killed
F ~ = 46%
Killed
¥ = 98 f
Killed
m = 95% Killed | Z
CALYX
76% Killed
83h Killed
93% Killed
~
S
IN
72 0
=79f Killed
= 897 Killed
94h Killed
9u-F Killed
_
TOTAL
(se)
O00 0G/ 0/0 /00 110 The
Unsprd I Sray 2 ‘Sbray LSpray LOprays Sdprays
only only only
Fig. 1.—Chart to illustrate relative value of early sprayings on the first brood of
‘““worms’’ of the codling moth.
Of those going in on the side a slightly larger percentage escaped,
ro) > f = ’
and as would be expected there was also less difference in killing
power of the two sprayings, and more gained’ by combining them.
Though lower than in the calyx, the killing power here indicated
is very high.
CONTROL OF CODLING MOTH IN ARID REGIONS. 59
RESULTS OF SPRAYINGS IN THE SECOND BROOD.
(Fig. 2.)
TABLE 1V.—Worms killed in the second brood by early sprayings.
|
|
—
| |
wilol a | Number Number
oS i ea e| fers Total + | = | = |
| = | & e, | number eg Percent- | aha Percent- | apne Percent-
LE} | |] wormy | worms | xitfea. || with | xia |) with | iif
aa = | | apples. killed. calyx | side
x 5 = wormy. wormy.
|) ao |e | |
San See 216 0 0 101 0 115 | 0
tees ieese gD | eee 0 OF | ee es Ol) ss-.asaee 0
} 1 120 96 44 41 59 79 | 3
1 eee See 78 138 64 8 92 70 | 39
a ee 48 168 | 78 3 97 45 61
1 1 if 48 | 168 | 78 4 96 44 | 62
The results of spraying in the second brood are an almost exact
duplication of those in the first, with the number of worms to be
killed trebled and the killing power somewhat reduced, the reduction,
however, being almost entirely in the killing of the worms infesting
the fruit at the side.
It is hard to believe that two sprayings applied before June 10
could kill over three-fourths of the worms appearing in August and
September, but the results are so uniform throughout each set that
there can be no question about their general accuracy.
These results were obtained on trees averaging about 3,500 apples
apiece; so the 4 worms escaping in the first brood together with the
48 in the second would make a total of almost exactly 14 per cent
of wormy fruit for the year remaining after two sprayings.
VALUE OF TWO EARLY SPRAYINGS.
The question of the value of two early sprayings was taken up first
in 1904 and the results published in Bulletin 95 of the Utah Station.
The comparative value of the two early sprayings in 1905 has been
shown in the previous table. Some of the plats, however, did not
contain trees enough for a complete test and so were not included in
the first set.
60 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
Omitting in the second-brood tables the sets in which the results
were obscured by lack of apples for the worms, in the first year we
get the following summary for all plats:
{01
= 59% Killed
292% Killed
297 Prilled
= 96% Killed
Us
a
o
X
we
=
7
a
62% Killed
Ps es
SIDE
G00 OO/ 0/0 100 22 SSO LG
Unsprd 3*ipuy 2*pay Spray 2 prays UW 3cSprays
only . only only
Fig. 2.—Chart to illustrate relative value of early sprayings on the second brood of
““worms’’ of the codling moth.
CONTROL OF CODLING MOTH IN ARID REGIONS. 61
a
TABLE V.— Worms killed in first brood by two early sprayings, Smart & Hatch
orchard.
1904. || 1905. 1905. |
First | Second febeeris sid ‘Womiber of |
: . Total | Total
spraying. spraying. x! Uae ples apples
wien Ma == Pee ie it cake = with side
an ples, | Wwormy. wormy.
eee SN BSS ee 247 97 65 | 32 |
1 1 yf , 6 1 5
Worms killed .... 220 91 64 | 27
Per cent killed .. 89 92 98 84
TABLE VI.—Worms killed in second brood by two early sprayings, Smart &
Hatch orehard.
| 1904. 1905. 1905..
First | Second Number of | Number of
: = Total Total
spraying. spraying. * | apples | apples
: pero! sg a | pares aP- || with calyx} with side
age ips wormy. | wormy.
j | |
ae Poe meen eae Ti. 273 177 | 96
1 1 236 64 6 58
Worms killed ...- 476 209 171 48
Per cent killed .. 67 76 97 40
Tables V and VI show clearly the reduction in the number of
worms the second year of spraying and also show a corresponding
‘increase in the killing power of the early sprays. This increase is
probably not real; instead it can be taken to mean that in the first
test some apples on the unsprayed trees harbored more than one
worm. All of the records indicate that the more worms there are,
up to nearly 1 to each apple, the larger the percentage that will
be killed.
VALUE OF THREE LATE SPRAYINGS.
Three late sprayings were applied to the second brood of worms
in 1904 and again in 1905. They were applied with the same nozzle
used in the early sprayings, but the nozzle was held farther away
and spraying stopped as soon as the trees began to drip. The first
of the late sprayings was applied as soon as the second-brood worms
began to enter and the other two at 15-day intervals.
Three separate tests were made in 1904. The first was on 12 trees
in an orchard that had no early spraying. The trees were about one-
third wormy in the first brood, an indication that the apples would
be entirely destroyed unless sprayed. Results, counting only second-
brood injury, were as follows:
TABLE VII.—Results of three late sprayings alone, in Hoggan orchard, 1904.
Wormy Sound
apples. apples,
- 6 unsprayed trees averaged
I IIE GRO Pn on knee naan manecenctcaccs 254
a
’
‘
‘
‘
‘
‘
‘
‘
‘
'
’
‘
‘
‘
'
‘
'
’
‘
‘
’
‘
’
’
‘
‘
‘
’
‘
‘
‘
‘
'
.
’
’
’
'
’
‘
’
‘
’
‘
‘
‘
’
‘
’
,
‘
’
‘
te
So.
-
is ew)
62 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
There were no sound apples on either set at picking time. The 8
sound apples on the sprayed trees were windfalls. In fact there were
very few apples left at picking time. The only difference that could
be noted was that the apples from the unsprayed trees had 1 calyx
worm each and 3 or 4 on the sides, while the sprayed ones were also
all calyx wormy, but had an average of only about 1 on the side.
The second test was on unsprayed checks in the twice-sprayed
Smart & Hatch orchards. These trees were nearly one-third wormy
in the first brood, but about two-thirds of these worms were caught
under bands, and the resulting moths from the remaining worms
would, of course, spread out over the sprayed trees, so that there
would be many less worms in the second brood than if the orchard
had been unsprayed. On two varieties many of the apples on the un-
sprayed checks had more than one worm, and the results in sound
apples are again too low to show the real killing power of this late
spray. They gave averages as follows:
TABLE VIII.—Results of three late sprayings alone in badly infested blocks in
Smart & Hatch orchards, 1904.
Wormy | Sound
apples. | apples.
|
Wnsprayediche@ks at ersscorceereeee ree eee he eae ee neon eee aes eee eee eee | 562 252
IDES Sorel Clavel Gigs Se depose socoemscodstesSaenabcoodousdecsecosedceerdesceddne 375 519
Many of the sound apples on the unsprayed trees were windfalls
and most of the rest were below and inside. The outer and upper
apples were badly infested.
On the third variety there were apples enough for the worms and
to spare, and these results should show the full killing power of the
sprayings when applied alone.
Taste IX.—Results of three late sprayings alone in moderately infested blocks
in Smart & Hatch orchard, 1904.
Number | Nu
al b We nt-
eee of eos of alee nea
of wormy enilee with side |sound ap-
apples. a ee tes wormy. ples.
Unepraved Cheeks ones: oes eee eee aster) Me tae Sacre | 712 487 225 51
Waterspray.edu Cheeky see ae teisisetnteleletas irate fet le etelatn litt icles 193 120 73 76
\itxonmearsiGl Weber Gaon ene essa osqdenseoedqdoeae UOseeSr 519 307 | 152 |). 23o3esee
Rercemtase) killed eee seria a oes terete eerie natalia 73 75 | 68:1]... neers
}
That the sound apples in Tables VIII and IX must be credited to
the fact that the early two sprayings reduced the number of worms in
the orchard, is evident on comparison with the first table, where there
were no early sprayings.
There was nearly the same number of
CONTROL OF CODLING MOTH IN ARID REGIONS. 63
worms in the first brood in each orchard, and without spraying the
results would, no doubt, have been nearly the same.
That the late sprayings alone are not to be considered as a means
of controling the codling moth under badly infested conditions is
abundantly shown by the above results. Therefore their true value
to us is their killing power when applied in connection with the early
sprayings, as shown below.
In the third test the three late sprayings were applied to trees that
had received the two early sprayings. Three varieties were used and
gave similar results, which are averaged in Table X.
TABLE X.—Results of three late sprayings on trees that had received two early
ones, Smart & Hatch orchard, 1904.
Total num- Number of Number of
berof japples with apples with
wormy ap- calyx side
ples. wormy. wormy.
hg SRRIRVAS OST) a0 0 Tess 15 ene eC Ee OR ane es = e417, 106 311
iyo.eariy, and three late sprayings .-.< -s..2co.cc. eee ee Secc cece ts | 112 35 77
“Ps NOTESLOG a, FRO ae ee eg | 305 71 234
SEI STG hs oe Oe a ee oe ee eR eee iu 67 75
The number of worms to be killed is much smaller than before,
and the proportion of “ calyx wormy ” to “ side wormy ” is reversed
as a result of the high killing power of the early spraying on the
calyx worms. The killing power of the late sprayings, however, was
only reduced 2 per cent below that shown when they were applied
alone.
This experiment was repeated in 1905 with a still smaller number
of worms left after the two early sprayings. used with a
more easily controlled. Examination of the structure of the scale
covering protecting the Howard scale explains, perhaps, the cause of
its greater susceptibility to contact sprays. With the Howard scale
the coverings are much more loosely attached to the bark. This gives
the spray less resistance in coming into direct contact with the body
of the insect concealed beneath.
All of the lime and sulphur preparations were effective. ‘ Chlo-
roleum ” did not promise well as an insecticide for this purpose and
almost a complete failure was made in attempting to prepare the
kerosene emulsion with the use of lime. A dry, finely slaked lime,
discarded as a by-product from a local sugar factory, was used,
which may have been the cause of its failure. The lime failed com-
pletely to properly absorb the oil, and when an attempt was made
to agitate the mixture by forcing through a force pump the thick,
doughy mess completely clogged strainer and nozzle.
“Scalecide,” on the other hand, gave much promise. It was
sprayed in November and consequently the final results are yet
unknown. It must be said, however, that the soluble petroleum
sprays are most deserving insecticides from the standpoint of both
effectiveness and convenience of use, and could their cost and trans-
portation expense to the West be lessened they would receive more
universal use by orchard men.
As stated, the lme-sulphur washes were found best adapted for
combating this new scale pest. The self-boiled mixtures and those
boiled by caustic soda in the experiment were not so satisfactory as
the ones prepared by boiling properly, but the inconvenience of
cooking creates a certain demand for a material ready made and
possible of immediate dilution with cold water. The * Rex ” lime-
sulphur used in the experiment was of the latter class. It is a con-
centrated lime-sulphur solution formerly used in the West as a stock
f
92 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
dip and first used in the Middle West against the San Jose scale by ©
Professor Forbes in Llinois. The following comparison shows it
slightly less effective than the orchard-boiled lime and sulphur wash,
but successful enough to justify use under special conditions, and
presents in brief a comparison of the “ Rex ” lime-sulphur wash and
the homeméde lime-sulphur spray as used in this test against the
Howard seale of pear.
Percentage Percentage
mete of scales of pears in-
Spray. Formule. e areal dead at ex- |festedatpick-
Ssprayec. | amination, ing time, Au-
April 25. gust 17.
SRS. Ss Se) Re ae dee “Rex,” 1 part; cold water, 8 parts. | April 6 84. 4 2.8
(Lime, 15 pounds per 50 gallons.)
Lime and sulphur..... Lime, 15 pounds; sulphur, 15 pounds; | April 5 93.8 6
wate1, 50 gallons; boil 45 minutes.
Checkacni tne ao8 xaos NOGS prayed sso lea eee tone ase lee ree eeaee 55. 0 Som
Two means of comparison are to be had in the above table, the +
first as indicated in the count of the percentage of scales dead upon
the bark of the tree upon April 25, at which time the Rex lime-
sulphur gave 84.4 per cent dead, the hme-sulphur wash 93.8 per cent
dead, and the plat given no spray 55 per cent scales dead of those
counted. As will be noted, this count was made only twenty days
following spraying, and a later examination would have yielded a
higher percentage killed in both of the treated plats, due to longer
action of the adhering spray.
The second means of comparison, and that of more practical bear-
ing to the fruit grower, is shown in the table as a count of the per-—
centage of pear fruit showing the pits from infestation, found on
the surface in a count made on August 17, at time of harvest. This
comparison shows but 2.8 per cent pears infested upon an average
borne upon the tree in the plat sprayed with the Rex. The hme-
sulphur plat gave 0.6 per cent infested pears or less than one per 100,
while the check or unsprayed trees gave 96.1 per cent infested. In_
each case many hundreds of pears were counted in securing these
ratios. They show good results with both sprays, but a slight
advantage with the orchard-boiled mixture. It was also apparent
that pears borne upon badly infested trees not treated would almost
without exception show infestation sufficient to exclude them for
market purposes.
With one proper dormant spray of lime-sulphur wash, it is shown
that the Howard scale may be controlled, and, unlike the San Jose
scale, it seems probable that one spraying in two years will accom-
plish this result.
|
. |
j
> ECONOMIC WORK AGAINST HOWARD SCALE. 93
The first spraying at Grand Junction against this pest was done
with whale-oil soap. In one orchard observed at that place it was
reported that three years ago over $1,000 worth of fruit was rejected
by the inspector of a local fruit growers’ association on account of
the pears being rendered unsightly by scale pits and blotches caused
by the insect, aside from the dwarfed tree growth and cracked condi-
tion of the bark. The year following this a thorough spring spray-
ing with lime-sulphur wash reduced the injury to tree and fruit to
a point beneath practical notice. The treatment was repeated last
March, with the remarkable result that of a crop of 2,200 boxes of
choice and fancy pears packed this fall only 2 pears were encoun-
tered bearing scales. Last spring in the orchard section for a few
miles surrounding Grand Junction, one of the fruit districts of west-
ern Colorado, 40,000 pounds of sulphur were used by the members of
a single fruit growers’ association, principally against the Howard
scale of the pear, besides a carload of 30,000 pounds of the “ Rex ”
lime and sulphur concentrate introduced as an experiment.
This season these same growers will consume a greatly increased
amount of sulphur, and have already placed their order for 5 car-
loads of the “* Rex ” product, aggregating over 400 barrels of the con-
-centrate, sufficient when diluted with 11 times its volume of water,
to produce 4,400 barrels of spray. Asa rule this will be applied with
gasoline power-spray outfits, nearly 200 of which are owned and
operated in the orchards about this one point mentioned.
Economic entomology is enthusiastically practiced by the progres-
sive fruit growers of Colorado, and well it may be when her fancy
~ grade lime-sulphur sprayed Buerré de Anjou pears net the growers
$9.10 per box, as they have done this season when placed upon the
New York City market.
:
1
|
In reply to an inquiry, Mr. Taylor stated that the Howard scale
was found on native trees, such as white ash, also on apple and plum.
He considered it quite a serious pest and that it might possibly be
hipped out on nursery stock. The danger, however, was somewhat
remote, as no stock was shipped east from Colorado.
Mr. Titus remarked that this insect was probably a species native
to Colorado, as he had found it on native wild plum.
Mr. Taylor stated that most of the spraying in Colorado was done
with gasoline spraying outfits, and that each outfit would cover about
20 acres of bearing orchard. He had used the Rex lime and sulphur
mixture with fair results. It was sold in Colorado for $12 a barrel.
)
94 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
A paper was presented, as follows:
THE MAPLE LEAF STEM-BORER.
(Priophorus acericaulis MacG.)
By W. E. Britton, New Haven, Conn.
[ Withdrawn for publication elsewhere. |
The following paper was read :
THE VALUE OF PARASITES IN CEREAL AND FORAGE CROP
PRODUCTION.
By F. M. WEBSTER, Washington, D. C.
While there has been much said of late concerning the beneficial
influences of parasites in affecting insect pests of the orchard, garden, —
and truck farm, we hear little of this in relation to such as attack grain
and forage crops. It might almost be said that the average farmer,
from his point of view, sees only the benefits derived by the fruit ©
grower, while the aid that he himself receives from the good offices of ~
parasites 1s quite outside his vision. The facts are, however, almost —
if not quite the reverse, and it is probable that the crops of the
average farmer are more continually under the protection of, and
greater losses are prevented by, beneficial insects than in any other
field of husbandry. The real difference is that in the case of the ~
farmer they are obscured or overlooked; while among the fruits and’ —
vegetables, where observation is less difficult, much more that tran-_
spires is seen and recorded in reports, bulletins, and the agricultural —
press. A case in point from my own observation many years ago will —
serve as an illustration.
There was a threatened outbreak of wheat midge (Contarima
tritici Kirby) in a field of wheat, the larvee at the usual season being
excessively abundant. During late afternoons and early forenoons
the heads of wheat were visited by great numbers of predaceous”
insects that hunted about among the bracts, and greedily devoured the ©
larve of the midge. Day after day this was observed, until it seemed
to me that none of the victims could have-escaped capture. Gradually
and naturally the heads changed from green to golden, and the threat-
ened disaster did not materialize, there being very few of the midge
larvee remaining in the heads, where a short time before there had
been myriads. To me, who had watched the proceedings daily, it
was clear that the crop had been saved from serious damage, if not,
indeed, a loss so great as to render the field of too little value to
harvest. One day at harvest the farmer himself was observed stand-
ing with a neighbor near the borders of his field, and I caught a few
words of his conversation as I passed by, to the effect that his success
in wheat growing that year had been due to good farming. I asked
.
¥
’PARASITES IN CEREAL AND FORAGE CROP PRODUCTION. 95
him if he had noticed any insects on the heads of his wheat, and he
gave me most conclusive proof to the contrary by stating that he had
never looked to see if there were any there, but he thought not.
Another case in point will be appreciated by those who are familiar
with the actions of the Hessian fly and its parasites. A field of wheat
in northern Indiana back in the 80’s was so seriously affected by the
fly in the fall as to render the outlook for the owner getting even his
seed back at harvest exceedingly dubious. With the coming of spring
the wheat plants, or rather the belated tillers thereof, sprang up and
the owner harvested a crop of 20 bushels per acre. There was almost
no infestation of fly in spring. Now for the reason for this Seemingly
supernatural phenomenon. In fall I had taken the precaution to
collect a quantity of dead wheat plants from this field and placed
them in breeding in a warm room. Very few flies were reared, but
swarms of Polygnotus hiemalis Forbes emerged from the * flaxseeds ”
ensconced among the dead wheat plants. I now know that of that
yield of 20 bushels per acre secured from this field not less than 18
bushels per acre should go to the credit of Polygnotus. This was
the year following Doctor Forbes’s description of his P. hiemalis, and
none of us at that time knew much about it. More than ten years
after, in another State, almost a parallel case was presented. This
time, however, a most perplexing matter developed. The infested
wheat was of a variety that persons with seed to sell were endeavor-
ing to boom, and one of the virtues claimed was immunity to attack
of the Hessian fly. Although I reared fully 100 Polygnotus to one
fly from the dead plants in the fall and knew absolutely that the
parasite saved the crop by sweeping the fly almost out of existence,
yet I found both myself and the Polygnotus alike discredited and
the claim set up and sustained that the whole thing was due to certain
virtues possessed by this particular variety of seed wheat, for which
_a fancy price was demanded and obtained.
Within the last two years, in a section where spring wheat only is
grown, we have found a similar. condition existing, and all facts so
_ far obtainable go to show that but for the efficient aid offered by Poly-
-gnotus spring-wheat growing in the Northwest would cease to be
profitable. These minute insect parasites save the country millions
_of dollars, yet they are unknown except among entomologists.
Again, Dr. Paul Marchal, who studied the development of Poly-
| gnotus minutus in France, but did not witness oviposition, states that
there is every evidence of polyembryonic development, the egg being
deposited in that of the Hessian fly and hatching in the body of the
maggot of the latter after it has left the egg. That is to say, there
may be several germ cells within a single ovum, and consequently sev-
eral larve may develop from a single egg. We have not by any
Means cleared up the obscurity relative to an American species,
96 ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGISTS.
though all of my assistants have repeatedly observed the female
Polygnotus ovipositing in the eggs of the Hessian fly, and Mr. G. I.
Reeves has found larvee to the number of 28 in the matured maggot.
We have thus observed the oviposition in eggs of the fly and reared —
adults from the “ flaxseeds.” If Doctor Marchal’s suppositions are
correct, and, as 1s very probable, our American species have similar
habits, their economic importance will be immense, for it will be pos-
sible for a single female Polygnotus to place her supply of eggs
singly in those of the Hessian fly, and the number of her progeny
would be limited only by the sustaining capacity of the host larve.
Another parasite with polyembryonic development is Platygaster
herrickii Pack. Mr. Reeves has observed this also, ovipositing in the
egos of the Hessian fly, and at another time, in a locality several
hundred miles distant, he counted over 40 larvee in a single maggot.
Whether or not there are other species of Platygaster infesting the
Hessian fly it is just now impossible to state, but there are certainly
more than one species of Polygnotus engaged in this efficient work,
and the saving to the wheat growers of North America through their
influences is Immense.
The whole problem of polyembryony among parasitic insects is
exceedingly interesting and of the utmost economic - importance.
When Doctor Howard called attention to the eMormous numbers of
Copidosoma that he had reared from a larva of Plusia brassice in
1882, the number from a single individual, of 19 larve, being 2,528,
he was unable to learn by dissection that the female Copidosoma was
capable of laying more than 160 eggs. Later, in Ohio, I reared from
a lot of 5 larve of this species the enormous number of over 4,800,
and since that time Mr. C. W. Mally, in South Africa, reared 2,112
from a Plusia larva, while Monsieur KE. Bugnion has reared over 3,000
individuals from a single host larva. Doctor Howard first thought
that more than one female Copidosoma had oviposited in a single —
host larva, but this has since been found to be exceedingly unlikely.
In the case of some of our American species of Polygnotus and —
Platygaster herrickii the female parasite positively refuses to ovi-
posit in eggs that have already been visited by another female.
Attention has also been called to the almost general phenomenon of
all individuals from a single larva being of the same sex, all of which
goes to imply that but a single ovum is placed in a single host, and
the extent to which the parasitic larve will multiply from this is—
only limited by the size of the host larva. Thus we have an expla-
nation of what has been a puzzle to entomologists, viz, the sudden
and almost complete disappearance of the Hessian fly between broods.
It also indicates the great value of these insects for use in introducing
parasites in sections where an outbreak of the host insect 1s seem-
ingly impending. How many of our parasites have this polyembry-
J
onic development we do not know, but where we rear such an abnor-
mal number of parasites from a single host, and those from a single
host are all of the same sex, the case will at least bear investigation.
These parasites have, however, one weak point. A sudden dis-
aster to their host reduces them almost to the verge of extermination.
For instance, over a considerable portion of the central Pacific
States during the past autumn there was so much rain just prior to
seeding time that the ground could not be prepared for wheat sowing
until late. Hence there are but few of the fly even in the earliest sown
fields, thus reducing the food supply of these parasites to the mini-
mum and preventing their breeding in any considerable numbers.
There is another group of parasites of the Hessian fly whose
habits are normal, but which have a greater number of host insects.
Among these may be placed H'upelmus allynii French. This species
ranges from New England to Montana, south to South Carolina,
Georgia, and Texas. The insect has two advantages in that it is
double brooded and is also a parasite of the several species of joint-
worms. (Isosoma) that work in wheat, rye, and cheat, thus being
present among these grains whether infested by the Hessian fly or
not. We also rear it from Isosoma-infested timothy, orchard grass,
quack grass, Muhlenbergia, Elymus, and in the West from Bouteloua,
Stipa, Sporobolus, and Hordeum jubatum. So, while this parasite
does not increase as rapidly as Polygnotus and Platygaster, it has
the advantage of not being so dependent upon a single host for
sustenance. This double-brooded feature is also found in Semiotel-
lus (Stictonotus) isosomatis Riley, Semiotellus chalcidiphagus Walsh
and Riley, and Websterellus tritici Ashmead, parasites of single-
brooded jointworms, but not, so far as is known, of the Hessian fly.
Turning to the parasites of Isosoma, we find here also illustrations
of the value of parasitism. While there are a few species that we
expect to breed from the larvee of any or all of them, there are others
that seem to be restricted to a single species. =, 2220.50), ecce ew e e 15
Amelancher vulgaris, food plant of Eriophyes pyri.............--.--.--------- 44
TA MRICCTIS DUCAUAALU—NCHISLOCETOS RAMAIUS. . 22 4 =. 2 ean ve foe ee ee ee 11
Puireia lineaiciia,, arsenate of lead a remedy .-:.-.../..-.-.-+-+-i2--na2-ss5<-- 47
MRS COPIA te. 52h Foes otk ace sly eee a sole aoe 103
Anthracnose following Heliothis obsoleta in cotton.........---.--------------- 101
eat, Whe red, work against it 1m-Minnesota. 2.22... .-------.5.20425-4----25- 16-17
small red, enemy of Carpocapsa pomonella..........---.-+.-+---+------- 38
sugar, ineffective aie Le FEO ‘aint of toe sh 2 a2: o). eieeae Sees ie 17
Aphides, is honeydew excreted from anus or cornicles?...........-...--..--.-- 33-34
GC appic Ih Nom, MOmenmaAle ss. 06 28 ede ed so ee ae cee 29
Ma eee an TL ie ee. to SS. . 2 ew ad) tee eS ee 31-33
Aphis, apple. (See Aphis mali.)
cotton. (See Aphis gossypii.)
epee ee mea Aen) S88 Siegel sn Ft ds eve oases 28 oo an ee
Mra TE NO COM PON TAR PEOID os Sor 32 Sei 2k Ae owe ee 101
RI eieei ee SDEAVE OW EPO8 52-8 soe Del dae x fee ee es oe te
imeeeIaE REA ace Pee Sty te) es ee ee 104
Wicmmerir teehee heey. aye i: 2 Sees tae ee 29
SPOTS OR 0) 1 See ie ree ee ane eee 33
malvjel., eiiccip Gt sprays On €fps. 2. - 2. -+---. -~.------2-24--2+-~----, BO
gh ES | Sie et Oe eae 29
CRO ao AURIS oy A re ae a eg ee 103
woolly (see also Schizoneura lanigera).
menpene eminisinn & FEMeOy. 222 ease oa nt oe =o bye oe eee ee 106
ec nines Ia Naw). OPE DIALe- 2.5. . 2. 0S. 4-52. 2s 4 se eee tee tee tee 29
aphis. (See Aphis mali.)
Pee Prin teishiom Ww. epraAvinie. 2-025 <> 2 oe i te Sees cnt 70-72
caterpillar, red-humped. (See Schizura concinna. )
yellow-necked. (See Datana ministra. )
Bee Patt Ol ne RMN ores. 2a es = 22 ee ka Sam a oes oa eee 104
Mae AMMNEND he 28 0). o 0 Soe Halse 20 cree Os OA 88, 93
Maremma femenati. 2S. ec es so ok el
BE ON ES: EG Oe SY OO a eS 44, 45
rete MNS ae Be Shins a di wy a DS w= ER «on os OE 23
SUT IAG) io 2a een fe Sec kes s+ as Sha wees 104
Deemer MMMM ONNGUTE. 2.4 cacti). soto. beso. lew Se oot ee 104
eameguajeitier in cotton elds in Georpia...-.:-.-.-.-.-.--.-..---...0-.ss00- 102
Army worm, fall. (See Laphygma frugiperda.)
(See Heliophila unipuncta. )
menennte Of lead against Anarsia lineatella...............- 525-0220. e ee ene 47
PR MEMT INGUIN 5. Foie Ay ae Gs Pec aoe came es 46
ieee NC0-NGRGIOs. =e 8k Sa oki. 2.2. 22s 72 83-84
Climatic influences as affecting life-history periods in insects. ......-......---- 81
Coccophagus flavoscutellum, is it form of C. lecanii?.......-.....---.----------- 52
parasite of Pulvinaria innumerabilis.....-..-.------ 51-52
: lecanu, parasite of Pulvinaria innumerabilis.........-.----.------- 48-52
Codling moth. (See also Carpocapsa pomonelia. )
SI ZENE NRE ae a os ge a 56
ise gos ig aU) See Ree ee a 55-75
Dag peemiererentt SMe es OR 9s se es so 53-55
Collinge, Walter E., paper, ‘‘On the Eradication of the Black Currant Gall-mite
REE ETN OLS) pene: aioe FT ees i ng ee ee ne 119-123
Colorado, economic work against Aspidiotus howardii...................------- 87-93
Columbines, food plants of Chorizagrotis auxiliaris and Noctua clandestina..... 126
Se ens. OCeMmmenCe Of pIpsy MOth.. -._-..< -: .. 525... kee 22-26
Conotelus obscurus in cotton bloom in Georgia...............---.------------- 102
Conotrachelus nenuphar in Georgia.........-- peewee ee a Tee NS OSS 103
Contarinia violicola, control in greenhouses..............-...----------------- 48
OO dA ee ee ee ae 2 41-42
initia, damage prevented by parasites..................--.--..-.- 94
§ Copidosoma, parasite of Plusia brassice, polyembryony.............---------- 96
3 Cordyceps clavulata (?), fungous disease of Eulecanium nigrofasciatum . ... ~~... 38
_ Cornicles of aphides, do they excrete honeydew?..........----..--------++--- 33-34
Corn meal, diluent of Paris green against tobacco budworms.............-..-- 107
| EO a a ee eee 102
Cotoneaster vulgaris, food plant of Eriophyes pyri........-...---.------------ 44
(See Aphis gossypii.)
s beetle, new. (See Luperodes brunneus.)
pam olnt OF Tomophyes Goamypis. .-. .-. <2. 5-2 ok elec eee Seeks 122
ES 2 ee ee ee en ee 101-102
. leaf-worm. (See Alabama argillacea. )
Cowpea, food plant of tobacco budworms.................-.-.--------- ee 3 107
pod weevil. (See Chalcodermus xneus.)
138 INDEX.
ee
A
Page.
Cranberry; tood: plant of chopiniaanupingia= 525-4 ee 35-36
Creosote/oljagaimst eee sioi: oapsiye Toi igs eee cree ee 23
Cricket, white flower. (See canthus niveus.)
Crude oil agaimst.aphis eggs. si4 lac ck js aeee ois BAe mee Se eet es 29-30
Cryptopristis, parasite of "[sosoma tritict: Bn .. oles ee ee 97
Cry ptorhynchus lapathi as a unTse nya) CSt. eee aoe nee eee eee 27-29
Cuba, oceurrence’oliGasvropiilusmasalissases-- ge et eee 117
Culex pipiens; house=mMosquItoim Mexieoelees saa ae a eee eee eae 124
Cultivation, remedy for Ponphilyus. persigiimi hese aes ee 86
Cultural - remedies for cutwonrms . 5-2 350 8 cess. 5.35 sass es ae 126
is their investigation a true part of economic entomology?.... 82-83
Curculio, plum. (See Conotrachelus nenuphar.)
Currant. black food) plamtiot Hriophyes TUisem: = = so eee ae ee 1S
food plant: of cutiworms =<": 5-2. ae eae ee eee eee 125
Cutworms (see also Chorizagrotis auxiliaris, Noctua CUES SHIN, and Paragrotis
ochrogaster ).
eaten by Calosoma Jarveez:) . 0. Bein tabs 2 leas = ee 98
un Mlorida 2.2505 2 ks os 2 i ae ee ee 110-111
Georgie 45 . Seles hog ees 2e oe aoe eee ee ee 103, 104
remedies i422 .8 34 2s ee PSG a Se eee 126
Dakruma coccidivora, enemy of Pulvinaria innumerabilis.........-.......--.--- 49
Datanaantegerrime to: Georeiac=) 5.2 e eee as ee 105
New York State. 22 uteeke 74S ee ee 39
maonistra in New York'State.-as2 555 gas no. ke eee ee 39
Dickerson, Edgar L., paper, ‘“Some Observations on the Natural Checks of the
Cottony Maple Scale (Pulvinaria innumerabilis Rathv.)”......-....--.----- 48-52
Digitalis, food plant of Chorizagrotis auxiliaris and N a Clan desta. == se 126
Diplotavis fr ondicola: on, peachrimy Geordies... ssss2>- passe ae a me ere een 103
Dipping versus fumigation of nursery {tees 21s. cade ee een 26
Disease of gipsy moth caterpillars: iil. fees a Ee a 25
Disparene against codllime mothe: Ses ee eee 53-64, 75-76
and Bordeaux mixture against codline;moth=!-ees5-- eee 53-54, 75-76
not effective against Psylliodes punctulata FAS Re lb oo he Bee 112
Drasterius. (See Wireworms. )
Elm bark-scale. (See Gossyparia spuria. )
Scotch, food plant ot Gossyparia spina sss ness ee eee ee ee 41
Plynvus,tood ‘plant of Isosoma ls. .2 5 52 Ses see es 2 sets eae te 97
Entomologists, Association of Economic, members, active.........-----.---- 130-132
ASSOGIALE-2 0 22 2 See eee 132-134
fOREICMA Lt vas a ee 134
oficersnior A907 24: ee 127
Entomology, applied, a great experiment therein...-.-..----.-.------1-2-.5-- 10
economic, importance of phenological oiheensrer fons erage eae 77
inthe Philippimess see ee ee eee 117
under thewAdamsvActey 22 42 eee ease ee eee 77-84
systematic, often necessary part of economic entomology ....--.- 80
Epicerus yormidolosus on tobacco ine lomda etre. -—= eee ae ee eee 110
(MIDNUCOULS AN ay LETOUS| SP ECles. 6). \ = ee eee ee 81-82
Epiinmerus pirt oniapplewand, pear 2222-2222 a- ee ese - es es ae ee 46
Hpiirir parvula on tobaccopim MH loriday sere seis ers eee ee 109 @
Eriophyes avellena, lime and sulphura:remedy-s. 02-5 25-2 6 eee eae 123
gossypw in West Indies, lime and sulphur a remedy......------.--- 122, 128
manjolix.on apple and pear 522 5 eases aa ae ee ee 46
olewworus 1m) Calitomya, sulphunamemediy 5223s oeesos =e eee 122
PYG cc 252d kad in de pee RE Oe Se II ee = ee eee 43-46
var. varolataonapple-andspeaiier..==- ssemm ert ee ee 46
mbis. eradication) im United skeimedcmeys 22-5 sees a ee 119-123
Tudis and tart lime and sul phumtagmented\y 4549 54s ee es = eee 123
Rshigmene acre on tobacco, mE loridass) sempre. = a= ae ee 109
Hucosma strenuang on ragweed an Georgia seme =o etre aa ee 105
Eulecanium ngrofasciatum on peach in Maryland...........----.------ iy eke 37-38
Newelensey 42 ics.) an ee ee 36
Eupelmus allynn, parasite of Hessian fly and Isosoma..........---.---------- 97
Euphoria melancholica and sepulchralis on cotton in Georgia. ....-.-..-.-------- 102
Euproctis chrysorrhea (see also Brown-tail moth).
not yet.in New WorksState: 3-2 23220 es ese e eee 39
“pd pT SD FR PS IR OE ee, er ee aE ee
her
INDEX. 139
Page
maps acoudane on tobacco in Florida. ........:-.-..2-.-..22225.5) eee 106
Felt, E. P., paper, “‘ Notes on Insects of the Year 1906 in New York State”... -. 3943
“‘ Observations on Cecidomyiide”’.-..............-.-.----- 112
Fernald, H. T., paper “‘A New Oriental Insect Pest (?) in Massachusetts” -...--- 22
neta TION @W- MONG DtALGs 20.0 o) ia. 2-2 - oooe h tec eb whee oboe se dtoee 40
Flea-beetle, cucumber, Bordeaux mixture a remedy..............----------- 112
pi tebacco we Connecticut.) 2-54. ie 2U A Poe 111
grapevine. (See Haltica chalybea.)
steely. (See Haltica chalybea.)
tobacco. (See Epitrix parvula.)
re eeninot.On Sitar peel, Teeny o>... 82. 32k 2 Ne ce glee ot ee 112
gy eC ee i ee ee 118-119
Hlorida. insect enemies of tobacco in -1905...............-22.2.-5-22.-2.-62- 106-111
Forage-crop production, value of parasites...............-------------------- 94-99
er An a aN eEM EL tn 2! > So. eS 2 ee Me 104-105
Foxglove. (See Digitalis.)
Nt eS CE a eitee 2 2 Ss See 2 2a) og oe 2's 2b a Soe E Ee 103-10
Memiraiion vermun dipping Of nutsery trees.-...:.-—--_--.-.--. 22252222. 3222- 26
PEPSIIIIeuMam MINNIE, 82h 3. POSS. ee ee ae eS 83
Fungus associated with pear mite in Tasmania.......-......-..--.----------- 47
enemy of Mulceanwuim -nigrojasciatum: .-.....- 2222-22252 52 22222552222 38
pear scab. (See Venturia pirina.)
Gahan, A. B., and G. P. Weldon, paper, ‘Miscellaneous Insect Notes from
tryst 906?” Anco en el pee mo 4h) 37-39
T. B. Symons, paper, “Notes on Fumigation and Dipping
(iE Eee 2 oh OM 2 Fon ta Se er a ee 26
emcees Meer in New Jemmege =...) 28 oe 2 bs Peis 2d. Sess 2 ok 36
Daw Poekereite. 3 ee oR il ee Se 41
Galleria mellonella in bee comb in Georgia...-......-------------- uss 106
Gall-midge, violet. (See Contarinia violicola. )
mite, black currant. (See Eriophyes ribis. )
Dee Un eCi Unneneneiiaa 2 ere pe ae. eo ke oe Tok ee cee Peet 104
Gastrophilus equi and nasalis in Cuba......---- Oe RN eh oh oe NN ee 117
eta eamie Imsecis GMANE F900... 2c). dL ee bes 101-106
Gipsy moth (see also Porthetria dispar). :
cree Or Rae cea ele SSS. ee on se ce 25
as RaPEG EMCEE ree ee eae Se RL as mm oa 22-26
Glue and bran or sawdust, protection against cabbage maggot-....-...--.------- 14-15
ear ten PRON CHEWMINE. © 2522220552. 224.2502 -.2202 56.4 02-2 lie 125
tree. (See Phyllanthus. )
Gossyparia spuria in New York State.....-.-.-.--- eet Se 1a UNE ie eee oe 41
nate eater ee ee Pi ree ok pe 102-103
we
Grape root-worm. (See Fidia viticida.)
Grapevine flea-beetle. (See Haltica chalybea.)
Grasses, food plants of Jsosoma tritici in Georgia............--..--------------- 102
neers itt SOC 1 IGM... foc cn.) 2 ee oe ee ee 109
8 SEEDS BSE SSG Sa es eS Seat gh C5 2 a ae a gn rs a 102-103
EES UU ee Se 97
Ie MOORMAN OR MEUIINEIRS 6.50. Os oe ot gee LEE - Sad ope 97
Gregson, P. B., paper, ‘‘ Notes on Insects in Central Alberta” .........-..-- 125-126
Grosella. (See Phyllanthus.)
ETE ee oe an a a ee a ae a are 103
CEO is Sos a a oe 39
en saE NGO. Y Of FtMEO. c= ors out is oh. ot ne i ene de oe wee 40
EE ES SE a ga ee 118-119
Heliophila unipuncta, destruction by tachinid flies...........-......-......--. 98
RUMOR UNM SGC CAS CRN NG oct 4 te et ooh uics wick ca eee
ma ouaclerd on Cotton in Georgia... - 225 ne recess eee ewe ke 101
Dan T Se URIOL Sear cheeks ou Loh dead cules ee 106-108
Hellebore and water, remedy for cabbage maggot..................-...------- 14
memerocampa leucostigma, girdling habit.................-.......00--0.--05- 41
MDOP ARG s 225 eee ns kee Rs Aes 4)
Herrera, A. L., paper, ‘‘ Destruction of Mosquitoes in Dwellings by the Powders
of Chrysanthemum, Spread therein by Means of Hand-bellows or a Towel’’. 123-124
Hessian fly (see also Mayetiola destructor).
destruction by Polygnotus hiemalis..............-.---.-+-+--++--- 95
Heterothops fumigatus, possible enemy of cabbage maggot...................-.. 15
140 INDEX.
Page
Hickory tussock-moth. (See Halisidota caryx.)
Hodgkiss, H. E., paper, ‘‘ Effects of Sprays on Aphis Eggs” .._.........:....-- 29-30
Honey dew, is it excreted from anus or cornicles?............------..-....---- 33-34
Honey tubes. (See Cornicles. )
Hooker, W. A., paper, ‘“‘Observations on Insect Enemies of Tobacco in pileada
in 1905? 2. . o ogec os ees oe oo ee | a eae er 106-111
Hopia trivialis omaJapan qlum: im Georetacewae ade see 104
Hops, food plant of Psylliodes punctulata.....-..--- wii HAE ee Uiel tees tee ea 112
Hordeum jubatum, tood> plamt;olisosoma spas ent - aes ae ae ee eee 97
Hornworms of tobacco. (See Phlegethontius quinquemaculata and P. sexta.)
Hydrocyanic acid gas not effective against Contarinia violicola larvee.-....._-- 42
recent Observations Om USe. .- esse 2 e-- ae eee eee 15-16
Hay PENGs pis “DiMOlatG =I. SIGMALA 2 sho. Se. 61 (ee ee 51
Sign ota; Enem yOrlscud OCOCCUS GCEMS = 26 e a naa ee eee 51
Pulvimariganwmeravvlis, sen 2 a ee ee 49, 52
Ep haniria cumned Im GeOreian ae. 2 oo 3s ee eee ee cere ce ee 104-105
Insecticides and apparatus, is their investigation a true part of economic ento-
MOLY, 22 LHe se inn oo 2 See OR Ee eee 82
report of committee on Cooperative testing =: 24225-22252 see ee 12-13
Insect pest,-orlental, im Massachusetts: fo3 5-528 — 25 eee eee ae eee ee 22
pests, introduced, report of committee on national control, discussion.. 19-22
Isosoma, Hupelmus allynu a parasite, food plants. ..........-....-.-----.------ 97 =
of timothy, Websterellius'’a parasites. 2-6 ete gi a eee ee 98 4
initics, Cry ptopristis a parasites 5a.) sept 20s eee eee 97
in straw, dalled’ by thrashime machine---2e-o5. ee eee 100
wheat and erasses im (Georfiags\: - Aseo st oe ees eee 102
probably eaten by Blarina brewcauda....f a: .-22 2482 ae 100
Jointworm. (See Jsosoma tritici.)
Jointworms. (See Isosoma.)
Kerosene against aphis eggs <. s2oheie 222.2 odie 8 ee Se ee Cee 29-30
little red: damit. 2 ..cte tases si Aes abe eee ee 17
willow borer. .2 Ac2.28 oo Passe ee ee ee 28
emulsion against aphis eees:. 32522 Se Se Oe eee eee 29-30
MO. wews LSeeeeeoe sd ee eee ee 104
Aspidiotus howarditn ei. eee. a = ee 91
cutworms and-wireworms: 21.220. eee. fee 110-111
Brio Phyes Wyte eee WS oo os ine eee 46
pupese of. Pamphilinuis persicum: o> 5 = eee eee 86
root formvot Scuzoneumaslaniqed a: -o- a) = eee 104
tobacco insects an Mlorida 2-32-5045 Sos see ome!
whitewash against aphis eves:.o 2224 Seto. 22 oe eee 30 |
Kil-o-Scale avainstiaphis eggs. =. sho. Sollee) see 29-30
San-Jose scaliess.. cat A ete: ota 47-48
Kirkland, A. H., presidential address, ‘‘A Great Experiment in Applied Ento-
mology” 2. F228. hs be ee CI oe ES SS) ee 10
KeL mixture against aphisiecess: 4-5. 2 eee ese.) ee ne ee 30
Ladybird, Asiatic. (See Chilocorus similis. )
Laphyoma jrugiperda im Georgia: 2-2-2. 22 -e == se bie ei toa eee 102-103
North Carolia: .. 3.5 Sebo cod see a ee 48
Lasioderma testaceum mi stored tobacco miMloridal? 2) -s-455- ee ee lig
Lathrobium-anale, possible enemy of cabbage maggot...........-.-.----------- 15
Leati-beetle, elm. (See Galerucella iuteola.)
hopper, eels. ose ee oe DA ee ae ec ee li =
Leaf-worm, cotton. (See Alabama argillacea.)
Lemon, food plant of rio plies olevvoris sae ee ee oe 2 ee ee ee 122 ©
Lepidosaphes ulmi (see also Scale, oyster-shell). e
in New Jersey: 22: 2-22 Bere hd eee ee cee eee 36
heprosy in Havanas 2.2. bese see oe oe et re a ee reels 118-119
Lilac, food plant of Per idroma-octulla.. 2. ae: eee 126
Lime and sulphur against species of Eriophyes.-.......-..---- Ae) Sen 121, 122-123
wash for dipping nurseryssioek:. 1 eae eee ae 26
objectionable dilutent of Paris green against tobacco budworms. ....----- 107
sulphur-salt wash not effective against Hulecanvum migrofasciatum ee 3]
soda, wash»against. Aspidiotus hewandi1: 22 -b2cae== 2 =e ee 90-91 -
wash against Aspidiotus howardw...-.--..-------:-+-----+-225-= 90-93
perniciosus, experiments in New York
Siatess 222.2. ote ae ee ee 39-40
INDEX. 141
“
: Page
Linden, food plant of Neurocolpus nubilus.......-.-.----- EERE ee er 105
Pulnnaria mummerabilag.. 02002" >. 2. 22s SS Se aa 105
Liquidambar. defoliation by Macrodactylus subspinosus.............-.--------- 48
meen rumens Off Cotton in-Georpin<. = 62250. 0532 ose Las e-ee e 101
Macrodactylus subspinosus (see also Rose bugs).
ml ennectirut 25S £tic 24a eae ee 86
Newierey =. oc. Shas be Ses eee 35
MOLIAS CAKOUNS 2.6. 8S oo oo ee een paw eee 48
Macrosiphum granaria, eamucuom-wy parasites /:.2 08.222. 20 Sols ee aa dees 99
Mantid, Chinese. (See Paratenodera sinensis.)
Maple borer. (See Plagionotus speciosus.)
Mit Plant of Asmiioimmancyius..-. 2.22.0 ¢.0_ 222. eis te vee sun ee 88
te oO Re ee a Ae See 36
oo Sy Lo ee ee nee en eee ee et 105
leaf stem-borer. (See Priophorus acericaulis.)
ct eee PINIEe WIDGET en a es ee ae 23
mipan, 40008- plan ols wivinaria acericola>.__ .-..-2...--+--.2---2.20 23 105
Maryland, miscellaneous insect notes for 1906.......--.....--------.-.---:--- 37-39
erciCunnciia, Hew crenial insech Peat. ._.2.---o. 22. -. 2.2 2e2-cs Rte 22
Mayetiola destructor (see also Hessian fly). ~
Mir tag wae ee 2 28 ne 5s ee I A ees 102
Megalopyge opercularis in Georgia EB eee ee ie Se Bt Se fe 106
Melanchroia geometroides on grosella in Cuba...............------------+----- 117
Melanoplus differentialis, destruction by Sarcophaga georgina......----.-------- 98
Peer tepor. of committee”. .... .... flacvi< 22. 2ois- 5 ilens-t--- 2S 127-128
Midge, wheat. (See Contarinia tritici.)
nner Ieee NOLES (OF (60ere - 2 2 See e. ce See 5l 2. 2 EU. se 13-17
Mite, cotton-leaf blister. (See Eriophyes gossypii.)
gall, of black currant. (See Eriophyes ribis.)
Seeeeea ios st ew PeUee. a. Sak 2S ye Se ee 37
pear blister. (See Erio ae Pe )
rust. (See Eriophyes Bie eivOrus. )
Monomorium pharaonis. (See Ant. little red.)
_ Mosquitoes, destruction in dwellings by chrysanthemum powders. .....--.--- 123-124
-Mountain ash, Enropean. (See Sorbus aucuparia. )
Mouse, field, dev ouring egg masses of Paratenodera sinensis..........-.--.---- 37
: Muhlenbergia, eee eee Sen 97
_ National control of introduced insect pests, report of committee......------.-. 19-20
_Nectaries. (See Cornicles.)
EWeurocolpus nubilus on linden in Georgia. -.-.-..--------.---------.-------- 105
New Jersey, unusual insect happenings i EEO Se as Seek SUL 34-37
Seek tate, meect notes of 1906. 2.2 oe 3943
ET a a ee 125-126
Nomenclature, report of committee --...........---- etme SL betes Gale 52. 10-11
Nominations, report oe TS eae, ye ie Seen ke ee 127
Nursery inspection, desirability of uniform State laws.................------- 20-22
governmental, of imports and interstate shipments. ---.-- 19-22
erie atta SMM EMER Fel ans 2 Fs 2 Se ee se 27-29
trees, notes on fumigation and dipping. -.-.-.-....----.------------- 26
Oats, food plant of 1 NORE RS Die ek Sc Cee 126
Ecanthus miveus in vineyards in New York State..................-.--.------ - 40
Oncometopia lateralis in tobacco fields in Florida.....-......-..-..-.--------- 111
Onion, dood. immnninen A/ectem MiMneMENAS Gs 2k ee ee 126
perereames in Ur miiver meatless 20. 222 eco. 2a 112
eainus notus on tobacco m Florida....-..........-.---+-.-.-----.--..-02. 110
Orange, food plant of Eriophyes oleivorus............-.------- bao Yc eee 122
Pamphilius eee eee 85-86
New Jersey and Pennsylvania. .-......-..-..-.--.---- 87
Pansies, food plants of Chorizagrotis auxiliaris and Noctua clandestina.........- 126
Paragrotis pomegemenin Centralnalberta .- 22.2.2... f.. 2 . 2a. weet see le 125-126
Parasites i in economic entomology, importance of muddy neh oer See ete, ey 83
value in cereal and forage crop production. ............-..---.------ 94-99
‘Paratenodera sinensis, failure to establish it in New Jersey.......2.....-.-.---- 7
is green against rne Re EF ie ORNS 2) lle awcidad ana 110
> Cy ee ee ee 109
EE LOD ORO eth Sus 2. on sae sp oe Sek S an 109
it 4 2 INDEX.
Page
Paris green. and. corn: meal against. tobacco bud wormp:. 2.222522. -2 te eee 107
imsects in Mloridae ss. e eee ee lite
lime against hormwormsrot tobacco= was a ee ee 108-109
Parrott, P. J., paper, “The Pear Blister-mit® (Eriophyes pyri (Pgst.) Nal.)...-- 43-46
Parsnip, food ‘plant of Noctua clamdestinwa ssn: sa ek eet ee eee eee 126
Peach=ioodsplant. of Apits perstceemigen= 21-4 sane ie eee 103
Conotrachelus menupharee=- Jae dese) ee ee ee 103
: Diplotanis jrondicolas as. 2 Nee ease Oe eae 103
Hulecanmim migropascumieum: 2 5.24 ere. Sey ee ee 36, 37
Macrodacnjlus suas punostis: — 6 se te ae ee 86
Pamphilius persteunts sree 5 2 ee a ae 85-86
Pear blister-mite. (See Hriophyes py7t.)
food: plant of As prdioris rowan, --epsse 5 oa re eee Sa e e 88
ITNT GGS 95 SAMs Se Ren a Slay See ele ee 43
Subune: sivmanbeas 22 S20 es Ae oat ee 105
Pecan: bud=wortn in; Georpide =. =< 2225.52 Sige cise: ere et ee 105
“iood: plant of \Callipterus) carucll ae seen ene ee ge 105
twig-eirdlermin Georgia 2s 2: 3550.3 ees ae ee ee ee 105
Pediculoides ventricosus, parasite of Sitotroga cerealella............--..-------- 102
Pegomya brassice. (See Cabbage maggot. )
Pennyroyal, metiective a¢amest little red antes: 47142) se ee ee 17
Peonies, food plants of Chorizagrotis auxiliaris and Noctua clandestina.......-- 126
Perrdroma:occulia on. hilac in central Albertar = 2 28 255 ee a ee 126
Persunmon, food plant_of Hyphantria cunea_.-.__2..... 2.52... 2252-22 e 104-105
Phenacoccus acericola in New York State.................----2++2+-+- 22s eeee- 4]
Phenological investigations, importance in economic entomology ils Orth, eae (ul
Philippines, problems mm economicentomolosy a). Sash shake ae 117
Phlegethontius quinquemaculata and sexta on tobacco in Florida, remedies. ... 108-109
Phorbia brassice. (See Cabbage maggot.)
Phthorimxa operculella on tobacco in Florida........---.-.---- in oh ae 110
Phyllanthus, food plant of Melanchrota geometroides..<. .. 22. =.= 22 ee ila 7/
Phytlocopies schlechtendalson-apple and pears 23225 -6- 2-- oe ee 46
Physiological studies, importance IMvECONOMIC eM tOMOLOP Ys =a > nase ee §1-82
Phytoptus ym In, Milimoigec sos. 2 each tk 5.4 SO re ge a 8 Se 43
Pissodes strobv, confusion of two or three species in literature .......-...------ 84
in cotton fields im, Georgia: yee es ee ae eer 102
Plagionotus:speciosus.im New Yorle States sa: ef oder ea. aa eee 40-41
Platygaster herricki, parasite of Hessian fly, probably polyembryonic......-.-- 96
Plechiscus sp.,, parasite of cabbage maggots. 0.56 2 Soa) See 15
Plum, food plant of Aspidiotus how OP AVES 35 Re ee oo ian oe a2 ot ay &7, £8, 93
Japan. food: plamtiol opliasiriuiglis..: aaee se ea ee 104
native wild, food plant of Aspidiotus howard. 2... -.= 2.252 2 eee 93
PSIG DIOSSCR S52 Dees BN RA eee ie BOS ON Gy em OS, eee a 96
Roison-bran: deainst Cutworms 3022 one ee ee ee Se oe ee 126
Polyembryony im; parasitie msects. 72. 712i ase ese ee a 95-97
Poljgnotus memals:- parasite of LH essiamiilyen.ten sor = see ae ee 95
minutus, polyembryome development 5 sae.) Soe eee eee ee
Poplar borer. (See Saperda calcarata.)
food plant of Saperdarcalcaratia ss. i= ne ea ee ee a een
Poplars; undésirable’shade trees'1m Hast: 22s -peacenas - kee ee ee
Populus monilifera, food plant of Ceutorhynchus lapathi.......-...-.-----------
Porthetria dispar (see also Gipsy moth).
not, yet:ini New York State... eee eee eee
Popato, food {plantof cut wormis sa 2 ee eee eee eee ne re
Predaceous insects in economic entomology, importance of study........------
PMOphorus Gcenvcaulis 2.2125 06-4 2 a 2 Oe ee ee ee
Prospalia auranti, parasite ol Asprdiotus howordiia- 2 =e eae ee ee
Prune, food plant ‘of Aspidiotus howarditcoy ess eee ee eee
Pseudeucela gilletteir, parasite of cabbage maggot..........-.-.:-.-------------
Pseudococcus aceris, Hyperaspis signata an enemy....-.---.--------------------
Psylliodes punctulata i in hopyards im British-«Golumbias:4. 55 =e eee ee
Pterostichus coracinus and lucublandus, enemies of cabbage maggot......--.----
Pulvinaria acericola on sugar maple in ‘Georgia Babi 30k LB iia a eee ea ee
innumerabulis' im: Geormians js a2 seen oe eee ee
New J GTSC Yo Pee eee. ee ee Ee
observations on “natural checks:+.. 2222 20.4 se)- eee
: j
INDEX. 145
Page
Pump, compressed-air, for spraying a mechanical mixture of oil with water or
IG er Dats 655 oe ns pees See ot eS ie os es 115
RES AO SARE OT PiEY: INO. soe. ss et fo Sek ees ees 23
Ragweed borer. (See Eucosma strenuana. )
meter, 100m Praline. CibwOrlis:.-).. 2. 2s. 022-0342 08 ta) a. uss ze eeee 125
UME SnREIaLCMC Ute AT 40 oS ce es oe oe ea abe Se oa tes ee 118-119
Report of committee on cooperative testing of insecticides.............-. Ser 12-13
MECH CINNID foc! sy cee ee eet ec Ot 2 sn ee 127-128
national control of introduced insect pests............- 19-20
IME PAIR ae oe AT SS 33 os 2S a Se 10-1]
PRAMAS 2 2208 oo oe hiro sc ee eet a ee 127
eerguanreomemete ts TS shea ede eee 128-129
Research in economic entomology under the Adams Act............-...----- 77-84
Rrra! ECT Ot COMMNLLEC. = Ss): etek be eee bn ee ek 128-129
‘*Rex’’ lime and sulphur wash against Aspidiotus howardii...............-.--- 90-93
PIU eerie ApEn emia ee PL i oe 2S eS 30
Se or DnOed. plate Ol CILWORTISS 20.30. 225.2802. 2s. a ee See ee 125
Root-worm, grape. (See Fidia viticida.)
Rose bugs (see also Macrodactylus subspinosus).
lpr cole ly-seort-iaired shrew. (oi sot eo bool ee eS 48
chafer. (See Macrodactylus subspinosus and Rose bugs. )
eit Peni Mi eo LO LNs Sehr SS Ls 2 ik ets ol PR eee eee 23
RrONELCNOPIIAIE Rees. 53 Sst rea oc 2 See Oat e eeie 105
Rumsey, W. E., paper, ‘‘ Manner of Birth of the Woolly Aphis of the Apple
Ser innienns Henig Latins) 2 28 | oo oe aoe ot ae et oe 31-33
BENE HaTLA Cr THONOIA. waa ie 2. oe DE VSO bs ath ae eee ea St 97
_ Saddle-back caterpillar. (See Sibine stimulea.)
© Sytt- > ey Gee oe ee Oe Eee
Ap tre
Te
Salix alba, amygdaloides, caprea, cordata, lucida, sericea, food plants of Crypto-
RIPART EM IIe ON. ets) ee Re So en a aig Re ae Le = + oe eos Es 27
Salt marsh caterpular. (See Estigmene acrva.)
Sanderson, E. Dwight, paper. ‘‘A Spray Nozzle for the Mechanical Mixture of
Oil with Water or Other Liquids’’.........- 112-116
‘“What Research in Economic Entomology is
Legitimate under the Adams Act?’’.......-... 77-84
REN ONIIP ELC POL RPUB EMG OOREEA eree 8e TRE SS secs ed e 103
Buperint Cul iLe Tt paps iar te rentias: 5 oo). 2. te. et Be See Se 105
Mate MLS neta 2 FA ar) a ee eS. bees Sg eee ee ee 104
Sarcophaga georgina, parasite of Melanoplus differentialis........-..-...-------- 98
Sawdust and glue, protection against cabbage maggot..........-------------- 14-15
Peay ew aibeackine tae. peach ~ .~ 7. aes. 2256 se, oost 8e seu. 85-86
ees Tae a CL TIO Doe ts eS oS a $e ck ele. - 29-30
Pa SOUS MOUNTAIN ots Se Sond Cet ean I) ee oe Shee Se LS 91
OPH GNMEUS eR es re SEU) Sere 47-48, 103
Seale, cottony maple. (See Pulvinaria innumerabilis. )
false maple. (See Phenacoccus acericola. )
Howard. (See Aspidiotus howardiv. )
oyster-shell (see also Lepidosaphes ulmi).
lpi MeMNE AIO RMN 7 Oe ene ee Se ee Se ok te 29
peach, soft. (See Fulecanium nigrofasciatum. )
Putnam. (See Aspidiotus ancylus.)
San Jose (see also Aspidiotus perniciosus).
Seen t Renee MeN ete ence et ee ek ee ae 29
scurfy. (See Chionaspis furfura. )
terrapin. (See Hulecanium nigrofasciatum. )
Schizoneura lanigera (see also Aphis, woolly).
PE RRR cer acka. Sails Set atvrt.< wis hong ee ee eee 104
RE es Se ee ee Oe ye 2 31-33
Dmanmemimnban Now york state... ....[........... 25-000. 6 2 0nd 39
Schoene, W. J., paper, “The Willow Borer as a Nursery Pest”’.. ........--.-- 27-28
In REAP a IN NG OGIP IR. = GE oe... Y.-S ee ne eee ese ee ee 103
“Searcher.’’ (See Calosoma scrutator.)
Semiotellus chalcidiphagus, double brooded, parasite of jointworms.. ....-....-- 97
(Stictonotus) isosomatis, parasite of jointworms .............------ 97
Service-berry. (See Amelanchier vulgaris.)
_ _ tree, wild. (See Sorbus terminalis.)
ENE Sit SPINS -28t A TOOTSIE. oS Sores ss DE eee ee OS ok sdk oe va see 105
144 INDEX.
re Page
Shade tree insects in Georgia ........-...--- eres yea eee erase ef 104-105
trees; injury by Lepidosaphes whinge. on ere rene ee eee 36
Sharpshooters. (See Aulacizes wrorata and Oncometopia lateralis.)
Shrew, short-tailed (see also Blarina brevicauda).
ENEMY Ol TOS DUBS: Sas: 15 See ene ees eT One Seen 48
Sibine stumuleaon roseand pear im: Georgians. 5. Sees 450) es Sear renee 105 —
Stphocoryne avenz etiect.ol sprays ONseegseee: 6 aaa es See ee 29-30
in. New orl: Staite scence > cos oe Bee ee 29
Sttotroga cerealelia in stored wheat in Georeia-: 22-2 252.0) oes te ee 102
Smith, J. B., paper, ‘‘ Unusual Insect Happenings in New Jersey in 1906”... ._. 34-37
R. I., paper, “Some Georgia Insects during 1906”..................- 101-106
Snout-beetle, imbricated. (See Epicerus imbricatus. )
Sorbus aria, aucuparia, and terminalis food plants of Eriophyes pyri..........--- 44
South American moth. (See Thysania zenobia.)
Sphinx, catalpa. (See Ceratomia catalpx.)
Splitworm of tobacco. (See Phthorimxa operculella.):
Spraying for.codling moth, discussion... so2se--- eee | ee 75-77
= in’arid regions) @Uitaihs) 28 ar. ae see ee ee 50-75
Ohi@ 2.2 35 Se oe Se ie Ae AO a Cee 53-50
Spray nozzle, for mechanical mixture of oil with water or other liquids... ..... 112-117
Sprays; etiects on aphisseees. 22. ii82e ee eee 5 Se sees en nee 29-31
Sporobolus, food plant of Iisosomac <2 = “Assess = a eee oe eee ere 97
Squash bups in Georgia. .2cce.25, se ee Se ee ee ee 104
Stem-borer, maple leaf. (See Priophorus acericaulis. )
Stipa; food. plant of Isosomaac jo) o 2255 22 eee. Dine go ener ee me 97
Strawberry, food: plant of cutworms: 2445 cess 3 Sea a hoe ane ee 125.9
Structural studies, importance in economic entomology...-.-.--...---..---.-- 81-82
Sugar beet, food plantjof flea-beetiles 2h a2 ee 2 ee 112
Silphur acaimst Hrophyes olewonise..) 2c. ceere ek ee ee 1229
and lime against, species oft@Eriophyesa= 22.2522 9 5-e os eee 121, 122-123
Solt, soap against -Eriophyes TUbtses ian eee ee ea 121-122 q
washes against aplis-eses-«2 4.<< Sen sk eee 29-30
Symons, T. B., and A. B. Gahan, paper, ‘* Notes on Fumigation and Dipping
of WNursery Trees’? sc2 5 252s Po es Se Oe ee ane
Tachinid flies, parasites of Helophilaninipunciges.--- -- s5-eee Gee eee 98
parasites of Heliophila unipuncta, practical absence in New Jersey in
190G 5.5: 2 oS epe heed eye alate age Rates pe Sins, 2 React ee A i ee 35
Tartaric acid solution ineffective against little red ant..-...-....---.--...---.- 17 @
Taylor, E. P., paper, ‘‘Economic Work Against the Howard Scale in Colorado .
(Asindiotus howard CK. eee ae ee Saas een ee 87-93
Thrvps tabaci not reported on tobacco in United States.......:-....-.-<-:---- 112
tobacco. (See Euthrips nicotiane. ) .
Tyson cencbra-me New Work State. seas s ee ee ee 398
Dibicen-septendecvii im’ Maney andl asco os eee eh meee ee ee 38
New Jersey =o. 20. auace Bas ee ie De 34 |
NewYork States sack iuaike - . "si Penta ne ae ieee oe aman ages 43
Timothy, food plant of Isosoma..-...-.-- OME nl an ee ne SRY are EE 97, 98
Tobacco decoction against aerial form of Schizoneura lanigera........----.----- 104 —
Aphis malic: 2 ata es Lean: gee ae eee 104 |
WOT SUCH ~TVG CT aero -c ee a a ae 103 —
flea-beetle. (See Epitrix parvula.)
food“ plant/oi cuecuntberilea-beel les sees. 2- cae eee nee eee ik
Thrips tabacy in Russias: 2 ees ee eee 112%
msects In Florida-uy 1905 ~. 22 oe Sees. = ee oe See a es 106-111
remedial practiGestess =... ose 26 has eee ..: Lim
worms. (See Phlegethontius quinquemaculata and P. sexta.) |
Toxoneuron seminigra, perhaps parasite of tobacco budworms..........------- 108
Tree-cricket, snowy. (See canthus niveus.) 4
tanglefoot against e1psy: moth = -.----5.---22----- 2-208 41-42, 48
Walden, B. H., paper, ‘‘ Notes on a New Sawfly Attacking the Peach (Pamphi-
pe R i PE AC Ras es, aie See ee cel gs we po - - es 85-86
Wall flowers, food plants of Chorizagrotis auxiliaris and Noctua clandestina.. . - - 126
Pamnith. moa mant ol-Datannd tiiegerrema 242-242 eo es ==> -- 2 2 105
worm.black. (See Datania wntegerrima. )
Washburn, F. L., paper, “Insect Notes from Minnesota for 1906”... ..-..---- 13-17
mensretelus., parasite of lsosoma of Tumothy _ 2. 2 ...22522.52 22..5--.---2-22- 98
tritici, double brooded, parasite of jointworms......-..--------- 97
Webster, F. M., paper, “The Value of Parasites in Cereal and Forage Crop
PROBING roe oo See ee 8 42 Tae ee ae es op eke 94-99
Webworm, fall. (See Hyphantria caneu)
Weevil, white-pine. (See Pissodes strobi.)
Weldon, G. P., paper, ‘‘ Miscellaneous Insect Notes from Maryland for 1906”’.. 37-39
Pireve- oll coup amaimeaplits eeess 8. 2s. le A - - s 2 s bee e 29-30
ae IES PEOMNITOUE ae FS Se. os. Ia oS 93
Peet 2000 plainer CULWOEINKe=* 2.2 2 150. SS be eee de he ees 126
Sees eee ee 2 Sone Os dns aeons es ew RRR 97
DEI a8 Set ee se ME x See ot a ee 102
MED) ELELOT «oan Dade = 2 ee One YL ee yee a ee 102
midge. (See Contarinia tritict.)
Siren, sGedron Omotroga cencdlella.. 223. 25. Sosa 22S. Sea ee eee 102
Dern wracit eae AMIN COOS spas se ae epee ei gwd weet ee 30
Willow borer. (See Cryptorhynchus lapathi. )
Diteworis ontenacce in Tiondma. 00002 2 Soop. ted PS A 110-111
““Woolworm.’’ (See Estigmene acrea. )
7487—No. 67—07 10