Skip to main content

Full text of "Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences"

See other formats


pees 


Pees 


pave 


es, 
cers 


oe 
n 


s 
. 
” 


4 he he ‘ 


qe hel ae! 


LZ ASNY GS lz Of Pa Av OQ GY Gi = O44 wy) 9 #f fray 
s) z= A NA x Z A fr 
: NS Luss = Sy | = , “i a errs a f | 
on . a “as Zz 7) z mi 
ON NOILNLILSNI_NVINOSHIINS Sa 1YVYdIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITL T | 
Y- = ~ ; > nw = 
it n us wn ul Vg 30 NG) 
\ = c ‘2 = Of%y.% Kem 
J = = eS i Bo c KK 
Hi7 LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3ZI1yVvy 
~ z - ra a z _@ 
wo 2 ¢ 0 = oa \ pe 
xB Je LY fp m) >] es 7\3 
> - «ZZ > ce > { = 
hay Vy -- ws ae 
: Hiei: 2 ; 2 
ON NOILQNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3ZIYVYEIT LIBRARIES 
= << = see =! < 
: “Z 2 é : : 
Z 2 g : g 2 | 
2 = =o = Zz 2 
> G = > = se = : 
2 7) Z 7) Ae ae an Lh 
72 LIBRARI ES SMITHSONIAN _ INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS -$ai Uva 
Pd uJ = lw Fd x ae be ee! 
x a. 1h Uy ws . 4 AS a 
= Pip = < = \e 
= x Wyigg S c: ah. NN a 
3 a “We 3 he 2 NG 
=z ea Pe a Zz og 
ON NOILALILSNI NWINOSHLINS S31YVYgIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN 
ma cabin z r z re 
2 a = 9 Y, OD 
a > a > Pod i> 
= aie = a = a 
wo ” a dl = 
= wn < a aaah: . 
eI INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYE 
“s ” ise ” z | Jia 
E 2 < s < = wy 
ike : S = _2 2 ¢ 
4 ok w ” Oo WM a2) G 
De O po cate © , O 
= = iS Z, 22 z 
ie \ be = >’ = > 
ee = ” rei = ” = 
ON L NOLLNLILSNI _NVINOSHLINS Sa 1YVYGIt LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN 
n ap Ps oe 7 z 
a aa Ww wi bey, 
: = : : - Vy? 
< =. 1) ie - <x te — 
oc ac oe oc c. 
= fae) a = 4, 
fe) an ) ody Oo Nwoswsd 
oo” ae sil = mer z= : 
Wi. tsi RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31uVUs 
nt m = 3a z= 
t R | 0 © oe oO G4] 
“5 = 3) am = = 
< ay a = 70 2 
se oO tee 7 ay ~ 
Sea viocanins Guill en Z ss a 
ON NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLIWS SAlYVUaI TL LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN 
= s ie. aa ee Z 
z = aa of 5 
on) O y ” n 7) 
@) O 4 a O B 
< = a = rai 
> > = oF ae = 
ae ae ” bs Pd W”? 


Eee sos \ ep ee | Re Ee a Ye Jar NE swe lee ee Ge ee 

Nr 2 YE NW 297 2" EM a eS 

‘S os se = SS yy = Say >" = : 
= 7p) : z 7p) 2 Y 


LLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS S3INVUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION  NOILI 


ES 


LIBRARIES 
NOILNLILSNI 


NOILNLILSNI 
NOILNLILSNI 


, 
_e 
‘ a 


ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31uvugi7_LIBF 


SatuvudIT LIBRARIES 


cc 
<x 
EE 
m 
a 
= ¢o = = o 
S ee) a - 0 
— *% xO - ze Ay 
F 2 : ; = 
ea D z Z . 
NLILSNI < IAN 
ALILSNI_ pod ldWa aI T_LIBRARIES SMITHSON AN _INSTITUTION,, 
< = os = x w = 
rie 4 oO aes — > ‘3 ae a 
Mf * & 2 % a. Ee 
lio = > = ess = ot ie 
; Ww J me (9) < PA YU) a Pid 
RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILMLILSNI_NVINOSHLIWS sgiuvugi7_+!2 
lw Lit SOK LS Lid oe) 
a 2% a af ASS oF a 
' ae pal SAI AES ox 
<j; me < =I WA < e 
bi _ oO cal 
ae = _ Pca eee < 
S31uYVUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION 
c Zz a Zz a z 
Oo © = w 2 YY, a c 
x Wg = 70 = li, 9 5 
> SONS “a > = Lob > E 
2 AY = z EG fC : 
j pea ap) = Ww — 
RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS, Saluvuat| ee 
d . Ww : 4 
1 < 7 a 5 Wy, = ° 
Mn DE Aas 1? He: 
AS 2 8 he = a i ae 
KZ Ee =e ie FOO Sn fe 
le = = > 7 = >" = 
NLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYEIT LIBRARIES INSTITUTION 
a “ne ” z oe z2 We 
oe eS ” iw Ww —_ 
ee. Xe Pa a = = ac 
= fod og ae 
Cc a fend ies w = oc 
aa. 5 + aa 
= ON roa) = co. — oO 
oO . ~ oO a @ aes 
Zz i a z= a z - 
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31u¥vudI7 LIB 
= i = a x ey ot, iA 
= 2) oi oe fe) 
= : = - “A = 4 
ao = ks Wea eS | > 
Ke > - > “SS - 
” om = a aS - a 
zZ . wo z a ae w 
NVINOSHLINS S3IYVHYEI1_ LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOL 
Zz ” = oe ” z ee 2) 
ts = Noes = < Ny = 
a A et fy =f z ia 
» EA ate = Se, ho 
FE zZ “fy = Zz = 2 
= > SF = > = > 


Sa wens 2 


a 


SYVWIlY 


Daw a3 


VOLUME 68 
Number 1 


J Our nal of the MARCH, 1978 


WASHINGTON 
ACADEMY., SCIENCES 


Issued Quarterly 
at Washington, D.C. 


t 


CONTENTS 


Features: 


WALTERI FREEZEE: The First Trans-Atlantic Cable ................. 


SIMON W. STRAUSS: The General Linear, First-Order Ordinary Differential 
ese MOU rte. Nel tacos ev oud gO Sone be eS nes os SRS 14 


Research Reports: 


RICHARD H. McCUEN: Design of Detention Structures for Controlling 
Riot mem Ibnighway SUMACES:. 2222.22. 5.260.085 nee es see ea Mew ne oe 19 
G. C. SMITH and R. B. EADS: Field Observations on the Cliff Swallow, 
Petrochelidon pyrrhonota (Vieillot), and the Swallow Bug, Oeciacus 
Pale EDITS MEA OANA Oe a) tcdsle  cUNS te stays < a's! Ss annie sx pemdys Elele's Soe See al ee 23 
RICHARD H. FOOTE: New Genera and Species of Neotropical Tephritidae 
STS IGTERD 275.61 6 oR SR ae enema cn a 


Academy Affairs: 


KELSO B. MORRIS: The Awards Program of the Academy .............. 33 
SCSI TISS TUE a Gian Sees Rae oS ae 


New Affiliate 
The Potomac Chapter, American Fisheries Society ................... 40 


Obituary 
LOTUS So GUS 87S AgSs ea eR a Se) ee ae ee eee... eee 


Washington Academy of Sciences 


EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 


President 
Richard H. Foote 


President-Elect 
Mary H. Aldridge 


Secretary 
Kelso B. Morris 


Treasurer 
Alfred Weissler 


Members at Large 
George Abraham 
Grover C. Sherlin 


BOARD OF MANAGERS 


All delegates of affiliated 
Societies (see facing page) 


EDITOR 

Richard H. Foote 
EDITORIAL ASSISTANT 
Elizabeth Ostaggi 
ACADEMY OFFICE 


9650 Rockville Pike 
Bethesda, MD. 20014 
Telephone: (301) 530-1402 


Founded in 1898 


The Journal 


This journal, the official organ of the Washington Aca- 
demy of Sciences, publishes historical articles, critical 
reviews, and scholarly scientific articles; proceedings 
of meetings of the Academy and its Board of Mana- 
gers; and other items of interest to Academy members. 
The Journal appears four times a year (March, June, 
September, and December)—the September issue | 
contains a directory of the Academy membership. 


Subscription Rates 


Members, fellows, and patrons in good standing re- | 


ceive the Journal without charge. Subscriptions are |} 


available on a calendar year basis only, payable in ad- | 
vance. Payment must be made in U.S. currency at the | 
following rates: 


U.S. and Canada....... $15.00 
Foreign: ..; +... cose 16.50 
Single Copy Price ...... 5.00 


Single-copy price for Vol. 66, No. 1 (March, 1976) 
is $15.00. 


Back Issues 


Obtainable from the Academy office (address at bot- | 
tom of opposite column): Proceedings: Vols. 1-13 | 
(1898-1910) Index: To Vols. 1-13 of the Proceedings 
and Vols. 1-40 of the Journal Journal: Back issues, | 
volumes, and sets (Vols. 1-62, 1911-1972) and all cur- | 
rent issues. i 


Claims for Missing Numbers 


Claims will not be allowed if received more than 60 | 
days after date of mailing plus time normally required | 
for postal delivery and claim. No claims will be al- | 
lowed because of failure to notify the Academy of a | 
change in address. 


Change of Address 


Address changes should be sent promptly to the Aca- | 
demy office. Such notification should show both old | 
and new addresses and zip number. 


Published quarterly in March, June, September, and December of each year by the 
Washington Academy of Sciences, 9650 Rockville Pike, Washington, D.C. Second class 
postage paid at Washington, D.C. and additional mailing offices. 


| 


{ 


i a Rs = en 


= 


a 


i ae 


DELEGATES TO THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 
REPRESENTING THE LOCAL AFFILIATED SOCIETIES 


Binigsopnical Society Of Washinpton (2). 20.5.0). 0.66 oso ees ole ew ae eroues sein ue ele sees James F. Goff 
| Pminnepologzical Society Of Washington .......06 uke cee wea ccs cess sun tmeaeeecnecr Jean K. Boek 
eemricamuciciyrOl WaShingtONy 2.25.0 6 ac. oe bid alee od. 6 pias doveanls Eile ce «Bisa dic William R. Heyer 
BMC MNEAIESNcIcty Ol WaShINStON | 22... fae coe bse vee bc pemelsnausaeevceuaeovanye David H. Freeman 
mapoamolorical Society of Washington .......2 0.0.0. cee cb cane ev edecceeeers D. W. S. Sutherland 
emer OORAP MIC: SOCICLY® 35.009. )e ce. ae susie sod w dlels cease snd Ads ale wise we ea dee ue cones T. Dale Stewart 
eeeolorieasociety, of Washmegton: . 1... 2.06. flee oe kee eee tee eet eees Marian M. Schnepfe 
memedesociety- othe Distmctof Columbia 2.2.2.6... ce ea hae els tose a ce cae wea sdesbneens Inactive 
OT OPER Di, IB TIS IOIRCR TS TOLCTIS NG AA AIS 7 a oP A ae ae OE Sv amen Paul H. Oehser 
Persmie wES@cietyrol WaShiNBfON 6 ssi wie els oles De cce el ebuedcuabacedbececcceeceaes Conrad B. Link 
Pie Ome TCAMMEONCSUCTS. Gio. .c 8 suis siete eb Soe wh da wean cs cee bow eeeeed Thomas B. Glazebrook 
asmmatanmnsociety Of BMpincers: so... 6 ie cc be cae ce cee ew oe deenes sed’ George Abraham 
Pastituce on Hlectrical and Electronics Engineers -.........6/2...0. 0c et ee ee cee eeeees George Abraham 
Pratcnieanisociecy of Mechanical EMGINEErs,..... ee ee eee tte vee cemeeeete Michael Chi 
Meimimenolorical Society of Washington: VP. )o.25. 0 ce. ee ee ON ve dle we aes Robert S. Isenstein 
eeincMcAnESOCICLY, TOL MICTODIOIOSY 3. ccs ss oes ee eet ee tee ce mem ence ce ece cabs Michael Pelzcar 
Bacicnnemamentcan Military EMPIMCCLS « a ites sje psenis acs ssecs aa m,oisie siwierslevens,» Oe Gas aioe eee ees H. P. Demuth 
BEMMchic HmOOGICtVAOl Civil PMOINEEIS 55 we eos We Pe le a be oie ws C8 oak Mee BERN Robert Sorenson 
Bociciion Expenmental Biology and Médicine §.... 2.22.52. .2. cece eee ee tenes Donald Flick 
ERIMCHIC AE SO CI IVI Tes ICCA Sealy c. gees ‘eilaia, 20s: Macspatananendtaed ose sane “eiacaeaprey abeaaredee wig ice sa ope. ePsuauace Glen W. Wensch 
mitermational Association of Dental Reséarch .2.......0....... 0.2 cee ec eee William V. Loebenstein 
wAmerican Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics .............0cccecccesevcceevees George J. Vila 
Pecan VicteCOlOlOSICAl SOGICLY 5.5... iwee coe sesh a deen beak gene bade tae ce we eedede A. James Wagner 
MIscelicmMeSOCIetyrOL VWaShiNetOMm  ... 3 fo. cela se eke cea ees cee ewe woneds sree deers Robert J. Argauer 
PRC OMSUICAMSOCICLV) OloAMENCA 5c. 5. 502s ce See ac abe case ngewe wot esweeeee de Delegate not appointed 
Paine THM INC it SOCICUY, 2s aayecs tus sus oe Ee Ws 6 Gash wise e clk gue Oe Ga eie e wl don't a, oie sbetmie, apeeear ele Dick Duffey 
RSH ROIBEOOG NECIMOLOSISES, 95. < gcse apse son 6 alos Siege Sis Wa tees Sgee nese see eee ee es as William Sulzbacher 
“PREG (CSRAITING SICILY ie ee coe ORC mn eon ar Eee arene Inactive 
BE eats RMN TAS OCIS BV ee ss ese Gros Sica cike leywieeshegane © o/ausieishs: +) dyaqejpgendeayauel@Rraosaun ote is Delegate not appointed 
IMMMOLONG eH ISLORVNOL SCIONC Ss CIID) a.i.. sas iak seed 3 sadeere soled wage aks pane aeeveye ouevalaieoyere wie Mugen Inactive 
Panenican Association Of Physics Feachers =...) .. os .vscie ieee Beda is sure olan s eevee hate 6 alee To be appointed 
ManicaleSGctelyeOleAMeniGa tae 4. 4s: Rak RPh ss hi. oie Poa Soe. arindinweeh deve Lucy B. Hagan 
minencan Society of Plant PhysiOlogistS.\) . 5.056. be ee ee See Walter Shropshire 
Sashineton Operations Research Council i iaide. ol os OSA ee ee ee ln uate John G. Honig 
ESOC TAS OCICLY Ole AMNCMICA . Sciat e rsh oe ee as oa OER Ne Sa BUM viet es, ota a ee eet San Inactive 
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical 
ACME SURG CUMMME TM CUNE CLSin, ein tosses ice is cotta: cot nec aiede a ee oe Stile aie fore neve wrei svnieyaustena ele Carl H. Cotterill 
MeO EC ADIFONVASTRONOMELS icc ec: oiciact cove Sis see iage cL eR raw wise mie ees eles wwe me otal Benson J. Simon 
MieGhemMAaliCal ASSOCIALIONUOL AMMETICA |.) cmd socks so ve tec are ne ee bole e, bee geges coe we oe eae ein Syere Patrick Hayes 
Orel StILUte: Ofg CHEMISES A Ai 6 5 Se 6S. < Sie bo oh 6 wre budpag® san bow b+ Ryepvils oye B is Oye Boe epee Miloslav Recheigl, Jr. 
eer ESVChOlOPICal ASSOCIATION: ind «cle 'ce os Mb S Gue Aa a homperet oped 6 wins unas os eb ae, lace Bola Spee. « John O’ Hare 
mica asnineton Pant Nechnical Group ©... 2 2). sale iagl wep eels e)ote eels eainlale vines «oda s Paul G. Campbell 
Senicnican Ehytopathological Society =... us. 6c. <2 se sib Shae ene bie ald eee oie) 4. Tom van der Zwet 
Bowler ton General Systems Research! os. cio... adda cee hee elk Meet Ronald W. Manderscheid 
BAM ACTORS: SOCICDY ere rk a ae ee one oa ee ON Ue DE ala wees Bewhth was H. McIlvaine Parsons 
EMME CATIONS NEIMESESOCIELYN fot t in te ates tie aie fs etal s SES oa wy oN ale ee a ee as Wied Slaey No delegate 


Delegates continue in office until new selections are made by the representative societies. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 1 


FEATURES 


The First Trans-Atlantic Cable 


| Walter D. Freezee 


12 Pershing Ave., Ridgewood, New Jersey 


ABSTRACT 


I The first trans-Atlantic cable was successfully laid in 1866. The cable itself and 
| virtually all the equipment was designed from scratch, and a great deal of pioneering 
q was done in many technical fields. Much of the development was a learn-by-doing 
i process, but sound scientific principles were observed throughout. The article describes 


! the progress of the project from beginning to completion. It includes as analysis of the 
| conditions that led to the project and the developments that made it succeed after 


| many attempts. The completed cable not only bound Britain and America in instant 
| | communication — it furnished an indispensable foundation for the scientific development 
|| of modern deep-sea cable construction and design. 


Modern submarine telephone cables to- 
_day connect important countries through- 
/ out the world under wide oceans and seas 
and enable persons to talk with each 
other as easily as if they were in the same 
town. One cable can carry as many as 
1,840 two-way talking circuits, and a new 
|, cable now planned will increase this to 
4000. 

The wonders of today’s submarine 
cable accomplishments have been built 
upon a long background of scientific 
development dating back many years. 
|! Many of the cable-laying and design tech- 
‘niques go back to the early telegraph 
> cables of over a century ago. One of those 
that probably contributed more than any 
other was the first Atlantic cable, finally 
successfully laid in 1866. 


SS 3 


| Favorable Conditions of the Times 


| The idea of spanning the Atlantic first 
) developed into a practical application in 
1854. Cyrus Field, a successful American 

business man, was attracted to the idea 


oa 


| J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


! 


through his chance acquaintance with a 
venturesome but unsuccessful engineer, 
Fredrick Gisborne. Gisborne had started, 
but because of financial difficulties, failed 
to complete a telegraph line through 
Newfoundland which would connect 
with existing lines to New York. Field 
was looking for new ventures on which 
to use his time and money, and it occurred 
to him that the telegraph line should not 
stop at Newfoundland but should con- 
tinue across the Atlantic to Ireland, the 
closest part of the British Isles. 
Telegraph land lines had already been 
built in great numbers on both sides of 
the Atlantic, and connected most of the 
large cities in Europe, Britain, and the 
United States. Short submarine cables 
had also been laid between England and 
Ireland, across the English Channel, the 
Mediterranean, and the Black Sea. How- 
ever in each of these cases the waters’ 
were relatively shallow and distances 
were short. Largely unexplored were 
such basic considerations for a trans- 
atlantic cable as the character of the 


ocean bottom, the time delay, and reduc- 
tion of signal strength in long distance 
cable transmission, and the techniques 
of laying cables at great ocean depths. 

Field had been to England a few years 
before and could see the need for better 
communication between America and 
Europe or England. He was impressed 
with how little America knew about what 
went on in the other two areas. There 
were American reporters on the scene, 
but their reports lost their vitality in trans- 
mittal by boat. Business between the 
areas was slow and handicapped for the 
same reason. 

Everywhere Field went he found a 
spirit of optimism, progress, and inno- 
vation. The railroads, telegraph, mills, 
and foundries seemed far more advanced 
than in America. Such geniuses as Farady 
and Thomson were introducing Britain 
to the Age of Electricity. New principles 
of electricity, magnetism, and physics 
were being discovered. New products 
such as gutta percha were also being 
developed. This material could be moulded 
into various shapes and sizes such as 
plastic dolls, caps for cabmen, handles 
for surgical appliances, and tubes for 
hearing devices. 

Farady had found gutta percha to be 
an effective insulation for telegraph wires 
in cables, and it was starting to be used 
for several short submarine cables in 
England and Europe. It was water resist- 
ant, durable, and pliable, and it could 
be molded around the conductors in 
liquid state. After cooling it became hard 
but not brittle, and its insulation qualities 
improved in the ocean depths. 

Field returned to America with a firm 
conviction of the need for improved com- 
munication with England and Europe. 
He could also see that England, with its 
progress in manufacturing and business 
management, would be the land to turn 
to for help in any great project. 


Exploring the Possibilities 


After his meeting with Gisborne, Field 
lost no time in exploring the feasibility 
of an Atlantic cable. Lieut. Maury, head 


of the U. S. National Observatory and a 
leading authority on oceanography, ad- 
vised Field that recent soundings indi- 
cated that the ocean bottom of the route 
between Newfoundland and Ireland was 
primarily a plateau, deep enough to clear 
iceburgs and ships, but shallow enough 
to make a submarine cable feasible. Sam- 
ples from the ocean floor indicated that 
it was composed of soft microscopic 
shells, with no sand or gravel to damage 
a cable. 

Professor Morse, a noted American 
telegraph scientist and inventor, advised 
Field that telegraph transmission through 
a long cable such as the trans-Atlantic 
was entirely feasible, and that commer- 
cial service could be provided. Two years 
later Morse proved this, in cooperation 
with some English scientists, by sending 
telegraph signals at commercial speeds 
as fast as 270 per minute through a looped 
cable network of over 2000 nautical miles 
in length. 


Financing the Project 


With the encouraging reports from 
Lieut. Maury and Prof. Morse, Field 
secured the financial assistance of a ven- 
turesome group of business associates, 
that was needed to complete the project 
started by Gisborne. A company was 
organized and financed to construct the 
telegraph line in Newfoundland, and thus 
have a complete telegraph system from 
New York to the American end of the 
proposed Atlantic cable. This would cut 
almost in half the boat time, and thus 
materially improve communication until 
the cable was finished. 

The Newfoundland project included 
500 miles of land line on poles, and 90 
miles of submarine cable. Because of 
the rugged terrain and bad weather, it 
took two years to complete the extension 
(in 1856). The first submarine cable was 
lost in a storm due primarily to using a 
sailing vessel to lay it. These experiences 
proved that only a steamship should be 
used in cable laying, and that much im- 
provement was needed in cable laying 
methods and machinery. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


The company that completed the New- 
foundland project was also organized 
to construct the Atlantic cable. However 

upon completion of the former, it was 
clear that the company did not have suf- 
ficient money to construct the latter. 
Since the Atlantic cable would terminate 
in Britain, it was decided to try to raise 
the needed money in that country. A new 
company (Atlantic Telegraph) was there- 
fore organized in England, and the initial 
| capital of £350,000 (about $1,750,000) 
was subscribed in that country. There 
were a number of prominent English 
scientists and business men who were 
‘active or interested in telegraphy, and 
most of this capital was furnished by 
them. Several of these became officers 
| in the new company and took an active 
part in the Atlantic cable project. Finan- 
_ cial assistance was also obtained from the 
British and United States govenments on 
' the basis that they would have prior rights 
| to the use of the cable. The two govern- 
| ments also agreed to provide the neces- 
sary ships to lay the cable. 
_ During the ten years that were required 
| to bring the project to a successful con- 
“clusion (1856-1866) the Atlantic Tele- 
graph Company (or its successors) raised 
| an additional £700,000 (about $3,500,000) 
to finance a total of five major cable laying 
expeditions. In spite of the apparent fail- 
ures of the early expeditions, the optimis- 
| tic faith of the company’s officers always 
led them to approve the continuation of 
the project, and even to furnish their own 
'money to help in the financing. In the 
final stages of the project the newly formed 
t 


Telegraph and Maintenance Company, 
responsible for manufacturing and laying 
the cable, showed such faith in the project 
| that it agreed to accept no payment unless 
the cable operated satisfactorily. 


Developments Leading to Success 


The same optimistic faith displayed by 
the officers of the company was also 
shown throughout the project by those 
in charge of the cable construction. To 
them the unsuccessful termination of 
each expedition was not a failure but only 
} 


_ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


a temporary setback that would ultimately 
lead to success. Something was learned 
from each failure, and they could see the 
progress that was being made each time. 
They were confident that they could over- 
come all difficulties, and they were able 
to instill this same confidence into those 
associated with the project. 

There were many developments and 
improvements during the period of ten 
years construction. Different cables were 
manufactured and laid, setbacks were 
experienced, and changes were made to 
correct troubles. During this period only 
335 miles of cable were laid in 1857, and 
341 miles were laid in the first expedition 
of 1858 (fig. 9). Cable-laying was sus- 
pended in each case because of cable 
breakage, and because no equipment was 
available to recover the end of the cable 
from the ocean bottom. 

In preparation for the second expedi- 
tion of 1858, the cable payout machinery 
was completely redesigned by William E. 
Everett, Chief Engineer of the U. S. 
Navy. This greatly reduced its size and 
weight and simplified its construction. 
Self-releasing brakes were provided, 
which automatically released when the 
cable tension reached an unsafe value. 
Electrical testing and signal transmission 
was also greatly improved by the inven- 
tion of Prof. Thomson’s ‘‘marine’’ gal- 
vanometer of extreme sensitivity. The 
second expedition was an apparent suc- 
cess as the entire cable of 2050 miles 
was laid with only minor difficulties due 
to several mysterious but temporary 
electrical interruptions in the cable con- 
tinuity. However, success was _ short 
lived. Signals over the cable gradually 
weakened, and they failed completely a 
month after the cable had been completed. 


Group Scientific Research 


After the cable failure in 1858 there was 
an extensive study made of the entire 
cable project by a committee of experts 
called the ‘‘Joint Scientific Committee.” 
The committee analyzed all the difficulties 
that had been experienced and made 
recommendations for correcting them. 


Fig. 1. Improved cable (cross section) used in 
1865 and 1866 expeditions. Heavy shore end. 


These included cable specifications, 
cable manufacturing and laying, and 
telegraph transmission arrangements. 
A summary of its report, published in 
1863, stated that the 1858 cable failure 
was due to a number of causes which 
could and should be corrected before 
another attempt was made. These in- 
cluded the following: 

1. During storage the cable had not 
been properly protected from the heat 
of air and sun, and this had softened and 
weakened the gutta percha insulation. 
The committee recommended that the 
cable be stored in water at all times during 
manufacture, laying, and intermediate 
operations. 

2. In the early expeditions inadequate 
stowage on ship allowed the cable to shift 
during severe storms, so the cable was 
badly tangled and twisted. This undoubt- 
edly weakened the insulation and may 
have caused some of the temporary inter- 
ruptions. These failures were mainly due 
to the use of ships not constructed for 
cable laying. Such ships should be of 
large capacity, very steady in rough seas, 
and should have sufficient power to main- 
tain constant speeds over the range of 
4 to 6 knots in all kinds of weather. 

3. A careful survey of the ocean bot- 


tom along the cable route should be made 
before laying the cable. Irregularities in 
ocean bottom levels are more important 
than actual depths in placing the cable so 
as to provide proper slack. Complete 
records of the survey would also facilitate 
any future cable repairs. 

4. The conductivity and insulation of 
the cable conductors should be improved 
by increasing the size of each strand from 
No. 22 to No. 18 BWG, and the copper 
purity should be maintained at no less 
than 85%. Insulation should be of the 
latest improved gutta percha, and should 
be tested under the highest hydraulic 
pressure attainable. Joints should be 
tested separately, and should not show 
a greater leakage than twice that of a cor- 
responding length of core. 


The committee concluded its report by | 


Stating that a well insulated cable, prop- 
erly protected, of suitable specific gravity, 
made with care, properly tested under 
water throughout the project, and laid 
with the best machinery, could not only 
be successfully installed, but should give 
satisfactory service for many years. 

The report was signed by the following 
prominent telegraph engineers and scien- 
tists: Douglas Galton, Cromwell F. Var- 
ley, Charles Wheatstone, George Saward, 
Latimer Clark, William Fairbairn, Edwin 
Clark, and George P. Bidder. 

The committee’s findings were rather 
broad and required more specific develop- 
ment and design. This work was carried 
out under the direction of Charles T. 
Bright, a prominent British telegraph 
engineer, in collaboration with the com- 
mittee. The result was a cable with three 
times the copper cross section, tensile 
strength, and weight. However because 
of the increased diameter, its weight in 
water was practically the same as the 
previous cable. 

Preparation for laying the improved 
cable (figs. 1, 2) proceeded more care- 
fully than in earlier expeditions, and it 
was 1865 before all was ready. This time 
the Great Eastern (figs. 3—5) a huge steam 
ship, five times the size of any other ship 
afloat, was used to lay the entire cable. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


The ship had the needed cable capacity 
and power, and needed only the required 
stowage and payout equipment. The 
_cable-laying operation worked perfectly, 
and over 1200 miles of cable were laid. 
_ However, two serious cable defects were 
experienced from bits of metal between 
the conductor and the metal sheath. In 
each case it was necessary to recover 
several miles of cable (fig. 6) to find the 
trouble, and the recovery operation was 
| slow and cumbersome. In the second case 
_the cable broke and sank (fig. 7), and the 
grappling equipment was not strong enough 
_ to raise the cable. 


Final Success 


_ In spite of another failure and the ap- 
| parent loss of 1200 miles of cable, it was 
felt that the 1865 expedition contained all 
|| of the elements of success. The cable lay- 
_ ing operations had worked perfectly, and 
_it was only in the recovery operations 
| where improvement was needed. To cor- 
| rect this condition, both fore and aft re- 
| covery gear was provided with more 
| powerful steam engines. This would 
_avoid moving the cable from stern to 


i 


Fig. 2. Improved cable used in 1865 and 1866 
expeditions. The seven-strand copper core was 
covered by four layers of gutta percha, wrapped 
in tarred hemp, and protected by ten steel wires, 
each wrapped in impregnated hemp. 


bow when the recovery operation was 
started. Improved grappling equipment 
was also provided that was stronger and 
more flexible. 

Sufficient cable was manufactured at 
Greenwich, England, and the Great 
Eastern was fitted out for an 1866 expedi- 
tion. With the improved equipment pro- 
vided, one cable was laid the entire dis- 
tance between Ireland and Newfoundland 


Fig. 3. The Great Eastern, 1860 (courtesy Burndy Library). 


_ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


Fig. 5. Paying-out machinery, the Great Eastern (courtesy Burndy Library). 


8 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


oN 


Fig. 6. Searching for fault after recovery of cable from bed of the Atlantic, July 31, 1865 (courtesy 
| Burndy, Library). 


| 


without difficulty. The end of the 1200- 
mile cable laid in 1865 was then recovered, 
after considerable difficulty due to bad 
weather, and was extended the remaining 
distance. Thus two working cables were 
provided between Ireland and New- 
foundland. | 

After suitable testing the first cable was 
placed in service, to be followed six weeks 
later by the second cable. Both cables 
carried increasing message loads, and the 
‘benefits to trade and international rela- 
| tions were soon apparent. Business and 
) government problems were solved faster, 
and people were kept better informed of 
what was happening in the different coun- 
| tries. Trading was based on sound infor- 
‘mation, and much of the business insta- 
bility between Europe and America was 
corrected. The cable was also of great 
| help in settling the differences between 
the United States and Britain arising 


\ 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


from the latter’s help given to the South 
during the Civil War. 


Important Technological Problems Solved 


A great deal of basic experimentation 
and scientific planning went into prepa- 
ration for the first cable expedition in 
1857, and was continued during the life 
of the project. This included experiments 
in the fundamental laws of telegraph 
transmission in long cables, determining 
the electrical and mechanical require- 
ments of the cable and terminal equip- 
ment, electrical tests in manufacture and 
laying of the cable, and cable laying meth- 
ods and equipment. Laboratory facilities 
were elementary and inadequate, and it 
was frequently a learn-by-doing process. 
In spite of these handicaps a remarkable 
amount of progress was made. 

The experiments in telegraph trans- 


Fig. 7. Forward deck cleared for final attempt at grappling, Aug. 11, 1865. 


mission conducted by Dr. E. O. W. White- 
house, British scientist, indicated that 
the telegraph signals would be consider- 
ably retarded through a long cable such 
as the Atlantic. The time lag between sig- 
nals would thus seriously impair the read- 
ability of the dots and dashes of the Morse 
code. Although not completely under- 
stood, it was realized that this retardation 
was related to the capacity and inductance 
of the cable and was proportional to the 
cable length. The tests indicated that this 
reduction in transmission speed and 
received signal current was much closer 
to a direct proportion to the cable length, 
rather than to the square of their ratios 
as was first believed (Table 1). The use 
of reversed polarity signals reduced this 
retardation, because they were opposite 
to the charge and discharge currents. 
It was also first thought that sending po- 
tentials equivalent to about 2000 volts 
were needed for satisfactory transmis- 
sion. However, after the failure of the 
1858 cable, further tests indicated that 


10 


this may have weakened the cable insula- 
tion and that satisfactory transmission 
was possible with much lower potentials. 

As aresult of this fundamental research, 
the terminal equipment was considerably 
improved during the life of the project. 
The polarized receiving relay, responding 
to sending voltages of reversed polarity, 
was later replaced by the more sensitive 
‘‘marine’’ galvanometer, invented by 
Prof. Thomson (later Lord Kelvin). This 
greatly increased the speed of telegraph 
reception and permitted reduced trans- 
mitting voltages. The ‘‘marine”’ galva- 
nometer (fig. 8) used a beam of light to 
magnify the tiny movements of a mirror 
suspended in the magnetic field of the 
received signal current. The beam of light 
was reflected on to a graduated screen 
where the amplitude of the coded signals 
could be read. Kelvin later improved 
his galvanometer with the so-called ‘‘si- 
phon recorder.’’ This automatically re- 
corded the coded signals as an undulating 
line on paper tape and thus eliminated 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


| Table 1.—Transmission Loss in Long 16-Gauge Gutta Percha-Insulated Cable 
_ Conductors. 


1. Transmission Time of the Signal 


Test No. 1.—Direct Battery Supply 


Transmit 
Miles of Ratio of Time in Ratio of 
Conductor Cum. Dist. Sec. Cum. Time 
83 — 08 zat 
166 z 14 ees 
249 3 36 4.5 
498 6 .79 9.87 
1,020 {2 14D WES! 
Test No. 2— Magneto Electric Supply 
300 1 .06—.08 = 
600 2 iG 38322-0600 
900 3 EOS 301223733 


| (Note No. 1—Magneto-electric supply provided through induction coils and alternate reversals of supply 
polarity.) 


Test No. 3—Effect of Increased Size of Conductors 


Miles of Transmission Time (Sec.) 
Each No. of Wires sa a a anc et ina 
Conductor in Parallel Battery Mag. Elec. 
166 1 16 .08 
166 y 44 .09 
166 3 28 .095 
250 1 29 145 
250 2 406 185 


2. Reduction of Received Signal Current 


7 Strength Ratio of 
Miles of Ratio of of Current Rec’d 
Conductor Cum. Dist. (grains) Current 
0 = 25,000 — 
200 os: 10,650 23 
400 2.0 3,250 335 
600 5 1,400 pes) 


(Note No. 2—Measurements made with a so-called magneto electrometer, designed to measure the 
» mechanical force of the signal exerted through an electromagnet.) 


the need to read the signals as they were time. By use of the Wheatstone bridge 
sent. Equipment was also later providedfor principle, the receiving relay was made 
duplexing the telegraph circuit, whereby insensitive to transmitted signals but 
two messages could be sent at the same __ sensitive to received signals. 


_ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 11 


Se 
jee 
pe 
eee Se 
ey 
es 
c sera a 
ie 
}—— = — = = = "EL ae (5) 
~ =. b 
a 
as 
——s 
Sas 
=< 
a 
TSS 
™”~ 


Fig. 8. Prof. Thomson’s marine galvanometer, 
consisting of a very small magnet to which was 
fastened a mirror. The magnet was suspended by 
a silk filament within a coil through which the 
signal current was passed. A light source from 
lamp (a) passed through slot (b) and was reflected 
from mirror (c) upon the scale (d). 


As the project developed, complete 
manufacturing specifications were needed 
to make sure the cable was as perfect as 
possible. Based on the research done by 


the Joint Committee, the manufacturer, 
under the direction of Mr. Bright, 


EXPEDITION 


1857 

1858 
(first) 

1858 
(second) 


Niagara 
(American) 


Aug. 5 Niagara 


ee 1,03 be 
Trinity Bay, oP 


Newfoundland 


CABLE LAID BY DATES AND SHIPS 


mid-Atlantic 
-. June 26 


255 mi. . 


Great Eastern J 
1865 [Ho 
i 2 Geis Valentia, 


Trinity Bay | 
July 27 Great Eastern 1,852 mi. July 13 
1866 I Valentia, 
Sept. 7 Great Eastern Lifting Tesland 
680 mi. Aug. 12 - Sept. 1 


prepared specifications covering the im- 
portant electrical and mechanical re- 
quirements of the cable. Seven strands 
of No. 18 BWG conductors were spe- 
cified with a carefully controlled cop- 
per content of at least 85%. Machines 
for stranding the conductors and the appli- 
cation of gutta percha by an extrusion 
process had been developed earlier in the 
project. During cable manufacture and 
placing, electrical continuity, insulation, 
and resistance were measured with the 
cable immersed in water under pressure. 
Mechanical breaking tests were also 
made periodically to insure the proper 
strength of the cable. An artificial line, 
invented by C. F. Varley, was used in 
preliminary cable design. The line was 
composed of variable resistances, induc- | 
tances, and condensers, and by its use _ 
the transmission characteristics of various 
cable designs could be predicted. 
Electrical insulation and continuity 
tests for use during cable laying were 
developed by Latimer Clark, noted Brit- 


Niagara A 
335 mi. Valentia, 
Ireland 


Agamemnon 
(British) 


June 27 


June 29 


July 29 Agamemnon Aug.5 


Valentia, 


102 Ics 
Cong Ireland 


Ireland 


Fig. 9. Summary of five Atlantic cable expeditions, 1857-1866. 


12 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


| 


ee en nn ES as 


—_ . ; . — Saas = 


ish telegraph engineer. These insured 
that conductor troubles were detected 
as soon as they developed. Charles Wheat- 


stone invented a resistance bridge for 


measuring the conductor resistance, and 


Varley devised a method of using the 
bridge to locate conductor troubles. This 


avoided the effect of fault resistance, 
thus improving the accuracy of trouble 
location. 

It was realized that improvement was 
badly needed in cable laying and recovery 


methods to avoid costly cable damage 


that had been experienced. Therefore 
Lord Kelvin made a scientific analysis 


_ of the mechanical forces involved in these 


operations and their application to the 


‘method of operations. The analysis was 


so complete and accurate that it is still 
the standard mathematical treatise on the 
subject. Kelvin showed that when a cable 
is laid in deep water, at uniform speed, 
on a level bottom, and without tension 


|, at the bottom, it moves on an inclined 


straight line from the water’s edge to the 
ocean floor. Under these conditions the 
cable tension at the ship during cable 
laying is essentially equal to the weight 
in water per unit length of cable multi- 
plied by the depth of the water. The cable 
should therefore be laid with just enough 
slack to conform to the contour of the 
ocean floor, so as to avoid residual bot- 
tom tension during and after laying. In 
cable recovery, a method of lifting the 
cable from the ocean floor was described 
using three ships. Each ship would raise 
the cable only part way, and the tension 
would always be less than the breaking 
strength of the cable. 

Kelvin’s methods were successfully 
used in laying the 1865 and 1866 cables, 
and recovery of the partially laid 1865 
cable in 1866. Cable-laying and recovery 
machinery was also developed, and many 
improvements were made during the 


project. These included the use of self- 
releasing brakes, recovery machinery at 
_the same location as the payout machinery, 


and an electric log for automatically re- 
cording the speed of the ship. The machin- 
ery for cable laying and recovery was so 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


satisfactory that the design was used for 
many years on other cable-laying projects. 

Compared to modern day standards, 
the methods and equipment used in the 
first Atlantic cable seem rather elemen- 
tary. However, the scientific knowledge 
of submarine cable manufacture and 
installation that was developed provided 
a very important foundation for modern 
day methods and equipment. Although 
the knowledge was not as complete nor 
were the phenomena as well understood 
as they are today, what was available 
was used in the scientific way. Develop- 
ment was accelerated under the pressure 
to complete the project, and failures did 
occur. However it was recognized that 
these were a part of the development 
process, and were to be expected as steps 
leading to ultimate success. 


Bibliography —A List of Sources Consulted 
by the Author 


‘The Atlantic Telegraph— Present State and Prog- 
ress of the Undertaking.’’ R. J. Mann, London, 
1857. 


‘‘Experimental Investigation of Laws Governing 
Propagation of Electric Currents in Long Sub- 
marine Cables.’’ Latimer Clark, London, 1861. 


‘‘Report of Joint Committee to Inquire into the 
Construction of Submarine Cables.’’ Board of 
Trade, London, 1861-1863. 


‘‘The Atlantic Telegraph’? W. H. Russell, Lon- 
don, 1866. 


‘‘The Forces Concerned in Laying and Lifting 
Deep Sea Cables.’’ William Thomson (Lord 
Kelvin), London, 1866. 

‘‘The Atlantic Telegraph—Description of Laying 
and Working of 1865-1866 Cables and Re- 
covery of 1865 Cable.’’ Edward B. Bright, 
London, 1867. 

‘‘The Trans Atlantic Submarine Telegraph.” 
George Saward, London, 1878. 

‘‘One Hundred Years of Submarine Cables.”’ 
G. R. M. Garrat, His Majesty’s Stationery 
Office, London, 1950. 

‘‘Dynamics and Kinematics of Laying and Recov- 
ery of Submarine Cables.’’ E. E. Zajac, Bell 
System Technical Journal, Sept. 1957. 

‘‘The Atlantic Cable.’’ Bern Debner, 
Library, 1959. 

‘*The Tooth of Time.’’ Jean Ford Brennan, D. Van 
Nostrand Co., 1967. 

‘‘Cyrus Field—Man of Two Worlds.’ Samuel 
Carter III, Putnam & Sons, 1968. 


Burndy 


13 


The General Linear, First-Order Ordinary 


Differential Equation 


Simon W. Strauss 


Directorate of Science, Director of Science and Technology, HQ Air Force 
Systems Command, Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland 20334. 


ABSTRACT 


A tersely annotated collection of references on types of approaches used in currently 
available methods to solve the general linear, first-order ordinary differential equation is 
presented, and another variant on a standard technique is described for obtaining the 


general solution of this type of equation. 


In applied mathematics, the most im- 
portant and frequently occurring dif- 
ferential equations are linear differential 
equations (51). This class of equations 
supplies some of the most frequently 
used models in all branches of science. 
Additionally, because any differential 
equation is linear to a first-order approx- 
imation, knowledge of the linear theory 
(already satisfactorily developed) often 
Suggests how one should study a non- 
linear problem (11). The present paper is 
concerned with a special type of linear 
equation, namely, the general linear, 
first-order ordinary differential equation. 
This equation is written in standard 
(normal) form as 


d 

— + Py=Q, 

dx 
where P and Q are continuous functions 
of x over the intervals for which solu- 
tions are sought. Although this is one of 
the simplest types of differential equa- 
tions, its practical importance stems from 
its applicability to a wide variety of 
problems (see, for example Betz, Bur- 
cham and Ewing (6); Buck and Buck 
(11); Spiegel (65); and Tenenbaum and 
Pollard (67)). A number of standard 
techniques and many variations thereof 
is already available to solve the above 
type of equation. The objectives of the 
present paper are to (a) provide a tersely 
annotated collection of references on 


(1) 


14 


types of approaches used in currently 
available methods to solve equation (1), 
and (b) describe another variant on a ~ 
standard technique for obtaining the 
general solution of equation (1). The sub- 
stance of the present paper should be of 
particular interest to the undergraduate 
student encountering for the first time 
the rudiments of elementary differential 
equations in general and equation (1) 
in particular. 


Approaches to Existing Methods of Solution 


Approaches used in existing tech- 
niques to obtain the general solution of 
equation (1) range from the very sim- 
plistic to the more mathematically elegant 
and include: 


I. Simply stating the general solution 
as a formula (17, 37)—a trivial case 
indeed, 


II. Direct application of a known posi- 
tive integrating factor (2, 21, 23, 33, 38, 
43, 50, 59, 65, 67), or a minor variation 
thereof (5, 52, 54, 63, 66, 69), 

III. Determination of an integrating 
factor by considering the homogeneous 
equation (also referred to as the reduced, 
abridged, associated homogeneous, cor- 
responding homogeneous, or related 
homogeneous equation) and its solution 
(7, 8, 16, 19, 30, 34, 35, 46, 47), 

IV. Introduction of an unknown inte- 
grating factor followed by the applica- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


tion of the necessary and sufficient 
condition for exactness which enables the 
determination of this factor (14, 26, 28, 
62 357/41-,53, 60, 67), 

V. A variation of IV which considers 
equation (1) as a special case. of a cate- 
gory of equations having an integrating 
factor which is a function of one variable 
only (6, 8, 26, 39, 40, 46, 65), 

VI. Another variation of IV which is 
based on the identification (by the per- 
spicacious observer) of a_ potentially 
integrable combination consisting of the 
derivative of a product of the de- 
pendent variable and an unknown but 
determinable function of the independent 
|. variable (an integrating factor) (3, 4, 9, 
| 10,11, 13,24, 29, 31, 42, 55, 56, 64, 68, 70), 

VII. An interesting variation of VI in 
which the simultaneous consideration of 
equation (1) and its adjoint equation leads 
to a directly integrable differential equa- 
tion which readily yields the desired 
general solution (25), 


VIII. The method of Lagrange (gen- 
erally called the method of variation of 
parameters or variation of constants) in 
which the general solution of equation (1) 
is obtained from the general solution of 
the corresponding homogeneous equa- 
tion by allowing the integration constant 
to vary with the independent variable 
(that is, by replacing the integration 
constant in the solution of the homogene- 
ous equation with an unknown but de- 
terminable function of the independent 
variable) (10, 12; 14, 15, 20, 26, 32, 40, 43, 
44, 49, 57, 59), and 

IX. A change in variable approach 
which assumes the dependent variable 
to be a product of 2 functions of the 
independent variable (an assumption 
possessing the advantage that one of 
these 2 functions can be made to satisfy 
' any convenient condition (58)) (22, 29, 
— 44, 48, 50, 51, 57, 58, 61, 62). For a rather 
unique change in variable approach (i.e., 
Z = Q/P — y) leading to a non-conven- 
tional, but correct, expression for the 
general solution of equation (1), see page 

2 of the second entry in reference (20). 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


Another Variant On A Standard Technique 


With the above information as a back- 
drop, we are now ready to proceed with 
the second objective of the present 
paper. In order to perform certain oper- 
ations in the technique to be described, 
let us assume that the quotient Q(x)/y(x) 
is continuous on the interval of inte- 
gration and y + 0. Equation (1) can now 
be rewritten in the form 


d 
oo ay [P x =a 0a) 
y y 
then integrated, and the result ex- 
pressed as 


ye! Pdx,—f(Qy)dx — K, (3) 
where K is an integration constant. Ob- 
viously, equation (3) does not yet con- 
stitute a satisfactory solution because it 
contains a factor having the dependent 
variable, y, under an integral sign. Taking 
into consideration properties of exponen- 
tials suggests a way to complete the 
solution. 

Equation (3) is differentiated, yielding 


d 
e —f(Q/y)dx eter (ye! Pax) 
dx 


d 
+ yelPdx a (e SQMdx) = 0. (4) 


Rearranging terms and simplifying, we 
obtain 


ate (ye! Pax) = ye! Pdx ie | = dx. 
dx AK, 


With the conditions imposed above on 
Q(x)/y(x) and y(x), 


a a ee gle 
dx J y(t) y(x) 
and equation (5) becomes 
be (ye! Pax) as Qe! Pax, (7) 
dx 


Direct integration of equation (7) gives 
the general solution 


y =e JPAxIC + fQelPXdx], (8) 


15 


where C is an integration constant. The 
restriction y #0, which we had im- 
posed in a previous section of this paper, 
can now be removed since equation (8) 
is valid for all y, C, P(x) and Q(x). 


Concluding Remarks 


Although the above derivation is a 
variant on a standard technique, it has 
the desirable feature of dealing with 


equation (1) in its entirety without re- 
sorting to homogeneous equations, un- 
known integration factors, or changes in 
variables. It is always instructive to 
examine the solution process of funda- 
mental equations from various perspec- 
tives (as exemplified by the hundreds of 
proofs of the well known Pythagorean 
proposition (theorem) (36)) since this al- 
lows one to obtain a greater insight and 
understanding of fundamental concepts. 


APPENDIX 


(Consideration of a Nonlinear Differential Equation) 


Phillips (page 64, reference (S0Q)) dis- 
cusses a problem in mathematical biol- 
ogy which gives rise to the differential 
equation 


d : 
sabi + mx = Rx’, (9) 
dt 


with initial condition x =a at t = 0, 
where x is the number of inhabitants 
in a country who at the end of t years 


have no ancestors in a specified group 
(of inhabitants); 


e—t/100 
R= ————. 
50(a + b) 


where a and b are positive constants 
(for additional details, see Phillips (50)). 

Equation (9) is a nonlinear differential 
equation (a special case of the so-called 
Bernoulli equation). This type of equa- 
tion is ordinarily solved by first reduc- 
ing it to a linear differential equation 
by a change of variable (see, for 
example, Rainville and Bedient (53)). 
We shall, however, solve equation (9) 
by applying the technique used in the 
present paper for the solution of equa- 
tion (1). Equation (9) is rewritten in the 
form 


b) 


AEE al ai le acti ti ONG 
»4 


then integrated, and the result expressed as 


xemte —JRxdt = M, (11) 


16 


where M is an integration constant. As in 
the case of equation (3), equation (11) 
does not yet constitute a satisfactory 
solution because it contains the de- 
pendent variable (x in the present case) 
under an integral sign. Equation (11) is 
differentiated, yielding 


e J Rxdt d (xe™) 


3 
" neM a (eT/RXCh) aes) 


Rearranging terms and simplifying, we 
obtain 


d d 

~(xe™) = xem == ee 13 

(xem) - | (13) 
Since 


. i R(z)x(z)dz = R(t)x(t), (14) 


equation (13) becomes 


ye (xem), = Rx2e™ = Rene m ean i>) 
Replacing m and R with the values given, 
equation (15) may be written in the di- 
rectly integrable form 
t/100 tt —t/50 
d(ixet™) _ (Cae (16) 
(xet/190)2 (a a2 b) 
Integration of equation (16) followed by 
evaluation of the integration constant 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


(using the given initial condition x = a 
at t = 0) gives the desired solution 
a(a + b) 


x = ——__—__.. (17) 
qe—t/100 4 pet/100 


Additional cases of nonlinear differen- 
tial equations will be investigated to de- 
termine conditions under which the tech- 
nique used in the present paper can be 
extended to other differential equations 
of the nonlinear-type. 


References Cited 


(1) Apostol, T. M. Calculus. Volume 1, Blaisdell 
Publishing Co., New York, 1961. 


(2) Bak, T. A., and J. Lichtenberg. Mathematics 
for Scientists. Volume 3; Series, Differen- 


tial Equations and Complex Functions. W. A. 


Benjamin, Inc., New York, 1967. 

(3) Bajpai, A. C., I. M. Calus, and J. Hyslop. 
Ordinary Differential Equations. John Wiley 
& Sons, Ltd., London, 1970. 


(4) Bateman, H. Differential Equations. Chelsea 
Publishing Co., New York 1966. 


(5) Belman, R., and K. L. Cook. Modern Ele- 
mentary Differential Equations (2nd Ed). 
Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1971. 

(6) Betz, H., P. B. Burcham, and G. M. Ewing. 
Differential Equations with Applications 
(2nd Ed). Harper and Row, New York, 1964. 

(7) Birkhoff, G., and G. C. Rota. Ordinary Dif- 
ferential Equations (2nd Ed.). Blaisdell Pub- 
lishing Co., Mass. 1969. 

(8) Boas, M. L. Mathematical Methods in the 
Physical Sciences. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 
New York 1966. 

(9): Boyce, W. E.. and RC: DiPrma. Ele- 
mentary Differential Equations and 
Boundary Valve Problems (2nd Ed). John 
Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, 1969. 

(10) Brookes, C. J., I. G. Betteley, and S. M. 
Loxston. Mathematics and Statistics. John 
Wiley & Sons, Ltd., London, 1966. 

(11) Buck, C. R., and E. F. Buck. Introduction 
to Differential Equations. Houghton Mifflin 
Co., Boston, 1976. 


(12) Chisholm, J. S. R., and R. M. Morris. 
Mathematical Methods in Physics. W. B. 
Saunders Co., Philadelphia, Pa. 1965. 

(13) Coddington, E. A. An Introduction to Ordi- 
nary Differential Equations. Prentice-Hall, 
Inc., 1961. 

(14) Cohen, A. An Elementary Treatise on Dif- 
ferential Equations. (2nd Ed.), D. C. Heath 
and Co., New York 1933. 


(15) Courant, R. Differential and Integral Cal- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


culus (Vol. 2). Interscience, New York, 
1936. 

(16) Curle, N. Applied Differential Equations. Van 
Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, 1971. 


(17) Daniels, F. Mathematical Preparation for 
Physical Chemistry. McGraw-Hill Book 
Co., Inc., New York, 1928. 


(18) Davis, H. T. Introduction to Nonlinear Dif- 
ferential and Integral Equations. Dover 
Publications, Inc., New York, 1960. 


(19) Dence, J. B. Mathematical Techniques in 
Chemistry. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 
LOTS: 


(20) Forsyth, A. R. A Treatise on Differential 
Equations (6 Ed.). Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 
London, 1951; Solutions of the Examples in 
a Treatise on Differential Equations, same 
publisher and date. 


(21) Gaskell, R. E. Engineering Mathematics. The 
Dryden Press, New York, 1958. 


(22) Granville, W. A., P. F. Smith, and W. R. 
Langley. Elements of Calculus. Ginn and 
Co., New York, 1946. 

(23) Greenspan, D. Theory and Solution of 
Ordinary Differential Equations. The Mac- 
millan Co., New York, 1960. 

(24) Hildebrand, F. B. Advanced Calculus for 
Engineers. Prentice-Hall, New York, 1949. 

(25) Hochstadt, H. Differential 
Modern Approach). Holt, 
Winston, New York, 1964. 

(26) Ince, E. L. Ordinary Differential Equations. 
Dover Publications, New York, 1944; Inte- 
gration of Ordinary Differential Equations 
(7th Ed.). Oliver and Boyd, London, 1956. 


(27) Jeffrey, A. Mathematics for Engineers and 
Scientists. Barnes and Noble, Inc., New 
York, 1969. 


(28) Kaplan, W. Ordinary Differential Equations. 
Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, 
Mass., 1958. 


(29) Karman, T., and M. A. Biot. Mathematical 
Methods in Engineering. McGraw-Hill Book 
Co., Inc., New York, 1940. 


(30) Kells, L. M. Elementary Differential Equa- 
tions (6th Ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Co., 
Inc., New York, 1965. 


(31) Kreider, D. L., R. G. Kuller, and D. R. 


Equations (A 
Rinehart and 


Ostberg. Elementary Differential Equa- 
tions. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass. 
1968. 


(32) Kreyszig, E. Advanced Engineering Mathe- 
matics (3rd Ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 
New York, 1972. 

(33) Kynch, G. L. Mathematics for the Chemist. 
Butterworths Scientific Publications, 
London, 1955. 


(34) Lambe, C. G., and C. J. Tranter. Differential 
Equations for Engineers and Scientists. The 


17 


English Universities Press Ltd., London, 
1961. 

(35) Langer, R. A First Course in Ordinary 
Differential Equations. John Wiley & Sons, 
Inc., New York, 1954. 

(36) Loomis, E. S. The Pythagorean Proposition. 
National Council of Teachers of Mathemat- 
ics, Washington, D. C., 1968. 

(37) Mackie, R. K., T. M. Shepherd, and C. A. 
Vincent. Mathematical Methods for Chem- 
ists. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 
1972. 

(38) Margenau, H., and G. V. Murphy. The 
Mathematics of Physics and Chemistry. 
D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., New York, 
1943. 


(39) Martin, H. G. Mathematics for Engineering, 
Technology and Computing Sciences. 
Pergamon Press, New York, 1970. 


(40) Martin, W. T., and E. Reissner. Elementary 
Differential Equations (2nd Ed.). Addison- 
Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1961. 

(41) Mellor, J. W. Higher Mathematics for 
Students of Chemistry and Physics. Dover 
Publications, New York, 1946. 


(42) Middlemiss, R. R. Differential and Integral 
Calculus (2nd Ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Co., 
Inc., New York, 1946. 

(43) Morris, M., and O. E. Brown. Differential 
Equations (revised Ed.). Prentice-Hall, Inc., 
New York, 1945. 

(44) Murphy, G. M. Ordinary Differential Equa- 
tions and Their Solutions. D. Van Nostrand 
Co., Inc., Princeton, New Jersey 1960. 

(45) Murray, D. A. Introductory Course in Dif- 
ferential Equations (Revised Ed.). Long- 
mans, Green and Co., New York, 1908 
(reprinted 1949). 

(46) Nelson, A. E., K. W. Folley and M. Coral. 
Differential Equations. D. C. Heath and Co., 
Boston, 1952. 

(47) Nielsen, K. L. Differential Equations (2nd 
Ed.). Barnes and Nobel, Inc., New York, 
1966. 


(48) Oakley, C. O. Calculus: A Modern Ap- 
proach. Barnes and Noble, Inc., New York, 
1971. 


(49) Petrovski, I. G. Ordinary Differential Equa- 
tions (Translated and edited by Silverman, 
R. A.). Dover Publications, Inc., New 
York, 1966. 

(50) Phillips, H. B. Differential Equations (3rd 
Ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 
1951. 

(51) Pipes, L. A., and L. R. Harvill. Applied 
Mathematics for Engineers and Physicists 


18 


(3rd Ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 
New York, 1970. 

(52) Rabenstein, A. E. Introduction to Ordinary 
Differential Equations. Academic Press, 
New York, 1966. 

(53) Rainville, E. D., and P. E. Bedient. Ele- 
mentary Differential Equations (4th Ed.). 
Macmillan Co., New York, 1969. 


(54) Randolph, J. R. Calculus and Analytic 
Geometry. Wadsworth Publishing Co., Be- 
mont, California, 1961. 

(55) Reddick, H. Differential Equations (2nd Ed.). 
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1949. 


(56) Reddick, H. W., and F. H. Miller. Ad- 
vanced Mathematics for Engineers. John 
Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1938. 

(57) Rektorys, K. (Editor). Survey of Applicable 
Mathematics. The M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, 
Mass., 1969. 


(58) Relton, F. E. Applied Differential Equations. 
Blackie and Son, Ltd., London, 1948. 


(59) Ritger, P. D., and N. J. Rose. Differential 
Equations with Applications. McGraw-Hill 
Book Co., Inc., New York, 1968. 

(60) Ross, S. L. Differential Equations. Ginn (A 
Zerox Corp), Waltham, Mass., 1964. 

(61) Rubinstein, Z. A Course in Ordinary and 
Partial Differential Equations. Academic 
Press, New York, 1969. 


(62) Sokolnikoff, I. S., and E. S. Sokolnikoff. 
Higher Mathematics for Engineers and Sci- 
entists (2nd Ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Co., 
Inc., New York, 1941. 


(63) Schwarzenberger, R. L. E. Elementary Dif- 
ferential Equations. Chapman and Hall, 
Ltd., London, 1969. 


(64) Spain, B. Ordinary Differential Equations. 
Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., Ltd., Lon- 
don, 1969. 

(65) Spiegel, M. R. Applied Differential Equa- 
tions (2nd Ed.). Prentice-Hall, Inc., Engle- 
wood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1967. 

(66) Taylor, A. E. Calculus with Analytic Geom- 
etry. Prentice-Hall, Inc.. Englewood Cliffs, 
New Jersey, 1959. 

(67) Tenenbaum, M., and H. Pollard. Ordinary 
Differential Equations. Harper and Row, 
Publishers, New York, 1963. 

(68) Thomas, G. B., Jr. Calculus and Analytic 
Geometry (3rd Ed.). Addison-Wesley Pub- 
lishing Co., Inc., Reading, Mass., 1960. 

(69) Woods, F. S. Advanced Calculus. Ginn, 
New York, 1926. 

(70) Wylie, C. R., Jr. Advanced Engineering 
Mathematics. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 
1951. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


} 


Richard H. McCuen 


College Park 20742. 


RESEARCH REPORTS 


| Design of Detention Structures for Controlling 
_ Runoff from Highway Surfaces 


|| Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Maryland, 


ABSTRACT 


Storm water runoff from highways and parking lots causes frequent localized flooding 
in urban areas. Storm water detention provides a means of minimizing the hydrologic 
impact of increased highway development and simultaneously reducing the total cost 
of the drainage system. A hydrologic model was formulated to determine the volume of 
storage that would be required to limit the peak rate of runoff from highways and parking 
lots to the discharge that occurred prior to development. A design curve that relates the 
area under development to the required volume of detention storage is presented for use 


specifically with highways and parking lots. 


In most metropolitan areas, streets and 
parking lots may account for as much as 
20% of the total area. Wallace (9) indi- 


_ cated that in 1968, highways and parking 


areas represented 17.22% of a 134-square- 
mile (347 km?) watershed, which includes 
part of Atlanta, Georgia; the correspond- 
ing figure for 1949 was 8.62%. An exten- 
sive land-use sampling analysis of a 132- 
Square-mile (342 km?) watershed in sub- 
urban Washington, D. C., showed that, 


in 1971, 12.83% of the watershed was 


paved in either streets or parking areas 
(6). And for smaller subwatersheds in 
urban areas the percentage may be sig- 
nificantly greater. Furthermore, the area 
paved in streets and parking lots may 
represent over 50% of the total im- 
pervious area. 

In many urban areas the peak rate of 
runoff may be 5 times greater than the 
peak discharge on a natural nonurbanized 
watershed having similar physiographic 
characteristics (e.g., slope). To cope with 
such increases in runoff rates, the size 


and capacity of a storm drainage system 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


must be increased significantly. In many 
areas a portion of the runoff from roof- 
tops, both residential and commercial, is 
not connected directly to the storm drain- 
age system. Since streets and parking lots 
account for a major portion of the im- 
pervious area and are usually connected 
directly to the drainage system, they may 
be a primary source of increases in peak 
rates of runoff. Stormwater runoff from 
highways and parking areas entering 
directly into small streams may be 
responsible for increased erosion and 
degradation of the quality of the water. 
Many stormwater management prac- 
tices have been suggested as alternatives 
for minimizing the hydrologic impact of 
continued urbanization. Various forms of 
stormwater detention and/or retention 
have proven to be both a practical and 
economically efficient means of reducing 
peak runoff rates, especially the frequent 
storms of small volume and small return 
periods. The objective of on-site storm- 
water detention is to redistribute the 
runoff with respect to time such that the 


19 


peak rates of runoff are below some 
prescribed standard. The use of temporary 
ponding in the Fort Campbell (Ky.) storm 
drainage system reduced the total project 
cost from an estimated $5,500,000 to 
$2,000,000 (3). In addition to the cost of 
the storm drainage system, stormwater 
detention can reduce downstream flood- 
ing and channel erosion, which may be a 
primary cause of stream pollution. 


Design of Detention Structures 


The maximum allowable discharge rate 
and the required volume of storage are 
the primary variables considered in the 
design of a detention structure. The 
maximum allowable discharge rate is 
usually set equal to the discharge rate 
that would occur on the site prior to 
development; a return period is usually 
selected for the design storm. However, 
in some instances, the maximum allow- 
able discharge rate may depend on the 
discharge capacity of downstream sewer 
systems or the bankfull flow rate of re- 
ceiving streams. 

The time distribution of inflow and the 
maximum allowable discharge rate is 
necessary but not sufficient to determine 
the required storage. The required stor- 
age will also depend on the configuration 
of the detention structure. The required 
volume of storage will be equivalent to 
the maximum difference between the 
cumulative distribution of inflow and the 
cumulative distribution of outflow when 
the maximum allowable discharge is not 
exceeded. The inflow to a detention 
structure may be simulated by routing a 
design hyetograph over the highway sur- 
face or parking lot and through the 
gutter/culvert system that connects the 
paved surface to the detention structure. 
The depth-discharge (or volume-dis- 
charge) relationship of the detention 
structure must be specified in order to 
route the inflow distribution through the 
detention structure. 

Different design criteria exist for 
designing detention structures. Design 
curves may differ because of different 
hydrologic criteria or because of differ- 


20 


ences in the models used in their deriva- 
tion. A model used in the derivation of 
detention structure design curves should 
include the following components: (1) a 
design hyetograph of some preselected 
frequency and duration, (2) a routing 
procedure to represent the effect of over- 
land runoff and gutter flow on the design 
storm, and (3) a stage-discharge relation- 
ship, which is controlled by certain deten- 
tion facility design parameters, for the 
detention structure. The third component 
is especially important if the required 
volume of storage, and thus project cost, 
is to be minimized. But many models do 
not include this important component. In 
some cases the maximum allowable dis- 
charge may be determined from an 
empirical prediction equation, such as the 
rational method or the Burkli-Ziegler 
formula. 

In the past, design criteria have been 
established for use in residential and 
commercial areas. Such criteria assume 
that the area under development is com- 
posed of a variety of land uses, including 
buildings, streets, and non-impervious 
surfaces. As such the design criteria 
may be inadequate for use with land uses 
that are predominantly transportation 
oriented. For areas that include only 
small parcels of pervious surface, such 
as a major highway and the adjoining 
right-of-way, the time of concentration 
will be much shorter than that of a 
residential development that includes 
large quantities of pervious surfaces. 
Thus, the peak discharge from a highway 
or parking lot after development will be 
greater than that for a residential area, 
and thus, a larger volume of detention 
storage may be required. 

The design of detention structures 
requires the determination of the required 
volume of storage and the maximum 
allowable release rate. The maximum 
allowable release rate was assumed 
herein to be the peak discharge on a 
natural watershed prior to development. 
The rational method is used herein to 
estimate the design peak discharge Q,. 
An estimate of the time of concentration 
of the watershed is required for estima- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


tion of Q, with the rational formula. 
Estimates of the time of concentration 
T. were computed using a method out- 
lined by Kent (2). A runoff coefficient 
of 0.2 was used for determining the peak 
discharge for the natural watershed. The 
area was varied over the range shown in 
Fig. 1. Fig. 1 shows the resulting peak 
discharge for an undeveloped drainage 
area. 

A design hyetograph having a duration 
of 24 hours and a 10-year return period 
was formulated. The total volume, in 
inches, was determined from Weather 
Bureau Technical Paper No. 40 (7). The 
method by Kent (2), which was de- 
scribed above, was also used to deter- 
mine the time of concentration for the 
developed drainage area. The 10-year 
rainfall volume for a storm of duration 
equal to the time of concentration was 
then obtained from Technical Paper No. 
40 (7); this volume was uniformly dis- 
tributed at the center of the design 
hyetograph over-a period of time equal 
to the time of concentration. The volu- 
metric difference between the 24-hour 
storm and the storm of duration equal 
to the time of concentration was dis- 
tributed over the remainder of the 24- 
hour period using a cumulative distribu- 
tion graph. 

A unit hydrograph approach was used 
in the model to represent the effect of 
overland flow routing. A unit hydrograph 
was determined for the developed drain- 
age area using a method outlined by 
Viessman (8). The inflow hydrograph to 
the detention structure was determined 
using the convolution integral, which is 
given in a generalized form by: 


| X(7)h(t — 7)dr (1) 


0 


Where X(7) is the design hyetograph, 
h(t — 7) is the 1-minute unit hydrograph, 
and 7 is the variable of integration. The 
discrete form of the above integral was 
used with the computer program to deter- 
mine the inflow hydrograph. 

A mathematical model of a stormwater 
detention facility (]) was used to deter- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


(=) 

Zz 

° 

S10 

¢2) 

~ 

= 

uJ 

uJ 

kw 

oO 

@o 

=) 

o 

—_ 

an 

io) 

ce 

C-¢ 

eS 

© 

2 

(=) 
0.1 

0.1 10 


AREA (ACRES) 


Fig. 1. Allowable release rate. 


mine the required storage. The model 
requires values representing the length, 
width, and side slope of the detention 
basin, the diameter of the riser pipe, the 
height of the top of the riser and bottom 
of the spillway above the bottom of the 
detention basin, and the cross sectional 
properties of the emergency spillway. 
The model also includes an option to 
simulate the effect of holes in the riser; 
if this option is selected, input variables 
are required that describe the number of 
holes, their diameter and the height of 
each hole above the bottom of the deten- 
tion structure. 

The stage-discharge relationship of the 
detention structure is represented by an 
algorithm that describes flow through the 
performations in the riser, flow through 
the top of the riser, and flow through 
the emergency spillway. If the option for 
flow through holes in the riser is selected, 
the flow rate through the holes is com- 
puted by 

Q; = 0.0436C,;N;D,?H,°° (2) 
where Q, (cfs) is the flow through the 
i set of holes, C is a discharge coefficient 
for orifice flow, N; is the number of holes 
in the i set, D, is the diameter (inches) 
of the holes and H, is the effective head 
(feet) of the holes. 


21 


STORAGE (10° CUBIC FEET) 
(é* 


Oo 5 15 20 


10 
AREA (ACRES) 
Fig. 2. Required storage. 


Flow over the top of the riser was 
treated as flow over.a sharpcrested weir 
having a length equal to the circum- 
ference of the riser pipe. The outflow can 
be computed by 


Q a mC,D,H,*? (3) 


where Q is the flow, cfs, C, is a discharge 
coefficient, D, is the diameter of the riser, 
in inches, and H, is the effective head, in 
feet. If flow in the riser is controlled by 
the pipe, the discharge from the pipe is 
given by 

Q = 0.44 D,7H,°*/ 


(1.5 + 3.8 L,/D,'33)°> (4) 


where L, is the length of the pipe in feet. 
Flow through the emergency spillway 
is treated as flow over a broadcrested 

welr: 
OF Solel (5) 


where Q is the flow in cfs, b is the 
width, in feet, of the spillway and H is the 
effective head, in feet. Thus, the total 
flow is the sum of the orifice flow, flow 
over the crest of the riser, and flow 
through the emergency spillway. 

The above procedure, which involved 
the determination of an inflow hydrograph 
and routing the hydrograph through 
a detention structure, was used to 


22 


determine the detention storage re- 
quired to maintain a flow that did not 
exceed the flow prior to development. 
The resulting storage requirements for 
different areas of development are given 
in Fig. 2. The relationships shown in 
Figs. 1 and 2 are designed especially for 
use with highways and parking lots. 
Because highways and parking lots do not 
usually include significant portions of 
pervious surfaces, the required storage 
indicated by Fig. 2 will be greater than 
the storage required for other patterns of 
land use that include significant amounts 
of pervious surfaces. 


Discussion and Conclusions 


A mathematical model that includes 
components representing overland runoff 
from an impervious surface, such as a 
parking lot or highway, and a detention 
structure was used in formulating design 
curves for determining the storage re- 
quired to minimize the hydrologic impact 
of highway development. In addition to 
the reduction in flooding, detention struc- 
tures will also have a positive effect on 
water quality. If properly designed, a 
detention basin can serve as a Settling 
basin and thus serve to remove dust and 
particulate matter that is suspended in the 
runoff from the highway surface or sedi- 
ment and/or decayed leaves that are in the 
runoff originating from nght-of-way areas. 
In many areas the poor quality of runoff 
from highways and parking lots is respon- 
sible for a reduction in the efficiency of 
waste water treatment facilities and deg- 
radation of water quality in receiving 
streams. 

In addition to reducing the problem of 
localized flooding, the use of stormwater 
detention as part of a drainage system 
for highways should result in significant 
reductions in the cost of drainage systems. 
Leach and Kittle (3) and Poertner (/0) 
demonstrated that detention storage can 
result in significant reductions in the cost 
of a storm drainage system. Rawls and 
McCuen (//) provided an equation for 
estimating the cost of detention storage 
facilities. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 | 


References Cited 


(1) Curtis, D. C. ‘‘A Mathematical Model of a 
Storm Water Detention Structure.’’ Tech- 
nical Report, Department of Civil Engineer- 
ing. University of Maryland, 1974. 

(2) Kent, K. M. ‘‘A Method for Estimating 
Volume and Rate of Runoff in Small Water- 
sheds.’’ Soil Conservation Service, SCS- 
TP-149, 1968. 

(3) Leach, L. G., and B. L. Kittle. ‘‘Hydraulic 
Design of the Fort Campbell Storm Drainage 
System.’’ Highway Research Record, No. 
116, pp. 1-7, 1966. 

(4) McCuen, R. H. ‘‘The Role of Sensitivity 
Analysis in Hydrologic Modeling.”’ Journal 
of Hydrology, Vol. 18, pp. 37—53, 1973. 

(5) McCuen, R. H. “‘Urban Storm Water Deten- 
tion: A Regional Approach.’’ Paper pre- 
sented at the 55th Annual Meeting, Ameri- 
can Geophysical Union, Washington, D. C., 
April 8—12, 1974. 

(6) Ragan, R. M., and E. C. Rebuck. Resource 
Identification Study for the Anacostia River 
Basin. Vol. 1, Department of Civil Engineer- 


ing, University of Maryland, College Park, 
Maryland, 1973. 


(7) U. S. Department of Commerce, Weather 
Bureau. Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the 
United States. Technical Paper No. 40, 
May 1961. 


(8) Viessman, W., Jr. ‘“‘Runoff Estimation for 
Very Small Drainage Areas.’’ Water Re- 
sources Research, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 87-93, 
1968. 


(9) Wallace, J. R. The Effects of Land Use 
Change on the Hydrology of an Urban 
Watershed. School of Civil Engineering, 
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, 
Georgia, 1971. 


(J0) Poertner, H. G. ‘“‘Better Storm Drainage 
Facilities — At Lower Cost.”’ Civil Engineer- 
ing, pp. 67-70, Oct. 1973. 


(J1) Rawls, W.J., and R. H. McCuen. *‘A Planning 
Tool for Economic Evaluation of Alterna- 
tives for Storm Drainage Facilities.’’ Paper 
presented at the Annual Meeting of the 
American Geophysical Union, Washington, 
DiC -e 1977: 


Field Observations on the Cliff Swallow, Petrochelidon 
pytrhonota (Vieillot), and the Swallow Bug, 


Oeciacus vicarius Horvath 


G. C. Smith and R. B. Eads 


Vector-Borne Diseases Division, Bureau of Laboratories, Center for Disease Control, 
Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 
P. O. Box 2087, Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 


ABSTRACT 


Observations are presented on the longevity of swallow bugs, Oeciacus vicarius 
Horvath, in the prolonged absence of their normal hosts and on the parasites and predators 
of these bugs. The use of the cliff swallow nests by other birds and mammals is discussed. 


Studies on known and suspected vec- 
tors and pathogens were initiated by 
Vector-Borne Diseases Division person- 
nel in the Colorado Counties of Morgan 
and Logan in 1972 in connection with a 
proposed impoundment of the South 
Platte River. Of special interest has been 
the report by Hayes et al. (1977) of the 
recovery in 1973 of an alphavirus strain 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


serologically related to western encepha- 
litis (WE). The virus was isolated from a 
pool of the swallow bug (Oeciacus vi- 
carius ) from an inactive house sparrow 
(Passer domesticus) nest built inside a 
cliff swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota) 
nest under Bijou Bridge, just outside Fort 
Morgan, Morgan County, Colorado. 
Hayes et al. (1977) recovered virus from 


23 


O. vicarius from several swallow nesting 
sites around Fort Morgan each month 
from May 1974 through February 1975, 
and from nestling house sparrows and 
cliff swallows during the summer months 
of 1974. These findings suggested the 
swallow bug as a possible overwintering 
mechanism for WE virus. 

Later studies have indicated that the 
virus strains from the bugs, house spar- 
row nestlings and cliff swallow nestlings 
represent 2 viruses, | serologically related 
to WE (tentatively named Fort Morgan 
virus), and the other related to Venezuelan 
equine encephalitis (VEE) (referred to as 
Biou Bridge virus). 

Investigations designed to clarify the 
taxonomic status and natural history of 
these viruses are continuing. Viral isola- 
tions have been made more frequently 
from nestling house sparrows than from 
nestling cliff swallows, and antibodies to 
the viruses are more prevalent in adult 
house sparrows than in adult cliff swal- 
lows. This presents a rather anomalous 
situation. O. vicarius normally parasi- 
tizes cliff swallows, although we have on 
occasion found the species in considera- 
ble numbers in barn swallow (Hirundo 
rustica) and bank swallow (Riparia ri- 
paria) nests. We know of no record of 
this bug being recovered from house 
Sparrow nests unassociated with cliff 
swallow nests. If these are normal house 
Sparrow viruses, vectors other than cimi- 
cids would have to be involved when 
the sparrows are not nesting within or 
in the vicinity of swallow nests. 

O. vicarius seems to be restricted to 
only a portion of the extensive range of 
the cliff swallow. It is widely distributed 
in the United States, although to our 
knowledge it has not been previously 
reported from the southeastern region. 
We have the species from cliff swallow 
nests from the face of Hartwell Dam 
located on the Savannah River in northern 
Georgia, July 12, 1975, coll. T. Monath. 
In spite of intensive efforts, Usinger 
(1966) was unable to find O. vicarius in 
the Southern Hemisphere where the cliff 
swallows spend the winter. 

In Colorado, cliff swallows commonly 


24 


use cliff faces, bridges, and culverts for 
nesting, with buildings less frequently 
selected as nesting sites. During our cimi- 
cid bug collecting in Colorado, we have 
found house sparrows nesting in cliff 
swallow nests only under bridges and 
culverts. There are records, however, in 
the literature of house sparrows rearing 
their young in cliff swallow nests on 
buildings (Grinnell 1937, Herman 1935). 
It would appear that cliff swallow nests 
on cliff faces are not especially attrac- 
tive nesting sites for house sparrows, 
although on one occasion one of us (GS) 
found house sparrow nests in such a situ- 
ation in Bon Homme County, South 
Dakota on June 21, 1977. 


The life cycle of O. vicarius is adjusted 
to long periods of fasting. In northern 
Colorado, cliff swallows begin returning 
in late April and early May and depart 
in September. Thus, the swallows are 
only in the area 5S months and considerably 
less than half of this time is spent in the 
nesting cycle, when adult and young birds 
are in the nests for appreciable periods 
of time. In this connection, cliff swallows 
probably produce single annual broods, 
with only an occasional second brood. 
In contrast, the house sparrow rears 
multibroods. The cliff swallows begin 
nesting activities at widely spaced inter- 
vals, with the consequence that in early 
July the nests may contain all stages— 
from eggs to almost fully feathered fledg- 
lings. 

Swallow bugs have been observed to 
survive in the nest for 2 years in the ab- 
sence of the swallows. A colony of cliff 
swallows consisting of some 300 nests 
under a concrete culvert in Lory State 
Park, some 10 km west of Fort Collins, 
Larimer County, Colorado, has been 
under observation for several years. 
These nests were occupied by cliff swal- 
lows during the summer of 1975. The nests 
were heavily infested with both nymphal 
and adult bugs during the winter of 1975— 
76. Winter-collected bugs fed readily in 
the laboratory on adult pigeons, wet 
chicks, mice and people, but laid negligi- 
ble numbers of eggs, even when cold- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


treated in an attempt to break the ap- 
parent diapause. 

In the spring of 1976, the bugs were 
observed massed just inside the nest 
entrances, awaiting the return of the 
swallows. Bugs collected at this time 
were fed in the laboratory on wet chicks, 
nestling house sparrows and adult cliff 
sparrows. All O. vicarius females laid 
numerous eggs, although more were pro- 
duced from bugs fed on cliff swallows. 

Swallows did not use the nests in the 
Lory Park culvert during the summer of 
1976. There have been reports of swal- 
lows alternating the use of nesting sites 
(Grinnell et al. 1930, Mayhew 1958). 


{ Our observations, however, have been 


that cliff swallows continue to use an 
established nesting site each year, except 
for some specific reason. In this case, 
the small stream that usually provides 
water through the culvert was dry, and 
mud for nest repair and building was not 
available. 

Several collections made during the 
winter of 1976-77 demonstrated the 
continuing presence of live bugs in the 
nests. In late April of 1977, bugs were 
not present in sufficient numbers to mass 
at the nest entrances as they had done 
the previous spring. However, 25 live 
nymphal and adult bugs were taken from 
2 nests. A third swallow nest in which 
a well-formed grass nest had been built 
contained several hundred cimicids in all 
Stages of development. It was evident 
that a pair of birds other than swallows 
had used the nest the previous summer, 
providing an opportunity for the cimicids 
to feed. 

The swallows also passed up the Lory 
Park nesting site during the summer of 
1977, even though water ran through 
the culvert in April and the first 2 weeks 
in May. Thus, the cliff swallow bugs in 
this colony sustained themselves in large 
- numbers through the winter of 1975-76 
and the summer of 1976 and in fair num- 
bers during the winter of 1976-77 and 
the summer of 1977, in the absence of 
their regular hosts. 

This is not to say that the bugs might 
not have had an opportunity to take blood 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


meals. No house sparrows have been 
observed in this nesting site during sum- 
mer or winter. However, on May 12, 
1977, we found a pair of western blue- 
birds, Sialia mexicana, rearing a brood 
of young within one of the swallow nests; 
2 other swallow nests containing well 
formed grass nests of the type constructed 
by bluebirds were seen, but they con- 
tained no eggs or young birds. 

Considerable activity of other bird 
species in cliff swallow nesting sites in 
all seasons has been documented, espe- 
cially in natural nesting sites on cliff 
faces. Sooter et al. (1954) reported use 
of cliff swallow nests as winter shelter in 
Larimer County, Colorado, on cliff 
faces by the black rosy finch (Leu- 
costicte atrata), the gray-crowned rosy 
finch (L. tephrocotis) and the canyon 
wren (Catherpes mexicanus), and for 
summer nesting by a pair of Say’s phoebe 
(Sayornis saya). Bailey and Niedrach 
(1965) indicate that both gray-crowned 
and brown-capped rosy finches (L. aus- 
tralis) were seen in numbers in and about 
cliff swallow nests near Ault, Weld County, 
Colorado, February 13, 1960. 

We have observed 3 species of birds 
nesting in association with 2 large cliff 
swallow colonies on cliff faces in Eden 
Valley, some 16 km west of Fort Collins, 
Larimer County, Colorado. The swal- 
lows did not return to nest repair and 
building until the middle of May in 1977. 
For several weeks prior to this, rock 
doves (Columba livia) were nesting on 
ledges in the immediate vicinity of the 
swallow nests; starlings (Sturnus vul- 
garis) were nesting in cracks and crevas- 
ses in the rocks and 2 pair of canyon 
wrens built grass nests within swallow 
nests for rearing their young. 

Of interest has been the comparatively 
harmonious relationships which seem to 
exist between cliff swallows and other 
species of birds utilizing their nests. Win- 
ter usage of the nests as shelter would 
present no problems as the swallows are 
not there. However, in the Fort Morgan 
study area, house sparrows may occupy 
one-half or more of the nests in a swallow 
nesting site. This is a year-round occu- 


25 


pancy, with the nests also used for winter 
shelter. The house sparrows have a brood 
of young about ready to fly by the time 
the swallows return from the south. When 
the swallows reappear, they simply repair 
old nests not being used by the sparrows 
and build new ones sufficient for their 
needs. The sparrows have not been ob- 
served to interfere with the brooding 
activities of the swallows. However, it 
is entirely possible that they do evict the 
swallows, because sparrow nestlings in 
newly constructed nests have been com- 
monly observed. 

The use of cliff swallow nests by other 
animal species is not confined to birds. 
In August of 1975, 2 juvenile deer mice, 
Peromyscus maniculatus, were discov- 
ered in a grass nest within a cliff swallow 
nest on a cliff face at the Weaver ranch 
near Fort Collins, Colorado. 

The mud nests are finite, being subject 
to action of the elements when on exposed 
cliff faces. Nests under bridges frequently 
are loosened and fall as a result of continu- 
ing traffic vibrations. Without annual re- 
pair of old nests and the construction of 
new ones by returning swallows, the 
crumbling nests would, in a few years, be 
unsuitable for use by other species of birds 
either in the summer or winter. Conse- 
quently, the long-term maintenance of 
large populations of bugs depends on the 
regular return of cliff swallows. 

High population densities of the swal- 
low bugs commonly encountered attest 
to the fact that natural enemies exercise 
little control of the species. Spiders are 
commonly observed in and around the 
nests, evidently preying on the bugs. No 
systematic effort has been made as yet 
to collect spiders from the nests for iden- 
tification. The following have been taken 
from cliff swallow nests in Larimer County, 
Colorado, in 1976-77: Steatoda borealis , 
family Theridiidae; Herpyllus propinquus , 
family Gnaphosidae; Nuctenea sp. (juven- 
iles), family Araneidae; Dictyna sp. 
(females and juveniles), family Dic- 
tynidae; and Mallos niveus, family Dic- 
tynidae. 

Four specimens of the masked bed bug 


26 


hunter (Reduvius personatus), 2 early 
and 2 late instar nymphs, were discovered 
in a cliff swallow nest September 27, 
1976, in the Lory State Park nesting site 
(Larimer County, Colorado). Two addi- 
tional nymphs were taken from cliff swal- 
low nests under a bridge June 6, 1977, 
in Weld County, Colorado. 

It seems unlikely that parasitic wasps 
would overlook the concentrated mass 
of swallow bugs. However, the only spe- 
cies we have taken from the swallow 
nests has been Nasonia vitripennis, a 
parasite of the blow fly, Protocalliphora 
hirundo, which attacks the nestling swal- 
lows. 


Acknowledgments 


We thank Norman I. Platnick, Ameri- 
can Museum of Natural History, for 
determining the spiders; Jon L. Herring, 
Systematic Entomology Laboratory, U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, for identify- 
ing the Reduvius; C. W. Sabrosky of 
the same Laboratory for the blow fly 
determination; and H. Evans, Colorado 
State University Zoology and Entomology 
Department, for specifically naming the 
wasp. 


References Cited 


Bailey, A. M., and R. J. Niedrach. 1965. Birds 
of Colorado. Denver Mus. Nat. Hist., Denver, 
Colorado. 895 pp. 

Grinnell, J., J. S. Dixon, and J. M. Linsdale. 1930. 
Vertebrate natural history of a section of 
northern California through the Lassen Peak 
region. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool. 35: 1—594. 

Grinnell, J. 1937. The swallows at the Life Sciences 
building. Condor 39: 206-210. 

Hayes, R. O., D. B. Francy, J. S. Lazuick, G. C. 
Smith, and E. P. J. Gibbs. 1977. Cliff swallow 
bug (Oeciacus vicarius Hovath) role in the 
natural cycle of a western encephalitis-like 
alphavirus. J. Med. Ent. 14(3): 257-262. 

Herman, C. M. 1935. Bluebirds and English spar- 
rows in a cliff swallow colony. Bird-Banding 
6: 137. 

Mayhew, W. W. 1958. The biology of the cliff 
swallow in California. Condor 60: 7—37. 
Sooter, C. A., E. E. Bennington, and L. B. Daniels. 
1954. Multiple use of cliff swallow nests by 

bird species. Condor 56: 309. 

Usinger, R. L. 1966. Monograph of Cimicidae. 
The Thomas Say Foundation. Vol. VII. En- 
tomol. Soc. Amer. College Park, Md. 585 pp. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


New Genera and Species of Neotropical 


Tephritidae (Diptera) 


Richard H. Foote 


Systematic Entomology Laboratory, IIBIII, Agric. Res. Serv., USDA (mail address: 
%U.S. National Museum NHB 168, Washington, D. C. 20560). 


ABSTRACT 


The following Neotropical taxa in the dipterous family Tephritidae are described: 
Lezca, n. gen., type-species L. tau, n. sp.; Laksyetsa, n. gen., type-species L. trinotata, 
n. sp.; Caenoriata, n. gen., type-species Acrotaenia pertinax Bates; and Neotaracia, 
n. gen., type-species Acrotaenia imox Bates. Comments on the relationships of these 


taxa to others are presented. 


The following taxa of Mexican and 
Neotropical Tephritidae are described to 
make the names available for inclusion in 
a forthcoming key to the genera of 
Tephritidae occurring south of Texas and 
Florida. 


Genus Lezca, new genus 


Type-species. —Lezca tau Foote, new 
species. 


Diagnosis. —In lateral view, head higher than 
long, frons and face meeting at an angle of about 
135°; frons haired; 3 pairs lower fronto-orbitals; 2 
pairs upper fronto-orbitals, ocellars poorly de- 
veloped; face shining, spotted, with deep antennal 
grooves and broadly rounded carina; antenna dis- 
tinctly longer than face, 3rd segment quite narrow, 
arista bare; 1 pair dorsocentrals, situated between 
transverse lines through the anterior supra-alars and 
postalars; acrostichals present; | pair anepisternals; 
2 pair scutellars; wing hyaline with a prominent 
transverse two-toned brown band and other dark 
marks; vein r-m closer to vein dm-cu than length of 
former; vein R2 + 3 slightly sinuate; vein R4 + 5 
haired; posterior extension of basal cubital cell long. 


Discussion. —The genus Lezca rather 
closely resembles 3 other trypetine 
genera—Cryptodacus Hendel (Hendel 
1914a, b), Cryptoplagia Aczél (Aczél 
1951), and Haywardina Aczél (Aczél 
1951). These 4 distinctive Neotropical 
genera feature a distally narrowed 2nd 
cell C, at least 1 prominent dark trans- 
verse band from the costa at or near the 
stigma to the posterior wing margin that 
may or may not cover both crossveins, a 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


dark area covering the basal cubital cell 
and a region anterior to it, and usually an 
apical infuscation. From closely related 
genera, Lezca can be distinguished by the 
features shown in Table 1. The wing 
venation and pattern also afford dis- 
tinguishing characters: veins r-m and 
dm-cu in Cryptodacus and Cryptoplagia 
are far removed from each other and are 
covered by separate transverse brown 
bands, while those of Lezca and Hay- 
wardina are situated very close together 
and are covered by a single brown band. 
The latter 2 genera differ from each other 
in that the transverse band of Hay- 
wardina is very narrow, and a 2nd partial 
transverse band is completely lacking. 
All 4 of these genera belong to the tribe 
Trypetini of the subfamily Trypetinae. 


The name Lezca, gender hereby desig- 
nated feminine, is an anagram of the name 
Aczél. Martin L. Aczél labored effec- 
tively to bring order out of chaos among 
the Neotropical genera of the subfamily 
Trypetinae. 


Lezca tau, new species 
(Figs? 1,274)" 


Head (fig. 1).— About 1.3 times as high as long; 
frons yellow, rather narrow, proportion of greatest 
width to length from ptilinal fissure to anterior 
corner of ocellar triangle 1.0:1.8, frontal setulae 
very slender, short, sparse; ocellar triangle black, 
ocellars only about as long as, but more slender 
than, posterior upper fronto-orbitals; 3rd antennal 
segment 4.5—5.0 times as long as greatest width, 


27 


Table I.— Comparison of taxonomic characters of trypetine genera. 


Lezca Haywardina Cryptodacus Cryptoplagia 

Face and frons mmeting in angle of 135° angle of 13S° curve curve 
Face surface shining matte matte matte 
Facial spots present absent absent absent 
Facial carina present present absent absent 
Apex 3rd antennal segment rounded pointed rounded pointed 
Antenna longer than face yes no no no 
Ocellar bristles short long long long 
Gena 14 eye height yes shorter shorter shorter 
Location of dorso-centrals between asa at asa at pa at asa 

and pa 
Vein r-m beyond mid beyond mid beyond mid discal at mid discal 

discal cell discal cell cell cell 
Vem) R25-3 straight sinuate straight straight 
Vein R4 + 5 haired haired haired bare 


slightly wider near apex than at base, base of arista 
yellow, remainder black; face in profile slightly 
swollen at middle, 1 pair large, rounded dark spots 
near anterior oral margin, antennal grooves deep 
along each side of rounded facial carina; gena with 
elongated black spot immediately ventrad of eye, 
postgenal setulae black; palpi expanded. 
Thorax.—Scutum orange with a large black 
inverted triangle between and touching humeri, its 
apex extending posteriorly along 4 to 4 length of 
scutum, or a longitudinal line in this position; a 
rounded black spot at base of prescutellar bristle 
and 2 narrower dark parallel postsutural fasciae, the 
supra-alar bristle in the ectal fascia and the postalar 
between them; a distinct median whitish triangle 
occupying posterior half of scutum; scuto-scutellar 
suture with a rather wide black band lying partly on 
the scutum, partly along anterior margin of 
scutellum, otherwise scutellum entirely light yellow; 
postscutellum black to yellow with longitudinal 
dark median line; humerus yellow; pleuron black 
but for contrasting yellow markings as follows: a 
wide band along dorsal margin of katepisternum; 
a diamond-shaped area along pleural suture, 
including wing base posteriorly, the top half of the 
diamond extending dorsally to cover visible portion 
of transverse suture; a small area surrounding base 
of halter. Legs with basal % of fore femur 
markedly expanded, setae in posteroventral row 
slender, shorter than width of femur at insertions, 
dorsal femoral setae scattered; basal half of mid 
femur infuscated posteriorly and ventrally; mid 
tibia yellow, lacking a row of outstanding setae; 
basal % of hind femur darkly infuscated around 
entire circumference; hind tibialess darkly but more 
extensively infuscated, with a row of heavy antero- 
dorsal setae, each about %4 as long as diameter of 
tibia, extending full length of tibia. Wing (fig. 4) 
rather narrow, about 7 mm long, proportion of width 
to length 1.0:2.5; disk hyaline, with the following 
dark areas: a triangular area in posterior 12 of cell M 
extending posteriorly into basal part of CulA and 


28 


ending about 4 the distance between base and apex 
of vein A; a wide brown fascia with narrow darker 
borders extending from cell 1st C through cell 2nd 
C, subcostal cell, bases of cells R1 and R3, apical 4 
of cell R and extreme base of cell RS, through apical 
Y of discal cell to hind margin; a much lighter brown 
area at apices of cells R3 and RS, and a faint dark 
area between the latter and the broad 2-toned brown 
band; vein r-m at a definite angle to vein dm-cu, 
these 2 veins much closer together along vein M 
than length of vein r-m, both crossveins covered by 
the dark brown margin of the wide transverse band; 
posterior extension of basal cubital cell about 4 
times as long as its width at base. 


Abdomen (fig. 2).— Yellow, a broad brown band 
covering all but extreme anterior and posterior 
borders and a narrow central area of tergite III, and 
2 narrower mesal bands separated by a yellow area 
as wide as one of the bands, on each of the following 
tergites; in addition, dark spots at the extreme 
lateral margins of tergites IV and V and large paired 
dark spots laterally on tergite VI and sternite VI in 
the female; ovipositor sheath orange yellow, about 
as long dorsally as tergite VI. Epandrium rounded 
dorsally with rather long, thickly set setae; 
surstyli long, slender, only very slightly curved; 
glans nearly rectangular in outline, the basiphallus 
relatively short. 


Type-series.—Holotype female, 
Cuernavaca, Mexico, 13-III-57, trampa 
cebo, O. Hernandez, coll. (USNM Type 
No. 75865); allotype male, same data; 
paratype (head and abdomen missing), 
same data, wing slide No. 15 (USNM). 


The species is named for the unusual 
dark ‘‘T’’-shaped mark on the abdominal 
dorsum. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


Genus Laksyetsa, new genus 


Type-species. —Laksyetsa_trinotata 


Foote, new species. 


Diagnosis. —In profile, head higher than long, 
frons and face meeting at an angle of about 120°; 
face shining, rather deep grooves beneath antennae 
but in no sense is a distinct carina present, spotted; 
frons haired, wider than long; 3 pairs lower fronto- 
orbitals, the anterior pair white; 2-3 pairs upper 
fronto-orbitals, all white; postoculars mixed black 
and white; parafrontal spot present; antenna as long 
as face, 3rd segment triangular but not distinctly 
pointed apically, arista bare; 1 pair dorsocentrals, 
situated in a transverse line through supra-alars; 3 
pairs anepisternals; 1 pair katepisternals; 2 pairs 
anepimerals; 2 pairs scutellars, equal in length; 
wing essentially dark with numerous light spots; 
bulla present, vein R2 + 3 bent forward around it; 


- vein r-m apicad of middle of discal cell; vein 


R4 + 5 bare or haired only at base; posterior exten- 
sion of basal cubital cell nearly 2 times as long as its 
width at base. 


Discussion. —This genus comes out in a key to 
Neotropical genera now in preparation with Para- 
cantha Coquillett and Neorhabdochaeta Malloch 
in a unique group of genera within the tribe 
Ditrichini having a number of characteristics in 
common. The heads of species of all 3 genera are 
quite similar in having a wide frons, large lunule, 
antennae widely separated at their bases, notably 
projecting oral margin, the face with a spotted, 
shining surface, mixed black and white postoculars, 
the anterior lower fronto-orbital light colored in 
contrast to the 2 dark posterior pairs, the upper 
fronto-orbitals all light colored or whitish, the 
scutum beset with setulae such that 6-8 rounded 
bare spots remain on the surface in barely dis- 


tinguishable patterns, and the fore femora with 


mixed dark and light bristles dorsally and ventrally. 


From Paracantha and Neorhabdo- 
chaeta, Laksyetsa may be distinguished 
by the wing pattern, which does not 
possess the characteristic dark rays from 
the center of the disk to the anterior, 
apical, and posterior margins, but is 
mainly dark with numerous light spots. In 
addition, the dorsocentrals of Laksyetsa 
are closer to a transverse line through the 
supra-alars than to the suture, and the 
anterior upper fronto-orbitals are located 
distinctly behind a transverse line through 
the posterior lower fronto-orbitals. 

The name Laksyetsa, gender hereby 
designated feminine, is an anagram of the 
name Steyskal. George C. Steyskal 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


originally pointed out that this genus had 
never been described or named. 


Laksyetsa trinotata Foote, new species 
(Figs. 3, 5) 

Head (fig. 3).—In profile, about 2.5 times as high 
as long; frons about 2.4 times as wide as length from 
anterior tip of ocellar triangle to ptilinal fissure; 
setulae on surface extremely fine, lacking pigment; 
upper fronto-orbitals well mesad of line through 
lower fronto-orbitals, anterior upper fronto-orbital 
distinctly posterior to a transverse line through 
posterior lower fronto-orbitals; anterior pair of 
lower fronto-orbitals white, about 0.5 times as long 
as middle pair; ocellar triangle black; lunule with 
an ‘‘M’’-shaped dark mark; face with 1 median 
black spot at level of posterior margin of 3rd 
antennal segment, another median spot at oral 
margin, and larger paired spots immediately 
anterior to anterior-most genal setulae; parafacial 
spot small but distinctly bordered; postocular row 
with 2-4 light colored setae among the black; 
genal bristle and 2—4 bristles close to it all about 
equal in size. 


Thorax.—Brown, matte, with golden setulae 
which are absent directly behind head between 
humeri, in vicinity of visible parts of transverse 
suture, and directly posterior to bases of acrostichals 
on each side; 1 pair semicircular dark spots at 
extreme posterior end of scutum, continuing across 
scutoscutellar suture to cover basal corners of 
scutellum; 1 pair large rounded dark spots at bases 
of postalars; pleurae concolorous with scutum 
except for an indistinctly bordered dark brown 
stripe involving humerus and proceeding posteriorly 
between notopleurals below and presutural and 
postalar above, and a somewhat narrower dark 
stripe along upper margin of katepisternum; center 
of anepisternum and most of katespisternum suf- 
fused with darker brown; postscutellum entirely 
dark but with a pair of lateral, black bands when 
viewed in incident light from behind. Legs 
yellowish brown with darker brown markings in the 
following areas: most of posterior margin of fore 
femur but darker ventrally subapically and sub- 
basally, fore tibia suffused with brown  sub- 
apically and subbasally, femora and tibiae of mid 
and hind legs each with distinct black subbasal and 
subapical black spots, especially ventrally on the 
femora; posteroventral row of setae of fore femur 
mixed black and white; S—6 setae in a posterior row 
on hind tibia, rather slender, shorter than diameter 
of tibia. Wing (fig. 5) 2.3 times as long as wide, 
field dark brown to base but slightly lighter along 
costa and in cell A, beset with numerous small 
rounded light brown (rather than hyaline) spots 
except in proximal posterior 4 of disk, where these 
small spots lighten and coalesce to form a rather 
broad, nearly hyaline area; vein dm-cu distinctly 
bowed apically at middle. 


29 


~—~—\—-<-—-+ SEAL 
Lit 


A 
moS& me 


Figs. 1-3. Lezca tau: 1, side view of head, female; 2, abdominal tergum, ovpestiay sheath, ovipositor, 
female. Laksyetsa trinotata: 3, side view of head, female. 


Abdomen. — Abdominal terga entirely matte, in 
female with paired median spots on tergites IV and 
V, dark area about 2 times as large on tergite IV 
as on tergite V; tergite VI entirely unspotted; in 
male, tergite V mostly black, those spots on tergite 
IV larger than in female. Ovipositor sheath as 
long as tergites V and VI together, suffused with 
brown, especially toward apex: epandrium with 


30 


long setae dorsally, surstyli short, truncated, the 
prensisetae distinctly separated; glans with the 
appearance of a transverse plate subapically. 


Type-series. —Holotype, female, Llano 
de las Flores, Oaxaca, Mexico, 24 
November 1969, R. L. Hodgdon, flower 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


head of Dahlia tenuicaulis. Intercepted 
Laredo, Tex. No. 000548, 69-24957 
(USNM Type No. 75866) Allotype, male, 
same data. Paratypes: 1 male, 2 (without 
abdomens), same data, 1 female, 10 mi. 
W. El Salto, Durango, Mexico, 9000’, 
30 June 1964, W. R. M. Mason (Canadian 
National Collection, Agriculture Canada). 
The specimens from Oaxaca were found 
in the flowers of Dahlia tenuicaulis 
being sent to the United States for 
propagation. 


The species is named for the 3 dark 
spots on the anterior oral margin. 


Genus Caenoriata, new genus 


Type-species.—Acrotaenia  pertinax 
Bates 1934: 12, fig. 3 (wing). 


Diagnosis. —Frons bare; 3 pairs lower fronto- 
orbitals; 2 pairs upper fronto-orbitals, both pairs 
light-colored; all setae in postocular row con- 
colorous light; face with broad, rounded carina; 2 
pairs dorsocentrals, 1 pair anterior to transverse 
suture; both pairs notopleurals unicolorous; 2 pairs 
scutellars, posterior pair longer than 0.5 times 
anterior; basal 0.6 of wing (fig. 6) almost entirely 
dark with narrow dark rays radiating to anterior, 
apical, and posterior margins from center of cell 
R5; vein r-m apicad of middle of discal cell; vein 
R2 + 3 rather sinuate; posterior extension of basal 
cubital cell rather long; bulla absent. 


Discussion.—The  type-species, 
Known only from Brazil, is the only 
Known representative of the genus. For 
comments on relationships with other 
genera, see discussion section under the 
following genus. 


The name Caenoriata, hereby desig- 
nated feminine in gender, is an anagram 
of the generic name Acrotaenia. 


Genus Neotaracia, new genus 


Type-species.—Acrotaenia imox 


Bates 1934: 11, fig. 2 (wing). 


Diagnosis. —Frons bare, 3 pairs lower fronto- 
orbitals; 2 pairs upper fronto-orbitals, only the 
posterior pair light colored; all setae in postocular 
row light colored; broad, rounded facial carina 
present; 1 pair dorsocentrals, situated almost 
directly in transverse suture; both pairs noto- 
pleurals the same color; 2 pairs scutellars, posterior 
pair less than 0.5 times length of anterior pair; 
wing (fig. 7) mostly dark, cell R1 almost completely 
and evenly dark save for a hyaline incision im- 
mediately apicad of subcostal cell and one at 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


Figs. 4-7, right wings. 4, Lezca tau; 5, Laksyetsa 
trinotata; 6, Caenoriata pertinax (Bates); 7, 
Neotaracia imox (Bates). 


extreme apex descending into cell R2 + 3; vein 
r-m at or very close to middle of discal cell; vein 
R2 +3 nearly straight; posterior extension of 
basal cubital cell quite short; bulla absent. 


Discussion.—The type-species has 
been recorded to date only from Trinidad, 
Costa Rica, and Panama. The name 
Neotaracia, gender hereby designated 
feminine, is an anagram of the generic 
name Acrotaenia. 


Caenoriata and Neotaracia are closely 
allied to Acrotaenia Loew and beiong, 
with several other genera, to the tribe 
Platensinini of the subfamily Tephritinae. 
Table 2 sets forth the principal characters 


31 


Table I1.—Comparison of taxonomic characters of tephritine genera. 


Acrotaenia 


Color of postoculars mixed dark and 


light 
Frons bare or haired 
Upper fronto-orbitals unicolorous 
Facial carina absent 
Dorsocentrals 1 pair 


Posterior pair scutellars equal to anterior 


Vein r-m beyond mid discal 
cell 
Vein R2 + 3 sinuate 
Posterior extension of basal 
cubital cell very short 


distinguishing the 3 genera being con- 
sidered here. Although the wings of all 3 
are rather similar structurally, their wing 
patterns differ markedly as shown in 
figs. 6 and 7. The wing of neither of the 
new genera possesses a) strongly empha- 
sized bullae in the anterior basal quarter 
of the wing disk, b) the numerous small 
rounded hyaline spots in the basal half, 
nor c) the transverse brown bands in the 
apical third of the wing disk, all of which 
are so characteristic of testudinea (Loew), 
the type-species of Acrotaenia, and its 
true congeners. Species of Acrotaenia 
have been recorded from southern United 
States, Mexico, Central America, Ba- 
hamas, West Indies, Trinidad, and 
Brazil (Foote 1967), and I have seen 
additional specimens more recently from 
Colombia and Surinam. 


Acknowledgments 


The assistance of George C. Steyskal, 
my colleague in the Systematic Ento- 


32 


Caenoriata Neotaracia 
all light all light 
bare bare 
unicolorous posterior pair light 
present present 
2 pairs 1 pair 
longer than 0.5 shorter than 0.5 
anterior anterior 
beyond mid discal at mid discal cell 
cell 
straight straight 
moderately long very short 


mology Laboratory, in making prelim- 
inary studies of some of the new taxa 
described herein, is deeply appreciated. 
He and F. L. Blanc, Sacramento, Cali- 
fornia, critically and very effectively 
reviewed the manuscript. 


References Cited 


Aczél, M. L. 1951. Géneros y especies neo- 
tropicales de la tribus ‘‘Trypetini.’”’ II. Dos 
géneros e una especie nuevos. Acta Zool. 
Lilloana 12: 253-278, illus. 

Bates, M. 1934. Notes on American Trypetidae 
(Diptera). IV. Acrotaenia and similar genera. 
Rev. Entomol. 4: 7-17, illus. 

Foote, R. H. 1967. Fasc. 57, Family Tephritidae, 
pp. 57.1-57.91, in Vanzolini, P. E., and N. 
Papavero (eds.), A Catalog of the Diptera South 
of the United States. Dep. Zool., Secr. Agr., 
Sao Paulo, Brazil. 

Hendel, F. 1914a. Die Gattungen der Bohrfliegen. 
(Analytische Ubersicht aller bisher bekannten 
Gattungen der Tephritinae.). Wien. Entomol. Z. 
33: 73-98. 

. 1914b. Die Bohrfliegen Stidamerikas. 

K. Zool. Anthrop.-Ethnogr. Mus. Abhandl. Ber. 

(1912)14(3): 1-84, illus. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


ACADEMY AFFAIRS 


THE AWARDS PROGRAM OF THE ACADEMY 


Kelso B. Morris, General Chairman 


The Annual Awards Dinner meeting of 
the Academy was held on Thursday, 
March 16, 1978 at the Indian Spring 
Country Club. The general chairman, Dr. 
Kelso B. Morris of the faculty at Howard 
University, announced that four research 


) scientists and three science teachers were 


recipients of the Academy’s awards for 
outstanding scientific achievement. 

In the area of research, the persons 
honored were the following: Dr. Robert 
Hogan (for the Behavioral Sciences) of 
the Johns Hopkins University; Dr. John 
Kebabian (for Biological Sciences) of 
National Institutes of Health; Dr. Tse-Fou 
Zien (for Engineering Sciences) of the 
Naval Surface Weapons Center; and Dr. 
Sandra C. Greer (for Physical Sciences) 
of the National Bureau of Standards. For 
the Teaching of Science, a joint award 
was presented to Dr. David S. Falk and 
Dr. Marjorie H. Gardner, both at the 
University of Maryland in the Physics 
and Chemistry Departments, respec- 
tively. The honoree for the Berenice G. 
Lamberton Award for teaching of High 
School Science was Mr. John Lieber- 
mann, Jr., of the T. C. Williams High 
School in Alexandria, Virginia. 


Behavioral Sciences 


Dr. Robert Hogan, Professor of Psy- 
chology at the Johns Hopkins University, 
was cited for ‘‘theoretical and empirical 


_ work in the developmental process of 


socialization.’”’ He was born in Los 
Angeles, California. In 1960, he received 
the A.B. degree from the University of 
California at Los Angeles. His Ph.D. 
degree was earned at the University of 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


Robert Hogan 


California at Berkeley in 1967. After 
completing all work for the Ph.D. degree, 
he was appointed Assistant Professor of 
Psychology at the Johns Hopkins Univer- 
sity and held that position for four years 
(1967-71). He next advanced to the rank 
of Associate Professor and held that posi- 
tion until he was promoted in 1976 to his 
present rank, Professor of Psychology. 
He has more than forty publications at 
the present time. 

He holds memberships in the following 
organizations: Eastern Psychological 
Association; American Psychological 
Association, and American Association 
for the Advancement of Science. Honors 
received by him are Summa Cum Laude 
when the A.B. was conferred; Phi Beta 
Kappa; and Fellow, Division 8, American 
Psychological Association. 


33 


John Kebabian 


Biological Sciences 


Dr. John Kebabian, Experimental 
Therapeutics Branch of the National 
Institute of Neurological and Communi- 
cative Disorders and Stroke, National 
Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Mary- 
land, was cited for “‘outstanding demon- 
stration of dopamine-sensitive adenylyl 
cyclase in mammalians.’’ Dr. Kebabian 
was born in New York City. His B.S. 
degree was received from Yale College in 
1968. At the graduate level, his M. Phil. 
(1970) and Ph.D. (1973) degrees were 
both earned at Yale University. 

The honoree is a world recognized 
authority on the mechanism by which 
dopamine initiates its physiological 
effects. Our present knowledge of the 
biochemical events associated with 
dopamine receptor activity in the striatum 
is largely due to Dr. Kebabian’s efforts. 


Engineering Sciences 


Dr. Tse-Fou Zien, Research Aero- 
space Engineer of the Mathematics and 


34 


Engineering Branch (NSWC) was cited 
for ‘‘Significant contributions to the field 
of fluid mechanics and heat transfer 
through research and teaching that have 
gained him national recognition.’’ He was 
born in Shanghai, China. His B.S. degree 
was received in June 1958 from National 
Taiwan University. His M.S. and Ph.D. 
degrees, respectively, were earned at 
Brown University and California Insti- 
tute of Technology. 

Organizations in which he holds mem- 
bership are American Institute of Aero- 
nautics and Astronautics (Associate 
Fellow); American Physical Society, and 
Society of the Sigma Xi. 

The current issue of ‘‘Oak Leaf,’ a 
publication of the Naval Surface Weapons 
Center at White Oak, Maryland, contains 
a very enlightening article about Dr. 
Zien and his researches. In the article, 
Dr. Zien states that ‘‘heat transfer is 
closely tied to fluid mechanics. It is 
important to understand the heat transfer 
phenomena in the optimal design of 
vehicles.’’ In addition to his being a 


Tse-Fou Zien 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


Biographee in the current issue of 
‘‘Who’s Who in the East’’ (Marquis), 
he received an outstanding performance 
award with quality salary increase in 1974. 


Physical Sciences 


Dr. Sandra Greer, the honoree this 
year in the Physical Sciences, is a 
researcher in the Institute for Basic 
Standards at National Bureau of Stand- 
ards, Washington, D. C. She was cited for 
‘‘her outstanding achievement as a re- 
search scientist in devising a carrying out 
experiments and applying new theories 
so as to help produce a better under- 
_ standing of the behavior of systems near 
critical points.”’ 

Dr. Greer is a native of Greenville, 
South Carolina. Her undergraduate de- 
gree, B.S. (magna cum laude) was 
received at Furman University in 1966. 
Both her M.S. (1968) and Ph.D. (1969) 
degrees, respectively, were earned at the 
University of Chicago. 

Organizations in which she holds mem- 


Sandra Greer 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


bership are the following: AAAS; Ameri- 
can Physical Society, and American 
Chemical Society. 

In her researches, she and her asso- 
ciates recognize that critical points are 
points of inherent instability. Such points 
occur in diverse systems such as, for 
example, pure fluids; fluid mixtures, 
magnetic solids, and binary alloys. The 
instabilities are sufficiently strong to 
produce anomalous behavior over a 
moderately large region around the 
critical point for each kind of system. 
This and the fact that critical points are 
end points of loci of phase transitions 
makes understanding the behavior of 
systems near their critical points im- 
portant both scientifically and _ tech- 
nologically. 


Teaching of Science 
A Joint Award 


The two recipients of this Award are 
Dr. David S. Falk and Dr. Marjorie H. 
Gardner, both at the University of 
Maryland. Dr. Falk was cited for being an 
innovative teacher and an able adminis- 
trator of Physics Education.’’ For Dr. 
Gardner, the citation was ‘‘for her great 
local, national, and international impact 
on chemistry teaching.”’ 

Dr. Marjorie H. Gardner was born in 
Logan, Utah. Her B.S. in Political 
Science/Chemistry was received from 
Utah State University in 1946. Her M.A. 
and Ph.D. degrees, both in Science 
Education and Chemistry, were earned at 
Ohio State University in 1958 and 1960, 
respectively. 

Her experience in higher education is 
rather noteworthy. She joined the Uni- 
versity of Maryland as an Assistant 
Professor (Chemistry and Secondary 
Education) in 1964. Today she is an 
Associate Dean in the College of Educa- 
tion and a Professor of Chemistry and 
Secondary Education. Part of her experi- 
ence involves participation in national 
and international meetings. 

Memberships in scientific organiza- 
tions include the following: American 
Association for the Advancement of 


35 


David Falk 


Science; American Chemical Society; 
American Educational Research Asso- 
ciation; American Institute of Chemists; 
and others. 

The other co-winner of the Award, 
Dr. David S. Falk, was born in New 
York City. His B.S. degree was earned 
at Cornell University in 1954. The M.A. 
and Ph.D. degrees were both earned at 
Harvard University in 1955 and 1959, 
respectively. 


Marjorie Gardner 


36 


He has been associated with the Uni- 
versity of Maryland since 1961. Today, 
he is Professor and Associate Chairman 
of the Department of Physics and 
Astronomy at the University of Maryland. 

Professional and honorary member- 
ships include Tau Beta Pi, Sigma Xi, and 
the American Physical Society. 

He is described by associates as an able 
administrator of science teaching. As the 
Department Associate Chairman for 
Educational Affairs, he is responsible for 
the total physics teaching program. 


The Berenice G. Lamberton Award 
Teaching of High School Science 


Mr. John Liebermann, Jr. is a resident 
of Fairfax, Virginia. As the recipient of 
the Berenice G. Lamberton Award for 
Teaching of High School Science, he was 
cited for ‘‘inspiring students to excell in 
science through effort and application by 
the example he set for them in his teach- 
ing and research.”’ 

He was born in Washington, D. C. His 
B.S. degree in Chemistry was received 
from George Mason University in 1969. 
He is currently studying toward the Ph.D. 
degree at American University. Organi- 
zations in which he holds membership 
are: NEA, VEA, EAA, and American 
Chemical Society. 


At the end of the presentation of the 
Awardees, the General Chairman stated 
that personal efforts were made by hima 
few years ago to make certain that the 
President, Deans and Department Heads 
in science-related fields at the Johns 
Hopkins University developed a greater 
awareness of the Awards Program of the 
Washington Academy of Sciences. It is 
significant, therefore, that the awardee 
this year in the Behavioral Sciences is 
the first one from that institution. — 
Kelso B. Morris. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


SCIENTISTS IN THE NEWS 


Contributions in this section of your Journal are earnestly solicited. 
They should be typed double-spaced and sent to the Editor by the 10th of 
the month preceding the issue for which they are intended. 


_ National Institutes of Health 


Dr. Robert H. Purcell, head of the Viral 
Hepatitis Section of the Laboratory of 
Infectious Diseases, National Institute of 
Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was 
_ recently awarded the Gorgas Medal for 
_ 1977 by the American Association of 

Military Surgeons. 

This medal is presented annually for 
‘‘distinguished work in preventive medi- 
cine’’ and Dr. Purcell was given the honor 
for his outstanding contributions to the 
development of methods for detecting 
and preventing viral hepatitis. 

Dr. Purcell has made many contribu- 
tions to the study of viral hepatitis and 
his accomplishments have made him an 
internationally recognized authority. 

His leadership of research teams 
attacking the various aspects of this 
major public health problem has led to the 
development of prototype vaccines for 
hepatitis B, and to visualization of the 
virus causing hepatitis A—a first step 
toward prevention. 

Recently, Dr. Purcell and his colleagues 
have presented evidence that in addition 
to hepatitis B virus at least one other 
hepatitis viral agent (non-A non-B) can be 
transmitted by blood transfusions. 

A graduate of Oklahoma State Uni- 
versity in 1957, Dr. Purcell received his 
M.S. degree in biochemistry from Baylor 
University in 1960 and received his M.D. 
degree in 1962 from Duke University. 

Dr. Purcell came to NIAID in 1963. 
Since 1967 he has headed the Institute’s 
intramural hepatitis research program. 


Dr. Robert J. Huebner has retired after 
35 years with the U. S. Public Health 
Service. He came to NIH in 1944 and 
Studied infectious diseases until 1968, 
when he became chief of the National 
Cancer Institute Laboratory of RNA 
Tumor Viruses. 

Dr. Huebner will continue doing re- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


search at NCI as an expert consultant on 
RNA tumor viruses and on immune 
protection against cancer. 

He entered the PHS in 1942 after re- 
ceiving his M.D. degree from the St. 
Louis University School of Medicine. 
‘‘I wanted to go into endocrinology,’’ he 
says, ‘‘but infectious disease was the only 
field that was open.”’ 

While working for the National Insti- 
tute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 
Dr. Huebner’s experience ranged from 
catching rats in Harlem to checking 
household milk supplies in Los Angeles 
to investigating Coxsackie virus in Texas. 

Dr. Wallace Rowe, a co-worker at 
NIAID, said that Dr. Huebner first 
received distinction by investigating a 
rickettsial outbreak in New York City. 

‘In record time, Dr. Huebner had 
identified the organism and the vector,”’ 
says Dr. Rowe. ‘‘He had solved the 
whole problem in 2 months—and he was 
basically a kid just starting out.”’ 

Then Dr. Huebner was off to Cali- 
fornia to investigate a Q-fever epidemic 
which was being spread in milk. Q-fever 
is a respiratory infection caused by 
another rickettsial microorganism. 

He set up his lab in a garage and 
hired young people living in the neighbor- 
hood to take care of his experimental 
animals. 

In 1950, after 3 years and between 
3,000 and 4,000 household visits, his 
report that the disease was carried in 
milk was released by the American 
Medical Association. 

‘‘When that hit the papers, there were 
weeks that no milk could be sold. The 
dairy industry didn’t even want me in the 
state,’’ he recalls. 

Dr. Huebner did extensive work with 
Coxsackie A virus in Maryland, swab- 
bing the throats of hundreds of school 
children in the process. He also dis- 
covered several viruses responsible for 
herpangina. 


37 


Dr. Huebner also worked in Texas with 
a disease called devil’s grip, distinguished 
by chest pain and fever. He demonstrated 
that devil’s grip is caused by the Cox- 
sackie B3 virus. 

In the late 1950’s, Dr. Huebner began 
to work with polyoma viruses and other 
tumor viruses in animals, and he de- 
veloped a special procedure that enables 
research to be done with tumor viruses 
just as it is with other viruses. 

He later discovered that adenoviruses 
produced tumors in mice. Further study 
showed that these tumors contained viral 
proteins, which are the telltale signs of 
virus infection in the cell. 

However, subsequent studies he has 
conducted have shown that there is no 
relationship between adenoviruses and 
human cancer. 

In 1969, Dr. Huebner and Dr. George 
Todaro of NCI introduced the viral 
oncogene theory. 

This theory incorporated the idea that 
cancer viruses were genetically inherited 
and yet could be dealt with as an in- 
fectious disease, plus the idea that the key 
determinant of cancer is in the genes. 

It states that there are transforming 
genes, or oncogenes, that exist in DNA 
and viruses. These can transform the cell 
from a normal state to a cancerous state 
when a cellular mechanism is not in 
control. 

‘‘Dr. Huebner has a _ tremendous 
breadth of interest and the ability to see 
things that others just don’t see,’ Dr. 
Todaro says. ‘‘His contribution to tumor 
virology goes far beyond the oncogene 
theory. 

‘‘Some of his observations in the early 
1960’s were key to the molecular biology 
now being done; things that are now being 
taken for granted.”’ 

Dr. Huebner is now trying to identify a 
tumor antigen associated with many 
types of cancer in man. Such an antigen 
might lead to the development of tumor 
vaccines in humans. 

‘‘There are a lot of things still left to 
do,’ he says. ‘‘One of these days I’ve got 
to write a book. . . . It’s all kind of an 
adventure.”’ 


38 


NAVAL SHIP 
R&D CENTER 


Dr. Elizabeth H. Cuthill, the Numerical 
Analysis Coordinator for the Computa- 
tion, Mathematics, and Logistics Depart- 
ment of the David W. Taylor Naval Ship 
R&D Center (DINSRDC), Bethesda, 
Maryland, recently received the David 
W. Taylor Award for Scientific Achieve- 
ment for the calendar year 1976. 

Dr. Cuthill was recognized for her 
valuable contributions in the develop- 
ment and exploitation of mathematical 
and computational techniques for signifi- 
cant Navy applications. Her achieve- 
ments date back to when she first joined 
DTNSRDC in 1953 and include technical 


leadership in the development of the | 


Navy’s nuclear reactor codes, a field in 
which she and her colleagues were 
preeminent and internationally recog- 
nized for their many accomplishments. 
Upon completion of this effort, Dr. 
Cuthill led the successful development 
of the widely used General Bending 
Response Codes which have received 


Dr. Elizabeth H. Cuthill 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


wide acceptance and are in general use 
throughout the nation. She was also the 
leader within the Navy in promoting the 


use of general purpose finite element 


codes for structural analysis. 

Dr. Cuthill’s personal technical con- 
tributions include the development of 
band width reduction techniques which 


| reduced by half the time and cost of 


structural analysis calculations. A leader 
in exploiting the use of computers for 
symbolic mathematics, she is presently 


engaged in making this capability avail- 


able to the entire Navy laboratory 
community. 
Captain Myron, V. Ricketts, USN, 


| DTNSRDC Commander, presented the 


Award to Dr. Cuthill, citing her ‘‘out- 
standing personal contributions and tech- 
nical leadership.’’ Reviewing her ac- 
complishments Captain Ricketts praised 
her ‘‘technical excellence and expertise 
of the highest order, scientific pro- 
ductivity addressed to Navy applications 
of major significance, and an ability to 
motivate and lead colleagues and sub- 
ordinates.”’ 

The Award is named after Rear 
Admiral David Watson Taylor, a naval 
constructor with a brilliant reputation in 
the field of naval engineering who was 
the driving force behind the development 
and adoption of modern experimental 
techniques in ship and aircraft research. 
Originally established by the Navy in 
1961, this Award has been presented 
annually since that time to the individual 
scientist whose contributions were con- 
sidered truly outstanding in the field of 
research and development. 

Dr. Cuthillis the author of many papers 
on mathematical and computational tech- 
niques and is a member of the following 
societies and associations: Phi Beta 
Kappa, Sigma Xi, the American Mathe- 


matical Society, the Mathematical Asso- 


ciation of America, the Society for In- 


dustrial and Applied Mathematics, the 


Association for Computing Machinery, 
the American Association for the Ad- 
vancement of Science, and the Washing- 


|) ton Philosophical Society. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


RICE UNIVERSITY 


Dr. Frederick D. Rossini, professor 
emeritus of chemistry at Rice University 
and an internationally recognized au- 
thority on petroleum chemistry, received 
the National Medal of Science from 
President Carter at ceremonies in Wash- 
ington, D. C., Tuesday, Nov. 22, 1977. 
Dr. Rossini, 78, was honored for his 
‘‘contributions to basic reference knowl- 
edge in chemical thermodynamics.’’ 

The award—one of 15 made by Presi- 
dent Carter—came to Dr. Rossini some 
13 months after receiving the coveted 
Carl Engler Medal from the German 
Society for Petroleum and Coal Chem- 
istry, Germany’s equivalent of the 
American Petroleum Institute. It recog- 
nized the Rice professor’s outstanding 
contributions to Petroleum research over 
the past several decades. Dr. Rossini is 
one of the very few non-Germans to win 
the Carl Engler Medal. 

The National Medal of Science Dr. 
Rossini received Tuesday from President 
Carter was established in 1959 by the 86th 
Congress. It is awarded to individuals 
‘‘deserving special recognition by reason 
of their outstanding contributions to 
knowledge in the physical, biological, 
mathematical, or engineering sciences.”’ 

Dr. Rossini, a native of Monongahela, 
Pennsylvania, is a member of the 
National Academy of Sciences and past 
presidents of the London-based World 
Petroleum Congress and of the Washing- 
ton Academy of Sciences. He is the 
author of some 250 scientific articles and 
11 books dealing mainly with thermo- 
dynamics, thermochemistry, numerical 
data for science and technology, and 
the physical chemistry of petroleum and 
hydrocarbons. 

Dr. Rossini joined the Rice faculty in 
1971 after a distinguished academic and 
governmental career that began in 1923 
as a laboratory assistant in physics at the 
Carnegie Institute of Technology (now 
Carnegie-Mellon University) and _ in- 
cluded 22 years (1928-1950) with the 
National Bureau of Standards in Wash- 
ington, D. C. 


39 


NEW AFFILIATE 


The Potomac Chapter of the American 
Fisheries Society, organized as a local 
chapter of the parent national society in 
1976, is a new affiliate of the Academy. 


Objectives: a.) To promote the conserva- 
tion and effective management of fish, 
other aquatic environment for the op- 
timum benefit of the people of this 
continent. b.) To advance the science, 
technology, education, and practice of all 
branches and disciplines related to the 
conservation of aquatic resources. c.) To 
encourage and recognize effective per- 
formance in all aspects of the fisheries 
profession. d.) To encourage and pro- 
mote effective communications among 
professional aquatic scientists, and be- 
tween the profession and the public. 


Members: The membership of the Chap- 
ter shall be composed of those American 
Fisheries Society members in good stand- 
ing residing in Maryland, Virginia, Dis- 
trict of Columbia, and Jefferson, 


Berkeley, and Morgan Counties of West | 
Va. who are listed on the Chapter | 
membership roll by virtue of having paid | 


established Chapter dues. 


Meetings: The chapter shall hold at least | 
one (1) meeting annually at a time and | 
place designated by the Executive Com- | 
mittee or its officially delegated alternate | 


committee. The program and presenta- 


tion of papers shall be the responsibility 


of the Program Committee. 


OBITUARY 


Louis S. Jaffe, 63, professor of epi- 
demiology and environmental health at 
George Washington University’s medical 
school, died July 24, 1977 after a heart 
attack while vacationing in Israel. He 
lived on Highland Drive in Silver Spring. 

Jaffe was a pioneer in the development 
of air quality criteria—the technical 
documents which delineate the various 
effects of specific air pollutants on man, 
animals, vegetation and materials and 
serve as the cornerstones of the national 
air quality standards. 

He joined the medical school staff in 
1970 upon his retirement from the U. S. 
Public Health Service. His last assign- 
ment during his 31 years of government 
service was as physical science adminis- 
trator and special assistant to the director 


40 


of the air quality criteria and standards 
development program. 
A native of Newark, N. J., and a 


graduate of Brooklyn College and Colum- | 


bia University, Jaffe was elected a fellow 
in the Washington Academy of Sciences 
in 1974 in recognition of his contributions 
to environmental medicine. 

Jaffe was active in civic affairs and at 
the time of his death was a vice president 
of the National Capital Area of B’nai 
B’rith Lodges. He was a past president of 
the Cardoza and Montgomery Lodges. 

He also served a two-year term as 
president of the Woodside Park Civic 
Association in Silver Spring and was a 
former chairman of the Montgomery 
County Civic Federation’s planning and 
zoning committee. | 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 1, 1978 


{ 


jj 


! 


| 
‘ 
| 
: 
t 


JOURNAL OF THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 


Instructions to Contributors 


Seneral 

‘| Type manuscripts on white bond paper 
| sither 8% by 11 or 8 by 10% inches. Double 
space all lines, including those in abstracts, 
| ables, legends, quoted matter, acknowledg- 
-|ments, and references cited. Number pages 
sonsecutively. Place your name and com- 
ylete address in the upper right hand corner 
pf the title page. 


‘ifitle, Author, and Affiliation 

Page | of your manuscript should contain 
Jonly this information and your name and 
laddress. Choose a concise but complete and 
| meaningful title. In research papers con- 

cerning biological subjects, include an indi- 
vation of the order and family of the taxa 
discussed. Academic degrees will not nor- 
mally be included unless the author so 
specifies. If possible, combine your affilia- 
‘ion and mailing address (including Zip) so 
chat readers can write to you directly. 


ae 


‘Abstract 

| Type on a separate sheet at the end of the 
manuscript. Make the abstract intelligible 
without reference to the text of the paper. 
'|\Write an informative digest of the significant 
jcontent and conclusions, not a mere descrip- 
tion. Generally, the abstract should not ex- 


seed 3% of the text. 


Footnotes 

Use footnotes as sparingly as possible. 
|| Number text footnotes consecutively with 
Arabic numerals and type them on a sepa- 
|sate sheet of paper at the end of the manu- 
script. Type table footnotes, if any, below 
|)each pertinent table on the same page. 


Illustrations and Legends 
| The quality of all original illustrations 
must be high enough to facilitate good offset 
jeproduction. They should have ample mar- 
gins and be drawn on heavy stock or 
jrastened to stiff cardboard to prevent bend- 
jing. They should be proportioned to column 
‘al x 3) or page (2 x 3) type-dimensions, 
‘seaving space for legend material. Photo- 


graphs should have a glossy finish. They re- 
produce best when the contrast is fairly 
high. Identify each illustration with number 
and author in light pencil marks on the 
reverse side. Submit all illustrations sepa- 
rately — please do not glue or clip them to 
the pages of the manuscript. 

Do not type or write legends directly on 
the illustrations. Type legends on a separate 
sheet or sheets at the end of the manuscript. 
Indicate where you want illustrations to 
appear in the printed paper by writing the 
figure numbers lightly in the text margins, 
and be sure that each figure is properly re- 
ferenced in the text itself. Original “art” will 
be returned only at the author’s request and 
expense. 


Tables 

Include tables only when the same infor- 
mation cannot be presented economically in 
the text, or when a table presents the data in 
a more meaningful way. Consider preparing 
extremely complicated tabular matter in a 
form suitable for direct reproduction as an 
illustration. In such cases, the use of the 
typewriter is not recommended. 


References to Literature 

Limit references within the text and in 
synonymies to author and year (and page if 
needed). In a ‘Reference Cited” section, list 
alphabetically by senior author only those 
papers you have included in the text. Like- 
wise, be sure all the text references are 
listed. Type the “References Cited” section 
on a separate sheet after the last page of 
text. Abbreviations should follow the USA 
Standard for Periodical Title Abbreviations, 
EST S-1965. 


Submission of Manuscripts 

Send completed manuscripts and sup- 
porting material to the Academy office (see 
address inside front cover) in care of the 
Editor. Authors will be requested to read 
Xerox “proofs” and invited to submit re- 
print orders prior to publication. 


Reprints - Prices for reprints may be obtained on request. 


Washington Academy of Sciences 2nd Class Postage Paid | 
9650 Rockville Pike (Bethesda) at Washington, D.C. _ 
Washington, D.C. 20014 and additional mailing offices. | 


Return Requested with Form 3579 


AL MJSEUM LIBRARY 
) OC 20025 


8 
iN 


(2a Cg 3 


VOLUME 68 
Number 2 


| J our nal of the JUNE, 1978 


WASHINGTON 
ACADEMY .. SCIENCES 


Issued Quarterly 
at Washington, D.C. 


CONTENTS 


Features: 
RAYMOND J. SEEGER: On the Humanism of Science .................. 


A. G. WHEELER, JR.: Mortimer Demarest Leonard, Entomologist: 
Biographical Sketch and List of Publications.....................008- 


Research Reports: 


NORMAN LIN: Contributions to the Ecology of the Cicada Killer, 
Sphecius speciosus (Hymenoptera: Sphecidae)....................... 


DORIS H. BLAKE: Colaspis quattuordecimpunctata costata Lefévre and 
Its Close Relatives in Brazil (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) ............. 


Academy Affairs: 


SCICMUStSHIMMMO SING WS: sie aides ioc a susie s/ecd alee aelays dsl hase be sia aw ded nee 
Obituaries 

SS CMMMICINE MIDS UNMET Is erties ete es ete tare ccs bl grduchbre cnchiearle dire. @ ola “ove Guede Beevers 91 
MHEOROKE CG avONMSTaANG: aoc. ose G auw oui dinw Hae ¥ 30 aie pinta mide coer a oes ane 


Washington Academp of Sciences 


EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 


President 
Mary H. Aldridge 


President-Elect 
Alfred Weissler 


Secretary 
James F. Goff 


Treasurer 
Nelson W. Rupp 


Members at Large 
Conrad B. Link 
Elaine Shafrin 


BOARD OF MANAGERS 


All delegates of affiliated 
Societies (see facing page) 


EDITOR 


Richard H. Foote 


EDITORIAL ASSISTANT 


Elizabeth Ostaggi 


ACADEMY OFFICE 


9650 Rockville Pike 
Bethesda, MD. 20014 
Telephone: (301) 530-1402 


Founded in 1898 


The Journal 


This journal, the official organ of the Washington Aca- 
demy of Sciences, publishes historical articles, critical 
reviews, and scholarly scientific articles; proceedings 
of meetings of the Academy and its Board of Mana- 
gers; and other items of interest to Academy members. 
The Journal appears four times a year (March, June, 
September, and December)—the September issue 
contains a directory of the Academy membership. 


Subscription Rates 


Members, fellows, and patrons in good standing re- 
ceive the Journal without charge. Subscriptions are 
available on a calendar year basis only, payable in ad- 
vance. Payment must be made in U.S. currency at the 
following rates: 


U.S. and Canada....... $15.00 
FOLIO ac aces 16.00 
Single Copy Price ...... 5.00 


Single-copy price for Vol. 66, No. 1 (March, 1976) 
is $15.00. 


Back Issues 


Obtainable from the Academy office (address at bot- 
tom of opposite column): Proceedings: Vols. 1-13 
(1898-1910) Index: To Vols. 1-13 of the Proceedings 
and Vols. 1-40 of the Journal Journal: Back issues, 
volumes, and sets (Vols. 1-62, 1911-1972) and all cur- 
rent issues. 


Claims for Missing Numbers 


Claims will not be allowed if received more than 60 
days after date of mailing plus time normally required 
for postal delivery and claim. No claims will be al- 
lowed because of failure to notify the Academy of a 
change in address. 


Change of Address 


Address changes should be sent promptly to the Aca- 
demy office. Such notification should show both old 
and new addresses and zip number. 


Published quarterly in March, June, September, and December of each year by the 
Washington Academy of Sciences, 9650 Rockville Pike, Washington, D.C. Second class 
postage paid at Washington, D.C. and additional mailing offices. 


Delegates continue in office until new selections are made by the representative societies. 


_ DELEGATES TO THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 
REPRESENTING THE LOCAL AFFILIATED SOCIETIES 
| PEMoMcal SOcIety Of WaSRINGLON, 3.505. 66 6 s)s bss aie a a oe o's’ w se oe re a es a oe eae James F. Goff 
PEReMOoric al SOCIety Of Washington: «.. . ......6.. sic 2 oa ss sc es Cee ne oo ee es oe Jean K. Boek 
Pee TeNOMICLy Of VW aSMINGtON «2. occ 6 eco eb Noda Sa Sale gee wt ase ow cee een elem c William R. Heyer 
DRC MEMPICtAOle WASHINEION) 225. 2 652.5 2266 oases Sac ac a a bance sb s Se tbees se beece David H. Freeman 
Para AUS OCIELY OF Washington j: 22 22s es che cece cee c scar ceasneseos D. W. S. Sutherland 
MINE AEE ApHIC SOCICLY. | 25. pc 5 aoc be code bac dd vee cid chews lecular lisavdes T. Dale Stewart 
DEREUMPEEBESOCICLY OF WaASHINCTON 2.) . 6. oi ceeee cece ce ee ata wesc cewceadeaes Marian M. Schnepfe 
Deemacicingorine District of Columbia no nn 660 So. oe ele ee ics Ge ee cee cece cseweeeceeees Inactive 
_ Columbia SLE POG EL SOILS LSS et SR ee Paul H. Oehser 
DEMS ESD CICHVEO! WASHINPLON «2.2045. 02s eee cc ewes cence cw cw ucreceeeentseaeie Conrad B. Link 
Society of American Foresters ....... BN Ree ek cca oh tae Larter igh ied Thomas B. Glazebrook 
PnEECrESOCICly Of ENPINEETS ... 5.1... ce ee ke eee ce neh eneteaneeueus George Abraham 
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ............0.0..0 ccc ceeeeeeeeeeee George Abraham 
Sememeanesocicty Of Mechanical Engineers ....... 06.6. ees cc cece eee ee eeeenteesbeeenes Michael Chi 
Helminthological SacietyaGk Was minPtONel 5x. 0G oct oe ete Sad eae ane. Bee Robert S. Isenstein 
memmearansocicry tor Microbiology .... 2-2... 6. ee deca eden e bases beecnecteueses Michael Pelzcar 
Society Ma MeTICANE VINIPATY EMOIMEETS! . 2. oss vies. 6 os ore at gheial ces @ bie SHG bold e wet oleae eles H. P. Demuth 
American SORIETS CH CIT BIT VS en Robert Sorenson 
MMe vaor Experimental Biology and Medicine ..........0..0.0.cccccecscnsecaccecets Donald Flick 
eR SEAGER VICES oc oe 2 oii on tik a as 2 oe oa a hn ee Gale os tines ss eee ores Glen W. Wensch 
International pssoctation Of Dental Research . 222... 2.256663 sie esas sees owes William V. Loebenstein 
| Pemeneam Mstitute of Aeronautics and Astromautics .............0.2 ccs ccsacccescnces George J. Vila 
| American PLETED PTL IGALP SOS Ie yee a re Pn ee en gee a eer ne A. James Wagner 
“Insecticide IMMA AS NMG OM ewe cy oro, ci5 Fs ees, sfoba cas. ola a woes aie whi’ snyoree « Sutecverse Sale seks Robert J. Argauer 
Memeeeieesucicty of America ...............0--sscceenveuevensouse es dove: Delegate not appointed 
| American PAE TIS OCICLYE Se ee eet. mee ts ce Ss cea ba el. Be eke Lee ek Dick Duffey 
| RM ETO OUNCCIMIOIOLISES: ofits 5. 6S a's obs os dw nd oa late wide be od Gos ee we oe William Sulzbacher 
| Vi erican PET AMH CES OCICI NEE eRe Bn eee MANS on sch eal ok MA EMEN GNU ois lols Lie aes ee Inactive 
EMPMEMMCAIOSOCICEY® 5-05 5 sfc ie Eke be elkalba ee ccceeedeadacatecanes Delegate not appointed 
MR EMMPEMIMAIS(ONY Ol SCIENCE CID) 25.06 ci oe ce kb chess ce nese leeaebectecebebohnaeeet cee Inactive 
Pee ane association Of Physics Teachers. ...... 2.56.20 ee ese c ee cece nese ne esees To be appointed 
| TED SDSS RY CLP EATEST ETE eR ee Lucy B. Hagan 
| mem SOcicty. Of Plant PHYSIOIOZIStS: 2.25.5 5-606 eee ee ae et ce ect ene eewesese Walter Shropshire 
| Seemann Operations Research COUNCI!) «2. <<. 65. 6 a0sspane Ka sas de oye 0 ede e nite ede nines John G. Honig 
EME NOCICIN TORU ANICIIC A: e525. 51. « piyansus cle Goes mie svsinls 4 cho 4 ie’ epnscecainim ween deus d «ar, Sagres « Inactive 
_ American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical 
} Pee OIC UISE MEINE CESH NS. oo. 25): etek Seite bo Sees LTA. Pah. eee ies See GE. Carl H. Cotterill 
PEER IEO ADILOVAC(EONOMENS *. 2. knees... cles so te NN TB be ba ies ale Benson J. Simon 
1) Seem aericaleAssociation-of America. 2600... ac et te ll Sean ele ne eee es notte as Patrick Hayes 
\ MIS HEIEC OKC HETINIS(S Sc ce OS Se ie aa OSs DSS Sel elele ce eee eek eee Miloslav Recheigl, Jr. 
Meretoloricalt Association ©) le Le ee John O’ Hare 
| See asaineton Paint Pechimical Group. ..... 2-06. cs cess ewe ese ew es cctereeseseees Paul G. Campbell 
Me annehiyiopatholopical Society... ..... 6-5. eee n ee tec eee e eet eet seeetace ns Tom van der Zwet 
| | Society MG ENCEAISVStCMS RESEALCM. oc 2). <5 och = Haus a ereters @ epee apo ecko oe Ronald W. Manderscheid 
MELTS OSES OCLC (Ne aoe y fo oalat 05.0 ie ah, Sosy 2 late Mandi. 5, «oppo one Shag whe H. Mcllvaine Parsons 
\ PEELS ICSE OCI CEM a Seco ons cats a5 vn ede. 8 + aleveinaers atl ele s Saka sige pps he eae No delegate 


| J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 41 


ae 


EIS 


ca 


A, 
“ 
i¥ 


Stil 34 GRiAL 


, of 


Mist oT 7 


fo “ey btess ~itt ei 


10 VIOWOADA WOEDARBAW SRT OT BITAD 
Lea, DAWAE SBT avIT Viner aaa 


Dek it, 


% be 
* 7 é 
gs 
ke 
iv 
' . HK 
Y isie Page 


THe TAO Me CaN: aie 
aoosies Wee Hau litle itt spelt 


me S000 2a t0¥ AI das 


Per nt 
Pe clences 


qoinudes 4 Yo seal 
tole 
yorads ol 
Rites tar 
(ae 

a. yoda oh 


‘TiNy 2 Te. 3 


ue): sa 
ee ‘wee (ee 
: moss 
aga 


= 


weet) 
gon 
Ff 
7 74% 
iJ 


gw Tee fh “Ee | al 
| Saas 


kA na” 
‘ nail 


i 


mTorr, Ts 


‘ c a>: Fe. rele Wa - 
a ee eee ee 
abe ries rietald 
ols dash 
ean Pal fe? ‘ 
; SeRER - : We hg 


“as JiA fey as 


| 
| Raymond J. Seeger 


| National Science Foundation (Retired). 


' John Donne, the poetic Dean of St. 
| Paul’s Cathedral (London), wrote in his 
| ‘Devotions’? (1624), ‘‘No man is an 
| island entire of itself.’’ We live in one 
world; we all live in the same world. 
There isn’t an old world and a new world, 
) a white world and a black world, a man’s 
| world and a woman’s world, a starry 
) world above and a moral world within, a 
| natural world and a supernatural world, 
/ an objective world and an existential 
| world, a world of science and a world of 
' humanities. We all live in one world, the 


a 
pele) 
= 
@) 
= 
ie) 
ak 
Q. 


Our experience, too, is one: we the 
subject, the world the object. Years ago 
when I was teaching a physics course, on 
“Our Physical Heritage’ for non-science 
students, I invited a professor of history 
to lecture on the reciprocal influences of 
history and science. ‘‘What,’’ he began, 
“is history?’ ‘‘History,’’ he proclaimed, 
“is the study of man and his environ- 
ment!’’ I made a note of this; although 
I had studied history all my life, no one 
had ever bothered to define it for me. 
| Later I asked a professor of philosophy 
‘to discuss philosophical implications of 
science. ‘‘ What is philosophy?’’ he asked 
| thetorically. ‘‘The study of man and his 
-environment!’’ he explained. For the 
‘| moment I was nonplussed. The next year, 
however, I introduced the course with a 
‘| query, “‘What is physics?’’ ‘‘The study of 


ann annaRamapRRaRRRE : =e = a 


‘Given at colleges and universities under the 
| NSF-funded Sigma Xi Bicentennial Lecture Pro- 
| gram (1974-1977) on **Science and Society.” 


| _J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


{ej 
| oe 


|On the Humanism of Science! 


FEATURES 


man and his environment!’ I joyfully 
announced. I, too, had realized that we 
are all studying the same thing, namely, 
the universe with man at its focus—but 
different aspects of it. 

The English Augustan poet Alexander 
Pope argued in his ‘“‘Essay on Man’’ 
(1737), ““The proper study of mankind is 
man’’ — usually understood to advocate a 
separation of man from his environment. 
This poem, however, which deals pri- 
marily with the justification of God’s 
ways to man, connotes a quite different 
discrimination as shown in the preceding 
line: “‘Know then thyself, presume not 
God to scan.’’ Ralph Waldo Emerson, 
the American transcendentalist essayist, 
also invoked the Delphic oracle in his 
famous Phi Beta Kappa address (1837) 
on ‘‘The American Scholar; ‘The 
ancient precept, ‘Know thyself,’ and the 
modern precept, ‘Study nature,’ become 
at last one maxim.’’ Man is thus part and 
partner in his changing environment— 
what might properly be called human 
ecology. The Greeks never separated 
man from his environment. They looked 
at nature and discovered it to be real 
and interesting and comprehensible. 
Greece itself contained both scientific 
Ionia and humanistic Attica in continuous 
communication. The word interesting, by 
the way, comes from the Latin inter esse, 
meaning to be among, viz., man and his 
environment. One cannot conceive of a 
man without an environment, and even 
the women’s lib is loath to have an 
environment without a man. 


43 


Nevertheless, we are wont to view our 
experience in differently colored lights, 
whether we look at a planet ora plant or a 
person. We can distinguish three primary 
cultural colors. There is sky blue signifying 
our aesthetic enjoyment—‘‘how brief the 
beauty of the moon!’ Grass green 
symbolizes the nourishment of scientific 
relatedness —how ‘‘the moon may draw 
the sea!’ Earth red represents tech- 
nological use—how ‘‘He appointed the 
moon for certain seasons!’’ Possibly a 
fourth light! an invisible aura— within the 
red, beyond the violet—that intimates 
mystically the unity of the universe! 
This many colored rainbow shines upon 
our everyday life. We need its integrated 
light to insure the integrity of our personal 
experience. 

Our outlook, however, is colored by 
our daily lookout through the tinted 
education spectacles furnished each one 
of us upon scholarly matriculation. 
Everyone nowadays is familiar with the 
two academic cultures publicized (1959, 
1963) by Charles Percy Snow, the British 
novelist. He himself is always careful to 
indicate that these two cultures—so- 
called humanities and science—are 
strictly academic fields. He deplores the 
gap between them and urges that it be 
bridged (modern education is spuriously 
measured at times by their very distance 
apart). It is, indeed, remarkable that both 
the ‘‘Civilisation”’ (1969) by the English 
art connoisseur Kenneth McKenzie Clark 
and the “‘Ascent of Man’’ (1971) by the 
English humanist mathematician Jacob 
Bronowski exhibit so little overlap, al- 
though they are presumably describing 
the same world. They reveal little evi- 
dence of the underlap of their common 
experience—a natural bridge. I must 
confess, however, my own deeper anxiety 
about the need to bridge a far greater gap, 
namely, that between these very academic 
cultures and the nonacademic—not our 
concern here. 

Victor Cousin, the French eclectic 
philosopher, sounded a tocsin in his 1818 
Sorbonne lectures: “‘L’art pour lart’’ 
(‘art for art’s sake’’). Some modern 
scientists would counter with the slogan, 


Ay 


‘*Science for the sake of science.’’ More 
basic, I believe, is, ‘‘Art and science 
together for man!’’ We must comprehend 
them. I am personally dissatisfied with 
the academic compartmentalization of 
ideas resulting so often from an adminis- 
trative departmentalization of fields of 
interest. 

Like the pilgrim (1638) of the English 
non-conformist preacher John Bunyan, 
we are eager to set out on a quest for 
ultimate truths. But like Alighieri Dante, 
the Italian philosophic poet, “‘Midway 
upon the journey of our life I found myself 
in a dark wood where the right way was 
lost’? (c. 1307). It was the Roman epic 
poet Vergil who guided him through Hell, 
where he accosted the Greek empirically 


oriented philosopher Aristotle as “‘the. | 


master of those who know.”’ Aristotle, 
indeed, had begun his “‘metaphysics,”’ 
All men by their very nature feel the 
urge to know’’—owing to an innate 
curiosity about their awful environment. 
Wondering Ionians sought eternal an- 
swers to their perennial questions: where 
am I? who am I? what will I be? This 
perpetual quest is a unique human 
activity. In his pursuit of it man has 
become enchanted with his mysterious | 
universe; he zealously searches for a 
unifying pattern—not a crazy quilt of his | 
own making. I do not fathom a recent | 
pronouncement of Harvey Cox, that , 
apparently godless Harvard theologian: 
‘Life is not an unfathomable mystery. 
... We know there is no ordered | 
universe awaiting the discovery of it by | 
man. . . . The universe is a human in- | 
vention.’’ Who would be so egotistical | 
as to believe the universe to be man-made? | 

I pity the modern Macbeths who regard | 
life as ‘‘a tale told by an idiot, full of | 
sound and fury, signifying nothing.” I | 
pity modern dramatists—the Czech Karl | 
Capek who would try to solve human } 
problems with dehumanized robots | 
(R. U. R. 1921); the German Friedrich | 
Diirrenmatt who would have physicists 
seek security in an insane asylum (1962). } 
I pity modern novelists: the English } 
George Orwell with his 1984 madmen 
seemingly united in a meaningless brother- | 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 | 


| hood (1949); the English Aldous Huxley 
seeking solace in his caricature of 
| scientists as cringing creatures crawling 
| blindlessly to escape his so-called ** Brave 
| New World’’ (1932), only to become later 
(1958) Buddhist addicts to painless 
nihilism. 

| In his perpetual quest for knowledge, 
| on the contrary, man has found some 
' comfort in science’s liberation from 
cultural bondage of some of his attitudes 
and thoughts. We shall now focus our 
‘| attention on this humanistic science. 
Confusion is rampant with respect to 
| humanism in general and the humanities 
| in particular. One speaks thoughtlessly of 
literary humanists, scientific humanists, 
| Christian humanists, et al. The term 
| humanities, in turn, varies from college 
to college (in their catalogues); it is 
| actually defined in the final report (1964) 
of the U. S. Commission of Humanities, 
_viz., ““The humanities are the study of 
|that which is most human... . The 
body is usually taken to include the study 
of history, the arts, religion, and phi- 
_losophy.’’ No science? Jacques Maritain, 
the French religious philosopher, whom 
‘no one can accuse of being partial to 
/ natural science, advocated in the Terry 
}lectures (1943) on ‘‘Education at the 
Crossroads,’ ‘‘Physics should be taught 
and revered as a liberal art of the first 
rank, like poetry.’’ We are liable to forget 
that one of the nine muses was Urania 
(astronomy). The Roman statesman Cas- 
siadorus’ seven liberal arts comprised the 
trivium (grammar, logic, rhetoric) and the 
quadrivium (astronomy, arithmetic, 
‘geometry, music (then largely applied 
'mathematics)). What happened over the 
ages? Nevertheless, the liberal arts, in 
principle, have always been for free men, 
to set men free, free to drink hemlock or 
, to die on a cross for the general welfare. 
| In historical perspective we can see the 
omnipresent role of science in the spread 
of humanism. 

What is humanism? We might seek its 
origin in the Greek philosopher Socrates’ 
ethical concerns in the golden age of 
antiquity or in the Renaissance’s emphasis 
‘upon the dignity of an individual. It is 


_| J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 
la 


amazing how often a _ representative 
humanist is popularly selected to be a 
non-scientist. My own preference would 
be a person like the Italian genius 
Leonardo da Vinci who doodled with art 
alongside his engineering notes and with 
engineering alongside the ones on art. 
Another versatile person was the Italian 
natural philosopher Galileo Galilei. In 
later life he reminisced about his youthful 
dream of becoming an artist (the Ameri- 
can art critic Erwin Panofsky concluded 
that he probably would have been suc- 
cessful in this capacity). In the tradition 
of his family (his father was a composer) 
he himself played several musical instru- 
ments. He boasted, when young, of 
knowing by heart the entire ‘‘Orlando 
Furioso”’ (1516) by the Italian poet 
Lodovico Ariosto. His own writings in 
the vernacular was an expression of his 
overwhelming desire to impress his own 
convictions on the common reader of his 
day. That led to his celebrated social 
controversy with the ruling Church; the 
people understood him. 

The popular formulation of humanism 
is credited to the Roman dramatist 
Publius Terentius Afer; in his comedy 
‘‘Heauton Timoramenos’’ (168 B.C., 
‘*The Self-Tormentor’’) a retired farmer 
justifies his own interest in the activities 
of a neighbor’s son by the remark, 
‘‘Homo sum: humani nihil a alienum 
puto’’ (‘‘Iamaman: I consider nothing of 
man alien to me’’). There are, however, 
different levels of human interest, from 
the star light of idealistic youth to the 
earth dung of realistic babes. The intelli- 
gent (Latin inter legere—to choose 
between): person chooses between 
possible courses of action; he dis- 
criminates rather than behaving pro- 
miscuously at random. The Greeks, for 
example, chose the potential excellence 
of the individual; for them humanism 
meant man at his best. 

In this spirit, we, too, might regard 
humanistic science from purely classical 
viewpoints: ‘‘the glory that was Greece 
and the grandeur that was Rome,” the 
grace that was Galilee. We must, how- 
ever, be careful not to become mere 


45 


antiquarians; we must look also from a 
modern point of view. For example, it 
is not enough that we share Dante’s 
feeling as he regarded the Ptolemaic 
universe of his day; we must consider 
how he might have felt in the Copernican 
universe of today. Regardless of our 
esteem for the classical vision (I myself 
began college as a classics major) or of 
our indebtedness to its later renascence 
(I still admire Galileo) we must be sensi- 
tive to the distinctive feature of our 
current culture, its new dimension of 
science and technology. To be sure, this 
itself is actually an extension of man’s 
propensities and interests and capabili- 
ties. It is, therefore, surprising to find 
so little regard for science in ‘‘Demo- 
cratic Experience’’ (1975) by the Pulitzer 
prize winning Librarian of Congress, 
Daniel Joseph Boorstin. 

There is, moreover, understandably 
widespread popular confusion between 
these two technical terms, science and 
technology. They can be regarded actually 
as the extremes of a whole spectrum; 
scientific understanding per se and tech- 
nological utilizing per se. The former 
leads to intellectual abstractions, the 
latter to social (including moral) applica- 
tions. One cannot fix any artificial line of 
demarcation which, at best, would shift 
with dominant interest from time to time. 
The picture is further complicated by 
their continuous interactions. For ex- 
ample, the amusing electric phenomena 
of the early nineteenth century gave rise 
to the engulfing electrical age at its close, 
while the contemporary powerful steam 
engine led inevitably to the fascinating 
field of thermophysics. 

It is helpful to distinguish three differ- 
ent types of revolutions in this cultural 
melée. First of all, there have been a 
number of technological revolutions, all 
of which have been concerned primarily 
with sources of energy and power. (As 
someone remarked, **The greatest inven- 
tion in the nineteenth century was the 
invention of invention.’’) One begins 
naturally with man’s use of mechanical 
energy, the energy of the wind and of the 
wave, with manpower and horsepower. 


46 


Then came his employment of electrical 
energy, which was succeeded by chemical 
energy, and now by so-called atomic 
energy. As each new form of energy has 
come into prominence, new social (and 
moral) problems have been encountered. 

Strictly scientific revolutions, on the 
contrary, have revolved about central 
ideas. For example, in the time of Galileo 
one might have properly inquired, ‘‘How 
does a stone fall?’ ‘“‘Let us consult 
Aristotle,’ would volunteer a classical 
scholar. ‘‘Why not Thomas Aquinas?’’ 
would urge a Christian thinker. Galileo, 
however, would probably ask, *‘Why not 
observe it directly as it falls?’’ Such a 
suggestion that one might obtain some 
answers directly from nature itself was 


truly revolutionary. In the nineteenth | 


century some speculators were em- 
boldened to seek answers to all man’s 
questions in this manner (but not J). 
Today there are some who claim that man 
can obtain such answers solely by the 
method of the physical sciences (but not 
I). Even though we may be able prag- 
matically to describe behavior sufficiently 
for everyday use, we cannot necessarily 
explain it to our complete satisfaction; 
for example, the origin of matter and life, 
of mind and spirit. With each scientific 
revolution there are disclosed new in- 
tellectual problems of a decidedly per- 
sonal concern because of their philo- 
sophical and religious implications. 

The twentieth century ushered in a 
third type of revolution, what might be 
called scientific-technological. Certain 
(not all) fields of science and of tech- 
nology apparently converge with bene- 
ficial interactions. Because one can de- 
scribe certain phenomena scientifically, 
one then finds that one can make tech- 
nological predictions. Accordingly, or- 
ganized research, jointly basic and ap- 
plied, has become sponsored by industry 
and by government and even by academia. 
In such common ventures, however, 
there is always a danger that one com- 
ponent will completely overshadow the 
other. In his ‘‘Grand Academy of Lagado 
in Laputa’’ (1726) the Irish satirist 
Jonathan Swift noted that while the 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


dedicated projectors were trying to 
understand phenomena (e.g., the extrac- 
tion of sunbeams out of cucumbers), 
‘‘the whole country lies miserably waste, 
the houses in ruins and the people without 
food or clothes.’’ Here was an extreme 
prevalence of personal scientific interests 
with dire social consequences. Nowadays 
the opposite is increasingly true: an 
anxious overemphasis upon harvesting 
technological fruits is leading to a care- 
less neglect of sowing scientific seeds, a 
short-sighted search for social applica- 
tions to the neglect of long-range basic 
science (new wars are not won now with 
old weapons). In life one must always 
allow a margin for the unexpected, in 
_ science for technology and in technology 
for science. 

Evidently a primary democratic need 
today is understanding of science by the 
public. We shall not be concerned here 
with reasons for the widespread current 
misunderstanding; to what extent it may 
be due to the spreading habit of technical 
jargon in all fields of human endeavor, 
to what extent it is a consequence of ever 
vacillating fashions of professional edu- 
cationalists. Mommy consoles Johnny, 
““You are having trouble with the new 
mathematics? Don’t worry; Mommy had 
trouble with the old mathematics. And 
look how she turned out!’’ (When Johnny 
did, he really became worried.) One time 
when I passed out problems to my 
sophomore Physics students, one of them 
exclaimed, ‘‘Do you expect me to do 
these? Who do you think Iam? Einstein?”’ 
I looked at him quizzically and replied, 
‘‘No! Einstein wouldn’t be taking this 
course the fourth time.’’ A Congressman 
once illustrated the scientific method as 
follows: Pluck the legs off a grasshopper, 
one by one. In each case tell the grass- 
hopper then to hop; he will do so until 
all the legs have been removed. ‘‘Prov- 
ing,’ said the Congressman, ‘‘by the 
scientific method that when a grass- 
hopper has lost all its legs it has lost also 
its sense of hearing!’ Our modern culture 
is permeated with such everyday mis- 
understandings of science. 

Evidently the public needs to improve 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


sophical and religious 


its understanding of natural phenomena, 
and, even more, the very understanding 
of that understanding, viz., the develop- 
ment of scientific thinking, including its 
interactions with politics and economics, 
with sociology and ethics, its philo- 
implications. 
Science, Iam convinced, can and must be 
taught humanistically. After all, scien- 
tists are people, human beings. They 
are not the youthful (21) Mary Godwin 
Shelley’s Frankenstein creating fantastic 
monsters; they are not the fanciful 
creatures lurking in the horror nightmares 
of science-fiction writers. On the other 
hand, one is well aware that even the 
so-called humanities are not necessarily 
taught humanistically. 

What is science? Essentially it is not 
such academic misrepresentations as the 
following: ‘Information, please!’’ Or- 
ganized common sense. Black magic 
(‘Beyond me!’’) Black-box gadgetry. 
Mysterious mathematics (with the im- 
primatur Q.E.D.). Technically, it is not 
primarily induction as popularized by the 
English lawyer statesman Francis Bacon 
(1620), or deduction as argued by the 
French mathematical philosopher René 
Descartes (1637), or puzzle solving as 
advocated by the American historian of 
science Thomas Samuel Kuhn (1962). 
Each of these, to be sure, may be 
involved in scientific reasoning, but none 
of these is the fundamental criterion 
which was characteristic of the experi- 
ential work of Galileo. 

What, then, is science? Obviously the 
result of the so-called scientific method! 
And this? Something used by a scientist! 
It would appear that we are merely 
begging the question. On the contrary, 
we are emphasizing that the ‘‘what’’ of 
science is dependent on ‘‘how’’ this is 
reached, which is meaningless except in 
terms of ‘‘who’’ does it. This point of 
view can be illustrated with four essential 
elements that are inherent in any ac- 
cepted scientific method. 

First of all, I—and you (the scientific 
method is necessarily communal)—ex- 
perience something, with nature as a 
source (possibly indirect). (One should 


47 


preferably study nature—not science. 
Note that mathematics per se is excluded 
in this definition.) Out of our intellectual 
curiosity we frame questions, selected, 
but not necessarily answerable at the 
time. In religious studies, for example, 
typical questions were the following: 
Why cannot an omnipotent God make a 
triangular circle? How many angels can 
be placed on the point of a needle? In 
mathematics, why can’t I try to square a 
circle if I wish to do so? Which is larger 
V1 or V—1? In physics, what is the color 
of that beautiful atom? Where is the 
elusive electron inside it? Selective ques- 
tions allow for even fewer possible 
answers, obtained sometimes by pene- 
trating insight, at other times through 
mystifying intuition. What is truly em- 
barrassing is to have irrelevant questions 
reveal relevant answers, to find im- 
pertinent questions lead to pertinent rela- 
tions. One’s experience, to be -sure, 
depends upon the questioner “‘who.”’ 
Secondly, I—and you—review these 
findings somehow, with imagination as 
inspiration—in the sense of the English 
romantic poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge, 
i.e., definitely not imaginary or fanciful, 
like a mermaid. An old lady once accosted 
the English romantic painter Joseph 
M. W. Turner, ‘“‘I’ve never seen a sunset 
look like that!’’ He replied ‘‘Don’t you 
wish you could?’ The French Fauvist 
Georges Rouault was asked how he was 
able to portray so brilliantly the glistening 
white birches of spring. ‘‘By observing 
the snow-clad fields of winter’’ was the 
reply. As the English natural philosopher 
Isaac Newton sat under an old apple tree, 
an apple fell on his head. ‘‘What a lucky 
day!’ he probably mused, ‘‘Suppose it 
had been the moon!’ What a revolu- 
tionary comparison, a moonlike apple 
and an applelike moon! This was the first 
time man conceived of a physical uni- 
verse, where the gravity of the earth acts 
on both moons and apples. Up to that 
time, man had actually inhabited a 
duoverse with the celestial heaven per- 
fect and unchanging while in the terrestrial 
region below it there was a perfect mess 
ever changing. What a comprehensive 


48 


imagination—made possible by the in- 
tellectual and emotional freedom of a 
scientist ‘‘who.”’ 

The third element is your ability —and 
mine—to deduce something else, with 
reason as a guide. We insist upon logical 
consistency with respect to man’s mind. 
In this connection we note the role of 
mathematics which may insure suffi- 
ciency, but not necessity. Suppose, for 
example, the price x of an apple is given 
by the equation x? = 25. Is 5¢ the correct 
answer? No! there are two answers; the 
one we choose is determined by the 
marketplace. Mathematics, you see, may 
tell us about all possible worlds that fit 
our stipulations. The actual world, how- 
ever, can be determined only by some 
experiential boundary condition. 

The fourth element is that very 
criterion: I—and you—check our con- — 
clusions, with nature as a re-source. Our 
speculations must be bound by our 
experience. You may recall the antics 
which the Greek giant Antaeus exhibited 
when he was strangled mid-air by that 
work-force of the Greek gods, Heracles. 
The unforgettable trick was to keep 
Antaeus’ feet from touching his mother 
earth where his strength would always 
be nourished upon contact. To me this is 
a parable of science —not to mention art 
and religion; one’s vital strength is con- 
tinually renewed so long as there is direct 
contact with experience, otherwise one 
merely goes through antics, regardless of 
how clever or complex. 

The sequence of these four elements is 
not significant, being dependent largely 
upon the skill of the explorer. The 
success iS a consequence mainly of the 
properties of the materials themselves. 
The whole process, however, is cumula- 
tive—not so much like the smooth ascent 
of a pyramid as the rough climbing a 
mountain with its unexpected ups and 
downs, going arounds, and occasional 
lost direction amid engulfing fog. 

In this concise review of what I call the 
scientific method (in preference to 
various incomplete statements which are 
often popularly dubbed scientific methods) 
we have ignored certain important tacit 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


assumptions. The most familiar one is the 
seeming experiential unity of nature. 
_ Nowadays we have become accustomed 
| to the apparent uniformity of matter 
whether it exists on the earth or on the 
_ moon, whether on the planet Mars or on 
evolving stars. More significant is the 
assumption of human comprehensibility. 
_ The German theoretical physicist Albert 
Einstein is said to have remarked that 
the one fact about the universe incom- 
| prehensible to him is its evident com- 
| prehensibility by man. Recently we have 
become more and more aware of the 
importance of a third requirement, viz. 
social acceptability. This assumption 
takes two prominent forms, viz., special 
professional dominances and the general 
cultural matrix. 

Max Planck, the German theoretical 
physicist, who conceived the quantum 
theory, notes in his posthumous (1948) 
‘Scientific Autobiography’: ‘‘A new 
scientific truth does not triumph by con- 
vincing its opponents and making them 
see the light, but rather because its 
Opponents eventually die, and a new 
generation grows up that is familiar with 
it.’ In this connection one recalls the 
first presentation of the conservation of 
energy to professional scientists. When 
James Prescott Joule, the English experi- 
mental physicist, presented a paper at the 
1847 Oxford meeting of the British Asso- 
ciation for the Advancement of Science, 
the chairman of the session insisted that 
the Manchester brewer’s son be brief, 
and allowed no time for any discussion. 
Fortunately a young Scotch-Irish pro- 
fessor of natural philosophy at the Uni- 
versity of Glasgow, William Thomson 
(later Baron Kelvin), academically ac- 
ceptable, rose to call attention to this 
epoch-making work that was about to be 
by-passed. Almost a century later (1937) 


| the English experimental physicist Ernest 


Rutherford (Baron of Nelson) predicted 


| the impracticability of atomic energy — 


only eight years prior to awesome 
Hiroshima. Senior scientists are wont to 
re-view current developments in the per- 
_ Spective of their own pioneering work — 
) areactionary procedure. 


| J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


This retarding social behavior is even 
more widespread with respect to the 
current cultural matrix. If there had been 
a Vatican Digest in 1616, it would 
undoubtedly have presented Galileo’s 
dilemma with respect to the Ptolemy- 
Copernicus issue in the form of a do-it- 
yourself analysis. Which is true: the 
hypothesis of the Alexandrian Claudius 
Ptolemy that all planets revolve about the 
earth, or that of the Polish Nicholaus 
Copernicus with the earth itself joining 
the planets all moving about the sun? 
What factors are critical in making such 
a decision? First of all, I suppose, is the 
requirement of agreement with observa- 
tional data. In this case both hypotheses 
could be regarded as satisfactory, al- 
though the data themselves were wanting 
in precision (the Ptolemaic theory how- 
ever, had been useful for more than 1400 
years). The Copernican theory, to be 
sure, waS more mathematically elegant 
than the Ptolemaic in the disuse of any 
large epicycles (there were still 34 circles 
in the Copernican theory in constrast 
with more than 80 in the Ptolemaic). 
Ptolemy’s view, however, was enshrined 
in Dante’s ‘‘Divine Comedy,”’ an epitome 
of the culture of the day, whereas 
Copernicus’ radical conception would 
have to be regarded as philosophically 
wanting. What about usually reliable 
common sense? Francis Bacon believed 
that any ‘‘fool’’ could see the sun moving 
across the sky. On the basis of these 
considerations one would reasonably 
favor overall the Ptolemaic hypothesis. 
Such as the concensus of intellectual 
opinion in Galileo’s day. Science is 
evidently culture-bound; hence the in- 
creasingly important new field, the 
sociology of science. 

We digress to discuss briefly several 
fruitful by-products of the scientific 
method that are noteworthy. First of all, 
there are the observed facts. Despite the 
German historian Leopold von Ranke’s 
dictum to let facts speak for themselves 
(‘‘wie es eigentlich gewesen’’ —‘‘how it 
really was’’), they don’t! It is rather the 
scientist who selects, questions, ob- 
serves, describes, and infers with respect 


49 


to what, where, when, how, and how 
much (measures always approximate). 


These observed facts, in short, reveal ° 


man’s fingerprints, like the soil that clings 
to a plucked root. 

Science, moreover, is never merely a 
loose-leaf notebook of recorded facts; it 
at least has them classified. But the 
Scientist again plays the chief role; he 
himself identifies associates, idealizes, 
and conceives. He transforms percepts 
into concepts, both empirical and theo- 
retical. For example, it is truly amazing 
that there was not even a thermoscope 
to detect temperature changes until the 
advent of Galileo. Up to that time a thing 
was regarded as having either heat or 
cold. It was Galileo who viewed these 
two conditions as being different states 
on a single scale—thus leading to the 
invention of a thermometer. 

Even more significant is the first 
theoretical concept ever formulated by 
man. The story is a familiar one. Hieron 
II, king of Syracuse (3rd century B.C.), 
ordered his goldsmith to make a new 
crown out of the royal gold. He was, how- 
ever, suspicious of the goldsmith; he 
wondered if the gold was in the com- 
pleted crown or under the goldsmith’s 
gown. He called upon his chief scientist 
Archimedes (the first great mathematical 
physicist) for advice. Archimedes’ cele- 
brated bath in this connection was not an 
uneventful occasion. In his life of 
Marcellus the first-century Greek biog- 
rapher Plutarch notes that this action was 
community inspired every now and then. 
In his Roman bath Archimedes was cer- 
tainly not striving to be the best bathed 
Syracusan. He was anxiously waiting for 
the ordeal to be over. Meanwhile he 
paddled playfully in the water and sud- 
denly noted that just as much water 
would overflow as he himself became 
immersed. Rushing out down the street, 
he shouted, ‘‘Eureka!’’ (“‘I have found 
it’’). The townspeople were amazed— 
not because he was naked (Greek runners 
always ran naked), but because there was 
no race. Out of this simple experience 
Archimedes formulated the first theo- 
retical concept in the history of mankind, 


50 


viz., specific gravity, which relates two 
important factors, the weight of a body 
and that of an equal volume of water. The 
concept is just as valid and useful today 
as when it was proposed more than 2000 
years ago. 

In addition to observed facts and 
related factors, there is a third important 
by-product, namely, a factitious theory. 
The word theory itself comes from the 
same Greek root as theatre; it signifies a 
view. The scientist attempts finally to 
relate all his findings in a single view, to 
comprehend all the facts and factors. A 
Scientist is thus a creative artist and 
science a human artifact. To change the 
metaphor, he is like an involved coach 
with a game plan—not a neutral referee 
judging the legality of each play. Max | 
Born, the German theoretical physicist, 
concludes the Appendix of his Wayne- 
flete Lectures (1949) on ‘‘Natural Phi- 
losophy of Cause and Chance’’ with his 
conviction that ‘‘faith, imagination, and 
intuition are decisive factors in the 
progress of science as in any other human 
activity.”’ Science in the making is 
adventure-some (one can always expect 
the unexpected), wonder-full, and joy-full. 

What are the chief factors that deter- 
mine the progress of science? Why does 
it flourish here and now, but not there and 
then? Why, for example, in colonial 
England and France, but not in colonial 
Spain? What are the essential develop- 
mental conditions? We would all like to 
optimize them. We will just mention two 
important factors. 

The progress of science depends in the 
first place on the definability of phe- 
nomena, which, in turn, is a function of 
their complexity and of the inevitable 
involvement of the observer. (Pure ob- 
jectivity does not exist, although the 
object aspect may be _ distinguishable.) 
The second major factor is the repro- 
ducibility of the phenomena, which is 
dependent upon the multiplicity and 
interrelatedness of their constituents, 
e.g., the proverbial unpredictability of 
weather is a notable illustration. The 
rapid development of the physical sci- 
ences in comparison with that of the life 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


| sciences and of the social sciences is 
owing largely to their relative simplicity 
—more so than to the interest of private 
investigators or to the funds available 
| from social agencies (usually in propor- 
tion to the practicability expectation). 
The progress of science is civilly LTD. 
There are definite limitations to any 
man’s dream that the scientific method 
will achieve success at all times and all 
places under all conditions. Blaise Pascal, 
the French philosophical physicist, noted 
| in his fragmentary ‘‘Pensées’’ that man 
is seemingly suspended between the 
| infinite and infinitesimal. Today man is 
)) floundering between ignorance of the 
) very large (e.g., nebulae receding with 
| almost the speed of light away from us) 
and ignorance of the very small (e.g., the 
German theoretical physicist Werner 
Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle with 
respect to precise knowledge simul- 
taneously of the position and speed for an 
elementary particle). A fog shrouds our 
scientific venture as it moves forward. 
Complete liberation seems more and 
more doubtful as we find ourselves bound 
/not only by our mental processes, but 
also by our man-made instruments. As 
an expanding ball of light spreads its 
illumination, at the same time it reveals 
proportionately more the immensity of 
the surrounding darkness. This phe- 
nomenon has become increasingly evi- 
| dent in the well-developed physical 
Sciences; one wonders how long it will 
take the life sciences, basking currently 
'in the glow of success through utilizing 
| fruits of the physical sciences, to reach a 
| similar apparent impasse. 
| Let us now touch lightly upon some 
} philosophical limitations—at least from 
| | my own point of view. There are four 
| primary scientific approaches to the basic 
| problem of man and his environment, 
| viz., the avenue of the physical sciences, 
| that of the biological sciences, that of 
| psychology, and that of the social 
sciences. Each of these avenues is 
| attendant with certain common ques- 
) tions: Pilate’s, ‘‘What is truth?’’ Mac- 
| beth’s, ‘‘is this a dagger?’ Hamlet’s, 
| “To be or not to be!’’ The attempt to 


SS aae is 


answer these three questions on truth, 
reality, and value is the philosophy of 
science. Physics, for instance, pre- 
supposes some metaphysics—not that 
metaphysics is essentially a part of 
physics, but rather it is part of the 
scaffolding used in building the physics 
edifice. In the twentieth century, ac- 
cordingly, science has become more 
philosophical and philosophy, in turn, 
more science based. 

What is true? This formulation of the 
first question, more akin to Hebraic 
verbal action than to the Greek nounal 
abstraction of Pilate, is typical of a 
behavioral approach. (The legal demand 
to “‘tell the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth’? belongs to the 
‘“theater of the absurd.’’ Who would claim 
to know all the truth?) In science, 
accordingly, one is content to insist only 
that a statement be true to observation 
and logic, and to hope that it may lead 
to a greater comprehension of the known 
and possibly to the unification of science 
itself. A scientist never pretends to know 
everything; on the other hand, he cannot 
deny knowing something. An illustration 
or two may serve to clarify how scientific 
thinking has influenced philosophical 
ideas. 

Imagine a trailer with two newlywed 
coeds inside. As she lights a candle in the 
very middle of the trailer, she muses, 
‘‘Have you ever had physics?’’ Chagrined 
by the very thought — particularly on his 
honeymoon—he grunts, ‘‘Yes.’’ She 
then asks, ‘‘When I light this candle, will 
the light reach the forward end first, or the 
rear?’ His countenance beams; he 
knows the answer, ‘‘It reaches both at the 
same time.’’ You and I, however, stand- 
ing outside, see that the trailer is moving. 
Obviously, the light will reach the ap- 
proaching rear end before it gets to the 
receding front end. Which answer is 
correct? Both! The theory of restricted 
relativity is based on the experimental 
fact that the speed of light is the same for 
all observers, independent of any relative 
motion of the observed and the observer. 
If we are not positive about the simul- 
taneity of such phenomena, how can we 


51 


be certain about basic concepts like space 
and time? Our notion of these, indeed, 
has had to be revised. The essence of 
relativity, indeed, is not that phenomena 
may be relative to the observer; rather, 
that some (e.g., the speed of light) are 
invariant to all observers. It is unfortunate, 
therefore, that a popularizer like Joseph 
Fletcher, the Cambridge (MA) secular 
theologian, has made relativity per se the 
corner stone of his so-called new mortality 
with respect to old situation ethics. What 
is requisite for relative mores are ethical 
invariances—what used to be called 
absolutes. 

Another familiar misunderstanding 
seems to be inherent in the popular notion 
of atomic energy. (cf. Jacob Bronowski’s 
comment (1973), ‘‘We should never have 
turned mass into energy.’’) By the end of 
the nineteenth century it had become 
customary to regard the world as con- 
taining electromagnetic radiation (light, 
x-rays, et al.) coexistent with material 
things. But how does radiation differ 
essentially from matter? Both have 
energy (E) and momentum. In addition, 
however, matter has mass (M); does 
radiation have mass also? Albert Einstein 
concluded from basic physical laws that 
radiation, as well as matter, has mass 
given by the universal formula E = Mc?, 
where c is the speed of light. Its mis- 
interpretation consists in thinking of mass 
transforming into energy, or vice versa. 
Actually neither is true. Mass is always 
conserved, and so is energy. The diffi- 
culty, I believe, stems from our short- 
hand way of speaking. We _ charac- 
teristically associate inert matter with its 
characteristic property mass and pene- 
trating radiation with its dominant 
characteristic energy. Hence when 
matter is transformed into radiation, we 
carelessly think of their associated 
characteristics as being transformed. 

Ever since the Ionian philosophers, the 
nature of matter itself has intrigued think- 
ing man. Immanuel Kant, the German 
transcendental philosopher, first pointed 
out the antimony lurking in matter; one 
cannot conceive of its infinite division or 
of its limited divisibility (cf. the Greek 


52 


radical concept of an atom). There was a 
time when the story of the universe could 
presumably be written with an alphabet 
of 92 letters, which could be formed with 
a single p e n (proton, electron, neutron). 
Then a number of new elementary 
particles were discovered: the positron, 
neutron, meson, and so on. Each year the 
situation became more and more puzzling 
as the number of so-called elementary 
particles increased to more than 200. In 


view of their approximate similarity of 


mass and electric charge, Werner Heisen- 


berg proposed the possibility of these | 
particles being merely different states of — 
a single dynamical system—like the | 


various energy levels of a single atom. 


The second philosophical question is | 
concerned with the reality of scientific. | 
theory. One would certainly prefer a | 
behavioral approach here, too; largely | 
because of the linguistic confusion in- | 
herent in the multiple usage of the word | 
real. (The American experimental phys- | 
icist Percy Williams Bridgman refused } 
ever to use the word real.) For example, | 
how does realism in art differ from that | 
in philosophy? Or existence in religion | 
from that in mathematics? Scientists, | 
therefore, are wont to content themselves | 


with a pragmatic use of the term. The 


gravitational force field, for instance, is | 
generally accepted as real because of its | 
usefulness as aconcept. May there not be |; 
other logics? Say, some kind of Aristo- | 
telian potential reality, where a New- j 
tonian material force and a Maxwellian | 
force field may be regarded as different 
manifestations of the same reality? | 
Suffice it for the moment to comment that | 
reality appears as a tantalizing multi- | 
faced creature facing many different | 
points of view. We shall not discuss it | 
further here except to remind you of the | 
confusion that arose in physics itself as to | 
the basicity of particles and waves, both | 
of which were unwarranted speculations | 
with respect to experiential phenomena. | 


The question of value presents an | 
immediacy of practical concern. Here, | 
too, a behavioral approach is desirable; ' 
for scientists do behave like human | 


beings. Noting their failures they make 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 | 


V4 
value judgements—zin terms not always 
of scientific goals, but rather of pragmatic 
| successes. They have generally been 
| successful when they themselves have 
| been truth-full and hope-full, as well as 
cooperative, regardless of color or creed, 
class or country. In so doing man has 
found himself to be a partner in a creative 
coordination like snowflakes that crystal- 
lize out of chaotic vapor motion. Out of 
the complexity emerges order, out of un- 
certainty an apparent sense of direction. 
Not that a scientist ever attains ultimate 
truth—or even strives for it. Great 
‘scientists like the English natural phi- 
losophers Isaac Newton and Michael 
Faraday have been sincerely humble. 
Extrinsic values, however, are of 
‘greater concern nowadays than these 
‘intrinsic ones. For example, is science 
\possibly evil? Some years ago I was in- 
-vited to participate in a symposium on 
‘Poetry and Science’’ sponsored by the 
American Society of Aesthetics. Another 
speaker was a poet-in-residence at a well 
known college, the third was a phi- 
losopher at a major university. The poet 
began by addressing me, ‘‘I do not know 
: you. I have nothing against you per- 
| 


sonally. Science, however, is essentially 
evil!’ I was dumfounded by this novel 
introduction to an academic discussion. 
I had to lay aside my notes, which 
jargued that science, dealing with the 
}) whole universe, is probably more imagi- 
}|native than poetry, restricted narrowly to 
‘)man’s own feelings. I was forced, how- 
ever, to tackle the problem at hand. 
| Take a knife,’ I said, ‘‘Is it good or 
j\bad?”’ In the hands of a benevolent 
}) physician it can cut out a bad appendix; 
|\in the hands of a predatory man it can 
\stab a good heart. The knife itself is 
‘‘/neither good nor bad, but it can be used 
by its holder for either good or bad. 
| Science, to be sure, in times of war can 
‘}jand must help to produce longer spears, 
‘/)sharper swords, and bigger bombs, but 
'))that same science can enable the partially 
}/blind to see better, the partially deaf 
/\io hear more, the very lame to get about 
from place to place. Science of itself is 
t) Meither good nor bad; it is neutral. It can, 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


however, be used by technological man 
for good or for bad. The heart of the 
war problem, for instance, has been, is 
now, and ever will be the heart of man 
himself. 

Scientists, however, are people; their 
personality has many aspects. As citizens, 
for example, they cannot remain morally 
neutral. Recently I had occasion to note 
the Greeks whom Dante had assigned to 
the first circle of Hell; among the chatting 
throng was the mathematician Euclid, the 
astronomer Ptolemy, and the physician 
Galen. I was surprised, moreover, to 
find the famous adventurer, wise Ulysses, 
being tormented in the eighth circle for 
his abandonment of his old father Laertes, 
of his faithful wife Penelope, and of his 
infant son discreet Telemachus; he was 
pictured by the English poet Alfred 
Tennyson as still setting out in his last 
years *‘to follow knowledge like a sinking 
star.’ Each individual, scientist or not, 
must personally solve his own social 
problems. He may appear vacillating like 
Albert Einstein who, as a nationalist, 
recommended the making of an atomic 
bomb (potentially for war), and later, (as 
a pacifist, deplored its actual use. Each 
one of us has to decide for himself; and no 
one knows just what he will do under 
stringent circumstances. Each scientist, 
however, should strive to tell just what he 
truly knows and the limitations of that 
very knowledge, beyond which he must 
act on faith. It is impossible to quaran- 
tine a scientist from the contagious ills 
of society. 

Intimately related to philosophical 
beliefs are religious implications of 
science. Man, of course, is intellectually 
curious about his spatial environment and 
is awfully inspired by its challenging 
mystery. His personal concerns, how- 
ever, are more apt to be confined to 
earth, which moves like a life boat in 
space with man himself seemingly the 
captain, without chart or compass. In 
addition to speculative philosophical 
issues, there is also Everyman’s question 
(cf. the popular 15th century morality 
Dutch play ‘‘Everyman’’): ‘‘Alas, 
whereto may I trust?’’ There is a vital 


53 


need for every man’s commitment to 
some overwhelming pattern for his every- 
day living. 

Whereas science is neutral, scientists 
themselves are people who have to 
couple their scientific experience and 
religious experience. They, too, may 
behave like the prophet Elijah who heard 
a still small voice, or like the patriarch 
Job who discerned an act of God in a 
whirlwind. Religious men of science have 
subscribed to many different personal 
beliefs. There have been Anglicans like 
Clerk Maxwell and Isaac Newton; Con- 
gregationalists like Josiah Willard Gibbs 
and Robert Andrews Millikan; Friends 
like John Dalton and Arthur Stanley 
Eddington; Lutherans like Werner 
Heisenberg, Hermann von Helmholtz, 
and Max Planck; Presbyterians like 
Arthur Holly Compton; Sandemanians 
like Michael Faraday; Roman Catholics 
like Galileo Galilei, Albertus Magnus, 
Gregor Mendel, Blaise Pascal, and Louis 
Pasteur; Unitarians like Benjamin Frank- 
lin; et al. —to mention only a few about 
whose lives I am somewhat familiar. (An 
interesting study would be the reciprocal 
influence of science and of religion.) 

One wonders why there is a wide- 
spread notion that there are apparent 
conflicts between science and religion. In 
the 18th century controversy was cer- 
tainly focused on the physical sciences; 
in the 19th century it was centered in the 
biological and earth sciences; in the 20th 
century it is apparent in psychology and 
the social sciences. On college campuses 
it still lurks often beneath a veneer of 
academic sophistication. The laboratory 
is frequently too narrow to permit a look 
out upon the whole universe; the chapel 
door (usually closed) may be too narrow 
to let even God enter. The average per- 
son, I suppose, does not have any problem 
of science and religion. Here is a 
scientist: he has had genuine scientific 
experiences, he believes these experi- 
ences to be true, he hopes truth is 
single. If there is any apparent conflict 
between science and religion, he chooses 
science which he knows. Here is a man of 
religion: he has had genuine religious 


54 


experiences, he believes these experi- 
ences to be true, he hopes truth is 
single. If there is any apparent conflict 
between religion and science, he rejects 
science which he does not understand. In 
both cases it is not a matter of science 
and religion, but rather of science or 
religion. 

There is naturally a desire by some for 
simply a theoretical world of science 
alone or for simply a theoretical world of 
religion alone; occasionally one finds an 
individual trying to straddle the two 
worlds despite a wide gulf between them. 
In my own judgement, however, conflicts 
between science and religion are always 


inevitable. Although each field deals with 
a particular aspect of our one world, each — 
is continually imperfect and incomplete; | 
their overlap, therefore, is necessarily | 
full of inconsistencies and lacunae. One | 
would, nevertheless, hope that the con- | 
flicts of a person at age sixty would not | 
be the same as those of the same person | 
at age sixteen; over the years there should | 
have been both scientific and spiritual | 


growth. ; 


We began our discourse with the con- | 
cept of one world. As we now look back, | 
we can discern three essentially different | 
scientific outlooks: first, every man looks | 
out on the world of phenomena as a | 
second, a scientist’s outlook | 
covers selected phenomena; third, an | 
individual’s outlook beyond phenomena | 
per se. Does science, however, ever | 
real’’ world of nature? At | 
have emphatically | 
shouted, ‘‘Yes!’’ But physicists nowa- | 
days are inclined to be cautious; they | 
are more apt to point to a possible dis- | 
closure without insisting on a logical | 
proof. To illustrate, consider the con- | 
tinual doubling of the number of sides of a | 
regular polygon. One can see a circle | 
emerging as the doubling increases | 
without end, but one cannot actually | 
reach it. Likewise in the case of the | 


whole; 


C6 


visualize a 
times scientists 


infinite series 1+4+%44+%4+... 


one expects the ultimate sum to be 2, 
although it will not ever be attained. Ina ; 
similar manner, I believe, science in its | 
successive approximations discloses the | 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 | 


)) ‘‘real’’ world of nature; it points to it 
|) symbolically. 

| Everyone has to make his own choice 
| with respect to the philosophical and 
| religious implications he discerns per- 
) sonally in the world of phenomena. There 
|) are three primary attitudes. First of all, 
| there are those who boastfully claim 
)) they do not know; they are called agnostics 
| (or ignoramuses). (One wonders how 
they themselves know that they don’t 
know.) Their closed minds, however, do 
|, not allow entrance into the storehouse 
| of knowledge. Then there is a group of 
persons who modestly admit they do not 
| know, but . . . These are skeptics who 
_ see the door ajar but hesitate to enter; 
their mind is open, but empty. Still 
|) others, admit that they do not know, but 
} boldly enter and find out more and more. 
|| These are men of faith; their open mind 
| steadily approaches answers to the 
| perennial questions: where am I? who am 
| I? what will I be? Civilization has not 
| been built by agnostics and skeptics, but 
) by men of faith. 

_ People differ, however, as to what they 
|) put their faith in. Some have been thrilled 
’ by the gay flowers about them by day and 
| the bright stars above them at night. They 
put their faith in the material environ- 
ment to provide answers to the basic 


i 
= 


| J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


oe 


questions; they may be called materialists. 
Others, however, have been entrapped in 
floods or earthquakes, in hurricanes or 
dust storms. They fear to put their trust 
in impersonal matter. On the other hand, 
they have been entranced by man’s music 
and painting, by his writings and build- 
ings. They put their faith in man; they 
are atheistic humanists. Still others have 
seen man’s inhumanity to man, in his city 
slums about and in atomic bombs above. 
They are compelled to look up for 
salvation to some higher power, which 
for want of a better name they call God; 
they are theistic humanists. Religion then 
becomes the binding together of the plane 
of man and his environment and God. 
One cannot prove that any of these 
attitudes is true or false. I myself have 
one life to live; Iam a theistic humanist. 
I believe in the divine rights of man. 


‘‘The world stands out on either side 
No wider than the heart is wide; 
Above the world is stretched the sky, — 
No higher than the sky is high. 
The heart can push the sea and land 
Farther away on either hand; 
The soul can split the sky in two, 
And let the face of God shine through. 
But East and West will pinch the heart 
That cannot keep them pushed apart; 
And he whose soul is flat—the sky 
Will cave in on him by and by.’’ 

Edna St. Vincent Millay (‘‘Renascence’’) 


So 


Mortimer Demarest Leonard, Entomologist: Biographical 
Sketch and List of Publications 


A. G. Wheeler, Jr. (1) 


Bureau of Plant Industry, Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, Harrisburg 17120 : 


Mortimer Demarest Leonard’s diverse 
and unconventional career spanned more 
than half a century, beginning as an under- 
graduate in 1909 during the glory years 
of entomology under J. H. Comstock at 
Cornell University and officially closing 
in 1961 near the end of an era of chlori- 
nated hydrocarbon insecticides and during 
the early days of integrated pest manage- 
ment. He has been described as one of 
the best-known members of his profes- 
sion (2); the reasons for his extraordinary 
visibility are many. Dr. Leonard’s career 
took him into the study of insect systema- 
tics, biology, and distribution in which 
he edited the New York State list of in- 
sects, revised the dipterous family Rhag- 
ionidae, and published on immature 
stages of Hemiptera and aphid distribu- 
tion; into extension entomology where 
he was a pioneer in establishing services 
for fruit growers; and into industry where 
he developed uses for numerous agricul- 
tural insecticides as one of the first ento- 
mologists to serve commercial interests. 
He worked for industry in nearly all re- 
gions of the country and abroad where 
he collaborated with hundreds of state, 
federal, and foreign workers. His out- 
going personality and genuine interest 
in others won friends wherever he went. 

My first association with Dr. Leonard 
came shortly after I began my graduate 
work at Cornell in 1966. He promptly 
identified a collection of aphids I had 
made and urged me to do additional col- 
lecting that might add data for the sec- 
ond supplement to his list of the aphids 
of New York State. Possibly because I 
was associated with his beloved Cornell, 
he took a special interest in my graduate 
career, encouraging me throughout in 


56 


correspondence from 1967 to 1971. I met | 
Dr. Leonard just once, at the 43rd An- | 
nual Meeting, Eastern Branch, Entomo- | 
logical Society of America at Philadelphia | 
in October 1971, shortly after I had fin- | 
ished my studies at Cornell. His encour- | 
agement and continued interest in my | 
work prompted me to assemble more | 
biographical material than space per-’ 
mitted Louise Russell to present in her © 
excellent obituary written after Dr. Leon- | 
ard’s death in August 1975 (Russell 1975). | 
The preparation of this sketch and | 
accompanying data was made easier for | 
me because Dr. Leonard had maintained | 
a partial list of his publications and had 
listed the species named in his honor, | 
scientific societies to which he belonged, 
and the professional congresses he had | 
attended. These personal items were | 
given to Cornell University and were | 
made available by L. L. Pechuman. I | 
am also indebted to Donald D. Leonard, | 
Mortimer’s younger brother and former | 
raw silk and yarn broker in New York | 
City, for answering many of my questions | 
about Dr. Leonard in a series of letters | 
to me from November 1976 to April 1978. 
Much valuable information was available | 
in letters by F. L. Campbell and J. S. 
Wade in recommending Leonard for 
membership in the prestigious Cosmos | 
Club of Washington, D. C. C. P. Alexan- | 
der provided details of his and Leonard’s | 
student years at Cornell. These sources | 
have enabled me to discuss fully Leon- § 
ard’s fruitful career. I hope to avoid a | 
mere sterile recording of his accomplish- | 
ments but to capture some of his per- | 
sonality. To this end, the narrative is q 
somewhat informal and anecdotal; at ; 
times I refer to Leonard affectionately | 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 | 


as ‘‘Mort’’ since this was how most of 
his friends and colleagues knew him. 


The Making of a Naturalist 


M. D. Leonard, born on June 23, 1890, 
grew up in the comfortable Brooklyn 
home of his talented parents, Mortimer 
Haight Leonard and Elizabeth Reid 
Demarest. His father, whose ancestors 
had come to New York City from Eng- 
land in the 18th century (3), attended 
family-interest businesses of banking and 
insurance and was active in amateur 
theatricals. His mother (Fig. 1), of Scotch- 
French Huguenot ancestry (3), was a 
well-known contralto soloist in New 

York City churches and oratorio and 
teacher and conductor of womens’ choral 
societies (4). 

City born and bred, young Mort at- 
tended neighborhood schools at 81st and 
91st streets. He was able to enjoy out- 
door activities at his parents’ summer 
home in Ridgewood, New Jersey, a coun- 


try place with swimming holes, brooks, 
and open fields where he collected butter- 
flies and pointed out insects to his parents. 
Mort worked in the garden and on the 
one-acre grounds of their summer home. 
Never a robust youth, he did not hold 
any other jobs since his parents consi- 
dered the physical work good for their 
son. Mort’s father died in 1908 when Mort 
was in high school and his brother Donald 
was 12 years old. Mrs. Leonard was a 
remarkably capable person who assumed 
the duties of mother and father, including 
buying and selling property and building 
a permanent home in Ridgewood (4, 5). 

In 1904 Leonard entered Chesire Aca- 
demy near New Haven, Connecticut, 
where he met Louis Dunham, a student 
of nearly his own age who had a keen 
interest in birds. Together they spent 
much of their spare time in the nearby 
woods and fields observing birdlife. Mort 
soon learned ‘‘almost by heart and rather 
effortlessly, the identifying characters of 


Fig. 1. M. D. Leonard with his wife, Doris Gardner Pratt (left), and his mother, Elizabeth Reid 
Demarest (right), ca. 1920. Courtesy of Donald D. Leonard 


__ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


= 


57 


a great many of our Northeastern birds’’ 
(Leonard 1957). 


Entomological Father. — After spend- 
ing a year at Chesire, Leonard began 
to commute from Ridgewood to New 
York City’s De Witt Clinton High School, 
at the time this country’s largest second- 
ary school (ca. 2500 students) (6). Dr. 
George Washington Hunter, author of 
the most widely used textbook of high 
school biology, was head of the biology 
department; one of his staff members 
was the well-known student of Hemiptera, 
Harry G. Barber. By chance, Leonard 
was assigned to Barber’s section of Bot- 
any and with his previous fascination 
with bird study, Mort showed an unusual 
interest in the class and attracted his 
teacher’s attention. The following year, 
Mr. Barber asked that Leonard be placed 
in his zoology class and obtained permis- 
sion for Mort to share his lunch periods 
with him. He told his student that ento- 
mology was a legitimate profession, and 
one spring Saturday he invited Mort to 
collect insects with him near his Rosell, 
N. J. home. Leonard described the im- 
pact this trip had on his career: 


I accepted at once, although I had not the slightest 
idea of what doing so entailed. This experience 
proved so fascinating that I decided then and there 
—that I wanted, more than anything else, to be- 
come an entomologist (Leonard 1957). 


Noting Leonard’s continued enthu- 
siasm for insect collecting, Mr. Barber 
stressed that Cornell was the school to 
attend if one really aspired to a career 
in entomology. At Barber’s suggestion, 
Mort’s family gave him a copy of A Man- 
ual for the Study of Insects by Professor 
Comstock and his wife Anna Botsford 
Comstock at Christmas, 1908. Mr. Barber 
then convinced the family that ento- 
mology could be a reasonably lucrative 
profession; they eventually consented 
for Mort to attend Cornell (6). 

Years later, Leonard gave credit to 
Barber for charting the course of the 
rest of his life, and he kept *‘in constant 
touch with him until the very day of his 
[Barber’s] death’? (Leonard and Sailer 
1960: 127). Several reprints that Mort 


58 


sent to his esteemed friend and teacher 
were fondly dedicated to his ‘‘Entomo- 
logical Father.”’ 


Cornell, Comstock and Crosby 


The Undergraduate Years.—Amidst 
the bustling activity in J. H. Comstock’s 
department, even Leonard’s first days on 
campus proved exciting. On September 
24, 1909, the freshman approached an- 
other young student in the departmental 
library, then housed in Roberts Hall, 
asking: ‘‘Sir, could you tell me where I 
could find a copy of Aldrich’s Catalogue 
of North American Diptera?’’ (7). After 
a moment, the surprised student told 
Mort that he too had an interest in the 
Diptera and had arrived in Ithaca only 
the day before. Together the two fresh- © 
men located a copy of the Aldrich cata- 
logue and marvelled over the fascinating 
volume. The other young man was Charles 
P. Alexander, destined to describe more 
than 10,000 insect species and publish 
more than 1,000 papers on crane flies 
(Diptera: Tipulidae) in studies that con- 
tinue today. Out of that chance meeting 
evolved several joint projects and two 
publications on crane flies during their 
freshman and sophomore years and arose 
a deep, life-long friendship. 

Leonard’s formal introduction to en- 
tomology was Professor Comstock’s gen- 
eral lecture course. The textbook used 
was the Manual with which Mort already 
was well versed. Additional courses 
under J. C. Bradley (Systematic Ento- 
mology), G. W. Herrick (Economic En- 
tomology), J. G. Needham (General 
Biology), A. D. MacGillivray (Systema- 
tic Entomology), and W. A. Riley (Medi- 
cal Entomology and Parasitology) served 
only to pique Leonard’s interest. He also 
benefitted from courses under other of 
Cornell’s famous zoologists: Ornithology 
under A. A. Allen, Comparative Anatomy 
of Vertebrates under H. D. Reed, and 
Systematic Vertebrate Zoology under 
A. H. Wright (6). Leonard also had the 
opportunity of associating with students 
who later achieved some distinction in 
entomology: C. P. Alexander, R. N. Chap- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


man, H. Dietrich, A. E. Emerson, H. E. 
Ewing, J. C. Faure, A. D. Funkhouser, 
S. W. Frost, S. A. Graham, G. H. Griswold, 
Rew... Harned, H. C. Huckett, H. B. 
Hungerford, H. H. Knight, H. Morrison, 
ee WW. Muesebeck,. E. M. Patch,-H: 
Ruckes, R. C. Shannon, R. C. Smith, 
J. D. Tothill, J. R. Traver, and others 
I might have mentioned. 

Cornell’s faculty shared a camaraderie 
with their students, often entertaining 
them in their homes. Sunday night open 
house at the Comstock’s, which Mort 
frequently attended, was a tradition. 
Edith Patch (quoted in Mallis 1971) de- 
scribed the student-faculty relationship: 


My first impression of Entomological Cornell 
was that it was sort of a family with the faculty 
acting as older brothers to the graduate students 
and everybody loving the Professor and Mrs. Com- 
stock better than they did anybody else and that 
Cornell was the friendliest group of people in the 
world. 


For such a distinguished group there 
was, as Prof. Bradley noted, a surprising 
lack of jealousy: 


In those early days, our Department was small 
enough so that the entire staff and graduate students 
could be sort of like a family. We all know each 
other well. . . . Inso far as I have known, there were 
no jealousies—there was always harmony amongst 
the members of the staff (8). 


Louis Agassiz Fuertes, the great bird 
artist, allowed Mort to accompany him 
to his studio to watch him paint; (6) Pro- 
fessor Bradley took Leonard with him to 
a December 1911 meeting of the New 
York Entomological Society. Mort also 
was privileged to participate in the Cor- 
nell Okefenokee Expedition as the first 
group of naturalists to explore that great 
southern Georgia swamp. Led by Brad- 
ley, other members of the expedition 
were C. R. Crosby (Cornell economic 
entomologist), A. H. Wright, W. D. Funk- 
houser (Headmaster of Ithaca’s Casca- 
dilla Preparatory School and specialist on 
the Membracidae), Lee Worsham (Geor- 
gia State Entomologist), and Leonard’s 
fellow classmate Sherman C. Bishop, 


who later became State Zoologist of New 


York. During late May to mid-July 1912, 


_ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


2 Pa 
£E My 


Wy 


Fig. 2. Mort at Gutland Vineyards, Patras, 
Greece, Sept. 18, 1911. Courtesy of D. D. Leonard. 


the group prepared hundreds of bird skins 
and thousands of insects. Mort brought 
back 5 closely pinned Schmitt boxes of 
flies after identifying some of them during 
a week’s stopover at the U. S. National 
Museum in Washington (6). Van Duzee 
(1915) named in Leonard’s honor a doli- 
chopodid fly Mort had collected in the 
swamp, the first named of many insects 
bearing the specific name leonardi. 

The love Mort had developed for insect 
collecting as an undergraduate can be 
shown by relating an incident that took 
place on a Mediterranean trip (Fig. 2) he 
made with his mother, his brother, and 
a Greek friend during the summer of 1911 
between his sophomore and junior years. 
When the other members of the party 
were sightseeing in Algiers, the Leonard 
boys wandered off to collect insects in 
the city square park. Mort became so 
fascinated with collecting exotic species 
that he and Donald overstayed their time. 
A search party located them, but Mort 


59 


drew a sharp reprimand for delaying 
departure of the Martha Washington (4). 

An obvious enthusiasm and aptitude 
for entomology brought Leonard into a 
close relationship with the department 
head, Prof. Comstock. When Leonard 
reported for his first class in the fall term 
of 1911, Dr. Riley informed him that the 
Professor wanted to see him in his office. 
Comstock had received a call from L. O. 
Howard, Chief Entomologist of the U. S. 
Department of Agriculture in Washington, 
who explained that Col. Gorgas urgently 
needed an entomologist to assist in malaria 
control in order to protect those working 
to build the Panama Canal. Anyone Com- 
stock recommended could have the posi- 
tion. The man Comstock chose was 
Leonard, after first checking with Riley 
to see whether Mort had satisfactorily 
completed his Medical Entomology and 
Parasitology course. Leonard considered 
the offer overnight, then decided to de- 
cline; he appreciated the compliment 
to his ability, but he did not want any- 
thing to interfere with his obtaining a 
Cornell degree (6). At the completion 
of the spring term in 1913, the University 
awarded him a B.S. degree. 


The Graduate Years.—At the urging 
of some of his professors, Leonard de- 
cided to stay at Cornell to pursue a Ph.D. 
Although his research (a revision of the 
dipterous family Rhagionidae of America 
north of Mexico) was begun under 
Professor Bradley and completed under 
O. A. Johannsen, Mort’s graduate years 
were influenced more by an economic 
entomologist and spider taxonomist, 
C. R. Crosby. 

Late in 1913 Leonard found several 
large notebooks in the Agriculture Li- 
brary that contained clippings of short 
articles written by Prof. Mark V. Slinger- 
land, who had died in 1909 at the age of 
45. Leonard showed his find to Crosby, 
who then told Comstock about the dis- 
covery. Comstock considered the clip- 
pings to represent valuable information 
on injurious insects of New York State, 
and since Slingerland’s writings were 
scattered in various popular magazines 


60 


and in newspapers, he suggested that if 
Mort were interested in compiling them 
for publication, he would furnish a photo- 
graph of Slingerland and write an intro- 
ductory biographical sketch (6). Thus, 
Leonard published in 1914 ‘‘A Bibliog- 
raphy of the Writings of Mark Vernon 
Slingerland,’’ consisting of titles of more 
than 800 articles published mainly in the 
Rural New-Yorker. Apparently Crosby 
and Leonard had hoped to complete and 
publish an index to the Experiment Sta- 
tion literature of entomology, a project 
begun earlier by Prof. Slingerland. The 
Comstock Memorial Library at Cornell 
contains five bound volumes of Slinger- 
land, Crosby, and Leonard’s ‘Index to 
Experiment Station Literature, 1888 to 
1913,’’ the first two volumes dated 1915, 
the last three, 1916. For some reason 
this extensive compilation was never 
published. 

Leonard further became involved in 
the practical aspects of entomology when 
he began to work with Crobsy to control 
the tarnished plant bug as a pest of peach 
nursery stock, part-time at first so he 
could continue his graduate studies. 
During the summers of 1913-15, he 
worked at Chase Brothers Nursery, a 
grower of fruit nursery stock and large 
importer of plant material, at Honeoye 
Falls, N. Y. In 1914 federal funds became 
available for extension work, and Leon- 
ard was appointed as assistant extension 
entomologist under Crosby during 1915— 
16. Together they described as new sev- 
eral chalcidoid wasps that parasitized 
economically important insects, published 
various bulletins relating to control of 
fruit pests, and their model bibliography 
of the tarnished plant bug, which con- 
tained 315 titles. Their joint publications 
culminated in a 1918 book on vegetable 
garden insects. 

The teacher and student remained 
close friends long after Mort left Cornell. 
A series of letters from Crosby to Leon- 
ard, written daily or every few days while 
the professor was on an extended collect- 
ing trip through the south and west, re- 
veals the depth of their relationship. In 
his first letter to Mort, dated February 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


22, 1936, and extracted by Osborn (1946), 
Crosby wrote: 


By this time you must realize that I am not merely 
writing you letters but keeping a diary. I never 
could keep a diary because I had no audience. By 
doing it this way I may be able to keep a record 
of the trip. I hope you find it of some interest. 
In spite of the bad weather we are getting a lot 
of stuff. Wish you were along. 


Perhaps more important than the 
Crosby-Leonard publications was the 
method they helped devise for trans- 
lating results of research work into prac- 
tical use by farmers. With plant pathol- 
ogists and other members of the Cornell 
extension group, they developed a spray 
service for the commercial fruit growers 
of the state. Special assistants of the 
New York State Food Supply Commis- 
sion were placed in the field, beginning 
in Monroe and Niagara counties in 1917, 
to show the growers how and when to 
apply various insecticides and fungicides. 
This idea, soon copied by other states, 
helped growers reduce their losses to 
insects and disease and represented one 
of this country’s first successful exten- 
sion programs in entomology and plant 
pathology (2). 

Despite the considerable influence of 
Prof. Crosby and the time-consuming 
work on control of the tarnished plant 
bug, Leonard must have initiated several 
of his own projects. During 1915-16, he 
managed to publish 4 papers containing 
descriptions and illustrations of the im- 
mature stages of plant bugs and leaf- 
hoppers, some of the first North American 
work on immatures of the Miridae and 
Cicadellidae. Some of his illustrations 
_ were used by Prof. Comstock in his 1918 
treatise on the wings of insects. It was 
in this period that Leonard become inter- 
ested in the plan to publish a list of New 
York State insects. J. C. Bradley was 
named Editor-in-Chief; the leading spe- 
cialists in the major groups of insects 
were to serve as sub-editors. 

Emergency extension work often took 
Leonard away from campus during the 
later years of his graduate studies. For 
short periods he worked on control of 
vegetable pests at Pennsylvania State 


| J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


College’s Erie County laboratory in 1918, 
on truck crop insects on Long Island in 
1919, and with Prof. Robert Matheson 
of Cornell on the European corn borer 
in Massachusetts in 1920. On October 28, 
1918, shortly after he returned from his 
stay in Pennsylvania, Mort married Doris 
Gardner Pratt (Fig. 1), a former secre- 
tary at Cornell and daughter of the pro- 
duction manager of the Ithaca Journal. 
Perhaps Crosby now thought his assist- 
ant had prolonged his graduate work 
long enough; he urged Leonard to com- 
plete his dissertation so he would be 
available to accept job offers (9). Leonard 
was awarded his Ph.D. in February 1921. 


Entomological Jack-of-All-Trades 


Off the Beaten Path.—In late 1921 
Bowker Chemical Co. of New York City 
offered the new graduate the opportunity 
to direct its field research in the eastern 
states. To leave Cornell for industry was 
a radical step since Leonard perhaps 
was only the second well-trained member 
of his profession to enter the commercial 
field. Leonard credits Otto H. Swezey 
with being the first graduate entomologist 
to serve a profit-making organization 
(Leonard 1958). The new job subjected 
Leonard to ridicule from his colleagues 
in official positions who made it known 
that Mort had compromised his principles. 
Years after his move to Bowker, he wrote: 
‘‘Few but the older entomologists can 
realize today the feeling which prevailed 
in this matter 25 or 30 years ago’ (Leon- 
ard 1946). So great could be the oppro- 
brium that J. G. Sanders (first State En- 
tomologist of Wisconsin and later director 
of Pennsylvania’s Bureau of Plant Indus- 
try), who joined the Sun Oil Co. in the 
early 1920’s, felt compelled to respond 
to his tormentors: “* . an economic 
entomologist still retains his identity and 
worth, irrespective of the source of his 
remunerations ... .’’ (Sanders 1925). 

As Bowker’s director of field research 
Leonard was to determine new uses for 
an old copper-arsenical compound that 
had recently been modified. In coopera- 
tion with land-grant colleges in several 


61 


eastern states he planned and carried 
out experiments with the new material 
on apples, potatoes, and other crops. 
In April 1923 he left to re-enter official 
entomology. 

When New York’s State Entomologist 
E. P. Felt was temporarily transferred 
to the State Conservation Department, 
Leonard was appointed Acting State 
Entomologist. At this time the editorial 
board of the New York Insect List was 
revised and Leonard succeeded Bradley 
as Editor. Among Mort’s other duties 
in Albany was the investigation of the 
~ state’s injurious and beneficial insects. 
When Felt returned, Leonard was ap- 
pointed and sent to Spain as special 
investigator by the New York Fruit Ex- 
change to determine the conditions sur- 
rounding the USDA’s embargo against 
Almeria grapes infested with Mediter- 
ranean fruit fly. 


Back to Cornell.—His assignment 
in Spain completed, Leonard returned 
to Cornell in December 1924 to see the 
New York Insect List through to comple- 
tion as its Editor-in-Chief. He also wrote 
two fascicles for the List: Families Xylo- 
phagidae, Coenomyiidae, and Rhagioni- 
dae (Diptera) and (with A. B. Gahan and 
Crosby) the Superfamily Chalcidoidea 
(Hymenoptera). Mort truly delighted in 
seeing the insect fauna of his home state 
documented. In studies on chrysomelid 
beetles under Prof. Matheson, T. L. Bis- 
sell collected a rare species and recalls 
Mort’s elation at having a new addition 
to the List (10). All possible sources of 
records were explored. As an example, 
he spent considerable time rummaging 
through W. T. Davis’ attic in search of 
records of Long Island and Staten Island 
insects (Abbott 1949). The project was 
completed in 1925, but it was not until 
1928 that the List was published as Cor- 
nell Memoir 101. With its more than 16,000 
insects and related arthropods, the List 
remains as the most comprehensive work 
on the insect fauna of any geographic 
region in North America. More than 150 
scientists had collaborated to do the col- 
lecting and taxonomic study necessary 
to complete the project. 


62 


Retreat from Blind Alleys.— Again 
Leonard had to leave Ithaca; once again, 
as F. L. Campbell aptly described (2), 
he was forced off the beaten path to ex- 
plore this way and that, often having to 
retreat, never becoming entrenched in a 
permanent position. During 1925—27 
Leonard conducted field experiments 
relating to control of citrus and vegetable 
pests for the Florida Agricultural Supply 
Co. of Orlando, a position similar to the 
one he had held with Bowker Chemical. 
For part of this period Leonard also 
worked for the Wilson & Toomer Fer- 
tilizer Co. of Jacksonville. In August 
1927 he returned to Ithaca for a few 
months as a special agent in the joint 
Cornell-USDA campaign to clean up in- 
festations of European corn borer. 

The campaign completed, Leonard 
returned to industry, this time as research 
entomologist with Tobacco By-Products 
and Chemical Corporation of Louisville, 
Kentucky. He was stationed at Wenat- 
chee, Washington, to test insecticides 
for control of codling moth. In slightly 
more than a year the experimental work 
was completed; Mort soon was back to 
official entomology. 


Basic Biology Again.—In January 
1930 Leonard became Chief of the Divi- 
sion of Entomology at Puerto Rico’s 
Insular Experiment Station at Rio Piedros 
(Fig. 3). His duties were broad: to make 
general insect surveys and to investigate 
the control of insect pests of all crops 
grown on the island. Here Leonard was 
able to return to active publishing. He 
had published his first paper as a sopho- 
more at Cornell and by the time he re- 
ceived his Ph.D. his scientific contribu- 
tions numbered more than 30. But in 
nearly a decade away from Ithaca, mainly 
in industry, he had published fewer than 
10 papers, most of those during his editor- 
ship of the New York list of insects. At 
the Insular Experiment Station he was 
able to carry out basic life history stud- 
ies similar to those he and Crosby had 
conducted at Cornell. Leonard and his 
co-workers studied the biology of the 
lima bean pod borer, bean lace bug, 
pink bollworm, cottony cushion scale, 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


| 


sugar cane borer, a lepidopterous leaf- 
miner of cotton, a root weevil of cas- 
sava, a coreid bug that injures citrus, 
papaya fruit fly, as well as other species. 
The annotated bibliography of Puerto 
Rican entomology published by Leonard 
(1933) lists 38 of his own titles, only 7 of 
them with a co-author. With political 
changes in the insular government in late 
1932, Mort was left without a position. 

After working for a month or so as a 
consulting entomologist for United Chem- 
ical and Exterminating Co. of New York 
City, Leonard settled into relative secur- 
ity as a research entomologist for the 
John Powell Co. of New York. For 5-4 
years he was stationed in Florida to con- 
duct tests with pyrethrum and rotenone 
in control of vegetable and other crop 
pests. 

His next three positions were short- 
lived: entomologist in charge of Du Pont’s 
pest control exhibit at the New York 
World’s Fair (Feb. 1939-—Nov. 1940), 
and entomologist with Angier Products 
of Cambridge, Massachusetts (Dec. 


Fig. 3. Mort in Puerto Rico, ca. 1930. Courtesy 
of D. D. Leonard. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


Fig. 4. Mort near his Dorchester House apart- 
ment, spring 1948. Courtesy of D. D. Leonard. 


1940—May 1941), and then with the Orange 
Manufacturing Co., Orlando, Florida 
(May—Oct. 1941). From December 1941 
to late 1945 he served as business analyst 
for the Office of Price Administration and 
was in charge of price controls for insec- 
ticides during World War II. His resi- 
dence at Dorchester House, 2480 Six- 
teenth Street NW (Fig. 4), about a mile 
north of the White House, would be his 
home for more than 30 years and would 
become the site of many ‘‘yellow-pan”’ 
collections of aphids. 


Looking for Security. — After the war 
Leonard sought security with the U. S. 
Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quaran- 
tine, then under the direction of E. R. 
Sasscer who had succeeded C. L. Mar- 
latt. He was assigned to Sasscer to help 
collect data on exotic insect pests, which 
if introduced into the U. S., would prove 
the greatest threat to our agriculture. 
Sasscer intended for the Bureau to pub- 
lish on all foreign insect pests that might 
enter the country, a work that would 


63 


supersede the well-known manual pub- 
lished by W. D. Pierce (1917). Leonard 
helped prepare a draft of a manuscript 
treating exotic pests of cruciferous crops 
(11), but even this first part of the intended 
series was never published. Funds for 
the project had been depleted; Leonard 
was dropped from the payroll in 1947. 

As noted by Campbell: ‘‘It is a tribute 
to his reputation and ability that at the 
age of 57 he was promptly employed by 
another insecticide manufacturer for de- 
velopmental work (2).’’ In October 1948 
Leonard joined the Julius Hyman Co. of 
Denver, Colorado, to aid in developing 
uses for new hydrocarbon insecticides in 
the eastern states. Shell Chemical Co. 
purchased Julius Hyman in 1952, acquir- 
ing exclusive rights to the compounds 
aldrin and dieldrin. In his position Leon- 
ard cooperated with numerous workers 
in state, federal, and foreign governments 
and functioned as an ‘‘Entomological 
Diplomat’’ in planning overseas uses for 
his company’s insecticides and dealing 
with various agencies such as the Foreign 
Health Division of the U. S. Public Health 
Service, the Institute of Inter-American 
Affairs, and the Pan-American Sanitary 
Bureau. As an example of his involve- 
ment with foreign countries, he was in- 
strumental in shipping to Egypt two air- 
planes loaded with insecticides to combat 
a locust plague. The promptness of his 
and Shell’s action helped save most of 
the cotton crop (12). Upon his retire- 
ment in July 1961, Shell honored Dr. 
Leonard ‘‘.. . for his integrity as a scientist 
and for his many contributions to advance 
the interests of entomology and his fellow 
entomologists’’ (13). 


Entomologist to the End 


Aphids on a Rooftop—Leonard had 
not yet developed an interest in aphids 
when, on his return to Ithaca from the 
1912 Okefenokee Expedition, he stopped 
at Plummers Island, Maryland to collect 
with H. S. Barber, W. L. McAtee, E. A. 
Schwarz, and H. L. Viereck (Leonard 
1966). We know, however, that by 1916 
he had begun to collect aphids; he sent a 


id 


letter to Edith Patch informing her of a 
collection he had made from golden seal. 
Her reply of September 1, 1916, cited by 
Mallis (1971) to capture the ‘‘flavor of 
her personality,’’ was essentially a repri- 
mand to Leonard for his careless packing 
of the vials containing the specimens. 
The zeal with which Mort later was to 
pursue studies of aphid distribution was 
the result of a reunion with Crosby dur- 
ing a short vacation at Cornell in the fall 
of 1932. At Crosby’s suggestion, Mort did 
some collecting in the Ithaca area and 
was impressed with the diversity of the 
aphid fauna. The recently published work 
on Illinois aphids (Hottes and Frison 
1931) further stimulated Leonard’s inter- 
est in the group. Separately and together 
Crosby and Leonard collected aphids 
until the Professor’s death in 1937 (Leon- 
ard 1963). Mort published their new 
records of New York species in a 1937 
paper, the first of his more than 50 papers 
on aphids. 

Although he had begun to collect aphids 
in the Washington area in 1945, it was 
not until the mid-1950’s that he concen- 
trated on the group. As consulting ento- 
mologist with Shell Chemical Co., he had 
time to operate a Moericke (‘‘yellow- 
pan’’) trap on the roof of his 9-story apart- 
ment building and accumulate records of 
the local fauna. Every six months or so, 
he and his wife Doris would visit her 
niece (Mrs. David Winters) in Haddon- 
field, N. J., and invariably Mort would 
set up his trap in the Winters’ yard (14). 
Some members of the prestigious Cos- 
mos Club in Washington must have 
looked askance when Mort collected 
from plants in the club’s gardens. For 
Mort there was always time for collecting: 


If one keeps at it as he travels, a great deal of 
valuable stuff can be gotten by dropping by for a 
few minutes at a likely spot, or during noon hour 
or after supper as well as on Sundays & occasional 
holidays. Anyone who really wants to collect .. . 
can find time even tho busy with other matters”’ (15). 


Leonard constantly encouraged his 
friends to collect aphids for him and, if 
they neglected to send specimens, he 
would remind them to be more diligent (9). 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


Roy Latham, a close friend and long-time 
naturalist on Long Island, made numerous 
collections of aphids from accurately 
determined host plants; Prof. L. L. Pechu- 
man collected two new species of New 
York aphids and contributed many new 
state records; and C. P. Alexander and 
others also submitted numerous collec- 
tions to Mort. It should be pointed out 
that Leonard was not a taxonomic spe- 
cialist in the Aphididae and did not de- 
scribe new species as he had for the Dip- 
tera and Hymenoptera earlier in his 
career. He did make many of his own 
identifications but usually submitted 
specimens to specialists for verification 
of his tentative determinations. Many 
of the world’s aphid authorities were 
called on for assistance: T. L. Bissell, 
V.F. Eastop, M. E. MacGillivray, A. T. 
Olive, J. O. Pepper, F. W. Quednau, 
A. G. Robinson, L. M. Russell, C. F. 
Smith, H. L. G. Stroyan, and A. N. 
Tissot. 

Through Mort’s own collecting and 
his encouragement of others, our knowl- 
edge of the aphid fauna of New York 
is better known than that of any other 
state, with some 462 species having been 
recorded up to publication of his fourth 
supplement in 1975. He also published 
distribution records for the aphids of 
Arizona, California, Connecticut, Dela- 
ware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, 
Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, 
New Jersey, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, 
and Virginia, as well as Cyprus and New- 
foundland. 


The Last Years.—Mort remained 
an active entomologist until his final 
months; his ambition seldom waned. 
Even in his later years he still had hopes 
for finishing a supplement to his New 
York Insect List (15); he still mentioned 
the possibility of publishing sketches of 
entomologists he felt had been neglected 
(C. H. Hadley and J. G. Sanders for ex- 
ample) (16); and he was still having aphids 
sent to him. Less than a month before he 
died, he turned over to Prof. Pechuman 
the notes that were to comprise a fifth 
supplement to his New York list of aphids 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


and asked him to oversee the typing of 
the manuscript (17). 

When Doris’ health began to fail, the 
Leonards moved to a Cherry Hill, N. J. 
nursing home in early August 1975. With 
his own health also beginning to decline 
and without the opportunity of daily tele- 
phone chats with his Washington friends 
and occasional visits to the Cosmos Club, 
Mort may literally have died of a broken 
heart. He died on August 26, 1975 and 
was buried in the family plot in Ridge- 
wood, N. J. Doris died soon after on 
February 29, 1976. 


Evaluation of a Career 


Mortimer D. Leonard’s more than 170 
publications in insect biology, distribu- 
tion, and control; in extension work; and 
on new uses of insecticides attest to a 
long and diverse career. He had the op- 
portunity to be part of the Comstock 
years at Cornell and to associate with 
some of the greatest scientists in his field 
and to be active both in basic and applied 
research in official and commercial posi- 
tions. His outstanding achievement prob- 
ably was overseeing the completion of 
the New York State List of Insects. Such 
an ambitious compiling of a state’s insect 
fauna may never again be attempted. The 
List is an invaluable reference for insect 
distribution records and, ina lighter vein, 
it inspired the long-running column *‘Au- 
tographa OO”’ by the editor of the Bulletin 
of the Entomological Society of America. 
Mort delighted in the explanation of how 
the name for the column (loosely ex- 
pressed as ‘‘Oh! Oh! What have I writ- 
ten’’!) was derived (with apology to gram- 
marians) from the noctuid moth, Auto- 
grapha oo, on page 627 of the List (18). 

In economic entomology the develop- 
ment and testing of new agricultural 
insecticides was an outstanding contribu- 
tion, although no single accomplishment 
or publication commemorates his devel- 
opmental work. F. L. Campbell credits 
Mort with benefitting peoples the world 
over: 


There is no question... that the present 
effectiveness of chemical control of insects can be 


65 


attributed to the effort over the years of Dr. Leon- 
ard and men like him. To a considerable extent 
credit for this great development in food production 
should go to Dr. Leonard who has been a pioneer 
and leader in this field (2). 


According to Leonard’s own estimate, 
40% of his time was spent in “‘official”’ 
entomology, 60% in ‘‘commercial’’ posi- 
tions (Leonard 1957). He declined to 
select either as the more enjoyable, 
although he was justly proud of being 
one of the first well-trained entomologists 
to serve industry. He traced the develop- 
ment of commercial entomology in the 
United States (Leonard 1958) and, accord- 
ing to one of Mort’s closest friends, the 
preparation of the paper truly was a labor 
of love (19). 

But did Dr. Leonard fulfill the promise 
he showed as a taxonomist and general 
biologist during his student years at Cor- 
nell? Would Prof. Comstock and _ his 
friend and adviser Cyrus Crosby have 
been pleased with their student’s accom- 
plishments? Comstock might well have 
been disappointed that Mort so soon 
abandoned his life history and taxonomic 
studies and only briefly returned to bio- 
logical investigations. As a pioneer in 
extension entomology, Crosby probably 
would have been pleased to see Mort 
develop new uses for agricultural chemi- 
cals which resulted in improved public 
health and increased food production 
throughout much of the world. He cer- 
tainly would have been pleased to see 
Mort continue his studies on aphids. 

In fairness to Leonard it should be 
emphasized that his wanderings were 
not intended, that a career characterized 
by an absence of stepwise progression 
was not planned (2). Sometimes he simply 
was the victim of bad luck. At various 
times political tampering (Puerto Rico), 
business failure (Orange Manufacturing 
Co.), and termination of funds (U. S. 
Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quaran- 
tine) cost him his position. In other cases 
Mort’s own actions may have kept him 
from securing permanency in a certain 
job. One of Leonard’s. compelling desires 
was to return to Cornell, and Prof. Crosby 
indeed tried (unsuccessfully for reasons 


66 


not known) to obtain a permanent faculty 
position for his friend (9). 

For an entomologist as well known and 
admired as Leonard was, one might ex- 
pect him to have held office in the many 
societies to which he belonged. His fre- 
quent shifting of positions and the exten- 
sive travel required by his developmental 
work in industry probably prevented him 
from holding office. In his later years he 
enjoyed counting ballots for the Entomo- 
logical Society of America at their head- 
quarters in College Park, Maryland (20), 
and he regularly attended meetings of the 
Entomological Society of Washington. In 
February 1975 he was elected to Honorary 
Membership in the Washington society. 

In an evaluation of Leonard’s work one 
should not be too critical of a career so 
diverse and fruitful. Earlier I referred 
to him as an ‘‘entomological jack-of-all 
trades,’ not disparagingly, but as a com- 
pliment to his achievements in several 
areas of his science. Perhaps his produc- 
tivity (however that might be measured) 
would not have been enhanced had he 
remained at Cornell. Certainly he would 
never have had the opportunity to make 
such lasting contributions to world food 
production. In the end, what others 
thought of his productivity matters less 
than how Mort viewed his life’s work. 
Clearly he enjoyed it: 


As I look back over the years, it seems to me 
that being an entomologist has been a very reward- 
ing way of life. I have travelled widely and met 
hosts of interesting people, including many from 
foreign lands, and I have made many valued friends. 
I believe my activities have been of benefit to my 
fellow man (Leonard 1957). 


Mort Leonard the Man 


Russell’s (1975) obituary of Dr. Leon- 
ard provides good insight into his per- 
sonality. She described him as ‘‘kind, 
cordial, sociable, communicative, and 
intensely interested in people and their 
activities.”’ Mort seldom failed to add 
a personal touch; nearly always he re- 
membered his friends’ anniversaries and 
birthdays (9). At the close of my graduate 
work at Cornell, Dr. Leonard learned 
that I had scheduled my “‘defense of the- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


sis’ exam and took time to send a letter 
wishing me success. 

When Mort’s father died, he became 
and would remain a ‘‘tower of strength’’ 
(21) to his younger brother Donald and an 
affectionate son to his mother. Although 
he was seldom home after he enrolled 
at Cheshire Academy, he helped his 
mother when he could and did his best 
to return for high days (the Leonard’s 
were Episcopalian) and holidays (5). 

At Cornell Mort enjoyed a social life 
apart from activities associated with 
the Entomology Department and lectures 
and field trips of the Agassiz Club. He 
was a member of Eleusis, a local fra- 
ternity that was merged into the national 
Theta Kappa Nu and then into Lambda 
Chi Alpha. Mort was a great storyteller 
and, like his father, had a flair for mimick- 
ing a Jewish and a Spanish dialect. He 
often was called on to entertain his fra- 
ternity’s ‘‘rushees’’; he had some of his 
mother’s musical ability and was a good 
‘fiddler’? (21). In the Agriculture College 
Mort was a member of the Violin Quar- 
tet and the Mandolin Club. Sometimes he 
made a small sum of money by playing at 
local dances. Over the years he sang and 
interpreted some of the humorous songs 
that his Aunt Neil, his mother’s younger 
sister, had handed down (22). 

A write-up prepared for the 1913 Cor- 
nell classbook vividly characterizes Mort 
the student: 

We call him ‘‘Bug’’ Leonard because of his 
proclivities not because of his state of mind. Despite 
his habitual church—deacon expression, Mort 
can, on occasion, give a very correct imitation of 
‘The Missing Link.’ He is perfectly at home with 


his pipe and his ‘“‘bugs,’’ a master stuntster, and 
a charter member of the Bachelors Club (23). 


To really capture the flavor of Mort’s 
personality, more should be said about 
Cornell. When he finished his doctoral 
work, Leonard probably wanted to re- 
main on the Cornell staff. Despite the 
disappointment of failure to land a perma- 
nent position, Mort always cherished 
memories of his years in Ithaca and rel- 
ished the opportunity to visit with Cor- 
nell alumni. In 1967 he donated to Cornell 
his personal collection of aphids con- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


sisting of some 500 species and nearly 
17,000 slides. Leonard’s collection, 
together with the aphids assembled by 
former Cornell entomologist Grace H. 
Griswold, is known as the ‘‘Griswold- 
Leonard Collection of Aphididae’’ (Pechu- 
man 1969). Shortly before he died, Leon- 
ard gave his books, reprints, reprint col- 
lection, diplomas, and microscope to 
the University (9). 

Although not physically impressive 
(he was 5'7” tall and weighed 125 lbs. as 
a Cornell student) (23), Mort was a hand- 
some man, bearing (some thought) a 
resemblance to the actor Adolph Men- 
jou. He was always well dressed, even 
dapper (Fig. 4); above all, he was a gentle- 
man. 

Like many entomologists, Leonard 
was not without his quirks. At times he 
could be stubborn. In restaurants his 
second cup of coffee had to be brought 
in aclean cup (20), and on his 50th reunion 
at Cornell he insisted on retracing his 
original route to Ithaca. Since train serv- 
ice was no longer available to Ithaca, 
Prof. Pechuman met Mort at the railroad 
station in Binghamton to take him and 
Doris to his reunion (9). 

In short, Mort Leonard was a convivial, 
gregarious sort. Robert Hamman per- 
haps said it best: ‘‘Mort never met a 
stranger, only friends’’ (19). 


The Writings of M. D. Leonard 


(Authorship of publication is in the order given) 


1912. Venational variation in Cladura (Tipulidae 
Diptera). J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 20:36-39. 
(C. P. Alexander and M. D. L.). 

1912. A new Palaearctic Geranomyia (Tipulidae, 
Diptera). Can. Entomol. 54: 205-207. 
(C. P. Alexander and M. D. L.). 

1913. Additions to the New Jersey Tipulidae (Dip- 
tera), with the description of a new species. 
Entomol. News 24: 247-249. 

1914. An egg-parasite of the tarnished plant bug, 
Lygus pratensis L. Can. Entomol. 56: 
181-182. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). 

1914. The tarnished plant-bug. Cornell Univ. 
Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 346, pp. 461-526. 
(C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). 

1914. A bibliography of the writings of Professor 
Mark Vernon Slingerland. Cornell Univ. 
Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 348, pp. 621-651. 

1914. The cabbage aphis. N. Y. State Coll. Agr., 


67 


1S: 


1915. 


LOSE 


LSS: 


1915. 


LOS: 


1915: 


1915: 


19S: 


LOIS: 


1916. 


1916. 


1916. 


1916. 


1916. 


1916. 


1916. 


1916. 


68 


Cornell. Unnumbered leaflet. 1 p. (C. R. 
Crosby and M. D. L.). 

Insects injurious to the fruit of the apple. 
N. Y. State Coll. Agr., Cornell Reading 
Courses 4(84) Insect Series 1: 121-144 
and supplement pp. 1-4. (C. R. Crosby 
and M. D. L.). 

The role of sucking insects in the dissemina- 
tion of fire blight bacteria. Phytopathology 
5: 117-123. (V. B. Stewart and M. D. L.). 

Spray calendar prepared for the E. C. Brown 
Co., of Rochester, N. Y. 16 p. (C. R. 
Crosby and M. D. L.). 

The control of insect pests and plant dis- 
eases (revised). Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. 
Stn. Bull. 283, pp. 463-500. (C. R. Crosby 
and M. D. L.). 

Further experiments in the control of the 
tarnished plant-bug. J. Econ. Entomol. 
8: 361-367. 

The immature stages of the black apple 
leafhopper ([diocerus provancheri Van 
Duzee). J. Econ. Entomol. 8: 415-419. 

The immature stages of Plagiognathus 
politus Uhler and Campylomma verbasci 
Herrick-Schaeffer (Capsidae, Hemiptera). 
J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 23: 193-197. 

A new species of Gonatocerus (Mymaridae) 
parasitic on the eggs of a new species of 
Idiocerus (Bythoscopidae) feeding on 
poplar. J. Econ. Entomol. 8: 541-547. 
(M. D. L. and C. R. Crosby). 

How and when to spray (revised). D. B. 
Smith, Utica, N. Y. 4 p. (C. R. Crosby 
and M. D. L.). 

Directions for use of insecticides. Insecti- 
cide and Disinfectant Manufacturers 
Assoc., Inc., N. Y. 36 p. (C. R. Crosby 

~ andsM. Dy 22 

The immature stages of Tropidosteptes 
cardinalis Uhler (Capsidae, Hemiptera). 
Psyche 23: 1-3. 

The immature stages of two Hemiptera— 
Empoasca obtusa Walsh (Typhlocybidae) 
and Lopidea robiniae Uhler (Capsidae). 
Entomol. News 27: 49-54. 

Further studies in the role of insects in the 
dissemination of fire blight bacteria. Phyto- 
pathology 6: 152-158. (V. B. Stewart 
and M. D. L.). 

Suggestions to rosebush owners. Honeoye 
Falls Times (N. Y.), June 1, 1916, 1 p. 
Rose slugs discovered on bushes. Honeoye 
Falls Times (N. Y.), June 8, 1916, 1 p. 
Striped cucumber beetle. Honeoye Falls 

dimes (Ns Y.); June15,; 1916, 1p: 

A tachinid parasite reared from an adult 
capsid (Dip., Hem.). Entomol. News 27: 
236. 

Grass insects. Pages 2745-2756 and clover 
insects, Pages 2864-2874. In Grasses and 
leguminous crops in New York State. 
N. Y. State Dept. Agric. Bull. 87. (C. R. 
Crosby and M. D. L.). 


1916. 


1916. 


1916. 


1917: 


1917: 


1917. 


1907: 


1972 


EDIT: 


1917. 


1918. 


1919: 


1920. 


1922, 


1922. 


1923: 


1924. 


1924. 


The part played by insects in the spread of 
Bacillus amylovorus. Intl. Inst. Agric. Bur. 
Agric. Intel. and Plant Dis. Mon. Bull. 
7: 1198-1199. (V. B. Stewart and M. D. L.). 

Rose insects and their control. Pages 57-67. 
In The American Rose Annual, 1916. Am. 
Rose Soc., Harrisburg, Pa. (C. R. Crosby 
and M. D. L.). 

Rose insects. Pages 3018-3019. In L. H. 
Bailey, The standard cyclopedia of horti- 
culture, Vol. S Macmillan Co., New York. 
(C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). 

The farm bureau as an agency for demon- 
strating the control of injurious insects. 
J. Econ. Entomol. 10: 20-25. (C. R. 
Crosby and M. D. L.). 

Controlling plant diseases and insect pests 
by dusting. Field Illustrated, March, 
pp. 193-195. (C. B. Savage and M. D. L.). 

An egg parasite of the sumac flea-beetle 
(Hym., Chalcid.). Entomol. News 28: 368. 
(C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). 

The egg of Byturus unicolor Say. (Col.). 
Entomol. News 28: 438. (C. R. Crosby 
and M. D. L.). 

Apple spray schedule. N. Y. State Coll. Agr. 
1 p. card. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). 

Insects injurious to late cabbage. Proc. N. Y. 
State Veg. Growers’ Assn. Tulley, N. Y., 
May 2, 2 p. 

Grass and clover insects. Cornell Univ. Ext. 
Bull. 20. 20 p.; reprint of same title pub- 
lished as N. Y. Dept. Agric. Bull. 87, 
1916. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). 

Manual of vegetable garden insects. Mac- 
Millan Co., New York. 391 p. (C. R. 
Crosby and M. D. L.). 

An injurious leaf-miner of the honeysuckle. 
J. Econ. Entomol. 12: 389-392. (C. R. 
Crosby and M. D. L.). 

A dipterous parasite of the parsnip webworm 
(Depressaria heracliana Linn.). J. Econ. 
Entomol. 13: 491-492. 

Insects that hunt the rose. Pages 89-100. 
In The American Rose Annual, 1922. 
Am. Rose Soc., Harrisburg, Pa. (C. R. 
Crosby and M. D. L.). 

The Pyrox spray guide (revised). Bowker 
Insecticide Co., New York. 32 p. 

The immature stages of the catnip leaf- 
hopper (Eupteryx mellissae Curtis). 
J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 31: 181-184. 
(M. D. L. and G. W. Barber). 

The apple and thorn skeletonizer and its 
control. Cornell Univ. Ext. Bull. 86. 7 p. 
(E. P. Felt and M. D. L.). 

The present status and distribution of the 
apple and thorn skeletonizer (Hemerophila 
pariana Clerck, Lepid.). 54th Ann. Rep. 
Entomol. Soc. Ont. 1923: 18-20. 


. Spray calendar (revised). E. C. Brown Co., 


Rochester, N. Y. 16 p. (C. R. Crosby and 
Mead). «L.). 


. Entomology. Pages 32-40. In 19th Rep. 


. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


1925 


1925 


1926. 


1928. 


1928. 


- 1928. 


1928. 


1929. 


1930. 


1930. 


1930. 


1930. 


1930. 


1930. 


1930. 


1951 


1931. 


1931. 


Dir. N. Y. State Mus. and Sci. Dept. N. Y. 
St. Mus. Bull. 253. 

Notes on the embargo of grapes from Almeria, 
Spain, on account of the Mediterranean 
fruit-fly (Ceratitis capitata Wied). J. Econ. 
Entomol. 18: 257-265. 

The spray service. Pages 87-90. In Proc. 
70th Ann. Mtg. N. Y. State Hort. Soc. 
Some profitable Florida crops. Wilson & 
Toomer Fert. Co. and Fla. Agr. Supply, 
Jacksonville & Orlando, Fla. 48 p. (M. D. L. 

and B. F. Floyd) (revised 1927). 

A list of the insects of New York, with a 
list of spiders and certain other allied 
groups. Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. 
Mem. 101. 1121 p. (M. D. L. Editor-in- 
Chief). 

Xylophagidae, p. 750; Coenomyiidae, p. 750; 
Rhagionidae, Pages 758-760. In Cornell 
Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Mem. 101. 

Chalcidoidea. Pages 975-985. In Cornell 
Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Mem. 101. (A. B. 
Gahan, C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). 

The European corn borer clean-up cam- 
paign in New York State 1927. J. Econ. 
Entomol. 21: 778-783. 

Observations on the oil-nicotine combina- 
tion for the control of the codling moth 
and other apple insects in the Pacific 
Northwest. J. Econ. Entomol. 22: 72-78. 
(F. B. Herbert and M. D. L.). 

Further experiments with nicotine-oil for 
the control of the codling moth in the 
Pacific Northwest. J. Econ. Entomol. 23: 
61-74. 

An unrecorded food habit of the large tobacco 
suck-fly in Porto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 
23: 640-641. 

A revision of the dipterous family Rhagioni- 
dae (Leptidae) in the United States and 
Canada. Amer. Entomol. Soc. Mem. 7: 
1-181. 

A new leaf-miner of cotton in Porto Rico 
(Nepticula gossypii new species). J. Dept. 
Agric. Porto Rico 14: 151-158. (W. T. M. 
Forbes and M. D. L.). 

A little-known root-weevil of cassava (Codo- 
sternus sulcatulus Boheman). J. Dept. 
Agric. Porto Rico 14: 159-165. 

Plagas de insectos de la Cual Esta Libre la 
Cana en Puerto Rico. Rev. de Agr. de 
Puerto Rico. 15: 62—63, 93-94. 

Recomendaciones para combatir las plagas 
que afectan en Puerto Rico al cultivo del 
algodon. El Mundo (San Juan). Oct. 14, 
1930. pp. 3, 9, 11. (Reprinted in Rev. Agr. 
Puerto Rico 25: 135-136, 163-164). 

Entomology in Puerto Rico during the past 
decade. J. Econ. Entomol. 24: 141-151. 

The papaya fruit fly in Puerto Rico. J. Econ. 
Entomol. 24: 331-332. (M. D. L. and F. 
Sein, Jr.). 

A bibliography of the banana root weevil. 
J. Dept. Agric. Porto Rico 15: 147-176. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


19511. 


1931. 


1931. 


19351- 


1931. 


LOSI: 


1955: 


19531. 


1931. 


1931: 


1931. 


eeu 


19311. 


1937. 


193i. 


1931. 


LOS. 


1931. 


1952. 


A preliminary report on the lima bean pod- 
borer and other legume pod borers in 
Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 24: 466- 
473. (M. D. L. and A. S. Mills). 

Report of the Division of Entomology for the 
fiscal year 1929-30. Pages 110-123. In 
Ann. Rep. Ins. Exp. Stn. Dept. Agric. & 
Labor Porto Rico. 

The eggs of the lima bean pod borer in Puerto 
Rico Maruca testulalis Geyer (Lepid., 
Pyralidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 24: 763. 
(A. S. Mills and M. D. L.). 

Leptoglossus gonagra Fab. injuring citrus 
in Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 24: 
765-767. 

Two new species of Symphoromyia (Rhag- 
ionidae, Diptera) from the eastern United 
States. Amer. Mus. Novitates 497: 1-2. 

Some notes on my Revision of the Rhagioni- 
dae (Diptera). Trans. Amer. Entomol. Soc. 
57: 321-323. 

Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during the 
fiscal year ended June 30, 1930. Ins. Pest 
Surv. Bull. 11: 33-37. 

Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during 
January and February 1931. Ins. Pest. 
Surv. Bull. 11: 76-78. 

Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during 
April, 1931 "Ins. “Pest!” Surv “Bull. “14: 
235-238. 

Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during 
May 1931. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 11: 317- 
319. 

Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during 
June 1931. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 11: 409- 
412. 

Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during 
July 1931. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 11: 492- 
494. 

Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during 
August, 1931. Ins. Pest Surv. Bull. 11: 
574-577. 

Insect conditions in Antigua, August 25-29, 
1931. Ins. Pest Surv. Bull. 11: 577-579. 
Insect conditions in Porto Rico during 
September 1931. Ins. Pest Surv. Bull. 11: 

642-645. 

Notes from annual report on insect condi- 
tions in Porto Rico July 1, 1930 to June 30, 
1931. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 11: 682-685. 

Observations on the bean lace bug in Porto 
Rico. J. Dept. Agric. Porto Rico. 15: 309- 
323. (M. D. L. and A. S. Mills). 

[Descriptions of two new species of Ptiolina 
(Rhagionidae)]. Pages 250-251 In C. H. 
Curran. Some new North American Dip- 
tera. Can. Entomol. 63: 249-254. 

Entomology at the Fourth Congress of the 
International Society of Sugar Cane Tech- 
nologists of Porto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 
25¢ (732=7332" (CC. Es Pemberton and 
M. D. L.). [publ. under same title in Ent. 
News 43: 195-196]. 


69 


1932: 


1932. 


1932. 


1932: 


1932: 


1932: 


1952" 


1932. 


1932; 


1932. 


19372. 


1933% 


11933: 


1933; 


1933. 


1933: 


11933: 


1953) 


19332 


1934. 


1936. 


1936. 


1936. 


70 


Thrips injury to citrus and rose in Puerto 
Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 25: 934-935. 
Additional references to the bean lace bug. 
J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico 16: 75-76. 
An early quarantine in Puerto Rico. J. Econ. 

Entomol. 25: 930-931. 

The initiation of an insect pest survey in 
Porto Rico. J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico 
16: 59-64. 

The pink bollworm of cotton in Porto Rico. 
J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico 16: 65-73. 
Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during the 
fiscal year, July 1, 1930 thru June 30, 1931. 
J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico 16: 121-144. 

The cottony cushion-scale in Puerto Rico. 
J. Econ. Entomol. 25: 1103-1107. 

Insect conditions in Porto Rico October 1, 
1931 to Jan. 31, 1932. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 
12: 36-38. 

Insect conditions in Porto Rico during Feb- 
ruary and March 1932. Ins. Pest Surv. Bull. 
12: 121-123. 

Insect conditions in Puerto Rico during April 
and May, 1932. Ins. Pest. Surv. Bull. 12: 
185-186. 

Insect conditions in Puerto Rico from Jan- 
uary 1 to June 30, 1932. Ins. Pest Surv. 
Bull. 12: 405-408. 

Observations on some factors which may 
affect the abundance of Diatraea sac- 
charalis in Porto Rico. Proc. 4th Congr. 
Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Techs. (Preprint 
Bull. No. 92: 1—2). 

Notes on the giant toad, Bufo marinus (L.), 
in Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 26: 
67-71. 

A braconid parasite of a coccinellid new 
to Puerto Rico. J. Econ. Entomol. 26: 294. 

Insects of coniferous evergreens. Pages 
338—354 In L. H. Bailey, The cultivated 
conifers in North America. Macmillan Co., 
New York. (C. R. Crosby and M. D. L.). 

Pyrethrum as an insecticide. Valley Farmer 
and South Texas Grower, March, 3 p. 
(M. D. L. and A. Weed). 

An annotated bibliography of Puerto Rican 
entomology. J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico 
17: 1-96. 

Notes on insect conditions in Puerto Rico 
for the fiscal year, July 1931 thru June 
1932. J. Dept. Agric. Puerto Rico. 17: 
97-137. 

A summary of recent results with pyrethrum 
as an agricultural dust. 8 p. John Powell 
Co., New York. (A. Weed and M. D. L.). 

Recent developments with pyrethrum and 
derris. Fico News 1(11): 4. 

Toxicity of rotenone powders. Soap 12(3). 
1 p. (D. G. Hoyer and M. D. L.). 

Pyrethrin content of pyrethrum flowers from 
various sources. J. Econ. Entomol. 29: 
605-606. (D. G. Hoyer and M. D. L.). 

Additions to the New York State list of 
aphids with notes on other New York 


1936. 
1939. 


1940. 
1944, 
1946. 


1947. 


1956. 
L957: 


1958. 


1959" 
1959: 


1960. 


1960. 


1961. 


1962. 


1963. 


. Additional 


species. J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 44: 177- 
185. 

El valor insecticida de la Rotonona y el 
Pieretro. La Hacienda, Sept., 2 pp. 

Broadening the field of usefulness of applied 
entomology. J. Econ. Entomol. 32: 229-234. 

The modern chemical arsenal and what it 
means in the fight against insects. Pests 
(March). 2 p. 

Wholesale prices of insecticides during 
World Wars I and II. J. Econ. Entomol. 
37: 854-855. (E. R. de Ong and M. D. L.). 

Victor Irving Safro, 1888-1944. J. Econ. 
Entomol. 38: 727-729. 

The ‘‘Special Survey in the Vicinity of Ports 
of Entry”’ as a contribution to “‘A List of 
the Insects of New York.’’ J. N. Y. Ento- 
mol. Soc. 55: 215-217. 

A preliminary list of the aphids of New Jer- 
sey. J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 64: 99-123. 

How I became an entomologist. Nat. Agric. 
Chem. Assoc. News 15(5): 12-13. 


The development of commercial entomology . 


in the United States. Proc. 10th Int. Congr. 
Ent. 3: 99-106. 

A preliminary list of the aphids of Missouri. 
J. Kans. Entomol. Soc. 32: 9-18. 

A proposed list of the aphids of New York. 
Bull. Brooklyn Entomol. Soc. 54: 47—S0. 

Harry Gardner Barber, 1871-1960. Proc. 
Entomol. Soc. Wash. 62: 125-129. 
(M. D. L. and R. I. Sailer). 

The aphids that feed on cacti. Bull. Brooklyn 
Entomol. Soc. 55: 64—66. 

Joseph Sanford Wade, 1880-1960. Proc. 
Entomol. Soc. Wash. 63: 219-222. (M. D. L. 
and W. H. Larrimer). 

[Discussion of the case “‘Aphis Linnaeus, 
1758; its type-species, and the family- 
group name derived from it (Insecta, 
Hemiptera) Z.N.(S) 881.’’] Bull. Zool. 
Nomencl. 19: 196. 

The distribution and habits of the mint aphid 
Ovatus crataegarius (Walker) (Homptera: 
Aphidae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 65S: 
55-62. 

records of Missouri aphids. 

J. Kans. Entomol. Soc. 36: 65-84. 


. A list of the aphids of New York. Proc. 


Rochester Acad. Sci. 10: 289-428. 


. Additional records of New Jersey aphids. 


J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 72: 79-101. 


. Aphids on a rooftop. Proc. Entomol. Soc. 


Wash. 66: 167-168. 


. Aphids on a rooftop— 1963. Proc. Entomol. 


Soc. Wash. 67: 253-254. 


. Apreliminary list of Texas aphids. Fla. Ento- 


mol. 48: 255—264. (M. D. L. and A. N. 
Tissot). 


. A preliminary list of the aphids of Massachu- 


setts (Homoptera). Trans. Amer. Ento- 
mol. Soc. 92: 29-66. 


. Natural history of Plummers Island, Mary- 


land. XIX. Annotated list of the aphids 


. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


——— 


1966. 
1966. 


1966. 
1967. 
1967. 
1967. 
1967. 
1968. 
1968. 


1968. 


1968. 


1969. 


1969. 
1970. 


1970. 


1970. 


1970. 
1970. 


197 1. 


(Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Biol. Soc. 
Wash. 79: 117-126. 

Further records of Missouri aphids. Proc. 
Entomol. Soc. Wash. 68: 97-99. 

Additions to the list of aphids of Massachu- 
setts. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 68: 273. 

An aphid with four cornicles (Homoptera: 
Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 
68: 320. 

Macrosiphum rosae (Linnaeus) on Ilex. 
Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 69: 59. 

The aphids or plant lice of Delaware (Homop- 
tera: Aphididae). Univ. Del. Agric. Exp. 
Stn. Tech. Bull. 363. 18 p. (M. D. L. and 
P. P. Burbutis). 

Further records of New Jersey aphids 
(Homoptera: Aphididae). J. N. Y. Ento- 
mol. Soc. 75: 77-92. 

A list of the aphids of Cyprus (Homoptera: 
Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 
69: 259-266. 

Further records of aphids from Plummers 
Island, Md. (Homoptera: Aphididae). 
Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 70: 84. __ 

California aphids in the Cornell University 
collection (Homoptera: Aphididae). Cor- 
nell Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Mem. 407. 31 p. 

The greenbug in the Atlantic Coast States 
(Schizaphis graminum (Rondani)) (Homop- 
tera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. 
Rep. 18: 930-938. 

A supplement to a list of the aphids of New 
York. Proc. Rochester Acad. Sci. 11: 
257-361. 

Aphid investigations at the Los Angeles 
State and County Arboretum. Laska 
Leaves 19: 29-31. (H. G. Walker, M. D. L., 
and L. Enari). 

Selected regional lists of North American 
aphids. USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 19: 
558-564. 

Records of new or little-known aphids in 
Massachusetts (Homoptera: Aphididae). 
Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 72: 201-202. 

Host plants of Myzus persicae at the Los 
Angeles State and County Arboretum, 
Arcadia, California (Homoptera: Aphidi- 
dae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 72: 
294-312. (M. D. L., H. G. Walker, and 
L. Enari). 

A list of the aphids of District of Columbia, 
Maryland and Virginia. Univ. Md. Agric. 
Exp. Stn. MP 770. 129 p. (M. D. L. and 
T. L. Bissell). 

Early records of a few Connecticut aphids 
(Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. 
Soc. Wash. 72: 499. 

Records of a few Vermont aphids (Homop- 
tera: Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. 
Wash. 72: 507. 

Host plants of Aphis gossypii at the Los 
Angeles State and County Arboretum, 
Arcadia, California (Homoptera: Aphidi- 
dae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 73: 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


1971. 


1971. 


1971. 


19g. 


1971. 


1972: 


1972. 


1972: 


1972 


1973: 


1973: 


1973: 


1973: 


1973: 


1974. 


1974. 


1974. 


9-16. (M. D. L., H. G. Walker, and L. 
Enari). 

Host plants of three polyphagous and widely 
distributed aphids in the Los Angeles 
State and County Arboretum, Arcadia, 
California (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. 
Entomol. Soc. Wash. 73: 120-131. 
(M. D. L., H. G. Walker, and L. Enari). 

More records of New Jersey aphids (Homop- 
tera: Aphididae). J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 
79: 62-83. 

Records of aphids collected in Newfound- 
land (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Ento- 
mol. Soc. Wash. 73: 168-169. 

Host plants of Toxoptera aurantii at the 
Los Angeles State and County Arboretum, 
Arcadia, California (Homoptera: Aphidi- 


dae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 73: 
324-326. (M. D. L., H. G. Walker and 
L. Enari). 


A second supplement to a list of the aphids 
of New York (Homoptera: Aphididae). 
Search (Agriculture); Cornell Univ. Agr. 
Exp. Stn., Ithaca, N. Y. 1(12): 1-31. 

Aphids in a yellow water-pan in Haddon- 
field, New Jersey. Proc. Entomol. Soc. 
Wash. 74: 26-31. 

Host plants of aphids collected at the Los 
Angeles State and County Arboretum dur- 
ing 1966 and 1967 (Homoptera: Aphididae). 
Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 74: 95-120. 
(M. D. L., H. G. Walker, and L. Enari). 

Aphids of New Jersey, a few more records 
(Homoptera: Aphididae). J. N. Y. Ento- 
mol. Soc. 80: 182-194. 

Corrections to the Cavariella slides in the 
Cornell University collection (Homoptera: 
Aphididae). Search (Agriculture); Cornell 
Univ. Agr. Exp. Stn., Ithaca, N. Y. 2(18): 
1-2. 

Glutops singularis Burgess on Long Island, 
N. Y. (Diptera: Pelecorhynchidae). Proc. 
Entomol. Soc. Wash. 75: 149. 

Aphids collected in the Los Angeles State 
and County Arboretum (Homoptera: 
Aphididae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 
75: 209-212. (M. D. L. and H. G. Walker). 

A third supplement to a list of aphids of New 
York (Homoptera: Aphididae). Search 
(Agriculture); Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. 
Stns aTthaca, N. Y. 3:8); 1-23. 

Records of a few aphids in Hawaii. USDA 
Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 23: 542. 

Records of a few Virginia aphids (Homop- 
tera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. 
Ins. Rep. 23: 769-771. 

A list of the aphids of Staten Island, New 
York (Homoptera: Aphididae). USDA 
Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 24: 12-18. 

Aphids in the Pine Barrens of New Jersey 
(Homoptera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. 
Econ. Ins. Rep. 24: 530-534. 

How international is ESA? Bull. Entomol. 
Soc. Am. 20: 327. 


71 


1974. More records of Massachusetts aphids 
(Homoptera: Aphididae). USDA Coop. 
Econ. Ins. Rep. 24: 558-560. 
Aphids collected in Arizona by S. M. Dohan- 
ian (Homoptera: Aphididae). USDA 
Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 24: 561-562. 
A list of aphids of Oregon (Homoptera: 
Aphididae). Ore. Dept. Agric., Salem. 
116 p. 
Records of a few Vermont aphids (Homoptera: 
Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 
DAT. 
Additional aphids collected in the Los Angeles 
State and County Arboretum (Homoptera: 
Aphididae). USDA Coop. Econ. Ins. Rep. 
24: 778-779. (M. D. L. and H. G. Walker). 
Senekerim Mardiros Dohanian, 1889-1972. 
J. Wash. Acad. Sci. 64: 250-251. 
1975. S. M. Dohanian (addendum). J. Wash. Acad. 
Sci. 65: 48. 

1975. A fourth supplement to a list of aphids of 
New York. Search (Agriculture); Cornell 
Univ. Agr. Exp. Stn., Ithaca, N. Y. 5(4): 
1-11. 


1974. 


1974. 


1974. 


1974. 


1974. 


New Names Proposed by M. D. Leonard 


Hemiptera-Homoptera 


Cicadelloidea-Idioceridae 
Idiocerus gemmisimulans Leonard & Crosby 
1915, J. Econ. Entomol. 8:542 (a syn- 
onym of J. decimaquartus (Schrank)). 


Diptera 
Tipulidae 

Geranomyia bezzii Alexander & Leonard 1912, 
Can. Entomol. 54:205. 

Limnophila albipes Leonard 1913, Entomol. 
News 24:248 (listed as an unplaced species of 
Limnophila by Alexander 1965). 

Limnophila nigripleura Alexander & Leonard 
1914, in Alexander, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil. 
66:592 (a synonym of Pseudolimnophila con- 
tempta (Osten Sacken)). 

Xylophagidae 

Rachicerus niger Leonard 1930, Mem. Amer. 

Entomol. Soc. 7:13. 
Xylomyidae 

Xylomyia pallipes Loew var. flavomaculata 
Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:43 
(a synonym of Solva pallipes (Loew)). 

Rhagionidae 

Chrysopilus andersoni Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. 
Entomol. Soc. 7:131. 

Chrysopilus fasciatus var. infuscatus Leonard 
1930, Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:141 
(a subspecies of C. fasciatus (Say)). 

Chrysopilus pilosus Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. 
Entomol. Soc. 7:152. 

Ptiolina alberta Leonard 1931, in Curran, Can. 
Entomol. 63:250. 

Ptiolina obsoleta Leonard 1931, in Curran, Can. 
Entomol. 63:250. 

Rhagio brunneipennis Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. 
Entomol. Soc. 7:92. 


72 


Rhagio californicus Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. 
Entomol. Soc. 7:93. 

Rhagio concavus Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. 
Entomol. Soc. 7:94 (a subspecies of R. maculi- 
fer (Bigot)). 

Rhagio costatus var. limbatus Leonard 1930, 
Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 7:96. (a synonym 
of R. costatus (Loew)). 


Rhagio pollinosus Leonard 1930, Mem. Am. 
Entomol. Soc. 7:116. 

Symphoromyia algens Leonard 1931, Am. Mus. 
Novitates 497:1. 

Symphoromyia currani Leonard 1931, Am. Mus. 
Novitates 497:2. 


Hymenoptera 


Mymaridae 

Anagrus ovijentatus Crosby & Leonard 1914, 
Can. Entomol. 46: 181 (now placed in the genus 
Anaphes Haliday). 

Gonatocerus ovicenatus Leonard & Crosby 1915, 
J. Econ. Entomol. 8:545 (now placed in the 
genus Lymaenon Haliday). 

Eulophidae 
- Tetrastichus ovipransus Crosby & Leonard 1917, 
Entomol. News. 28:368. 


Species Named in Honor of M. D. Leonard 


Acarina . 
Tarsonemidae 
Hemitarsonemus leonardi Smiley 1967 
Odonata 


Gomphidae 
Gomphus mortimer Needham 1943 (a synonym 
of G. descriptus Banks) 


Hemiptera-Homoptera 
Aphididae 
Calaphis leonardi Quednau 1971 
Uroleucon leonardi (Olive 1965) (described in 
Dactynotus) 


Coleoptera 


Mordellidae 
Mordellistena leonardi Ray 1946 


Diptera 


Tipulidae 
Rhabdomastix leonardi Alexander 1930 
Shannonomyia leonardi Alexander 1932 
Dolichopodidae ] 
Condylostylus leonardi (Van Duzee 1915) (de- 
scribed in Sciapus) 


Tachinidae 
Trochilodes leonardi (West 1925) (described in 
Rhamphina) 
Hymenoptera 
Scelionidae 
Trimorus leonardi Fouts 1948 
Platygasteridae 
Inostemma leonardi (Fouts 1925) (described in 
Acerota) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


M. D. Leonard: Membership in Scientific Societies 


American Association of Economic Ento- 
mologists, Elected 1911 

American Association for the Advance- 
ment of Science 

- Brooklyn Entomological Society, 1943 

Entomological Society of America, 1910 

Entomological Society of Japan, 1957 

Entomological Society of Washington, 
1921—E lected to Honorary Member- 
ship, February 1975 

Florida Entomological Society 

New York Entomological Society, 1921 

Sigma Xi, 1915 

Texas Entomological Society, 1933 
Washington Academy of Sciences, 1958 


Acknowledgments 


I am especially indebted to M. D. 
Leonard’s younger brother, Donald D. 
Leonard, now a resident of Spartan- 
burg, S. C., who kindly answered my 
numerous questions about Mort, sup- 
plied all photographs used in this paper, 
and read an early draft of the manu- 
script. C. P. Alexander, Amherst, 
Mass., and L. L. Pechuman, Depart- 
ment of Entomology, Cornell Univer- 
sity, supplied valuable information and 
also reviewed the manuscript. I appre- 
ciate permission to refer to conversa- 
tions or correspondence with: T. L. 
Bissell, Hyattsville, Md.; R. E. Ham- 
man, Greensboro, N. C.; R. H. Nelson, 
Mechanicsburg, Pa.; L. L. Pechuman; 
P. M. Schroeder, USDA-APHIS, 
Hyattsville, Md.; and Mrs. David Win- 
ters, Haddonfield, N. J. My colleagues 
at the Bureau of Plant Industry in the 
Pennsylvania Department of Agricul- 
ture, T. J. Henry and Karl Valley, 
kindly criticized the manuscript. 


References Cited 


Abbott, M. 1949. The life of William T. Davis. 
Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, N. Y. 321 p. 

Hottes, F. C., and T. H. Frison. 1931. The plant 
lice, or Aphiidae, of Illinois. Bull. Ill. Nat. Hist. 
Surv. 19: 121-447. 

Leonard, M. D. 1933. An annotated bibliography 
of Puerto Rican entomology. J. Dept. Agric. 
Puerto Rico 17: 1-96. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


1946. Victor Irving Safro, 1888-1944. 
J. Econ. Entomol. 38: 727-729. 


. 1957. How I became an entomologist. 
Nat. Agric. Chem. Assoc. News 15(5): 12-13. 


1958. The development of commercial 
entomology in the United States. Proc. 10th Int. 
Cong. Ent. 3: 99-106. 


. 1963. A list of the aphids of New York. 
Proc. Rochester Acad. Sci. 10: 289-428. 


. 1966. Natural history of Plummers Island, 
Maryland. XIX. Annotated list of the aphids 
(Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 
79: 117-126. 

Leonard, M. D., and R. I. Sailer. 1960. Harry 
Gardner Barber, 1871-1960. Proc. Entomol. Soc. 
Wash. 62: 125-129. 


Mallis, A. 1971. American entomologists. Rutgers 
Univ. Press, New Brunswick, N. J. 549 p. 


Osborn, H. 1946. Fragments of entomological 
history, Part II. Publ. by the author, Columbus, 
Ohio. 232 p. 


Pechuman, L. L. 1969. Recent gifts to the Cornell 
University Insect Collection. Entomol. News 
80: 43. 


Pierce, W. D. 1917. A manual of dangerous insects 
likely to be introduced in the United States 
through importations. USDA, Washington, D. C. 
256 p. 

Russell, L. M. 1975. Obituary, Mortimer D. Leon- 
ard, 1890-1975. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 
77: 505-507. 

Sanders, J. G. 1925. Entomologists entering com- 
mercial fields. J. Econ. Entomol. 18: 163 (Abstr.). 

Van Duzee, M. C. 1915. Descriptions of three 
new species of the dipterous genus Sciapus with 


a key to the North American species. Entomol. 
News 26: 17-26. 


Footnotes 


(1) Adjunct Assistant Professor of Entomology. 
The Pennsylvania State University, University 
Park, PA 16802. 

(2) Letter dated May 31, 1952, from F. L. Campbell 
to Committee on Admissions, Cosmos Club, 
Washington, D. C. 

(3) Letter dated February 27, 1978, from Donald 
D. Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 

(4) Letter dated January 27, 1977, from Donald 
D. Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 

(5) Letter dated January 18, 1978, from Donald 
D. Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 

(6) ‘““‘Why I Went to Cornell,’’ notes provided by 
M. D. Leonard, March 29, 1975, in a letter to 
E. H. Smith, Chairman, Department of Entomol- 
ogy, Cornell University; on file in Comstock 
Memorial Library, Cornell. 

(7) Letter dated January 7, 1977, from Charles P. 
Alexander to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 

(8) Interview with J. Chester Bradley, December 
18, 1962, by Gould P. Colman, Archivist, De- 
partment of Manuscripts and University Archives, 


73 


Cornell University; transcript on file in Com- 
stock Memorial Library, Cornell. 

(9) Personal communication with L. L. Pechuman, 
Department of Entomology, Cornell University. 

(10) Letter dated December 17, 1977, from T. L. 
Bissell to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 

(11) Personal communication with P. M. Schroeder, 
USDA-APHIS, PPQ, Hyattsville, Md. 

(12) Letter dated April 17, 1978, from Donald D. 
Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 

(13) Shell Chemical Agricultural News, New York, 
N. Y., August 1961. 

(14) Letter dated January 13, 1978, from Mrs. David 
Winters to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 

(15) Letter dated January 22, 1945, from M. D. 
Leonard to L. L. Pechuman. 

(16) Letter dated April 26, 1975, from M. D. Leon- 
ard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 


74 


(17) Letter dated July 30, 1975, from M. D. Leonard 
to L. L. Pechuman. 

(18) Personal communication with R. H. Nelson, 
Mechanicsburg, Pa. (formerly Executive Secre- 
tary, Entomological Society of America); see 
‘‘Autographa OO,’ inside front cover, Bull. 
Entomol. Soc. Am., Dec. 1968. 

(19) Personal communication with Robert E. Ham- 
man, Greensboro, N. C. 

(20) Personal communication with R. H. Nelson, 
Mechanicsburg, Pa. 

(21) Letter dated December 1, 1976, from Donald 
D. Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 

(22) Letter dated January 7, 1977, from Donald 
D. Leonard to A. G. Wheeler, Jr. 

(23) From Alumni Office records, Cornell Univer- 
sity, Ithaca, N. Y. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


RESEARCH REPORTS 


Contributions to the Ecology of the Cicada Killer, 
Sphecius speciosus (Hymenoptera: Sphecidae) 


Norman Lin 


1487 East 37th St., Brooklyn, New York 11234 


ABSTRACT 


The cicada killer Sphecius speciosus (Drury) emergence hole was linked to the wasp 
by a direct observation of an emergence. Wasps do not emerge via their burrows but 
tunnel directly from their cells to the surface. The fixed order of first emergences in 
the different populations appears related to the friableness of the soil. The harder the 
soil the later the emergence season begins. Males begin emerging before females, although 
there is considerable overlap. Males emerge from holes 10 mm and smaller and females 
emerge from holes 12 mm and larger. Holes of 11 mm are about one-half male and 
one-half female. The specific density or the total number of wasps over the tract inhabited 
by Population 1 was taken daily. The sex ratio of Population | was highly male biased, 
2:1 based on the specific density and 3:1 based on the total number of emergence holes. 
Sphecius in the Brooklyn area apparently had no natural enemies, and wasps died of 
old age. The female life span is approximately 30 days and the male life span is approxi- 
mately 15 days. 


Studies of four populations of the soli- emergence hole was definitely linked to 


tary wasp Sphecius speciosus (Drury) 
were conducted during the summer of 
1956-1963. The populations were desig- 
nated 1, 2, 3, and 4, inhabiting tracts on 
opposite sides of 2 adjacent baseball dia- 
monds in the Parade Grounds, a huge 
sandlot ball field area in Brooklyn, New 
York. Certain discrepancies uncovered 
in the literature concerning various as- 
_pects of the life history of the cicada killer 
are now reviewed in the light of new evi- 
dence. 


Direct Observation of Emergence 


The emergence hole was first described 
by Dambach and Good (1943) as the exit 
tunnel made by the young wasp in leaving 
the nest. It was also described as being 
nearly perpendicular to the surface. The 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


the wasp in 1958, when a direct observa- 
tion of emergence was made in popula- 
tion 1. On July 23, 1958, in the early after- 
noon, the surface of the ground suddenly 
broke in one spot, the wasp’s face was vis- 
ible, and after a minute’s struggle the young 
adult was on the surface. It was inactive 
for 2 or 3 seconds and then flew off. 


Description of the Emergence Hole 


In hundreds of holes noted, nearly all 
were perpendicular to the surface of the 
ground. They are circular in shape, and 
the 145 holes to appear in Population 1 
(1958) ranged from 6—16 mm in diameter 
at the surface with 10 mm being the mode 
diameter (N = 40). In depth they varied 
from 25 mm to 304 mm with more than 
half falling in the 76—203 mm range. The 

75 


hole whose formation was observed was 
88 mm deep and 10 mm in diameter. 


Place of Emergence 


Dambach and Good (1943) in their 
description of the nest found the burrow 
to be 30.4—45.7 cm in length from the 
entrance to the terminus where the first 
cell was excavated. A new cell was gen- 
erally made immediately in front of the 
one just completed. As many as 4 have 
been found in one series. After a cell or 
series of cells is completely provisioned, 
a new lateral off the main tunnel is exca- 
vated, and the process is repeated. 

Riley (1893) stated that the young wasp 
in leaving the nest passes through the 
burrow made by the female the year 
before. Considerable evidence to the 
contrary indicates that each wasp tunnels 
independently to the surface from its 
cell. The basis of this conclusion lies 
in the following evidence: 

1. Of a total of 145 emergence holes to 
appear in Population 1 in 1958, all but 7 
were more than 15.2 cm from a wire fence 
whose lower rim runs the length of the 
tract. Yet of the estimated 159 burrows 
dug in Population 1 in 1957, all but 13 
had their entrance within 15.2 cm of the 
fence, and the bulk of these were against 
it. The same general picture was noticed 
from 1956-1963. The burrows were dug 
along the fence near the edge of the tract 
while the wasps emerged further out on 
the tract. 

2. In Population 1| (1958) almost half of 
the emergence holes (44%) appeared 
within 3 days of another hole located 
not more than 35.6 cm away. Often holes 
appeared within centimeters of one 
another. 

3. The emergence holes come to the 
surface of the ground vertically, while 
the burrow entrances are inclined at 
angles of about 45°. 

4. In many years there was a much 
larger number of holes than of nests dug 
the previous year. For example, in Popu- 
lation 1 in 1960, there were 125 nests, 
yet these nests produced 939 emergence 
holes in 1961. 


76 


The different locations of the emer- 
gence holes and burrows are clearly ex- 
pected if the wasps tunnel directly from 
their cells to the surface, since the cells 
as indicated are a distance from the en- 
trance burrow. 

The appearance of clusters of emer- 
gence holes is also to be expected if 
wasps from the same nest emerge about 
the same time from separate tunnels, 
and if, as according to Dambach and 
Good (1943), cells are made in series. 
The vertical emergence hole need hardly 
be pointed out as obviously distinct from 
the comparatively gently sloping entrance 
of the nest burrow. 


Variations in the Emergence Period 


In 1957 in Population 1 the date of first 
emergence was June 30, and the date of 
first emergence of Population 2 was July 1. 
In 1958 in Populations 1, 2, 3, and 4, the 
dates of first emergence were July 15, 
July 24, July 31, and August 7, respec- 
tively. In 1958 in Populations 1, 2, 3, and 
4, the dates of last emergence were Sep- 
tember 1, September 1, September 1, and 
August 14, respectively. 

Seasonal fluctuations in the date of 
earliest emergence in a specific popula- 
tion can be quite large, with a difference 
of 23 days recorded between the first 
emergences in Population 2 during the 
years 1957 and 1958. When computed for 
different populations (1 and 4), a differ- 
ence as great as 38 days was obtained 
between 2 generations (1957-1958). 
Climatic conditions are not entirely re- 
sponsible for this fluctuation, since pop- 
ulations in the same field (1 and 4) under 
identical weather conditions can differ 
as much as 23 days in their date of first 
emergence during the same season (1958). 
This is hardly surprising, since a differ- 
ence as great as 48 days was recorded 
between the first and last emergence hole 
to appear in a single population (Popula- 
tion 1, 1958). The friableness of the soil 
in Population 1 and its greater hardness 
in other populations probably explain the 
nearly fixed order of first emergences 
among the populations (see Lin 1966 and 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


Lin (personal communication) in Evans, 
1966). 

Dambach and Good (1943) (in comput- 
ing the life span) considered the mean 
first date of adult life as July 1. By this 
they probably meant the date over a period 
of years which averaged the greatest 
number of emergences. This is apparently 
completely invalid for the Parade Ground 
populations during the summers 1957- 
1958, as the dates of first and last emer- 
gences show. In all cases there was only 
1 emergence hole for a given population 
on the dates of first and of last emergence. 


Emergence Time in Relation To Sex 


Considerable evidence indicates that 
the males generally emerge earlier than 
the females, although there is much over- 
lapping. As is well known, the female is 
usually larger than the male (Riley, 1893; 
Dow, 1942). Accordingly, the diameter 
of the emergence hole seems to provide 
a good index of the sex of the emerged 
individuals. As indicated, emergence 
holes varied from 6—16 mm in diameter 
(Population 1, 1958). It was subsequently 
found (1958-1967) that males emerge 
from holes 10 mm and smaller, and fe- 
males emerge from holes 12 mm and 
larger. Holes of 11 mm are about one- 
half male and one-half female. On July 27 
(Population 1, 1958) the first nest appeared. 
Only | hole which had yet appeared was 
as large as 12 mm, further supporting the 
view that holes 12 mm and larger were 
formed by females. 

Evidence of the relationship between 
the size of the emergence hole and the 
sex of the wasp is further shown in the 
following account. Of a total of 66 emer- 
gence holes appearing before July 28 
(Population 1, 1958), none was larger 
than 12 mm. On that date, 1 appeared 
which was 14mm. On July 29, 2 appeared 
which were 13 and 14 mm, and for the 
first time 2 females were seen. One very 
huge one, by far the largest wasp seen 
this season, was resting on a fence rail- 
ing in section 39, the same 3-m quadrat 
in which the 14 mm hole was located, 
while another very large female and a 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


50 


De} WwW bh 
[e) [e) {e) 


NUMBER OF EMERGENCE HOLES 


S 


WiS-T/25 1/29-8/4, 85-8 /ii 


DATE 


T22-7/28 8/i2- 8/18 8/19- 8/25 8/2-9/ 


Fig. 1.—Evidence of earlier male and later 
female emergence is shown by the generally earlier 
appearance of “‘male’’ holes (clear bars) and later 
appearance of ‘‘female’’ holes (shaded bars). 


male were flying around in copulo. Such 
a simultaneous appearance of large holes 
and large wasps on the same tract cer- 
tainly suggests that the relationship is 
not fortuitous and that the appearance 
of large holes provides an excellent indi- 
cation of the emergence of female wasps. 

Fig. 1 plots the weekly total of male 
emergence holes against female emer- 
gence holes (Population 1, 1958) begin- 
ning on July 15, the date of first emer- 
gence. It is evident that the male holes 
are more common, accelerate faster, 
peak and decline earlier than the female 
holes. While the male holes are on the 
decline during the week beginning July 
29, the female holes are in the peak stage. 
During the following week the decline of 
male holes was very sharp while the fe- 
male holes were still near their peak. On 
July 25, 1957 (Population 1), when the 
emergence holes were well into the de- 
cline, 10 of the total of 14 were 12 mm or 
larger. What the graph does not show is 
the earlier appearance of the male holes. 
The first male hole appeared on July 15 
and the first female hole on July 20. In 
that period before July 20, 11 male holes 
appeared. 

Of the total 145 emergence holes to 
appear in Population 1 in 1958, 35 were 
not included in the graph for various 
reasons such as not having been meas- 
ured because of their inaccessibility or 


WW. 


Table 1.—Specific density or the number of wasps present at a given time on the tract inhabitated by 
Population 1 in 1958. Every other date was deliberately omitted in the interests of condensing the table. 


Specific Number of Number of 
Date Time density females males Number unknown 
7/20 0910 1 0 1 0 
7/22 1803-2045 1 0 1 0 
7/24 0737-0858 3 0 3 0 
7/26 1520-1915 1 0 0 1 
7/28 1340-1530 4 0 3 1 
7/30 0821-1045 B) 0 6) 2 
8/1 1045-1105 9 0 4 =) 
8/3 1045-1215 9 lie 3 =) 
8/5 0845-1008 16 1 1 14 
8/7 1130-1145 9 {3 2 y | 
8/9 1355-1410 2 i 1 1 
8/11 1015—1050 6 Ze 2 4 
8/13 1000-1150 8 i? 0. 8 
8/15 0947-1430 D 1 3 3 
8/17 1845-2020 1 1 0 0 
8/19 1as2 1 1 0 0 
8/21 0950-1010 3 is |e ps 
8/23 1004-1140 3 2 0 1 
8/25 1115-1130 0 0 0 0 
8/27 1745-2003 3 3 0 0 
8/29 1540-1700 3 3 0 0 
8/31 1820 1 1 0 0 
9/2 1630-1930 1 1 0 0 
9/4 0800-0847 0 0 0 0 
9/6 1905-1955 1 1 0 0 
9/8 1040-1100 0 0 0 0 
9/10 1745-1830 0 0 0 0 
9/15 1820-1905 0 0 0 0 


@ = new nest or nests. 
> = found dying. 
© = paralyzed cicada. 


having been damaged. During the first 
and sixth weeks only 1 11-mm hole ap- 
peared, and it was not counted as either 
male or female. 

Daily sexing of living wasps, primarily 
on the basis of behavioral differences 
between the sexes, gives evidence in 
complete accord with that derived from 
the emergence holes. In the examination 
on 5 different dates (between July 30, 
1958 and August 15, 1958) of the sex of 
wasps engaging in territorial behavior, 
without exception all were males (see 
Lin, 1963). In territorial behavior, the 
male defends a small area, about 2.5 m?, 
against intruding males and conspicuous 
insects. These are chased from the area 
while the male continually returns to a 
usually localized spot (generally an emer- 
gence hole) within the territory. Terri- 


78 


torial behavior thus becomes a means for 
recognizing the male. The female is like- 
wise recognized by behavior such as the 
manner of flight, leaving or entering the 
nest, digging, or carrying a cicada to 
the nest. 


Specific Density 


Table 1 contains an exact, or nearly 
exact, determination of the specific den- 
sity (total number of wasps over or on 
the tract inhabitated by Population 1, 
1958) at any one point during the time 
listed. The specific density was deter- 
mined by total counts repeated several 
times after which the same sum was 
usually obtained. It is the large size of 
the wasp and its tendency for localiza- 
tion, whether the male around his terri- 
tory or the female around her nest, which 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


makes this most accurate of methods 
possible. On some occasions when the 
number of wasps was greatest, the high- 
est count with certainty that no wasp had 
been counted twice was taken as the 
density. The vertical bars on the fence 
broke the tract up into 51 3-m sections 
for a total of 153 m. 

During most determinations of the 
specific density, a number of wasps com- 
pletely at random (dependent on chance 
opportunity) were sexed, usually by 
behavioral determinations; sometimes by 
anatomical means consisting of body 
segment counts while in the field. As 
Table 1 shows, in complete agreement 
with the evidence from the emergence 
holes, the males appeared earlier, peaked 
earlier and declined earlier than the fe- 
males. In Population 1 (1957) the first 
male was recorded on July 3 and the last 
on July 25. The first female was recorded 
on July 14 and the last on Aug. 27. In 
Population 3 (1958) the first male was 
recorded on Aug. 4 and the last on Aug. 
23. The first female was recorded on 
Aug. 9 and the last on Sept. 3. Fig. 2, 
based upon data from Table 1 (including 
the data omitted to condense the table), 
with the exclusion of indirect signs, shows 
the weekly sex ratio for Population 1 
in 1958. It is readily seen that numbers 
of males are on the decline before the 
females reach their peak. The males then 
disappear entirely while the females are 
still present. This graph bears a striking 
resemblance in the relative number of 
males to females for any week to that of 
the relative number of male to female 
emergence holes the week before, as 
shown in Fig. 1. In later years it was 
found that the females rejoin the society 
about a week after emergence, and males 
spend considerably more time in their 
territories after about a week after emer- 
gence. During the week July 15—21, only 
male emergence holes appeared, with one 
exception. In the week beginning July 20 
only males were observed. In the week 
of July 22-28 there was an increase of 
female and male holes and in the follow- 
ing week the number of females relative 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


to males was about what might be antic- 
ipated from the emergence holes. To 
give a final instance, in the week of Au- 
gust 5-11, the male holes had greatly 
declined so that the numbers of male 
holes and female holes were almost equal. 
The situation was almost the same for 
the relative numbers of males and females 
for the following week. This similarity 
between the graphs has a basis if males 
emerge predominately from holes 10 mm 
and smaller while females emerge from 
those which are 12 mm and larger. This 
similarity is also based on the extensive 
marking data of later years showing that 
wasps habitat imprint to the tract from 
which they emerged. The inevitable con- 
clusion is that females were seen later in 
the season because they generally emerged 
later. Also, as will be shown, the female 
life span is approximately double the 
male life span. 


The Sex Ratio 


Dambach and Good (1943) in their 
review of the sex ratio gave the following 
account. “‘Of 25 adults emerging from 
stored larval cases, 15 were males and 
10 were females. Seven collected in Musk- 
higum County were females, and of speci- 
mens at Ohio State University and Ohio 
State Museum, 29 were males and 37 
were females. Denton (1931) obtained 13 
females and 7 males from a group of 20 
he collected from a colony on August 2, 
1930 at Robbinville, North Carolina. 
These collections totaling 128 specimens 
indicate a sex ratio of 70 females to 48 
males or 59.3% females to 40.7% males.”’ 
Only their data obtained from stored 
larval cases can be considered reliable. 
Dow (1942) likewise obtained a male 
biased ratio from adults (6 females and 
12 males) reared from 18 stored cocoons 
he collected. 

Dambach and Good’s (1943) method 
in determining the sex ratio is invalidated 
by their method of adding together the 
total males and females caught by dif- 
ferent observers from completely unre- 
lated populations. They failed to take into 
consideration such factors as the differ- 


79 


NUMBER OF WASPS 


Fig. 2.—The weekly sex ratio (males clear bars, 
females shaded bars) based only upon the number 
of wasps sexed in determinations of the specific 
density, shows considerable fluctuation. Absolute 
numbers between any 2 weeks should not be com- 
pared, since more determinations of specific density 
were made in some weeks than in others. 


ences in the time of emergence between 
the sexes, the longer active season of 
females, and the tendency of females to 
be present on the tracts the entire day, 
while the males seldom remain past the 
morning. To illustrate the former, if, as 
shown in Fig. 2 using Dambach and Good’s 
method, collecting was done in Popula- 
tion | between July 20 and July 26, the 
conclusion arrived at would be a popu- 
lation of 100% males. Conversely, if 
collections were made between August 
24 and September 6, the conclusion would 
be a population consisting of 100% fe- 
males. 

Lin and Michener (1972) state, ‘‘it 
seems that the evolution of the sex ratio 
depends more on the natural history of 
the species’’ in reference to male hap- 
loidy. According to White (1954) the 
entire order of Hymenoptera with the 
exception of a few species show haploid 
parthenogenesis. White states, “‘It is 
characteristic of groups with haploid 
males that the sex ratio fluctuates rather 
widely from species to species and from 
strain to strain within the species, and 
also to some extent with various environ- 
mental factors, showing no particular 
tendency to conform to any fixed percen- 
tage of males’’. Consequently the sex 


80 


ratio becomes meaningful only in terms 
of the population and even here seasonal 
fluctuations are likely to be considerable, 
so that separate determinations should 
be made for each season. 

In Population 1 (1958), 139 wasps were 
sexed during daily determinations of the 
specific density. A total of 121 wasps 
were not sexed although their behavior 
strongly suggested males. Only the wasps 
themselves, living or dead, were used 
in determining the sex ratio, since indi- 
rect evidence like new nests or paralyzed 
cicadas would obviously distort the pic- 
ture in favor of the female. Fig. 2 plots 
the weekly sex ratio, which is seen to 
vary considerably. By taking the sum 
total for all the weeks of the season, a 
seasonal ratio of 91 adult males to 48 adult 
females (65% males to 35% females) in 
the Population 1 area (1958) is obtained. 
The high male frequency suggests pos- 
sibly the easier recognition of the male 
behaviorly rather than so great a number 
of males. This possibility has been consi- 
dered, and it appears that this conclusion 
would be unwarranted. | 

Of the 110 emergence holes Fig. 1 
(Population 1, 1958) the ratio of male holes 
to female holes was 83 to 27 or 3:1. In 
1959 the ratio was 132 to 22 or 6:1, in 
1960, 137 to 45 or 3:1; in 1961, 630 to 212 
or 3:1; in 1962, 596 to 235 or 2.5:1; and in 
1963 293:to SSion ieee 


Adult Longevity and Mortality 


Dambach and Good (1943) consider 
July 1 and September | as the mean first 
and last dates of adult life and thus ap- 
proximate the life span of the adult to 
be 65 days. 

In 1956-58 dead and dying wasps were 
found on the tracts between August 3 and 
31. The dead wasps were in most cases 
in perfect condition. Though wasps were 
usually present in considerable numbers 
before August, out of a total of 20 dead 
or dying, none was found in July. There 
was in these cases no evidence of preda- 
tion though on the other hand the good 
condition of the dead wasps, the wasps 
found dying from no apparent outside 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


Table 2.—Adult S. speciosus longevity table. 


First emergence 


Year Location hole 
1957 Population 1 6/30 
1957 Population 1 6/30 
1957 Population 1 6/30 
1957 Population 1 6/30 
1957 Population | 6/30 
1958 Population 1 7/15 
1958 Population 1 TINS 
1958 Population 3 TEM 
1958 Population 3 7/31 
1958 Population 3 7/31 
1958 Population 3 7/31 
1958 Population 1 WLS 
1958 Population 1 aS 
1958 Population 1 TINS 
1958 Population 4 8/7 
1958 Population 1 Sy 
1958 Population 3 7/31 
1958 Population 1 7/15 
1958 Population 3 7/31 
1958 Population 2 7/24 


4 found dying. 


causes, and the period in which dead 
wasps were found, make it highly im- 
probable that death (at least in most 
cases) was due to anything other than 
old age. No natural predators of the adult 
cicada killer have been observed in Brook- 
lyn during the period of study. 

In 1957 the first emergence hole on the 
tract inhabitated by Population 1 ap- 
peared June 30. The last dead wasp on 
this tract was found on August 14, thus 
no wasp was older than 45 days. In 1958, 
the first emergence hole on the tract in- 
habited by Populations 1, 2, 3, and 4 ap- 
peared respectively July 15, 24, 31, and 
August 7. Table 2 gives the maximum 
age of wasps found on each tract. 

In 1958 in Populations 1—4, 32% or 
more of the emergences took place on or 
after August 1. It is these later emergences 
which probably account for wasps seen 
in late August or September. Dambach 
and Good (1943) were probably unaware 
of these later emergences (since mark- 
ing the emergence holes appears neces- 
sary), and attributed all wasps of the 
season to emergences in early July. 

Table 2 reveals a pattern with 3 excep- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


Maximum age 


Dead wasp of wasp 
found Sem (for population) 
8/4 g 35 days 
8/7 2 38 days 
8/8 eS 39 days 
8/9 2 40 days 
8/14 2 45 days 
8/3 va 19 days 
8/10 3 26 days 
8/11 63 11 days 
8/12 3 12 days 
8/13 3 13 days 
8/14 ? 14 days 
8/16 & 32 days 
8/18 & 34 days 
8/19 ? 35 days 
8/19 ? 12 days 
8/20 2 36 days 
8/23 ? 23 days 
8/23 ? 39 days 
8/24 ? 24 days 
8/31 2 38 days 


tions in which the maximum age of fe- 
males dying were in their 30’s. Males 
of which there were only 4 with 1 excep- 
tion of 26 days, were 11, 12 and 13 days 
of age. In later years, a number of males 
and females were captured and marked 
on emergence and followed daily for 
their entire lives. This highly precise 
data indicates that Table 2 is roughly 
correct. Males live about a maximum of 
15 days and females live a maximum of 
about 30—33 days. 


Acknowledgments 


I am indebted to Dr. Charles D. Mich- 
ener and Dr. Howard E. Evans for con- 
structive criticism of this paper. 


References Cited 


Dambach, C. A., and E. G. Good. 1943. Life history 
and habits of the cicada killer in Ohio. Ohio 
J. Sci. 43(1): 32-41, 6 fig. 

Denton, S. B. 1931. Habits of cicada killer. Bull. 
Brook. Entomol. Soc. 26: 35. 

Dow, Richard. 1942. The relation of the prey of 
Sphecius speciosus to the size and sex of the 
adult wasp. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 35(3): 
310-317, 4 fig. 


81 


Evans, H. E. 1966. The Comparative Ethology and 
Evolution of the Sand Wasps. Cambridge: 
Harvard University Press. 


Lin, N. 1963. Territorial behavior in the cicada 
killer wasp Sphecius speciosus (Drury) (Hy- 
menoptera: Sphecidae). Behaviour 20: 115-133. 


. 1966. Weather and the natural regulation 
of three populations of the cicada killer wasp, 


Sphecius speciosus. Amer. Zool. 6(3): abstract 
208. 

Riley, C. V. 1893. The larger digger wasp. Insect 
Life 4: 248-252. 

White, M. J. D. 1954. Animal Cytology and Evolu- 
tion. Cambridge University Press, pp. 326-338. 

Lin, N., and C. D. Michener. 1972. Evolution 
of sociality in insects. Quart. Rev. Biol. 47(2): 
131-159. 


Colaspis quattuordecimcostata Lefevre and Its Close 


Relatives in Brazil 


Doris H. Blake 


Research Associate, U. S. National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian 


Institution, Washington, D. C. 


ABSTRACT 


Colaspis quattuordecimcostata Lefévre is redescribed from the type specimen, and 
nine additional Brazilian species of Colaspis are described and figured. 


In my studies of the Chrysomelidae I 
have had difficulty in establishing the true 
identity of the species from Brazil de- 
scribed by Lefévre in 1887 as Colaspis 
quattuordecimcostata. My study of Lefé- 
vre’s type was made possible by Nicole 
Berti, who sent the holotype from the 
Natural History Museum in Paris for my 
examination. There are 9 closely related 
new species of Colaspis, all from Brazil, 
which I am describing in this paper. 


Colaspis quattuordecimcostata Lefévre 
(Fig. 1) 


Colaspis 14-costata Lefévre, 1887. Ann. Soc. Ent. 
France, 1887, p. 144-45. 


Length 11 mm. Width 4.3 mm. 
Oblong oval, shining black with mostly black 
antennae. 

Head black with fine punctures, interocular space 


half width of head, a medium depression down 


front, labrum dark brown, antennae with only joints 
2 and 3 pale. Prothorax twice as broad as long, 
margin with tooth below middle, disc with mod- 
erately dense punctures. Scutellum shining black. 


82 


Elytra a little more than 3 times as long as pro- 
thorax and wider, punctures in geminate rows 
except near suture where in single row and near 
the apex of second row, with well marked costae. 
Body beneath with blue-green lustre. Legs black, 
hind tibiae short and almost the same length as 
other tibiae. 


Holotype. —Female, Natural History 
Museum, Paris (from which I borrowed 
the type specimen and made a drawing). 

Type-locality. —Brazil. 

Remarks. —The most striking charac- 
ter in this species is the very short hind 
tibiae. 


Colaspis paracostata, n. sp. 
(Fig. 2) 


Length 8 mm. Width 4 mm. 

Elongate oblong oval, shining black with dark 
blue-black head and prothorax. 

Head with dense fine punctures, labrum brown. 
Interocular space a little more than half width of 
head, antennae with only third joint pale. Pro- 
thorax approximately twice as wide as long, margin 
with tooth below middle, disc sparsely punctate. 
Elytra more than 3 times as long as prothorax 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


—_——_ -*- 


and wider. Elytra with geminate punctures except 
near suture and at apex of next row with costae 
between rows. Body beneath shining blue-black. 
Prosternum with few punctures. Legs all black. 


Holotype —Female, USNM Type No. 
75744. 

Type-locality. —Brazil. 

Remarks.—This species so closely 
resembles C. guattuordecimcostata that 
I am naming it C. paracostata n. sp. It 
differs in having longer hind tibiae. 


Colaspis braxatibiae , n. sp. 
(Fig. 3) 


Length 8 mm. Width 4 mm. 

Very elongate oblong oval, black all over, an- 
tennae black. 

Head densely punctate with a depression down 
front, interocular space half width of head, anten- 
nae all black. Prothorax with margin having tooth 
below middle, disc with dense punctures, prothorax 
not twice as wide as long. Scutellum black. Elytra 
more than 3 times as long as prothorax and wider, 
so densely punctate that arrangement of punctures 
is not clear, but with tendency to be geminate, 
costae fairly well marked. Hind tibiae short. Pro- 
sternum with punctures. 


Holotype. —Female, USNM Type 


No. 75745. . 
Type-locality. —Curraliahe, Minas 
Gerais, Brazil. 
Remarks. —This species has unusually 
long elytra and short hind tibiae. 


Colaspis corumbensis, n. sp. 
(Fig. 4) 


Length 8 mm. Width 4 mm. 

Elongate oblong oval, black with green lustre. 
Antennae with four basal joints pale. 

Head small, interocular space less than half 
width of head, head rather sparsely punctate, 
antennae with seven apical joints dark. Prothorax 
approximately twice as wide as long, margin with 
tooth below middle, disc densely punctate. Scutel- 
lum black. Elytra more than 3 times as long as 
prothorax, and wider, with more or less geminate 
punctures when they are not in single lines sep- 
arated by costae. Hind tibiae rather short for so 
long a body, and with green lustre. 


Holotype.—Male, USNM Type No. 
75747. One paratype. 

Type-locality. —Corumba, 
Grosso, Brazil. 

Remarks. —The unusually small head 
and interocular space are noticeable for 


Mato 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


so large a beetle. The aedeagus has a long 
narrow tip. 


Colaspis ekraspedona, n. sp. 
(Fig. 5) 


Length 7.5 mm. Width 3.5 mm. 

Oblong oval, shining black, antennae and legs 
black. 

Head with interocular space more than half 
width of head, densely and finely punctate. Anten- 
nae all black. Prothorax with margin with tooth, 
disc very densely punctate. Elytra not 3 times as 
long as prothorax and somewhat wider, densely 
punctate, punctures in geminate rows except near 
suture, with costae near punctures. Body beneath 
with dense punctures on prosternum, dark brown, 
legs dark brown. 


Holotype. —Male, USNM type No. 
75748. 

Type-locality. —Lombory, Minas 
Gerais, Brazil, collected by J. Halix in 
November. 

Remarks. —The aedeagus of this spe- 
cies has an unusually broad tip and as a 
whole is longer than usual. The beetle 
itself is densely punctate. 


Colaspis lampomela, n. sp. 
(Fig. 6) 


Length 7 mm. Width. 3.5 mm. 

Elongate oblong oval, shining black with mostly 
black antennae, black legs, ventral surface very 
dark green. 

Head with interocular space more than half 
width of head, finely and densely punctate, anten- 
nae with only joint 2 entirely pale, joints 1, 3, 5, and 
6 partly pale, remainder black. Prothorax twice 
as wide as long, margin with tooth below middle, 
disc sparsely punctate with median elevations 
about punctures. Scutellum shining black. Elytra 
more than 3 times as long as prothorax and a little 
wider, densely punctate with geminate punctures 
except near suture and near apex, with costae 
between. Prosternum rather sparsely punctate. 
Ventral surface greenish black. Legs dark brown, 
nearly black. 


Holotype.—Female, USNM Type 
No. 75749. 

Type-locality. —Corotuba, Brazil. 
Collected Feb. 19, 1947. From Monros 
collection. 

Remarks.—Unfortunately the only 
specimen is a female. However, this spe- 
cies differs from all the others described 
here in having few punctures on the pro- 


thorax. 


83 


Figs. 1-10 (left to right, top to bottom), species of Colaspis. Fig. 1, Colaspis quattuordecimcostata 
Lefévre; fig. 2, C. paracostata Blake, n. sp.; fig. 3, C. braxatibiae Blake, n. sp.; fig. 4, C. corumbensis 
Blake, n. sp.; fig. 5, C. ekraspedona Blake, n. sp.; fig. 6, C. lampomela Blake, n. sp.; fig. 7, C. flavantenna 
Blake, n. sp.; fig. 8, C. purpurala Blake, n. sp.; fig. 9, C. manausa Blake, n. sp.; fig. 10, C. juxaoculus 


Blake, n. sp. 


Colaspis flavantenna, n. sp. 
(Fig. 7) 


Length 10.5 mm. Width 5.0 mm. 

Elongate oblong oval, dark brown, almost black, 
shining with a green lustre. Scutellum shining 
margins, legs dark brown, antennae pale. 

Head with interocular space half width of head, 
densely punctate, antennae all pale. Prothorax 


84 


twice as wide as long with margin having tooth 
below middle, disc rather irregularly punctate, 
shining with a green lustre. Scutellum shining 
with a dark green lustre. Elytra a little more than 
3 times as long as prothorax and somewhat wider, 
punctures mostly in geminate rows except near 
suture and apex, where they occur in single or 
sometimes alternate rows, costae between very 
conspicuous. Body beneath shining dark blue- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


green, prosternum punctate. Legs with femora 
dark above and all dark near tip, tibiae all dark. 
Aedeagus long and broad with tip very broad, and 
widening somewhat behind tip. 


Holotype.—Male, USNM Type No. 
75751. One female paratype. 

Type-locality. —not given (from Bow- 
ditch collection). 

Remarks.—This species is very like 
C. quattuordecimcostata but larger, with 
a larger head and longer hind tibiae. No 
locality is given, but the fact that it resem- 
bles so many of the group leads me to 
believe that it, too, may have been col- 
lected in Brazil. It is the only one of the 
group with yellow antennae, which dis- 

_ tinguishes it from the rest of the species. 
In addition, the aedeagus has an unusu- 
ally broad tip. 


Colaspis purpurala, n. sp. 
(Fig. 8) 


Length 9 mm. Width 4.5 mm. 

Very elongate oblong oval, black, elytra with 
a rosy lustre and sides with a green lustre, anten- 
nae all black. 

Head with interocular space half width of head, 
a median depression down front, finely and densely 
punctate, antennae all black. Prothorax approxi- 
mately twice as wide as long, margin with tooth 
below middle, disc densely punctate. Scutellum 
black. Elytra nearly 4 times as long as prothorax 
with geminate punctation becoming alternate and 
then in single row below middle, costae promi- 
nent. Body beneath blue green. Prosternum with 
few punctures. Legs long and black. 


USNM Type 


Holotype. — Female, 
INO: 75752. 

Type-locality.—Not given. 
Bowditch collection). 

Remarks .— A member of the quattuor- 
decimcostata group with unusually long 
elytra. It resembles C. brachytibiae, 
except that the legs are much longer. The 
Specimen on the pin bears the name ‘‘pur- 
' purala,’ a name I cannot find in any 
' catalogue. 


(from 


Colaspis manausa, Nn. sp. 
(Fig. 9) 


Length 10.5 mm. Width 5.7 mm. 
Elongate oblong oval, black shining with a green 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


lustre in the light, undersurface dark green, anten- 
nae with first 2 joints and up to the tip of third 
joint pale, joint 4 all dark, remainder missing. 

Head densely and finely punctate, a median 
depression down front, interocular space less than 
half width of head, labrum dark. Prothorax nearly 
twice as wide as long, margin with prominent tooth 
below middle, disc irregularly punctate with many 
bare spaces. Scutellum shining black. Elytra not 
3 times as long as prothorax and wider, with punc- 
tures somewhat irregular but tending to be gemi- 
nate, becoming single near suture and apex, costae 
between prominent. Body beneath dark green, 
prosternum with deep punctures. Femora near body 
dark green, becoming dark brown before end, 
tibiae dark brown, almost black. 


Holotype.— Female, 
No. 75753. 

Type locality. —Manaus, Brazil. 

Remarks. —This species appears black 
except in bright light, where it has a green 
lustre all over body. The interocular 
space is less than half the width of the 
head, in this feature resembling C. corom- 
bensis which is unusual in this group. It 
is also like C. flavantenna except that the 
antennae are not completely pale. 


USNM Type 


Colaspis juxaoculus, n. sp. 
(Fig. 10) 


Length 11 mm. Width 4.6 mm. 

Elongate oblong oval, shining black. 

Head with interocular space half width of head, 
densely punctate, antennae with first joint dark 
from above, joints 2 and 3 pale, remainder missing. 
Prothorax twice as wide as long with margin having 
a tooth below middle, disc densely punctate. Scutel- 
lum shining black. Elytra more than 3 times as long 
as prothorax and wider, with geminate punctures 
except near suture and apex of next row, where 
punctures are in single line. Legs and ventral sur- 
face black, mesosternum without punctures. 


Holotype.—Female, USNM Type No. 
75754. 

Type locality. —Brazil. 

Remarks. —This beetle bears the label 
‘‘Colaspis 14-costata Lefévre,’’ and it is 
very close to Lefévre’s species, with the 
difference that the hind tibiae of C. quat- 
tuordecimcostata are very short and the 
hind tibiae of C. juxaoculus are much 
longer than those of the former. 


85 


ACADEMY AFFAIRS 


SCIENTISTS IN THE NEWS 


Contributions in this section of your Journal are earnestly solicited. 
They should be typed double-spaced and sent to the Editor three 
months preceding the issue for which they are intended. 


NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY 


Dr. Isabella Karle has been elected to 
the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). 
She is the only female physical chemist 
in the Academy. Her husband, Dr. 
Jerome Karle, also a physical chemist at 
NRL, was elected to the Academy two 
years ago. The Karles are one of the few 
husband-wife teams elected to the 
Academy. 


The National Academy of Sciences, a 
private organization of eminent scientists 
and engineers dedicated to the ‘‘further- 
ance of science and its use for the general 


welfare,’’ was established in 1863 by a 


Congressional Act of Incorporation 
signed by President Lincoln. The 
Academy is frequently called upon to 
act as an official adviser to the Federal 


Jerome and Isabella Karle 


86 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


4 


government in matters of science or 
technology. 

Mrs. Karle, a native of Detroit, Michi- 
gan, joined the NRL staff in 1946 and 
holds BS and MS degrees in Chemistry 
and a PhD in Physical Chemistry, all from 
the University of Michigan. She heads 
NRL’s X-ray Analysis Section in the 
Laboratory for Structure of Matter. Ever 
since Mrs. Karle developed the.symbolic 
addition method of determining molecular 


_ structures directly from x-ray diffraction 


experiments 15 years ago, she has con- 
tinued to make significant contributions 


in crystallography by her analyses of 


important materials particularly of in- 


_ terest in organic and biological chemistry. 
_ Mrs. Karle has gained world-wide recog- 
_ nition for her work in this field. 


Dr. Jerome Karle, Chief Scientist of 


_NRL’s Laboratory for Structure of 


Matter, was elected to the Academy in 
1976, at which time he was also named 
recipient of the 1976 Captain Robert 
Dexter Conrad Award for Scientific 
Achievement, the highest recognition the 
Navy can bestow on any of its scientists 
engaged in Naval R & D. 

Mrs. Karle has been active in teaching, 
training many postdoctoral students in 
new analytical techniques. She and her 
husband are members of several scientific 
associations, including the American 
Chemical Society, the American Physical 
Society, the American Crystallographic 
Association, the Biophysical Society and 
the Washington Academy of Sciences. 

The Karles live in Falls Church, Va. 
They have three daughters, Madeleine, 
Jean and Louise. Madeleine is a graduate 
of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute & 
State University. Jean, Louise and 
Louise’s husband, Jonathan Hanson, 
have earned PhDs in Chemistry. 

Drs. Ming-Chang Lin and George Sigel, 
Jr. are the 1978 recipients of the Pure 
Science and Applied Science awards 
from the Naval Research Laboratory’s 
Chapter of Sigma Xi, the Scientific 
Research Society of North America. 

Each year the NRL chapter presents 
awards to two outstanding NRL scientists 
who have made distinguished contribu- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


Ming-Chang Lin 


tions to pure science and applied science 
while conducting research at the Labora- 
tory. These awards are in keeping with 
the objective of the chapter, which is to 
encourage investigation in pure and 
applied science, and to promote the spirit 
of scientific research at NRL. 

Lin was cited for his discovery of the 
first chemical Transverse Electric-dis- 
charge Atmospheric (TEA) laser and its 
application to chemical systems. He is 
also noted for his discovery of numerous 
new chemical laser reactions, for his 
pioneering research in laser-accelerated 
chemical reactions and ‘‘for furthering 
our knowledge of chemical reaction 
mechanisms.”’ 

Sigel was recognized for providing new 
insights concerning the optical properties 
of oxide glasses, their atomic defect 
structures and their response to ionizing 
radiation, and for applying this knowl- 
edge to the selection and development of 
radiation resistant optical fibers for 
military data links. 

Lin, a research chemist, joined the 


87 


George Sigel, Jr. 


NRL staff in 1970. He received his BS 
from Taiwan National Normal University 
in 1959 and his PhD degree from the 
University of Ottawa, Canada, in 1965. 
He has authored or co-authored over 140 
technical papers and scientific presenta- 
tions in the area of chemical kinetics 
and lasers. He is a member of several 
technical societies and organizations and 
was the recipient of the 1975 Hillebrand 
Prize from the American Chemical So- 
ciety of Washington, D. C., and the 1976 
Physical Sciences Award of the Wash- 
ington Academy of Sciences. He lives 
with his wife, Judy, and their three 
children, Karen, 11, Ellena, 7, and Linus, 
10, in Oxon Hill, Md. 

Sigel, who is aresearch physicist, came 
to NRL in 1966, working in the areas of 
glassy materials and radiation damage in 
glasses. He received his BS in physics 
from St. Joseph’s College in Philadelphia, 
Pa. and his MS and PhD degrees in 
physics from Georgetown University in 
Washington, D. C. He is a member of 
the American Physical Society and the 
American Ceramic Society and has 
served as the Chairman of the Tri- 
Service Working Group on Radiation 
Effects in Optical Fibers. He has authored 
or co-authored over 50 technical papers 
in the area of glasses. Sigel lives with 


88 


his wife, Jean, and their two children, 
Bobby, 9, and Laura, 7, in Great 
Falls, Va. 

Dr. Theodore A. Jacobs, former Super- 
intendent of the Optical Sciences Divi- 
sion at the Naval Research Laboratory, 
has been appointed an Associate Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of the Navy in the 
Office of Research and Advanced Tech- 
nology. Prior to his employment at NRL 
in 1976, Dr. Jacobs had served in high 
level positions for the TRW Corporation, 
Aerospace Corporation, California In- 
stitute of Technology, Rocketdyne Divi- 
sion of North American Aviation and 
Douglas Aircraft Company. He was a 
research associate and lecturer in me- 
chanical engineering at the University of 


Southern California in the late 1950s. Dr. ~ 


Jacobs has held formal Defense Depart- 
ment appointments to the Army Missile 
Command Scientific Advisory Group, 
Defense Intelligence Agency Scientific 
Advisory Committee, and the Chief of 
Naval Operations. A native of Atlanta, 
Georgia, Dr. Jacobs holds an A.B. degree 
in chemistry from Emory University in 
Georgia, an M.S. in mechanical engineer- 


Theodore A. Jacobs 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


ing from the University of Southern 
California and a Ph.D. in engineering 


} and chemistry from the California In- 


stitute of Technology. He is a member 
of numerous professional and scientific 


| societies, and holds one U. S. patent and 


has another pending. 
In a change of command ceremonies 


| held at the Naval Research Laboratory, 


Navy Captain Edward E. (Buzz) Henifin 
became the new NRL Commanding 
Officer on July 31, 1978. He relieved 


_ Captain Lionel M. Noel, who is retiring 


from the Navy. Captain Noel has been 
Commanding Officer of NRL since June, 
1976. Prior to his new assignment, Capt. 


-Henifin served as Deputy Director of 


Navy Technology. 

Capt. Henifin was born in Madison, 
South Dakota, August 23rd, 1931. He was 
graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy 
and commissioned an Ensign in June 
1954. He served aboard the USS THE 
SULLIVANS (DD-537) before volunteer- 
ing for submarine duty. Following duty 
aboard HARDHEAD and BARBEL, 
Captain Henifin attended post-graduate 
school at the University of Washington, 
receiving a BA in Physical Oceanography 
in 1962. He then served aboard the USS 
ALBACORE (AGSS-569) in’ various 
Capacities including Executive Officer. 
During this tour in 1963, Captain Henifin, 
on an additional duty assignment, par- 
ticipated in the search for the USS 
THRESHER. His next assignments were 
as Officer in Charge of the BATHY- 
SCAPH TRIESTE II and then Command- 
ing Officer USS POMFRET (SS-391), 
followed by an extended tour in the 
Deep Submergence Program Coordi- 
nators Office. In 1975 Captain Henifin 
reported to the Naval Material Command 
Headquarters and served as the Deputy 
Director of Navy Laboratories. He 
moved to the Deputy Director of Navy 
Technology billet in February of 1977. 

Captain Henifin is a designated Deep 
Submergence Vehicle Operator and a 
designated subspecialist in Oceanog- 
raphy. He was awarded the Navy 
Achievement Medal for his performance 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


ID 


a 


Edward E. Henefin 


aboard TRIESTE II and the Meri- 
torious Service Medal for the planning 
of and participation in deep submergence 
operations in 1971. Additionally, he is 
authorized to wear the Navy Unit 
Commendation Ribbon for participation 
in the THRESHER search, and in the 
Palomares bomb search in 1966. 

Captain Henifin is married to the 
former Elisabeth Phillips of Drexel Hill, 
Pennsylvania. The Henifins have three 
children, Ann, David and Edward, and 
reside in Alexandria, Virginia. 

Dr. Richard Tousey, a space scientist 
at the Naval Research Laboratory since 
1941 and the physicist credited with 
pioneering NRL’s rocket spectroscopy 
research, was honored with a seminar 
on solar radiation prior to his official 
retirement from the Laboratory on June 
30. He is widely recognized throughout 
the scientific community for his out- 
standing leadership in solar spectroscopy 
investigations and was the principal 
investigator for four successful solar 
experiments carried out by astronauts 
aboard the Skylab space station in 
1973-74. Dr. Tousey’s experiments 
aboard Skylab provided a wealth of new 


89 


Richard Tousey 


data on the physics of the sun, and color 
enhanced photos of solar activity taken 
by his instruments have been appearing 
in scientific journals and popular 
astronomy magazines throughout the 
world ever since. 

The retiring NRL scientist received his 
doctorate in physics from Harvard in 
1933, and from 1935 until his employ- 
ment at NRL in 1941, he was a research 
instructor at Tufts University, . . . the 
school that granted him an honorary 
D.Sc. degree in 1961. 

Appropriately enough, Dr. Tousey 
began his Navy career at NRL by 
initiating a program of upper atmosphere 
research to investigate the brightness of 
the sky and the visibility of the stars 
from aircraft in the daytime. In addition, 
Dr. Tousey headed the investigations into 
the fields of vision and atmospheric 
optics during World War II and received 
the Meritorious Civilian Service Award 
in 1945 for the design and development 
of a reflector gun sight for the Navy. In 
1946 he began a series of experiments 
from high-altitude probes using captured 
German rockets with his spectrograph 
instrumentation aboard them. This en- 
abled him to obtain the first detailed 


record of the sun’s radiation in the far .— 


ultraviolet region and extreme short 
wavelengths that are otherwise hidden to 
an observer because of the absorption 
of the atmosphere. 

His upper atmospheric research from 
rockets resulted in the first extension of 
the solar spectrum into the ultraviolet, 
high resolution solar extreme ultraviolet 
spectra, the discovery of many emission 
lines in the ultraviolet spectrum of the 
sun, the determination of the profile of the 
Lyman alpha line of hydrogen, and the 
direct measurement of the altitude of 
several night airglow emissions. During 
the late 1950’s, Dr. Tousey also directed 
an NRL program of research on the 
visibility of earth satellites and was a 


member of the Science Program Com- - 


mittee of Project Vanguard. (Inciden- 
tally, the Navy’s Vanguard satellite 
launched in 1958 is still traveling in space 
and is now the oldest man-made satellite 
in orbit. It is expected to be in orbit 
for about 400 years.) 

Among his awards are the 1959 Progress 
Medal of the Photographic Society of 
America, the Frederick Ives Medal of the 
Optical Society of America for 1960, 
the Prix Ancel of the Societe Francaise 
de Photographie in 1962, the Draper 
Medal for investigations in astronomical 
physics and the NASA Medal for Excep- 
tional Scientific Achievement. 

Dr. Tousey is a member of many 
professional associations, including the 
National Academy of Sciences and the 
International Academy of Astronautics; 
and he is a fellow of the American 
Physical Society, the Optical Society of 
America, and the American Geophysical 
Union. His publications include some 
200 papers. 

Lendell E. Steele, associate super- 
intendent of the Materials Science and 
Technology Division and head of the 
Thermostructural Materials Branch, has 
been named a recipient of the Award of 
Merit by the American Society for Test- 
ing and Materials (ASTM). Steele re- 
ceived the award from ASTM President 
William A. McAdams during ceremonies 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, No. 2, 1978 


hosted by ASTM Standing Committee 
on Standards in Boston on 30 June 1978. 
| Steele was cited for ‘‘distinguished 
| service rendered in encouraging the 
transfer of research results to technology, 


furthering ASTM Committee E-10 on 
Nuclear Technologies and Applications 
goals and redirecting E-10 activities to a 
broader nuclear area, and leadership of 
the Committee on Standards.’’ 


OBITUARIES 


Samuel B. Detwiler, Jr. 


Samuel Bertolet Detwiler, Jr., a retired 
| research administrator, U. S. Depart- 
| ment of Agriculture, died in the Sleepy 
' Hollow Nursing Home, Fairfax, after a 
' long illness following a heart attack 
| in 1973. He lived on Walter Reed Drive 
- in Arlington. 

Born in Wabasha, Minn. in 1909, son of 
Samuel B. and Kate E. Detwiler, he 
attended public schools in Arlington, the 
old Western High School in Georgetown, 
and received a BS degree in chemistry 
in 1934 from the George Washington 
University while working as a laboratory 
assistant at the National Bureau of 
Standards, then located at Connecticut 
Avenue and Van Ness Street. He was 
awarded an MA degree in organic 
chemistry by the University of Illinois 
in 1941. He served as research chemist 
at the USDA Regional Soybean Industrial 
Products Laboratory in Urbana, IIl., 
where his work helped lay the ground- 
work for the emergence of the soybean 
as the primary source of vegetable oil 
for shortenings and margarine in the 
United States. The Urbana laboratory 
was the prototype for a number of larger 
USDA laboratories, later established, 
dedicated to discovering new and wider 
uses for U. S. farm products. In 1944 
he returned to the Washington area proj- 
ect officer of the Bureau of Agricultural 
and Industrial Chemistry, USDA, and 
became Assistant to the Administrator of 
the Agricultural Research Service in 
1958, a position he held until his retire- 
ment in 1972. In the latter capacity he 
was intimately involved in the direction 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


of agricultural research in foreign uni- 
versities supported by proceeds from the 
sale of surplus U. S. agricultural com- 
modities abroad. His official travels took 
him to most of the countries of Western 
Europe, Israel, and India. During the past 
several years he served as research 
associate with the Federation of Ameri- 
can Societies for Experimental Biology, 
Bethesda. He was author of many 
scientific articles on chemistry and 
research administration. 

He was manager, councilor, treasurer, 
and secretary of the Chemical Society 
of Washington and editor of its publica- 
tion, the Capital Chemist. Mr. Detwiler 
received the Honor Scroll of the Ameri- 
can Institute of Chemists and the Public 
Service Award of the Chemical Society of 
Washington. He was a member of the 
American Chemical Society, the Ameri- 
can Institute of Chemists, the American 
Oil Chemists’ Society, Alpha Chi Sigma, 
Phi Sigma Kappa, Omicron Delta Kappa, 
and the Cosmos Club. He was life 
member of the Hugenot Society of Penn- 
sylvania. Among his many interests, 
any of which could have become a second 
vocation, were photography, military 
history, music, genealogy, mathematics, 
firearms, farming, and boating. 

For a number of years Mr. Detwiler 
was a Fellow of the Washington Academy 
of Sciences. As editor of the Academy 
Journal in the recent past, he abundantly 
demonstrated his love and regard for his 
fellow scientists by the meticulous atten- 
tion he devoted to promoting that activity. 
He also served in a number of offices in 
the Academy during his association with 
that organization. 


91 


Theodor C. von Brand 


Dr. Theodor C. von Brand, 78, a 
retired physiologist and parasitologist 
for the National Institutes of Health 
and a former president of the American 
Society of Parasitologists, died on July 
18, 1978 in Suburban Hospital after a 
heart attack. Von Brand was head of the 
physiology and biochemistry section of 
the parasitic diseases laboratory of the 
National Institute of Allergy and Infec- 
tious Diseases from 1947 until he retired 
from NIH in 1969. He was known inter- 
nationally for his work in invertebrate 
physiology and biochemistry. 

He was amember of many professional 
organizations and was on the expert 
advisory panel on parasitic diseases of 
the World Health Organization. At his 
retirement he was presented the Superior 
Service Honor Award of the Department 
of Health, Education and Welfare for 
‘‘meritorious research on the chemical 
composition and metabolism of para- 
Sites.” 

Dr. von Brand was a true pioneer in the 


92 


field of parasite physiology and bio- 
chemistry. It can be said with justifica- 
tion that he single-handedly through his 


research and scholarship founded and | 
developed this area of parasitology in this | 


country. His intellect, immense scholar- | 
ship and productivity enabled him to be- | 
come the author of more than 200 papers © 


and 6 textbooks. 


Although he was _ 


mandatorily retired at age 70 from the | 


NIH in 1969, he continued to be active 


until the end. His latest textbook will be | 


published this autumn. 

A native of Ortenberg, 
von Brand received a Ph.D. in zoology 
from the University of Munich and a 


Germany, | 


M.D. from the University of Erlangen. | 


After immigrating to the United States — 
in 1936 he was a research fellow at Johns 
Hopkins University’s school of hygiene. — 
He also taught at Barat College in — 


Illinois and at Catholic University before © 


joining the NIH staff in 1946. 

He leaves his wife, Margarethe, at the 
home on Hempstead Avenue in Bethesda; 
a son, Theodor P., of Bethesda; a sister 
and three grandchildren. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 2, 1978 


er OP er Be oh, 


JOURNAL OF THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 


| 
Seneral 
Type manuscripts on white bond paper 


sither 8% by 11 or 8 by 10% inches. Double 
|ypace all lines, including those in abstracts, 


‘ables, legends, quoted matter, acknowledg- 
ments, and references cited. Number pages 
sonsecutively. Place your name and com- 
plete address in the upper right hand corner 
of the title page. 


Title, Author, and Affiliation 
_ Page | of your manuscript should contain 
only this information and your name and 


}address. Choose a concise but complete and 


meaningful title. In research papers con- 
cerning biological subjects, include an indi- 
cation of the order and family of the taxa 


discussed. Academic degrees will not nor- 


mally be included unless the author so 
specifies. If possible, combine your affilia- 
tion and mailing address (including Zip) so 
that readers can write to you directly. 


Abstract 

| Type on a separate sheet at the end of the 
pimaniuscript. Make the abstract intelligible 
without reference to the text of the paper. 
Write an informative digest of the significant 
content and conclusions, not a mere descrip- 
tion. Generally, the abstract should not ex- 


ceed 3% of the text. 


Footnotes 

| Use footnotes as sparingly as possible. 
Number text footnotes consecutively with 
Arabic numerals and type them on a sepa- 
rate sheet of paper at the end of the manu- 
script. Type table footnotes, if any, below 
each pertinent table on the same page. 


' Illustrations and Legends 


| The quality of all original illustrations 


must be high enough to facilitate good offset 
reproduction. They should have ample mar- 
gins and be drawn on heavy stock or 
fastened to stiff cardboard to prevent bend- 
ing. They should be proportioned to column 
{1 x 3) or page (2 x 3) type-dimensions, 
leaving space for legend material. Photo- 


Instructions to Contributors 


graphs should have a glossy finish. They re- 
produce best when the contrast is fairly 
high. Identify each illustration with number 
and author in light pencil marks on the 
reverse side. Submit all illustrations sepa- 
rately — please do not glue or clip them to 
the pages of the manuscript. 

Do not type or write legends directly on 
the illustrations. Type legends on a separate 
sheet or sheets at the end of the manuscript. 
Indicate where you want illustrations to 
appear in the printed paper by writing the 
figure numbers lightly in the text margins, 
and be sure that each figure is properly re- 
ferenced in the text itself. Original “‘art” will 
be returned only at the author’s request and 
expense. 


Tables 

Include tables only when the same infor- 
mation cannot be presented economically in 
the text, or when a table presents the data in 
a more meaningful way. Consider preparing 
extremely complicated tabular matter in a 
form suitable for direct reproduction as an 
illustration. In such cases, the use of the 
typewriter is not recommended. 


References to Literature 

Limit references within the text and in 
synonymies to author and year (and page if 
needed). In a “Reference Cited” section, list 
alphabetically by senior author only those 
papers you have included in the text. Like- 
wise, be sure all the text references are 
listed. Type the “References Cited” section 
on a separate sheet after the last page of 
text. Abbreviations should follow the USA 
Standard for Periodical Title Abbreviations, 
Z39.5-1963. 


Submission of Manuscripts 

Send completed manuscripts and sup- 
porting material to the Academy office (see 
address inside front cover) in care of the 
Editor. Authors will be requested to read 
Xerox “proofs” and invited to submit re- 
print orders prior to publication. 


Reprints - Prices for reprints may be obtained on request. 


Washington Academy of Sciences 
9650 Rockville Pike (Bethesda) 
Washington, D.C. 20014 

Return Requested with Form 3579 


2nd Class Postage Pai d 
at Washington, D.C 
and additional mailing offices. 


VOLUME 68 
Number 3 


| Journal of the SEPTEMBER, 1978 


Issued Quarterly 
at Washington, D.C. 


Directory Issue 


CONTENTS 


Directory, 1978: 


Mitceminpol Whe ACAGEMY 2366220. 6 sce eee oe hee se co ewe 


Alphabetical MSU Pw ee ysis a dk i eo a aa ena seemes 


Washington Academy of Sciences 


Founded in 1898 


EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 


President 
Mary H. Aldridge 


President-Elect 
Alfred Weissler 


Secretary 
James F. Goff 


Treasurer 
Nelson W. Rupp 


Members at Large 
Conrad B. Link 
Elaine Shafrin 


BOARD OF MANAGERS 


All delegates of affiliated 
Societies (see facing page) 


EDITOR 


Richard H. Foote 


EDITORIAL ASSISTANT 


Elizabeth Ostaggi 


ACADEMY OFFICE 


9650 Rockville Pike 
Bethesda, MD. 20014 
Telephone: (301) 530-1402 


The Journal 


This journal, the official organ of the Washington Acad- 
emy of Sciences, publishes historical articles, critical 
reviews, and scholarly scientific articles; proceedings 
of meetings of the Academy and its Board of Mana- 
gers; and other items of interest to Academy members. 
The Journal appears four times a year (March, June, 
September, and December)—the September issue 
contains a directory of the Academy membership. 


Subscription Rates 


Members, fellows, and patrons in good standing re- - 
ceive the Journal without charge. Subscriptions are 
available on a calendar year basis only, payable in ad- 
vance. Payment must be made in U.S. currency at the 
following rates: 


U.S. and Canada....... $17.00 
FP OLEIRM sew din covese.oe ae os 18.50 
Single Copy Price ...... 6.00 


Single-copy price for Vol. 66, No. 1 (March, 1976) 
is $7.50. 


Back Issues 


Obtainable from the Academy office (address at bot- 
tom of opposite column): Proceedings: Vols. 1-13 
(1898-1910) Index: To Vols. 1-13 of the Proceedings 
and Vols. 1—40 of the Journal Journal: Back issues, 
volumes, and sets (Vols. 1-62, 1911-1972) and all cur- 
rent issues. 


Claims for Missing Numbers 


Claims will not be allowed if received more than 60 
days after date of mailing plus time normally required 
for postal delivery and claim. No claims will be al- | 
lowed because of failure to notify the Academy of a 
change in address. 


Change of Address 


Address changes should be sent promptly to the Acad- 
emy office. Such notification should show both old 
and new addresses and zip number. 


Published quarterly in March, June, September, and December of each year by the 
Washington Academy of Sciences, 9650 Rockville Pike, Washington, D.C. Second class 
postage paid at Washington, D.C. and additional mailing offices. 


DELEGATES TO THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 
REPRESENTING THE LOCAL AFFILIATED SOCIETIES 


Eimmsemsnical-SOcCIeLY OF WaSMINGION) 55/0). .0006 ln ee e as os See esc e eae wee eae ee wee ole James F. Goff 
PMMTMreOrical SOCIELY Ol WaSMiMetON: 605 00) 4g .ecoe ete ts ee ae vis eevee dee eee ne wees Jean K. Boek 
Sue TE SCICEVEOL NVASHINGLOM: «252: she) oi5. es) Reeso ia ce 5265 yegeh oe idaci ith loys a leds ny AiaeelS doak woe William R. Heyer 
Bema cicty Ob) Washington! ".7...\22). 24... ole ae be ee ee Res Delegate not appointed 
Pac SOCIcIY Of Washington .:..5 5s 2 icc cae seals t fede wt le ween s Oe Maynard Ramsay 
Se ASR PRAT Ce SOUL CO a osc Blois as Shey ashes tet mx akon a celia, a aseinue revere, = OMe, ease tare wee © T. Dale Stewart 
Pe eie AS GCICly Ol WasmingtOM in)Pesh oie oe ee ec bede edad oe ate ceca Delegate not appointed 
mete mcieiycor the Disthict of Columbia. 5... 6.22). oe cic oa snc ole ge ede ee cae decd ucwewe ees Inactive 
7 LER TTS, SUAS ICIRIGALIS OTTER ea enone et Paul H. Oehser 
PLM OMLILIN OM NV ASHINGLON 2... a. fe nears ceo ok fee ata e ble as bese ate se as Conrad B. Link 
ee aH TECH AM) MOLCSLCES | 05 oagsjnie s)sco. sie asad doe coe ew elare oe salt oe eae ee ea Thomas B. Glazebrook 
ae OCICINGOU FNPITCCES. soccisa. is = 2 ectysu AG aus aoe jets SM Annus Baye WEIS a a2 Bel arne oe George Abraham 
Mamecmaricctticaland Electronics’ Engineers... 05. 26s se0 . ed Pek a a George Abraham 
Pmcneamoucicty Of Mechanical ENQINEErs .... oso. ek ee dc obs t ce evoke ee weasceaene Michael Chi 
a PeminenOlOPical Society Of Washington -. 2... i.e ce nese eee caw ea set ees Robert S. Isenstein 
eee SIC IR Ols MICTOULOIONY, 2 Me. eee edn a a6 een sie viele no dale G oo ele g-ehbie cs Siadeerdls Michael Pelzcar 
Paine Mei winetican Military ENGINEERS 9... 6... e ck cae eee eee en neeweneceeees H. P. Demuth 
4 SLE GED SOCE Cel Cia a) SN i0oT (ce) nei ee Robert Sorenson 
MmEmemmonexpenmental Biology and Medicine... 2.0.2.2. le et ee eee ene Donald Flick 
Pe MESO IC I Om NMCIAIS (265 Ute EME as ai. as he a ede aaa ee aha we se Glen W. Wensch 
armavienal Association of Dental Research ... 2.20.22. ee ce ee eee William V. Loebenstein 
minvenean Institute of Acronautics and Astronautics .............060.c0 ces eeceeecsaes George J. Vila 
PEAS SIC OL OIG PICA SOCICLY fay oiayc)- Is So ce ee eases bas bed eee see neeee A. James Wagner 
PP IAC SOCICIYIOl WASHINGTON (0... on2 ce hate kl asa se sate ca seta te se dea bas Robert J. Argauer 
PESEE AES OCICIN OL AMONCA Ye i einpn ME 5 acini © ahapeyeiZya se mae Be eoielel bie e eeheads 5 Delegate not appointed 
ee ee ABC ATES OIE LY P58), 2 SP ye Ne eae a ease eke is ALS 6 oad edness ela Sa auelo Dick Duffey 
NCCES OM NC CHOI OPISES ip aci02 a s-seNepeens oie, so eas 6 olefe ee Yew eae need be ame e eo William Sulzbacher 
cae IO CECE SOCICUY, gt A TA,...0k RENE MIN. A sas at. Ps Een i LI Re Inactive 
LE PLSD G EGIL GAL SVC SL SY aa aes Sit en rer ae ee oe aie eee bd David R. Flinn 
et POI ELI STOTV OLS SCICMCE HO MED) ice cou iaieaci bd be! c3e o0o avalon Sle we aw eaten WS oe se we a bee oo reve ae Inactive 
Phe Ane ASSOCIALION OF PHYSICS LCACNEDS —2 222 cb eecds ec ce ccs cede ceed epee cesacees To be appointed 
(LL BELL SCVGr Sty LAITY S LEY C7 Ip Ree ores, TET eer Re Te eo Lucy B. Hagan 
Pemeniean SoOciciy Or Liant Physiologists 45 sik Disc. od Plea aialeanie dae depen eyes + Walter Shropshire 
Beene On Operations KeEScarch COUNCH ieee) 2 fos Bt sso 4 Bee eee eee nes teeelone eis ime John G. Honig 
PEER ME SOREL VEO NINCIICAL To gyro ane sacs cstiaye eo c= ne, 3. 6de SeBtysgcKe oie eS oie Soe a wien bo, fa)iel ines lae Inactive 
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical 
ee UN MITRE IST CET. Sig eee a 1h, ols Seu A eyes: Said Se Seeiatta Sod SA Gy opie Sco 'e ew agony es Gus H. Goudarzi 
SMITA AIOMAGITONOMELS: Falennd.os. SP eiolits s Mowea dhe ew ekumber Reltawws . te abt Benson J. Simon 
Sraucinaticd Association Of Amenca 6. 5 tiiin . ales  OOR n Pn F Patrick Hayes 
EIS ETI CUOLACHEMMSES 50 Sie ona caso ake, sos as occu sinus 30 210 +) ein, oie a 0/8 ® tyne es Miloslav Recheigl, Jr. 
SEC HOLGSICAl-ASSOCIATION ... Se cabteaaier. ek: Hokie bce oe cone bed eee seers mbien John O’ Hare 
Pee asnincon bam Dechmical Group) c.0 bos 6 Uk eee et oe he we bldre eit be ne we stew Paul G. Campbell 
Pemeican PAytopathological SOCICEY=0..G... Gaicrab < fs. 2 seveswmats Smmrttaponisy. oie Sl a bh Tom van der Zwet 
mere tor General Systems Research ™...22. 6600) 0.. be. fe die lo Ronald W. Manderscheid 
7 REESE TRPSIOTRS) SYOCTE I pine IGS 65 eee EIR AG co ene a Ane H. McIlvaine Parsons 
Sees HIN EISHEHIESISOCICLY. 2.) Aeeitiny: bos a Se eels das dle « 4 ceria) oNasinte ws Sapte te ate 2 Irwin M. Alperin 


Delegates continue in office until new selections are made by the representative societies. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 93 


ooh os wee acy } gi 
AOE aa ye 4 " AL 1 3090 0 


Wy | TAR gran! are orp ae ® ond ie et Keiennes al 


TA 
ry top : : i. . ‘a ’ Cy “see 4 ae notgnisten ta on 


6 


St ombecitr #4 avdiegt if sia a songs ON 


iV rs ay * \  Plaetin dees alia iN iat! a ‘ ° . ' ium ee itehicle: 
tah VE Of Bea ee € MQOT b 
nNOS a ao OE le ania Nas 
as ; io and bs . bias Ve d 
z ~* *p* 
ne MN y Tie er eel 


= 
yo 
-" 


a OM petite: 


oe icky 
a Pee 
ary 4 t 
; a the Ole , moore oa es 
4 ; 
t 5 . A if i 
‘ a! he 
a " 
* 4 
7 . 2 Ley : 
’ baci 
.' aes 
ee ys . - Ae | he 


eee ee . 28. QO AACS 


i orig os 

i FER ROAD Se . i * 
= . ajar Ae i rt 
i GS)? yi rac raid aa ane a 4 my Hse 


| 4 1? 4 (Tir) d, , ‘ ¥ fit et 4 fait she rae aon 


io Lot weNeioiyh Bonga 


biyeoyetl 4 . i py : 
45 . nigrctus f 
jeaonre Siocus ot . fe ae aa , 


rir 


; va le 
; ; 2 " 
YW wal 3 . | m 
a Sn Sel SE 


a i$ SRSA 5. ih Si AT ue ree 


i Aisvter ec Ht. Vc vs ‘i +e a * 
: ) 
VW 050 i : . att . HOS Cpe tao Prd meatmaaasle “se 
; et At { . eee ie ee coor Me . 
a s ya 5h oO animal 
Wag, * . 
t ‘ ~ LS 
(3 taM ' . 
‘ at g+' oN th 
y it i F atin 
7 bins 
mn? |. EVO y 
SER 
, : real 1a) re ees 6, ‘fe 
, i ‘ ngelsy: ge TEs J 
ne 4 
aiieekhcte ede He : we ei aes Laat 
; a ij ‘ ; . Cae T. 1M Me of ae het oir eyiene ; 
VYlaw * 
{ 114 fool Regs) fe ike’ pitti 
‘pelaae. Ff. Me 
Cy ‘i ri 
4 ihe, yb i Pa +4, Lt} ) ; 
tg © ° © aru ve or 1, SRR 
ie Mak rs IR Ss late . Ladchaninn ‘ena hr ssuktg Nast wert | 
ries } 7 uss ee hy te bey pet ar . . os er v4 rz wig ‘tet Daisies ; a 
eT oes eae ee yay SEA « » aD aaah “dale eyestett >» aie i" 
TN gore En, i pias Yleiwoe bai vied! 
Wa My MEY 2 ap ats ae ‘ hee 
a verre Voom a CPE a NS Ay Cae i ae 5 een emg 
Rhiiiterd anit or is arse Tipe Sepa wes. % 
tae 5 We pe VF ‘ ‘ \ 
wed apiRy i) OM ikke OF Sheers POT RA he: bissveaies noise 
PIS oA AHA Alden bierag tural Res apn eM ore comer ana ie ; 
‘Ot age, vas Leer A WO ahety vet enetoetes: saregey: BxSht yatlho at he eh 
y i - 4 f 
94 * 
P : e 


: 


THE DIRECTORY OF THE ACADEMY FOR 1978 


Foreword 


The present, 53rd issue of the Academy’s direc- 
tory is again this year issued as part of the September 
number of the Journal. As in previous years, the 
alphabetical listing is based on a postcard question- 
naire sent to the Academy membership. Members 
were asked to update the data concerning address 


and membership in affiliated societies by June 30, 
1978. In cases in which cards were not received by 
that date, the address appears as it was used during 
1978, and the remaining data were taken from the 
directory for 1977. Corrections should be called to 
the attention of the Academy office. 


Code for Affiliated Societies, and Society Officers 


1 The Philosophical Society of Washington (1898) 


President: George T. Armstrong, 1401 Dale Dr., 
Vice-President: 

Secretary: 

Delegate: James F. Goff, 3405 34th Pl., 


2 Anthropological Society of Washington (1898) 

President: 

20016 

President-elect: 
Secretary: 
Delegate: 

VA 22201 


3 Biological Society of Washington (1898) 


Ruth Lardman, Dept. of Anthropology, American Univ., 


Silver Spring, MD 20910 


William G. Maisch, 205 Yockum Parkway, Alexandria, VA 22034 
Lowell D. Ballard, 722 S. Colonial, Sterling, VA 22170 


N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 


Washington, D.C. 


Marie Bourglaise, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20014 
Mary F. Gallager, Montgomery College, Rockville, MD 20853 
Jean K. Boek, National Graduate Univ., 


1101 N. Highland St., Arlington, 


W. Duane Hope, Dept. of Invertebrate Zoology, National Museum of 


Natural History, Smithsonian Institutions, Washington, D.C. 20560 


President: Richard S. Cawan 
Vice-President: Clyde F. E. Roper 
Secretary: 
Delegate: 


William R. Heyer, Amphibian & Reptiles, Nat. History Bice Smithsonian 


Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560 


4 Chemical Society of Washington (1898) 


President: 

Vice-President: 

Secretary Cheryl Marks, 6004 Balsam Dr., 
Delegate: Not appointed 


5 Entomological Society of Washington (1898) 
President: 
Vice-President: 

ton, D.C. 
Secretary: 


Douglas W. S. Sutherland, 125 Lakeside Dr., 
Donald R. Davis, Dept. of Entomology, Smithsonian Institution, Washing- 
20560 

Donald R. Whitehead, Rm. W-605, U.S. National Museum of Natural 


David H. Freeman, Univ. of Md., College Park, MD 20742 
Walter Benson, FDA-HFD 420, 200 C St. S.W., Washington, D.C. 20204 


McLean, VA 22101 


Greenbelt, MD 20770 


History, Washington, D.C. 20560 


Delegate: 


6 National Geographic Society (1898) 
President: 
Chairman: 
Secretary: 
Delegate: 


Maynard J. Ramsay, 3806 Viser Court, Bowie, MD 20715 


Robert E. Doyle, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 
Melvin M. Payne, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 
Owen R. Anderson, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 
T. Dale Stewart, Smithsonian Institution, Museum of Natural History, 


Washington, D.C. 20560 


7 Geological Society of Washington (1898) 
President: 


Vice-President: 


Francis R. Boyd, Jr., 
Lab., 2801 Upton St., 
J. Thomas Dutro, U.S. Geological Survey, Branch of Paleontology and 


Carnegie Institution of Washington, Geophysical 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 


Stratigraphy, U.S. National Museum, Washington, D.C. 20560 


Secretary: 


Delegate: Not appointed 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


William E. Davies, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston VA 22092, Mail Stop 973 


95 


10 


11 


12 


13 


14 


15 


16 


Medical Society of the District of Columbia (1898) 


President: William S. McCune 
President-elect: Frank S. Bacon 
Secretary: Thomas Sadler 
Delegate: Not appointed 
Columbia Historical Society (1899) 
President: Wilcomb E. Washburn, Amer. Studies, S.I., Washington, D.C. 20560 
Vice-President: William H. Press, 1511 K St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005 
Secretary: Marcellina Hummer, 2006 Columbia Rd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20009 
Delegate: Paul H. Oehser, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 
Botanical Society of Washington (1902) 
President: Robert L. Boher, Dept. of Horticulture, Univ. of Md., College Park, MD 
20742 
Vice-President: Richard S. Cowan, Dept. of Botany, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, 
D.C. 20560 
Secretary: James J. White, Dept. of Botany, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, 
D.C. 20560 
Delegate: Conrad B. Link, Univ. of Md., Dept. of Horticulture, College Park, MD 20742 
Society of American Foresters, Washington, Section (1904) 
President: Thomas B. Glazebrook, 7809 Bristow Dr., Annandale, VA 22003 
President-elect: Arthur H. Smith, 3301 Wessynton Way, Alexandria, VA 22309 
Secretary: George Cheek, American Forest Institute, 1619 Mass. Ave., N.W., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20036 
Delegate: T. B. Glazebrook 


Washington Society of Engineers (1907) 
President: Jeffrey H. Rumbaugh, Potomac Electric Power Co., 1900 Pennsylvania 
Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20068 
Vice-President: Guy H. Hammer, Washington Hospital Dr., Washington, D.C. 20010 


Secretary: Charles E. Remington, 2005 Columbia Pike, Arlington, VA 22204 

Delegate: George Abraham, 3107 Westover Dr., S.E., Washington, D.C. 20020 
Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Washington Section (1912) 

Chairman: Horst W. A. Gerlach 4521 Cheltenham Dr., Bethesda, MD 20014 

Vice-Chairman: G. David Crandell, 12214 Old Colony Dr., Upper Marlboro, MD 20870 

Secretary: Richard J. Bache, 10400 Burnt Ember Dr., Silver Spring, MD 20903 

Delegate: George Abraham, 3107 Westover Dr., S.E., Washington, D.C. 20020 


American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Washington Section (1923) 
Chairman: Robert L. Hershey, 1255 New Hampshire Ave., N.W., Apt. 433, Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20036 
Vice-Chairman: Ron Niebo, 8587 Brae Brook Dr., Lanham, MD 20801 
Secretary: Markley An, 8800 Fox Hill Trail, Potomac, MD 20854 
Delegate: Michael Chi, 2721 N. 24th St., Arlington, VA 22207 


Helminthological Society of Washington (1923) 
President: Harley G. Sheffield, Lab. of Parasitic Diseases, NIH, NOAID, Bldg. 5, 
‘ Bethesda, MD 20014 
Vice-President: Ronald Fayer, SEA, USDA, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD 20705 


Secretary: J. Ralph Lichtenfels, Animal Parasitology Inst., SEA, BARC-East, Belts- 
ville, MD 20705 ; 

Delegate: Robert S. Isenstein, FSQS, USDA, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD 20705 

American Society for Microbiology, Washington Branch (1923) 

President: June A. Bradlaw, Food & Drug Adm., Genetic Toxicology Branch, 
HFF-156, Washington, D.C. 20204 

Vice-President: Irvin C. Mohler, The George Washington University School of Medicine, 
Dept. of Medical & Public Affairs, Washington, D.C. 20037 

Secretary: Phyllis D. Kind, The George Washington University School of Medicine, 
Dept. of Microbiology, Washington, D.C. 20037 

Delegate: Michael J. Pelczar, Jr., Vice President for Graduate Studies & Research, 


University of Md., College Park, MD 20742 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


17 


18 


19 


20 


21 


22 


23 


25 


Society of American Military Engineers, Washington Post (1927) 


President: Col. Edwin P. Geesey, DAEN-FEZ-B, Washington, D.C. 20314 
Vice-President: R.Adm. H. R. Lippold, NOAA, Washington, D.C. 20233 
Secretary: William I. Jacob, DAEN-FER-P, Washington, D.C. 20314 
Delegate: Hal P. Demuth, 4025 Pine Brook Rd., Alexandria, VA 22310 


American Society of Civil Engineers, National Capital Section (1942) 
President: James W. Harland, 1511 K St., N.W., Suite 337, Washington, D.C. 20005 
Vice-President: Norman L. Cooper, Dept. of Transportation, 400 7th St., Rm. 9422, Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20590 


Secretary: Robert Efimba, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Howard University, Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20059 
Delegate: Robert Sorenson, Coastal Engineering Research Ctr., Kingman Bldg., 


Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060 
Society for Experimental Biology & Medicine, D.C. Section (1952) 


President: Arthur Wykes, Natl. Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD 20014 

President-elect: Elise A. Brown, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20014 

Secretary: William Von Arsdel, Food & Drug Adm., Bureau of Drugs, Rockville, 
MD 20850 

Delegate: Donald F. Flick, 930 19th St., So., Arlington, VA 22202 


American Society for Metals, Washington Chapter (1953) 
Chairman: Klaus M. Zwilsky, U.S. Atomic Energy Comm., Washington, D.C. 20545 
Vice-Chairman: Alan H. Rosenstein, Air Force Office of Scientific Res., 1400 Wilson Blvd., 
Arlington, VA 22209 


Secretary: Joseph Malz, NASA, Code RWM, Washington, D.C. 20546 
Delegate: Glen W. Wensch, U.S. Atomic Energy Comm., Washington, D.C. 20545 
International Association for Dental Research, Washington Section (1953) 
President: John D. Termine, Natl. Institute of Dental Research, Bethesda, MD 20014 
Vice-President: William R. Cotton, Naval Medical Research Institute, Bethesda, MD 20014 
Secretary: Stanley Vermilyea, Walter Reed Army Inst. of Res., Washington, D.C. 
20012 
Delegate: William V. Loebenstein, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, National Capital Section (1953) 
Chairman: Robert O. Bartlett, 18333 Duchess Dr., Olney, MD 20832 
Vice-Chairman: George J. Vila, General Dynamics, 1025 Conn. Ave., N.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20036 
Secretary: Richard Hallion, 1003 Montrose Lane, Laurel, MD 20810 
Delegate: George J. Vila 


American Meteorological Society, D.C. Chapter (1954) 
Chairman: Celso Barrientos, Natl. Weather Serv. W427, 821 Gramax Bldg., 8060 
13th St., Silver Spring, MD 20910 
Vice-Chairman: June Bacon-Bercey, Rm. 1310 Gramax Bldg., W 116X2, Silver Spring, 


MD 20233 
Secretary: David H. George, Rm. 1424, Gramax Bldg., Silver Spring, MD 20233 
Delegate: A. James Wagner, National Weather Service, World Weather Bldg., 5200 


Auth Rd., Washington, D.C. 20233 
Insecticide Society of Washington (1959) 


Chairman: Neal O. Morgan, USDA, ARS, Bldg. 476, Rm. 100, BARC-East, Beltsville, 
MD 20705 

Chairman-elect: Jack R. Plimmer, USDA, ARS, Bldg. 306, Rm. 313, BARC-East, Beltsville, 
MD 20705 

Secretary: John Neal, ARS, ARC, Bldg. 467, Beltsville, MD 20705 

Delegate: Robert Argauer, ARS, ARC, Bldg. 309, Beltsville, MD 20705 

Acoustical Society of America (1959) 

Chairman: John A. Molino, Sound Section, NBS, Washington, D.C. 20234 

Vice-Chairman: Charles T. Molloy, 2400 Claremont Dr., Falls Church, VA 22043 

Secretary: William K. Blake, Naval Ship R & D Ctr., Bethesda, MD 20034 

Delegate: None appointed 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 ae 


26 


27 


28 


29 


30 


31 


32 


33 


34 


98 


American Nuclear Society, Washington Section (1960) 


President: Arthur Randal, Am. Nuclear Energy Council, 1750 K St., N.W., Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20006 

Vice-President: S. Bassett, NUS Corp., Rockville, MD 20852 

Secretary: Ray Durante, Westinghouse Electric, 1801 K St., N.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20006 

Delegate: Dick Duffy, Nuclear Engineering, Univ. of Md., College Park, MD 20742 

Institute of Food Technologists, Washington Section (1961) 

Chairman: Tannous Khalil, Giant Foods, Inc., Landover, MD 20785 

Vice-Chairman: Florian C. Majorack, Food & Drug Adm., Washington, D.C. 

Secretary: Glenn V. Brauner, National Canners Assoc., Washington, D.C. 20036 

Delegate: William Sulzbacher, 8527 Clarkson Dr., Fulton, MD 20759 


American Ceramic Society, Baltimore-Washington Section (1962) 
Chairman: W. T. Bakker, General Refractories Co., P.O. Box 1673, MD 21203 
Chairman-elect: L. Biller, Glidden-Dirkee Div., SCM Corp., 3901 Hawkins Point Rd., 
Baltimore, MD 21226 
Secretary: Edwin E. Childs, J. E. Baker Co., 232 E. Market St., York, PA 17405 
Delegate: None appointed 


Electrochemical Society, National Capital Section (1963) 
Chairman: David R. Flinn, Bureau of Mines, College Park Research Center, College 
Park, MD 20740 
Vice-Chairman: John R. Ambrose, National Bureau of Standards, Bldg. 223, Rm. B254, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 


Secretary: George Marinenko, National Bureau of Standards, Bldg. 222, Rm. A217, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 
Delegate: David R. Flinn 
Washington History of Science Club (1965) 
Chairman: Richard G. Hewlett, Atomic Energy Comm. 
Vice-Chairman: Deborah Warner, Smithsonian Institution 
Secretary: Dean C. Allard 
Delegate: None appointed 
American Association of Physics Teachers, Chesapeake Section (1965) 
President: William Logan, D.C. Teachers College, 2565 Georgia Ave., Washington, 
D.C. 20001 
Vice-President: Eugenie V. Mielczarek, George Mason Univ., 4400 University Dr., Fairfax, 
VA 22030 
Secretary: John B. Newman, Towson State College, Towson, MD 21204 
Delegate: None appointed 
Optical Society of America, National Capital Section (1966) 
President: Mark Daehler, Naval Research Laboratory, Code 7122.2, Washington, D.C. 
20375 


Vice-President: George J. Simonis, Harry Diamond Laboratory, Branch 32, 2800 Powder 
Mill Rd., Adelphi, MD 20783 


Secretary: Martin J. Koomen, Naval Research Laboratory, Code 7141, Washington, 
D.C.226375 
Delegate: Lucy B. Hagan, National Bureau of Standards, Rm. B360, Physics, 


Washington, D.C. 20234 
American Society of Plant Physiologists, Washington Section (1966) 


President: Anne H. Datko, NIMH Bldg. 32A, Rm. 101, Bethesda, MD 20014 

Vice-President: Werner J. Meudt, USDA, ARS Bldg. 50, Beltsville, MD 20705 

Secretary: Charles F. Cleland, Radiation Biology Lab., 12441 Parklawn Dr., Rock- 
ville, MD 20852 

Delegate: W. Shropshire, Jr., Smithsonian Institution, 12441 Parklawn Dr., Rockville, 
MD 20852 

Washington Operations Research Council (1966) 

President: Charles Tiplitz, 8809 Bells Mills Rd., Potomac, MD 20854 

Vice-President: Thomas Sicilia, 113 N. Oakland St., Arlington, VA 22212 

Secretary: James Boisseau . 

Delegate: John G. Honig, 7701 Glenmore Spring Way, Bethesda, MD 20034 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


35 


36 


37 


38 


39 


40 


41 


42 


43 


Instrument Society of America, Washington Section (1967) 


President: Francis C. Quinn 
President-elect: John I. Peterson 
Secretary: Frank L. Carou 
Delegate: None appointed 
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical & Petroleum Engineers (1968) 
Chairman: Garrett R. Hyde, 6027 Springhill Dr., Greenbelt, MD 20770 
Vice-Chairman: John A. Patterson, 7705 Hamilton Spring Rd., Bethesda, MD 20034 
Secretary: John H. DeYoung, Jr., 12677 Magna Carta Rd., Herndon, VA 22070 
Delegate: Gus H. Goudarzi, 658 Pemberton Court, Herndon, VA 22070 
National Capital Astronomers (1969) 
President: James Trexler, 5609 Otlarow St., Oxon Hill, MD 20021 
Vice-President: Daniel G. Lewis, 11201 Farmland Dr., Rockville, MD 20852 
Secretary: William R. Winkler, 15804 Pinecroft Lane, Bowie, MD 20716 
Delegate: Benson J. Simon, 8704 Royal Ridge Lane, Laurel, MD 20811 
Maryland-District of Columbia and Virginia Section of Mathematical Assoc. of America (1971) 
Chairman: Orville Thomas, U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD 21401 
Chairman-elect: John Smith, 1837 Negel Ct., Vienna, VA 22180 
Secretary: Reuben Drake, 3701 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 
Delegate: Patrick Hayes, 950 25th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 
D.C. Institute of Chemists (1973) 
President: Kelso B. Morris, 1448 Leegate Rd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20012 
President-elect: Leo Schubert, 8521 Beech Tree Rd., Bethesda, MD 20034 
Secretary: Fred D. Ordway, 2816 Fall Jax Dr., Falls Church, VA 22042 
Delegate: Miloslav Rechcigl, Jr., 1703 Mark Lane, Rockville, MD 20852 
The D.C. Psychological Association (1975) 
President: John F. Borriello, St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, Overholser Division, Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20032 
President-elect Eugene Stammeyer, St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, Overholser Division, 
Washington, D.C. 20032 
Secretary: Sylvia M. Tetrault, Howard Univ. College of Medicine, Washington, D.C. 
20059 
Delegate: John J. O’Hare, Office of Naval Research, 800 N. Quincy St., Arlington, 
VA 22217 
The Washington Paint Technical Group (1976) 
President: Maurice S. Moen, Sherwin Williams Co. 
Vice-President: Robert F. Brady, Jr., GSA 
Secretary: Mildred A. Post, National Bureau of Standards, Bldg. 226, Rm. B-348, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 
Delegate: Paul G. Campbell, National Bureau of Standards, B-348 Br., Washington, 
D.C. 20234 
Potomac Division, American Phytopathological Society (1977) 
President: C. W. Roane, Dept. of Plant Pathology, Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and 


State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061 
Vice-President: J. R. Stavely, Tobacco Laboratory, USDA, Agric. Research Center, 
Beltsville, MD 20705 


Secretary: L. D. Moore, Dept. of Plant Pathology, Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and 
State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061 
Delegate: T. van der Zwet, Fruit Laboratory, USDA, Agric. Research Center, 


Beltsville, MD 20705 
Metropolitan Washington Chapter of the Society for General Systems Research (1977) 


Chairman: Ronald W. Manderscheid, 6 Monument Ct., Rockville, MD 20850 
Secretary: Helen G. Tibbitts, 4105 Montpelier Rd., Rockville, MD 20853 
Delegate: Ronald W. Manderscheid, 6 Monument Ct., Rockville, MD 20850 
Potomac Chapter, Human Factors Society (1977) 
President: M. Dean Havron, 6222 Edgewater Dr., Falls Church, VA 22041 
Vice-President: Michael L. Fineberg, 10707 Huntley Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20902 
Secretary: Erwin W. Bedarf, 12901 Livingston Rd., Oxon Hill, MD 20022 
Delegate: H. Mcllvaine Parsons, 4701 Willard Ave., Chevy Chase, MD 20015 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 99 


45 Potomac Chapter, American Fisheries Society (1978) 
President: Worrall R. Carter, III, Maryland Fisheries Admin., P.O. Box 68, Wye 
Mills, MD 21679 
President-elect: Galen L. Buterbaugh, Dep. Assoc. Director, Fish., U.S. Fish & Wildlife 
Service, U.S. Dept. Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240 


Secretary: Norville S. Prosser, Sport Fishing Institute, 608 13th St., N.W., Suite 801, 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
Delegate: Irwin M. Alperin, Exec. Director, Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Comm., 


1717 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 


100 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


i 


aide 


Alphabetical List of Members 


M = Member; F = Fellow; E = Emeritus member; L = Life Fellow. Numbers in parentheses refer to 
numerical code in foregoing list of affiliated societies. 


A 


ABDULNUR, SUHEIL F., Ph.D., Chemistry Dept. 
The American University, Washington, D.C. 
20016 (F) 

ABELSON, PHILIP H., Ph.D., Editor SCIENCE 
Magazine, American Association for the 
Advancement of Science, 1550 Mass. Ave., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005 (F-1, 4, 7, 16) 

ABRAHAM, GEORGE, M.S., Ph.D., 3107 West- 
over Dr., S.E., Washington, D.C. 20020 (F-1, 
Gmi2. 13,25, 31, 32) 

ACHTER, M. R., Code 6416, U.S. Naval Research 
Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F-20, 36) 
ADAMS, CAROLINE L., 242 North Granada St., 

Arlington, Va. 22203 (E-10) 

ADLER, SANFORD C., 14238 Briarwood Terr., 
Rockville, Md. 20853 (F-1) 

ADLER, VICTOR E., 8540 Pineway Ct., Laurel, 
Md. 20810 (F-5, 24) 

AFFRONTI, LEWIS, Ph.D., Dept. of Microbiology, 
George Washington Univ. Sch. of Med., 2300 
Eye St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 
(F-16, 19) 

AHEARN, ARTHUR J., Ph.D., 9621 East Bexhill 
Dr., Box 294, Kensington, Md. 20795 (F-16) 

AKERS, ROBERT P., Ph.D., 9912 Silverbrook Dr., 
Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-6) 

ALBUS, JAMES S., 4515 Saul Rd., Kensington, 
Md. 20014 (F) 

ALDRICH, JOHN W., Ph.D., 6324 Lakeview Dr., 
Falls Church, Va. 22041 (F) 

ALDRIDGE, MARY H., Ph.D., Dept. of Chemistry, 
American University, Washington, D.C. 20016 
(F-4) 

ALEXANDER, ALLEN L., Ph.D., 4216 Sleepy 
Hollow Rd., Annandale, Va. 22003 (E-4) 

ALEXANDER, BENJAMIN, Ph.D., Pres., Chicago 
State Univ., 95th St. at King Dr. Chicago Ill. 
(F) 

ALGERMISSEN, S. T., 5079 Holmes PI., Boulder, 
Colo. 80303 (F) 

ALLEN, ANTON M., D.V.M., Ph.D., 11718 Lake- 
way Dr., Manassas, Va. 22110 (F) 

ALLEN, FRANCES J., Ph.D. 7507 23rd Ave., 
Hyattsville, Md. 20783 (F)45 

ALLEN, WILLIAM G., P.E., B.S., 8306 Custer 
Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-14) 

ALTER, HARVEY, Ph.D., Nat. Center for 
Resource Recovery, Inc., 1211 Connecticut 

Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 (F-4) 

ANDERSON, JOHN D., Jr., Ph.D., Dept. Aerospace 
Eng., Univ. Maryland, College Park, Md. 
20742 (F-6, 22) 

ANDERSON, MYRON S., Ph.D., 1433 Manchester 
Lane, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20011 (E-4) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


ANDERSON, WENDELL L., Rural Rt. 4, Box 4172, 
La Plata, Md. 20646 (F-4) 

ANDREWS, JOHN S., Sc.D., 10314 Naglee Rd., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20903 (E-15) 

ANDRUS, EDWARD D., BS., 1600 Rhode Island 
Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 (M-7, 25) 

APOSTOLOU, Mrs. GEORGIA L., B.A. 1001 
Rockville Pike, #424, Rockville, Md. 20852 
(M-4) 

APSTEIN, MAURICE, Ph.D., 4611 Maple Ave., 
Bethesda, Md., 20014 (F-1, 6, 13) 

ARGAUER, ROBERT J., Ph.D., 4208 Everett St., 
Kensington, Md. 20795 (F-24) 

ARMSTRONG, GEORGE T., Ph.D., 1401 Dale Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (F-1, 4) 

ARONSON, C. J., 3401 Oberon St., Kensington, 
Md. 20910 (E-1, 32) 

ARSEM, COLLINS, 10821 Admirals Way, 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (M-1, 6, 13) 

ARVESON, PAUL T., Code 1926, Naval Ship R&D 
Ctr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 

ASLAKSON, CARL I., 5707 Wilson Lane, Be- 
thesda, Md. 20014 (E) 

ASTIN, ALLEN V., Ph.D., 5008 Battery Lane, 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E-1, 13, 22, 35) 

AXILROD, BENJAMIN M., Ph.D., 9915 Marquette 
Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-1) 

AYENSU, EDWARD, Ph.D., 9200 Wilmett Ct., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-3, 10) 


BAILEY, R. CLIFTON, Ph.D., 6507 Divine St., 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F) 

BAKER, ARTHUR A., Ph.D., 5201 Westwood Dr., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-7) 

BAKER, LOUIS C.W., Ph.D., Dept of Chemistry, 
Georgetown University, N.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20007 (F-4) 

BALLARD, LOWELL D., 722 So. Colonial, Ster- 
ling, Va. 22170 (F-1, 6, 13, 32) 

BARBOUR, LARRY L., 19309 Poinsetta Court, 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (M) 

BARBROW, LOUIS E., Natl. Bureau of Standards, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1, 13, 32) 

BARGER, GERALD L., Ph.D., Rt. 4, Box 165AC, 
Columbia, Mo. 65201 (F-23) 

BEACH, LOUIS A., Ph.D., 1200 Waynewood 
Blvd., Alexandria, Va. 22308 (F-1, 6) 

BECKER, EDWIN D., Ph.D., Inst. Arthritis & Meta- 
bolic Dis., Bldg. 2 Rm. 122, National Institutes 
of Health, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-4) 

BECKETT, CHARLES W., 5624 Madison St., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-1, 4) 


101 


BECKMANN, ROBERT B., Ph.D., Dept of Chem. 
Engineering, Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 
20742 (F-4) 

BElJ, HILDING, K., 69 Morningside Dr., Laconia, 
NH 03246 (L-1) 

BEKKEDAHL, NORMAN, Ph.D., 405 N. Ocean 
Bivd., Apt. 1001, Pompano Beach, Fla. 
33062 (E) 

BELSHEIM, ROBERT, Ph.D., 2475 Virginia Ave. 
#514, Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-1, 12, 14, 
25) 

BENDER, MAURICE, Ph.D., 16518 N.E. 2nd. PI., 
Bellevue, Wa. 98008 

BENESCH, WILLIAM, Inst. for Molecular Physics, 
Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 
(F-1, 32) 

BENJAMIN, C. R., Ph.D., IPD/SEA, USDA, Rm. 
459, Federal Bg., Hyattsville, Md. 20782 
(F-6, 10, 42) 

BENNETT, BRADLEY F., 3301 Macomb St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-1, 20) 

BENNETT, JOHN A., 7405 Denton Rd., Bethesda 
Md. 20014 (F, 20) 

BENNETT, MARTIN TOSCAN, Ch.E., 3700 Mt. 
Vernon Ave., Rm. 605, Alexandria, Va. 22305 
(F-4, 6) 

BENNETT, WILLARD H., Box 5342, North 
Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, N.C. 27607 (E) 

BENSON, WILLIAM, Ph.D., 618 Constitution 
Ave., N.E., Washington, D.C. 20002 (M-32, 44) 

BERGMANN, OTTO, Ph.D., Dept. Physics, 
George Washington Univ., Washington, D.C. 
20052 (F-1) 

BERMAN, ALAN, Ph.D., 9304 Maybrook PI., 
Alexandria, Va. 22309 (F-25) 

BERNETT, MARIANNE K., Code 6170, Naval Res. 
Lab., Washington D.C. 20375 (M-4) 

BERNSTEIN, BERNARD, M.S., 7420 West- 
lake Terr., #608, Bethesda, Md. 20034 
(M-25) 

BERNTON, HARRY S., 4000 Cathedral Ave., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F 3-8) 

BESTUL, ALDEN B., 9400 Overlea Ave., Rock- 
ville, Md. 20850 (F-1, 6) 

BICKLEY, WILLIAM E., Ph.D., P.O. Box 20840, 
Riverdale, Md. 20840 (F-5, 24) 

BIRD, H. R., Animal Science Bg., Univ. of Wis- 
consin, Madison, Wisc. 53706 (F) 

BIRKS, L. S., Code 6680, U.S. Naval Research 
Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) 

BLAKE, DORIS H., A.M., 3416 Glebe Rd., North 
Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-5) 

BLANK, CHARLES A., Ph.D., 5110 Sideburn Rd., 
Fairfax, Va. 22030 (M-4, 39) 

BLOCK, STANLEY, Ph.D., National Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4) 
BLONG, CLAIR K., Ph.D., 10603 Tenbrook Dr., 

Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M) 

BLUNT, ROBERT F., 5411 Moorland Lane, 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

BOEK, JEAN K., Ph.D., Natl. Graduate Univ., 1101 
North Highland St., Arlington, Va. 22201 (F-2) 

BOGLE, ROBERT W., Apt. 1433, 3001 Veagly 
Terr., Washinton, D.C. 20008 (F) 


102 


BONDELID, ROLLON O., Ph.D., Code 6640, Naval 
Research Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) 

BORGESEN, KENNETH G., M.A., 3212 Chillum 
Rd. #302, Mt. Rainier, Md. 20822 (M) 

BOTBOL, J. M., 2301 November Lane, Reston, 
Va. 22901 (F) 

BOWLES, R. E., Ph.D., 2105 Sondra Ct., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20904 (F-6, 14, 22, 35) 

BOWMAN, THOMAS E., Ph.D., Dept. Invert. 


Zoology, Smithsonian Inst., Washington, 
D.C. 20560 (F-3) 
BOZEMAN, F. MARILYN, Div. Virol., Bur. 


Biologics, FDA, 8800 Rockville Pike, Rock- 
ville, Md. 20014 (E-16, 19) 

BRADY, ROBERT F., Jr., Ph.D., 706 Hope Lane, 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4, 41) 

BRANCATO, E. L., M.S., Code 4004, U.S. Naval 
Research Lab., Washington, D.C. 20390 (F-6, 
13) 

BRANDEWIE, DONALD F., 6811 Field Master Dr., 
Springfield Va. 22153 (F) 

BRAUER, G. M., Dental Research & Medical 
Materials, A-123 Polymer, Natl. Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 21) 

BREGER, IRVING A., Ph.D., 212 Hillsboro Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-4, 6, 7, 39) 

BREIT, GREGORY, Ph.D., 73 Allenhurst Rd., 
Buffalo, N.Y. 14214 (E-13) 

BRENNER, ABNER, Ph.D., 7204 Pomander Lane, 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-4, 29) 

BRICKWEDDE, F. G., 104 Davey Lab., Dept. of 
Physics, Pennsylvania State Univ., University 
Park, Pa. 16802 (L-1) 

BRIER, GLENN W., A.M., Dept. Atmosph. Sci., 
Colorado State Univ., Ft. Collins, Colo. 
80523 (F-6, 23) 

BROADHURST, MARTIN G., B322, Bldg. 224, 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F) 

BROMBACHER, W. G., 17 Pine Run Community, 
Doylestown, Pa. 18901 (E-1) 

BROWN, ELISE A. B., Ph.D., 6811 Nesbitt Place, 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F-4, 19) 

BROWN, RUSSELL G., Ph.D., Dept. of Botany, 
Univ. of Maryland College Park, Md. (F) 
BROWN, THOMAS, McP., 2465 Army-Navy 

Dr., Arlington, Va. 22206 (F-8, 16) 

BRUCK, STEPHEN D., Ph.D., 1113 Pipestem PI., 
Rockville, Md. 20854 (F-4, 6, 39) 

BURAS, EDMUND M., Jr., M.S., Gillette Research 
Inst., 1413 Research Blvd., Rockville, Md. 
20850 (F-4, 6, 39) 

BURGER, ROBERT J., (COL. M.S.) 953 Lynch Dr., 
Arnold, Md. 21012 (F-6, 22) 

BURGERS, J. M., Prof. D.Sc., 3450 Toledo Terr., 
Apt. 517, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (F-1) 

BURK, DEAN, Ph.D., 4719 44th St., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-4, 19, 33) 

BURNETT, H. C., Metallurgy Division, Natl. 
Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 (F) 

BYERLY, PERRY, Ph.D., 5340 Broadway Terr., 
#401, Oakland, Calif. 94618 (F) 

BYERLY, T. C., Ph.D., 6-J Ridge Rd., Greenbelt, 
Md. 20770 (F-6, 19) 


N.W., 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


C 


CAHNMAN, HUGO N., 125-10 Queens Blvd., 
Kew Gardens, N.Y. 11415 (M) 

CALDWELL, FRANK R., 4821 47th St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-1, 6) 

CALDWELL, JOSEPH M., 2732 N. Kensington St., 
Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-18) 

CAMPAGNONE, ALFRED F., P.E., 9321 Warfield 
Rd., Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F) 

CAMPBELL, LOWELL E., B.S., 10100 Riggs Rd., 
Adelphi, Md. 20783 (F-12, 13) 

CAMPBELL, PAUL G., Ph.D., 3106 Kingtree St., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-4, 41) 

CANNON, E. W., Ph.D., 5 Vassar Cir., Glen Echo, 
Md. 20768 (F-1, 6) 

CANTELO, WILLIAM W., Ph.D., 11702 Wayneridge 
St., Fulton, Md. 20759 (F-6, 24) 

CARNS, HARRY R., Bg. 001, Agr. Res. Cent. (W.), 
USDA, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (M-33) 

CARROLL, Miss KAREN E., M.S., 815 18th St., 
#504, Arlington, Va. 22202 (M) 

CARROLL, WILLIAM R., 4802 Broad Brook Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

CARTER, HUGH, 2039 New Hampshire Ave., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20009 (E) 

CASH, EDITH K., 505 Clubhouse Rd., Bingham- 
ton, N.Y. 13903 (E-10) 

CASSEL, JAMES M., Ph.D., 12205 Sunnyview Dr., 
Germantown, Md. 20767 (F-4, 21) 

CHAPLIN, HARVEY P., Jr., 1561 Forest Villa 
Lane, McLean, Va. 22101 (F-22) 
CHAPLINE, W. R., 4225 43rd St., 

Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-6, 10, 11) 

CHEEK, CONRAD H., Ph.D., Code 8330, 
U.S. Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 
(F-4) 

CHERTOK, BENSON T., Ph.D., Dept. of Physics, 
American Univ., Wash. D.C. 20016 (M-1) 
CHEZEM, CURTIS G., Ph.D., % Waterman, Inc., 

P.O. Box 11133, Amarillo, Tx. 79111 (F) 

CHI, MICHAEL, Sc.D., Civil Engr. Dept., Catholic 
Univ., Washington, D.C. 20064 (F-14) 

CHOPER, JORDAN J., 121 Northway, Greenbelt, 
Md. 20770 (M) 

CHRISTIANSEN, MERYL N., Ph.D., Chief Plant 
Stress Lab. USDA ARS, Beltsville, Md. 
20705 (F-6, 33) 

CHURCH, LLOYD E., D. D. S., Ph.D., 8218 Wis- 
consin Ave., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-1, 9, 
19, 21) 

CLAIRE, CHARLES N., 4403 14th St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20011 (F-1, 12) 

CLARK, FRANCIS E., ARS Research Lab., P.O. 
Box E, Ft. Collins, Colo. 80521 (F) 

CLARK, GEORGE E., Jr., 4022 North Stafford 
St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (F) 

CLARK, JOAN ROBINSON, Ph.D., U.S. Geologi- 
cal Survey, 345 Middlefield Rd., Menlo Park, 
Calif. 94025 (F-7) 

CLEEK, GIVEN W., 5512N. 24th St., Arlington, Va. 
22205 (M-4, 6, 28, 32) 

CLEMENT, J. REID, Jr., 3410 Weltham St., 
Suitland, Md. 20023 (F) 


N.W., 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


CLEVEN, GALE W., Ph.D., RD. 4, Box 334B, 
Lewistown, Pa. 17044 (F-1) 

COATES, JOSEPH F., Off. of Tech Assessment 
U.S. Congress Wash. D.C. 20510 (F-1, 2, 4) 

COHN, ROBERT, M.D., 7221 Pyle Road, Be- 
thesda, Md. 20034 (F-1) 

COLE, KENNETH S., Ph.D., 2404 Loring St., 
San Diego, Ca. 92109 (F-1) 

COLE, RALPH I., M.S., 3431 Blair Rd., Falls 
Church, Va. 22041 (F-12, 13, 22) 

COLLINS, HENRY B., Dept. Anthropology, 
Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D.C. 20560 
(E-2) 

COLWELL, R. R., Ph.D., Dept. of Microbiology, 
Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 
(F-6, 16) 

COMPTON, W. DALE, Ford Motor Co., P.O. 
Box 1603, Dearborn, Mich. 48121 (F) 

CONGER, PAUL S., M.S., Dept. of Botany, U.S. 
National Museum, Washington, D.C. 20560 (E) 

CONNORS, PHILIP I|., Central New England Col- 
lege, 768 Main St., Worcester, Ma. 01608 
(F-6, 31) 

COOK, RICHARD K., Ph.D., 8517 Milford Ave., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (F-1, 25) 

COONS, GEORGE H., Ph.D., % Dr. J. E. Dees, 
413 Carolina Circle, Durham, N.C. 27707 
(E-42) 

COOPER, KENNETH W., Ph.D., Dept. Biol., Univ. 
of California, Riverside, Cal. 92521 (F-5) 
CORLISS, EDITH L. R., Mrs., 2955 Albemarle 

St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-13, 25) 

CORLISS, JOHN O., Ph.D., 9512 E. Stanhope 
Rd., Kensington, Md. 20795 (F-6) 

CORNFIELD, JEROME, G.W.V. Biostat-Ctr., 7979 
Old Georgetown Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20014 
(F) 

COSTRELL, LOUIS, Chief 535. 02, Natl. Bureau 
of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) 
COTTERILL, CARL H., M.S., U.S. Bureau of Mines 
2401, E. St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20241 

(F-36) 

COYLE, THOMAS D., National Bureau of Stand- 
ards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6) 

CRAFTON, PAUL A., P.O. Box 454, Rockville, 
Md. 20850 (F) 

CRAGOE, CARL S., 6206 Singleton Place, 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-1) 

CRANE, LANGDON T., Jr., 7103 Oakridge Ave., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6) 

CREITZ, E. CARROLL, 10145 Cedar Lane, Ken- 
sington, Md. 20795 (E-32) 

CREVELING, CYRUS R., Ph.D., 4516 Amherst 
Lane, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F 4-19) 

CROSSETTE, GEORGE, 4217 Glenrose St., Ken- 
sington, Md. 20795 (M-6, 17) 

CULBERT, DOROTHY K., 812 A St., S.E., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20003 (M-6) 

CULLINAN, FRANK P., 4402 Beechwood Rad., 
Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E-10, 13) 

CULVER, WILLIAM H., Ph.D., Optelecom, Inc., 
2841 Chesapeake St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20008 (M-1, 32) 

CURRAN, HAROLD R., Ph.D., 3431 N. Randolph 
St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-16) 


103 


CURRIE, CHARLES L., S.J., President, Wheeling 
College, Wheeling, W.Va. 26003 (F) 

CURTIS, ROGER, W., Ph.D., 6308 Valley Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E) 

CURTISS, LEON F., 1690 Bayshore Drive, Eng- 
lewood, Fla. 33533 (E-1) 

CUTHILL, JOHN R., Ph.D., 12700 River Rad., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-20, 36) 

CUTKOSKY, ROBERT D., 19150 Roman Way, 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-13) 


D 


DARRACOTT, HALVOR T., M.S., 3325 Mansfield 
Rd., Falls Church, Va. 22041 (F-13, 34, 38) 

DAVIS, CHARLES M., Jr., Ph.D., 8458 Portland 
Pl., McLean, Va. 22101 (M-1, 6, 25) 

DAVIS, MARION MACLEAN, Ph.D., Apt. 100, 
Crosslands, Kennett Square, Pa. 19348 
(L-4, 6) 

DAVIS, R. F., Ph.D., Chairman, Dept. of Dairy 
Science, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, 
Md. 20742 (F) 

DAVISSON, JAMES W., Ph.D., 400 Cedar Ridge 
Dr., Oxon Hill, Md. 20021 (E-1) 

DAWSON, ROY C., Ph.D., 7002 Chansory Lane, 
Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E-16) 

DAWSON, VICTOR C. D., 9406 Curran Rd., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20901 (F-6, 14) 

DEAL, GEORGE E., D.B.A., 6245 Park Road, 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F-34) 

DE BERRY, MARIAN B., 3608 17th St., N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20018 (M) 

DEDRICK, R. L., Bldg. 13, Rm. 3W13, NIH, 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-1) 

DE VOE, JAMES R., 17708 Parkridge Dr., Gai- 
thersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4, 6) 

DE WIT, ROLAND, Metallurgy Division, Natl. 
Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 (F-1, 6, 36) 

DELANEY, WAYNE R., The Wyoming Apts., 111, 
2022 Columbia Rd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20009 (M-6, 9, 32) 

DEMUTH, HAL P., MSEE, 4025 Pinebrook Rd., 
Alexandria, Va. 22310 (F-13, 17) 

DENNIS, BERNARD K., 915 Country Club Dr., 
Vienna, Va. 22180 (F) 

DERKSEN, WILLARD L., 11235 Oak Leaf Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M) 

DESLATTES, RICHARD D., Jr., 610 Aster Blvd., 
Rockville, Md. 20850 (F) 

DEVIN, CHARLES, Ph.D., 629 Blossom Dr., 
Rockville, Md. 20850 (M-25, 31) 

DI MARZIO, E. A., 14205 Parkvale Rd., Rockville, 
Md. 20853 (F) 

DICKSON, GEORGE, MA, 52 Orchard Way North, 
Rockville, Md. 20854 (F-6, 21) 

DIEHL, WILLIAM W., Ph.D., 200 Maple Ave., Falls 
Church, Va. 22046 (E-10) 

DIGGES, THOMAS G., 3900 N. Albemarle St., 
Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-20) 


104 


DIMOCK, DAVID A., 4800 Barwyn House Rad., 
#114, College Park, Md. 20740 (M-13) 

DIXON, PEGGY A., Ph.D., 422 Hillsboro Dr., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20902 (F) 

DOCTOR NORMAN, B.S., 3814 Littleton St., 
Wheaton, Md. 20906 (F-13) 

DOFT, FLOYD S., Ph.D., 6416 Garnett Drive, Ken- 
wood, Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (E-4, 6, 19) 

DONALDSON, JOHANNA B., Mrs., 3020 North 
Edison St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (F) 

DONNERT, HERMANN J., Ph.D., RFD 4, Box 136, 
Terra Heights, Manhattan Ks. 66502 (F) 

DONOVICK, RICHARD, Ph.D., 16405 Alden Ave., 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-6, 16, 19) 

DOUGLAS, CHARLES A., Ph.D., 7315 Delfield St., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6, 32) 

DOUGLAS, THOMAS B., Ph.D., 3031 Sedgwick 
St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-4) 

DRAEGER, R. HAROLD, M.D., 1201 N. 4th Ave., 
Tucson, Ariz. 85705 (E-32) 

DRECHSLER, CHARLES, Ph.D., 6915 Oakridge 
Rd., University Park (Hyattsville), Md. 20782 
(E-6, 10) 

DUBEY, SATYA D., Ph.D., 7712 Groton Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) 

DUERKSEN, J. A., B.A., 3134 Monroe St., N.E. 
Washington, D.C. 20018 (E-1, 6, 38) 

DUFFEY, DICK, Ph.D., Nuclear Engineering, 
Univ. Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 
(F-1, 26) 

DUNKUM, WILLIAM W., M.S., 3503 Old Dominion 
Bivd., Alexandria, Va. 22305 (F-31) 

DU PONT, JOHN ELEUTHERE, P.O. Box 358, 
Newtown Square, Pa. 19073 (M) 

DUPRE, ELSIE, Mrs., Code 5536A, Optical Sci. 
Div., Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20390 
(F-32) 

DURIE, EDYTHE G., 5011 Larno Dr., Alexandria, 
Va. 22310 (F) 

DURRANI, S. H., Sc.D., 17513 Lafayette Dr., 
Olney, Md. 20832 (F-13, 22) 

DYKE, E. D., 173 Northdown Rd., Margate, Kent, 
England (M) 


E 


EDDY, BERNICE E., Ph.D., 6722 Selkirk Ct., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-6, 16) 

EGOLF, DONALD R., 3600 Cambridge Court, 
Upper Marlboro, Md. 20870 (F-10) 

EISENBERG, PHILLIP, C.E., 6402 Tulsa Lane, 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (M-6, 14, 22, 25) 

EISENHART, CHURCHILL, Ph.D., Met B-268, 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-1, 38) 

EL-BISI, HAMED M., Ph.D., 135 Forest Rd., Millis, 
Ma. 02054 (M-16) 

ELLINGER, GEORGE A., 739 Kelly Dr., York, Pa. 
17404 (E-6) 

ELLIOTT, F. E., 7507 Grange Hall Dr., Oxon Hill, 
Md. 20022 (E) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


EMERSON, K. C., Ph.D., 2704 Kensington St., 
- Arlington, Va. 22207 (F-3, 5, 6) 

EMERSON, W. B., 415 Aspen St., N.W., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20012 (E) 

ENNIS, W. B., Jr., Ph.D., Agricultural Res. Ctr. 
U. of Florida, 3205 S.W. 70th Ave., Ft. Lauder- 
dale, Fl. 33314 (F-6) 

ERNST, JOHN A., NOAA/NESS WWB, S3X1 Room 
810-G, Washington, D.C. 20233 (M-22, 23) 
ETZEL, HOWARD W., Ph.D., 7304 Riverhill Rd., 

Oxon Hill, Md. 20021 (F-6) 

EWERS, JOHN C., 4432 26th Rd., N, Arlington, 

Va. 22207 (F-2, 6) 


= 


FAHEY, JOSEPH J., U.S. Geological Survey, 
Washington, D.C. 20242 (E-4, 6, 7) 

FARROW, RICHARD P., 2911 Northwood Dr., 
Alameda, Ca. 94501 (F-4, 6, 27) 

FATTAH, JERRY, 3451 S. Wakefield St., Arling- 
ton, Va. 22206 (M-4, 39) 

FAULKNER, JOSEPH A., 1007 Sligo Creek Pky., 
Takoma Park, Md. 20012 (F-6) 

FAUST, GEORGE T., Ph.D., P.O. Box 411, 
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920 (E-7, 28) 

FAUST, WILLIAM R., Ph.D., 5907 Walnut St., 
Temple Hills, Md. 20031 (F-1, 6) 

FEARN, JAMES E., Ph.D., Materials and Com- 
posites Sect., Natl. Bureau of Standards, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6, 9) 

FELDMAN, SAMUEL, NKF Engr. Associates, 
Inc., 8720 Georgia Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 
20910 (M-6, 25) 

FELSHER, MURRAY, Ph.D., NASA Code ERS-2, 
Wash. D.C. 20546 (M-1, 7) 

FERRELL, RICHARD A., Ph.D., Dept. of Physics, 
University of Maryland, College Park, Md. 
20742 (F-6, 31) 

FIFE, EARLH., Jr., M.S., Box 122, Royal Oak, Md. 
21662 (E-6, 16, 19) 

FILIPESCU, NICOLAE, M.D., Ph.D., 4836 S. 7th 
St., Arlington, Va. 22204 (F-4) 

FINN, EDWARD J., Ph.D., 4211 Oakridge La., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6, 31) 

FISHER, JOEL L., 5602 Asbury Ct., Alexandria, 
Va. 22313 (M) 

FISHMAN, PETER H., Ph.D., 3333 University 
Blvd. West, Kensington, Md. 20795 (F) 

FLETCHER, DONALD G., Natl. Bureau of Stand- 
ards, Rm. A102, Bldg. 231-IND, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (M-4) 

FLICK, DONALD F., 930 19th St. So., Arlington, 
Va. 22202 (F-4, 19, 39) 

FLINN, DAVID R., 8104 Bernard Dr., Ft. Washing- 
ton, Md. 20022 (F-4, 29) 

FLORIN, ROLAND E., Ph.D., Sci. & Stds. Div., 
B-318, National Bureau of Standards, Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6) 

FLYNN, DANIEL R., Ph.D., 17500 Ira Court, 
Derwood, Md. 20855 (F-4) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


FLYNN, JOSEPH H., Ph.D., 5309 Iroquois Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20016 (F-4) 

FOCKLER, HERBERT, M.A. MSLS., 10710 Lorain 
Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M-22, 43) 
FONER, S. N., Applied Physics Lab., The Johns 
Hopkins University, 11100 Johns Hopkins 

Rd., Laurel, Md. 20810 (F-1) 

FOOTE, RICHARD H., Sc.D., 8807 Victoria Road, 
Springfield, Va. 22151 (F-5, 6) 

FORZIATI, ALPHONSE F., Ph.D., 15525 Prince 
Frederick Way, Silver Spring, Md. 20906 
(F-1, 4, 29) 

FORZIATI, FLORENCE H., Ph.D., 15525 Prince 
Frederick Way, Silver Spring, Md., 20906 
(F-4) 

FOSTER, AUREL O., 4613 Drexel Rd., College 
Park, Md. 20740 (E-15, 24) 

FOURNIER, ROBERT O., 108 Paloma Rad., Por- 
tola Valley, Calif. 94025 (F-6, 7) 

FOWLER, EUGENE, Int. Atomic Energy Agency, 
Kartner Ring 11, A-1011, Vienna, Austria 
(M-26) 

FOWLER, WALTER B., M.A., Code 683, Goddard 
Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. 20771 
(M-32) 

FOX, DAVID W., The Johns Hopkins Univ., 
Applied Physics Lab., Laurel, Md. 20810 (F) 

FOX, WILLIAM B., 1813 Edgehill Dr., Alexandria, 
Va. 22307 (F-4) 

FRANKLIN, PHILIP J., 5907 Massachusetts Ave. 
Extended, Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-4, 13, 
39) 

FRANZ, GERALD J., M.S., Box 695, Bayview, 
Id. 83803 (F-5, 25) 

FREDERIKSE, H. P. R., Ph.D., 9625 Dewmar 
Lane, Kensington, Md. 20795 (F) 

FREEMAN, ANDREW F., 5012 N. 33rd. St., Arling- 
ton, Va. 22207 (M) 

FRENKIEL, FRANCOIS N., Code 1802.2, Naval 
Ship Res. & Develop. Ctr., Bethesda, Md. 
20084 (F-1, 22, 23) 

FRIEDMAN, MOSHE, 4511 Yuma St., Washing- 
ington, D.C. 20016 (F) 

FRIESS, S.L., Ph.D., Environmental Biosciences 
Dept., Naval Med. Res. Inst. NNMC, Bethesda, 
Md. 20014 (F-4) 

FRUSH, HARRIET L., 4912 New Hampshire Ave., 
N.W., Apt. 104, Washington, D.C. 20011 
(F-4, 6) 

FULLMER, IRVIN H., Lakeview Terrace, P.O. Box 
100, Altoona, Fla. 32702 (E-1, 6, 14) 

FURUKAWA, GEORGE T., Ph.D. National Bureau 
of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1, 
4, 6) 


G 


GAFAFER, WILLIAM M., 133 Cunningham Dr., 
New Smyrna Beach, Fla. 32069 (E) 

GAGE, WILLIAM, Ph.D., 2146 Florida Ave., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-2) 


105 


GALLER, SIDNEY, 6242 Woodcrest Ave., Balti- 
more, Md. 21209 (F) 

GALTSOFF, PAUL S., Ph.D., 15 Jacque Loeb 
Rd., Woods Hole, Mass. 02543 (E) 

GANT, JAMES Q., Jr., M.D., 4349 Klingle St., N.W. 
Wash. D.C. 20016 (M) 

GARDNER, MARJORIE H., Ph.D., 7720 Hanover 
Parkway, Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (F) 

GARNER, C. L., The Garfield, 5410 Connecticut 
Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (E-1, 4, 
25 lee 16) 

GARVIN, DAVID, Ph.D., 18700 Walker's Choice 
Rd., Apt. 519, Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4) 

GUANAURD, GUILLERMO C., Ph.D., 4807 Macon 
Rd., Rockville, Md. 20852 (M-1, 6, 25) 

GHAFFARI, ABOLGHASSEN, Ph.D., D.Sc., 5420 
Goldsboro Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (L-1, 
38) 

GHOSE, RABINDRA N., Ph.D., LL.B., 8167 Mul- 
holland Terr., Los Angeles Hill, Calif. 90046 
(F-13, 22) 

GIACCHETTI, ATHOS, Dept. Sci. Affairs, OAS, 
1735 Eye St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006 
(M-32) 

GIBSON, JOHN E., Box 96, Gibson, N.C. 28343 
(E) 

GIBSON, KASSON S., 4817 Cumberland St., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (E) 

GINTHER, ROBERT J., Code 5585, U.S. Naval 
Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20390 (F-28, 29) 

GIST, LEWIS A., Ph.D., Science Manpower 
Improvement, National Science Foundation, 
Washington, D.C. 20550 (F-4, 39) 

GIWER, MATTHIAS M., 3922 Millcreek Dr., 
Annandale, Va. 22003 (M) 

GLADSTONE, VIC S., Ph.D., 8200 Andes Ct., 
Baltimore, Md. 21208 (M-6, 25) 

GLASGOW, Augustus R., Jr., Ph.D., 4116 Hamil- 
ton St., Hyattsville, Md. 20781 (F-4, 6) 

GLAZEBROOK, THOMAS B., 7809 Bristow Dr., 
Annandale, Va. 22003 (F-11) 

GLICKSMAN, MARTIN E., Ph.D., Materials Engr. 
Dept., Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, N.Y. 
12181 (F-20, 36) 

GLUCKSTERN, ROBERT L., Ph.D., Chancellor 
Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 20742 (F-31) 

GODFREY, THEODORE B., 7508 Old Chester 
Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E) 

GOFF, JAMES F., Ph.D., 3405 34th Pl., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-1) 

GOLDBERG, MICHAEL, 5823 Potomac Ave., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-1, 38) 

GOLDBERG, ROBERT N., Ph.D., 19610 Brassie 
Pl., Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-39) 

GOLDMAN, ALAN J., Ph.D., Applied Math. Div. 
Inst. for Basic Standards, Natl. Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-34, 38) 

GOLDSMITH, HERBERT, 238 Congressional 
Lane, Rockville, Md. 20852 (M-32, 35) 

GOLUMBIC, CALVIN, 6000 Highboro Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) 

GONET, FRANK, 4007 N. Woodstock St., Arling- 
ton, Va. 22207 (F-4, 39) 


106 


GOODE, ROBERT J., B.S., Performance Metals 
Br., Code 6380, Metallurgy Div., U.S.N.R.L., 
Washington, D.C. 20390 (F-6, 20) 

GORDH, GORDON, Systematic Entomology Lab. 
11B111, U.S. National Museum, Washington, 
D.C. (M) 

GORDON RUTH E., Ph.D., Waksman Inst. of 
Microbiology, Rutgers Univer., P.O. Box 
759, Piscataway, N.J. 08854 (F-16) 

GRAHN, Mrs. ANN, M.A., 849 So. La Grange Rad., 
La Grange, III. 60525 (M) 

GRAMANN, RICHARD H., 1613 Rosemont CT, 
McLean, Va. 22101 (M) 

GRAY, ALFRED, Dept. Math., Univ. of Maryland, 
College Park, Md. 20742 (F) 

GRAY, IRVING, Ph.D., Georgetown Univ., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20057 (F-19) 

GREENOUGH, M. L., M.S., Greenough Data 
Assoc., 616 Aster Blvd., Rockville, Md. 20850 
(F) 

GREENSPAN, MARTIN, B.S., 12 Granville Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-1, 25) 

GREER, SANDRA, Ph.D., 11402 Stonewood Lane, 
Rockville, Md. 20852 (F-1, 4) 

GRISAMORE, NELSON T., Nat. Acad. Sci., 2101 
Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20418 (F) 

GRISCOM, DAVID L., Ph.D., Material Sci. Div., 
Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 
(F-6, 28) 

GROSSLING, BERNARDO F., Rm. 4B102, USGS 
Nat. Ctr., 12201 Sunrise Valley Dr., Reston, 
Va. 22092 (F-7) 

GUILD, PHILIP W., Ph.D., 3609 Raymond St., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (M-7, 36) 

GURNEY, ASHLEY B., Ph.D., Systematic Ento- 
mology Laboratory, USDA, % U.S. National 
Museum, NHB-105, Washington, D.C. 20560 
(F-3, 5, 6) 

GUTTMAN, CHARLES M., 9510 Fern Hollow Way, 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4) 


H 


HACSKAYLO, EDWARD, Ph.D., Agr. Res. Ctr., 
West, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-6, 10, 11, 33) 

HAENNI, EDWARD O., Ph.D., 7907 Glenbrook 
Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-4, 39) 

HAGAN, LUCY B., Ph.D., Natl. Bur. Stds., Rm. 
B360, Bg. 221, Washington, D.C. 20234 (M-4, 
32) 

HAINES, KENNETH A., M.S., ARS, 3542 N. Dela- 
ware St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (F-5, 24) 

HALL, E. RAYMOND, Ph.D., Museum of Natural 
History, Univ. of Kansas, Lawrence, Kans. 
66044 (E-3, 6) 

HALL, STANLEY A., M.S., 9109 No. Branch Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-4, 24) 

HALL, WAYNE C., Ph.D., 557 Lindley Dr., 
Lawrence, Kans. 66044 (E-6, 13) 

HALLER, WOLFGANG, Ph.D., National Bureau 
of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


HAMBLETON, EDSON J., 5140 Worthington Dr., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-3, 5, 6) 

HAMER, WALTER J., Ph.D., 3028 Dogwood St., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (F-4, 13, 29, 39) 

HAMMER, GUYS, II, 8902 Ewing Dr., Bethesda, 
Md. 20034 (M-12, 13) 

HAMPP, EDWARD G., D.D.S., National Institutes 
of Health, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-21) 

HAND, CADET H., Jr., Bodega Marine Lab., 
Bodega Bay, Calif. 94923 (F-6) 

HANIG, JOSEPH P., Ph.D., 822 Eden Court, 
Alexandria, Va. 22308 (F-4, 19) 

HANSEN, LOUIS S., D.D.S., School of Dentistry, 
San Francisco, Med. Center, Univ. of Calif., 
San Francisco, Calif. 94122 (F-21) 

HANSEN, MORRIS, H., M.A., Westat Research, 
Inc., 11600 Nebel St., Rockville, Md. 20852 
(F) 

HARDENBURG, ROBERT E., Ph.D., Agr. Mktg. 
Inst., Agr. Res. Ctr., (W), Beltsville, Md. 20705 
(F-6) 

HARR, JAMES W., M.A., 
Lanham, Md. 20801 (M-6) 

HARRINGTON, FRANCIS D., Ph.D., 4600 Ocean 
Beach Blvd., #204, Cocoa Beach, Fla. 
32931 (F) 

HARRINGTON, M. C., Ph.D., 4545 Connecticut 
Ave., N.W., Apt. 334, Washington, D.C. 20008 
(E-1, 32) 

HARRIS, FOREST K., Ph.D., National Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) 

HARRIS, MILTON, Ph.D., 3300 Whitehaven St., 
N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 20007 (F) 

HARRISON, W. N., 3734 Windom PI., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-1, 6, 25) 

HARTLEY, JANET W., Ph.D., National Inst. of 
Allergy & Infectious Diseases, National In- 
stitutes of Health, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

HARTMANN, GREGORY K., Ph.D.,10701 Keswick 
St., Garrett Park, Md. 20766 (F-1, 25) 

HARTZLER, MARY P., 3326 Hartwell Ct., Falls 
Church, Va. 22042 (M-6) 

HASKINS, C. P., Ph.D., 2100 M St., N.W., Suite 
600 Washington, D.C. 20037 (F) 

HAS, GEORG H., 7728 Lee Avenue, Alexandria, 
Va. 22308 (F-32) 

HAUPTMAN, HERBERT, Ph.D., Med. Fndn. of 
Buffalo, 73 High St., Buffalo, N.Y. 14203 
(F-1, 6, 38) 

HAYDEN, GEORGE A., 1312 Juniper St. N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20012 (M) 

HAYES, PATRICK, Ph.D., 950 25th St., Apt. 707, 
Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-38) 

HEADLEY, ANNE R., Ph.D., Ms., 2500 Virginia 
Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 (F) 

HEIFFER, M. H., Whitehall, #701, 4977 Battery 
La., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-6, 19) 

HEINRICH, KURT F., 804 Blossom Dr., Woodley 
Gardens, Rockville, Md. 20850 (F) 

HEINS, CONRAD P., Ph.D., Civil Engr. Dept., 
Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 20742 
(F-6, 18) 

HENDERSON, E. P., Div. of Meteorites, U.S. Na- 
tional Museum, Washington, D.C. 20560 (E-7) 


9503 Nordic Dr., 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


HENDRICKSON, WAYNE A., M.D., Ph.D., Lab. for 
the Structure of Matter, Naval Res. Lab. 
Code 6030, Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) 

HENNEBERRY, THOMAS J., 1409 E. North 
Share, Temple, Ariz. 85282 (F) 

HENRY, WARREN E., Ph.D., Howard Univ., 
P.O. Box 761, Washington, D.C. 20059 (F-1, 31) 

HENVIS, BERTHA W., Code 5277, Naval Res. 
Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (M-32) 

HERBERMAN, RONALD B., 8528 Atwell Rd., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F) 

HERMACH, FRANCIS L., 2415 Eccleston St., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-1, 13, 25) 

HERMAN, ROBERT, Ph.D., Traffic Sci. Dept., 
General Motors Res. Lab., 12 Mi & Mound 
Rds., Warren, Mich. 48090 (F-1) 

HERSCHMAN, HARRY K., 4701 Willard Ave., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (E) 

HERSEY, JOHN B., 923 Harriman St., Great Falls, 
Va. 22066 (M-25) 

HERSEY, MAYO D., M.A., Div. of Engineering, 
Brown Univ., Providence, R.!. 02912 (E-1) 
HERZFELD, KARL F., Dept. of Physics, Catholic 
Univ., Washington, D.C. 20017 (E-1, 25) 
HESS, WALTER, C., 3607 Chesapeake St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20008 (E-4, 6, 19, 21) 
HEWSTON, ELIZABETH, Felicity Cove, Shady 

Side, Md. 20867 (F-39) 

HEYDEN,. FR. FRANCIS, Ph.D., Manila Observa- 
tory, P.O. Box 1231, Manila, Philippines D-404 
(E-32) 

HEYER, W. R., Ph.D., Amphibians & Reptiles, 
Natural History Bldg., Smithsonian Inst., 
Washington, D.C. 20560 (F-3) 

HIATT, CASPAR W., Ph.D., Univ. of Texas Health 
Science Center, 7703 Floyd Curl Dr., San 
Antonio, Texas 78284 (F) 

HICKLEY, THOMAS J., 626 Binnacle Dr., Naples, 
Fla. 33940 (F-13) 

HICKOX, GEORGE H., Ph.D., 9310 Allwood Ct., 
Alexandria, Va. 22309 (E-6, 14, 18) 

HILDEBRAND, EARL M., 11092 Timberline Dr., 
Sun City, Ariz. 85351 (E-10, 16, 33, 42) 

HILL, FREEMAN K., Ph.D., 12408 Hall’s Shop Rd., 
Fulton, Md. 20759 (F-1, 6, 22) 

HILLABRANT, WALTER, Ph.D., Dept. Psychol- 
ogy, Howard Univ., Washington, D.C. 20059 
(M-40) 

HILSENRATH, JOSEPH, 9603 Brunett Ave., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20901 (F-1, 38) 

HOBBS, ROBERT B., 7715 Old Chester Rad., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-1, 4, 39) 

HOFFMANN, C. H., Ph.D., 6906 40th Ave., Univer- 
sity Park, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E-5, 11, 24) 

HOGAN, ROBERT, Dept. of Psychology, the 
Johns Hopkins Univ., Baltimore, Md. 21218 (F) 

HOGE, HAROLD J., Ph.D., 5 Rice Spring Lane, 
Wayland, Me. 01778 (F-1) 

HOLLIES, NORMAN R. S., Gillette Research 
Institute, 1413 Research Blvd., Rockville, Md. 
20850 (F-4) 

HOLMGREN, HARRY D., Ph.D., 3044-3 R St., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20007 (F-1) 


107 


HONIG, JOHN G., Office, Dep. Chief of Staff 
for Res., Dev. and Acquis., Army, The Penta- 
gon, Washington, D.C. 20310 (F-34) 

HOOD, KENNETH J., 2000 Huntington Ave., 
#1118, Alexandria, Va. 22303 (M-6, 33) 

HOPP, HENRY, Ph.D., 6604 Michaels Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-11) 

HOPP, THEODORE H., 2800 Powder Mill Rd., 
Adelphi, Md. 20783 (M-6, 13) 

HOPPS, HOPE E., Mrs., 1762 Overlook Dr., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20903 (F-16, 19) 

HORNSTEIN, IRWIN, Ph.D., 5920 Bryn Mawr Rad., 
College Park, Md. 20740 (F-4, 6, 27) 

HOROWITZ, E., Asst. Deputy Director, Institute 
for Materials Res., National Bureau of Stand- 
ards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) 

HORTON, BILLY M., 14250 Larchmere Bivd., 
Shaker Heights, Ohio 44120 (F-1, 6, 13) 
HOWARD, JAMES H., Ph.D., 3822 Albemarle St., 

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F) 

HUANG, KUN-YEN, M.D., Ph.D., 1445 Laurel 
Hill Rd., Vienna, Va. 22180 (F-16) 

HUBBARD, DONALD, Ph.D., 4807 Chevy Chase 

_ Dr., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-4, 6) 

HUBERT, LESTER F., 4704 Mangum Rad., College 
Park, Md. 20740 (F-23) | 

HUDSON, COLIN M., Ph.D., Product Planning 
Dept., Deere & Co., John Deere Rd., Mocine, 
Il. 61265 (F-6, 17, 22) 

HUDSON, GEORGE E., Ph.D., Code WR 4, Naval 
Surface Weapons Ctr., White Oak, Silver 
Spring, Md. 20910 (F-1, 6) 

HUDSON, RALPH P., Ph.D., National Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1) 
HUGH, RUDOLPH, Ph.D., George Washington 
Univ. Sch. of Med., Dept. of Microbiology, 
2300 Eye St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 

(F-16, 19) 

HUNT, W. HAWARD, B.A., 11712 Roby Ave., 
Beltsville, Md. 20705 (M-6) 

HUNTER, RICHARD S., 9529 Lee Highway, 
Fairfax, Va. 22031 (F-6, 27, 32) 

HUNTER, WILLIAM R., M.S., Code 7143, U.S. 
Naval Research Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 
(F-1, 6, 32) 

HURDLE, BURTON G., 6222 Berkeley Rd., Alex- 
andria, Va. 22307 (F-25) 

HURTT, WOODLAND, Ph.D., ARS-USDA, P.O. 
Box 1209, Frederick, Md. 21701 (M-33) 

HUTTON, GEORGE L., 809 Avondale Dr., W. 
Lafayette, Ind. 47906 (F) 


INSLEY, HERBERT, Ph.D., 5 Graund Place, 
Albany, N.Y. 12205 (E-1, 7) 

IRVING, GEORGE W., Jr., Ph.D., 4836 Langdrum 
Lane, Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-4, 6, 27, 39) 

IRWIN, GEORGE R., Ph.D., 7306 Edmonston Rd., 
College Park, Md. 20740 (F-1, 6) 

ISBELL, H. S., 4704 Blagden Ave., 
Washington, D.C. 20011 (F-4) 


N.W., 


108 


ISENSTEIN, Robert S., FSQS, Bldg. 318-C, Barc- 


East, USDA, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (M-6, 15) 

JACKSON, H. H. T., Ph.D., 122 Pinecrest Rd., 
Durham, N.C. (E-3) 

JACKSON, PATRICIA C., B.S., Ms., Plant Stress 
Lab. Plant Physiology Inst., Agr. Res. Ctr. 
(W), ARS, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (M-4, 6, 33) 

JACOBS, WOODROW C., Ph.D., 6309 Bradley 
Bivd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-23) 

JACOBSON, MARTIN, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 
Agr. Res. Center (E) Beltsville, Md. 20705 
(F-4, 7, 24) 

JACOX, MARILYN E., Ph.D., National Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4) 
JAMES, MAURICE T., Ph.D., Dept. of Ento- 
mology, Washington State University, Pull- 

man, Washington 99164 (E-5) 

JANI, LORRAINE L., 430 M St., S. W. Apt. #N800, 
Washington, D.C. 20024 (M) 

JAROSEWICH, EUGENE, NMNH, Smithsonian 
Inst., Washington, D.C. 20560 (M-4) 

JEN, C. K., Applied Physics Lab., John Hopkins 
Rd., Laurel, Md. 20810 (E) 

JENSON, ARTHUR S., Ph.D., Westinghouse 
Defense & Electronic Systems Ctr., Box 1521, 
Baltimore, Md. 21203 (F-13, 31, 32) 

JESSUP, R. S., 7001 W. Greenvale Pkwy., Chevy 
Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6) 

JOHANNESEN, ROLF B., Ph.D., National Bureau 
of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6) 

JOHNSON, CHARLES, Ph.D., Inst. for Fluid Dy- 
namics & App. Math. Univ. of Md., College 
Park, Md. 20850 (F) 

JOHNSON, DANIEL P., Ph.D., Rt. 1, Box 156, 
Bonita, La. 71223 (E-1, 22, 35) 

JOHNSON, KEITH C., 4422 Davenport St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (F) 

JOHNSON, PHILLIS T., Ph.D., Nat. Marine 
Fisheries Serv., Oxford Lab., Oxford, Md. 
21654 (F-5, 6) 

JOHNSTON, FRANCIS E., Ph.D., 307 W. Mont- 
gomery Ave., Rockville, Md. 20850 (E-1) 
JONES, HENRY A., 1115 South 7th St., El Centro, 

Calif. 92243 (E) 

JONES, HOWARD S., 6200 Sligo Mill Rd., N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20011 (F-6, 13) 

JONG, SHUNG-CHANG, Ph.D., Amer. Type Cul- 
ture Collection, 12301 Parkland Dr., Rock- 
ville, Md. 20852 (F-16, 42) 

JORDAN, GARY BLAKE, Ph.D., 1012 Olmo Ct., 
San Jose, Calif. 95129 (M-6, 13, 22) 

JUDD, NEIL M., % C. A. McCary, 5311 Acacia 
Ave., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E-2, 6) 


K 


KABLER, MILTON N., Ph.D., 3109 Cunningham 
Dr., Alexandria, Va. 22309 (F) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


| 
| 
| 
| 


KAISER, HANS E., 433 South West Dr., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20901 (M-6) 

KARR, PHILIP R., 5507 Calle de Arboles, Tor- 
rance, Calif. 90505 (F-13) 

KARRER, ANNIE M. H., Ph.D., Port Republic, 
Md. 20676 (E-6) 

KAUFMAN, H. P., M.P.L., Box 1135, Fedhaven, 
Fla. 33854 (F-12) 

KEARNEY, PHILIP C., Ph.D., 13021 Blairmore St., 
Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-4) 

KEBABIAN, JOHN, Ph.D., 12408 Village Sq. Terr. 
#402, Rockville, Md. 20852 (F) 

KEGELES, GERSON, RFD 2, Stafford Springs, 
Conn. 06076 (F) 

KENNARD, RALPH B., Ph.D., Apt., 1207 Ross- 
moor Tower I, Leisure World, Laguna Hills, 
Calif. 92653 (E-1, 6, 32) 

KESSLER, KARL G., Ph.D., B164 Physics, Natl. 
Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 
(F-1, 6, 32) 


KEULEGAN, GARBIS H., Ph.D., 215 Buena Vista 


Dr., Vicksburg, Miss. 39180 (F-1, 6) 

KLEBANOFF, PHILIP S., Fluid Dynamics Sect., 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-1, 22) 

KLINGSBERG, CYRUS, Adams House, #1010, 118 
Monroe St., Rockville, Md. 20850 

KLUTE, CHARLES H., Ph.D., Apt. 118, 4545 Con- 
necticut Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 
(F-1, 4, 39) 

KNOBLOCK, EDWARD C., RD 4, Box 332; 
Mt. Airy, Md. 21771 (F-4, 19) 

KNOWLTON, KATHRYN, Ph.D., Apt. 837, 2122 
Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20008 (F-4) 

KNOX, ARTHUR S., M.A., M.Ed., 2006 Columbia 
Rd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20009 (M-6, 7) 

KNUTSON, LLOYD V., Ph.D., Insect Introduction 
Inst., USDA, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-5) 

KRUGER, JEROME, Ph.D., Rm B254, Materials 
Bldg., Natl. Bur. of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-4, 29, 36) 

KURTZ, FLOYD E., 8005 Custer Rd., Bethesda, 
Md. 20014 (E-4) 

KUSHNER, LAWRENCE M., Ph.D., Consumer 
Product Safety Commission, Washington, 
D.C. 20207 (F-4) 


L 


LABENZ, PAUL J., P.O. Box 30198, Bethesda, 
Md. 20014 

LADO, ROBERT, Ph.D., Georgetown Univ., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20007 (F) 

LAKI, KOLOMAN, Ph.D., Bldg. 4, Natl. Inst. of 
Health, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

LANDSBERG, H. E., 5116 Yorkville Rd., Temple 
Hills, Md. 20031 (F-1, 23) 

LANG, MARTHA E. C., B.S., Connecticut Ave., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-6, 7) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


LANGFORD, GEORGE S., Ph.D., 4606 Hartwick 
Rd., College Park, Md. 20740 (E-5, 24) 

LAPHAM, EVAN G., 2242 S.E. 28th St., Cape 
Coral, Fla. 33904 (E) 

LASHOF, THEODORE W., 10125 Ashburton 
Lane, Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) 

LAWSON, ROGER H., 4912 Ridge View Lane, 
Bowie, Md. 20715 (F-6, 42) 

LEACHMAN, ROBERT B., 5330 Wapakoneta Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20016 (F-1, 26) 

LE CLERG, ERWIN L., 14620 Deerhurst Terrace, 
Silver Spring, Md. 20906 (E-10, 42) 

LEE, RICHARD H., RD 2, Box 143E, Lewes, Del. 
19958 (E) 

LEIBOWITZ, JACK R., 12608 Davan Dr., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20904 (F) 

LEINER, ALAN L., 580 Arastradero Rd., #804, 
Palo Alto, Calif. 94306 (F) 

LEJINS, PETER P., Univ. of Maryland, Inst. 
Crim. Justice and Criminology, College Park, 
Md. 20742 (F-10) 

LENTZ, PAUL LEWIS, Ph.D., 5 Orange Ct., 
Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (F-6, 10) 

LESSOFF, HOWARD, Code 5220, Naval Res. Lab., 
Washington, D.C. 20375 (F-34) 

LEVY, SAMUEL, 2279 Preisman Dr., Schenec- 
tady, N.Y. 12309 (E) 

LIDDEL, URNER, 2939 Van Ness St. N.W., Apt. 
1135, Washington, D.C. 20008 (E-1) 

LIEBLEIN, JULIUS, 1621 E. Jefferson St., Rock- 
ville, Md. 20852 (E-34) 

LIN, MING CHANG, Ph.D., 9513 Fort Foote Rad., 
Oxon Hill, Md. 20022 (F-4, 32) 

LINDQUIST, A. W., Rt. 1, Box 36, Lindsberg, 
Kansas 67456 (E) 

LINDSEY, IRVING, M.A., 202 E. Alexandria Ave., 
Alexandria, Va. 22301 (E) 

LING, LEE, 1608 Belvoir Dr., Los Altos, Calif. 
94022 (E) 

LINK, CONRAD B., Dept. of Horticulture, Univ. 
of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 (F-6, 
10) 

LINNENBOM, VICTOR J., Ph.D., Code 8300,. 
Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20390 
(F-4) 

LITTLE, ELBERT L., Jr., Ph.D., 924 20th St., 
S. Arlington, Va. 22202 (F-10, 11) 

LOCKARD, J. DAVID, Ph.D., Botany Dept., Univ. 
of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 (F-33) 

LOEBENSTEIN, WILLIAM V., Ph.D., 8501 Sun- 
dale Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (F-4, 21) 

LONG, B. J. B., Mrs., 416 Riverbend Rd., Oxon 
Hill, Md. 20022 (M) 

LORING, BLAKE M., Sc.D., Rt. 2, Laconia, N.H. 
03246 (F-6, 20, 36) 

LUSTIG, ERNEST, Ph.D., Ges Biotechnol Forsch 
Mascheroder Weg 1, 3300 Braunschweig 66, 
W. Germany (F-4) 

LYNCH, Mrs. THOMAS J., 1062 Harriman St., 
Great Falls, Va. 22066 (M) 

LYONS, JOHN W., Rte. 4, Box 261, Mount Airy, 
Md. 21771 (F-4) 


109 


MA, TE-HSIU, Dept. of Biological Science, West- 
ern Illinois Univ., Macomb, Ill. 61455 (F-10, 19) 

MADDEN, ROBERT P., A251 Physics Bldg., Natl. 
Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 (F-32) 

MAENGWYN-DAVIES, G. D., Ph.D., 15205 Totten- 
ham Terr., Silver Spring, Md. 20206 (F-19) 

MAGIN, GEORGE B., Jr., General Delivery, 
Bakerton, W.Va. 25410 (F-6, 7, 26) 

MAHAN, A. I., Ph. D., 10 Millgrove Place, Ednor, 
Md. 20904 (E-1, 32) 

MAIENTHAL, MILLARD, 10116 Bevern Lane, 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-4) 

MANDEL, JOHN, Ph.D., B356 Chem. Bg., Natl. 
Bur. of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 
(Fad) 

MANDERSCHEID, RONALD W., Ph.D., 6 Monu- 
ment Ct., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-43) 

MANGUS, JOHN D., 6019 Berwyn Rd., College 
Park, Md. 20740 (F) 

MANNING, JOHN R., Ph.D., Metallurgy Div., 
Natl. Bur. of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 (F-20) 

MARCHELLO, JOSEPH M., Ph.D., 506 West 11th 
St., Rella, Md. 65401 (F) 

MARCUS, MARVIN, Ph.D., Dept. Math., Univ. of 
California, Santa Barbara, Calif. 93106 
(F-6, 38) 

MARGOSHES, MARVIN, Ph.D., 69 Midland Ave., 
Tarrytown, N.Y. 10591 (F) 

MARTIN, JOHN H., Ph.D., 124 N.W. 7th St., Apt. 
303, Corvallis, Oregon 97330 (E-6) 

MARTIN, ROBERT H., 2257 N. Nottingham St., 
Arlington, Va. 22205 (M-23) 

MARTON, L., Ph.D., Editorial Office, 4515 Lin- 
nean Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (E- 
1, 13, 30, 31) 

MARVIN, ROBERT S., 11700 Stony Creek Rad., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (E-1, 4, 6) 

MARYOTT, ARTHUR A., 4404 Maple Ave., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E-4, 6) 

MASON, HENRY LEA, Sc.D., 7008 Meadow Lane, 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-6, 14, 35) 

MASSEY, JOE T., Ph.D., 10111 Parkwood Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-1, 13) 

MATLACK, MARION, Ph.D., 2700 N. 25th St., 
Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-4, 6) 

MAXWELL, LOUIS R., Ph.D., 3506 Leland St., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1) 

MAY, DONALD C., Jr., Ph.D., 5931 Oakdale Rd., 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F) 

MAY, IRVING, M.S., U.S. Geological Survey, 
National Ctr. 912, Reston, Va. 22092 (F-4, 6, 7) 

MAYOR, JOHN R., Asst. Provost for Res., 
1120H, Univ. Maryland, College Park, Md. 
20742 (F) 

MC BRIDE, GORDON W., Ch.E., 3323 Stuyvesant 
Pl. N.W., Chevy Chase, D.C. 20015 (E-4) 

MC CAMY, CALVIN S., M.S., 54 All Angels Hill 
Rd., Wappingers Falls, N.Y. 12590 (F-32) 


110 


MC CULLOUGH, JAMES M., Ph.D., 6209 Apache 
St., Springfield, Va. 22150 (M) 

MC CULLOUGH, N. B., Ph.D., M.D., Dept. of 
Microbiology & Public Health, Michigan State 
Univ., East Lansing, Mich. 48823 (F-6, 8) 

MC ELHINNEY, JOHN, Ph.D., 11601 Stephen Rad., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20904 (F-1, 13, 26) 

MC KELVEY, VINCENT E., Ph.D., 6601 Broxburn 
Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-7) 

MC KENZIE, LAWSON W., A.M., 806 Madison 
Bldg., 111 Arlington Blvd., ‘Arlington, Va. 
22209 (F-1) 

MC NESBY, JAMES R., Dept. of Chemistry, 
Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 20742 (F-1, 4) 

MC PHEE, HUGH C., 3450 Toledo Terrace, Apt. 
425, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E-6) 

MC PHERSON, ARCHIBALD T., Ph.D., 403 
Russell Ave., Apt. 804, Gaithersburg, Md. 
20760 (L-1, 4, 6, 27) 

MEADE, BUFORD K., 5516 Bradley Blvd., aes 
andria, Va. 22311 (F-17) 

MEARS, FLORENCE, M., Ph.D., 8004 hatipden 
Lane, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E) 

MEARS, THOMAS W., B.S., 2809 Hathaway Ter- 
race, Wheaton, Md. 20906 (F-1, 4, 6) 

MEBS, RUSSELL W., Ph.D., 6620 32nd St., N., 
Arlington, Va. 22213 (F-12, 20) 

MELMED, ALLAN J., 732 Tiffany Court, Gaithers- 
burg, Md. 20760 (F) 

MENDELSOHN, MARK B., Psychology Dept., 
George Mason Univ., 4400 University Dr., 
Fairfax, Va. 22030 (F-40) 

MENIS, OSCAR, Analytical Chem. Div., 
Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
20234 (F) 

MENZER, ROBERT E., Ph.D., 7203 Wells Pkwy., 
Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (F-4, 24) 

MERRIAM, CARROLL F., Prospect Harbor, 
Maine 04669 (F-14) 

MESSINA, CARLA G., M.S., 9916 Montauk Ave., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) 

MEYERHOFF, HOWARD A., Ph.D., 3625 S. Flor- 
ence PI., Tulsa, Okla. 74105 (F-6, 7) 

MEYERSON, MELVIN R., Ph.D., 611. Golds- 
borough Dr., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-20) 

MICHAELIS, ROBERT E., National Bureau of 
Standards, Chemistry Bldg., Rm. B314, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-20) 

MIDDLETON, H. E., Ph.D., 3600 Grove Ave., 
Richmond, Va. 23221 (E) 

MILLAR, DAVID B., NMRI, NNMC, Stop 36, 

Biochemistry Div., Washington, D.C. 20014 

(F) | 

MILLER, CARL F., M.A., P.O. Box 127, Gretna, Va. 
24557 (E-2, 6) 

MILLER, J. CHARLES, Ph.D., 10600 Eastborne 
Ave., Apt. 7, W. Los Angeles, California 90024 
(E-7, 36) 

MILLER, PAUL R., Ph.D., 207 S. Pebble Beach 
Blvd., Sun City Ctr., Fla. 33570 (E-10, 42) 
MILLER, RALPH L., Ph.D., 5215 Abington Rd., 

Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-7) 

MILLER, W. ROBERT, Mrs., 11632 Deborah Dr., 

Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-6) 


Natl. 
D.C. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


MILLER, ROMAN R., 1232 Pinecrest Circle, Silver 
Spring, Md. 20910 (F-4, 6, 28) 

MILLIKEN, LEWIS T., SRL, 6501 Lafayette Ave., 
Riverdale, Md. 20840 (M-1, 4, 6, 7) 

MITCHELL, J. MURRAY, Jr., Ph.D., 1106 Dog- 
wood Dr., McLean, Va. 22101 (F-6, 23) 

MITTLEMAN, DON, Ph.D., 80 Parkwood Lane, 
Oberlin, Ohio 44074 (F-1) 

MIZELL, LOUIS R., 108 Sharon Lane, Greenlawn, 
N.Y. 11740 (F) 

MOLINO, JOHN A., Ph.D., Sound Bldg., Nat. 
Bureau Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 
(M-25) 

MOLLARI, MARIO, 4527 45th St., N.W., Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20016 (E-3, 5, 15) 

MOORE, GEORGE A., Ph.D., 1108 Agnew Dr., 
Rockville, Md. 20851 (F-6, 20, 29, 36) 

MORRIS, J. A., 23-E Ridge Rd., Greenbelt, Md. 
20770 (M-6, 15, 16) 

MORRIS, JOSEPH BURTON, Ph.D., Chemistry 
Dept. Howard Univ., Washington, D.C. 20059 
(F-4) 

MORRIS, KELSO B., 1448 Leegate Rd., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20012 (F-4, 39) 

MORRISS, DONALD J., 102 Baldwin Ct., Pt. Char- 
lotte, Fla. 33950 (E-11) 

MOSTOFI, F. K., M.D., Armed Forces Inst. of 
Pathology, Washington, D.C. 20306 (F) 

MOUNTAIN, RAYMOND D., B216 Physics Bldg., 
Nat. Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 (F) 

MUEHLHAUSE, C. O., Ph.D., 9105 Seven Locks 
Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-1, 26) 

MUESEBECK, CARL F. W., U.S. Natl. Museum 
of Nat. Hist., Washington, D.C. 20560 (E-3, 5) 

MULLIGAN, JAMES H., Ph.D., 12121 Sky Lane, 
Santa Ana, Calif. 92705 (F-12, 13, 38) 

MURDOCH, WALLACE P., Ph.D., Rt. 2, Gettys- 
burg, Pa. 17325 (F-5, 6, 24) 

MURRAY, THOMAS H., 2915 27th St., N. Arling- 
ton, Va. 22207 (M) 

MURRAY, WILLIAM S., 1281 Bartonshire Way, 
Potomac Woods, Rockville, Md. 20854 (F-5) 

MYERS, RALPH D., Physics Dept., Univ. of Mary- 
land, College Park, Md. 20740 (F-1) 


N 


NAESER, CHARLES R., Ph.D., 6654 Van Winkle 
Dr., Falls Church, Va. 22044 (E-4, 7, 39) 
NAMIAS, JEROME, Sc.D., 2251 Sverdrup Hall, 
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La 
Jolla, Calif. 92093 (F-23) 

NELSON, R. H., 7309 Finns Lane, Lanham, Md. 
20801 (E-5, 6, 24) 

NEPOMUCENE, SR. ST. JOHN, Villa Julie, Valley 
Rd., Stevenson, Md. 21153 (E-4) 

NEUENDORFFER, J. A., 911 Allison St., Alex- 
andria, Va. 22302 (F-6, 34) 

NEUSCHEL, SHERMAN K., 7501 Democracy 
Blvd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-7) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


NEWMAN, MORRIS, Dept. of Mathematics, Univ. 
of Calif., Santa Barbara, Calif. 93106 (F) 
NICKERSON, DOROTHY, 4800 Fillmore Ave., Apt. 

450, Alexandria, Va. 22311 (E-6, 32) 
NIKIFOROFF, C. C., 4309 Van Buren St., Univer- 
sity Park, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E) 
NOFFSINGER, TERRELL L., 9623 Sutherland 
Rd., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (F-6, 23) 
NORRIS, KARL H., 11204 Montgomery Rad., 
Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-27) 
NOYES, HOWARD E., Ph.D., 4807 Aspen Hill 
Rd., Rockville, Md. 20853 (F-6, 16) 


O 


O’BRIEN, JOHN A., Ph.D., Dept. of Biology, 
Catholic Univ. of America, Washington, D.C. 
20064 (E-10) 

OEHSER, PAUL H., 9012 Old Dominion Dr., 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F-1, 3, 9, 30) 

O’CONNOR, JAMES V., 10108 Haywood Cir., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (M-6, 7) 

O’HARE, JOHN, Ph.D., 301 G St. S.W., Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20024 (F-40, 44) 

O’HERN, ELIZABETH M., Ph.D., 633 G St., S.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20024 (M-16) 

O'KEEFE, JOHN A., Code 681, Goddard Space 
Flight Ctr., Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (F-1, 6) 
OKABE, HIDEO, Ph.D., Rm. A-243, Bg. 222, Natl. 
Bur. of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 

(F-4) 

OLIPHANT, MALCOLM W., Ph.D., 1606 Ulupii 
St., Kailua, Hi. 96734 (F) 

ORDWAY, FRED, Ph.D., 5205 Elsmere Ave., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-4, 6, 28, 39) 

ORLIN, HYMAN, Ph.D., Natl. Academy of Sci- 
ences, 2101 Constitution Ave N.W., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20418 (F-17) 

OSER, HANS J., Ph.D., 8810 Quiet Stream Ct., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-6) 

OTA, HAJIME, M.S., 5708 64th Ave., E. Riverdale, 
Md. 20840 (F-12) 

OWENS, JAMES P., M.A., 14528 Bauer Dr., Rock- 
ville, Md. 20853 (F-7) 


=) 


PAFFENBARGER, GEORGE C., D.D.S., ADA 
Health Foundation Res. Unit, Natl. Bur. of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-21) 

PARKER, KENNETH W., 6014 Kirby Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-3, 10, 11) 

PARKER, ROBERT:-L., Ph.D., Metallurgy Div., 
Natl. Bur. of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 (F) 

PARMAN, GEORGE K., 8054 Fairfax Rd., Alex- 
andria, Va. 22308 (F-4, 27) 

PARRY-HILL, JEAN, Ms., 3803 Military Rd., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (M) 


111 


PARSONS, HENRY JR., Ph.D., Institute for Be- 
havioral Research, 2429 Linden Lane, Silver 
Spring, Md. 20910 (F) 

PATRICK, ROBERT L., Ph.D., 6 Don Mills Court, 
Rockville, Md. 20850 (F) 

PAYNE, FAITH N., 1745 Hobart St. N.W., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20009 (M-7) 

PELCZAR, MICHAEL J., 4318 Clagett Pineway, 
University Park, Md. 20782 (F-16) 

PEROS, THEODORE P., Ph.D., Dept of Chem- 
istry, George Washington Univ., Washington, 
D.C. 20006 (F-1, 4, 39) 

PHAIR, GEORGE, Ph.D., 14700 River Rad., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-7) 

PHILLIPS, Mrs. M. LINDEMAN, M.S., 2510 
Virginia Ave., N.W., #507N, Washington, D.C. 
20037 (F-1, 6, 13, 25) 

PIKL, JOSEF, 211 Dickinson Rd., Glassboro, N.J. 
08028 (E) 

PITTMAN, MARGARET, Ph.D., 3133 Connecticut 
Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (E) 

PLAIT, ALAN O., M.S., 5402 Yorkshire St., 
Springfield, Va. 22151 (F-13) 

POLACHEK, HARRY, 11801 Rockville Pike 
Rd., Rockville, Md. 20852 (E) 

POOS, F. W., Ph.D., 5100 Fillmore. Ave., 
Alexandria, Va. 22311 (E-5, 6) 

POLLACK, Mrs. FLORA G., Mycology Lab., Rm. 
11 North Bldg., Beltsville Ars. Ctr. W. Belts- 
ville, Md. 20705 (F-10) 

PONNAMPERUMA, CYRIL, Ph.D., Lab. of Chemi- 
cal Evolution, U. of Maryland Dept. of Chem., 
College Park, Md. 20742 (F-4, 7) 

POWERS, KENDALL, Ph.D., 6311 Alcott Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-6, 15) 

PRESLEY, JOHN T., 3811 Courtney Circle, 
Bryan, Tx. 77801 (E) 

PRESTON, MALCOLM S., 10 Kilkea Ct., Balti- 
more, Md. 21236 (M) 

PRINZ, DIANNE K., Ph.D., Code 7121.5, Naval 
Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (M-32) 
PRO, MAYNARD J., 7904 Falstaff Rd., McLean, 

Va. 22101 (F-26) 

PRYOR, C. NICHOLAS, Ph.D., Naval Underwater 
Systems Ctr., Newport, RI. 02840 (F-137) 
PUGH, MARION S., Mrs., Little Fiddlers’ Green, 

Round Hill, Va. 22141 (M) 

PURCELL, ROBERT H., 17517 White Grounds 
Rd., Boyds, Md. 20720 (F-6, 16) 

PYKE, THOMAS N., Jr., M.S., Techn. Bg. A231, 
Nat. Bur. Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 
(F-6, 13) 


R 


RABINOW, JACOB, E. E., 6920 Selkirk Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-1, 13) 

RADER, CHARLES A., Gillette Res. Inst., 1413 
Research Blvd., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-4, 39) 

RADO, GEORGE T., Ph.D., 818 Carrie Court, 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F-1) 


112 


RAINWATER, H. IVAN, 2805 Liberty Pl., Bowie, 
Md. 20715 (E-5, 6, 24) 

RAMIREZ-FRANKLIN, LOUISE, 2501 N. Florida 
St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (M) 

RAMSAY, MAYNARD, Ph.D., 3806 Viser Ct., 
Bowie, Md. 20715 (F-5, 24) 

RANEY, WILLIAM P., Ph.D., NASA, Code E, 600 
Independence Ave., S. W., Washington, D. C. 
20546 (M-6, 25) 

RAUSCH, ROBERT, Div. of Animal Medicine, 
SB-42, School of Medicine, University of 
Washington, Seattle, WA 98195 (F3-15,) 

RAVITSKY, CHARLES, M.S., 1505 Drexel St., 
Takoma Park, Md. 20012 (E-32) 

READING, O. S., 6 N. Howells Point Rd., Bellport 
Suffolk County, New York, N.Y. 11713 (E-1) 

REAM, DONALD F., Holavallagata 9, Reykjavik, 
Iceland (F) 

RECHCIGL, MILOSLAV, Jr., Ph.D., 1703 Mark 
Lane, Rockville, Md. 20852 (F-4, 19, 27, 39) 

REED, WILLIAM D., 3609 Military Rd., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20015 (F-5, 6) 


REGGIA, FRANK, MSEE, 5227 N. Garden Lane, - 


Roanoke, Va. 24019 (F-6, 12, 13) 

REHDER, HARALD A., Ph.D., 5620 Oden Rad., 
Bethesda, Md. 20016 (F-3, 6) 

REINER, ALVIN, B.S., 11243 Bybee St., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20902 (M-6, 12, 13, 22) 

REINHART, FRANK W., D.Sc., 9918 Sutherland 
Rd., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (F-4, 6) 

REINHART, FRED M., M.S., 210 Grand Ave., 
Apt. 1, Ojai, Ca. 93023 (F-6, 20) 

REMMERS, GENE M., 7322 Craftown Rad., Fairfax 
Station, Va. 22039 (M) 

REYNOLDS, ORR E., Ph.D., Amer. Physiol. Soc., 
9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

RHODES, IDA, Mrs., 6676 Georgia Ave., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20012 (E) 

RHYNE, JAMES J., Ph.D., 15012 Butterchurn La., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20904 (F) 

RICE, FREDERICK A., 8005 Carita Court, 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-4, 6, 16, 19) 

RIOCH, DAVID MckK., M.D., 2429 Linden Lane, 
Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (F-3, 6) 

RITT, P. E., Ph.D., GTE Labs., Inc., 40 Sylvan 
Rd., Waltham, Mass. 02154 (F-6, 13, 23, 29) 

RIVLIN, RONALD S., Ctr. for Application of 
Math, 203 E. Packer Ave., Bethlehem, Pa. 
18015 (F) 

ROBBINS, MARY LOUISE, Ph.D., George Wash- 
ington Univ. Med. Ctr., 2300 Eye St. N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-6, 16, 19) 

ROBERTS, ELLIOT B., 4500 Wetherill 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-1, 6, 18) 

ROBERTS, RICHARD B., Ph.D., Dept. Terrestrial 
Mag., 5241 Broad Branch Rd., N.W., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20015 (E) 

ROBERTS, RICHARD C., 5170 Phantom Court, 
Columbia, Md. 21044 (F-6, 38) 

ROBERTSON, A. F., Ph.D., 4228 Butterworth PI., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F) 

ROBERTSON, RANDAL M., Ph.D., 1404 Highland 
Circle, S.E., Blacksburg, Va. 24060 (E-6) 


Rd., 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


ROCK, GEORGE D., Ph.D., The Kennedy Warren, 
3133 Conn. Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20008 (E) 

RODNEY, WILLIAM S., 8112 Whites Ford Way, 
Rockville, Md. 20854 (F-1, 32) 

RODRIGUEZ, RAUL, 254 Tous Sato, Baldrich, 
Hato Rey, PR. 00918 (F-17) 

ROLLER, PAUL S., 1440 N St., N.W., Apt. 1011, 
Washington, D.C. 20005 (E) 

ROSADO JOHN A., 10519 Edgemont Dr., Adelphi, 
Md. 20783 (F-13) 

ROSE, WILLIAM K., Ph.D., 10916 Picasso Ln., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F) 

ROSENBLATT, DAVID, 2939 Van Ness St., N.W., 
Apt. 702, Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-1) 

ROSENBLATT, JOAN R., 2939 Van Ness St., 
N.W., Apt. 702, Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-1) 

ROSENTHAL, JENNY E., 7124 Strathmore St., 
Falls Church, Va. 22042 (F-13, 32) 

- ROSENTHAL, SANFORD M., Bldg. 4, Rm. 122, 
National Insts. of Health, Bethesda, Md. 
20014 (E) 

ROSS, FRANKLIN, Off. of Asst. Secy. of the Air 
Force, The Pentagon, Rm. 4E973, Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20330 (F-22) 

ROSS, SHERMAN, 2131 N.E. 58 Court, Fort 
Lauderdale, Fl. 33308 (F-40) 

ROSSINI, FREDERICK D., Ph.D., 19715 Green- 
side Terr., Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-1) 
ROTH, FRANK L., M.Sc., 200 E. 22nd St., #33 

Roswell, NM. 88201 (E-6) 

ROTH, ROBERT S., Solid State Chem. Sect., 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F) 

ROTKIN, ISRAEL, M.A., 11504 Regnid Dr., 
Wheaton, Md. 20902 (F-1, 13, 34) 

RUBIN, MORTON J., M.Sc., World Meterol. Org., 
Casa Postale #5, CH-1211, Geneva 20, 
Switzerland (F-23) 

RUDOLPH, MICHAEL, 4521 Bennion Rad., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20906 (M) 

RUPP, N. W., D.D.S., American Dental Assoc., 
Research Division, Rm. A157, Bldg. 224, 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-21) 

RUSSELL, LOUISE M., M.S., Bg. 004, Agr. Res. 
Center (West), USDA, Beltsville, Md. 20705 
(F-5, 6) 

RYERSON, KNOWLES A., M.S., Dean Emeritus, 
15 Arlmonte Dr., Berkeley, Calif. 94707 (E-6, 11) 


S 


SAALFIELD, FRED E., Naval Res. Lab., Code 
6100, Washington, D.C. 20375 

SAENZ, ALBERT W., Ph.D., Radiation Techn. 
Div., Naval Research Laboratory, Code 
6603S, Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) 

SAGER, MARTHA C., Ph.D., Briarcliff Rd., 
Arnold, Md. 21012 (F) 

SAILER, R. |., Ph.D., 3847 S.W. 6TH PI., Gaines- 
ville, Fla. 32607 (F-5, 6) 


_ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


SALISBURY, LLOYD L., 10138 Crestwood Rad., 
Kensington, Md. 20795 (M) 

SALLET, DIRSE W., Ph.D., 12440 Old Fletcher- 
town Rd., Bowie, Md. 20715 (M-1, 14) 

SARIMENTO, RAFAEL, Ph.D., % UNDP, Lagos, 
Nigeria, Box 20, Grand Central Post Office, 
New York, N.Y. 10017 (F-4, 5, 24, 39) 

SASMOR, ROBERT M., 4408 N. 20th Rd. Arling- 
ton, Va. 22207 (F) 

SAULMON, E. E., 202 North Edgewood St., 
Arlington, Va. 22201 (M) 

SAVILLE, THORNDIKE, Jr., M.S., 5601 Albia Rd., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-6, 18) 

SAYLOR, CHARLES P., Ph.D.,10001 Riggs Rd., 
Adelphi, Md. 20783 (F-1, 4, 32) 

SCHALK, JAMES M., Ph.D., U.S. Vegetable 
Lab., Highway 17 South, P.O. Box 3107, 
Charleston, S.C. 29407 (F) 

SCHECHTER, MILTON S., 10909 Hannes Court, 
Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (E-4, 24) 

SCHINDLER, ALBERT I., Sc.D., Code 6000, U.S. 
Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 
(F-1) 

SCHLAIN, DAVID, Ph.D., P.O. Box 348, College 
Park, Md. 20740 (F-4, 20, 29, 36) 

SCHMIDT, CLAUDE H., Ph.D., 1827 No. 3rd St., 
Fargo, No. Dak. 58102 (F-5) 

SCHNEIDER, SIDNEY, 239 N. Granada St., 
Arlington, Va. 22203 (E) 

SCHNEPFE, MARIAN M., Ph.D., Potomac Towers 
Apts. 640, 2001 North Adams St., Arlington, 
Va. 22201 (F-4, 7) 

SCHOENEMAN, ROBERT LEE, 9602 Ponca PI., 
Oxon Hill, Md. 20022 (F) 

SCHOOLEY, ALLEN H., 6113 Cloud Dr., Spring- 
field, Va. 22150 (F-6, 13, 23) 

SCHOOLEY, JAMES F., 13700 Darnestown Rad., 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-35) 

SCHUBAUER, G. B., Ph.D., 5609 Gloster Rad., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-1, 22) 

SCHULMAN, FRED, Ph.D., 11115 Markwood Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-4) 

SCHULMAN, JAMES H., Ph.D., U.S. Off. Naval 
Res., Code 102, 800 N. Quincy St., Arlington, 
Va. 22217 (F-1, 4, 6, 32) 

SCHWARTZ, ANTHONY M., Ph.D., 2260 Glen- 
more Terr., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-4, 39) 
SCHWARTZ, MANUEL, 321-322 Med. Arts Bg., 

Baltimore, Md. 21201 (M) 

SCOTT, DAVID B., D.D.S., 15C-1, 2 North Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-6, 21) 

SEABORG, GLENN T., Ph.D., Lawrence Berkeley 
Lab., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif. 
94720 (F-26) 

SEEGER, RAYMOND J., Ph.D., 4507 Wetherill 
Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20016 (E-1, 6, 30, 31) 
SEITZ, FREDERICK, Rockefeller University, New 

York, N.Y. 10021 (F-36) 

SERVICE, JERRY H., Ph.D., Cascade Manor, 65 
W. 30th Ave., Eugene, Oreg. 97405 (E) 

SHAFRIN, ELAINE G., M.S., Apt. N-702, 800 4th 
St., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20024 (F-4) 

SHAPIRA, NORMAN, 86 Oakwood Dr., Dunkirk, 
Md. 20754 (M) 


113 


SHAPIRO, GUSTAVE, B.S., 3704 Munsey St., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20906 (F-13) 

SHELTON, EMMA, National Cancer Institute, 
Bldg. 37, Rm. 4C-06, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

SHEPARD, HAROLD H., Ph.D., 2701 S. June St., 
Arlington, Va. 22202 (E-5) 

SHERESHEFSKY, J. LEON, Ph.D., 9023 Jones 
Mill Rd., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (E-4) 
SHERLIN, GROVER C., 4024 Hamilton St., 

Hyattsville, Md. 20781 (L-1, 6, 13, 31) 

SHMUKLER, LEON, 817 Valley Forge Towers, 
1000 Valley Forge Circle, King of Prussia, Pa. 
19404 (F) 

SHNEIDEROV, A. J., M.M.E., 1673 Columbia Rd., 
N.W.,#309, Washington, D.C. 20009 (M-1, 22) 

SHOTLAND, EDWIN, 418 E. Indian Spring Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M-1) 

SHROPSHIRE, W., Jr., Ph.D., Radiation Bio. Lab., 
12441 Parklawn Dr., Rockville, Md. 20852 
(F-6, 10, 33) 

SHUBIN, LESTER D., Proj. Mgr. for Standards, 
NILECJ/LEAA, U.S. Dept. Justice, Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20531 (F-4) 

SIEGLER, EDOUARD HORACE, Ph.D., 201 Tulip 
Ave., Takoma Park, Md. 20012 (E-5, 24) 
SILVER, DAVID M., Ph.D., Applied Physics Lab., 
Johns Hopkins Univ., Laurel, Md. 20810 

(M-4, 6) 

SIMHA, ROBERT, Ph.D., Case Western Reserve 
Univ., Cleveland, Ohio 44106 (F) 

SIMMONS, LANSING G., 3800 N. Fairfax Dr., 
Villa 809, Arlington, Va. 22203 (F-18) 

SIMON, BENSON J., M.B.A., 8704 Royal Ridge 
Lane, Laurel, Md. 20811 (M-37) 

SITTERLY, CHARLOTTE M., Ph.D., 3711 Brandy- 
wine St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 
(E-1, 6, 32) 

SLACK, LEWIS, 27 Meadow Bank Rd., Old Green- 
wich, Conn. 06870 (F) 

SLAWSKY, MILTON M., Ph.D., 8803 Lanier Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (E-6, 22, 31) 

SLAWSKY, ZAKA I., Ph.D., 9813 Belhaven Rad., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) 

SLEEMAN, H. KENNETH, Ph.D., Div. Biochem. 
WRAIR. Washington, D.C. 20012 (F) 

SLOCUM, GLENN G., 4204 Dresden St., Ken- 
sington, Md. 20795 (E-16, 27) 

SMILEY, ROBERT L., 1444 Primrose Rd., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20012 (M-5) 

SMITH, BLANCHARD DRAKE, M.S., 5265 Port 
Royal Road, Springfield, Va. 22151 

SMITH, DAYNA, 1745 Pimmit Dr., Falls Church, 
Va. 22043 (M) 

SMITH, FLOYD F., Ph.D., 9022 Fairview Rad., 

_ Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (E-5, 24, 42) 

SMITH, FRANCIS A., Ph.D., 1023 55th Ave., 
South, St. Petersburg, Fla. 33705 (E-6) 

SMITH, ROBERT C., Jr., %Versar, Inc., 6621 
Electronic Dr., Springfield, Va. 22151 (F-4, 22) 

SNAVELY, BENJAMIN L., Ph.D., 721 Springloch 
Rd., Silver Spring, Md. 20904 (F-25, 32) 

SNAY, HANS G., Ph.D., 17613 Treelawn Dr., 
Ashton, Md. 20702 (F-6, 7) 


114 


SNOW, C. EDWIN, 12715 Layhill Rd., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20906 (M-32) 

SNYDER, HERBERT H., Ph.D., RFD. A-1, Box 7, 
Cobden, IL. 62920 (F) 

SOKOL, PHILLIP E., Ph.D., 4704 Flower 
Valley Dr., Rockville, Md. 20853 (F-4, 6, 39) 

SOKOLOVE, FRANK L., 3015 Graham Rad., Falls 
Church, Va. 22042 (M) 

SOLOMON, EDWIN M., 5225 Pooks Hill Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (M-4) 

SOMERS, IRA I., 1511 Woodacre Dr., McLean, 
Va. 22101 (M-4, 6, 27) 

SOMMER, HELMUT, 9502 Hollins Ct., Bethesda, 
Md. 20034 (F-1, 13) 

SORROWS, H. E., Ph.D., 8820 Maxwell Dr., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-6, 13) 

SPALDING, DONALD H., Ph.D., 17500 S.W. 89th 
Ct., Miami, Fla. 33157 (F-6, 10) 

SPECHT, HEINZ, Ph.D., 311 Oakridge Dr., 
Schenectady, N.Y. 12306 (E-1, 6) 

SPENCER, LEWIS V., Box 206, Gaithersburg, 
Md. 20760 (F) 

SPERLING, FREDERICK, 1131 University Blvd., ~ 
W., #1807, Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-19) 

SPIES, JOSEPH R., 507 N. Monroe St., Arlington, 
Va. 22201 (F-4, 6, 19) 

SPOONER, CHARLES S., Jr., M.F., 346 Spring- 
vale Rd., Great Falls, Va. 22066 (F-1, 13, 25) 

SPRAGUE, G. F., Ph.D., Dept. Agronomy, Univ. of 
Illinois, Urbana, Ill. 61801 (E-33) 

ST. GEORGE, R. A., 3305 Powder Mill Rd., 
Adelphi Station, Hyattsville, Md. 20783 (F-3, 
5, 11, 24) 

STAIR, RALPH, 1686 Joplin St. S., Salem, Ore. 
97302 (E-6) 

STAKMAN, E. C., Univ. of Minnesota, Inst. of 
Agric., St. Paul, Minn. 55108 (E) 

STAUSS, HENRY E., Ph.D., 8005 Washington 
Ave., Alexandria, Va. 22308 (F-20) 

STEARN, JOSEPH L., 3511 Inverrary Dr., #108, 
Lauderville, Fl. 33319 (E) 

STEELE, LENDELL E., 7624 Highland St., 
Springfield, Va. 22150 (F-20, 26) 

STEERE, RUSSELL L., Ph.D., 6207 Carrollton 
Ter., Hyattsville, Md. 20781 (F-6, 10, 16, 42) 

STEGUN, IRENE A., National Bureau of Stand- 
ards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) 

STEIDLE, WALTER E., 2439 Flint Hill Rd., Vienna, 
Va. 22180 (F) 

STEINER, ROBERT F., Ph.D., 2609 Turf Valley 
Rd., Ellicott City, Md. 21043 (F-4) 

STEINHARDT, JACINTO, Ph.D., Georgetown 
Univ., Washington, D.C. 20057 (F-4) 

STEPHENS, ROBERT E., Ph.D., 4301 39th St., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-1, 32) 

STERN, KURT H., Ph.D., Naval Res. Lab., Code 
6130, Washington, D.C. 20375 (F-4, 29) 

STEVENS, RUSSELL B., Ph.D., Div. of Biological 
Sciences, N.R.C., 2101 Constitution Ave., 
Washington, D.C. 20418 (F-10, 42) 

STEVENSON, JOHN A., 3256 Brandy Ct., Falls 
Church, Va. 22042 (E-6, 10) 

STEWART, KENNETH R., 12907 Crookston La., 
#16, Rockville, Md. 20851 (M-25) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


\ ke 


, 


STEWART, T. DALE, M.D., 1191 Crest Lane, 
McLean, Va. 22101 (E-2, 6) 

ST. GEORGE, R. A. (Mr.), 3305 Powder Mill Rd., 
Adelphi, Md. 20783 (E) 


 STIEF, LOUIS J., Ph.D., Code 691, NASA God- 


dard Space Flight Ctr., Greenbelt, Md. 20771 
(F-4) 

STIEHLER, ROBERT D., Ph.D., 3234 Quesada 
St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (F-1, 4, 
14, 39) 

STILL, JOSEPH W., M.D., M.P.H., 1408 Edge- 
cliff Lane, Pasadena, Calif. 91107 (E) 

STIMSON, H. F., 2920 Brandywine St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20008 (E-1, 6) 


_ STOETZEL, MANYAB., Ph.D., 2600 Millvale Ave., 


North Forestville, Md. 20028 (F-5) 
STRAUSS, SIMON W., Ph.D., 4506 Cedell PI., 
Camp Springs, Md. 20031 (F-4) 


_ STRIMPLE, HARRELL, L., Dept. of Geology, The 


Univ. of lowa, lowa City, IA. 52242 (F) 


~ STUART, NEIL W., Ph.D., 1341 Chilton Dr., Silver 


Spring, Md. 20904 (F-10, 33) 
SULZBACHER, WILLIAM L., 8527 Clarkson Dr., 
Fulton, Md. 20759 (F-16, 27) 

SUTHERLAND, DOUGLAS, W. S., Ph.D., 125 
Lakeside Dr., Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (M) 
SWICK, CLARENCE H., 5514 Brenner St., Capitol 

Heights, Md. 20027 (F-1, 6, 7) 

SWINGLE, CHARLES F., Ph.D., 431 Humboldt 
St., Manhattan, Kans. 66502 (E-10, 11, 33) 
SYKES, ALAN O., 304 Mashie Dr., S.E., Vienna, 

Va. 22180 (M-25) 


+ 


TALBERT, PRESTON T., Ph.D., Dept. of Chem., 
Howard Univ., Washington, D.C. 20059 (F-4, 
39) ; 

TALBOTT, F. LEO, R.D. #4, Bethlehem, Pa. 
18015 (F-1, 6) 

TASAKI, ICHIJI, M.D., Ph.D., Lab. of Neuro- 
biology, Natl. Inst. of Mental Health, 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

TATE, DOUGLAS R., B.A., 11415 Farmland Dr., 
Rockville, Md. 20852 (F-1) 

TAYLOR, ALBERT L., 2620 14th Dr., Gainesville, 
Fl. 32608 (E-15) 


TAYLOR, B.N., Ph.D., Bg. 220, Rm. B258, Nat. 


Bureau Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 
(F-6, 13) 

TAYLOR, JOHN K., Ph.D., Chemistry Bldg., Rm. 
B-326, Natl. Bur. of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-4, 29) 


. TAYLOR, LAURISTON S., 7407 Denton Ra., 


Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E) 


_ TCHEN, CHAN-MOU, City College of New York, 


Mechanical Engr. Dept., New York, N.Y. 
10031 (F) 

TEAL, GORDON K., Ph.D., 5222 Park Lane, 
Dallas, Tex. 75220 (F-13, 29) 

TEITLER, S., Code 4105, Naval Res. Lab., 
Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


TERMAN, MAURICE J., U.S. Geological Survey, 
National Ctr. (917), Reston, Va. 22092 
(M-6-7) 

THEUS, RICHARD B., 8612 Van Buren Dr., Oxon 
Hill, Md. 20022 (F) 

THOMPSON, F. CHRISTIAN, 4255 S. 35th St., 
Arlington, Va. 22206 (F-3, 5) 

THURMAN-SCHWARTZWELDER, E. B., 3443 
Esplanade Ave., Apt. 210, New Orleans, La. 
70119 (E-5, 6) 

TILDEN, EVELYN B., Ph.D., 12101 Lomas Blvd., 
N.E., Box 24 Albuquerque, NM 87112 (E). 
TITUS, HARRY W., 7 Lakeview Ave., Andover, 

N.J. 07821 (E-6) 

TODD, MARGARET RUTH, Miss, P.O. Box 687, 
Vineyard Haven, Mass. 02568 (F-7) 

TOLHURST, GILBERT, Ph.D., 714.N.E. 12th Ave., 
Gainesville, Fl. 32601 (F-25, 40) 

TOLL, JOHN S., Ph.D., Pres., Univ. of Md., 
College Park, Md. 20742 (F-31) 

TORRESON, OSCAR W., 4317 Maple Ave., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E-6) 

TOUSEY, RICHARD, Ph.D., Code 7140, Naval 
Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F-1, 32) 

TOWNSEND, MARJORIE R., B.E.E., 3529 Tilden 
St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-13, 22) 

TRAUB, ROBERT, Ph.D., 5702 Bradley Blvd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-5) 

TREADWELL, CARLETON R., Ph.D., Dept. of 
Biochemistry, George Washington Univ., 
2300 Eye St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 
(F-19) 

TRENT, EVAN M., Mrs., P.O. Box 1425, Front 
Royal, Va. 22630 (M) 

TRUEBLOOD, EMILY E., Ph.D., 7100 Armat 
Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-6, 19) 

TRUNK, GERALD, Ph.D., 503 Tolna St., Balti- 
more, Md. 21224 (F) 

TUNELL, GEORGE, Ph.D., Dept. of Geol. °Sci., 
Univ. of California, Santa Barbara, Calif. 
93106 (E-7) 

TURNER, JAMES H., Ph.D., 11902 Falkirk Dr., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F) 


U 


UHLANER, J. E., Ph.D., 4258 Bonanita Dr., 
Encino, Ca. 91436 (F-40, 44) 


V 


VACHER, HERBERT C., 350 E. Eva St., Apt. 25, 
Phoenix, Arizona, 85020 (E) 

VAN DERSAL, WILLIAM R., Ph.D., 6 S. Kensing- 
ton St., Arlington, Va. 22204 (F-6) 

VAN DER ZWET, T., Ph.D., USDA Fruit Lab, 
Agric. Res. Ctr. West, Beltsville, Md. 20705 
(F-6, 10, 42) 


115 


VAN TUYL, ANDREW H., Ph.D., 1000 W. Nolcrest 
Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20903 (F-1, 6, 22) 


VEITCH, FLETCHER P., Jr., Ph.D., Dept. of 


Chemistry, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, 
Md. 20742 (F-4) 

VIGUE, KENNETH J., 12417 Ellen Ct., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20904, (M-13, 31) 

VILA, GEORGE J., Mr., 5517 Westbard Ave., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (M) 

VINCENT, ROBERT C., Dept. Chem., George 
Washington Univ., Washington, D.C. 20006 
(F) 

VINTI, JOHN P., Sc.D., M.I.T. Bldg., W91-202, 
Cambridge, MA. 02139 (F-1, 6) 

VISCO, EUGENE P., B.S., 2100 Washington 
Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (M-1, 34) 
VON HIPPEL, ARTHUR, Ph.D., 265 Glen Rad., 

Weston, Mass. 02193 (E-6) 


W 


WACHTMAN, J. B., Jr., B. 306, Matis. Bldg., 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F) 

WAGMAN, DONALD D., 7104 Wilson Lane, 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-4) 

WAGNER, A. JAMES, M.S., NOAA Nat. Weather 
Serv., Nat. Meteorol. Ctr., W31, World 
Weather Bg., Washington, D.C. 20233 (F-6, 23) 

WALKER, E. H., Ph.D., Friends House, 17330 
Quaker Lane, Sandy Spring, Md. 20860 (E-10) 

WALKER, JOHN D., Martin Marietta Corp., 1450 
S. Rolling Rd., Baltimore, Md. 21227 (F) 

WALTHER, CARL H., Ph.D., 1337 27th St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20007 (F-6, 18) 

WALTON, W. W., Sr., 1705 Edgewater Pkwy., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20903 (F-4, 6, 41) 

WARGA, MARY E., 2475 Virginia Ave., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-1, 4, 6, 32) 

WARING, JOHN A., 8502 Flower Ave., Takoma 
Park, Md. 20012 (M-12, 30) 

WARSHAW, STANLEY I., 1519 West Kersey Lane, 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-6, 28, 36) 

WATERWORTH, HOWARD E., Ph.D., 10001 
Franklin Ave., Seabrook, Md. 20801 (F-6, 41) 

WATSON, ROBERT B., 1167 Wimbledon Dr., 
McLean, Va. 22101 (E-6, 13, 25, 31) 

WAYNANT, RONALD W., Ph.D., 13101 Claxton 
Dr., Laurel, Md. 20811 (F-13, 32) 

WEAVER, E. R., 6815 Connecticut Ave., Chevy 
Chase, Md. 20015 (E-4, 6) 

WEBB, HAMILTON B., 4701 Willard Ave., Apt. 
1406, Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (M-6) 

WEBB, RALPH E., Ph.D., 21P Ridge Rd., 
Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (F-5, 24) 

WEBB, RAYMON E., Ph.D., Agr. Res. Center, 
Vegetable Lab., Bldg. 004, Rm. 220, Belts- 
ville, Md. 20705 (M-6, 10, 42) 

WEBER, EUGENE W., B.C.E., 2700 Virginia Ave., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 (E-6, 12, 17, 18) 

WEBER, ROBERT S., P.O. Box 56, 301 E. Alba 
St., Venice, Fl. 33595 (M-6, 13, 17) 


116 


WEIDLEIN, E. R., Weidacres, P.O. Box 445, 
Rector, Pa. 15677 (E) 

WEIHE, WERNER K., 2103 Basset St., Alexandria, 
Va. 22308 (E-32) 

WEINBERG, HAROLD P., B.S., 1507 Sanford Rd., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-20) 

WEINTRAUB, ROBERT L., 305 Fleming Ave., 
Frederick, Md. 21701 (E-4, 10, 16, 33) 

WEIR, CHARLES E., Rt. 3, Box 260B, San Louis 
Obispo, Calif. 93401 (F) 

WEISS, ARMAND B., D.B.A., 6516 Truman Lane, 
Falls Church, Va. 22043 (F-34) 

WEISS, GEORGE, 1105 N. Belgrade Rd., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20902 

WEISSLER, ALFRED, Ph.D., 5510 Uppingham 
St., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 4, 25) 

WELLMAN, FREDERICK L., Dept. of Plant 
Pathology, North Carolina State Univ., 
Raleigh, N.C. 27607 (E) 

WENSCH, GLEN W., 2207 Noel Dr., Champaign, 
Ill. 61820 (F-6, 20, 26) 

WEST, WILLIAM L., Dept. of Pharmacology, 
College of Medicine, Howard Univ., Washing- _ 
ton, D.C. 20059 (M-19, 26, 39) 

WETMORE, ALEXANDER, Ph.D., Smithsonian 
Inst., Washington, D.C. 20560 (F-3, 6) 

WHERRY, EDGAR T., 5515 Wissahichon Ave., 
Apt. E303, Philadelphia, Pa. 19144 (E) 

WHITE, HOWARD J., Jr., 8028 Park Overlook Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-4) 

WHITE, MARVIN H., Ph.D., 11176 Oakenshield 
Circle, Columbia, Md. 21044 (F-13) 

WHITELOCK, LELAND D., B.S.E.E., 2320 Bris- 
bane St., Clearwater, Fl. 33515 (F-13) 

WHITMAN, MERRILL J., 3300 Old Lee Highway, 
Fairfax, Va. 22030 (F-26) 

WHITTEN, CHARLES A., 9606 Sutherland Rd., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (E-1, 6) 

WICHERS, EDWARD, 9601 Kingston Rd., Kens- 
ington, Md. 20795 (E) 

WIENER, ALFRED, B.S., USDA Forest Service, 
3226 South Agriculture Bldg., Washington, 
D.C. 20013 (F-11) 

WILDHACK, W. A., 415 N. Oxford St., Arlington, 
Va. 22203 (F-1, 22, 31, 35) 

WILHELM, PETER G., 6710 Elroy PI., Oxon Hill, 
Md. 20021 (F) 

WILLENBROCK, F. KARL, School of Engin. & 
Appl. Sci., Southern Methodist Univ., 
Dallas, Tex. 75275 (F-13) 

WILLIAMS, DONALD H., 4112 Everett St., Kens- 
ington, Md. 20795 (M) 

WILSON, BRUCE L., 20 N. Leonora Ave., Apt. 
204, Tucson, Ariz. 85711 (F-1, 6) 

WILSON, WILLIAM K., M.S., 1401 Kurtz Rd., 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F-4) 

WINSTON, JAY S., Ph.D., 3106 Woodhollow Dr., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-6, 23) 

WISTORT, ROBERT L., M.Ed., 11630 35th PI., 
Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F) 

WITHINGTON, C. F., 3411 Ashley Terr., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-7) 

WITTLER, RUTH G., Ph.D., 83 Bay Dr., Bay Ridge, 
Annapolis, Md. 21403 (E-16) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


WOLCOTT, NORMAN N., Adm. Bldg. A224, 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-1) 

WOLFF, EDWARD A., 1021 Cresthaven Dr., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20903 (F-6, 13, 22) 

_WOLFLE, DAEL, Graduate School of Public 

| Affairs, University of Washington, Seattle, 
Washington 98195 (F) 

WOLFSON, ROBERT P., B.E., 10813 Larkmeade 
Lane, Potomac, Md. 20854 (M-13) 

WOMACK, MADELYN, Ph.D., 11511 Highview 
Ave.,Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-4, 19) 

WOOD, LAWRENCE A., Ph.D., Natl. Bur. of 

. Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (E-1, 4) 

WOOD, MARSHALL K., M.P.H., P.O. Box 27, 
Castine, Me. 04421 (F) 

WOOD, REUBEN E., 3120 N. Pershing Dr., 

| Arlington, Va. 22201 (F-4, 29) 

WORKMAN, WILLIAM G., M.D., 5221 42nd St., 

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (E-6, 8) 

WULF, OLIVER R., Noyes Lab. of Chem. Phys., 

Calif. Inst. of Tech., Pasadena, Calif. 91125 


(E) 


Y 


YAO, AUGUSTINE Y. M., Ph.D., 4434 Brocton 
Rd., Oxon Hill, Md. 20022 (M-23) 


_ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 3, 1978 


YAPLEE, BENJAMIN S., 8 Crest View Ct., Rock- 
ville, Md. 20854 (F-13) 

YODER, HATTEN S., Jr., Geophysical Lab., 2801 
Upton St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 
(F-4, 7) 

YOLKEN, H. T., 8205 Bondage Dr., Laytonsville, 
Md. 20760 (F-29) 

YOUNG, DAVID A., Jr., Ph.D., 612 Buck Jones 
Rd., Raleigh, N.C. 27606 (F-5) 

YOUNG, M. WHARTON, 3230 Park PI., Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20010 (E) 


Z 


ZELENY, LAWRENCE, Ph.D., 4312 Van Buren 
St., University Park, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 
(E-6) 

ZIEN, TSE-FOU, Ph.D., Naval Surface Weapons 
Ctr., White Oak, Silver Spring, Md. 20910 
(F-6, 22) 

ZIES, EMANUEL G., 3803 Blackthorne St., Chevy 
Chase, Md. 20015 (E-4, 7) 

ZOCH, RICHMOND T., 12605 Westover Court, 
Upper Marlboro, Md. 20870 (F) 

ZON, GERALD, Dept. Chemistry, Catholic Univ. 
of America, Washington, D.C. 20064 (M) 
ZWEMER, RAYMOND L., Ph.D., 3600 Chorley 
Woods Way, Silver Spring, Md. 20906 (E) 


117 


PCRS Te OND RE hee 
gn Wied iE Seth aaa 


Cala 


. a 
len, = 
‘as 


oe, t , + tl an ai é “1 
ie ee ey 


iii RM A EASY 


fue 
Ly 


4 ive: tg ’ ie 
hg 1 ra 
ry Tie Cray 38 he 4 ) 
' 
Pre ter 1 hak ae ‘ 
a { ; 


Beery aba 
Wf 0 if i\ i , as Y | 


Papa heats ai) im) Meee peat oy’ 


men Ley, tee eRe eagE Tee ane 


sats Eat, ie Baan 


toon 4 ey Hi iii (LTR VE. eee WWM s - 
we! draws, Gb heavy ate ou 

hte gtitt bardhoned txy (eewmin in a e 
BR drould be propociens Se a al | ‘ 
bh ve wee Cay mee iPr ks ca “m mye i ; | 

ron, Leven pate en a get 


q 
Ow, 


i 
Mi 


tm 
val 


Hf 


f 


Pop 


Se a 


JOURNAL OF THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 


Instructions to Contributors 


General 

Type manuscripts on white bond paper 
either 8% by 11 or 8 by 10% inches. Double 
‘space all lines, including those in abstracts, 
tables, legends, quoted matter, acknowledg- 
‘ments, and references cited. Number pages 
consecutively. Place your name and com- 
plete address in the upper right hand corner 
lof the title page. 
| 
Title, Author, and Affiliation 

Page | of your manuscript should contain 
only this information and your name and 
address. Choose a concise but complete and 
meaningful title. In research papers con- 
cerning biological subjects, include an indi- 


‘cation of the order and family of the taxa 
| discussed. Academic degrees will not nor- 


mally be included unless the author so 
specifies. If possible, combine your affilia- 
tion and mailing address (including Zip) so 


that readers can write to you directly. 


| Abstract 


Type on a separate sheet at the end of the 
manuscript. Make the abstract intelligible 
without reference to the text of the paper. 
Write an informative digest of the significant 


- content and conclusions, not a mere descrip- 


tion. Generally, the abstract should not ex- 
ceed 3% of the text. 


- Footnotes 


Use footnotes as sparingly as possible. 
Number text footnotes consecutively with 
Arabic numerals and type them on a sepa- 
rate sheet of paper at the end of the manu- 
script. Type table footnotes, if any, below 
each pertinent table on the same page. 


_ Illustrations and Legends 


The quality of all original illustrations 


_ must be high enough to facilitate good offset 
_ teproduction. They should have ample mar- 
gins and be drawn on heavy stock or 
' fastened to stiff cardboard to prevent bend- 


ing. They should be proportioned to column 


(1 x 3) or page (2 x 3) type-dimensions, 
- leaving space for legend material. Photo- 


graphs should have a glossy finish. They re- 
produce best when the contrast is fairly 
high. Identify each illustration with number 
and author in light pencil marks on the 
reverse side. Submit all illustrations sepa- 
rately — please do not glue or clip them to 
the pages of the manuscript. 

Do not type or write legends directly on 
the illustrations. Type legends on a separate 
sheet or sheets at the end of the manuscript. 
Indicate where you want illustrations to 
appear in the printed paper by writing the 
figure numbers lightly in the text margins, 
and be sure that each figure is properly re- 
ferenced in the text itself. Original “art” will 
be returned only at the author’s request and 
expense. 


Tables 

Include tables only when the same infor- 
mation cannot be presented economically in 
the text, or when a table presents the data in 
a more meaningful way. Consider preparing 
extremely complicated tabular matter in a 
form suitable for direct reproduction as an 
illustration. In such cases, the use of the 
typewriter is not recommended. 


References to Literature 

Limit references within the text and in 
synonymies to author and year (and page if 
needed). In a “Reference Cited” section, list 
alphabetically by senior author only those 
papers you have included in the text. Like- 
wise, be sure all the text references are 
listed. Type the “References Cited” section 
on a separate sheet after the last page of 
text. Abbreviations should follow the USA 
Standard for Periodical Title Abbreviations, 
7395-1963. 


Submission of Manuscripts 

Send completed manuscripts and sup- 
porting material to the Academy office (see 
address inside front cover) in care of the 
Editor. Authors will be requested to read 
Xerox “proofs” and invited to submit re- 
print orders prior to publication. 


Reprints - Prices for reprints may be obtained on request. 


Washington Academy of Sciences 
9650 Rockville Pike (Bethesda) 
Washington, D.C. 20014 

Return Requested with Form 3579 


d 


2nd Class Postage Pai 1 
at Washington, D.C. — 
and additional mailing offices. 


2W,23 


VOLUME 68 
Number 4 


Jour nal of the DECEMBER, 1978 


WASHINGTON 
ACADEMY-.- SCIENCES 


ISSN 0043-0439 


Issued Quarterly 
at Washington, D.C. 


CONTENTS 
Features: 
ARCHIBALD T. McPHERSON: The Golden Age of Nutrition............ 121 
OSCAR W. ALBRECHT: What Price Should Society Pay for Conservation?.... 129 


Research Reports: 


RICHARD H. McCUEN, ROBERT L. POWELL, and FRED W. DEW: 
A Programming Approach to Planning For Agricultural Resource 
Allocation and Inngation System Design..:..:...2....2.+..2-.4060n0e0 133 


GEORGE R. ZUG and RONALD ALTIG: Anuran Locomotion— Structure 
and Finetion:, ihe Jumping Forces of Frogs ....:.:....-.s.0808--++-- 144 


ROBERT A. WHARTON and PAUL M. MARSH: New World Opiinae 
(Hymenoptera: Braconidae) Parasitic on Tephritidae (Diptera) ......... 147 


Washington Academy of Sciences 


Founded in 1898 


EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 


President 
Mary H. Aldridge 


President-Elect 
Alfred Weissler 


Secretary 
James F. Goff 


Treasurer 
Nelson W. Rupp 


Members at Large 
Conrad B. Link 
Elaine Shafrin 


BOARD OF MANAGERS 


All delegates of affiliated 
Societies (see facing page) 


EDITOR 


Richard H. Foote 


EDITORIAL ASSISTANT 


Elizabeth Ostaggi 


ACADEMY OFFICE 


9650 Rockville Pike 
Bethesda, MD. 20014 
Telephone: (301) 530-1402 


The Journal 


This journal, the official organ of the Washington Acad- 
emy of Sciences, publishes historical articles, critical 
reviews, and scholarly scientific articles; proceedings 
of meetings of the Academy and its Board of Mana- 
gers; and other items of interest to Academy members. 
The Journal appears four times a year (March, June, 
September, and December)—the September issue 
contains a directory of the Academy membership. 


Subscription Rates 


Members, fellows, and patrons in good standing re- 
ceive the Journal without charge. Subscriptions are 
available on a calendar year basis only, payable in ad- 
vance. Payment must be made in U.S. currency at the 
following rates: 


U.S. and Canada....... $17.00 
I OGEVOM aici ae eras eee 18.50 
Single Copy Price...... 6.00 


Single-copy price for Vol. 66, No. 1 (March, 1976) 
is $7.50. 


Back Issues 


Obtainable from the Academy office (address at bot- 
tom of opposite column): Proceedings: Vols. 1-13 
(1898-1910) Index: To Vols. 1—13 of the Proceedings 
and Vols. 1—40 of the Journal Journal: Back issues, 


volumes, and sets (Vols. 1—62, 1911—1972) and all cur-. 


rent issues. 


Claims for Missing Numbers 


Claims will not be allowed if received more than 60 
days after date of mailing plus time normally required 
for postal delivery and claim. No claims will be al- 
lowed because of failure to notify the Academy of a 
change in address. 


Change of Address 


Address changes should be sent promptly to the Acad- 
emy office. Such notification should show both old 
and new addresses and zip number. 


Published quarterly in March, June, September, and December of each year by the 
Washington Academy of Sciences, 9650 Rockville Pike, Washington, D.C. Second class 
postage paid at Washington, D.C. and additional mailing offices. 


ee — ee ee ee 


ee oe 


5 o_o 


DELEGATES TO THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 
REPRESENTING THE LOCAL AFFILIATED SOCIETIES 


Bmimsaphicdl SOCIety Ol Washington. 455.606 fe 2s oe che + Dae meeae eo ele eee See cleree James F. Goff 
PREMIDAOIOLICAl SOCIELY; Of WaSMIN@tON 2 oo s.6 6 5 .0. csi echo’ os > sera Cra teieoes ees = Jean K. Boek 
Peerical Society OF Washington <2... 266i Vic os oo ees cee vuln oe ee Sie ate ond allo William R. Heyer 
Mneutedl society Of Washington ............ 060 ccc es eee cece eee dee beeeees Delegate not appointed 
Eenomolorical Society of Washington ).... 22.0.6. 55 5 cece eee chee bee de wee ean Maynard Ramsay 
eMC OPTAPMIC SOCIOL, oie s/c c's etic cere v aclsicly wie Gers weld wis bie rein Glee & fa een ees oe T. Dale Stewart 
memieeican society Of Washington 2.2... 22 c0ccsve veces went eeaeeveuetanves Delegate not appointed 
Manca Socicty OF the District, of Columbia. 2... .006 20 0 cee cee ete eet eee bene Pawns Inactive 
2 cheers a TENISSTRICRY TAS YOYS) (EL ale enc Paul H. Oehser 
Peete ee SOCICHV Ol W ASMINGTON. 2 ices ies cin di eek ee ee ee eke ee tee eben es Conrad B. Link 
DELS OF JAE CCRT SO ete) ae Thomas B. Glazebrook 
PHP ONESOCICLY, Of ENPINCEHS .i26)o. Se cides cae co eS ne es eee veewe web erncas George Abraham 
eeeercrombmrcctrical and Electronics Empineers’ ... 2.20... ec eee eee eee George Abraham 
me ncine Society of Mechanical: Engineers 2.45. 65. oe. ee ek see wee enc wees Michael Chi 
Memunthological Society of Washington «............ 2s. .0.5.s cece eee meee ees Robert S. Isenstein 
Pmchicanisociety tor Microbiology <<... 22.06 226 oe ooo ek ee en ee he ee Michael Pelzcar 
PecicinmomAmenican Military EMSINEErs, ... 6.00... 6 ecb cee cscs beens cme eb asta en H. P. Demuth 
PaCHICANESOCICLYCO! Civil ENPINCETS: shies «<tc s lees cade Hews OG bene wees se eee vole Robert Sorenson 
poacicty tor Experimental Biology and Medicine’... .:...... 0.4 2.00 ec ee eee eee ann Donald Flick 
Pa TAC AMESOCICIVTOMNICLAISE ja. oiaicys cals sncyace- d-cue sa mch sc uh tne gad yaae els dame sae oe es Glen W. Wensch 
international Association of Dental Research ©...............000.00 eee canes William V. Loebenstein 
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics ... 02.2... 5.0..00 0.06 ee ee eleees George J. Vila 
Pt MEME eI COLOIONICAl SOGICLY. 6 d.<5 os 5 ee vee es ouabain bea shee eee ee te eae s A. James Wagner 
MISCeliCldcHSOCIcty Ol WaASMINGtOMs 2.4 05... cite oo ace derma tied synwiwes wees see wee Robert J. Argauer 
PORES SOCIEDY OF AMENICA oa.) es. cere aig se oe ota ke ee oe we AS UO S Wiles eal Delegate not appointed 
Penn ReaABIEINENE IC Al SOCICUN tegen Sao BLA a © chs ni ais ale erates lenape a wie le 1s Rvael oe iale.s ote ieis ew Oe Dick Duffey 
PASE e Rone OOGs NECHNOLOGISIS 2a sjdue eke Pettis oe de ee ed bn ee he ace wee William Sulzbacher 
LEE SIRIS2 TE (COPATAIG GOLETA TC ee era Rta ar eae eR AS Inactive 
RARE NIIIC AE SOCIE LY 6.2 ao. & cette che shanvonstekansariedsvencueheeenatenuntiouess SAI a de aa ae ee a eee David R. Flinn 
RemetongiStony) Of SCICNICe ClUD s 6.0. 5 os oo hee eee Sea a ddan eee bead ee ee ceded ewes Inactive 
PamccicanvAssociation of Physics Teachers ©... .... .05. ei eed wees ce oe eee os fee es To be appointed 
PMA SOCICLVAOIMAUNEIIGA tid: kinks Noe cee oi. RS ee. Wad or. wee Saterel., flay! Lucy B. Hagan 
Pamciicanesociery OF Plant PHYSIOIOGISUS: ie... .¢.. . PS Rees SOD Ee ee okt Walter Shropshire 
Seasineton Operations Research Council’ 0.2. oo. eee Pat eben wave ap dev ekeels John G. Honig 
PMC SOCIELYAO NIMCHICA © ccc same Ses Nea sso ke sea dae Ses twee EE OSE SG Woe ew ewe ete Inactive 
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical 

PRCMEC UROL TILT Ie NM ONC CHS ae rie ete Gu clo an ad Gatch ange yes, cle im a G.o bie was oe es es 8 Gus H. Goudarzi 
Bronce anitOleASthOMOMENS. 42.000 asc e Asati hea cibes betes vod Goo hh ee we eon m Benson J. Simon 
Memmematicall ASSOCIAHOM: OfeAMENICA coc: 6 ere Sie «since w Gk ale eitnye, vn oud tyeynre bleie hw sateen eg Patrick Hayes 
DOMES TINLS FOleCNeMIStS payee isc Ao eae, ceotenehe. = @ ue wb ybusicde a= + wade s owcrmaee quate anne Miloslav Recheigl, Jr. 
BOP IESVCHOIOCICAIWASSOCIATION) ~c.5 5 sila aos @ lee dbyaleel ds bacac s ocd Grew aslo s ayad whe Shrew eis John O’ Hare 
ince ashington Pamt Nechnical’Group! 9) .2.%.. de) cede 0eles Seas eee eee Paul G. Campbell 
PemCriCcany EnV COpatnOlopicalsSOCIGtyY TMA icn is... ck kc gie aa oe eee ged ene heed Tom van der Zwet 
Saciery tor General Systems Research. . selves cece ee ee eae cadences Ronald W. Manderscheid 
PAtieaneRACtOnsy SOCICLY 1. 2 yee ere enc ek es ws sR ae Shae i nebaane cage H. McIlvaine Parsons 
PMIMehI CAnwlSWelHeS SOCICLY. a2 a5 cuieg ete sce ea kbs cet ae hone eed Oba be Face ae mone Irwin M. Alperin 


Delegates continue in office until new selections are made by the representative societies. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 119 


FEATURES 


The Golden Age of Nutrition 


Archibald T. McPherson 


403 Russell Ave. #804, Gaithersburg, MD 20760 


ABSTRACT 


Within recent years science, engineering, and technology have reached a stage at 
which one can see the possibility of producing food in any desired quantity by total 
synthesis from abundant raw materials. Food supplementing and eventually 
superseding food from agriculture can be provided for everyone on the earth. 
Beginnings have been made by the synthetic production of vitamins, amino acids, 
fats, and carbohydrates. The following actions are proposed: (1) preparation, by a 
select interdisciplinary group, of a comprehensive program for research, development, 
and production; (2) endorsement of the program by the scientific community; (3) 
consideration of the program by the World Food Council, and recommendation by 
the Council to the United Nations Development Program; (4) financing by the UNDP; 
(5) establishment of an agency for synthetic foods; (6) coordination of synthetic and 
agricultural production. The vicious circle of poverty and malnutrition is now a major 
handicap to vast numbers of people in the developing countries. This circle can be 
broken by a massive infusion of food. The cost of the food would be offset, in the long 
range, by the increased gross national product which would result from increased 
productivity and a higher standard of living. 


This paper is a sequel to ‘‘Chemistry, 
Food, and Civilization,’ an address 
before the Washington Academy of 
Sciences by the author as retiring Presi- 
dent on February 19, 1959 (McPherson, 
1960). Publication of this address and 
citations in the literature led to a succes- 
sion of requests for talks, papers, and 
participation in symposiums that has 
continued almost to the present. This 
paper is intended as a concluding state- 
ment by the author. 

The attention to the address is in no 


way due to its originality or novelty. 


Indeed the basic idea of the production 
of human food by direct synthesis was 
presented by the celebrated German 
chemist, Emil Fischer (1906), in an ad- 


dress before the Royal Prussian Academy 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


of Sciences. Even at that time the idea 
was so widely current that it had been 
ridiculed in cartoons. But what was once 
speculation has been brought within the 
range of practicality by signal advances 
in science, engineering, and technology 
within the past 70 years. We can now 
clearly foresee the possibility of develop- 
ing a new source of food for man that 
will transcend the limitations that are im- 
posed on agricultural production by 
rainfall, soil, climate, and the availability 
of arable land. 


Golden Ages 


Many accounts of golden ages in the 
long distant past have come down to us 
in legends. History records a number of 
golden ages such as the Golden Age of 


121 


Pericles. Such golden ages, whether of 
history or legend, were usually of short 
duration; indeed, they may have been 
scarcely recognized as golden during the 
time they occurred. 

The Golden Age of Nutrition, in con- 
trast, lies in the future, and will be con- 
tinuing rather than ephemeral. Whereas 
the golden ages of the past resulted from 
‘some fortuitous or unusual combination 
of circumstances, the Golden Age of Nu- 
trition will not be heaven-sent, but will 
come only through the concerted action 
and sustained efforts of men and na- 
tions. | 

What, then, is this new Golden Age to 
be? What is needed to bring it in? How 
may it be recognized when it shall have 
been attained? The ancients pictured 
this age as a time of abundance of milk 
and honey—two basic nutrients that 
were usually scarce and always highly 
prized. A familiar hymn pictures future 
life in ‘‘Jerusalem the golden, with milk 
and honey blest! .. .”’ 

The Golden Age that we are speaking 
about will be realized when there will 
be enough food and correct food for every- 
one on earth. The food will not only be 
sufficient in quantity and optimal in nu- 
tritional value, but it will also appeal to 
the taste and afford pleasure in eating. 
The end sought is to assure that each 
child that is born will grow and develop 
to the maximum of his or her full 
physical, emotional, and mental capacity. 

At the present juncture in human 
affairs the Golden Age of Nutrition may 
seem very remote because of the gloomy 
prospect that the population of the earth 
may far outrun the food supply before 
the increase in population can be brought 
under control. The recent biennial 
survey by the Food and Agriculture 
Organization (1978) supports this fore- 
cast. In two years the world population 
has increased by 2%, whereas the food 
supply has gone up by only 1.5%, even 
though weather has been generally 
favorable and vigorous efforts have been 
made to increase the output of agri- 
culture. Furthermore, much of the in- 


122 


crease has been attained in countries that 
need it least. But even if food production 
could be brought into step with the in- 
crease in population, it would serve only 
to maintain the unhappy status quo of 
hunger and malnutrition of nearly half 
of the people of the earth. 

Looking ahead, and considering only 
agriculture, many can foresee only a 
long, slow, and painful period of adjust- 
ment of population to food supply, 
marked by small gains here, disastrous 
famines there, and the tragic failure of 
millions of children to attain normal 
growth and development. A few indi- 
viduals, however, can see the present 
dismal outlook as a stimulus to go to the 
next stage beyond agriculture and pro- 


duce man-made food by methods that | 


have proven so successful in forestalling 
shortages of fiber, rubber, plastics, 
detergents, pharmaceuticals, and many 
other products that were formerly 
derived wholly from agriculture. The 
development of synthesis as a major 
source of food can, and ultimately will, 
usher in a new era in human affairs 
as significant as was the development of 
agriculture 10,000 years ago. 


Food Through the Ages 


The advancement of man over the 
past two million or so years has been 
closely associated with successive stages 
in the increase or the improvement of 
food supply. The discovery and use of 
tools for obtaining food marked the 
transition from anthropoid to man. The 
prehuman diet had consisted principally 
of fruit, tender shoots and leaves, grubs, 
insects, and very occasional small ani- 
mals. It was greatly enriched by game, 
fish, nuts, and seeds that were obtained 
or utilized by the aid of tools. Man 
became omnivorous and was able to find 
subsistence over a much wider area. 
Then came the discovery of fire which 
further increased his range. His diet was 
greatly improved by the roasting or 
cooking of food, and many plants and 
roots that are toxic when eaten raw 
became safe and palatable on cooking. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


The advent of agriculture about 
10,000 years ago marked what was 
probably the greatest single advance in 
human affairs. The simultaneous do- 
mestication of sheep and goats and the 


cultivation of the wild grain, emmer, 


came about in the Fertile Crescent lying 
to the east, north, and west of the Tigris- 
Euphrates Valley. This made possible 
settled abode in village-farming com- 
munities such as Jarmo and Jericho. 
Similar developments occurred else- 


where in the world at about the same 


time, all possibly resulting from popula- 
tion pressure (Cohen, 1977). The simul- 


taneous domestication of animals and 
| grain met two essential needs. Animals 


in the herd and grain in storage assured 


_ a supply of food in winter, and the milk 


and meat were especially important for 


the survival and normal growth of 


children in the critical period after 
weaning. 7 

In the historically brief span of a few 
thousand years after the domestication 
of animals and plants came the discovery 
of irrigation. Irrigation made possible 
the development of cities by the produc- 
tion of a large quantity of food within an 
area from which it could be transported 
readily to a center of population. Thus 
great cities arose in the valleys of the 
Tigris-Euphrates, the Nile, and the 
Indus. In these cities many facets of our 
civilization today had their beginning. 


Factors Foreshadowing Man-Made Food 


During the past 5,000 years agriculture 
and cities supported by agriculture have 
spread over the earth. As has already 
been mentioned agriculture is approach- 
ing its practical limits. We shall here 
sketch briefly some of the factors that 
are setting the stage for the transition 
from agriculture to synthesis as a major 
source of food. It is not anticipated that 
synthetic production will quickly or com- 
pletely supersede agriculture. Rather, 
each will produce those items that it can 
make most efficiently. Indeed, the hunt- 
ing, the gathering of wild plants, and 
especially the fishing of the pre-agricul- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


tural era are still practiced today, though 
with the use of more sophisticated tools. 


Knowledge of Nutrition.—Basic to 
man-made food is the identification of the 
essential nutrients in food and the de- 
termination of the role of each in the 
growth and maintenance of the human 
body. It is only within very recent years 
that all (so we think) of the essential 
vitamins and trace elements have been 
clearly identified. Much current research 
is concerned with determining the 
optimal amounts of each nutrient and 
interactions among the nutrients. The 
validity of present knowledge has been 
demonstrated by feeding tests with ani- 
mals and human subjects, using com- 
pletely synthetic diets. In one experiment 
lasting 19 weeks, 15 subjects (men in 
good health) showed a definite improve- 
ment in nutrition over that at the 
beginning of the experiment (Winitz, 
1965). 


Synthetic Organic Chemistry.—The 
knowledge of chemistry is now such that 
it is possible to make nearly any desired 
substance, starting with the elements or 
with any conveniently available raw 
material containing the elements. The 
synthesis of large and complex molecules 
may be a long and difficult task, but if 
the demand for a substance is sufficiently 
great the synthesis can be accomplished 
and practical means of production can 
be found. This has been illustrated many 
times by the transition of a substance 
from a laboratory curiosity to a com- 
mercial product within a year or two. 


Chemical Engineering .—Correspond- 
ing advances have been made in chem- 
ical engineering. The control of processes 
in the factory is such that it is often 
possible to obtain a purer product there 
than in the laboratory. Automation and 
control by computers now may enable an 
entire manufacturing process to be con- 
trolled by one person at a console. Even 
30 years ago the capability of industry 
for speedily accomplishing a large and 
difficult task was illustrated by the 


123 


production of synthetic rubber in World 
War II. In 1939 not a single pound of 
general purpose synthetic rubber was 
produced in the United States; in 1943 
the output was over 400,000 tons. 


Food Technology.—A few synthetic 
nutrients such as sugars and certain fats 
and oils might be used directly in the 
diet in the pure state. Most nutrients, 
however, would require admixture with 
other nutrients and with flavors, colors, 
and other ingredients, also synthetic, so 
as accurately to simulate familiar foods 
of plant or animal origin. The food 
processing industry has been reasonably 
successful in making simulated milk, 
meat, and other food products from 
products of vegetable origin. Given pro- 
teins, flavors, and colors identical to 
those of animal origin, it should experi- 
ence no major difficulty in making food 
products identical to customary foods, 
except in origin. 


Present Status of Essential Nutrients 


The essential nutrients are now at 
widely different stages of development, 
ranging from vitamins which are now 
in commercial production in most in- 
dustrialized countries, to polypeptides 
and proteins, only a few of which have 
been made in the laboratory. 


Vitamins.—The synthetic production 
of vitamins has been commercially suc- 
cessful inasmuch as vitamins are products 
that can be made in relatively small quan- 
tity to command a high unit price. Pure 
vitamins range from about $8.00 per kilo- 
gram for ascorbic acid to $8.00 per gram 
for vitamin B,, or cyclocobalamin. Even 
at these prices the recommended daily 
allowance of cyclocobalamin costs only 
about one-onehundredth as much as 
that of ascorbic acid. Over the twenty- 
year period from 1945 to 1965 the price 
of ascorbic acid decreased from about 
$11.00 per pound to $2.00 or $.44 per 
kg. as production increased propor- 
tionately. The increase in price since 
1965 reflects the current inflation. 


124 


Minerals.—Minerals in the amounts 
required for human nutrition present 
no problems from the standpoint of 
availability or price. Some elements, 
particularly iron, are absorbed by the 
body at different rates, depending on 
the particular compound in which they 
are provided. Certain vitamins and min- 
erals are required by law to be added to 
cereal and other processed foods to 
compensate for losses in processing. 


Fats.—Fats were made in quantity 
for human consumption in Germany 
under emergency conditions in World 
War II. The initial raw materials were 
coke, air, and water, use being made of 
the Fischer-Tropsch reaction. Production 
was not continued after the war because 
the price was not competitive with that 
of natural fats and oils. Fatty acids are 
said to be made synthetically now for 
industrial applications in eastern Euro- 
pean countries in order to save the 
limited supply of natural fats for human 
consumption. Saturated fatty acids can 
be made readily by the catalytic oxida- 
tion of the corresponding hydrocarbons 
by oxygen of the air; conversion of fatty 
acids to fats is readily accomplished by 
combination with glycerol, also made 
from petroleum. The production of 
the polyunsaturated fats that are re- 
garded as the more desirable for human 
nutrition is less direct and may require 
further research and development. 

Fats are scarce and relatively expen- 
sive in some of the developing countries; 
as a consequence in some places special 
measures are required to keep motor oil 
from being used as an adulterant or 
otherwise mistakenly consumed for 
food. Thus, fats should be marked for 
early consideration in any program for 
the synthetic production of food. 


Carbohydrates.—Extensive research 
has been conducted by the National Aero- 
nautics and Space Administration on the 
production of carbohydrates and other 
sources of energy from respired carbon 
dioxide and water on space flights of 
long duration. An essential requirement 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


= ee ee 


ES ie i 


is that the equipment be capable of 
operating within the narrow confines of 
a space vehicle. One of the more feasible 
processes is for the production of glycerol 
which is suitable as a source of energy 
and acceptable in the diet in any pro- 
portion. 

When not limited by the constraints 
of space travel, an immediately prac- 
tical method of making carbohydrates 
is by the hydrolysis of cellulose, the 
most abundant of all natural products. 
Over many years studies have been made 
of the acid hydrolysis of cellulose, but 
no means have been found that have 
proved commercially practical. Now, 


however, enzymatic hydrolysis for the 


production of glucose from waste paper 
has been carried to a promising pilot 
plant stage. Although the present objec- 
tive is to make alcohol from the glucose, 
the glucose could be used for food or it 
could be converted to starch, also for 
food. 


Non-Natural High Energy Foods.— 
1,3-butanediol and other substances that 
do not occur in nature have been shown 
to be readily used by the body as a source 
of energy and to be acceptable from the 
standpoint of taste when incorporated 
in the diet. 


Amino Acids.—The 24 amino acids 
that constitute proteins have all been 
made by synthesis and are commercially 
available in lots of at least one kilo- 
gram. Glutamic acid is widely used as a 
condiment in the form of monosodium 
glutamate. Principal interest from the 
standpoint of nutrition, however, is in 
the nine so called ‘‘essential’’ amino acids 
that must be supplied in the diet since 
the body cannot synthesize them. Pro- 
teins of animal origin contain the essen- 
tial amino acids in approximately the 
proportion required by the body, but 
plant proteins are virtually all deficient 
in one or more of the essential amino 
acids. In the use of plant proteins for 
food or as feed for animals the efficiency 
of the protein for growth or maintenance 
may be markedly increased by the addi- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


tion of the limiting amino acids; the 
amounts required are only a few tenths 
of a per cent. Methionine and its 
hydroxy-analog are manufactured in 
car-load quantities for supplementing 
the protein of soybean meal used 
for the feeding of poultry and swine. 
Lysine is likewise used as a supplement 
to cereal grains; the addition of 0.375% 
to wheat is said to double the protein 
efficiency of bread. Threonine and 
tryptophan are also used as supplements 
in cereal grains. 

A major problem with synthetic amino 
acids lies in the fact that chemical syn- 
theses produce equal amounts of the 
dextro- and the laevo- form whereas the 
body utilizes only the laevo. With 
methionine and phenylalanine the body 
is able to convert the dextro- to the 
laevo- form, but with other amino acids 
the dextro- form can be used, if at all, 
only as a source of energy. Means are 
available for separating the isomers and 
for converting the dextro- to the desired 
laevo- form but the difficulty and cost of 
the additional steps seems to have limited 
their use. At present it seems more 
practical to make lysine by a fermenta- 
tion process that yields only the laevo- 
form. 

Present market prices of methionine 
and lysine are respectively, $2.20 and 
$3.59 per kilogram, whereas other 
amino acids are priced in the order of 
$100 per kilogram. The latter prices 
indicate that the demand has not been 
sufficient to warrant the development of 
simpler methods of synthesis or the use 
of large scale production methods. 


Polypeptides and Proteins.—Two 
methods of synthesis have been employed 
in the laboratory. In one method, 
amino acid groups are added, one at a 
time, to a terminal amino acid group 
until the long chain polypeptide or 
protein molecule has been built up. (By 
convention, one hundred amino acids 
groups mark the dividing line between 
polypeptides and proteins.) In another 
method, a number of sub-groups are 


125 


built up and are then linked together 
to make the desired large molecule. 
Neither method seems practical for use 
in manufacture. An alternative method 
would be to make polymers or multi- 
polymers of amino acids by conventional 
methods of polymer science and to em- 
ploy them as food in mixtures that would 
provide the optimal amino acid pattern. 
The major problem in implementing 
this plan would be the production of 
polymers that would be broken down on 
digestion to yield the constituent in just 
the same way as natural proteins. 

A possibility for long range research 
is suggested by current studies of the 
origin of life on the earth. Proteinoids 
made up of amino acids are readily 
produced in a single stage from simple 
substances such as nitrogen, methane, 
water, and hydrogen cyanide. Modern 
knowledge of reaction mechanisms and 
thermodynamics might show the way to 
the production of proteins in a single- 
stage process from abundant simple 
substances. 


Raw Materials for Synthesis 


In the chemical industry today most 
syntheses employ liquid or gaseous 
petroleum to provide the carbon chain 
of the desired product and also to serve 
as a source of process energy. Petroleum, 
however, is not essential as shown by the 
Fischer-Tropsch employed in Germany 
during World War IJ. This process 
produced airplane fuel, fats, rubber, 
and many other products from coke, 
water, and air. Thus, coal, wood char- 
coal, or carbon from other sources could 
be used instead of petroleum and, as 
mentioned in a previous section, car- 
bohydrates, starch, and other food prod- 
ucts could be made from cellulose, the 
most abundant of all natural products. 

Even if petroleum should be used, the 
amount required would be much less 
than that now used for fuel. The annual 
consumption of petroleum is equivalent 
to 35.1 x 10! Cal, whereas all the food 
in the world provides only 3.6 x 10! 
Cal, or only about one-tenth as much. 


126 


Furthermore, even this consumption 
would be offset by the use of petroleum 
in modern agriculture as fuel for farm 
machinery and for the production of 
fertilizer and for other purposes. In 
some situations today the energy con- 
sumed may even be greater than the 
energy content of the food grown. 

Nitrogen in the form of ammonia is 
used both as fertilizer and for the 
synthesis of amino acids and proteins. 
Most of the current production of 
ammonia is from nitrogen of the air, 
natural gas, and water, though some is 
made with the use of coal or liquid 
petroleum instead of natural gas. Look- 
ing to possible future dependence on the 
biomass as a renewable source of both 
materials and energy, methane pro- 
duced by fermentation could be used 
instead of natural gas for the production 
of ammonia. 


When ammonia is used for the syn- 
thesis of amino acids and polypeptides 
and protein there is no significant loss 
of material, whereas when ammonia is 
applied to the soil as fertilizer only 
a small fraction of the nitrogen is 
returned as food at the end of the food 
chain. The author estimated that for the 
year 1969 in the United States the 
amount was 15.6% (McPherson, 1972). 
The recovery of other elements was even 
less—8.7% for potassium and 5.5% for 
phosphorus. Thus synthetic production 
has a conspicuous advantage over agri- 
culture in the saving of materials and 
the energy consumed in their produc- 
tion. 


Accomplishing the Production of Food 
by Synthesis 


The production of food by synthesis 
on a scale commensurate with world 
needs can be foreseen as inevitable at 
some time in the future. The under- 
taking, as now visualized, is too complex 
and too difficult to be done by industry. 
It can be seen as best accomplished by 
a unified, massive operation, in three 
stages. The first stage would be the 
preparation of a comprehensive pro- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


gram. The second would be the approval 
of the program by leading men and 
organizations of the world’s scientific 
community. With their approval, the 
third stage would be consideration of 
the proposed program by political 
leaders who would be in a position to 
determine to support the program with 
the provision of manpower, funds, and 
priorities on a continuing basis. They 
would provide for the manufacture, dis- 
tribution, and utilization of the products. 


Planning the Program.—The prepara- 
tion of an adequate program will, in 
itself, be an undertaking of the first 
magnitude, inasmuch as it will require 
_ the coordinated effort of persons drawn 
from a number of disciplines including 
nutrition, chemistry, engineering, poly- 
mer science, physiology, food technology, 
and social and political sciences. For- 
tunately, there is a small prototype of 
just such an operation. A summer work- 
shop on synthetic carbohydrate was 
conducted at Stanford University in the 
summer of 1972 under the joint spon- 
sorship of the University and the 
National Aeronautics and Space Ad- 
ministration (Berman and Murashige, 
1973). The participants in this study 
were 18 young faculty members drawn 
from universities throughout the United 
States. The study dealt in detail with 
possible processes, yields, costs, and 
social and economic implications. Taking 
India as an example, the study showed 
that it would be possible to produce 
starch from sugarcane bagasse at a com- 
petitive price. 

The study here contemplated would 
require a larger number of participants 
working together for a longer period of 
time. It is suggested that the participants 
be drawn from their positions in uni- 
Versities, industry, and government on 
special leave for an academic year. A 
supporting staff, organized well in ad- 
vance, would be required to draft pro- 
cedures and make necessary prepara- 
tions. The cost might be of the order of 
one or two million dollars. In order to 
get started some person of vision and 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


initiative must provide the spark and 
motivate a university or other organiza- 
tion to assume leadership of the plan- 
ning operation and to secure, from 
whatever source possible, the necessary 
funds. 


Endorsement by the Scientific Com- 
munity. —The preparation of the program 
would necessarily involve frequent com- 
munication between the participants 
and a wide range of individuals and 
organizations both in the United States 
and abroad. There would probably be 
occasions in which committees or task 
forces would be set up to deal with par- 
ticular questions or problems. Thus, 
scientists and others concerned with 
world food supply would have consider- 
able knowledge of the proposed program 
in advance of its publication. With the 
release and wide dissemination of the 
proposed program the stage would be 
set to seek endorsement by cognizant 
scientific societies and other organiza- 
tions, and, with endorsement, presenta- 
tion of the program at the international 
level. 


Implementation by International Ac- 
tion. —The World Food Council is the or- 
ganization to which the proposed pro- 
gram should be addressed. The Council 
has been called by United Nations 
Secretary General Waldheim, “‘the high- 
est political body in the world which 
deals exclusively with food problems.’’ 
The Council is not an operating agency. 
Rather, it is concerned with stating 
global objectives, outlining the measures 
needed to attain them, and mobilizing 
political and financial support. 

The organization to which the Council 
would logically turn for support of the 
program would be the United Nations 
Development Program. It is a financing, 
programming, and monitoring agency, 
funded by voluntary contributions from 
governments. Agriculture, as might be 
expected, is the largest single component 
of its program with an expenditure of 
$623 million in 1976. The UNDP 
projects are usually actually administered 


127 


by other agencies such as the Food and 
Agriculture Organization. The synthetic 
production of food, however, differs so 
greatly from any activity now in progress 
that a wholly new organization would be 
required for its effective conduct. The 
new organization would, however, work 
closely with FAO so as to coordinate, 
insofar as possible, the output of man- 
made food with deficits in agricultural 
production. The aim would be to main- 
tain the total amount of food produced 
by agriculture and by synthesis at a level 
determined by the World Food Council. 

The new agency would engage in two 
important activities in addition to the 
production of essential nutrients and 
other constituents of natural food prod- 
ucts. One activity would be food process- 
ing in which these various constituents 
would be combined so as to duplicate 
the composition and properties of a wide 
variety of conventional foods. A second 
activity would be distribution of food 
with particular concern for the poor and 
the underprivileged. 


Poverty, Malnutrition, and Food 


Vast numbers of people in the de- 
veloping countries are caught in the 
vicious circle of poverty and malnutrition. 
Because they are poor, they cannot get 
adequate food. Lacking food, they are 
malnourished and lack vitality and 
energy. Lacking energy, their work out- 
put is low. With low output, they remain 
in poverty. 

The vicious circle can be broken by 
a massive infusion of food—more 
calories and more protein for men and 
women, and especially for children. A 
continuing supply of more and better 
food should result in an almost immedi- 


128 


ate gain in productivity and, in the long 
range, the increase in productivity 
would lead to a higher standard of 
living. There is ample evidence of the 
relation between the number of calories 
in the diet and the useful work ac- 
complished, but the time scale of the 
effect of increments of food on the 
standard of living is less well defined but 
equally certain in the long range. 

Only with the production of man- 
made food would it be possible to raise 
the diet of a country or a region from a 
near starvation or bare subsistence level 
up to an optimal level in one major 
operation and to maintain the diet at that 
level without regard to variations in 
agricultural production. The cost of the 
operation will be large. It should not be 
regarded as a humanitarian activity but 
rather as an investment to be repaid in 
the long range by a large gain in the 
gross national product. 


References Cited 


Berman, G. A., and Murashige, K. H. (Eds.). 
1973. Synthetic Carbohydrate. An Aid to Nu- 
trition in the Future. NASA Contract NGR- 
05-020-409. School of Engineering, Stanford 


University. 
Cohen, M. N. 1977. The Food Crisis in Pre- 
history. Overpopulation and the Origins of 


Agriculture. Yale Univ. Press. 

Fischer, Emil. 1906. The chemistry of proteins 
and their relation to biology. Sitzber. Preuss. 
Akad. Wiss. 35. (1907). 

Food and Agriculture Organization (Rome). 1978. 
Press Release 77/119. C/22. 

McPherson, A. T. 1959. Food, chemistry, and 
civilization. J. Wash. Acad. Sci. 50: 1-14 (1960). 

. 1972. Synthetic foods: their present and 
potential contribution to the world food supply. 
Indian J. Nutr. Dietet. 9: 285-309. 

Winitz, Milton, et al. 1965. The use of chemically de- 
fined diets in metabolic studies. Nature 205: 
741-743. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


What Price Should Society Pay for Conservation? 


Oscar W. Albrecht 


Senior Economist, Processing Branch, Solid & Hazardous Waste Research 
Division, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268 


ABSTRACT 


Numerous external forces can cause divergencies between the socially optimal prices 
and the prices that prevail in the market place. If prevailing market prices fail to reflect 
conservation values at their true values, the prices are suboptimal from the viewpoint of 
future generations and government intervention may be warranted. The real problem is in 
estimating the value of conservation from every vantage point in time. 


Much has been said in recent years 
about the urgent need to conserve our 
material resources through conservation 
and recycling. Expressing the value of 
conservation in monetary terms, how- 
ever, is extremely difficult. Market 
prices provide an indication of increasing 
scarcity but whether current and fore- 
seeable market prices adequately reflect 


| the value of conservation from a long-run 


perspective continues to be an issue. 

This issue involves the economic well- 
being of future generations. Decision- 
makers must decide whether our natural 
resources, especially the nonrenewable 
resources, are being developed and con- 
sumed too rapidly and if so, what policies 
are needed to encourage conservation 
and recycling. A review of the historical 
concern over conservation sheds little 
light on the problem. The major point to 
be emphasized in this discussion is that 
there is great difficulty involved in placing 
a value on conservation, when viewed 
from different points in time. 


The Conservation Movement 


The virtues of conservation were ex- 


pounded centuries ago by well known 
| economists such as Malthus and Ricardo 


' Adapted from the EPA report entitled ‘*‘Evalua- 
tion of Economic Benefits of Resource Conserva- 
tion’”’ by Robert C. Anderson, Environmental Law 


| Institute (EPA Grant No. R-803880.01-1). 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


(1, 2). These writers expressed grave 
concern over what they considered the 
exploitation of natural resources result- 
ing from rapid population growth. Later, 
an organized group known as the Con- 
servation Movement asserted that natural 
resources prices were too low and were 
being wastefully exploited and nearing 
exhaustion. They maintained that ulti- 
mately this would result in depriving 
future generations of their rightful share 
of the earth’s finite resources. As 
examples of waste they pointed to the 
flaring of natural gas from oil wells and 
flooding of inactive mines when useful 
ores remained. Their views were shared 
by others in the past, and still are today 
by many advocates of conservation. 

The historical predictions of early 
exhaustion, however, generally turned 
out to be erroneous. For one reason, 
subsequent discoveries of additional 
deposits added to the existing reserves 
on which the gloomy predictions were 
based. And probably more important, 
the predictions usually failed to recog- 
nize that the demands were sensitive to 
rising prices, and that technological 
change and substitution also respond to 
rising prices. 


Market Allocation of Resources 


Whether a free and competitive market 
allocates exhaustible resources in a 
socially optimal fashion is crucial to the 


129 


Table 1.—Impact of selected tax provisions on 
market prices (in percent). 


Federal State 
tax depletion severance 
Mineral allowance taxes 
Pig iron = 5 =) 
Copper =i +1.5 
Lead —3 +1 
Aluminum —2 +0.2 


4 (For detailed information on the methodology 
used in estimating these impacts, see the recent 
EPA report, ‘““The Impact of the Tax Code on Re- 
source Recovery’’ [EPA-600/2-76-009]). 


question of whether new policies are 
needed for conservation and recycling. 
The traditional Pareto Optimal test re- 
quires that a reallocation is desirable as 
long as the change benefits someone 
without adversely affecting someone 
else. This criterion, however, relates to a 
single point in time, while the problem of 
valuing conservation extends over many 
generations. The basic question is whether 
resources are worth more, less, or the 
same to succeeding generations as to the 
present generation? 

It may be assumed that in the long run, 
prices of extractive resources will in- 
crease despite technological improve- 
ments because increased inputs of labor 
and capital are needed per unit of extrac- 
tive output. This is because in a competi- 
tive market the high grade and readily 
available ores are usually extracted first, 
followed by extraction of the lower-grade 
and more costly deposits. Extractors of 
high-cost ores cannot compete as long as 
the low-cost, readily obtainable deposits 
exist. 

The availability of some minerals, how- 
ever, changes very little when extraction 
shifts to a lower grade of ore, and this 
makes for a relatively inelastic supply 
curve for such minerals. For other 
minerals, rising prices provide an incen- 
tive to mine a lower grade which is 
relatively plentiful. The Taconite ores are 
an example. These ores are about 27 
percent ferrous, or 3.4 times the average 


130 


of the earth’s crust. If prices rose suffi- 
ciently, the entire earth’s crust could 
conceivably become a potential supply of 
iron ore. Another example is the bauxite 
ores presently mined which contain about 
2.2 times the average for the earth’s 
crust. The relative abundance of these 
low-grade ores, referred to as ‘““‘backstop 
technology,”’ places an upper limit on the 
price of a resource whenever there exists 
an abundant though more expensive 
substitute. 

Rising prices stimulate research for 
new ore deposits and also induce tech- 
nological changes. This can result in 
greater output per unit of production 
input. The introduction of electric fur- 
naces using practically 100 percent scrap 


resulted from the increased scarcity and | 


rising costs of virgin iron ores and the 
readily available ferrous scrap. And the 
substitution of steel for iron greatly 
increased the strength to weight ratio, 
resulting in increased output of consumer 
goods per unit of iron ore input. Thus, 
the market pricing system permits prices 
to rise when scarcities loom, and the 
increased prices serve to constrain re- 
source exploitation and excessive waste. 


The Effects of Biased Market Prices 


While a free and competitive market 
system may allocate resources in a 
socially optimal fashion, various external 
forces may tend to bias the optimal 
prices and cause distortions in alloca- 
tions. These external forces include those 
of taxation, monopolies, externalities, 
and uncertainties. The extractive sector, 
for example, is affected by provisions in 
various tax laws, including depletion 
allowances, exploration and develop- 
ment expenses, severance taxes, and 
property and capital gains taxes. Their 
influence on prices can cause production 
to be either above or below the optimal 
rate. When prices are biased below the 
optimal, consumption and consequently 
extraction are above the optimal and vice 
versa. The estimated effect of the federal 
depletion allowance and state severance 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


taxes on market prices for several 
minerals is indicated in Table 1. 

Monopolistic ownership of natural re- 
sources can also bias the rate of extrac- 
tions. Hotelling suggested that monopo- 
lists tend to delay production, thereby 
serving the interests of conservation 
groups (3). Taking the opposite view, 
Sweeney and Lewis believed that pat- 
terns of demand growth configurations 
might lead a monopolist to extract at a 
faster rate than he would under competi- 
tive ownership (4, 5). 

The effects of uncertainty on produc- 
tion decisions are generally assumed to 
cause an acceleration in the rate of 
extraction. The uncertainty may be with 
regard to tenure or ownership, future 
technology and costs, future taxes or 
royalty payments. It is generally assumed 
that resource owners tend to be risk 
adverse. The conditions in politically 
unstable countries often make for uncer- 
tain tenure of ownership. Uncertainty 
may tend to discourage exploration, 
thus resulting in smaller known reserves 
and consequently higher prices. And 
when prices are above the true marginal 
cost of extraction, production is below 
the socially optimal rate (i.e., the rate 
which would maximize the present value 
of producer’s and consumer’s surpluses). 

Market biases due to externalities is an 
area of concern to both resource and 
environmental economists. One example 
of a pecuniary type of externality is in 
the field of exploration, where the in- 
formation generated upon the discovery 
of an important deposit often conveys 
valuable information to others searching 
for deposits. The traditional market 
mechanism generally fails to compensate 
those making the initial discovery; in this 
respect it also discourages expenditures 
for exploration. Another kind of ex- 
ternality is that associated with the 
wastes from mining, smelting, and re- 
fining activities. When such wastes im- 
pose costs on others instead of being 
internalized and reflected in the costs and 
prices, then social costs exceed private 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


costs, and the quantity of output exceeds 
that which is socially optimal. 


The Perspective of Conservation from the Future 
Generation’s Vantage Point 


As resources become more scarce and 
additional inputs of factors of reproduc- 
tion are required per unit of output, 
prices tend to rise; thus providing market 
incentives for conservation, recycling, 
improved technology, and substitution. 
Given that these adjustments occur, the 
question that remains is whether prevail- 
ing market prices are sufficient indicators 
of the value of conservation from the 
perspective of future generations. The 
question is, ‘‘Do prevailing market prices 
correctly bring forth the rate of extrac- 
tion based on the resource values as 
perceived by our children, grandchildren, 
great grandchildren, and generations yet 
unborn?’’ This is the long-run perspec- 
tive of the value of conservation! If 
present prices do not perform this func- 
tion, our present society is not conserving 
or recycling at the rate that is socially 
optimal. If the present rate of resource 
extraction and use is excessive from the 
long-run perspective, it means a lower 
standard of living for generations to 


Benefits 


to ty Time 


Fig. 1. Time profile of expected benefits 


and costs. 


131 


come. On the other hand, if conservation 
and recycling activities were carried to 
the extreme, as some now propose, the 
future might reveal that the present 
generations sacrificed unnecessarily, opt- 
ing for themselves lower living standards 
in exchange for relatively higher living 
standards for future generations. 


Summary 


The problem in estimating the value of 
conservation arises in valuing resources 
from every vantage point in time. Com- 
petitive market prices, even in the ab- 
sence of external biases, may not cor- 
rectly determine resource use on the 
basis of what the future holds for genera- 
tions concerning resource scarcities. Our 
present conservation goals and objec- 
tives must therefore rely heavily on our 
perception of the needs of future genera- 
tions, admitting that we have inadequate 
information on which to base decisions. 
In prioritizing government projects, it is 


132 


a common practice to discount future 
costs and benefits to arrive at a present 
value estimate. A discount rate has the 
effect of emphasizing the present, and 
discounting the future. The long-standing 
debate over rates and the appropriateness 
of discounting the effects on future 
generations is likely to continue for some 
time to come. 


References 


(1) Malthus, T. An Essay on Population. Ward 
Lock and Co., London, England, 1826. 

(2) Ricardo, D. Principles of Political Economy. 
Longmans, Green, and Co., Ltd. New York, 
New York, 1929. 

(3) Hotelling, H. The Economics of Exhaustible 
Resources. Journal of Political Economy, 39 
(2):137-—175, 1931. 

(4) Sweeney, J. Economics of Depletable Re- 
sources: Market Forces and Intertemporal 
Bias. Review of Economic Studies, 44 (1): 
125—141, 1977. 

(5) Lewis, T. Monopoly Exploitation of an 
Exhaustible Resource. Journal of Environ- 
mental Economics and Management, 3 (3): 
198-204, 1976. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


| 


| 


RESEARCH REPORTS 


A Programming Approach to Planning 
for Agricultural Resource Allocation 


and Irrigation System Design’ 


Richard H. McCuen, Robert L. Powell, and Fred W. Dew 


Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Maryland, 
College Park, MD 20742; Civil Engineer, Greenhorne & O’ Mara, Inc., 6715 Kenilworth 
Avenue, Riverdale, MD 20840; and Civil Engineer, United States Navy; respectively. 


ABSTRACT 


With the increasing demand for food, regional growth may depend on the 
development of marginal lands for the purpose of increasing agricultural output. Linear 
programming can be effectively used in the initial planning and design of agricultural 
systems. Case studies are used to demonstrate the use of linear programming in selecting 
crops to yield the maximum profit, allocating land under conditions of constraints in 
water supply, and determining the optimum design of the necessary irrigation systems. 
The effect of crop rotation on the system design is also demonstrated. Post-optimal 
analyses are performed to determine the relative importance of the design variables 
on the optimum solution, the stability of the optimum solution and the relative impact 


of data error. 


In planning for engineering systems 
and before an optimum design. can be 
determined, it is necessary to specify 
many system characteristics, including 
physical characteristics of the site and its 
environment. It is also necessary to 
specify any physical, legal, or monetary 
constraints that the optimum design 
must satisfy. And finally, an optimality 
criterion must be formulated for choos- 
ing between alternate system designs. 
However, even after the optimum con- 
figuration has been determined, the 
engineer should subject a proposed de- 
sign to a complete post-optimal analysis. 


' The contents of this paper do not necessarily 
represent the views of the U. S. Navy or any 
affiliation thereof. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Such an analysis is necessary to test the 
stability of the optimum design to error 
or variation in either the system con- 
straints, the criterion used to test for 
optimality, or estimates of the system 
characteristics. Furthermore, a _ post- 
optimal analysis may also be useful for 
determining the relative importance of 
the design variables. 

With the growing demand for food, 
one system of particular interest is the 
development of marginal lands for the 
purpose of increasing crop output. And 
in many areas, especially those in arid 
and semi-arid regions, the availability of 
water is an important constraint on the 
feasibility of reclaiming marginal lands 
for crop production. In such cases, the 
proper selection of crops, the allocation 


133 


of land parcels, and the installation of 
properly designed irrigation systems 
are three factors that may decide the 
profits obtained from farming these 
marginal lands. 

Pipe networks are designed for use in 
water supply systems, in agricultural 
irrigation systems, and for transporting 
petroleum products. The use of linear 
programming as a planning tool for 
determining the optimum configuration 
of water distribution systems has pre- 
viously been documented (Simonds and 
Kinney, 1972; Hoppe and Viessman, 
1972). The objective of this paper is to 
demonstrate that the linear program- 
ming model has application in the 
analysis of agricultural systems. A meth- 
odology is outlined for sequentially 
determining the optimum distribution 
of land use and the water distribution 
system required to meet irrigation de- 
mands. Hypothetical case studies are 
used to demonstrate the proposed meth- 
odology. A methodology is then pre- 
sented in which the optimum design is 
subjected to sensitivity analyses to de- 
termine the relative importance of key 
factors. 


Model Formulation 


Land Use Allocation.—To determine 
the optimum allocation of land use, a 
measure of optimality must be selected. 
For this case study, the expected return 
from the irrigation project was selected 
as a means of comparing alternatives in 
land use allocation. To determine the 
optimum allocation of land use, the 
following mathematical objective func- 
tion was selected: 


Maximize R = 5 r,a, wherea, =O (1) 
i=1 


where R is the total expected return 
from the development, r; is the expected 
return from i land use classification (in 
dollars per unit area of land), and a; is 
the optimum area allocated for land use 
classification i. 

The objective function that is used to 
determine the optimum allocation of 


134 


land use is subject to several constraints. 
First, the sum of the parcels of land 
allocated to different land use must equal 
the total area subject to development. 
This constraint can be represented in the 
linear programming model as: 


Yas (2) 


where A is the total area under de- 
velopment. Second, there may be a max- 
imum amount of water W (volume/day) 
that is available for the irrigation de- 
mand of the proposed project. In agri- 
cultural planning, forecasts of the water 
yield during the growing season may be 
available during the spring measurement 
of snow water content in the mountain- 
ous parts of major watersheds (McCuen, 
1977; Soil Conservation Service, 1972). 
These forecasts may be used to quantify 
W but because the forecasts may be in 
error, a proposed plan should be evalu- 
ated as to its sensitivity to error in the 
forecast of W. Mathematically, the water- 
availability constraint is: 


S wiaj = W (3) 
i=1 


where w, is the water requirement for 
land use classification 1 (volume/area- 
day). The amount of land devoted to 
each land use classification can then be 
determined for given values of r,, Ww, 
W and A. After the m areas (a;) are 
determined, the expected return R can 
be determined from the linear objective 
function of equation 1. 


Pipe Network Design.—The objective 
function used to determine the optimum 
pipe distribution is the minimization of 
the installation costs: 

m 
Minimize P = YS c,x; where x;=0 (4) 
i=1 
where P is the total minimum installa- 
tion cost of the distribution system ($), 
c; is the unit cost per foot for installation 
of a pipe ($/foot), x; is the optimum 
length of pipe (feet) in reach j, and n is 
the total number of pipe segments. 
The cost of the pipe c, is a function 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


of pipe diameter, and the size of the 
pipe depends on the water requirements 
of the crop in subarea a;. Thus, the 
optimization process must be executed 
sequentially; that is, the optimum sub- 
areas a; allocated to a specific crop must 
be determined before the water require- 
ments can be determined. And after 
determining the proper pipe network 
design, it is necessary to check the op- 
timum allocation of land use for crops. 
However, in evaluating planning al- 
ternatives, it will usually not be necessary 
to make changes to the allocation of 
land use. 

The objective function for the pipe 
distribution system is also subject to 
several constraints. Since a reach may 
include pipes of different diameters, the 
total length of pipes of different di- 
ameters in a reach must equal the total 
length of the reach; thus, the objective 
function, Equation 4, is subject to the 
constraint: 


k 
xe, — 3, yl 2s. (5) 
i=1 


where x; is the optimum length of pipe of 
segment i in reach j, L, is the total length 
of pipe in reach j, k is the total number 
of segments in reach j, and u is the num- 
ber of reaches. 

The head loss in the pipe distribution 
system is also important in determining 
the optimum pipe distribution system. 
The objective function is also subject to 
the following head loss constraint: 


SS eal (6) 
=1 


where sg; is the friction loss (ft/ft) associ- 
ated with pipe diameter d,, and H is the 
elevation head (ft) measured from the 
discharge point to source elevation head. 
The friction loss s; can be determined 
from Scobey’s formula (Littleton, 1953): 


S; = KV ids (7) 


where K, is a constant having a value 
of 0.40 for welded steel irrigation pipe. 
The velocity V; (ft/sec) is determined 
from the equation: 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Vi = Q)/(0.78d;”) (8) 


where Q, is the flow in pipe segment j 
(ft?/sec), and is determined from the 
equation: 

Q; = k,wia; (9) 


where k, is a conversion factor (acre-ft/ 
day to ft?/sec). 


Case Study 


The above objective functions and 
constraint equations were applied to a 
10 acre (40470 m?) plot subject to con- 
tinuous cropping practices (Figure 1). 
The water source was capable of sup- 
plying 0.150 acre-feet/day (185 m?/day). 
The values in Table 1 show the expected 
return from four crops and their water 
requirements. The expected return 
values are used to formulate the follow- 
ing objective function: 


Maximize R = 500a, + 400a, 


+ 300a; + 450a, (10) 
The area constraints are: 
a, +a, +a, +a, =10 (11) 
a, + a=) (12) 
a5 sdge = 2 (13) 


The water requirements of the four 
crops are used to formulate the follow- 
ing additional constraint equation: 


0.0175a, + 0.0112a, + 0.0140a; 
+ 0.008a, = 0.150 (14) 


— 


Fig. 1. Plot characteristics, continuous cropping. 


135 


Table 1.—Crop data for continuous and rotation cropping practices. 


Continuous Cropping 


Crop Corn 

Expected Return ($/acre) 500 

Expected Return ($/m?) .124 

Water Demand (=) .0175 
da 

Water Demand (m?/day) 26 


Rotational Cropping 


Crop Corn 

Expected Return ($/acre) 500 

Expected Return ($/m?) .124 

Water Demand (= .0175 
day 

Water Demand (m?/day) 21.6 


The simplex method was used to solve 
the linear programming problem. The 
optimum land use allocation for the 
four crops was determined to be a, 
= 7.368 acres (29818 m”), a. = a; = 0, 
a, = 2.632 acres (10652 m?), and the 
expected return was R = $4868.40. By 
planting 7.368 acres of corn and 2.632 
acres of wheat a maximum return of 
$4868.40 will be achieved; such a land 
use allocation will require 0.150 acre-ft/ 
day (185 m?/day) of water, which is the 
maximum yield of the water source. 
Having determined the areas used for 
the different crops the optimum con- 
figuration of the pipe distribution sys- 
tem can be determined. The proposed 
water distribution system is shown in 
Figure 1. Since wheat has a lower water 
demand than corn, the 2.632 acre 
(10652 m?) plot devoted to wheat is 
placed at the end of the pipe distribution 
network. The physical characteristics of 
the plot and the water demand for each 
subarea are given in Table 2. The 
physical characteristics of the pipe net- 
work system and the unknowns are 


Beans Potatoes Wheat 
400 300 450 
.099 074 111 
.0112 .0140 .0080 
13.8 173 9.87 
Wheat Clover 
450 150 
Fit .037 
.0080 .0100 
9.87 133 


given in Table 3. The friction slopes s; 
were computed from equation 10. The 
pipe cost C, data includes purchase and 
installation per linear foot of pipe and 
was taken from Building Construction 
Cost Data (Means, 1973). 

To determine the unknown lengths of 
pipe, the data from Table 3 was used to 
formulate the objective function: 


Minimize P = 3.25X, + 4.10X, | 

+: 5, 22X, +, 1.75 Xa epee 

+ 2.50X, + 3.25X, + 1.75Xg 

+ 2.50X%5 +. 2.50 X49, +32 

Because the total lengths of pipe of 
different diameters in each reach must 
equal the reach length, the objective 
function, equation 15, is subject to the 
constraints: 


The objective function is also subject to the following head loss constraints: 


0.01554X, + 0.00380X, + 0.00052X; + 0.03168X,) + 0.00434X,, = 25 


136 


X, +X, + XK, =300 (16) 
MS, Se ee = 330 (17) 
ee > € = 200 (18) 
Xe APG ='330 (19) 
Said Ne = 220 (20) 

(21) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


_ 0.01554X, + 0.00380X, + 0.00052X, + 0.10438X, + 0.00350X, 
+ 0.03168X,, + 0.00434X,, = 30 (22) 
0.01554X, + 0.00380X, + 0.00052X, + 0.02938X, + 0.00403X, = 25 (23) 
0.01554X, + 0.00380X, + 0.00052X, + 0.08117X, + 0.00272X, 
+ 0.02938X, + 0.00403X, = 30 (24) 


The above linear programming model 
was solved using the simplex method and 
provided the optimum pipe lengths 
shown in Table 4. A minimum cost of 
$3314.90 was determined for the objec- 
tive function of Equation 15. 


Maximize R = 500 4 
The Effect of Crop Rotation. — The ob- See 500a; + 450a, + et . 
jective functions and constraints defined . | 
_ by equations 1—9 were also applied to subject to the following area constraints: 


values in Table 1 show the expected 
annual return for each crop and the 
corresponding daily water requirements. 
From this data the following objective 
function was formulated: 


the same 10-acre plot shown in Figure 1 eae a 10 (26) 

for a crop rotation system. Rotation se- 

quencing for the system was based on a. + as =D (27) 

standard agricultural practices using one n = 4 (28) 
i > 


year of corn, followed by one year of 
wheat, and then one year of clover. The The objective function is also subject to 


Table 2.—Plot characteristics: Continuous cropping. 


Water demand Pipe flow Pipe 

Area —— — length Elevation 
Sub _ (m?/sec Pipe (m3/sec (ee 
area (acres) (m7?) Crop (cfs) 107?) segment (cfs) 10-3) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) 
1 2.632 10652 wheat 0212 .60 Bl .0212 .60 330 ~=s:101 700" 2103 
2 3.000 12141 corm .0530 1.50 B2 .0742 2.10 200 61 7D 1229 
3 1.368 5536 corn .0242 .69 B3 .0242 .69 330 ~=—s:101 gO, ies 
4 3.000 12141 corn .0530 1.50 B4 .0772 2.18 200 61 ASL 229 
R .1510 4.28 300 91 100 30.5 


Table 3.—Pipe system data, continuous cropping. 


Diameter Friction 
Pipe Pipe a Cost Cost slope 
reach segment (inches) (cm) ($/ft) ($/m) (ft/ft) 
R XG 3 7.62 35) 10.66 .01554 
xs 4 10.16 4.10 13.45 .00380 
X3 6 15.24 5122 1718 .00052 
f Bl X, 1 2.54 Le 5.74 .08117 
Xs 2 5.08 2.50 8.20 .00272 
Xe Zz 5.08 2.50 8.20 .02938 
x g) 7.62 525 10.66 .00403 
B3 x 1 2.54 aS 5.74 .10438 
<< 2 5.08 2.50 8.20 .00350 
B4 Xe 2 5.08 2.50 8.20 .03 168 
a 3 7.62 395 10.66 00434 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 137 


the following water demand constraints: 


0.0175a, + 0.0080a, + 0.0010a; = 0.15 
0.0080a, + 0.0100a, + 0.0175a; = 0.15 
0.0100a, + 0.0175a, + 0.0100a; = 0.15 


Using the simplex method the optimum 
land use allocation was determined to be 
a, = 5.0 acres (20235 m?), a, = 3.0 acres 
(12141 m?), and a; = 2.0 acres (8094 m7). 
The expected return for this allocation 
is $4150.00 for the first year. The water 
demand is 0.132 acre-ft/day (163 m?/ 
day), which is less than the maximum 
yield of the water source. The total re- 
turn for the three year rotation cycle is 
1000, regardless of the initial land 
allocation. 

After determining the optimum land 
allocation, the optimum pipe distribution 
system, as shown in Figure 2, can be 
determined. Since the irrigation system 


(29) 
(30) 
(31) 


must supply the water demands for all 
three years of the rotation cycle the water 
demand for each year of the cycle must be 
used for the determination of the opti- 
mum pipe system. The physical charac- 
teristics and water demands for the plot 
and pipe system are given in Table 5. 
Physical characteristics of the pipe 
system are given in Table 6. The pipe cost 
C; includes purchase and installation and 
was taken from Building Construction 
Cost Data (Means, 1973). 

Determination of the optimum pipe 
lengths in the system were based on min- 
imizing the construction cost given by the 
following objective function: 


Minimize P = 3.25X, + 4.10X, + 5.22X, + 1.75X, + 2.50X; + 2.50X, 


+. 3.25Xq..4- 1.73Xg. 44 2.50X, se. 2: SOXG eee 


(32) 


Using the reach lengths shown in Table 2 the objective function is subject to the 


following length constraints: 


Xr XE 00 


Ones & 
Me MK: 
Ky ce, 
EO 


Table 4.—Optimum pipe network design, con- 
tinuous cropping. 


Pipe length 


Pipe Pipe 
reach segment (ft) (m) 
R xe 300.0 91.4 
Bl x; 236.6 Ieee 
Xe 93.4 28.5 
B2 Xe 200.0 61.0 
B3 xe 176.9 53.9 
xe L581 46.7 
Xa6 200.0 61.0 
138 


(33) 
= 330 (34) 
= 200 (35) 
= 330 (36) 
= 200 (37) 


Fig. 2. Plot characteristics, rotational cropping. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


The objective function is also subject to the following head loss constraints for the 
three-year rotation cycle: 


| 0.01221X, + 0.00298X, + 0.00041X, + 0.01107X, + 0.00152X, = 25 (38) 
0.01221X, + 0.00298X, + 0.00041X,; + 0.07405X, + 0.00248X, 

+ 0.01108X, + 0.00152X, = 30 (39) 

0.01221X, + 0.00298X, + 0.00041X; + 0.04116X,, + 0.00564X%,, = 25 (40) 
0.01221X, + 0.00298X,; + 0.00041X, + 0.21272X, + 0.00712X, 

+ 0.04116X,,) + 0.00564X%,, = 30 (41) 

- 0.00791X, + 0.00193X, + 0.00026X, + 0.02312X, + 0.00317X, = 25 (42) 
0.00791X, + 0.00193X, + 0.00026X, + 0.21272X, + 0.00712X, 

+ 0.02312X, + 0.00317X, = 30 (43) 

0.00791 X, + 0.00193X, + 0.00026X,; + 0.00926X,,) + 0.00127X,, = 25 (44) 
0.00791X, + 0.00193X, + 0.00026X, + 0.04869X, + 0.00163X, 

+ 0.00926X,, + 0.00127X,, = 30 (45) 

0.01004X, + 0.00245X, + 0.00034X,; + 0.02602X, + 0.00357X, = 25 (46) 
0.01004X, + 0.00245X, + 0.00034X,; + 0.04869X, + 0.00163X;, 

+ 0.02602X, + 0.00357X, = 30 (47) 

0.01004X, + 0.00245X, + 0.00034X; + 0.01409X,, + 0.00193X,, = 25 (48) 
0.01004X, + 0.00245X, + 0.00034X; + 0.07405X, + 0.00248X, 

+ 0.01409X,, + 0.00193X,, = 30 (49) 


The above linear programming model 
was solved to yield the pipe sizes shown a cost of $3492.20 for the pipe distribu- 
in Table 7. The objective function yielded tion system. This system was designed to 


Table 5.—Plot characteristics —rotational cropping. 


Water demand Pipe flow Pipe 
Rota- Area —— Pipe SS length Elevation 
tion Sub — (m3/sec seg- (m?/sec 
year area (acres) (m?) Crop (cfs) 10-3) ment (cfs) 10-%) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) 
1 1 2 8094 clover 0.0202 0.57 Bl 0.0202 0.57 330 = 101 70) 3213 
2 3 12141 wheat 0.0242 0.68 B2 0.0444 1.26 200 61 15) 2259 
3 2 8094 corm 0.0352 1.00 B3 0.0352 1.00 330 = 101 10) 213 
4 3 12141 com 0.0534 esi B4 0.0886 PyS il 200 61 75) 4 22:9 
R 0.1330 Sei 300 91 100 30.5 
2 1 72 8094 corn 0.0352 1.00 Bl 0.0352 1.00 330 = 101 TO 23 
D 3 12141 clover 0.0302 0.86 B2 0.0654 1.85 200 61 ey 22S) 
3 2 8094 wheat -0.0162 0.46 B3 0.0162 0.46 330 = 101 TO ee2leS 
4 3 12141 wheat 0.0242 0.68 B4 0.0404 1.14 200 61 (ky 22S? 
R 0.1058 3.00 300 91 100 30.5 
3 1 2 8094 wheat 0.0162 0.46 Bl 0.0162 0.46 33001 Te es 
71 3 12141 com 0.0534 1.51 B2 0.0696 1.97 200 61 ie 7229 
3 D 8094 clover 0.0202 0.57 B3 0.0202 0.57 330 ~=s:'101 70 1 2ae3 
4 3 12141 clover 0.0302 0.86 B4 0.0504 1.43 200 61 JD  F22E9 
R 0.1200 3.40 300 91 100 =30.5 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 139 


Table 6.—Pipe system data—rotational cropping. 


Pipe diameter 


Pipe 
segment 


Pipe 


reach (inches) 


R Xy 3 


Xz 4 


X3 6 


Bl X4 1 


x 2 


B2 X, 2 


Xz 3 


B3 Xz l 


x 2 


B4 X40 Z 


meet the irrigation needs of the study plot 
for the three-year rotation cycle. 


Post Optimal Analysis 


In reference to a post optimal analysis, 
Dantzig (1963) stated, ‘‘In many applica- 
tions, the information thus obtained is 
as valuable as the specification of the 
optimum solution itself’’. Most post 
optimum analyses involve the derivation 


140 


(cm) 


1.62 


10.16 


15.24 


2.54 


5.08 


5.08 


7.62 


2.54 


5.08 


5.08 


762 


Pipe cost 
Friction slope 
(ft/ft or m/m) 


($/ft) ($/m) 


BE) 10.66 0.01221 
0.00791 


0.01004 


0.00298 
0.00193 
0.00245 


0.00041 
0.00026 
0.00034 


4.10 13.45 


22 17.13 


1.75 5.74 0.07405 
0.21272 


0.04869 


0.00248 
0.00712 
0.00163 


8.20 


8.20 0.01108 
0.02312 


0.02602 


0.00151 
0.00317 
0.00357 


3225 10.66 


1.75 5.74 0.21272 
0.04869 


0.07405 


0.00713 
0.00163 
0.00248 


2.50 8.20 


0.04116 
0.00926 
0.01409 


0.00564 
0.00127 
0.00193 


20) 8.20 


3:25 10.66 


of sensitivity estimates. Sensitivity can 
be expressed in either absolute or relative 
form (McCuen, 1972). Absolute sensi- 
tivity, $,, is defined as the rate of change 
of output 0 with respect to change in in- 
put or a system characteristic P: 


AO 
AP 


However, since the magnitude of an 


S$, = (50) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


_ different system characteristics. 


Par 


absolute sensitivity estimate is a func- 
tion of the units of both the output and 
system characteristics, absolute sensi- 


_ tivity estimates cannot be used for making 


comparisons of the relative importance of 
The 
relative sensitivity is not a function of the 
units of measurement and thus, it is 
frequently used to compare the relative 
importance of the input and system 
characteristics. The relative sensitivity 
R, is defined as the percentage change 
AO in the system output O that results 
from a one percent change in a system 
characteristic or input: 


B= (5 )/(F) 


where AP is the change in an input or 
system characteristic P. 

The optimum land use distribution was 
subjected to sensitivity analyses. Spe- 
cifically, analyses were performed to 
determine the sensitivity of the optimum 
land use distribution and profit to changes 
in water requirements of and profit from 
the crops in the optimum solutions. The 
results are shown in Tables 8 and 9. The 
profit is comparatively sensitive to 
changes in the profit from the crops, 
especially the profit in corn. For the con- 
tinuous cropping system, a 10% change in 
the profit from corn and wheat will cause 
a 7.6 percent and 2.4 percent change in 


Table 7. Optimum pipe network design, rotation 
cropping. 


Pipe length 


Pipe Pipe 
reach segment (ft) (m) 
R KG 300.0 91.4 
Bl XG 100.5 30.6 
X; 229.5 70.0 
B2 Xe 200.0 61.0 
B3 Xz 76.6 785-5} 
Xo 253.4 Wil 
B4 Sp 200.0 61.0 


total profit, respectively. Error or changes 
in the water requirements of corn and 
wheat produce a relatively smaller change 
in profit. A 10 percent change in water 
requirements of corn and wheat cause 
changes of 1.5 and 0.2 percent, respec- 
tively, in the total profit. For the rota- 
tional cropping system a 10 percent 
change in the profit from corn, wheat 
and clover produced a change of 4.6, 4.1 
and 1.4 percent, respectively, in the total 
profit for the three year rotation period. 
The maximum sensitivity during any of 
the three years to changes in crop profits 
is dependent on the relative size of the 
expected profit for each crop and the re- 
spective area under cultivation. Changes 
in the water demand had no effect on 
the optimum solutions since the max- 
imum demand at the optimum solution is 
less than the available supply. A 12 per- 
cent reduction in the available water 


Table 8.—Sensitivity analyses land use allocation—continuous cropping. 


Change Rela- 
Area in corn Area in wheat in tive 
Se Profit, profit, sensi- 
Problem (acres) (m?) (acres) (m7?) $ $ tivity 
Optimum solution 7.368 29820 2.632 10650 4868.40 _— — 
cost coefficient for corn changed 
from $500 to $490 7.368 29820 2.632 10650 4794.70 —73.70 755 
cost coefficient for wheat changed 
from $450 to $440 7.368 29820 2.632 10650 4842.10 — 26.30 241 
water requirements of corn changed 
from 0.0175 to 0.0170 acre-feet/day 
(70.82 to 68.80 m*/day) 7.778 31480 DDD 8990 4888.90 20.50 145 
water requirements of wheat changed 
from 0.008 to 0.0075 acre-feet/day 
(32.37 to 30.35 m3/day) 7.500 30350 2.500 10120 4875.00 6.60 —.021 
J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 141 


Table 9.—Sensitivity analyses pipe network design—continuous cropping. 


Length of 
pipe segment 


(3") 
(1") 
(2") 
(2") 
(1") 
Xg (2") 
X19 (2") 


X, 
X4 
X; 
Xs, 
Xs 


Total cost of pipe 
network 

Change in total cost 

Relative sensitivity 


* Optimum 
solution 
feet meters 
300 91.4 
237 202 
93 28.3 
200 61.0 
UF) 53.9 
153 46.6 
200 61.C 
$3314.90 


Head reduced 


by one foot 
(0.305 m) 
feet meters 
300 91.4 
224 68.3 
106 32.3 
200 61.0 
167 50.9 
163 49.7 
200 61.0 
$3331.90 
$17.00 
—0.141 


Cost of pipe 


increased increased 
by 5% by 10% 
feet meters feet meters 
300 91.4 300 91.4 
237 9/9) 202 61.6 
93 28.3 128 39.0 
200 61.0 200 61.0 
177, 53.9 150 CRY / 
153 46.6 180 54.9 
200 61.0 200 61.0 
$3484.10 $3361.20 
$169.20 $46.30 
1.02 0.140 


Friction slope 


supply could be absorbed without chang- 
ing the optimum land use allocation. The 
results of the post optimal analyses 
suggest that the profit from the invest- 
ment is more dependent on small changes 


in profit from the individual crops than 
in small fluctuations in water require- 
ments. When the cost of pipe is increased 
by 5 percent the cost coefficients of equa- 
tion 18 must change. For the continuous 


Table 10.—Sensitivity analysis land use allocation—rotational cropping. 


Area 
Rela- 
Rota- Corn Wheat Clover Change tive 
tion in sensi- 
Problems year (acres) (m?) (acres) (m*) (acres) (m7?) Profit profit tivity 
Optimum solution 1] 5.0 20235 3.0 12141 2.0 8094 $4150.00 _ — 
2 2.0 8094 5.0 20235 3.0 12141 $3700.00 _— — 
3 3.0 12141 2.0 8094 5.0 20235 $3150.00 
SY = $11000.00 
Cost coefficient for corn changed 1 5.0 20235 3.0 12141 2.0 8094 $4100.00 $—50.00 .602 
from $500 to $490 2 2.0 8094 5.0 20235 3.0 12141 $3680.00 $—20.00 .270 
3 3.0 12141 2.0 8094 5.0 20235 $3120.00 $—30.00 .476 
¥ = $10900.00 $—100.00 455 
Cost coefficient for wheat changed 1 5.0 20235 3.0 12141 2.0 8094 $4120.00 $—30.00 B325 
from $450 to $440 2 2.0 8094 5.0 20235 3.0 12141 $3650.00 $—50.00 .608 
3 3.0 12141 2.0 8094 5.0 20235 $3130.00 $—20.00 .286 
¥ = $10900.00 $—100.00 .409 
Cost coefficient for clover changed 1 5.0 20235 3.0 12141 2.0 8094 $4130.00 $—20.00 .072 
from $150 to $140 2 2.0 8094 5.0 20235 3.0 12141 $3670.00 $—30.00 Se 
3 3.0 12141 2.0 8094 5.0 20235 $3100.00 $—50.00 .238 
¥ = $10900.00 $—100.00 136 
Water requirement corn changed 
from 0.0175 to 0.0180 ac-ft/day 
(70.82 to 72.84 m3/day) No change in optimum solution $0.00 0.000 
Water req. wheat changed from 
0.009 to 0.0085 ac/ft/day (32.37 
to 34.40 m%/day) No change in optimum solution $0.00 0.000 
Water req. clover changed from 
0.0100 to 0.0105 ac-ft/day (40.47 
to 42.49 m°/day) No change in optimum solution $0.00 0.000 


142 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Table 11.—Sensitivity analysis pipe network design—rotational cropping. 


Head 
reduced Cost of pipe Friction type 
Optimum by one foot increased increased 
solution (.305 meters) by 5% by 10% 
Length of — 
pipe segment (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) (ft) (m) 
ee) 300 91.4 300 91.4 300 91.4 300 91.4 
i (1”) 100 30.5 96 29.3 100 30.5 87 26.5 
xe (2") 230 70.1 234 71.3 230 70-1 243 74.1 
Me (2") 200 61.0 200 61.0 200 61.0 200 61.0 
ea Gl”) Tal 23.5 72 21.9 Te 23-5 63 1922 
Pina (2,,.) 233 Tal 258 78.6 253 Ihiled | 267 81.4 
Keg (2) 200 61.0 200 61.0 200 61.0 200 61.0 
Total cost of pipe 
network $3492.20 $3499.50 $3670.90 $3512.10 
Change in total cost 7.30 $178.70 19.90 
Relative sensitivity 2057: 1.02 .057 


cropping system, this produced a relative 
change in the total cost of 1.02; that is, 
a 10 percent change in the cost of pipe 
will result in a 10.2 percent change in total 
project cost. A change of 10 percent in 
either the total head or the friction slope 
produces a change of approximately 1.4 
percent in total cost. 

For the rotational cropping system an 
increase in pipe cost again produced a 
relative sensitivity of 1.02. Changes in the 
total head or friction slope yielded a 
relative sensitivity of 0.057. Thus, the 
optimum solution is much more sensitive 
to changes in pipe cost than either error 
or changes in source elevation, head, or 
the friction slope (see Tables 10 and 11). 


Conclusions 


Linear programming can be employed 
effectively in the initial planning and 
design phases of agricultural systems. 
The linear programming model can pro- 
vide reasonable estimates of land use 
distribution and pipe network designs. 
Depending on the project objectives, a 
more complex objective function and 
additional constraint equations may be 
introduced to reflect additional factors 
such as the rental cost of the land, 
machinery costs, and labor requirements. 
The linear programming model can also 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


be used to optimize regional land use 
allocation as well as small scale develop- 
ment. 

A post optimal analysis that includes 
a sensitivity study can provide valuable 
information about the stability of the 
optimum solution. A sensitivity analysis 
can be used to study the effect of uncer- 
tainty in measured quantities (McCuen, 
1974). The requirements to thoroughly 
examine fluctuations in the water supply 
was demonstrated herein. Thus, it is 
necessary to have a reliable and suf- 
ficient quantity of hydrologic data. 


Notation 


= jth structural coefficient for ith 
constraint equation 

total project area 

area of ith parcel of land 

ith stipulation in linear program- 
ming model 

weighting (cost) coefficient for the 
ith decision variable 

unit cost per foot of pipe for in- 
stallation of pipe of diameter d; 
diameter of pipe segment j 
empirical coefficient in Scobey’s 
formula 

number of pipe segments in reach j 
conversion factor (acre feet/day to 
cubic feet/second) 


Ai; 
A 
aj 
bj 
C; 


A Ae 2 
| 


~ 
Ko) 


143 


H = elevation head measured from the 
water source to the point of dis- 
charge 

L,; = total length of pipe in reach j 

m = number of land use classifications 

n =total number of pipe segments 
from water source to outlet 

Oo = output of the system 

P = optimum total installation cost of 
the pipe network 

Q, = flow in pipe reach j 

I; = expected return from i™ parcel of 
land 

R =total expected return from the 
project 

R, = relative sensitivity 

S,; = friction loss associated with pipe 
diameter d,; of segment j 

u = total number of pipe reaches 

V; = velocity of water in pipe of diam- 
eter d, in segment j 

WwW; = water requirements for ith parcel 
of land 

W = total water demand for project 

optimum length of pipe iin areach 

$, = absolute sensitivity 


ae 
T 


References Cited 


Dantzig, G. B. 1963. Linear Programming and 
Extensions. Princeton University Press, Prince- 
ton, N. J., 625 pp. 

Hoppel, S. K., and W. Viessman. 1972. A linear 
analysis of a water supply system. Water Re- 
sources Bulletin 8(2): 304-10. 

Littleton, C. T. 1953. Industrial Piping. McGraw- 
Hill Book Co. 

McCuen, R. H. 1973a. The role of sensitivity 
analysis in hydrologic modeling. Journal of 
Hydrology 18: 37-53. 

. 1973b. Component sensitivity: A tool for 

the analysis of complex water resource sys- 

tems. Water Resources Research 9(1): 243-6. 

. 1977. Application of Statistical Methods 
for Water Supply Forecasting on the Sevier 
River, Utah. Technical Report, Department of 
Civil Engineering, University of Maryland, 
College Park, Md. 

Means, R. S. 1973. Building Construction Cost 
Data, 1973. Construction Consultants and Pub- 
lishers, 31st Edition. 

Simond, R. A., and L. A. Kinney. 1972. Application 
of Operation Research Methods for USBR Pipe 
Distribution Systems. Paper presented at ASCE 
National Water Resources Engineering Meeting, 
Atlanta, Ga. 

Soil Conservation Service. 1972. Snow Survey and 
Water Supply Forecasting. Section 22, SCS 
National Engineering Handbook, U. S. Depart- 
ment of Agriculture. 


Anuran Locomotion —Structure and Function: 


The Jumping Forces of Frogs 


George R. Zug and Ronald Altig 


Department of Vertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, 
Washington, DC 20560, and Department of Biological Sciences, Mississippi 
State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762 respectively. 


The flight of a jumping frog has 
been frequently compared to the trajec- 
tory of a missile or projectile (Gray, 
1953; Gans and Rosenberg, 1966; Calow 
and Alexander, 1973). As such, the gen- 
eral ballistic equation and its related 
equations with minor modifications have 
been accepted as adequate mathematical 
descriptors of a frog’s jump. To date, 
these equations have been examined 


144 


only by using a single value of terminal 
velocity at liftoff or distance jumped 
(Gray, 1968; Calow and Alexander, 
1973). Our goal has been to record the 
maximum force at liftoff in a variety of 
frog species in order to determine if 
our measure of force and the general 
ballistic equation or a modification 
thereof provide a reasonable estimate of 
terminal velocity and distance jumped. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Materials and Methods 


Adult males of 10 species of frogs 
(scientific names and sample sizes listed 
in Table 1) were collected in Oktibbeha 
and Hancock Counties, Mississippi, dur- 
ing the spring of 1975. The weight 
(nearest 0.1 g), snout-vent length, and 
right hindlimb length (nearest 0.1 mm) 
were recorded for each frog immedi- 
ately following its jumping test. In most 
cases, the frogs were tested within 24 
hr of capture. 

The force platform was a water-filled 
tambor constructed from a plastic funnel 
(64 mm mouth diameter) covered by a 
thin plastic diaphragm. The tambor 
was connected via Tygon tubing through 
a Strathmore pressure transducer to a 
Beckman Dynagraph. The tambor was 
calibrated by placing metal balance 
weights on the diaphragm. The resulting 
Dynagraph records provide a summa- 
tion of the forces applied during 
jumping and the duration of these forces. 

For the tests, the tambor diaphragm 
was covered with moist absorbent paper 
in order to provide sufficient friction to 
enable the frog to jump normally. The 
frog was placed on the diaphragm with 
its hindfeet in the center, thus permitting 
maximum downward displacement of 
the diaphragm. Each frog was tested 
once. 


Results and Discussion 


The initial data are summarized in 
Table 1. Since the samples were restricted 
to adult males, variations in the length 
measurements of each species are low 
(coefficients of variation, 5—8). In con- 
trast, weight variation is higher (cv, 
10—35), and the force and its duration 
are even higher (cv, 15—5S0 and 20-85, 
respectively). A portion of variation in 
the latter 2 parameters undoubtedly 
results from the design of the force plat- 


form and experimental procedure; how- 


ever, consecutive leaps of a frog are 
seldom equidistant (Zug, 1978). Thus, 
the jumping distances of a single frog or 
a sample of equal-sized frogs will show 
considerable variation as will also the 
force and duration that are responsible 
for propelling the frog forward. 

The naturalness of the force data may 
be evaluated by using these data to 
estimate the terminal velocities prior to 
liftoff and the distances traveled (Table 
2). In most cases, these estimates differ 
only slightly from actual jumping dis- 
tances, i.e., distances from Zug (1978). 
The estimated velocities and distances, 
hence the forces, are lower than ‘‘normal’’ 
for Hyla chrysoscelis, H. gratiosa, and 
Pseudacris triseriata. Presumably, the indi- 
viduals of these species were not jumping 
normally, because the similarity of actual 


Table 1.—A summary of the jumping tests. The first number in each column is the mean, the second the 


standard deviation. 


Snout-vent Hindlimb Body Duration 
length length weight Force of force 
N (mm) (mm) (g) (g) (sec) 
Hylidae 
Acris gryllus 4 Der ee 1 ay AVG = 13 FORE 332 G32 .054 + .047 
Hyla avivoca 23 3482.1 3323 + 345 DES 4 P1.4°3320 (030 017 
H. chrysoscelis 5) AAD 3.0 612 = 4.9 G4 = 14 12.9 + 320 .027 + .011 
H. cinerea 8 5.622: 2-8 86.3 + 5.8 Seats hey 2:5 i RR Sa .058 + .034 
H. crucifer 3 30.8 + 1.4 47.0 + 5.1 1:8 EFS 9.1 + 1.4 .035 + .008 
H. femoralis 3 524 = 08 Ay .4 = 2.0 DOSE 60 ee eae: 1042-2018 
H. gratiosa 3) 65.2 = 4.0 ot 1 + 33 114 42 222 ba .066 + .034 
Pseudacris nigrita 1 28.0 41.1 1.0 3.2 .027 
P. triseriata 1 37 45.0 1.8 2.8 .037 
Microhylidae 
Gastrophryne 
carolinensis 1 29.5 36 eal | ral 6.0 0.047 
145 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Table 2.—A comparison of estimated jumping distances to actual jumping distances (from Appendix, 


Table B in Zug, 1978). 


Estimated Estimated 
Velocity Distance Mean 
Taxon (cm/sec) (cm) Distance Difference 

A. gryllus 223.9 SZ 47.4 3.8 
H. avivoca 218.3 48.6 
H. chrysoscelis Ss 24.7 44.6 —19.9 
H. cinerea 207.0 43.7 49.7 —6.0 
H. crucifer 215-8 47.5 50.5 —3.0 
H. femoralis 187.5 So9 39.5 —3.6 
H. gratiosa 186.5 35.5 47.0 S158) 
P. nigrita 160.6 26.3 26.5 =) 
P. triseriata LIZ. 14.0 44.3 —30.3 
G. carolinensis 136.2 18.9 roel —0.2 


@ Velocities were calculated from Gray’s (1968) force equation F = (WV?) =~ (2 gs); W, body weight; 
g, gravity; s, hindlimb length. The estimated distances were calculated from the ballistic equation (Gans 
and Rosenberg, 1966), D = (V” sin 26) + g; the angle was assumed to be 45°. Note that a deviation from 
45° will decrease jumping distance but not significantly so until about +10°. 


and estimated distances for the other 
species indicate that the force platform 
and experimental procedure were pro- 
viding an accurate measure of the forces 
applied during natural jumping. 

We must emphasize that the close 
similarity between the estimated and 
observed jumping distances derives only 
from Gray’s and Gans’ equations (see 
legend of Table 2). The equations V 
=s +t and D= V? = ¢ (where V°is 
average velocity during propulsive phase 
of jump; s, distance during propulsion 
or hindlimb length; t, time or duration 
of force; D, distance jumped) greatly 
underestimate velocity and jumping 
distance. An overestimate of velocity and 
jumping distance was obtained from the 
equations A = Fg + W,V =A ~=t,and 
D = (V2 = g) sin 20. 


Table 3.—A linear correlation coefficient matrix 
comparing five jumping parameters in A. gryllus, 
H. cinerea, H. crucifer, H. femoralis, P. nigrita, and 
G. carolinensis. 


BW F Dut Die AL 


Body weight 1:00: ~ 0962 0:55. 0.22 07932 
Force 00) 0°43 .0.47 "942 
Duration 100% O40" 0:37 
Distance (estim.) 1.00 0.35 


Hindlimb length 1.00 


a A significant correlation at 0.05 level. 


146 


An interspecific comparison of several 
jumping parameters (Table 3) shows 
significant positive correlations between 
force (Y) and body weight (X), force 
(Y) and hindlimb length (X), and body 
weight (Y) and hindlimb length (X). 
More force is required to propel a 
heavier frog; more force is produced by 
longer hindlimbs; and as a frog becomes 
larger, its body weight and hindlimb 
length increase. Although these correla- 
tions would be expected in an intra- 
specific comparison, they might not 
occur in an interspecific comparison, 
which includes frog species with dif- 
ferent jumping behaviors and abilities. 
We suspect our results obtain from the 
preponderance of hylid species in the 
sample, because they are similar in 
behavior and ability. The low correla- 
tions between jumping distance and 
force or hindlimb length are surprising; 
force and hindlimb length are strongly 
correlated and are used to estimate the 
jumping distance, hence jumping dis- 
tance would also be assumed to show a 
high correlation to both of them. 

Gans and Rosenberg (1966) proposed 
that the force of a jump was proportional 
to 7/6 power of body weight in Bufo 
marinus. Although our data show a sig- 
nificant correlation between force and 
weight (Table 3: Y = 3.47 + 2.19X; Y 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


= 4.69X°* r= 0:90; Y, force; X, body 
weight), they are not suitable for testing 
this relationship, because bufonids are 
weak jumpers and our sample is dom- 
inated by strong jumpers. We do, how- 
ever, wish to correct the typographical 
error in Gans’ and Rosenberg’s deriva- 
tion, because F7M~? ~ M!? becomes F? 
~ M7® or F ~ M”” and not F ~ M’“*. 


Acknowledgments 


We wish to thank Drs. S. Emerson, 
C. Gans, W. R. Heyer, and J. Mosimann 
for their comments on the manuscript. 


References Cited 


Calow, L. J., and R. McN. Alexander. 1973. A 
mechanical analysis of a hind leg of a frog 
(Rana temporaria). J. Zool., London 171: 293- 
321. 

Gans, C., and H. I. Rosenberg. 1966. Numerical 
analysis of frog jumping. Herpetologica 22(3): 
209-213. 

Gray, J. 1953. How Animals Move. Cambridge 
University Press, Cambridge. 144 pp. 

. 1968. Animal Locomotion. Weidenfeld 
and Nicolson, London. 479 pp. 

Zug, G. R. 1978. Anuran locomotion-structure 
and function 2: Jumping performance of semi- 
aquatic, terrestrial, and arboreal frogs. Smiths. 
Contrib. Zool. (276): 1-31. 


New World Opiinae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) 
Parasitic on Tephritidae (Diptera) 


Robert A. Wharton! and Paul M. Marsh 


Star Route, Somerset, California 95684; and Systematic Entomology Laboratory, 
U. §. Department of Agriculture, % U.S. National Museum, Washington, 


D. C. 20560, respectively 


ABSTRACT 


A key is presented for the New World species of Opiinae that have been recorded as 
parasites of Tephritidae, including species introduced and established in the New World. 
A brief discussion is given for each species including distribution, hosts, biological 
references, and distinguishing characteristics. One new species is described, Biosteres 
sublaevis, n. sp., and the following new synonymies are indicated: Biosteres tryoni 
(=Parasteres acidusae), Doryctobracon (=Parachasma), D. crawfordi (=D. conjugens), 
Opius anastrepha (=O. argentina and O. mombinpraeoptantis), O. bellus (=O. gomesi 
and QO. turicai), O. canaliculatus (=O. lectus and O. lectoides), and O. frequens 


(=O. glasgowi). 


A large number of opiine braconids 
has been described from the New World. 
Although nothing is known concerning 
the biology of the majority of these, 39 
species have been reared from various 


’ Work on this paper done while senior author 
was ona temporary assignment with the Systematic 
Entomology Laboratory, USDA. Present address: 
Namib Desert Research Station, Walvis Bay, 
South West Africa 9190. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


members of the dipterous family Tephri- 
tidae. This paper is an aid to the identifica- 
tion of these species and brings some of 
the literature pertaining to them together 
in one place. A key is presented to 39 
species followed by a brief discussion of 
each species including distribution, host 
records, biological references, and dis- 
tinguishing characteristics. Tobias (1977) 
has discussed the European species of 
Opius parasitic on fruit flies. 


147 


We have included here only those 
species for which there is reliable in- 
formation concerning their hosts, either 
from the literature or from labels on 
specimens in the National Insect Collec- 
tion in Washington. We have discussed 
briefly a few species that have been 
introduced but not established in the New 
World but these are not included in the 
key. A few synonymies will affect names 
of parasites, some of which are being 
actively studied at the present: Parasteres 
Fischer is returned to Biosteres Foerster 
and P. acidusae Fischer is synonymized 
with B. tryoni (Cameron); Parachasma 
Fischer is synonymized with Dorycto- 
bracon Enderlein; D. areolatus (Szep- 
ligeti) replaces Parachasma cereum 
(Gahan); D. conjugens Enderlein is 
synonymized with D. crawfordi (Viereck); 
Bracanastrepha argentina Bréthes and 
Opius mombinpraeoptantis Fischer are 
synonymized with O. anastrephae Vi- 
ereck; O. gomesi Costa Lima and O. 
turicai Blanchard are synonymized with 
O. bellus Gahan; O. lectus Gahan and 
O. lectoides Gahan are synonymized 
with O. canaliculatus Gahan; and O. 
glasgowi Fischer is synonymized with 
O. frequens Fischer. One new species 
is described from Texas. 

The tephritid hosts and their Opiinae 
parasites are summarized in the list that 
follows. 


Anastrepha sp. 
Doryctobracon capsicola (Muesebeck) 
Doryctobracon tucumanus (Turica & 
Mallo) 
Opius hirtus Fischer 
Anastrepha benjamini Costa Lima 
Doryctobracon areolatus (Szépligeti) 
Anastrepha consobrina (Loew) 
Doryctobracon areolatus (Szépligeti) 
Anastrepha fraterculus (Wiedemann) 
Doryctobracon areolatus (Szépligeti) 


Doryctobracon brasiliensis (Szépli- 
geti) | 

Doryctobracon fluminensis (Costa 
Lima) 


Doryctobracon zeteki (Muesebeck) 
Opius anastrephae Viereck 


148 


Opius bellus Gahan 
Anastrepha interrupta Stone 
Doryctobracon anastrephilus (Marsh) 
Anastrepha ludens (Loew) 
Doryctobracon areolatus (Szépligeti) 
Doryctobracon crawfordi (Viereck) 
Anastrepha montei Costa Lima 
Doryctobracon areolatus (Szépligeti) 
Opius bellus Gahan 
Anastrepha obliqua (Macquart) 
Biosteres tryoni (Cameron) 
Doryctobracon areolatus (Szépligeti) 
Opius anastrephae Viereck 
Opius bellus Gahan 
Anastrepha pickeli Costa Lima 
Doryctobracon areolatus (Szépligeti) 
Anastrepha rheediae Stone 
Opius vierecki Gahan 
Anastrepha serpentina (Wiedemann) 
Doryctobracon areolatus (Szépligeti) 
Doryctobracon auripennis 
(Muesebeck) 
Doryctobracon trinidadensis (Gahan) 
Opius bellus Gahan 
Anastrepha striata Schiner 
Doryctobracon crawfordi (Viereck) 
Doryctobracon trinidadensis (Gahan) 
Doryctobracon zeteki (Muesebeck) 
Opius vierecki Gahan 
Anastrepha suspensa (Loew) 
Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Doryctobracon anastrephilus (Marsh) 
Opius anastrephae Viereck 
Opius concolor Szépligeti 
Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) 
Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Biosteres oophilus (Fullaway) 
Biosteres tryoni (Cameron) 
Opius bellus Gahan 
Dacus ciliatus Loew* 
Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett** 
Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Dacus curvipennis (Froggatt)** 
Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Dacus dorsalis Hendel*** 
Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Biosteres tryoni (Cameron) 
Dacus frauenfeldi Schiner* 
Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Dacus incisus Walker* 
Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Dacus latifrons (Hendel)* 

Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Dacus limbifer (Bezzi)* 

Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Dacus nubilus Hendel* 

Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Dacus passiflorae (Froggatt)* 

Biosteres tryoni (Cameron) 
Dacus pedestris (Bezzi)* 

Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Dacus psidii (Froggatt)* 

Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Dacus tryoni (Froggatt)* 

Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 

Biosteres tryoni (Cameron) 
Dacus xanthodes (Broun)* 

Biosteres tryoni (Cameron) 
Dacus zonatus (Saunders)* 

Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Eutreta xanthochaeta Aldrich 

Biosteres tryoni (Cameron) 
Gerrhoceras sp. 

Opius tafivallensis Fischer 
Myoleja limata (Coquillett) 

Biosteres melleus (Gahan) 

Opius aciurae Fischer 
Procecidochares utilis Stone 

Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
~ Biosteres tryoni (Cameron) 
Rhagoletis basiola (Osten Sacken) 

Opius baldufi Muesebeck 

Opius rosicola Muesebeck 
Rhagoletis berberis Curran 

Opius downesi Gahan 
Rhagoletis boycei Cresson 

Biosteres juglandis (Muesebeck) 
Rhagoletis cingulata (Loew) 

Biosteres melleus (Gahan) 

Diachasma ferrugineum (Gahan) 

Opius frequens Fischer 
Rhagoletis indifferens Curran 

Diachasma muliebre (Muesebeck) 

Opius rosicola Muesebeck 
Rhagoletis completa Cresson 

Biosteres sublaevis Wharton 

Biosteres tryoni (Cameron) 
Rhagoletis cornivora Bush 

Opius canaliculatus Gahan 
Rhagoletis fausta (Osten Sacken) 

Diachasma ferrugineum (Gahan) 

Opius canaliculatus Gahan 

Opius frequens Fischer 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Rhagoletis juglandis Cresson 

Biosteres juglandis (Muesebeck) 
Rhagoletis mendax Curran 

Biosteres melleus (Gahan) 

Opius canaliculatus Gahan 
Rhagoletis pomonella (Walsh) 

Biosteres melleus (Gahan) 

Diachasma alloeum (Muesebeck) 

Diachasma ferrugineum (Gahan) 

Opius canaliculatus Gahan 

Opius downesi Gahan 

Opius richmondi Gahan 
Rhagoletis suavis (Loew) 

Biosteres melleus Gahan 
Rhagoletis tabellaria (Fitch) 

Opius canaliculatus Gahan 

Opius downesi Gahan 

Opius juniperi Fischer 

Opius tabellariae Fischer 
Rhagoletis zephyria Snow 

Opius canaliculatus Gahan 
Tomoplagia sp. 

Opius itatiayensis Costa Lima 
Tomoplagia rudolphi (Lutz & Costa 

Lima) 

Opius tomoplagiae Costa Lima 
Toxotrypana curvicauda Gerstacker 

Doryctobracon toxotrypanae 

(Muesebeck) 

Zonosemata electa (Say) 

Biosteres sanguineus (Ashmead) 
Zonosemata vittigera (Coquillett) 

Biosteres sanguineus (Ashmead) 


* Not known to occur in the New World. 

** Trapped in California on a few occasions, 
but extensive surveys showed no subsequent 
infestations. 

*** Established in California on several separate 
occasions but successfully eradicated each time. 


The key to species that follows is 
aimed at the non-specialist in braconid 
taxonomy, for whom some terms may be 
unfamiliar. Some of these terms are de- 
fined below. 

Malar space. The space between the 
eye and base of mandible. 

Mesonotal midpit. A pit on the 
mesonotum just in front of the prescutellar 
furrow (see below), sometimes repre- 
sented only by a small circular shallow 


149 


pit, other times by an extended tear- 
drop-shaped depression. 

Notauli. Two furrows on the mes- 
onotum extending posteriorly from the 
anterior lateral corners and meeting at the 
prescutellar furrow. They are usually 
smooth but sometimes have cross carinae 
at regular intervals appearing to be a row 
of pits, in which case they are termed 
crenulate. They are synonymous with 
parapsidal furrows of older descriptions. 

Occipital carina. A carina or ridge that 
goes around the back of the head sep- 
arating the occiput from the temples and 
vertex. 

Prescutellar furrow. A transverse fur- 
row in front of the scutellum separating 
it from the mesonotal lobes; usually with 


distinct cross carinae dividing it into sec- 
tions. 

Propodeum. The last segment of the 
thorax, actually the morphological first 
abdominal segment fused with the thorax. 

Sternaulus. A groove on the lower part 
of the mesopleuron extending from the 
middle coxa forward usually to the mid- 
dle of the pleuron. It can be either 
smooth or crenulate (see notauli for 
definition of crenulate). 

Wing venation. See Fig. 1 for explana- 
tion of terms. 

As is the case with most braconids, 
males not associated with females are 
difficult to identify. Therefore, the key 
that follows is based mainly on the fe- 
males. 


Key to the New World Opiinae Reared from Tephritidae 


1. Second radial segment of fore wing longer than first intercubitus (fig. 1, 
R1, 11); postnervellus of hind wing (see fig. 5, Pn) usually absent or only 


*weakly indicated? 0. Poo rs. ic owadeow oe eee, Oe 2 
Second radial segment equal to or shorter than first intercubitus (fig. 5); 
postnervellus present, often strongly pigmented ...................... 19 
2(1). Second abdominal tergite always and base of third often distinctly striate; 
lower. border, of mandible.notched ... 6 0:...:«+. 2.222 12. oehtee eee I 
Abdomen unsculptured beyond first tergite; lower border of mandible 
SVGMILY" CURVE wos sss cris uga es Sar sie, cig ovate atresia, cee a ke aa eee 4 
3(2). Ovipositor about as long as first abdominal tergite; first tergite usually 
TUSWIOSE OF PrANUIAE L75... cus ee Oca ee ee Opius baldufi Muesebeck 
Ovipositor at least as long as abdomen beyond first tergite; first tergite 
USUallysStiate we Ts ee saad, SS ee Opius downesi Gahan 
4(2). Recurrent vein of fore wing entering first cubital cell (fig. 6) ............. 5 
Recurrent vein entering second cubital cell (as in fig. 5), very rarely in- 
terstitial: with mtercubitus (as in figs: 1,°4)"....-.....22. 0. ...¢0 oOo 8 
5(4). Propodeum with well developed longitudinal median carina; third segment 
of discoidal vein of fore wing (D3) absent or nearly so (fig. 2, 3) ....... 6 
Propodeum without carinae; third segment of discoidal vein present and 
welldevelopedi(tig. Orissa. o>. ere Opius tafivallensis Fischer 
6(5). Stigma of fore wing nearly linear (fig. 3), about 9 times longer than 
WS: Sgt ARE: BOE A Ge en any Bd coh ceca Opius hirtus Fischer 
Stigma broad (fig. 2), roughly 4 times longer than wide ................. 7 
7(6). Opening present between mandibles and clypeus when mandibles closed; 
Siro ma Velo ich saci cas coburn. 6-00 SERS ere oe Opius concolor Szépligeti 
Opening absent between mandibles and clypeus when mandibles closed; 
Stigma Drown. : Pie Meee fe oie: vis ee Oe a ene eee Opius bellus Gahan 
3(4): Occipital’canmiaaOSent,.. . sco acucws Vale ae lees Senoiou ce oc ee ee ee 9 
Occipital carma ‘present and'well’developed 22.2 23-9%:2-40-2+4-. =. = nee 13 
96)" Mesonotal*midpit absent ~2) 3.5. .5.-05:. 02h ccee ee Opius bucki Costa Lima 
Mesonotal midpit present and nearly always deep ..................005- 10 
10(9). Eye small, at most 2.5 times longer than malar space; width of clypeus less 
than’ 2:5 times height Gigs! 14:06). .... cine CE Re, eee 11 
Eye larger, usually at least 3 times longer than malar space; width of clypeus 
more, thane? 7 SstiMES Mea Mbp pars cress stereo cya ee eee eee ne ee 12 


150 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


11(10). 


12(10). 


13(8). 


14(13). 


15(14). 


16(13). 


17(16). 


18(16). 


1900): 


20(19). 


21(20). 


22(21). 


23(22). 


24(22). 


25(24). 


Propodeum distinctly areolate; facial carina present between antennae but 


\ HCE ua |: ge ey ae EA ee Pe me PP Opius tomoplagiae Costa Lima 
Propodeum with only a pair of short carinae at apex; facial carina strong, 

nearly spinose, between antennae........... Opius itatiayensis Costa Lima 
Eyes large, strongly bulging in dorsal view (fig. 9), more than 4 times longer 

PA ATCSN PLES gc... 55 a2 Ne RRs St eet Opius vierecki Gahan 
Eyes moderately sized, not strongly bulging in dorsal view (fig. 10), less 

than 3.5 times longer than temples ........... Opius anastrephae (Viereck) 
Ovipositor extending beyond apex of abdomen by distance equal to or shorter 

thanshinstwabdominal terete tin + < cc fw oka ws adie os 2 MS See 14 
Ovipositor extending beyond apex of abdomen by distance greater than first 

STG Me Roc ra weg os te et Jone atelier, col 16 


Carinae on first abdominal tergite weak or absent; propodeum weakly riigose 
medially; temples as seen from above bulging slightly beyond margin 


CN eR ert oa eri Ns ort chic obHete a <6: oe RR Opius juniperi Fischer 
Carinae on first tergite strong; propodeum strongly rugose; temples sloping 
inward not bulsing beyond eye Mareinm. ........6...s.0.20..0+000eeee- 15 


Mesopleuron always marked with black, propodeum usually black or dark 
BROWN ers soot pee ee cs el as da a 3 3c Opius canaliculatus Gahan 

Mesopleuron honey yellow, propodeum usually honey brown ........... 
NS aa te So Shove (le Saks BeyoR eGR Opius acicurae Fischer 


Dark colored species, most of thorax and abdomen dark brown or black.. 17 
Light colored species, body entirely orange, rarely propodeum brown .... 18 


Prescutellar furrow divided into two distinct pits by strong central carina; 
second radial segment of fore wing not more than 3 times longer than 
second intercubitus; abdominal tergites 2 and 3 usually black.......... 

DS Sipe he sd te ee cre eae ais east Opius frequens Fischer 

Prescutellar furrow not divided into two pits, all carinae of equal size; 
second radial segment about 4 times longer than second intercubitus; 
feRneites rand: J VElOW. ses ote oe aoe be he eee Opius tabellariae Fischer 


Ovipositor not longer than one-half abdomen; body length 4-5 mm ...... 

Joe hel Shai See Node tee ia ae ore ek Pe eh ei ise Opius rosicola Muesebeck 
Ovipositor about as long as abdomen; body length 2-3 mm ............. 

St cee ea be oe se aE Be i Sea A ele alg Opius richmondi Gahan 


Opening present between mandibles and clypeus when mandibles closed; 


apical margin of clypeus concave, truncate, or sinuous (figs. 11, 13).... 20 
Opening absent between mandibles and clypeus when mandibles closed; 
apicalamareim ol-clypeus convex (fig. 12) 5. 2.0.2. te. bs eee ote ose oe 33 


Apical margin of clypeus sinuous (fig. 13); recurrent vein entering first cubital 
cell, sometimes nearly interstitial with intercubitus; occipital carina 
FI SCI basen ‘coe. pct BER oe colic cat OER Oe CE PRG, ce eM MR yt Are ee Se 21 
Apical margin of clypeus concave to truncate (fig. 11); recurrent vein 
entering second cubital cell; occipital carina well developed, at least at 


LORGSTRCU PE SN Mee tL iste le, SAO NN Ce REEL Soi, Selene a Abe sa sies 31 
Propodeum areolate (fig. 8); head of most species yellow or orange, some- 

times black dorsally but at least lower face yellow ................... 22 
Propodeum bearing only a pair of short apical carinae (fig. 7), never areolate; 

MeAMaeAEKUOROMNTE TOOIAGK (sie a. 2 sees sa wx) 2 cies oo dce' « we ea oat ee Bytes © 28 
Fore winessyellowswith black apical borders/.% 22.0 st ots sl 23 
Fore wings predominately concolorous, hyaline to infuscated............ 24 


Head and hind femur largely black; first abdominal tergite roughly 1.2 (2) 
and 1.5(d) times longer than apical width . .. Doryctobracon zeteki (Muesebeck) 
Head and hind femur yellow or yellow orange; first tergite 1.0(¢) and 1.2(d) 
times longer than apical width ..... Doryctobracon auripennis (Muesebeck) 


Fore and middle tibiae and femora dark brown to black, at least in part.... 25 
Fore and middle tibiae and femora yellow or yellow orange ............. 26 


Ovipositor slightly but distinctly shorter than body; stigma without black 
DOereer erro oie ba oe «Se Bee NER Doryctobracon anastrephilus (Marsh) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


151 


Ovipositor slightly but distinctly longer than body; stigma with black 
DORE T Berets eicy sito as cake Doryctobracon tucumanus (Turica & Mallo) 


26(24). Wings hyaline or nearly so; posterior femur yellow..................... 
E MATS ee SEAR Geet SR. Mb ish, See Doryctobracon areolatus (Szépligeti) 

Wings infuscated except for a small light patch beyond stigma; posterior 
femur dark pdt Least Ml! Pant ; ..+ <iscca ey eet arene ees aa oa aoe ee 27 


27(26). ‘Apical abdominal tergites. of female yellow -.....2...: .. eos ees eae ee 
NS So. Sor BOI. thpanee Doryctobracon capsicola (Muesebeck) 

Apical abdominaltereites: of female:dark/ i 7200). eee SS eee 
Ee ee ee ee ee Doryctobracon fluminensis (Costa Lima) 


280 a Sugmaiwellow ses. ee Bete 4 AE Doryctobracon brasiliensis (Szépligeti) 
Shipma bro win seis s SE SONGS. Ws Si ON a BR ae 23 


29(28). Head and thorax black, abdomen yellow; clypeus strongly sinuous....... 
shea SER a Ns ae as See Bas Doryctobracon toxotrypanae (Muesebeck) 

Head often dark brown, thorax and abdomen orange; clypeus usually not 
aS) SCROMETY GSINU@US, V0 2 eles 2s eh se bau beeen aoe de oa ee 30 


30(29). Frons with dense area of hair directly behind antennae ................. 
A Re ar RAD oC tape a Doryctobracon crawfordi (Viereck) 


31(20). First abdominal tergite smooth apically, median pair of carinae absent 
POSTERIORI « trey ante cece ee take Diachasma muliebre (Muesebeck) 
First tergite rugose apically, median pair of carinae strong throughout .... 32 


32(31). Antennae usually 38—42 segmented; ovipositor subequal to length of body... 
no Peal! Watt eee Aad, Beh ae Se Diachasma ferrugineum (Gahan) 

Antennae usually 43—47 segmented; ovipositor much longer than body ... 
sigh ee ea. aS. aeteer as Slee Diachasma alloeum (Muesebeck) 


33(19). ‘Second abdominal tergite fieavily striate: 0.222502. . 25 0 oP eee 34 
Second abdomimal terpite smooth, or nearly So... :. 5.25.2 2.0... eee 37 
34(33). Notauli distinct and deeply impressed throughout their length ........... 35 
Notauli absent posteriorly, not reaching mesonotal midpit............... 36 


35(34). Thorax and abdomen dark brown; notauli crenulate .................... 
2 ja 0 ys RSME Ge cue ec OA an atk SA hare a Biosteres oophilus (Fullaway) 


36(34). Second cubital cell of fore wing large, third radial segment less than 3.5 times 


lengthiof Second SCOMEeNE s.. @ -.6.5 <ce5)-,¢is cei xe Biosteres melleus (Gahan) 
Second cubital cell small; third radial segment more than 4.2 times longer 
than. second seoment-(fig-: 5) 2. cae. «tac Biosteres sublaevis Wharton, n. sp. 


37(33)... Wing, hyaline; hind femur yellow to yellow orange... .... .. >. .2. s5cn0 see 
Ses ceanctaad Sie MORSA CCS WM cos eae i aie aR REE eee REE Biosteres juglandis (Muesebeck) 
Wing membrane distinctly infuscated; hind femur dark brown ........... 38 


38(37). Abdominal tergites largely dark brown to black; ovipositor about 1.5 times 
longer than thorax plus abdomen; fore and middle femora yellow ...... 

ROSA eestor AO ADGA APOE REN Ba oA OSS Lea Biosteres tryoni (Cameron) 
Abdominal tergites orange; ovipositor subequal to length of thorax plus 
abdomen; fore and middle femora dark brown ................0e0000: 

LE ioe Se SEE Sy ee SEIS, Pee oe ne, Se eee Biosteres sanguineus (Ashmead) 


In the discussion below, the distribu- Genus Biosteres Foerster 

tion, hosts, and most significant litera-  p;,. ,eres Foerster. 1862:259. 
ture references are given foreach species.  Zetetes Foerster, 1862:258. 
Many distribution records and literature — Chilotrichia Foerster, 1862:258. 
references pertaining to areas outside the ey tg Hee roel Rite 
New World have been omitted for some Adu suRET CORE SL. 

: : Opiellus Ashmead, 1900:368. 
of the introduced species, but they canbe —Cejjestella Cameron, 1903:343. 


found in Fischer (1971). Diachasmimorpha Viereck 1913:641. 


152 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Figs. 1-6. Wings: 1, Opius rosicola Muesebeck; 2, O. bellus Gahan; 3, O. hirtus Fischer; 4, O. anastrephae 
(Viereck); 5, Biosteres sublaevis Wharton, n. sp.; 6, O. tafivallensis Fischer. Figs. 7-8. Propodeum: 7, 
Doryctobracon trinidadensis (Gahan); 8, D. anastrephilum (Marsh). Figs. 9-10. Head, dorsal view: 9, 
O. vierecki Gahan; 9, O. anastrephae. Abbreviations: Cul, Cu2, Cu3 = Ist, 2nd, and 3rd cubital cells; 
D3 = 3rd segment of discoideus; I1, I2 = 1st and 2nd intercubiti; Pn = postnervellus; Rl, R2, R3 = Ist, 
2nd, and 3rd segments of radius; Rec = recurrent vein; Rn = radiellen vein. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 153 


Figs. 11—16. Lower portion of face, anterior view: 11, Diachasma muliebre (Muesebeck); 12, Biosteres 
melleus (Gahan); 13, Doryctobracon anastrephilum (Marsh); 14, Opius itatiayensis Costa Lima; 15, O. 
vierecki Gahan; 16, O. tomoplagiae Costa Lima. 


Biosteres (Parasteres) Fischer, 1967:3. New syn- 
onymy. 

Fischer (1967) originally described 
Parasteres as a subgenus of Biosteres and 
later (Fischer 1971) gave it full generic 
status. Still later (Fischer 1973) separated 
it from Biosteres by placing Parasteres 
in a different tribe, the Desmiostomatini, 
which he characterized as having the 
occipital carina completely absent. This 
seems to be an unnatural arrangement, 
however, as the occipital carina is vari- 
ously reduced in both Biosteres and 
Opius of the tribe Opiini. The relative 
development of the occipital carina 
appears to be an attribute of species or 
possibly subgenera rather than a generic 


154 


or tribal characteristic. And in at least 
one species, the development of such a 
carina is intraspecifically variable. Vari- 
ables involving the shape of the mandi- 
bles and clypeus and the presence, 
absence, and relative lengths of various 
wing veins, are much more significant 
and useful for discriminating higher cate- 
gories. And even these characters are 
insufficient in themselves and are best 
used in combination for the accurate 
characterization of genera in the Opiinae. 
Fischer’s Opiini and Desmiostomatini 
need to be reassessed to determine the 
true cross-tribal relationships of the in- 
cluded genera. Tobias (1977) has rejected 
the generic separation of Biosteres, 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Diachasma, and Opius, retaining them as 
subgenera of Opius. We have seen the 
male holotype of the type-species of 
Parasteres, and it agrees well with the 
genus Biosteres. Further it is conspecific 
with B. tryoni. 


The genus Biosteres is characterized 
as follows: second cubital cell short, 
second radial segment usually shorter 
than first intercubitus; post-nervellus 
well developed; clypeus large, opening 
between clypeus and mandibles absent 
when mandibles closed. 


Biosteres juglandis (Muesebeck) 
Opius juglandis Muesebeck, 1961:57. 


Distribution. — Arizona, New Mexico; 
laboratory reared in California. 


Hosts.—Rhagoletis boycei, R. jug- 
landis. 


Biosteres juglandis differs from its 
close relatives in the longicaudatus com- 
plex by the absence of well-developed 
sculpture on the second abdominal tergite. 
Some sculpture is discernible on a few 
specimens but this is always limited to the 
base of the tergite. The biology of this 
species has recently been studied by 
Buckingham (1975). 


Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead 
Biosteres longicaudatus Ashmead, 1905:970. 


Distribution. —First described from 
the Philippines; also collected in Costa 
Rica and Mexico. Released and success- 
fully established in Hawaii and recently 
in southern Florida (Baranowski 1974) 
and Trinidad (Bennett et al. 1977). 


Hosts.—Anastrepha suspensa, Cera- 
titis capitata, Dacus ciliatus (?), D. 
cucurbitae, D. curvipennis, D. dorsalis, 
D. frauenfeldi, D. incisus, D. latifrons, 
D. limbifer, D. nubilus, D. pedestris, 
D. psidii, D. tryoni, D. zonatus, Proce- 
cidochares utilis. 

Additional references.— Ashley et al. 
1977(1976) (adult emergence); Beardsley 
1961 (status of varieties and forms); 
Fullaway 1951, 1953 (discussion and 
description of new varieties); Greany, 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Allen et al. 1977 (laboratory rearing); 
Greany, Ashley et al. 1976 (detailed life 
history and rearing techniques from 
laboratory cultures in Florida); Greany, 
Tumlinson et al. 1977 (host finding); 
Lawrence et al., 1976 (effect of host age 
on development); Lawrence et al. 1978 
(oviposition behavior); van den Bosch et 
al. 1951 (one of numerous status reports 
following introduction into Hawaii). 

A large amount of additional literature 
is available concerning the introduction, 
mass rearing, and use of longicaudatus 
for biological control of fruit flies in 
Hawaii and other regions of the World. 

Biosteres longicaudatus is similar to 
both melleus and sublaevis. Populations 
of longicaudatus introduced into the New 
World differ from these two species in 
the possession of distinctly lighter basal 
flagellomeres. It should be noted, how- 
ever, that some of the described vari- 
eties of longicaudatus do have a com- 
pletely dark flagellum. In addition to 
characters mentioned in the key, speci- 
mens of longicaudatus often have a dark 
apical or subapical band on the abdomen, 
and the posterior ocelli are more widely 
spaced than in melleus and sublaevis. 
Another distinguishing character for 
longicaudatus is the distinctive kink near 
the tip of the ovipositor. 

The status of the numerous varieties 
belonging to the longicaudatus complex 
needs to be examined in much more 
detail. The mass rearing and introduction 
of large numbers of these varieties into 
the same habitats has undoubtedly 
altered some of the physiological (and 
perhaps morphological) barriers which 
may still persist in the Oriental Region. 


Biosteres melleus (Gahan) 


Opius melleus Gahan, 1915:73 
Biosteres rhagoletis Richmond, 1915:294. 


Distribution. —Minnesota and Nova 
Scotia south to Florida. 


Hosts. —Rhagoletis cingulata, R. men- 
dax, R. pomonella, R. suavis, Myoleja 
limata? (numerous specimens from Flor- 
ida have been reared from J/ex spp., 


155 


and M. limata is the only tephritid known 
from this host plant (Wasbauer 1972)). 


Additional references.—Lathrop and 
Nickels 1932; Lathrop and Newton 1933 
(detailed biology on the blueberry maggot, 
includes essential details of all earlier 
reports). 

This species is most closely related to 
sublaevis n. sp. It differs primarily in 
the configuration of the second cubital 
cell. In addition, the sternaulus is 
strongly crenulate in melleus but nearly 
smooth in sublaevis. Specimens of mel- 
leus from Florida, although reared from a 
different host and unrelated host plant, 
appear essentially identical to those 
reared from Rhagoletis mendax and R. 
pomonella in Maine. There are some 
slight differences in the shape of the 
second cubital cell. Because of the un- 
usual host, some doubt must be attached 
to the Florida material until further 
biological information can be obtained. 
Biosteres melleus differs from the species 
of Opius attacking R. pomonella, R. 
mendax, and R. cingulata by lacking 
an opening between the clypeus and man- 
dibles, the strigose tergite two, and the 
shorter second radial segment. 


Biosteres oophilus (Fullaway) 
Opius oophilus Fullaway, 1951:248 


This Oriental species has been reared 
in the laboratory in Costa Rica on Cera- 
titis capitata and is included here in the 
event that it becomes established. It can 
be distinguished from all New World 
species on tephritids by the -crenulate 
notauli. 


Biosteres sanguineus (Ashmead) 
Phaedrotoma (?) sanguineus Ashmead, 1889(1888): 
655. 
Distribution.—Maryland to Florida 
and west to Missouri and Arizona 


Hosts.—Zonosemata electa, Z. vitti- 
gera. 

Additional references. —Ashmead 1892 
(brief note on host association with 
the weed Solanum carolinense); Cazier 
1962 (brief note on biology). 


156 


This species is characterized by the | 
dark wings, dark legs, and completely 
orange body in both sexes. In addition, 
it has a shorter ovipositor and a much 
more robust appearance than other 
species of Biosteres. Other than the brief 
notes by Ashmead and Cazier, nothing 
is known about the biology of sanguineus. 


Biosteres sublaevis Wharton, new species? 
(Fig. 5) 


Head. —1.67—1.80 (M = 1.74, H = 1.76)? times 
broader than long, 1.20-—1.34(M = 1.24, H = 1.21) 
times broader than mesonotum; eyes slightly 
bulging beyond temples in dorsal view, eyes 
roughly twice as long as temples. Temples, 
occiput and frons (laterally) moderately densely 
hairy; eyes bare. Occipital carina strong to mid 
eye height; face distinctly hair-punctured, slightly 
protruding medially, usually with weak median 
carina above middle. Face nearly twice wider than 
high; clypeus roughly three times wider than high. 
Lower border of clypeus evenly convex; opening 
almost completely absent between clypeus and 
mandibles when mandibles closed. Mandible 
roughly 1.8 times broader at base than at apex, 
upper and lower borders gradually diverging at 
apex, more strongly diverging over basal third; 
upper tooth larger, extending distinctly distad of 
lower. Malar space % to 4 eye height, roughly 0.7 
times basal width of mandible. Distance between 
antennal bases about equal to distance between 
antennae and eyes; antenna roughly 1.5 times 
longer than body, 41-45 segmented. Maxillary 
palps distinctly longer than head. 

Thorax. —1.24—1.36(M = 1.30, H = 1.26) times 
longer than high; 1.32—1.41 (M = 1.34, H = 1.32) 
times higher than wide. Mesonotum strongly 
declivous anteriorly; densely hairy and weakly 
ptuctured throughout, hairs longer, more erect, and 
less dense posteriorly and on scutellum; notauli 
very deep, but short, very weakly impressed to 
absent beyond anterior-lateral corners; mesonotal 
midpit deep, tear-drop shaped. Prescutellar groove 
3 to 4 times broader than long, with well-developed 
midridge and distinct lateral ridges of varying 
strength. Apical half of propodeum strongly 
declivous; propodeum rugulose, sparsely hairy 
throughout; median areola occasionally discernible. 
Metapleuron and mesopleural disc sparsely hairy 
centrally; hairs on mesopleuron shorter and more 
numerous than on metapleuron. Sternaulus dis- 
tinctly impressed, but nearly unsculptured. Hind 
femur nearly 3.5 times longer than mid-width. 

Wings (fig. 5).—stigma broad, discrete, 2.65—3.30 
(M = 3.06, H = 2.67) times longer than broad; first 


2 The description of this new species is to be 
credited solely to R. A. Wharton. 
3M = median, H = holotype. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


= 


C—O 


segment of radius short, arising from near middle of 
stigma, 1% to /s length of second segment, third 
segment 4.20—5.50 (M = 4.96, H = 4.21) times 
longer than second segment and ending before wing 
tip; first intercubitus 1.32-1.73 (M = 1.46, H 
= 1.52) times longer than second segment of radius, 
roughly 1.65 times longer than second intercubitus; 
recurrent vein postfurcal by 3 to 7/s its own length, 
0.51-0.59 (M = 0.56, H = 0.51) times length of 
first segment of discoideus; nervellus postfurcal by 
about its own length; subdiscoideus arising from 
well below middle of closed brachial cell; first 
mediellan segment roughly 1.3 times longer than 
second; postnervellus long, nearly reaching wing 
margin, weakly sclerotized posteriorly. 

Abdomen.—petiole 1.10-1.25 (M = 1.16, H 
= 1.13) times longer than apical width; apex nearly 
twice wider than base; surface striate and bicarinate, 
the carinae often weak and _ indistinguishable 
beyond middle, especially in smaller specimens. 
Tergite 2 densely striate medially, smooth laterally; 
gaster smooth beyond tergite 2. Ovipositor sheath 
densely hairy, with at least 5 rows of moderately 
long hairs; ovipositor more than twice length of 
thorax. 

Color. —orange; ovipositor sheaths, mandibular 
teeth, flagellum, pedicel, and scape (dorsally) dark 
brown; hind tibiae dorsally and most of hind tarsi 
often lighter brown; wings hyaline, veins dark 
brown. 

Length. —2.2-—3.5 mm. 

Holotype.—female; Texas, Jefferson Davis 
County, Davis Mountains, August 1974, ex. 
Rhagoletis completa, S. Berlocher. Deposited in 
USNM. 

Paratypes.—7 22,346, same data as holotype. 
Deposited in USNM and personal collection of K. 
Hagen, University of California, Berkeley. 

This species is closely related to melleus, 
particularly the Florida populations of that species 
(see discussion above), but differs primarily in the 
possession of a distinctly shorter second radial 
segment. In addition, the sternaulus is much more 
deeply impressed and sculptured in melleus than 
in sublaevis. B. sublaevis is also similar to B. 
giffardii (Silvestri) and B. carinatus Szépligeti 
but differs in having more extensive abdominal 
sculpture and a broader stigma. It differs from 
longicaudatus primarily in having much weaker 
notauli. One of the specimens from the type locality 
appears to be deformed. The striations on tergite 
2 are very weak although still extending to the 
apex of the segment. 

The specimens of the type-series were made 
available by Dr. K. Hagen, University of California, 
Berkeley, who originally suggested that they might 
represent a new species. 


Biosteres tryoni (Cameron) 


Opius tryoni Cameron 1911:343. 
Biosteres (Parasteres) acidusae Fischer, 1967:3. 
New Synonymy. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Distribution. —Originally described 
from Australia; introduced into Cali- 
fornia (Boyce 1934), Puerto Rico (Bart- 
lett 1941), and Hawaii (Pemberton and 
Willard 1918b); not recovered in Cali- 
fornia. 


Hosts.—Anastrepha obliqua, Ceratitis 
capitata, Dacus dorsalis, D. passiflorae, 
D. tryoni, D. xanthodes, Eutreta xan- 
thochaeta, Procecidochares utilis, Rha- 
goletis completa. 


Additional references. —Pemberton and 
Willard 1918a (competition with Opius 
humilis); Pemberton and Willard 1918b 
(life history as Diachasma tryoni); Bart- 
lett 1941 (rearing, release, recovery, and 
then apparent loss in Puerto Rico). 
Further information on this species can 
be found in the numerous accounts of the 
rearing, release, and status of fruit fly 
parasites for attempts at biological con- 
trol especially in Hawaii. 

This species is characterized by the 
poorly developed to absent occipital 
carina. It is similar to the Australian 
deeralensis in this regard but is otherwise 
unrelated due to strong differences in the 
shape of the clypeus. The clypeus is 
weakly indented as seen from below in 
tryoni, similar to longicaudatus, but 
tryoni is easily separated from the other 
Biosteres species included here by the 
color pattern of darkened wings and dark 
abdomen in both sexes. 

B. acidusae was described from a 
single male taken in Puerto Rico by K. A. 
Bartlett (Fischer, 1967). It agrees in all 
respects with other Puerto Rican material 
collected by Bartlett in the same year and 
from the same host following the in- 
troduction and establishment of tryoni. 


Genus Diachasma Foerster 


Diachasma Foerster, 1862:259. 
Bathystomus Foerster, 1862:235. 
Atoreuteus Foerster, 1862:241. 


Like Biosteres and Doryctobracon, 
Diachasma is characterized by the 
short second cubital cell and the presence 
of a postnervellus in the hind wing. 
Diachasma differs from Biosteres by 


157 


the presence of a broad opening between 
the clypeus and mandibles, and from 
Doryctobracon by the shorter more 
evenly margined clypeus and the well- 
developed occipital carina. 


Diachasma alloeum (Muesebeck) 
Opius alloeus Muesebeck, 1956:101. 
Distribution. —Ontario to New Bruns- 
wick; Connecticut, Florida, Maine, New 
York, Pennsylvania. 
Host.—Rhagoletis pomonella. 


Additional references. —Boush and 
Baerwald 1967 (courtship behavior, evi- 


dence for a sex pheromone); Cameron. 


and Morrison 1977 (mortality factor of 
R. pomonella); Rivard 1967 (distribution 
and rearing records). 

This species has been bred from R. 
pomonella in all of the above areas. As 
Muesebeck (1956) has noted, this species 
is closely related to ferrugineum, but 
alloeum has a distinctly longer ovipositor 
and is a somewhat larger species. The 
metapleuron is also usually more heavily 
sculptured. 


Diachasma ferrugineum (Gahan) 
Opius ferrugineus Gahan, 1915:75. 


Distribution. —Northeastern United 
States and eastern Canada; Florida, Cali- 
fornia (?). 


Hosts.—Rhagoletis cingulata, R. 
fausta, R. pomonella. 


Additional references. —Harper 1962, 
1963 (release, recovery, and successful 
establishment in California); Fleschner 
1963 (record of release in California 
against R. cingulata); Porter 1928 (dis- 
cussion of reasons for low percentage of 
parasitism on P. pomonella). Other refer- 
ences listed in Fischer (1971) are limited 
to rearing records. Apparently ferru- 
gineum attacks R. pomonella only rarely. 

Harper (1962) and Fleschner (1963) 
indicate that ferrigineum was released in 
California and Harper (1963) stated that 
it was recovered, but we have not seen 
any specimens from California to sub- 
Stantiate that fact. Parasites recovered 


158 


from release sites of ferrugineum in 
California are apparently all muliebre. 

Muesebeck (1956) separated muliebre 
from eastern ferrugineum on the basis 
of a minor, but apparently constant 
difference in sculpture of the first ab- 
dominal tergite, that of muliebre being 
smooth apically. The two species also 
have differing biologies, muliebre being 
parthenogenetic and ferrugineum being 
bisexual. Further biological studies are 
needed to determine if the two species 
are indeed distinct. 


Diachasma muliebre (Muesebeck) 
(Fig. 11) 


Opius muliebris Muesebeck, 1956:100. 


Distribution.— Washington to Cali- 
fornia. 


Host.—Rhagoletis indifferens. 


See the discussion under ferrugineum 
for relationships of muliebre and fer- 
rugineum. 


Genus Doryctobracon Enderlein 


Doryctobracon Enderlein, 1920(1918): 144. 
Parachasma Fischer, 1967:7. 


Fischer (1967) proposed the name 
Parachasma for this distinctive group 
but apparently overlooked Enderlein’s 
Doryctobracon since it was not originally 
placed in the Opiinae. Fischer (1973) 
later recognized Doryctobracon in a 
generic key implying, but not directly 
stating, that Parachasma was a synonym. 
The synonymy and new combinations 
were later published in Fischer (1977). 

Members of this genus are probably all 
parasites of Tephritidae. Species are 
quite closely related and separated pri- 
marily by color differences (Fischer 
1964b, 1965b, 1967) but need to be more 
carefully examined with respect to bi- 
ology and intraspecific variations to 
determine their exact identities. 

Doryctobracon is characterized by the 
distinctive shape of the clypeus (fig. 13), 
the short second cubital cell, strong post- 
nervellus, recurrent vein entering first 
cubital cell, and the absence of an 
occipital carina. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Doryctobracon anastrephilus (Marsh) 
(Figs. 8, 13) 


Parachasma anastrephilum Marsh, 1970:31. 


Distribution. —Southern Florida. 
Host.—Anastrepha interrupta, A. sus- 
pensa. 


This species is characterized by the 
complete propodeal areola, dark legs, 
and relatively short ovipositor. Nothing 
is known about its biology other than 
the host rearing listed. 

Doryctobracon areolatus (Szépligeti), 
new combination 


Biosteres areolatus Szépligeti, 1911:286. 

Opius cereus Gahan, 1919:169. New synonymy. 

Opius saopaulensis Fischer, 1961:290. New syn- 
onymy. Unnecessary new name for areolatus 
Szépligeti 1911. 
Distribution. — Argentina, Brazil, 

Mexico, Panama, Trinidad, Venezuela; 

Florida, recently introduced and estab- 

lished. 


Hosts.—Anastrepha benjamini, A. 
consobrina, A. fraterculus, A. ludens, 
A. montei, A. obliqua, A. pickeli, A. 
serpentina. 


Additional references.— Baranowski 
and Swanson 1970, 1971 (release and 
recovery in Florida, as cereum); Clausen, 
Clancy, and Clock 1965 (unsuccessful 
attempts against Hawaiian fruit flies due 
to specificity on Anastrepha, as cereum); 
Plummer, McPhail, and Monk 1941 (host 
records, aS cereum). 

The type of areolatus agrees very well 
with specimens of cereus from Brazil; 
the clypeus is slightly less sinuate, but 
we feel they are definitely the same 
species. Fischer (1967) places this species 
in Diachasma. The clypeus on the type is 
not very sinuate, but there is no occipital 
carina and the recurrent vein is antefurcal, 
placing areolatus in Doryctobracon. 

Little information has been published 
on the biology of this species despite the 
numerous introductions (as Dorycto- 
bracon cereus). It is readily distinguished 
by the relative hyalinity of the wings and 
appears to be quite close to anastrephilus , 
but the legs are predominately yellow 
rather than black. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 © 


Doryctobracon auripennis (Muesebeck) 
Opius auripennis Muesebeck, 1958:453. 


Distribution. —Panama. 
Host.—Anastrepha serpentina. 


This species is quite similar to zeteki 
but differs in having both head and hind 
femora yellow or yellow orange instead 
of predominately dark brown to black. 
The only biological information is the 
host record above. 


Doryctobracon brasiliensis (Szépligeti) 


Biosteres brasiliensis Szépligeti, 1911:285. 

Coeloides anastrephae Bréthes, 1924:7. 

Opius (Diachasma) brasilianus Fischer, 1963:392. 
Unnecessary new name for brasiliensis Szép- 
ligeti 1911. 


Distribution. — Argentina, Brazil. 
Host.—Anastrepha fraterculus. 


Additional references.—Costa Lima 
1937 (host and distributional records). 

The only biological information avail- 
able for brasiliensis is the host record 
listed. This species is easily distinguished 
by the brightly colored stigma of the fore 
wing. The few individuals available for 
study indicate that the body is usually 
dark but variable in color. 

Costa Lima (1937) synonymized 
anastrephae with Biosteres brasiliensis 
Szépligeti 1902. This should be 1911, 
since Szépligeti described Opius brasi- 
liensis in 1902 which is definitely not the 
same as Biosteres brasiliensis. We have 
seen the types of Biosteres brasiliensis 
and Coeloides anastrephae, and they are 
definitely the same species. 


Doryctobracon capsicola (Muesebeck) 
Opius capsicola Muesebeck, 1958:450. 


Distribution. — Panama. 


Host.—Anastrepha sp. in Manihot 
esculenta seed capsules. 


The only biological information is that 
listed above taken from the specimen 
labels. This species is nearly identical 
with fluminensis, but the vertex is darker 
and the apical abdominal tergites lighter 
in the female of capsicola. These two 
species differ from other Doryctobracon 


159 


with a complete propodeal areola by the 
color of the legs and fore wings. 


Doryctobracon crawfordi (Viereck) 


Diachasma crawfordi Viereck, 1911:181. 
Doryctobracon conjugens Enderlein, 1920(1918): 
144. New synonymy. 
Distribution. —Central America, Co- 
lombia, Ecuador. 


Hosts.—Anastrepha ludens, A. striata. 


Additional references. —Baker et al. 
1944 (summary and interpretations of 
previous biological accounts); Crawford 
1927 (host records); Darby 1933, Darby 
and Kapp 1934 (importance of tempera- 
ture and humidity in development com- 
pared to A. ludens); Keilin and Picado 
1913 (description of larvae and adults, as 
species of Diachasma); Keilin and Picado 
1920 (rearing techniques); McPhail and 
Bliss (parasitism on A. ludens); Plum- 
mer, McPhail, and Monk 1941 (host 
records). Several other workers have 
discussed the unsuccessful attempts to 
introduce this species into other areas. 

We have seen the type of conjugens 
and it is identical with that of crawfordi. 
This species is characterized by reduced 
propodeal sculpture, uniformly dark 
wings, and orange body. It is similar to 
trinidadensis in coloration but has a more 
extensively punctate and densely hairy 
frons. 


Doryctobracon fluminensis (Costa Lima) 
Opius fluminensis Costa Lima, 1938:69. 

Distribution. — Brazil, Venezuela. 

Host.—Anastrepha fraterculus. 

This species is very similar to capsicola 
but the apical abdominal segments are 
darker and the vertex lighter in the 
females of fluminensis. The only biological 
information known is the host record 
listed. 

Doryctobracon toxotrypanae (Muesebeck) 
Opius toxotrypanae Muesebeck, 1958:451. 
Distribution. —Costa Rica, Mexico. 
Host.—Toxotrypana curvicauda. 


No additional information is avail- 
able concerning this species. It is very 
similar to crawfordi but has a darker 


160 


thorax. The extent of the dark markings 
on the thorax is sometimes variable, and 
the two species, which are sympatric 
over part of their ranges, are best sep- 
arated by their host preferences. 


Doryctobracon trinidadensis (Gahan) 
(Fig. 7) 
Opius trinidadensis Gahan, 1919:168. 
Distribution. —Trinidad. 


Hosts.—Anastrepha serpentina, A. 
striata. 


There is no information about this 
species other than the rearing records 
mentioned by Gahan (1919). It is very 


_ similar to crawfordi but is distinguished 


by smooth and hairless frons behind the 
antennae. 


Doryctobracon tucumanus (Turica and Mallo), 
new combination 


Opius tucumanus Turica and Mallo, 1961:149. — 
Distribution. — Argentina. 
Host.—Anastrepha sp. on “‘ubajay.”’ 


Additional references. —Blanchard 1966 
(redescription, as new species, listed as 
common in Loreto); Hayward 1941, 
1943 (rearing and releases in Tucuman 
against unnamed fruit flies). 

Almost nothing has been published on 
the biology of this species. It is similar 
in coloration and propodeal sculpture to 
anastrephilus but has a distinctly longer 
ovipositor. 


Doryctobracon zeteki (Muesebeck) 
Opius zeteki Muesebeck, 1958:454. 


Distribution. —Panama. 


Hosts.—Anastrepha fraterculus, A. 
striata. 


The only biological information known 
about zeteki is the host records men- 
tioned. This species is similar to auripen- 
nis but has a darker head and darker 
femora. 


Genus Opius Wesmael 
Opius Wesmael, 1835:115. 
At least 21 synonyms are associated 
with Opius, and we are not listing them 


here. The complete list of synonyms can 
be found in Fischer 1971. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Most of the New World Opius species 
reared from tephritids have the post- 
nervellus of the hind wing lacking or 
weakly developed. Otherwise, the genus 
contains a number of distinct mor- 
phological groups. The differences be- 
tween these groups appear to be as great 
as those separating some of the other 
genera discussed above. In fact, Fischer 
(1973, 1977) has resurrected Bracana- 
strepha Bréthes for those species lacking 
an occipital carina and having an open- 
ing between the clypeus and mandibles. 
This genus, whose type-species is the 
same as Opius anastrephae Viereck (see 
below), has not been further charac- 
terized or discussed, however, and it 
seems premature to split off some of the 
species discussed below before the genus 
Opius has been adequately studied as a 


whole and the relationships of the various 


included groups are sufficiently under- 
stood. 

The members of Fischer’s truncatus- 
group subgroup II (Fischer 1964:271) 
appear to form a distinct morphological 
unit and all are probably parasites of 
the Tephritidae. Most are separable only 
with difficulty and even then only on the 
basis of slight differences in color and 
Ovipositor length. Unassociated males 
are extremely difficult to identify. Some 
of the species are undoubtedly synonyms, 
but more work is needed on intraspe- 
cific variation and host preferences be- 
fore such synonymies can be resolved. 
Differences in biology and _ internal 
anatomy may eventually prove of more 
importance than color and ovipositor 
length in separating these species. 


Opius aciurae Fischer 
Opius aciurae Fischer, 1964a:272. 
Distribution. — Florida. 
Host.—Myoleja limata on Ilex spp. 


Almost nothing is known concerning 
this species. It is nearly identical to 
canaliculatus except for the lighter colora- 
tion. The difference in host range 
appears sufficient in itself to separate 
the two species. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Opius anastrephae Viereck 
(Figs. 4, 10) 


Opius anastrephae Viereck, 1913:563. 

Bracanastrepha argentina Bréthes, 1924:8. New 
synonymy. 

Opius mombinpraeoptantis Fischer, 1966:116. New 
synonymy. 


Distribution. — Argentina, Brazil, Cen- 
tral America, West Indies; Florida. 


Hosts.—Anastrepha fraterculus, A. 
obliqua, A. suspensa. 


Additional references. —Clausen, 
Clancy, and Chock 1965 (introduction 
attempts, host records, limitations in 
biological control); Gowdy 1925, Plank 
1938, 1939, Bartlett 1941 (host records 
and rates of parasitism). 

We have compared the types of 
argentina and mombinpraeoptantis with 
that of anastrephae and they are iden- 
tical, apparently representing a color 
variable species. It can be distinguished 
by the absence of an occipital carina, 
large eyes, short malar space, and 
temples not bulging. This species was 
introduced into Hawaii and apparently 
into the continental U. S. but not estab- 
lished. The Florida record indicated 
above is based on specimens in the Na- 
tional Collection reared at Key Biscayne 
from A. suspensa. 


Opius baldufi Muesebeck 
Opius baldufi Muesebeck, 1949:256. 


Distribution. —Illinois, Michigan, 


Minnesota, Wisconsin. 


Host.—Rhagoletis basiola (Muese- 
beck’s original description states host as 
R. alternata, which is a misidentification 
of basiola). 


Additional references. —Balduf 1958 
(effect of parasites on host size), 1959 
(detailed life history). 

This species belongs to the mor- 
phologically distinct ochrogaster group 
(Fischer 1964a:350) which differ from 
other species discussed here by the shape 
of the mandibles which bear a distinct 
notch on their lower edge. O. baldufi is 
similar to downesi but has a somewhat 
shorter ovipositor. 


161 


Opius bellus Gahan 
(Fig. 2) 


Opius hellus Gahan, 1930:1. 

Opius gomesi Costa Lima, 1938:71. New synonymy. 

Opius turicai Blanchard, 1966:24. New synonymy. 
Distribution. — Argentina, Belize, Bra- 

zil, Costa Rica, Panama, Trinidad, Vene- 

Zuela. 


Hosts.—Anastrepha fraterculus, A. 
montei, A. obliqua, A. serpentina, Cera- 
titis capitata. 


Additional references. —Bartlett 1941 
(record of laboratory rearing in Puerto 
Rico and unsuccessful establishment); 
Costa Lima 1937, 1938 (host records); 
Guagliumi 1963 (host records). | 

Despite a widespread distribution, 
very little seems to have been pub- 
lished concerning this species. It is 
characterized by the antefurcal recur- 
rent vein, broad stigma, complete ab- 
sence of notauli, absence or near absence 
of sternaulus, and absence of the third 
discoidal segment of the fore wing. 

Both gomesi and turicai were described 
as being quite close to bellus but differing 
in the color of the mesonotum. Gahan, 
in his original description of bellus, 
mentioned the color variation in this 
species, but this fact was apparently 
overlooked in the description of gomesi 
and turicai as new species. We have not 
been able to see the types of gomesi and 
turicai and the synonymy is based on the 
original descriptions. 


Opius bucki Costa Lima 
Opius bucki Costa Lima, 1938:71. 


Distribution. — Brazil. 


Host.—Unknown species of Tephri- 
tidae. 


Nothing is known concerning this 
species other than the reference by 
Costa Lima. This species is charac- 
terized by the absence of both an oc- 
cipital carina and a mesonotal midpit 
and by the presence of a postfurcal 
recurrent vein and a broad stigma. It 
does not appear to be similar to any of 
the other species treated here. The lower 
face appears unusually elongate because 
the eyes are fairly small. 


162 


Opius canaliculatus Gahan 


Opius canaliculatus Gahan, 1915:80. 
Opius lectus Gahan, 1919:167. New synonymy. 
Opius lectoides Gahan, 1930:2. New synonymy. 


Distribution. — Quebec south to Mary- 
land, west to Oregon; Florida. 


Hosts.—Rhagoletis cornivora, R. 
fausta, R. mendax, R. pomonella, R. 
tabellariae, R. zephyria. 


Additional references. —Cameron and 
Morrison 1977 (mortality factor of R. 
pomonella); Middlekauff 1941 (rearing 
records); Rivard 1967 (rearing and emerg- 
ence records). All references are to 
lectus. 

We have been unable to adequately 
distinguish between canaliculatus, lectus, 
and lectoides on morphological grounds. 
Foote and Blanc (1963) have discussed 
the relationships between the two main 
host species of Rhagoletis, pomonella 
and zephyria, but there does not seem to 
be any differences in the parasites. We 
have seen four specimens from Florida 
reared from R. cornivora and they also 
are identical to canaliculatus. 

This species is very similar to acicurae 
and differs primarily in its darker 
coloration and host range. 


Opius concolor Szépligeti 


Opius concolor Szépligeti, 1910:244. 
Opius fuscitarsus Szépligeti, 1913:605. 
Opius perproximus Silvestri, 1914:103. 
Opius siculus Monastero, 1931:195. 


This Mediterranean species is being 
studied in Florida and has been success- 
fully reared for several generations on 
Anastrepha suspensa (Baranowski, pers. 
comm.). It is included here in the likely 
event that it will be established. It is 
similar to bellus but is distinguished by 
its yellow stigma and the opening be- 
tween clypeus and mandibles when the 
mandibles are closed. 


Opius downesi Gahan 


Opius downesi Gahan, 1919:164. 
Opius (Opius) berberidis Fischer, 1964a:358. 


Distribution. —British Columbia, 
Michigan, New Brunswick, New York, 
Ontario, Washington. Probably widely 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


distributed across northern U. S. and 
southern Canada. 


Hosts.—-—Rhagoletis berberis, R. pom- 
onella, R. tabellaria. 


Almost nothing is known concerning 
this species. Downes (1919) mentioned 
it as a parasite of R. pomonella; the 
other records are based on reared speci- 
mens in the National Collection. This 
species is characterized by the unusual 
mandible and wing venation as in baldufi 
but differs from baldufi in the possession 
of a slightly longer ovipositor. 


Opius frequens Fischer 
Opius (Opius) frequens Fischer, 1964a:279. 
Opius (Opius) glasgowi Fischer, 1964a:286. New 
synonymy. 
Distribution.—Maine west to Wash- 
ington and Oregon. 


Hosts.—Rhagoletis cingulata, R. 
fausta. 


Aside from rearing records based on 
label information, nothing appears to be 
known about this species. 

O. glasgowi is based on a male speci- 
men which differs from typical female 
frequens specimens only in its slightly 
lighter coloration. A female from the 
same series as the male type of glasgowi, 
found in the National Collection, is 
identical to specimens from the type 
series of frequens in both coloration and 
sculpture. This species is characterized 
and separated from other members of the 
nearctic truncatus-group as follows: dark 
body, weakly infuscated wings, and 
moderately long ovipositor. It most 
closely resembles the slightly lighter 
colored tabellariae but is distinguished 
by the length of the second intercubitus 
and the strong central carina in the 
prescutellar furrow. 

Opius hirtus Fischer 
(Fig. 3) 
Opius (Opius) hirtus Fischer, 1963:376. 


Distribution. —Costa Rica, Dominican 
Republic. 


Host.—Anastrepha sp. 


The host record above is from label 
information on a single specimen reared 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


from guava in Costa Rica. This species 
is readily recognized by the narrowly 
elongate stigma, antefurcal recurrent 
vein, lack of an opening between clypeus 
and mandibles, unsculptured meson- 
otum, and weak radiellan vein of hind 
wing. It is perhaps closest to tafivallensis , 
but the later is black and white and hirtus 
is orange. 


Opius itatiayensis Costa Lima 
(Fig. 14) 


Opius itatiayensis Costa Lima, 1937:24 (in key); 
1938:70 (description). 
Distribution. — Brazil. 


Host.—Tephritidae, possibly Tomo- 
plagia (Costa Lima, 1937:23). 

The only biological information on 
itatiayensis is the brief note by Costa 
Lima mentioned above. This species is 
separated from the other Opius species 
lacking an occipital carina by the rela- 
tively small eyes, postfurcal recurrent 
vein, and moderately sized clypeus. It is 
similar to tomoplagiae but has a strong 
facial carina and a more weakly sculp- 
tured propodeum. 


Opius juniperi Fischer 
Opius (Opius) juniperi Fischer, 1964a:288. 
Distribution. — Arizona. 
Host.—Possibly Rhagoletis tabellaria 


The holotype and one paratype were 
reared from juniper berries in associa- 
tion with the above tephritid. Fischer 
also listed a specimen from Manitoba, 
but, since we have not seen this specimen 
and the wide range of localities seems too 
great, we have not included this record 
in the distribution. This species is sep- 
arated from other Nearctic members of 
the truncatus-group by the near absence 
of sculpture on the petiole, the greatly 
reduced sculpture of the propodeum, 
and the bulging eyes. 


Opius richmondi Gahan 
Opius richmondi Gahan, 1919:165. 
Distribution. —Maine, Minnesota. 
Host. —Rhagoletis pomonella. 


Additional references. —WLathrop and 
Nickels 1932 (rearing record). 


163 


Very little is known concerning this 
species. It is readily distinguished from 
other nearctic members of the truncatus- 
group by the much longer ovipositor, 
the petiolar carinae which usually extend 
to the apex as well-developed ridges, 
and the orange body. 


Opius rosicola Muesebeck 
(Fig. 1) 
Opius rosicola Muesebeck, 1949:254. 


Distribution. —California, Illinois, 
Minnesota, Oregon, Saskatchewan, Wash- 
ington, Wisconsin. 


Hosts.—Rhagoletis basiola, R. in- 
differens. 


Additional references.—Balduf 1958 
(effect of parasite on host size), 1959 
(detailed life history). 

The material from western U. S. was 
reared from the cherry fruit fly in Prunus 
emarginatus but appears to be identical 
to the type material reared from rose 
hips. The biology of this species is 
apparently identical to that of baldufi 
despite strong morphological differences. 

O. rosicola is similar to the other 
nearctic members of the truncatus-group 
with moderately long ovipositor but 
differs in the lighter coloration, the nearly 
hyaline wings, and the weak carinae on 
the petiole. 


Opius tabellariae Fischer 

Opius (Opius) tabellariae Fischer, 1964a:305. 
Distribution. — Minnesota, New York. 
Host.—Rhagoletis tabellaria. 

The only biological information known 
is the host record listed above. This 
species is similar to frequens but differs in 
its shorter second intercubital vein and 
the prescutellar furrow not having a 
strong central dividing carina. 

Opius tafivallensis Fischer 
(Fig. 6) 

Opius tafivallensis Fischer, 1968:69. 
Distribution. — Argentina, Peru. 
Host.—Gerrhoceras sp. 

The above host record is from labels on 
three specimens collected in San Mateo, 
Peru. This species is quite different from 
all other opiines discussed here because 


164 


of its black and white color. In addition, it 
has the petiole and propodeum unsculp- 
tured with the mesonotum and meso- 
pleuron nearly so, the petiole narrowly 
elongate, the propodeum densely cov- 
ered with long hairs, the postnervellus 
and third discoidal segments well-devel- 
oped, the recurrent vein entering first 
cubital cell, and the stigma narrow. 
Opius tomoplagiae Costa Lima 
(Fig. 16) 
Opius tomoplagiae Costa Lima, 1937:24 (in key); 
1938:69 (description). 
Distribution. — Brazil. 
Host.—Tomoplagia rudolphi. 


This distinctive species is similar to 
itatiayensis but differs by its distinctly 
areolated propodeum and weak facial 
carina. The only biological information is 
the host record mentioned by Costa Lima 
(1937). 

Opius vierecki Gahan 
(Figs. 9, 15) 
Opius vierecki Gahan, 1915:76. 

Distribution. —Mexico, Panama. 


Hosts.—Anastrepha rheediae, A. 
striata. 


Viereck stated in the original descrip- 
tion that the type was ‘“‘probably’’ reared 
from A. striata. The National Collection 
contains a specimen reared from A. 
rheediae. This species belongs to the neo- 
tropical complex of Anastrepha parasites 
which lack an occipital carina. It differs 
from other members of this group in 
having greatly enlarged eyes. 


Other Species Not Included in Key 


Biosteres fullawayi (Silvestri): Intro- 
duced into Puerto Rico but apparently 
not established. 

Opius fletcheri Silvestri: Introduced 
into Puerto Rico but not established. 

Opius humilis Silvestri: Introduced into 
California and Puerto Rico but ap- 
parently not established. 

Opius macrocerus Thompson: Occurs in 
Europe, Japan, and is recorded from 
Michigan; a parasite of Agromyzidae 
but Fischer (1964c:9) lists it also as 
attacking Trypeta sp. which needs to be 
confirmed; apparently not related to any 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


species discussed in the present paper 
and the tephritid host is suspect. 


Acknowledgments 


Several institutions have aided this 
study by loaning types in their posses- 
sion: Museo Argentino de Ciencas 
Natureles, Buenos Aires (Bréthes types); 
Hungarian Natural History Museum, 
Budapest (Szépligeti types); Polish Acad- 
emy of Sciences, Warsaw (Enderlein 
types). The illustrations were made 
by Ellen Paige, to whom we are 
grateful. Use of the scanning electron 
microscope was supported in part by the 
Electron Microscope Central Facility, 
University of Maryland, College Park. 
Many helpful suggestions and comments 
were made by R. M. Baranowski, Uni- 
versity of Florida, Homestead; F. D. 
Bennett, CIBC, Trinidad; and R. H. 
Foote, Systematic Entomology Labora- 
tory, USDA. 


Literature Cited 


Ashley, T. R., P. D. Greany, and D. L. Chambers. 
1977(1976). Adult emergence in Biosteres (Opius) 
longicaudatus and Anastrepha suspensa in rela- 
tion to temperature and moisture concentration of 
the pupation medium. Fla. Entomol. 59: 391- 
396. 

Ashmead, W. H. 1889(1888). Description of new 
Braconidae in the collection of the U. S. 
National Museum. Proc. U. S. Natl. Mus. 11: 
611-671. 

. 1892. Extracts from correspondence, notes 

from Missouri, U. S. Dept. Agr. Insect Life 5: 

135: 


. 1900. Some changes in generic names in 

Hymenoptera. Canad. Entomol. 32: 368. 

. 1905. Additions to the recorded hymenop- 
terous fauna of the Philippine Islands, with 
descriptions of new species. Proc. U. S. Natl. 
Mus. 28: 957-971. 

Baker, A. C., W. E. Stone, C. C. Plummer, and 
M. McPhail. 1944. A review of studies on the 
Mexican fruitfly and related Mexican species. 
Misc. Publ. U. S. Dept. Agric. 531, 155 pp. 

Balduf, W. V. 1958. The puparium of Rhagoletis 
basiola (O.S.): variation in length and form. 
Ohio J. Sci. 58: 7-14. 

. 1959. Obligatory and facultative insects 
in rose hips; their recognition and bionomics. 
Ill. Biol. Monogr. 26, 194 pp. 

Baranowski, R. M. 1974. Release of Opius 
longicaudatus against Anastrepha suspensa in 
Florida. Fruit Fly News 3: 17. 

and R. W. Swanson. 1970. Introduction 

of Parachasma (Opius) cereus (Hymenoptera: 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Braconidae) into Florida as a parasite of 
Anastrepha suspensa (Diptera: Tephritidae). Fla. 
Entomol. 53: 161-162. 

. 1971. The utilization of Parachasma cereum 
(Hymenoptera: Braconidae) as means of sup- 
pressing Anastrepha suspensa (Diptera: Tephri- 
tidae) populations. Proc. Tall Timbers Conf. 
1971: 249-252. 

Bartlett, K. A. 1941. The introduction and 
colonization in Puerto Rico of beneficial insects 
parasitic on West Indian Fruit Flies. J. Agr. 
Dinivs P2R. 25: 25—3.l. 

Beardsley, J. W. 1961. A review of the Hawaiian 
Braconidae. Proc. Haw. Entomol. Soc. 17: 
333-366. 

Bennett, F. D., M. Yaseen, M. N. Berg, and M. J. 
Sommeijer. 1977. Anastrepha spp.—Investiga- 
tions on their natural enemies and establish- 
ment of Biosteres longicaudatus in Trinidad, 
West Indies. Comm. Inst. Biol. Contr. Tech. 
Bull. 18, 12 pp. 

Blanchard, E. E. 1966. Dose nuevos Opiinos 
(Hym. Braconidae) parasitos de Tripetidos 
(Dipt.) del genero Anastrepha. Rev. Invest. 
Agropecuarias, INTA, B. Aires, Ser. 5 Patol. 
Veo 97, 21—25: 

Bodenheimer, F. S. 1928. Contributions towards 
the knowledge of the citrus insects in Palestine, 
1. Preliminary report on the work of the 
Palestine Breeding Laboratory at Petah-Tikwa, 
1924-1927. Palestine Citograph 1, 16 pp. 

Boush, G. M., and R. J. Baerwald. 1967. Court- 
ship behavior and evidence for a sex pheromone 
in the apple maggot parasite, Opius alloeus 
(Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Ann. Entomol. 
Soc. Amer. 60: 865-866. 

Boyce, A. M. 1934. Bionomics of the walnut husk 
fly, Rhagoletis completa. Hilgardia 8: 363-579. 

Bréthes, J. 1924. Various Himenopterous de la 
America del Sud. Numquam Otiosus 2: 6-16. 

Buckingham, G. R. 1975. The parasites of walnut 
husk flies (Diptera: Tephritidae: Rhagoletis) 
including comparative studies on the biology of 
Biosteres juglandis Mues. (Hym.: Braconidae) 
and on the male tergal glands of the Brac- 
onidae. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Univ. 
Calif., Berkeley. 

Cameron, P. 1903. Descriptions of new genera 
and species of Hymenoptera from India. Ztschr. 
Syst. Hym. Dipt. 3: 337-343. 

. 1911. On a collection of parasitic Hymen- 
optera (chiefly bred) made by Mr. W. W. 
Froggatt, F. L. S., in New South Wales, with 
descriptions of new genera and species. Proc. 
Linn. Soc. N. S. W. 34: 333-346. 

Cameron, P. J., and F. O. Morrison. 1977. Analysis 
of mortality in the apple maggot, Rhagoletis 
pomonella (Diptera: Tephritidae), in Quebec. 
Canad. Entomol. 109: 769-788. 

Cazier, M. A. 1962. Notes on the bionomics of 
Zonosemata vittigera (Coquillett), a fruit fly 
in Solanum (Diptera: Tephritidae). Pan-Pac. 
Entomol. 38: 181-186. 

Clausen, C. P., D. W. Clancy, and Q. C. Chock. 
1965. Biological control of the oriental fruit fly 


165 


(Dacus dorsalis Hendel) and other fruit flies in 
Hawaii. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bull. 1322, 
102 pp. 

Costa Lima, A. da. 1937. Vespa do genero Opius, 
parasitas de larvas de moscas de frutas (Hy- 
menoptera: Braconidae). O Campo, September: 
22—24, October: 29-32. 

1938. Vespas parasitas de moscas de 
frutas (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). O Campo, 
March: 69-72. 

Crawford, D. L. 1927. Investigation of Mexican 
fruit fly (Anastrepha ludens Loew) in Mexico. 
Calif. Dept. Agr. Mon. Bull. 16: 422-445. 

Darby, H. H. 1933. Insects and micro-climates. 
Nature 131(3319): 839. 

, and E. H. Kapp. 1934. Studies on the 
Mexican fruit fly Anastrepha ludens (Loew). 
U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bull. 444, 20 pp. 

Downes, W. 1919. The apple maggot in British 
Columbia. Canad. Entomol. 51: 2-4. 

Enderlein, G. 1920(1918). Zur Kenntnis aus- 
sereuropaischer Braconiden. Arch. Naturgesch. 
11: 51-224. 

Fischer, M. 1961. Zur Kenntnis der von Szépligeti 
beschriebenen Opius-Arten. 2. Teil. Polskie 
Pismo Entomol. 31: 263-293. 

. 1963. Die Opius-arten der Neotropischen 

Region. Polskie Pismo Entomol. 33: 253—409. 

1964a. Die Opiinae der Nearktischen 

Region. I Teil. Polskie Pismo Entomol. 34: 

197-530. 

. 1964b. Revision der Neotropischen Opi- 

inae. Reichenbachia 3: 1-67. 

. 1964c. Die gezuchteten Opiinae der Samm- 

lung Groschke (Hymenoptera, Braconidae) 

Stutt. Beitr. Naturk. 136: 1-12. 

1965a. Die Opiinae der Nearktischen 

Region. -II Teil. Polskie Pismo Entomol. 35: 

3-212. 

. 1965b. Uber Neotropische Opiinae (Hy- 

menoptera, Braconidae). Ann. Naturhist. Mus. 

Wien 68: 407-441. 

1966. Neue Neotropische Opius-arten 

aus dem U. S. National Museum Washington. 

Beitr. Entomol. 16: 84—150. 

. 1967. Zusammenfassung der Neotropis- 

chen Opiinae mit Ausschluss der Gattung 

Opius Wesm. Beitr. Neotrop. Fauna 5: 1-21. 

. 1968. Beschreibungen Neotropischer Opi- 

inae (Hymenoptera, Braconidae). Ann. Natur- 

hist. Mus. Wien 72: 53-76. 

. 1971. Hym. Braconidae. World Opiinae. 

Index of Entomophagous Insects, Le Francois, 

Paris. 189 pp. 

. 1973. Hymenoptera Braconidae (Opiinae 

I). Das Tierreich 91: 1-620. 

. 1977. Hymenoptera Braconidae (Opiinae 
II). Das Tierreich 96: 1—1001. 

Fleschner, C. A. 1963. Releases of recently 
imported insect parasites and predators in 
California, 1960-61. Pan-Pac. Entomol. 39: 
114-116. 

Foerster, A. 1862. Synopsis der Familien un 
Gattungen der Braconen. Verh. Naturh. Ver. 
Preuss. Rheinl. 19: 225-288. 


166 


Foote, R. H., and F. L. Blanc. 1963. The fruit 
flies or Tephnitidae of California. Bull. Calif. 
Ins. Sur. 7: 1-117. 

Fullaway, D. T. 1951. Review of the Indo- 
Australian parasites of the fruit flies (Tephri- 
tidae). Proc. Haw. Entomol. Soc. 14: 243-250. 

. 1953. New species and varieties of Opius. 
Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 55: 308-314. 

Gahan, A. B. 1915. A revision of the North 
American Ichneumon-flies of the subfamily 
Opiinae. Proc. U. S. Natl. Mus. 49: 63-95. 

. 1919. Descriptions of seven new species 

of Opius (Hymenoptera-Braconidae) Proc. En- 

tomol. Soc. Wash. 21: 161-170. 

. 1930. Synonymical and descriptive notes 
on parasitic Hymenoptera. Proc. U. S. Natl. 
Mus. 77(2831), 12 pp. 

Gowdey, C. C. 1925. Report of the Government 
Entomologist. Rept. Dept. Sci. Agr. Jamaica 
1924: 17-20. 

Greany, P. D., G. E. Allen, J. C. Webb, J. L. Sharp, 
and D. L. Chambers. 1977. Stress-induced 
septicemia as an impediment to laboratory rear- 
ing of the fruit fly parasitoid Biosteres (Opius) 
longicaudatus (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and 
the caribbean fruit fly Anastrepha suspensa 
(Diptera: Tephritidae). J. Invert. Path. 29: 
153-161. 

, T. R. Ashley, R. M. Baranowski, and D. L. 

Chambers. 1976. Rearing and life history studies 

on Biosteres (Opius) longicaudatus (Hym.: Brac- 

onidae). Entomophaga 21: 207-215. 

, J. H. Tumlinson, D. L. Chambers, and 
G. M. Boush. 1977. Chemically mediated host 
finding by Biosteres (Opius) longicaudatus, a 
parasitoid of tephritid fruit fly larvae. J. Chem. 
Ecol. 3: 189-195. 

Guagliumi, P. 1963. La Mosca del Mediterranea 
(Ceratitis capitata Wied.: Dipt., Trypetidae) in 
Venezuela. Rev. Agr. Subtrop. Trop. 57: 
364-369. 

Harper, R. W. 1962. 42nd Annual Report Bureau 
of Entomology. Bull. Calif. Dept. Agr. 51: 
84-95. 


. 1963. 43rd Annual Report Bureau of 
Entomology. Bull. Calif. Dept. Agr. 52: 98-109. 

Haywood, K. J. 1941. Departmento de Entomol- 
ogia. Rev. Ind. Agr. Tucuman 31: 50—S58. 

. 1943. Departmento de Entomologia. Rev. 

Ind. Agr. Tucuman 33: 66-84. 

. 1944. Departmento de Entomologia. Rev. 
Ind. Agr. Tucuman 34: 151-165. 

Keilin, D., and C. Picado. 1913. Evolution et 
formes larvaires du Diachasma crawfordi n. sp. 
Braconide parasite d’une mouche des fruits 
(Anastrepha striata Schin.). Bull. Sci. Fr. Belg. 
47: 203-214. 

. 1920. Biologie et morphologie larvaires 
d’Anastrepha striata Schiner mouche des fruits 
de l’Amerique Centrale. Bull. Sci. Fr. Belg. 
48: 421-441. 

Lathrop, F. H., and R. C. Newton. 1932. The 
biology of Opius melleus Gahan a parasite of the 
blueberry maggot. J. Agr. Res. 46: 143-160. 

, and C. B. Nickels. 1932. The biology and 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


t 
} 


control of the blueberry maggot in Washington 
County, Maine. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bull. 
DiS, 71 pp: 

Lawrence, P. O., R. M. Baranowski, and P. D. 
Greany. 1976. Effect of host age on development 
of Biosteres (=Opius) longicaudatus , a parasitoid 
of the Caribbean fruit fly Anastrepha suspensa. 
Fla. Entomol. 59: 33-39. 

, P. D. Greany, J. L. Nation, and R. M. 
Baranowski. 1978. Oviposition behavior of 
Biosteres longicaudatus, a parasite of the carib- 
bean fruit fly, Anastrepha suspensa. Ann. 
Entomol. Soc. Amer. 71: 253-256. 

Marsh, P. M. 1970. A new species of fruit fly 
parasite from Florida (Hymenoptera: Brac- 
onidae: Opiinae). Fla. Entomol. 53: 31-32. 

. 1974. New combinations and new syn- 
onyms in North American Braconidae (Hymen- 
optera). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 76: 285-— 
289. 

McPhail, M., and C. I. Bliss. 1933. Observations 
on the Mexican fruit fly and some related 
species in Cuernavaca, Mexico, in 1928 and 
i222 Ss. Dept. Agr. Circ. 255, 24 pp. 

Middlekauff, W. W. 1941. Some _ biological 
observations on the adults of the apple maggot 
and the cherry fruit flies. J. Econ. Entomol. 
34: 621-624. 

Monastero, S. 1931. Un nuovo parasita endofago 
della mosca delle olive trovato in Altavilla 
Milicia (Sicilia). Atti. R. Accad. Sci. Palermo 
16, 6 pp. 

Muesebeck, C. F. W. 1931. Descriptions of a new 
genus and eight new species of ichneumon-flies 
with taxonomic notes. Proc. U. S. Natl. Mus. 
79(2882), 16 pp. 

. 1949. Two new species of Opius from 

rose hips (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Canad. 

Entomol. 81: 254-256. 

. 1956. On Opius ferrugineus Gahan and two 

closely similar new species (Hymenoptera: 

Braconidae). Entomol. News 67: 99-102. 

1958. New Neotropical wasps of the 

family Braconidae (Hymenoptera) in the U. S. 

National Museum. Proc. U. S. Natl. Mus. 107: 

405-461. 

. 1961. A new Opius and two new species 

of Microctonus (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). 

Bull. Brooklyn Entomol. Soc. 56: 57-61. 

, K. V. Krombein, and H. K. Townes. 1951. 
Hymenoptera of America North of Mexico, 
Synoptic Catalog. U. S. Dept. Agr., Agr. 
Monogr. 2, 1420 pp. 

Pemberton, C. E., and H. F. Willard. 1918a. Inter- 
relations of fruit-fly parasites in Hawaii. J. Agr. 
Res. 12: 285-295. 

. 1918b. A contribution to the biology of 
fruit-fly parasites in Hawaii. J. Agr. Res. 15: 
419-466. 

Plank, H. K. 1938. Puerto Rico Experiment 
Station Report for 1937, p. 96. 

1938. Puerto Rico Experiment Station 

Report for 1938, p. 99. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 68, NO. 4, 1978 


Plummer, C. C., M. McPhail, and J. W. Monk. 
1941. The yellow chapote, a native host of the 
Mexican fruitfly. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bull. 
iia~ app: 

Porter, B. A. 1928. The apple maggot. U. S. 
Dept. Agr. Tech. Bull. 66, 48 pp. 

Ratkovich, M. 1950. Primera lista de Insectos 
Tucumanos Utiles. Misc. Publ. Est. Exper. Agr. 
Tucuman 5, 33 pp. 

Richmond, E. A. 1915. In Woods, Biosteres 
rhagoletis Richmond, sp. n., a parasite of Rhago- 
letis pomonella Walsh. Canad. Entomol. 47: 
293-295. 

Rivard, I. 1967. Opius lectus and Opius alloeus 
(Hymenoptera: Braconidae), larval parasites of 
the apple maggot, Rhagoletis pomonella (Diptera: 
Trypetidae), in Quebec. Canad. Entomol. 99: 
895-896. 

Russell, T. A. 1934. The Mediterranean fruit 
fly. Agr. Bull. Bermuda 13: 59-60. 

Salas F., L. A. 1958. Informe sobre el estudis 
de la mosca del Mediterranea en Costa Rica. 
Pub. Univ. Costa Rica, Ser. Agron. no. 1, 53 pp. 

Silvestri, F. 1914. Descrizione e notizie biologische 
dei parassiti. Fam. Braconidae. Boll. Lab. Zool. 
Gen. Agr. Portici 8: 97-123. 

Szépligeti, G. 1910. Jn Marchal, Sur un Braconide 
nouveau, parasite du Dacus oleae. Bull. Soc. 
Entomol. France 13: 243-244. 

. 1911. Zwei neue Braconiden aus Brasilien. 

Boll. Lab. Zool. Gen. Agr. Portici 5: 285-286. 

. 1913. Neue afrikanische Braconiden aus 
der sammlung der Ungarischen National- 
Museum. Ann. Hist.-Nat. Mus. Nat. Hung. 11: 
592-608. 

Tobias, V. I. 1977. The genus Opius Wesm. 
(Hymenoptera, Braconidae) as parasites of fruit 
flies (Diptera, Tephritidae). Entomol. Obozr. 
56: 420-430. 

Turica, A., and R. G. Mallo. 1961. Observaciones 
sobre la poblacion de las Tephritidae y sus 
endoparasitos en Algunas Regiones Citricolas 
Argentinos. IDIA 5, Suppl. 6: 145-161. 

van den Bosch, R., H. A. Bess, and F. H. 
Haramoto. 1951. Status of oriental fruit fly 
parasites in Hawaii. J. Econ. Entomol. 44: 
753-759. 

Viereck, H. L. 1911. Descriptions of six new 
genera and thirty-one new species of ichneumon 
flies. Proc. U. S. Natl. Mus. 40: 173-196. 

. 1913. Descriptions of ten new genera and 
twenty-three new species of ichneumon-flies. 
Proc. U. S. Natl. Mus. 44: 555-568. 

Wasbauer, M. S. 1972. An annotated host 
catalog of the fruit flies of America North of 
Mexico (Diptera: Tephritidae). Occas. Papers 
Bur. Entomol., Calif. Dept. Agr. 19, 172 pp. 

Wesmael, C. 1835. Monographie des Braconides 
de Belgique. Nouv. Mem. Acad. Sci. Bruxelles 
9: 1—252. 

Willard, H. F., and A. C. Mason. 1937. Parasitiza- 
tion of the Mediterranean fruit fly in Hawaii, 
1914-33. U. S. Dept. Agr. Circ. 439, 17 pp. 


167 


1s) et) we Or eee ee 
mys we Me em 
7 ro on } ; 


| 


SS ee 
£ - - 


SS SSeS SSS SS SS 
: , > 
‘ 
| 
a 
~~ 
Py 
=» = 
+ 
*. 
t dorm 
“ 


i 


he Py ; 
bu es ae SRG ate "ae ae soy aah, 4 ? By (Awe, with 
a). ae Ye reek (A ke iy og”, TAR) 


ih + oy an pet od) Vier) nnaikee 


. Jor aegey ri pees | 
«4 oy ile: A ee ue . hyip agarg agit Ant, aR 
fi teu ers | ir : ‘ve Ca das Bt eh ttle VY Nol es TO if nies . + pS set 


et 
ea 


; BT 
‘ ' Pa : ; ycdvag wes oan f iz ety al ue 7 Hy 


2 


vrai iPobeal 3 
niet wt ae 


SSS 
. 
- 
. 
® - 
, = 
i: 
r 
¥ 
; 
. ~ 
J 
~ - 
x 
i 
ox ’ 
- 


5 a ‘ 
i 4 \ ' alvue 
N 
a? 
a 5 a A } 
4 
& , 
‘ ? i 
. - 
J 
‘ A 4 33 ~ in 4 
: ie v 
Ay ; pag #y t 
¢ 5 4 
; ? $¥ 5 Wide ti 
an 3) ' acy H 
\ 1 
$ E ? é 
’ 
" { 
¥ _ , Ln oy 
» Lh 
: 7 io t 
w 
=< ao 4 
b 4 ‘ 
A g - i] 
4 yy ges 
i> 
ce it ae 


7 PY 
‘ Fs 3 } ~ ‘ a 
: . 4 
( i 
y 
7 ¥ ’ a a. We 
. ae 
+ ; t ¥ 
} p 
bs ahs t t 
77, we 5S .s ch wh ss z 
i ‘ ‘ ~ Le 1 , 4 
j ’ io ’ vaergt ma ni 


oi 4 is): Sa ae eal sed BA Reet sate et 
ete oo ae Sa eine «+ ey ee | ie it Oya “ ih 

«EP eee ; et cab Ye a8; Sas fail ne Very i hr Esheg 
. es AS Aaa in eee Wh iy eth eB ae 

an | \" ae SCs rn i fist y haya ae t var 
1 , eK eae a) roe Me. Bh 


Ss 
' 


Se 


JOURNAL OF THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 


Instructions to Contributors 


General 
Type manuscripts on white bond paper 
either 8% by 11 or 8 by 10% inches. Double 


space all lines, including those in abstracts, 


tables, legends, quoted matter, acknowledg- 


| ments, and references cited. Number pages 


consecutively. Place your name and com- 
plete address in the upper right hand corner 


| of the title page. 


| Title, Author, and Affiliation 


Page | of your manuscript should contain 
only this information and your name and 


| address. Choose a concise but complete and 
| meaningful title. In research papers con- 


cerning biological subjects, include an indi- 
cation of the order and family of the taxa 
discussed. Academic degrees will not nor- 
mally be included unless the author so 
specifies. If possible, combine your affilia- 
tion and mailing address (including Zip) so 
that readers can write to you directly. 


Abstract 

Type on a separate sheet at the end of the 
manuscript. Make the abstract intelligible 
without reference to the text of the paper. 
Write an informative digest of the significant 
content and conclusions, not a mere descrip- 
tion. Generally, the abstract should not ex- 
ceed 3% of the text. 


Footnotes 

Use footnotes as sparingly as possible. 
Number text footnotes consecutively with 
Arabic numerals and type them on a sepa- 
rate sheet of paper at the end of the manu- 
script. Type table footnotes, if any, below 


_ each pertinent table on the same page. 


Illustrations and Legends 
The quality of all original illustrations 


_ must be high enough to facilitate good offset 


reproduction. They should have ample mar- 


gins and be drawn on heavy stock or 
fastened to stiff cardboard to prevent bend- 


ing. They should be proportioned to column 


| {1 x 3) or page (2 x 3) type-dimensions, 
_ leaving space for legend material. Photo- 


graphs should have a glossy finish. They re- 
produce best when the contrast is fairly 
high. Identify each illustration with number 
and author in light pencil marks on the 
reverse side. Submit all illustrations sepa- 
rately — please do not glue or clip them to 
the pages of the manuscript. 

Do not type or write legends directly on 
the illustrations. Type legends on a separate 
sheet or sheets at the end of the manuscript. 
Indicate where you want illustrations to 
appear in the printed paper by writing the 
figure numbers lightly in the text margins, 
and be sure that each figure is properly re- 
ferenced in the text itself. Original “art” will 
be returned only at the author’s request and 
expense. 


Tables 

Include tables only when the same infor- 
mation cannot be presented economically in 
the text, or when a table presents the data in 
a more meaningful way. Consider preparing 
extremely complicated tabular matter in a 
form suitable for direct reproduction as an 
illustration. In such cases, the use of the 
typewriter is not recommended. 


References to Literature 

Limit references within the text and in 
synonymies to author and year (and page if 
needed). In a “Reference Cited” section, list 
alphabetically by senior author only those 
papers you have included in the text. Like- 
wise, be sure all the text references are 
listed. Type the “References Cited” section 
on a separate sheet after the last page of 
text. Abbreviations should follow the USA 
Standard for Periodical Title Abbreviations, 
Z39.5-1963. 


Submission of Manuscripts 

Send completed manuscripts and sup- 
porting material to the Academy office (see 
address inside front cover) in care of the 
Editor. Authors will be requested to read 
Xerox “proofs” and invited to submit re- 
print orders prior to publication. 


Reprints - Prices for reprints may be obtained on request. 


Washington Academy of Sciences 
9650 Rockville Pike (Bethesda) 
Washington, D.C. 20014 

Return Requested with Form 3579 


2nd Class Postage Paid 
at Washington, D.C. 
and additional mailing offices . 


q ; 


WYO fd 


DLW 23 


or 
VOLUME 69 
Number 1 
Jour nal of the MARCH, 1979 


WASHINGTON 
ACADEMY .. SCIENCES 


| 
ISSN 0043-0439 
| 


Issued Quarterly 
at Washington, D.C. 


CONTENTS 


Features: 


RUSSELL W. PETERSON: Science and Society ...........5..........5. 
WILLIAM V. LOEBENSTEIN: How to Balance Chemical Equations....... 


Research Reports: 


PAUL M. MARSH: Descriptions of New Braconidae (Hymenoptera) 
Parasitic on the Tomato Tuberworm and on Related Lepidoptera from 
Centratjand SouthvAmMertCa .sscics4 9 oaccic dae cule Gere ae os wos cet vedios 


W. RONALD HEYER and RONALD I. CROMBIE: Natural History Notes 
on Craspedoglossa petropolitana (Amphibia: Salientia, Leptodactylidae). . . 


RICHARD H. McCUEN: Accuracy of Land-Use Sampling Methods....... 


C. P. HEINS, J. P. TANG, J. C. S. YANG, AND D. W. CALDWELL: 
BridgeuRespouse and Damage .:< 2.56.26 cde eee de eee eee ee lee ee 


Academy Affairs: 


SCICMUSESEEIMUME EI NEMISE@ tat: hee cde caine waa stick Ws sit. Guise einen ear ek chaps 
ING ae HOM Greater eer oh. csr ahs sors AySie, sive Soin, « oF OE Mist wiw Sima euene ees Sie eullels 40 
Minutes; Board Of Managers. 6s... c.c sc eee seta sb awield ws yee ee ewe ee ces 41 
Annual Report of the Treasurer, 1978 2... ccc cee eee eee ne eee 


Washington Academy of Sciences 


EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 


President 
Mary H. Aldridge 


President-Elect 
Alfred Weissler 


Secretary 
James F. Goff 


Treasurer 
Nelson W. Rupp 


Members at Large 
Conrad B. Link 
Elaine Shafrin 


BOARD OF MANAGERS 


' All delegates of affiliated 
Societies (see facing page) 


EDITOR 


Richard H. Foote 


EDITORIAL ASSISTANT 


Elizabeth Ostaggi 


ACADEMY OFFICE 


9650 Rockville Pike 
Bethesda, MD. 20014 
Telephone: (301) 530-1402 


Founded in 1898 


The Journal 


This journal, the official organ of the Washington Acad- 
emy of Sciences, publishes historical articles, critical 
reviews, and scholarly scientific articles; proceedings 
of meetings of the Academy and its Board of Managers; 
and other items of interest to Academy members. The 
Journal appears four times a year (March, June, 
September, and December)—the September issue 
contains a directory of the Academy membership. 


Subscription Rates 


Members, fellows, and patrons in good standing re- 
ceive the Journal without charge. Subscriptions are 
available on a calendar year basis only, payable in ad- 
vance. Payment must be made in U.S. currency at the 
following rates: 


U.S. and Canada....... $17.00 
FOreiemt 52 oe ae Saas 18.50 
Single Copy Price...... 6.00 


Single-copy price for Vol. 66, No. 1 (March, 1976) is 
$7.50. 


Back Issues 


Obtainable from the Academy office (address at bottom 
of opposite column): Proceedings: Vols. 1—13 (1898- 
1910) Index: To Vols. 1-13 of the Proceedings and 
Vols. 1-40 of the Journal Journal: Back issues, 
volumes, and sets (Vols. 1—62, 1911-1972) and all cur- 
rent issues. 


Claims for Missing Numbers 


Claims will not be allowed if received more than 60 days 
after date of mailing plus time normally required for 
postal delivery and claim. No claims will be allowed 
because of failure to notify the Academy of a change in 
address. 


Change of Address 


Address changes should be sent promptly to the Acad- 
emy office. Such notification should show both old and 
new addresses and zip number. 


Published quarterly in March, June, September, and December of each year by the 
Washington Academy of Sciences, 9650 Rockville Pike, Washington, D.C. Second class 
postage paid at Washington, D.C. and additional mailing offices. 


Ye A a, 


DELEGATES TO THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 
REPRESENTING THE LOCAL AFFILIATED SOCIETIES 


Emlesophical: Society Of Washington 52 0.!si06 6 ocesc sca vos ese 2+ SRE eee nee oe ee James F. Goff 
Eaarepolovical Society Of Washington... . 2... 66.00 esses oe seeks oh eee ees cae Jean K. Boek 
Baneried Society Ol WaSninBtOM 2.4 526 os ciecaae ones wees a hee eee eeeemee dave. William R. Heyer 
Siemicawmociety of Washington 2... . 26.6. 2.6 6026s cee eee ee cea ewes eae Delegate not appointed 
Paronioopical Society.of Washingion .... 2... 6.062. c6.e sec tc ewes es cece ceewaes Douglas Sutherland 
BEMEAG GCOPTADIMC SOCIGIY) 2120) fi elaw Svea slabs ena AS ne teed seb oe 0 lg albucle's wae 6 T. Dale Stewart 
Memmcte meSOciety-Ol Washington (6.2... 668s cee ke ec s ee dees eee veenencns Marian M. Schnepfe 
Ben ClonyroOine PISthCl Ol COLMMDIA® 55.6005. oes nd i wel eee Soe obo a Seas eo ee a os ewes Inactive 
PAM ALBANS (OTICAl GS OCICBY c250 5h ee cinin ines cicies ence elbow seb es beds vee ded wtedldee eds Paul H. Oehser 
UP ESS2L SUIT OEE IVI YS (0) 0 Ree Conrad B. Link 
ee eee MCHC AN IM OLCSUCIS: fi...) 2.5 o's oon see pe bik ce we bn dle Sab we eee senses Thomas B. Glazebrook 
emi nNemMESOCICiY OF MAPINCETS) (27). 6:0). /50) Fie ak 2a se ol nice de Dale be Me bate es George Abraham 
Hastiote of Plectrical and Electronics Enginéers .............2000sc0008eccerecees George Abraham 
Pancnicanesociety, of Mechanical Engineers 23.6.2 252.2 22 A. See ee ks ce cece cease Michael Chi 
He mimnthological Society of Washington ........ 2... .0. 05.2 c eee e cto eseweons Robert S. Isenstein 
Paucucanesociety for Microbiology ..2. 2.22... 6.ce cc cee ee cee esos bcp ctcbeneccs Michael Pelzcar 
Perio ee tmHencan Military ENGINEErS: 6.052... a eee we ee he eet ee Mote eevee H. P. Demuth 
Panne PRES OCIC CV Ole CIVIl ENEIMECTS — .s ciclo seis cic es.s cle ss ea eee 5,5 30s eb ae wee dale 6 Robert Sorenson 
sacicty tor Experimental Biology and Medicine .............5 2.0620 cccee ence enecnes Donald Flick 
4 EVER S20 SOSeGy TOE WY GE Cites oc ene ear Glen W. Wensch 
intemational Association of Dental Research ........ 22.022... ncssee neces William V. Loebenstein 
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics ........2.5...00.000c eee cecenees George J. Vila 
PemicmediMElTCOLOlOPICAlSOCIELY i.e. Seist oielk)s «ste siete s FoR E RR ION ald we tace ee A. James Wagner 
eS eMIRIGe IOCICLY Ol WASHINGTON: 5.10580 Se cles os eee See etele « Glace «ha ayelei Robert J. Argauer 
PPE TESOCICUVEOLATNETICA Onih on fics feces sob ble a daeloantie . Doak led Delegate not appointed 
Pee AECL C AT SOCICL VET Etta t todas. fats tea es 6. alate er eek Re tae Ekle Seen wae 4 Dick Duffey 
Mistinite OrmbOod TeChnOlopistS 5) 52... ck ce betwee b ene utceteweeteees William Sulzbacher 
6 SHEEIC ENE, CSIR ITE) SOT EIR het ear ERR ERC AC eA een Hangar Inactive 
2 SSIPaS NS TaOall SOS LST ha See on SI nea NPs Oi DN ee eRe David R. Flinn 
PeMAeTONerISTOny OF SCIENCE CID) <n seis soc cee ols che weg oie ode bg be tac bteshaaine eclnaests Inactive 
PmtemMean Association On Physics Teachers .... a2. cee. see esis s veg bod ces eee cee To be appointed 
rite AESOCICIN AOI AMCHICA: Fee). fo. sig aie, «. « sue ovaxtyc bo Sus touelay's e'exensuodese ays biepbpc avs this eye afelee one Lucy B. Hagan 
manenican) Society Of Plant PhySiOlOpistS. . ...........csemeties 6 Bis cleus ssi a eleiele» tres Walter Shropshire 
iasmneton Operations Research Council 932. ..c. . «cscs stele e(es FPalel so Ra oe ks John G. Honig 
Mesitmeme SOC IY Ol AMeNGaL \oiae)., 180 Jel. oe. olde. DAORMAR. JAKE. Saeko. JOE . SE. Inactive 
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical 

ARUBLe Olen PINECCLSMets.2 2 ot Sars Naot rG an Gye eee ble See wo bee olan Carl H. Cotterill 
Scanlon ADIL ONVASTEONOMENS I aoc ek eh os ha be 2 os wk eo eee Die wees kb whe Siew islene ow bows Benson J. Simon 
RrariematicalvASSOCIAUION Of AMELICA 05.02 obs ws es eee ce ewe eekccasancencteswocss Patrick Hayes 
ememltiStitUteTOCNGINISIS Cs ete ne ha dae oe os os Mee aie ea he ke sae aes we ee Miloslav Recheigl, Jr. 
MO BESNCHOlOPICAlASSOCIAMON Wee 6. <5 roo 4 cio cicle ble So's 24 2:6 Sw chelate ord Boye oe eye's wb a oo Oi Seah or John O’ Hare 
Seem asmnpton Paint Hechiical (Group: .. .iccec cis os 2 as wecee shh ee ee cee nee eng Paul G. Campbell 
Pacn can LAY LOPAtnOlOPICal SOGICtYs cs.) veoidis.o 6 acces « «s+ S ileum syeepeibenreyare + exe orsue te eset e's Tom van der Zwet 
Bacietyator General Systems Research. 5 <.:..:5 bjcse's «fe nperens + 2 ose ofan eb ve ere wi Ronald W. Manderscheid 
SAME DABELACTORS WSOCICEY, Hos fie teiren fos oe ui cis) + dvace cierto 6 Gi « baal ~ le SapereyR bie achat H. McIlvaine Parsons 
Pettis ARIST HIESE SOCIETY PU Fn hpi cia crs Sow o Saati ast lla's Gomees Meche etl Irwin M. Alperin 


Delegates continue in office until new selections are made by the representative societies. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 1 


eo en . ee dads Lea 


eheaet es 


pa the 


2 a } - ‘ute Ate. een 


° + a 
th bh ATOR. . ¥ Lease ’ Ai 


io) ' . avast te 4 { at | hay 


a = 
~w 

= : 
< 


i 

a 

i fF aot aye 

ail [ Lae ‘i 

fp ” TO pe 

io) ; i oe 4) 

4 aye EOS Ltd an ate B Me. ae | qa AD BNE AMUN. 

We t ; : s { ad as © way 

ap VOna(aa.2 0 tint’ ' Ne ci eA ere ix, 

i\| | 

i - vs Mu i } ah ath ‘ 

My, te ee gy “WR : f a 
bishop reba tty FF ahold wuts: pein, « Sohail 

| | PRORDAL Dep boi ed A PACES: 

He ariaal Aarau, ia} 


Ph ae 


EL I babe 


rosa wlaw vi wy 


uF } 2 . we ‘ay ran ‘ 
sy : paedived cordionth 41 ; 


oe y So Se 


AN TT Oi eta Eto eis 


. hie oul 
8 he xt a Wy, 


wy Tt 0 i 


dont TNyDeHEe ery 


-h ‘sdieudienal t | 
Cain ly sas yi lias PLR, Waa: nkngicomsee 4 = 
‘iv ow! garde outed a ud ilbedatenih neath i Hares Wiriae? 
ct» vi ay xd aanet, Ou ordre pss per Men aafity fy 


cited jan WA ta 
a ‘a il 


iM JqniteaW ‘ 


v 


Pine vay ay 
—— aratia1ag », 


hog eee ee te 


wy } , : ; ‘144 tt he v7 wt otf tiv Bi 
} : ha ‘ Yeeotiiant al ; Ee Oerh : yo Mi 


y Syst mie 
orga a voy 


nt vie VAs dele wt 


errr 


‘geval se 


“yok: 508 iwi 


—_ 


Science and Society! 


Russell W. Peterson 


FEATURES 


Director, Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress, Washington, D. C.20510 


*“Mankind,’’ T. S. Eliot once re- 


-marked, ‘“‘cannot bear very much reality.” 


I imagine most Americans must feel 
they've had about as much reality as 
they can handle over the last 10 to 15 
years. 

For a time, in the mid-60’s, it seemed 
as if there was almost nothing we didn’t 
have the know-how and the where- 
withall to do. We had, we believed, 
nearly succeeded in perfecting a per- 
petual growth machine—an economy 
whose enormous productive power we 
had, at long last, learned how to man- 
age and manipulate. The learned and 
the popular journals alike were busily 
Sketching glowing scenarios for the 
soaring 70’s and dazzling visions of 
what life would be like in the year 
2000. 

We have since suffered through a 
series of seismic shocks that seems to 
have left us unsteady and unsure. In 
the wake of the Vietnam War, of the 
environmental, the energy and the eco- 
nomic crises— which I believe are simply 
different aspects of the same crisis— 


we seem no longer certain of where we 


are and where we’re going. 

I think, in fact, that we have reached 
a watershed in American society, that 
we are now in a period of transition 


' Address presented to the Academy at its 
meeting on January 30, 1979. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


toward a future that, in ways we only 
dimly understand, must be built on far 
different assumptions than those that 
have sustained us for more than two 
centuries. 

I believe also that, despite the pain 
and the anguish we are going through, 
this transition period offers us enor- 
mous opportunities—if we have the 
courage to take advantage of them— 
for turning our tremendous scientific 
and technological resources toward the 
creation of a genuinely strong and 
stable society whose distinguishing char- 
acteristic is the high quality of life it 
offers to all its citizens. 

The progress and prosperity we have 
achieved in this country, and the 
great technological advances we have 
made, have all been based on the as- 
sumption that, in this vast and richest 
of lands, we would never run out of 
room or of resources and that we could, 
therefore, be free and easy with both. 
And if, for a time, we ran into some 
obstacle or another, we could either 
move on or, if things really got bad 
and there was no way out, we could 
count on technology—like the seventh 
cavalry—to come to the rescue. 

Throughout most of our history, we 
have, so to speak, lived off the fat of 
the land. There is no longer that much 
fat left. For, while we have plenty of 
resources left, they are becoming in- 


creasingly expensive—especially that 
vital resource, energy. 

Our entire economy, and the vast 
technological structure that helps sus- 
tain it, were built on the assumption 
that cheap energy was going to be 
abundantly available. 

We are lately learning that there is, in 
fact, no such thing as a free lunch, 
even in a country as lavishly endowed 
as we are, and that the days of cheap 
energy are Over. 

As a result, a good deal of modern 
technology —designed, as it is, to make 
lavish use of energy and other resources 
—1is no longer modern, or is becoming 
increasingly less so. We can no longer 
seek to secure real economic growth on 
the assumption that waste makes wealth, 
for it is the waste of increasingly ex- 
pensive energy and other resources that 
lies at the root of much of our economic 
difficulties. 

The task before us, then, is to act 
now, while we have the time. 

Nor can we continue to act on the 
basis of old habits and approaches. 
For as our energy and other crises 
are demonstrating, we cannot act simply 
on the basis of narrow and near-term 
concerns. The really serious concerns 
before us are not the immediate and 
isolated ones, but the interrelated and 
long-term ones. The long-term has, in 
fact, become the short-term. The world 
of the year 2000 is already well ‘‘within 
the pipeline’ — we are shaping it by what 
we do and fail to do today.. 

It is true that we have been able to 
muddle through in most cases, but this 
is a luxury which we are no longer able 
to afford. The pace of technical develop- 
ments, the fact that we are approach- 
ing real limits of both our natural 
resources and the capacity of our en- 
vironment to absorb the abuse we are 
inflicting on it, and the staggering scale 
and power of the technologies we are 
now able to master, have forced us out 
of an age of innocence in resolving 
technical problems. Our planning simply 
must mature if we are to survive. 


One can suppose that the govern- 
ment would be able to take a longer 
view on the issues, but inertia and 
lack of imagination in government can 
be part of the problem. It has been 
said that there is only one thing more 
certain than change, and that is resistance 
to change. We are being carried into 
the future by the momentum of the 
status quo. 

Take this example. Our inability to 
deal adequately with energy problems 
results in part from the assumption on 
the part of both the Federal govern- 
ment and major electric utilities that 
the solution to the problem will be more 
of the enormous centralized generating 
facilities which are providing an increas- 
ing share of our electric power. Once — 
this assumption was made, it was largely 
self perpetuating. The enormous Federal 
investments in developing, commercial- 
izing, fueling, insuring, protecting and 
providing waste disposal for nuclear 
facilities have greatly accelerated the 
development of this technology with 
respect to possible competitors. The 
clear and continuing Federal commit- 
ment to the development of new cen- 
tralized facilities has given the cen- 
tralized technologies prestige which 
discouraged private investment in al- 
ternatives. The subsidies for this ap- 
proach have had the effect of creating 
a large constituency of scientists, en- 
gineers, and investors which has de- 
veloped its own political momentum. 
Federal bureaucracies have mushroomed 
with an institutional interest in proving 
the wisdom of decisions they have 
made. Moreover, the size and complexity 
of new centralized plants mean that 
investors must be convinced to commit 
over a billion dollars to facilities which 
may not begin providing useful power 
for over a decade. These investors 
must somehow be assured that energy 
growth rates and consumption patterns 
will be maintained at predictable levels 
during the expected life of the plant. 
The need to protect these investments 
by assuring this demand could severely 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


constrain our ability to make energy 
policy in the future. 

One of the casualties of the assump- 
tion that energy will always be best 
provided by centralized facilities is an 
inability to think clearly about the ad- 
vantages of solar energy and energy 
conservation technologies. Both of these 
technologies work best when an attempt 
is made to match the energy resources 
to the immediate requirements of the 
buildings or industrial facilities served; 
they can be built quickly, usually as a 
part of the building served, and can be 
changed quickly to meet new energy 
needs. The implementation of these 
technologies will not require any pro- 
found reshaping of industrial, financial, 


or governmental institutions since they 


can be built, financed, insured, and 
maintained by the kinds of organiza- 
tions now providing similar services for 
heating and air conditioning equipment, 
for example. The technology is of a 
scale that permits concepts to be de- 
veloped and brought to the market by 
many different kinds of organizations. 
Competition in these technologies is 
feverish and probably always will be. 
Since the small technologies do not fit 
neatly into the competition for new cen- 
tralized generating facilities, we have 
never developed a coherent plan for 
promoting them and have never funded 
them as serious long-term solutions to 
the energy problem. Supporting the de- 
centralized technologies will not be 
easy and will require an unprecedented 
amount of imagination, flexibility, and 
restraint on the part of policy makers. 
But what would happen if the Federal 
government made a commitment to the 
development of small, renewable energy 
sources equivalent to the commitment 
we made to develop fission reactors two 
decades ago? 

The advantages of the enormous en- 
ergy resource which these solar and 
conservation technologies represent can 
only be properly understood if social 
and environmental issues are considered 
along with the technical ones. It will, 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


however, probably be easier to resolve 
the technical questions associated with 
the development of new energy tech- 
nologies than it will be to understand 
the ways in which they can be integrated 
into a society we would like to per- 
petuate. This difficulty must not deter us, 
since, unless we are careful, we may find 
ourselves in a position where we must 
adjust our society and institutions to fit 
the technologies which we develop in- 
stead of the other way around. 

As this discussion has suggested, the 
task for science and technology is far 
different, but surely no less challenging, 
than it was in days when energy and 
other resources were plentiful and 
cheap. We must increasingly design, 
develop, and deploy a finer-tuned tech- 
nology that—unlike much of the so- 
called advanced technology we have 
in place—makes the most, and wastes 
least, of our exhaustible and increas- 
ingly expensive resources and makes 
possible our growing reliance on re- 
newable resources. 

The task for all of us is to create 
the kind of climate in which that kind 
of scientific effort and technological 
development can flourish. 

This is far from a simple task, be- 
cause old habits die exceedingly hard. 

Scientists, engineers, innovators face 
a special challenge in trying to create 
this new kind of climate. For while 
they have much to contribute, they often 
find it hard to get the attention of the 
top decision-makers. Nearly all decision- 
makers are oriented toward the near 
term. They are besieged by a multitude 
of urgent problems. Tomorrow’s prob- 
lems can wait. But the scientists’ busi- 
ness is with tomorrow. And it’s in- 
creasingly urgent that they get to see 
the boss today. With today’s trends 
in the world leading to catastrophe, 
the decision-makers better get close to 
the practitioners of change. 

At the same time it would do well for 
scientists to establish the habit of 
stepping back occasionally from the 
immediate task to reflect on what kind of 


a world he or she wants for his or her 
children or grandchildren and consider 
whether the work he or she is doing 
is leading in the right direction. If not, 
the scientist should have the courage to 
alter his course, even if it means some 
near-term personal sacrifice. It requires 
courage to speak and act effectively 
against the status quo. But educators 
and scientists can bring about the essen- 
tial changes. We should pursue re- 
sponsible, professional goals, but at the 
same time we need to work toward 
worldwide goals. We need to become 
generalists. Traditionally, scientists have 
broken their endeavors down into spe- 
cific disciplines for their own con- 
venience, and hence have perceived 
reality from many different perspectives. 
Such specialization has been necessary 
for scientific and technological advance; 
and we have learned much and learned 
it quickly by breaking phenomena down 
into various compartments and studying 
them from the standpoints of biology, 
physics, chemistry, and so forth. But 
we must remember that our world does 
not exist in compartments; it comes in 
single interrelated communities, each 
part of which affects other parts. 

The distinguished scientist, Lewis 
Thomas, has observed that: ‘“‘The men 
who run the affairs of nations today 
are, by and large, our practical men. 
They have been taught that the world is 
an arrangement of adversary systems, 
that force is what counts, aggression 
is what drives us at the core, only the 
fittest survive, and only might can make 
more might.’ In fact, however, we are, 
so far as we know, the only species 
on this Earth that believes or behaves 
this way. Instead, Thomas says, ‘‘Most 
of the associations between the living 
things we know about are essentially 
cooperative ones. . . When they have 
the look of adversaries, it is usually 
a standoff relation, with one party 
issuing signals, warnings, flagging the 
other off. ‘““We do not,’’ he concludes, 


‘‘have solitary beings. Every creature is, 
in some sense, connected to and depend- 
ent on the rest.”’ 

We cannot afford the same old atomis- 
tic, accidental approach that is, in my 
judgment, responsible for many of the 
problems we face today. Nor can we 
let ourselves be drawn into that increas- 
ingly centralized approach that some ad- 
vocate and many fear we are inevitably 
heading for. 

What we need, I believe, is an ap- 
proach which fully recognizes and re- 
flects the fundamental interdependence 
of individuals, institutions, nations at the 
same time that it nurtures and draws 
on the rich diversity of outlook and 
activity that characterizes not only our 
society, but all life. We need, especially 
among the leaders in every field of hu- 
man endeavor, an approach I call 
‘holistic pluralism’’—an approach in 
which each individual, institution, na- 
tion takes the larger, longer view into 
account as each pursues its own par- 
ticular interests and goals. It is, in my 
view, only through such an approach 
that, in such an incredibly and in- 
creasingly interdependent world, we can 
realistically expect to serve our own 
self-interests. 

We have, I think, reached that point 
in human history where, for our own 
survival, let alone for our continued 
success, we can no longer ignore, as we 
all too often have during our relatively 
brief duration here on Earth, the essen- 
tial community of interest among humans 
everywhere and between humans and 
the Earth they inhabit. 

We have, I earnestly hope, come in- 
creasingly to understand and to appre- 
ciate the simple and surpassing idea that 
T. S. Eliot once expressed in these 
lines: 


We shall not cease from exploration; 
And the end of our exploring 

Will be to arrive where we started 
And know the place for the first time. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


— 


y 


How to Balance Chemical Equations 


- William V. Loebenstein, Ph.D. 


_ 8501 Sundale Drive, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 


ABSTRACT 


It is shown that an algebraic method may always be used to balance chemical equa- 
tions. The method is equally applicable to REDOX reactions, complex organic reactions, 
ionic reactions, etc. It is not necessary to determine the oxidation numbers of the elements 
which comprise the various molecules, nor is there any advantage to be gained by 
doing so. In rare instances more than one ‘‘correct’’ solution can be found for the 
balanced equation. When this occurs, the method reveaAls the fact that it is the result of 
independent chemical processes taking place simultaneously. 


The balancing of chemical equations is 
a task usually confronted for the first time 
by students in high school or by fresh- 
men in college. They start with the 
simplest of equations and are taught to 
balance by “‘inspection.’’ As they appear 
to gain confidence, the equations grow in 
complexity until it becomes obvious that 
something more dependable than a 
method of inspection is required to com- 
plete the process. Before his initial en- 
thusiasm gives way to total frustration, 
the student is introduced to REDOX 
equations, oxidation numbers, valences, 
electron transfer, etc., along with that 
method of equation balancing suggested 
by R. J. Carney in 1928.1 This is ex- 
plained in different ways depending upon 
the textbook used, but essentially it boils 
down to the fact that the total increase 
in oxidation number (loss of electrons) 
must exactly balance the total decrease 
in oxidation number (gain of electrons). 
Many of the student’s problems are 
solved, but not all. He has difficulty with 
valences in such substances as tetra- 
thionates, peroxides, etc., while the 
method is entirely inapplicable in many 
organic reactions. 

I have used a method for balancing 
chemical equations successfully for more 
than 40 years. Although I am not aware 
of it having been published previously, 
the concept is so simple that it is dif- 


~ ficult to believe that it wasn’t discovered 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


i 


independently many times before. I shall 
refer to it simply as the algebraic method 
and show by several examples how it may 
be applied successfully in balancing any 
chemical equation, without exception. 

The method requires no prior knowl- 
edge of valence or oxidation state. An 
algebraic symbol, say, x, is arbitrarily 
assigned as the coefficient of the most 
complicated compound on either side of 
the equation (i.e., the compound with the 
greatest number of different atoms). The 
equation is then balanced in terms of x 
as far as one can proceed. In some in- 
stances the entire equation can be 
balanced in this manner and it only re- 
mains to assign a small integer for the 
value of x in order to complete the 
problem. This can be illustrated by the 
REDOX equation involving an iodide and 
an iodate: 


The coefficient x is assigned to KIOs. 
Since all of the oxygen on the left side 
of the equation appears in the KIOs;, 
there are 3x atoms total. These are found 
only in the H,O on the right hand side 
so 3x becomes the coefficient of this 
molecule. The partially balanced equa- 
tion now may be written: 


x 3X 
KIO, + KI + HCl = KCl + H,O + I, 


This now determines the coefficient of 


the HCl because hydrogen is found no- 
where else on the left hand side and also 
appears only combined in the H,O on the 
right side. There are 6x atoms of hy- 
drogen altogether (two for each molecule 
of H,O). Therefore 6x becomes the coef- 
ficient of HCl. By the same reasoning 
applied to the Cl atoms, 6x becomes the 
coefficient of KCI. At this point the equa- 
tion becomes: 


x 6x 6x 3x 
KIO, + KI + HCl = KCl + H,O + I, 


In order to obtain a balance for the K 
atoms, it is necessary to affix 5x as the 
coefficient of the KI because 1x K atoms 
already appear in the KIO;. The iodine 
balance is all that remains. There are 6x 
atoms on the left hand side (x + 5x) and 
since it all appears with 2 atoms to the 
molecule in the I,, the coefficient of that 
molecule would have to be 3x. Now the 
smallest value of x to give integer values 
to each of the coefficients would be x = 1 
and the balanced equation becomes: 


KIO, + 5KI + 6HCl = 6KCI + 3H,O + 31, 


A second example of this first type is 
found in the equation: 


K,Cr,O; + KI + H,SO, 
= K,SO, ae Cr.(SO4)3 “fe H,O “Tr lB 


Let x be the coefficient of the K,Cr,O,. 
Then, by virtue of the Cr atom, there will 
also be x molecules of Cr.(SO,)3. Now 
since the oxygen which is combined with 
the S in the SO, remains intact, the 
only other oxygen appears in the K,Cr,O, 
on the left hand side of the equation 
and in the H,O molecule on the might. 
There are, consequently, 7x molecules of 
H,O. The other coefficients are found 
as follows: 


H — H.SO,:(7x) 
S>'KSO2 (x — 3x ="4x) 
K —> KI:(x2 — 2x,— 6x) 
I > 1,:(6x = 2 = 3x) 
Now all of the coefficients are accounted 


for and again the simplest solution results 


8 


by letting x = 1. The balanced equation 
becomes: 


K,Cr,O, + 6KI + 7H,SO, = 4K,SO, 
+ Cr.(SO,4)3 + 7H,O + 31, 


As a final illustration of this first type, 
consider the reaction between lead chro- 
mate and potassium iodide: 


PbCrO, + KI + HCl 
= PbCl, + KCI + CrCl, + H,O + I, 


Let x be the coefficient of PbCrO,. The 
following sequence shows the order in 
which each succeeding coefficient may be 
found along with its value (in terms of x): 


Pb — PbCl,:(x) 
Cr — CrCl,:(x) 
O — H,0:(4x) 
H — HCI1:(8x) 
Cl —> KCI:(8x — 2% = 33% ss) 
K — KI:(3x) 
I> 1,:3x + 2 = @r)x) 


It can be seen that the smallest integer 
values for all of the coefficients are ob- 
tained by letting x = 2. The balanced 
equation, therefore, is 


2PbCrO, + 6KI + 16HCI = 2PbCl, 
+ 6KCI + 2CrCl,; + 8H,O + 31, 


The examples illustrated so far repre- 
sent a minority group where one un- 
known, x, was sufficient to balance the 
equation. In the great majority of cases, 
this cannot be done. For this second type, 
therefore, one proceeds as follows: 


Choose an unknown coefficient, x, as | 
before and continue until all possibilities | 
have been exhausted. Then choose a . 
second coefficient, y, and continue until | 


every other remaining molecule has its 


coefficient determined in terms of x and/ | 


or y. Next, determine the ratio of x to 
y. The simplest integer values of x and y 
which satisfy that ratio and result in in- 
teger values for the coefficients will give 
the correct solution. As a first illustration 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


of this type, consider the (unbalanced) 
equation: 


V,.0O, + KMnO, + H,SO, 
= VO; ote K,SO, sf MnSO, ain H,O 


Let x be the coefficient of K,SO, then 
proceed as usual: 


K — KMn0O,:(2x) 

Mn — MnSO,:(2x) 
S — H,SO,:(2x + x = 3x) 
H — H,0:(3x) 


This is as far as one can go using x, 
alone, and the equation has coefficients 
_ for every molecule except V,O, on the left 
and VO, on the right. Let V.O; be given 
the coefficient y, then: 


V — V202:(y) 


completes the coefficients, symbolically. 
The result is: 


y DX Be 
V0, + KMnO, + H,.SO, 


y x 2X 3x 
= VO; = K,SO, ats MnSO, te H,O 


It can be verified that all atoms have 
been used with the exception of the oxy- 
gen. The oxygen balance is given by: 


Wolo = Sy + 4x + 8x +-3x 


5x = 3y 
N t3 
Von 3 


Therefore, x = 3 and y = 5 may be sub- 
stituted back to satisfy the coefficients of 
the balanced equation: 


5V,O, + 6KMnO, + 9H,SO, 
= 5V.O; + 3K,SO, + 6MnSO, + 9H,O 


A second example of this type is il- 
lustrated by the potassium dichromate 
oxidation of ferrous chloride: 


K,Cr,O, + FeCl, + HCl 
= FeCl, + KCl + CrCl, + H,O 
Let x equal the coefficient of K,Cr,O,. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


Then, continuing, 
Ke KCl) 
Cr — CrCl,:(2x) 
O — H,O:(7x) 
H — HC1:(14x) 


Next, let y = coefficient of the FeCl,, 
then: 
Fe => FeC:@) 


The only element that has not been used 
yet in this example is the chlorine. There- 
fore, it is called upon to furnish the x/y 
relationship. The Cl balance is: 


Dy Ma Sy x, 16x 
1 


Thus, x = 1 and y = 6 leads to: 
K,Cr,O, + 6FeCl, + 14HCl 
= 6FeCla+ 2K El 2CrCle +, 7H-O 


In some cases it may be found neces- 
sary to introduce the second variable so 
early that some of the coefficients be- 
come sums or differences involving both 
variables. An illustration of this is given 
next: 


Mn(NO;). + NaBiO; + HNO; 

= NaNO, + Bi(NO;)3; + H,O + HMnO, 

Let x = coefficient of Mn(NO;).. Then 
Mn — HMn0O,:(x) 


Since no other coefficient can be deter- 
mined in terms of x alone, the second 
variable must be assigned at this time. Let 
y = coefficient of Bi(NOs3)s3. 


Bi — NaBiO,:(y) 
Na — NaNoO:;:(y) 
N — HNO3:(y + 3y — 2x = 4y — 2x) 
O — H,0:(6x + 3y + 12y — 6x 
— 3y — 9y — 4x = 3y — 4x) 


The equation with symbolic coefficients 


is therefore given by: 


(4y — 2x) 


5,8 y 
Mn(NO;). + NaBiO,; + HNO; 


y y 
— NaNO, a Bi(NO3)s 


Giy"= 4x) x 
H,O0O + HMn0O, 


The hydrogen balance supplies the rela- 
tionship between x and y: 


Avis 2K= Gy) POXGh x 


5x = 2y 
Be) Ret 2 
y 5 


It follows that the simplest sequence of 
integer numerical coefficients is: 


2. 3, 416,'S, 3) 7, and 24 respectively: 


Ionic equations are accommodated 
with equal facility as illustrated by the 
next example: 


H,O + As,S3; + NO,7? 
= AsO, ? + SO,-? + NO + Ht 
Let x = coefficient of As,Ss. 
As — AsO,73:(2x) 
S > SO,7?:3x) 
Let y = coefficient of H,O. 
H — H*1:(2y) 


Now the partially balanced equation 
looks like this: 


¥ x 
H,O + As,S; + NO,7! 


pap a5 2y 
= AsO,? + SO, ? + NO + H?*} 


The coefficient of the NO, ! can now be 
obtained from the charge balance: 


32xy °26%)-—" Kay) ='2(6x = y) 


which also becomes the coefficient of the 
NO by virtue of the nitrogen content. It 
may be verified from the oxygen balance 
that x = 3 and y = 4. Consequently, the 
sequence of coefficients that comprise 


10 


the balanced equation is: 
4, 3, 28, 6, 9, 28, and 8, respectively. 


For the final example in this category 
an organic reaction will be used which 
does not adapt itself readily to the oxida- 
tion number (or valence change) method 
currently taught in secondary schools. 
This reaction involves the preparation of 
azoxybenzene from nitrobenzene: 


C,H;NO, + CH;0Na 
= C,.H,)N,.0 + HCOONa + H,O 


Let x = coefficient of C,.H,)>N,O. 
N — C,H;NO,:(2x) 
Let y = coefficient of CH,ONa. 


Na — HCOONa:(y) 
O — H,0:(4x + y —~ x —2y = 3% —y) 
Finally, the hydrogen balance yields: 
10x + 3y = 10x +) 4 Oe eee 


and the balanced equation may be written 
by substitution: 


4C,H;NO, + 3CH;0Na 
= 2C,.H,)N.0 + 3HCOONa + 3H,O 


A third classification of equations is 
that for which an infinite number of *‘cor- 
rect’’ solutions exists. Typical of this 
group are certain reactions involving hy- 
drogen peroxide as one of the reactants. 
The first illustration is the following re- 
action involving auric chloride: 


AuCl, + H,O, + NaOH 
= NaCl + H,O + O, + Au 


One may proceed as usual by letting x 
= coefficient of AuCl,, then: 


Au — Au:(x) 
Cl — NaCl:(3x) 
Na — NaOH:(3x) 


Now assign y = coefficient of H,Ox. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


me Pe am ~ ele 


H — H,O:(2y + 3x)/2 
O—0,:(2y + 3x) — Qy + 3x)/2] + 2 
= 2Qy + 3x)/4 


While this appears to be straightforward, 
careful examination will disclose that all 
of the atoms have been used to obtain 
the coefficients, leaving none for deter- 
mining a unique ratio of x to y. There- 
fore, no such relationship exists! Conse- 
quently, any combination which gives 
non-reducible integer values for the co- 
efficients while satisfying the functional 
requirements must be as acceptable as 
any other: 


4 y 25s 
AuCl, + H,O, + NaOH 


3x Qy st 3x2 
= NaCl + ” H,0 


(2y + 3x)/4 XG 
=- O, + Au 


It is interesting that in some of the older 
chemical handbooks? the above reaction 
is given corresponding to x = 2, y = 3 
while a simpler solution would be satis- 
fied byx = 2,y = 1. The chemical reason 
why these different combinations (as well 
as many others) are all consistent is that 
independent processes with one or more 
molecules common to each process can 
take place simultaneously. In the present 
example, part of the HO, is used to 
reduce the auric chloride to metallic gold 
as shown here: 


2AuCl, + H,O, + 6NaOH 
= 6NaCl + 4H,O + 20, + 2Au 


while, at the same time and quite inde- 
pendently, any number of molecules may 
undergo spontaneous decomposition ac- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


cording to: 
2H,0, = 2H,O at O, 


When these two reactions are added to- 
gether, the result corresponds to x = 2, 
y = 3. It may come somewhat as a shock, 
however, that the same equation whose 
sequence of coefficients is: 


6, 17.18; 18; 2654356 


corresponding to x = 6, y = 17 is also 
equally valid! 

As a second example of this type, I 
submit the well known reaction of potas- 
sium permanganate with hydrogen perox- 
ide in the presence of sulfuric acid: 


ag yy, 2y 
H,O, + KMnO, + H,SO, 


y y 
Coa syi2 Oe Sy ia 
+ H,O O, 


The symbolic coefficients appearing 
above the corresponding molecules can 
easily be verified by means of the method 
described. The sequence of coefficients: 


12. 4.52) 2,4, 3 


while simpler, is no more “‘correct’’ than, 
say, the sequence: 


12. 24. 12... 12, 26, 09 
or even the sequence: 
12, 20.540°5720; 20.42, 3). 


References Cited 


(1) Carney, R. J.: Outline of the Methods of Quali- 
tative Analysis, 13th Ed. Copyright by George 
Wahr, Publisher, Ann Arbor, Mich. (1928). 

(2) See, for example, Handbook of Chemistry and 
Physics, 17th Ed., Chemical Rubber Co., 
Cleveland, Ohio (1932), p. 1421. 


11 


RESEARCH REPORTS 


Descriptions of New Braconidae (Hymenoptera) Parasitic 
on the Potato Tuberworm and on Related Lepidoptera 
from Central and South America 


Paul M. Marsh 


Systematic Entomology Laboratory, SEA, U. §. Department of Agriculture, 
% U.S. National Museum, Washington, D. C. 20560. 


ABSTRACT 


Six new species of braconids are described: Orgilus jennieae and Chelonus kellieae 
from Costa Rica which are being reared in California for possible release against the 
potato tuberworm; Chelonus johni, Apanteles oatmani, Bracon lucileae, and Mirax 
malcolmi from Colombia, parasites of Scrobipalpula sp. Orgulis parcus Turner, pre- 
viously released into California, is diagnosed and compared to O. jennieae. 


Descriptions of the following new 
species of Braconidae are being provided 
at the request of E. R. Oatman, Univer- 
sity of California, Riverside. Two of these 
species, Orgilus jennieae n. sp. and 
Chelonus kellieae n. sp. from Costa Rica, 
are being studied and reared for release 
against the potato tuberworm, Phthori- 
maea operculella (Zeller), in Southern 
California. The other 4 species were 
collected by Dr. Oatman and colleagues 
during searches in Colombia for para- 
sites of the potato tuberworm and the 
tomato pinworm, Keiferia lycopersicella 
(Walshingham). Colonies were not ob- 
tained for any of these 4 parasites, but 
they are described at this time in the 
event they are collected again for future 
study. 


Orgilus jennieae Marsh, new species 


Female. Length of body, 3.5—4.0 mm; ovi- 
positor, 2.5—3.0 mm. Color: head including an- 
tennae, thorax and abdomen black; fore and middle 


12 


legs with coxa light brown, first trochanter 
black, second trochanter light brown, femur 
light brown, black dorsally, tibia light brown 
but sometimes black on apical 14, tarsus black; 
hind leg with coxa black basally and light 
brown apically, first trochanter black, second 
trochanter brown, femur brown ventrally, black 
dorsally and laterally, tibia brown on basal %, 
black on apical 4, tarsus black; tegula and wing 
base black, wing uniformily lightly infumated. 
Head: in dorsal view 1.5 times broader than long, 
face about 1.25 times as broad as eye height, 
clypeus strongly convex; frons smooth and polished 
except for hair pits; ocellocular distance about 
twice diameter of lateral ocellus; antenna 29 
segmented, segments in apical 4 about as long as 
broad. Thorax: mesonotal lobes smooth and 
polished except for numerous hair pits, notauli 
deep and strongly crenulate, scutellar disc smooth 
and shining, prescutellar furrow deep and with 
numerous low carinae; propleuron strongly rugose, 
granular along dorsal edge; mesopleuron smooth 
and polished, hairless above sternaulus, sternaulus 
arched and strongly crenulate; propodeum rugose, 
longitudinal carinae at posterior margin strong, 
spiracles set into shallow circular impression, 
sides of propodeum rugose ventrally, granular 
dorsally. Abdomen: first tergite about 1.5 times 
longer than apical width, rugulopunctate, smooth 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


at extreme base, basal longitudinal keels well 
developed; second tergite about 1.3 times as long 
as broad at base, finely granular medially, 
smooth and polished along apical and lateral 
edges; second suture fine but distinct; remainder 
of terga smooth and polished; ovipositor about 
as long as abdomen plus % thorax. Wings 
(fig. 4): radial cell along wing margin as long as 
stigma; second segment of radius at a slight 
angle with intercubitus; stub of third segment of 
cubitus slightly longer than second segment; 
nervulus nearly interstitial with basal vein, only 
slightly postfurcal; hind wing 4.5 times as long as 
greatest width; second segment of mediella slightly 
longer than nervellus. Legs: hind coxa granular, 
rugulose dorsally at base; hind femur 4 times 
as long as wide; inner spur of hind tibia more 
than % as long as basitarsus; tarsal claws simple. 

Male. Essentially as in female; apical antennal 
segments longer than broad. 


Holotype.—Female, Cartago, Costa 
Rica, Central America, IV-24-73, E. R. 
Oatman collector, ex. Phthorimaea oper- 
culella on potato. Deposited in the U. S. 
National Museum (USNM). 


Paratypes.—18 22, 20466, same 
data as holotype; 4 22,4 34, Cartago, 
Costa Rica, [V-25-73, E. R. Oatman, ex. 
Gelechiid on potato; 3 29°, 3 66, Car- 
tago, Costa Rica, IV-19-73, coll. Oat- 
man, ex potato tuberworm. Deposited 
in USNM and the University of Cali- 
fornia, Riverside (UCR). 

This species is similar to the Nearctic 
Orgilus ferus Muesebeck but differs by 
the legs being brown or black, the 


h 


| 


® 


Figs. 1-7. Wing venation: 1, Mirax malcolmi, n. sp.; 2, Apanteles oatmani, n. sp.; 3, Bracon lucileae, 
| n. sp.; 4, Orgilus jennieae, n. sp.; 5, O. parcus Turner; 6, Chelonus (Microchelonus) kellieae, n. sp.; 


: 7, C. (M.) johni, n. sp. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 13 


antennae black, and the radius being 
angled with the intercubitus. The legs of 
ferus are testaceus and the radius is ona 
straight line with the intercubitus. This 
species is named for my wife, Jennie 
Suderman Marsh. 


Orgilus parcus Turner 


Orgilus parcus Turner, 1922. Ann. Mag. Nat. 
Hist. (Ser. 9) 10: 276. 


Diagnosis. —Length of body, 3.5-—4.0 mm; 
ovipositor, 2.5—3.5 mm. Color: head, thorax, and 
abdomen black, basal flagellomeres dark brown, 
apex of fore femur, fore tibia and tarsus brown, 
middle tibia and tarsus dark brown, wings uni- 
formly lightly infumated. Face coarsely punctate 
and shining, temples and vertex smooth and shin- 
ing, frons weakly rugose; mesonotum coarsely 
punctate and shining; abdominal terga one and two 
completely rugose, third tergite weakly rugose 
medially at base; ovipositor as long as abdomen 
plus 2 thorax; second segment of radius slightly 
angled with intercubitus, nervulus only slightly 
postfurcal, hind wing (fig. 5) about 6 times as 
long as wide. 


Type locality. —Mossel Bay, Cape 


Province, South Africa. 


This species is similar to the Nearctic 
Orgilus arcticus Muesebeck but is easily 
distinguished by the smooth and shining 
temples and vertex, and the wing vena- 
tion, particularly the angle of the radius 
and intercubitus (they are on a straight 
line in arcticus) and the nervulus being 
postfurcal by about 3 its length. It is 
also similar to O. jennieae described 
above but differs in its black legs, 
narrower hind wing, and more strongly 
sculptured second abdominal tergite. 

Orgilus parcus was introduced from 
South Africa and released in 1968 at 
Moreno Valley, Riverside County, Cali- 
fornia, against the potato tuberworm. It 
was colonized but apparently not estab- 
lished (E. R. Oatman, pres. comm.). 
Further surveys in this area for potato 
tuberworm parasites are being made and 
this species is included here in the event 
it does become established. 


Chelonus (Microchelonus) kellieae Marsh, 
new species 


Female. Length of body, 3.0 mm. Color: 
entire body black except for scape, pedicle, base 


14 


of first flagellomere, apex of fore femur, fore 
tibia, fore basitarsus, base and apex of middle 
femur, middle tibia, middle basitarsus, base and 
apex of hind femur, and basal % of hind tibia 
which are honey yellow. Head: slightly wider 
than long; face granular and dull, clypeus weakly 
granular and shining, frons rugose, a definite 
carinate ridge between antennae extending half 
way down face, vertex rugulostriate, temples 
finely striate, malar space about equal to length 
of first flagellomere, antenna 16 segmented, short, 
not extending beyond propodeum, flagellomeres 
12-15 as wide as long, level of lower eye 
margins slightly above dorsal margin of clypeus. 
Thorax: mesonotum rugose, somewhat areolate 
where notauli meet before prescutellar furrow, 
mesonotal lobes granular, mesopleuron rugose, 
areolate; propodeum rugose, caudal margin defined 
by transverse ridge, outer pair of projections 
large and distinct, inner pair weak. Abdomen: 
carapace rugose basally, rugulose apically, basal 
carinae short but distinct, apex of ventral open- 
ing reaching about to apex of carapace. Wings 
(fig. 6): stigma about as long as wide, radial 
cell along wing margin half as long as stigma, 
first and second segments of radius about equal 
in length. 

Male. Essentially as in female; opening at apex 
of carapace (fig. 8) somewhat flattened heart- 
shaped, about 2.5 times wider than high, center 
tubercle with scattered short hair, carapace formed 
into a low rounded tubercle below this apical 
opening. . 


Holotype.—Female, Cartago, Costa 


Rica, April 1973, coll. E. R. Oatman. 
Deposited in USNM. 


Paratypes.—17 2°, 20466, same 
data as holotype; 5 22,8 66, Cartago, 
Costa Rica, 4-25-73, E. R. Oatman, ex 
Gelechiid on potato. Deposited in USNM 
and UCR. 


This species is similar to the Nearctic 
Chelonus (Microchelonus) cosmopteridis 
McComb, both species having striate 
temples, but kellieae differs from cos- 
mopteridis by having a shorter radial 
cell which is half as long as stigma, 
and shorter apical flagellomeres which 
are as wide as long. It does not appear 
to be similar to any of the described 
Neotropical species. This species is 
named for my daughter, Kellie Lyneé 
Marsh. 


Chelonus (Microchelonus) johni Marsh, 
new species 


Female. Length of body, 3 mm. Color: black 
except scape, apex of fore femur, fore tibia, fore 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


Figs. 8—9. Opening at apex of male carapace, Chelonus (Microchelonus) species: 8, kellieae, n. sp.; 
9, johni, n. sp. 


basitarsus, apex of middle femur, middle tibia, 
middle tarsus, basal % of hind tibia, and hind 
basitarsus which are honey yellow. Head: wider 
than long, entirely striate, clypeus granular and 
shining medially; malar space slightly longer 
than first flagellomere; antenna 16 segmented, 
short, not quite reaching base of propodeum, 
flagellomeres 10-15 as wide as long; level of 
lower eye margins slightly above dorsal margin of 
clypeus. Thorax: mesonotum rugose, strongly areo- 
lated where notauli meet, along notauli, and 
along median line of middle mesonotal lobe; 
mesopleuron strongly rugose and areolate; propo- 
deum rugose, caudal margin defined by strong 
transverse ridge, both pair of projections strong. 
Abdomen: carapace strongly rugose and areolate, 
particularly at base, basal carinae strong and 
reaching to basal 4 of carapace; apex of ventral 
opening reaching almost to apex of carapace. 
Wings (fig. 7): stigma twice as long as wide; 
radial cell along wing margin %4 as long as stigma; 
first and second segments of radius about equal 
in length. 

Male. Essentially as in female; opening at apex 
of carapace (fig. 9) evenly oval, about 1.5 
times wider than high, inner tubercle with scattered 
long hair. 


Holotype.—Female, Palmira, Colom- 
bia, So. America, 5-8-73, coll. E. R. Oat- 
man, gelechiid on Solanum sp. Deposited 
in USNM. 


Paratypes.—4 22,5 36, same data 
as holotype; 1 2, 1 6, Palmira, Colom- 
bia, 9-15-75, A. Saldarriaga, ex. Scrobi- 
palpula sp. on Solanum saponaceum. 
Deposited in USNM and UCR. 


This species is similar to Chelonus 
(Microchelonus) kellieae but is dis- 
tinguished by the longer radial cell which 
is 3%4 as long as stigma, and the stronger 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


sculpturing on the mesonotum and head. 
It is named for my father-in-law, Mr. 
John H. Suderman. 


Apanteles oatmani Marsh, new species 


Female. Length of body, 2.5 mm; ovipositor, 
1 mm. Color: black except palpi, apical 74 of fore 
femur, fore tibia, fore tarsus, apex of middle 
femur, middle tibia, middle tarsus, hind trochanter 
2, and basal % of hind tibia which are honey 
yellow; stigma brown and margined on all sides 
by darker brown. Head: distinctly punctate, 
densely covered with short white hair; malar space 
shorter than clypeus; face only slightly narrower 
at clypeus than at antennae, at its narrowest 
part equal to eye height; antenna about equal to 
body length. Thorax: mesonotum distinctly punc- 
tate, punctures dense along course of notauli 
and somewhat rugose posteriorly, densely covered 
with short white hair; disc of scutellum flat, 
shining, slightly punctate, polished area on lateral 
face of scutellum semicircular; propodeum rugose, 
central areola strongly margined by carinae, 
occasionally open at base, costulae absent; meso- 
and metapleuron smooth and shining. Wings (fig. 
2): stigma broad, about 2.5 times as long as 
broad; metacarpus longer than stigma; radius 
longer and slightly narrower than intercubitus; 
nervellus of hind wing slightly curved toward 
wing base, vanal lobe straight or slightly convex 
and without fringe of hair. Legs: inner spur of 
hind tibia considerably longer than outer and as 
long as % hind basitarsus. Abdomen: first tergite 
slightly longer than apical width, sides parallel 
or very slightly bulging medially, base and apex 
of equal width, strongly rugose, occasionally 
a slight median depression indicated at apex; second 
tergite extremely short, about 5.5—6.0 times as 
wide as long, rugose, suture between second and 
third terga strongly crenulate; hypopygium acute 
and extending beyond apex of abdomen; ovi- 
positor about as long as hind tibia, slightly 
evenly curved downward. 


15 


Male. Essentially as in female except antenna 
longer and legs darker. 


Holotype.— Female. Palmira, Colom- 
bia, Sept. 15, 1975, A. Saldarriaga V.., 
ex. Scrobipalpula sp. on Solanum sapo- 
naceum. Deposited in USNM. 


Paratypes.—7 22,4646, same data 
as holotype. Deposited in USNM and 
UCR. 


This species is distinguished by its very 
short second abdominal tergite which 
is about 6 times as wide as long. It 
appears to be similar to the Neotropical 
Apanteles bruchi Blanchard but differs 
by the black tegula and rugose second 
abdominal tergite. This species is named 
for Earl R. Oatman. 


Bracon lucileae Marsh, new species 


Female. Length of body, 2.0-3.0 mm; ovi- 
positor, 0.50—1.25 mm. Color: entirely honey 
yellow except antenna, ocellar triangle, and ovi- 
positor sheaths which are black, and apical seg- 
ments of fore and middle tarsi, apex of hind 
tibia, and entire hind tarsus which are brown; 
wings lightly infuscated on basal half, veins 
brown, stigma light brown, transparent and edged 
with dark brown. Head: entirely smooth and 
polished; eyes large and bulging well beyond 
temples which are strongly receding; malar space 
about 4% eye height and with a distinct smooth 
groove extending from base of eye to base of 
mandible; transverse diameter of circular mouth 
opening nearly as long as distance from opening 
to eye; antenna 26—29 segmented. Thorax: smooth 
and polished; notauli weakly indicated at least 
anteriorly and thickly hairy; sternaulus absent; 
propodeum without any indication of median 
carina, with a smooth oblique groove under 
each spiracle. Abdomen: entirely smooth and 
polished; first tergite about 1.25 times longer 
than apical width, central and oblique furrows 
smooth; suture between second and third terga 
smooth and slightly arched medially; ovipositor 
about % as long as abdomen. Wings (fig. 3): 
second segment of radius nearly 3 times as long 
as first. Legs: tarsal claws with large basal 
tooth. 

Male. Essentially as in female; length of body, 
1.5-2.5 mm; antenna 25-30 segmented; apical 
abdominal segments sometimes marked with black. 


Holotype.—Female. Palmira, Colom- 
bia, Sept. 15, 1975, A. Saldarriaga V. 
collector, ex. Scrobipalpula sp. on 


Solanum saponaceum. Deposited in 
USNM. 


16 


Paratypes.—6 22,4646, same data 
as holotype. Deposited in USNM and 
UCR. 


This species is similar to the Nearctic 
Bracon psilicorsi Viereck but is dis- 
tinguished by its entirely yellow body, 
lack of oblique furrows on second ab- 
dominal tergite, and strongly receding 
temples. It is also similar to B. vul- 
pinus Szépligeti from Brazil but differs 
by the entirely smooth second abdominal 
tergite. This species is named for my 
mother, Lucile Garges Marsh. 


Mirax malcolmi Marsh, new species 


Female. Length of body, 2.0—2.5 mm; ovi- 
positor, 0.5 mm. Color: face and temples honey 
yellow, vertex brown, occiput black, antenna 
black, palpi whitish, thorax black, abdomen 
black beyond second segment, median plate of 
first tergite honey yellow, median plate of second 
tergite brown, lateral parts of second tergite 
black, membranous areas of first and second 
tergites whitish-yellow, ovipositor sheaths black; 
wings lightly infumated, stigma black, tegula and 
wing base honey yellow; legs yellow, apical tarsal 
segments brown. Head: face lightly punctate, 
vertex and temples more strongly punctate; ver- 
tex with a weak polished groove extending from 
median ocellus to occiput; frons with a slight 
raised ridge extending between antennae a short 
distance down face; temples about as wide as 
eyes and not receding behind eyes, bulging 
slightly; antenna 14 segmented, first and second 
flagellomeres about equal in length. Thorax: 
mesonotum and scutellum mostly smooth with 
only scattered punctures; notauli deeply impressed 
anteriorly, absent posteriorly; mesopleuron smooth 
and polished, sternaulus represented by a wide, 
shallow, rugulose impression; propodeum coarsely 
rugose with strong median carina; metapleuron 
and sides of propodeum smooth. Abdomen: plate 
of first tergite smooth, very narrow on basal 2, 
suddenly widening near apex and then narrowing at 
apex (i.e., Somewhat spoon-shaped); second tergite 
mostly membranous, median plate smooth, narrow 
at base, gradually widening to apex and then 
extending across entire apex of tergite; remainder 
of tergites smooth; ovipositor about as long as 
hind basitarsus. Wings (fig. 1): cubitus weak or 
absent at base so first cubital and first discoidal 
cells are not completely separated; radius almost 
completely absent. 

Male. Essentially as in female. 


Holotype.—Female, Palmira, Colom- 
bia, Sept. 15, 1975, A. Saldarriaga V. 
collector, ex. Scrobipalpula sp. on 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


Solanum saponaceum. Deposited in the 
USNM. 


Paratypes.—6 22,6646, same data 
as holotype. Deposited in the USNM and 
UCR. 


This species is easily distinguished 
from the only other described Neotropi- 


cal species, Mirax brasiliensis Brues 
and M. insularis Muesebeck, by its 
dark thorax. In North America it is 
similar to M. lithocolletidis Ashmead but 
is distinguished by its darker color and 
more coarsely rugose propodeum. This 
Species is named for my father, Mal- 
colm B. Marsh. 


Natural History Notes on Craspedoglossa stejnegeri 
and Thoropa petropolitana (Amphibia: Salientia, 


Leptodactylidae) 


W. Ronald Heyer and Ronald I. Crombie 


Division of Reptiles and Amphibians, Natural History Building, 
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. 20560. 


ABSTRACT 


Larvae are described for the first time for the burrowing leptodactylid frog, 
Craspedoglossa stejnegeri. The terrestrial larvae resemble those of Zachaenus-_parvulus 
in several distinctive features. Territoriality is described for the first time for any 
frog in SE Brazil; male Thoropa petropolitana defend calling sites and egg clutches. 


During the month of December 1977, 
we obtained some natural history ob- 
servations on previously unreported life 
history parameters for Craspedoglossa 
Stejnegeri and Thoropa petropolitana. 
Our observations were made near the city 
of Teresépolis in the State of Rio de 
Janeiro, Brazil. Specimens are in the 
collections of the Museu de Zoologia da 
Universidade de Sao Paulo and the 
National Museum of Natural History, 
Washington, D. C. 


Craspedoglossa stejnegeri 


We obtained a series of 29 juvenile 
and adult C. stejnegeri from burrows 
in hillsides or under logs. During the 
day, specimens were found in the burrow 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


systems under logs. At night, the frogs 
were near the mouths of the burrows. 
In six cases, Craspedoglossa and micro- 
hylids (a single species, as yet uniden- 
tified) shared the same burrows; four of 
the burrows contained one microhylid 
and one C. stejnegeri, two burrows, 
two microhylids and one C. stejnegeri. 
On the morning of 10 December, the 
second author found a female C. stej- 
negeri with 40 larvae on her back under 
a 15 cm. diameter log beside a stream. 
The female sat in a depression below the 
level of the surrounding soil. Egg cap- 
sules were next to the female and one 
egg had been parasitized. The egg cap- 
sules were in a bead-like string. The lar- 
vae were very light in color, the yellow 
yolk being the most striking feature. 


17 


Fig. 1. Lateral view and mouthparts of larva of Craspedoglossa stejnegeri. 


Thirty-eight of the larvae are stage 31 
(Gosner, 1960), two are stage 30. Abun- 
dant yolk stores at this stage are ob- 
vious (Fig. 1). The oral disk is distinc- 
tive in having only two papillae at the 
lateral margins (Fig. 1). The denticles 
are not well developed and not clearly 
visible in all specimens at low magnifica- 
tion. At high magnification, the follow- 
ing tooth row formula is characteristic: 
2-2/1;1. The larvae lack a spiracle, the 
anus iS median and usually bifid. Of 10 
larvae measured, the head-body length/ 
total length average is 0.30; the longest 
larva is 25.2 mm total length. _ 

The larvae of C. stejnegeri share the 
following distinctive features with the 
larvae of Zachaenus parvulus as de- 
scribed by Lutz (1944): No spiracle; 
general shape of oral disk (Lutz’s figures 
appear almost identical to the mouth- 
parts of Fig. 1); and peculiar bilobed 
anal tube (see Figure 16 in Lutz, 1944, 
for a comparable view of the condition 
in the series of C. stejnegeri at hand). 
The larvae differ in tooth row formulae, 
the tooth row formula for Z. parvulus 
is 1-1/1 (Lutz, 1944). Lutz describes 
the upper and lower lips of the disk 
being connected by 2 or 3 large papillae 
(as in C. stejnegeri), but that the lower 
lip has shorter, continuous papillae. The 
lower part of the disk in C. stejnegeri 
is emarginate (Fig. 1). Lutz gives the 
maximum length of Z. parvulus larvae 
as 19 mm. 

The distinctive larvae of Craspedo- 
glossa stejnegeri and Z. parvulus sug- 
gest close relationship, supporting Lynch’s 


18 


(1971) synonymization of these two gen- 
era. The distinctive adult morphologies 
argue for generic recognition, however 
(Heyer, 1975). The close similarities of 
larval morphologies indicate that the 
larvae of C. stejnegeri are terrestrial 
larvae, completing metamorphosis on the 
nutrients from the large yolk stores. 

Lutz (1944) found a Z. parvulus egg 
mass which contained 30 eggs; no adult 
was in attendance. We found one egg 
mass of 12 eggs of Z. parvulus with an 
attendant female. It is difficult to imagine 
a larger clutch size for Zachaenus 
parvulus than what we found, owing 
to the large eggs and small size of adult 
females. Lutz may have uncovered a 
communal nesting site. The eggs of 
Zachaenus are in a clump, not a 
string as in Craspedoglossa. 


Thoropa petropolitana 


Our observations extend the informa- 
tion provided by Bokermann (1965), who 
discussed the general ecology of adults 
and larvae and described the larval 
morphology and mating call of Thoropa 
petropolitana. Most of our observations 
were made on a road cut rock wall 
with a high population density of T7. 
petropolitana. 

On the night of 4 December, the 
second author found an amplectant 
pair (axillary amplexus) in the final 
process of egg laying. Most of the eggs 
had been deposited in the character- 
istic circular mass when discovered. 
The following sequence was observed 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


to be the same for deposition of 3 
eggs. The male called sporadically 
(1-3 times), then squeezed the female 
2—3 times. The female extruded a single 
egg. The male then pushed the egg onto 
the substrate (a vertical bare rock sur- 
face, surrounded by rock covered with 
algal and moss slime) with his right hind 
foot. The female rotated counterclock- 
wise 5°, and the process was repeated. 
After the last egg was deposited, the 
male dismounted and moved about 30 
mm from the clutch facing it, calling 
emphatically. The female straddled the 
circular clutch and sat on top of the 
clutch with her nose buried in moss. The 
total clutch was 16 eggs. 

We checked the egg clutch almost 
daily, and at every observation period 
but 2, we found the male in attendance. 
One time when we did not see the male, 
he was attendant 15 minutes later when 
we rechecked the clutch. The embryos 
were at least at the neurula stage on 
the 4th day and several had died. On the 
6th day, tails and movement were evi- 
dent. On the 9th day, only eight em- 
bryos were still alive, the rest were 
dead. A small hydrophilid water beetle 
(Oocyclus sp.) was in the midst of the 
egg clutch, where it had apparently 
eaten its way in. We prodded the beetle. 
When the beetle moved, the male Thoropa 
reacted in the jerky motions which terri- 
torial males perform. The frog advanced 
on the beetle, bumped it with his chin, 
put his front foot on it, moved past it, 
and tried to dislodge it with a kick of 
his hind foot. The frog made no attempt 
to eat the beetle. On the 10th day, two 
larvae had hatched and were still on the 
jelly. On the 11th day, all but one larva 
had hatched; all larvae remained on or 
around the jelly. On the 12th day, all 
larvae had hatched; two were on the edge 
of the jelly, the others were gone. The 
male was absent. On the 13th day, no 
larvae were around the jelly; the male sat 
facing the jelly 10 cm away. 

We found no males defending more 
than one clutch of eggs. Male T. petro- 
politana are territorial. Males defend 


_ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


calling sites and egg clutches from other 
males. One natural agonistic encounter 
was observed. The resident male gave 
what we interpret to be a territorial 
call (a creaking, attenuated note in 
contrast to the short chirps we interpret 
as the advertising call), then grabbed 
the face to face interloping male around 
the neck and wrestled. The resident re- 
leased the invader and gave a territorial 
call followed by 5-6 rapid advertising 
calls. The invader remained flat on the 
substrate. The resident turned back 
towards his calling site, and the invader 
quickly left with two long hops. 

We experimentally introduced males 
into the territories of other males, who 
were defending either calling sites or egg 
clutches. In all cases, the resident male 
called and postured toward the invading 
male. In one instance, calling and pos- 
turing was adequate to drive off the 
invader. In all others, physical contact, 
either wrestling or kicking, occurred. 
The adpression of the invader to the 
substrate was a common response. The 
defended territories are small. We found 
several instances of males calling 20 cm 
apart with no interference. 

As Wells (1977) recently summarized, 
‘‘Attachment to a fixed site will be ad- 
vantageous if this gives the occupant 
exclusive or priority access to resources 
in short supply.’’ We suggest that the 
resource in short supply for T. petro- 
politana is the egg deposition site for 
the following 2 reasons: (1) The males 
defend the site against other males only. 
When males are attending egg clutches, 
they do not remove spoiled eggs or clean 
the clutch of predatory insects. The 
clutch is defended only in terms of other 
T. petropolitana. (2) We discovered only 
one site where 7. petropolitana was ina 
natural habitat—a waterfall. In contrast 
to the road cut, the population density 
of T. petropolitana here was very low. 
Our impression was that there were few 
protected but open rock surfaces with a 
film of water flowing over that were 
suitable for T. petropolitana egg deposi- 
tion sites. The males of Thoropa miliaris 


19 


do not attend egg clutches, and we saw 
no instances of territorial behavior 
in J. miliaris. Eggs of T. miliaris 
occur in much more exposed and hori- 
zontal situations than those of 7. petro- 
politana, suggesting that the egg deposi- 
tion sites of JZ. miliaris are not as 
limited aresource as forT. petropolitana. 

In his recent review, Wells (1977) 
listed 2 species each of Leptodactylus 
and Eleutherodactylus as the only 
Neotropical leptodactylids for which ter- 
ritorial behavior had been reported. The 
occurrence of territoriality in the dis- 
tantly related Thoropa _ petropolitana 
suggests that territoriality in leptodactylid 
frogs may be much more common than 
previously thought. 

We thank Maria Christina Duchéne 
and Francisca Carolina do Val for 
assistance in the field. Paul Spangler iden- 
tified the water beetle. Frances McCul- 
lough drew the figure. This is a contribu- 
tion to the research project, ‘‘Evolu- 
tionary zoogeography of the Atlantic 
forest system of Brasil: The anuran 


20 


example,’’ supported jointly by the 
Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de 
Sao Paulo and the Smithsonian Insti- 
tution’s Amazon Ecosystem Research 
Program. 


Literature Cited 


Bokermann, W. C. A. 1965. Notas sobre as 
espécies de Thoropa Fitzinger (Amphibia, Lepto- 
dactylidae). An. Acad. Brasil. Cienc. 37: 525- 
537. 


Gosner, K. L. 1960. A simplified table for staging 
anuran embryos and larvae with notes on 
identification. Herpetologica 16: 183—190. 


Heyer, W. R. 1975. A preliminary analysis of 
the intergeneric relationships of the frog family 
Leptodactylidae. Smithsonian Contrib. Zool. 
199: 1-55. 


Lutz, B. 1944. Biologia e taxonomia de Zachaenus 
parvulus. Bol. Mus. Nac., Rio de Janeiro, 
Zool. 17: 1-66. 


Lynch, J. D. 1971. Evolutionary relationships, 
osteology, and zoogeography of leptodactyloid 
frogs. Univ. Kansas Mus. Natur. Hist., Misc. 
Publ. 53: 1-238. 


Wells, K. D. 1977. The social behaviour of anuran 
amphibians. Anim. Behav. 25: 666-693. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


Accuracy of Land-Use Sampling Methods 


Richard H. McCuen 


Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Maryland, 


College Park, Maryland 20742 


ABSTRACT 


Estimates of land-use proportions are required for many engineering planning and 
design models, as well as some environmental impact statements. Four methods are 
commonly used to estimate the proportion of various land uses in a study area: 1) planim- 
etering of aerial photographs, 2) land-use sampling with aerial photographs, 3) predic- 
tion using regionalized relationships that require estimates of demographic character- 
istics, and 4) a weighted mean of the materials associated with each land-use classifica- 
tion. Because the methods give different answers, it is important to know the accuracy 
of each estimate. While planimetering and sampling provide almost exact estimates, the 
empirical estimation techniques are only accurate within 10% of the true value. Remote 
sensing techniques appear to provide an alternative method that should provide a high 


degree of accuracy. 


Over the past few decades the propor- 
tion of the U. S. population that resides 
in urban/suburban areas has increased 
significantly (10). One result of this 
pattern of urban development has been 
noticeable changes in land uses, espe- 
cially increased concentrations of im- 
perviousness. Recognizing the physical 
significance of increases in impervious- 
ness on the stormwater runoff process, 
hydrologists have used the percentage of 
impervious area aS a measure of ur- 
banization. This has led to attempts to 
relate the percentage of impervious area 
with peak discharge and other flood 
characteristics (11, 15). Such relation- 
ships can be used by planners to ex- 
amine the hydrologic impact of proposed 
developments (12) or the effect on flood 
characteristics of continued urbanization 
with time (20). 

Recognizing the impact of urbaniza- 
tion on runoff characteristics of a water- 
shed, hydrologists have used the per- 
centage of imperviousness as a parameter 
in hydrologic models (4, 15). The percent- 
age of impervious area has been shown 
to be just as important as other water- 
shed and climatic characteristics (15). 
Due to the relative importance of the 
percentage of imperviousness, accurate 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


predictions of the hydrologic response of 
an urban watershed require accurate 
estimates of the impervious area. 

The percentage of impervious area in a 
watershed can be estimated using any of 
the following 4 methods: 1) planimeter- 
ing of aerial photographs, 2) land use 
sampling with aerial photographs, 3) 
prediction using empirical relationships 
having demographic characteristics as 
predictor variables, and 4) a weighted 
mean of the average percentage of im- 
pervious area associated with each land- 
use classification. While the first 2 meth- 
ods require aerial photographs, methods 
3 and 4 make use of regionalized in- 
formation and readily available census 
tract information. While the regionalized 
estimation techniques are less costly, 
the method selected for any one site will 
depend on both accuracy and cost 
considerations. 

The objective of this paper is to 
evaluate and compare the accuracy of 
these 4 methods of estimating the im- 
pervious area. The accuracy levels are 
also applicable to other land use types. 


Planimetering 


The most accurate estimates could be 
obtained by planimetering from aerial 


21 


photographs. Planimetering of areas 
should provide almost exact values, 
with the accuracy of an estimate de- 
pendent upon the resolution of the aerial 
photograph and the availability of ground 
truth information. Requirements for 
ground truth depend on the relative 
importance of the land use in the study 
area. For larger areas and where there 
is little spatial homogeneity, such as in 
urban and suburban areas, planimetering 
may require an excessive amount of 
time, technical capability, ground truth 
verification, and cost. And Stafford, et al. 
(16) made the following important con- 
clusion: 


The use of a planimeter to measure parcels of 
land in each land use class on aerial photo- 
graphs may produce area measurements with higher 
accuracy than are actually required when the 
accuracy of other elements of the procedure are 
examined. Consequently, the use of a land use 
sampling approach rather than making area meas- 
urements with a planimeter is a reasonable modi- 
fication to the procedure described herein which 
can significantly reduce the time and labor re- 
quired to obtain data on the distribution of land 
use from aerial photographs. 


Land-Use Sampling 


The land use sampling approach may 
be a reasonable alternative for estimating 
percentages of different land uses, in- 
cluding the proportion of impervious 
area. The sampling approach has been 
used in hydrologic analyses (11, 20) and in 
resource identification studies (14). 

When sample size is the factor that 
controls accuracy, a confidence interval 
can be used to indicate the accuracy of 
land-use proportion that is estimated by 
land-use sampling. For large samples, 
such that the sampling distribution of the 
proportion is approximately normal, the 
100(1 — a)% 2-sided confidence limits 
for a proportion P are given approxi- 
mately by: 


N _2 
IN: + Z* 2N 
LC Se he 
Sigh Baha, | (1) 
N 4N? 
22 


where WN is the sample size, Z is the 
standardized normal variate that cuts off 
the upper a/2 proportion, and a is the 
level of significance. Large samples can 
be expected when using methods of auto- 
matic classification by remote sensing 
and equation 1 reduces to (19): 


| ween iia 2 
N 


Either equation 1 or 2 can be used to 
determine an interval about an observed 
land-use proportion and determine the 
probability that the true land-use pro- 
portion lies within this range. 

Equations 1 and 2 can also be used to 
estimate the sample size required to 
provide a specified degree of accuracy. 
A proportion of 0.5 is the most critical 
proportion and thus has the widest con- 
fidence interval. For a proportion of 0.5 
and a degree of confidence of 99%, 
equation 2 indicates that a sample size of 
16,577 would be required to provide an 
estimate of a proportion within 1% of the 
true value. For a proportion of 0.25, 
which is similar to the proportion of 
impervious area in a suburban area, the 
required sample size would be 12,433. 
Ragan (14) used a sample size of over 
94,000 to estimate the proportion of 
the land use in 10 mutually excusive 
categories. 


(2) 


Prediction Using Demographic Characteristics 


But both the planimetering and sam- 
pling methods assume that aerial photo- 
graphs are available. For many water- 
sheds current aerial photographs may not 
be available. And for many planning — 
problems only the spatial extent of 
future trends in urbanization is known. 
Thus, the planimetering and land-use 
sampling techniques are not always 
applicable. 

When planimetering or land-use sam- 
pling are not applicable or the re- 
sources required to use these methods 
are not available, it may be possible 
to estimate imperviousness and other 
land-use characteristics using empirical 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


f 


prediction equations having demographic 
characteristics, such as population and 
housing densities, as predictor variables 
(8, 9, 18). Estimates of demographic 
characteristics, which can be used for 
prediction, may be available from past 
census summaries or planning projec- 
tions of future development. 

The standard error of estimate of the 
prediction equations can be used to 
indicate the accuracy of land-use es- 
timates. The prediction equation ap- 
proach may provide estimates of im- 
perviousness and other land-use charac- 
teristics that are within 10% of the true 
value. Graham (9) reported a standard 
error of estimate of 11.8% of impervious- 
ness when using housing density as the 
predictor variable. Gluck (8) reported a 
standard error of estimate of 6.3% of 
imperviousness when using the popula- 
tion density and the distance from the 
central business district as predictor 
variables. 


Land-Use Class Averaging 


Aerial photographs for planimetering 
and land-use sampling and estimates 
of demographic characteristics for use 
with prediction equations are often not 
available or require too much effort for 
evaluating many different planning al- 
ternatives. Furthermore, planning pro- 
jections often include estimates of spe- 
cific land uses without distinguishing 
between the proportion of pervious and 
impervious surface cover. Specifically, 
specifying the percentage of residential 
land use does not provide the informa- 
tion needed for many planning models. 


When gross areas devoted to specific 
land uses are available, a means of 
transforming these estimates to im- 
pervious area estimates is required. In 
such cases, a second empirical method 
of estimating imperviousness may be a 
feasible alternative. An estimate of the 
imperviousness of a study area can be 
obtained using a weighted mean of the 
average impervious area associated with 
each land use in the study area; the 
estimate can be obtained from: 


Aa Sy LP. (3) 
j=1 


where J; is the average percentage of 
impervious area associated with land-use 
classification j, P; is the fraction of the 
study area devoted to land use j, n is the 
number of different land-use categories 
in the study area, and JA is the estimated 
percentage of impervious area in the 
study area. 

Stankowski (18) provided low, inter- 
mediate and high estimates of impervious 
land area for 6 land-use categories; these 
values are reproduced in Table 1. These 
estimates were based on general field 
observations and studies by Carter (3), 
Felton and Lull (7), Antoine (2), and 
Stall, Terstriep, and Huff (17). However, 
the separation of land-use categories in 
Table 1 may not be sufficiently disag- 
gregated for some hydrologic planning 
and design activities. 

To provide impervious area estimates 
that can be used in many research 
activities, a land-use classification sys- 
tem, Table 2, that was proposed (1) for 
use with remote sensor data was adopted 


Table 1.—Impervious Land Area Within Land-Use Categories. 


Land-use category 


Single-family residential 
Multiple-family residential 
Commercial 

Industrial 

Public and quasi-public 
Conservational, recreational and open 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


Impervious land area (percentage) 


Low Intermediate High 

12 ZS 40 
60 70 80 
80 90 100 
40 70 95 
50 60 70 

0 0 0 

23 


01. 


02. 


03. 


04. 


0S. 


06. 


07. 


08. 
09. 


Level I 


Urban and 
Built-up 
Land 


Agricultural 
Land 


Range Land 


Forest Land 


Water 


Nonforested 
Wetland 


Barren 
Land 


Tundra 


Permanent 
Snow and 
Icefields 


Table 2. —Land-Use Classification System. 


Level II 


. Residential 

. Commercial and services 
. Industrial 

. Extractive 

. Transportation, Com- 


munications and Utilities 


. Institutional 
. Strip and Clustered 


Settlement 


. Mixed 
. Open and Other 


. Cropland and Pasture 
. Orchards, Groves, Bush 


Fruits, Vineyards, and 
Horticultural Areas 


. Feeding Operations 
. Other 


. Grass 

. Savannas 

. Chaparral 

. Desert Shrub 


. Deciduous 
. Evergreen (Coniferous 


and other) 


. Mixed 


. Streams and Waterways 
. Lakes 

. Reservoirs 

. Bays and Estuaries 

. Other 


. Vegetated 
. Bare 


. Salt Flats 

. Beaches 

. Sand and Other Beaches 
. Bare Exposed Rock 

. Other 


. Tundra 


. Permanent Snow and 


Icefields 


herein, with 1 modification and several 
deletions. The structure of the classifica- 
tion system provides for 2 levels of 
classification, but can be refined further. 
A detailed description of each category 
was provided by Anderson, et al. (1). 

In the study reported herein, land-use 
classification 01.01, residential, was fur- 
ther separated into three categories: 


24 


01. Recent residential, 
02. Older residential, 
03. Multiple-family housing. 


This refinement of the classification sys- 
tem was necessary because of the wide 
differences in impervious area within the 
residential category and the importance 
of residential areas in determining the 
degree of imperviousness in a watershed. 
Older residential housing consists of 
those areas developed prior to the early 
1950’s. In addition to having a different 
average percentage of imperviousness, 
older residential housing has different 
visual characteristics on aerial photo- 
graphs when compared with recent resi- 
dential areas. 

The average percentage of impervious 
area for 13 land-use categories were 
derived herein. An aerial photograph at 
a scale of 1:24000 was obtained from a 
U2 flight (60,000 ft or 18,300 m) for an 
area of approximately 830 km?. The 
averages were obtained by planimetering 
the percent of impervious area for a 
number of parcels of land in each 
land-use category. The parcels ranged 
in total area from approximately 0.01 
km? to 0.4 km?. Using these impervious 
area averages and a weighting function 
such as equation 3, urban planners may 
obtain estimates of impervious area as 
input to hydrologic models. 

Several Level I and Level II cate- 
gories were omitted in this study either 
because they are not associated with 
impervious areas (e.g., 05. Water), or 
because data were not available from 
the aerial photographs (e.g., 07.02. 
Beaches). For the remaining land-use 
categories, average impervious area 
estimates were obtained as previously 
discussed and are given in Table 3. 

Impervious area estimates were ob- 
tained for 3 residential land-use cate- 
gories. Mean values of 24.4% and 22.6% 
were computed for recent and older 
single-family residential housing, respec- 
tively. Standard deviations of approxi- 
mately 9% of imperviousness were 
determined herein for these forms of 
residential housing. The standard devia- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


tion provides a measure of the ac- 
curacy of an estimated value when 
additional information is not available. 
The computed mean values and ranges 
for single-family residential housing were 
in close agreement with the values re- 
ported by Stankowski (18). 

For many urban watersheds single- 
family residential land use represents a 
significant portion of the total water- 
shed. For such cases, the observed varia- 
tion in imperviousness of 9% may have 
a significant effect on the accuracy of 


17.62 + e(4:10-6.30L) 
i= 


24.50 — 9.167L 


14 93 ak e (4-28—6.41L) 


IA = 
22.71 — 10.40L 


When the average lot size is also avail- 
able to the planner, equation 4 and 5 
should provide more accurate estimates 
of imperviousness than the averages 
given in Table 3. For lot sizes less 
than 0.2 acres (809 m?’) the average 
impervious area for older residential is 
greater than for recent residential; this 
reflects the high percentage of im- 


Table 3.—Impervious Area Estimates. 


impervious area estimates computed us- 
ing equation 3. The accuracy of estimates 
can be improved by using additional 
information to estimate the impervious 
area associated with single-family resi- 
dential land use. 

Carter (3) observed that the percentage 
of impervious area in residential areas 
decreased with increases in lot size. To 
test this observation, relationships were 
derived relating impervious area JA to 
lot size L. Equations 4 and 5 are for 
recent and older residential housing, 
respectively: 


0 =L < 0.6 acres 
0.6 < L = 1.8 acres 


(4) 


0 = L = 0.6 acres 


(5) 
0.6 < L = 1.8 acres 


perviousness for row houses in urban 
areas. For lot sizes greater than 0.2 
acres (809 m7?) the impervious area for 
recent residential was slightly higher; 
this results from the higher proportion 
of parking areas, patios, and swimming 
pools included with recent residential 
housing. 


Impervious area 


Sample Standard 
Land use category Size Mean Low High deviation 
01. Urban and Built-up Land 
01. Residential 
01. Recent residential oi, 24.4 9.7 62.1 8.6 
02. Older residential 28 22.6 8.1 58.8 8.9 
03. Multiple-family residential 13 80.4 67.3 90.6 5.8 
02. Commercial and services 1 93.6 85.4 100.0 4.4 
03. Industrial 5 TAS 63.8 81.5 dl 
04. Extractive y Tei 67.2 82.0 7.8 
05. Transportation, Communications 
and Utilities 31 8557 0.0 78.3 213 
06. Institutional 1a, 26.4 8.3 54.5 137 
07. Strip and Clustered Settlement 8 84.3 71.6 91.9 6.1 
09. Open and Other 11 2.8 0.0 9.4 les, 
02. Agricultural Land 
01. Cropland and Pasture 13 0.8 0.0 5:2 0.6 
02. Orchards, Groves, etc. 2 1.1 
04. Forest Land 7 0.4 0.0 Pay 0.7 
J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 25 


Multiple-family residential housing has 
a mean impervious area and a standard 
deviation of 80.4 and 5.8%, respectively. 
This mean is approximately 10% higher 
than that reported by Stankowski (18). 
There are 2 points that must be con- 
sidered when assessing the significance 
of this difference. First, the degree of 
imperviousness will depend on the 
delineation of the boundary of the hous- 
ing development. Quite often, new 
multiple-family housing developments 
are adjacent to cleared land and the 
degree of imperviousness will depend on 
the amount of cleared land included as 
part of the open space for the develop- 
ment. Since most of the developments 
examined in this study were adjacent 
to commercial or transportation land 
uses it was not difficult to delineate 
the boundaries. Second, housing de- 
velopments located in metropolitan areas 
are often developed more intensively 
than those in suburban areas. Since 
most of the housing developments 
analyzed herein were in the Washing- 
ton, D. C. Metropolitan area, the higher 
percentage should have been expected. 
In this study the sites within the 
delineated area had a mean percentage 
of imperviousness that was approxi- 
mately 5% greater than the sites located 
in suburban areas. A significant relation- 
ship was not observed between percent 
impervious area and developed area for 
multiple-family residential developments. 

Twelve commercial and service de- 
velopments were analyzed with a mean 
imperviousness of 93.6%; Stankowski 
(18) reported an intermediate value of 
90%. For many newer commercial de- 
velopments it is difficult to delineate 
the boundary and this affects the com- 
puted percentages. And the intensity of 
land use appeared to decrease as the 
distance from the central business district 
increased. This observation is in agree- 
ment with the prediction equation re- 
ported by Gluck (8). 

From 5 industrial sites, a mean im- 
perviousness of 71.9% was computed; 
this was in good agreement with the 
mean of 70% reported by Stankowski 


26 


(18). A standard deviation of 7.7% was 
observed. This variation should not 
have a significant effect on the com- 
puted impervious area of an urban water- 
shed unless the proportion of industrial 
land use is high. 

Estimating statistical characteristics 
for the land-use classification 01-05 
(Transportation, Communications and 
Utilities) is somewhat complicated be- 
cause of the diversity in land use within 
this level II category. Specifically, in 
this study some rights-of-way for trans- 
mission lines had impervious areas of 
zero % while some urban highway 
areas were almost completely imper- 
vious. Furthermore, highway interchanges 
ranged in imperviousness from 23.9% to 
57.7%, with a mean and standard de- 
viation of 40.5% and 12.2%, respec- 
tively. However, there was a noticeable 
tendency for interchanges having a 
smaller total area to be more intensively 
developed, i.e., a higher percentage of 
impervious area. The percentage of im- 
pervious area for highways depends 
primarily on the size of the right-of-way. 
In the central business district trans- 
portation routes are almost completely 
impervious while in rural and agricul- 
tural areas the percentage may have a 
mean of approximately 20%. Airports, 
which are also included in category 
01-05, ranged in imperviousness from 
20 to 35%, with the smaller airports 
more intensively developed. Rights-of- 
way for transmission lines were charac-. 
terized by small levels of impervious- 
ness (0% to 4%), although at sites 
where transmission equipment shelters 
are located the percentage of imper- 
viousness may be as high as 20%. In 
summary, due to the large variation in 
both imperviousness and spectral signa- 
tures within the 01-05 land-use cate- 
gory, it should be separated either by 
forming 2 or more level II categories 
or at level III. 

Mean percentages of impervious area 
for other land-use categories were also 
determined by planimetering and are 
reported in Table 3. 

When using average values such as 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


i a 


those from Table 3, the resulting ac- 
curacy will depend in part on the dis- 
ageregation of the land-use classifica- 
tion system. The system of classification 
used herein provided average impervi- 
ous area estimates for 13 land uses 
associated with urban and suburban 
areas. Furthermore, relationships, equa- 
tions 4 and 5, were provided that relate 
impervious area and residential lot size. 
These relationships are especially im- 
portant because residential land use is 
often the primary land use in the water- 
shed and thus the equations may result 
in increased accuracy in impervious area 
estimates for single-family residential 
land use. 

To provide a test of the accuracy of 
the average values given in Table 3, these 
values were used to estimate the per- 
centage of imperviousness of the Ana- 
costia Watershed. A land-use sampling 
approach indicated that the watershed 
was 23.51% impervious (14). Areas of 
7 land uses were planimetered herein 
from a land-use map provided as part of 
the same study (13). The land-use maps 
did not provide sufficient detail to eval- 
uate different materials (i.e., concrete, 
grass, trees) so it was not possible to 
directly evaluate imperviousness. Thus, 
the land-use averaging technique was 
appropriate. The areas planimetered 
from the land-use map were weighted 
by the impervious area estimates of 
Table 3 to compute a weighted mean 
percentage of imperviousness. The com- 
putations shown in Table 4 indicate 
an estimate of 25.49%, which is a 
reasonable approximation to the value 
of 23.51% obtained by a land-use 
sampling survey. A higher degree of 
accuracy may have been realized if the 
same land-use categories shown in Table 
3 had been used in developing the 
land-use map. 


Discussion and Conclusions 


In comparing the accuracy of the 
different methods of estimating imper- 
viousness it is evident that the empirical 
approaches may provide estimates of 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


Table 4.—Estimated Impervious Area for the 
Anacostia Watershed. 


Average 
imper- Frac- 
vious tion of Weighted 
area total value 
Land use (%)* area** (%) 
Residential 
single-family 23.5 sail [Sts 
multiple-family 80.4 .050 4.02 
Commercial 93.6 .031 2.90 
Industrial 71.9 .044 3.16 
Institutional 26.4 .044 1.16 
Federal 3.0 AWS 0.35 
Open-space 2.8 141 59 
1.000 25.49 


* Obtained from Table 3. 
** Planimetered from land use map in refer- 
ere NE 


imperviousness that are within 10% of 
the true value. Planimetering and land- 
use sampling should provide almost exact 
estimates. The test case reported herein 
suggests that the method of averages 
may provide estimates that are just as 
accurate as those obtained using pre- 
diction equations with demographic char- 
acteristics as predictor variables. While 
the method of averages certainly requires 
less input, the prediction equation has 
the advantage of being able to show di- 
rectly the effect of changes in demo- 
graphic characteristics. However, for 
many planning problems, the method 
of averages of equation 3 may be pre- 
ferred due to the minimal amount of 
computational effort required and the 
reasonably accurate estimates provided. 

Recent advances in technology include 
the development of remote sensoring 
equipment that is capable of collecting 
and storing large quantities of data 
on the reflective and emissive properties 
of a watershed. The Landsat Multispec- 
tral Scanner System (MSS) is currently 
being used to acquire vast amounts 
of data that can be used to compile 
land-use maps (5, 6). Dornbach and 
McKain (5) concluded that most of the 
Level I and II categories of Table 2 
could be detected using Landsat data and 
spectral pattern recognition techniques. 


27 


If remote sensing data is to be useful 
in urban hydrologic modeling, a means of 
converting land use estimates to param- 
eters needed for hydrologic models must 
be provided. The values reported in 
Table 3 provide the means of trans- 
forming land-use estimates obtained from 
Landsat to impervious area estimates. 
Thus, automatic computer-aided machine 
classification can be used to identify 
generalized land-use proportions. Com- 
bining these with mean impervious area 
proportions will provide accurate es- 
timates of imperviousness at a mini- 
mum cost. 


References 


1. Anderson, J. R., E. E. Hardy, and J. T. 
Roach, *‘A Land-Use Classification System for 
Use With Remote-Sensor Data,’’ U. S. Geol. 
Survey Circ. 671, pp. 1—16, 1972. 

2. Antoine, L. H., ‘“‘Drainage and Best Use 
of Urban Land,’’ Public Works, Vol. 95, pp. 
80-90, 1964. 

3. Carter, R. W., ‘‘Magnitude and Frequency 
of Floods in Suburban Areas,’’ U. S. Geol. 
Survey Prof. Paper 424-B, pp. B9-B11, 1961. 

4. Crawford, N. H., and R. K. Linsley, Digital 
Simulation in Hydrology: Stanford Watershed 
Model IV, Tech. Report No. 39, Depart- 
ment of Civil Engineering, Stanford Uni- 
versity, California, July 1966. 

5. Dornbach, J. E., and G. E. McKain, The 
Utility of ERTS-1 Data for Applications in 
Land Use Classification, paper presented at 
the Third Earth Resources Technology Satel- 
lite-1 Symposium, December 10-14, 1973. 

6. Ealy, C. G., R. M. Ragan and R. H. McCuen, 
Resource Identification Studies on Urban 
Watersheds Using the Anacostia River Basin 
as an Example, Report No. NSG 5017, 
Department of Civil Engineering, University 
of Maryland, 1975. 

7. Felton, P. N., and H. W. Lull, ‘“‘Suburban 
Hydrology Can Improve Watershed Condi- 
tions,’ Public Works, Vol. 94, pp. 93-94, 
1963. 

8. Gluck, W. R., and R. H. McCuen, ‘‘Esti- 
mating Land Use Characteristics for Hydro- 
logic Models,’’ Water Resources Research, 
(in press), 1975. 


28 


10. 


Ile 


19. 


20. 


. Graham, P. H., L. S. Costello, and H. J. 


Melton, ‘‘Estimation of Imperviousness and 
Specific Curb Length for Forecasting Storm- 
water Quality and Quantity,’ J. Water Pollu- 
tion Control Federation, Vol. 46, No. 4, 
pp. 717-725, 1974. 

Landsberg, H. H., L. L. Fischman, and J. L. 
Fischer, Resources in America’s Future, 
Patterns of Requirements and Availabilities, 
1960-2000, The Johns Hopkins Press, Balti- 
more, Md., 1963. 

Martens, L. A., Flood Inundation and Ef- 
fects of Urbanization in Metropolitan Char- 
lotte, North Carolina, U. S. Geol. Survey 
Water Supply Paper 1591-C, pp. C-1-C-60, 
1968. 


. McCuen, R. H., and H. W. Piper, “‘Hydro- 


logic Impact of Planned Unit Developments,”’ 
J. Urban Planning and Development, ASCE. 
Vol. 101 (UP1), pp. 93-102, May, 1975. 


. Ragan, R. M., Resource Identification Study 


for the Anacostia River Basin, Vol. 5, Dept. 
Civil Engineering, University of Maryland, 
College Park, Maryland, 1974. 


. Ragan, R. M., and E. C. Rebuck, Resource 


Identification Study for the Anacostia River 
Basin, Vol. 1, Dept. Civil Engineering, Univ. 
of Maryland, College Park, Md., 1974. 


. Sarma, P. B., J. W. Delleur, and A. R. 


Rao, A Program in Urban Hydrology, Part 
II, Purdue Univ. Water Resources Center, 
Lafayette, Indiana, Technical Report No. 9, 
1969. 


. Stafford, D. B., J. T. Ligon, and M. E. 


Nettles, ‘‘Use of Aerial Photographs to 
Measure Land Use Changes,’ presented at 
the ASCE National Meeting on Water Re- 
sources Engineering, Los Angeles, Calif., 
1974. 


. Stall, J. B., M. L. Terstriep, and F. A. Huff, 


‘‘Some Effects of Urbanization on Floods,’’ 
ASCE National Meeting On Water Resources 
Engineering, Memphis, Tenn., 1970. 


. Stankowski, S. J. ‘‘Population Density as an 


Indirect Indicator of Urban and Suburban 
Land-Surface Modifications,’’ U. S. Geol. Sur- 
vey Prof. Paper 800-B, pp. B-219-B224, 
1972. 

United States Dept. of Commerce, Experi- 
mental Statistics (M. G. Natrella, ed.), Na- 
tional Bureau of Standards Handbook 91, 
GPO, Washington, D. C., 1963. 

Wallace, J. R., The Effects of Land Use 
Change on the Hydrology of an Urban Water- 
shed, School of Civil Engineering, Georgia 
Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Ga. 1971. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


Bridge Response and Damage 


C. P. Heins, J. P. Tang, J. C. S. Yang, and D. W. Caldwell 


Professor, Civil Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, Md.; Professor, 
Civil Engineering, National Central Univ., Taiwan, Republic of China; Professor, 
Mechanical Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, Md.; and 
Graduate Student, Mechanical Engineering Dept., University of Maryland, 


College Park, Md., respectively. 


ABSTRACT 


As part of a NSF cooperative program between the University of Maryland and 
National Central University, Taiwan, and the R.O.C. National Science Council, the 
live load response of various bridges throughout Taiwan were to be studied. The study 
included in part; 1) the examination of the response of a welded plate girder highway 
bridge when subjected to random truck loadings and the measurement of induced 
stresses and traffic patterns, 2) the evaluation of the damping ratio and fundamental 
frequency of (14) pedestrian bridges using various analytical methods when examining 
the experimental data. The results from these tests and the analytical correlations are 


presented herein. 


Plate Girder Bridge Test 
1) Test Results 


Field Studies.—As described previ- 
ously part of the cooperative study in- 
volved examination of the response of a 
A36 steel bridge located in Taipei, 
Taiwan, shown in Figs. 1 and 2. This 
structure consists of 5 welded steel 
composite plate girders, spaced at 3120 
mm, of variable cross section, as shown 
in Fig. 3. The flange plates had variable 
widths and depth, which were built 
welded at the junction of the change. 
The main structure, of the Taipei Bridge, 


Fig. 1. Taipei bridge—elevation. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


consists of these plate girders, compris- 
ing 5 spans @62.3 meters long as shown 
in Fig. 1. The bridge was designed using 
the 1961 AASHTO design code, using 
A36 steel. 

In order to evaluate the response of 
this bridge when subjected to random 
traffic loading, a series of strain gages 
was attached to the lower flange of 2 
outside girders, on the second interior 
girder span. These strain gages were 
monitored during random traffic. 


Stress Distribution.— During the pas- 
sage of traffic, a continuous 24-hour- 
strain recording was made from 4 strain 


Fig. 2. Taipei bridge—bottom flanges. 


29 


5@ 62.30 M 


Approach 
San-Chung 


Sy i i 


4@ 3120 MM 


Test Span 


Test Span 


Approach 


Taipei 


Ul =/17 


Elevation 


Test 


x Girder 


Section 


Fig. 3. Bridge details. 


gages. These gages were located on the 
bottom flange of the outside of a 52-m 
girder and a 62-m girder, as shown in 
Fig. 4. The resulting strip chart re- 
cordings, taken from 3 AM (8/12/77) to 


Test Span 2 
Top Flange 


Bottom Flange 


Fig. 4. Gage locations. 


24.60 M | 6.15 M 
Taipei San-Chung 
Approach Approach 
30 


3 AM (8/13/77), were subsequently re- 
duced in the form of number of occur- 
rences during a time interval at a given 
stress range. 

The resulting time-frequency data have 


Test Span 1 


Top Flange 
fe Flange _____} 


1F2 "1F1 


Bottom Flange 


ea 
S 
ay 

24.60 M | 3.075 M | 
Taipei San-Chung 
Approach Approach 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


Table 1.— Gage 1F1 Time-—Frequency Data. 


Sige pe Oe a ee 


3-4 AM 21 4 0 0 0 
4—5 27 1 0 0 0 
5-6 50 5 0 0 0 
6-7 rs) ih 0 0 1 
7-8 156 6 0 0 0 
8-9 116 10 1 0 0 
9-10 114 5 1 0 0 
10-11 102 15 0 0 
11-12 100 18 4 0 0 
12-1 80 19 1 0 0 
1-2 81 6 1 1 0 
2-3 123 10 0 0 0 
3-4 117 12 1 0 0 
4-5 115 16 pe 0. 0 
5-6 131 8 0 0 1 
6-7 128 11 0 0 0 
7-8 96 if 1 0 0 
8-9 95 6 1 0 0 
9-10 106 2 0 0 0 
10-11 66 3 0 0 0 
11-12 Sy 8 0 0 0 
12-1 a2 v 0 0 0 
1-2 30 8 0 0 0 
2-3 35 3 l 0 0 


been reduced and are given in Tables 1 
through 4. These data have been reduced 
in the form of percentages, for each 12 
hour period, as given in Table 5S. 


Table 2. —Gage 2F1 Time—Frequency Data. 


Hour 1 ksi 2 ksi 3 ksi 
3-4 AM 32 1 
4-5 20 1 
5-6 45 
6=7 75 
(=o 78 5 
8-9 162 11 
9-10 157 
10-11 142 4 
11-12 144 15 3 
= 100 DA 2 
12 126 7 
2-3 112 12 
4 120 9 
a5 136 5 p) 
5-6 132 9 2 
6-7 129 10 
7-8 94 5) 
8-9 123 5 
9-10 122 5 
10-11 101 3 
12 57 4 
12-1 48 1 
2 SZ 1 
23 56 1 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


Table 3.—Gage 2F3 Time-—Frequency Data. 


Hour 1 ksi 2 ksi 3 ksi 


3-4 AM 14 I 
4-5 7 

5-6 8 

6-7 11 1 
7-8 7) 

8-9 84 

9-10 64 Il 
10-11 ay) 

11-12 54 

12-1 del 

1-2 7a 1 
2-3 30 

3-4 Si 

4—5 40 1 
5-6 35 2 
6-7 3 10 
7-8 15 1 
8-9 22 

9-10 26 

10-11 Da 

11-12 15 

12-1 8 

1-2 13 

2-3 13 


Vehicle Distribution.—In addition to 
recording continuous strains (stresses), 
vehicle types and frequencies were also 
recorded. The trucks were classified 


Table 4.— Gage 1F2 Time—Frequency Data. 


Hour 1 ksi 2 ksi 3 ksi 


— 
E 
— 
_— 
N 
\O 
~— 
— 


1-2 136 


— 
N 
| | 
— 
N 
S 
\O 
Nr We hNO he 


= O ONAN N WW 
— 
BSN 
nN 


— 
me YN 
eel 
nN — 
N 
= 


31 


Table 5.—Summary —Time-Frequency Data 

(percentage). 
1 2 3 4 5 

Hour ksi ksi ksi ksi ksi Gage 
3am/3pm «89:9 (OF 0:8 Of O21 1F1 
3pm/3am 91.0 8.4 54.0 1F1 
3am/3pm = 93.6 6.0 4 0 0 2F1 
3pm/3am 95.7 4.0 3a 0 0 2F1 
3am/3pm_—séSO9#99.. 1 a Pia 0 2F3 
3pm/3am =98.6 «61.4 (0 0 0 2F3 
3am/3pm = 97.6 2.3 is 10 0 1F2 
3pm/3am_—=—s: 99.5 5 0 0 0 1F2 


as types 2D, 3, and 2S2, as shown in 
Fig. 5. Also recorded were the fre- 
quencies of buses, pick-ups, and taxi/ 
sedans. The results of this data, in terms 
of frequency versus truck type for 3 
twelve-hour periods, are given in Figs. 
6, 7, and 8. 


2) Comparison of Results 


Vehicle Data.—As explained in the 
previous section, some vehicle data were 
collected during the field testing of the 
Taipei Bridge. These data consisted of 
vehicle types (Figures 6, 7, and 8) and 
frequencies. Examination of these data, 
during the entire test period, indicates 
that the trucks have the following fre- 
quency distribution; 


Type Frequency (%) 
2D 61 
3 23 
282 16 


i as Type 3 
ea ie | 
oO O =f OO al Type 2S2 
Fig. 5. Truck types. 
32 


6AM - 6 PM (12 HRS) 


% Vehicles 
i) 
° 
<2 
1 


H init 


282 3 2D Bus Pickup Sedan 


6PM - 6 AM (12 HRS) 


% Vehicles 


282 3 2D Bus Pickup Sedan 


6AM - 6 AM (24 HRS) 


% Vehicles 


0 282 3 2D Bus Pickup Sedan 


Figs. 6—8 (top to bottom). Percentage distribution 
of vehicle types at various time periods. 


These percentages exclude the influence 
of buses, pick-ups and sedans given in 
Figs. 6, 7, and 8. 

Examination of data collected through- 
out the USA (1-16) results in vehicle 
distribution as given in Table 6. Com- 
parisons between the results given in 
Table 6 and those obtained during the 
Taipei Bridge show similarities for the 
metropolitan area. In order to relate the 
results between the 2 countries, truck 
types 2S-1 and 3S-2 have been ex- 
cluded from the USA data. Although 
vehicle weights and distributions which 
traversed the Taipei Bridges were not 


Table 6.—Average Distribution of Trucks by 
Type. 


Truck Metro- 
type politan Urban Rural 
2D 51 30 40 
3 33 f/ 12 
25-2 16 63 48 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


Table 7.— Truck Characteristics from Various Countries. 


Percent 
Truck gross axle load % Truck 
Truck weight (kips) distribution type Traffic 
classi- (% of distribution data 
fication Mean Maximum gross weight) (population) Country () 

2D 14 50 25=75 35 USA e 
= 24,32 30-70 — India ‘ 
a=: 22 36-64 56 Belgium - 
a 31,38 — 80 France 2 
= 40 50-50 — Canada 
— 38 32-68 59 Belgium : 
= a2 50-50 — France 

3 35 80 25—37.5—37.5 23 USA e 
== 50 20—40-—40 = India ce 
— 36 25=38—37 7 Belgium i 
— 52 — 4.4 France ig 
— 60 33-33-33 — Canada 
= 2 24-38-38 6 Belgium - 
= 60 20-40-40 — France 

2S2 41 100 10—40-—25-25 11 USA S 
— 60 16—30—27-27 — India i: 
= 56 14-—29-29-28 30 Belgium x 
= 70 — 10.6 France a 
= 146 12-—34-—20-34 — Sweden 
== 100 20-—40-—20-20 — Canada 
= 76 13-35-—26-—26 27 Belgium a 


* Data observed from typical traffic, otherwise data is suggested design loading. 


obtained, results from other countries 
have been collected as given in Table 7 
and are given herein for reference. 


Stress Data.—The induced girder 
Stresses, obtained on the Taipei Bridge, 
are listed in detail in Tables 1 through 
4 and are summarized in Table 5. These 
Stresses are given as stress ranges, 
which are important in establishing 


/ 7 


/ 


Fig. 9. Pedestrian bridge —tests. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


fatigue damage and bridge life. The 
establishment of fatigue design criteria 
requires traffic patterns and relationships 
between the induced stresses and those 
vehicle types which induce the par- 
ticular stress. Such a technique has 
successfully been employed (16) for 
bridges in the USA. 

Examination of the resulting stress 
data, given in Table 5, indicates that 


Fig. 10. Pedestrian bridge. 


338 


Table 8. Empirical Damping Ratio of P.C. Bridge. 


Auto 
Correlation 


Random 
Decrement 


Free 
Vibration 


Bridge Name Spectrum 


Analysis 


Remark 


Chung-Li 
Taipei Station(A) 


Taipei Station(B) 


Taipei Station(C) 
Nan Ching West Rd. (A) 0.015 


Nan Ching West Rd. (B) 0.019 


7a 
* 


“I 


Chung Hsing Bridge 0.051 


oem Hua Chung Bridge 


Chung Cheng Bridge 


10 Pai Ling Bridge pe 


in-Lin 
11 Chung Cheng Bridge 


a 
Ww 
* 


Sung Chiang Bridge 


Nan Men Market 


14* Sung Chiang Rd. 


* Pedestrian Bridge 


** Overhanged-Simple Supported 


90% or more of the stress range has time. Such trends are similar to those 
a magnitude of 1 ksi or less. In fact, observed in the USA for this type of 
the maximum observed stress was only _ structural detail (cover plate), and indi- 
5 ksi and occurs only 0.10% of the cates a long fatigue life. 


Table 9. Fundamental Frequency of P.C. Bridge, Cycles Per Sec. 


Auto 


Free Random A 
Correlation 


Theoretical 


Vibration | Decrement i Values 


Function 


25.6 


* Pedestrian Bridge 


** Overhanged-Simple Supported 


34 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


Pedestrian Bridge Test 
1) Test Results 


The induced dynamic responses of 14 
pedestrian crossing bridges located 
throughout Taipei, Taiwan have been ob- 
tained by using accelerometers which 
were located at various locations on 
the bridges. A typical bridge of this 
type is shown in Figs. 9 and 10. The 
induced vibrations on the bridges were 
instituted by human motions across the 
structure. The resulting vibration records 
were then obtained, using a strip chart 
recorder. From such data the damping 
ratio and fundamental frequency have 
been computed, as given in Tables 8 
and 9. 


2) Comparison Between Theory and 
Tests 


Theory.—Various methods can be 
employed in obtaining the structural 
damping and free vibration of struc- 
tures, when subjected to applied forces. 

One such method in use is the spectral 
power density, where damping is meas- 
ured by the half power point band width 
(17, 18). This method, however, has 
large measurement variances, especially 
when the band width is small and when 
the system is nonlinear. 

Another method, auto-correlation (17, 
18), involves use of the Logarithmic 
Decrement. This method is sensitive to 
the intensity of the random input and 
cannot be utilized for nonlinear systems. 

A new method, designated Random 
Decrement (19, 20) has recently been 
formulated and considers the random 
excitation of a bridge when only re- 
sponse data is available. The applica- 
tion of this method, in addition to those 
described above, has been employed in 
analyzing the 14 bridges. The results of 
each are given in Tables 8 and 9. 


Acknowledgment 


The work performed under this study 
was supported by National Science 
Foundation Grant 14750, AO1, under the 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


direction of Dr. Allen Holt. Their sup- 
port and interest is gratefully appreciated. 


References Cited 


1. T. R. Douglas, ‘‘Fatigue of Bridges Under 
Repeated Highway Loadings,’’ Dept. No. 54, 
Civil Engineering Dept., University of Ala- 
bama, April 1971. 

2. D. G. Bowers, ‘‘Loading History Span No. 10 
Yellow Mill Pond Bridge I-95, Bridgeport 
Connecticut,’’ Department of Transportation, 
State of Connecticut, May 1972. 

3. P. Christiano, L. E. Goodman, C. N. Sun, 
‘Bridge Stress Range History and Diaphragm 
Stiffening Investigation,’ Civil Engineering 
Dept., University of Minnesota, April 1970. 

4. C. P. Heins, A. D. Sartwell, ‘‘Tabulation 
of 24 Hour Dynamic Strain Data on Four 
Simple Span Girder-Slab Bridge Structures,”’ 
Report No. 29, Department of Civil En- 
gineering, University of Maryland, June 1969. 

5. A. D. Sartwell, C. P. Heins, ‘‘Tabulation of 
Dynamic Strain Data on a Girder Slab 
Bridge Structure During Seven Continuous 
Days,’ Report No. 31, Department of Civil 
Engineering, University of Maryland, Sep- 
tember 1969. 

6. A. D. Sartwell, C. P. Heins, ‘‘Tabulation of 
Dynamic Strain Data on a Three Span 
Continuous Bridge Structure,’’ Report No. 33, 
Department of Civil Engineering, University 
of Maryland, November 1969. 

7. C. F. Galambos, C. P. Heins, ‘‘Loading 
History of A Highway Bridge—Comparison 
of Stress Range Histograms,’’ Public Roads 
Journal, Vol. 36, No. 9, August 1971. 

8. R. D. Desrosiers, ‘‘The Development of a 
Technique for Determining the Magnitude and 
Frequency of Truck Loadings on Bridges,”’ 
Report No. 12, Department of Civil Engineer- 
ing, University of Maryland, April 1969. 

9. G. R. Cudneg, ‘‘The Effects of Loadings on 
Bridge Life,’’ Department of State High- 
ways, State of Michigan, September 1967. 

10. W. T. McKeel, C. F. Maddox, H. L. Kinnier, 
C. F. Galambos, ‘‘A Loading History Study 
of Two Highway Bridges in Virginia,’ Vir- 
ginia Highway Research Council, Charlottes- 
ville, Virginia, December 1971. 

11. J. W. Fisher e¢ al., ‘‘Effect of Weldments on 
the Fatigue Strength of Steel Beams,’’> NCHRP 
Report No. 102, HRB Washington, D. C., 
1970. 

12. R. L. Khosa, C. P. Heins, ‘“‘Study of Truck 
Weights, and the Corresponding Induced 
Bridge Girder Stresses,’’ Report No. 40, Civil 
Engineering Dept., University of Maryland, 
February 1971. 

13. M.S. Miner, ‘‘Cumulative Damage in Fatigue,”’ 
Journal Applied Mechanics, Vol. 12, No. 1, 
September 1945. 

14. S. R. Swanson, ‘‘Random Load Fatigue Test- 
ing: A State of The Art Survey,’ Materials 


35 


US 


16. 


Ne 


36 


Researchand Standards, Vol. 8, No.4, ASTM, 
Phila., Pa., April 1968. 

R. Forbes, C. P. Heins, ‘‘Analysis Charts for 
Use in Issuing Vehicle Permits’? Report No. 
49, Department of Civil Engineering, Uni- 
versity of Maryland, June 1973. 

C. P. Heins, C. F. Galambos, “‘Fatigue Analy- 
sis of Bridge Structures Due to Daily Traffic,”’ 
Highway Research Record No. 507, Highway 
Research Board, June 1974. 

Sparks, P. R. and Crist, R. A., ‘‘Deter- 
mination of the Response of Tall Buildings 
to Wind Loading.’’ Presented and Published 
at the ASCE/EMD Specialty Conference, 
University of CA, Los Angeles, March 1976. 


18. 


19: 


R. A. Crist, Marshall, R. C. and Laursen, 
H. I., ‘‘Electro-Optical Deflection Measuring 
Device.’’ NBS Technical Note 873. 

H. A. Cole, Jr., ‘‘On-the-line Analysis of Ran- 
dom Vibrations.’’ AIAA Paper No. 68-288, 
presented at the AIAA/ASME Ninth Struc- 
tures, Structural Dynamics and Materials 
Conference, Palm Springs, CA., 1968. 


20. J. C. S. Yang, D. W. Caldwell, ‘“The Meas- 


urement of Damping and the Detection of 
Damages in Structures by the Random Decre- 
ment Technique.’’ Presented and published at 
the 46th Shock and Vibration Symposium 
and Bulletin, San Diego, CA., November, 
1975. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


ACADEMY AFFAIRS 


SCIENTISTS IN THE NEWS 


Contributions in this section of your Journal are earnestly solicited. 
They should be typed double-spaced and sent to the Editor by the 10th of 
the month preceding the issue for which they are intended. 


NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH 


Dr. Alfred D. Steinberg, senior investi- 
gator with the Arthritis and Rheumatism 
Branch of the National Institute of 
Arthritis, Metabolism, and Digestive 
Diseases, is the 1978 recipient of the 
Award in Biological Sciences of the 
Washington Academy of Sciences. 

The award was presented at the 
organization’s annual awards dinner held 
in Bethesda on Mar. 15. 

Dr. Steinberg, an immunologist, was 
recognized for his investigations of the 
pathogenesis and treatment of systemic 
lupus erythematosus (SLE), a serious 
connective tissue disease that primarily 
affects women of childbearing age. At 
present, the cause of SLE is unknown. 

In the course of his basic research, Dr. 
Steinberg and his colleagues have studied 
both humans with SLE as well as New 
Zealand mice that serve as an animal 
model for SLE. 

Dr. Steinberg was the first to show that 
nucleic acids were antigens, and he de- 
veloped radioimmunoassays for measure- 
ment of antibodies to nucleic acids. He 
has contributed to understanding of im- 
mune regulation and its derangement in 
SLE; genetic factors associated with 
autoimmunity; and the role of sex 
hormones in the expression of auto- 
immunity. 

Recent studies suggest that spon- 
taneously produced antilymphocyte anti- 
bodies play an important role in the 
immune abnormalities observed in both 
SLE mouse models and humans with 
SLE. In addition to basic studies, Dr. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


u 


Steinberg has carried out evaluations of 
newer therapeutic modalities in mice and 
has initiated clinical studies in SLE 
patients in an attempt to improve treat- 
ment of SLE. 

In 1974, Dr. Steinberg received the 
Philip Hench Award of the Association of 
Military Surgeons for his outstanding 
contributions in the field of rheumatology 
and arthritis. 

Dr. Steinberg graduated from Prince- 
ton University and from Harvard Medical 
School. He joined the intramural re- 
search program of NIAMDD in 1968 as a 
clinical associate. 

Dr. Steinberg is an associate editor of 
the Journal of Immunology, and is on the 
editorial board of the Journal of Immuno- 
pharmacology. He is a fellow of the 
American College of Physicians and 
serves as the NIH coordinator for the 
Medical Student Immunology Program. 


NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY 


Dr. Dennis Papadopoulos, a consultant 
in plasma physics at the Naval Research 
Laboratory, is the winner of the 1978 
Washington Academy of Sciences Award 
for scientific achievement in the physical 
sciences. Papadopoulos was cited for his 
‘‘scientific achievements and leadership 
in plasma physics.”’ 

The award was presented at the awards 
dinner (March 15) at the Kenwood 
Country Club in Bethesda, Md. in 
conjunction with the commemoration of 
the 100th anniversary of Albert Einstein’s 
birth. 


37 


Dennis Papadopoulos 


A graduate of the University of Athens 
(Greece), Papadopoulos received his MS 
in nuclear engineering from the Massa- 
chusetts Institute of Technology and his 
PhD in physics from the University of 
Maryland. He joined the NRL staff in 
1969 as a research physicist and was 
appointed senior consultant to the Plasma 
Dynamics Branch in 1973. In 1975 he was 
appointed to his present position. | 

At the request of the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary of Energy for Energy 
Technology, Papadopoulos is presently 
serving as Science Advisor to the 
Director of the Applied Physics Division 
of the Office of Fusion Energy. 

Papadopoulos’ research interests cover 
a wide range of scientific projects from 
Space physics and communications to 
magnetic and laser fusion. 

The renowned scientist was the re- 
cipient of NRL’s E. O. Hulburt Award 
for Science in 1977 for his outstanding 
achievements in the field of plasma 
physics. 

Papadopoulos is the author of more 
than 70 publications and has presented 
over 30 technical papers at international 
scientific meetings. He also has served on 


38 


many National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration and Department of Energy 
advisory panels. 

A native of Larissa, Greece, Papa- 
dopoulos is married to the former 
Susan Tepper, an attorney with the Na- 
tional Labor Relations Board. They live 
in Washington, D.C. 


Dr. Jay Boris, Head of the Laboratory 
for Computational Physics at the Naval 
Research Laboratory, has won the 1978 
Washington Academy of Sciences Award 
for scientific achievement in mathematics 
and computer sciences. , 

The award was presented at the awards 
dinner (March 15) at the Kenwood 
Country Club in Bethesda, Md. in 
conjunction with the commemoration of 
the 100th anniversary of Albert Einstein’s 
birth. 

Boris was cited for his ‘‘outstanding 
contributions in computational physics 
and numerical analysis.’ 

Boris received his BA in physics in 
1964, and his MA and PhD degrees in 
astrophysical sciences in 1966 and 1968 


Jay Boris 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


from Princeton University. Throughout 
his academic years, his work was recog- 
nized by numerous honors and awards. 


_In addition to being his class vale- 


dictorian in high school and an Honorary 
National Merit Scholar and member of 
the High School National Honor Society, 
Boris won the Kusaka Memorial Physics 


Prize and was graduated Magna Cum 


Laude. He is also a member of Phi Beta 
Kappa and Sigma Xi honorary societies. 
Boris joined the NRL staff in 1970 as a 


| senior research physicist in the Plasma 


Physics Division where he was respon- 


|| sible for the development of computa- 


tional capabilities within the division. 


| These include the development of large 


computer simulation models for non- 
linear plasma physics, fluid mechanics, 
magnetohydrodynamics, chemically re- 
active flows and computational physics. 
Much of his present work includes con- 
sulting on plasma, fluid and computa- 


- tional physics projects for NRL, the 


Navy, DOD and the Department of 
Energy. 

Last year, Boris was named to a Chair 
of Science, the most enduring recognition 
of scientific excellence established at 
NRL. Chair of Science holders are 
selected by the Laboratory for unique 
and sustained research accomplishments 
leading to international reputations as 
founders of or acknowledged leaders ina 
field of basic or applied science. 

The NRL physicist has authored many 
technical papers. He received the Navy 
Superior Civilian Service Award in 1975, 
and the Arthur S. Flemming Award in 
1976, for his development of new com- 
putational techniques for the numerical 
simulation of ionospheric and atmos- 
pheric phenomena associated with 
natural and man-made disturbances. 

Boris lives with his wife, Elizabeth, 
and their sons, David and Paul, in Falls 


~ Church, Virginia. 


Dr. Wayne A. Hendrickson, a_bio- 
physicist at the Naval Research Labora- 
tory, is one of the ten recipients 
of the Arthur S. Flemming Award, in 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


ceremonies held at the Capital Hilton 
hotel. 

The Flemming Award is granted 
annually by the Downtown Chapter of 
the District of Columbia Junior Chamber 
of Commerce to the ten young men and 
women in the federal service who have 
performed unusual and outstanding work 
of distinct benefit to the government. 

Dr. Hendrickson was recognized for 
his advancement of NRL’s structural 
research program on complex biological 
molecules of great molecular weight that 
are of significance in the medical field. 
In particular, he has worked out the 
atomic arrangements in several oxygen 
carrying protein molecules. 

Through Dr. Hendrickson’s develop- 
ment of experimental and computational 
models of the proteins, a deeper insight 
has been gained into the way in which 
these giant molecules work. Scientists 
also hope to use his models of the crucial 
oxygen-binding sites in blood proteins as 
a kind of blueprint for synthesizing small 
molecules that can mimic the natural 
products. Such synthetic substitutes 
could eventually be used as blood supple- 
ments for treating severely anemic pa- 
tients or in heart-lung machines during 
surgery. 

Dr. Hendrickson also collaborates with 
his colleagues at NRL and with outside 
research laboratories and universities ina 
variety of computational projects to de- 
rive accurate atomic pictures for large 
biological molecules from the x-ray 
scattering by crystals of these molecules. 

In addition to his involvement in the 
scientific community, Dr. Hendrickson 
participates in a number of activities 
dedicated to the improvement of the 
health and social welfare of the people 
throughout the world. 

A native of Spring Valley, Wisconsin, 
Dr. Hendrickson obtained his BA degree 
at the University of Wisconsin at River 
Falls in 1963 and his PhD in biophysics 
at Johns Hopkins University in 1968, 
where he remained as a research asso- 
ciate until 1969. 

In 1969 he joined the Naval Research 


39 


Laboratory as a Postdoctoral Research 
Associate of the National Research 
Council, and in 1971 was hired by the 
Laboratory in his present position. 

Dr. Hendrickson won the Washington 
Academy of Sciences Award in Bio- 


logical Sciences for 1975 and the Navy 
Meritorious Civilian Service Award for 
1978. He and his wife, Gerry, and their 
two children, Helen Margaret and Inga 
Marie, live on Capitol Hill in Wash- 
ington, D.C. 


NEW FELLOWS 


Suheil F. Abdulnur, Senior Research 
Scientist, Chemistry Dept., American 
Univ. In recognition of his contributions 
in the field of theoretical chemistry, 
particularly his work in elucidating the 
theoretical principles underlying the 
mutagenic and carcinogenic phenomena. 
Sponsors: Mary Aldridge, Leo Schubert. 


Cyrus R. Creveling, Chemist, Lab. 
Chem NIAMDD, NIH. In recognition of 
his contribution to neuropharmacology 
and in particular his researches on the 
biosynthetic and degradative pathways 
for biogenic amines; the synthesis and 
mechanisms of action of the specific 
neurotoxic amines, 6-hydroxydopamine 
and 5,7-dihydroxytryptamine; and the 
development of methodology for the 
measurement of hormonally sensitive 
adenylate cyclase systems in prepara- 
tions of rodent cortex. Sponsors: Mary 
Louise Robbins, Carleton Treadwell. 


Elise A. Brandenburger Brown, Re- 
search Pharmacologist, Section on Ex- 
perimental Therapeutics, NIH. In recog- 
nition of her contributions to the science 
of pharmacology and in particular, for 
comparative metabolic studies. Spon- 


sors: Charles Naeser, Theodore P. 
Perror. 
Joseph P. Hanig, Pharmacologist, 


FDA. In recognition of his contribution 
to pharmacology, and in particular his 
research on the enhancement of blood- 
brain barrier permeability to catechola- 
mines, and the neurotoxicology of hexa- 
chlorophene and lindane. Sponsors: 


40 


Mary Louise Robbins, Carleton Tread- 
well. 


Martha C. Sager, Professor of Biology 
& Director of Environmental Systems 


Management Program, American Uni- — 


versity. In recognition of her contribu- 
tions to increasing public knowledge of 
water pollution control technology 
through some 50 lectures throughout the 
U. S., and for her contribution to inter- 
national understanding and cooperation 
in environmental resource planning man- 
agement through her direction and par- 
ticipation in symposia in both Europe 
and South America. Sponsors: Mary H. 
Aldridge, Leo Schubert. 


Guillermo C. Gaunaurd, Research 
Physicist, Naval Surface Weapons Ctr., 
Silver Spring, Md. In recognition of his 
work in Acoustics, particularly for his 
contribution to the development of the 
theory of resonant scattering and its 
applications to sound-absorbers for 
coated underwater structures. Sponsors: 
George E. Hudson, Victor C. D. Dawson. 


Doris E. Hadary, Professor of Chem- 
istry, American Univ. In recognition of 
her contribution to the development of a 
program for the teaching of art and 
science to blind, deaf and emotionally 
disturbed children in a mainstream 
setting. Sponsors: Mary Aldridge, 
Martha C. Sager. 


Nina M. Roscher, Professor of Chem- 
istry, American Univ. In recognition of 
her contributions to scholarship, to 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


/) teaching, to administration, and to the 


| promotion of women in science. Spon- 
| sors: Mary Aldridge, Martha Sager. 


Alayne A. Adams, Research chemist, 
U. S. Army Mobility Equipment R&D 
Command, Fort Belvoir, Va. In recogni- 


tion of her work in electrochemistry, 
particularly for the role of organic 
superacid electrolytes on the mechanism 
and kinetics of reactions on electro- 
catalysts and their applications in fuel 
cell energy conversion devices. Spon- 
sors: Kurt H. Stern, Mary Aldridge. 


MINUTES —BOARD OF MANAGERS 


The 634th Meeting was called to order 
by President Aldridge on Jan. 10, 1979 in 
the Beaumont Conference Room at 


) FASEB at 8:00 p.m. 


1. Minutes: The previous minutes should 
have been numbered 633rd. The minutes 
were accepted as corrected. 

2. Treasurer's Report: There was no 
report. The treasurer’s report will be 
given at the next meeting. 

3. Membership Committee: Two nomi- 
nees for fellowship: Dr. Doris E. Hadary, 
American University, and Dr. Nina M. 
Roscher, American University, were 
accepted unanimously. 

4. Program Committee: Assistance was 
requested for Comsat visit arrangements. 
Guy Hammer volunteered. 

There was a general discussion of the 
attendance. The norm is 30—50 attendees 
with an occasional 100. The point was 
stressed that a central location, a definite 
time, and a published program would help 
increase attendance. 

The program serves to attract delegates 

and to give coherence to the Board. 
G. Abraham suggested we should work 
more closely with the affiliates by holding 
joint meetings. 
5. New Business: Meaning of Academy: 
There was a short discussion of the mean- 
ing of the Academy. Rita Colwell sug- 
gested that the Academy promotes dis- 
cussion, thought, and exchange of ideas. 
She felt that there should be only two 
meetings a year on some chosen subject 
and perhaps 2 symposia. There was some 
discussion on behalf of more general 
interest subjects. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


6. Board of Managers Meetings: Jean 
Boek brought up a discussion of the 
frequency of Board of Managers meet- 
ings. There was a general discussion in 
which it was argued that we did not want 
too many meetings but yet enough to 
preserve a member’s sense of continuity 
even though he might be occasionally 
absent. She moved to amend the Bylaws 
as follows: 

It is mandatory that business meetings 
of the Board of Managers be held in 
October, February, and May, and at 
times not in conjunction with a program 
meeting. Three other business meetings 
will be called by the President to be 
held immediately preceding program 
meetings at some time during the annual 
session. 

The motion was seconded by G. Vila. 
The motion carried with one dissenting 
vote. 

Agenda: The agenda at each business 
meeting should consist of: 

Minutes of preceding meeting. 

Reports 

Old Business 

New Business. 

Reorganization: G. Abraham _sug- 
gested that the Bylaws be changed so 
that the President be a _ well-known 
person assisted by a presiding executive 
officer. This proposal will be discussed 
in February. 

Plans and Goals Committee: A Com- 
mittee was appointed to consist of: 
A. Forziati, G. Irving, K. Stern, G. Vila, 
A. Weissler, and H. Alter. 

Other Academies: G. Sherlin will sum- 


41 


marize the activities of the other 50 
academies in the U. S. 

Sub-Divisions of the Academy: The 
sub-divisions will be discussed at the 
next meeting. 


The 635th Meeting was called to order 
by President Aldridge on Feb. 28, 1979 
at 8:00 p.m. 

1. Minutes of Last Meeting: 

The motion to specify the number and 
type of meetings of the Board of 
Managers should have been given as an 
amendment to the Standing Rules rather 
than to the By-laws. | 

A Plans and Goals Committee was 
recommended rather than appointed. A. 
Weissler was designated chairman. 

The minutes were accepted as cor- 
rected. 

2. Announcements: 

There were no announcements. 
3. Report of the Secretary: 

It requested that the Agenda of the 
meetings of the Board of Managers 
follow the format given in the Standing 
Rules. 

It is requested that copies of the 
correspondence of all committees be sent 
to the two secretaries and the President 
for their records and information. 

4. Report of the Treasurer: 

The Treasurer was not present. A sheet 

tabulating receipts and expenses was 


For Behavioral Sciences: 


Dinner/Beer: 
dinner/beer at the program meetings will 
be discussed at the next meeting. 

The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 
p.m.—James F. Goff, Secretary. 


forwarded. This sheet has been filed in a 

file labeled Treasurers Reports. 

Alter commented that this sheet does 
not show our assets. Weissler said that he 
was uncertain as to the disposition to the 
Academy’s securities account. The pro- 
cedures stipulated in Article IV, Section 
5 of the By-laws which require both the 
President and Treasurer to jointly assign 
and endorse financial papers have not 
been followed. 

Honig recommended that the Execu- 
tive Committee meet with the Treasurer 
to prepare a definitive report. The Board 
concurred. The Executive Committee 
will consist of: President: Aldridge; 
President-elect: Weissler; Secretary: 
Goff; Treasurer: Rupp; Appointed: J. 
O’Hare, J. Wagner and M. Townsend. 

The Treasurer’s Report was not ac- 
cepted. 

5. Reports of Standing Committees: 
Executive: No report. : 
Membership: Dr. Alayne A. Adams 

was proposed for fellowship and un- 

animously accepted. 

Scientific Achievement: The awards 
for 1978 are as follows: 


Stephen M. Kerst, Catholic Univ. of America 


For his creative and illuminating research on the role 
of visual imagery in human memory. 


For Biological Sciences: 


Alfred D. Steinberg, National Institutes of Health 


For concepts of the pathogenesis and treatment of 
systemic lupus erythematosus. 


For Engineering Sciences: 


Robert E. Berger, National Bureau of Standards 


For development of improved test methods to reduce 
head and eye injuries. 


For Mathematics & 
Computer Sciences: 


Jay B. Boris, Naval Research Lab. 
For outstanding contributions in computational physics 


and numerical analysis. 


For Physical Sciences: 


Konstantinos Papadopoulos, Naval Research Lab. 


For scientific achievements and leadership in plasma 


physics. 


42 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


The advisability of ~ 


|| The Leo Schubert Award 
| for teaching of College 
| Science 


For Teaching of Science: 


Milton M. and Zaka I. Slawsky, Univ. of Md. 

For pioneering work in the development of a highly 
successful physics tutoring program and for 
demonstrating an innovative approach to the 


involvement of retired scientists in the teaching of 


physics. 
The Berenice G. Lamberton 


_ Award for teaching of 
High School Science 


Ronald R. Myers, T. C. Williams High School, 
Alexandria, Va. 
For excellence in motivating and teaching ordinary 


students to do extraordinary work in chemistry. 


Ronald J. Smetanick, Thomas S. Wootton High 
School, Rockville, Md. 
For an outstanding teacher and humanitarian. 


_ These awards will be presented at the 
next meeting in the form of citations 
_but no speeches. 

Encouragement of Science Talent: E. 
Shafrin reported that the Berenice G. 
Lamberton Science Fair Award recipient 


_ has been selected. The school will receive 


a plaque and the student a medallion. It 
_ was suggested that the student be givena 
plaque in the future. 

It was moved that the WAS continue to 
sponsor the dinner for the Joint Board 
on Science and Engineering/Jr. Academy 
of Sciences. The motion carried. 

6. Reports of Special Committees: 

Committee on Election: The Tellers’ 
Report was given and is on file under 
special committees. Elections: the fol- 
lowing were elected for 1979-80: 


President- 
elect: 

Secretary: 
Treasurer: 


Marjorie R. Townsend 
James F. Goff 
Nelson W. Rupp 


Managers- 
at-Large: John J. O’Hare 


Michael J. Pelczar, Jr. 


7. Report of the Editor: 

There was no report. 

8. Report of the Archivist: 

There was no report. 

9. Report from the JBSEE: 

There was no report. 

10. Unfinished Business: 

Reorganization (G. Abraham) no dis- 
cussion. 

Other Academies (G. Sherlin) no 
report. 

Sub-divisions of the Academy, no 
discussion. 

Dinner/Beer, no discussion. 

11. New Business: 

Office Secretary, Ms. Ostaggi should 
attend meetings. The meeting was ad- 
journed at 10:55 p.m.—James F. Goff, 
Secretary 


ANNUAL REPORT OF THE TREASURER, 1978 


Receipts and Income 


Dues (Members and Fellows) ’78 & °79 


~ Journal 


Subscriptions 


Sale of Reprints (Reimbursements from authors) 


Sale of Back Issues 
Page Charges ($25 per pg.) 
Investment Income 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


$13,760.50 


5,011.25 
1,566.00 

220.34 
2,500.00 
4,819.20 


43 


Reimbursements 
JBSEE (includes quarterly service charge & payment for services) 
Dinners (reimbursed by members, monthly, awards and annual) 
Grants-in-Aid (Summer Science at AU) 


Miscellaneous 

Loan 
Misc. 

Total 

Checking Acct. bal. beg. ’78 

Total for ’78 

Expenses and Disbursements 

Journal 


Publishing cost including mailing 
Reprints (reimbursed by authors) 
Honorarium to Editor 
Operating Expenses 
Rent (Jan. thru Dec.) 
Telephone 
Supplies 
FASEB Misc. 
Salary 
FICA 
Personnel benefits 
Meetings 
Arrangements (includes print, mail, computer, Xerox, Zip Codes, 
Board, Committees, & Gen. Office) 
Reimbursable Items 
Dinners (reimbursable by members) 
Services ordered by JBSEE 
Grants-in-Aid (Summer Science at AU) 
Miscellaneous 
Encouragement of Science Talent, Jr. Acad. ’77 & ’78 
Contribution (memory of Mr. Detwiler) 
Loan 
Misc. 


Total for ’78 


824.74 
1,652.70 
360.00 


4,000.00 
35.42 


$34,750.15 
3,425.89 


$38,176.04 


$ 6,540.29 
621.11 
1,000.00 


2,021.28 
218.39 
24.77 
147.62 
12,087.47 
743.29 
1,503.25 


eee 180 oe} 


2,078.80 


$34,617.15 


44 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 1, 1979 


JOURNAL OF THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 


Instructions to Contributors 


_ General 


Type manuscripts on white bond paper 


either 8% by 11 or 8 by 10% inches. Double 


space all lines, including those in abstracts, 
tables, legends, quoted matter, acknowledg- 
ments, and references cited. Number pages 
consecutively. Place your name and com- 


} plete address in the upper right hand corner 


of the title page. 


Title, Author, and Affiliation 


Page | of your manuscript should contain 
only this information and your name and 
address. Choose a concise but complete and 


“meaningful title. In research papers con- 
cerning biological subjects, include an indi- 


cation of the order and family of the taxa 
discussed. Academic degrees will not nor- 
mally be included unless the author so 
specifies. If possible, combine your affilia- 
tion and mailing address (including Zip) so 
that readers can write to you directly. 


Abstract 

Type on a separate sheet at the end of the 
manuscript. Make the abstract intelligible 
without reference to the text of the paper. 
Write an informative digest of the significant 
content and conclusions, not a mere descrip- 
tion. Generally, the abstract should not ex- 
ceed 3% of the text. 


Footnotes 

Use footnotes as sparingly as possible. 
Number text footnotes consecutively with 
Arabic numerals and type them on a sepa- 
rate sheet of paper at the end of the manu- 
script. Type table footnotes, if any, below 
each pertinent table on the same page. 


Illustrations and Legends 

The quality of all original illustrations 
must be high enough to facilitate good offset 
reproduction. They should have ample mar- 


- gins and be drawn on heavy stock or 


fastened to stiff cardboard to prevent bend- 
ing. They should be proportioned to column 


[ (1 x 3) or page (2 x 3) type-dimensions, 
_ leaving space for legend material. Photo- 


graphs should have a glossy finish. They re- 
produce best when the contrast is fairly 
high. Identify each illustration with number 
and author in light pencil marks on the 
reverse side. Submit all illustrations sepa- 
rately — please do not glue or clip them to 
the pages of the manuscript. 

Do not type or write legends directly on 
the illustrations. Type legends on a separate 
sheet or sheets at the end of the manuscript. 
Indicate where you want illustrations to 
appear in the printed paper by writing the 
figure numbers lightly in the text margins, 
and be sure that each figure is properly re- 
ferenced in the text itself. Original ‘“‘art” will 
be returned only at the author’s request and 
expense. 


Tables 

Include tables only when the same infor- 
mation cannot be presented economically in 
the text, or when a table presents the data in 
a more meaningful way. Consider preparing 
extremely complicated tabular matter in a 
form suitable for direct reproduction as an 
illustration. In such cases, the use of the 
typewriter is not recommended. 


References to Literature 

Limit references within the text and in 
synonymies to author and year (and page if 
needed). In a “Reference Cited” section, list 
alphabetically by senior author only those 
papers you have included in the text. Like- 
wise, be sure all the text references are 
listed. Type the “References Cited” section 
on a separate sheet after the last page of 
text. Abbreviations should follow the USA 
Standard for Periodical Title Abbreviations, 
Z39.5-1963. 


Submission of Manuscripts 

Send completed manuscripts and sup- 
porting material to the Academy office (see 
address inside front cover) in care of the 
Editor. Authors will be requested to read 
Xerox “proofs” and invited to submit re- 
print orders prior to publication. 


Reprints - Prices for reprints may be obtained on request. 


Washington Academy of Sciences 
9650 Rockville Pike (Bethesda) 
Washington, D.C. 20014 

Return Requested with Form 3579 


2nd Class Postage I aid 
at Washington, D.C. 
and additional mailing offices. _ 


b 


VOLUME 69 
Number 2 


~ Journal of the ie 


| 


WASHINGTON 
ACADEMY ., SCIENCES 


ISSN 0043-0439 


Issued Quarterly 
at Washington, D.C. 


CONTENTS 


Guest Editorial 
GEORGE W. IRVING, JR.: Samuel B. Detwiler, Jr., Editor, 1960-1969 ... 47 


Feature: 


HERBERT UBERALL, F. J. KELLY, and A. W. SANEZ: Neutrino Beams: 
A New. Concept in TelecOmMUNICALIONS.... 2.000... . oases ee we dates 3 


Research Reports: 


KENNETH N. DERUCHER, DAVID E. HORMBY, and MARTIN A. 
MANMER: Poriland-Pozzolan Cement... 50. i665. ett aaa ctw eee ee 


EDSON J. HAMBLETON: The Status of Rhizoecus amorphophalli Betram, 
a Little-Known Oriental Mealybug (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) ...... 


W. RONALD HEYER: Annual Variation in Larval Amphibian Populations | 
UMMM aM CMIPHAKe ME ONG. oa ia. ¢ eae eee & oe beet me Gate alm eRe ele meen 


Academy Affairs: 


The Awards Program of the Academy—Annual Awards Dinner Meeting, 
RPE OR MIR Omer a ees eS a cs oe bd oa hen Ge ne we ae ae aie 


Washington Academy of Sciences 


EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 


President 
Alfred Weissler 


President-Elect 
Marjorie Townsend 


Secretary 
James F. Goff 


Treasurer 
Nelson W. Rupp 


Members at Large 
Conrad B. Link 
Elaine Shafrin 
Grover Sherlin 


BOARD OF MANAGERS 


All delegates of affiliated 
Societies (see facing page) 


EDITOR 


Richard H. Foote 


ACADEMY OFFICE 


608 H St. S.W. 
Washington, DC 20024 
Telephone: (202) 347-3368 


Founded in 1898 


The Journal 


This journal, the official organ of the Washington Acad- 
emy of Sciences, publishes historical articles, critical 
reviews, and scholarly scientific articles; proceedings 
of meetings of the Academy and its Board of Managers; 
and other items of interest to Academy members. The 
Journal appears four times a year (March, June, 
September, and December)—the September issue 
contains a directory of the Academy membership. 


Subscription Rates 


Members, fellows, and patrons in good standing re- 
ceive the Journal without charge. Subscriptions are 
available on a calendar year basis only, payable in ad- 
vance. Payment must be made in U.S. currency at the 
following rates: 


U.S. and Canada....... $17.00 
PORCIOMs aaron ele oslarde 18.50 
Single Copy Price -..:.. 6.00 


Single-copy price for Vol. 66, No. 1 (March, 1976) is 
$7.50. 


Back Issues 


Obtainable from the Academy office (address at bottom 
of opposite column): Proceedings: Vols. 1—13 (1898- 
1910) Index: To Vols. 1-13 of the Proceedings and 
Vols. 1-40 of the Journal Journal: Back issues, 
volumes, and sets (Vols. 1—62, 1911—1972) and all cur- 
rent issues. 


Claims for Missing Numbers 


Claims will not be allowed if received more than 60 days 
after date of mailing plus time normally required for 
postal delivery and claim. No claims will be allowed 
because of failure to notify the Academy of a change in 
address. 


Change of Address 


Address changes should be sent promptly to the Acad- 
emy office. Such notification should show both old and 
new addresses and zip number. 


Published quarterly in March, June, September, and December of each year by the 
Washington Academy of Sciences, 608 H St. S.W., Washington, D.C. Second class postage 
paid at Washington, D.C. and additional mailing offices. 


DELEGATES TO THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 
REPRESENTING THE LOCAL AFFILIATED SOCIETIES 


Hiiasopnical SOciebyiOL WaShiNBtOM . 66.25... e ce ans bee ee ce as eo lc ad Moe uieiheecd ce cen James F. Goff 
mma polovical Society Of Washington 2... ).. 6... cc eas bbc due ese nea peins obacne Jean K. Boek 
PAM OSIe AE SOCICLY OF WaASMINPLOM oie. cele tgs cb da eldi dina denis a bp ae dies bee dhe es William R. Heyer 
ironmMedUSOcicty, OF WASMINGLOM 9)... 65. ced c oc cpm cs sbeemeecvaeetwveedecaueke JoAnne Jackson 
Emromolepical Society of Washington ............0 00. c eee eee ce een cneee Douglas Sutherland 
aM COPTADMIC SOCICLY) aouac'e hiad be eed vse Ss ms ae plate ae bed cues oainewlelwlo elds T. Dale Stewart 
Pampa SOCIetyOf Washington © 26.6). es ede ve cee ct ea Gee a en wen sewes Marian M. Schnepfe 
Mmeaemsoaciety of the District of Columbia. .....006 036. cle hace cae ee eee e ceeele ede den Inactive 
PRteCR EN ELS (ORICA SOCIEUY 6 cet Were tua: dig waa Reve «3 impeessaie 8 a dvelerepaoa. sia) 4iead o:ana,e dee. vynumse ares Paul H. Oehser 
eeMme te SOCICTY, Of. WaASMIMBCOM) 6 5,6 nye a)s ce oe eyayies sia tpat ave, siiele go ee ee winiei'e bllere: aigiecd Bieta Bee Conrad B. Link 
Sanrom ete AIMeriCan FOLEStErs! ae 2. dis Ws ate diate ala ud nls eda eal e sles baie wells orale) evs Thomas B. Glazebrook 
PMeOM SOCICIY Of EMPINEEDS 1s... Weis dc ce cas cc eee b ee nee eeeeeus George Abraham 
inmsemute of Blectrical and Electromics Engineers .. 21. .... 004 .0.004 bec be ee ences George Abraham 
Panencanmoociery Of Mechanical Engineers 2.2... 00.0 cla ee ee cee ew cnewecae Michael Chi 
Helminthological Society of Washington ............0. 0000 cube ccc cw ccc aneeeees Robert S. Isenstein 
Porcicaneoocieny for MicrObIOIOSY: fo... ee ee eles hoc ae eb taee ae vwaen Michael Pelzcar 
PacicmuGrmAmentcan Military PMGINCETS ..... 06.0060 6004 be cic eae nese gee ener ewe sens H. P. Demuth 
PanehieanesOciety Of Civil EMGINCElS 1... 666. a kee ee ce sb es eee weet eneeees Robert Sorenson 
Society fon Experimental Biology and Medicine ............. 002.0060 cecceneerveccecs Donald Flick 
PME AMES OCIS PaO VICTAIS Hae cle ays 22/20 /5).'o)a ov wie) ae Gilese, oc 4%: Bye oie lala cdllana-cyera: la oiled 6 lots Glen W. Wensch 
International Association of Dental Research ............ 0... cece eee eee William V. Loebenstein 
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics .......... 0.0.00 cece eee ee cence George J. Vila 
Pee AT eteOrolopical’ SOCIELY) ) Ha)... sissies wind ood bb Wldw oh aha Waldo sb Eee ele sulées A. James Wagner 
MiseciCIMeRSOGIeLy Ol WaASMINOSTON Sic b i. da cies ile ceded odasesueneducusdabcecues Robert J. Argauer 
Meousimical Society Of AMenIGa! 22. i). eb elke bee e bebe coed cakes Delegate not appointed 
ASTUBIMLGZ)E: UNV UCI SATPUS TOC (GNI MINA an PL Dick Duffey 
Mister ormeOOd HECHNOlOPIStS 2.2 s el ac ee ec ce eee bd eee tee lees William Sulzbacher 
American Ceramic SIO STINT iste sein nh del aeh aaa aR na ei tans ABARAT eM tre aay hdl Alt Oe RUE He TA Inactive 
PAR eene ne nNC An SOCIOL a etn ye Gee ers sndho bag Ge ciulens eo lade aide soniye VG are ea eee aa ed Alayne A. Adams 
ee eM OCON eISTOLY iOl SCIENCE CLUB (ea sic nse a, <, s.r e ange o, s seeganascallsior 4 o/s )biS aaa tye) aye ae sale, wlmiairelle ever Inactive 
mamenican Association of Physics Teachers .....,....: 0000 000s0afneveesnceunneneveuncs Peggy A. Dixon 
PP pinAESOCIE ROLE AMCGIC Al capers le Gyateics sicus Aeen guts uaboemtuers. Gelitabe avira dk ly al @dere.elavara asehabur-dleys Lucy B. Hagan 
Aiiencan society. of Plant) Physiologists)... 06 sc.4 se bieys cle adie ed ole ole ee ee owls ale Walter Shropshire 
Pvashimoetony Operations) Research Council ios oe ics lec ee wclecn nba ae ceed eles. John G. Honig 
PUSH SOC EUNEOUAMOlIC A Wiel seks) o/c) d sia iy qoncle leueheeelducdere tele We SAILS AIR a bene Inactive 
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical 
AUcdee mOLeUMsENESINEETS Mme. Pe le MOLE be ee eee Seb bts Carl H. Cotterill 
Pion @ApitOlASITOMOMEES Fos o cb k cc dees cd esas resets eun was aeeaecnes ae Benson J. Simon 
eelathematical Association Of AMEerCa ... 0.0... eee ce eee ee anew wane es emacs Patrick Hayes 
IMO MIS CITUILE Oi CG NEMISES, cc Me kaiic soy. cise 4s. oe a yw vince o Madimie ie Rsode @ nye Bins s Bad eee is Miloslav Recheigl, Jr. 
ER SV CNOLO SICAL VA SSOCLALTOIN  sataisiale u's soos. as) ew ace» elaeig lore iouern Si@be, ails le pieia edlehe ayduel @Redmusye tia) sigue John O’ Hare 
Mic aVashineton Paint Technical Group...) ..6. 2c. 0c cad babe t eee vec ewes wees Paul G. Campbell 
minehican PuytOpal nological: SOCIELY | voc...) koe es eb eae ne ae ks cone dane ale alma oe Tom van der Zwet 
Seciety for GeneralSystems Research .......2..02.0eeccneere cee eteweres Ronald W. Manderscheid 
MeCAL ARES TOUS) SOCESDY a. 0 oy ate etnies. cies o's Vic's 6 ' dae heath avasme'nle s ¥ooa a'e sie lentils H. Mcllvaine Parsons 
POMC MCANMISMETICSHSOCICLY Geli is osicieldi eislt ais a cceulslas s Wels dled wie inl ele cimee/a@ielale eles Irwin M. Alperin 


Delegates continue in office until new selections are made by the representative societies. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 45 | 


y ’ 1 vt s ig # nl sie rede A i" , py u i 1 anes pace sr: 
aS loupe t ennad ; . Cis ho BN sy : are rgetrtteNt Mp 
ay tyr ha matte cee a : aso ainsi be: y' 


. 
Pai 
he i , yi + iv 
\ ; 
hers 
4 ” é 
J oe x 
} d - 
| j ‘ot Saag ‘a 
: 
ay ‘ i j 


| i a ee ‘ on an aw a a H 
j 
'" 
7 4 re r 
| t i hd 
{ eae : 
3 A PONTE 
2 the iis oh 
} j 4 
? t ' ‘ PY é 1 1 
” 
| F 4 ‘4 i ‘e hue , a 
| * 
| eee oly * wy ha oe 
| fh ony EM Te, A 
9 Pista gine 
a a 4 
{ 
h; ¥ : row ’ i 
f ’ 
VW oa, #' haf Wy) , 
/ Sette ‘ f 
7 f 
| $ 
4 
4 bt 
é ' : 
i 
' ; 4 
a 
i 
a ee 
Het 


{ ¥ ‘ U ] 7" 
| 
| oe! 
4 * ay J ¢ 
Ps il i. N i 
F ab ae! 
LJ 
“4 hs 
ea He DP al 8 
My y Lat 4 
Had ; ic 
. 
~% \ A, eet 
wal it ' 
| hoe pint oa! wal r 
ee eC 
EY 
‘ » j rn 
| 
bir 
; epee 
| 4 
} UT . 
> his Pia Led 
| bi - ’ Ay i 7 . 
j 
{ ; 
| ee 
{ ” 
| rp = ee yr 1 a) 
, 
one 


LLL, A peti, hy qi on wert 


| bt Oe iilin oe "uRY 


ee 


GUEST EDITORIAL 


Samuel B. Detwiler, Jr. 


Editor, 1960-1969 


A tribute to the late Sam Detwiler for his services to the Academy is a 
tribute as well to all, like him, who devote themselves to learned society 
tasks where the main reward is the strange satisfaction that comes from 
doing them. But for Sam it would have been stranger still if he had not 
been in the vanguard of volunteers. 

Sam believed in making full use of the days’ hours. He finished high 
school in three years, elected to work full-time in Government labora- 
tories while earning his B.S. in chemistry in evening school at The 
George Washington University, and managed to complete his Master’s 
in organic chemistry at the University of Illinois while employed at the 
U.S. Regional Soybean Industrial Products Laboratory then in Urbana. 
Sandwiched in were active, continuing and often leadership roles in 
GW’s glee club, its student newspaper and dramatics group, a profes- 
sional and a social fraternity, as well as such frivolous indulgences as 
tennis, canoeing, and automobile trips just for the adventure of it. It’s 
no wonder that these habits persisted post-graduation and on his return 
to the Washington area. Despite an important and demanding career in 
research administration in the U. S. Department of Agriculture, he held 
a number of offices in the Academy, the Chemical Society of Washing- 
ton, and Alpha Chi Sigma’s professional chapter and edited their jour- 
nals. He was active in the American Oil Chemists’ Society, the Ameri- 
can Institute of Chemists, and the Cosmos Club, and still found time to 
pursue his hobbies of military history, boating, photography, music, 
mathematics, firearms, farming and genealogy. 

To each of these tasks he brought manifold skills, a great diversity of 
knowledge, stoutness and earnestness, meticulous attention to accu- 
racy and detail, and a knack for making other dedicated people enjoy 
working with him. He established standards of excellence for the Acad- 
emy’s Journal that have persisted, making it an effective medium for 
scientific communication and a publication of which members can be 
proud. 

Emerson, in his essay on self-reliance, called an institution the length- 
ened shadow of one man. While the institution we call the Journal of 
the Washington Academy of Sciences has not been, of course, the work 
of one man alone, we can be grateful that the shadow Editor Sam Det- 
wiler cast was a long one. 

This issue of the Academy’s Journal is dedicated to him with the 
deepest respect and gratitude. 

—George W. Irving, Jr. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


47 


FEATURE 


Neutrino Beams: A New Concept in Telecommunications 


Herbert Uberall 


Catholic University, Washington, D. C. 20064 (Consultant, Naval Research 


Laboratory, Washington, D. C. 20375) 


F. J. Kelly and A. W. Saenz 


Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, D. C. 20375 


ABSTRACT 


This paper describes the potential use of high-energy neutrino beams for telecommuni- 
cation purposes—a new concept in telecommunications advanced recently. The present 
possibilities and future requirements of beam production, as well as possible schemes for 
signal reception, are outlined. The proposed system is not meant to replace present means 
of communication, but to fulfill special needs for which conventional telecommunication 


systems may prove unsuited. 


Communication methods in current 
use are based on the propagation of acous- 
tic and electromagnetic signals. The bulk 
of telecommunications is achieved by 
electromagnetic waves, including wire- 
guided and optical signals. Radio waves 
attain global distances by reflection from 
the ionosphere. Microwaves, like optical 
signals, only permit point-to-point com- 
munications along the line of sight, but 
can be made to reach larger distances by 
the use of relay stations, including 
satellite transmitters. However, they can 
be obstructed by physical barriers and 
almost none of the wave-borne signals is 
capable of penetrating matter to any 
appreciable degree, except for blue-green 
laser light and extremely-low-frequency 
electromagnetic waves which can pene- 
trate the upper ocean depths. This latter 
fact is used, e.g., in the Navy’s Project 


48 


Seafarer, where communications with 
submerged submarines are attempted by 
means of 40 Hz ELF electromagnetic 
waves. (Acoustic and seismic waves also 
penetrate the ocean and the earth at low 
frequencies, but have relatively small 
speeds.) 

Radio communications are susceptible 
to jamming and other types of interfer- 
ence, such as atmospheric noise, solar 
flare activity, and high-altitude nuclear 
explosions. In addition, wave-borne sig- 
nals are often prone to interception by 
others besides the intended recipient, due 
to their wide-ranging nature. 


Particle Communications 


The use of particle beams for purpose 
of point-to-point telecommunications 
would constitute a step forward com- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


parable to that from wire-guided to 
wireless telegraphy following the work of 
Hertz and Marconi in the 1880s and 
1890s, insofar as it introduces the 
application of a new basic principle. It is, 
however, neither expected nor envisaged 
to replace conventional telecommunica- 
tions systems, but may complement these 
by fulfilling certain specialized needs of 
communication in which it would be 
superior to present systems. 

Telecommunication by means of ele- 
mentary particle beams is necessarily 
restricted to beams of stable or suffi- 
ciently long-lived particles. Four types of 
stable elementary particles are known: 
photons, electrons, neutrinos and pro- 
tons. 

The electromagnetic waves employed 
in telecommunication can be viewed, of 
course, as coherent assemblies of photons 
with wavelengths in the radio, micro- 
wave, or optical regions. Photon beams 
of shorter wavelength, say x-ray photons, 
are strongly absorbed by matter and 
hence are less suitable for long-range 
communication. Electrons also have rela- 
tively short ranges in matter, even if their 
initial energies are in the GeV region [1 
GeV (gigaelectron volt) = 10° eV (elec- 
tron volts)], so that they too are less suit- 
able. Besides interacting electromag- 
netically with matter as do photons and 
electrons, proton beams are depleted to 
such an extent by nuclear scattering proc- 
esses in their passage through matter 
that they are not used for telecom- 
munication. 

Before discussing the long-distance 
communication potentialities of neu- 
trinos, we consider those of the muon, 
the only unstable particle whose lifetime 
(~2 x 10° sec for muons at rest) is suf- 
ficiently long to make it a realistic can- 
didate as a long-distance communication 
carrier as proposed by Arnold (1). Since 
the muon is about 207 times heavier than 
the electron, its electromagnetic inter- 
action with matter is greatly reduced and, 
unlike the proton, it has no strong inter- 
actions with matter. It can be shown from 
these facts that the useful communication 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


range of a muon beam of tens of GeV 
energy is primarily determined by its de- 
cay rate in flight, provided that its path 
traverses mainly the rarified air of the 
upper atmosphere. Thus, a 100 GeV 
muon beam could be used to com- 
municate over 1,000 km under favorable 
circumstances by exploiting the earth’s 
magnetic field to curve the beam into 
such a path. At this energy, the radius of 
curvature of the muon beam produced by 
the field would be approximately equal to 
the earth’s radius. Hence, 1,000 km is a 
rough upper limit for global-type muon 
telecommunication (without relays). Be- 
sides this drawback, muons directed 
through the atmosphere would constitute 
a radiation hazard, as would x-ray, elec- 
tron, and proton beams. However, 
muons could furnish an alternative to 
microwave point-to-point communica- 
tions which would function even in the 
presence of moderate physical barriers 
(a 10, 20 or 50-GeV muon penetrates a 
depth of 50, 100 or 250 m of water, re- 
spectively, and hence muon beams could 
be sent into the ocean from a satellite for 
communication purposes). 


Neutrino Communications 


There remains to discuss neutrino 
beams as candidates for global telecom- 
munications (neutrinos and antineutrinos 
of both electron and muon type will 
be called ‘‘neutrinos’’ here). Neutrinos 
were postulated to explain ordinary nu- 
clear beta decay by Pauli in 1933 and 
then by Fermi in 1934. Their existence 
was proved experimentally by Reines 
and Cowan in 1956. Neutrinos have no 
charge and zero or extremely small mass, 
and therefore travel at exactly or es- 
sentially the speed of light for the neu- 
trino energies of interest here. They in- 
teract so weakly with matter that up to 
energies of <10* GeV neutrino beams 
traversing the entire earth were predicted 
by Volkova and Zatsepin (2) to suffer 
negligible attenuation. Accordingly, neu- 
trino beams of the kind mentioned below 
could provide almost instantaneous, 


49 


Table 1.— Parameters of Existing and Future High-Energy Proton Accelerators and of Their Neutrino 
Beams. ‘‘Tevatron’’ Designates the Energy-Doubled FNAL Accelerator, and the Last Column Refers 


to a5 TeV Accelerator. 


Present accelerators 


FNAL CERN 
E, (rev) 0.4 0.4 
ppp 25x10" 10% 
E, (GeV) 5-50 5-50 

(20) (20) 
3, (mrad) 3 3 


direct-line communication to any point 
on or below the surface of the earth, in- 
cluding locations that are inaccessible by 
any other means of telecommunications. 

The largest single difficulty of such a 
communications scheme is caused by the 
property of neutrinos that gives them 
their extreme penetrating power: their 
weak interaction with matter. This prop- 
erty will render their reception difficult, 
so that for effective communications 
massive neutrino detectors will be neces- 
Sary as well as intense, and hence well- 
collimated, neutrino beams. Narrowly 
collimated beams restrict one to point-to- 
point communications, but these could be 
made to possess a high degree of privacy 
and absence of message interception. 
Two further desirable properties of neu- 
trinos for communication are the impos- 
sibility of blocking their propagation (in 
contrast to electromagnetic waves) and 
the fact that they do not constitute an 
environmental hazard (in contrast to 
muons). 

The possibility of neutrino commu- 
nication was briefly mentioned by Arnold 
(1) and was quantitatively analyzed in an 
earlier paper of Saenz et al. (3). Kotzer 
and his associates (4) are now considering 
an experiment for detecting neutrinos at 
large distances from an accelerator 
source. 

In the following, we shall describe 
briefly present and future prospects of 
neutrino communications as_ regards 
available neutrino sources, suitable de- 
tector arrangements, expected and re- 
quired signal reception or counting rates, 


50 


Future accelerators 


Tevatron Serpukhov VBA 
l 2-5 =10 
5x 1028 ~108 

10-80 40-120 

(35) (80?) 

1 0.2 


and possible information content of the 
messages to be transmitted. 


Neutrino Sources.—Since according 
to the experiments of Barish et al. (5), 
the interaction cross section of muon 
neutrinos v, (the type most copiously 
produced by high-energy accelerators) in 
the reaction by which they are mainly 
detected, 


Vy +n— yp + hadrons (1) 
(n = neutron, wo=muon, hadrons 
= strongly interacting particles), in- 


creases linearly with neutrino energy up 
to the highest measured energies of 200 
GeV, the use of neutrinos with maximum 
obtainable energies is preferable for tele- 
communications purposes. Hence it is 
desirable to employ as neutrino sources 
accelerators such as the existing proton 
synchrotrons at the Fermi National Ac- 
celerator Laboratory (FNAL), Batavia, 
Ill., and at CERN, Geneva, Switzerland. 
Both of these produce proton beams of 
400 GeV energy. As described e.g. by 
Wilson (6), the energy of the FNAL ac- 
celerator is to be raised to 1000 GeV = 1 
TeV (Tera-electron volt) by 1980 and it 
will then be called the Tevatron. Designs 
for a 2—5 TeV accelerator are underway 
at Serpukhov, USSR, and the possibili- 
ties of a very big accelerator (VBA) of 10 
TeV have been explored as described 
e.g. by Adams (7). 

Table I shows the relevant parameters 
of these accelerators, the first row giving 
the proton energy E,. The existing ac- 
celerators are located in a ring-shaped 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


= 


tunnel, with a ring radius of 1 km, and a 
tunnel diameter of 3 m. (This installation 
could easily be hardened.) At FNAL, the 
circulating proton beam is extracted once 
every eight seconds in a 20 usec pulse of 
intensity ~2 x 10!° ppp (protons per 
pulse), which is directed into a metal 
target where it produces 7 and K mesons, 
as well as other hadrons. The mesons, fo- 
cused in a magnetic horn, decay mainly 
into muons and neutrinos while passing 
through a 400 m tunnel. The muons are 
absorbed by a | km earth shield and in this 
way an essentially pure neutrino beam is 
obtained. Its full opening angle is #, 
= 3mrad. The energy E, of these neu- 
trinos is concentrated in an interval of 5— 
50 GeV, with a maximum located at ~20 
GeV, the total flux being about 10?° neu- 
trinos per pulse. Figure 1 shows schemat- 
ically how such an accelerator could be 
used for neutrino telecommunications, 
with the dacay tunnel aimed in the desired 
direction for point-to-point communica- 
tions, and Fig. 2 depicts the neutrino 
beam’s traversal of the earth and recep- 
tion by the detector. Note that with 0, 
= 3 mrad, the beam diameter is ~38 km 
on the opposite side of the globe. 


Neutrino Detectors.—The neutrino 
message may be received by a detector 
sensitive to the reaction Eq. (1). As men- 
tioned, massive targets are required for 
obtaining reasonable counting rates. 
With the possible exception of scintilla- 
tion detectors, the best detection scheme 


BEAM EXTRACTION 
STATION 


MAIN ACCELERATOR 
RING 


BEAM BENDING 
MAGNETS 


FOCUSING HORN 
AND TARGET 


jl _v BEAM TRAVELING 
jl! THROUGH THE EARTH 


Fig. 1. Scheme for generating a neutrino beam for 
telecommunication. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


TRANSMITTER 
(ACCELERATOR) 


NEUTRINO BEAM TRAVELING 
THROUGH THE EARTH 


SUBMERGED OR 
BURIED DETECTOR 


Fig. 2. Neutrino telecommunication with a sub- 
merged or buried detector. 


for neutrinos in the energy range con- 
sidered appears to be one proposed a 
number of years ago by the late C. L. 
Cowan and one of the present authors (8). 
This method consists in using a very large 
(10° tons or more) body of water (in the 
ocean, a deep lake, or a flooded mine) as 
the target as well as the detector. The 
muons produced in Eq. (1) which on the 
average carry off half of the original neu- 
trino energy, propagate a mean distance 
of 50 m in the water (see above), emitting 
all along their path a cone of blue-green 
Cerenkov light of forward-opening angle 
41°, at a rate of 200 or more photons per 
cm path length (Fig. 3). This light in turn 
propagates over a length of about 20 m in 
clear water, and can be trapped in a sys- 
tem of light collectors (e.g., lucite plates 
or rods) with attached photomultipliers 
which register the light flash of the muon. 

Because of the limitation imposed by 
the short absorption length of visible light 
in water, we envisage a large cubic array 
of detector modules (Fig. 4), spaced 20 m 
apart from each other and perhaps con- 
sisting each of a 1 m? horizontal lucite 
plate with one (pressurized) photomulti- 
plier attached to its upper face. [Note 
that as described in workshop pro- 
ceedings edited by Roberts (9), an anal- 
ogous detector array has also been pro- 
posed for project DUMAND (deep un- 
derwater muon and neutrino detection), 
designed to detect cosmic neutrinos]. In 
Ref. (3), it was estimated that such a de- 
tection scheme would have a muon de- 
tection efficiency of close to 100%. The 
effective target volume of the detector is 
larger than that of the array, because a 


51 


OCEAN SURFACE 
a 


PHOTOMULTIPLIER 


CERENKOV PHOTON 
MUON 
HADRON JET 


ACCELERATOR 
NEUTRINO 


Fig. 3. Cerenkov neutrino detector. 


muon produced by reaction Eq. (1) can 
travel a significant distance in water from 
its point of origin to where it can be de- 
tected by the array. 

Counting Rates and Background— 
For a muon beam from the present 
FNAL accelerator, Ref. (3) gives event 
rates of 25 counts/hr with an 80-module 
(10° tons of water) array at a distance of 
10° km from the source, or with an 11,400- 
module array (10° tons) at 10* km (which 
is roughly the diameter of the earth). For 
the Tevatron case, the latter rate was 
stated to increase to 2,500 counts/hr, see 
Saenz et al. (3), but more careful estimates 
based on calculated neutrino flux dis- 
tributions as quoted by Lach (6) raise this 
to ~10* counts/hr. Such a rate would be 
quite sufficient for practical neutrino 
communication, but could be further in- 
creased (or the detector size decreased) 
by additional improvements in the neu- 
trino beam quality. (Note that acceler- 
ators specifically designed for neutrino 
communications should, by definition, 
produce neutrino beams that are better 
suited to this purpose than those of the 
general purpose research accelerators 
such as FNAL). Such improvements 
could be obtained by increasing the pri- 
mary proton beam intensity, better beam 
collimation (which is automatic with higher 
proton energies), and a longer decay tun- 
nel (factor 3 improvement by extending 
the tunnel from 400 m to 2 km). For ex- 
ample, we estimate that for an accelerator 
such as in the last column of Table I, with 
E, = 5TeV, 2 X 10% ppp, 3, = 0.2 mrad, 
and a 2-km decay tunnel, even a small 


52 


(10° ton) detector array would lead to as 
many as 3 x 10* events/hr at a distance of 
10* km (where the 1.5-km diameter neu- 
trino beam would still illuminate the 
detector array of about 100 m linear di- 
mension). 

Background to the signals is provided 
mainly by sunlight, Cerenkov light from 
cosmic-ray muons, and bioluminescence. 
Flashes of the latter origin typically last 
for milliseconds, and can thus be dis- 
criminated against the nanosecond Ceren- 
kov flashes from the muons produced in 
the reaction of Eq. (1). On the basis of 
data got by Higashi and by Oster and 
Clarke (10), we estimated that for 10+ 
signal counts/hr immersion depths of 
300—400 m and 600-700 m would provide 
adequate shielding depths against cosmic 


ray muons and sunlight in the ocean, - 


respectively (of course, sunlight could be 
eliminated by enclosures). With higher 
counting rates, the immersion depths 
could be correspondingly reduced. 


Communications Considerations. — 
Although neutrinos are unique in their 
penetrating ability, the concepts that 
govern pulsed neutrino beam communi- 
cations are not much different from those 
governing pulsed laser beam modulation, 
as discussed by Gagliardi or by Bar 
David (11). This technique for transfer- 
ring information consists in placing a 
pulsed signal into one of a large possible 


| COSMIC RAY MUON 


Tew oe 


r = x 
MUON FROM 
ACCELERATOR 
NEUTRINO 


DETECTOR 
MODULE 


Fig. 4. Cerenkov neutrino detection array. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


een BEAM | ACCELERATION | BEAM | 
RCYCL. INJEC- PERIOD EXIT 


TION 


Pee aeme (etd TE, eel gl tie ae eee 2 
0 | 2 3 ot 5 6 | 


8 SECONDS 


——______——-2!5: 32768 INTERVAL§ ——————————~ 


3x10 SEC INTERVAL 


x=NOISE EVENTS 


o=SIGNAL EVENTS 


7 SEC : 8 SEC 


0000000000000000 
0000000000000000 
0000000000000000 
0000000000000000 
0000000000000000 
0000000000000000 
0000000000000000 
0000000000000000 
0000000000000000 
0000000000000000 
000000000000000! 
OOOO0OOOI! I IIIIIIO 
OO0ODITIIOOOOIIIIO 
OOlLIOOIOOIIOOIIO 
Ol0iO0!tIO10101010 


= MESSAGE SENT 


biol sf 
bocbetf 
ltl 
ed | 
Fatal 
It 
lat 
LP > tSBITS 
el 
ee 
Locbiyt 
lI 
palit 
Ol! 
1 Ol 


| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
0 
0 


Breen te Pe oe pe SSS 


(5 UNIT TTY CODE) 


Fig. 5. Pulse position modulation: The upper portion of the figure shows the synchrotron repetition period 
for the systems described in the text. First there is a 6-second initial period in which the ring magnet is re- 
turned from its highest field to its initial field condition. Then the protons are injected into the synchrotron 
over the period of a second. The protons are accelerated to their maximum energy during the following 5.4 
seconds. During some short interval between the seventh and eighth seconds the ejection of the proton 
beam from the synchrotron by the use of a ‘‘kicker’’ magnet causes neutrino events in the corresponding time 
interval at the detector, thereby transmitting the three letters THB in international telegraphic code. 


sequence of time intervals. To show how 
a neutrino beam communications system 
could use pulse position modulation, 
assume that a transmitting accelerator 
and a receiving array have been con- 
structed such that 104 neutrino events per 
hour (22 events per eight second cycle) 
may be reliably observed in the detector. 
Assume that the synchrotron trans- 
mitter of one km radius requires seven 
seconds to bring a proton beam to its 
maximum energy [see, e.g., Sanford 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


(12)]. It will then take ~2 x 10° sec for 
the entire circulating beam to emerge from 
the accelerator ring after an internal mag- 
netic field ‘‘kicker’’ is triggered. 
Assume that the transmitter and re- 
ceiver have synchronized clocks and that 
the receiver takes into account the prop- 
agation delay between the triggering of 
the kicker and the receipt of a neutrino 
pulse. After each seven second accelera- 
tion period (see Fig. 5) the transmitter 
is prepared to send its message. The next 


53 


second may be divided into 32768 (=2!°) 
equal intervals of time, each of duration 
3.05 x 10°> seconds. A unique 15-bit 
binary message may be associated with 
each time interval as shown in Fig. 5. The 
time at which the kicker is triggered is 
selected according to the binary message 
to be sent. After the triggering event 
the neutrinos are generated and travel 
through the earth with the speed of light 
to the receiving array. There the neutrino 
pulse causes about 22 events to occur in 
the array during the 2 x 10™° sec interval 
corresponding to the proton beam spill 
time. Clocks and counter electronics are 
arranged to decode the observed time of 
occurrence of these events and hence to 
reconstruct the 15-bit binary message. 
The system would then operate at a com- 
munication rate of ~1.9 bits/sec of fifteen 
bits per eight seconds. 

It should not prove difficult to con- 
struct and deploy a receiving array in 
which false neutrino pulse events are un- 
likely to arise spontaneously from the 
background noise. Using a simple de- 
tection algorithm which interprets the 
presence of eight or more events within 
the detector array during a 3 x 10°° sec 
interval as a valid neutrino signal, the 
probability of message error will be less 
than 10~? if the average single neutrino- 
like (false) event rate is less than 0.4 
events per 3 x 10°° sec interval or 1.3 
x 10* events/sec. For the above men- 
tioned example of a 10° ton water detector 
at 10* km from the neutrino source, the 
latter rate could be achieved by im- 
mersion to 300 m or more, assuming that 
cosmic-ray muons furnish the only signif- 
icant background, i.e., assuming that 
sunlight has been excluded by suitably 
covering the detector. 


Conclusions 


Telecommunication over global dis- 
tances by means of neutrino beams is 
proposed as an alternative to the con- 
ventional electromagnetic-wave com- 
munication methods. Assuming the use 
of suitable underwater Cerenkov de- 
tectors, neutrino telecommunication is 


54 


shown to approach feasibility if presently 
existing high-energy proton accelerators 
are employed as neutrino sources, and to 
be definitely feasible with the advent of 
higher-energy accelerators which are al- 
ready in the design stage. Special ad- 
vantages of this type of communications 
as compared to other types are that they 
could be made essentially safe from jam- 
ming and disruption as well as to furnish 
a high degree of privacy. The method 
may prove useful as a low-data link to 
buried or submerged receivers with 
which communications might otherwise 
be difficult. 


Acknowledgments 


The authors wish to thank D. W. Pad- 
gett for bringing the concept of neutrino 
communication to their attention. We 
also thank H. Beck, R. Arnold, J. A. 
Murray, R. H. Bassel, M. Hass, N. See- 
man, M. M. Shapiro, and W. W. Zachary 
for useful conversations. 


References Cited 


(1) R. C. Arnold, Science 177, 163 (1972). 

(2) L. V. Volkova and G. T. Zatsepin, Bull. 
Acad. Sci. USSR, Phys. Ser. 38, 151 (1974). 

(3) A. W. Sdenz, H. Uberall, F. J. Kelly, D. W. 
Padgett, and N. Seeman, Science 198, 295 
(1977). 

(4) J. Albers and P. Kotzer, Bull. Amer. Phys. 
Soc. 24, 24 (1979). 

(5) B. C. Barish et al., Phys. Rev. Letters 39, 
1595 (1977). 

(6) R. R. Wilson, Physics Today 30, 23 (1977); 
J. Lach, ed. 1976 Summer Study, Fermi 
National Acceller Laboratory, Batavia, IIl. 

(7) See, e.g., J. B. Adams, in CERN Annual 
Report, 1976; L. Camilleri, CERN Report 
76-12, June 1976. 

(8) C. L. Cowan, H. Uberall, and C. P. Wang, 
Nuovo Cimento A 44, 526 (1966). 

(9) A. Roberts, ed., Proceedings of the 1976 
DUMAND Summer Workshop, Fermi Na- 
tional Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, Ill. 

(10) S. Higashi et al., Nuovo Cimento A43, 334 
(1966); R. H. Oster and G. L. Clarke, J. Opt. 
Soc. Am. 25, 84 (1935). 

(11) Robert M. Gagliardi and S. Karp, IEEE 
Transactions on Communications Technology, 
COM-17, 208, (1969); I. Bar David, IEEE 
Transactions on Information Theory, IT-15, 
31 (1969). 

(12) James, R. Sanford, ‘‘The Fermi National 
Accelerator Laboratory’? Ann. Rev. Nucl. 
Sci. 26, 151 (1976). 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


Portland Pozzolan Cement 


Kenneth N. Derucher 


RESEARCH REPORTS 


Principal, Civil Design and Technology Corp., 3107 Teal Lane, Bowie, 


Maryland 20715; 


David E. Hormby and Martin A. Mayer 


Research Assistants, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742 


ABSTRACT 


The research described herein is concerned with evaluating the effect of Portland- 
Pozzolan cement (American Society for Testing and Materials Designation Type 1P) as it 
was used for structural concrete. The use of Portland-Pozzolan cements for structural 
concrete has been limited due to inadequate knowledge of their performance characteris- 
tics. These performance characteristics include rate of strength development, workability, 
resistance to freezing and thawing, and salt scaling. This research hopes to add to the 
literature by indicating that Portland-Pozzolan cement may be used successfully for 


structural concrete. 


In view of the world need to conserve 
natural resources, to utilize waste prod- 
ucts, and to prepare for possible problems 
in the supply of Portland cements, 
blended cements will, at least partially, 
be substituted for Portland cements. 
Blended cements are used extensively in 
many countries and are increasing rapidly 
each year in all types of construction. 
Their use for structural concrete has been 
limited due to inadequate knowledge of 
their performance characteristics. These 
performance characteristics include rate 
of strength development, workability, re- 
sistance to freezing and thawing, and salt 
scaling. Knowledge of the factors affect- 
ing the performance of blended cements 
and methods of characterization of 
blended cements are needed to facilitate 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


their acceptance for use in structural 
concrete without compromise on quality. 
A blended cement is a cement in which 
a pozzolan (usually fly ash) is pre-blended 
or interground with the cement. This type 
of cement, Portland-Pozzolan, is desig- 
nated by the American Society for Test- 
ing and Materials (ASTM) as Type 1P. 
The Portland-Pozzolan mixtures pres- 
ently in use, in limited amounts, are not 
the stoichiometry optima for the chemical 
reactions which take place. The replace- 
ment of cement by fly ash, on an equal 
weight basis, varies from 0 to 30%. If the 
composition of the Portland-Pozzolan 
blend is balanced so that the potential 
stoichiometry of the reaction is satisfied, 
the engineering performance of the 
hardened mass may be improved. 


55 


Table 1.—Compressive Strength (7 Days). 


Compression results (7 days) 


Blended cement Specimen 1 Specimen 2 Specimen 3 Average 

Cement Flyash PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa 
100 0 2128) 15-35 22570) VSS 2300) hey 92 2265 15.61 
95 5 1650/5 E137 1685 11.58 1637 7 es lG570 ell 4 1 
90 10 1578 10.87 1575 10.82 1556 VRlOy72 LSTO AO 82 
85 15 1821 12.54 1811 12.48 1890 = 13.02 1841 12.68 
80 20 1785 12330 7ST > eles 1801 12.41 1791 12.34 
Ts aps 755 12.09 1767 12a L737 eon 1753 12.08 
70 30 1665 11.47 1665 11.47 1670 47 Mest 1667 =11.48 


With prospects for higher coal use in 
the future (due to the recent energy crisis) 
the use of waste material such as fly ash 
from coal burning will be extremely im- 
portant. In the 30 years since the end of 
World War II, an estimated 350 million 
tons of fly ash have been produced in the 
United States alone, with an additional 
650 million tons worldwide, of which only 
about 20% has been utilized. By the year 
1980, utility coal consumption will ap- 
proach 550 million tons, with resulting 
ash production of over 55 million tons 
annually in the United States. It is ap- 
parent that continued effort is desirable 
to develop new fly ash outlets and expand 
existing ones. 

Fly ash as an additive in Portland ce- 
ment concrete has proved satisfactory 
and gained wide acceptance among en- 
gineers. Data on the performance charac- 
teristics of fly ash as an additive is 


Table 2.—Compressive Strength (14 Days). 


enormous (1-15). The data on the op- 
timization and performance characteris- 
tics of blended cements (Type 1P) is mini- 
mal. Additional data is needed such that 
blended cements may become as readily 
acceptable as the Portland cement-fly ash 
additive types. 

In order to provide solutions to these 
problems, the following areas were 
studied: 


1. The optimization of the Portland- 
Pozzolan blend (Type 1P) by balanc- 
ing the stoichiometry of the reaction. 

2. The determination of the factors af- 
fecting the performance of concretes 
made from mixtures of the Portland- 
Pozzolan blend (Type 1P), in relation 
to the needs of structural concrete. 
Performance characteristics con- 
sidered include rate of strength devel- 
opment, workability, resistance to 
freezing and thawing, and salt scaling. 


Compression results (14 days) 


Blended cement Specimen 1 Specimen 2 Specimen 3 Average 
Cement Flyash PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa 
100 0 ZNO Ge Os0i 2700 ~=s-: 118..61 2695 18.60 2702 =: 18.63 
95 5) 2100 14.47 2098 =: 14.50 20 ata 54 2103" ) 14450 
90 10 1887 13.00 1928 =13.30 1S75' 0 12295 1897 13.08 
85 15 2690 = 18.53 2715 = 18.60 2720 ~=—- 18.74 2IOSA re tS.62 
80 20 2400 16.54 2395 16.54 2387 ~=16.47 2394 16.52 
15) 25 25505) liGel9 2347 = 16.19 23702 ¢aG. 35 2356 §=6:16..24 
70 30 2057 ~=—s- 14.19 2065 14.26 2047 = 14.12 2056 = 14.19 
56 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


— —— 


—_ —— = 


Table 3.—Compressive Strength (28 Days). 


Compression results (28 days) 


Blended cement Specimen 1 Specimen 2 Specimen 3 Average 

Cement Flyash PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa 
100 0 3041 20.97 S1Dey 2143 3041 20.95 3065" WIE 
95 5 2300 8=15.86 2285) © 15.74 23105 15:92 2298 15.84 
90 10 212204 14:63 2192 15.09 2051 14.12 2122 yel4eot 
85 15 3112e% 21-46 31830) 21:91 3147 21.70 3147 #82169 
80 20 2678 18.46 ZI Soar el 902 28291" 19550 2765. #21899 
Ts) DS 2600 817.91 2758 19.02 DISSE 19:02 2705: #518265 
70 30 2334 16.09 25460" 17.57 25468). 17:57 2475 17.08 


Experimental Design 


A total of 168 standard size cylinders 
(63) and beams (105) was made and cured 
in accordance with ASTM C 192-69; 
Making and Curing Test Specimens in 
the Laboratory. All concrete was ap- 
proximately 3000 Ibs/in.? (20 MPa) struc- 
tural concrete. Except for the Portland 
cement-fly ash ratio, all other factors re- 
mained the same in the concrete mix 
design. The fly ash (of a type which met 
ASTM standards) was interground with 
Type 1 Portland cement and replaced the 
cement in increments of 5% by weight 
from zero to 30% for a total of 7 mixtures. 
A series of 4 tests was performed on the 
concrete cylinders and beams as follows: 


1. ASTM C39: Test for Compressive 
Strength of Concrete Cylinders 

2. ASTM C78: Test for Flexural 
Strength of Concrete 


3. ASTM C290: Test for Resistance of 
Concrete Specimens to Rapid Freez- 
ing and Thawing in Water 

4. Resistance to Salt Scaling: Details of 
this test will be presented further on in 
the article. 


In test series one, 3 concrete cylinders 
of each mix proportion were tested in 
compression at 7, 14, and 28 days for a 
total of 63 specimens. In test series two, 
3 concrete beams of each mix proportion 
were tested in flexure at 7, 14, and 28 
days for a total of 63 specimens. Test 
series three consisted of testing 3 con- 
crete beams of each mix proportion for 
a total of 21 specimens in a standard 
freezing and thawing apparatus. The 
temperature in a 4-hour period will vary 
from a minus 10°F (—23°C) to a positive 
40°F (4.4°C) such that six (6) cycles a day 
would be accomplished. The final test 


Table 4. — Flexural Strength (7 Days). 


Flexure (7 days) 


Blended cement Specimen 1 Specimen 2 Specimen 3 Average 

Cement Flyash PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa 
100 0 584 4.02 587 4.04 593 4.07 588 4.05 
35 5 397 2.74 395 Die, 390 2.69 394 OG (| 

90 10 367 D3 371 2.56 363 2.50 367 2.93 

85 15 395 Pas pe 400 2.76 408 2.81 401 2.76 

80 20 384 2.65 397 2.74 410 2.82 397 2.74 

iD ZS 349 2.40 354 2.44 350 2.41 35] 2.42 

70 30 300 2.07 301 2.07 302 2.07 301 2.07 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 57 


Table 5.—Flexural Strength (14 Days). 


Flexure (14 days) 


Blended cement Specimen | Specimen 2 Specimen 3 Average 
Cement Flyash PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa 
100 0 698 4.81 699 4.82 676 4.66 691 4.75 
95 5 624 4.30 633 4.36 633 4.36 630 4.34 
90 10 605 4.17 612 4.22 613 4.22 610 4.20 
85 15 694 4.78 671 4.62 699 4.82 688 4.74 
80 20 513 3)y9)5) 524 3.61 583 4.02 540 Biz 
is) 25 499 3.44 517 3.56 526 3.62 514 3.54 
70 30 487 3.36 503 3.47 489 3537 493 3.40 


series, resistance to salt scaling was per- 
formed as follows: 


The top surface of 3 concrete beams for each mix 
proportion for a total of 21 specimens was 
covered with 4 in. (6.4 mm) water in the standard 
freezing and thawing apparatus. Once the water 
had frozen and the thawing cycle began, flake 
calcium chloride was applied to the ice in an 
amount equivalent to 2.4 pounds/yard? (1.3 kg/m?) 
of surface area (which simulates actual con- 
ditions). 


The beams were subjected to this pro- 
cedure daily. Visual examinations were 
made at regular periods and numerical 
ratings assigned. 


Results 


The results of the above-mentioned 4 
tests are shown in tabular and/or graphi- 
cal form. Tables 1-3 are the results of 
the Compressive Strength of Concrete 
Cylinders (ASTM C39: Tests for Com- 
pressive Strength of Concrete Cylinders) 


Table 6.—Flexural Strength (28 Days). 


after curing for 7, 14, and 28 days. Tables 
4-6 are the results of the Flexural 
Strength of Concrete Beams (ASTM 
C78: Tests for Flexural Strength of Con- 
crete) after curing for 7, 14, and 28 days. 
Figures 1 and 2 show a graphical result of 
both the compression and flexural results. 

It becomes obvious that, in the early 
stages of development, concrete made 
without fly ash (Type 1) surpasses that 
made with fly ash (Type 1P). However, at 
14 days, concrete made with Type | ce- 
ment and Type 1P cement (85% cement 
and 15% fly ash) showed relatively the 
same strength. Further, at 28 days, con- 
crete made with Type 1P cement (85% 
cement and 15% fly ash) surpassed 
strength-wise concrete made with Type 1 
cement. 

Similar results were obtained for the 
Flexural Strength of Concrete Beams 
tested at 7, 14, and 28 days. 

The results of test for Freezing and 


Flexure (28 days) 


Blended cement Specimen 1 Specimen 2 Specimen 3 Average 

Cement Flyash PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa PSI MPa 
100 0 797 5.49 804 S5))| 850 5.86 817 5.65 
95 5 761 5.24 745 5.15 744 5.10 750 5.17 

90 10 atS 4.93 740 5.10 744 5.10 FIC) 5.05 

85 15 834 SA) 823 5.67 812 5.58 823 5.66 

80 20 657 4.53 682 4.70 686 4.73 675 4.69 

75 25 597 4.11 601 4.13 602 4.13 600 4.13 

70 30 529 3.64 538 S72 552 3.67 533 3.65 

58 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


4000 


3000 
Qe eee daysmcurdne 


ae 4 day se curine 


2000 


SS 7 days curing 


Compression (PSI) 


% Fly Ash 


Eig., 1. 
results. 


Comparison of compressive strength 


Thawing of Concrete Beams (ASTM 
C290: Test for Resistance of Concrete 
Specimens to Rapid Freezing and Thaw- 
ing in Water) are shown in Tables 7, 8, 
and 9, which show the Young’s Modulus 
of Elasticity in the transverse and longi- 
tudinal direction and the dynamic modu- 
lus of rigidity. Again in reviewing these 


=> 28 days curing 


= 14 days curing 


Flexure (PSI) 
eal 
Oo 
lo) 


a 


7 days curing 


i@ 18 20 25. x0 


% Fly Ash 


Fig. 2. Comparison of flexural strength results. 


results, concrete made with Type 1 ce- 
ment and Type 1P cement (85% cement 
and 15% fly ash) showed relatively the 
Same capacity and/or requirements. 

In the final test, Resistance to Salt 
Scaling, the concrete made with Type 1 
cement and Type 1P cement (85% cement 
and 15% fly ash) proved to be of satis- 


Table 7.—Dynamic Young’s Modulus, Transverse (Ibs/in? x 10°). 


Blended cement 


Cement Flyash Zero cycles 30 cycles 60 cycles 90 cycles 120 cycles 
100 0 6.13 2.26 159 0.92 — 
100 0 6.17 127 0.95 0.63 — 
100 0 6.69 0.69 0.51 0.42 — 

5 5 6.88 0.90 0.68 0.47 — 
95 5 6.92 0.46 0.23 0.54 — 
95 5 Gkly 0.77 0.50 0.51 — 
90 10 6.29 tJ) 0.88 — — 
90 10 6.85 1.78 0.83 — — 
90 10 6.67 — — — — 
85 15 6.41 3.76 2.20 0.64 0.39 
85 IS 6.71 3.99 21 0.67 0.08 
85 15 7.10 4.89 2.81 — _ 
80 20 6.66 0.96 0.70 0.46 — 
80 20 6.56 1.07 0.54 — _ 
80 20 6.47 1.09 0.61 — — 
15 7s) 6.32 0.65 0.39 0.13 — 
Ws 25 a/9 0.65 0.33 — a 
75 25 4.82 0.67 0.39 — _ 
70 30 5.82 0.30 0.15 0.14 — 
70 30 5.89 0.71 0.43 — —- 
70 30 6.03 0.71 0.45 — 
J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 59 


Table 8.—Dynamic Young’s Modulus, Longitudinal (Ibs/in? x 10°). 


Blended cement 


Cement Flyash Zero cycles 30 cycles 60 cycles 90 cycles 120 cycles 
100 0 0.94 0.36 0.10 0.12 = 
100 0 0.96 0.33 0.11 0.11 = 
100 0 0.98 0.20 0.09 0.12 = 

95 5 1.01 0.28 0.17 0.05 == 
95 5 0.99 0.37 0.23 0.05 — 
95 5 1.00 0.63 0.32 0.06 — 
90 10 1.00 ih? 0.17 — = 
90 10 0.97 0.40 0.23 — — 
90 10 0.98 — — — = 
85 15 0.95 0.58 0.45 0.31 0.62 
85 15 0.96 0.64 0.49 0.38 0.61 
85 15 0.98 0.77 0.58 — — 
80 20 0.91 0.27 0.32 0.36 — 
80 20 0.90 0.22 0.25 — — 
80 20 0.91 0.19 0.10 — — 
75 25 0.86 0.21 0.13 0.05 — 
i: 25 0.88 0.23 O12 — — 
75 25 0.93 0.25 0.12 — — 
70 30 0.85 0.11 0.06 0.06 — 
70 30 0.86 0.12 0.08 —_ — 
70 30 0.88 0.13 0.10 — — 


Table 9.—Dynamic Modulus, of Rigidity (Ibs/in? < 10°). 


Blended cement 


Cement Flyash Zero cycles 30 cycles 60 cycles 90 cycles 120 cycles 

100 0 2.64 0.47 0.43 0.34 — 

100 0 2.64 0.49 0.37 0.21 — 
100 0 2.65 0.53 0.44 0.21 — 

95 5 2.85 0.16 0.10 0.05 — 

95 5 2.86 0: 1655 0.12 0.03 — 

95 5 2.84 0.16 0.13 0.08 — 

90 10 2.58 0.32 0.20 = — 

90 10 2.68 0.31 0.14 — — 

90 10 2.78 = — — — 

85 15 2.60 0.71 0.47 0.39 0.31 

85 1) 2.65 0.95 0.49 0.49 0.35 

85 15 2.70 0.80 0.48 — — 

80 20 2.65 0.35 0.21 0.07 — 

80 20 2.56 0.39 0.20 — — 

80 20 2.61 0.38 0.21 — — 

75 25 2.53 0.16 0.10 0.03 — 

qe) 25 295 0.13 0.07 — — 

75 25 2.58 0.13 0.08 — — 

70 30 2.45 0.03 0.02 0.01 zh 
70 30 2.46 0.05 0.03 — — : 
70 30 2.47 0.03 0.01 — — | 


| 
| 
60 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


Table 10.—Results of Deicer Scaling Tests. 


Blended cement 


——— Zero 30 
Cement Flyash cycles cycles 
100 0 0 1 
100 0 0 1 
100 0 0 1 
95 5 0 1 
95 5 0 2 

bs 5 0 

90 10 0 2 
90 10 0 72 
90 10 0 2 
85 15 0 

85 15 0 

85 15 0 

80 20 0 2 
80 20 0 1 
80 20 0 1 
75 O55 0 2 
TS 25 0 D 
75 25 0 2 
70 30 0 2 
70 30 0 2 
70 30 0 1 

Where: caling 


S 

Slight Scaling 

Slight to Moderate Scaling 
Moderate Scaling 
Moderate to Severe Scaling 
Severe Scaling 


Liat eat eee 


aA PWN K oO 


factory performance when compared as 
shown in Table 10. 


Conclusions 


1. The Pozzolan fly ash proved to be a 
satisfactory cement replacement as a 
Type 1P cement (85% cement and 15% 
fly ash). 

2. Type 1P cement (85% cement and 15% 
fly ash) can be used successfully in 
place of Type 1 provided that the con- 
crete is allowed to cure at least 14 
days. 

3. No difference in workability was 
noticed in acomparison of all batches. 

4. Type 1P cement (85% cement and 15% 
fly ash) was the only mix design por- 
tion that proved satisfactory. Any 
lesser or greater portion of fly ash 
would have additional results. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


60 
cycles 


NW WwW NWN 


NN Ww Wn Ww NM Ww Ne 


Scale rating 


90 120 150 200 
cycles cycles cycles cycles 
1 1 1 1 

2 Z 
1 1 1 1 
3 4 5 is 
4 5 6 — 
3 3 4 — 
4 5 5 — 
4 5 5 — 
3 4 » — 
De 2 Z 2 
1 1 1 1 
1 1 1 1 
4 5 5 _ 
3 4 5 — 
3 4 6) at 
4 5 5 — 
3 4 5 a 
4 5) 5 — 
4 5 5) — 
3 4 5 ae 
2 3 4 — 


References Cited 


. Davis, R. E., R. W. Carlson, J. W. Kelly, and 


H. E. Davis. ‘‘Properties of Cements and Con- 
cretes Containing Fly Ash,’’ Proceedings, Am. 
Concrete Inst., Vol. 33, p. 577, May—June, 
1937. 


. Davis, R. E., H. E. Davis, and J. W. Kelly. 


Weathering Resistance of Concrete Containing 
Fly Ash Cements,’’ Proceedings Am. Con- 
crete Inst., Vol. 37, p. 281, January 1, 1941. 


. H. A. Frederick. ‘‘Application of Fly Ash for 


Lean Concrete Mixes,’ Proceedings, Am. 
Soc. for Testing Mats., Vol. 44, p. 810, 1944. 


. Grieb, W. E., and D. O. Woolf. ‘‘Concrete 


Containing Fly Ash as a Replacement for Port- 
land Blast-Furnace Slag Cement,’’ Proceed- 
ings, Am. Soc. for Testing Mats., Vol. 61, p. 
1143, 1961. 


. T. D. Larson. ‘‘Air Entrainment and Durability 


Aspects of Fly Ash Concrete,’ Proceedings, 
Am. Soc. for Testing Mats., Vol. 64, p. 866, 
1964. 


. Pasko, T. J., and T. D. Larson. ‘‘Some Statis- 


tical Analyses of the Strength and Durability of 


61 


Fly Ash Concretes,’’ Am. Soc. for Testing 
Mats., Vol. 62, p. 1054, 1962. 

7. Timms, A. G., and W. E. Grieb. “‘Use of Fly 
Ash in Concrete,’’ Proceedings, Am. Soc. for 
Testing Mats., Vol. 56, p. 1139, 1956. 

8. Klieger, P., and W. F. Perenchio. “‘Laboratory 
Studies of Blended Cements, Portland- 
Pozzolan Cements,’’ Portland Cement Associ- 
ation Bulletin RDO13, 1973. 

9. Minnick, L. John. ‘“‘Corson Company Re- 
searches Fly Ash Lightweight Aggregate,”’ 
Rock Products, Sept. 1964, pp. 74-77. 

10. ‘‘Enercon Ltd. Develops Fly Ash Process for 
Concrete Industry,’’ Concrete Products, Feb. 
1969, pp. 46-49. 


11. ACI Committee 213, ‘‘Guide for Structural 


Lightweight Aggregate Concrete,’ ACI Jour- 
nal, Aug. 1967, Proceedings, Vol. 64, No. 8, 
pp. 433-469. 

12. ACI Committee 318, Building Code Require- 
ments for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-63), 
Detroit, American Concrete Inst. 1963. 

13. 1968 Book of ASTM Standards, Part 10, Con- 
crete & Mineral Aggregates, Phila., Am. Soc. 
for Testing & Materials, 1968. 

14. ACI Comm. 213, ‘‘Guide for Struc. Light- 
weight Aggregate Concrete,’’ ACI Journal, 
Aug. 1967, Proceedings, V. 64, No. 8, pp. 
433-469. 

15. Pearson, A. S. ‘‘Lightweight Aggregate from 
Fly Ash,”’ Civil Engineering, Sept. 1964, Vol. 
43, No. 9, pp. 51-53. 


The Status of Rhizoecus amorphophalli Betram, a Little- 
Known Oriental Mealybug (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) 


Edson J. Hambleton 


Cooperating Scientist, Systematic Entomology Laboratory, IIBUI, Agricultural 
Research, Sci. & Educ. Admin., USDA. Mail address: 5140 Worthington Dr., 


Washington, D. C. 20016. 


ABSTRACT 


~ Rhizoecus amorphophalli Betram, originally described from Java, is widely distributed 
in the Pacific area. Comparison of the types with material from Hawaii, India and the 
Philippines reveals no morphological differences. Rhizoecus advenus Beardsley from 
Hawaii and Micronesia is considered a junior synonym of Rhizoecus amorphophalli. The 
latter is redescribed, illustrated, and a lectotype designated. 


Betram (1940) described Rhizoecus 
amorphophalli from Java. In 1946, I 
transferred the species to Ripersiella 
Tinsley, a genus later synonymized with 
Rhizoecus (Hambleton, 1974). No further 
mention was made of R. amorphophalli 
until Beardsley (1966) compared it with 
Rhizoecus advenus Beardsley from 
Hawaii and Micronesia, indicating that 
they may eventually be synonyms. 

A comparison of 5 paratypes of R. 
advenus with the syntypes of R. amor- 
Phophalli reveals no major diagnostic 
differences in their morphology. The 
minor differences in the size of cerores 


62 


and number of multilocular disk pores 
that were noted are normal variations in 
a species. Specimens from India and the 
Philippines were identical with the syn- 
types of R. amorphophalli, except for 
size. According to Beardsley (op cit.), 
R. advenus possesses a single circulus on 
abdominal segment IV and occasionally 
has a small circulus on segment V. Of 31 
specimens examined during this study, 24 
possessed 2 circuli. Invariably the cir- 
culus on segment V is smaller. For these 
reasons, R. advenus is here considered a 
junior synonym of R. amorphophalli. 
This species is widely distributed in the 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


_——e 


Figs. 1-8. Rhizoecus amorphophalli, female, 1, terminal segments of antenna; 2, rostrum; 3, cephalic 
plate; 4, tubular duct; 5, tritubular ceroris; 6, anal ring, right half; 7, circulus; 8, hind claw. 


Oriental Region and probably was trans- 
ported by man on roots and tubers of 
various economically important food 
plants. 


Rhizoecus amorphophalli Betram 
Figs. 1-8 


Rhizoecus amorphophalli Betram, 1940:267. 
Ripersiella amorphophalli: Hambleton, 1946:61. 
Rhizoecus advenus Beardsley, 1966:468. New 
synonymy. 


Adult female: Broadly ovate. Length, 1.48-—1.73 
mm; width, 0.73—0.93 mm. Antennae 6-segmented, 
broadly separated, average length of segments in 
microns: I, 33; II, 23; III, 33; IV, 18; V, 17: VI, 42; 
apical segment about twice as long as wide, with 3 
moderately stout sensory setae and 1 spinelike 
sensory seta; segment V with | short, small sensory 
seta. Interantennal space equal to combined length 
of segments IV-VI. Eyes small, pigmented, about 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


10 in diameter. Rostrum of medium size, 63 long, 
50u wide; rostral loop extending to or slightly be- 
yond 2nd coxae. Cephalic plate irregularly tri- 
angulate, 20u long, 30u wide, with 3 prominent 
body setae on its periphery. Dorsal ostioles strongly 
sclerotized. 

Legs smali, average length of segments of hind 
pair in microns: Trochanter, 40; femur, 91; tibia, 81; 
tarsus, 53; claw, 17; claw digitules elongate, dilated 
at extremities, extending beyond claws. 

Normally with 2 stout, truncate, strongly sclero- 
tized circuli, the larger on abdominal segment IV 
averaging about 20 long, 30u wide, one on segment 
V smaller, sometimes absent, averaging 15 long, 
21 wide, both prominently reticulated. Anal lobes 
weakly developed, unsclerotized, with 3 elongate 
setae, longest about 60u long, trilocular pores 
usually crowded at their bases. Anal ring small, 35 
in diameter, its setae 50—58y long; outer portion of 
anal ring with 12—14 elongate oval to sinuate cells, 
with spicules; inner portion of ring with 10 much 
larger, irregularly shaped cells adjacent to a series of 


63 


globular, darkened cells. Tritubular cerores of 2 
sizes, their ducts short, stout, bifurcate at bases, 
maximum length about 7u, evenly distributed, 
varying between 117-140, larger size more abun- 
dant dorsally, smaller size occurring on both sur- 
faces. Multilocular disk pores confined to venter of 
abdominal segments VII-IX, 13-23 borne trans- 
versly along posterior margin of segment VII, 
27-42 occurring on VIII and IX. Tubular ducts 
elongate, with broadly rounded sclerotized bases, 
length about 6y, widely distributed on both surfaces 
over entire body; more common ventrally, 5—7 per 
segment. Trilocular pores almost circular in outline, 
more abundant dorsally, sparse around legs and 
intersegmentally. Body setae variable in size, 
longest on venter about 25y, shorter and finer on 
dorsum, about 15y long. 


Lectotype female —From 3 syntypes 
on slide No. 1, remounted in 1978, I des- 
ignate the adult female on the extreme 
right as lectotype. The slide labeled as 
follows: ‘‘Amorphophalus I °38, Bogar. 
leg. Bot. A. P. L., CCV 1290, Rhizoecus 
amorphophalli det. Betram’’ is to be de- 
posited in the Agricultural Experiment 
Station, Bogar. Paralectotypes: 10 on 3 
slides taken with lectotype, and 8 newly 
mounted females from original preserved 
type material, 6 in Rijksmuseum van 
Natuurlijkke Historie, Leiden, Nether- 
lands and 2 in U. S. National Museum, 
Washington, D. C. 


Specimens Examined. —In addition to 
the type material from Bogar, the fol- 
lowing specimens were examined: 5 para- 
types of Rhizoecus advenus Beardsley, 
Honolulu, Hawaii, 27-VIII-1959, J. W. 
Beardsley, 2 2 2, intercepted at Washing- 
ton, D. C. from Java, 6-III-1925, W. V. 


Reed 9 2 2 intercepted at Los Angeles, 
Calif., 30-V-1973 from the Philippines, 
J. R. Davidson, 6 ° 2 intercepted at New 
York from India, 29-VI-1976, D. Fem- 
iano. 


Host Plants.—Amorphophallus vari- 
abilis, Colocasia esculenta (Araceae), 
Cordyline terminalis (Agavaceae), Cur- 
cuma longa, Kaempferia galanga (Zingi- 
beraceae). 


Distribution.—Caroline Island (Truk), 
Hawaii, India, Java, Philippines. 


Acknowledgments 


I am very grateful to Dr. P .H. van 
Doesburg, Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke 
Historie, Leiden, and Dr. J. G. Betram, 
Deventer, Netherlands, for their as- 
sistance in securing and making available 
the type specimens of Rhizoecus amor- 
phophalli. I thank Richard Wilkey, Ar- 
thropod Slide Mounts, Bluffton, Indiana 
for remounting the type material. 


References Cited 


Beardsley, J. W. 1966. Insects of Micronesia. 
Homoptera: Coccoidea. Jn Insects of Micronesia. 
Bernice P. Bishop Museum 6(7): 377-562. 

Betram, J. G. 1940. A new Rhizoecus species. 
Treubia 17(4): 267-270. 

Hambleton, E. J. 1946. Studies of hypogeic mealy- 
bugs. Rev. de Ent. (Rio de Janeiro) 17(1—2): 
1-77. 

. 1974. Three new species of Rhizoecus 

(Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) from New Zea- 

land, with notes and redescription of others. New 

Zealand Jour. Zool. 1(2): 147-158. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


Annual Variation in Larval Amphibian Populations 


Within a Temperate Pond 


W. Ronald Heyer 


Reptiles and Amphibians, National Museum of Natural History, 
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. 20560 


ABSTRACT 


This study reports the results of a four year monitoring program of larval amphibians 
from a single pond located in the eastern United States. Striking year to year population 
variation occurred in terms of (1) population size, (2) larval recruitment, and (3) habitat 
use. The present data base precludes isolation of cause and effect relationships in the 
population dynamics of larval populations. Any given kind of larval amphibian population 
variation is the simultaneous interactive result of several causes. 


Basic to an understanding of the func- 
tioning and dynamics of amphibian com- 
munities is a knowledge of the kinds and 
intensities of year-to-year variation in 
larval populations. Surprisingly, little 
basic information is available for larval 
amphibian communities. Most studies of 
variations in amphibian life history pat- 
terns have focused on the adult phase, 
treating the larval phase as a kind of 
‘“black box.’’ The number of quantitative 
studies analyzing larval population dy- 
namics at the community level can be 
counted on the fingers of one hand. The 
most important of these studies is from a 
two-species amphibian community in 
British Columbia, Canada (Calef, 1973). 
The present study was undertaken with 
the purpose of gathering basic informa- 
tion on year-to-year variability in larval 
populations from a diverse temperate 
amphibian community. 

The results of a four-year monitoring 
program of larval amphibians from a 
single pond located in the coastal plains 
of Maryland are reported herein. The 
study site is a large pond which rarely 
dries up completely. Data from the first 
two years have been analyzed previously 
with respect to habitat partitioning 
(Heyer, 1976). The patterns of larval oc- 
currence of growth stages and micro- 
habitat overlap are similar for all years of 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


the study and are not dealt with further 
(see Heyer, 1976, for first two year’s 
results). 


Methods and Materials 


Minimum and maximum daily tem- 
peratures and daily rainfall were taken 
from records kept by the Environmental 
Sciences Program of the Smithsonian 
Institution at the Chesapeake Bay Center 
for Environmental Studies, near Edge- 
water, Anne Arundel County, Maryland. 
Pond water temperatures were recorded 
when weekly samples of larval am- 
phibians were taken through the spring, 
terminating at the end of June for four 
successive years. Three dipnet sweeps 
were taken each week during the sam- 
pling period: a surface, midwater, and 
bottom sample. The pond, together with 
details on how the sweeps were taken and 
the disposition of the larval samples 
through identification, are described else- 
where (Heyer, 1976). The basic data set 
analyzed herein consists of the numbers 
of larvae of the species taken in each 
sweep sample each week. The raw data 
comprise an adjunct appendix which is 
available from the author on request. 
This data set is supplemented with field 
notes recorded each week during the 
sampling period. 


65 


JAN 


A 


FEB MAR 
yy 


255 


204 


TEMPERATURE 
° 


PR MAY JUN 
e 


155 i 
bo) 


b 
RAINFALL 


. MACULATUM 

. OPACUM 

. CRUCIFER 

. CHRYSOSCELIS 
. CLAMITANS 
PALUSTRIS 

. SYLVATICA 
AMERICANUS 


DDDUDIID>>Y 


Fig. 1. Climatic and larval occurrence patterns for the first 180 days of 1974. Rainfall incm, maximum and 
minimum temperatures in degrees Celsius. Solid circles equal surface water temperatures taken in shade 
and sun, afternoon readings. If only a single water temperature, sky was overcast. Dark horizontal bars 
equal presence of free swimming larvae captured in nets. Presence of A. opacum assumed from 1 January 
to first sampling date. Open circles equal presence of eggs, hatchlings, or Gosner (1960) stage 25 or 26 tad- 
poles and represent larval recruitment (data not gathered for salamanders). 


Results of the four-year study differ 


slightly from results of the previous two- 


year study (Heyer, 1976) for three rea- 
sons. The first is that Rana palustris 
larvae were not identified until the third 
year’s sample was being processed. In 
the previous report, the Rana clamitans 
samples contained Rana palustris. The 
earlier collections were re-examined and 
identifications were corrected for the 
present study. Second, a single sample of 
296 Bufo americanus larvae which had 
just hatched from their egg string was in- 
cluded in the previous analysis. These are 
excluded from this study as they repre- 
sent data on egg placement rather than 
larval habitat use. Third, Acris crepitans 
was not analyzed as the species was taken 
rarely in the pond (data are included in the 
total numbers of larvae category as used 
in the niche breadth measures, however). 


Results and Analyses 


Climate, Larval Occurrence, and Num- 
bers of Individuals. — Figures 1-4 show 


66 


the relationship of the climate param- 
eters of temperature and rainfall with 
occurrence of eggs, recently hatched 
larvae and older larvae. Recently hatched 
larvae (Gosner, 1960, stages 25—26) are 
included to provide information on pop- 
ulation recruitment. 

The numbers of larvae sampled each 
year are presented in Table 1. Because 
sampling techniques were the same over 
the four-year period, the numbers of 
larvae sampled reflect changes in popu- 
lation size over the four years. 

It is clear that several biotic and abiotic 
factors varied during the four-year study. 
There was considerable variation in the 
intensity of winter cold conditions, in the 
timing and intensity of warming trends in 
the spring, and in the amount and distri- 
bution of rainfall. The time that larval 
populations were in the pond varied from 
year to year, as did the length of the larval 
recruitment period for those species with 
a long breeding season (e.g., Hyla cru- 
cifer), and the total larval biomass. 

Particular weather patterns unques- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


JAN FE 


APR 


JUN 


35 


i ge hie, yl if 


RAINFALL 


Rs =A MACUL ATUM 
A. OPACUM 
a ee ee ee ee ee =] CRUCIFER 
ee =H CHRYSOSCELIS 
R. CLAMITANS 
ee ees «= RO OPALUSTRIS 
CO C0 EE EE R. SYLVATICA 
(ork. enn aa) B. AMERICANUS 


Fig. 2. Climatic and larval occurrence patterns for the first 180 days of 1975. Legend as for Fig. 1 except 
water temperatures taken in morning; presence of A. opacum and R. clamitans assumed from 1 January to 


first sampling period. 


tionably account for two instances of 
larval dynamics. The extremely cold 
winter of 1977 killed all overwintering 
Ambystoma opacum larvae and greatly 
reduced the population of overwintering 
Rana clamitans larvae. Keith Berven 
(pers. comm.) found many Rana clami- 
tans larvae trapped in ice on the pond in 


the early spring of 1977. Other weather 
patterns may account for variations in 
other larval populations (e.g., Rana syl- 
vatica), but other relationships are not as 
clear or obvious as those discussed for 
Ambystoma opacum and Rana clami- 
tans. Certain other probable cause-and- 
effect relationships are discussed below. 


JAN FEB MAR PR MAY JUN 
oni || hae ry ny T1r° 
30 i f 1 l 
25 A evs fe 
e 
moe PRU om 
ie : : fs 
< 15 @ 4 z 
ie § < 
a 10 5a 
= 
WW 
FEF 5 6 
Ny 
a) De en Sa eae a ea A. MACULATUM 
A. OPACUM 
fo) ae Ee BT H. CRUCIFER 
a H. CHRYSOSCELIS 
R. CLAMITANS 
OE aR a R. PALUSTRIS 
oO © ©) aD R. SYLVATICA 
[ioe Ne ad eS B. AMERICANUS 


Fig. 3. Climatic and larval occurrence patterns for the first 180 days of 1976. Legend as for Fig. 2. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


67 


FEB MAR 


JAN 
1 


= N 
Nn o 


TEMPERATURE 
° 


aia | nae i 
My ita 


b 
RAINFALL 


MACULATUM 
OPACUM 
CRUCIFER 
CHRYSOSCELIS 
CLAMITANS 
PALUSTRIS 
SYLVATICA 
AMERICANUS 


ona rriIpPp> 


Fig. 4. Climatic and larval occurrence patterns for the first 180 days of 1977. Legend as for Fig. 2 except 
rainfall for first five days of April combined; presence of R. clamitans assumed from 1 January to first 


sampling date. 


Habitat Use.-Larval Distribution in 
Sweep Types.—Individual species of 
larvae are not equally distributed among 
sweep types (Table 2). The three sweep 
types sampled different microhabitats 
within the pond. The unequal distribution 
of larvae among sweep types reflects 
habitat partitioning by the larvae (also see 
Heyer, 1976). 


Microhabitat Breadth.— Another mode 
of habitat utilization concerns distribu- 
tion across all microhabitants in the 
pond. The basic information statistic 
commonly used to compare species use 


Table 1.—Numbers of Larvae Sampled. 


1974 1975 1976 1977 
A. maculatum Ag. 134 80 20 
A. opacum 12 4 10 0 
H. chrysoscelis 26 26 Z 21 
H. crucifer 634 1884 1295 754 
R. clamitans 12 58 60 20 
R. palustris Z 107 488 SF 
R. sylvatica eM 79 5 0 
B. americanus 0 480 345 86 
Totals 884 2790 2285 1284 
68 


of a habitat is the formula for niche 
breadth: 


B; a DuDiane 


where B; is habitat breadth and p,, is the 
proportion of occurrence of species j in 
sweep i (modified from Levins, 1968). 

The habitat breadths calculated from 
the summarized sweep data of Table 2 are 
presented in Table 3. The resultant 
values (Table 3) give an overview of how 
the three microhabitats (three sweep 
types) were used from year to year by the 
entire species assemblage. Most of the 
species used little of the sampled habitat, 
but a few species used much of the sam- 
pled habitat. Considerable year to year 
variation occurs among the three sweep 
types. 

In summary, three kinds of year to 
year larval populational variation ac- 
count for the variation discussed and 
documented above. These, ranked in 
what are believed to be the decreasing 
order of importance are: 

1) Population size. Variation in the 
number of larvae of each species from 
year to year. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


2) Larval recruitment. Variation in the 
time at which hatchlings are incorporated 
into the populations, as well as how many 
times they are incorporated each year. 


Table 3.—Habitat Breadths, Based on Summed 


Sweep-Type Occurrences. 


1974 1975 1976 1977 
A. maculatum 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 
A. opacum 0.01 0.01 0.01 0 
H. chrysoscelis 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 
H. crucifer 1.14 1.50 0.98 0.87 
R. clamitans 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 
R. palustris 0.01 0.01 0.33 0.76 
R. sylvatica 0.64 0.01 0.01 0 
B. americanus 0 0.14 0.16 0.06 


3) Habitat use. The differential utiliza- 
Table 2.—Total Numbers of Larvae Sampled by 
Sweep Type. 
S M B xe 
A. maculatum 
1974 11 2 4 7.88* 
1975 59 28 47 10.94** 
1976 48 a7 5 34.68%*** 
1977 14 3 7 Ua 
A. opacum 
1974 6 3 3 — 
1975 0 1 3 == 
1976 2 6 2 = 
1977 0 0 0 — 
H. crucifer 
1974 530 46 58 72 leer 
1975 891 566 427 180.60*** 
1976 1001 136 158 1126.92*** 
1977 642 40 We 912.90*** 
H. chrysoscelis 
1974 6 17 3 12545" % 
1975 3 12 11 5.62 
1976 1 1 0 — 
1977 20 1 0 86295en 
R. clamitans 
1974 3 | 8 — 
1975 11 10 37 24.24*** 
1976 24 12 24 4.80 
1977 8 4 8 1.60 
R. palustris 
1974 0 1 1 — 
1975 0 63 44 58.56*** 
1976 | abet 258 ipa V Ie DNS 
1977 82S Ierrnoa: 112.08*** 
R. sylvatica 
1974 eo BO 54 121.00*** 
1975 6 34 39 24.03*** 
1976 Dy 2 1 — 
1977 0 0 0 — 
B. americanus 
1974 0 0 0 — 
1975 4 433 43 703 .46*** 
1976 Les 20M S7 190.82*** 
1977 6 60 20 54.79"** 


* = Significant at 5% level, ** at 1% level, *** at 
0.1% level. S = surface sweep, M = midwater 
sweep, B = bottom sweep. X? testing hypothesis 


S:M:B. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


tion of microhabitats by each species 
from year to year. 

Interactions among these three kinds 
of variation produce the results seen in 
year-to-year variation of habitat breadths 
(Table 3). 


Discussion 


Two observations that contributed to 
the observed variation are difficult to ex- 
plain. The first is the collection of Bufo 
americanus larvae as they were hatching 
in 1974, but the lack of subsequent larval 
captures of this species for 1974. The 
second is the absence of Rana sylvatica 
larvae in the 1977 samples, despite the 
fact that Rana sylvatica was known to 
breed that year, the egg masses were as 
abundant as in previous years, and the 
eggs hatched. There were no obvious in- 
stances of greater egg mortality in 1977 
than observed in other years, nor were 
predators observed at the egg masses. A 
possible explanation is that the 1977 
larvae were killed by heat. The tempera- 
ture of 30 March was unseasonably warm 
(Figure 4), and the hatchling larvae have 
an upper thermal temperature tolerance 
of about 35°C (Zweifel, 1977). On 30 
March, the hatchlings likely were still 
congregated around the egg masses. The 
eggs were laid in shallow water exposed 
to direct sunlight, a situation where water 
temperature sometimes exceeds the max- 
imum air temperature (as in Figure 1). 
Unfortunately, no temperature readings 
of the water were taken at the egg mass 
site on 30 March nor is the degree of 


69 


larval dispersal known, so this explana- 
tion must remain speculative. 

The remainder of this discussion 
focuses on the year-to-year larval varia- 
tion, the probable sources of the varia- 
tion, and the interactions between kind 
and source of variation. The purpose of 
the discussion is an attempt to under- 
Stand what annual variation means in the 
larval amphibian community studied. Al- 
though discussion centers upon the study 
community itself, much of the interpreta- 
tion should be valid for larval amphibian 
communities in general. Data from this 
study are integrated with results from 
other studies. In attempting to present a 
complete discussion, some assumptions 
are made where no data are available; 
such assumptions lack literature cita- 
tions. 

Three major modes of year-to-year 
larval population variation are docu- 
mented above: population size, recruit- 
ment, and habitat use. Larval recruitment 
reflects the interaction of three com- 
ponents: (1) egg deposition, that is, when 
and how often the adults deposit egg 
masses; (2) egg and embryonic mortality; 
and (3) embryonic development, that is, 
the amount of time involved from egg 
deposition to hatching into a free swim- 
ming larva. For purposes of discussion, 
these three components are treated sepa- 
rately. Two other expressions of larval 
variation not examined in this study, but 
potentially important are: the time from 
hatching to metamorphosis, and the size 
of larvae at metamorphosis. These seven 
kinds of variation are likely the most im- 
portant affecting the larval community 
under study. The relative importance of 
these kinds of variation are thought to be: 
(1) population size (egg number), (2) egg 
deposition, (3) egg and embryonic mor- 
tality, (4) embryonic development, (5) 
size at metamorphosis, (6) time from 
hatching to metamorphosis, and (7) 
habitat use. 

The major sources of year to year lar- 
val population variation are (no ranking 
order intended): 

1) Physical-climatic factors. The inter- 


70 


action of rainfall, temperature, and 
photoperiod likely are sufficient de- 
scriptors. 

2) Number and breeding pattern of 
adults. More variation would be expected 
in non-territorial species (e.g., Ayla 
crucifer) than in territorial species (e.g., 
Rana clamitans). More variation would 
be expected in species with a prolonged 
breeding season (e.g., Ayla crucifer) 
than in species with a single egg depo- 
sition pattern (e.g., Rana sylvatica). 

3) Food resources. The two species of 
salamanders probably feed on the same 
kind of food, aquatic invertebrates and 
tadpoles. The six species of tadpoles are 
all scraping and chewing feeders and 
likely feed on detritus, algae, epifauna, 
and plankton. Previous studies suggest 
larvae with similar mouthparts would be 
feeding on these kinds of food (e.g., 
Heyer, 1973), but no feeding data were 
gathered in this study. 

4) Predators. Potential predators of 
salamander larvae in the study pond in- 
clude other salamander larvae and 
aquatic insects. Tadpole predators in- 
clude salamander larvae and aquatic in- 
sects. No quantitative data on predation 
were obtained in this study. 

5) Intra-specific and 6) inter-specific 
competition among larvae. No direct 
data for these interactions were taken in 
this study. 

Neither the expressions of variation 
nor their sources are independent factors. 
As one example, habitat use is probably 
density-dependent, i.e., correlated with 
population size. Similarly, the number of 
breeding adults and predators un- 
doubtedly are influenced strongly by 
physical-climatic factors. 

The most important observation to be 
made is that each causal factor finds ex- 
pression in more than one kind of varia- 
tion, and conversely, that each mode of 
variation, save one, has more than one 
cause (Table 4). The one exceptional 
mode is variation in embryonic develop- 
ment. This is largely influenced by 
physical climatic factors, ignoring genetic 
variation in developmental time. Genetic 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


Table 4.—Sources of Variation Affecting Various Parameters in Larval Amphibian Populations. 


Intra- Inter- 
Physical- # & breeding specific specific 
climatic pattern Food re- Pred- compe- compe- 
Parameter factors of adults sources ators tition tition 
1. Population size E x (x) x (x) (x) 
2. Egg deposition x x 
3. Egg and embryonic mortality x x 
4. Embryonic development x 
5. Metamorphic size x x x x 
6. Time from hatching to 
metamorphosis x x x x 
7. Habitat use E x x x x 


E = Cause and effect documented in this study, x = cause and effect documented or presumed from 
other studies, (xX) cause and effect presumed to be of minor importance. 


variation, while evolutionarily important, 
should not be an important factor over 
ecological time as considered in this 
study. The amount of yolk stores also 
affects developmental time. Variation in 
yolk stores within eggs of each of the 
study pond species is not known, but 
probably would add only a day or two 
of variance at most in hatching time as 
all study pond species have relatively 
little yolk in each egg. Other possible 
causes of variation in embryonic develop- 
ment time, such as oxygen concentration, 
although probably not important for the 
study pond populations, could be im- 
portant at other sites. Causal factors are 
now discussed in terms of the modes of 
variation they produce, with documenta- 
tion from this and other studies. 

The only source of variation that 
affects all parameters considered here is 
the category ‘‘physical-climatic’’ factors. 
This study documents the apparent effect 
of a severe winter on populations of Am- 
bystoma opacum and Rana clamitans. 
Another common physical-climatic fac- 
tor affecting population dynamics is the 
drying up of temporary ponds (Heyer, 
1973; Wiest, 1974). Physical-climatic 
factors are very important in determining 
when eggs are deposited. The most 
thorough analysis of this phenomenon is 
Savage’s (1961) study of variation in egg 
deposition dates in the frog Rana tem- 
poraria. Savage (1961) found that aspects 
of temperature, rainfall, photoperiod, 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


altitude, longitude, and latitude could be 
used to build a multiple correlation co- 
efficient mathematical model that ac- 
counted for 50% (r”) of the total variance 
of observed spawn dates for Rana tem- 
poraria. Because of the immense volume 
of data required to perform an adequate 
analysis of this sort, it is unlikely that 
Savage’s study will ever be repeated for 
another amphibian species. Egg mortality 
due to heavy rains, ponds drying or freez- 
ing is well known (e.g., Heyer, 1973), as 
is the relationship between temperature 
and variation in embryonic development 
time (e.g., Lillie and Knowlton, 1897; 
Moore, 1939). The present study demon- 
strates that a harsh winter can affect 
habitat use by removing one species from 
the habitat. Temperature also is known to 
affect the time from hatching to meta- 
morphosis as well as size at metamor- 
phosis (e.g., Herreid and Kinney, 1967). 

The number of breeding adults deter- 
mines the maximum number of larvae in 
the pond. The number of breeding adults 
also might affect variation in timing of 
egg deposition, especially in species 
with extended breeding seasons. If adult 
population densities are high, eggs should 
be laid on more days than if adult popula- 
tion densities are low. 

Food resources could be so limiting 
that some individuals actually died from 
starvation, thereby affecting variation in 
population size. This is probably a rare 
situation, as most temporary ponds likely 


71 


have a flush of energy input with a result- 
ant algal bloom that is cropped by the 
tadpoles. Distribution of food resources 
could affect habitat use if the food re- 
sources were patchily distributed. Food 
resources affect the time from hatching to 
metamorphosis as starved tadpoles con- 
tinue to live but do not grow (e.g., Calef, 
1973). Food resources also affect the size 
of the larvae at metamorphosis. 

Predators have a direct effect qn larval 
population size due to feeding on eggs 
and free swimming larvae (e.g., Brockel- 
man, 1969; Calef, 1973). Predators also 
could have an effect on habitat parti- 
tioning, if predators occurred more fre- 
quently in some microhabitats and not in 
others. At the study pond odonate naiads 
were present in the microhabitats sam- 
pled by the surface and bottom sweeps, 
but not in the midwater sweep micro- 
habitat. Inferential support for predators 
having an effect on larval amphibian 
habitat use is found in Heyer, McDiar- 
mid, and Weigmann (1975) and Heyer 
(1976). 

Intraspecific competition can have an 
effect on population size in the case of 
cannibalism resulting from competition 
for food, a possible explanation for the 
documented cases of cannibalism in 
Scaphiopus (Bragg, 1964). The results of 
intraspecific competition are not usually 
this drastic, however. Experimental 
studies have demonstrated the effects of 
intraspecific competition on time from 
hatching to metamorphosis (e.g., Brock- 
elman, 1969). As intraspecific com- 
petition has been demonstrated in experi- 
mental studies, it is reasonable to assume 
that competition occurring at high den- 
sities would result in the utilization of 
suboptical habitat by some members of 
the population. Intraspecific interactions 
can have a positive or negative effect on 
size at metamorphosis (e.g., Wassersug, 
1973). 

The role of interspecific competition is 
much better understood for salamanders 
(e.g., Wilbur, 1972) than for tadpoles 
(e.g., DeBenedictus, 1974). Experi- 
mental studies have shown the effects of 


72 


interspecific competition on time from 
hatching to metamorphosis and size at 
metamorphosis (e.g., Wilbur, 1972). 
Interspecific competition, if occurring in 
nature, would be expected to have an 
effect on habitat use. : 

The between-year variability outlined 
above is similar to the variability ob- 
served between ponds within a year 
(Heyer, 1973). Different ponds in a given 
geographic area have different physical 
environmental regimes, numbers of 
breeding adults, food resources, and 
predators. Because larval population 
sizes are different from pond to pond, 
larval competitive interactions among 
ponds would be expected to differ. 
Adults of a given amphibian species may 
be confronted by a variety of breeding 
ponds which differ extensively in their 
Suitability for breeding and for larval 
growth. The results of this study indicate 
that the same sort of marked variability 
is observed in a single pond over time: 
this pattern of extreme between-pond and 
between-year variability puts certain 
constraints on life history parameters of 
the amphibians using the environments. 
Because the larval habitat is unpredict- 
able, a given adult has a better chance of 
maintaining its genes in the gene pool if 
it places its eggs in more than one pond or 
in the same pond for more than one year. 
The variability demonstrated in this 
study contrasts with Calef’s (1973) study 
of a two-species permanent pond system 
in British Columbia, where he found very 
little variability over a two year period. I 
believe the British Columbia system is a 
special ecological situation and the sys- 
tem examined in this study is more typical 
of larval population dynamics. 

The major point of this discussion is 
that it is virtually impossible to isolate 
individual cause-and-effect relationships 
in the population dynamics of naturally 
occurring larval amphibian populations. 
For example, variability in size at meta- 
morphosis may reflect the interaction of 
physical-climatic factors, food resources, 
and intra- and interspecific competition. 
An experimental study isolating any one 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


of these sources of variation could dem- 
onstrate variation in size at metamor- 
phosis. Thus, a study which examined 
competition would demonstrate that 
competition could explain variation oc- 
curring in nature but would not predict 
whether competition was the only source 
of larval metamorphic size variation in 
nature, nor that it was the critical source 
of variation. A case in point is the attempt 
to explain the variation seen in larval 
populations of Rana palustris and R. 
sylvatica in the present study. Population 
sizes of both species were very different 
from year to year, as was habitat use. 
Assuming that food resource and preda- 
tor levels were equivalent over the four 
years (assumptions needed for simpli- 
fication to focus on the possible effects of 
competition, but may in fact not be equiv- 
alent), yearly variation in larval popula- 
tions can be explained in three ways. The 
first is to invoke interspecific competition. 
The data in Tables 1 and 3 indicate a 
trend where the first year is dominated 
by R. sylvatica larvae, the third and 
fourth years are dominated by R. palus- 
tris larvae. This could be interpreted as a 
replacement of one species by the other 
over time as the result of interspecific 
competition. However, an equally plau- 
sible explanation would be that the varia- 
tion in population size was due to physi- 
cal-climatic differences from year to year. 
Whatever climatic conditions are optimal 
for R. sylvatica larvae are suboptimal for 
R. palustris larvae, and vice versa. Thus, 
1974 had climatic conditions optimal for 
R. sylvatica survival and poor for R. 
palustris survival; 1976 and 1977 had 
climatic conditions optimal for R. palus- 
tris survival and poor for R. sylvatica 
survival; 1975 had intermediate climatic 
conditions for both. The fact that about as 
many R. sylvatica eggs were laid and 
hatched in 1977 as in 1974, lends some 
support to this explanation. Yet a third 
plausible explanation would consider the 
combined effects of climate and com- 
petition whereby competitive ability de- 
pends on physical conditions. It is im- 
possible to conclusively isolate the factors 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


of cause and effect of larval popula- 
tion variation in this case, given the data 
available. Similarly, I think it is impos- 
sible to isolate the cause and effect of 
larval population variation in most, if not 
all, naturally occurring larval popula- 
tions, given our present data base. 


Conclusions 


The larval phase is one part of the 
amphibian life cycle where the effects of 
natural selection likely are the greatest. 
Therefore, it is necessary to understand 
the kinds and sources of larval population 
variation in naturally occurring situations 
to fully understand the amphibian life 
cycle. The kinds of larval population 
variations encountered in nature cannot 
be demonstrated to have simple cause- 
and-effect relationships. Rather, a given 
kind of variation is the simultaneous in- 
teractive result of several causes. 

Experimental studies on larval popula- 
tions that demonstrate the cause and 
effect of certain kinds of variation cannot 
be extrapolated convincingly of field con- 
ditions. Experimental studies do lead toa 
greater understanding of larval popula- 
tion dynamics in nature, however. The 
experimental manipulation of larval am- 
phibians in a field setting introduced by 
Brockelman (1969) has been followed by 
a series of studies, several of which are 
ongoing, examining the effects of food 
resources, predation, and intra- and inter- 
specific competition on larval population 
variation. There is much to be learned 
from these types of studies, but at our 
present state of knowledge, we already 
know more about how larval amphibians 
live in field pens than in naturally occur- 
ring ponds. One of the goals of larval 
amphibian studies should be to gather 
basic data on densities and occurrences 
of larvae in naturally occurring ponds, so 
that experimental results can be inter- 
preted with greater meaning. 


Acknowledgments 


Elena, Laura, and Miriam Heyer 
worked with me in the field over the entire 


73 


study. Miriam Heyer helped process the 
larvae in the laboratory. Without their 
willingness to share their Saturdays with 
me collecting larvae, the project would 
not have been undertaken. 

David L. Correll, James F. Lynch, and 
Francis Williamson, of the Smithsonian 
Institution’s Chesapeake Bay Center for 
Environmental Studies, facilitated our 
work at the study site. 

James F. Lynch and Roy W. McDiar- 
mid, National Fish and Wildlife Labora- 
tory, Smithsonian Institution, have help- 
fully criticized the manuscript. 


References Cited 


Bragg, A. N. 1964. Further study of predation and 
cannibalism in spadefoot todpoles. Herpeto- 
logica 20: 12-24. 

Brockelman, W. Y. 1969. An analysis of density 
effects and predation in Bufo americanus tad- 
poles. Ecology 50: 632-644. 

Calef, G. W. 1973. Natural mortality of tadpoles 
in a population of Rana aurora. Ecology 54: 
741-758. 

DeBenedictus, P. A. 1974. Interspecific competition 
between tadpoles of Rana pipiens and Rana 
sylvatica: An experimental field study. Ecol. 
Monogr. 44: 129-151. 

Gosner, K. L. 1960. A simplified table for staging 
anuran embryos and larvae with notes on identi- 
fication. Herpetologica 16: 183-190. 

Herreid, C. F., II, and S. Kinney. 1967. Tempera- 


74 


ture and development of the wood frog, Rana 
sylvatica, in Alaska. Ecology 48: 579-590. 

Heyer, W. R. 1973. Ecological interactions of frog 
larvae at a seasonal tropical location in Thailand. 
J. Herpetology 7: 337-361. 

. 1976. Studies in larval amphibian habitat 
partitioning. Smithsonian Contrib. Zool. 242: 
1-27. 

Heyer, W. R., R. W. McDiarmid, and D. L. Weig- 
mann. 1975. Tadpoles, predation and pond 
habitats in the tropics. Biotropica 7: 100-111. 

Levins, R. 1968. Evolution in changing environ- 
ments: Some theoretical explorations. Monogr. 
Pop. Biol. 2: 1-120. 

Lillie, F. R., and F. P. Knowlton. 1897. On the effect 
of temperature on the development of animals. 
Zool. Bull. 1: 179-193. 

Moore, J. A. 1939. Temperature tolerance and rates 
of development in the eggs of amphibia. Ecology 
20: 459-478. 

Savage, R. M. 1961. The ecology and life history of 
the common frog (Rana temporaria temporaria). 
Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, Ltd., London. 221 pp. 

Wassersug, R. J. 1973. Aspects of social behavior 
in anuran larvae. Pages 273-297 in: Evolution- 
ary biology of the anurans: Contemporary re- 
search on major problems (J. L. Vial, ed.). Univ. 
Missouri Press, Columbia. 470 pp. 

Wiest, J. A., Jr. 1974. Anuran succession at tem- 
porary ponds in a Post Oak savannah region of 
Texas. M. Sc. Thesis, Texas A & M University, 
177 pp. 

Wilbur, H. M. 1972. Competition, predation, and 
the structure of the Amystoma-Rana sylvatica 
community. Ecology 53: 3-21. 

Zweifel, R. G. 1977. Upper thermal tolerances of 
anuran embryos in relation to stage of develop- 
ment and breeding habits. Amer. Mus. Novitates 
2617: 1-21. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


ACADEMY AFFAIRS 


THE AWARDS PROGRAM OF THE ACADEMY 


Irving Gray 


General Chairman 


The Annual Awards Dinner meeting of 
the Academy which commemorated the 
100th anniversary of Albert Einstein’s 
birth was held March 15, 1979, at the 
Kenwood Country Club. Five awards 
were made for distinctive contributions 
to research and two joint awards were 
made for science teaching. 

This year the award for Teaching of 
College Science was named in honor of 
Dr. Leo Schubert, former Chairman of 
the Department of Chemistry, American 
University. Dr. Schubert’s untimely 
death in June, 1978, caused a severe loss 
both personal and professional to many 
individuals throughout the nation in the 
field of chemistry and science education. 
His work with young people in science 
was a major contribution to the growth of 
many scientific careers. His warm per- 
sonality and his insights into the positive 
development of science teaching, his 
guidance, counsel, and friendship will be 
sorely missed. 

The scientists honored in research 
were: Behavioral Sciences, Stephen M. 
Kerst, Ph.D., Catholic University of 
America; Biological Sciences, Alfred D. 
Steinberg, M.D., National Institutes of 
Health; Engineering Sciences, Robert E. 
Berger, Ph.D., National Bureau of 
_ Standards; Mathematics and Computer 
- Sciences, Jay P. Boris, Ph.D., Naval 
_ Research Laboratory; Physical Sciences, 
Konstantinos Papadopoulos, Ph.D., 
_ Naval Research Laboratory. 

The scientists honored in teaching 
were: Leo Schubert Award in College 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


Teaching, Milton M. Slawsky, Ph.D., 
and Zaka I. Slawsky, Ph.D. (joint 
award), University of Maryland; Bernice 
G. Lamberton Award in High School 
Teaching, Ronald R. Myers, T. C. Wil- 
liams High School and Ronald J. Smeta- 
nick, Thomas S. Wooton High School 
(joint award). 


Behavioral Sciences 


Dr. Stephen M. Kerst is Assistant 
Professor of Educational Psychology in 


Stephen M. Kerst 


75 


Alfred D. Steinberg 


the School of Education of The Catholic 
University of America. Born in Cham- 
paign, Illinois, Dr. Kerst had all of his 
college education at the University of 
Wisconsin, receiving his Ph.D. in Educa- 
tional Psychology in 1974. He is a mem- 
ber of several learned societies including 
The Psychonomic Society, Eastern 
Psychological Association, American 
Educational Research Association, 
American Psychological Association and 
others. Dr. Kerst was cited for **creative 
memory.’ 


Biological Sciences 


Dr. Alfred D. Steinberg is Senior 
Investigator, Arthritis and Rheumatism 
Branch, National Institute of Arthritis, 
Metabolism and Digestive Disorders of 
the National Institutes of Health. Born in 
New York City, Dr. Steinberg received 
his A.B. from Princeton University in 
1962 and his M.D. from Harvard Medical 
School, cum laude. He has membership 
in several learned societies among which 
are: American College of Physicians 
(Fellow), American Society for Clinical 
Investigation, American Association of 
Immunologists, and several others. Dr. 
Steinberg was cited for ‘‘concepts of the 
pathogenesis and treatment of systemic 
lupus erythromytosis.’’ 


76 


Robert E. Berger 


Engineering Sciences 


Dr. Robert E. Berger is Mechanical 
Engineer, National Bureau of Standards. 
Born in Baltimore, Maryland, Dr. Berger 
received his B.S. in Engineering from 
Case Western Reserve University in 1968 
and his Ph.D. in Fluid Mechanics from 
Johns Hopkins University in 1973. He is 
a member of the American Society for 
Testing Materials, the American Society 
of Mechanical Engineers, as well as other 
learned societies. Dr. Berger was cited 
for ‘‘development of improved test 
methods to reduce head and eye injuries.’’ 


Mathematics and Computer Sciences 


Dr. Jay P. Boris occupies the Chair of 
Science in Computational Physics and is 
Chief Scientist, Laboratory of Computa- 
tional Physics, National Bureau of Stand- 
ards. Born in Buffalo, New York, Dr. 
Boris received his college education at 
Princeton University, obtaining his Ph.D. 
in 1968. He is a member of The Applied 
Physics Society, Sigma Xi, Phi Beta 
Kappa, and others. He received the Re- 
search Publication Award in 1972 and 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


Jay P. Boris 


1973, as well as other performance 
awards including The Arthur S. Fleming 
Award in 1976. Dr. Boris was cited for 
‘outstanding contributions in computa- 
tional physics and numerical analysis.’’ 


Physical Sciences 


Dr. Konstantinos Papadopoulos is 


Division Consultant and Professor in 


Konstantinos Papadopoulis 


‘J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


Physics Department, University of 
Maryland, and The Naval Research 
Laboratory. Born in Larissa, Greece, he 
received his B.Sc. in physics from the 
University of Athens in 1960, his M.Sc. 
in nuclear engineering from the Mas- 
sachusetts Institute of Technology in 
1965 and Ph.D. in physics from the Uni- 
versity of Maryland. He is a member 
of several learned societies including: 
Fellow of American Physical Society, 
American Geophysical Union, Full 
Member of Sigma Xi. He was the re- 
cipient of the E. O. Hulbert and Navy 
Meritorious Awards. Dr. Papadopoulos 
was cited not only for a wide range of 
contributions to physical and geophysical 
phenomena, but particularly for his lead- 
ership in theoretical and computational 
plasma physics. 


Teaching of College Science— 
Leo Schubert Award 


Dr. Zaka I. Slawsky was Chief of 
Physics Research at the Naval Ordnance 
Laboratory and Professor of Physics 
(P.T.) at the University of Maryland 
until his retirement in 1975. Born in 
Brooklyn, New York, Dr. Slawsky re- 
ceived a B.S. degree from Rensselaer 
Polytechnic Institute in 1933, an M.S. 


Me 


Zaka I. Slawsky 


77 


from California Institute of Technology 
in 1935 and Ph.D. from the University 
of Michigan in 1938, all in Physics. He 
is a member of many learned societies 
including The Philosophical Society and 
a Fellow of the American Physical 
Society and Washington Academy of 
Sciences. Dr. Slawsky was cited (with 
Dr. Milton M. Slawsky) for *‘Pioneering 
work in the development of a highly 
successful physics tutoring program and 
for demonstrating an innovative ap- 
proach to the involvement of retired 
scientists in the teaching of physics.”’ 
Dr. Milton M. Slawsky was Director 
of Physics, Air Force Office of Scientific 
Research, until his retirement in 1974. He 
is visiting lecturer in physics at the Uni- 
versity of Maryland. Born in Brooklyn, 
New York, he received a B.S. degree 
from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 
1933, an M.S. from California Institute of 
Technology in 1935, and Ph.D. from the 
University of Michigan in 1938, all in 
physics. Dr. Slawsky is a Fellow of the 
Washington Academy of Sciences, the 
American Physical Society, and other 
learned societies. He was cited (with Dr. 
Zaka I. Slawsky) for ““pioneering work 
in the development of a highly successful 
physics tutoring program and for demon- 


78 


Ronald R. Myers 


Strating an innovative approach to the 
involvement of retired scientists in the 
teaching of physics.”’ 


Teaching of High School Science 


Mr. Ronald R. Myers is teacher of 
Chemistry at the T. C. Williams High 
School in Alexandria, Virginia. Born in 
Fostoria, Ohio, Mr. Myers received his 
B.S. and M.S. at Bowling Green State 
University, finishing in 1974. He at- 
tended N.S.F. institutes in physics in 
1974 and 1975 and is currently a candidate 
for a Ph.D. at American University. He 
is amember of several societies including 
the American Chemical Society and 
American Association of Physics Teach- 
ers. He received a grant from the latter 
organization for an innovative teaching 
project and the Merck Award in Chemistry 
while at Bowling Green State University. 
Mr. Myers was cited for “excellence in 
teaching and motivating ordinary students 
to do extraordinary work in chemistry.’’ 

Mr. Ronald J. Smetanick is teacher of 
Biology at the Thomas S. Wooton High 
School in Rockville, Maryland. Born in 
Tarentum, Pa., Smetanick received a 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


Sa 


B.S. in Biology from Clarion State Uni- 
versity in 1963 and a M.S. in Secondary 
Education from the University of Mary- 
land in 1970. He has had a distinguished 
_ career at both the Junior High and High 
~ School levels, making a significant impact 
in student relations. Mr. Smetanick was 
cited as being ‘‘an outstanding teacher 
and humanitarian.’’ 

The chairmen of the several subcom- 
mittees that carried out the difficult job of 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 2, 1979 


making the individual selections are 
acknowledged with sincere thanks: 


Dr. Sherman Ross, Behavioral Sciences 

Dr. Lewis Affronti, Biological Sciences 

Dr. Joan Rosenblatt, Mathematics and 
Computer Sciences 

Dr. Conrad H. Cheek, Physical Sciences 

Dr. Joseph B. Morris, Teaching of 
Science. —IJrving Gray, Ph.D. 


79 


ae a 
AP Ge i " 


¥ ioe se cant 


re dk ®l 7 a ‘ya j ia "4 


ri Ne! * Saar 5 rep ety: Nubine " 


t ‘ ( 
‘ ivi 


a io . ie hE 
Ce nT OE : 
wiley ied ithe: To gesiingy 
SAR anne i 7 iy is a’ pik th } MeO: alee 
¥en Abit | | . . Pareitons, PY, 


JOURNAL OF THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 


Instructions to Contributors 


General 
Type manuscripts on white bond paper 


either 84 by 11 or 8 by 10% inches. Double 


space all lines, including those in abstracts, 


tables, legends, quoted matter, acknowledg- 


ments, and references cited. Number pages 
consecutively. Place your name and com- 


plete address in the upper right hand corner 


of the title page. 


Title, Author, and Affiliation 

Page | of your manuscript should contain 
only this information and your name and 
address. Choose a concise but complete and 
meaningful title. In research papers con- 


cerning biological subjects, include an indi- 


cation of the order and family of the taxa 


discussed. Academic degrees will not nor- 


mally be included unless the author so 


specifies. If possible, combine your affilia- 


tion and mailing address (including Zip) so 


. that readers can write to you directly. 


Abstract 

Type on a separate sheet at the end of the 
manuscript. Make the abstract intelligible 
without reference to the text of the paper. 
Write an informative digest of the significant 
content and conclusions, not a mere descrip- 
tion. Generally, the abstract should not ex- 
ceed 3% of the text. 


Footnotes 

Use footnotes as sparingly as possible. 
Number text footnotes consecutively with 
Arabic numerals and type them on a sepa- 
rate sheet of paper at the end of the manu- 
script. Type table footnotes, if any, below 
each pertinent table on the same page. 


Illustrations and Legends 
The quality of all original illustrations 
must be high enough to facilitate good offset 


_ reproduction. They should have ample mar- 
gins and be drawn on heavy stock or 
fastened to stiff cardboard to prevent bend- 
‘ing. They should be proportioned to column 
(1 x 3) or page (2 x 3) type-dimensions, 
leaving space for legend material. Photo- 


graphs should have a glossy finish. They re- 
produce best when the contrast is fairly 
high. Identify each illustration with number 
and author in light pencil marks on the 
reverse side. Submit all illustrations sepa- 
rately — please do not glue or clip them to 
the pages of the manuscript. 

Do not type or write legends directly on 
the illustrations. Type legends on a separate 
sheet or sheets at the end of the manuscript. 
Indicate where you want illustrations to 
appear in the printed paper by writing the 
figure numbers lightly in the text margins, 
and be sure that each figure is properly re- 
ferenced in the text itself. Original ‘“‘art” will 
be returned only at the author’s request and 
expense. 


Tables 

Include tables only when the same infor- 
mation cannot be presented economically in 
the text, or when a table presents the data in 
a more meaningful way. Consider preparing 
extremely complicated tabular matter in a 
form suitable for direct reproduction as an 
illustration. In such cases, the use of the 
typewriter is not recommended. 


References to Literature 

Limit references within the text and in 
synonymies to author and year (and page if 
needed). In a “Reference Cited” section, list 
alphabetically by senior author only those 
papers you have included in the text. Like- 
wise, be sure all the text references are 
listed. Type the “References Cited” section 
on a separate sheet after the last page of 
text. Abbreviations should follow the USA 
Standard for Periodical Title Abbreviations, 
Z39.5-1963. 


Submission of Manuscripts 

Send completed manuscripts and sup- 
porting material to the Academy office (see 
address inside front cover) in care of the 
Editor. Authors will be requested to read 
Xerox “proofs” and invited to submit re- 
print orders prior to publication. 


Reprints - Prices for reprints may be obtained on request. 


Washington Academy of Sciences 
608 H St. S.W. 


Washington, D.C. 20024 
Return Requested with Form 3579 


2nd Class Postage Paid 
at Washington, D.C. 
and additional mailing offices. 


DOL AA KY 

DaAWAs 

: VOLUME 69 
Number 3 


Jour nal of the September, 1979 


WASHINGTON 
ACADEMY -.. SCIENCES 


ISSN 0043-0439 


Issued Quarterly 
at Washington, D.C. 


CONTENTS 


Albert Einstein’s 100th Birthday: 
OTTO BERGMANN: Theoretical General Relativity —1979............... 


RAYMOND J. SEEGER: Einstein’s Philosophy of Physics ............... 


STEPHEN G. BRUSH: Einstein and Indeterminism...................... 


HARRY POLACHEK: Einstein and Religion ..... «0.0... .2-06005.-50+00% 


WALTER G. BERL: Albert Einstein—A Moral Visionary in a Distraught 


Ce 


cece e se ee eee ee ee ee ww 


Directory and Alphabetical List of Members, 1979.................. 


Bylaws — Washington Academy of Sciences ......................... 


Washington Academy of Sciences 


Founded in 1898 


EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 


President 
Alfred Weissler 


President-Elect 
Marjorie R. Townsend 


Secretary 
James F. Goff 


Treasurer 
Nelson W. Rupp 


Members at Large 
Conrad B. Link 
Elaine Shafrin 


BOARD OF MANAGERS 


All delegates of affiliated 
Societies (see facing page) 


EDITOR 


Richard H. Foote 


ACADEMY OFFICE 


608 H St., S.W. 
Washington, DC 20024 
Telephone: (202) 347-3368 


The Journal 


This journal, the official organ of the Washington Acad- 
emy of Sciences, publishes historical articles, critical 
reviews, and scholarly scientific articles; proceedings 
of meetings of the Academy and its Board of Managers; 
and other items of interest to Academy members. The 
Journal appears four times a year (March, June, 
September, and December)—the September issue 
contains a directory of the Academy membership. 


Subscription Rates 


Members, fellows, and patrons in good standing re- 
ceive the Journal without charge. Subscriptions are . 
available on a calendar year basis only, payable in ad- 
vance. Payment must be made in U.S. currency at the 
following rates: 


U.S. and Canada....... $17.00 
ROTCIEDE ico stick eee 18.50 
Single Copy Price ...... 6.00 


Single-copy price for Vol. 66, No. 1 (March, 1976) is 
$7.50. 


Back Issues 


Obtainable from the Academy office (address at bottom 
of opposite column): Proceedings: Vols. 1—13 (1898- 
1910) Index: To Vols. 1—13 of the Proceedings and 
Vols. 1-40 of the Journal Journal: Back issues, 
volumes, and sets (Vols. 1—62, 1911-1972) and all cur- 
rent issues. 


Claims for Missing Numbers 


Claims will not be allowed if received more than 60 days | 


after date of mailing plus time normally required for 
postal delivery and claim. No claims will be allowed 
because of failure to notify the Academy of a change in 
address. 


Change of Address 


Address changes should be sent promptly to the Acad- | 
emy office. Such notification should show both old and | 


new addresses and zip number. | 
| 


Published quarterly in March, June, September, and December of each year by the 


Washington Academy of Sciences, 608 H St., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20024. Second class 
postage paid at Washington, D.C. and additional mailing offices. 


DELEGATES TO THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 
REPRESENTING THE LOCAL AFFILIATED SOCIETIES 
Emasopmical Society Of Washington. 2... ic. 62.2. ee ce ke es bes wae else ee cies cdma James F. Goff 
Prunporosical Society Of Washington . . 2... 6c cc. ee ea ding coe a scaly Sule dies ce Jean K. Boek 
ea IBSOCICUN Ol) WASMINGLON! 3. 2Se oak aaaie a owe ee uel sien nad wtedineces ee William R. Heyer 
PeeEOCICLY Ol WaShINPtOM) ...°. 2 Fado eck siacdes oe a we ale de a eles sno 0b )0 wee uss didele a Jo-Anne Jackson 
Penaia lent SOCICLY Of WaSMINStON © 21...) 6 cases ces ons ea a els 6 cides cinley ou de ss ewes Donald R. Davis 
eT RTA INCAS OCIEEW) 1652 core se syn le ese ahelboa ka wid «Rial Gb wale ere Oerelylaiche @ a aulwelend le T. Dale Stewart 
ermecieni society OF WaShINStON) ... oi ea pec ee ee eee eee bee de cvmenenes Delegate not appointed 
Mem aeSocicry or the District of Columbia -)...5.0. 90.5.0 6 de cc ca cen stan eaves biceeeee Inactive 
IESE MEETS FOC SOCICLY . sc205 rer cares aie esis @ weiatlowls Dauateta ea senile ub wel asm scaewlalees Paul H. Oehser 
Bepeeeseciciy OF WaShiINStON 2.66 keke e bee enc bees elc eee daeuswesne Conrad B. Link 
aan BUMMER AT TL OLCSECES alo i 2 ase «ofc do Sic abe dinate Se Ae Meee bg AO oa aE AES tp elemee ba No delegate 
Rete TIO CIC Ol PM OINECENS, 20h. p5 o\a'eee ies) 0 c)a/Sioenn orale, « 6 3 ap eepevannpsyighe aE aa diauelaase.s George Abraham 
iasamicver Electrical and Electronics EMQimeers, ... 2.0.0 s2 parece eye a ne ee eee George Abraham 
Pememeaneseciery of Mechanical ENPinee,rs, :.... 2.6.02. esse due de caine oi eee ln ee eee babe ees Michael Chi 
Peonmnmnsloricalssociety Of WashiNStOn oq <5... ays oe oes eaeiete aa sis nein Bere meee Robert S. Isenstein 
Path Mie SAW OTA LICTODI GIO RY pHi ys, 5). Lie Syssinale Gaye able aod alah dy & ia oe leen Gis, e clave ladeliereyhpwece No delegate 
Paecmaenamerncan Military Engineers.) .u..o.. 02,06. 226 ek a a ce eee ee dee H. P. Demuth 
PEMA OOCICLY OF CIVIP EMPINCEIS 2.655.652 00s e oes dees bee deteewcestaerecesas Robert Sorenson 
MOcierviOr Experimental Biology and Medicine ... 02.65.00 0+. c sees as twee es een Cyrus R. Creveling 
PORE AMESOCICEY NON WICtAIS. va qeesai.c.6.0 o> Sol Ge egn vaca cea Mua tb belo sane as Charles G. Interrante 
mmncican Association OF Dental Research cr. 5.56 sé neko Sind bye eee sc efeye ae ase Donald W. Turner 
American Institute of Acronautics and Astronautics: . .... 2. .fle cess cde nc cle ee em ee George J. Vila 
PRimchic At VICLCOLOlOSIGAl SOCICLY ic), «ky sinus acs epalds acne ye ofagiaje o's led Wim dialed bleays ses 6 dg A. James Wagner 
Mee CCMA CMSOICICEY Gl VV ASMINGTOM © 2) 5) 6:.ylo-ceeieceyssevese wore yo,8 2b toilet a oe 00k ow edie’ ao aE Jack R. Plimmer 
EGOUISINER SYOTOTEN IO a0 115) (Ce ee eee Delegate not appointed 
Perea TIC IC ATE SOCIOL Ye) Aarts Gre Mae a's iiadiatievaserbiss <<a. sued ao 4's winiee oop wo. age wud ably bm adm ol aye Dick Duffey 
JLSTULIS GH lFereal Tiere ain fo! ko) 1) oe ee William Sulzbacher 
Eset AE MEOD CT TTENUEE NOCECHY A Che Perris co ictatc s (osc s\lbisite 0 super Meauevinrtts let «cyiel ea lath: alvw ayetencvetinay 2) svebe iayantueleys foe Inactive 
ESE ODE PETES, SO ETE ON EA or ae ee ee Alayne Adams 
Pease OneEAIS TORY OM OCICNCE CUD es... 5... os 2 PR RRS RO O, Ca las eaias be eas Inactive 
Pemchicait ssOciauon Of PMYSICS Feachers . 5.3366 h iar ea Ps A Peggy A. Dixon 
MSHI IESOCIOIV AO AIMICKICE,, /cigiitrs: 6 faiigs oa rs ck a ne tes oa As SASS de eae Cee ea George J. Simonis 
PMnEmeAaneSOGICtY OL blant PMySiGlOgistS ”. 0.20.26 050.0 .s eee ce soba es hee ee eee’ Walter Shropshire 
aSmnetOnLOUCLALOnS NeESCAnCH COUNCI! 5 occ se cee bees ce eter cee tees e sce ecne John G. Honig 
AL SUTPUNRT SIN SOVIETS SATO TANTS) BG gee A a aE Inactive 
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical 
MMC TRO CUI MONIC CRSM Ms era hare clos. eaie seh aia eis aisle o Sette < manip ale aces see eco ow le eho ieee Gus H. Goudarzi 
mietonall Capitol AStOnOMerS: b.fic 06... ee ee ee Bit corer pA SoD oa ee Cone Benson J. Simon 
WIE IIALICAleASSOCIAMONUOL AMMEEICA sc: .. .claele sacle wiabie be wd dave aeeee eee beens vue bls Patrick Hayes 
eS MINS GLUES TO ls @INEMIESUS facie Wey cera alee s. eis vets aime wie ub & Wim. cia wig ele wales es Sle dese @ Miloslav Rechcigl, Jr. 
Wee D.C. Psychological Association ........2. 1... e eee eee eee e tee e ete e eee nes John O’Hare 
ney asnineton: Paint echnical Groups i... 6. 6k doen h de ee eee Hoda ss eeiealee oe Paul G. Campbell 
Pane nCAl EMyVtOpAtnOlOPical SOCICLY 6.06.2. 5 s+ s+ 0 Ruidls elope jnilcl vi waieeyere Gade pies # siete Tom van der Zwet 
eaciety tor General: Systems Research... o. .c ais. wale Mee ale fle won deve oe ale sears Ronald W. Manderscheid 
RSME A MEA CLORSES OCLC LY, 20h cate te coins Ce) Siw. ts. oh. 301 a a ols Wh Lane ate BEA aie eS Blade bie lp tlhe H. Mcllvaine Parsons 
RE HICAT HISMETMES SOCICLY Vth e sie iid wicie nS oad see dle le wo ed ene alin dose eens aes Irwin M. Alperin 


Delegates continue in office until new selections are made by the representative societies. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 81 


A BIRTHDAY COMMEMORATION 


This issue of the Academy’ Journal is devoted, in part, to the com- 
memoration of the 100th anniversary of the birth of Albert Einstein. 


Three papers bearing upon this commemoration were presented at 
the 584th meeting of the Academy on March 15, 1979 at the Kenwood 
Country Club in Bethesda, Maryland. Two of those papers, by Drs. 
Otto Bergmann and Steven Brush, are among those you will find 
published in this issue of the Journal. The third presentation at that 
meeting was by Dr. Carroll Alley, ‘Experimental General Relativity — 
1979°’, but a manuscript was not received for publication in this 
collection. 


The remaining articles presented here were delivered at a subsequent 
meeting of the Academy on May 17, 1979, also at Kenwood. 


Richard H. Foote 
Editor 


_ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


EINSTEIN 


Theoretical General Relativity —1979 


Otto Bergmann 


Department of Physics, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C. 20052 


i 


The physical idea of the general theory 
of relativity can perhaps be explained 
with a story of historical possibilities. 
We know that Eratosthenes of Cyrene 
determined the radius of the earth in the 
third century B.C. It is quite possible that 


|| a qualitative theory of surfaces could 


have been developed at that time, a 
theory which we owe to C. F. Gauss. 
Considering the highly speculative nature 
of ancient science, one can easily imagine 
that some philosopher proposed the idea 
that the curvature at any point of the sur- 
face of the earth may not be fixed for all 
times, but that it may change with the in- 
tensity of the sunlight or the temperature 
of the fire deep underneath the point on 
the earth. This is an absurd view but it 
does illustrate the physical idea of general 
relativity without the need to visualize a 
four-dimensional space-time continuum. 

Einstein’s general relativity general- 
izes the flat space-time continuum, de- 
scribed by the invariant four-distance 
between neighbouring events 


is)? — c*(dt)?,— (dx)? — (dy)? — (dz) 
T7 Sedx°dx? (1) 


_ to a curved space-time continuum 


(ds)? = guedx°dx® (2) 


(summation over all indices occurring 
twice!) 


_ J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


WEN KO SC bX eK (KV KOE — nial 
the meaning of §,, can be seen from (1). 
Although (2) cannot be reduced to (1) in 
general, we may introduce local co- 
ordinates which reduce to (1) at one 
space-time point. In local Riemannian co- 
ordinates, (2) can be expanded 


Sap — Sas ar YAR ynpnX*x* sie, +e (3) 


where R,,g, 1S the curvature tensor, 
which is restricted by the field equations 


RK os. a YagapR — =KW ap (4) 


where T,, is the energy-momentum ten- 
sor, which includes all the contributions 
in energy and momentum which may be 
present at the point except gravitational 
energy. The derivation of (4) does not 
make use of the flat space-time metric 
(1), but an alternative derivation of Ein- 
stein’s equation (4) starts from a field 
equation in flat space-time 


’e a 
Ox%ax® 


and leads to (4) on the grounds that the 
energy-momentum tensor in (5) should 
include the contribution from the gravita- 
tional field. The latter is quadratic in 
the derivatives of g,, and one obtains 
in fact Einstein’s equation (4).' 
Returning to (2), we make two observa- 
tions. First, A. Z. Petrov in 1954 gave a 
classification of the curvature tensor 


ee sais iy (5) 


83 


Rygxx In empty space, i.e. with Ty, = 0 
in (4), which became most valuable in the 
study of gravitational radiation. Secondly, 
it is easy to derive from (3) the equa- 
tion of geodesic deviation which makes 
the curvature tensor directly measurable. 
The equation was known to C. G. J. 
Jacobi for surfaces and was generalized 
by T. Levi-Civita. 

For many years after the formulation 
of general relativity, only two exact and 
physically important solutions were 
known. The Schwarzschild solution de- 
scribes a single mass point without in- 
ternal structure and the theoretical study 
of the three early experimental tests were 
made with the help of this solution. The 
Reissner-Nordstrom solution includes a 
net electrical charge with the mass. Since 
then many new exact solutions have been 
found, the most important being the Kerr 
solution.” It describes a spinning mass 
particle and is important because the final 
state of a collapsing star will in general 
have a finite angular momentum. Many 
other exact solutions have been found, 
but their physical significance is not al- 
ways transparent. The modern theory of 
gravitational collapse belongs to astro- 
physics and depends as much on elemen- 
tary particle physics as on gravitation. 
This is true even of cosmology, whose 
greatest triumph recently has been the 
experimental support of the big-bang 
theory on the early universe by the dis- 
covery of the black-body radiation cor- 
responding to a temperature of 3°K. It 
should perhaps be said in this connection 
that we now have a fairly complete 
relativistic kinetic theory with a relativis- 
tic Boltzmann equation.? 

The classical theory of general rela- 
tivity is a theory of gravitation, but the 
gravitational interaction between ele- 
mentary particles is rather weak com- 
pared to the electric and nuclear inter- 
action, and it is therefore hardly surpris- 
ing that the unification of gravitation with 
other interactions has not progressed as 
much as the study of gravitation for 
macroscopic bodies. We can have com- 
plete confidence in the latter—radical 


84 


modifications are either not attractive or 
have no experimental support— but there 
is still much room for speculations on the 
atomic level. We will mention here briefly 
the Yang-Mills formalism, which plays an 
important role in elementary-particle 
physics; it could be considered an off- 
spring of the general theory of relativity. 
According to W. Heisenberg, the proton 
and the neutron should be considered as 
two members of one family, the nucleon- 
family. Yang and Mills insisted that the 
mathematical distinction between these 
two particles should be left to the choice 
of a local observer and should not be pre- 
determined for the whole universe. If the 
index A = | or 2 distinguishes between 
proton and neutron, Yang and Mills 
demanded that a theory involving a 


field Ww, should be invariant under trans- - 


formations 
Wa'(X) = Sa?(x)Wp(x) (6) 


and this gives rise to covariant deriva- 
tions with intrinsic affine connections 
I,” and then also to a curvature in the 
intrinsic space. Similar concepts have ap- 
peared even before Yang and Mills in the 
theory of spinors in curved space-time. It 
is amusing that these theories are linked, 


formally at least, to the theory of rela- — 


tivity through the principle of general co- 


variance, which is often considered as the 
least physical cornerstone of the classical 
theory of relativity, and sometimes even 
just as a necessary evil. — 


The aim of fundamental physics is a | 


unified field theory, which in some way 
can describe the many particle varieties 


and their interactions. The only way this | 
can be done at present is by introducing | 


many fields and quantize these fields. The 
Unified Field theory which Einstein 


developed in the last years of his life con- | 
tains too few degrees of freedom and its | 
quantization would be next to impossible. | 


Unfortunately the attempts to unify the 


general relativity and quantum theory of | 
elementary particles do not take into ac- | 


count the intuitive meaning of the con- 
cepts employed by the classical theory of 


relativity: length and time intervals, 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


curvature and parallel transfer. We may 
hope for another Albert Einstein to bring 
clarity and beauty back into physics. 


References 


1. W. Thirring, Annals of Physics 16, 96 (1962). 
2. See for instance: R. Adler, M. Bazin and M. 
Schiffer, Introduction to General Relativity, at 


McGraw Hill, New York (1965); Charles W. 
Misner, Kip S. Thorne and John A. Wheeler, 
Gravitation, W. H. Freeman & Co., San Fran- 
cisco (1970); S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. 
Ellis, The Large Scale Structure of Space- 
Time , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 
(1973). 

3. Steven Weinberg, Gravitation and Cosmology, 
John Wiley (1972); John M. Stewart, Lecture 
Notes in Physics #10, Springer Verlag (1971). 


Einstein’s Philosophy of Physics 


| Raymond J. Seeger 


National Science Foundation; retired 


‘‘One of the greatest achievements in 
the history of human thought’’ was the 
comment of the physicist Sir Joseph J. 
Thomson, PRS, when he announced the 
experimental comfirmation of Einstein’s 
general theory of relativity at a meeting 
of the Royal Society on Nov. 6, 1919. 
He added, ‘‘I have to confess that no 
one has yet succeeeded in stating in 
clear language what the theory of Ein- 
stein really is’ —a typical remark of that 
time. Cornelius Lanczos, sometime re- 
search assistant of Einstein, claimed in 
his “‘Albert Einstein and the Cosmic 
World Order’’ (1965), ‘‘He [Einstein] 
considered himself more a philosopher 
than a professional physicist.’ Strictly 
a natural philosopher, truly a genuine 
amateur! He was, indeed, distinguished 
by his interest in a broad domain of physics, 
in contrast with modern theoreticians. 

The evolution of philosophical ideas, to 
be sure, is often guided by the develop- 
ment of physical theories. Einstein, for 
instance, came into contact with prob- 
lems formerly regarded as the pre- 
rogatives of professional philosophers, 
namely, the nature of space and time. 
His own approach, a combination of 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


" ie 


mathematical insight and observed data, 
was quite remote from that of the ivory 
tower philosopher, but it involved more 
implicit philosophy than many an ex- 
plicitly philosophical system owing to 
his own broad view. 

The German theoretical physicist Max 
Planck, a sponsor of Einstein for the 
Prussian Academy of Science, noted that 
two conflicting philosophies of science 
have cited Einstein’s writings in their 
support, namely, the positivistic and the 
metaphysical. In this connection it is 
interesting to peruse “‘Albert Einstein: 
Philosopher-Scientist’’ (ed. P. A. Schilpp, 
1949). In the article ‘‘Einstein, Mach, 
and Logical Positivism’’ the theoretical 
physicist Philipp Frank, who knew Ein- 
stein from 1910 and succeeded him two 
years later at the German University of 
Prague, concluded that there is not ‘‘any 
essential divergence between Einstein 
and 20th-century logical empiricism.’’ In 
his concluding comments Einstein made 
no remark about this article, whereas he 
particularly noted with respect to the one 
on ‘‘Einstein’s Theory of Knowledge”’ 
that ‘‘the American physicist Victor Len- 
zen constructs a synoptic total picture in 


85 


which what is missing in the utterances 
is carefully and with delicacy of feeling 
supplied. Everything said there appears 
to me convincing and correct.’’ The basis 
of my own comments here is primarily 
Einstein’s Herbert Spencer Lecture ‘‘On 
the Method of Theoretical Physics’’ (Ox- 
ford, 1933), which Frank has called ‘‘the 
finest formulation of his [Einstein] views 
on the nature of physical theory.’’ It is 
truly amazing how Einstein’s logical 
analysis of relativity at age 54 coincided 
with his interpretation of it at 26. 

Einstein always acknowledged his in- 
debtedness to the Austrian physicist 
Ernst Mach, first rector of the German 
University of Prague, whom he did not 
actually meet until the Vienna Congress 
in 1913. In his 1916 obituary Einstein 
gratefully stated, ‘‘I can say with cer- 
tainty the study of Mach and Hume has 
been directly and indirectly a great help 
in my work.’’ Einstein, I believe, was the 
true heir of Mach’s physical ideas. Let us 
see in what way. 

The 19th-century philosophy of phys- 
ics was still embroiled in Pilate’s peren- 
nial question, ‘‘What is truth?’’ Is there 
scientific truth as opposed to philosoph- 
ical truth? You may recall Adam’s at- 
tempt in ‘‘Paradise Lost’’ to learn from 
the archangel Raphael whether the 
Copernican planetary system or the 
Ptolemaic one is true. The politic reply 
was to leave such matters to God above, 
an admonition ignored later by the ag- 
gressive Galileo. In the 19th century for 
a physical phenomenon to be scien- 
tifically true meant for it to have a satis- 
factory mechanical analogue as in the 
case of sound, heat, and light. This view 
peaked in popularity about 1870. Gustav 
Kirchhoff, the Heidelberg physicist, as- 
serted in his ‘‘Mechanics’’ (1874) that its 
purpose was ‘‘to describe completely and 
as simply as possible motions occurring 
in nature.’ Two years earlier Mach had 
prescribed logical economy of thought 
and simplicity for all science. But a new 
day was heralded in 1889 by the Bonn 
professor of Physics Heinrich R. Hertz, 
who preferred to take Maxwell’s equa- 


86 


tions for directly describing electromag- 
netic phenomena. 

Mach’s own attitude went back to the 
French philosopher Auguste Comte who 
argued in 1830 that any scientific theory 
should be judged with respect to its repre- 
sentation of positive experience— subse- 


quently called positivism. In 1883 Mach 


himself urged that only statements lead- 
ing to observable phenomena should be 
used—a positivistic criterion. On this 
basis he opposed any vacuous notion 
such as Newton’s idea of absolute space. 
He insisted that terrestrial motions in 
space should be viewed relative to the 
‘‘fixed’’ stars. Einstein saw these ma- 
terial bodies distorting the space about 
them and thus determining the paths of 
freely moving objects there, i.e., general 


relativity—a wholly new idea in the . 


history of thought. 

Pursuing the critical outlook of Mach 
and the Scottish philosopher David 
Hume, he analyzed the concept of simul- 
taneity, which is simple enough when two 
events occur at the same place, but not 
so obvious when they are separated by a 
great distance accessible only by light 
travelling with its finite speed. Percy W. 
Bridgman, the Harvard experimental- 
ist, regarded Einstein’s conception of 
simultaneity as the best illustration of 
operationalism. 

In Mach’s phenomenological physics 
processes were to be described by con- 
cepts derived inductively or intuitively 
from sensory experiences. Einstein, 
however, did not agree with his view of 
general laws of physics as mere sum- 
maries of experiential results, or simple 
abstractions from them, such as white- 
ness from white objects, i.e., in the spirit 
of Newton’s ‘“‘non fingo hypotheses’’ — 
typical of 19th-century scientific doctrine, 
e.g., the English physicist John Tyndall 
(Mach himself did allow a small gap). 

Einstein was indebted also to the 
French mathematical physicist Henri 
Poincaré, whom he did not actually meet 
until the 1911 Solvay Conference in Brus- 
sels. In this connection let us glance back 
at 18th-century rationalism. In 1748 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


Hume questioned causality being neces- 
sarily inherent in successive events. 
Immanuel Kant, the German philosopher, 
argued in 1781 that phenomena per se are 
insufficient for describing phenomena; 
some reason has to be injected into the 
description, but not without limit—crea- 
tivity is bounded by certain necessary 
thought conditions. Such was Euclidean 
geometry, a thought mold, an a priori 
requisite. The production, however, of 
consistent non-Euclidean geometries in- 
dependently by the Russian mathema- 
tician Nicholaus I. Lobachevski and 
the Hungarian mathematician Wolfgang 
Bolyai soon liberated the human mind 
in this regard. 

In 1912 Poincaré insisted that ‘‘the 
general properties of science are not 
statements about reality, but arbitrary 
statements how words such as straight 
lines, force, energy are to be employed 
in properties of geometry, mechanics, 
and physics;’’ they are “‘free creations of 
the mind,’ agreements among people for 
expediency, mere conventions, hence the 
designation of this as conventionalism. 
Einstein, for instance, considered in- 
tegers to be an invention of man for 
simplifying his experience. He regarded 
the approximate success of both New- 
ton’s law of gravitation and his own as 
indicative of their fictitious character. In 
the Spencer lecture he confessed, ‘‘I am 
convinced that we can discover by means 
of purely mathematical constructions the 
concepts and the laws connecting them 
with each other, which furnish the key to 
the understanding of natural phenomena.”’ 
General relativity, in his opinion, il- 
lustrates the incorrectness of the proposi- 
tion that scientific concepts are neces- 
sarily derived from experience. 

These two points of view, Mach’s 
and Poincaré’s, represent opposite ex- 
tremes of the positivism movement— 
Mach emphasising the empirical founda- 
tion and Poincaré the logical consistency 
of the superstructure. In the late 1920’s 


_ the Vienna circle (Morris Schick, Rudolf 


Carnap, Otto Neurath, et al.) combined 
them to form logical positivism— happily 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


renamed logical empiricism by the 
American philosopher Charles Morris. 
Inasmuch as Hume is sometimes re- 
garded as its father and Poincaré as its 
godfather, let us examine Einstein’s own 
relation to this doctrine. 

Einstein considered it an oversimpli- 
fication that every statement of physical 
science should be translatable word for 
word into observable facts. He preferred 
to replace this positivistic criterion witha 
much broader one, viz., that one can 
use ‘‘any symbols or words possible in 
the formulation of the principles, pro- 
vided that statements about observable 
quantities can be equally derived from 
them.’’ In the Spencer lecture he stated, 
‘*The structure of the world of reason, the 
empirical contents, and their relations 
must find their representation in the con- 
clusions of the theory.’ (Einstein him- 
self had a remarkable faculty of deduc- 
ing all possible logical consequences from 
his own fundamental principles.) Einstein 
did not at all agree with the French 
philosopher René Descartes’ dictum that 
thinking per se can reveal a knowledge 
of the world of experiences, he felt that 
the latter itself serves as a necessary 
boundary condition, that physical con- 
tent is a prerequisite to any mathematical 
formulation. In his 1921 lecture at Prince- 
ton University he warned that ‘‘the uni- 
verse of ideas is just as little independent 
of the nature of our experience as clothes 
are of the form of the human body.”’ 

Einstein placed emphasis not only on 
testing observation but also on simplify- 
ing theory, (Simplicity itself, to be sure, 
is not a simple concept.) In 1902 he had 
simplified the Boltzmann theory for 
random motion (Gibbs’ method being un- 
known to him at the time); he applied it 
three years later to explain quantitatively 
Brownian motions. In his Oxford lecture 
he concluded, ‘‘It is the grand object of 
all theory to make these irreducible 
elements simple and as few in number 
as possible without having to renounce 
the adequate representation of any 
empirical content whatever.’ A long 
chain of mathematical and _ linguistic 


87 


arguments may result; the length, I 
believe is usually proportional to the 
simplicity of the structure. Neverthe- 
less, one is always amazed at the power 
of abstract thinking. 

These two major emphases of Einstein, 
particularly after 1920, appear to be in 
keeping with Frank’s own conclusion 
(1947) that ‘‘Einstein speaks almost in 
line with logical empiricism in his ‘Re- 
marks on Bertrand Russell’s Theory of 
Knowledge’ [1944]”’ 

But not quite! Einstein’s passionate 
quest for reality, I believe, led him far 
beyond logical empiricism. 

Einstein, you see, believed in nature. 
In the first place, he looked upon nature 
as real. In 1931 he said, ‘‘The belief in 
an external world independent of the 
percipient subject is the foundation of all 
science.’ ‘‘I cannot conceive of a 
genuine scientist without that profound 
faith.”’ Secondly, he considered nature 
rational. In his 1936 lecture ‘‘On Physical 
Reality’’ he confessed, ‘‘The most in- 
comprehensible thing about the world is 
that it is comprehensible.’’ The freedom 
of thought (within limits) he regarded as 
one of Kant’s great discoveries in ap- 
proaching nature, that it is “‘possible to 
get away from the individual observer 
and sublimate it into something universal, 
‘public,’ and ‘real.’ ’’ For Einstein, the 
primacy was neither theory nor experi- 
ment, but rather the all-embodying law- 
fulness which manifests itself in the uni- 
verse — hence his own humility. (It seems 
to me that Robert Berks’ large figure of 
Einstein looking down casually at the 
small constellations at his feet is hardly 
in keeping with his character; a humble 
Einstein would have been gazing up in 
rapturous admiration at the overpower- 
ing, wonder-full universe.) 

Nature, in the third place, is a riddle 
that man can solve to some extent. Ein- 
stein had a passion to understand it; he 
would not be content merely to describe 
it somehow, with his deep artistic feel- 
ing (cf. his love of music) he sought the 
underlying harmony of the universe, 


88 


the luring music of the spheres. Walter 
Nernst, the German chemist, saw in the 
young Einstein the model for the young 
Kepler in ‘“‘The Redemption of Tycho 
Brahe’’ by Max Brod, a Prague associate 
of Einstein. He believed profoundly that 
‘‘behind the tireless effort of the investi- 
gator lurks a stronger, more mysterious 
drive; it is existence and reality that one 
wishes to comprehend.’ In 1929 he 
combined the gravitational field with the 
electromagnetic field to form a unified 
field theory—unfortunately inaccessible 
to experimental check in its four-dimen- 
sional expression. 

The starting point for any pilgrim’s 
progress toward understanding the uni- 
verse must be reality itself, i.e., physical 
reality in Einstein’s view, which exists 
only with respect to those characters 
manifest in observable experimental 
results. Geometry, for example, is a 
description of physical reality. Einstein 
regarded a physical field as the most 
profound and fruitful conception of 
reality since Newton; he had pictures of 
the English Michael Faraday and Clerk 
Maxwell hanging in his study both in 
Berlin and in Princeton. (Relativity, in- 
deed, reveals connections between de- 
scriptions of one and the same reality; 
it by no means implies an abandon- 
ment of truth, i.e., relativism.) 

The struggling pilgrim, however, is 
not without a road guide. Einstein was 
convinced that ‘‘since sense perception 
informs us only indirectly of the world of 
physical reality, it is only by speculation 
that it can become comprehensible to 
us.’’ His intuition, he believed, would 
lead him to penetrate the depth of reality 
by means of mathematical ideals. Ein- 
stein’s law of gravitation, for instance, 
resulted from his search for the simplest 
covariant law for a space-time Rieman- 
nian matrix. (The very intensity, indeed, 
of his investigation gave an impression of 
a somewhat metaphysical quest.) Some 
specially illuminated road, he believed, 
would lead ultimately to the real explana- 
tion; there would be revealed the magic 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


words ‘“‘Open Sesame’’ to uncover the 
universe’s secret. At Oxford he insisted, 
‘‘In my opinion there is the correct path, 
and . . . itis in our power to find it. Our 
experience to date justifies us in feeling 
sure that in nature is centralized the idea 
of mathematical simplicity. ...In a 
certain sense I hold it to be true that pure 
thought is competent to comprehend the 
real as the ancients dreamed.’ Else- 
where he noted, ‘‘The function is not that 
of a novelist [fancy free—in Coleridge’s 
sense], but that of a person who solves 
a crossword puzzle. Any word can be 
proposed in the solution, but there is 
only one that fits the puzzle in all its 
parts.’’ There is an answer to the riddle. 
In the mathematics common room of Fine 
Hall, Princeton University, above the 
fireplace, is an inscription ascribed to 
Einstein: ‘‘Raffiniert ist der Herr Gott, 


Einstein and Indeterminism 


Stephen G. Brush 


aber boschaft ist Er nicht.’’ (God is cun- 
ning, but He is not mischievous.) 

About all his physics appears an aura 
of religion. At Oxford Einstein admitted 
to ‘‘something ineffable about the real, 
something occasionally described as 
mysterious and awe-inspiring.’’ He saw 
in “‘the fact that the method turns out to 
be true in the empirical sense’’ ‘‘a prop- 
erty of our world, an empirical fact, a 
hard fact.’’ He had a mystical feeling 
toward the harmony of universal law. As 
Frank observed, ‘‘The possibility of 
mathematical physics, if we put it per- 
functorily, is almost identical with reli- 
gion.’ In his opinion Einstein’s self- 
designated cosmic religion was essen- 
tially a “‘belief in the possibility of a 
symbolic system of great beauty and con- 
ceptual simplicity from which all facts 
can be logically derived.’’ 


Department of History and Institute for Physical Science and Technology, 


University of Maryland, College Park 


The current celebrations of Albert 
Einstein’s 100th birthday have now 
reached a level of intensity which is high 
enough to bring back from the grave, if 
not Einstein himself, at least a couple 
of his colleagues, if you believe the report 
which appeared in the March 12, 1979 is- 
sue of the Chronicle of Higher Education: 


They were all gathered back at Albert Ein- 
stein’s old stomping grounds at the Institute 
for Advanced Study last week. J. Robert 
Oppenheimer, the ‘‘father of the atomic 
-bomb.’’ John Wheeler, the man who coined the 
name “black hole.’’ John von Neumann, 
formulator of the game theory.’ 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


Although Wheeler was certainly alive and 
well when he lectured at the Smithsonian 
recently, I don’t think anyone has seen 
Oppenheimer or von Neumann for at 
least a decade.” 

Tonight I want to talk about another 
ghost: the philosophical position which 
Einstein defended throughout most of 
his life, but which is now generally 
thought to be dead. I realize that a suc- 
cessful revival of this position would be 
almost as great a miracle as reviving 
Oppenheimer and von Neumann, but I 
think it is appropriate when we celebrate 
a great man like Einstein to discuss his 


89 


defeats as well as his victories. Others 
will tell you all you want to know about 
the theory of relativity and the other 
discoveries which constitute Einstein’s 
permanent contribution to modern physi- 
cal science. But you may occasionally 
hear them mention, somewhat apolo- 
getically, the embarrassing fact that 
Einstein would not accept the funda- 
mental validity of quantum mechanics 
as acomplete description of nature on the 
atomic level. As Max Born wrote in 1949, 
many physicists regarded this fact ‘‘as a 
tragedy —for him, as he gropes his way in 
loneliness, and for us who miss our leader 
and standard-bearer.’’? 

What was Einstein’s objection to 
quantum mechanics? First of all I must 
emphasize that it was much more than the 
well-known statement, “‘God does not 
play dice.’ Indeed the announced title of 
my talk is perhaps a little misleading in 
this respect. Several months ago I agreed 
that I would speak to this group in Washing- 
ton on March 14, on the topic ‘‘Einstein 
and Indeterminism.’’ If you believe in the 
principle of indeterminism you should not 
be surprised to find that I am now speak- 
ing in a Slightly different place at a slightly 
different time ona slightly different topic. 
But the deviation itself, in accordance 
with the indeterminacy principle, is based 
on the quantum. What Einstein disliked 
about quantum theory was not simply 
that it postulated an inherent randomness 
in nature, but that it denied the existence 
of a real world independent of our ob- 
servations of it. He felt that Niels Bohr 
and Werner Heisenberg had gone too far 
along the road of positivism and idealism, 
by denying reality not only to entities that 
can’t be observed, but also to those that 
aren't observed in a particular experi- 
ment. He could not accept the proposi- 
tion that the existence of a particular 
property of the electron, such as its posi- 
tion or momentum, depends on the fact 
that we choose to measure it; or, as Bohr 
expressed it, that reality belongs to the 
observation, not to the property. 

Einstein is often regarded as the 
founder of theories which provide no 


90 


comprehensible explanation of reality but 
which must nevertheless be accepted 
since they have been confirmed by 
experiment. A prime example of this 
‘‘Einstein mystique’’ is the statement 
that only 12 people in the world can 
understand the theory of relativity. As an 
historian of science I am sometimes 
asked by colleagues, and even by com- 
plete strangers, to verify or give the 
source of Einstein quotations and anec- 
dotes. Usually I am unable to do so, but 
in this case I think I have found something 
very close to the original source. In an 
article in the New York Times , November 
10, 1919, after stating that Einstein is 
‘‘about 50 years of age’’ (exaggerating 
only by 10 years) the reporter says: 


When he offered his last important work to 
the publishers he warned them there were not 
more than twelve persons in the whole world 
who would understand it, but the publishers 
took the risk.? : 


So apparently we must blame Einstein 
himself for starting this myth. But it was 
eagerly accepted and popularized by the 
press, and provides a convenient excuse 
for anyone who doesn’t want to make the 
effort to understand relativity theory. 
But Einstein suffered from a more in- 
sidious form of mystification. For many 
years his example was invoked in support 
of logical positivism or empiricism; it 
was claimed that relativity theory had 
been invented in order to explain the 
failure to observe any motion of the earth 
through ‘‘absolute space”’ or ‘‘ether’’ as 
in the Michelson-Morley experiment. 
Einstein was depicted as a follower of 
Ernst Mach, and he was praised for hav- 
ing abstained from using any theoretical 
concepts that could not be defined by 
measurements. The logical positivists 
used Einstein as an ally in their efforts 
to show that science should not attempt 
to find out what the world is really like, 
but must be content with systematizing 
and predicting the results of experiments. 
Einstein’s friend and biographer Philipp 
Frank, one of those responsible for 
promoting this view of Einstein, was 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


at least honest enough to record his own 
surprise when he learned, in 1929, that 
Einstein was opposed to positivism.°® 

Another colleague who was surprised 
to learn that he had misunderstood Ein- 
Stein’s attitude was Werner Heisenberg. 
When Einstein in 1926 questioned the 
notion that “‘none but observable mag- 
nitudes must go into a physical theory,”’ 
Heisenberg replied: ‘‘Isn’t that precisely 
what you have done with relativity. .. . 
After all, you did stress the fact that it is 
impermissible to speak of absolute time, 
simply because absolute time cannot be 
observed; that only clock readings, be it 
in the moving reference system or the 
system at rest, are relevant to the deter- 
mination of time.’’ Heisenberg reports 
Einstein’s unsettling rejoinder: ‘‘Pos- 
sibly I did use this kind of reasoning,” 
Einstein admitted, ‘“but it is nonsense all 
the same ... on principle it is quite 
wrong to try founding a theory on ob- 
servable magnitudes alone. In reality the 
very opposite happens. It is the theory 
which decides what we can observe.’’® 

Recent historical work, especially by 
Gerald Holton, has shown that Einstein 
turned away from Mach’s empiricist 
philosophy toward a realist view of na- 
ture, and that his earliest work on rela- 
tivity was not undertaken in response 
to the Michelson-Morley experiment.’ 
Hence the positivists should not be al- 
lowed to cite Einstein in support of their 
doctrines. But my primary concern here 
is with the much more direct attack which 
Einstein launched against positivism in 
the realm of atomic physics. 

In the great trilogy of 1905, Einstein’s 
paper on Brownian movement is gener- 
ally considered the least revolutionary. 
It acquires significance only if one 
realizes that at the end of the 19th century 
it was fashionable among the more 
philosophically sophisticated scientists 
to deny the existence of atoms, or rather 
to proclaim that the atomic hypothesis 
was useless and even harmful because 
atoms had not been directly observed. 
Ernst Mach, Wilhelm Ostwald and their 
followers were the precursors of the 20th- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


century logical positivists, insisting that 
scientific theories only describe rather 
than explain the phenomena of nature, 
and that concepts not directly based on 
observation are meaningless. I do not 
mean to imply that a majority of scientists 
actually accepted this view, but it was 
certainly quite influential and led some of 
the atomists, such as Ludwig Boltzmann, 
to feel that their approach was in danger 
of being abandoned.® 

At this point, around 1902, Einstein en- 
tered the picture. Here is his own account: 


Not acquainted with the earlier investigations 
of Boltzmann and Gibbs, which had appeared 
earlier and actually exhausted the subject, 
I developed the statistical mechanics and the 
molecular-kinetic theory of thermodynamics 
which was based on the former. My major 
aim in this was to find facts which would 
guarantee as much as possible the existence 
of atoms of definite finite size. In the midst 
of this I discovered that, according to atomistic 
theory, there would have to be a movement 
of suspended microscopic particles open to 
observation, without knowing that observa- 
tions concerning the Brownian motion were 
already long familiar. . . . The agreement of 
these considerations with experience together 
with Planck’s determination of the true 
molecular size from the law of radiation (for 
high temperatures) convinced the sceptics, 
who were quite numerous at that time (Ost- 
wald, Mach) of the reality of atoms. The 
antipathy of these scholars towards atomic 
theory can indubitably be traced back to their 
positivistic philosophical attitude. This is an 
interesting example of the fact that even 
scholars of audacious spirit and fine instinct 
can be obstructed in the interpretation of 
facts by philosophical prejudices. The prejudice— 
which has by no means died out in the meantime— 
consists in the faith that facts by themselves can 
and should yield scientific knowledge without free 
conceptual construction. Such a misconception is 
possible only because one does not easily become 
aware of the free choice of such concepts, which, 
through verification and long usage, appear to be 
immediately connected with the empirical ma- 
terial.° 


It was the French physical chemist 
Jean Perrin (1870-1942) who accom- 
plished the experimental confirmation of 
Einstein’s formulae for Brownian mo- 
tion, and with the help of these and other 
results finally established the atomic 
structure of matter.'° While no one 


91 


doubted the reality of atoms after Mach’s 
death in 1916, positivism reared its head 
again in the 1920s with the development 
of quantum mechanics; the question now 
became: do instantaneous properties of 
subatomic particles (e.g. the position and 
momentum of the electron) have a 
real existence? 

Before examining Einstein’s answer to 
that question, I must make two remarks 
about Einstein’s role in the development 
of quantum theory. 

First, while it is generally acknowledged 
that Einstein’s 1905 paper on the photo- 
electric effect was a major advance be- 
yond Planck’s formulation of quantum 
theory, the importance of Einstein’s 
work has been enhanced by Thomas 
Kuhn’s recent arguments that Planck did 
not actually propose a quantum hypothe- 
sis in 1900. Kuhn claims that Planck used 
his constant A only to define intervals 
of energy for the purpose of combina- 
torial calculations, and that the notion of 
a discontinuity in allowed values of 
energy originated with Einstein (rein- 
forced by Paul Ehrenfest).'! Thus a case 
can be made that Einstein is the founder 
of both relativity and quantum theory. 

Second, the idea of indeterminism did 
not suddenly enter atomic physics with 
the quantum formulations of Heisenberg 
and Born in 1926-27, but emerged 
gradually from debates on irreversibility 
going back to the 19th century.’ Ein- 
stein himself was largely responsible for 
promoting indeterminism in the first 
quarter of the 20th century. Brownian 
movement, thanks to Einstein’s success- 
ful theoretical explanation of it, could 
be cited as visible evidence of the ef- 
fects of random atomic motions. Rela- 
tivity theory challenged Newtonian ideas 
of space and time, and Heisenberg him- 
self, in his 1927 announcement of the In- 
determinacy Principle, compared the 
impossibility of talking about the simul- 
taneity of distant events with the impos- 
sibility of talking about the precise posi- 
tion and momentum of a particle. But it 
was Einstein’s quantum theory which, ac- 
cording to Max Born and others, showed 


92 


that atomic radiation must be treated as 
arandom process, although Einstein him- 
self considered it a ‘‘weakness of the 
theory . . . that it leaves the duration 
and direction of the elementary processes 
to! “chance...” 742 

The first evidence of Einstein’s strong 
opposition to indeterminism (aside from 
his remark in the 1916 paper quoted 
above) is found in a letter to Max Born, 
29 April 1924, about the Bohr-Kramers- 
Slater paper in which strict energy con- 
servation in atomic processes was re- 
placed by a probabilistic hypothesis: 


Bohr’s opinion about radiation is of great 
interest. But I should not want to be forced into 
abandoning strict causality without defending 
it more strongly than I have so far. I find 
the idea quite intolerable that an electron ex- 
posed to radiation should choose of its own 
free will, not only its moment to jump off, but 
also its direction. In that case, I would rather 
be a cobbler, or even an employee in a gaming- 
house, than a physicist.!® 


Einstein’s verdict on the work of Heisen- 
berg and Schrodinger was expressed in 
another letter to Born, 4 December 1926: 


Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But 
an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the 
real thing. The theory says a lot, but does 
not really bring us any closer to the secret of 
the ‘old one.’ I, at any rate, am convinced that 
He is not playing at dice.’ 


In October 1927, at the Solvay Con- 
gress in Brussels, Bohr presented his 
theory of complementarity, the nucleus 
of the ‘‘Copenhagen Interpretation of 
Quantum Mechanics.’ The famous 
Bohr-Einstein debate began at this meet- 
ing. Einstein attempted to disprove the 
Indeterminacy Principle with a series of 
thought-experiments, but Bohr was able 
to refute each one, in some cases by in- 
voking relativity theory. As a result of 
these discussions Einstein was forced to 
accept the Heisenberg principle, but he 
still rejected Bohr’s claim that quantum 
mechanics tells us all we can expect to 
know about nature. Bohr succeeded in 
showing that the Copenhagen interpreta- 
tion is logically selfconsistent and that 
quantum mechanics accounts for the 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


experimental facts— but only at the cost 
of abandoning the idea that a particle 
has definite properties independent of 
our observations. For Einstein that was 
clearly unsatisfactory and so he concen- 
trated on showing that quantum me- 
chanics is an ‘“‘incomplete theory’’ that 
fails to account for every element of 
reality. 

Einstein’s objection that quantum 
mechanics is incomplete was most 
sharply articulated in a 1935 paper pub- 
lished with two younger physicists, Boris 
Podolsky and Nathan Rosen. They began 
by defining reality (perhaps the first time 
this had ever been done in a scien- 
tific journal?): 


If, without in any way disturbing a system, we 
can predict with certainty . . . the value of a 
physical quantity, then there exists an element 
of physical reality corresponding to this physi- 
cal quantity.'® 


Note that Einstein is not disputing the 
19th-century positivist claim that reality 
must not be attributed to a quantity 
which cannot be determined by observa- 
tion. But he refused to follow Bohr in his 
claim that reality may not be attributed to 
a quantity unless it actually is deter- 
mined by observation. 

Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen con- 
sidered two systems (which might be sim- 
ply two electrons) which interact for a 
short time and then remain completely 
separated so that neither one can pos- 
sibly influence the other. One can then 
measure the momentum of system I and, 
since the total momentum is assumed to 
be known, one has thereby determined 
by subtraction the momentum of system 
II—with complete certainty. Alterna- 
tively one could have chosen to meas- 
ure the position of I and, by a similar 
line of argument, the position of II would 
be exactly determined. By hypothesis 
neither measurement could have any 
direct effect on II. Thus, they argue, II 
must actually have had those particular 
values of position and momentum, 
whether or not the measurements were 
made on system I. But this conclusion 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


contradicts the Indeterminacy Principle, 
and there is no solution of the Schro- 
dinger wave equation corresponding to 
definite values of both position and mo- 
mentum. Hence quantum mechanics fails 
to give a complete description of reality. 

In his reply Bohr protested that the 
Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen criterion for 
reality is ‘‘ambiguous.’’ By this he meant 
that one cannot talk about the ‘‘reality”’ 
of system II apart from the experiment 
on system I; even though there is no 
direct interaction by which the measure- 
ment on I might influence the state of II, 
they are bound together by the very fact 
that one is trying to get information about 
II by observing I. Thus the Einstein- 
Podolsky-Rosen argument only illus- 
trates a characteristic feature of quan- 
tum mechanics, and in particular shows 
how it involves a new conception of 
physical reality—a conception which, 
Bohr claimed, had already been intro- 
duced by Einstein’s general theory of 
relativity.” 

Bohr and Einstein agreed that their dis- 
agreement was essentially philosophical. 
Einstein had maintained the realist posi- 
tion but had stripped it of all reference 
to unobservable quantities, in deference 
to the acknowledged success of quantum 
mechanics; he insisted only that if a quan- 
tity can be measured with certainty, then 
it must be real. Bohr chose to defend 
an extreme instrumentalist position: a 
quantity is not real just because it can 
be measured, it is also necessary that 
it is measured. Or rather, reality cannot 
be attributed to the quantity itself in 
any case, but only to the measurement of 
the quantity. 

Erwin Schrodinger then entered the 
debate on the side of Einstein, with his 
famous ‘‘cat paradox.’’ A cat is placed 
in a chamber with a radioactive sample 
and a Geiger counter connected to an 
electrical device that will kill the cat with 
probability 12 in a certain time interval. 
At the end of the experiment the cat is 
represented, according to quantum 
mechanics, by a wave function which is 
the sum of functions corresponding to the 


BS 


cat alive and dead. According to the 
Copenhagen interpretation (if one is 
willing to apply it to macroscopic ob- 
jects as well as to atomic particles) the 
cat is neither alive nor dead but in some 
intermediate state—until we open the 
chamber and look at it. At the instant 
when we observe the cat, its wave func- 
tion ‘“‘collapses’’ and it becomes either 
alive or dead.'® 

The cat paradox makes rather more 
vividly the same point that Einstein had 
been pressing against Bohr since 1927: 
however accurate quantum mechanics 
may be in predicting the results of ex- 
periments, it fails to give an acceptable 
description of reality, i.e. of the external 
world independent of the observer. 
Bohr’s reply boiled down to the claim 
that one simply cannot expect quantum 
mechanics to give such a description be- 
cause there is none. The tragedy of Ein- 
stein was that he failed to find a replace- 
ment for quantum mechanics that would 
satisfy his personal criteria. By general 
agreement he ‘‘lost’’ the debate with 
Bohr; yet anyone who believes that the 
physical world exists independently of 
his or her own observation of it must 
hesitate just a bit before applauding 
the victor.'9 


Notes 


1. Anne C. Roark, ‘‘Notes on. . . Einstein,”’ 
Chronicle of Higher Education, March 12, 
1979) psi2. 

2. J. Robert Oppenheimer died 18 February 1967; 
John von Neumann died 8 February 1957. 

3. Max Born, ‘‘Einstein’s Statistical Theories,”’ 
in Albert Einstein Philosopher-Scientist, ed. 
P. A. Schilpp (New York: Library of Living 
Philosophers, 1949), pp. 163-177 (quotation 
from pp. 163-64). 

4. **Lights all askew in the heavens,’ New York 
Times, November 10, 1919, reprinted in 
Science in the Twentieth Century, ed. Walter 
Sullivan (New York: Arno Press, 1976), p. 8. 

5. Philipp Frank, Einstein, His Life and Times 
(New York: Knopf, 1947), p. 215. Cf. his 
Modern Science and its Philosophy (Cam- 
bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 
1941), pp. 30-57. 


94 


10. 


ie 


12: 


St 


14. 


[S: 
16. 


Ie 


19. 


. Werner Heisenberg, Physics and Beyond (New 


York: Harper & Row, 1971), p. 63. 


. Gerald Holton, Thematic Origins of Scientific 


Thought, Kepler to Einstein (Cambridge, 
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973). See 
also E. Zahar, ‘‘Mach, Einstein and the Rise of 
Modern Science,’ British Journal for the 
Philosophy of Science, 28 (1977): 195-213. 


. See e.g. Boltzmann’s foreword to Part II (1898) 


of his Lectures on Gas Theory, trans. S. G. 
Brush, (Berkeley: University of California 
Press, 1964) pp. 215-216. 


. Albert Einstein, ‘‘Autobiographical Notes,’’ in 


Albert Einstein Philosopher-Scientist,ed. P. A. 
Schilpp (New York: Library of Living 
Philosophers, 1949), pp. 1—95 (quotation from 
pp. 47, 49). For the history of Brownian motion 
and details of Einstein’s theory, see S. G. 
Brush, The Kind of Motion We Call Heat 
(New York: American Elsevier, 1976), Chap- 
ter XV. 

See Mary Jo Nye, Molecular Reality: A Per- 
spective on the Scientific Work of Jean Perrin 
(New York: American Elsevier, 1972). 
Thomas S. Kuhn, Black-Body Theory and the 
Quantum Discontinuity, 1894-1912 (New 
York: Oxford University Press, 1978). 

S. G. Brush, ‘“‘Irreversibility and Indeter- 
minism: Fourier to Heisenberg,’’ Journal of the 
History of Ideas, 37 (1976): 603-630. 

Quoted from the translation of Einstein’s 1916 
paper in B. L. van der Waerden, Source 
of Quantum Mechanics (Amsterdam: North- 
Holland, 1967), p. 76. For additional references 
see Brush, op. cit. (note 12). 

The Born-Einstein letters, trans. Irene Born 
(New York: Walker, 1971), p. 82. 

Ibid ais We 

A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, *‘Can 
Quantum-Mechanical Description of Reality be 
considered complete?’’ Physical Review, series 
2, 47 (1935): 777-780. 

Bohr’s reply is reprinted with the Einstein- 
Podolsky-Rosen paper in Physical Reality, ed. 
S. Toulmin (New York: Harper & Row, 1970). 
See also Bohr’s article ‘‘Discussion with Ein- 
stein on epistemological problems in atomic 
physics,’ pp. 199-241 in the Schilpp book 
cited in note 3. 


. E. Schrodinger, ‘‘Die gegenwartige Situation in 


der Quantenmechanik,’’ Naturwissenschaften 
23 (1935): 807-812. _ 

For a survey of recent developments see B. 
d’Espagnat, “‘The Quantum Theory and 
Reality,’ Scientific American, 241, no. 5 
(November 1979): 158—181 and references on 
page 206; A. Shimony, ‘‘Metaphysical Problems 
in the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics,”’ 
International Philosophical Quarterly, 18 
(1878): 3-17. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


a 


Einstein and Religion 


Harry Polachek 


U. S. Naval Observatory, Washington, D. C. 


When I mentioned to some of my col- 
leagues that I was planning to give a talk 
about Einstein’s views on religion, I was 
greeted with considerable skepticism and 
many a raised eyebrow. ‘‘Einstein was a 
great scientist, but he was not a theolo- 
gian—of what significance are his 
opinions about religion?’ ‘‘He did not 
concern himself with theological ques- 
tions.’’ “‘He did not write or publish 
much about his religious views.’’ These 
were some of the comments I received 


from my more outspoken friends. Some 


considered a discussion on my part about 
Einstein and Religion as a trivial or even 
frivolous undertaking. 

In answer to these doubts, I would 
like to point out two well known facts. 
First, Moses did not complete a full four- 
year course at an accredited theological 
Seminary—nor did Buddha or Moham- 
med or Jesus Christ. Secondly, in his 
book, Ideas and Opinions, Einstein de- 
votes 18 full pages to the subject of 
religion. His famous paper on the special 
theory of relativity, published in 1905 in 
the Annalen der Physik, which shook the 
foundations of classical physics and 
ushered in a new era in modern science, 
was only a few pages longer. It could be 
safely assumed that Einstein did not de- 
vote 18 pages of his writings to a subject 
of this importance without giving this 
matter prolonged and serious study. 

Before discussing Einstein’s ideas on 
religion, we will briefly review what is 
known about his religious background 
and upbringing. As is well known, Ein- 
stein was born of Jewish parents at Ulm, 
a medium size city in Bavaria. His Jewish 
ancestors, both maternal and paternal, 
lived for many generations in south- 
western Germany in a region known as 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


Swabia. Although his parents generally 
adhered to Jewish traditions, they were in 
Einstein’s own words, ‘‘entirely ir- 
religious.’’ In spite of his parents’ attitude 
toward religion, Einstein states in his 
autobiographical remarks (Albert Ein- 
stein: Philosopher, Scientist; Edited by 
Paul Arthur Schilpp, 1970, p. 3’ that he 
was deeply religious until he reached the 
age of twelve. 

Here we should insert the following in- 
formation concerning Einstein’s early 
schooling. At the time of Einstein’s child- 
hood, the elementary schools in Germany 
were run under religious auspices. How- 
ever, instead of sending young Einstein 
to a Jewish religious school, his parents 
sent him to a Catholic school. The 
reasons for that decision are not known, 
but Philipp Frank, who knew Einstein 
intimately since the year 1910, states in 
his book Einstein, His Life and Times (p. 
9), that his parents “‘were not sufficiently 
interested in a Jewish education to send 
their children to a Jewish school since 
there was none near their home and it 
would have been expensive. His parents 
may even have felt that by sending their 
boy to a Catholic school he would come 
into more intimate contact with non- 
Jewish children.’’ Einstein was the only 
Jewish child in his class, but according to 
Frank, Einstein had no recollection of 
having any objection to his participation 
as a Jewish pupil in a Catholic religious 
school. On the contrary, he seems to have 
derived a great deal of pleasure from this 
experience. Einstein left elementary 
school at the age of ten to enter Luitpold 
Gymnasium in Munich. 

When he turned twelve, a drastic 
change took place in young Einstein’s 
attitude toward traditional religion. Just 


95 


as he had acquired strong religious feel- 
ings as a child on his own—his parents 
being entirely indifferent to religion— 
he also developed a strong contrary 
opinion when he reached the age of 
twelve. He recalls (Schilpp, p. 3): 

“Through reading of popular scientific 
books, I soon reached the conviction that 
much in the stories of the Bible could 
not be true. The consequence was a posi- 
tively fanatic (orgy of) freethinking 
coupled with the impression that youth 
is intentionally being deceived by the 
State through lies; it was a crushing im- 
pression: J). 

Through most of his formative years 
Einstein was largely oblivious to religion, 
being much too preoccupied with other 
activities such as his scientific studies, 
his problems connected with making it 
through the school system, and later with 
earning a livelihood. 

An interesting incident occurred during 
the process of Einstein’s appointment to 
the German University in Prague in the 
fall of 1910, which sheds some light on 
his attitude toward religion during his 
earlier adult years. It pertains to Ein- 
stein’s religious affiliation. At that time 
appointments to the German University 
were made by the emperor of Austria 
upon recommendation from the uni- 
versity faculty. Franz Josef, who was 
then emperor of Austria, held strong 
religious convictions and would not ap- 
point anyone to teach at the university 
who did not belong to a recognized 
church. During that period Einstein did 
not consider himself as affiliated with any 
religious denomination, and if required to 
State his religion in connection with an 
application for office would normally 
have given the response: none, to any 
question about his religious affiliation. 
It should be noted that Einstein was 
at that time married to Mileva Maritsch, 
a Classmate of his at the Swiss Federal 
Polytechnic School in Zurich, who was of 
the Greek Orthodox religion. He had no 
qualms about marrying outside his faith, 
or having his children, whom he loved 
dearly, brought up by their mother in the 
Greek Orthodox faith. When Einstein 


96 


learned about Emperor Franz Josef’s 
requirement he simply stated his religion 
in his application for appointment as 
‘*Mosaic,’’ which was the customary 
nomenclature then used in Austria to 
designate a member of the Jewish faith. 

I would like to recount one more 
incident bearing on Einstein’s reli- 
gious views, which took place about 20 
years later. 

On April 7, 1929, Einstein’s theory of 
relativity was mercilessly denounced by 
Cardinal O’Connell of Boston as atheis- 
tic. Delivering a major address in Boston 
to the members of the Catholic Clubs of 
America of the New England area, he 
warned his audience against professor 
Einstein’s theory of relativity as ‘“‘be- 
fogged speculation producing universal 


doubt about God and His creation’’ and - 


as ‘‘cloaking the ghastly apparition of 
atheism’? (New York Times, 25 April, 
1929, p. 60). 

When he read about this vehement and, 
what he believed to be, unjustified attack 
upon Albert Einstein and his theories by 
a fellow clergyman, Rabbi Herbert S. 
Goldstein of the Institutional Synagogue 
at 37 W. 116th Street in New York City 
was outraged. He immediately sat down 
and dispatched a telegram—not to 
Cardinal O’ Connell in Boston, but to Pro- 
fessor Einstein, who was at that time in 
Dusseldorf, Germany. The telegram con- 
tained five little words; namely, *‘Do you 
believe in God?’’ This was rather a de- 
meaning question to pose to any self- 
respecting individual in a telegram, but 
especially to a world renowned scientist 
of Einstein’s stature. 

Einstein had several options open. He 
could have just ignored so disrespect- 
ful and foolhardy a question emanating 
from a recognized religious leader in 
America. Or better still, he could have 
replied with five little words of his own— 
rather four little words and a blank, viz: 
‘‘Mind your own business.’’ 

Einstein chose neither of these two ap- 
proaches. He was apparently not at all 
offended by the boldness of the Rabbi’s 
question—and within a few days Rabbi 
Goldstein received a substantive reply in 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


NE le AY ae 


a telegram from Albert Einstein at his 
home in New York. Einstein’s tele- 
gram read: 

‘Ich glaube an Spinozas Gott der Sich 
in gesetzlicher Harmonie des seienden 
offenbart, nicht an Gott der Sich mit 
Schicksalen und Handlungen der Men- 
schen abgibt.’’ 

Which translated from good emperor’s 
German to good king’s English means: 

‘“‘T believe in Spinoza’s God who re- 
veals Himself in the orderly harmony of 
what exists, not in a God who concerns 


in Himself with the fates and actions of 


human beings.”’ 

Einstein’s reply to Rabbi Goldstein 
summarizes in one sentence one of 
the basic tenets which forms the founda- 
tion of his religious doctrine. He de- 
scribes these views in greater detail in 
several articles which he published and in 
talks to religious groups which he de- 
livered during his lifetime. 

Einstein was awed and enthralled by 
the majesty and harmony of the universe 
and the laws of nature which govern the 
cosmos. “‘The most incomprehensible 
thing about the world is that it is com- 
prehensible,’’ he used to say (Albert 
Einstein and the Cosmic World Order, 
Cornelius Lanczos, 1965, p. 112). On the 
one hand, we look at the great complexity 
of the world we live in, beginning with 
elementary particles and fundamental 
forces, progressing through the simple 
atomic and molecular structures of 
matter to the more complex molecules, 
the amino acids, DNA (deoxyribonucleic 
acid) and organic materials, then to liv- 
ing self-reproducing organisms, plants 
and animals, and finally to the develop- 
ment of thinking, intelligent and cultured 
human beings. On the other hand, we wit- 
ness the discovery of universal, compre- 
hensive, all-embracing, yet simple laws 
which precisely govern the behavior of 
natural phenomena at all levels of mag- 
nitude and complexity, from the minutest 
elementary particles to the largest 
galaxies; from the simplest elementary 
forces to the most complex forms of 
human behavior. It is this superior uni- 
versal power which governs the cosmos 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


and which may be entirely beyond the 
feeble grasp of the human mind which 
Einstein calls God. This God, as Einstein 
conceives Him, is the God of all exist- 
ence, who governs all phenomena and 
actions in the universe. But he is not a 
personal God, who punishes and rewards 
human actions or who concerns himself 
with the daily lives of human beings. 

We quote a few representative state- 
ments from Einstein’s writings or public 
discussions on this subject. Einstein 
writes (Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, 
Vol. IV, 1941, pp. 32-33): 

‘*My religion consists of a humble ad- 
miration of the inimitable superior spirit 
who reveals himself in the slight details 
we are able to perceive with our frail and 
feeble mind. Ethics are a more important 
matter for us, not God. That deeply emo- 
tional conviction of the presence of a 
superior reasoning power, which is re- 
vealed in the incomprehensible universe, 
forms my idea of God; in the conventional 
manner of expression it could therefore 
be designated as pantheistic.”’ 

In “‘The World As I See It’ (1929, 
p. 242) Einstein expresses these thoughts 
in the following words: 

‘‘The most beautiful thing we can ex- 
perience is the mysterious. It is the 
fundamental emotion which stands at the 
source of true art and true science. He to 
whom this emotion is a stranger, who can 
no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt 
in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are 
closed. This insight into the mystery of 
life, coupled though it be with fear, has 
also given rise to religion. To know that 
what is impenetrable to us really exists, 
manifests itself as the highest wisdom 
and the most radiant beauty which our 
dull faculties can comprehend only in 
their most primitive forms—this knowl- 
edge, this feeling, is at the center of true 
religiousness. In this sense, and in this 
sense alone, I belong in the ranks of 
devoutly religious men.’’ 

And again, on page 267 (Ibid.): 

‘*But the scientist is possessed by the 
sense of universal causation. The future 
to him is every whit as necessary and 
determined as the past. There is nothing 


97 


divine about morality, it is purely a 
human affair. His religious feeling takes 
the form of rapturous amazement at the 
harmony of natural law, which reveals an 
intelligence of such superiority that, com- 
pared with it, all the systematic thinking 
and acting of human beings is an utterly 
insignificant reflection.”’ 

Einstein was a humanitarian. He was, 
as a person, kind, gentle and humble. He 
was a leader in the movement for pacifism 
and disarmament. Insofar as time al- 
lowed, he aided many charitable en- 
deavors. He despised authoritarianism 
and militarism. He fought for the under- 
dog and the oppressed. He decried the in- 
nate human desires for wealth, honor and 
power. Among the ethical virtues upon 
which Einstein placed an especially high 
value was the goal to achieve individual 
freedom. He stressed this on many occa- 
sions. On the other hand, we have al- 
ready noted in two of Einstein’s quota- 
tions his belief that morality or ethics is 
not a standard of conduct which is 
established by a divine being, but in his 
words is ‘‘purely a human affair.’’ In view 
of this belief, how then does Einstein 
justify the necessity for human beings to 
conduct themselves in accordance witha 
code of ethics and morality? 

His justification is based on two 
premises: 1) that none of us have achieved 
the high level of culture and material 
well-being we now enjoy on our own, but 
are indebted to others now living, or to 
past generations for this progress, and 2) 
that by providing freedom to individuals 
to conduct their lives in accordance with 
their own inclinations, society stands to 
gain greatly from the important advances 
which some of these individuals will 
achieve, which they would not have been 
able to accomplish if forced to exist in a 
regimented environment. 

Let us read the basis for the first of 
these justifications as expressed in Ein- 
stein’s words (Forum and Century, Vol. 
84, pp. 193-194; reprinted in Einstein, 
Ideas and Opinions, 1954, p. 8): 

‘“How strange is the lot of us mortals! 
Each of us is here for a brief sojourn; for 


98 


what purpose he knows not, though he 
sometimes thinks he senses it. But with- 
out deeper reflection one knows from 
daily life that one exists for other people 
—first of all for those upon whose smiles 
and well-being our own happiness is 
wholly dependent, and then for the many, 
unknown to us, to whose destinies we are 
bound by the ties of sympathy. A hundred 
times every day I remind myself that my 
inner and outer life are based on the 
labors of other men, living and dead, and 
that I must exert myself in order to give 
in the same measure as I have received 
and am still receiving.’ 

Einstein expressed opinions on a 
number of other questions pertaining to 
religion. In the remaining time I would 
like to touch upon some of these. The 
most important subject among these is, 
no doubt, the perennial strife which 
existed throughout the centuries between 
science and religion. Einstein addressed 
this subject on a number of occasions. 
On November 9, 1930 the New York 
Times featured an article in its Sunday 
Magazine section, written expressly for 
the newspaper by Albert Einstein and en- 
titled ‘‘Religion and Science.’’ On May 
19, 1939 Einstein gave an address at the 
Princeton Theological Seminary on 
‘*Science and Religion’’ and in 1940 he 
participated in a symposium entitled 
‘*The Conference on Science, Philosophy 
and Religion in Their Relation to the 
Democratic Way of Life’’ (published in 
New York, 1941). 

Einstein attempted to reconcile the 
conflict between science and religion. His 
main thesis was that there is no valid 
reason for this conflict to exist between 
these two important fields of human en- 
deavor, since their purposes and methods 
do not overlap but are separate and com- 
plementary. In his view knowledge or 
science can teach us only what is or 
how facts are related to each other. The 
purpose of religion, on the other hand, 
is to determine what should be, espe- 
cially what should be the goal of hu- 
man aspirations. 

In his address to the Conference on 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


alll 


Science, Philosophy and Religion in 
Their Relation to the Democratic Way of 
Life (reprinted, Einstein, Ideas and 
Opinions, p. 45) Einstein states these 
views very clearly: | 

‘*For science can only ascertain what 
is, but not what should be, and outside 
of its domain value judgements of all 
kinds remain necessary. Religion, on the 
other hand, deals only with evaluations 
of human thought and action: it cannot 
justifiably speak of facts and relationships 
between facts. According to this inter- 
pretation the well-known conflicts be- 
tween religion and science in the past 
must all be ascribed to a misapprehen- 
sion of the situation which has been 
ascribed.”’ 

Of special interest is also Einstein’s 
views on the theological and philosophi- 
cal question of free will. Einstein did not 
believe that a human being is endowed 
with the capacity to exercise free will. He 
quoted Schopenhauer in this regard who 
said, ‘‘a man can do what he wants, 
but he cannot want what he wants.’’ 

Einstein also showed a religious-like 
devotion for such human goals and en- 
deavors as Goodness, Truth, Beauty, 
Fellowship, Art, Research and Music. 
He writes (Einstein, The World As I See 
Meeps) 239): 

‘*The ideals which have lighted me on 
my way and time after time given me new 
courage to face life cheerfully have been 
Truth, Goodness and Beauty. Without 
the sense of fellowship with men of like 
mind, of preoccupation with the objec- 
tive, the eternally unattainable in the field 
of art and scientific research, life would 
have seemed to me empty. The ordinary 
objects of human endeavor—property, 
outward success, luxury—have always 
seemed to me contemptible.”’ 

Finally, I would like to describe Ein- 
stein’s attitude toward the traditional reli- 
gions. As we have noted, he did not 
believe in a God who punishes the wicked 
or rewards the righteous; nor did he 
believe in a God who concerns himself 
with the daily activities of men. He 
definitely did not believe the bible stories 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


and at one time, at age twelve, he casti- 
gated them as intentional lies and decep- 
tions. What, then, were his views con- 
cerning the older religions in adult life? 

Einstein actually showed a high regard 
for the contributions made by the major 
religions. In his writings he tended to 
emphasize the positive contributions 
made by these religions and to overlook 
the grief, misery, torture and deaths 
which have resulted from the great con- 
flicts that have occurred due to religious 
rivalry. Although he certainly was op- 
posed to the practice of religious rituals 
and customs, he believed that there was a 
useful purpose in some of these in the 
educational processes. He gave high 
praise to the part played by the traditional 
religions and their leaders in bringing to 
the human race the ideals of morality and 
ethical behavior. We quote from his ad- 
dress at the Princeton Theological 
Seminary (reprinted, Einstein, Ideas and 
Opinions, p. 43): 

‘‘The highest principles for our aspira- 
tions and judgements are given to us in 
the Jewish-Christian religious tradition. 
It is a very high goal which, with our 
weak powers, we can reach only very in- 
adequately, but which gives a sure founda- 
tion to our aspirations and valuations.”’ 

In the New York Times article he states 
(reprinted, Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, 
pa): 

‘‘The Jewish scriptures admirably il- 
lustrate the development from the reli- 
gion of fear to moral religion, a develop- 
ment continued in the New Testament. 
The religions of all civilized peoples, 
especially the peoples of the Orient, are 
primarily moral religions.’ 

Now, what more precisely were Ein- 
stein’s views concerning the contribu- 
tions of the Jews to morality? He states 
these most succinctly in his Credo as a 
Jew, republished in the Universal Jewish 
Encyclopedia, Vol. IV, 1941, pp. 32-33: 
(See also Einstein, the World As I See 
12 19333-p. 143.) 

‘‘The striving after knowledge for its 
own Sake, the love of justice verging on 
fanaticism, and the quest for personal 


99 


independence —these are the motivating 
traditions of the Jewish people which 
cause me to regard my adherence thereto 
as a gift of destiny. Those who rage 
today against the ideals of reason and 
of individual freedom, and seek to impose 
an insensate state slavery by means of 
brutal force, rightly see in us their ir- 
reconcilable opponents. History has im- 
posed upon us a Severe struggle. But as 
long aS we remain devoted servants of 
truth, justice and freedom, we shall not 
only continue to exist as the oldest of all 
living peoples, but we shall also, as 
hitherto, create, through productive ef- 
fort, values which shall contribute to the 
ennobling of mankind.”’ 

One of my former schoolmates, Rabbi 
Morris Gordon (Congregation Har 
Shalom), has recently told me an interest- 
ing private story about Einstein, which 
sheds additional light on his sentimental 
attachment to traditional Jewish cus- 
toms. It was told to him by a young 
woman he knows very well, who lived, 
when she was a child, with her family in 
Princeton in close proximity to Einstein’s 
residence. This young woman, by the 
way, iS now a prominent mathematician 
in her own right and teaches mathematics 
at the University of California. 

Occasionally, on Saturdays, the Jewish 
Sabbath, Einstein used to invite all the 
children in the neighborhood to his house 
for an Oneg Shabbat (Sabbath celebra- 
tion). He used to given them refresh- 
ments, play his violin and tell them 


100 


stories, often about the children in Israel 
(then Palestine) whom he visited, and 
who were working hard helping their 
parents to build a new homeland for the 
Jews. He used to tell them that on the 
Sabbath he did not like to do everyday 
work, even research in mathematics or 
physics, but he liked to engage in more 
pleasant activities such as playing 
the violin. 

On Passover eve he would sometimes 
gather the children in his house for a 
Passover mini-Seder. Einstein was a 
lover of freedom, and Passover is the 
holiday of freedom, which commemor- 
ates the deliverance of the Israelites from 
slavery to freedom. Einstein would talk 
to the children about freedom, and he 
would point out to them that freedom can- 
not be won once and for all (as by the 
exodus of the Israelites from Egypt), 
but must be regained over and over again 
by every generation. He drew an analogy 
with a beautiful statue which was erected 
long long ago in the desert, and he would 
ask the children what would happen to 
the statue after a number of years. They 
would reply that it would be covered with 
sand before too long and would lose its 
beauty. And he would point out that in 
order to regain its original beauty the sand 
would have to be carefully and pain- 
stakingly removed every ten or twenty 
years, and the statue would have to be 
refurbished so that it could glisten again 
in its full beauty. The same principle 
applies to the attainment of freedom. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


Albert Einstein—A Moral Visionary ina Distraught World 


Walter G. Berl 


Applied Physics Laboratory, The Johns Hopkins University, Laurel, Md. 


Toward the end of January 1933, after 
an indecisive election that gave no clear 
majority to any of the numerous contend- 
ing political parties, Hindenburg, Presi- 
dent of the embattled German Republic, 
turned over the office of Chancellor to 
Adolph Hitler. This limited transfer of 
power was quickly followed by a fire of 
suspicious origin in the Reichstag Build- 
ing. It provided the excuse for the arrest 
of members of the opposition parties, and 
opened the door for the absolute rule of 
the German Nazi party. 

Within six years these events led to 
World War II and to convulsions that 
even today remain to be resolved. They 
also, at the time, confronted many 
people, especially those of Jewish an- 
cestry with decisions of crucial im- 
portance. Among those affected were 
thousands of scientists. 

By April of 1933, many extreme Nazi 
policies were put into effect, such as the 
abrupt retirement or removal from office 
of all Jewish state employees. When the 
likely consequences of this decision were 
brought to the attention of Hitler, he said: 


Our national policies will not be revoked or 
modified, even for scientists. If the dismissal 
of Jewish scientists means the annihilation of 
contemporary German science, then we shall 
do without science for.a few years.! 


dann arbeiten wir eben einmal 100 Jahre ohne 
Physik und Chemie? (Then we shall do without 
physics and chemistry for 100 years). 


A person’s response to cataclysmic 
events uncovers the deepest wellsprings 
of beliefs and attitudes. Three well- 
known German-Jewish scientists were 
among the thousands who were trapped 
by events into formulating their re- 
sponses. They were born less than ten 
years and less than a few hundred miles 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


apart. All three had received Nobel 
awards for their outstanding contribu- 
tions within a few years of each other. 
They were neighbors in Berlin just prior 
to and during World War I. Each was the 
head of newly established Kaiser-Wil- 
helm Institutes for Chemistry, Physical 
Chemistry and for Physics. They knew 
each other well. They were Fritz Haber, 
the brilliant physical chemist and creator 
of the synthetic ammonia industry; 
Richard Willstatter, the most creative 
organic chemist of his day; and Al- 
bert Einstein. 

With such similar backgrounds one 
would surmise that their responses to the 
threats of 1933 would have been similar. 
But no. Haber, whose most deep-seated 
passion was a fanatical attachment to 
his country, was dead of a broken heart 
in less than a year.? Willstatter remained 
a virtual prisoner in Germany for five 
tortured years. At last, on reaching 
Switzerland and safety, he said: 


I hear that many, who after overcoming much 
fear and many hazards, on leaving Germany 
and crossing the frontier, would wave their 
hats with joy. I want to weep.* 


What a contrast with Einstein! He was, 
in the winter of 1932, visiting the Cali- 
fornia Institute of Technology where he 
had been spending half a year for the past 
two years with R. A. Millikan and E. D. 
Hubbell. He was about to return to 
his Institute in Berlin in late March. But 
before leaving Pasadena he gave an inter- 
view to a reporter of the New. York 
World Telegram and said, in tones ring- 
ing clear to this day: 

As long as I have any choice in the matter 

I shall live only in a country where civil liber- 


ties, tolerance and equality of all citizens 
before the law prevail. Civil liberty implies 


101 


freedom to express one’s political convictions 
in speech and in wniting: tolerance implies 
respect for the convictions of others: whatever 
they may be. These conditions do not exist in 
Germany at the present time.® (1933) 


and added a statement that, even today, 
has few adherents: 


For an internationally minded man, citizenship 
of a specific country is not important. Hu- 
manity is more important than national citizen- 
ship.® (1933) 


Citizenship As A Political Statement 


How can one summarize the social 
views of this extraordinary person which 
molded his entire personality and formed 
his most fundamental beliefs? I will make 
this attempt with a few happenings that, 
like well-matched pearls, form a beautiful 
strand. The veritable flood of books and 
of reminiscences, the collections of let- 
ters and the massive archival material 
of speeches, statements and interviewing 
help to explain apparent paradoxes and 
curious twists that were difficult to com- 
prehend when viewed in isolation. 

Although Einstein never wrote an auto- 
biography that touched on much more 
than his love for physics,’ he frequently 
and with great candor expressed his 
thoughts about matters that affected 
him deeply: 

My passionate sense of social justice and 

social responsibility has always contrasted 

oddly with my pronounced lack of need for 
direct contact with other human beings and 
human communities. I am truly a ‘lone 
traveler’ and have never belonged to my 

country, my home, my friends or even my im- 

mediate family with my whole heart. In the 

face of all these ties I have never lost a sense of 


distance and a need for solitude—feelings 
that increase with the years.® 


He craved solitude and yet became the 
most public of men; he disliked war and 
yet rallied the world in a war against 
Nazi tyranny; he wanted world rule and 
threw his efforts into the creation of 
Israel; he was appalled by the misuse of 
science and yet had a share in the un- 
leashing of the most destructive weapons 
that technological man was able to design. 


102 


His most characteristic pattern was 
that of a stubborn fighter. Once involved 
in a struggle that touched his sense of 
values, he would pursue the matter dog- 
gedly, privately in days when no one yet 
listened, or before the world when the 
tools of public discourse became avail- 
able to him. 

Let us survey the unusual events con- 
nected with his citizenship. As a young 
student in Munich he chafed under the 
strict German school system: 

The teachers in the elementary school ap- 


peared to me like sergeants and the pe 
teachers like lieutenants. 


His parents, having moved to Italy to 
recoup a foundering business, had left 
Albert in Munich to complete his pre- 
college studies. After suffering for half 
a year in solitude disliking the drill- 
field atmosphere of learning by rote while 
all the time teaching himself calculus and 
geometry, he so upset the teaching staff 
that he had no difficulty being released 
prematurely from school at the age of fif- 
teen, with a physician’s certificate that a 
nervous condition made a trip to Italy to 
rejoin his parents desirable both for him 
and the school’s staff. 

Ronald W. Clark, with the help of a 
German historian of science, spent much 
effort to document the subsequent 
events.? The sixteen-year old Albert 
pleaded with his father that he should 
help him to renounce his German citizen- 
ship. These laborious efforts bore fruit 
and in 1896 the Wirttenberg authorities 
formally ended his German citizenship. 
He was left without nationality papers as 
he moved to Switzerland to continue with 
his studies of Physics at the Eidgenoes- 
sische Technische Hochschule in Zurich 
and was granted Swiss citizenship in 
1901. By then, he had completed his 
academic studies, in less than brilliant 
fashion, as far as the outside world could 
see. Eligible for Swiss military service, 
he was promptly rejected because of flat 
feet and varicose veins. 

In a peaceful and seemingly stable 
Europe this unusual political statement 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


and change of national allegiance would 
have served for a lifetime. Eleven years 
of intense and productive scholarship fol- 
lowed. To be sure, family problems had 
to be overcome but the world seemed at 
peace. Only the controversies that 
swirled about fundamental issues in 
Physics needed his attention. 

Then came the year 1912. The most 
prestigious offer to accept the Director- 
ship of the new Kaiser-Wilhelm Institute 
fir Physik in Berlin and, as an addi- 
tional honor, membership in the Preus- 
sische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 
brought with it an automatic conferral of 
Prussian (and, therefore, German) 
citizenship. Since a Kaiser-Wilhelm In- 
stitute director was a German civil 
servant (even though most of the funds 
for the setting up of the organization and 
paying for the building of the structures 
came from private donors, many of them 
Jewish) there was some doubt whether 
that position, indeed, required German 
citizenship. This issue was never formally 
resolved. Einstein continued as a Swiss 
citizen and retained his Swiss passport. 
The German authorities were apparently 
satisfied that the automatic acquisition of 
Prussian citizenship satisfied their needs. 

Within a year World War I broke out. 
Belgium was invaded. Belgian citizens 
were apprehended, accused of sabotage 
and shot, often as hostages. The world 
was appalled. To counteract this wave of 
condemnation, a Manifesto was _ pub- 
lished and signed by nearly one hundred 
of Germany’s best known intellectuals.'° 
Einstein refused to sign. 

When the war ended in defeat for the 
Germans, with the monarchy overthrown 
and a republic based on democratic prin- 
ciples established in Weimar for the first 
time in Germany’s history, Einstein 
formally threw in his lot with the new 
government. He requested the civil rights 
of a German citizen as a symbolic act of 
support for the new regime. Luckily, it 
was not necessary to relinquish his Swiss 
citizenship or passport, acquired 20 
years earlier. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


He said later that this act of solidarity 
was one of the big mistakes of his life, 
comparable only to the introduction of an 
unnecessary constant into his cosmo- 
logical equation which led to the conclu- 
sion that the universe was ‘‘stationary”’ 
rather than ‘‘expanding’’; and the writing 
of two letters to President Franklin D. 
Roosevelt in 1939 and 1940, urging the de- 
velopment of nuclear weapons against 
the Germans and Japanese. 

At first only one small diplomatic in- 
cident arose. When in 1922 he was 
awarded the Nobel prize for his work on 
the Photo-electric Effect and was unable 
to attend the Stockholm ceremonies, a 
question arose as to which ambassador, 
the German or the Swiss, should stand in 
for him to receive the award. It was 
finally resolved that the German ambas- 
sador was to receive the medal in Sweden 
and that the Swiss ambassador in Berlin 
was to hand it to Einstein. In the records 
of the Nobel Foundation Einstein is listed 
as a German. 

In 1933 this tortuous citizenship prob- 
lem was finally resolved. When the con- 
sequences of Hitler’s access to power be- 
came clear, a break with everything that 
tied Einstein to Germany was inevitable. 
Having said publicly that ‘‘I am not going 
home’’!! the decision was made to return 
from the USA on the planned date but to 
disembark in Antwerp, go to Brussels, 
hand over the German passport, there- 
with surrendering his German civil rights 
and, after leaving the German embassy, 
never to set foot on German soil again. 

The break with the country that had 
disappointed him twice, as a youth and, 
again, in middle age, was irreparable. 
Until his death, some twenty years later, 
he would not join any German society or 
accept any German awards. He replied to 
an inquiry from Otto Hahn whether he 
would accept a Foreign Membership of 
the Max Planck Gesellschaft, the descend- 
ent of the Kaiser Wilhelm Gesellschaft: 


It pains me that I must say “‘No”’ to you, one 
of the few men who remained decent and did 
what they could during those evil years: but I 


103 


cannot do otherwise. The crime of the Germans 
is truly the most abominable ever to be 
recorded in the history of the so-called 
civilized nations.!? (1949) 


Arguments for Peace and World Government 


There was in Einstein a stubborness 
about fundamental moral issues that 
served him as a compass throughout his 
life. He hated killing. He found wars ab- 
horrent. While his Kaiser Wilhelm In- 
stitute colleagues Haber and Willstatter 
eagerly signed up for war service, Ein- 
stein, in the very center of Prussianism, 
helped to prepare an antiwar Manifesto.'® 
Forty years later, one week before his 
death, he joined Lord Russell in a ring- 
ing declaration to contain the nuclear 
arms race with the Soviet Union, to re- 
think once again the horrors of a nuclear 
war and to lay down a foundation on 
which to build peace. And three days 
later, working on a statement to celebrate 
the anniversary of Israel’s independence, 
he said: 


And the big problem of our time is the division 
of mankind into two camps... .a power 
conflict between East and West, although the 
world being round, it is not clear what pre- 
cisely is meant by the term ‘East’ and ‘West’. 

. . political passions, once they have been 
fanned into flame, exact their victims. . . ."* 
(1955) 


But he was confounded by events 
where absolute and extreme moral or 
political judgments cannot stand inviolate 
forever. When he saw that a country like 
Germany, by a deliberate policy of 
violence and war, might overwhelm all 
the values that were dear to him and to 
subjugate anyone standing in its way, he 
cast aside his pacifism and his refusal for 
self-defense and protection: 


Were I a Belgian, I should not, in the present 
circumstances, refuse military service: rather, 
I should enter such service cheerfully in the 
belief that I would thereby be helping to save 
European civilization.!° (1933) 


He was pleading for a political system 
in which the anarchy among nation states 
would be replaced by a world order of 
new institutions with sufficient powers 


104 


so that disputes could be settled by a 
superior authority: 


I believe the condition in which the world 
finds itself today makes it not only a matter of 
idealism but one of direct necessity to create 
unity and intellectual co-operation among na- 
tions. Those of us who are alive to these 
needs must stop thinking in terms of ‘‘What 
should be done for our country?’’. Rather, we 
should ask: ‘‘What must our country do to 
lay the groundwork for a larger world com- 
munity?’’ For without that greater community 
no single country will long endure.'® (1922) 


The destructive tools made available 
by technology gave added urgency to 
his pleas: 


In my opinion the only salvation for civiliza- 
tion and the human race lies in the creation of 
a world government, with security of nations 
founded upon law. As long as sovereign states 
continue to have separate armaments and 
armament secrets, new world wars will be in- 
evitable.'* (1945) 


There can be no doubt that world law is 
bound to come soon, whether by coercion or 
peaceful agreement. No other defense exists 
against the modern methods of mass destruc- 
tion. Should man misuse science and en- 
gineering in the service of selfish passions, our 
civilization is doomed. The nation-state is no 
longer capable of adequately protecting its 
citizens: to increase the military strength of a 
nation no longer guarantees its security.'® 
(1947) 


The Chain of Events to Popular Fame 


What made it possible for Einstein, 
whose deepest instincts were to be left 
alone, to command so much public recog- 
nition? How could a man, whose profes- 
sional contributions required insights that 
few people can put forth, become a 
household word as a symbol of scientific 
wisdom, an oracle of man’s future? 
There were no passionate public debates 
about his work as there were with Darwin 
about the Descent of Man that threatened 
the comfortable belief of man’s special 
place in the universe. There was no public 
taking of sides as with Freud’s reap- 
praisal of dimly recognized dark and 
threatening forces behind man’s _ be- 
havior that challenged long-held views of 
morals and standards. What special cir- 
cumstances prevailed to direct the flash 
of public recognition onto this man? 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


The clues to this extraordinary de- 
velopment were buried in the silver grains 
of half a dozen photographic plates that 
were brought back in May 1919 from a 
solar eclipse that swept across northern 
Brazil and the small island of Principe 
off the coast of Africa. By a freak of ac- 
cident, this eclipse occurred against a 
stellar background in which an unusually 
large number of bright stars were posi- 
tioned near the sun’s rim. Einstein had 
predicted three years earlier that the 
image of the stars whose light needed to 
pass near the sun’s rim would be dis- 
placed by a small amount (1.76” of arc, or 
less depending on the distance), less than 
¥000 of an inch for the closest encounters, 
as compared to their normal position in 
the sky when there was no massive body 
interacting with the path of the light. 

Late in 1915 and early in 1916, in the 
middle of the war, Einstein had published 
his climatic paper that linked gravity with 
the space-time relations that he had ex- 
amined 10 years earlier in his Special 
Relativity Theory. His new General 
Relativity Theory led him to make three 
predictions. It gave a new value to the al- 
ready well-known abnormality in the mo- 
tion of Mercury around the sun, a value 
in much closer agreement than anything 
calculable from Newtonian assumptions. 
He predicted a small change in the fre- 
quency of light due to gravitational ef- 
fects, a prediction that proved difficult 
to detect but was finally observed by 
watching a companion star of Sirius. 

The third prediction of the bending of 
light, however, was more easily meas- 
ured’? and, in fact, could have been seen 
at previous solar eclipses if someone had 
gone to the trouble of setting up an ex- 
periment that would have concentrated 
on this effect. However, in the absence 
of a compelling theoretical guide, the de- 
termination of such a small deflection 
would have been an effort beyond any- 
thing an astronomer would be expected 
to perform. 

Einstein’s predictions were the result 
of a conceptual picture that looked for 
scientific truths in the opposite way— 
a deductive way—from the more com- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


mon inductive way where many observa- 
tions are combined to give rise to a 
general law which, in turn, may predict 
further unexpected events. Mendele’ev 
did it with his Periodic Table of chemical 
elements which, when properly arranged 
in a systematic way, pointed out where 
to look for missing structures.”° Not so 
with Einstein’s approach. His con- 
structs owed nothing to specific observa- 
tions. Rather, he began with general 
propositions from which particular meas- 
urable results might be deduced. 

How was the prediction of the bending 
of light confirmed? The events culminat- 
ing in the momentous joint meeting of 
the British Royal Society, meeting with 
the Royal Astronomical Society in 
November 1919, read as if they had been 
thought up by a skilled dramatist. Ima- 
gine the setting for the announcement — 
Burlington House, the home of the Royal 
Society of which Newton was a founding 
member more than 200 years ago and 
whose portrait hung prominently in the 
auditorium. The devastating war between 
England and Germany had ended less 
than a year before and while there was no 
peace as yet, the terrible carnage of World 
War I was, at last, over. 

The meeting had no intentions of re- 
newing contacts broken by the war, or to 
reestablish the severed threads between 
the separated scientific communities. The 
sole objective of the meeting was to 
present and to discuss a formal report 
by the Astronomer Royal and his as- 
sociates on: 


‘‘A determination of the deflection of light by 
the sun’s gravitational field from observations 
made at the total solar eclipse of May 29, 
1919724 


a venture that had been jointly organized 
by the two societies two years earlier. 
Sir J. J. Thompson, President of the 
Royal Society, known for his work on the 
electron, was in the chair. Frank Dyson, 
the Astronomer Royal, who had pointed 
out the unusually favorable circum- 
stances of this particular eclipse,” and 
Sir Arthur Eddington of Cambridge 
University, the leader of one of the two 


105 


expeditions, spoke to a hushed audience. 
As Alfred North Whitehead recalled later: 


It was my good fortune to be present at the 
meeting of the Royal Society in London when 
the Astronomer Royal for England announced 
that the photographic plates of the famous 
eclipse, as measured by his colleagues in 
Greenwich Observatory, had verified the pre- 
diction of Einstein that rays of light are bent 
as they pass in the neighborhood of the sun. 


The whole atmosphere of tense interest was 
exactly that of the Greek drama: we were the 
chorus commenting on the decree of destiny 
as disclosed in the development of a supreme 
incident. There was dramatic quality in the 
very Staging: the traditional ceremonial, and in 
the background the picture of Newton to 
remind us that the greatest of scientific 
generalizations was now, after more than 
two centuries, to receive its first modifica- 
tion. Nor was the personal interest wanting: 
a great adventure in thought had at length come 
safe to shore.”® 


The two expeditions had nearly failed. 
Eddington’s expeditions to the island of 
Principe came back with 18 photographs 
of the eclipse. Sixteen of them were use- 
less because of a thin cloud cover and 
only two showed images of the very 
brightest stars nearest to the sun. At 
Sobral in Brazil the clouds lifted one 
minute prior to totality but all 18 pic- 
tures taken with an astrographic tele- 
scope that depended ona mirror to deflect 
light into the instrument, were hope- 
lessly blurred. Luckily, a second tele- 
scope, borrowed from an Irish astronomer- 
priest, provided seven acceptable pictures. 

Despite these near disasters the meas- 
urements could leave no doubt. Dyson’s 
report said that the greatest weight should 
be attached to the results from Sobral 
(1.94"). The Principe observations gave 
deflections of 1.61”, but with a large prob- 
able error. Both pointed clearly toward the 
predicted 1.75” of Einstein’s theory. 

At the meeting Dyson and Eddington 
stated most emphatically that the crucial 
test of Einstein’s theory had been a suc- 
cess. Thompson, calling for a general 
discussion added: 


If it is sustained that Einstein’s reasoning holds 
good then it is the result of one of the highest 
achievements of human thought.”4 


106 


There was a spirited debate. Could 
other explanations suffice? One speaker, 
pointing to Newton’s portrait said: ‘‘We 
owe it to that great man to proceed very 
carefully’’ But there was no holding back 
now, no waiting for the next eclipse in 
1922 in Australia which confirmed the 
results without doubt.”° The next day, the 
London Times carried a banner headline 
story and an editorial 


REVOLUTION IN SCIENCE 
NEW THEORY OF THE UNIVERSE 
NEWTONIAN IDEAS OVERTHROWN 
The Fabric of the Universe”® 


The unsigned author of this beautifully 
and accurately presented story quotes 
Thompson as saying: 

‘‘They had just listened to ‘one of the most 


momentous, if not the most momentous pro- 
nouncement of human thought.’ ’*7 


With such a send-off the press had no 
need to invent more drama than was there 
in fact. An English expedition, making its 
preparations in the middle of a terrible 
war, had confirmed predictions of an in- 
dividual living in the land of the enemy, 
and formulating a view of space, time and 
gravitation that differed from the com- 
mon sense view of Newton. | 

Like a spark in a room filled with com- 
bustibles the news story burned a spot in 
men’s minds at a time when despair with 
man’s behavior had all but triumphed. 
Einstein’s prediction, skillfully con- 
firmed by the British astronomers, 
dramatically presented to the scientific 
world, and so responsibly reported to the 
world at large, came at a time when its 
emotional impact was profoundly mov- 
ing. It uncovered a person who, through 
the strength of his character and the mes- 
sages of his humane outlook, would sus- 
tain this attention throughout his life. 


‘“‘This I Believe’’ 


Just prior to his journey to Pasadena in 
1932, without knowing that the political 
developments would forestall a return to 
his home and to the country of his birth 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


forever, Einstein made a radio recording 
for the German public of his most deeply 
held views. It came too late to influence 
the events that were about to descend on 
the world. But as the beliefs of a thought- 
ful person, it will be read after the rant- 
ings of those then in power have long 
been forgotten: 


It is a special gift of grace to join those who have 
the opportunity and who are able to dedicate 
their best efforts to the study and exploration 
of objective, timeless topics. I am happy and 
grateful that I shared in this gift. It made me 
independent of the personal fate and actions 
of my fellow men, even though this indepen- 


dence should not blind one to the obligations 
that bind us irrevocably to the past, the present 
and future of humanity. 


Our situation on this earth is a curious one. 
Each one of us arrives here for a short stay, 
involuntarily and unbidden, not knowing for 
what reason and for what purpose. In our daily 
lives we feel that we are here for the sake of 
others, those whom we love and many others 
whose fate is intertwined with ours. 


I am often saddened by the thought of how 
much of my life is based on the labor of others 
and I know how much I owe them. 


I do not believe in free will. Schopenhauer’s 
saying that ‘“‘A man can do what he wants, 
but he cannot will what he wants’’ accompany 
me in all situations. It excuses the behavior of 
people even when they hurt me. This recogni- 
tion of the absence of free will protects me 
from taking myself and my fellow men too 
seriously as acting and as judging individuals, 
and it keeps me from losing my sense of humor. 


I never sought wealth and luxury and have, in 
fact, a good deal of contempt for them. My 
passion for social justice has brought me into 
conflict with people, as has my antipathy to any 
bonds and dependencies that are not absolutely 
essential. I admire the individual and inexpres- 
sibly dislike force and discrimination. These 
feelings have made me a dedicated pacifist and 
an opponent of militarism. I reject nationalism 
even in the guise of patriotism. 


Privileges based on position or property ap- 
pear to me unjust and corrupting, as is an ex- 
cessive personality cult. I acknowledge the 
ideal of democracy, even as I recognize the dis- 
advantages of democratic governments. Social 
equality and economic protection of the in- 
dividual appear to me important goals of the 
social compact. 


In daily life I am a ‘loner’ but the aware- 
ness of being part of the invisible company 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


who strive for beauty and justice leaves me no 
time to feel lonely. 


The most beautiful and profound thrill that 
man can experience is the feeling of mystery. 
It forms the basis of religions and provides 
the deepest nourishment for art and for 
science. He who does not experience it appears 
to me not dead but blind. To be aware that 
beyond the accessible there is hidden an un- 
reachable experience whose beauty and 
majesty touches us only indirectly and in pale 
reflection—that is true religion. In this sense 
I am a believer. It is enough for me to ap- 
proach these secrets with wonder and to at- 
tempt to formulate a concise picture in my 
mind of the majestic structure of the universe.8 
(1932) 


Acknowledgments 


I am grateful to Ms. Brenda G. Corbin 


who made the splendid collection of the 
Naval Observatory Library available for 
research and study. 


References 


. Quoted in C. Weiner, ‘‘A New Site for the 


Seminar: The Refugees and American Physics 
in the Thirties’? Perspectives in American 
History, Vol. II, 1968, p. 205. 


. R. Willstatter, Aus Meinem Leben, p. 274. (con- 


versation with A. Hitler related by Carl Bosch). 


. The Haber Memorial Lecture by J. E. Coates, 


J. Chem: Soce.(1939), p:- 1671. 


. R. Willstatter, ibid., p. 413. 
. Interview by Evelyn Seeley, New York World 


Telegram, March 11, 1933. 


. Ibid. 
. ‘Autobiographical Notes’ in P. A. Schilpp 


(Ed.), Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, 
Vol. I, The Library of Living Philosophers 
(1949). 


. A. Einstein, The World as I See It, New York 


(1934), p. 239. 


. Ronald W. Clark, Einstein: The Life and Times, 


World Publishing Company (1971). 


. ‘‘Manifesto to the Civilized World’’, October 


1914, (signed by Ernst Hackel, Wilhelm 
Rontgen, Paul Ehrlich, Engelhart Humper- 
dinck, Max Reinhart and others). Excerpts in 
Ref. 12, pp. 3-4. 


. Ref. 5. 
. O. Nathan and H. Norden (Eds.), Einstein on 


Peace, Schocken Books (1969), p. 577. 


. ‘‘Manifesto to Europeans’’, reprinted in Ref. 
12, p. 4ff. 
a Refa12, pae3s9: 


. Ref. 12, p. 229 (letter to Alfred Nahon, July 


207193535): 


. Ref. 12, p. 51 (Meeting of German Peace 


Congress, Berlin 1923). 


107 


17. Ref. 12, p. 336, (Interview in New York Times, 
September 15, 1945). 

18. Ref. 12, p. 407 (May 1947). 

19. W. de Sitter, ‘‘On Einstein’s Theory of Gravi- 
tation and Its Astronomical Consequences’’, 
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical 
Society 76, 717 (1916) (‘The difference could 
probably very well be measured’). 

20. D. Mendele’ev, The Principles of Chemistry, 
Vol. II, London (1891). (‘When, in 1871, I 
wrote a paper on the application of the 
periodic law to the determination of yet un- 
discovered elements, I did not think I should 
live to see the verification of the consequences 
of the law, but such was to be the case. Three 
elements were described—and now, after the 
lapse of twenty years, I have had the great 
pleasure of seeing them discovered and named 
after those great countries where the rare 
minerals containing them are found, where they 
were discovered—Gallia, Scandinavia and 
Germany’). 

21. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. 220 A, 291 (1919). 


Einstein in the U. S. Navy 


Stephen Brunauer 


Clarkson College, Potsdam, N. Y. 13676 


The figure of Albert Einstein has fas- 
cinated his contemporaries; he was not 
only the greatest scientist of our age, but 
also the best-loved and most admired 
man among all scientists. Because of his 
stupendous contributions to science, one 
of which resulted in the atomic age, his 
name became known, through news- 
papers, magazines, radio and television, 
not only to the educated laymen, but also 
to those who had less education than the 
present audience; and even those who 
know the name of no other scientist know 
the name of Einstein. 

Several biographies of Einstein were 
published, which dealt with almost every 
aspect of his life, but one aspect of his life 
—in my opinion an important aspect— 
was not discussed in any of them but one, 


108 


22. F. W. Dyson, ‘‘On the Opportunity Offered 
by the Eclipse of 1919, May 29, of Verify- 
ing Einstein’s Theory of Gravitation’’, Monthly 
Notice of the Royal Astronomical Society 77, 
445 (1917). 


23. Alfred North Whitehead, Science and the 
Modern World, The MacMillan Company 
G1925): p.nhd; 


24. The Observatory, ‘‘Joint Eclipse Meeting of the 
Royal Society and the Royal Astronomical 
Society’’, 42, 389 (1919). 

25. W. W. Campbell and K. Trummpler, *‘Ob- 
servations on the Deflection of Light in Pas- 
sing Through the Sun’s Gravitational Field 
Made During the Total Solar Eclipse of 
September 21, 1922’, Lick Observatory Bul- 
letin Number 346 (1923). 


26. The (London) Times, November 7, 1919. 
27. Ibid. 


28. F. Herneck, ‘‘Albert Einstein’s gesprochenes 
Glaubensbekenntnis’’, Naturwissenschaften 
(1966), p. 198. 


and in that only very briefly and to some 
extent misleadingly. This aspect is the 
story of how Einstein, a lifelong pacifist, 
helped during World War II to fight the 
Nazis through his work for the U. S. Navy. 

The best and most complete biography 
of Einstein was written by Ronald W. 
Clark, with the title Einstein, the Life 
and Times, and it was published by the 
World Publishing Company in 1971. 
Clark devoted less than two pages in his 
63 1-page book to Einstein’s work for the 
Navy Bureau of Ordnance, and even that 
is partly erroneous, based on George 
Gamow’s book My World Line. This is 
not Clark’s fault; he wrote what scant 
information he received, and apparently 
no one referred him to the person who 
could have given him both more and more 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


| 
| 


accurate information, namely, to me. At 
the time Mr. Clark wrote his book, I was 
a professor in the Department of Chemistry 
at Clarkson College of Technology. 

First I have to tell you the background 
of how Einstein and I became acquainted. 
At the time of Pearl Harbor, I was a re- 
search chemist in the U. S. Department 
of Agriculture. Soon after that, I applied 
for a commission in the Navy. After a 
long drawn-out fight with the Navy, 
which included one rejection, I won the 
fight, and received my commission as a 
full lieutenant (equivalent to a captain 
in the Army) on September 2, 1942. 
After that it took more than a month until 
I located a billet in the Bureau of Ord- 
nance and was called in for active duty. 

Mr. Clark, following Gamow’s book, 
wrote about the ‘‘Division of High Ex- 
plosives’? in the Bureau of Ordnance, 
but there was no such thing. The Bureau 
had a “‘Research and Development Divi- 
sion (Re),’’ the division had a section 
called ‘‘Ammunition and Explosives 
(Re2)’’, and the section had a subsec- 
tion called ‘‘High Explosives and Propel- 
lants (Re2c).’’ I was assigned to Re2c. 
It had two other reserve officers in it 
when I joined, and we divided the work 
among ourselves. One became head of 
propellant research, I became head of 
high explosives research, and the third, 
who was a lieutenant j.g., became my 
assistant and deputy. I was, on the basis 
of my broad experience in the field, ex- 
cellently qualified for my assignment. I 
knew the names of two high explosives: 
TNT and dynamite. With that knowl- 
edge, I became head of high explosives 
research and development for the world’s 
largest Navy! 

But I was young and learned fast; 
furthermore, the staff kept on growing as 
the war progressed. I acquired two 
groups of civilian scientists; one headed 
by one of the speakers at this meeting, 
Raymond J. Seeger; another of tonight’s 
speakers, Harry Polachek, was in this 
group; the other group was headed by 
Gregory Hartmann, who eventually be- 
came Technical Director of the post- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


war Naval Ordnance Laboratory at 
White Oak. I also had a few officers. 
Besides the people directly under me, I 
had very many other scientists working 
for us indirectly. The great majority of 
the civilian scientists doing war research 
was organized into the National Defense 
Research Committee (NDRC), which had 
two divisions doing research on high ex- 
plosives: Division 2, headed by Professor 
E. Bright Wilson of Harvard University, 
which worked on underwater explosives 
in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, and 
Division 8, headed by Professor George 
Kistiakovsky, also of Harvard, which 
worked on explosives in air in Bruceton, 
Pennsylvania. This is a long introduction 
to my meeting Einstein, but I believe it 
was necessary to see the set-up to under- 
Stand better what I will say from this 
point on. 

The top people of the Army, Navy and 
the two civilian divisions had occasional 
joint conferences to discuss their re- 
search on high explosives. At one such 
conference, the name of Einstein was 
mentioned by somebody. That gave me 
an idea. I asked the Army people whether 
Einstein was working for them. The 
answer was no. Then I asked the civilians 
whether Einstein was working for them, 
and the answer again was no. Why? 
‘‘Oh, he is a pacifist,’’ was the answer, 
‘‘furthermore, he is not interested in any- 
thing practical. He is only interested in 
working on his unified field theory.”’ I 
was not satisfied with these answers. 
Like those who gave the answers, I was 
ignorant of the fact that Einstein had 
changed his pacifist views publicly since 
Hitler’s ascension to power; nor did I 
know that Einstein was interested in 
practical things. The first biography of 
Einstein, that of Philipp Frank, was to ap- 
pear only four years later. Nevertheless, 
I felt that Einstein could not be a pacifist 
in a war with Hitler, nor did I believe that 
he would be unwilling to contribute his ef- 
forts to this war. So I decided that I would 
try to get Einstein for the Navy. 

In the second week of May, 1943, I 
wrote a letter to Einstein, asking his 


109 


permission to visit him in Princeton. The 
gracious consent came by return mail. 
The visit took place on May 16. After 
the pleasant preliminaries, I asked Ein- 
stein whether he would be willing to be- 
come a consultant for the Navy in general, 
and for me, in the field of high explo- 
sives research, in particular. Einstein was 
tremendously pleased about the offer, 
and very happily gave his consent. He 
felt very bad about being neglected. He 
had not been approached by anyone to 
do any war work since the United States 
entered the war. He said to me, “*People 
think that I am interested only in theory, 
and not in anything practical. This is not 
true. I was working in the Patent Office 
in Zurich, and I participated in the de- 
velopment of many inventions. The gyro- 
scope too.’ I said, ‘‘That’s fine. You are 
hired.’’ We both laughed, and agreed that 
Einstein would talk the details over with 
Dr. Frank Aydelotte, the Director of the 
Institute for Advanced Study, where Ein- 
stein was employed. 

Already on the next day, both Einstein 
and Aydelotte wrote separate letters to 
me, and it is worth quoting both letters in 
full. Both letters came on the stationery 
of the Institute. The following was Ein- 
stein’s letter: 


May 17, 1943 
Dear Lieutenant Brunauer: 

I have your kind letter of May 13 and 
have discussed with Dr. Aydelotte, Director 
of the Institute for Advanced Study, the mat- 
ter of my cooperation with the Research and 
Development Division of the Navy. Dr. 
Aydelotte approved heartily of my participat- 
ing in your research operations. He and I both 
feel that the individual contract would be most 
suitable, and I agree fully with the arrange- 
ments outlined in the enclosed letter from 
Dr. Aydelotte. 

I very much enjoyed your visit and look 
forward with great satisfaction to this asso- 
ciation with you in research on Navy prob- 
lems. I shall expect to receive from you in 
due course the contract and information about 
the work which you wish me to undertake, and 
I hope that I shall be able to make some use- 
ful contribution. 

In this connection, I should like to raise one 
question: Would it in any way interfere with 
my usefulness to the Navy if I should spend 
a part of the summer in a cottage at Lake 


110 


Saranac? I do not know whether it will be 
possible for me to take a holiday away from 
Princeton in any case, and certainly if my use- 
fulness to the Navy would be increased by re- 
maining in Princeton I should be most happy 
to do so. If, however, it would be equally 
convenient for you, I think I could probably 
work to better advantage in the more agree- 
able climate of Lake Saranac during the hot 
months of summer. 


Yours very sincerely, 
(signed) A. Einstein 


How clear from this letter is Einstein’s 
joy over the fact that he was finally drawn 
into the war research! ‘‘I very much 
enjoyed your visit and look forward with 
great satisfaction to this association with 
you in research on Navy problems.” I 
think it is obvious that I enjoyed the 
visit at least as much as he. This was 
my first opportunity to meet the man 
whom I considered one of the two great- 
est scientists of all times (the other was 
Newton). And how clearly the letter 
shows Einstein’s humility, asking the 
permission of a simple Navy lieutenant 
to spend the summer at Lake Saranac. 
I am sure that Einstein couldn’t know at 
that time that I was a scientist, my field 
being very far from Einstein’s interests. 
He could have written simply that during 
the summer he may be reached at Lake 
Saranac, but no—he asked the permis- 
sion of the Navy lieutenant. Naturally he 
received it from me, but he didn’t use 
it. He stayed at Princeton. The letter of 
Dr. Aydelotte is also interesting and I 
quote that also in full. 

May 17, 1943 

Dear Lieutenant Brunauer: 

Professor Einstein has told me of his con- 
versation with you and showed me your 
gracious letter of May 13th suggesting arrange- 
ments under which he may be of assistance to 
the Navy for theoretical research on explo- 
sives and explosions. 

In talking over the matter with Professor 
Einstein he and I have both come to the 
conclusion that probably the best arrangement 
would be for the Navy to make an individual 
contract with him on the basis of $25 per day, 
Professor Einstein to let you know at intervals 
the amount of time he has actually spent on 
Navy problems. I think it is important to leave 


in the arrangements for an assistant in case a 
great deal of routine work should be neces- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


=~ —_ 


sary, although Professor Einstein cannot tell at 
this time whether or not he will need the 
services of an assistant. 

I take the liberty of writing to you simply to 
say that the Institute for Advanced Study 
cordially approves of this arrangement with 
Professor Einstein and looks forward with 
pride to having him undertake this service 
for the Navy. 

Believe me, 


Yours very sincerely, 
(signed) Frank Aydelotte, Director 


This gracious letter shows that Dr. 
Aydelotte was doubly happy about my of- 
fer: for the sake of Einstein and for the 
sake of himself and the Institute. The 
most amusing part of the letter for us 
today is the consultant fee of $25 per 
day for the world’s greatest scientist. 
It was a ridiculously small fee even at 
that time. As to the assistant mentioned 
in the letter, it was never needed because 
no routine work was ever assigned to 
Professor Einstein. 

The originals of the two letters are in 
the Navy or in the Archives, but I had 
photocopies made of them, and had them 
framed. This is the only thing I had ona 
wall of my office, wherever I worked, and 
one of the greatest joys in my life has been 
that I was able to make Einstein happy. 
And so I became, using some exaggera- 
tion suggested by a friend, Einstein’s 
‘‘boss’’ for three years. 

The news of my successful visit spread 
like wildfire in the Bureau of Ordnance. 
Officers, from ensigns to admirals, came 
to me with the question, ‘‘Is it true that 
Professor Einstein is working for us?’’ 
When they found out that it was true, it 
settled the matter of the outcome of the 
war in their minds. The U. S. Navy and 
Einstein were an unbeatable combination. 

Einstein’s security clearance was ob- 
tained very quickly, and the contract was 
signed on May 31. Soon after that, I made 
my second trip to Einstein, taking to him 
for consideration one of the toughest 
problems that puzzled us at that time. The 
problem was whether the detonation of a 
torpedo should be initiated in the front or 
in the rear. The three most important 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


characteristics of the shock wave pro- 
duced in a detonation are the peak pres- 
sure, the impulse or momentum of the 
shock wave, which includes the duration 
of the shock, and the energy released in 
the explosion. If in a torpedo the detona- 
tion of the high explosive is initiated at 
the forward end, one obtains the highest 
peak pressure. If the detonation is ini- 
tiated in the rear end, one obtains the 
highest momentum. The energy de- 
veloped is the same, regardless where the 
explosion is initiated. So the ques- 
tion was which of the three main char- 
acteristics causes the most damage. If it 
is the peak pressure, the explosion should 
be initiated at the front end of the tor- 
pedo; if it is momentum, it should be 
initiated at the rear end, and if it is the 
energy, the location of the initiation does 
not make any difference. 

Einstein was thinking about the prob- 
lem for about ten minutes, and finally 
chose momentum and gave the reasons. 
But a few days later I received a letter 
from him telling me that he gave much 
further thought to the matter, and changed 
his conclusion. He decided that the 
energy developed in the explosion was 
the most important factor, and gave his 
reasons. Very expensive experiments 
performed much later showed that he was 
right. Of course this subject was highly 
confidential during the war, but I hope 
that now—thirty-five years later—it 
is declassified. 

This is a good example of the prob- 
lems we took to Einstein, and this one 
example should suffice. He always gave 
very careful thought to the problems we 
took to him and always came up with a 
reasonable answer. I alluded to some mis- 
leading statements in Clark’s excellent 
book. These he took from George Gamow. 
Gamow, a brilliant theoretical physicist, 
was also one of my consultants during 
the Second World War. According to 
Gamow’s story, he was the Navy’s liai- 
son man with Einstein; he took the re- 
search we did to Einstein, who listened 
with interest and praised the work. The 
implication is that Einstein only “‘lis- 


111 


tened,’’ but made no contribution, and 
this is false. Less important is the im- 
plication that he was the only contact 
with Einstein. He claimed that he visited 
Einstein every two weeks, which is not 
true; I visited Einstein about once in 
two months and that was more fre- 
quent than Gamow’s visits. Raymond 
Seeger and many others also utilized 
Einstein’s services. 

I mention here two men. A young man, 
who worked on torpedoes in the old 
Naval Ordnance Laboratory, asked my 
permission to consult Einstein about his 
research. Naturally, I gave my permis- 
sion. My co-workers and I considered 
this young man very brilliant, but we did 
not suspect that he would be the first man, 
and to date the only one, to receive two 
Nobel Prizes in the same subject, phys- 
ics. His name is John Bardeen. Another 
man was Henry Eyring, who is one of the 
greatest physical chemists of the country 
and the world. Eyring was then a profes- 
sor at Princeton University, but he had 
never met Einstein. He and his brilliant 
group of young coworkers worked on a 
high explosives project for us. I intro- 
duced Henry to Einstein, and our walk 
in Einstein’s garden became one of the 
great experiences of Eyring’s life. 

If I were asked to state what specific 
contributions were made by Einstein to 
our high explosives research, I would 
have to say this. New and more effec- 
tive high explosives were developed dur- 
ing the war, and they were used by the 
Navy and the Army (which then included 
the Air Force) against Germany, Japan 
and their allies. (I found out later that at 
least the underwater explosives, possibly 
others, were also used in the Korean and 
the Vietnam War.) But these develop- 
ments were the results of the efforts of 
large groups of people, including Ein- 
stein. It is impossible to assess the 
contributions of the individuals within 
the groups. The new developments re- 
sulted from team work, and Einstein was 
a member of the team—three of tonight’s 
speakers were members of the team. But 
it is easy to assess the value of a dif- 


112 


ferent type of contribution of Einstein— 
his contribution to morale. It was up- 
lifting to know that ‘‘Einstein was one 
of us.”’ 

I learned from Clark’s book that in 
July 1943, i.e., soon after Einstein joined 
the Navy, he wrote to his friend Bucky, 
‘*So long as the war lasts and I work 
for the Navy, I do not wish to begin any- 
thing else.’’ But we were unable to 
supply him with enough work to occupy 
him full time. Whenever I visited him, I 
found that the tall and long blackboard 
in his study was filled from the left to 
right end, and from top to bottom, with 
long, complicated equations, written 
with neat, small-sized symbols—ob- 
viously work on the unified field theory. 
Nor were my bimonthly or more or less 
frequent visits spent on business alone. 
After the business came the conversa- 
tion. We talked about the progress of the 
war, about interesting items in the news, 
about history, philosophy, about per- 
sonal experiences, and about a great 
variety of other things. Einstein had a 
wonderful sense of humor; he loved to 
make witty remarks and tell humorous 
anecdotes. He laughed heartily at his 
own jokes and also at mine. His well- 
known wisecrack, “‘I amin the Navy, but 
I was not required to get a Navy hair- 
cut,’’ was born in one of our conversa- 
tions. I am very sorry now that I did not 
make detailed notes after each trip to 
Einstein. But that was the busiest time of 
my life; I worked seven days a week and 
twelve hours or more every day, as 
did many others. During three and a half 
years, we had three days off, the three 
Christmas days. 

The great mathematician G. H. Hardy 
called Einstein ‘‘good, gentle, and wise,”’ 
and it would be difficult to find better ad- 
jectives for him than these. But I would 
add one more, ‘‘humble.’’ You could see 
that in his letter to me, which I read to 
you, but that is only one example. In all 
my visits, I received the impression of 
a genuinely humble person. On one oc- 
casion, he gave me one of his books as 
a present. It was The Meaning of Rela- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


a 


7 


tivity. On the empty page under the cover 
he wrote in his beautiful, small, clear 
letters only this much: A. Einstein, and 
under it the year, 1945. I was disappointed 
that he did not write more, but I attribute 
it to his humility, to his great modesty. 
C. P. Snow visited Einstein only once 
in his life, in the summer of 1937. He 
wrote a long essay about his visit. He 
found Einstein a sad man and a pes- 
simist. During the eight hours they spent 
together, he heard Einstein’s famous 
laughter only once. Einstein had good 
reasons to be pessimistic then; that was 
the time of the rapid rise of Hitler, and 
the western powers did nothing about it. 
But since Snow’s essay appeared twelve 
years after Einstein’s death, it created the 
impression that Einstein was always like 
that. This is not so. During my visits, 
while the war lasted, Einstein was gay 
and ebullient; in those visits he laughed 
heartily and often. He had good reasons 
for that too; we were on the way to 
eradicating Hitler and his Nazi system, 
and Eintein was—by his work in the 
Navy—one of the eradicators. 
Although Einstein’s third and last con- 
tract as ‘‘Consultant for Research on Ex- 
plosives’’ ran from July 1, 1945 (before 
the end of the war) to June 30, 1946 (nine 
months after the end of the war), there 
was no need to consult him after the end 
of the war. Hiroshima shook up many 
people, and Einstein more than any- 
one else. I visited him twice after the 
war; last time in April 1946. Einstein’s 
mood changed—he was worried about 
the fate of mankind. I expressed the 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


deep gratitude of the Navy, the Bureau of 
Ordnance, and especially of my own for 
the privilege of working with him, and he 
in turn thanked me for getting him into the 
war research, which gave him great satis- 
faction. When we said goodbye to each 
other, I was deeply moved, and perhaps 
he was moved too. 

That was the last time I saw him. Our 
paths diverged after that. Our aim was 
the same: the prevention of a third world 
war, but our paths were different. I 
stayed in the Navy for four and a half 
more years to build up a new organiza- 
tion for high explosives research and 
development. Einstein’s path was com- 
plete disarmament and the establishment 
of a world government, and he exerted 
all his energy, all his effort, and all his 
influence to achieve those ideals. As we 
know, he failed. I believe that Einstein 
knew that his efforts were doomed to 
failure; he was a prophet way ahead of 
his time. But the “‘conscience of the 
world,’’ as Einstein was called, could not 
but fight to the end for what he believed, 
however hopeless the fight was. 

This is the story of Einstein in the Navy 
in a nutshell. It is incomplete for two 
reasons: I myself could have said more 
if the time allotted to my talk had been 
longer. What is more important, doubt- 
less others could add their experiences to 
mine. Some day a more complete story 
will emerge about this important part of 
Einstein’s life. But even this short history 
is far more complete than anything you 
can find in print to date. Thank you for 
your attention. 


113 


DIRECTORY 


THE DIRECTORY OF THE ACADEMY FOR 1979 


Foreword 


The present, 54th issue of the Academy’s direc- and membership in affiliated societies by June 30, 
tory is again this year issued as part of the September 1979. In cases in which cards were not received by 
number of the Journal. As in previous years, the that date, the address appears as it was used during 
alphabetical listing is based on a postcard question- 1979, and the remaining data were taken from the 
naire sent to the Academy membership. Members __ directory for 1978. Corrections should be called to 
were asked to update the data concerning address ___ the attention of the Academy office. 


Code for Affiliated Societies, and Society Officers 


1 The Philosophical Society of Washington (1898) 


President: 


Vice-President: 


Secretary: 
Delegate: 


George T. Armstrong, 1401 Dale Dr., Silver Spring, MD 20910 
William G. Maisch, 205 Yockum Parkway, Alexandria, VA 22034 
Lowell D. Ballard, 722 S. Colonial, Sterling, VA 22170 

James F. Goff, 3405 34th Pl., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 


2 Anthropological Society of Washington (1898) 


President: 


- President-elect: 


Secretary: 
Delegate: 


Marie J. Bourgeois, Rsch. Trng. Sec., Div. Nursing, BHM, HSA, HEW, 
3700 East West Hwy., Hyattsville, MD 20782 

Michael Kenny, Dept. of Anthro., Catholic University, Washington, D.C. 
20017 

John L. Landgraf, 2423 Eye St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 

Jean K. Boek, National Graduate Univ., 1101 N. Highland St., Arlington, 
VA 22201 


3 Biological Society of Washington (1898) 


President: 
Vice-President: 
Secretary: 
Treasurer: 


Delegate: 


Oliver S. Flint, Jr., Curator, Dept. of Ptasnbloneke Smithsonian Institution, 
Washington, D. C. 20560 

Richard Banks, U.S. Dept. of Interior, Fish & Wildlife Div., Bird & 
Mammal Labs., Washington, D.C. 20240 

Michael A. Bogan, U.S. Dept. of Interior, Fish & Wildlife Div., Bird & 
Mammal Labs., Washington, D.C. 20240 

David L. Pawson, Curator, Dept. of Invertebrate Zoology, Smithsonian 
Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560 

William R. Heyer, Amphibian & Reptiles, Nat. History Bldg., Smithsonian 
Institution, Washington, D.C: 20560 


4 Chemical Society of Washington (1898) 


114 


President: 
President-elect: 
Secretary: 


Delegate: 


Dr. Walter Benson, FDA, HFD 420, 200 C St. S.W., Washington, D.C. 
20204 

Dr. George Mushrush, Chem. Dept. George Mason Univ., 4400 University 
Dr., Fairfax, VA 22030 

Dr. Jo-Anne Jackson, Natl. Bureau of Stds., Bg. 223, Rm. A329, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 

Dr. Barbara Howell, Natl. Bureau of Stds., Bg. 222, Rm. A367, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


10 


Entomological Society of Washington (1898) 
President: Donald R. Davis, Dept. of Entomology, NHB 105, Smithsonian Institution, 
Washington, D.C. 20560 
Vice-President: T. J. Spilman, Dept. of Entomology, NHB 169, Smithsonian Institution, 
Washington, D.C. 20560 


Secretary: Wayne N. Mathis, Dept. of Entomology, NHB 169, Smithsonian Institution, 
Washington, D.C. 20560 


Delegate: Donald R. Davis, see above 


National Geographic Society (1898) 


President: Robert E. Doyle, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 
Chairman: Melvin M. Payne, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 
Secretary: Owen R. Anderson, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 
Delegate: T. Dale Stewart, Smithsonian Institution, Museum of Natural History, 


Washington, D.C. 20560 


Geological Society of Washington (1898) 
President: Francis R. Boyd, Jr., Carnegie Institution of Washington, Geophysical 
Lab., 2801 Upton St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 
Vice-President: J. Thomas Dutro, U.S. Geological Survey, Branch of Paleontology and 
Stratigraphy, U.S. National Museum, Washington, D.C. 20560 
Secretary: William E. Davies, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA 22092, Mail Stop 973 
Delegate: Not appointed 


Medical Society of the District of Columbia (1898) 


President: William S. McCune 
President-elect: Frank S. Bacon 
Secretary: Thomas Sadler 
Delegate: Not appointed 


Columbia Historical Society (1899) 


President: Wilcomb E. Washburn, Amer. Studies, S.I., Washington, D.C. 20560 
Vice-President: William H. Press, 1511 K St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005 

Secretary: Marcellina Hummer, 2006 Columbia Rd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20009 
Delegate: Paul H. Oehser, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 20036 


Botanical Society of Washington (1902) 
President: Dr. Kittie Parker, Dept. of Biology, George Washington University, 2029 G 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20052 
Vice-President: Dr. Ted Bradley, Dept. of Botany, George Mason University, 4400 
University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030 


Secretary: Mrs. Antoinette Frederic, Dept. of Botany, Howard University, 2401 
6th St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20059 
Delegate: Conrad B. Link, Univ. of Md., Dept. of Horticulture, College Park, MD 20742 
11 Society of American Foresters, Washington, Section (1904) 
Chairman: Dr. Richard T. Marks, Rt. 2, Box 29, Warrenton, VA 22186 
Chairman-elect: Jay McConnel, 4324 Ashford La., Fairfax, VA 22032 
Secretary: Charles Newlon, 13106 Poplar Tree Rd., Fairfax, VA 22030 
Delegate: Boyd Post 
12 Washington Society of Engineers (1907) 
President: Jeffrey H. Rumbaugh, Potomac Electric Power Co., 1900 Pennsylvania 
Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20068 
Vice-President: Guy H. Hammer, Washington Hospital Dr., Washington, D.C. 20010 
Secretary: Charles E. Remington, 2005 Columbia Pike, Arlington, VA 22204 
Delegate: George Abraham, 3107 Westover Dr., S.E., Washington, D.C. 20020 
13 Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Washington Section (1912) 
Chairman: C. David Crandall, 12214 Old Colony Drive, Upper Marlboro, MD 20870 
Vice-Chairman: Dr. Sajjad H. Durrani, 17513 Lafayette Dr., Olney, MD 20832 
Secretary: Dr. Gideon Kantor, 10702 Kenilworth Ave., Garrett Park, MD 20766 
Delegate: George Abraham, 3107 Westover Dr., S.E., Washington, D.C. 20020 
J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 115 


14 American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Washington Section (1923) 


Chairman: John Ritzmann, Washington Gas Light Co., 6801 Industrial Dr., Springfield, 
VA 22151 

Vice-Chairman: Markley Au, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Fuel Cycle Division, 
Washington, D.C. 20555 

Secretary: John Fairbanks, Naval Ship Engineering Center, Crystal Plaza, Arling- 
ton, VA 22207 

Delegate: Michael Chi, 2721 N. 24th St., Arlington, VA 22207 


15 Helminthological Society of Washington (1923) 
President: J. Ralph Lichtenfels, Animal Parasitology Inst., SEA, BARC-East, 
Beltsville, MD 20705 
Vice-President: Nancy Pacheco, Naval Medical Research Inst., Bethesda, MD 20014 


Corresponding 
Secretary/ 
Treasurer: Sherman Hendricks, Gettysburg College, Dept. of Biology, Gettysburg, PA 
Recording 17325 
Secretary: Milford Lunde, Lab. of Parasitic Diseases, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20014 
Delegate: Robert S. Isenstein, FSQS, USDA, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD 20705 
16 American Society for Microbiology, Washington Branch (1923) 
President: Frank Hetrick, Dept. of Microbiology, Univ. of Md., College Park, MD 20742 
Vice-President: Dr. George Royal, Dept. of Microbiology, Howard Univ., Washington, 
D.C. 20059 
Secretary: Dr. Thomas Elliott, 126 Moore Ave., Vienna, VA 22180 
Delegate: None Appointed 
17 Society of American Military Engineers, Washington Post (1927) 
President: Col. Edwin P. Geesey, DAEN-FEZ-B, Washington, D.C. 20314 
Vice-President: R.Adm. H. R. Lippold, NOAA, Washington, D.C. 20233 
Secretary: William I. Jacob, DAEN-FER-P, Washington, D.C. 20314 
Delegate: Hal P. Demuth, 4025 Pine Brook Rd., Alexandria, VA 22310 


18 American Society of Civil Engineers, National Capital Section (1942) 
President: James W. Harland, 1511 K St., N.W., Suite 337, Washington, D.C. 20005 
Vice-President: Norman L. Cooper, Dept. of Transportation, 400 7th St., Rm. 9422, Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20590 


Secretary: Robert Efimba, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Howard University, Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20059 
Delegate: Robert Sorenson, Coastal Engineering Research Ctr., Kingman Bldg., 


Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060 
19 Society for Experimental Biology & Medicine, D.C. Section (1952) 


President: Elise A. Brown, USDA, Washington, D.C. 20750 
Vice-President: Ariel Hollinshead, G. W. Univ., Warwick Cancer Clinic, Washington, D.C. 
20052 
Recording 
Secretary: Jocelyn Stewart, Food & Drug Adm., Rockville, MD 20204 
Corresponding 
Secretary: William Von Arsdel, Food & Drug Adm., Bureau of Drugs, Rockville, MD 
20204 
Treasurer: Margaret Davison, Dept. of Defense, Defense Fuel Supplies, Washing- 
ton, D.C. 
President Emeritus: Arthur Wykes, Natl. Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD 20014 
Delegate: Cyrus R. Creveling, NIAID, Washington, D.C. 
20 American Society for Metals, Washington Chapter (1953) 
Chairman: Charles N. Scott, Southern Railway System, P.O. Box 233, Alexandria, 
VA 22313 


Vice-Chairman: Dr. Anna C. Fraker, B118 Materials Bldg. (564), Natl. Bureau of Stds., 
Washington, D.C. 20234 


Secretary: Joseph R. Crisci, David Taylor NSRDC, Code 282, Annapolis, MD 21402 

Treasurer: James R. Ward, V-S-E, Inc., 2550 Huntington Avenue, Alexandria, VA 
22303 

Delegate: Dr. Charles G. Interrante, B120 Materials Bldg. (562), Natl. Bureau of 


Stds., Washington, D.C. 20234 


116 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


21 American Association for Dental Research, Washington Section (1953) 


President: John D. Termine, Natl. Institute of Dental Research, Bethesda, MD 20014 

Vice-President: William R. Cotton, Naval Medical Research Institute, Bethesda, MD 20014 

Secretary: Stanley Vermilyea, Walter Reed Army Inst. of Res., Washington, D.C. 
20012 

Delegate: William V. Loebenstein, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 


22 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, National Capital Section (1953) 


Chairman: George J. Vila, General Dynamics, 1745 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Suite 1000, 
Arlington, VA 22202 

Vice-Chairman: Dr. Richard Hallion, Smithsonian Institution, National Air & Space Mus., 
7th & Independence Ave., Washington, D.C. 20560 

Secretary: Dr. Frederick L. Schuyler, Department of Energy, MS C-448, Washington, 

_ D.C. 20545 
Delegate: George J. Vila, General Dynamics, 1743 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 
23 American Meteorological Society, D.C. Chapter (1954) 

Chairman: Dr. John A. Leese, NOAA/NESS, Room 3308 FB 4 S1X1, Washington, 

D.C. 20233 


Vice-Chairman: Mr. Edward M. Carlstead, NOAA/NWS/NMC, Room 410 WWB W33, 
Washington, D.C. 20233 


Corresponding 
Secretary: Capt. Donald G. Buchanan, DOD Weather Liaison Officer, DET 1, 
AFGWC, Washington, D.C. 20330 
Delegate: Mr. A. James Wagner, NOAA/NWS/NMC, Room 604 WWB W335, 


Washington, D.C. 20233 


24 Insecticide Society of Washington (1959) 
Chairman: William E. Bickley, American Mosquito Control Association, P.O. Box 75, 
Riverdale, MD 20840 
Chairman-elect: William Hollis, National Agricultural Chemicals Association, 1155 15th St., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005 


Secretary: Judd O. Nelson, Dept. of Entomology, University of Maryland, College 
Park, MD 20742 
Delegate: Jack R. Plimmer, USDA, SEA, Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, 


Beltsville, MD 20705 


25 Acoustical Society of America (1959) 


Chairman: John A. Molino, Sound Section, NBS, Washington, D.C. 20234 

Vice-Chairman: Charles T. Molloy, 2400 Claremont Dr., Falls Church, VA 22043 
Secretary: William K. Blake, Naval Ship R & D Ctr., Bethesda, MD 20034 
Delegate: None appointed 


26 American Nuclear Society, Washington Section (1960) 
President: Arthur Randal, Am. Nuclear Energy Council, 1750 K St., N.W., Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20006 
Vice-President: S. Bassett, NUS Corp., Rockville, MD 20852 


Secretary: Ray Durante, Westinghouse Electric, 1801 K St., N.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20006 

Delegate: Dick Duffy, Nuclear Engineering, Univ. of Md., College Park, MD 20742 

27 Institute of Food Technologists, Washington Section (1961) 

President: Mahlon Burnette III, Grocery Manufacturers of America, 1010 Wisconsin 
Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20007 

Secretary: Allen Matthys, National Assn. of Food Processors 

Treasurer: Katherine Albert 

Delegate: William Sulzbacher, 8527 Clarkson Dr., Fulton, MD 20759 


28 American Ceramic Society, Baltimore-Washington Section (1962) 
Chairman: W. T. Bakker, General Refractories Co., P.O. Box 1673, MD 21203 
Chairman-elect: L. Biller, Glidden-Dirkee Div., SCM Corp., 3901 Hawkins Point Rd., 
Baltimore, MD 21226 
Secretary: Edwin E. Childs, J. E. Baker Co., 232 E. Market St., York, PA 17405 
Delegate: None appointed 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 117 


29 


30 


31 


32 


33 


34 


35 


36 


37 


118 


Electrochemical Society, National Capital Section (1963) 
Chairman: David R. Flinn, Bureau of Mines, College Park Research Center, College 
Park, MD 20740 
Vice-Chairman: John R. Ambrose, National Bureau of Standards, Bldg. 223, Rm. B254, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 


Secretary: George Marinenko, National Bureau of Standards, Bldg. 222, Rm. A217, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 
Delegate: David R. Flinn, see above 
Washington History of Science Club (1965) 
Chairman: Richard G. Hewlett, Atomic Energy Comm. 
Vice-Chairman: Deborah Warner, Smithsonian Institution 
Secretary: Dean C. Allard 
Delegate: None appointed 
American Association of Physics Teachers, Chesapeake Section (1965) 
President: Morton Rubin, University of Maryland, Baltimore County 
Vice-President: Eugenie V. Mielczarek, George Mason Univ., 4400 University Dr., Fairfax, 
VA 22030 
Secretary: Roberta Stoney, Langley High School 
Delegate: Peggy A. Dixon, Montgomery College, Takoma Park Campus 


Optical Society of America, National Capital Section (1966) 
President: George J. Simonis, Harry Diamond Laboratory, Code 320, 2800 Powder 
Mill Road, Adelphi, MD 20783 
Vice-President: Carl H. Mikeman, Night Vision and Electro-Optics Lab., DELNV-VI, 
Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060 
Secretary: Martin J. Koomen, NRL Code 7171, Washington, D.C. 20375 
Delegate: Dr. George Simonis 


American Society of Plant Physiologists, Washington Section (1966) 
Chairman: Werner J. Meudt, USDA, ARS Bldg. 50, Beltsville, MD 20705 
Vice-Chairman: Charles F. Cleland, Radiation Biology Lab., 12441 Parklawn Dr., 
Rockville, MD 20852 


Secretary: William VanDerWoude, Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, Seed 
Research Lab., Bldg. 049, Beltsville, MD 20705 
Delegate: W. Shropshire, Jr., Smithsonian Inst., 12441 Parklawn Drive, Rockville, 
MD 20852 
Washington Operations Research Council (1966) 
President: G. Thomas Sicilia, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (MRA & L) 
(RR) Pentagon, Washington, D.C. 20301 
Vice-President: Gary Sorrell, Management Consulting and Research Inc., 5203 Leesburg 
Pike, #608 Falls Church, VA 22041 
Secretary: Donald J. Gantzer, Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. 20545 
Treasurer: James Dwyer, Office of the Secretary of Defense (MRA & L) 
Delegate: John G. Honig, 7701 Glenmore Spring Way, Bethesda, MD 20034 
Instrument Society of America, Washington Section (1967) 
President: Francis C. Quinn 
President-elect: John I. Peterson 
Secretary: Frank L. Carou 
Delegate: None appointed 
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical & Petroleum Engineers (1968) 
Chairman: Garrett R. Hyde, 6027 Springhill Dr., Greenbelt, MD 20770 
Vice-Chairman: John A. Patterson, 7705 Hamilton Spring Rd., Bethesda, MD 20034 
Secretary: John H. DeYoung, Jr., 12677 Magna Carta Rd., Herndon, VA 22070 
Delegate: Gus H. Goudarzi, 658 Pemberton Court, Herndon, VA 22070 
National Capital Astronomers (1969) 
President: Mary Ellen Simon, 8704 Royal Ridge Lane, Laurel, MD 20811 
Vice-President: Wolfgang Schubert, 7906 Gosport Lane, Springfield, VA 22151 
Secretary: Sharon Edmonds, 11322 Cherry Hill Road, Beltsville, MD 20705 
Delegate: Benson J. Simon, 8704 Royal Ridge Lane, Laurel, MD 20811 


J- WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


38 Maryland-District of Columbia and Virginia Section of Mathematical Assoc. of America (1971) 


Chairman: John Smith, 1837 Negel Ct., Vienna, VA 22180 
Vice-Chairman: Howard Penn, U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD 21402 
Secretary: John Hanson, James Madison Univ., Harrisonburg, VA 22801 
Vice Chairman/ 
Delegate: Patrick Hayes, 950 25th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 
39 D.C. Institute of Chemists (1973) 
President: Dr. Nina M. Roscher, American University, Dept. of Chemistry, Washing- 


| ton, D.C. 20016 
President-elect: Dr. Robert L. Patrick, Gillette Research Inst., 1413 Research Blvd., 
Rockville, MD 20850 


Secretary/ 
Treasurer: Ms. Carolyn E. Damon, 3100 S. Manchester St., Apt. 540, Falls Church, 
_ VA 22044 
Delegate: _ Dr. Miloslav Rechcigl, Agency for International Development, Washington, 
D.C. 20523 
Alternate 
Delegate: Edmund M. Buras, Jr., Gillette Research Institute, 1413 Research Blvd., 


Rockville, MD 20850 
40 The D.C. Psychological Association (1975) 


President: John F. Borriello, St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, Overholser Division, Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20032 

President-elect: Eugene Stammeyer, St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, Overholser Division, 
Washington, D.C. 20032 

Secretary: Sylvia M. Tetrault, Howard Univ. College of Medicine, Washington, D.C. 
20059 

Delegate: John J. O’Hare, Office of Naval Research, 800 N. Quincy St., Arlington, 
VA 22217 


41 The Washington Paint Technical Group (1976) 
President: Robert F. Brady, Jr., GSA 
Vice-President: Mildred A. Post, National Bureau of Standards, Bldg. 226, Rm. B-348, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 


Secretary: William Allanach, International Paint, Harve de Grace, MD 
Delegate: Paul G. Campbell, National Bureau of Standards, B-348, Br., Washington, 
D.C. 20234 


42 Potomac Division, American Phytopathological Society (1977) 
President: J. R. Stavely, Tobacco Laboratory, USDA, Agric. Research Center, 
Beltsville, MD 20705 
Vice-President: C.R. Curtis, Dept. of Plant Pathology, Va. Polytechnic Inst., Blacksburg, 


VA 24061 
Secretary/ 
Treasurer: L. D. Moore, Dept. of Plant Pathology, Va. Polytechnic Inst., Blacksburg, 
VA 24061 
Delegate: T. van der Zwet, Fruit Laboratory, USDA, Agric. Research Center, 


Beltsville, MD 20705 
43 Metropolitan Washington Chapter of the Society for General Systems Research (1977) 


Chairman: Ronald W. Manderscheid, 6 Monument Ct., Rockville, MD 20850 
Secretary: Helen G. Tibbitts, 4105 Montpelier Rd., Rockville, MD 20853 
Delegate: Ronald W. Manderscheid, 6 Monument Ct., Rockville, MD 20850 
44 Potomac Chapter, Human Factors Society (1977) 
President: Dr. Michael L. Fineberg, BDM Corp. 7915 Jones Branch Road, McLean, 
VA 22101 


Vice-President: Dr. E. Ralph Dusek, Army Research Institute, 5001 Eisenhower Ave., 
Alexandria, VA 22333 


Secretary: Mr. Gerald S. Malecki, Office of Naval Research, 800 N. Quincy St., 
Arlington, VA 22217 
Delegate: Dr. H. Mcllvaine Parsons, Institute for Behavioral Research, 2429 Linden 


Lane, Silver Spring, MD 20910 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 119 


45 Potomac Chapter, American Fisheries Society (1978) 


President: Galen Buterbaugh, 8708 Higdon Drive, Vienna, VA 22180 

President-elect: Norville Prosser, 511 Shaw Drive, Spotsylvania, VA 22553 

Secretary: Stephanie Story, 6538 Lee Valley Drive, #101, Springfield, VA 22150 

Delegate: Irwin Alperin, ASMFC, 1717 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20236 


120 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


Alphabetical List of Members 


M = Member; F = Fellow; E = Emeritus member; L = Life Fellow. Numbers in parentheses refer to 
numerical code in foregoing list of affiliated societies. 


A 


ABDULNUR, SUHEIL F., Ph.D., Chemistry Dept. 
The American University, Washington, D.C. 
20016 (F-4) 

ABELSON, PHILIP H., Ph.D., Editor SCIENCE 
Magazine, American Association for the 
Advancement of Science, 1550 Mass. Ave., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005 (F-1, 4, 7, 16) 

ABRAHAM, GEORGE, M.S., Ph.D., 3107 West- 
over Dr., S.E., Washington, D.C. 20020 (F-1, 
GeiZ 013, 31532) 

ACHTER, M. R., 417 5th St., S.E., Washington, 
D.C. 20003 (F-20, 36) 

ADAMS, ALAYNE A., Ph.D., 8206 Lake Park 
Dr., Alexandria, Va. 22309 (F) 

ADAMS, CAROLINE L., 242 North Granada St., 
Arlington, Va. 22203 (E-10) 

ADLER, SANFORD C., 14238 Briarwood Terr., 
Rockville, Md. 20853 (F-1) 

ADLER, VICTOR E., 8540 Pineway Ct., Laurel, 
Md. 20810 (F-5, 24) 

AFFRONTI, LEWIS, Ph.D., Dept. of Microbiology, 
George Washington Univ. Sch. of Med., 2300 
Eye St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 
(F-16) 

AHEARN, ARTHUR J., Ph.D., 9621 East Bexhill 
Dr., Box 294, Kensington, Md. 20795 (F-16) 

AKERS, ROBERT P., Ph.D., 9912 Silverbrook Dr., 
Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-6) 

ALBUS, JAMES S., 4515 Saul Rd., Kensington, 
Md. 20795 (F) 

ALDRICH, JOHN W., Ph.D., 6324 Lakeview Dr., 
Falls Church, Va. 22041 (F) 

ALDRIDGE, MARY H., Ph.D., 2930 45th St., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-4) 

ALEXANDER, ALLEN L., Ph.D., 4216 Sleepy 
Hollow Rd., Annandale, Va. 22003 (E-4) 

ALEXANDER, BENJAMIN, Ph.D., Pres., Chicago 
State Univ., 95th St. at King Dr. Chicago Ill. 
(F) 

ALGERMISSEN, S. T., 5079 Holmes PI., Boulder, 
Colo. 80303 (F) 

ALLEN, ANTON M., D.V.M., Ph.D., 11718 Lake- 
way Dr., Manassas, Va. 22110 (F) 

ALLEN, J. FRANCES, Ph.D. 7507 23rd Ave., 
Hyattsville, Md. 20783 (F-45) 

ALLEN, WILLIAM G., P.E., B.S., 8306 Custer 
Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-14) 

ALTER, HARVEY, Ph.D., Nat. Center for 
Resource Recovery, Inc., 1211 Connecticut 
Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 (F-4) 

ANDERSON, JOHN D., Jr., Ph.D., Dept. Aerospace 
Eng., Univ. Maryland, College Park, Md. 
20742 (F-6, 22) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


ANDERSON, MYRONS., Ph.D., 1433 Manchester 
Lane, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20011 (E-4) 

ANDERSON, WENDELLL., Rural Rt. 4, Box 4172, 
La Plata, Md. 20646 (F-4) 

ANDREWS, JOHN S., Sc.D., 10314 Naglee Rd., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20903 (E-15) 

ANDRUS, EDWARD D., B.S., 1600 Rhode Island 
Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 (M-7, 25) 

APOSTOLOU, Mrs. GEORGIA L., B.A. 1001 
Rockville Pike, #424, Rockville, Md. 20852 
(M-4) 

APSTEIN, MAURICE, Ph.D., 4611 Maple Ave., 
Bethesda, Md., 20014 (F-1, 6, 13) 

ARGAUER, ROBERT J., Ph.D., 4208 Everett St., 
Kensington, Md. 20795 (F-24) 

ARMSTRONG, GEORGE T., Ph.D., 1401 Dale Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (F-1, 4) 

ARONSON, C. J., 3401 Oberon St., Kensington, 
Md. 20975 (E-1, 32) 

ARSEM, COLLINS, 10821 Admirals Way, 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (M-1, 6, 13) 

ARVESON, PAUL T., Code 1926, Naval Ship R&D 
Ctr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 

ASCIONE, RICHARD, Ph.D., National Cancer 
Institute, National Institutes of Health, Be- 
thesda, Md. 20014 (M) 

ASLAKSON, CARL I., 5707 Wilson Lane, Be- 
thesda, Md. 20014 (E) 

ASTIN, ALLEN V., Ph.D., 5008 Battery Lane, 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E-1, 13, 22, 35) 

AXILROD, BENJAMIN M., Ph.D., 9915 Marquette 
Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-1) 

AYENSU, EDWARD, Ph.D., 9200 Wilmett Ct., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-3, 10) 


BAILEY, R. CLIFTON, Ph.D., 6507 Divine St., 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F) 

BAKER, ARTHUR A., Ph.D., 5201 Westwood Dr., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-7) 

BAKER, LOUIS C.W., Ph.D., Dept of Chemistry, 
Georgetown University, N.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20057 (F-4) 

BALLARD, LOWELL D., 722 So. Colonial, Ster- 
ling, Va. 22170 (F-1, 13, 32) 

BARBOUR, LARRY L., 19309 Poinsetta Court, 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (M) 

BARBROW, LOUIS E., Natl. Bureau of Standards, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1, 13, 32) 

BARGER, GERALD L., Ph.D., Rt. 4, Box 165AC, 
Columbia, Mo. 65201 (F-23) 

BEACH, LOUIS A., Ph.D., 1200 Waynewood 
Bivd., Alexandria, Va. 22308 (F-1, 6) 


121 


BECKER, EDWIN D., Ph.D., Inst. Arthritis & Meta- 

bolic Dis., Bldg. 2 Rm. 122, National Institutes 
of Health, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-4) 

BECKETT, CHARLES W., 5624 Madison St., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-1, 4) 

BECKMANN, ROBERT B., Ph.D., Dept. of Chem. 
Engineering, Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 
20742 (F-4) 

BElJ, K. H., 69 Morningside Dr., 
N.H. 03246 (L-1) 

BEKKEDAHL, NORMAN, Ph.D., 405 N. Ocean 
Blvd., Apt. 1001, Pompano Beach, Fla. 
33062 (E-4, 6) 

BELSHEIM, ROBERT, Ph.D., 2475 Virginia Ave., 
N.W., #514, Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-1, 12, 
14, 25) 

BENDER, MAURICE, Ph.D., 16518 N.E. 2nd. PI., 
Bellevue, Wa. 98008 

BENESCH, WILLIAM, Inst. for Molecular Physics, 
Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 
(F-1, 32) 

BENJAMIN, C. R., Ph.D., IPD/SEA, USDA, Rm. 
459, Federal Bg., Hyattsville, Md. 20782 
(F-6, 10) 

BENNETT, BRADLEY F., 3301 Macomb St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-1, 20) 

BENNETT, JOHN A., 7405 Denton Rd., Bethesda, 
Md. 20014 (F, 20) 

BENNETT, MARTIN TOSCAN, Ch.E., 3700 Mt. 
Vernon Ave., Rm. 605, Alexandria, Va. 22305 
(F-4, 6) 

BENNETT, WILLARD H., Box 5342, North 
Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, N.C. 27607 (E) 

BENSON, WILLIAM, Ph.D., 618 Constitution 
Ave., N.E., Washington, D.C. 20002 (M-34, 
40, 44) 

BERGER, ROBERT E., Ph.D., 10313 Twinedew 
PI., Columbia, Md. 21044 (F) 

BERGMANN, OTTO, Ph.D., Dept. Physics, 
George Washington Univ., Washington, D.C. 
20052 (F-1) 

BERMAN, ALAN, Ph.D., 9304 Maybrook PI., 
Alexandria, Va. 22309 (F-25) 

BERNETT, MARIANNE K., Code 6170, Naval Res. 
Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (M-4) 

BERNSTEIN, BERNARD, M.S., 7420 West- 
lake Terr., #608, Bethesda, Md. 20034 
(M-25) 

BERNTON, HARRY S., 4000 Cathedral Ave., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F 3-8) 

BESTUL, ALDEN B., 9400 Overlea Ave., Rock- 
ville, Md. 20850 (F-1, 6) 

BICKLEY, WILLIAM E., Ph.D., P.O. Box 20840, 
Riverdale, Md. 20840 (F-5, 24) 

BIRD, H. R., Animal Science Bg., Univ. of Wis- 
consin, Madison, Wisc. 53706 (F) 

BIRKS, L. S., Code 6680, U.S. Naval Research 
Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) 

BLAKE, DORIS H., A.M., 3416 Glebe Rd., North 
Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-5) 

BLANK, CHARLES A., Ph.D., 5110 Sideburn Rd., 
Fairfax, Va. 22030 (M-4, 39) 

BLOCK, STANLEY, Ph.D., National Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4) 


Laconia, 


122 


BLONG, CLAIR K., Ph.D., 10603 Tenbrook Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M-6, 43) 

BLUNT, ROBERT F., 5411 Moorland Lane, 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

BOEK, JEAN K., Ph.D., Natl. Graduate Univ., 1101 
North Highland St., Arlington, Va. 22201 (F-2) 

BOGLE, ROBERT W., Apt. 1433, 3001 Veagly 
Terr., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F) 

BONDELID, ROLLON O., Ph.D., Code 6640, Naval 
Research Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) 

BORGESEN, KENNETH G., M.A., 3212 Chillum 
Rd. #302, Mt. Rainier, Md. 20822 (M) 

BORIS, J. P., 3516 Duff Dr., Falls Church, Va. 
22041 (F) 

BOTBOL, J. M., 2301 November Lane, Reston, 
Va. 22901 (F) 

BOWLES, R. E., Ph.D., 2105 Sondra Ct., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20904 (F-6, 14, 22, 35) 

BOWMAN, THOMAS E., Ph.D., Div. of Crustacea, 
NHB Mail Stop 163, Smithsonian Institution, 
Washington, D.C. 20560 (F-3) 

BOZEMAN, F. MARILYN, Div. Virol., Bur. 
Biologics, FDA, 8800 Rockville Pike, Rock- 
ville, Md. 20014 (E-16, 19) 

BRADY, ROBERT F., Jr., Ph.D., 706 Hope Lane, 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4, 41) 

BRANCATO, E. L., M.S., Code 4004, U.S. Naval 
Research Lab., Washington, D.C. 20390 (F-6, 
13) 

BRANDEWIE, DONALD F., 6811 Field Master Dr., 
Springfield Va. 22153 (F) 

BRAUER, G. M., Dental Research & Medical 
Materials, A-123 Polymer, Natl. Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 21) 

BREGER, IRVING A., Ph.D., 212 Hillsboro Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-4, 6, 7, 39) 

BREIT, GREGORY, Ph.D., 73 Allenhurst Rd., 
Buffalo, N.Y. 14214 (E-13) 

BRENNER, ABNER, Ph.D., 7204 Pomander Lane, 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-4, 29) 

BRICKWEDDE, F. G., Ph.D., 104 Davey Lab., 
Dept. of Physics, Pennsylvania State Univ., 
University Park, Pa. 16802 (L-1) 

BRIER, GLENN W., A.M., Dept. Atmosph. Sci., 
Colorado State Univ., Ft. Collins, Colo. 
80523 (F-6, 23) 

BROADHURST, MARTIN G., B322, Bldg. 224, 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F) 

BROMBACHER,, W. G., 17 Pine Run Community, 
Doylestown, Pa. 18901 (E-1) 

BROWN, ELISE A. B., Ph.D., 6811 Nesbitt Place, 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F-4, 6, 19) 

BROWN, RUSSELL G., Ph.D., Dept. of Botany, 
Univ. of Maryland College Park, Md. (F) 
BROWN, THOMAS, McP., 2465 Army-Navy 

Dr., Arlington, Va. 22206 (F-8, 16) 

BRUCK, STEPHEN D., Ph.D., 1113 Pipestem PI., 
Rockville, Md. 20854 (F-4, 6, 39) 

BURAS, EDMUND M., Jr., M.S., Gillette Research 
Inst., 1413 Research Blvd., Rockville, Md. 
20850 (F-4, 6, 39) 

BURGER, ROBERT J., (COL. M.S.) 953 Lynch Dr., 
Arnold, Md. 21012 (F-6, 22) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


BURGERS, J. M., Prof. D.Sc., 3450 Toledo Terr., 
Apt. 517, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (F-1) 

BURK, DEAN, Ph.D., 4719 44th St., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-4, 19, 33) 

BURNETT, H. C., Metallurgy Division, Natl. 
Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 (F) 

BYERLY, T. C., Ph.D., 6-J Ridge Rd., Greenbelt, 
Md. 20770 (F-6, 19) 


N.W., 


C 


CAHNMAN, HUGON., M.E., 125-10 Queens Bivd., 
Kew Gardens, N.Y. 11415 (M) 

CALDWELL, FRANK R., 4821 47th St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-1, 6) 

CALDWELL, JOSEPH M., 2732 N. Kensington St., 
Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-18) 

CAMPAGNONE, ALFRED F., P.E., 9321 Warfield 
Rd., Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F) 

CAMPBELL, LOWELL E., B.S., 10100 Riggs Rad., 
Adelphi, Md. 20783 (F-12, 13) 

CAMPBELL, PAUL G., Ph.D., 3106 Kingtree St., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-4, 41) 

CANNON, E. W., Ph.D., 5 Vassar Cir., Glen Echo, 
Md. 20768 (F-1, 6) 

CANTELO, WILLIAM W., Ph.D., 11702 Wayneridge 
St., Fulton, Md. 20759 (F-6, 24) 

CAREY, RICHARD, 8402 Quintana St., New 
Carrollton, Md. 20784 (M) 

CARNS, HARRY R., Bg. 001, Agr. Res. Cent. (W.), 
USDA, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (M-33) 

CARROLL, KAREN E., M.S., 815 18th St., 
#504, Arlington, Va. 22202 (M) 

CARROLL, WILLIAM R., 4802 Broad Brook Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

CARTER, HUGH, 2039 New Hampshire Ave., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20009 (E) 

CASH, EDITH K., 505 Clubhouse Rd., Bingham- 
ton, N.Y. 13903 (E-6, 10) 

CASSEL, JAMES M., Ph.D., 12205 Sunnyview Dr., 
Germantown, Md. 20767 (F-4, 21) 

CHAPLIN, HARVEY P., Jr., 1561 Forest Villa 
Lane, McLean, Va. 22101 (F-22) 

CHAPLINE, W. R., B.Sc., 4225 43rd St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-6, 10, 11) 

CHEEK, CONRAD H., Ph.D., Code 8330, U.S. 
Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 
(F-4) 

CHERTOK, BENSON T., Ph.D., Dept. of Physics, 
American Univ., Wash. D.C. 20016 (M-1) 
CHEZEM, CURTIS G., Ph.D., 408 Louisa St., 

Key West, Fla. 33040 (F) 

CHI, MICHAEL, Sc.D., Civil Engr. Dept., Catholic 
Univ., Washington, D.C. 20064 (F-14) 

CHOPER, JORDAN J., 121 Northway, Greenbelt, 
Md. 20770 (M) 

CHRISTIANSEN, MERYL N., Ph.D., Chief Plant 
Stress Lab. USDA ARS, Beltsville, Md. 
20705 (F-6, 33) 

CHURCH, LLOYD E., D. D. S., Ph.D., 8218 Wis- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


consin Ave., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-1, 9, 
19, 21) 

CLAIRE, CHARLES N., 4403 14th St. N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20011 (F-1, 12) 

CLARK, FRANCIS E., ARS Research Lab., P.O. 
Box E, Ft. Collins, Colo. 80521 (F) 

CLARK, GEORGE E., Jr., 4022 North Stafford 
St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (F) 

CLARK, JOAN ROBINSON, Ph.D., U.S. Geologi- 
cal Survey, 345 Middlefield Rd., Menlo Park, 
Calif. 94025 (F-7) 

CLAYTON, FRED W., Ph.D., 19116 Rhodes Way, 

- Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (M) 

CLEEK, GIVEN W., 5512 N. 24th St., Arlington, Va. 
22205 (M-4, 6, 28, 32) 

CLEMENT, J? REID, Jr. 
Suitland, Md. 20023 (F) 

CLEVEN, GALE W., Ph.D., RD. 4, Box 334B, 
Lewistown, Pa. 17044 (F-1) 

COATES, JOSEPH F., Off. of Tech Assessment 
U.S. Congress Wash. D.C. 20510 (F-1, 2, 4) 
COHN, ROBERT, M.D., 7221 Pyle Road, Be- 

thesda, Md. 20034 (F-1) 

COLE, KENNETH S., Ph.D., 2404 Loring St., 
San Diego, Ca. 92109 (F-1) 

COLE, RALPH I., M.S., 3431 Blair Rd., Falls 
Church, Va. 22041 (F-12, 13, 22) 

COLLINS, HENRY B., Dept. Anthropology, 
Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D.C. 20560 
(E-2) 

COLWELL, R. R., Ph.D., Dept. of Microbiology, 
Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 
(F-6, 16) 

COMPTON, W. DALE, Ford Motor Co., 
Box 1603, Dearborn, Mich. 48121 (F) 
CONGER, PAUL S., M.S., Dept. of Botany, U.S. 

National Museum,Washington, D.C. 20560 (E) 

CONNORS, PHILIP |., Central New England Col- 
lege, 768 Main St., Worcester, Ma. 01608 
(F-6, 31) 

COOK, RICHARD K., Ph.D., 8517 Milford Ave., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (F-1, 25) 

COONS, GEORGE H., Ph.D., % Dr. J. E. Dees, 
413 Carolina Circle, Durham, N.C. 27707 
(E-42) 

COOPER, KENNETH W., Ph.D., Dept. Biol., Univ. 
of California, Riverside, Cal. 92521 (F-3, 5) 

CORLISS, EDITH L. R., Mrs., 2955 Albemarle 
St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-13, 25) 

CORLISS, JOHN O., Ph.D., 9512 E. Stanhope 
Rd., Kensington, Md. 20795 (F-6) 

CORNFIELD, JEROME, G.W.V. Biostat-Ctr., 7979 
Old Georgetown Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20014 
(F) 

COSTRELL, LOUIS, Chief 535. 02, Natl. Bureau 
of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) 
COTTERILL, CARL H., M.S., U.S. Bureau of 
Mines, 2401 E. St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 

20241 (F-36) 

COYLE, THOMAS D., National Bureau of Stand- 
ards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6, 29) 
CRAFTON, PAUL A., P.O. Box 454, Rockville, 

Md. 20850 (F) 


3410 Weltham St., 


P20: 


123 


CRAGOE, CARL S., 6206 Singleton Place, 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-1) 

CRANE, LANGDON T., Jr., 7103 Oakridge Ave., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6) 

CREITZ, E. CARROLL, 10145 Cedar Lane, Ken- 
sington, Md. 20795 (E-32) 

CREVELING, CYRUS R., Ph.D., 4516 Amherst 
Lane, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F 4-19) 

CROSSETTE, GEORGE, 4217 Glenrose St., Ken- 
sington, Md. 20795 (M-6, 17) 

CULBERT, DOROTHY K., 812 A St., S.E., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20003 (M-6) 

CULLINAN, FRANK P., 4402 Beechwood Rad., 
Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E-10, 13) 

CULVER, WILLIAM H., Ph.D., Optelecom, Inc., 
2841 Chesapeake St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20008 (M-1, 32) 

CURRAN, HAROLD R., Ph.D., 3431 N. Randolph 
St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-16) 

CURRIE, CHARLES L., S.J., President, Wheeling 
College, Wheeling, W.Va. 26003 (F) 

CURTIS, ROGER W., Ph.D., 6308 Valley Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E) 

CURTISS, LEON F., 1690 Bayshore Drive, Eng- 
lewood, Fla. 33533 (E-1) 

CUTHILL, JOHN R., Ph.D., 12700 River Rd., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-20, 36) 

CUTKOSKY, ROBERT D., 19150 Roman Way, 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-13) 


D 


DARRACOTT, HALVOR T., M.S., 3325 Mansfield 
Rd., Falls Church, Va. 22041 (F-13, 34, 38) 

DAVIS, CHARLES M., Jr., Ph.D., 8458 Portland 
Pl., McLean, Va. 22101 (M-1, 6, 25) 

DAVIS, MARION MACLEAN, Ph.D., Apt. 100, 
Crosslands, Kennett Square, Pa. 19348 
(L-4, 6) 

DAVIS, R. F., Ph.D., Chairman, Dept. of Dairy 
Science, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, 
Md. 20742 (F) 

DAVISSON, JAMES W., Ph.D., 400 Cedar Ridge 
Dr., Oxon Hill, Md. 20021 (E-1) 

DAWSON, ROY C., Ph.D., 7002 Chansory Lane, 
Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E-16) 

DAWSON, VICTOR C. D., 9406 Curran Rd., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20901 (F-6, 14) 

DEAL, GEORGE E., D.B.A., 6245 Park Road, 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F-34) 

DE BERRY, MARIAN B., 3608 17th St., N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20018 (M) 

DEDRICK, R.L., Ph.D., Bldg. 13, Rm. 3W13, NIH, 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-1) 

DE VOE, JAMES R., 17708 Parkridge Dr., Gai- 
thersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4, 6) 

DE WIT, ROLAND, Metallurgy Division, Natl. 
Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 (F-1, 6, 36) 

DELANEY, WAYNE R., The Wyoming Apts., 111, 


124 


2022 Columbia Rd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20009 (M-6, 9, 32) 

DEMUTH, HAL P., MSEE, 4025 Pinebrook Rd., 
Alexandria, Va. 22310 (F-13, 17) 

DENNIS, BERNARD K., 915 Country Club Dr., 
Vienna, Va. 22180 (F) 

DERKSEN, WILLARD L., 11235 Oak Leaf Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M) 

DESLATTES, RICHARD D., Jr., 610 Aster Blvd., 
Rockville, Md. 20850 (F) 

DEVIN, CHARLES, Ph.D., 629 Blossom Dr., 
Rockville, Md. 20850 (M-25, 31) 

DEWIT, ROLAND, Ph.D., Metallurgy Division, 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-6, 14, 20, 36) 

DI MARZIO, E. A., 14205 Parkvale Rd., Rockville, 
Md. 20853 (F) 

DICKSON, GEORGE, MA, 52 Orchard Way North, 
Rockville, Md. 20854 (F-6, 21) 

DIEHL, WILLIAM W., Ph.D., 200 Maple Ave., Falls 
Church, Va. 22046 (E-10) 

DIMOCK, DAVID A., 4800 Barwyn House Rad., 
#114, College Park, Md. 20740 (M-13) 

DIXON, PEGGY A., Ph.D., 422 Hillsboro Dr., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20902 (F) 

DOCTOR, NORMAN, B.S., 3814 Littleton St., 
Wheaton, Md. 20906 (F-13) 

DOFT, FLOYD S., Ph.D., 6416 Garnett Drive, Ken- 
wood, Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (E-4, 6, 19) 

DONALDSON, JOHANNA B., Mrs., 3020 North 
Edison St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (F) 

DONNERT, HERMANN J., Ph.D., RFD 4, Box 136, 
Terra Heights, Manhattan Ks. 66502 (F) 

DONOVICK, RICHARD, Ph.D., 16405 Alden Ave., 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-6, 16, 19) 

DOUGLAS, CHARLES A., Ph.D., 7315 Delfield St., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6, 32) 

DOUGLAS, THOMAS B., Ph.D., 3031 Sedgwick 
St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-4) 

DRAEGER, R. HAROLD, M.D., 1201 N. 4th Ave., 
Tucson, Ariz. 85705 (E-32) 

DRECHSLER, CHARLES, Ph.D., 6915 Oakridge 
Rd., University Park (Hyattsville), Md. 20782 
(E-6, 10, 42) 

DUBEY, SATYA D., Ph.D., 7712 Groton Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) 

DUERKSEN, J. A., B.A., 3134 Monroe St., N.E. 
Washington, D.C. 20018 (E-1, 6, 38) 

DUFFEY, DICK, Ph.D., Nuclear Engineering, 
Univ. Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 
(F-1, 26) 

DUNKUM, WILLIAM W., Ph.D., 3503 Old Dominion 
Blvd., Alexandria, Va. 22305 (F-31) 

DU PONT, JOHN ELEUTHERE, P.O. Box 358, 
Newtown Square, Pa: 19073 (M-6) 

DUPRE, ELSIE, Mrs., Code 5536A, Optical Sci. 
Div., Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20390 
(F-32) | 

DURIE, EDYTHE G., 5011 Larno Dr., Alexandria, 
Va. 22310 (F) 

DURRANI, S. H., Sc.D., 17513 Lafayette Dr., 
Olney, Md. 20832 (F-13, 22) 

DYKE, E. D., 173 Northdown Rd., Margate, Kent, 
England (M) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


ae. 


E 


EDDY, BERNICE E., Ph.D., 6722 Selkirk Ct., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-6, 16, 19) 

EGOLF, DONALD. R., 3600 Cambridge Court, 
Upper Marlboro, Md. 20870 (F-10) 

EISENBERG, PHILLIP, C.E., 6402 Tulsa Lane, 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (M-6, 14, 22, 25) 

EISENHART, CHURCHILL, Ph.D., Met B-268, 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-1, 38) 

EL-BISI, HAMED M., Ph.D., 135 Forest Rd., Millis, 
Ma. 02054 (M-16) 

ELLINGER, GEORGE A., 739 Kelly Dr., York, Pa. 
17404 (E-6) 

ELLIOTT, F. E., 7507 Grange Hall Dr., Oxon Hill, 
Md. 20022 (E) 

EMERSON, K. C., Ph.D., 2704 Kensington St., 
Arlington, Va. 22207 (F-3, 5, 6) 

EMERSON, W. B., 415 Aspen St., N.W., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20012 (E) 

ENNIS, W. B., Jr., Ph.D., Agricultural Res. Ctr. 
U. of Florida, 3205 S.W. 70th Ave., Ft. Lauder- 
dale, Fl. 33314 (F-6) 

ERNST, JOHN A., NOAA/NESS WWB, S3X1 Room 
810-G, Washington, D.C. 20233 (M-22, 23) 
ETZEL, HOWARD W., Ph.D., 7304 Riverhill Rd., 

Oxon Hill, Md. 20021 (F-6) 

EWERS, JOHN C., 4432 26th Rd., N, Arlington, 

Va. 22207 (F-2, 6) 


= 


FAHEY, JOSEPH J., U.S. Geological Survey, 
Washington, D.C. 20242 (E-4, 6, 7) 

FARROW, RICHARD P., 2911 Northwood Dr., 
Alameda, Ca. 94501 (F-4, 6, 27) 

FATTAH, JERRY, 3451 S. Wakefield St., Arling- 
ton, Va. 22206 (M-4, 39) 

FAULKNER, JOSEPH A., 1007 Sligo Creek Pky., 
Takoma Park, Md. 20012 (F-6) 

Favot, GEORGE T.,'Ph:D:;  P:0:) Box: 411, 
Basking Ridge, N.J. 07920 (E-7, 28) 

FAUST, WILLIAM R., Ph.D., 5907 Walnut St., 
Temple Hills, Md. 20031 (F-1, 6) 

FEARN, JAMES E., Ph.D., Materials and Com- 
posites Sect., Natl. Bureau of Standards, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6, 9) 

FELDMAN, SAMUEL, NKF Engr. Associates, 
Inc., 8720 Georgia Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 
20910 (M-6, 25) 

FELSHER, MURRAY, Ph.D., NASA Code ERS-2, 
Wash. D.C. 20546 (M-1, 7) 

FERRELL, RICHARD A., Ph.D., Dept. of Physics, 
University of Maryland, College Park, Md. 
20742 (F-6, 31) 

FIFE, EARLH., Jr., M.S., Box 122, Royal Oak, Md. 
21662 (E-6, 16, 19) 

FILIPESCU, NICOLAE, M.D., Ph.D., 4836 S. 7th 
St., Arlington, Va. 22204 (F-4) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


FINN, EDWARD J., Ph.D., 4211 Oakridge La., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6, 31) 

FISHER, JOEL L., 5602 Asbury Ct., Alexandria, 
Va. 22313 (M) 

FISHMAN, PETER H., Ph.D., 3333 University 
Blvd. West, Kensington, Md. 20795 (F) 

FLETCHER, DONALD G., Nati. Bureau of Stand- 
ards, Rm. A102, Bldg. 231-IND, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (M-4) 

FLICK, DONALD F., 930 19th St. So., Arlington, 
Va. 22202 (F-4, 19, 39) 

FLINN, DAVID R., 8104 Bernard Dr., Ft. Washing- 
ton, Md. 20022 (F-4, 29) 

FLORIN, ROLAND E., Ph.D., Sci. & Stds. Div., 
B-318, National Bureau of Standards, Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6) 

FLYNN, DANIEL R., Ph.D., 17500 Ira Court, 
Derwood, Md. 20855 (F-4) 

FLYNN, JOSEPH H., Ph.D., 5309 Iroquois Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20016 (F-4) 

FOCKLER, HERBERT, M.A. MSLS., 10710 Lorain 
Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M-22, 43) 
FONER, S. N., Applied Physics Lab., The Johns 
Hopkins University, 11100 Johns Hopkins 

Rd., Laurel, Md. 20810 (F-1) 

FOOTE, RICHARD H., Sc.D., 8807 Victoria Road, 
Springfield, Va. 22151 (F-5, 6) 

FORZIATI, ALPHONSE F., Ph.D., 15525 Prince 
Frederick Way, Silver Spring, Md. 20906 
(F-4, 29) 

FORZIATI, FLORENCE H., Ph.D., 15525 Prince 
Frederick Way, Silver Spring, Md., 20906 
(F-4) 

FOSTER, AUREL O., 4613 Drexel Rd., College 
Park, Md. 20740 (E-15) 

FOURNIER, ROBERT O., 108 Paloma Rd., Por- 
tola Valley, Calif. 94025 (F-6, 7) 

FOWLER, EUGENE, Int. Atomic Energy Agency, 
Kartner Ring 11, A-1011, Vienna, Austria 
(M-26) 

FOWLER, WALTER B., M.A., Code 683, Goddard 
Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. 20771 
(M-32) 

FOX, DAVID W., The Johns Hopkins Univ., 
Applied Physics Lab., Laurel, Md. 20810 (F) 

FOX, WILLIAM B., 1813 Edgehill Dr., Alexandria, 
Va. 22307 (F-4) 

FRANKLIN, PHILIP J., 5907 Massachusetts Ave. 
Extended, Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-4, 13, 
39) 

FRANZ, GERALD J., M.S., Box 695, Bayview, 
Id. 83803 (F-6) 

FREDERIKSE, H. P. R., Ph.D., 9625 Dewmar 
Lane, Kensington, Md. 20795 (F) 

FREEMAN, ANDREW F., 5012 N. 33rd St., Arling- 
ton, Va. 22207 (M) 

FRENKIEL, FRANCOIS N., Code 1802.2, Naval 
Ship Res. & Develop. Ctr., Bethesda, Md. 
20084 (F-1, 22, 23) 

FRIEDMAN, MOSHE, 4511 Yuma St., Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20016 (F) 

FRIESS, S.L., Ph.D., Environmental Biosciences 
Dept., Naval Med. Res. Inst. NNMC, Bethesda, 
Md. 20014 (F-4, 39) 


125 


FRUSH, HARRIET L., 4912 New Hampshire Ave., 
N.W., Apt. 104, Washington, D.C. 20011 
(F-4, 6) 

FULLMER, IRVIN H., Lakeview Terrace, P.O. Box 
100, Altoona, Fla. 32702 (E-1, 6, 14) 

FURUKAWA, GEORGE T., Ph.D. National Bureau 
of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1, 
4, 6) 


G 


GAFAFER, WILLIAM M., 133 Cunningham Dr., 
New Smyrna Beach, Fla. 32069 (E) 

GAGE, WILLIAM, Ph.D., 2146 Florida Ave., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-2) 

GALLER, SIDNEY, 6242 Woodcrest Ave., Balti- 
more, Md. 21209 (F) 

GALTSOFF, PAUL S., Ph.D., P.O. Box 684, 
Falmouth, Mass. 02540 (E) 

GANT, JAMES Q., Jr., M.D., 4349 Klingle St., 
N.W., Wash., D.C. 20016 (M-6, 8, 37) 

GARDNER, MARJORIE H., Ph.D., 7720 Hanover 
Parkway, Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (F) 

GARNER, C. L., The Garfield, 5410 Connecticut 
Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (E-1, 4, 
12017, 18) 

GARVIN, DAVID, Ph.D., 18700 Walker’s Choice 
Rd., Apt. 519, Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4) 

GHAFFARI, ABOLGHASSEN, Ph.D., D.Sc., 5420 
Goldsboro Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (L-1, 
38) 

GHOSE, RABINDRA N., Ph.D., LL.B., 8167 Mul- 
holland Terr., Los Angeles Hill, Calif. 90046 
(F-13, 22) 

GIACCHETTI, ATHOS, Dept. Sci. Affairs, OAS, 
1735 Eye St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006 
(M-32) 

GIBSON, JOHN E., Box 96, Gibson, N.C. 28343 


(E) 

GIBSON, KASSON S., 4817 Cumberland St., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (E) 

GINTHER, ROBERT J., Code 5585, U.S. Naval 
Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20390 (F-6, 
28, 29) 

GIST, LEWIS A., Ph.D., Science Manpower 
Improvement, National Science Foundation, 
Washington, D.C. 20550 (F-4, 39) 

GIWER, MATTHIAS M., 3922 Millcreek Dr., 
Annandale, Va. 22003 (M) 

GLADSTONE, VIC S., Ph.D., 8200 Andes Ct., 
Baltimore, Md. 21208 (M-6, 25) 

GLASGOW, Augustus R., Jr., Ph.D., 4116 Hamil- 
ton St., Hyattsville, Md. 20781 (F-4, 6) 

GLAZEBROOK, THOMAS B., 7809 Bristow Dr., 
Annandale, Va. 22003 (F-11) 

GLICKSMAN, MARTIN E., Ph.D., Materials Engr. 
Dept., Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, N.Y. 
12181 (F-20, 36) 

GLUCKSTERN, ROBERT L., Ph.D., Chancellor 
Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 20742 (F-31) 

GODFREY, THEODORE B., 7508 Old Chester 
Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E) 


126 


GOFF, JAMES F., Ph.D., 3405 34th Pl., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-1) 

GOLDBERG, MICHAEL, 5823 Potomac Ave., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-1, 38) 

GOLDBERG, ROBERT N., Ph.D., 19610 Brassie 
Pl., Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-39) 

GOLDMAN, ALAN J., Ph.D., Applied Math. Div. 
Inst. for Basic Standards, Natl. Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-34, 38) 

GOLDSMITH, HERBERT, 238 Congressional 
Lane, Rockville, Md. 20852 (M-32, 35) 

GOLUMBIC, CALVIN, 6000 Highboro Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) 

GONET, FRANK, 4007 N. Woodstock St., Arling- 
ton, Va. 22207 (F-4, 39) 

GOODE, ROBERT J., B.S., Performance Metals 
Br., Code 6380, Metallurgy Div., U.S.N.R.L., 
Washington, D.C. 20390 (F-6, 20) 

GORDH, GORDON, Systematic Entomology Lab. 
11B111, U.S. National Museum, Washington, 
D.C. (M) 

GORDON, RUTH E., Ph.D., Waksman Inst. of 
Microbiology, Rutgers Univ., P.O. Box 
759, Piscataway, N.J. 08854 (F-16) 

GRAHN, Mrs. ANN, M.A., 849 So. La Grange Rad., 
La Grange, III. 60525 (M) 

GRAMANN, RICHARD H., 1613 Rosemont CT, 
McLean, Va. 22101 (M) 

GRAY, ALFRED, Dept. Math., Univ. of Maryland, 
College Park, Md. 20742 (F) 

GRAY, IRVING, Ph.D., Georgetown Univ., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20057 (F-19) 

GREENOUGH, M. L., M.S., Greenough Data 
Assoc., 616 Aster Blvd., Rockville, Md. 20850 
(F) 

GREENSPAN, MARTIN, B.S., 12 Granville Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-1, 25) 

GREER, SANDRA, Ph.D., 11402 Stonewood Lane, 
Rockville, Md. 20852 (F-1, 4) 

GRISAMORE, NELSON T., Nat. Acad. Sci., 2101 
Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20418 (F-1, 6, 13) 

GRISCOM, DAVID L., Ph.D., Material Sci. Div., 
Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 
(F-6, 28) 

GROSSLING, BERNARDO F., % Cosmos Club, 
2121 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20008 (F-7) 

GUILD, PHILIP W., Ph.D., 3609 Raymond St., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (M7-36) 

GURNEY, ASHLEY B., Ph.D., Systematic Ento- 
mology Laboratory, USDA, % U.S. National 
Museum, NHB-105, Washington, D.C. 20560 
(F-3, 5, 6) 

GUTTMAN, CHARLES M., 9510 Fern Hollow Way, 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-4) 


H 


HACSKAYLO, EDWARD, Ph.D., Agr. Res. Ctr., 
West, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-6, 10, 11, 33) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


HADARY, DORIS E., Ph.D., 9216 Le Velle Dr., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F) 

HAENNI, EDWARD O., Ph.D., 7907 Glenbrook 
Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-4, 39) 

HAGAN, LUCY B., Ph.D., Natl. Bur. Stds., Rm. 
B354, Bldg. 228, Washington, D.C. 20234 
(M-4, 32) 

HAINES, KENNETH A., M.S., ARS, 3542 N. Dela- 
ware St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (F-5) 

HALL, E. RAYMOND, Ph.D., Museum of Natural 
History, Univ. of Kansas, Lawrence, Kans. 
66044 (E-3, 4) 

HALL, STANLEY A., M.S., 9109 No. Branch Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-4, 24) 

HALL, WAYNE C., Ph.D., 557 Lindley Dr., 
Lawrence, Kans. 66044 (E-6, 13) 

HALLER, WOLFGANG, Ph.D., National Bureau 
of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-28) 

HAMBLETON, EDSON J., 5140 Worthington Dr., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-3, 5, 6) 

HAMER, WALTER J., Ph.D., 3028 Dogwood St., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (F-4, 13, 29, 39) 

HAMMER, GUYS, II, 8902 Ewing Dr., Bethesda, 
Md. 20034 (M-1, 12, 13) 

HAMPP, EDWARD G., D.D.S., National Institutes 
of Health, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-21) 

HAND, CADET H., Jr., Bodega Marine Lab., 
Bodega Bay, Calif. 94923 (F-6) 

HANIG, JOSEPH P., Ph.D., 822 Eden Court, 
Alexandria, Va. 22308 (F-4, 19) 

HANSEN, LOUIS S., D.D.S., School of Dentistry, 
San Francisco Med. Center, Univ. of Calif., 
San Francisco, Calif. 94122 (F-21) 

HANSEN, MORRIS H., M.A., Westat Research, 
Inc., 11600 Nebel St., Rockville, Md. 20852 
(F) 

HARDENBURG, ROBERT E., Ph.D., Agr. Mktg. 
Inst., Agr. Res. Ctr., (W), Beltsville, Md. 20705 
(F-6) 

HARR, JAMES W., M.A., 
Lanham, Md. 20801 (M-6) 

HARRINGTON, FRANCIS D., Ph.D., 4600 Ocean 
Beach Blvd., #204, Cocoa Beach, Fla. 
32931 (F) 

HARRINGTON, M. C., Ph.D., 4545 Connecticut 
Ave., N.W., Apt. 334, Washington, D.C. 20008 
(E-1, 22, 32) 

HARRIS, FOREST K., Ph.D., National Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) 

HARRIS, MILTON, Ph.D., 3300 Whitehaven St., 
N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 20007 (F) 

HARRISON, W. N., 3734 Windom PI., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-1, 6, 28) 

HARTLEY, JANET W., Ph.D., National Inst. of 
Allergy & Infectious Diseases, National In- 
stitutes of Health, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-16) 

HARTMANN, GREGORY K., Ph.D.,10701 Keswick 
St., Garrett Park, Md. 20766 (F-1, 25) 

HARTZLER, MARY P., 3326 Hartwell Ct., Falls 
Church, Va. 22042 (M-6) 

HAS, GEORG H., Ph.D., 7728 Lee Avenue, 
Alexandria, Va. 22308 (F-32) 

HASKINS, C. P., Ph.D., 2100 M St., N.W., Suite 
600, Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-6) 


9503 Nordic Dr., 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


HAUPTMAN, HERBERT, Ph.D., Med. Fndn. ot 
Buffalo, 73 High St., Buffalo, N.Y. 14203 
(F-1, 6, 38) 

HAYDEN, GEORGE A., 1312 Juniper St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20012 (M) 

HAYES, PATRICK, Ph.D., 950 25th St., Apt. 707, 
Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-38) 

HEADLEY, ANNE R., Ph.D., Ms., 2500 Virginia 
Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 (F) 

HEIFFER, M. H., Whitehall, #701, 4977 Battery 
La., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-6, 19) 

HEINRICH, KURT F., 804 Blossom Dr., Woodley 
Gardens, Rockville, Md. 20850 (F) 

HEINS, CONRAD P., Ph.D., Civil Engr. Dept., 
Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 20742 
(F-6, 18) 

HENDERSON, E. P., Div. of Meteorites, U.S. Na- 
tional Museum, Washington, D.C. 20560 (E-7) 

HENDRICKSON, WAYNE A., M.D., Ph.D., Lab. for 
the Structure of Matter, Naval Res. Lab. 
Code 6030, Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) 

HENNEBERRY, THOMAS J., 1409 E. North 
Share, Temple, Ariz. 85282 (F) 

HENRY, WARREN E., Ph.D., Howard Univ., 
P.O. Box 761, Washington, D.C. 20059 (F-1, 31) 

HENVIS, BERTHA W., Code 5277, Naval Res. 
Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (M-32) 

HERBERMAN, RONALD B., 8528 Atwell Rd., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F) 

HERMACH, FRANCIS L., 2415 Eccleston St., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-1, 13, 25) 

HERMAN, ROBERT, Ph.D., 8434 Antero Dr., 
Austin, Tex. 78759 (F-1) 

HERSCHMAN, HARRY K., 4701 Willard Ave., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (E) 

HERSEY, JOHN B., 923 Harriman St., Great Falls, 
Va. 22066 (M-25) 

HERSEY, MAYO D., M.A., Div. of Engineering, 
Brown Univ., Providence, R.I. 02912 (E-1) 
HERZFELD, KARL F., Dept. of Physics, Catholic 
Univ., Washington, D.C. 20017 (E-1, 25) 
HESS, WALTER C., 3607 Chesapeake St., N.W., 

Washington, D.C. 20008 (E-4, 6, 19, 21) 

HEWSTON, ELIZABETH, Felicity Cove, Shady 
Side, Md. 20867 (F-39) 

HEYDEN, FR. FRANCIS, Ph.D., Manila Observa- 
tory, P.O. Box 1231, Manila, Philippines D-404 
(E-32) 

HEYER, W. R., Ph.D., Amphibians & Reptiles, 
Natural History Bldg., Smithsonian !nst., 
Washington, D.C. 20560 (F-3) 

HIATT, CASPAR W., Ph.D., Univ. of Texas Health 
Science Center, 7703 Floyd Curl Dr., San 
Antonio, Texas 78284 (F) 

HICKLEY, THOMAS J., 626 Binnacle Dr., Naples, 
Fla. 33940 (F-13) 

HICKOX, GEORGE H., Ph.D., 9310 Allwood Ct., 
Alexandria, Va. 22309 (E-6, 14, 18) 

HILDEBRAND, EARL M., 11092 Timberline Dr., 
Sun City, Ariz. 85351 (E-10, 16, 33, 42) 

HILL, FREEMAN K., Ph.D., 12408 Hall’s Shop Rd., 
Fulton, Md. 20759 (F-1, 6, 22) 

HILLABRANT, WALTER, Ph.D., Dept. Psychol- 


127 


ogy, Howard Univ., Washington, D.C. 20059 
(M-40) 

HILSENRATH, JOSEPH, 9603 Brunett Ave., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20901 (F-1, 38) 

HOBBS, ROBERT B., 7715 Old Chester Rad., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-1, 4, 6, 39) 

HOFFMANN, C. H., Ph.D., 6906 40th Ave., Univer- 
sity Park, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E-5, 11, 24) 

HOGAN, ROBERT, Dept. of Psychology, the 
Johns Hopkins Univ., Baltimore, Md. 21218 (F) 

HOGE, HAROLD J., Ph.D., 5 Rice Spring Lane, 
Wayland, Me. 01778 (F-1) 

HOLLIES, NORMAN R. S., Gillette Research 
Institute, 1413 Research Blvd., Rockville, Md. 
20850 (F-4) 

HOLMGREN, HARRY D., Ph.D., 3044-3 R St., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20007 (F-1) 

HONIG, JOHN G., Office, Dep. Chief of Staff 
for Res., Dev. and Acquis., Army, The Penta- 
gon, Washington, D.C. 20310 (F-34) 

HOOD, KENNETH J., 2000 Huntington Ave., 
#1118, Alexandria, Va. 22303 (M-6, 33) 

HOPP, HENRY, Ph.D., 6604 Michaels Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-11) 

HOPP, THEODORE H., 2800 Powder Mill Rd., 
Adelphi, Md. 20783 (M-6, 13) 

HOPPS, HOPE E., Mrs., 1762 Overlook Dr., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20903 (F-16, 19) 

HORNSTEIN, IRWIN, Ph.D., 5920 Bryn Mawr Rad., 
College Park, Md. 20740 (F-4, 6, 27) 

HOROWITZ, E., Asst. Deputy Director, National, 
Measurement Laboratory, National Bureau 
of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) 

HORTON, BILLY M., M.S., 14250 Larchmere 
Blvd., Shaker Heights, Ohio 44120 (F-1, 6, 13) 

HOWARD, JAMES H., Ph.D., 3822 Albemarle St., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F) 

HUANG, KUN-YEN, M.D., Ph.D., 1445 Laurel 
Hill Rd., Vienna, Va. 22180 (F-16) 

HUBBARD, DONALD, Ph.D., 4807 Chevy Chase 
Dr., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-4, 6, 32) 

HUDSON, COLIN M., Ph.D., Product Planning 
Dept., Deere & Co., John Deere Rd., Mocine, 
-61265.(F-6:517,; 22) 

HUDSON, GEORGE E., Ph.D., Code WR 4, Naval 
Surface Weapons Ctr., White Oak, Silver 
Spring, Md. 20910 (F-1, 6) 

HUDSON, RALPH P., Ph.D., National Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-1) 
HUGH, RUDOLPH, Ph.D., George Washington 
Univ. Sch. of Med., Dept. of Microbiology, 
2300 Eye St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 

(F-16) 

HUNT, W. HAWARD, B.A., 11712 Roby Ave., 
Beltsville, Md. 20705 (M-6) 

HUNTER, RICHARD S., 9529 Lee Highway, 
Fairfax, Va. 22031 (F-6, 27, 32) 

HUNTER, WILLIAM R., M.S., Code 7143, U.S. 
Naval Research Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 
(F-1, 6, 32) 

HURDLE, BURTON G., 6222 Berkeley Rd., Alex- 
andria, Va. 22307 (F-25) 

HURTT, WOODLAND, Ph.D., ARS-USDA, P.O. 
Box 1209, Frederick, Md. 21701 (M-33) 


128 


HUTTON, GEORGE L., 809 Avondale Dr., W. 
Lafayette, Ind. 47906 (F) 


INSLEY, HERBERT, Ph.D., 5 Graund Place, 
Albany, N.Y. 12205 (E-1, 7) 

IRVING, GEORGE W., Jr., Ph.D., 4836 Langdrum 
Lane, Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-4, 6, 27, 39) 

IRWIN, GEORGE R., Ph.D., 7306 Edmonston Rd., 
College Park, Md. 20740 (F-1, 6) 

ISBELL, H. S., 4704 Blagden Ave., 
Washington, D.C. 20011 (F-4) 

ISENSTEIN, ROBERT S., Ph.D., FSQS, Bldg. 
318-C, Barc-East, USDA, Beltsville, Md. 20705 
(M-15) 


N.W., 


J 


JACKSON, H. H. T., Ph.D., 122 Pinecrest Rd., 
Durham, N.C. (E-3) 

JACKSON, JO-ANNE, Ph.D., 4412 Independence 
St., Rockville, Md. 20853 (M) 

JACKSON, PATRICIA C., B.S., Ms., Plant Stress 
Lab. Plant Physiology Inst., Agr. Res. Ctr. 
(W), ARS, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (M-4, 6, 33) 

JACOBS, WOODROW C., Ph.D., 6309 Bradley 
Blvd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-23) 

JACOBSON, MARTIN, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 
Agr. Res. Center (E) Beltsville, Md. 20705 
(F-4, 7, 24) 

JACOX, MARILYN E., Ph.D., National Bureau of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4) 
JAMES, MAURICE T., Ph.D., Dept. of Ento- 
mology, Washington State University, Pull- 

man, Washington 99164 (E-5) 

JANI, LORRAINE L., 430 M St., S.W. Apt. #N800, 
Washington, D.C. 20024 (M) 

JAROSEWICH, EUGENE, NMNH, Smithsonian 
Inst., Washington, D.C. 20560 (M-4) 

JEN, C. K., Applied Physics Lab., John Hopkins 
Rd., Laurel, Md. 20810 (E) 

JENSEN, ARTHUR S., Ph.D., Westinghouse 
Defense & Electronic Systems Ctr., Box 1521, 
Baltimore, Md. 21203 (F-13, 31, 32) 

JESSUP, R. S., 7001 W. Greenvale Pkwy., Chevy 
Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 6) 

JOHANNESEN, ROLF B., Ph.D., National Bureau 
of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 6) 

JOHNSON, CHARLES, Ph.D., Inst. for Fluid Dy- 
namics & App. Math. Univ. of Md., College 
Park, Md. 20850 (F) 

JOHNSON, DANIEL P., Ph.D., Rt. 1, Box 156, 
Bonita, La. 71223 (E-1, 22, 35) 

JOHNSON, KEITH C., 4422 Davenport St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (F) 

JOHNSON, PHYLLIS T., Ph.D., Nat. Marine 
Fisheries Serv., Oxford Lab., Oxford, Md. 
21654 (F-5, 6) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


JOHNSTON, FRANCIS E., Ph.D., 307 W. Mont- 
gomery Ave., Rockville, Md. 20850 (E-1) 
JONES, HENRY A., 861 Canal Dr., McLean, Va. 
22102 

JONES, HOWARD S., Jr., 6200 Sligo Mill Rd., 
N.E., Washington, D.C. 20011 (F-6, 13) 

JONG, SHUNG-CHANG, Ph.D., Amer. Type Cul- 
ture Collection, 12301 Parkland Dr., Rock- 
ville, Md. 20852 (F-16, 42) 

JORDAN, GARY BLAKE, Ph.D., 1012 Olmo Ct., 
San Jose, Calif. 95129 (M-6, 13, 22) 

JUDD, NEIL M., % C. A. McCary, 5311 Acacia 
Ave., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E-2, 6) 


K 


KABLER, MILTON N., Ph.D., 3109 Cunningham 
Dr., Alexandria, Va. 22309 (F) 

KAISER, HANS E., 433 South West Dr., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20901 (M-6) 

KARR, PHILIP R., 5507 Calle de Arboles, Tor- 
rance, Calif. 90505 (F-13) 

KARRER, ANNIE MAY, Ph.D., Port Republic, 
Md. 20676 (E-6) 

KAUFMAN, H. P., M.P.L., Box 1135, Fedhaven, 
Fla. 33854 (F-12) 

KEARNEY, PHILIP C., Ph.D., 13021 Blairmore St., 
Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-4) 

KEBABIAN, JOHN, Ph.D., 12408 Village Sq. Terr. 
#402, Rockville, Md. 20852 (F) 

KEGELES, GERSON, RFD 2, Stafford Springs, 
Conn. 06076 (F) 

KENNARD, RALPH B., Ph.D., Apt. 1207 Ross- 
moor Tower |, Leisure World, Laguna Hills, 
Calif. 92653 (E-1, 6, 32) 

KERST, STEPHEN, Ph.D., 701 Devonshire Rd., 
Takoma Park, Md. 20012 (F) 

KESSLER, KARL G., Ph.D., B164 Physics, Natl. 
Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 
(F-1, 6, 32) 

KEULEGAN, GARBIS H., Ph.D., 215 Buena Vista 
Dr., Vicksburg, Miss. 39180 (F-1, 6) 

KLEBANOFF, PHILIP S., Fluid Dynamics Sect., 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-1, 22) 

KLINGSBERG, CYRUS, Adams House, #1010, 
118 Monroe St., Rockville, Md. 20850 

KLUTE, CHARLES H., Ph.D., Apt. 118, 4545 Con- 
necticut Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 
(F-1, 4, 39) 

KNOBLOCK, EDWARD C., RD 4, Box 332; 
Mt. Airy, Md. 21771 (F-4, 19) 

KNOWLTON, KATHRYN, Ph.D., Apt. 837, 2122 
Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20008 (F-4) 

KNOX, ARTHUR S., M.A., M.Ed., 2006 Columbia 
Rd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20009 (M-6, 7) 

KNUTSON, LLOYD V., Ph.D., Insect Introduction 
Inst., USDA, Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-5) 

KRUGER, JEROME, Ph.D., Rm B254, Materials 
Bldg., Natl. Bur. of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-4, 29, 36) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


KUSHNER, LAWRENCE M., Ph.D., Consumer 
Product Safety Commission, Washington, 
D.C. 20207 (F-4) 


L 


LABENZ, PAUL J., P.O. Box 30198, Bethesda, 
Md. 20014 

LADO, ROBERT, Ph.D., Georgetown Univ., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20007 (F) 

LAKI, KOLOMAN, Ph.D., Bidg. 4, Natl. Inst. of 
Health, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

LANDSBERG, H. E., 5116 Yorkville Rd., Temple 
Hills, Md. 20031 (F-1, 23) 

LANG, MARTHA E. C., B.S., Connecticut Ave., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-6, 7) 

LANGFORD, GEORGE S., Ph.D., 4606 Hartwick 
Rd., College Park, Md. 20740 (E-5, 6, 24) 

LAPHAM, EVAN G., 2242 S.E. 28th St., Cape 
Coral, Fla. 33904 (E) 

LASHOF, THEODORE W., 10125 Ashburton 
Lane, Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) 

LAWSON, ROGER H., 4912 Ridge View Lane, 
Bowie, Md. 20715 (F-6, 42) 

LEACHMAN, ROBERT B., 5330 Wapakoneta Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20016 (F-1, 26) 

LE CLERG, ERWIN L., 14620 Deerhurst Terrace, 
Silver Spring, Md. 20906 (E-10, 42) 

LEE, RICHARD H., RD 2, Box 143E, Lewes, Del. 
19958 (E) 

LEIBOWITZ, JACK R., 12608 Davan Dr., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20904 (F) 

LEINER, ALAN L., 580 Arastradero Rd., #804, 
Palo Alto, Calif. 94306 (F) 

LEJINS, PETER P., Ph.D., 7114 Ewersfield Dr., 
College Heights Estates, Md. 20782 (F-10) 
LENTZ, PAUL LEWIS, Ph.D., 5 Orange Ct., 

Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (F-6, 10) 

LESSOFF, HOWARD, Code 5220, Naval Res. 
Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F-34) 

LEVY, SAMUEL, 2279 Preisman Dr., Schenec- 
tady, N.Y. 12309 (E) 

LIDDEL, URNER, 2939 Van Ness St. N.W., Apt. 
1135, Washington, D.C. 20008 (E-1) 

LIEBLEIN, JULIUS, 1621 E. Jefferson St., Rock- 
ville, Md. 20852 (E-34) 

LIN, MING CHANG, Ph.D., 9513 Fort Foote Rd., 
Oxon Hill, Md. 20022 (F-4, 32) 

LINDQUIST, A. W., Rt. 1, Box 36, Lindsberg, 
Kansas 67456 (E-5, 24) 

LINDSEY, IRVING, M.A., 202 E. Alexandria Ave., 
Alexandria, Va. 22301 (E) 

LING, LEE, 1608 Belvoir Dr., Los Altos, Calif. 
94022 (E) 

LINK, CONRAD B., Dept. of Horticulture, Univ. 
of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 (F-6, 
10) 

LINNENBOM, VICTOR J., Ph.D., Code 8300, 
Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20390 
(ea), 

LITTLE, ELBERT L., Jr., Ph.D., 924 20th St., 
S. Arlington, Va. 22202 (F-10, 11) 


129 


LOCKARD, J. DAVID, Ph.D., Botany Dept., Univ. 
of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742 (F-33) 

LOEBENSTEIN, WILLIAM V., Ph.D., 8501 Sun- 
dale Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (F-4, 21) 

LONG, B. J. B., Mrs., 416 Riverbend Rd., Oxon 
Hill, Md. 20022 (M) 

LORING, BLAKE M., Sc.D., Rt. 2, Laconia, N.H. 
03246 (F-6, 20, 36) 

LUSTIG, ERNEST, Ph.D., Ges Biotechnol Forsch 
Mascheroder Weg 1, 3300 Braunschweig 66, 
W. Germany (F-4) 

LYNCH, Mrs. THOMAS J., 1062 Harriman St., 
Great Falls, Va. 22066 (M) 

LYONS, JOHN W., Rte. 4, Box 261, Mount Airy, 
Md. 21771 (F-4) 


MA, TE-HSIU, Dept. of Biological Science, West- 
ern Illinois Univ., Macomb, Ill. 61455 (F-10, 19) 

MADDEN, ROBERT P., A251 Physics Bldg., Natl. 
Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 (F-32) 

MAENGWYN-DAVIES, G. D., Ph.D., 15205 Totten- 
ham Terr., Silver Spring, Md. 20206 (F-6, 19) 

MAGIN, GEORGE B., Jr., General Delivery, 
Bakerton, W.Va. 25410 (F-6, 7, 26) 

MAHAN, A. I., Ph. D., 10 Millgrove Place, Ednor, 
Md. 20904 (E-1, 32) 

MAIENTHAL, MILLARD, 10116 Bevern Lane, 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-4) 

MANDEL, JOHN, Ph.D., B356 Chem. Bg., Natl. 
Bur. of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 
(Fat) 

MANDERSCHEID, RONALD W., Ph.D., 6 Monu- 
ment Ct., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-43) 

MANGUS, JOHN D., 6019 Berwyn Rd., College 
Park, Md. 20740 (F) 

MANNING, JOHN R., Ph.D., Metal Science and 
Standards Div., Natl. Bur. of Standards, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-6, 20, 36) 

MARCHELLO, JOSEPH M., Ph.D., 506 West 11th 
St., Rella, Md. 65401 (F) 

MARCUS, MARVIN, Ph.D., Dept. Math., Univ. of 
California, Santa Barbara, Calif. 93106 
(F-6, 38) 

MARGOSHES, MARVIN, Ph.D., 69 Midland Ave., 
Tarrytown, N.Y. 10591 (F) 

MARTIN, JOHN H., Ph.D., 124 N.W. 7th St., Apt. 
303, Corvallis, Oregon 97330 (E-6) 

MARTIN, ROBERT H., 2257 N. Nottingham St., 
Arlington, Va. 22205 (M-23) 

MARTON, L., Ph.D., Editorial Office, 4515 Lin- 
nean Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (E- 
1) 1:3}, 30), 311) 

MARVIN, ROBERT S., 11700 Stony Creek Rad., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (E-1, 4, 6) 

MARYOTT, ARTHUR A., 4404 Maple Ave., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E-4, 6) 

MASON, HENRY LEA, Sc.D., 7008 Meadow Lane, 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-6, 14, 35) 


130 


MASSEY, JOE T., Ph.D., 10111 Parkwood Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-1, 13) 

MATLACK, MARION, Ph.D., 2700 N. 25th St., 
Arlington, Va. 22207 (E-4, 6) 

MAXWELL, LOUIS R., Ph.D., 3506 Leland St., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1) 

MAY, DONALD C., Jr., Ph.D., 5931 Oakdale Rd., 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F) 

MAY, IRVING, M.S., U.S. Geological Survey, 
National Ctr. 912, Reston, Va. 22092 (F-4, 7) 

MAYOR, JOHN R., Asst. Provost for Res., 
1120H, Univ. Maryland, College Park, Md. 
20742 (F) 

MC BRIDE, GORDON W., Ch.E., 3323 Stuyvesant 
Pl. N.W., Chevy Chase, D.C. 20015 (E-4) 

MC CAMY, CALVIN S., M.S., 54 All Angels Hill 
Rd., Wappingers Falls, N.Y. 12590 (F-32) 
MC CULLOUGH, JAMES M., Ph.D., 6209 Apache 

St., Springfield, Va. 22150 (M) 

MC CULLOUGH, N. B., Ph.D., M.D., Dept. of 
Microbiology & Public Health, Michigan State 
Univ., East Lansing, Mich. 48823 (F-6, 8) 

MC ELHINNEY, JOHN, Ph.D., 11601 Stephen Rd., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20904 (F-1, 13, 26) 

MC KELVEY, VINCENT E., Ph.D., 6601 Broxburn 
Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-7) 

MC KENZIE, LAWSON W., A.M., 806 Madison 
Bldg., 1111 Arlington Blvd., Arlington, Va. 
22209 (F-1) 

MC NESBY, JAMES R., Dept. of Chemistry, 
Univ. of Md., College Park, Md. 20742 (F-1, 4) 

MC PHEE, HUGH C., 3450 Toledo Terrace, Apt. 
425, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E-6) 

MC PHERSON, ARCHIBALD T., Ph.D., 403 
Russell Ave., Apt. 804, Gaithersburg, Md. 
20760 (L-1, 4, 6, 27) 

MC WRIGHT, CORNELIUS G., Ph.D., 7409 
Estaban PIl., Springfield, Va. 22151 (M) 

MEADE, BUFORD K., 5516 Bradley Blvd., Alex- 
andria, Va. 22311 (F-17) 

MEARS, FLORENCE M., Ph.D., 8004 Hampden 
Lane, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E) 

MEARS, THOMAS W., B.S., 2809 Hathaway Ter- 
race, Wheaton, Md. 20906 (F-1, 4, 6) 

MEBS, RUSSELL W., Ph.D., 6620 32nd St., N., 
Arlington, Va. 22213 (F-12, 20) 

MELMED, ALLAN J., 732 Tiffany Court, Gaithers- 
burg, Md. 20760 (F) 

MENDELSOHN, MARK B., 3336 Runnymede PI., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (F-40) 

MENIS, OSCAR, Analytical Chem. Div., Natl. 
Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 (F) 

MENZER, ROBERT E., Ph.D., 7203 Wells Pkwy., 
Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (F-4, 24) 

MERRIAM, CARROLL F., Prospect Harbor, 
Me. 04669 (F-14) 
MESSINA, CARLA G., M.S., 9916 Montauk Ave., 

Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) 

MEYERHOFF, HOWARD A., Ph.D., 3625 S. Flor- 
ence PIl., Tulsa, Okla. 74105 (F-6, 7) 

MEYERSON, MELVIN R., Ph.D., 611 Golds- 
borough Dr., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-20) 

MICHAELIS, ROBERT E., National Bureau of 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


Standards, Chemistry Bldg., 
Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-20) 

MIDDLETON, H. E., Ph.D., 3600 Grove Ave., 
Richmond, Va. 23221 (E) 

MILLAR, DAVID B., NMRI, NNMC, Stop 36, 
Biochemistry Div., Washington, D.C. 20014 
(F) 

MILLER, CARL F., M.A., P.O. Box 127, Gretna, Va. 
24557 (E-2, 6) 

MILLER, J. CHARLES, Ph.D., 10600 Eastborne 
Ave., Apt. 7, W. Los Angeles, California 90024 
(E-7, 36) 

MILLER, PAUL R., Ph.D., 207 S. Pebble Beach 
Blvd., Sun City Ctr., Fla. 33570 (E-10, 42) 
MILLER, RALPH L., Ph.D., 5215 Abington Rad., 

Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-7) 

MILLER, W. ROBERT, Mrs., Ph.D., 11632 Deborah 
Dr., Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-6) 

MILLER, ROMAN R., 1232 Pinecrest Circle, Silver 
Spring, Md. 20910 (F-4, 6) 

MILLIKEN, LEWIS T., SRL, 6501 Lafayette Ave., 

Riverdale, Md. 20840 (M-1, 4, 6, 7) 

MITCHELL, J. MURRAY, Jr., Ph.D., 1106 Dog- 

wood Dr., McLean, Va. 22101 (F-6, 23) 

MITTLEMAN, DON, Ph.D., 80 Parkwood Lane, 
Oberlin, Ohio 44074 (F-1) 

MIZELL, LOUIS R., 108 Sharon Lane, Greenlawn, 
N.Y. 11740 (F) 

MOLINO, JOHN A., Ph.D., Sound Bidg., National 
Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 
20234 (M-25) 

MOLLARI, MARIO, 4527 45th St., N.W., Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20016 (E-3, 5, 15) 

MOORE, GEORGE A., Ph.D., 1108 Agnew Dr., 
Rockville, Md. 20851 (F-6, 20, 29, 36) 

MORRIS, J. A., Ph.D., 23-E Ridge Rd., Greenbelt, 
Md. 20770 (M-6, 15, 16, 19) 

MORRIS, JOSEPH BURTON, Ph.D., Chemistry 
Dept., Howard Univ., Washington, D.C. 20059 
(i) 

MORRIS, KELSO B., 1448 Leegate Rd., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20012 (F-4, 39) 

MORRISS, DONALD J., 102 Baldwin Ct., Pt. Char- 
lotte, Fla. 33950 (E-11) 

MOSTOFI, F. K., M.D., Armed Forces Inst. of 
Pathology, Washington, D.C. 20306 (F) 

MOUNTAIN, RAYMOND D., B216 Physics Blidg., 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F) 

MUEHLHAUSE, C. O., Ph.D., 9105 Seven Locks 
Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-1, 26) 

MUESEBECK, CARL F. W., U.S. Natl. Museum 
of Nat. Hist., Washington, D.C. 20560 (E-3, 5) 

MULLIGAN, JAMES H., Ph.D., 12121 Sky Lane, 
Santa Ana, Calif. 92705 (F-12, 13, 38) 

MURDOCH, WALLACE P., Ph.D., Rt. 2, Gettys- 

. burg, Pa. 17325 (F-5, 6, 24) 

MURRAY, THOMAS H., Ph.D., 2915 27th St., N. 
Arlington, Va. 22207 (M-6, 13, 34, 43) 

MURRAY, WILLIAM S., 1281 Bartonshire Way, 
Potomac Woods, Rockville, Md. 20854 (F-5) 

MYERS, RALPH D., Physics Dept., Univ. of Mary- 
land, College Park, Md. 20740 (F-1) 


Rm. B314, 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


MYERS, RONALD R., 3945 North Forest Dale 
Ave., Woodbridge, Va. 22193 


N 


NAESER, CHARLES R., Ph.D., 6654 Van Winkle 
Dr., Falls Church, Va. 22044 (E-4, 7) 

NAIDEN, EULAINE, 6107 Roseland Dr., Rockville, 
Md. 20852 

NAMIAS, JEROME, Sc.D., 2251 Sverdrup Hall, 
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La 
Jolla, Calif. 92093 (F-23) 

NELSON, R.H., M.Sc., 7309 Finns Lane, Lanham, 
Md. 20801 (E-5, 6, 24) 

NEPOMUCENE, SR. ST. JOHN, Villa Julie, Valley 
Rd., Stevenson, Md. 21153 (E-4) 

NEUENDORFFER, J. A., 911 Allison St., Alex- 
andria, Va. 22302 (F-6, 34) 

NEUSCHEL, SHERMAN K., 7501 Democracy 
Blvd., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-7) 

NEWMAN, MORRIS, Dept. of Mathematics, Univ. 
of Calif., Santa Barbara, Calif. 93106 (F) 
NICKERSON, DOROTHY, 4800 Fillmore Ave., Apt. 

450, Alexandria, Va. 22311 (E-32) 
NIKIFOROFF, C. C., 4309 Van Buren St., Univer- 
sity Park, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 (E) 
NOFFSINGER, TERRELL L., 9623 Sutherland 
Rd., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (F-6, 23) 
NORRIS, KARL H., 11204 Montgomery Rad., 
Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F-27) 
NOYES, HOWARD E., Ph.D., 4807 Aspen Hill 
Rd., Rockville, Md. 20853 (F-6, 16) 


O 


OBERLE, MARILYN, M.S., 2801 Quebec St., 
N.W., #622, Washington, D.C. 20008 (4, 6) 

O’BRIEN, JOHN A., Ph.D., Dept. of Biology, 
Catholic Univ. of America, Washington, D.C. 
20064 (E-10) 

OEHSER, PAUL H., 9012 Old Dominion Dr., 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F-1, 3, 9, 30) 

O’CONNOR, JAMES V., 10108 Haywood Cir., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (M-6, 7) 

O’HARE, JOHN, Ph.D., 301 G St. S.W., Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20024 (F-40, 44) 

O’HERN, ELIZABETH M., Ph.D., 633 G St., S.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20024 (M-16) 
O’KEEFE, JOHN A., Code 681, Goddard Space 
Flight Ctr., Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (F-1, 6) 
OKABE, HIDEO, Ph.D., Rm. A-243, Bg. 222, Natl. 
Bur. of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 
F-4) 

sR MALCOLM W., Ph.D., 1606 Ulupii 
St., Kailua, Hi. 96734 (F) 

ORDWAY, FRED, Ph.D., 5205 Elsmere Ave., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-4, 6, 28, 39) 

ORLIN, HYMAN, Ph.D., Natl. Academy of Sci- 
ences, 2101 Constitution Ave. N.W., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20418 (F-17) 


131 


OSER, HANS J., Ph.D., 8810 Quiet Stream Ct., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-6) 

OTA, HAJIME, M.S., 5708 64th Ave., E. Riverdale, 
Md. 20840 (F-12) 

OWENS, JAMES P., M.A., 14528 Bauer Dr., Rock- 
ville, Md. 20853 (F-7) 


p 


PAPADOPOULOS, KONSTANTINOS, Ph.D., 6346 
32D St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (F) 

PAFFENBARGER, GEORGE C., D.D.S., ADA 
Health Foundation Res. Unit, Natl. Bur. of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F-21) 

PARKER, KENNETH W., 6014 Kirby Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-3, 10, 11) 

PARKER, ROBERT L., Ph.D., Metal Science and 
Standards Div., Natl. Bur. of Standards, 
Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) 

PARMAN, GEORGE K., 8054 Fairfax Rd., Alex- 
andria, Va. 22308 (F-4, 27) 

PARRY-HILL, JEAN, Ms., 3803 Military Rd., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (M) 

PARSONS, HENRY JR., Ph.D., Institute for Be- 
havioral Research, 2429 Linden Lane, Silver 
Spring, Md. 20910 (F-40, 43, 44) 

PATRICK, ROBERT L., Ph.D., 6 Don Mills Court, 
Rockville, Md. 20850 (F) 

PAYNE, FAITH N., 1745 Hobart St. N.W., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20009 (M-7) 

PELCZAR, MICHAEL J., 4318 Clagett Pineway, 
University Park, Md. 20782 (F-16) 

PEROS, THEODORE P., Ph.D., Dept of Chem- 
istry, George Washington Univ., Washington, 
D.C. 20006 (F-1, 4, 39) 

PHAIR, GEORGE, Ph.D., 14700 River Rad., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-7) 

PHILLIPS, Mrs. M. LINDEMAN, M.S., 2510 
Virginia Ave., N.W., #507N, Washington, D.C. 
20037 (F-1, 6, 13, 25) 

PIKL, JOSEF, 211 Dickinson Rd., Glassboro, N.J. 
08028 (E) 

PITTMAN, MARGARET, Ph.D., 3133 Connecticut 
Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (E) 

PLAIT, ALAN O., M.S., 5402 Yorkshire St., 
Springfield, Va. 22151 (F-13) 

POLACHEK, HARRY, Ph.D., 11801 Rockville Pike 
Rd., Rockville, Md. 20852 (E) 

POOS, F. W., Ph.D., 5100 Fillmore Ave., 
Alexandria, Va. 22311 (E-5, 6) 

POLLACK, Mrs. FLORA G., Mycology Lab., Rm. 
11 North Bldg., Beltsville Ars. Ctr. W. Belts- 
ville, Md. 20705 (F-10) 

PONNAMPERUMA, CYRIL, Ph.D., Lab. of Chemi- 
cal Evolution, U. of Maryland Dept. of Chem., 
College Park, Md. 20742 (F-4, 7) 

POWERS, KENDALL, Ph.D., 6311 Alcott Rd., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-6, 15) 

PRESLEY, JOHN T., 3811 Courtney Circle, 
Bryan, Tx. 77801 (E) 

PRESTON, MALCOLM 6S., 10 Kilkea Ct., Balti- 
more, Md. 21236 (M) 


132 


PRINZ, DIANNE K., Ph.D., Code 7121.5, Naval 
Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (M-32) 
PRO, MAYNARD J., 7904 Falstaff Rd., McLean, 

Va. 22101 (F-26) 
PRYOR, C. NICHOLAS, Ph.D., Naval Underwater 
Systems Ctr., Newport, R.I. 02840 (F-137) 
PUGH, MARION S., Mrs., Little Fiddlers’ Green, 
Round Hill, Va. 22141 (M) 

PURCELL, ROBERT H., 17517 White Grounds 
Rd., Boyds, Md. 20720 (F-6, 16) 

PYKE, THOMAS N., Jr., M.S., Techn. Bg. A231, 
Nat. Bur. Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 
(F-6, 13) 


R 


RABINOW, JACOB, E. E., 6920 Selkirk Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-1, 13) 

RADER, CHARLES A,., Gillette Res. Inst., 1413 
Research Blvd., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-4, 39) 

RADO, GEORGE T., Ph.D., 818 Carrie Court, 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F-1) 

RAINWATER, H. IVAN, 2805 Liberty PlI., Bowie, 
Md. 20715 (E-5, 6, 24) 


RAMIREZ-FRANKLIN, LOUISE, 2501 N. Florida 


St., Arlington, Va. 22207 (M) 

RAMS, EDWIN M., 12112 Lerner PI., Bowie, Md. 
20715 

RAMSAY, MAYNARD, Ph.D., 3806 Viser Ct., 
Bowie, Md. 20715 (F-5, 24) 

RANEY, WILLIAM P., Ph.D., NASA, Code E, 600 
Independence Ave., S.W., Washington, D.C. 
20546 (M-6, 25) 

RAUSCH, ROBERT, Div. of Animal Medicine, 
SB-42, School of Medicine, University of 
Washington, Seattle, Wash. 98195 (F-3, 6, 15) 

RAVITSKY, CHARLES, M.S., 1505 Drexel St., 
Takoma Park, Md. 20012 (E-32) 

READING, O. S., 6 N. Howells Point Rd., Bellport 
Suffolk County, New York, N.Y. 11713 (E-1) 

REAM, DONALD F., Holavallagata 9, Reykjavik, 
Iceland (F) 

RECHCIGL, MILOSLAV, Jr., Ph.D., 1703 Mark 
Lane, Rockville, Md. 20852 (F-4, 19, 27, 39) 

REED, WILLIAM D., 3609 Military Rd., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20015 (F-5, 6) 

REGGIA, FRANK, MSEE, 5227 N. Garden Lane, 
Roanoke, Va. 24019 (F-6, 12, 13) 

REHDER, HARALD A., Ph.D., 5620 Oden Rad., 
Bethesda, Md. 20016 (F-3, 6) 

REINER, ALVIN, B.S., 11243 Bybee St., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20902 (M-6, 12, 13, 22) 

REINHART, FRANK W., D.Sc., 9918 Sutherland 
Rd., Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (F-4, 6) 

REINHART, FRED M., M.S., 210 Grand Ave., 
Apt. 1, Ojai, Ca. 93023 (F-6, 20) 

REMMERS, GENE M., 7322 Craftown Rd., Fairfax 
Station, Va. 22039 (M) 

REYNOLDS, ORR E., Ph.D., Amer. Physiol. Soc., 
9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

RHODES, IDA, Mrs., 6676 Georgia Ave., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20012 (E) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


RHYNE, JAMES J., Ph.D., 15012 Butterchurn La., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20904 (F) 

RICE, FREDERICK A., 8005 Carita Court, 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-4, 6, 16, 19) 

RIOCH, DAVID McK., M.D., 2429 Linden Lane, 
Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (F-3, 6) 

RITT, P. E., Ph.D., GTE Labs., Inc., 40 Sylvan 
Rd., Waltham, Mass. 02154 (F-6, 13, 23, 29) 

RIVLIN, RONALD S., Ctr. for Application of 
Math, 203 E. Packer Ave., Bethlehem, Pa. 
18015 (F) 

ROBBINS, MARY LOUISE, Ph.D., George Wash- 
ington Univ. Med. Ctr., 2300 Eye St. N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-6, 16, 19) 

ROBERTS, ELLIOT B., 4500 Wetherill 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-1, 6, 18) 

ROBERTS, RICHARD B., Ph.D., Dept. Terrestrial 
Mag., 5241 Broad Branch Rd., N.W., Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20015 (E) 

ROBERTS, RICHARD C., 5170 Phantom Court, 
Columbia, Md. 21044 (F-6, 38) 

ROBERTSON, A. F., Ph.D., 4228 Butterworth PI., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (F) 

ROBERTSON, RANDAL M., Ph.D., 1404 Highland 
Circle, S.E., Blacksburg, Va. 24060 (E-6, 11) 

ROCK, GEORGE D., Ph.D., The Kennedy Warren, 
3133 Conn. Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20008 (E-1, 31) 

RODNEY, WILLIAM S., 8112 Whites Ford Way, 
Rockville, Md. 20854 (F-1, 32) 

RODRIGUEZ, RAUL, 254 Tous Sato, Baldrich, 
Hato Rey, PR. 00918 (F-17) 

ROLLER, PAUL S., 1440 N St., N.W., Apt. 1011, 
Washington, D.C. 20005 (E) 

ROSADO, JOHN A., 10519 Edgemont Dr., Adelphi, 
Md. 20783 (F-13) 

ROSCHER, NINA, Ph.D., 10400 Hunter Ridge Dr., 
Oakton, Va. 22124 

ROSE, WILLIAM K., Ph.D., 10916 Picasso Ln., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F) 

ROSENBLATT, DAVID, 2939 Van Ness St., N.W., 
Apt. 702, Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-1) 

ROSENBLATT, JOAN R., 2939 Van Ness St., 
N.W., Apt. 702, Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-1) 

ROSENTHAL, JENNY E., 7124 Strathmore St., 
Falls Church, Va. 22042 (F-13, 32) 

ROSENTHAL, SANFORD M., Bldg. 4, Rm. 122, 
National Insts. of Health, Bethesda, Md. 
20014 (E) 

ROSS, FRANKLIN, Off. of Asst. Secy. of the Air 
Force, The Pentagon, Rm. 4E973, Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20330 (F-22) 

ROSS, SHERMAN, 2131 N.E. 58 Court, Fort 
Lauderdale, Fl. 33308 (F-40) 

ROSSINI, FREDERICK D., Ph.D., 19715 Green- 
side Terr., Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-1) 
ROTH, FRANK L., M.Sc., 200 E. 22nd St., #33 

Roswell, N. Mex. 88201 (E-6) 

ROTH, ROBERT S., Solid State Chem. Sect., 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F) 

ROTKIN, ISRAEL, M.A., 11504 Regnid Dr., 
Wheaton, Md. 20902 (F-1, 13, 34) 


Rd., 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


RUBIN, MORTON J., M.Sc., World Meterol. Org., 
Casa Postale #5, CH-1211, Geneva 20, 
Switzerland (F-23) 

RUDOLPH, MICHAEL, 4521 Bennion Rd., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20906 (M) 

RUPP, N. W., D.D.S., American Dental Assoc., 
Research Division, Rm. A157, Bldg. 224, 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-21) 

RUSSELL, LOUISE M., M.S., Bg. 004, Agr. Res. 
Center (West), USDA, Beltsville, Md. 20705 
(F-5, 6) 

RYERSON, KNOWLES A., M.S., Dean Emeritus, 
15 Arlmonte Dr., Berkeley, Calif. 94707 (E-6, 11) 


S 


SAALFIELD, FRED E., Naval Res. Lab., Code 
6100, Washington, D.C. 20375 (4) 

SAENZ, ALBERT W., Ph.D., Radiation Techn. 
Div., Naval Research Laboratory, Code 
6603S, Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) 

SAGER, MARTHA C., Ph.D., Briarcliff Rd., 
Arnold, Md. 21012 (F) 

SAILER, R. |., Ph.D., 3847 S.W. 6th PI., Gaines- 
ville, Fla. 32607 (F-5, 6) 

SALISBURY, LLOYD L., 10138 Crestwood Rad., 
Kensington, Md. 20795 (M) 
SALLET, DIRSE W., Ph.D., 12440 Old Fletcher- 

town Rd., Bowie, Md. 20715 (M-1, 14) 

SARMIENTO, RAFAEL, Ph.D., % UNDP, Lagos, 
Nigeria, Box 20, Grand Central Post Office, 
New York, N.Y. 10017 (F-4, 5, 24) 

SASMOR, ROBERT M., 4408 N. 20th Rd., Arling- 
ton, Va. 22207 (F) 

SAULMON, E. E., 202 North Edgewood St., 
Arlington, Va. 22201 (M) 

SAVILLE, THORNDIKE, Jr., M.S., 5601 Albia Rd., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-6, 18) 

SAYLOR, CHARLES P., Ph.D.,10001 Riggs Rd., 
Adelphi, Md. 20783 (F-1, 4, 32) 

SCHALK, JAMES M., Ph.D., U.S. Vegetable 
Lab., Highway 17 South, P.O. Box 3107, 
Charleston, S.C. 29407 (F) 

SCHECHTER, MILTON S., 10909 Hannes Court, 
Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (E-4, 24) 

SCHINDLER, ALBERT I., Sc.D., Code 6000, U.S. 
Naval Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 
(F-1) 

SCHLAIN, DAVID, Ph.D., P.O. Box 348, College 
Park, Md. 20740 (F-4, 20, 29, 36) 

SCHMIDT, CLAUDE H., Ph.D., 1827 No. 3rd St., 
Fargo, No. Dak. 58102 (F-5) 

SCHNEIDER, SIDNEY, 239 N. 
Arlington, Va. 22203 (E) 

SCHNEPFE, MARIAN M., Ph.D., Potomac Towers 
Apts. 640, 2001 North Adams St., Arlington, 
Va. 22201 (F-4, 7) 

SCHOENEMAN, ROBERT LEE, 9602 Ponca PI., 
Oxon Hill, Md. 20022 (F) 


Granada St., 


133 


SCHOOLEY, ALLEN H., 6113 Cloud Dr., Spring- 
field, Va. 22150 (F-6, 13, 23, 31) 

SCHOOLEY, JAMES F., 13700 Darnestown Rad., 
Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 (F-35) 

SCHUBAUER, G. B., Ph.D., 5609 Gloster Rd., 
Washington, D.C. 20016 (F-1, 22) 

SCHULMAN, FRED, Ph.D., 11115 Markwood Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-4) 

SCHULMAN, JAMES H., Ph.D., U.S. Off. Naval 
Res., Code 102, 800 N. Quincy St., Arlington, 
Va. 22217 (F-1, 4, 6, 32) 

SCHWARTZ, ANTHONY M., Ph.D., 2260 Glen- 
more Terr., Rockville, Md. 20850 (F-4, 39) 
SCHWARTZ, MANUEL, 321-322 Med. Arts Bg., 

Baltimore, Md. 21201 (M) 

SCOTT, DAVID B., D.D.S., 15C-1, 2 North Dr., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-6, 21) 

SEABORG, GLENN T., Ph.D., Lawrence Berkeley 
Lab., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif. 
94720 (F-26) 

SEEGER, RAYMOND J., Ph.D., 4507 Wetherill 
Rd., Bethesda, Md. 20016 (E-1, 6, 30, 31) 
SEITZ, FREDERICK, Rockefeller University, New 

York, N.Y. 10021 (F-36) 

SERVICE, JERRY H., Ph.D., Cascade Manor, 65 
W. 30th Ave., Eugene, Oreg. 97405 (E-1, 13) 

SHAFRIN, ELAINE G., M.S., Apt. N-702, 800 4th 
St., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20024 (F-4) 

SHAPIRA, NORMAN, 86 Oakwood Dr., Dunkirk, 
Md. 20754 (M) 

SHAPIRO, GUSTAVE, B.S., 3704 Munsey St., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20906 (F-13) 

SHELTON, EMMA, National Cancer Institute, 
Bldg. 37, Rm. 4C-06, Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

SHEPARD, HAROLD H., Ph.D., 2701 S. June St., 
Arlington, Va. 22202 (E-5) 

SHERESHEFSKY, J. LEON, Ph.D., 9023 Jones 
Mill Rd., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (E-4) 
SHERLIN, GROVER C., 4024 Hamilton St., 

Hyattsville, Md. 20781 (L-1, 6, 13, 31) 

SHMUKLER, LEON, 817 Valley Forge Towers, 
1000 Valley Forge Circle, King of Prussia, Pa. 
19404 (F) 

SHNEIDEROV, A. J., M.M.E., 1673 Columbia Rd., 
N.W.,#309, Washington, D.C. 20009 (M-1, 22) 

SHOTLAND, EDWIN, 418 E. Indian Spring Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (M-1) 

SHROPSHIRE, W., Jr., Ph.D., Radiation Bio. Lab., 
12441 Parklawn Dr., Rockville, Md. 20852 
(F-4, 6, 10, 33) 

SHUBIN, LESTER D., Proj. Mgr. for Standards, 
NILECJ/LEAA, U.S. Dept. Justice, Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20531 (F-4) 

SIEGLER, EDOUARD HORACE, Ph.D., 201 Tulip 
Ave., Takoma Park, Md. 20012 (E-5, 24) 
SILVER, DAVID M., Ph.D., Applied Physics Lab., 
Johns Hopkins Univ., Laurel, Md. 20810 

(M-4, 6) 

SIMHA, ROBERT, Ph.D., Case Western Reserve 
Univ., Cleveland, Ohio 44106 (F) 

SIMMONS, LANSING G., 3800 N. Fairfax Dr., 
Villa 809, Arlington, Va. 22203 (F-18) 

SIMON, BENSON J., M.B.A., 8704 Royal Ridge 
Lane, Laurel, Md. 20811 (M-37) 


134 


SITTERLY, CHARLOTTE M., Ph.D., 3711 Brandy- — 


wine St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 © 


(E=1Guo2) 

SLACK, LEWIS, 27 Meadow Bank Rd., Old Green- — 
wich, Conn. 06870 (F) 

SLAWSKY, MILTON M., Ph.D., 8803 Lanier Dr., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (E-6, 22, 31) 

SLAWSKY, ZAKA I., Ph.D., 9813 Belhaven Rad., 
Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F) 

SLEEMAN, H. KENNETH, Ph.D., Div. Biochem. 
WRAIR. Washington, D.C. 20012 (F) 

SLOCUM, GLENN G., 4204 Dresden St., Ken- 
sington, Md. 20795 (E-16, 27) 

SMETANICK, RONALD J., 4273 Charley Forest 
St., Ocney, Md. 20832 (F) 

SMILEY, ROBERT L., 1444 Primrose Rd., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20012 (M-5) 

SMITH, BLANCHARD DRAKE, M.S., 
Ryegate La., Alexandria, Va. 22308 (F) 

SMITH, DAYNA, 1745 Pimmit Dr., Falls Church, 
Va. 22043 (M) 

SMITH, FLOYD F., Ph.D., 9022 Fairview Rd., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (E-5, 24, 42) 

SMITH, FRANCIS A., Ph.D., 1023 55th Ave., 
South, St. Petersburg, Fla. 33705 (E-6) 

SMITH, JACK C., Ph.D., 3708 Manor Rd. #3, 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 

SMITH, ROBERT C., Jr., B.S., % Versar, Inc., 6621 
Electronic Dr., Springfield, Va. 22151 (F-4, 22) 

SNAVELY, BENJAMIN L., Ph.D., 1686 New 
Holland Ave., Lancaster, Pa. 17601 (F-25, 32) 

SNAY, HANS G., Ph.D., 17613 Treelawn Dr., 
Ashton, Md. 20702 (F-6, 7) 

SNOW, C. EDWIN, 12715 Layhill Rd., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20906 (M-32) 

SNYDER, HERBERT H., Ph.D., RFD. A-1, Box 7, 
Cobden, III. 62920 (F) 

SOKOL, PHILLIP E., Ph.D., 4704 Flower 
Valley Dr., Rockville, Md. 20853 (F-4, 6, 39) 

SOKOLOVE, FRANK L., 3015 Graham Rad., Falls 
Church, Va. 22042 (M) 

SOLOMON, EDWIN M., 1881 Oak Bark Court, 
Clearwater, Fla. 33515 (M-4) 

SOMERS, IRA I., 1511 Woodacre Dr., McLean, 
Va. 22101 (M-4, 6, 27) 

SOMMER, HELMUT, 9502 Hoilins Ct., Bethesda, 
Md. 20034 (F-1, 13) 

SORROWS, H. E., Ph.D., 8820 Maxwell Dr., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-6, 13) 

SPALDING, DONALD H., Ph.D., 17500 S.W. 89th 
St., Miami, Fla. 33157 (F-6, 10) 

SPECHT, HEINZ, Ph.D. 3 Oakndger br 
Schenectady, N.Y. 12306 (E-1, 6) 

SPENCER, LEWIS V., Box 206, Gaithersburg, 
Md. 20760 (F-6, 26) ~ 

SPERLING, FREDERICK, 7722 Schelhorn Rad., 
Alexandria, Va. 22306 (F-19) 

SPIES, JOSEPH R., 507 N. Monroe St., Arlington, 
Va. 22201 (F-4, 6, 19) 

SPOONER, CHARLES S., Jr., M.F., 346 Spring- 
vale Rd., Great Falls, Va. 22066 (F-1, 13, 25) 

SPRAGUE, G. F., Ph.D., Dept. Agronomy, Univ. of 
Illinois, Urbana, Ill. 61801 (E-33) 

ST. GEORGE, R. A., 3305 Powder Mill Rd., 


2509 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


= 


Adelphi Station, Hyattsville, Md. 20783 (F-3, 
5, 11, 24) 

STAIR, RALPH, 1686 Joplin St. S., Salem, Ore. 
97302 (E-6) 

STAKMAN, E. C., Univ. of Minnesota, Inst. of 
Agric., St. Paul, Minn. 55108 (E) 

STAUSS, HENRY E., Ph.D., 8005 Washington 
Ave., Alexandria, Va. 22308 (F-20) 

STEARN, JOSEPH L., 3511 Inverrary Dr., #108, 
Lauderville, Fl. 33319 (E) 

STEELE, LENDELL E., 7624 Highland St., 
Springfield, Va. 22150 (F-20, 26) 

STEERE, RUSSELL L., Ph.D., 6207 Carrollton 
Ter., Hyattsville, Md. 20781 (F-6, 10, 16, 42) 

STEGUN, IRENE A., National Bureau of Stand- 
ards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (F) 

STEIDLE, WALTER E., 2439 Flint Hill Rd., Vienna, 
Va. 22180 (F) 


STEINBERG, ALFRED D., 8814 Bells Mill Rad., 


Potomac, Md. 20854 (F) 

STEINER, ROBERT F., Ph.D., 2609 Turf Valley 
Rd., Ellicott City, Md. 21043 (F-4) 

STEINHARDT, JACINTO, Ph.D., Georgetown 
Univ., Washington, D.C. 20057 (F-4) 

STEPHENS, ROBERT E., Ph.D., 4301 39th St., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016 (E-1, 32) 

STERN, KURT H., Ph.D., Naval Res. Lab., Code 
6130, Washington, D.C. 20375 (F-4, 29) 

STEVENS, RUSSELL B., Ph.D., Div. of Biological 
Sciences, N.R.C., 2101 Constitution Ave., 
Washington, D.C. 20418 (F-10, 42) 

STEVENSON, JOHN A., 3256 Brandy Ct., Falls 
Church, Va. 22042 (F-6, 10, 42) 

STEWART, KENNETH R., 12907 Crookston La., 
#16, Rockville, Md. 20851 (M-25) 

STEWART, T. DALE, M.D., 1191 Crest Lane, 
McLean, Va. 22101 (E-2, 6) 

ST. GEORGE, R. A., 3305 Powder Mill Rd., 
Adelphi, Md. 20783 (E) 

STIEF, LOUIS J., Ph.D., Code 691, NASA Goda- 
dard Space Flight Ctr., Greenbelt, Md. 20771 
(F-4) 

STIEHLER, ROBERT D., Ph.D., 3234 Quesada 
St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (F-1, 4, 
14, 39) 

STILL, JOSEPH W., M.D., M.P.H., 1408 Edge- 
cliff Lane, Pasadena, Calif. 91107 (E-19) 
STIMSON, H. F., 2920 Brandywine St., N.W., 

Washington, D.C. 20008 (E-1, 6) 

STOETZEL, MANYAB., Ph.D., 2600 Millvale Ave., 
North Forestville, Md. 20028 (F-5) 

STRAUSS, SIMON W., Ph.D., 4506 Cedell PI., 
Camp Springs, Md. 20031 (E-4, 38) 

STRIMPLE, HARRELL L., Dept. of Geology, The 
Univ. of lowa, lowa City, la. 52242 (F) 

STUART, NEIL W., Ph.D., 1341 Chilton Dr., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20904 (F-10, 33) 

SULZBACHER, WILLIAM L., 8527 Clarkson Dr., 
Fulton, Md. 20759 (F-16, 27) 

SUTHERLAND, DOUGLAS W. S., Ph.D., 125 
Lakeside Dr., Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (M-5, 24) 

SWICK, CLARENCE H., 5514 Brenner St., Capitol 
Heights, Md. 20027 (F-1, 6, 7) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


SWINGLE, CHARLES F., Ph.D., 431 Humboldt 
St., Manhattan, Kans. 66502 (E-10, 11, 33) 
SYKES, ALAN O., 304 Mashie Dr., S.E., Vienna, 

Va. 22180 (M-25) 
SYNDER, HERBERT H., Ph.D., RFD-1 A-1 Box 7, 
Cabden, Ill. 62920 (F) 


7 


TALBERT, PRESTON T., Ph.D., Dept. of Chem., 
Howard Univ., Washington, D.C. 20059 (F-4, 
39) 

TALBOTT, F. LEO, R.D. #4, Bethlehem, Pa. 
18015 (F-1, 6) 

TASAKI, ICHIJI, M.D., Ph.D., Lab. of Neuro- 
biology, Natl. Inst. of Mental Health, 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F) 

TATE, DOUGLAS R., B.A., 11415 Farmland Dr., 
Rockville, Md. 20852 (F-1) 

TAYLOR, ALBERT L., 2620 14th Dr., Gainesville, 
Fl. 32608 (E-15) 

TAYLOR, B.N., Ph.D., Bg. 220, Rm. B258, Na- 
tional Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-6, 13) 

TAYLOR, JOHN K.,:Ph.D., Chemistry Bldg., Rm. 
B-326, National Bureau of Standards, Wash- 
ington, D.C. 20234 (F-4, 29) 

TAYLOR, LAURISTON S., 7407 Denton Rad., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E) 

TCHEN, CHAN-MOU, City College of New York, 
Mechanical Engr. Dept., New York, N.Y. 
10031 (F) 

TEAL, GORDON K., Ph.D., 5222 Park Lane, 
Dallas, Tex. 75220 (F-13, 29) 
TEITLER, S., Code 4105, Naval 
Washington, D.C. 20375 (F) 
TERMAN, MAURICE J., U.S. Geological Survey, 
National Ctr. (917), Reston, Va. 22092 

(M-6-7) 

THEUS, RICHARD B., 4825 Cypress Dr., Lake 
Wales, Fla. 33853 (F) 

THOM, GARY, Ph.D., Center for Building Tech- 
nology, Natl. Bureau of Standards, Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20234 

THOMPSON, F. CHRISTIAN, 4255 S. 35th 
St., Arlington, Va. 22206 (F-3, 5) 

THURMAN-SCHWARTZWELDER, E. B., Ph.D., 
3443 Esplanade Ave., Apt. 210, New Orleans, 
La. 70119 (E-6) 

TILDEN, EVELYN B., Ph.D., 12101 Lomas Blvd., 
N.E., Box 24 Albuquerque, N. Mex. 87112 
(E-6, 16) 

TITUS, HARRY W., 7 Lakeview Ave., Andover, 
N.J. 07821 (E-6) 

TODD, MARGARET RUTH, Miss, P.O. Box 687, 
Vineyard Haven, Mass. 02568 (F-7) 

TOLHURST, GILBERT, Ph.D., 714.N.E. 12th Ave., 
Gainesville, Fl. 32601 (F-25, 40) 

TOLL, JOHN S., Ph.D., Pres.,; Univ. of Md., 
College Park, Md. 20742 (F-31) 

TORRESON, OSCAR W., 4317 Maple Ave., 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 (E-6) 


Res. Lab., 


135 


TOUSEY, RICHARD, Ph.D., Code 7140, Naval 
Res. Lab., Washington, D.C. 20375 (F-1, 32) 

TOWNSEND, MARJORIE R., B.E.E., 3529 Tilden 
St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-13, 22) 

TRAUB, ROBERT, Ph.D., USA (RET.) 5702 
Bradley Blvd., Bethesda, Md. 20014 (F-3, 5, 15) 

TREADWELL, CARLETON R., Ph.D., Dept. of 
Biochemistry, George Washington Univ., 
2300 Eye St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 
(F-19) 

TRENT, EVAN M., Mrs., P.O. Box 1425, Front 
Royal, Va. 22630 (M) 

TRUEBLOOD, EMILY E., Ph.D., 7100 Armat 
Dr., Bethesda, Md. 20034 (E-6, 19) 

TRUNK, GERALD, Ph.D., 503 Tolna St., Balti- 
more, Md. 21224 (F) 

TUNELL, GEORGE, Ph.D., Dept. of Geol. Sci., 
Univ. of California, Santa Barbara, Calif. 
93106 (E-7) 

TURNER, JAMES H., Ph.D., 11902 Falkirk Dr., 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F) 


U 


UBERALL, HERBERT, Dept. of Physics, Catholic 
University, Washington, D.C. 20064 (M) 
UHLANER, J. E., Ph.D., 4258 Bonanita Dr., 

Encino, Ca. 91436 (F-40, 44) 


V 


VACHER, HERBERT C., 350 E. Eva St., Apt. 25, 
Phoenix, Arizona, 85020 (E) 

VAN DERSAL, WILLIAM R., Ph.D., 6 S. Kensing- 
ton St., Arlington, Va. 22204 (F-6) 

VAN DER ZWET, T., Ph.D., USDA Fruit Lab, 
Agric. Res. Ctr. West, Beltsville, Md. 20705 
(F-6, 10, 42) 

VAN TUYL, ANDREW H., Ph.D., 1000 W. Nolcrest 
Dr., Silver Spring, Md. 20903 (F-1, 6, 22) 
VEITCH) FLETCHER’ P; Ur... Phb!, "Dept.’-of 
Chemistry, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, 

Md. 20742 (F-4) 

VIGUE, KENNETH J., 12417 Ellen Ct., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20904 (M-13, 31) 

VILA, GEORGE J., Mr., 5517 Westbard Ave., 
Bethesda, Md., 20016 (M-22) 

VINCENT, ROBERT C., Dept. Chem., George 
Washington Univ., Washington, D.C. 20006 
(F) 

VINTI, JOHN P., Sc.D., M.I.T. Bldg., W91-202, 
Cambridge, Mass. 02139 (F-1, 6) 

VISCO, EUGENE P., B.S., 2100 Washington 
Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (M-1, 34) 
VON HIPPEL, ARTHUR, Ph.D., 265 Glen Rad., 

Weston, Mass. 02193 (E-6) 


136 


W 


WACHTMAN, J. B., Jr., B. 306, Matls. Bidg., 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F) 

WAGMAN, DONALD D., 7104 Wilson Lane, 

_ Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-4) 

WAGNER, A. JAMES, M.S., NOAA Nat. Weather 
Serv., Nat. Meteorol. Ctr., W31, World 
Weather Bg., Washington, D.C. 20233 (F-6, 23) 

WALKER, E. H., Ph.D., Friends House, 17330 
Quaker Lane, Sandy Spring, Md. 20860 (E-10) 

WALKER, JOHN D., Martin Marietta Corp., 1450 
S. Rolling Rd., Baltimore, Md. 21227 (F) 

WALTHER, CARL H., Ph.D., 1337 27th St., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20007 (F-18) 

WALTON, W. W., Sr., 1705 Edgewater Pkwy., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20903 (F-4, 6, 41) 

WARGA, MARY E., 2475 Virginia Ave., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20037 (F-1, 4, 6, 32) 

WARING, JOHN A., 8502 Flower Ave., Takoma 
Park, Md. 20012 (M-12, 30) 

WARSHAW, STANLEY I., 1519 West Kersey Lane, 
Potomac, Md. 20854 (F-6, 28, 36) 

WATERWORTH, HOWARD €E., Ph.D., 10001 
Franklin Ave., Seabrook, Md. 20801 (F-6, 42) 

WATSON, ROBERT B., 1167 Wimbledon Dr., 
McLean, Va. 22101 (E-6, 13, 25, 31) 

WAYNANT, RONALD W., Ph.D., 13101 Claxton 
Dr., Laurel, Md. 20811 (F-13, 32) 

WEAVER, E. R., 6815 Connecticut Ave., Chevy 
Chase, Md. 20015 (E-4, 6) 

WEBB, HAMILTON B., 4701 Willard Ave., Apt. 
1406, Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (M-6) 

WEBB, RALPH E., Ph.D, 21F) Ridge} Aad, 
Greenbelt, Md. 20770 (F-5, 24) 

WEBB, RAYMON E., Ph.D., Agr. Res. Center, 
Vegetable Lab., Bldg. 004, Rm. 220, Belts- 
ville, Md. 20705 (M-6, 10, 42) 

WEBER, EUGENE W., B.C.E., 2700 Virginia Ave.., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 (E-6, 12, 17, 18) 

WEBER, ROBERT S., P.O. Box 56, 301 E. Alba 
St., Venice, Fl. 33595 (M-6, 13, 17) 

WEIDLEIN, E. R., Weidacres, P.O. Box 445, 
Rector, Pa. 15677 (E) 


WEIHE, WERNER K., 2103 Basset St., Alexandria, 


Va. 22308 (E-32) 

WEINBERG, HAROLD P., B.S., 1507 Sanford Rd., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-20) 

WEINTRAUB, ROBERT L., 408 Brooks Ave., 
Raleigh, N.C. 27607 (E-4, 33) 

WEIR, CHARLES E., Rt. 3, Box 260B, San Louis 
Obispo, Calif. 93401 (F) 

WEISS, ARMAND B., D.B.A., 6516 Truman Lane, 
Falls Church, Va. 22043 (F-34) 

WEISS, GEORGE, 1105 N. Belgrade Rad., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20902 

WEISSLER, ALFRED, Ph.D., 5510 Uppingham 
St., Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-1, 4, 25) 

WELLMAN, FREDERICK L., Dept. of Plant 
Pathology, North Carolina State Univ., 
Raleigh, N.C. 27607 (E) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


WENSCH, GLEN W., 2207 Noel Dr., Champaign, 
Ill. 61820 (F-6, 20, 26) 

WEST, WILLIAM L., Dept. of Pharmacology, 
College of Medicine, Howard Univ., Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20059 (M-19, 26, 39) 


' WETMORE, ALEXANDER, Ph.D., Smithsonian 


Inst., Washington, D.C. 20560 (F-3, 6) 


WHERRY, EDGAR T., 5515 Wissahichon Ave., 


Apt. E303, Philadelphia, Pa. 19144 (E) 


WHITE, HOWARD J., Jr., 8028 Park Overlook Dr., 


Bethesda, Md. 20034 (F-4) 

WHITE, MARVIN H., Ph.D., 11176 Oakenshield 
Circle, Columbia, Md. 21044 (F-13) 

WHITELOCK, LELAND D., B.S.E.E., 2320 Bris- 
bane St., Clearwater, F!. 33515 (F-13) 

WHITMAN, MERRILL J., 3300 Old Lee Highway, 
Fairfax, Va. 22030 (F-26) 

WHITTEN, CHARLES A., 9606 Sutherland Rad., 
Silver Spring, Md. 20901 (E-1, 6) 

WICHERS, EDWARD, 9601 Kingston Rd., Ken- 
sington, Md. 20795 (E) 


: WIENER, ALFRED, B.S., USDA Forest Service, 


Retired, 607 Janneys La., Alexandria, Va. 
22302 (F-11) 

WILDHACK, W. A., M.S., 415 N. Oxford St., 
Arlington, Va. 22203 (F-1, 22, 31, 35) 

WILHELM, PETER G., 3354 Huntley Sq. Dr., #T2, 
Temple Hills, Md. 20031 (F) 

WILLENBROCK, F. KARL, School of Engin. & 
Appl. Sci., Southern Methodist Univ., 
Dallas, Tex. 75275 (F-13) 

WILLIAMS, DONALD H., 4112 Everett St., Ken- 
sington, Md. 20795 (M) 

WILSON, BRUCE L., 20 N. Leonora Ave., Apt. 
204, Tucson, Ariz. 85711 (F-1, 6) 

WILSON, WILLIAM K., M.S., 1401 Kurtz Rd., 
McLean, Va. 22101 (F-4) 

WINSTON, JAY S., Ph.D., 3106 Woodhollow Dr., 
Chevy Chase, Md. 20015 (F-6, 23) 

miotOnn, ROBERT L., M-Ed., 11630 35th Pl., 
Beltsville, Md. 20705 (F) 

WITHINGTON, C. F., 3411 Ashley Terr., N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20008 (F-7) 

WITTLER, RUTH G., Ph.D., 83 Bay Dr., Bay Ridge, 
Annapolis, Md. 21403 (E-16) 

WOLCOTT, NORMAN N., Adm. Bldg. A224, 
National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
D.C. 20234 (F-1) 

WOLFF, EDWARD A., 1021 Cresthaven Dr., Silver 
Spring, Md. 20903 (F-6, 13, 22) 

WOLFLE, DAEL, Graduate School of Public 
Affairs, University of Washington, Seattle, 
Washington 98195 (F) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


WOLFSON, ROBERT P., B.E., 10813 Larkmeade 
Lane, Potomac, Md. 20854 (M-13) 

WOMACK, MADELYN, Ph.D., 11511 Highview 
Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 20902 (F-4, 19) 

WOOD, LAWRENCE A., Ph.D., Natl. Bur. of 
Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234 (E-1, 4) 

WOOD, MARSHALL K., M.P.A., P.O. Box 27, 
Castine, Me. 04421 (F) 

WOOD, REUBEN E., 3120 N. Pershing Dr., 
Arlington, Va. 22201 (F-4, 29) 

WORKMAN, WILLIAM G., M.D., 5221 42nd St., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20015 (E-6, 8) 

WULF, OLIVER R., Noyes Lab. of Chem. Phys., 
Calif. Inst. of Tech., Pasadena, Calif. 91125 
(E) 

WYATT, DOROTHY K., 15521 Wembrough St., 
Colesville, Md. 20904 


Y 


YAO, AUGUSTINE Y. M., Ph.D., 4434 Brocton 
Rd., Oxon Hill, Md. 20022 (M-23) 

YAPLEE, BENJAMIN S., 8 Crest View Ct., Rock- 
ville, Md. 20854 (F-13) 

YODER, HATTEN S., Jr., Geophysical Lab., 2801 
Upton St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 
(F-4, 7) 

YOLKEN, H. T., 8205 Bondage Dr., Laytonsville, 
Md. 20760 (F-29) 

YOUNG, DAVID A., Jr., Ph.D., 612 Buck Jones 
Rd., Raleigh, N.C. 27606 (F-5) 

YOUNG, M. WHARTON, 3230 Park PI., Washing- 
ton, D.C. 20010 (E) 


Z 


ZELENY, LAWRENCE, Ph.D., 4312 Van Buren 
St., University Park, Hyattsville, Md. 20782 
(E-4, 6) 

ZIEN, TSE-FOU, Ph.D., Naval Surface Weapons 
Ctr., White Oak, Silver Spring, Md. 20910 
(F-6, 22) 

ZIES, EMANUEL G., 3803 Blackthorne St., Chevy 
Chase, Md. 20015 (E-4, 7) 

ZOCH, RICHMOND T., 12605 Westover Court, 
Upper Marlboro, Md. 20870 (F) 

ZON, GERALD, Dept. Chemistry, Catholic Univ. 
of America, Washington, D.C. 20064 (M) 
ZWEMER, RAYMOND L., Ph.D., 3600 Chorley 
Woods Way, Silver Spring, Md. 20906 (E) 


137 


ON a 


BYLAWS 


Washington Academy of Sciences 


Last Revised in September, 1974 


Article I. OBJECTIVES 


Section 1. The purposes of the Washington Academy of Sciences shall be: (a) to stimulate 
interest in the sciences, both pure and applied, and (b) to promote their advancement and the 
development of their philosophical aspects by the Academy membership and through cooperative action 
by the affiliated societies 


Section 2. These objectives may be attained by, but are not limited to: 

(a) Publication of a periodical and of occasional scientific monographs and such other publica- 
tions as may be deemed desirable. 

(b) Public lectures of broad scope and interest in the fields of science. 

(c) Sponsoring a Washington Junior Academy of Sciences. 

(d) Promoting science education and a professional interest in science among people of high — 
school and college age. : 


(e) Accepting or making grants of funds to aid special research projects. 
(f) Symposia, both formal and small informal, on any aspects of science. 
(g) Scientific conferences. 

(h) Organization of, or assistance in, scientific expeditions. 

(1) Cooperation with other Academies and scientific organizations. 

(j) Awards of prizes and citations for special merit in science. 


(k) Maintaining an office and staff to aid in carrying out the purposes of the Academy. 


Article I]. MEMBERSHIP 
Section 1. The membership shall consist of three general classes: members, fellows and patrons. 


Section 2. Members shall be persons who are interested in and will support the objectives of the 
Academy and who are otherwise acceptable to at least two-thirds of the Committee on Membership. A 
letter or application form requesting membership and signed by the applicant may suffice for action by the 
Committee; approval by the Committee constitutes election to membership. 


Section 3. Fellows shall be persons who by reason of original research or other outstanding service 
to the sciences, mathematics, or engineering are deemed worthy of the honor of election to Academy 
fellowship. 


Section 4. Nominations of fellows shall be presented to the Committee on Membership as a form 
approved by the Committee. The form shall be signed by the sponsor, a fellow who has knowledge of the 
nominee’s field, and shall be endorsed by at least one other fellow. An explanatory letter from the sponsor 
and a bibliography of the nominee’s publications shall accompany the completed nomination form. 


Section 5. Election to fellowship shall be by vote of the Board of Managers upon recommendation 
of the Committee on Membership. Final action on nominations shall be deferred at least one week after 
presentation to the Board, and two-thirds of the vote cast shall be necessary to elect. 


Section 6. Each individual (not already a fellow) who has been chosen to be the recipient of an 
Academy Award for Scientific Achievement shall be considered nominated for immediate election to 
fellowship by the Board of Managers without the necessity for compliance with the provisions of 
Sections 4 and 5. 


Section 7. An individual of unquestioned eminence may be recommended by vote of the Committee 
on Membership Promotion for immediate election to fellowship by the Board of Managers, without the 
necessity for compliance with the provisions of Sections 4 and 5. 


Section 8. Persons who have given to the Academy not less than one thousand (1,000) dollars orits _ 
equivalent in property shall be eligible for election by the Board of Managers as patrons (for life) of 
the Academy. 


138 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


Section 9. Life members or fellows shall be those individuals who have made a single payment in 
accordance with Article III, Section 2, in lieu of annual dues. 


Section 10. Members or fellows in good standing who are retired and are no longer engaged in regular 
gainful employment may be placed in emeritus status. Upon request to the treasurer for transfer to this 
_ Status, they shall be relieved of the further payment of dues, beginning with the following J anuary first; shall 
receive notices of meetings without charge; and at their request, shall be entitled to receive the Academy 
periodical at cost. 


Section 11. Members or fellows living more than 50 miles from the White House, Washington, D.C., 
shall be classed as nonresident members or fellows. 


| Section 12. An election to any dues-paying class of membership shall be void if the candidate does not 
within three months thereafter pay his dues or satisfactorily explain his failure to do so. 


; Section 13. Former members or fellows who resigned in good standing may be reinstated upon 
|) application to the Secretary and approval by the Board of Managers. No reconsideration of the applicant’s 
qualifications need be made by the Membership Committee in these cases. 


Article III. DUES 


| Section 1. The annual dues of each class shall be fixed by the Board of Managers. No dues shall be 
__ paid by emeritus members and fellows, life members and fellows, and patrons. 


Section 2. Members and fellows in good standing may be relieved of further payment of dues by 
making a single payment to provide an annuity equal to their annual dues. (See Article II, Section 9.) The 
amount of the single payment shall be computed on the basis of an interest rate to be determined by 
the Board of Managers. 


Section 3. Members or fellows whose dues are in arrears for one year shall not be entitled to receive 
Academy publications. 


Section 4. Members or fellows whose dues are in arrears for more than two years shall be dropped 
from the rolls of the Academy, upon notice to the Board of Managers, unless the Board shall otherwise 
direct. Persons who have been dropped from membership for nonpayment of dues may be reinstated upon 
approval of the Board and upon payment of back dues for two years together with dues for the year of 
reinstatement. 


Article IV. OFFICERS 


Section 1. The officers of the Academy shall be a President, a President-elect, a Secretary, and a 
Treasurer. All shall be chosen from resident fellows of the Academy. 


Section 2. The President shall appoint all committees and such non-elective officers as are needed 
unless otherwise directed by the Board of Managers or provided in the Bylaws. He (or his substitute — 
the President-elect, the Secretary, or the Treasurer, in that order), shall preside at all meetings of the 
Academy and of the Board of Managers. 


Section 3. The Secretary shall act as secretary to the Board of Managers and to the Academy at 
large. He shall conduct all correspondence relating thereto, except as otherwise provided, and shall be the 
custodian of the corporate seal of the Academy. He shall arrange for the publication in the Academy 
periodical of the names and professional connections of new members, and also of such proceedings of the 
Academy, including meetings of the Board of Managers, as may appropriately be of interest to the member- 
ship. He shall be responsible for keeping a register of the membership, showing such information as 
qualifications, elections, acceptances, changes of residence, lapses of membership, resignations and 
deaths, and for informing the Treasurer of changes affecting the status of members. He shall act as secretary 
to the Nominating Committee (see Art. IV, Sect. 9). 


Section 4. The Treasurer shall be responsible for keeping an accurate account of all receipts and dis- 
bursements, shall select a suitable depository for current funds which shall be approved by the Executive 
Committee, and shall invest the permanent funds of the Academy as directed by that Committee. He shall 
prepare a budget at the beginning of each year which shall be reviewed by the Executive Committee for 
presentation to and acceptance by the Board of Managers. He shall notify the Secretary of the date when 
each new member qualifies by payment of dues. He shall act as business advisor to the Editor and shall keep 
necessary records pertaining to the subscription list. In view of his position as Treasurer, however, he 
shall not be required to sign contracts. He shall pay no bill until it has been approved in writing by the 
chairman of the committee or other persons authorized to incur it. The fiscal year of the Academy shall be 
the same as the calendar year. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 139 


Section 5. The President and the Treasurer, as directed by the Board of Managers, shall jointly — 


assign securities belonging to the Academy and indorse financial and legal papers necessary for the uses of 


the Academy, except those relating to current expenditures authorized by the Board. In case of disability — 


or absence of the President or Treasurer, the Board of Managers may designate the President-elect or a 


qualified Delegate as Acting President or an officer of the Academy as Acting Treasurer, who shall perform — 


the duties of these officers during such disability or absence. 


Section 6. An Editor shall be in charge of all activities connected with the Academy’s publications. 
He shall be nominated by the Executive Committee and appointed by the President for an indefinite term 
subject to annual review by the Board of Managers. The Editor shall serve as a member of the Board. 


Section 7. An Archivist may be appointed by the President. If appointed, he shall maintain the 
permanent records of the Academy, including important records which are no longer in current use by the 
Secretary, Treasurer, or other officer, and such other documents and material as the Board of Managers 
may direct. 


Section 8. All officers and chairmen of standing committees shall submit annual reports at the May 
meeting of the Board of Managers. 


Section 9. The Nominating Committee (Article IV, Section 2) shall prepare a slate listing two or more 
persons for each of the offices of President-elect, of Secretary and of Treasurer, and four or more persons for 
the two Managers-at-large whose terms expire each year and at least two persons to fill each vacant 
unexpired term of manager-at-large. The slate shall be presented for approval to the Board of Managers at its 
first meeting in October. Not later than November 15, the Secretary shall forward to each Academy Member 
and Fellow an announcement of the election, the committee’s nomination for the offices to be filled, and a 
list of incumbents. Additional candidates for such offices may be proposed by any Member or Fellow in 
good standing by letter received by the Secretary not later than Dec. 1. The name of any eligible candidate 
so proposed by ten Members or Fellows shall be entered on the ballot. 


Section 10. Not later than December 15, the Secretary shall prepare and mail ballots to members and 
fellows. Independent nominations shall be included on the ballot, and the names of the nominees shall be 
arranged in alphabetical order. When more than two candidates are nominated for the same office the voting 
shall be by preferential ballot in the manner prescribed by the Board of Managers. The ballot shall contain 
also a notice to the effect that votes not received by the Secretary before the first Thursday of January, and 
votes of individuals whose dues are in arrears for one year or more, will not be counted. The Committee of 
Tellers shall count the votes and report the results at the annual meeting of the Academy. 


Section 11. The newly elected officers shall take office at the close of the annual meeting, the 
President-elect of the previous year automatically becoming President. 


Article V. BOARD OF MANAGERS 


Section 1. The activities of the Academy shall be guided by the Board of Managers, consisting of the 
President, the President-elect, the immediate past President, one Delegate from each of the affiliated 
societies, the Secretary, the Treasurer, six elected Managers-at-Large, and the Editor. The elected officers 
of the Academy shall hold like offices on the Board of Managers. 


Section 2. One Delegate shall be selected by each affiliated society. He shall serve until replaced by 
his society. Each Delegate is expected to participate in the meetings of the Board of Managers and vote on 
behalf of his society. 


Section 3. The Board of Managers shall transact all business of the Academy not otherwise provided 
for. A quorum of the Board shall be nine of its members. 


Section 4. The Board of Managers may provide for such standing and special committees as it deems 
necessary. 


Section 5. The Board shall have power to fill vacancies in its own membership until the next annual 
election. This does not apply to the offices of President and Treasurer (see Art. IV, Sect. 5), norto Delegates 
(see Art. V, Sect. 2). 


Article VI. COMMITTEES 


Section 1. An Executive Committee shall have general supervision of Academy finances, approve 
the selection of a depository for the current funds, and direct the investment of the permanent funds. At 
the beginning of the year it shall present to the Board of Managers an itemized statement of receipts and 
expenditures of the preceding year and a budget based on the estimated receipts and disbursements of the 
coming year, with such recommendations as may seem desirable. It shall be charged with the duty of con- 


140 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


sidering all activities of the Academy which may tend to maintain and promote relations with the affiliated 
societies, and with any other business which may be assigned to it by the Board. The Executive Committee 
shall consist of the President, the President-elect, the Secretary and the Treasurer (or Acting Treasurer) 
ex officio, as well as two members appointed annually by the President from the membership of the Board. 


Section 2. The President, with the approval of the Board of Managers, shall appoint a Nominating 
Committee of six Fellows of the Academy, at least one of whom shall be a past President of the Academy, 
and at least three of whom shall have served as Delegates for at least one year. The Chairman shall be a past 
_ President. (See Article IV, Section 9.) 


Section 3. The President shall appoint in advance of the annual meeting an Auditing Committee con- 
sisting of three persons, none of whom is an officer, to audit the accounts of the Treasurer (Art. VII, Sect. 1). 


Section 4. On or before the last Thursday of each year the President shall appoint a committee of 
three Tellers whose duty it shall be to canvass the ballots (Art. IV, Sect. 10, Art. VII, Sect. 1). 


Section 5. The President shall appoint from the Academy membership such committees as are 
authorized by the Board of Managers and such special committees as necessary to carry out his functions. 
Committee appointments shall be staggered as to term whenever it is determined by the Board to be in the 
interest of continuity of committee affairs. 


Article VII. MEETINGS 


Section 1. The annual meeting shall be held each year in May. It shall be held on the third Thursday of 
the month unless otherwise directed by the Board of Managers. At this meeting the reports of the Secretary, 
Treasurer, Auditing Committee (see Article VI, Sect. 3), and Committee of Tellers shall be presented. 


Section 2. Other meetings may be held at such time and place as the Board of Managers may 
determine. 


Section 3. The rules contained in ‘‘Robert’s Rules of Order Revised’’ shall govern the Academy in all 
cases to which they are applicable, and in which they are not inconsistent with the bylaws or special 
rules of order of the Academy. 


Article VIII. COOPERATION 


Section 1. The-term ‘‘affiliated societies’’ in their order of seniority (see Art. VI, Sect. 2) shall be 
held to cover the: 


Philosophical Society of Washington 

Anthropological Society of Washington 

Biological Society of Washington 

Chemical Society of Washington 

Entomological Society of Washington 

National Geographic Society 

Geological Society of Washington 

Medical Society of the District of Columbia 

Columbia Historical Society 

Botanical Society of Washington 

Washington Section of Society of American Foresters 

Washington Society of Engineers 

Washington Section of Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers 
Washington Section of American Society of Mechanical Engineers 
Helminthological Society of Washington 

Washington Branch of American Society for Microbiology 

Washington Post of Society of American Military Engineers 

National Capital Section of American Society of Civil Engineers 

District of Columbia Section of Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine 
Washington Chapter of American Society for Metals 

Washington Section of the International Association for Dental Research 
Washington Section of American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 
D. C. Branch of American Meteorological Society 

Insecticide Society of Washington 

Washington Chapter of the Acoustical Society of America 

Washington Section of the American Nuclear Society 

Washington Section of Institute of Food Technologists 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 141 


ee ee 


Baltimore-Washington Section of the American Ceramic Society 
Washington-Baltimore Section of the Electrochemical Society 
Washington History of Science Club 

Chesapeake Section of American Association of Physics Teachers 
National Capital Section of Optical Society of America 

Washington Section of American Society of Plant Physiologists 
Washington Operations Research Council 

Washington Section of Instrument Society of America 

American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers 
National Capital Astronomers 

Maryland-District of Columbia-Virginia Section of the Mathematical Association of America 
District of Columbia Institute of Chemists 

D. C. Psychological Association 

Washington Paint Technical Group 

American Phytopathological Society 

Society for General Systems Research 

Human Factors Society 

American Fisheries Society 


and such others as may be hereafter recommended by the Board and elected by two-thirds of the members 
of the Academy voting, the vote being taken by correspondence. A society may be released from affiliation 
on recommendation of the Board of Managers, and the concurrence of two-thirds of the members of the 
Academy voting. 


Section 2. The Academy may assist the affiliated scientific societies of Washington in any matter of _ | 


common interest, as in joint meetings, or in the publication of a joint directory: Provided, it shall not have 
power to incur for or in the name of one or more of these societies any expense or liability not previously 
authorized by said society and societies, nor shall it without action of the Board of Managers be responsible 
for any expenses incurred by one or more of the affiliated societies. 


Section 3. No affiliated society shall be committed by the Academy to any action in conflict with the 
charter, constitution, or bylaws of said society, or of its parent society. 


Section 4. The Academy may establish and assist a Washington Junior Academy of Sciences for the 
encouragement of interest in science among students in the Washington area of high school and college age. 


Article IX. AWARDS AND GRANTS-IN-AID 


Section 1. The Academy may award medals and prizes, or otherwise express its recognition and 
commendation of scientific work of high merit and distinction in the Washington area. Such recognition 
shall be given only on approval by the Board of Managers of a recommendation by a committee on awards 
for scientific achievement. 


Section 2. The Academy may receive or make grants to aid scientific research in the Washington 
area. Grants shall be received or made only on approval by the Board of Managers of a recommendation 
by a committee on grants-in-aid for scientific research. 


Article X. AMENDMENTS 


Section 1. Amendments to these bylaws shall be proposed by the Board of Managers and submitted 
to the members of the Academy in the form of a mail ballot accompanied by a statement of the reasons for 
the proposed amendment. A two-thirds majority of those members voting is required for adoption. At least 
two weeks shall be allowed for the ballots to be returned. 


Section 2. Any affiliated society or any group of ten or more members may propose an amendment to 
the Board of Managers in writing. The action of the Board in accepting or rejecting this proposal to amend 
the bylaws shall be by a vote on roll call, and the complete roll call shall be entered in the minutes of 
the meeting. 


ACT OF INCORPORATION OF 
THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 
We, the undersigned, persons of full age and citizens of the United States, and a majority being 
citizens of the District of Columbia, pursuant to and in conformity with sections 545 to 552, inclusive, of the 


Revised Statutes of the United States relating to the District of Columbia, as amended by an Act of Congress 
entitled ‘‘An Act to amend the Revised Statutes of the United States relating to the District of Columbia 


142 J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 


; : 


and for other purposes,’ approved April 23, 1884, hereby associate ourselves together as a society or body 
corporate and certify in writing: 


1. That the name of the society is the Washington Academy of Sciences. 
2D: That the term for which the Corporation is organized shall be perpetual. 
a That the Corporation is organized and shall be operated exclusively for charitable, educational 


and scientific purposes and in furtherance of these purposes and for no other purpose shall have, but not be 
limited to, the following specific powers and purposes: 


a. To encourage in the broadest and most liberal manner the advancement and promotion of 
science. 
b. To acquire, hold, and convey real estate and other property and to establish general and 


special funds. 

c To hold meetings. 

d To publish and distribute documents. 

e. To conduct lectures. 

fr To conduct, endow, or assist investigation in any department of science. 

g To acquire and maintain a library. 

h And, in general, to transact any business pertinent to an academy of sciences. 

Provided, however, that notwithstanding the foregoing enumerated powers, the Corporation 
shall not engage in activities, other than as an insubstantial part thereof, which are not in themselves in 
_ furtherance of its charitable, educational and scientific purposes. 

4, That the affairs, funds, and property of the Corporation shall be in general charge of a Board of 
_ Managers, the number of whose members for the first year shall be nineteen, all of whom shall be chosen 
from among the members of the Academy. 

5. That in the event of dissolution or termination of the Corporation, title to and possession of all 
the property of the Corporation shall pass to such organization, or organizations, as may be designated by 
the Board of Managers; provided, however, that in no event shall any property of the Corporation be trans- 
mitted to or vested in any organization other than an organization which is then in existence and then 
qualified for exemption as a charitable, educational or scientific organization under the Internal Revenue 
Code of 1954, as amended. 

Editor’s Note: This Act of Incorporation is shown as amended in 1964 by Francois N. Frenkiel, 
President, and George W. Irving, Jr., Secretary, acting for the Washington Academy of Sciences, in a 
Certificate of Amendment notarized on September 16, 1964. A copy of the original Act of Incorporation 
dated February 18, 1898, appears in the Journal for November 1963, page 212. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 3, 1979 143 


ee 


: 
: 
ia 


BD ve i y " i ; i i, | ig 
4 beg Vere ae Ee oe A Wy R Le ae Dy fy 1 aC | AMPLE 
* ‘ . ¥ ‘h » fee 
oii Lough? "yi 7% t. djs D {248 needy! a) af bar 
r 


eye, ae eke < \ he ie < va ti Wi al . 
saath sem oii ce aan i Liiewcdes 
yy Aye , ‘ nt Ae Kage ip w tan} yyy Hu peeteahieat vit } {; 
V3) Ait i ANN Nc Mabe anki bgniden pnt al ernest aie, 
ves die Aihabpbcence: seg ihutia ‘oes der mat te AP YR soil heen, 18 1 
‘lb hig yh UD PANNA ce Rydal tna Feed ante Sater a aa} oh Feet 
peri Soa siaciconeii ay incenndenle nah Me shin note hemanpansd a4 i i! 
Vo ek pip eine yay wii hinbices) onisege a 
be jeytes Lies Ry SPP (ie ue au reels) Montdnbeadeneid: oily eh 
eer Ca Mat. ba eee eae Stk , wir ie hatter 
Ve Aaitepinia fine ey foodo bre alates Snot ¥ toa DOM meer 


i i a rh 4 Be ATL 2 gciee 
versa." hone 
. HEM oehy aed ital Daeg 


ea iit 


i Tee a re Ce epta it? iM pies Vee Fale be TO. Wey 
ie age) ee ere rey ein 
id ah ee ae Cl Us Ol SaSalsaey 2 mug ne Peetu od 
4 La J ae he | oi od axis f } iM , 
: { ~ G ana im a6 ate, 


brands pre vy 4 boi vpn t “.ay hes bat? | The. 6 all 
Mii sR eis hg ‘ar etl ie etl » Stor rn eee ves 1g bac, Sa ee 
‘7; pT Oe Wig he hae Aly ae? pemed Vhaye Ay ni Ln 
Ue) ; at) Va eS yea Os toes b } 

; le / J nr wee j ; 

at if d f ? oN, Py " . poe iit > Ath F id i ‘2 | ; fed. A 


j iA aa Py wiht Siren ta vty 7% biieg , GOL MGR haa i ek 


wd hd, Mtibones DiS), a SA a ORT PARRA END” 
Th Lee.LkDa by Ye ia omic arr Ob cy, 5) Clee 
cient | | OG A TARE kM opmalqe? 


) i 
4A 
, 
\ ’ { 
‘ 
nS) # 
B vic ThoT 
‘at 
e ue 2h 
j ‘¢) Gate 
y + 
WaNG " 
es) 
) 
ry? 
_ ND 
ai aL 


JOURNAL OF THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 


- General 

| Type manuscripts on white bond paper 
either 8% by 11 or 8 by 10% inches. Double 

| space all lines, including those in abstracts, 

tables, legends, quoted matter, acknowledg- 
ments, and references cited. Number pages 
consecutively. Place your name and com- 
plete address in the upper right hand corner 
of the title page. , 


| Title, Author, and Affiliation 
Page | of your manuscript should contain 
only this information and your name and 
address. Choose a concise but complete and 
meaningful title. In research papers con- 
cerning biological subjects, include an indi- 
cation of the order and family of the taxa 
/ discussed. Academic degrees will not nor- 
_ mally be included unless the author so 
specifies. If possible, combine your affilia- 
tion and mailing address (including Zip) so 
_ that readers can write to you directly. 


’ Abstract 

_ Type on a separate sheet at the end of the 
/ manuscript. Make the abstract intelligible 
i without reference to the text of the paper. 
) Write an informative digest of the significant 
| content and conclusions, not a mere descrip- 
tion. Generally, the abstract should not ex- 


ceed 3% of the text. 


_ Footnotes 

_ Use footnotes as sparingly as possible. 
Number text footnotes consecutively with 

Arabic numerals and type them on a sepa- 

. rate sheet of paper at the end of the manu- 

script. Type table footnotes, if any, below 

- each pertinent table on the same page. 


| Illustrations and Legends 

_ The quality of all original illustrations 
Ws ‘must be high enough to facilitate good offset 
i teproduction. They should have ample mar- 
' gins and be drawn on heavy stock or 
i fastened to stiff cardboard to prevent bend- 
. ‘ing. They should be proportioned to column 
i iq x 3) or page (2 x 3) type-dimensions, 
az space for legend material. Photo- 


| Instructions to Contributors 


graphs should have a glossy finish. They re- 
produce best when the contrast is fairly 
high. Identify each illustration with number 
and author in light pencil marks on the 
reverse side. Submit all illustrations sepa- 
rately — please do not glue or clip them to 
the pages of the manuscript. 

Do not type or write legends directly on 
the illustrations. Type legends on a separate 
sheet or sheets at the end of the manuscript. 
Indicate where you want illustrations to 
appear in the printed paper by writing the 
figure numbers lightly in the text margins, 
and be sure that each figure is properly re- 
ferenced in the text itself. Original “art” will 
be returned only at the author’s request and 
expense. 


Tables 

Include tables only when the same infor- 
mation cannot be presented economically in 
the text, or when a table presents the data in 
a more meaningful way. Consider preparing 
extremely complicated tabular matter in a 
form suitable for direct reproduction as an 
illustration. In such cases, the use of the 
typewriter is not recommended. 


References to Literature 

Limit references within the text and in 
synonymies to author and year (and page if 
needed). In a “Reference Cited” section, list 
alphabetically by senior author only those 
papers you have included in the text. Like- 
wise, be sure all the text references are 
listed. Type the ‘References Cited” section 
on a separate sheet after the last page of 
text. Abbreviations should follow the USA 
Standard for Periodical Title Abbreviations, 
Z39.5-1963. 


Submission of Manuscripts 

Send completed manuscripts and sup- 
porting material to the Academy office (see 
address inside front cover) in care of the 
Editor. Authors will be requested to read 
Xerox “‘proofs” and invited to submit re- 
print orders prior to publication. 


Reprints - Prices for reprints may be obtained on request. 


Washington Academy of Sciences 
608 H St. S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20024 

Return Requested with Form 3579 


2nd Class Postage Paid 
at Washington, D.C. 
and additional mailing offices. | 


FS 
Pay 


00678201 COP= 0 
ae \ 

U NATT hte MUSEUM LIBRARY 
WASHINGTO DC 20025 


vy 
Ta Ub 


VOLUME 69 
Number 4 


| J Our nal of the December, 1979 


WASHINGTON 
ACADEMY .. SCIENCES 


ISSN 0043-0439 


Issued Quarterly 
at Washington, D.C. 


CONTENTS 


Research Reports: 


RICHARD H. McCUEN: Risk Assessment in Dam Safety Analysis........ 


KENNETH W. COOPER: Plasticity in Nesting Behavior of a Renting Wasp, 
and Its Evolutionary Implications. Studies on Eumenine Wasps, VIII 
(UB OUTED yal Mei AVC T(E 12) aie a oar na ae on OE TT 


NORMAN LIN: The Weight of Cicada Killer Wasps, Sphecius speciosus, 
DT OM LTE AY Wee rere) 2B) YEN i) 27 1) en a aoc or ae EE SS 


A. FREIDBERG: The Afrotropical Species Assigned to Terellia R.D. 
Dar eacieinte PNT HIN) eure tye Pe ein «Fei G laid Faia eun ts saw arsenic d a xo Dae ee 


RICHARD H. FOOTE: A Review of the Neotropical Genus Neotaracia Foote 
(DIS Ste Tero VC AVS) Ea ae gen ey 0 ear 


Academy Affairs: 


Mecine Notes-—boatd OF MANABEIS 2.2 ob aes s ea ow ee ners one orci aes wre bie 


ODO JOM Ae SECVETISON. << «2-4 = JS eta ete eek ov ow ea 8 a mien Rae etka eee 


Washington Academy of Sciences 


Founded in 1898 


EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 


President 
Alfred Weissler 


President-Elect 
Marjorie R. Townsend 


Secretary 
James F. Goff 


Treasurer 
Nelson W. Rupp 


Members at Large 
Conrad B. Link 
Elaine Shafrin 


BOARD OF MANAGERS 


All delegates of affiliated 
Societies (see facing page) 


EDITOR 


Richard H. Foote 


ACADEMY OFFICE 


608 H St., S.W. 
Washington, DC 20024 
Telephone: (202) 347-3368 


The Journal 


This journal, the official organ of the Washington Acad- | 
emy of Sciences, publishes historical articles, critical | 
reviews, and scholarly scientific articles; proceedings 
of meetings of the Academy and its Board of Managers; | 
and other items of interest to Academy members. The | 
Journal appears four times a year (March, June, | 
September, and December)—the September issue 
contains a directory of the Academy membership. 


Subscription Rates 


Members, fellows, and patrons in good standing re- 
ceive the Journal without charge. Subscriptions are- 
available on a calendar year basis only, payable in ad- | 
vance. Payment must be made in U.S. currency at the 
following rates: 


U.S. and Canada....... $17.00 
IRQECIOR eee ao evs te me 18.50 
Single Copy Price :...~: 6.00 


Single-copy price for Vol. 66, No. 1 (March, 1976) is 
$7.50. 


Back Issues 


Obtainable from the Academy office (address at bottom 
of opposite column): Proceedings: Vols. 1—13 (1898- 
1910) Index: To Vois. 1—13 of the Proceedings and 
Vols. 1-40 of the Journal Journal: Back issues, | 
volumes, and sets (Vols. 1—62, 1911—1972) and all cur- 
rent issues. 


Claims for Missing Numbers 


Claims will not be allowed if received more than 60 days | 
after date of mailing plus time normally required for | 
postal delivery and claim. No claims will be allowed | 
because of failure to notify the Academy of a change in | 
address. 


Change of Address 


Address changes should be sent promptly to the Acad- | 
emy office. Such notification should show both old and 
new addresses and zip number. / 


Published quarterly in March, June, September, and December of each year by the 
Washington Academy of Sciences, 608 H St., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20024. Second class 
postage paid at Washington, D.C. and additional mailing offices. 


DELEGATES TO THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 
REPRESENTING THE LOCAL AFFILIATED SOCIETIES 


Eiemnapinical SOCIELY Ol Wy ASHINEZOM | 6(.. 2.1. o)4'- nye aed o's'o b.a's © a orcid = :c eR eee oe I aa James F. Goff 
PAiMmEDpOIarical Society Of Washington ............ 065.00 ee ace. ete eee oe uueeee wees Jean K. Boek 
capris ESOPely Ol WaASHINPLON) 66.2% sic. Sc es 4 eh aR ass Bl eek be bee William R. Heyer 
PEE PICICLY Oly WASHINGLOM 5/0020 6 fd ee ale oa alee wads see le wuss bh vbeeune's Jo-Anne Jackson 
anrmeimricd Society Of Washington \.\. 5.0.00 5b cee ones bs be vee weecadecuebues Donald R. Davis 
BEeMEEPICOPTAPLIC SOCICLY 2. = ne ewe este nsec tases T. Dale Stewart 
Pm wMESOCICLY OF WASHINGTON «5a. 2 66 fos bc yege vile coe eo aie ac cenasee Delegate not appointed 
Der eeeaciy al tic Mistrict of Columbia ..>. 20.1. cl. eel e coc sees iel eee, Inactive 
AME TREES TIC ANS OGLE EY 2 oo cca ois 5s ioiaiale So S5 a1 9 6,10 ale niw wogisiois aieleld es @ o'ene pce siecle Paul H. Oehser 
ee ee CEN LOL NV ASDIM ELON 2)6)5) 515. <.3.6,2 odes oye sidiwterels 0.00 0's oe ons evs ewlcmn d's « eoeee ees Conrad B. Link 
ee MCHC AMEE OLESCCNS Fi 3)5)25 50 n- - HaiiSiciosed os cc bisia tas eda ed eec assole buweaaees No delegate 
Sees OCICL Ys OF Ee NPINEETS. 8) 215 «ase a ee ale dds eas oe OLE We thee da ane'e ols aes George Abraham 
Sastmimteror electrical and Electronics Engineers: :.5...........00.00c0c cee encences George Abraham 
Peaicmeansecicry on Mechanical’ ENGineers: oo...) eek we ci ev ee cca case eenseceecenn Michael Chi 
Melmmutiological Society of Washington) oe) 6c.c8 8k ce Wied chee eee ealeigee wale Robert S. Isenstein 
Ae SOCIETY 1Ol MICFODIOIORY |... 0. 2c hs ccc ck welousdc whee 6 vue a elelele obs cle bone Beir 's No delegate 
Bociomnem american Military ENGINES. o6i sis cs ne ele cs oe cd be od nts epee a eewee H. P. Demuth 
Pete OCIC On CAVE MOINEETSY |. 2/55 vee. ola es ss Vides wales wh od teas meds Robert Sorenson 
Society tor Experimental Biology and Medicine.....-......0.c0c000ceseccnenees Cyrus R. Creveling 
PT AME CIC EN OT NN CLANS e840, ai'ss bi a's fea n RVepoiie. a8 wate 'e © AS aleve ao 0 8-4 8 e'eselao Charles G. Interrante 
PCE ATE ASSOCIAnOH OL Dental IRESEATCH: 55.35) ke be ce cele Pave wees eceeeeen Donald W. Turner 
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics ............. ccc ccc cecc cece ccces George J. Vila 
MPL MENTE OLOlOPICAN SOCICLY. sili ste Pee Oe OPE re SS POR ce ce eee A. James Wagner 
aseerteime AGCIcty, OF WASHINGTON 205 ok ce ke cee ees ema eesejesmectaseee ce Jack R. Plimmer 
PRC EA OCICIVEOH AMCIICA® Gene). a leek eb awe ain ereemeporerscus Delegate not appointed 
TE SNC IRE S OCIS) er ees eS ee oc Siala ope cd nin fe avin wieleeeromes Atel tueie» wich ounce aia Dick Duffey 
Seeeeees RIL OP NC CHNOIOPISES \ cs 5s < cys ae bos ct ade wb te le eilerele p elelewle aa. e fu William Sulzbacher 
aaa ar SPREO CRATER (CR SOC I GUN te ee seis a owned gs a8 ae ap lol BvE AEM Soin ave a leahe «i aE aue she « ae Inactive 
Sear rap PTA AON CLEA ee Es woh = asco, Gos a ascha «2 2d ain ter irek eal eieepao tical Meainne RNS Alayne Adams 
asin cone TIStOLy Ol SCIENCE, CIID, ja aciy) oes, s ajse ee an a ee ese meen BRE Een ee Pa Inactive 
Pee hiedMe A SSOCIAIOMN Ol: ENYSICS MECACHETS ined fois iipe-2°o me « i2ope aps eee oy ogee © warlous © ohare, ame» Peggy A. Dixon 
ae ENG CLOT VCO MP ANTICTIGA hy rs eC VRE ih bk betes odes. meet eats » ole Gi AAbi oe Bs sae A George J. Simonis 
PEnenican SOCieLy Or llant/ Physiologists) )W).u. Ye. gs... oe aki eiahe ward) Oa ie ie wes be Walter Shropshire 
Miashineron Operations Research Council): 2.00)... os MSDS hd he eek ie Ps John G. Honig 
JE SETI SOC SLUGIE suri 7(e7 0 Oame lenges Lee karan Pan et ras eee eee A eA er Inactive 
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical 
SMP GE CCE E MEUNCEES EET sien. eos coe ond ace hot he os Soke es Mee eS Gus H. Goudarzi 
PAatondl apitol AStTONOMIEIS, . 2.0.0.0 cee cseeceerecs ot th ol pel sce il let Pe tse Benson J. Simon 
APEC Aly ASSOCIATION Ol AIMEDICA wiles cc.c's.c 6d eteay > sis twic cs shiek edger es 40s Slee ee eyes Patrick Hayes 
MNT SUE IRC NONE (CO LICEINIS ES Bar ros oy es oie e665 soo. sab oA ae eae A nose Fale acals Beda ee Dee aye Miloslav Rechcigl, Jr. 
Os EC OMIPLC ANE ASSOCIALLO Ua gna: say -0i.3 0) %0/ rsd ag ed Lo) ae ny She abo. oases fells ined Wile ueilehs. Sle, ob e's alin cme John O’Hare 
Rie Washineton Part Mechnical Group) io. seed 6 tore nye wedelienaSoersis Sie Glayoleuwyw ees maja eee Paul G. Campbell 
PIneCHeAnIENVLOPALNOIOBIGAINSOCIELY: oi.) 2% << sis\s siel ee « siniayeyeiesh del eenclele LW ajee Stee agaere Tom van der Zwet 
Soctcevion General Systems Research. . 22.25... oie. oe elle che Wleheig opm lelo alias Ahap els Ronald W. Manderscheid 
JUTE PAGIp IS US acl Dy Mig Os a UG 8 as eae H. Mcllvaine Parsons 
SMMC AtEISMEMESISORICLY 4 | 2 hee Pete e Alas ose cles oe ested slam clav dele sails gai e's wn e's Irwin M. Alperin 


Delegates continue in office until new selections are made by the representative societies. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 145 


RESEARCH REPORTS 


Risk Assessment in Dam Safety Analysis 


Richard H. McCuen 


Department of Civil Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 


ABSTRACT 


While those involved in the design and construction of dams have an excellent safety 
record, the fact that dam failures have occurred requires the engineering profession to re- 
examine current design practices. A design system that permits the assessment of risk for 
all design factors that involve uncertainty and relates the relative risks to the overall 
risk of failure would be a major improvement over the factor of safety approach to 
design. This can be accomplished using Bayesian decision theory. The Bayesian approach 
was demonstrated for the design of a small earth dam used to control flooding in 
construction areas, and its use was discussed as a means of selecting the optimum design 


hydrograph. 


Risk: Definition and Interpretation 


All of the words, danger, peril, hazard, 
and risk, refer to an exposure to harm or 
loss. Because it stresses uncertainty, risk 
distinguishes itself from the others and is 
especially significant with respect to dam 
safety. Furthermore, the uncertainty of 
harm or loss is often weighed against 
possible gain, and quite often the exposure 
to the harm or loss is made voluntarily (1). 

While the idea of risk is rarely mis- 
understood, there is some confusion about 
how it is measured. In some cases, risk is 
represented by the probability of occur- 
rence or non-occurrence of an event, 
while often risk is converted to an expected 
value of monetary benefits or loss. For 
consistency, risk should be limited to a 
probability statement and used only as a 
component of expected benefits or losses. 
The latter can be referred to as risk cost 
or risk loss. 

With respect to dam safety, the prob- 
ability of failure of the structure is the 


146 


event of interest. The risk involved may 
be assessed either subjectively or with an 
analytical model. For comparing benefits 
to be derived from an inspection program, 
risk can be assessed on an annual basis 
and the benefits of inspection measured 
using the decrease in the probability of a 
failure. The annual risk, which is the 
probability that a dam will fail during one 
year, can be separated into component 
parts called relative risks, which are 
conditional probabilities that reflect the 
possible causes of failure (2). 

In order to accurately assess the annual 
risk and the benefits of an inspection 
program, it will be necessary to quantify 
the relative risks. Uncertainty arises 
because of both the complexity of the 
physical system and the natural forces 
that affect the system. That is, relative 
risks reflect different sources of uncer- 
tainty. To accurately assess the annual 
risk, it is, therefore, important to have a 
means of combining the benefits and losses 
associated with the relative risks. The 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


method selected to assess the most profit- 
able action should be systematic and 
capable of weighing all of the relative 
risks involved. 

Those involved in the design and con- 
struction of dams recognize the uncer- 
tainty that exists. Primary components 
of the total risk include extreme hydro- 
logic events and variation in geologic 
characteristics. To account for sources of 
uncertainty, design includes factors of 
safety. Unfortunately, the relationship 
between design safety factors and the risk 
of failure are not adequately defined. 
Without such a relationship it is difficult 
to minimize the costs. Only by assessing 
the relative risks and the associated costs 
can the risk cost to society be optimized. 


A Decision Theory Approach to Risk Assessment 


Bayesian statistical decision theory (3), 
which has been called the statistical 
method of the 21st century, provides a 
more rational and effective methodology 
for assessing risk than classical statistics. 
Specifically, it provides for decision 
making that involves a combination of 
empirical analysis, professional experi- 
ence, and engineering judgment. 

In Bayesian analysis the decision proc- 
ess is assumed to consist of a set of 
alternative actions, a set of possible out- 
come events that are associated with each 
action, and a utility function that describes 
the value of each outcome. While the 
expected value theorem is used as the 
decision mode of classical analysis, the 
action/outcome sequence is expressed in 
probabilistic terms and the expected 
value of a utility function is used in 
Bayesian analysis to select the preferred 
action; the preferred action is the one 
that provides the optimal (i.e., either the 
maximum or minimum) value of the 
utility function. 

The decision process is a systematic 
process that is conveniently represented 
by a decision diagram. The decision 
maker begins with a certain amount of 
information I. This information is used to 
identify n courses of action A;. Associated 
with each course of action are a set of 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


possible outcomes, where O, indicates 
the j‘" outcome and P(O,) is the probability 
of outcome O;. Associated with each 
decision process is a utility function that 
describes the utility of each outcome; the 
utility that corresponds to outcome QO, is 
denoted as U;;. The decision maker should 
select the action A, that provides the 
optimum value of the expected utility 
EU;, which is given by 


EU U;;P(O;) (1) 


Ms 


J 


When the decision process is executed 
in a Sequential mode, collateral informa- 
tion is collected and used to modify the 
prior probabilities P(O,). The collateral 
information will yield an estimate of the 
most likely outcome, which will be repre- 
sented by a set of conditional probabilities. 
Specifically, past experience has indicated 
that when outcome O, occurred, the 
collateral information indicated outcome 
event E,; the likelihood of this is repre- 
sented by the probability P(E, | QO,). Fora 
future prediction of an outcome, the prior 
probability P(O,) is then modified to yield 
the posterior probability P(O,|E,), which 
is the probability of outcome O;. Given 
that the collateral information indicates 
outcome E,, the posterior probabilities 
are computed using Bayes Theorem: 


P(E,,| O;)P(O;) 
> P(E, |0;)P(O;) 


all j 


(Oy2e) = (2) 


The posterior probabilities can then be 
used to compute revised estimates of the 
expected utility: 


EU(A;) = > U,P(O,| Ex) 


all j 


(3) 


The action A; with the optimal utility is 
then selected. 

Quite often the collection of collateral 
information involves a probabilistic anal- 
ysis (4). In such cases a preposterior 
analysis can be used to decide whether or 
not the collection of collateral information 


147 


Table 1.— Outcomes and utility function for dam 
design example. 


Outcome 
Action O, OF O; 
Ay S(—1200) F(1200—10000) F(—1200-—10000) 
A> S(—4000) S(—4000) F(—4000- 10000) 


S = Survival; F = Failure 


will be worthwhile. The preposterior 
analysis examines the terminal decision 
for each possible outcome. If a pre- 
posterior analysis indicates that the experi- 
ment should be conducted or collateral 
information collected, then the posterior 
analysis estimates the set of posterior 
probabilities according to the outcome of 
the experiment. When the experiment 
has been conducted, the expected benefits 
are computed using the posterior analysis. 


A Decision Theory Approach to Design of Earth Dams 


The decision theory approach can be 
illustrated using a typical design problem. 
An earth dam is required to protect a 
construction site during construction. 
There are two possible designs, with the 
more expensive design providing a higher 
level of protection. The costs of the dams 
are $1200 and $4000. Failure of either dam 
will cause $10,000 worth of damage. An 
analysis indicates that the hydrologic 
States of nature can be represented by 
three outcomes: Q, = 400 cfs, Q, = 500 
cfs, and Q, = 600 cfs. Table 1 shows both 
the outcome and utility for the two actions 
and three outcomes, with F and S in- 
dicating failure and survival, respectively. 
The utility function consists of either the 
cost of the structure when the dam sur- 
vives or the sum of the cost and damage 
when the state of nature causes failure. 
The outcome probabilities are made from 
a hydrologic analysis of past data and for 
the example the following probabilities 
were determined: P(O,) = 0.3, P(O,) 
= 0.5, P(O;) = 0.2; these are called the 
prior probabilities. The decision diagram 
is shown in Fig. 1. Using the outcome 
probabilities and the utility function, 
the following expected utilities were 


148 


determined: 
EU(A,) = 0.3(—1200) + 0.5(— 11200) 

+ 0.2(—11200) = —$8200 
EU(A,) = 0.3(—4000) + 0.5(—4000) 

+ 0.2(— 14000) = —$6000 


Since the objective is to minimize the 
expected utility, action A, is selected. 
Note that while the expected utility is | 
— $6000 that this payoff will never occur; 
there will be either a cost of $4000 for the 
dam or $14000 for cost and damage. 

Toimprove the reliability of the decision, 
a meteorologist is hired to make a long- 
range weather forecast for the design life 
of the temporary dam. Past experience 
has indicated that when the outcome 
proved to be O;,, the forecast predicted 
outcome E, with the conditional prob- 
ability P(E,|O;). For the example, the 
conditional probabilities are given in 
Table 2. Specifically, when the outcome 
proved to be O., the forecaster had 
predicted O,; in 3 of 10 cases and O, in 
2 of 10 cases. The prior probabilities 
can be revised using Bayes Theorem 
(Eq. 2). For example, if the collateral 
information indicated that outcome O,; 
was most likely, then revision of the 
prior probabilities would yield the posterior 
probabilities: P(O,) = 0.1, P(O,) = 0.5, 
and P(O;) = 0.4. While the posterior 
probability indicates that outcome O, is 
still the most likely outcome, the posterior 
probability of O; increased and that of 
O, decreased. The expected utilities are 
then revised as: 


EU(A,) = 0.1(—1200) + 0.5(—11200) 
| + 0.4(—11200) = —$10,200 
EU(A,) = 0.1(—4000) + 0.5(—4000) 
+ 0.4(— 14000) = —$8,000 


The collateral information did not change 
the decision that should be made (i.e., 
A, should still be selected). However, the 
expected utility of the optimum decision 
increased because the collateral informa- 
tion indicated that the high discharge 
associated with outcome O,; was most 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


INFORMATION ACTION 


OUTCOME 


Py, 


UTILITY FUNCTION 
Ui) = —-$1,200 


Ud, = —§ 4,000 


O2 
P(Oa|Aa)=0.5 
O. 


fe) ff; 
v4 s 


Use i $4,000 


Os 


Us3=—-814,000 


Fig. 1. Decision tree for earth dam design problem. 


likely to occur. Note that while the 
collateral information indicates that O, is 
the most likely outcome, there is still 
considerable uncertainty and O, is the 
most likely outcome when both sources 
of information are considered. 


A Decision Theory Approach to Design Flood Selection 


An important element in the design of a 
dam is the selection of the design hydro- 
graph. If the exceedence probability of 
the peak discharge is used as the design 
characteristic of the design hydrograph, 
then the decision theory approach can 
consider flood hydrographs for several 
alternative exceedence probabilities and 
the design hydrograph that minimizes the 
expected utility selected for the final 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


design. Note that this process does not 
reduce the overall safety of the structure 
and, in fact, it optimizes the social cost 
of the structure. Furthermore, the decision 
theory approach has the advantage that 
the exceedence probability is not -being 
selected arbitrarily but, instead, is selected 
in a way that reflects the risk of failure. 


Table 2.— Conditional probability matrix P(E,10;) 
for dam design example. 


O; 
Ex 1 2 3 
1 0.8 0.2 0.0 
2 0.2 0.7 0.1 
3 0.1 0.3 0.6 
149 


The procedure for finding the optimum 
design hydrograph follows the procedure 
outlined for the dam design case. In this 
example, the magnitude of floods may be 
determined using any of the available 
methods for estimating peak discharges 
at ungaged locations. The prior prob- 
abilities could be evaluated and used in 
the computation of the expected utility. 
To improve the reliability of the decision, 
a decision may be made to collect 
collateral information prior to the design 
and construction of the facility. Specifi- 
cally, it is worthwhile examining the 
possibility of installing a gage at the site 
and collecting streamflow data for a period 
of time. A preposterior analysis can be 
used to identify the optimum record 
length. If the preposterior analysis in- 
dicates that streamflow should be mon- 
itored at the site, then a Bayesian 
analysis can be used to compute the 
posterior probabilities. The expected 
utility evaluated using the posterior prob- 
abilities can be used to select the optimum 
design hydrograph. 


Conclusions 


At the present time, factors of safety 
are used to account for the uncertainty 
involved in the design and construction 
of dams. While this approach has resulted 
in an excellent safety record, the fact that 
dam failures have occurred requires the 
engineering profession to re-examine 
current practices in the design and con- 


150 


struction of dams. A major step forward 
would be to adopt a design system that 
permits the assessment of risk for all 
design factors that involve uncertainty 
and enables the overall risk of failure to 
be related to the relative risks involved. 
Bayesian decision theory provides a 
framework for directly evaluating both 
the economics and engineering risk in- 
volved in the design and construction of 
dams. While the decision theory approach 
has numerous advantages over the tradi- 
tional factor of safety method of design, 
it requires an assessment of the prob- 
ability distribution function for all design 
factors that involve uncertainty. This 
assessment may be the result of both 
theoretical and empirical analyses. How- 
ever, after these analyses have been made, 
the decision theory approach should lead 
to safer dams at less cost. The decision 
theory approach was discussed for two 
factors that involve uncertainty. 


References Cited 


1. Morris, W. (ed.), The American Heritage 
Dictionary of the English Language, American 
Heritage Publishing Co., Inc., and Houghton 
Mifflin Co., Boston, 1969. 

2. Vanmarcke, E. H., Decision Analysis in Dam 
Safety Monitoring, pp. 127-148, in Safety of 
Small Dams, published by American Society of 
Civil Engineers, New York, 1975S. 

3. Morgan, B. W., An Introduction to Bayesian 
Statistical Decision Processes, Prentice-Hall, 
Inc., Englewood Cliffs, 1968. 

4. McCuen, R. H., A Sequential Decision Ap- 
proach in Recreational Analysis, Water Re- 
sources Bulletin, 9(2): 219-230, 1973. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


Plasticity in Nesting Behavior of a Renting Wasp, and 
Its Evolutionary Implications. Studies on Eumenine Wasps, 


VIII (Hymenoptera, Aculeata) 


Kenneth W. Cooper 


Department of Biology, University of California, Riverside 9252] 


ABSTRACT 


Ancistrocerus tuberculocephalus sutterianus (Saussure), previously known as a 
‘‘renting’’ wasp (namely, a wasp that nests within preexisting cavities), is shown to be 
a facultative rather than an obligate renter. The wasp mined and masoned nests within 
a block of pith-like plastic, and it did so inside of a dark enclosure (<0.8 lux = maximum 
illumination). Thus it can (and does) excavate nests of a strikingly different sort than 
those it commonly rents. Significantly, the excavated nests are quite similar to the 
supposedly primitive nests of certain ground-nesting Euodynerus. 

Occupancy of a darkened enclosure is related to A. t. sutterianus’ association with 
Sceliphron. Evolutionary aspects are discussed, and it is shown that current, favored 
methods for studying twig-dwelling wasps must tend to bias results. Contrary to common 
belief, facultative renters are very likely a numerous class among eumenids, obligate 


renters comprising a small or empty one. 


The striking behavior and nests of 
Ancistrocerus tuberculocephalus sutteri- 
anus (Sauss.) to be described have no 
parallel in what has been recorded for this 
species or, as far as I am aware, for any 
other of the many nearctic eumenid 
wasps known to occupy trap nests. Both 
A. tuberculocephalus tuberculocephalus 
(Sauss.) and A. ¢t. sutterianus are ‘‘renting”’ 
wasps; that is, they are known to con- 
struct nests in small preformed cavities 
and in open burrows in wood, whether 
natural or artificial (Rau 1940, Bequaert 
1944, Bohart [in Muesebeck et al. 1951], 
Barr [in Ferguson 1962], Parker 1962, 
Parker and Bohart 1968, Krombein 1967, 
Goodpasture 1974). Is ‘‘renting’’ obliga- 
tory for A. tuberculocephalus —is that 
the limit of its nesting behavior and 
capability? 

As neither subspecies is known to mine 
in the ground, to burrow in plant stems, 
or to construct free nests of mud, each a 
regular but different mode of nest con- 
struction employed by particular eu- 
menines, it may seem idle to wonder what 
sorts of nest A. ¢t. sutterianus would or 
could construct were it not to ‘‘rent.’’ 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


The eleven nests to be described give ten 
direct, surprising answers to that question. 

The behavior that led to construction 
of the nests of A. ¢. sutterianus (River- 
side, California) is unusual in two main 
respects: (1) the nests were made within 
a dark, nearly completely enclosed space 
of approximately 0.02 m? (0.68 ft*), namely 
within a box with tight walls, and (2) they 
were made in a solid block of plastic 
having a pith-like consistency. 

The box, mounted on a masonry wall 
112 cm (3’8") above the ground, was 
open only on the underside by an irregular 
hole roughly 5 x 2 cm (1.6 in?). I[llumina- 
tion within the box was by reflection 
through the hole from the earth below, 
reduced by an internal baffle to a level at 
the nesting site at midday of only 0.5-0.6 
lux, reaching a peak of 0.8 lux in the early 
afternoon. Subjectively 0.5—0.6 lux cor- 
responds with summer dusk about one- 
half hour after sunset and is near the 
absolute threshold (0.26 lux) of the com- 
pletely dark-adapted honey bee (Autrum 
and Seibt 1965). The exposed soil below 
the box, regularly dampened by a slight 
seepage each evening, apparently served 


151 


as source of mortar used by the nesting 
wasp. 


The Nesting Substrate 


The nests were constructed in a 
20 cm X 18 cm X 25 mm-thick block of 
white styrofoam® placed furthest from 
the entrance, against the left inner wall 
of the box. The block served to hold 
unused control pins (of a timing device), 
the pins being inserted in a horizontal 
row near its upper edge. One pin, how- 
ever, had fallen from the plastic, leaving 
an irregular hole. On August 18, that hole 
was found to have been covered with a 
dab of mud; elsewhere on the formerly 
unbroken vertical surface of the styrofoam, 
well below the line of inserted pins, 
there were ten other scattered pats of mud. 


The Nests 


The dabs of mud marked the closure of 
a nest of Ancistrocerus t. sutterianus in 
each case. Burrows of ten of the eleven 
nests had necessarily been initiated and 
excavated by a female wasp, for they 
were constructed where no pins had 
pierced a passage into the styrofoam. The 
control pin that had fallen from its hole 
must have left a broken surface and an 
only partially open, horizontal passage 
about 17—20 mm long x 0-2 mm wide, 
irregularly compressed into the styrofoam 
(to judge from those perforations left by 
the other pins when removed). That 
narrow, ill-shaped hole had been greatly 
widened and modified by the founding 
wasp to form a single-celled nest (fig. A). 
The construction of that nest differed in 
no obvious way from those of the five 
other one-celled nests (figs. B—F), even 
though it alone had been excavated along 
the line of a preformed passage. The wasp 
that emerged from that nest had done so 
before the nests were discovered in mid- 
August, 1976. To judge from the dimen- 
sions of its provisioned cell (table 1, A), 
the occupant almost certainly had been a 
male. 

The eleven nests had in common (1) 
a covering cap, somewhat ellipsoidal or 
circular in shape, rough on its surface and 


152 


generally but not always (e.g. figs. B, D) 
somewhat convex, (2) an entrant passage, 
largely filled with the mud of the cap but 
in no case partitioned by a special wall to 
form a vestibular cell, and (3) one or two 
cells, dug with the major axes very 
roughly normal to the entrant passage. 
In only two cases (cells I-1 and K-1) was 
the bottom of a cell not veneered with 
mud to form a smooth, concave floor; in 
neither of these had that cell been pro- 
visioned by the wasp, nor had an egg been 
attached to its wall. Each of the five 
two-celled nests (G-K) had a complete 
mud partition separating the two pro- 
visioned cells. The outer surface of the 
partition that faced the upper cell was 
smooth and concave, the inner surface 
(forming the roof of the bottom cell) was 
rough and convex, as usual in eumenine 
nests and so important for the survival 
of individuals and species (Cooper 1956, 
1957; Tsuneki and Moriyama 1973). 

The cocooning larvae, having thrust 
the remains of the caterpillar prey and 
their fecal pellets below, had coated the 
surfaces of their cells with ““varnish’’ and 
silk. The cocoon of the parasitic wasp 
Chrysis (Tetrachrysis) coerulans Fabr. 
in nest D was free, nevertheless the walls 
of that cell also had been lightly ‘“‘var- 
nished’’ and very loosely webbed. 

Measurements, ratios, and estimates 
(as areas and volumes) of components 
of the nests are given in Table 1. There 
is little quantitative fidelity in either one- 
celled or two-celled nests, a fact well 
reflected in the very large coefficients of 
variation of the linear measurements that 
range from 13 to 79 for rank-1 nests, 
15 to 66 for rank-2 nests. Nor do features 
of individual nests, such as attributes of 
the cap, length of passage, size of cell, 
depth of nest or cell correlate in any 
obvious way with dates of emergences 
from the nests. The only clear relation 
is that the necessarily younger wasp of 
each fully-provisioned two-celled nest had 
emerged before its elder, the older wasp 
in each case having developed in the larger 
bottom cell. 

Such structural regularities as do occur 
are all familiar architectural features 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


Table 1.—Nests of Ancistrocerus tuberculocephalus sutterianus (Sauss.) excavated in a styrofoam block, 
ranked in order of cell number and date of emergence and lettered to correspond with figures. One-celled 
nests = A through F, 2-celled = G through K (lower cell = 1, upper = 2). Linear measurements and 
thickness (9) in mm, areas in mm’, volumes in mm? (all decimals rounded). Cap asymmetry = length: 
width; masonry at base of cell = maximum thickness of mud liner of single and bottom cells, and cross wall 
of 2-celled nests. Nest depth is the greatest vertical distance excavated from the surface of the styrofoam. 


CV = coefficient of variation for linear dimensions. 


Masonry 
Emerged Cap Passage Cell Exit Ratio 
Nest base cross hole V wasp: 
Fig. Sex Date Area Asym 7) L W depth Vol L:W cell-1 wall Dia.  V cell 
A ie 8/18 79 1.4 62 Deen 4 oe eds eer (Teil 0.8 — 3.6 g 
B 3 112087 39 2 1.0 Os 24:8iie 90n 123) jel 9 [5 — 2.8 0.2 
D u 3/18 30 1.0 3.0 AG: 4:5) AVS 231, 1-4 |) — ? -- 
F 3 3/19 35 2.0 2.8 DO oe BO. OS. HG WOM — ? 0.3 
E 3 3/23 23 IES SIE) Se seo TOM aa OM eS 1.0 — u 0.3 
C 3 3/23 87 1.4 310-5, 76109 4:0 140 17 OG MES 0.1 — ? 0:5 
CV 53-4, 50.1 13.0, 16:0 78.8 
fy Lo. 37 1.0 1S) tO wee AV) 4.4 
Di aeS: 11/13 179 1.0 0.3 
1 3 11/16 188 1.8 0.4 
CS See 34 1-2 Ded, BLO, 43-5).18.5 3.6 
a Gi 11/13 204 1.4 1.0 0.2 
] 3 11/18 751) a pen8) 0.8 0.4 
i) ~certia dala 49 14 E14 3.0 4.5 16.0 4.0 
oy Ws) 11/20 198: 18 4.0 0.3 
1 ? DAT 2A (05 2 
Oe 91 fet 325 Br Si yO eetoc0 35) 
2 e230 466 1.2 1.6 0.2 
ry. OP tor 1:8 0 — 
Were rs 37 ted Se) LE SiPer A Opn ele — 
2 2107 — 28e5 230 2.0 
or? — Seles 0 
CV 46.4 45.2 14.8 19.23 65.9% 64.5 


1 The wasp had emerged before the suite of nests was discovered. 

2 Unprovisioned cells; those of I-2, I-1 are clearly too small for rearing, the nest is abnormal and its 
bottom cell contained the shriveled remains of a walled-in spider. 

3 CV for nest depth estimated for cells of H, G and J only, known to be those of males—or probably 


so (cell J-1). 


regularly found in linear nests of eumenids 
constructed in hollow twigs or in trap 
nests of which the outer walls limit cell 
shapes: (1) the first provisioned cell is 
larger than any subsequent provisioned 
cell; (2) the base of the first cell is smoothed 
with mud into aregular concavity if other- 
wise it would be irregular, and if that cell 
iS a provisioned one (compare the un- 
provisioned basal cells of nests I and K 
with all other basal cells); and (3) cross 
walls are smooth and concave where 
facing the exit of the nest, rough and 
convex on the reverse side. Finally, the 
sole cell from which a female wasp 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


emerged is by far larger than any of the 
nine cells from which males emerged. 


The Sex Ratio 


The observed sex ratio is 9 males to 
1 female. Two of the original brood died 
as larvae and were not sexed, so the 
probable primary sex ratio for this family 
cannot be less than 9 males to 4 females 
or more than 12 males to 1 female (for 
the sex is unknown of the wasp that 
emerged prior to discovery of the nests), 
namely from 69 to 92% males. Possibly 
these nests were made by a female with 


153 


18 


198 


247 


Fig. 1. A-K, diagrams of nests excavated by Ancistrocerus tuberculocephalus sutterianus (Saussure) 
in styrofoam. All nests were dug normal to the vertical surface of the plastic; mud closures and cross-walls 
hatched (see text and table for details); volume, in mm?, noted to lower right of each cell; sex 
of occupant of each cell indicated where known; Chrysis coerulans Fabr. emerged from D; pharate pupa 
accidentally destroyed in J-1; e = empty cell, f = female, m = male, s = dead spider; scale = 1 cm. 


a nearly exhausted supply of sperm, for 
available records from rearings of A. f. 
sutterianus suggest a less skewed ratio, 
thus 9 males, 0 females (Bequaert 1944), 
37 males, 43 females (Parker 1962), 
6 males, 3 females (Goodpasture 1974), 
and 3 males, 1 female (Cooper, unpub- 
lished), for a total of 55 males to 47 
females, or 54% males. Nevertheless, it 
cannot be guessed whether that ratio is 
close to the primary one or not, for only 
Bequaert and I have recorded the total 
number of provisioned cells involved. 
Krombein (1967) reports that 86 stored 
cells of A. t. tuberculocephalus gave 43 
males, 5 females, with 38 cells failing 
to produce adults, of which most were 
judged by Krombein to have been those 
of males on the basis of cell dimensions 
and position in the linear nests. Krombein’s 
observations gave lower (43 males, 43 
females) and upper (81 males, 5 females) 
bounds for the sex ratio of 50% and 98% 
males, with 50% very probably far too 
low. In any case the range for the 
nominate species includes the estimates 
for my eleven nests of A. f. sutterianus. 
The strongly skewed sex ratio observed 
is thus not likely to be attributable to 
limitations placed on cell size or on 


154 


nidification by pecularities of the nesting- 
substrate. It may, however, prove a 
function of the particular portion of the 
nesting period during which the nests 
were made; for example, Krombein’s 
nests and those made in styrofoam proba- 
bly represent samples from near (or at) the 
close of the nesting period. 


Discussion 


Excavation of the nests was not seen, 
so it cannot be proven that the eleven 
nests were all constructed by a single 
female (although believed to be so). Indeed 
it is known only that the nests were 
built not later than the close of July. 
Emergences were not clustered, but 
scattered over a period of at least seven 
months (Table 1). Such irregular emer- 
gence does not require the progeny to 
be that of more than one nesting female. 
Krombein (1967) records a nest of An- 
cistrocerus t. tuberculocephalus that took 
more than a year for the emergence of 
all occupants, and I have observed 
occasional nests of A. antilope (Panzer) 
with mixtures of diapausing and not 
diapausing individuals (see Nielsen 1932 
for similar records). But either way, 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


whether nests of one female or more than 
one, the observations bear importantly 
on the adaptive plasticity of this eumenine 
wasp, and probably on that of many 
others. 

It is striking that a founding female of 
A. t. sutterianus explored a darkened, 
spacious enclosure as a possible nesting 
site, an enclosure in which the maximum 
illumination attained was only 0.8 lux (at 
about 1300 hours Standard Time). That 
behavior is quite unlike what has com- 
monly been recorded for other eumenids, 
but it assuredly must prove adaptive if 
finding old nests of Sceliphron, suitable 
for renovation, is now a significant 
feature of this eumenid’s ecology as it 
seems to be (Bequaert 1944, Bohart 
[in Muesebeck et al. 1951], Goodpasture 
1974, Parker [in litt.]). Species of Sceli- 
phron, including S. caementarium (Drury) 
(Shafer 1949), frequently make their mud 
nests in shaded, or even dimly lit situa- 
tions. For example, Sceliphron have been 
recorded by Fabre (1891) as having con- 
structed nests within a narrow-mouthed 
gourd on the mantlepiece of a farmhouse, 
as well as within the depths of stone 
piles; Ferton (1908) took a nest from 
beneath a large stone; Dutt (1913) and 
Williams (1945) found nests in hollow 
trees, and indeed Iwata (1976) holds 
Sceliphron deforme Smith may at times 
‘*’, . prefer dark wall corners within 
closets’? of houses. Thus search of a 
darkened space probably does not repre- 
sent a behavioral quirk of the female (or 
females) that made the nests in styrofoam; 
it is viewed as one behavioral component 
involved in the common association of 
A. t. sutterianus with abandoned nests of 
S. caementarium. 

A second striking fact is that A. ¢. 
sutterianus does not have a strongly 
stereotyped nesting routine. Maindron 
(1882) classified eumenids into three 
categories of nesting types: (1) construc- 
tors of masonry enclosed cells, (2) 
burrowers (mainly into soil), and (3) 
occupiers and renovators of preexistent 
burrows or cavities, namely ‘‘renters’’ as 
Iwata (1942, 1976) and others call them. 
Renting ordinarily minimizes the effort of 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


nest construction, thus providing a reduc- 


tion in the wasp’s energy budget (as 
Roubaud 1916 and Malyshev 1917 pointed 
out) even though the preexistent burrow 
may require modification to its needs as 
in Rau’s (1928) record of Ancistrocerus 
antilope (Panzer) enlarging a burrow of 
Ceratina in sumach pith. When modifica- 
tion requires cutting out pith, as in that 
case, the renting wasp demonstrates a 
capacity that should permit it to construct 
in entirety its own nest in suitable, un- 
worked pithy stems. Were renting long 
established, with available preformed 
burrows regularly exceeding demand and 
now the exclusive abode of a species, 
selection would be expected to favour 
maintenance of those abilities required 
for renovating hollowed stem nests or 
modifying available mud nests (since 
widening or reworking may often be 
required). There would be no such pres- 
sure, however, to maintain any genetic 
basis for instinctive construction of an 
entire nest in the absence of an available 
preformed burrow or cavity. An expected 
evolutionary result would be species of 
wasp that have become obligate renters. 

Before the large number of observations 
now on record had been obtained, it was 
quite generally believed that the eumenids 
include many species which regularly 
mine soft wood and pith, constructing 
nests in their entirety, in contrast to 
others, also nesting in burrows, that 
habitually rent. There are, however, few 
cases (if any) on record where this may 
now be taken to be so, for all established 
burrowers in pith and wood known to me 
appear in fact to be facultative renters that 
readily accept suitable, preformed cavities 
as nesting sites. Among eumenines they 
include at least the African Rygchium 
marginellus (Fabr.) (Roubaud 1916), the 
Formosan Nortonia kankauensis Schult. 
(Iwata 1939, see Iwata 1976), and the 
European Gymnomerus laevipes (Schuck- 
ard) (Bliithgen 1961, Danks 1971b), 
Pseudomicrodynerus parvulus (Herrich- 
Schaeffer) (Bliithgen 1961), Microdynerus 
helvetius Sauss. (Enslin, 1922), M. exilis 
(Herrich-Schaeffer) (Bliithgen 1961; 
Danks 1961b) and Ancistrocerus parietinus 


155 


(Linn.) (Maindron 1882; Bliithgen 1961). 
Among rhaphiglossines certain species of 
Rhaphiglossa (see p. 250, Iwata 1976) and 
Psiloglossa algeriensis Saunders (Ferton 
1920) have also been shown to be faculta- 
tive renters. Indeed facultative renters 
may be a much larger class among 
eumenids than now suspected, including 
fabricators of masonry-enclosed cells as 
well as species that burrow in soil, in 
plant stems, etc. Except perhaps for very 
common species, however, facultative 
renting will not often be recognized as 
such for two principal reasons: (1) the 
very useful hollow trap-nest technique, 
as now so widely employed, permits only 
a test of the faculty for renting and, 
in some cases, for modifying existing 
burrows; (2) when a naturally occurring 
nest is found within an earlier abandoned 
masonry nest, or in a burrow within which 
there are unmistakable signs of prior 
occupancy, it is quite correctly con- 
cluded that a prefabrication has been 
used, namely that the nest is in fact a 
‘‘rented’’ one. However, in the latter 
case all or most other natural nests of 
that species thereafter automatically be- 
come suspect as a rented nest even in 
the absence of clear evidence of earlier 
occupancy. For example, Krombein (1959) 
obtained a series of seven natural twig 
nests of Leptochilus republicanus (Dalla 
Torre). One among them had clearly 
been rented, for a dead Ectemnius (a 
crabronid) was found at the bottom of 
that nest; the origins of all six others 
therefore come into doubt! Is L. repub- 
licanus a facultative renter, or an obligate 
one as Parker (1966) believes to be the 
case for all twig-dwelling Leptochilus? 
With luck, traps of blueberry stems, rose 
stems, sumach and elder twigs, etc., 
having an intact central pith and set out 
where wasps abound, as Danks (1971a) 
appears first to have done in a systematic 
way, might give an answer in this and 
other cases. 

In any case the evidence presented 
proves A. t. sutterianus to be a facultative 
renter. Furthermore the nests it con- 
structed in the soft plastic have a special 
significance. All eleven are less like nests 


156 


of a typical stem nesting eumenine than 
they are similar to nests of a primitively 
ground burrowing eumenine, Euodynerus 
crypticus (Say), described by Isely (1914), 
Rau and Rau (1918), Turner (1922) and 
Vest (1936) under the name Odynerus 
dorsalis Fabr. (see Bohart and Menke 
1974). The encircling hard outer wall of a 
plant stem of course limits to a cylindrical 
hollow the shape that can be given to a 
cell by a wasp whose body’s cross- 
section is but slightly less than the diameter 
of the pith cavity. The nests in styrofoam, 
however, had no lateral limitations placed 
upon their construction, although the 
depth to which they could be constructed 
could not exceed 25 mm unless the wasp 
curved its entrant burrow from the 
horizontal plane (as many aculeates that 
burrow into clay banks do, but which it 
did not do). Unlike the described nests of 
E.. crypticus, that were dug more or less 
vertically into hard soil (first moistened 
and softened by the wasp), and which 
frequently had a vestibular space, those 
of A. ¢. sutterianus were tunnelled 
horizontally, and no vestibule was made. 
In all else, however, though made in 
substrates of markedly different textures, 
hardnesses and necessarily modes of 
working, the nests of the two species are 
closely similar in design. Thus entrances 
are normal to the surface, or nearly so; 
ovoid cells are wider than the entrant 
burrows, with long axes not in line with 
the entrant burrows, and in tandem when 
there is more than one per nest for there 
are no lateral offshoots; separations of 
cells are by mud partitions, with the 
bottom provisioned cell of multicelled 
nests the larger. What is more, the 
nesting A. ¢. sutterianus removed the 
excavated pellets of plastic from the 
interior of the box, just as E. crypticus 
scatters its earthen pellets remote from 
its burrow’s entrance. All of which gives 
emphasis to Evan’s (1977) observation 
that in Eumenidae: certain aspects of 
nesting behavior, location and type of 
nest ‘‘are not closely correlated with 
generic divisions based on structure.”’ 
Thus A. ¢. sutterianus is not an obligate 
renter, even though heretofore it has been 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


known exclusively as an occupant of 
empty nests of other aculeates, preformed 
burrows and trap nests. It is fully capable 
of constructing a nest in entirety in the 
absence of a suitable cavity and, when it 
does so, it surprisingly may exhibit what 
is widely considered to be a primitive 
nesting behavior and nest pattern (e.g., 
Evans and Eberhard 1970, Iwata 1976). 
It seems likely that available free or 
abandoned cavities suitable for occupancy 
do not regularly exceed demand, that on 
average both intra- and extraspecific 
competition for them must occur and, 
therefore, that selection still favors reten- 
tion of primary nesting capability and 
behavior. Very likely A. ¢. sutterianus 
is not unusual among renting eumenids as 
a facultative renter (consider the cases 
cited above). Indeed the class of obligate 
renters, now regarded as largest of all, 
may prove to be a small or empty one, 
literally an artifact of the common current 
use of hollow trap nests. As with A. f. 
sutterianus, nesting routines of many 
species are probably less rigid than now 
believed to be the case, at least among 
eumenids that rent. Seemingly “‘atavistic’”’ 
patterns may be expressed adaptatively 
under circumstances departing from those 
provided by hollow trap-nests and other 
preformed cavities, hence from what is 
now believed to be customary. Interest- 
ingly, Tsuneki and Moriyama (1973) 
point out a similar persistence of atavistic 
attributes as explanation of the appropriate 
responses by Discoelius japonicus Perez 
(a leaf-cutting eumenid) to cues that are 
included in the mud walls of nests made 
by wasps of other, widely different species, 
for orientation of pupae toward a nest’s 
exit. 


Acknowledgment 


My gratitude is expressed to Prof. R. M. 
Bohart for his identification of the chrysidid 
parasite, and to Dr. F. D. Parker for his 
kind and detailed response to many 
questions I placed before him. 


’ Literature Cited 


Autrum, H., and Seibt. U. 1965. Die Dunkel- 
adaptation des Bienenauges. Naturwiss. 52: 566. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


Bequaert, J. C. 1944. The North American species of 
Ancistrocerus , proper (Hymenoptera, Vespidae). 
Entomol. Amer. 23 (New Ser.): 225-286. 

Bliithgen, P. 1961. Die Faltenwespen Mitteleuropas 
(Hymenoptera, Diploptera). Abhandl. Deutsch. 
Akad. Wissensch., Berlin. Klasse Chemie, Geol., 
Biol. 1961: 248 + 3 pp. 

Bohart, R. M., and A. S. Menke. 1974. Names of 
some North American vespoid wasps (Hymenop- 
tera: Vespidae and Eumenidae). Jour. Kans. 
Entomol. Soc. 47: 459-469. 

Cooper, K. W. 1956. An instance of delayed 
communication in solitary wasps. Nature. 178: 
601-602. 

1957. Biology of eumenine wasps. V. 
Digital communication in wasps. Jour. Exper. 
Zool. 134: 469-514. 

Danks, H. V. 1971la. Populations and nesting sites 
of some aculeate Hymenoptera nesting in Rubus. 
Jour. Anim. Ecol. 40: 63-77. 

1971b. Biology of some stem-nesting 
aculeate Hymenoptera. Trans. Roy. Entomol. 
Soc., London 122: 323-395. 

Dutt, G. R. 1913. Life histories of Indian insects-IV 
(Hymenoptera). Memoirs of the Dept. Agric. 
India. Entomol. Ser. 4: 183-267. 

Enslin, E. 1922. Beitrage zur Biologie der Hymen- 
optera. I. Arch. Naturgesch., Abt. A. 88: 
127 =138. 

Evans, H. E. 1977 (1978). Observations on the nest 
and prey of eumenid wasps (Hymenoptera, 
Eumenidae). Psyche 84: 255-259. 

and Eberhard, M. J. W. 1970. The wasps. 
University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, vi 
+ 265 pp. 

Fabre, J. H. 1891. Souvenirs entomologiques. 
Etudes sur |’ instinct et les moeurs des insects. 
(Quatriéme Serie.) I. Le pelopée: 1-18. IV. 
L’hirondelle et le moineaux: 57-70. Edition 
définitive illustrée, 1932. Delagrave, Paris, 1—358 
Dp: 

Ferguson, W. E. 1962. Biological characteristics of 
the mutillid subgenus Photopsis Blake and their 
systematic values (Hymenoptera). Univ. Calif. 
Pub. Entomol. 27: 1-92. 

Ferton, C. 1908. Notes détachées sur I’instinct des 
hyménoptéres melliféres et ravisseurs (4° Sér.). 
Ann. Soc. Entomol. France 77: 535-586. 

. 1921. Notes détachées sur I’instinct des 
hyménoptéres melliféres et ravisseurs (9° Sér.). 
Ann. Soc. Entomol. France 89: 329-375. 

Goodpasture, C. 1974. Karyology and taxonomy 
of some species of eumenid wasps (Hymenoptera, 
Eumenidae). Jour. Kans. Entomol. Soc. 47: 
364-372. 

Isely, D. 1914. The biology of some Kansas 
Eumenidae. Kans. Univ. Sci. Bull. 8: 233-309. 

Iwata, K. 1942. Comparative studies on the habits 
of solitary wasps. Tenthredo/Acta Entomol. 4: 
1-146. 

. 1976. Evolution of instinct: comparative 
ethology of Hymenoptera. Amerind Pub. Co., 
New Delhi, xl + 535 pp. 

Krombein, K. V. 1959. Biological notes on Chrysis 


157 


(Ceratochrysis) enhuycki Cooper, and its host, 

Leptochilus republicanus zendaloides (Robertson) 

(Hymenoptera: Chrysididae, Vespidae). Entomol. 

News 70: 14-23. 

. 1967. Trap-nesting wasps and bees: life 
histories, nests and associates. Smithsonian 
Pub. 4670, vi + 570 pp. 

Maindron, M. 1882. Histoire des guépes solitaires 
(Euméniens de 1’ Archipel Indien et de la Nouvelle- 
Guinée). Considérations générales-nidification- 
moeurs etc. Ann. Soc. Entomol. France (6° Sér.) 
2: 168-188. 

Malyshev, S. 1971. Sur la classification des nids 
des abeilles et des guépes. Rev. Russe Entomol. 
17: 1-19. 

Muesebeck, C. F. W., Krombein, K. V., and 
Townes, H. K. 1951. Hymenoptera of America 
North of Mexico: Synoptic Catalog. U. S. Dept. 
Agric., Agri. Mon. 2: 1—1420. 

Nielsen, E. T. 1932. Sur les habitudes des Hy- 
ménoptéres aculéates solitaires. II. (Vespidae, 
Chrysididae, Sapygidae & Multillidae). Entomol. 
Medd. 18: 84-174. 

Parker, F. D. 1962. A host of Chyrsis ( Trichrysis) 
mucronata Brullé and an additional host of 
Chrysis (Chrysis) coerulans Fabricius (Hymen- 
optera: Chrysididae). Pan-Pac. Entomol. 38: 140. 

. 1966. A revision of the North American 

species in the genus Leptochilus (Hymenoptera: 

Eumenidae). Misc. Pub. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 5: 

152-229. 

and Bohart, R. M. 1968. Host-parasite 

associations in some twig-nesting Hymenoptera 


158 


from western North America. Part II. Pan-Pac. 
Entomol. 44: 1-6. 

Rau, P. 1928. Field studies in the behavior of the 
non-social wasps. Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis 25: 
325-489. 

. 1940. Some mud-daubing wasps of Mexico 

and their parasites. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 

33: 590-595. 

and Rau., N. 1918. Wasp studies afield. 
Princeton University Press, Princeton (N.J.), 
xv + 372 pp. 

Roubaud, E. 1916. Recherches biologiques sur les 
guépes solitaires et sociales d’ Afrique: la genése 
de la vie sociale et l’evolution de Il instinct 
maternel chez les vespides. Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool. 
10° Sér. 1: 1-160. 

Shafer, G. D. 1949. The ways of a mud dauber. 
Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford (Calif.), xiii 
+ 78 pp. 

Tsuneki, K., and Moriyama, H. 1973. Digital 
communication in non-social wasps and bees. 
Mem. Fac. Educat. Fukui Univ. Ser. II, Nat. 
Sci. 23: 13-21. : 

Turner, C. H. 1922. A week with a mining eumenid: 
an ecologico-behavior study of the nesting habits 
of Odynerus dorsalis Fab. Biol. Bull. 42: 153-172. 

Vest, E. T. 1936. Observations on the nesting 
habits of Odynerus dorsalis Fabricius (Vespidae; 
Hymenoptera). Proc. Utah Acad. Sci., Arts, and 
Lett. 13: 207-209. 

Williams, F. X. 1954. The aculeate wasps of New 
Caledonia with natural history notes. Proc. Haw. 
Entomol. Soc. 12: 407-452. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


The Weight of Cicada Killer Wasps, Sphecius speciosus, 


and the Weight of their Prey 


Norman Lin 


1487 E. 37th St., Brooklyn, N.Y. 11234. 


ABSTRACT 


Contrary to the distinct weights and lengths between male and female cocoons 
previously found by other workers, a slight overlap in the weights of adult cicada killers 
was found in the present study. Wasps preyed on 3 species of Tibicen. Two of these, T. resh and 
T. figurata, have never previously been reported as prey. Of the 10 specimens of prey, 
8 were the larger T. resh. As reported previously by several workers, female cicada 
prey considerably outnumbered males taken. Six T. resh were female, 2 were male. 
The remaining T. figurata and T. lyricen were both females. Two of 5 cicadas weighed 
more than twice as much as the wasps carrying them, and the remaining 3 cicadas 
weighed less than twice as much as the wasps. Previous claims of cicadas weighing 
4 to 6 times as much as the wasps carrying them appear to be greatly exaggerated. 


Female cicada killer wasp eggs are 
typically provisioned with 2 cicadas and 
male eggs with 1 cicada (Dow 1942). Dow 
found that cocoons were of 2 different 
classes in respect to size. Measure- 
ments of their lengths and weights 


showed that male and female cocoons. 


were quite distinct and separated by 
intervals of 5.0 mm and 1.0 g. Accord- 
ing to Dambach and Good (1943), 47 
cells containing small or medium-sized 
cocoons were found to be provisioned 
with but 1 cicada. In the same set of 
observations, cells containing large co- 
coons were found to have been pro- 
visioned with 2 cicadas in 19 cells and 
with 3 cicadas in 5 cells. Only 2 large 
cocoons were found with single cicadas, 
and each of these had a large female, 
Tibicen lyricen. Dow (1942) excavated 
42 cells, 3 of which contained 3 cicadas; 
none of the 3 contained cocoons. Of the 
18 cocoons Dow reared to adults, 2 of 
the adult males came from cells con- 
taining 2 cicadas each. Both contained a 
male and a female of the lighter Tibicen 
canicularis. Of the 6 adult females reared, 
all came from cells which contained 2 
female cicadas, 2 of them 2 females 
of T. lyricen, 2 a T. canicularis and a 
T. lyricen, and 2 T. canicularis. Dow 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


reared 12 adult males and 6 adult fe- 
males and found the weight of the males 
to range from 0.13 g to 0.44g and 
the weight of the females to range from 
0.61 g to 1.09 g. 

The present study will show that al- 
though female wasps tend to be con- 
siderably larger and heavier than male 
wasps, this is occasionally not the case. 
This was first suspected as a result of 
years of data gathering from Brooklyn 
populations in which the sex of wasps 
could be determined from their emer- 
gence holes. Males came from holes 5 
to 10 mm, 5- and 6-mm holes were 
rare, and females came from emergence 
holes 12 mm to 19mm, 17- to 19-mm holes 
being quite rare. However, roughly one- 
half of 11 mm emergence holes were 
made by males, and roughly one-half 
were made by females. A further as- 
sumption supported by numerous ob- 
servations of emerging wasps is the 
width of the emergence hole provides 
a good index of the width and size. 
of the wasp. Dambach and Good (1943) 
found the average length of 135 cocoons 
was 32 mm, and the average width at 
the widest point was 11 mm. The smallest 
cocoon found measured 21 mm in 
length and 7 mm in diameter. The largest 


159 


160 


Table 1.— Weight of the Various Male and Female Cicada Killers in Present Study. 


Adult Males 


17 


16 


No. 


0.41 0.46 0.47 0.50 0.51 0.54 O55 0.57 0.62 0.64 064 064 069 069 0.70 0.71 


0.30 


Weight (g) 


Adult Females 


23 


ip 


No. 


ON2=— O0922 e06e 12 2118 ~~ WSs 200. 120 = 2 2 2425) 1 28. 187 = 138 2 - eae 14 50) Ses eS keeled 


0.61 


Weight (g) 


specimen found was 47 mm in length 
and 16 mm in diameter. Dambach and 
Good’s (1943) cocoon widths are almost 
identical with adult emergence hole 
widths used by the observer in sexing 
the Brooklyn populations. There is little 
doubt that the relationship is not one of 
chance. The mean width of 111 emer- 
gence holes in population 1 in Brooklyn 


‘in 1958 was 10 mm. The smallest hole 


measured 6 mm in diameter. The largest 
hole was 16 mm in diameter. These 
figures closely approximate Dambach 
and Good’s (1943) figures for cocoon 
widths. 

Dow (1942) obtained his cicada killer 
cocoons from Berkley, Massachusetts. 
The following study of a cicada killer 
population was made on a sandy tract 
surrounding the main building of the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture, South- 
ern Forest Experiment Station in Pine- 
ville, Louisiana in July, August, and 
September of 1977. A total of 40 adult 
Sphecius, 17 males and 23 females, was 
captured and weighed while alive. A total 
of 10 paralyzed cicadas was taken from 
females and weighed. Three live cicadas 
from the area were weighed which were 
not captured by wasps. The Pineville 
cicadas belonged to 3 species. In order 
of decreasing size, they were Tibicen 
resh, T. figurata, and T. lyricen. There 
were 10 JT. resh (8 22 and 2 da), 2 
T. figurata (1 2 and 16); amdmiec 
T. lyricen. The use of T. resh and T. 
figurata as prey by Sphecius had not 
been previously reported. Assuming that 
the 3 prey species and sexes are equally 
easy to capture, the relative number of 
the different cicadas caught might reflect 
the relative abundance of the different 
Species and sexes in the area, or the 
wasps might have been selecting their 
prey species as well as the sex of their 
prey. This latter hypothesis appears to 
be true of Sphecius in general (Lin, 
in press). 

In 5 of the previous cases, the weight 
of the female wasp as well as the 
weight of her prey was obtained. 

In 4 cases, the female was weighed 
immediately after her emergence, having 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


* Captured by observer. 
TA. = T. lyricen lyricen. 
T.f. = T. figurata. 

Pro — f. resh. 


been caught while still in copula. In 2 
of these cases, the male in copula with 
the female was also subsequently weighed. 
All wasps and cicadas were weighed on 
a Mettler H64 scale which is accurate 
to +0.1 mg. 

The weight of adult males ranged from 
.30 g to .71 g with a mean of .57 g. The 
weight of adult females ranged from .61 g 
to 1.58 g with a mean of 1.26 g. See Table 
1 for the weights of the various males 
and females in the present study. The 
mean weight of Dow’s males was .35 g 
and considerably less than the mean 
weight of males in the following study. 
The mean weight of Dow’s females was 
| .82 g and also considerably less than the 
mean weight of females of the study. 
| Only 2 of the 17 males in the present study 
were lighter than 1 or more males in 

Dow’s sample. 
Four females of the total of 23 in the 
following study were lighter than 1 or 
more females in Dow’s sample. 
| 
: 
| 


The lightest female in the present 
study (.61 g) was lighter than 8 of the 
17 males in the present sample (see 
Table 1). This female also weighed the 
same as Dow’s lightest female. 

The range in weight of the 10 prey 
specimens taken from female wasps was 
1.61 g to 2.81 g X 2.33 g. Table 2 gives 
the weight and sex of these specimens 
including the three not captured by 
Sphecius. Dow (1942) did not have any 
freshly paralyzed prey, so he captured 
a few cicadas of the 2 species (Tibi- 
cen canicularis and T. lyricen) used by 
Sphecius in his sample and took the 
weight of these specimens as estimates 
of the weight of the actual prey. The 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


Table 2.— Weight of Living Cicada Prey (1) Taken from Sphecius and (2) Captured by Observer. 


No. 1 2 ae 4 5 Tes 8 9 10 11 12 15* 
Wt. of 

aes t 6t 1 1.79) 186" 2.1 2.24 2-35 2.59 2.66 2.70 2970 2.78 2:81 © 2.84 
Species eter drt shen lai ae, Lr. Lat: GR Ta ee. a e*, Tee ee, 
Sex 2 2 ) 3 2 2 2 2 fe) 2 2 2 


male 7. canicularis weighed .93 g, and 
the female 1.12 g. The male T. lyricen 
weighed 1.39 g and the female 1.94 g. All 
of the specimens in the present study 
weighed more than the male and female 
of T. canicularis and the male of T. 
lyricen. Only 2 of the 10 specimens 
weighed less than Dow’s female T. 
lyricen (see Table 2). The heavier wasps 
in the present study might be a conse- 
quence of the heavier prey species used 
by the Pineville wasps. Dow (1942), 
however, presents several reasons why 
his weight data should be subject to 
criticism. The most serious of these is 
that his specimens were weighed both 
alive and dead in varying periods of time 
after reaching full development. 

Table 3 gives the weight of the 5 female 
Sphecius and the weight of each female’s 
prey. Though the sample is small, there 
is no correlation between the weight of 
the female Sphecius and the weight of her 
prey. The lightest of the 5 females car- 
ried the heaviest prey specimen. Balduf 
(1941) claimed to have weighed freshly 
killed wasps and their cicada prey and 
found the cicadas to weigh 4—6 times as 
much as the wasps. Table 3 reveals that 
2 of the 5 cicadas weighed more than 
twice as much as the wasps but con- 


Table 3.— Weight of Female Sphecius and Weight 
of Her Prey. 


No. 1 2 3 4 5 


Wt. of 

Cicada:(e) > 2.66 2:70, 2570 2:78) © 2.81 

Wt. of 

Wasp (g) 1:3 K4 £h20), 138i 1d SB el OG 

Weight ratio 1.94 2.25 1.95 1.76 2.65 
161 


Num ber 
—- MW bom 0 


-30 .40 .50 .60 .70 
= 39 <49).59 <69 79 


Weight of Male Sphecius (g) 


Fig. 1. Weight of male Sphecius in grams. 


siderably less than 3 times as much, 
and the remaining 3 cicadas weighed 
less than twice as much as the wasps. 
Only by comparing the lightest of the 
female wasps (.61 g) and the heaviest 
cicada captured by Sphecius (2.81 g) do 
we come to a figure approximating Bal- 
duf’s, where the cicada weighed more 
than 4 times the wasp. However, we 
are seemingly dealing with a rare ex- 
treme because this female weighed less 
than 8 males in the sample of 17. In the 
case of the second lightest female (.82 
g), the cicada weighed less than 4 times 
the wasp (2.81 g). Dow’s data support 
a similar conclusion; his heaviest cicada 
(1.94 g) weighs 3 times his 2 lightest 
female wasps (.61 g, .63 g) and 2 times 
his third and fourth lightest female and 
less than 2 times his 2 heaviest wasps. 
The Pineville cicadas are all larger spe- 
cies than the Brooklyn cicadas which 
were TJ. linnei, and sometimes these 
Brooklyn females abandoned the cicadas 
in unsuccessful attempts to climb ob- 
jects tall enough to take flight from and 


Number 
iw) 
ul 


(S37 f3) Cy KO) da 


Width of Male Emergence Holes(mm) 


Fig. 2. Width of male emergence holes in mm. 


162 


Num ber 
—- wowrhon oO 


-60 .70.80 .901.010 120 130 140 150 160170 


-69 .79.89 99109119 1.29 139149 159 169179 
Weight of Female Sphecius (g) 


Fig. 3. Weight of female Sphecius in grams. 


reach the nest. Thus, cicadas typically 
double or less than double the weight of 
wasps were too heavy for some wasps 
to return with. Balduf’s (1941) claims 
of prey weighing 4-6 times as much as 
the wasps carrying them seems to be 
greatly exaggerated. 

The weight of 4 newly emerged fe- 
males caught in copula was .61 g, .82 g, 
1.21 g, and 1.28 g. The males involved 
in the second and third cases were 
also weighed, being .69 g and .54 g. In 
the copulatory flight, the female pulls the 
male behind her (Lin, 1966, 1967). The 
data for females indicate there is no large 
change of weight between emergence and 
later in the season. The 2 lightest fe- 
males were caught at emergence (.61 g, 
.82 g). However, 2 relatively heavy fe- 
males were also caught on emergence — 
the 10th heaviest female (1.21 g) and the 
14th heaviest female (1.29 g) of the total 
of 23 females (Table 1). After emergence 
and copulation, females leave the arena- 
nesting society for approximately 8 days. 


N um ber 
Nw) 
ol 


11 1213 1415161718 


Width of Female Emergence Holes (mm) 


Fig. 4. Width of female emergence holes in mm. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


The remaining females in Table 1 were 
probably at least 8 days old or older. 
Emergence holes and their widths were 
marked, counted, and measured from 
July 12 to July 31. These holes were 
not counted daily but sporadically on 9 
different dates. Most holes were probably 
accounted for, since the soil was hard 
clay and relatively inaccessible to de- 
structive forces. Emergence continued 
after July 31 and up to August 25, 
when Dr. John Moser saw a copulating 
pair; thus, the female had just emerged. 
Males live a maximum of about 15 days 
and females about 30 to 33 days (Lin in 
Evans, 1966). I suspect I counted and 
measured one-half to three quarters of all 
the emergence holes in the population. 
Wasps were weighed from July 15 to 
September 7. A very large proportion of 
weighed wasps probably had their emer- 
gence holes measured, especially since 
after mating, the newly emerged female 
leaves the arena-nesting society for about 
8 days, and males spend long periods 
in their territories, approximately after 
5 days following their emergence. In Fig. 
1, male-weight categories were plotted by 
number of wasps. Weight and width of 
wasps are likely to be correlated. Thus, 
in Fig. 2, male emergence holes (6 to 
10 mm and one-half 11 mm holes— 
because about one-half of 11 mm holes 
produce males) were plotted as to num- 
ber, and there is a very similar pattern 
between numbers in male-weight cate- 
gories and size categories of male emer- 
gence holes. The same was done for 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


females in Figs. 3 and 4. In the females, 
there is no distinct pattern. 


Acknowledgments 


I am deeply indebted to Dr. John C. 
Moser, without whose assistance this 
study would not have been possible, 
for providing for the use of the facilities 
of the Southern Forest Experiment Sta- 
tion, 2500 Shreveport Highway, Pine- 
ville, Louisiana. I am also indebted 
to Mrs. Fay Guinn for weighing the 
wasps and cicadas, to Dr. Tom Moore 
for the identification of the cicadas, and 
to Dr. Howard E. Evans for construc- 
tive criticism of the paper. 


Literature Cited 


Balduf, W. V. 1941. Take-offs by prey-laden 
wasps (Pompilidae, Sphecidae). Ent. News 52(4): 
91-92. 

Dambach, C. A., and Good, E. 1943. Life, his- 
tory and habits of the cicada killer in Ohio. 
Ohio Jour. Sci. 43: 32-41. 

Dow, R. 1942. The relation of the prey of Sphe- 
cius speciosus to the size and sex of the adult 
wasp. Ann. Ent. Soc. America 35(3): 310-317. 

Evans, H. E. 1966. The comparative ethology and 
evolution of the sand wasps. Cambridge, Mass.: 
Harvard University Press. 

Lin, N. 1966. Copulatory behavior of the cicada 
killer wasp, Sphecius speciosus. Anim. Behav. 
14: 130-131. 

. 1967. Role differentiation in copulating 

cicada killer wasps. Science 157(3794): 1,334- 

1.335% 

. In press.) Differential prey selection for the 

sex of offspring in the cicada killer Sphecius 

speciosus (Hymenoptera; Sphecidae). Proc. 

Entomol. Soc. Wash. 


163 


The Afrotropical Species Assigned to Terellia R.D. 


(Diptera: Tephritidae) 


A. Freidberg 


Department of Zoology, George S. Wise Faculty of Life Sciences, Tel Aviv University, 
Tel Aviv, Israel. Present Address: Department of Entomology, NHB 169, 
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. 20560. 


ABSTRACT 


None of the Afrotropical species assigned to Terellia Robineau-Desvoidy belongs to 
that genus. The following new combinations are made: Terellia nigrofemorata Munro 
and Terellia taeniaptera Bezzi are transferred to Stephanotrypeta Hendel; Terellia 
complanata Munro and Trypeta planiscutellata Becker are transferred to Hyalotephritis 
n. gen., the latter as the type-species; Terellia planiscutellata Becker var. australis Bezzi 
(=Terellia australis Bezzi) is transferred to Tephritites n. gen., as type- and only included 
species; Terellia xanthochaeta Munro is transferred to Trupanea Schrank. Stephano- 
trypeta vittata n. sp. is described, and a key to the four known species of the genus is 
given. Terpnodesma Munro becomes a junior synonym of Stephanotrypeta (n. syn.). A 


lectotype is designated for S. taeniaptera. 


Terellia was proposed by Robineau- 
Desvoidy (1830) for palpata Robineau- 
Desvoidy and /uteola Robineau-Desvoidy. 
Both of these species were later found to 
be conspecific with serratulae Linnaeus, 
an older name (Becker, 1905; Hendel, 
1927). While revising the Terelliinae of 
the world, I have confirmed that the 
Palaearctic species assigned to Terellia 
(e.g. Hendel, 1927) form a monophyletic 
group (evidence to be elaborated in greater 
detail elsewhere) and belong to this genus 
or to the closely related Orellia. Among 
other features, specimens of these species 
are characterized by the inclinate posterior 
upper fronto-orbital bristle. 

None of the Afrotropical species as- 
signed to Terellia is congeneric with its 
type-species or even belongs to the 
subfamily Terelliinae. This is easily 
revealed by their reclinate posterior 
upper fronto-orbital bristles. Munro 
(1967) mentioned the incorrect place- 
ment of the Afrotropical species in 
Terellia; however, in the Afrotropical 
catalog (Cogan and Munro, in press) the 
Same species are still being listed under 
Terellia. Munro (1929) presented a key to 
the six Afrotropical species assigned to 


164 


Terellia: australis, complanata, hysia, 
nigrofemorata, taeniaptera and xantho- — 
chaeta. Of these, Trypeta hysia Walker 
was later stated by Munro (in litt.) to 
belong to the Otitidae, and Terellia 
taeniaptera Bezzi was transferred to, and 
designated as, the type-species of Terpno- 
desma Munro (1956). The latter species 
as well as the other four species are 
treated herein and are assigned to the 
proper genera (two are here described as 
new) and subfamilies. 


Subfamily Aciurinae 


Stephanotrypeta Hendel 


Stephanotrypeta Hendel, 1931: 8. Type-species: 
Stephanotrypeta brevicosta Hendel, by monotypy. 
— Munro, 1947: 88, 219 (key, discussion). 

Terpnodesma Munro, 1956: 469. [New synonym. ] 


Hendel (1931) erected Stephanotrypeta 
and placed it in the subfamily Trypetinae 
because of the relatively short 6th ab- 
dominal tergum of the female (as com- 
pared with the Sth) and the banded wing 
pattern. Munro (1947) transferred Steph- 
anotrypeta to the Aciurinae, a subfamily 
that he revised for the Afrotropical Region. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


Munro (1956) proposed Terpnodesma for 
Terellia taeniaptera Bezzi, and placed it 
in the subfamily Tephritinae. He stated, 
however, that the correct placement of 
Terpnodesma must await further study. 
Munro (1929: 7) described Terellia nigro- 
femorata, which has never been recorded 
since. After studying specimens of these 
species, as well as of a related, unde- 
scribed species, I have concluded that all 
four species are congeneric. The unusual 
character of S. brevicosta, the costa 
reaching r4,;, 1S Shared also by S. nigro- 
femorata and is not considered to be of 
generic significance. 

The generic characterization given by 
Hendel (1931) and Munro (1956) is suf- 
ficient and will not be repeated. How- 
ever, the subfamilial placement of Steph- 
anotrypeta requires a comment. While 
some Aciurinae have whitish, lanceolate, 


postorbital bristles, a character of Teph-. 


ritinae, very rarely do they have the 
posterior upper orbital bristle lanceolate. 
Stephanotrypeta has lanceolate post- 
orbitals and 2 dark and acuminate upper 
orbitals; and therefore can hardly be 
included in the Tephritinae. The wing 
pattern is neither typical of the Tephritinae 
nor of the Aciurinae. The absence of 
distinct scapular bristles in this genus 
makes its inclusion in the Trypetinae 
unwarranted. The relative length of the 
6th tergum of the female was found to be 
somewhat variable inter- and intraspecif- 


ically. Even if the 6th tergum were only 
half the length of the Sth, as stated by 
Hendel (1931), this character cannot be 
considered a conclusive factor in sub- 
familial assignment of this or other genera. 
Although females of most trypetines have 
the 6th tergum shorter than the Sth, and 
most tephritines have it as long or longer, 
there are many exceptions in both sub- 
families. In the Aciurinae the length of 
the 6th tergum varies from less than to 
greater than the length of the Sth. 

The best-known character to define an 
aciurine is probably a biological one. All 
known hosts of Aciurinae are either 
Labiatae, Acanthaceae or Verbenaceae 
(Trirhithromyia marshali Bezzi (Schistop- 
terinae) is the only known example of a 
non-aciurine species breeding in plants of 
one of these families (Acanthaceae)). The 
record of specimens of S. brevicosta 
from Lantana (Verbenaceae), although 
not being a rearing record, is significant, 
therefore, in supporting the inclusion of 
Stephanotrypeta inthe Aciurinae. Within 
the Aciurinae Stephanotrypeta may fall 
within the platensina group (Munro, 1947) 
or, if the hosts are indeed Verbenaceae, it 
could perhaps be placed in Munro’s 
‘‘Group IV’’, together with Munroella 
and other genera, which have a similar 
tendency for banded wing patterns. 

The Aciurinae are restricted to the Old 
World, where they are abundant in the 
tropics, mainly in the Afrotropical Region. 


Key to the species of Stephanotrypeta 


1. Costa reaching end of r,,;; last section of m attenuated toward apex; r4,; and m 


. divessent toward apex: apex of cell.R- hyaline . 4... 2.05 scecs.... . Vie tee ose Z, 
Costa reaching end of m; last section of m not attenuated; r,,; and m parallel or 
EGuvercent apicauy apex of CellyR! Drown ....05-. 5522-55. oe oe chee een eee ss 3 


2. Mesonotum with distinct but pale, partly fused, brown, dorsocentral vittae; femora 
mostly yellow, hind femur, except base and apex, black; 2 longest bands of wing 
convergent posteriorly; stigma about 3 times as long as wide, mainly yellow, except 
for brown base and apex; aedeagus with apical funnel-like structure, without 
cornuti (fig. 4); ‘oviscape with coarse whitish hairs’........ S. brevicosta Hendel 

! Mesonotum uniformly gray, without brown vittae; femora, except base and apex, 
mainly black; 2 longest bands of wing parallel; stigma about 2 times as long as wide, 
mainly brown; aedeagus not known; oviscape mainly with fine brown hairs, with 
Set WikisWenalTs at DASE 2.5. 600 205-06 d sb ees ete eas S. nigrofemorata (Munro) 

3. Mesonotum with two distinct, brown, dorsocentral vittae; aristal hairs shorter than 
basal width of arista (fig. 6); surstylus distinctly produced into curved, posterior 

; flaps (fig. 3); aedeagus more sclerotized (fig. 5); oviscape with white pubescence 

: nabasallo cere. bert... ore week. 2.0.14 ae: S. vittata Freidberg, n. sp. 

; Mesonotum uniformly gray; aristal hairs as long as, or slightly longer than, basal 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 165 


width of arista (fig. 7); surstylus not produced into distinct posterior flaps (fig. 2); 
aedeagus less sclerotized; dorsal side of oviscape at most with slight white pubes- 


GENCE aIsDASG Le. ee Seren Saas pias chews a 


Stephanotrypeta brevicosta Hendel 


Stephanotrypeta brevicosta Hendel, 1931: 8, Pl. 1, 
figs. 4, 5.—Munro, 1947: 219. 


This species was originally described 
from Egypt (a male and female), and has 
not been recorded since. Three males 
from Kenya—two caught on Lantana, 
Nairobi, VI.37, Van S. (?2=Van Sommern), 
and the other from Kajiado, 6.1.1972, 
A. Freidberg—extend the range of this 
species to east Africa and provide the 
only indication for the hosts of species of 
Stephanotrypeta. The preapical spot in 
the wing of the male from Kajiado is not 
connected to the transverse band, but this 
is only intraspecific variation. The 9th 
tergum is similar to that of S. vittata in 
posterior view but differs in lateral view, 
being narrower and almost equally wide 
throughout its height (fig. 1). The aedeagus 
has an apical funnel-like structure (fig. 4), 
but no cornuti. Females were not available 
for study. 


Stephanotrypeta nigrofemorata (Munro), 
new combination 


Terellia nigrofemorata Munro, 1929: 9, Pl. 1, fig. 2. 
‘“‘Terellia’ nigrofemorata, Munro, 1967: 16. 


This species was described and is thus 
far known from a single female that I have 
seen from South West Africa. The femora 
are mainly black, and the wing pattern is 
distinctive too (see Munro’s figure and 
the above key). The costa reaches r4,;, 
not m as shown in Munro’s figure. 


Stephanotrypeta taeniaptera (Bezzi), 
new combination 


Terellia taeniaptera Bezzi, 1923; 581; 1924a; 506, 
Pl. 13, fig. 52; 1924b: 118.— Munro, 1929: 7. 
Terpnodesma taeniaptera (Bezzi): Munro, 1956: 

469, figs. 2, 3; 1966: 3. 


This was the first Afrotropical species 
to be assigned to Terellia, and later it was 


SPR ot ht: Rada S. taeniaptera (Bezzi) 


designated as the type-species of Terpno- 
desma. Bezzi (1923) recorded a female 
from Madagascar and compared it to a 
male from Transvaal, on which he based 
his (1924a) more detailed description. 
However, the species dates from 1923, 
not 1924 (as cited by Munro, 1956), despite 
the heading ‘‘Terellia taeniaptera sp. 
nov.” for the 1924a description. Bezzi 
(1924a) stated: ‘“‘One specimen from 
Pretoria, August 1916(H. K. Munro); but 
the species is known also from East Africa 
and even from Madagascar’’. Munro 
(1956) said: ‘“‘The type, a male, in the 
South African National Collection of 
Insects, Pretoria, is from Barberton, 
August 1913, L. S. Hulley (not from 
Pretoria)’’. I have seen a male which is 
labeled: ‘‘Barberton, Aug 1913, LSH 
[?=L. S. Hulley], H. K. Munro/Terellia 
taeniaptera n. sp., t [?=type] 6’’, and 
also the female recorded by Bezzi (1923) 
from Madagascar. The female is labeled: 
‘“‘Terellia taeniaptera Bezzi, Type 2”’, 
but it is a different species than the male 
(see also record under S. vittata n. sp.). 

Although Bezzi (1923) referred to a 
male and female in the original descrip- 
tion (the female is deposited in the 
Museum Civico Storia Naturale, Milan), 
he did not designate a type specimen, 
and both specimens referred to must be 
considered as syntypes. In a recent letter 
from Munro (23 October 1979) he con- 
firms: ‘‘There is only the single type of 
T. taeniaptera the only specimen of the 
species that Bezzi ever had from me. It is 
from Barberton, 1913.’ Based on this 
statement, I can only conclude that Bezzi 
errored in citing the label data for the 
type specimen. The correct data were 
given above. Munro stated that this 
specimen is the “‘type’’, but as he did 
not formally designate this specimen as 
the lectotype, I am doing so here. The 


Figs. 1-8, Stephanotrypeta spp.: 1, S. brevicosta, male, 9th tergum, lateral view; 2, S. taeniaptera, 
male, 9th tergum, lateral view; 3, S. vittata, male, 9th tergum, lateral view; 4, S. brevicosta, aedeagus; 
5, S. vittata, aedeagus; 6, S. vittata, arista; 7, S. taeniaptera, head, lateral view; 8; S. vittata, male, 


9th tergum, posterior view. 


166 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


167 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


NT 


lectotype is deposited in the Plant Pro- 
tection Research Institute, Pretoria, South 
Africa. 

I have studied specimens from South 
Africa, Rhodesia, Kenya and Uganda. 
The species is distinguished from the 
other congeners by the characters given 
in the key. Additional descriptive remarks 
are: The arista is not bare, as stated by 
Bezzi, but pubescent, as in fig. 7. Further- 
‘more, there are 2 mesopleural bristles, 
not one, as stated by Bezzi (sockets of 
3 missing bristles are visible in the lec- 
totype). The legs are usually completely 
yellow; in one specimen the middle and 
hind femora are somewhat blackish. The 
wing and aedeagus were illustrated by 
Munro (1956). Vein r,,; often with several 
setulae along distal section, in addition 
to setulae at node. The 9th tergum of the 
male is illustrated in fig. 2. The 6th 
tergum of the female is half to about as 
long as the Sth. Oviscape somewhat 
shorter than combined length of last three 
terga, with pubescence entirely or mainly 
fine and brown, coarser and whitish only 
ventrally at base, rarely with some 
whitish pubescence dorsally at base. 

Material examined: Uganda: Mnkole, 
Mbarara, 22.1V.1968, P. J. Spangler 
(16,12). Kenya: Tsavo, 11—12.1.1972, 
A. Freidberg (16 ). Rhodesia: S. Rhodesia, 
Shangani, De Beer’s Ranch, V.1932, 
Miss A. Mackie (12). South Africa: 
Pretoria, 12.111.1926, H. K. Munro (1<d), 
13.11.1972, A. Freidberg (36); Pretoria, 
Roodeplaat, XI.1960, J. Bot (1¢); Kaal- 
fontein, Pretoria Dist., 19.1V.1950, A. L. 
Capener (1° ); Irene, Transvaal, 24.II.1952, 
H. K. Munro (1@), 2.111.1952, H. K. 
Munro (1¢,1@). 

I have not verified records from Zaire, 
Burundi and Tanzania. Tanzanian speci- 
mens, determined as this species (Munro, 
1966), belong to S. vittata n. sp. 


Stephanotrypeta vittata Freidberg, new species 


This species is similar to S. taeniaptera but 
differs in the following characters: Arista with 


shorter pubescence (fig. 6). Mesonotum with two 
brown vittae that start at the anterior border, 
extend over the insertion of the dorsocentral 
bristles, converging slightly, and terminate a little 
behind the insertion of the prescutellar bristles; a 
faint and shorter median vitta is more or less 
distinct at the anterior part of mesonotum. No 
such vittae are present on mesonotum of S. 
taeniaptera. The dark spots at the insertion of the 
scutellar bristles are smaller. Legs mainly yellow, 
forefemur posterodorsally with a blackish longi- 
tudinal stripe, middle and hind femora with more or 
less distinct blackish basal and preapical annuli. 
Wing: r44; with setulae only at node; the pattern 
and venation are very similar in the two species 
but may show small significant differences if large 
enough series of specimens are studied. The 9th 
tergum (fig. 8) differs in having the surstyli 
distinctly produced into flattened, curved posterior 
processes, thus it broadens ventrally in side view 
(fig. 3), while in S. taeniaptera it tapers ventrally 
(fig. 2). The aedeagus (fig. 5) is somewhat more 
sclerotized but otherwise is very similar to that of 
S. taeniaptera (compare Munro, 1956, fig. 3). The 
pubescence of the oviscape is coarse and white on 
the basal 2-—%, fine and brown otherwise, whereas 
it is entirely or almost entirely brown in S. taeniaptera. 
Length of body: ¢: 4.3-4.6 mm, 2: 4.5-6.0 mm, 
of wing: 3.7—4.3 mm, of oviscape (dorsal side): 
0.8—1.3 mm. 


Material examined: Holotype, 2, allo- 
type, £ ,and46 paratypes, Kenya, Tsavo, 
11-—12.1.1972, A. Freidberg. Additional 
paratypes: Kenya, Ukunda, 25.1.1968, 
K. V. Krombein (16 ); 20 mi S. Mombasa, 
23—25.1.1968, Malaise trap, Krombein 
& Spangler (1¢). Tanzania: Makoa, 
10.1V.1959, E. Lindner (16 ,2¢), deter- 
mined as Terpnodesma taeniaptera (Bezzi) 
by H. K. Munro in 1966. Aden: Aden 
Prot., Wadi Natid, Kirsh, ca 2300 ft, 
8.XII.1937, H. Scott & E. B. Britton 
(12); West Aden Prot., Jebel Jihaf, ca 
7000 ft, X.1937, H. Scott & E. B. Britton 
(12). Saudi Arabia: 18.30N 41.45E, Nr. 
Muhail, and 18.18N 41.50E, 22.XII.71 
(43). Madagascar: Andrabomana, 1901, 
Ch. Alluaud (1°), determined: ‘‘Terellia 
taeniaptera Bezzi/type 2’’ (Bezzi’s hand- 
writing on red paper). The Madagascan 
specimen, which was described by Bezzi 
in 1923, was misidentified (see also 
remark in this paper under S. taeniaptera). 
The holotype and some paratypes are 


Figs. 9-15, Hyalotephritis spp.: 9, H. planiscutellata, head, lateral view; 10, H. complanata, male, 
9th tergum, posterior view; 11, H. complanata, head, lateral view; 12, H. planiscutellata, aedeagus; 
13, H. complanata, aedeagus; 14; H. planiscutellata: a, aculeus, b, enlarged tip of aculeus; 15, H. 


complanata: a, aculeus, b, enlarged tip of aculeus. 


168 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


169 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


deposited in the Department of Zoology, 
Tel Aviv University, Israel. Paratypes 
are also deposited in the British Museum 
(Natural History), London; National Mu- 
seum of Natural History, Washington, 
D. C.; Museum Civico Storia Naturale, 
Milan; and Staatliches Museum fiir Na- 
turkunde, Ludwigsburg. 

Etymology: The specific epithet vittata 
is derived from the Latin noun, vitta, 
meaning bands or stripes, referring to the 
banded mesonotum. 


Subfamily Tephritinae 
Hyalotephritis Freidberg, new genus 


Type-species: Trypeta planiscutellata Becker, by 
present designation. 


Diagnosis: Head distinctly higher than long, oval; 
frontal stripe pubescent; fronto-facial angle 125°— 135°, 


usually rounded, occasionally somewhat angular; 
arista bare or almost bare; proboscis capitate; 2 
upper, 3 lower fronto-orbital bristles, posterior upper 
and anterior lower bristles white and lanceolate, the 
latter bristle sometimes difficult to detect or missing; 
apical scutellars 0.5—0.6 as long as basals; wing 
entirely hyaline, with stigma sometimes yellowish, 
with pale veins; vein r,,; bare; oviscape tapering, 
almost triangular; 9th tergum of male oval, with 
broad surstyli; aedeagus elongate, with slight 
sclerotization at base, followed by what appears to 
be pubescence. 


The type-species, planiscutellata, has 
been included in Tephritis (e.g. Hendel, 
1927). In Tephritis , however, the head is 
relatively longer and lower, more angular, 
fronto-facial angle usually about 100°, 
only 2 lower fronto-orbital bristles, wing 
pattern present and the aedeagus less 
attenuated, more sclerotized and lacking 
pubescence. 


Key to species of Hyalotephritis 


1. Head height—length ratio averaging 1.30; aedeagus relatively shorter, sclerotization 


and pubescence occupying greater part (fig. 12) ...... H. planiscutellata (Becker) 
Head height—length ratio averaging 1.47; aedeagus relatively longer, sclerotization 
and pubescence occupying smaller part (fig. 13)......... H. complanata (Munro) 


Hyalotephritis planiscutellata (Becker), 
new combination 


Trypeta planiscutellata Becker, 1903: 136. 

Terellia planiscutellata (Becker), Efflatoun, 1924: 
80, Pl. 3, fig. 4. 

Tephritis planiscutellata (Becker), Hendel, 1927: 
193.— Munro, 1955: 425.— Kugler and Freidberg, 
1975: 66. 


This species was described from Egypt 
and recorded also from Israel and Ethiopia. 
I have studied numerous specimens from 
Israel (deposited in the Department of 
Zoology, Tel Aviv University), as well as 
23 from Egypt, Al Fayyun, 24.X.1966, 
J. G. Rozen (deposited in National 
Museum of Natural History, Washington). 
The head, aedeagus and aculeus are 
illustrated in figs. 9, 12, and 14 respec- 
tively. The only known host plant of this 
species is Conyza dioscoridis (L.) Desf. 
(Compositae). Efflatoun (1925, 1927) de- 
scribed the immature stages. 


Hyalotephritis complanata (Munro), 
new combination 


Terellia complanata Munro, 1929: 9, Pl. 1, fig. 4. 
‘‘Terellia’’ complanata, Munro, 1967: 16. 


This species is known from South- and 
South West Africa only, and I have 
examined 1d paratype from Hoarlisib 
Otshu, S. W. A., III.1926, Mus. Exp., 
as wellas 136 2 from Njelele R., N. Tvl., 
Farm ‘‘Joan’’, [X.1939, H. K. Munro 
(deposited in Plant Protection Research 
Institute, Pretoria). It differs from the 
previous species by the characters given 
in the key. In addition, the aculeus is 
longer and shaped differently (fig. 15). 
The head, 9th tergum and aedeagus are 
illustrated in figs. 11, 10, and 13 re- 
spectively. 

According to Munro (person. commun.) 
the species was bred from flower heads 
of Conyza dioscoridis. A puparium, 


Figs. 16-22, Tephritites australis and Trupanea xanthochaeta: 16, T. australis, head, lateral view; 17, 
T. xanthochaeta, head, lateral view; 18, T. australis, wing; 19, T. australis, male, 9th tergum, posterior 
view; 20, T. xanthochaeta, male, 9th tergum, posterior view; 21, T. australis , aedeagus; 22, T. xanthochaeta, 


aedeagus. 


170 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


Za Vy 
J 


ZA ; 


16 


| 
: 
| 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


22 


171 


associated with a female (Shewasaulu, 
N. Tvl., May 1953, H. K. Munro) was 
studied. This puparium fits Efflatoun’s 
descriptions and figures (1925 and 1927) 
for planiscutellata, except for the seg- 
mentation, which is less demarcated. The 
surface is distinctly punctate. The distance 
between the posterior spiracles is 6 times 
longer than smallest spiracular diameter. 


Tephritites Freidberg, new genus 


Type-species: Terellia planiscutellata var. australis 
Bezzi (=Terellia australis Bezzi). 


Diagnosis: The genus is distinguished from 
other tephritine genera by the following combination 
of character states: Head as in fig. 16; frons 
slightly longer than wide; frontal stripe bare; 
fronto-facial angle about 120°—130°; arista bare; 
proboscis capitate; 2 upper, 2 lower fronto-orbital 
bristles, the posterior upper bristle white and 
lanceolate; apical scutellar bristles considerably 
shorter than half length of basal scutellars; legs: 
forefemur ventrally at apical “4 or 4 with a row of 
brown or blackish setulae, in addition to the usual 
paler bristles; wing as in fig. 18: distance between 
crossveins as long or longer than dm-cu; wing 
almost entirely hyaline, with small, pale brown, 
almost indistinct spots, mainly in cells R,, R3, and 
R;; terminalia as described for the type-species. 


Tephritites is similar and_ possibly 
related to Tephritis. In Tephritis, how- 
ever, the fronto-facial angle is usually 
smaller, often about 90°— 100°, the apical 
scutellars are usually more than half as 
long as basals, the forefemur lacks 
the row of dark setulae, the distance 
between the crossveins is usually much 
shorter than dm-cu and the wing pattern 
is more extensive. Tephritis, well repre- 
sented in most temperate zones, has been 
recorded from the Afrotropical Region 
from only two species, of which one is 
endemic. 


Tephritites australis (Bezzi), new combination 


Terellia planiscutellata Becker var. australis Bezzi, 
1924a: 508, Pl. 14, fig. 55. 

Terellia australis Bezzi, 1924b: 118; Munro, 1929: 8. 

‘“‘Terellia’’ australis, Munro, 1967: 16. 


This species is known from South- and 
South West Africa only. It was described 
from several females collected in Pretoria 
and Barberton. Among other specimens 


172 


I examined 12 in poor condition (Barber- 
ton, 17.V.13, H. K. Munro), labeled: 
‘“‘Terellia planiscutellata Beck.’’ (Bezzi’s 
handwriting on red paper). This specimen 
agrees with Bezzi’s original description 
and fixes my concept of the name australis. 
According to Munro (in litt.) it is a 
syntype, but owing to its poor condition, 
I am not designating it as a lectotype. 

The small spots on the wing are some- 
times difficult to detect (compare with 
Bezzi’s figure and description); 9th tergum 
of male egg-shaped (fig. 19), with the 
surstyli strongly bent inwardly; aedeagus 
as in fig. 21; 6th tergum of female with a 
large shiny black spot, without (or almost 
without) pollinosity, but often obscured 
by the dense and coarse pubescence; 
Oviscape as long as combined length of 
the last 3-4 terga, with a large black 
spot dorsally at base. 

According to Munro (in litt.) the species 
was bred by W. H. Ghent from Geigeria 
passerinoides (Compositae) (16 ,12 , Vry- 
burg, Nov. 1947). I have also studied 1? 
and an associated puparium, reared by 
Munro from Geigeria sp. (Kraalkop, 
Tvl., 20.III.1928). The puparium is shiny 
black, finely punctate and striated, and 
with distinct segmentation; anterior spi- 
racle with 3 or 4 papillae; posterior 
spiracles closer together than diameter of 
a spiracle. 

Other material studied: South Africa: 
Johannesburg, 10.XII.1927, H. K. Munro 
(16); Pretoria, 11.X1I.1917, H. K. Munro 
(1d ¢@), 12.XI.1928, H. K. Munro (12), 
16.XII.1925, H. K. Munro (2<¢), 1.1926, 
H. K. Munro (1¢), 13.11.1972, A. Freid- 
berg (12); Witdraai BP., X.1925, C. W. 
Mally (362°); Bapsfontein TP, 7.XII.1933, 
H. K. Munro (12); E. Transvaal, Vaal- 
hoek, 6.1I.1972, A. Freidberg (1d). South 
West Africa: Kalahari Gamsbok Natnl. 
Park, S. Afr. Exp., 16—24.V.1956, Twee 
Rivieren, H. K. Munro, sweeping Gaigeria 
and Pituranthos (16 2); 9miS. Rehoboth, 
24.X.1968, J. G. Rozen & E. Martinez 
(23); Gobabeb, Kuiseb River Bed, 
26.1.1978, O. Lomholdt (1°). The speci- 
mens are deposited in the Plant Protection 
Research Institute, Pretoria; Department 
of Zoology, Tel Aviv University; National 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


Museum of Natural History, Washington; 
and Zoologisk Museum, Copenhagen. 


Trupanea Schrank 


Trupanea Schrank, 1795: 147. Type-species: Trupanea 
radiata Schrank = Musca stellata (Fuessly). 


The Afrotropical species of this genus 
were revised by Munro (1964), but the 
following species was not included. 


Trupanea xanthochaeta (Munro), new combination 


Terellia xanthochaeta Munro, 1929: 8, Pl. 1, fig. 3. 
“‘Terellia’’ xanthochaeta, Munro, 1967: 16. 


I have examined several of the para- 
types and a few other specimens from 
South West Africa, the only country from 
which this species is known. From the 
original description the species can easily 
be placed in Trupanea (note the presence 
of only two scutellar bristles). However, 
the anterior lower fronto-orbital bristle 
is whitish and lanceolate, usually differing 
from the remaining darker and acuminate 
lower orbitals. In typical Trupanea the 
lower fronto-orbital bristles are con- 
colorous. The shape of the head (fig. 17) 
and of the 9th tergum of male (fig. 20) 
are also somewhat different from those of 
other species. In all other respects, 
including the aedeagus and its spine 
(fig. 22), the species fits the concept of 
Trupanea. 

Among the studied material were PSPS: 
plus associated flower head and puparia, 
collected. by H. K. Munro (Kachikau, 
Bechuanaland, 25.V.1954). According to 
Munro (in litt.) these flies were swarming 
on the plant, Pluchea leubniziae (Com- 
positae). The flower head contains 5 
empty puparia, which are shiny black and 
with distinct stripes of spicules. Each of 
the anterior spiracles has 3 papillae. Other 
material studied: Kamanyab and Kaross, 
S.W.A. (462 paratypes); Letaba KNP. 
S. Afr., 31.X.1950, H. K. Munro (452) 
(deposited in Plant Protection Research 
Institute, Pretoria). 


Acknowledgments 


I am greatly indebted to the following 
persons and their respective institutions 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


for lending specimens for this study: 
Dr. H. K. Munro, Plant Protection 
Research Institute, Pretoria, for providing 
most of the South African specimens and 
also all the host records; Mr. Brian H. 
Cogan, British Museum (Natural History), 
London; Dr. B. Herting, Staatliches 
Museum Fiir Naturkunde, Ludwigsburg; 
Dr. C. Leonardi, Museum Civico Storia 
Naturale, Milan; Prof. J. Kugler, Tel 
Aviv University, Tel Aviv; Dr. R. se 
Foote, % National Museum of Natural 
History, Washington, D. C. I am also 
grateful to Mr. Brian H. Cogan for 
sending a manuscript copy of the Afro- 
tropical catalog, to Dr. C. W. Sabrosky, 
for comments on nomenclature and to 
Drs. R. H. Foote, Wayne N. Mathis and 
F. C. Thompson for critically reading 
the manuscript. 


References Cited 


Becker, T. 1903. Agyptische Dipteren. Mitt. Zool. 
Mus. Berlin 2(3): 67-195. 4 plates. 

_ 1905. Trypetidae, pp 108-145, in: Becker, 
T., M. Bezzi, K. Kertesz and P. Stein. Katalog 
der Paladarktischen Dipteren. Vol. 4: 1-328. 
Budapest. 

Bezzi, M. 1923. Trypaneides d’ Afrique (Dipt.) de la 
collection du Muséum National de Paris. Bull. 
Mus. Nat. d’Hist. Nat. 29: 577-581. 

_1924a. South African Trypaneid Diptera in 

the collection of the South African Museum. Ann. 

S. Afr. Mus. 19: 449-577. Plates 12-15. 

_ 1924b. Further notes on the Ethiopian 
fruit-flies, with keys to all the known genera and 
species. Bull. Entomol. Res. 15: 73-118. 

Efflatoun, H. C. 1924. A monograph of Egyptian 
Diptera (Part II. Fam. Trypaneidae). Mém. Soc. 
Roy. Entomol. D’Egypt. Vol. 2, fasc. 2, pp 1-132. 
5 plates. Cairo. 

_ 1925. Descriptions of the larvae and pupae 

of Schistopterum moebiusi Beck. and Terellia 

planiscutellata Beck. (Diptera, Trypaneidae). 

Bull. Soc. Roy. Entomol. D’Egypt 9: 62-75. 

2 plates. 

_ 1927. On the morphology of some Egyptian 
Trypaneid larvae (Diptera) with descriptions of 
some hitherto unknown forms. Bull. Soc. Roy. 
Entomol. D’Egypt 11: 17-50. 8 plates. 

Hendel, F. 1927. Trypetidae (Fam.) 49, pp 1-221, 
17 plates. in: Lindner E., ed., Die Fliegen der 
Palaearktischen Region. Stuttgart. 

_ 1931. Natchtrag zu den Palaearktischen 
Trypeptiden (Neue aegyptische Arten von Prof. 
Efflatoun Bey gesammelt). Bull. Soc. Roy. Ento- 
mol. D’Egypt 15: 1-12. 1 plate. 

Kugler, J., and A. Freidberg. 1975. A list of the 
fruit-flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) of Israel and 


173 


nearby areas, their host plants and distribution. 
Israel J. Entomol. 10: 51-72. 

Munro, H. K. 1929. Additional trypetid material 
in the collection of the South African Museum 
(Trypetidae, Diptera). Ann. S. Afr. Mus. 29: 1-39. 

. 1947. African Trypetidae (Diptera). Mem. 

Entomol. Soc. S. Afr. 1: 1—284. 321 figures. 

. 1955. The influence of two Italian ento- 

mologists on the study of African Diptera and 

comments on the geographical distribution of 
some African Trypetidae. Boll. Lab. Zool. Gen. 

Agr. ‘‘Filippo Silvestri’’ portici 33: 410-426. 

1956. Diptera Trypetidae (CIV). Ann. 

Mus. Congo Tervuren, in 8°, Zool. 51: 462—474. 

. 1964. The genus Trupanea in Africa. Dept. 


Agr. Tech. Serv. Repub. S. Afr. Entomol. Mem. 

8: 1-101. 313 figures. 

. 1966. Fruitflies collected by Dr. Erwin 

Lindner in East and South Africa (Trypetidae, 

Diptera). Stuttgarter Beitr. Naturk. 157: 1-7. 

. 1967. Trypetidae (fruitflies) of South West 
Africa with the description of a new genus and 
species (Xenodorella mira gen. et sp. nov.). 
Cimbebasia 22: 3-23. 

Robineau-Desvoidy, J. B. 1830. Essai sur les 
Myodaires. Mém. l’Acad. Sci. l’Inst. France 
2: 1-813. 

Schrank, F. von P. 1795. Naturhistorische und 
Okonomische Briefe tiber das Donaumoor. 211 
pp. 1 plate. Mannheim. 


A Review of the Neotropical Genus Neotaracia Foote 


(Diptera: Tephritidae) 


Richard H. Foote 


Research Entomologist, Systematic Entomology Laboratory, LIBIIL, Sci. & Educ. 
Admin., U. S. Department of Agriculture. Mail address: % U.S. National 
Museum NHB 168, Washington, D. C. 20560 


ABSTRACT 


The neotropical tephritid genus Neotaracia Foote is reviewed. Two previously 
described species, Neotaracia imox (Bates) and N. plaumanni (Hering) (n. comb.), 
are redescribed, and their taxonomic characters are compared with a third species, 
unimacula, which is described as new. A key to species, a review of the literature, and 
illustrations of the critical taxonomic characters are included. No information is avail- 
able concerning the biology of the 3 species belonging to this genus. 


Among specimens of Tephritidae cur- 
rently present in the U. S. National 
Museum, two closely related but distinc- 
tive species of Tephritinae, originally 
described in the genus Acrotaenia Loew, 
are represented. Earlier (Foote 1978) I 
designated one of these species, imox 
Bates, the type-species of a new genus 
Neotaracia, which closely resembles 
Acrotaenia in many respects but differs 
from that genus mainly in wing pattern. 
The other species represented in the 
collection is plaumanni Hering, collected 
mostly at Nova Teutonia from 1950 to 
1977 by F. Plaumann, which is trans- 


174 


ferred to Neotaracia in the present paper. 
The discovery of a third species from 
Mexico and San Salvador, described here 
as new, prompted me to undertake the 
present review. 


Genus Neotaracia Foote 


Neotaracia Foote 1978: 31. Type-species, Acro- 
taenia imox Bates. 


Diagnosis.—Frons bare, 3 pairs lower fronto- 
orbitals, 2 pairs upper fronto-orbitals, the pos- 
terior pair light colored; all setae in postocular 
row light colored; broad, rounded facial carina 
present; 1 pair dorsocentrals, situated on or 
directly behind transverse suture; notopleurals 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


| 


q 


unicolorous; 2 pairs scutellars, posterior pair 
less than 0.5 times as long as anterior pair; 
wing broad, disk dark with hyaline spots in most 
of the cells; an inverted hyaline triangle usually 
at apex of subcostal cell and always at apex of 
vein R2 + 3, and 2 or 3 narrow hyaline incisions 
into disk from posterior margins of cells RS and AM. 


Discussion.—Neotaracia belongs to 
the tephritine tribe Platensinini, which 
is characterized by having a long-oval 
head and a relatively broad wing. In 
profile the frons meets the face at an 
obtuse angle or is rounded into it at the 
antennal bases without a perceptible 
angle, and the anterior half or third of 
the wing disk is usually marked darker 
than the remainder of the disk; the 
costa usually is bowed prominently be- 
tween the apices of veins Rl and R2 + 3. 

The tribe contains 4 other neotropical 
genera—Acrotaenia Loew, Caenoriata 
Foote, Acrotaeniacantha Hering, and 
Pseudacrotaenia Hendel. Foote (1978) 
discusses means for distinguishing Neo- 
taracia from Acrotaenia and Caeniorata, 
both of which it closely resembles: 


the presence in Neotaracia of uni- 
colorous postoculars, a facial carina, a 
bare frons, light colored posterior upper 
fronto-orbitals, a single pair of dorso- 
centrals, a straight rather than sinuate 
vein R2 + 3, relatively short posterior 
scutellars, and the central position of 
vein r-m relative to the discal cell. 
In Neotaracia the posterior pair of lower 
fronto-orbitals and the anterior pair of 
upper fronto-orbitals are well separated, 
whereas in Acrotaeniacantha and Pseuda- 
crotaenia these bristle pairs are situated 
very close together, and in some species 
the anterior upper fronto-orbitals are 
placed anterior to and between the pos- 
terior lower fronto-orbitals. The wing 
disk of Acrotaeniacantha is filled with 
numerous, very small light or hyaline 
spots, while the discal spots of Pseuda- 
crotaenia are larger, less numerous, 
and have distinct brown borders. 

Virtualiy nothing is known about the 
ecology or host relationships of the 
three species discussed herein. 


Key to the Species of Neotaracia Foote 


1. Inverted hyaline triangle immediately apicad of apex of vein R1 absent, 
replaced by a diagonal, irregular-shaped hyaline spot in the disk of cell R1 
(Fig. 8); 2 hyaline incisions from posterior margins of cells R5 and AM 


etches sere bere unimacula Foote, n. sp. 


Inverted hyaline triangle immediately apicad of apex of vein R1 present and 
about the same size and shape at that at apex of vein R2 + 3; 3 hyaline 
incisions from posterior margins of cells RS and AM .................. Z 


2. Hyaline triangle apicad of apex of vein R1 rarely extending posteriorly across 
vein R2 + 3; cell R3 and discal cell each with at most 1 very small hyaline 
spot; apical half of vein M and basal half of vein CuA bordered with brown 
concolorous with remainder of disk (Fig. 7)..................4. imox (Bates) 

This hyaline triangle usually extending posteriorly across vein R2 + 3; cell 
R3 and discal cell each with 2 or 3 hyaline spots; apical half of vein M and 
basal half of vein CuA bordered with yellow (Fig. 9) .... plaumanni (Hering) 


Neotaracia imox (Bates) 


Acrotaenia imox Bates 1934: 11; fig. 2 (wing). Type- 
locality, Higuito, San Mateo, Costa Rica.— 
Aczél 1949: 268 (in neotropical catalog).— 
Foote 1967: 57.5 (in neotropical catalog). 

Neotaracia imox (Bates): Foote 1978: 31; fig. 7 
(wing) (taxonomic discussion). 


Description.—Similar in size and color to 
unimacula with yellow head and body, abdomen 
brown or marked with a brown pattern dorsally. 
Frons from posterior margin of ocellar triangle to 
ptilinal suture 1.1 times as long as width between 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


eyes at vertex; head and thoracic bristles yellow, 
nearly concolorous with adjacent integument; dor- 
socentrals arising very close to or actually upon 
transverse suture; scutum unmarked except for the 
presence of an indistinct medial scutoscutellar spot; 
postscutellum and metanotum entirely yellow or 
darkened somewhat laterally, the latter without 
a silvery pollinose central area; hyaline incision at 
apex of vein R1 rarely crossing vein R2 + 3; cell 
R3 completely dark centrally (Fig. 7); hyaline spot 
in base of cell R5 small in both sexes; hyaline 
spot in base of cell AM small, rounded; brown 
areas contiguous with apical half of vein M and 
basal half of vein CuA concolorous with rest of disk; 


175 


\\ 
oe ome 


N 
fi 5S RS 
X\ BS 
5 S 
GNIS 
DNV RSS 
CONS 
Sal 4 SS 
AINA 
5A NAV) \SS 
ANNO AACS 
ARR 
UY) 
U ‘if N 


Figs. 1-3, ovipositors, Neotaracia spp.: 1, N. 
imox (Bates); 2, N. unimacula Foote, n.sp. (tip 
broken); 3, N. plaumanni (Hering). 


extension of basal cubital cell 2.3—2.5 times as long 
as its width at base; abdominal tergites usually 
completely brown or with yellow areas antero- 
laterally on each segment; aeaeagus and apodeme 
of fultella as in Fig. 1; ovipositor (Fig. 4) 0.68—0.77 
times as long as sheath. 


Specimens examined.—Holotype, °, 
Higuito, San Mateo, Costa Rica, Pablo 
Schild, col. Additional material. MEX- 
ICO: 1 2, 16, Cacahoatan, Chiapas, 
30. VIII.1961, H. Sanchez R., Steiner 
trap in orange tree (USNM). COSTA 
RICA: 9 22,3 66, 6 ??, Higuito, San 
Mateo, Pablo Schild (USNM); 1 2,1 4, 
Pedregoso, D.L. Rounds (USNM);2 ¢ °, 
Turrialba, 15—19. VII.1965, P. J. Spangler 
(USNM). PANAMA (all USNM): 1 6, 
La Campana, Munoz Grove, 10.1.1939, 
glass traps, J. Zetek No. 4317; 2 22°, 
1 6, La Campana, I-III.1938, J. Zetek 
No. 4104; 3 66, El Cermeno, X.1939, 


176 


1.1940, fly trap, J. Zetek No. 4621; 1 9, 
Colon, 1. VIII.1946, N. L. H. Krauss No. | 
823;5 92,3 36, David, X.1959,N.L.H. | 
Krauss, 3 22,1 46, XII.1946, N. L. H. 
Krauss No. 999. CANAL ZONE: 1 2, | 
Ancon, 30.XII.1932, J. Zetek; Barro 
Colorado I., 1 2, X.1942, J. Zetek No. | 
5030, 2 66, 4.V.1942, J. Zetek No. 
4952. COLOMBIA: 2 22, 16, Villa- | 
vicencio, VI.1976, O. Jiminez, McPhail | 
trap (USNM). ECUADOR: 1 2, Napo, | 
Limoncocha, 11.VI.1977, D. L. Vincent — 
(USNM). ‘““WEST INDIES”: 1 2, E. F. 
Becher, 1907-173 (BMNH). TRINI- 
DAD: 2??, St. Augustine, X.1958, 
F. D. Bennett, CIE Coll. No. 16930, 


& ve 
: oo 


Figs. 4-6, aedeagi (a) and apodemes of fultella 
(b) of Neotaracia spp.: 4, N. imox (Bates); 5, 
N. unimacula Foote, n. sp.; 6, N. plaumanni 
(Hering). 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


ex inflorescence Synedvella nod. fluva 
[sic] (BMNH); St. Augustine, 5 °°, 
Bo 6, o—12.1.1959 (CNC); 4 292: 1 6, 
1.1959 (CNC); 1 ?, X.1959 (CNC); 1 6, 
ps9 ENC): 1 235% mi: s. San 
Fernando, 24.X.1931, Kisliuk and Coo- 
ley No. 231, on leaf sapodilla (USNM); 
1 3, Port of Spain, nr. Imperial College, 
12.X1.1956, fruit fly trap (USNM). 
VENEZUELA: 1 ??, Carabobo, Valle 
Seco, 1.1940, P. Anduze (USNM); 3 @ 2, 
1d, Guanare, est. Portuguesa, 10- 
13.1X.1957, Borys Malkin (CNC); 1 °°, 
San Esteban, X1.939, P. Anduze (USNM). 


Discussion.—The wing patterns of 
both imox and unimacula contrast with 
that of plaumanni in having fewer and 
smaller hyaline markings, causing them 
to appear somewhat darker. In contrast 
to unimacula, which imox resembles 
closely, the wing of imox possesses 2 
distinct inverted hyaline triangles, one 
immediately apicad of the apex of vein 
R1 and another about the same size and 
shape at the apex of vein R2 + 3 (see 
description and discussion of unimacula). 

N. imox is the most widely spread of 
the 3 species discussed here, occurring 
from Chiapas, Mexico south to Colombia 
and Ecuador and east to Trinidad and 
Venezuela. It has been collected from 
McPhail traps on a number of occasions 
in Panama, the Canal Zone, and Trini- 
dad. Two specimens from Trinidad seen 
in this study were reared from the in- 
florescence of the composite Syndrella 
nodiflora, and the species has been found 
resting on sapodilla and citrus leaves. 


Neotaracia unimacula Foote, new species 


Description.—Similar to imox with yellow head 
and thorax but with nearly unmarked yellow 
abdomen; frons from posterior margin of ocellar 
triangle to ptilinal suture equal to width between 
eyes at vertex; head and thoracic bristles yel- 
low, very nearly concolorous with adjacent integu- 
ment; dorsocentrals arising immediately posterior 
to transverse suture; scutum anterior to acrostichals 
with 3 very faint yellow longitudinal fasciae visible 
only when viewed from behind; no dark scuto- 
scutellar mark present; postscutellum with a pair of 
very light brown triangular marks ventrolaterally; 
metanotum somewhat darker yellow than scutellum 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


Figs. 7-9, right wings of Neotaracia spp.: 7, 
N. imox (Bates); 8, N. unimacula Foote, n. sp.; 
9, N. plaumanni (Hering). 


and postscutellum, otherwise unmarked; triangular 
hyaline mark at apex of vein R1 absent, replaced 
in disk of cell R1 by a small, irregularly shaped 
diagonal hyaline spot not touching costa or veins 
R1 or R2 + 3 (Fig. 8); cell R3 with 2 or 3 very 
small rounded hyaline spots; hyaline spot at base of 
cell RS small, all the hyaline areas in cells R and R5 
with brown borders darker than in adjacent wing 
disk; hyaline spot in base of cell AM transversely 
elongate, sometimes nearly contiguous across vein 
RS with a transverse spot in cell R3; brown areas 
contiguous with apical half of vein M and basal 
half of vein CuA concolorous with rest of disk; 
extension of basal cubital cell about 2.0 times as 
long as wide; abdominal tergites of both sexes 
yellow, concolorous with metanotum, unmarked 
with darker brown but darker apically and basally 
than centrally; ovipositor (Fig. 2) about as long as 
ovipositor sheath (tip broken); aedeagus and apo- 
deme of fultella as in Fig. Sa, b. 


Specimens examined.—Holotype, °, 
San Salvador, El Salvador, 19.V.1958, 


177 


O. L. Cartwright (USNM Type No. 
76061). Paratypes: 1 6, same data as 
holotype (USNM); 1 2, Fortin de las 
Flores, Sumidero, Vera Cruz, Mexico, 
planta de la cerveceria, D. Rabago Res., 
2-—3,000 ft., H. V. Weems, Jr. (UF). 


Discussion.—The wing pattern of uni- 
macula resembles that of imox in having 
fewer and smaller hyaline markings than 
that of plaumanni (cf. Figs. 7-9). The 
new species may be immediately recog- 
nized among the 3 species of Neotaracia 
by the absence of a distinct inverted 
hyaline triangle immediately apicad of the 
apex of vein R1. This triangle is replaced 
by a small irregularly shaped hyaline 
spot in the middle of the field of cell 
R1 posterior to the apex of the subcostal 
cell. Unlike imox and plaumanni, a very 
small yellowish or hyaline incision is 
usually present subapically on the costa 
in cell Rl, and there are only 2 hyaline 
incisions in the posterior apical quarter 
of the wing disk. See the description 
of each species for additional differentiat- 
ing characters. 

N. unimacula has been found only 
in the Mexican state of Vera Cruz and 
in San Salvador, El Salvador, Central 
America. No information is available 
concerning the habits, life history, or 
host relationships of this species. 


Etymology.—The name unimacula 
signifies the presence of only one promi- 
nent inverted hyaline triangle on the 
anterior costal margin of the wing 
pattern. 


Neotaracia plaumanni (Hering), new combination 


Acrotaenia plaumanni Hering 1938: 188, fig. 2 
(wing). Type-locality, Nova Teutonia, Santa 
Catarina, Brazil.— Aczél 1949: 269 (in neotropi- 
cal catalog).— Foote 1967: 57.6 (in neotropical 
catalog). 


Description.—Frons from posterior margin of 
ocellar triangle to ptilinal suture 0.9 times as long 
as width between eyes at vertex; head and thoracic 
bristles distinctly browner than adjacent yellow- 
ish integument; dorsocentral arising close to, 
but distinctly posterior to, transverse suture; 
scutum with a narrow, indistinctly margined 
median vitta; no scutoscutellar mark present; 


178 


central third of postscutellum silvery pollinose, 9 


this segment darkened laterally; metanotum en- 
tirely dark; inverted hyaline triangle immediately 
apicad of apex of vein R1 often extending pos- © 
teriorly across vein R2 + 3 into cell R3, latter 
with at least 3 small spots centrally (Fig. 3); 
hyaline spot in basal half of cell RS small in | 
females but occupying more than half the length © 
of cell in males; hyaline spot in base of cell 
AM more or less elongate in parallel with vein © 
dm-cu; apical half of vein M and basal half of 
vein CuA bordered narrowly with yellow in 
contrast to surrounding brown color of disk; ex- | 
tension of basal cubital cell 3.5—4.0 times as long 
as its width at base; abdominal tergites 3-6 
brown or brown and yellow, with a distinct | 
yellow transverse band at apex of each tergite; 
aedeagus and apodeme of fultella as in Fig. 6a, 
b; ovipositor (Fig. 3) about 0.77—0.82 times as 
long as sheath. 


Specimens examined.— ARGENTINA: 
266, 322, 2 22,.Misioneswaicc 
F. & M. Edwards, BM 1927-63, Bomp- ~ 
land, 13-—14.1. 1927 (BMNH). BRAZIL: 
Barueri, K. Lenko, 1 2, 19.1X.1965, 
146, XII, 1962 (MZSP); 1 2, Iguacu 
Falls, 11.XI.1970, J. Sedlacek (Bish); 
Nova Teutonia (some of following speci- 
mens labeled 27°11', 52°23’, 2—300 m., F. 
Plaumann): 1 3d, 12, 4.1X.1950; 1 9, 
19.V.1957; 3 66, 6.1.1959; 1 9, 6.111959; 
1-9, 10.11.1959; 1 6, Ses 
22.X%.1959; 16, 14X10. 1959 sites 
XIT. 1959; 1.6, 5.1V.1960:7 Pi oeeaey 
1960; 1 36, 20.XII.1961; 1 d, 19.X.1962; 
1.2; 25.X.1962; 1 6.30.5 19G2eaae oe 
Ld, V.1963;.2 92.0 DXeieeee ee 
X.1963; 19; IX.1964:> Pig ao oeiSGs: 
1 6, X1.1963;2 2 2,1.1965;1 3, 11.1965; 
1 9, IV.1965; 3.2.2... 1. 6) SG aries 
XII.1965; 2 292, 1.1966; 1.9 xe 1966; 
1 2, X.1966; 3 9°, 1 dpe 
1 2, 16, 1 ?,, X1L.1970:22 eo 
222, 11.1971; 1-2, Vien 
2366, X.1971; 3 9 Os 2c iets 
1.2, 1L.1972:1 9, 1V.1975: 1 oa ere: 
1 ¢@, 1.1977 (CNC, FNMH, MZSP, 
UCR, USNM). . 


Discussion.—In comparison with the 
2 foregoing species, plaumanni is dis- 
tinctive in that the hyaline spots in the 
wing disk are larger and more numerous 
(cf. Figs. 7-9), a feature especially evi- 
dent when seen with the naked eye. Al- 
though this species resembles imox in 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


. 


having 2 inverted hyaline triangles on 
the anterior margin of the costa as 
described, it may be distinguished easily 
from both imox and unimacula by the 
narrow yellow margins along the apical 
half of vein M and the basal half of vein 
CuA which contrasts with the widespread 
brown color of the wing disk. Other 
differences are set forth in the descrip- 
tions of the 3 species. 

N. plaumanni is apparently restricted 
to those parts of Brazil and extreme 
eastern Argentina that lie between 23 and 
28° S. Lat. Most of the specimens seen 
in this study were collected from Nova 
Teutonia in the state of Santa Catarina, 
Brazil, where the species must be ex- 
tremely common. However, no informa- 
tion is available concerning its life his- 
tory or host associations. 


Acknowledgments 


I hereby extend my appreciation to 
G. C. Steyskal, F. L. Blanc, and R. E. 
White, who read and made valuable 
comments on this manuscript. Brian 
Cogan, British Museum (Natural His- 
tory), corrected some host data asso- 
ciated with specimens. Ms. Laurine 
Van Wie mounted genitalia and made 
extensive basic measurements to facili- 
tate the research. The wing figures were 
drawn by Linda H. Lawrence. The 
following individuals made study mate- 
rial available to me (initials of institu- 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


tions indicate depositories to which spec- 
imens have been returned): Paul H. 
Arnaud, Jr., California Academy of Sci- 
ences, San Francisco (CAS); Brian Co- 
gan, British Museum (Natural History), 
London, England (BMNH); Henry S. 
Dybas, Field Museum of Natural His- 
tory, Chicago, Illinois (FMNH); Saul 
Frommer, University of California, River- 
side (UCR); J. F. McAlpine, Agricul- 
ture Canada, Ottawa (CNC); Nelson 
Papavero, Museum of Zoology, Univer- 
sity of Sao Paulo, Brazil (MZSP); Jose 
Tenorio, Bishop Museum, Honolulu, 
Hawaii (Bish); and Howard V. Weems, 
Jr., University of Florida, Gainesville 
(UF). Specimens deposited in the U. S. 
National Museum, Washington, D. C. 
are designated (USNM). 


References Cited 


Aczél, M. 1949. Catalogo de la familia ‘*Trypeti- 
dae’’ (Diptera) de la region Neotropical. Acta 
Zool. Lilloana 7: 177-328. 

Bates, M. 1934. Notes on American Trypetidae 
(Diptera). IV. Acrotaenia and similar genera. 
Rev. Entomol. 4: 7-17, figs. 1-6. 

Foote, R. H. 1967. 57. Family Tephritidae, pp. 
57.1-57.91. In Vanzolini, M., and Papavero, 
N. (eds.), A catalog of the Diptera of the 
Americas south of the United States. Dep. 
Zool., Secr. Agric., Sao Paulo, Brazil. 

. 1978. New genera and species of neo- 
tropical Tephritidae (Diptera). J. Washington 
Acad. Sci. 68: 27-32, figs. 1-7. 

Hering, M. 1938. Neue Bohrfliegen aus Brasilien 
(Dipt.). Rev. Entomol. 8: 187-196, figs. 1-8. 


179 


ACADEMY AFFAIRS 


MEETING NOTES—BOARD OF MANAGERS 


638th Meeting — May 22, 1979 


The 638th Meeting of the Board of 
Managers of the Washington Academy 
of Sciences was called to order by the 
President, Alfred Weissler at 8:05 P.M. 


1. Minutes of Last Meeting: The follow- 
ing corrections were made to the minutes: 
a. The minutes of the 636th meeting 
should read that our securities consist of 
the Bond Fund of America and the 
Massachusetts Investors Trusts Bond 
Fund. b. It was noted that the Treasurer’s 
Report is not correct. This report will be 
discussed under Jreasurer’s Report. The 
minutes were accepted with this correc- 
tion and comment. 


2. Announcements: G. Vila will be the 
Meetings Chairman for the 1979-1980 
season. Committee chairmen were desig- 
nated for the 1979-1980 season. The list 
of committees and chairmen are given in 
Attachment 1. 


3. Report of the Treasurer: The report 
of the Auditing Committee was pre- 
sented. The books of the Treasurer were 
found to be in good order. 

A statement of capital assets and 
projected cash flow and expense flow was 
submitted. There was considerable dis- 
cussion about the uncertainties in the last 
two items that would arise as a result of 
our changing our secretarial operations. 
This discussion culminated in a motion 
by Cook (seconded by Aldridge). 

The Executive Committee is to be 
empowered to survey our financial situa- 
tion through the summer and to decide 
whether we should sell our securities or 
borrow as needed up to $3000 to meet 
expenses. 


180 


The motion carried with only one 
opposing vote. 
There were two suggestions to improve 
our cash flow: 
1. Request remission of dues during the 
summer rather than fall, and 
2. Solicit Life Memberships. There was 
no action on these suggestions. 


4. Standing Committees: 

V. Meetings (Vila): | 

The planning for the Fall program wiil 
begin in August. Help would be ap- 
preciated. 

There was a discussion of the possi- 
bility of reinstituting the Christmas 
lectures. However, it was felt that sucha 
program would interfere with Junior 
Academy programs before and after 
Christmas. 

VII. Grants-in-aid for Research: 

Betty Jane Long will be contacted to 
determine how money is obtained from 
AAAS for these grants. 

VIII. Encouragement on Science Talent: 

192 attended the banquet on 21 May 
1979. The bulletin contained errors which 
were very embarrassing. Obviously, 
there had been inadequate proofreading. 

IX. Public Information: 

H. M. Parsons was appointed the new 
chairman. 


5. Report of the Joint Board on Science 
Education: James W. Harr will be the 
new chairman. 


6. Unfinished Business: Letters from and 
to the National Graduate University are 
attached. It was noted that the 5-year 
period mentioned in Attachment 3-1 
should end 31 May 1984. 

No furniture may be sold. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


| 7. New Business: O’ Hare will establish a 

| committee to reexamine our publications 

| policies. Sherlin will review and clarify 
our policies on Life Members. 


The meeting was adjourned at 10:21 P.M. 


Respectfully submitted, 
James F. Goff, Secretary 


_ Attachment 1: 


Committee Chairmen 


1979-1980 

RMT NN coe eo efor lc in sic o's 6 8 CSRS NE he. Dr. Alfred Weissler 
BETO? Sn A er ear RS AR cua petetare ies, coset einem Mr. George J. Vila 
GRILLES on Oe a brs oa or a Dr. Mary H. Aldridge 

See icoavracement of Science Talent: 0.0... 0500. 0.0...0 0045 Mrs. Elaine F. Shafrin 
Mercreculaucarion (JBSEE eos. elo. BRO. OR a eos Mr. Grover C. Sherlin 
EEC! 255.5 4 Ae ted Sek es nee are es Se Mr. Charles Rader 
Glee EMOTNCETING, & SOCIELY? 0.100008. ee. oe OE Mr. George Abraham 


Attachment 2: 


May 4, 1979 

Dr. Mary Aldridge 

President 

Washington Academy of Sciences 
608 H Street, S.W. 

Washington, D. C. 20024 


Dear Dr. Aldridge: 


In response to the request for use of space 
at National Graduate University for its 
offices, I am pleased to inform you that 
National Graduate University is willing 
to permit the Washington Academy of 
Sciences to utilize Suite 321 consisting of 
three offices, and a secretarial area on the 
third floor of its Old Dominion Building at 
1101 North Highland Street, Arlington, 
Virginia. In addition, the Academy is 
permitted to use a conference room for 
its monthly Board or other meetings by 
arrangement. This space consists of three 
offices with outside windows with ap- 
proximately 648 square feet. The building 
is about 100 yards from the Clarendon- 
National Graduate University Metro 
station which is scheduled to open in 
November of this year. Thus, it will soon 
be just a few minutes from downtown 
Washington by Metro. Keys to the front 
door of the building and to Suite 321 will 
be provided authorized representatives 
of the Academy. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


| Special Committee on Journal and Publications Policies:....... Dr. John J. O’ Hare 


This agreement is for the five-year period 
beginning June 1, 1979 through May 31, 
1983 with its conditions subject to mutual 
review at the end of two years. 


The Washington Academy of Sciences 
hereby agrees the University is not 
responsible for Academy property or 
persons and will therefore carry its own 
insurance for fire, theft, vandalism, 
damage and liability. 


For information of persons who will be 
using the space, the phone number of the 
resident caretaker is 243-3769. 


Sincerely yours, 


(signed) Walter E. Boek, Ph.D. 
President, National Graduate University 


639th Meeting —Sept. 18, 1979 


The 639th Meeting of the Board of 
Managers of the Washington Academy 
of Sciences was called to order by the 
President, Alfred Weissler at 8:00 pm. 


1. Minutes of Last Meeting: The minutes 
were accepted as corrected. 


2. Announcements: There was a good 
response to the request for early payment 
of dues. 

The Nominating committee has been 
appointed (Attachment 1). 


181 


R. Foote has resigned as Editor. The 
Ad Hoc committee on Publications has 
been asked to consider successors. 

Additional Committee Chairmanships 
are listed in Attachment 2. These chair- 
men were accepted by the Board. 


3. Report of the Secretary: The secretarial 
service is not functioning well. It was 
suggested that a representative of the 
service attend future Board meetings for 
instructional purposes. 


4. Report of the Treasurer: The Treas- 
urer’s report was presented. The total 
indebtedness of the Academy is approxi- 
mately $16,000. Therefore Mr. Rupp 
moved: 
‘*The Board-of-Managers approves the 
sale of sufficient bonds to raise 
$16,000 for the retirement of this debt 
as soon as possible’. 
Seconded and approved. 
The Treasurer’s report was accepted 
subject to audit. 


5. Report of the Standing Committees: 

a. EXECUTIVE 

The committee met 28 August 1979. 
The two orders of business were the 
program for this season and discussion of 
finances. 

b. MEMBERSHIP (Buras) 

Applications for two Members and 
nominations for six Fellows have been 
received. There have been problems in 
processing these forms because of the 
change in the secretarial service. These 
problems will be solved shortly. 

c. MEETINGS (Vila) 

The tentative program was presented. 

d. ENCOURAGEMENT OF SCIENCE 
TALENT (Shafrin) 

The membership of the Jr. Academy 
declined several years ago as a result of 
elimination of science fairs in several 
jurisdictions, and bussing which prevents 
afterschool clubs. There are now only 
200 members. 

It was moved that the programs of 
awards banquet be reprinted without 
errors for the distribution to the attendees. 
Motion accepted. 


182 


On Friday, 9 May 1980 at 0830 hours, 


the American Institute of Aeronautics 


and Astronautics will give the Jr. Academy — 


a special tour of its displays at the New 


Convention Center in Baltimore. At 1100 © 
hours Saturday and Sunday the displays © 


will be open to the public for a small fee. 


e. PUBLIC INFORMATION (Parsons) : 
Plans are being made to publicize — 


meetings through delegate newsletters. 


6. Report of Special Committees: a. | 
POLICY FOR ACADEMY PUBLICA- | 


TIONS (O’ Hare) 
The committee consists of: 
Dr. John J. O'Hare, Chairman 
Dr. Rita R. Colwell 
Dr. William M. Benson 
Mr. LaVerne S. Birks 
Dr. James H. Howard, Jr. 
There was no further report. 


7. Report of the Editor (Foote): Lancaster 
Press will publish the last three issues 
for this year. 

At Your Service is to coordinate with 
the Press to bring out the Membership 
issue. 

The future of the journal (beginning 
1980) should be considered because it 
causes financial problems. The Editor 
should be in close contact with the 
budget. 


8. Report from Joint Board on Science 
Education (Sherlin): The Joint Board will 
be recruiting people to serve on it in the 
future. The composition of the JBSEE is 
given in Attachment 5. 


9. Unfinished Business (Honig): We need 
standing operative procedures for each 
committee and officer. The Action Policy 
Planning Committee (Honig) will prepare 
them. 


10. New Business: — 

Moved that: 

a. Standing Rules be reprinted in the 
annual organizational guide. 

b. By-laws (with revisions) be reprinted 
in the directory issue of the Journal. 

Accepted. 

Policy Planning Committee (Honig) 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


§ should consider effect of amending the 
| By-laws so that a former member could 
join without penalty under certain con- 
ditions. 


| The next Board meeting will be Thurs- 
| day, October 11, 1979 at 1630 hours 
‘before the program. At Your Service 
| should attend. 


| The meeting was adjourned at 2234 
| hours. 


Respectfully submitted, 
James F. Goff, Secretary 


| Attachment 2: 


Membership 
- Policy Planning 
| Ways and Means 
_ Awards for Scientific Achievement 
_ Grants-in-Aid 
~ Public Information 
By-laws and Board Rules 
Auditing 


640th Meeting — October 11, 1979 


The 640th Meeting of the Board of 
Managers of the Washington Academy of 
Sciences was called to order by the 
President Alfred Weissler at 4:40 P.M. 

The minutes were accepted as cor- 
rected. 


1. Minutes of the Last Meeting: Correc- 
tion: L. Wood should read as C. Wood. 


2. Announcements: The National Acad- 
emy of Sciences has published a bro- 
chure which lists the addresses and 
officers of the Academies of Science of 
the United States. This brochure is 
on file. 

The Academy organization brochure is 
still being compiled. 


3. Report of the Treasurer: The Treas- 
urer was absent. However, it was 
reported by the President that authoriza- 
tion has been sent to the Bond Fund of 
America authorizing them to sell $16,000 
of our bonds. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


Attachment |: 


Nominating Committee: 

Dr. Mary H. Aldridge (Chairman), 
Immediate Past-President 

Dr. Richard H. Foote, Past-President 

Dr. Alphonse F. Forziati, Past- 
President 

Mr. Grover Sherlin, Past-President 

Dr. Kurt Stern, Past-President 

Mrs. Marjorie Townsend, President- 
Elect 

Secretary, Dr. James F. Goff (By-laws, 
Art. 4, Sec. 3) 


Additional Committee Chairmanships 


Mr. Edward M. Buras, Jr. 
Dr. John Honig 

Dr. Kurt Stern 

Dr. Irving Gray 

Mrs. Betty Jane Long 

Dr. Henry M. Parsons 
Dr. Lawrence A. Wood 
Dr. Rita R. Colwell 


It was requested that there be compiled 
a list of those who have paid their dues 
and that there be a second mailing. 


4. Report of the Standing Committees: 

a. MEMBERSHIP (Buras) 

The following were accepted as new 
members: Ms. Marcia S. Smith, Dr. 
Steven Barry Berger, Ms. Lani Hummel 
Raleigh, and Mr. James G. Moore. 

It was suggested that letters of wel- 
come be sent to all new members. 

b. WAYS AND MEANS (Stern) 

The committee will be composed of: 
K. Stern (Chairman), N. Rupp, and 
R. Foote. 

The committee’s preliminary report 
follows: 

e The new secretarial operation should 
be given a full year trial period. 

e A computer service should be found 
which is located in D. C. 

e The fiscal year should be changed to 
correspond to the terms of the officers; 
that is, from summer to summer. 

e The proper investment of the 
Academy funds is being considered. 


183 


c. MEETINGS (Vila) 

e The annual announcement card is 
being planned. 

e Joint meetings are favored. 

e Charges for dinners should continue 
to be collected in advance. 

d. ENCOURAGEMENT OF SCI- 
ENCE TALENT (Shafrin) 

e 27 October 1979 at 1000 hours there 
will be a program at Georgetown Uni- 
versity on Radiological Health. 

e 16-17 November 1979 there will be 
an overnight at the Schmidt Science 
Center (Prince Georges County). 

e 15 December 1979 there will be the 
Christmas colloquium. 

e 11-12 January 1980 there will be a 
symposium. 

e February 1980 there will be a 
Smithsonian Mall Day. 

e March 1980. Date held open for 
possible snow conflicts in January and 
February programs. 

e 19 April 1980 University of D. C. 
meeting proposed. 


Attachment 1: 


Report of Nominating Committee 
Slate of Candidates for 1979-80 


President 

Dr. John Honig 
Mr. George Vila 
Dr. John O’ Hare 


Treasurer 
Mr. A. James Wagner 
Mr. LaVerne S. Birks 


641st Meeting —November 29, 1979 


The 64Ist Meeting of the Board of 
Managers of the Washington Academy of 
Sciences was called to order by the 
President, Alfred Weissler at 8:00 P.M. 


1. Minutes of Last Meeting: In the 
minutes of the 639th meeting, C. Wood 
should read as L. Wood. 

In the minutes of the 640th meeting, 
under announcements, the ‘‘National 


184 


e May Elections. 
The report was accepted. 


5. Report of Special Committees: | 
a. NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE 


officers (Attachment 1). Foote moved } - 


(Shafrin seconded) that the slate be 
accepted. The motion was accepted. | 
e It was moved that ballots be rated | 


} 


by 1, 2, 3 order and that the low rates be | 


was accepted. 


The next meeting of the Board of | 


Managers will be held at the Gillette | 


Research Institute. 


The meeting was adjourned at 1013 


hours. 


Respectfully submitted, 
James F. Goff, Secretary 


Secretary 
Dr. Jean Boek 
Mr. Charles Rader 


Managers-at-Large 
Mr. Grover C. Sherlin 
Mr. Alvin Reiner 

Dr. Joel Fisher 

Dr. Joanne Jackson 
Dr. Zaka I. Slawsky 


Academy of Sciences’? should read 


‘‘National Association of Academies of | 


Sciences. 
The minutes were accepted as cor- 
rected. 


2. Announcements: The mailing list is not 
complete; the following should be 
checked: 


Nina Roscher, Provost 
American University 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


allocated to the higher ones. The motion | 


'Jean Boek, Director 

| Division of Special Studies 

} National Graduate University 
1101 North Highland Street 

| Arlington, Virginia 22201 


| James F. Goff 
| 3405 34th Place, N.W. 
t Washington, D. C. 20016 


| 

i The election ballot is being mailed with 
' the announcement of the next two meet- 
i ings: 3 January 1980 and 29 January 1980. 
F 


The Washington Academy of Sciences 
| organization brochure is still not out. Our 
affiliates here have not been notified. 


_ 3. Report of the Secretary: The National 
’ Association of Academies of Science has 
' requested display material for the AAAS 
| meeting in San Francisco. The secretarial 
_ service should supply. 

The Cosmos Club has been reserved 
for our 15 May meeting. 


4. Report of the Treasurer: The report of 
the Treasurer was given. The second 
dues notice has been mailed. All debts 
are paid. | 

The Treasurer’s report was received 
as read. 


5. Report of the Standing Committees: 
a. EXECUTIVE 
There was no report. 
b. MEMBERSHIP (Buras) 
The following new members were 
accepted: 


Christos A. Kapetanakos 
John Dennis McCurdy 
Dorothy K. Wyatt 
Rosilind L. Gross 


The following new fellows were 
accepted: 


Marlene Cook Morris 

Pearl G. Weissler 

James Stanley Murday 

Guy Saint Clair Hammer, II 

George Julian Vila 

The papers are to be forwarded to the 
Secretarial service. Copies are on file 
with the secretary. Mr. Weissler will send 
a letter to each of those people. 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


c. WAYS AND MEANS (Stern) 

The report of the Committee was 
presented. It was decided to consider 
these recommendations in the Executive 
Committee. In particular, concerning 
Item 6, it was suggested that there should 
be a check as to why only about one- 
half the dues are being collected. The 
report was accepted with deferral of 
action. 

d. MEETINGS (Vila) 

The program schedule was presented. 
The time and place of the 25 January 
1980 meeting has not been decided. The 
20 March 1980 meeting will be held in the 
Copley Lounge of Georgetown Uni- 
versity at 6:30 P.M. The May meeting 
will be 15 May 1980 at the Cosmos Club. 

e. AWARDS FOR SCIENTIFIC 
ACHIEVEMENT (Gray) 

Mr. Gray has transmitted a set of 
letters to the Chairman of the six 
scientific panels. 

f. PUBLIC INFORMATION (Parsons) 

There are 20 newsletters. A notice will 
be promulgated to encourage member- 
ship in the Academy. 


6. Report of Special Committees: 

a. POLICY FOR ACADEMY PUB- 
LICATIONS (O’ Hare) 

There are five candidates for the Editor 
of the Journal. The Board decided that 
the editor should be a local resident. 

b. SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND 
SOCIETY (Abraham) 

It was suggested that tape talks for 
Public Broadcasting might be a means of 
furthering public understanding. It was 
commented that NSF may have an 
interest since it sponsors programs like 
NOVA. Such talks should not be pedantic 
but should be definitive. 

c. NOMINATING COMMITTEE 
(Aldridge) 

The ballot has been mailed. 

d. AUDITING COMMITTEE (Col- 
well) 

There was no report. Secretary should 
be contacted during January. 

Sherlin and Boek will go through files 
at At-Your-Service to check for un- 
known obligations. 


185 


7. Report from Joint Board on Science 
Education (Sherlin): The logistics of 
transporting children to the May meeting 
in Baltimore are being planned. 

It was proposed that each affiliate have 
a delegate on the Joint Board. However, 
no one saw much point. 


8. New Business: A motion was proposed 
that a committee be appointed to prepare 
at an early date, an information sheet 
or brochure for Presidents and Chairmen 
of affiliated organizations which will 


summarize rules of organization ap- sk | 

plicable to said affiliates and their Respectfully submitted, © 

members. This would specifically include James F. Goff, Secretary — 
OBITUARY 


John A. Stevenson 


John A. Stevenson, 89, a research 
scientist for the Agriculture Department 
for more than 50 years, died Tuesday, 
Oct. 30, 1979, in the Sleepy Manor 
Nursing Home in Annandale. He lived on 
Brandy Court in Falls Church. 

Mr. Stevenson retired in 1960 and was 
appointed a collaborator in the Agricul- 
ture Department and for 15 years con- 
tinued his scientific work. For about 35 
years he headed the division of mycology 
and disease survey in Washington and 
later in Beltsville, where he was in charge 
of research on the identification of fungi 
that cause plant diseases. 

Mr. Stevenson wrote more than 100 
scientific articles, including many on 
fungi and plant diseases of the American 
tropics. His scientific and personal merits 
were recognized by other members of his 
profession, who named more than a 
dozen newly discovered fungi in his 
honor. 

He was a charter member and former 


186 


action points relating to their responsi- | 
bilities and benefits as affiliates, and the 


procedures for individual membership 
and elevation to fellowship. 


The motion, proposed by Ed Buras and © 
seconded by Grover Sherlin, was passed © 


unanimously. 


The next Board Meeting will be at 7:30 — 


P.M., January 17, 1980 at the Gillette 
Research Institute. 


The meeting was adjourned at 11:13 { 


president of the Mycological Society of 
America and was president of the 
Botanical Society of Washington in 1957. 
He also served in executive positions of 


the Washington Academy of Sciences» 


and in the American Phytopathological 
Society and was a member of numerous 
other scientific societies in the United 
States and abroad. 

An honorary curator of fungi for the 
Smithsonian Institution, Mr. Stevenson 
presented his mycological library of more 
than 6,000 volumes to the Smithsonian 
in 1976, with the understanding that it 
would remain with the herbarium of 
fungus specimens at Beltsville as part of 
the National Fungus Collection. 

Mr. Stevenson was a Past Master of 
the William R. Singleton Masonic Lodge 
in the District. 

He was born in Woonsocket, S. D., and 
attended high schools in Wisconsin and 
Iowa. In 1912 he received a forestry 
degree from the University of Minnesota. 
He also was trained in plant pathology 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


— 


s 
¥ 


and in ecology and was a naturalist in 
addition to his specialization as a my- 


- cologist. 


After graduation, Mr. Stevenson was a 
plant pathologist in Puerto Rico for 
several years and founded The Journal of 


_ Agriculture, a technical publication still 


issued by the University of Puerto Rico. 
Mr. Stevenson became a pathology 


inspector for the Federal Horticultural 


Board in Washington, D. C., in 1918. 


_ Later, he was in charge of foreign agricul- 


tural explorations until he began working 
as a mycologist in 1927. 

Mr. Stevenson developed the refer- 
ence fungus collections and mycological 
library for the Agriculture Department at 
Beltsville. He also wrote two technical 
books and maintained his interest in 
stamp collecting. 

He leaves his wife of 63 years, 
Katherine T.; three sons, John Jr., 
Robert and Donald; a sister; eight grand- 
children; and four greatgrandchildren. 


CBE Style Manual 


4th edition 


This publication of the Council of Biology Editors is a 
guide for authors, editors, and publishers in the bio- 
logical sciences. It was prepared by a committee of 
the council, with the assistance of scientists, librari- 
ans, editors, and publishers. 


Substantially revised, this new edition contains valu- 
able information on article planning and preparation, 
editorial review of the manuscript, proofreading, and 
indexing. It delineates general style conventions as 
well as style in special fields, abbreviations, sym- 


bols, and word usage and features an annotated 
bibliography and a greatly expanded index. The 
CBE Style Manual should be readily accessible to 
anyone involved in scientific editing, writing, and/or 
publishing. 


265 pages (casebound) .. . $12.00 
Postage and handling included. 


A 10% discount is available for orders of 10 or more 
copies delivered to one address. Make checks/money 


orders payable to “AIBS.” 


All orders must be prepaid. 
American Institute of Biological Sciences 
1401 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22209 


J. WASH. ACAD. SCI., VOL. 69, NO. 4, 1979 


187 


JOURNAL OF THE WASHINGTON ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 


Instructions to Contributors 


General 

_ Type manuscripts on white bond paper 
2ither 8% by 11 or 8 by 10% inches. Double 
space all lines, including those in abstracts, 
tables, legends, quoted matter, acknowledg- 
ments, and references cited. Number pages 
consecutively. Place your name and com- 
plete address in the upper right hand corner 
of the title page. 


Title, Author, and Affiliation 

_ Page | of your manuscript should contain 
only this information and your name and 
address. Choose a concise but complete and 
‘meaningful title. In research papers con- 
‘cerning biological subjects, include an indi- 
‘cation of the order and family of the taxa 
‘discussed. Academic degrees will not nor- 
‘mally be included unless the author so 
specifies. If possible, combine your affilia- 
tion and mailing address (including Zip) so 
that readers can write to you directly. 


Abstract 

Type on a separate sheet at the end of the 
‘manuscript. Make the abstract intelligible 
without reference to the text of the paper. 
Write an informative digest of the significant 
‘content and conclusions, not a mere descrip- 
‘tion. Generally, the abstract should not ex- 
ceed 3% of the text. : 


Footnotes 

_ Use footnotes as sparingly as possible. 
Number text footnotes consecutively with 
Arabic numerals and type them on a sepa- 
‘rate sheet of paper at the end of the manu- 
script. Type table footnotes, if any, below 
each pertinent table on the same page. 


Illustrations and Legends 
— The quality of all original illustrations 
must be high enough to facilitate good offset 
reproduction. They should have ample mar- 
gins and be drawn on heavy stock or 
fastened to stiff cardboard to prevent bend- 
ing. They should be proportioned to column 
(1 x 3) or page (2 x 3) type-dimensions, 
leaving space for legend material. Photo- 


ee ee 


graphs should have a glossy finish. They re- 
produce best when the contrast is fairly 
high. Identify each illustration with number 
and author in light pencil marks on the 
reverse side. Submit all illustrations sepa- 
rately — please do not glue or clip them to 
the pages of the manuscript. 

Do not type or write legends directly on 
the illustrations. Type legends on a separate 
sheet or sheets at the end of the manuscript. 
Indicate where you want illustrations to 
appear in the printed paper by writing the 
figure numbers lightly in the text margins, 
and be sure that each figure is properly re- 
ferenced in the text itself. Original “art” will 
be returned only at the author’s request and 
expense. 


Tables 

Include tables only when the same infor- 
mation cannot be presented economically in 
the text, or when a table presents the data in 
a more meaningful way. Consider preparing 
extremely complicated tabular matter in a 
form suitable for direct reproduction as an 
illustration. In such cases, the use of the 
typewriter is not recommended. 


References to Literature 

Limit references within the text and in 
synonymies to author and year (and page if 
needed). In a “Reference Cited” section, list 
alphabetically by senior author only those 
papers you have included in the text. Like- 
wise, be sure all the text references are 
listed. Type the “References Cited” section 
on a separate sheet after the last page of 
text. Abbreviations should follow the USA 
Standard for Periodical Title Abbreviations, 
Z39.5-1963. 


Submission of Manuscripts 

Send completed manuscripts and sup- 
porting material to the Academy office (see 
address inside front cover) in care of the 
Editor. Authors will be requested to read 
Xerox “proofs” and invited to submit re- 
print orders prior to publication. 


Reprints - Prices for reprints may be obtained on request. 


| 
| 

| 

| 

| 

| 

i] 

| 

Washington Academy of Sciences 2nd Class Postage Paid | 
608 H St. S.W. at Washington, D. C.} 
Washington, D. C. 20024 and additional mailing offices. |} 
Return Requested with Form 3579 
7. 

coP= 0 : 

9967620), eM / TBRARY 

WAS ATIONAL MUSE~ “He 20025 |f 

WASHINGTON 

| 

| 

1 

f 


| 
| 
| 
= os 4S on \f 
¢ » 41 fy 
Og =YV i 1 
| 
| 
| 
i 
| 


eS eee ee ee SO RE eS ea eo tee ae Vea Oe ee te ee ee Se Seen Peal Mane \ WN eee Re eee ee SS Sey es ee TNS ete FF te Fate WS I oi dad ee oe | 


NOILNLILSNI 


NOILNLILSNI 
LIBRARIES 


LIBRARIES 


TUTION NOILNLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS SSIYVYUgIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN 
\Y a 


tT 


» 
~“ 


INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI 


INSTITUTION 
INSTITUTION 
SAluvudiy 


NVINOSHLINS SAJIYVYGITLIBRARIES 


ow 
, a 
> 
a?) 
LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILOLILSNI_ NVINOSHLIWS, S31 uo 
< bk < x = v < 4 Sp 
z Zz = Zz ea yh 
Ss NY S z i = ff) 
pa : SS =< : 5 ts te o W fy y 
Ee wes EE 2, = a 
TUTION Mitek levi NVINOSHLINS _LIBRARI ES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITU 
7 “i Ks + me oa »} 
< c . <x Pm < mm aed 4 
a = a = es rt by 
a) = a = mo. a 
co O om O om 3 sh) 
ea ty Zz J > er > 
JvuYdi1 LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVE 
a 5 a z ° aoe | 
to = rw 2 wo ° “q 
20 a Pe) i ms | 
: F = : = Ra 
o act z a ee. | 
ITUTION , NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3INVYGIT_ LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITU 
2 ines Z = = Ae ae 
NG = $y Z = S =: z 
S Yj, = Zz E se e 
> KG s > = nes = 
Ry ae 7) Zz 7) * aes Vv) 
4VUYGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI 
2 2 2 7 
op) Ee aM axe n pet 
<} < < 
s ox or a er w 
iS) . Ss) 5 Te 
2 a z a 2 = eis ae 
ITUTION | NOILALILSNI_ ~S3!uVUGIT_ LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITU 
2 o ‘ o = GL . 
= - =) “i za LEE a8 | 
= = iy Pf 
= . b ~ Ti 
192) 
F pear a see o z o 7 
ivYaIT_ LIBRARIES) SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILMLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS S31uve 
Be Sie = oh z < z 4 
z = = \. a es H 
2 NA 2 a. § ; 
fs AOA So rt 4 WY oO ae 2) 
es * SN = = AS = ¥ 2 mit . 
= OS = =. = = = ; 
ITUTION NOILMLILSNI_NVINOSHLINS S21YVHYGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN NST 
Ww 7 sab & ; a a Q 
o = ac = ce ao KAM 
< a. < a < ele ye 
c Te b te oie Le ae 


ee 


\ 


a 


RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLIWS 


S 
N 
S 
N 
S! 


SSIYVYesIT LIBR 


” > n pr 
Ww her ae a RNS us an 
a = 0 <1 ny ees - 
<x 5 S < = Was < = 
a “GY S ze 5 Ys 5 
py Fos | a = os 
MLSNI" NVINOSHLIWS S318VYGIT LIBRAR| ES_ SMITHSONIAN” INSTITUTION — 
sh me 4 
: otey Oo <= O 5 . 
4 = ms - YY ® = 
Ee = 2 5 L9G, > > 
| > = Via fi ® K 
4 = a - OF £7 ® us 
m Y) — rsp hes g af —_ 'p 
w eS <. m7 rd m a Po! 
Ber" : { — op) ‘aaa iep) =e 
RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3INvVugt7 LIBR 
ae Ww ww 
= < z f =, 
=4 > = 4 = x 
5 = 5 @&y 3 x 
S ey S Vip 6 x 
z FE Sr 2 : 
S ah oe, >" 
NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYSIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOLES 


NOILALILSNI 
NOILALILSNI 


NOILNLILSNI 


RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI LIBR 


NVINOSHLINS S31NVUSIT 


INSTITUTION 
SJINVUGIT LIBRARIES 
SJIMUVYUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN 


INSTITUTION 
INSTITUTION 


\ 
* 


LNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION | NOILI 


ma 
= 
z= 
Bese 
i“ wn 
pa 
ae 
= 
ep) 
Y) 
uJ 
oO 
< 
ac = 
mM - 
a | 
| ae 
wo 
A 
> 
A 
m 
w) 
2) 
s 
—~+ 
2 
~” 
O 
= 
> 
z= 


= ei Fah oe gg 
<< = < < as 
z = = ra = - 
O SG © ae O iy is 
Oe: gy z s 4 
i * 2 E E 2] 
We > = = ee fei. 
Wy Wn 2 ef ‘ ” oa 
RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS Sa iyvusi1 LIBR 
” ZS — ak goss | 
MASON, iJ iJ 4 uJ wstat 
Dm = < : 2 WN 2 y 3 
<) : : ERX = yz] c 
x = 
mo = oo = & mo Say) = 
ae QO ae oO <5 UD» 
aad = oe] = i ned a 
S3IYVYUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION 
- Zz = Zz , ie = 
w = w ° oo Ss 
3 i = = Se) be 
= =) ; — 
> Ke > = Pd - 
4 es > a KE, en - 
ASNS m NS Y m w m a 
| n hi eS w = Ww = 
i We ohik a INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI_ NVINOSHIINS, S31uVuITTIBR 
¥ = ae! Z < = = J 
SAN 8 Z 2 - 2 8 as 
2 Ba ccc a = 5 


BI OLILSNI Ne 


NSTITY > 
w 


_Saluvual LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOI! 


ARIES 


\LILSNt 
TIT 
ia 
eat 
; 
SOK, 
lay 


\LILSNI 
? 
ARIE 
ELT Py 
ie 
ILILSNI 


S) 
ra) 


SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION LIBRARIES 


DU 


3 9088 01303.2107 


s t<. : 
pes a le oa : 
zoe ‘ : ‘ 
Fee ‘ : Z ‘ 
‘ g ‘ J 
Pe: . é : 
. = : ‘ . me 
ie eas z 
oe F . \ wae 
p ‘ : : 2-% 
2 hy = 
Gani bs 3 : 2? 
P : . 2a28 
. 3 re | 
a Q i