Historic, archived document

Do not assume content reflects current
scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.

D4,

wit ,

=

| 6% BULLETIN Ng.295

Contribution from the Bureau of E ptomology/
L. O. HOWARD, Chie

Washington, D. C. PROFESSIONAL P

THE GRASSHOPPER OUTBREAK IN NEW MEXICO DURE
THE SUMMER OF 1913.1

By HARRISON E. SMITH,

Entomological Assistant, Cereal and Forage Insect Investigations.
INTRODUCTION.

Of the several important grasshopper outbreaks in the United
States during the summer of 1913 that of the so-called long-winged

Fic, 1.—Long-winged grasshopper (Dissosteira longipennis): Adult
female. About one-third enlarged. (Original.)

grasshopper (fig. 1) in the Pecos Valley of New Mexico proved one
of the most interesting. Though more or less important outbreaks
of this grasshopper have been reported heretofore, very little actual
data pertaining to this species appears to have been assembled.

The writer, under the direction of F. M. Webster, in charge of
cereal and forage insect investigations of the Bureau of Entomology,
spent the month of June, 1913, in the field investigating this rather
unusual invasion.

The data are of necessity in certain phases somewhat incomplete
since the investigations were carried on entirely under field condi-
tions, although a very considerable amount of information relative
to this species was obtained and is herein presented.

1The grasshopper discussed in this paper is scientifically known as Dissosteira longi-
pennis Thomas; synonym, Oedipoda nebracensis Bruner.

4070°—15

2 BULLETIN 293, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

HISTORY IN AMERICA.

This long-winged grasshopper was originally described by Cyrus
Thomas in 1872 under the name of Oedipoda longipennis, from a
male specimen, marked “ Kansas,” submitted to him in a collection
from the Agricultural Department. C. V. Riley claims to have col-
lected this species in Colorado on his first trip to that State in 1867.

In 1876 S. H. Scudder proposed a new genus (Dissosteira) for the
reception of Oedipoda longipennis Thom. and Gryllus carolina Linn.,
designating the latter species as the genotype.

In 1875 Philip R. Uhler found this species in small numbers in
the region west of Colorado Springs, Colo.

In 1891 Lawrence Bruner, while upon a general tour of observation
to investigate rumored grasshopper ravages in different parts of the
Western States, stated that the species causing the alarm in Colorado
was “* * * 9 rather rare species, known as D. longipennis, it
occurring at that time over 400 sq. miles of territory in sufficient
numbers to materially injure the grasses growing on the range of
the entire region. Grains and other cultivated plants did not appear
to be especially attractive to it. In fact, very little or no injury
was done by it to the cultivated crops growing within the region
infested.” |

Between July 10 and 19, 1891, the late E. H. Popenoe visited Lin-
coln County, Colo., where grasshoppers of this species were so
numerous as to stop the trains.

In 1892 Kellogg stated that this species was locally hurtful in
Kansas, but that no serious crop destruction was threatened. He
stated further, “* * *. This lecust is a nonmigratory tor,
eccasionally abundant on the plains of eastern Colorado. It some-
times occurs in sufficient numbers in restricted areas to destroy all
vegetation.”

In 1895 Bruner noted this species Out on the plains
away from the foothills and irrigating ditches,” as quite abundant
over a large portion of Colorado and Nebraska. He _ believed
«x * * stony hillsides furnished a suitable place for the increase
of D. longipennis and several other barren-ground species.”

In 1896 Bruner again noted this species abundant in Colorado
and Nebraska, recording it attacking and actually destroying entire
fields of small grains, some corn, potatoes, and a number of garden
plants.

In 1898 this species was occasionally noted in western Kansas by
S. J. Hunter, who stated that in Edwards County this locust. was
abundant in a portion of an alfalfa field of 320 acres. This was first
observed July 6. On September 1 females of this species were
seen ovipositing in this field. It was his opinion that this colony

66 * *

y)

GRASSHOPPER OUTBREAK IN NEW MEXICO. 3)

was bred and reared upon this ground. In the same year he also
recorded: “ On the evening of July 21 the locusts came from the west
down into Colorado Springs in countless numbers.”

In 1900 this insect invaded the town of Las Vegas, N. Mex., in
great numbers and crushed specimens were everywhere seen on the
sidewalks.

In 1904 Bruner wrote, regarding this species, “A native of the
high prairies of western Kansas, Nebraska, eastern Colorado, and
Wyoming; not nearly so abundant as it was five years ago.”

The 1918 outbreak of this species extended over 400 to 500 square
miles, the prairie grasses, grain, and garden crops within this area
being in great part devastated. Herds of cattle usually grazing
within this infested area were forced to travel from 11 to 13 miles
for grazing facilities, and would return to their usual watering
places only at intervals, varying from 24 to 56 hours. Freight and
passenger trains were repeatedly stopped by grasshoppers massing
upon the railroad tracks, this being frequent from the middle of
May until the first of July.

The prairie grasses within the infested area were so completely
ravaged that hardly a surface depression of the soil could be located
which was not from one-fourth to completely filled with grass-
hoppers’ droppings.

DISTRIBUTION.

This species is native to the western United States. Since Thomas
described the species from western Kansas it has been found in
Colorado, Wyoming, Nebraska, Idaho, New Mexico, Texas, and
Oklahoma.

SEASONAL HISTORY.

The eggs of this species in New Mexico evidently commence to
hatch en masse during the first week of May, though a few nymphs
may probably appear during the latter part of April.

Adults were first noted on June 4, and by June 24 the majority of
the grasshoppers were in the adult stage. However, third and
fourth stage nymphs were present in numbers up to the second week
in July.

So far as known, this species has but a single generation per year,
the eggs being deposited during late August and early September.

A MIGRATORY OR NONMIGRATORY SPECIES?

In 1892 Kellogg stated that in Kansas this grasshopper is a non-
migratory species. |

4. BULLETIN 293, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

In 1913, from May 4 to June 24, nymphal droves of this species
traveled in a northeasterly direction some 15 to 18 miles, ravaging
the entire growth of prairie grasses in their path.

The species is gregarious, the early maturing adults remaining
with the nymphal droves until the majority have attained the fully-
winged state.

The adults are readily attracted to lights, having been taken at
Clovis, N. Mex., during June, 1913, about. 25 miles north of Elida,
where the main nymphal droves were located at the time.

In the winged state these insects are very wary and are excep-
tionally strong fliers.

ORIGIN OF OUTBREAK.

This outbreak originated from a tremendous swarm of adults flying
from some unknown point to the north. These settled in the outly-
ing districts of Elida, N. Mex., during the latter part of August and
early September. During one evening, when swarms of this species
were passing over Elida, large numbers of them flew against the
plate-glass window of a brilliantly lighted barber shop. The follow-
ing morning several bushels of dead grasshoppers were heaped on
the sidewalk.

BREEDING GROUNDS.

The breeding grounds on which these swarms settled to deposit
their eggs were in most part in a chain of sandhills running from
about 8 to 10 miles northwest to southwest of Elida. Another con-
siderable swarm settled and deposited eggs in the sandhills 64 miles
southeast of Elida.

On May 4, 1913, at a point 8 miles northwest of Elida, Mr. B. W.
Kinsolving noted the tiny grasshoppers coming out of the sand “by
the million.” Watching this area for a little over a week Mr. Kin-
solving says: “ Tiny hoppers appeared to be coming out of the sand
continually. One evening during a heavy shower certain areas of this
breeding ground were covered at least 6 inches deep with tiny hop-
pers.”

On May 6, 1913, 64 miles southeast of Elida, Mr. Bruce Marsh
noted the tiny grasshoppers issuing from the sand in an area nearly
1 mile square, “the ground over this area appearing like a living
mass of crawling maggots.”

At about the same time the cowboys on the Littlefield ranch, 84
miles southwest of Elida, noted the sand moving up and down over
a great area. When examined they found “countless millions of
tiny hoppers crawling to the surface.”

GRASSHOPPER OUTBREAK ™N NEW MEXICO, ne

Though the major portion of the egg pods were deposited in the
sandhills during the fall of 1912, the writer was informed by several
parties that some of the eggs, at least, were deposited in hard land.
This is very probably true, but at best they constituted a very small
percentage.

METHODS OF TRAVEL.

Grasshoppers of this species appear to have a decided preference
for massing together and traveling over barren areas, such as road-
ways, footpaths, and along railroad, tracks and right of ways.
Over such areas, under favorable weather conditions, immense
droves 1 or 2 miles in length, massed closely together, travel along
at a rapid gait, all generally traveling in the same direction.
Though large droves mass and travel over the prairie proper, the
rate of travel is somewhat less than that of the droves passing over
barren areas.

Grasshoppers in the third nymphal stage travel at the rate of
from 8 to 12 feet per minute; those in the fourth instar from 15 to
20 feet per minute. The rate of travel of nymphs in the first two
instars is proportionally less. Nymphal droves of these grasshop-
pers, under proper weather conditions, travel from 1 to 2 miles a
day.

Adults taking flight during a heavy wind fly with the wind,
though generally facing it during the rise from the ground to the
desired altitude, which usually is from 30 to 40 feet. Adults have
been noted to alight on the surface of water and then easily take
wing therefrom.

WEATHER CONDITIONS.

Weather conditions are a very important factor in the dispersion
of the grasshoppers, at least during that period when. the majority
are in the nymphal stages.

Throughout the month of June, 1913, the aa ine of precipitation
in New Mexico was greatly in excess Be normal.

On dark, cloudy days or during rainy weather the grasshoppers
travel very little. Under such conditions they generally collect be-
neath available shelter, or mass upon the prairie to feed, or slowly
wander around with no apparent object in view. If, however, during
one of these periods the sun breaks through the clouds to shine bril-
lantly for a few moments, every individual becomes active and almost
immediately the entire drove is rapidly moving along its usual course
of travel. The moment the sun disappears travel ceases as promptly
as it began, and the former state of inactivity is soon restored.

-During fair, bright sunny weather travel usually commences early
in the forenoon and continues until the latter part of the afternoon.

6 BULLETIN 293, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

Under high prevailing wind conditions the grasshoppers will seek
the windward side of any available shelter, there to remain until the
wind has ceased or considerably abated. )

FEEDING HABITS.

The major portion of the feeding takes place during the early
morning hours and the last part of the afternoon, although intermit-
tent feeding is indulged in throughout the day. Under favorable
weather conditions the approximate hours of feeding are from day-
Jight until 8 or 9 o’clock in the forenoon, and from 3 to 4 o’clock until
sundown during the afternoon. Apparently little or no feeding
takes place during the night. The foliage may be entirely devoured
or irregular patches cut out from the margin of the leaves. The
stems or stalks may be partly or entirely girdled and cut off.

FOOD PLANTS.

‘Grama grass (Bouteloua oligostachya) , buffalo grass (Bulbilis dac-
tyloides), and mesquite grass (Bouteloua hirsuta) are by preference
the most relished food plants of this species. Fields of maize, kafir
corn, and millet were completely devastated. Millet is in all instances
a most desirable food plant. Mr. Hobson, of Elida, informed the
writer that he noted the grasshoppers massing in 5 acres of millet on
his farm, and in less than 30 minutes every plant had been eaten to
the ground. Sorghum is fed upon to a slight extent, but is seldom
disturbed if other more desirable food plants are readily available.

Truck crops in the infested area were entirely defoliated, including
the following plants: Cultivated mustard, radish, lettuce, squash,
sweet potato, young white potato (old plants seldom disturbed),
tomato, sweet corn, and immature onion plants.

Under certain conditions Russian thistle (Salsola tragus) is read-
ily fed upon, and slight feeding upon soapweed (Chlorogalum pom-
eridianum) has been noted.

Though S. J. Hunter has recorded this species as being abundant
in part of a 320-acre tract of alfalfa in western Kansas during 1898,
nymphs of this species forwarded to the Wellington, Kans., labora-
tory, and confined in a Comstock cage placed over alfalfa plants,
failed to display any desire for feeding upon this plant, the nymphs
ultimately dying from apparent starvation.

PREDACIOUS ENEMIES.

Among the more important bird enemies noted to be feeding upon
grasshoppers during this invasion were the desert horned lark (Oto-
coris alpestris leucolaema), western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta),

GRASSHOPPER OUTBREAK IN NEW MEXICO. y

desert sparrow hawk (Falco sparverius phalaena) , nighthawk (Chor-
deiles virginianus), \killdeer (Oxyechus vociferus), and quail (Coli-
nus virginianus). The results of further investigations in coopera-
tion with the Biological Survey on the destruction of grasshoppers
by birds in New Mexico will be published in another connection.

Several species of lizards, which were very numerous in this local-
ity, fed voraciously upon the nymphs. Oftentimes lizards were noted
so bloated from grasshopper feeding that travel was accomplished
only with great difficulty. Horned toads were also heavy feeders
upon the immature grasshoppers.

While the large droves were passing through the prairie-dog towns
these animals appeared to feed upon the grasshoppers in numbers.

PARASITIC ENEMIES.

A dipteron, Sarcophaga kellyt Ald., was found to be by far the
most important factor in the control of this species, and it was
equally efficient as a parasite upon both the nymphs and adults.

Larviposition by the female of S. kellyi was continually noted
throughout the month of June. The female, as far as observed by
the writer, always chose individuals freshly molted or inactive, but
in an apparently healthy condition.

During the latter part of June the grasshoppers were enormously
reduced in numbers from parasitism by S. kellyi. It was a simple
matter to count 15 or more dead grasshoppers to the square foot over
large areas. The grasshoppers died in such numbers in some lo-
calities that ranchers informed the writer that certain droves were
almost completely destroyed.

On June 16 a female of S. kellyi was noted to deposit tiny mag-
gots on the dorsum of the thorax (pronotum) of a freshly molted
nymph. This nymph was captured as the fiy finished the act. The
fly in question was then noted to rest upon the thorax of a second
- nymph, where it commenced to larviposit. At this time, while in the
act of depositing a maggot, she was captured, and, although badly
crushed, the specimen was not so greatly disfigured but that com-
parison with previously reared specimens proved beyond a question
that all were identical. Careful comparison of this female taken in
the act of larviposition, with another female noted to be larv positing
in the same manner, but not captured while in the act, proved again
that both were the same species.

From the captured nymph above noted six specimens of S. kellyi
were reared.

This was the only female which the writer was able to capture in
the act of depositing the tiny maggots, but it abundantly determined
the method of larviposition utilized by S. kellyt in parasitizing D.

8 BULLETIN 293, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

longipennis. Sarcophagids were continually noted to larviposit on
nymphs left comatose upon the open prairie, after having been stung
by a wasp (Priononyx atrata Lep.). In not a single instance was
it possible to note a sarcophagid endeavoring to strike a moving
nymph or flying adult.

When large numbers of the grasshoppers were molting at approxi-
mately the same time the familiar noise of hundreds of female sar-
cophagids in search of their victim was easily heard. Hot, sunny
weather greatly stimulated the activities of the flies, as well as those
of the grasshoppers, whereas cold, cloudy, or rainy weather invari-
ably checked them.

The female, upon locating a suitable victim, was observed to alight
upon the dorsum of the thorax and quickly deposit several living
maggots, which, encountering only the soft, tender membrane, speed-
ily made their way into the body
cavity of their host. The maggots
are capable, however, of entering a
host which is fully dried out and
hardened, the writer having noted
a female sarcophagid to larviposit
on a grasshopper nymph (fig. 2)
which had been stung by Priononye
atrata and left upon the open prai-
rie beside the partially excavated
Fic, 2.—Long-winged grasshopper: hole of the wasp; the maggots de-

Nymph which had been stung by the : °

wasp Priononyx atrata and on which posited soon entering the host and

the parasitie fly Sarcophaga kellyi the puparia later emerging, to give

Me eine (Glens Avout issuance to adults of S. kellyi.

The number of living maggots
deposited by the female upon an individual host during one period
of larviposition would vary from 1 to 7 or more, although from 3 to
6 appeared to be the more general. The writer has reared individuals
from five puparia of S. kellyi taken from an adult of Dissosteira
carolina captured at Wellington, Kans., on the wing July 9, 1918,
the maggots emerging from the host July 10, As many as 16 mag-
gots have been found in the body cavity of a large nympth of Hzp-
piscus sp. in New Mexico.

The maggots of S. kellyt usually issue from their host just pos-
terior to the anterior coxa. A certain percentage, however, depart
from the host by boring through the abdomen at the segmental
sutures or by passing through the anal orifice. Upon leaving the
host the maggots may enter the soil directly beneath their victim, or
they may crawl several feet away before entering the ground. The
summer generations of S. kellyt pupate from one-half to 2 inches

GRASSHOPPER OUTBREAK IN NEW MEXICO. 9

below the soil surface, but very probably the maggots or puparia of
the hibernating fall generation enter the soil to a much greater depth.

Sarcophaga kellyi is a plural-brooded species, several generations
occurring during the season. At least two and probably three gen-
erations went through to maturity as parasites of D. longipennis
from early May to the middle of July.

The grasshoppers will die from the effects of the parasitism while
in the act of feeding, and thus they are found hanging to a grass
stem, the mandibles firmly attached, in their last dying grasp. The
dead grasshoppers lying on the ground may be full of crawling
maggots still feeding or endeavoring to issue from their host to enter
the soil. When the maggots have emerged from the host only the
shell of the grasshopper remains.

Methods of larviposition much similar to those noted by the writer
have been recorded by Kunkel d’Herculais on Sarcophaga clathrata
Meig. in Algiers during 1893-1905. Apparently the foregoing
writer had only one species of Sarcophaga involved, as was true in
the case of the writer during the present studies.

Second in importance as a controlling factor of D. longipennis
was the preying upon the nymphs by the sphecid wasps Priononyx
atrata Lep.

These wasps were always present in large numbers among the
hoppers. Being very diligent workers, apparently working from
sunrise to sunset during favorable weather conditions, the numbers
of the grasshoppers were greatly depleted from their efforts. Dur-
ing the observations of the writer, however, only nymphs were noted
to be attacked.

In nearly every instance the single nymph placed in each nest is
stung before the excavation is undertaken, but occasionally the bur-
row will be completed before this is done. However, the female
wasps frequently sting several nymphs during the period of con-
structing a single nest, and in one instance, observed by the writer.
as many as five were stung by a single female while excavating an
individual burrow. In this case it was the last nymph stung which
was drawn into the burrow. The nest finished, the Priononyx flew
away, leaving the other four victims lying upon the prairie in a
comatose condition. The nymphs once stung by Priononyx seldom,
if ever, regain consciousness. This habit, naturally, increases the
efficiency of this species. :

Usually the hopper is stung in the abdomen, but stinging in the
venter of the head regions is common. The wasp, approaching the
victim unawares, generally seizes and stings it so quickly that the
grasshopper has little opportunity to offer any effective resistance.
When a nymph is aware of the presence of a Priononyx it will sud-
denly assume the very characteristic protective attitude of defense.

10 BULLETIN 293, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

Crouching close to the ground, it will raise the posterior pair of legs
above the abdomen in the shape of an inverted V, whereupon it will
remain perfectly quiet until the wasp has apparently departed.
Though the Priononyx will occasionally attack a nymph while in this
protective attitude, a severe struggle generally ensues, with ite grass-
hopper ope aS the victor.

A large number of the nymphs which have been stung by Prio-
nonyx and left upon the prairie while she is building the nest are in
the meantime larviposited upon by Sarcophaga kellyi.

The nest is usually built in compact sand. Between railroad tracks |
and along the right of ways are also desirable nesting places. The
excavation of the burrow is commenced by the female rapidly
scratching away the surface with the anterior pair of legs. As the
depth of the burrow increases the head is cooperatively brought into
play with the workings of the anterior legs, when finally the exca-
vation of the burrow is completed by the wasp bringing huge
mouthfuls of the soil to the surface. The burrow is excavated almost
vertically downward to a depth of 14 to 2 inches and about one-
half inch in diameter. The bottom of the burrow is then excavated
in a horizontal direction until a cavity is made sufficiently large con-
veniently to permit of a nymph being placed within it. In drag-
ging the nymph to the burrow the wasp assumes a horizontal posi-
tion astraddle the victim. Seizing the nymph with her mandibles
at the base of the antenne, she drags it venter down to the entrance
of the burrow. Then facing the nymph, still holding it at the base
of the antenna, she backs into the burrow, dragging in the nymph
head foremost behind her. Placing the nymph in the horizontal
cavity at the base of the burrow, venter down, in a horizontal posi-
tion, she deposits a single egg. This egg, white in color, elongate
oval, and somewhat curved, is invariably attached to the tender
membrane at the base of the posterior coxa.

The egg having been deposited, the wasp proceeds to the surface.
Taking a position, back to the burrow, she rapidly scratches the
excavated soil into the hole. From time to time she packs down the
soil with her head, which she uses as a most efficient ramming instru-
. ment. The excavation filled, the wasp carries small sticks, stones,
cinders, and the like—these often much heavier than the wasp her-
self—and places them over the burrow. The time elapsing from the
moment the nest is started until its completion usually varies from
30 minutes to 1 hour.

Though it is virtually impossible for the human eye to locate a
completed Priononyx nest, there is a bembecid wasp, Megastizus
unicinctus Say, a secondary upon Priononyx atrata, which without
the least difficulty locates the Priononyx nest with the greatest exacti-

GRASSHOPPER OUTBREAK IN NEW MEXICO, ig

tude. After Priononyx has completed a nest, a Megastizus will locate
it, reexcavate the burrow, and proceed to destroy the egg deposited
upon the nymph by the sphecid. This egg is apparently destroyed
by the Megastizus crushing it between her mandibles. The Megas-
tizus then deposits upon the nymph an egg of her own.

Megastizus is not particular about refilling the burrow, nor does she
attempt to hide the location of it in any manner, as does the Prio-
nonyx. Oftentimes Megastizus will leave the nest when the burrow is
not more than half refilled with soil. Occasionally the Priononyx
will be driven from her nest by Megastizus while in the act of filling
up her burrow. Neither Priononyx nor her nest, however, were ever
noted to be disturbed by Megastizus until after the prey had been
placed in the burrow.

Megastizus never attempted to sting a grasshopper during the
present observations, but preyed upon Priononyx entire:y, in the role
of a secondary within the sphecid’s nest. Being present in consid-
erable numbers, it most certainly affected the efficiency of Priononyx
to a great extent.

ARTIFICIAL REMEDIES.

The most effective artificial means of exterminating the grasshop-
pers of this species was found in the use of the poisoned bran mash.
This was made as follows: Thoroughly mix together in the dry state
25 pounds of wheat bran and 1 pound of Paris green. Into a sepa-
rate receptacle containing 2 quarts of a cheap molasses or sirup add
the juices and finely ground skin and pulp of three oranges or lemons.
Dilute the molasses mixture in 2 gallons of water and add to the
poisoned bran mixture. Thoroughly mix the two together, adding
enough more water, if necessary, to bring all to a stiff dough. This
amount of poisoned bait will treat from 5 to 10 acres.

The bait should be sown broadcast early in the morning, before
sunrise, in strips 1 rod apart, over the area to be treated. The
most satisfactory method of distributing the bait is to sow it from
the rear end of a buggy.

In using the poisoned bait as above, with lemons as the fruit em-
ployed, tremendous numbers of the grasshoppers were exterminated.
As many as 75 dead grasshoppers per square foot were frequently
found, several days after the application, over large areas. The
grasshoppers usually die from 6 to 80 hours after taking the poisoned
bait into the system.

Coarse-fiaked brans should be used in preference to the fine-flaked
varieties. Only those brands of Paris green which are guaranteed
to contain not less than 55 per cent of arsenic should be employed.
Arsenate of lead should not be used in any form. There have ex-

4

1G BULLETIN 293, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

isted some differences of opinion as to whether oranges or lemons >
make the bait more effective. As 75 per cent of the efficiency of the
bait is attributed to the use of these citrous fruits, this point is natu-
rally a very important one. The writer, in extensive experiments
with different species of grasshoppers, has yet to note any material
advantage or marked difference of efficiency in favor of either
oranges or lemons.

The Criddle mixture, as commonly employed i in grasshopper ex-
termination, was not experimented with during the present investi-
gation for lack of available material. But as nymphs of this species
are voracious feeders on horse droppings and dried “cow chips”
there seems little question but what this bait could be effectively used
if the ingredients were readily available.

On account of the irregularity of the land in the infested area of
this outbreak the use of a hopperdozer was not practicable.

LITERATURE CITED.

1872. Thomas, Cyrus, Notes on the saltatorial Orthoptera of the Rocky Mountain
Regions. Jn U. S. Geol. Surv. of Montana and . . . Territories, being a
5th Ann. Rpt. of Progress, v. 5, p. 425-466, 2 pl.

1876. Scudder, Samuel H. Ann. Rpt. Geog. Surv. west of the 100th meridian
being Appendix J J, of the Ann. Rpt. Chief of Engineers f, 1876, p. 278-295.

1877. Uhler, P. R. Report upon insects collected during the explorations of 1875, includ-

ing monographs of the families Cydnidae and Saldae, and the Hemiptera collected
by A. S. Packard, jr. Bul, U. S. Geol. and Geog. Surv., v. 3, p. 765-801; pl. 27-28.

1891. Bruner, Lawrence. Destructive locusts of North America, together with notes on
the occurrences in 1891. Jn U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Ent., Insect Life, v. 4, nos, i
and 2, p. 18—24.

1891. Popenoe, E. A. Notes on the recent outbreak of Dissosteira longipennis. In U.S.
Dept. Agr., Div. Ent., Insect Life, v. 4, nos. 1 and 2, p. 41-42.

1892. Kellogg, V. L. Kansas Notes. In U. 8S. Dept. Agr., Div. Ent., Insect Life, v. 5,
no. 2, p. 114-117.

1892. Kellogg, V. L. Common Injurious Insects of Kansas. 126 p., 61 fig.

Page 41-49. Injurious locusts.

1892. Riley, C. V. The locust or grasshopper outlook. Jn U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Ent.,
Insect Life, vy. 4, nos. 9 and 10, p. 821-323.

1895. Bruner, Lawrence. Grasshopper report for 1895. U.S. Dept. Agr., Div. Ent., Bul.,
Ne S.,.NO.9%,_.D. o2—o0:

1896. Bruner, Lawrence. Grasshopper report for 1896. U.S. Dept. Agr., Div. Ent., Bul.,
NS... NOs 1,2 D:. o0—a0-

1898. Hunter, S. J. Alfalfa, grasshoppers, bees: their relationship. Bul. Dept. Ent.
Uniy. Kansas, no. 65, pt. 1, 64 p., 8 pl., 30 fig.

1898. Bruner, Lawrence. The first report of the Merchants’ Locust Tayesticatiod Com-
mission of Buenos Aires, 98 p., 1 pl., 28 fig.

Page 47. Tachina flies.

1904. Bruner, Lawrence. Grasshopper notes for 1901. U.S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Ent., Bul.,
n. S., no. 38 (revised), p. 39-61.

Page 48. Dissosteira longipennis.

1893-1905. Kunckel GHereulats, J. P. A. Invasions des Acridiens vulgo Sauterelles en
Algerie, t. 1, pt. 2, p. 690.

1914. Kelly, E. 0. G. A new sarcophagid parasite of cansencopers! In U. S. Dept. Agr.,
Jour. Agr, Res., v. 2, no. 6, p. 435-446, pl. 40.

«

WASHINGTON : GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1915